Cory Booker reports record campaign haul after marathon speech
On April 1, Booker delivered the longest recorded floor speech in Senate history, breaking the record set by segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond in 1957. Booker was protesting President Donald Trump's policies.
Booker said that he decided to undertake the marathon speech because Democrats had a "responsibility" to "do something different" in the face of the unprecedented changes taking place in the first few months of Trump's second term as president.
Booker ran for president in 2019. His name has been floated as a potential contender for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028.
Other potential Democratic presidential candidates, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, have reported raising similar amounts, according to NBC News, which first reported Booker's cash haul. Fundraising reports for the second quarter are due July 15.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
17 minutes ago
- NBC News
How Trump's 'big beautiful bill' is shaping this year's biggest elections
President Donald Trump's sweeping tax cut and spending law known as the 'big beautiful bill' is expected to be a major issue in the 2026 midterm elections. But first, candidates for governor this year in Virginia and New Jersey are already testing how the measure plays on the campaign trail. Rep. Mikie Sherrill and former Rep. Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic nominees in New Jersey and Virginia, respectively, have warned about devastating impacts from looming cuts to social safety net programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Republicans are taking mixed approaches. In New Jersey, a high-tax state where affordability is a top issue, former Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli and his allies are planning to go on offense, arguing that Sherrill voted to block critical tax cuts. And in Virginia, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, the GOP nominee, has dismissed concerns about program cuts, arguing that the state's Republican governor has put the state in a strong position to respond. Those lines of attack could determine who holds the governorships of two key states by the beginning of next year, as well as set the tone for how candidates battling for control of Congress approach the issue in 2026. Democrats focus on budget cuts, Republicans focus on tax cuts Democrats have already signaled that they plan to go all in on the measure's changes to SNAP, the program once known as food stamps, and Medicaid. The Democratic Governors Association released a memo Monday detailing its polling of Virginia and New Jersey, which showed majorities of voters in both states have 'serious concerns' and slim majorities saying they would prefer governors who oppose the measure. 'The races for governor in Virginia and New Jersey in November will be voters' first opportunity to reject Trump's harmful budget bill — and the GOP nominees will not be able to run from their record of supporting these deeply unpopular Medicaid cuts,' DGA Executive Director Meghan Meehan-Draper wrote in the memo. A congressional analysis published by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee estimates that in Virginia, more than 300,000 residents could lose their health care by 2034. The number is a combination of people who could lose their Medicaid under changes to the program and people who would no longer be eligible for the state's expansion of that program under the Affordable Care Act. The New Jersey Department of Human Services estimated that around 350,000 residents who are eligible for Medicaid would lose health care coverage 'because of bureaucratic barriers,' and warned that the state's food assistance program, which affects 800,000 residents, is at risk unless the state can raise between $100 million and $300 million. In New Jersey, Ciattarelli has confronted concerns about Medicaid cuts by echoing Republicans in Washington who say those who need the program's crucial health coverage will still receive it. 'The best way to protect Medicaid is to make sure that those who receive it are truly in need of it most,' Ciattarelli said in a video posted on X after the measure passed the Senate. 'As I go around the state each and every day, I find an overwhelming number of New Jerseyans agree that able-bodied adults without young children should have to work or go to school at least 20 hours a week to remain eligible for their Medicaid benefits.' Ciattarelli and his GOP allies are planning to go on offense on the measure with a focus on taxes, lauding provisions codifying the 2017 tax cuts and temporarily raising the federal deduction for state and local taxes from $10,000 to $40,000, a top issue in the high-tax state. Ciattarelli knocked Sherrill for opposing the measure after pledging to work to eliminate the SALT cap, saying in his video statement that Sherrill 'voted to raise your taxes.' (Democrats note that a SALT cap is still in place under the new law and argue the law's tax cuts will benefit the wealthy overall.) Chris Russell, a Ciattarelli campaign consultant, told NBC News that the campaign plans to emphasize Sherrill's vote against the tax provisions in this measure, which also boosted the child tax credit, and made tips and overtime pay exempt from federal taxes. 'That is going to directly impact people in New Jersey and their pocketbooks,' Russell said, later adding, 'We intend to make her defend that vote.' Change NJ, a pro-Ciattarelli super PAC, has already launched digital ads knocking Sherrill for opposing the measure, focusing on the tax provisions. The group also released a memo last week with a poll from its senior adviser and pollster Kellyanne Conway, Trump's former campaign manager. The survey, which tested a range of attacks against Sherrill, found that the best-performing attack highlighted 'her vote to not extend Trump tax cuts, leading to a potential $1,700 tax hike for families, tax hike on small businesses and a cut to the child tax credit,' although critics of the poll note it modeled an electorate more favorable to Republicans. 'This is the most recent, most vivid example of Mikie doing the things in Washington that people are tired of Trenton Democrats doing,' Change NJ spokesman Carlos Cruz said. 'To that end, you should expect to see us talking a lot about it.' Democrats highlight downstream effects of Medicaid spending cuts Hospital associations have also warned that rural hospitals in Virginia will take a major financial hit under the law, because they rely so heavily on Medicaid dollars: People living in rural areas are far more likely to receive their health insurance through Medicaid. Both Spanberger and Sherrill have emphasized those cuts on the campaign trail. Sherrill held events earlier this month at a health care center in Camden, a solar energy business in Southampton Township, and Kean University in Union to highlight the effects of the 'one big beautiful bill,' which Sherrill has called the "Republican Price Hike Bill.' 'This cruel piece of legislation will kick hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans off their healthcare and raise costs for even more, cut food assistance for working families, and increase the cost of utilities and mortgages,' Sherrill said in her statement explaining her vote against the measure. 'At the same time, they are funneling New Jersey's hard-earned tax dollars to Trump's billionaire friends and donors.' Spanberger, for her part, made criticism of Trump's bill a central tenet of a campaign bus tour through Virginia in late June, telling voters during a stop in Fredericksburg before the measure was enacted that she'd already begun 'looking at how we can make sure that, come January, as few people as possible get pushed off of Medicaid.' In video released by her campaign after the House passed its iteration of the bill, she warned that it would constitute a 'massive attack on health care as we know it' and create 'a reality where Virginians cannot afford the care they need,' warning that it would boot people off Medicaid, cause rural hospital closures, increase prescription drug costs and overrun emergency rooms. In both states, Democrats also plan to use the Republicans' support for the bill to make the broader case that they won't stand up to Trump, who lost both states by nearly 6 percentage points. Earle-Sears says 'don't panic' In Virginia, Earle-Sears has both praised Trump's tax-and-spend law and brushed off concerns about the measure. At a press conference one week after the law was enacted, Earle-Sears responded to questions about its impact on rural hospitals and voters' concerns about the law more broadly. 'I would say to Virginia, don't panic,' she said, before adding that 'things are being worked out' and saying that federal and state lawmakers had begun taking actions to counter hits to health care coverage. A week earlier — but still after the bill was enacted — Earle-Sears said during an interview on Newsmax, a conservative television network, that the bill 'does so many great things' amid a broader discussion about her policy plans to create jobs in Virginia. And in June, prior to Trump's bill becoming law, Earle-Sears told a crowd at an event in the rural town of Marion that the state would be able to fill in financial gaps created by cuts to Medicaid with 'rainy day' state budgetary funds. Virginia Democrats have pushed as loudly on instances of Earle-Sears defending the law as they have on Spanberger's criticism of it. 'After supporting and praising these cuts, all Winsome Earle-Sears has to say is 'don't panic,'' Democratic Party of Virginia spokesperson Maggie Amjad said in response to questions about how the party was positioning itself to message on Trump's law in the governor's race. Amjad called the GOP nominee's comments 'dismissive and empty advice.' Responding to questions about Earle-Sears' views on Trump's law — and about Democratic attacks on that response — campaign spokesperson Peyton Vogel wrote in an email that 'Abigail Spanberger may not be aware of this, but we're running for Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.' 'When she and Joe Biden were sending bills that directly impacted the future of our Commonwealth, Governor Youngkin and Lt. Governor Winsome Earle-Sears fought for all Virginians,' Vogel added. 'That's where all of our priorities should be focused, on the people of Virginia. Fear mongering over President Trump's tax cuts is a losing strategy, but we aren't going to get in Abigail's way.' Republicans working for some outside groups wouldn't rule out the idea of ads promoting aspects of Trump's law in the state, as seems to be on the menu in New Jersey, where the pro-Ciattarelli super PAC noted the political value of the tax cut provisions. But Vogel said the Earle-Sears campaign was not planning to feature in any ads, or as part of any paid media, any messaging that defended or touted the "big beautiful bill." 'We are focused on Virginia and Winsome's story,' she said.
NBC News
17 minutes ago
- NBC News
Calls to strip Zohran Mamdani's citizenship spark alarm about Trump weaponizing denaturalization
WASHINGTON — Immediately after Zohran Mamdani became the presumptive Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City last month, one Republican congressman had a provocative suggestion for the Trump administration: 'He needs to be DEPORTED.' The Uganda-born Mamdani obtained U.S. citizenship in 2018 after moving to the United States with his parents as a child. But Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., argued in his post on X that the Justice Department should consider revoking it over rap lyrics that, he said, suggested support for Hamas. The Justice Department declined to comment on whether it has replied to Ogles' letter, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said of his claims about Mamdani, 'Surely if they are true, it's something that should be investigated.' Trump himself has claimed without evidence that Mamdani is an illegal immigrant, and when erstwhile ally Elon Musk was asked about deporting another naturalized citizen, he suggested he would consider it. The congressman's proposal dovetails with a priority of the Trump administration to ramp up efforts to strip citizenship from other naturalized Americans. The process, known as denaturalization, has been used by previous administrations to remove terrorists and, decades ago, Nazis and communists. But the Trump DOJ's announcement last month that it would 'prioritize and maximally pursue denaturalization proceedings' has sparked alarm among immigration lawyers and advocates, who fear the Trump administration could use denaturalization to target political opponents. Although past administrations have periodically pursued denaturalization cases, it is an area ripe for abuse, according to Elizabeth Taufa, a lawyer at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. 'It can be very easily weaponized at any point,' she said. Noor Zafar, an immigration lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, said there is a 'real risk and a real threat' that the administration will target people based on their political views. Asked for comment on the weaponization concerns, a Justice Department spokesperson pointed to the federal law that authorizes denaturalizations, 8 U.S.C. 1451. 'We are upholding our duty as expressed in the statute,' the spokesperson said. Immigrant groups and political opponents of Trump are already outraged at the way the Trump administration has used its enforcement powers to stifle dissent in cases involving legal immigrants who do not have U.S. citizenship. ICE detained Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist engaged in campus protests critical of Israel, for more than 100 days before he was released. Turkish student Rümeysa Öztürk was also detained for two months over her pro-Palestinian advocacy. More broadly, the administration has been accused of violating the due process rights of immigrants it has sought to rapidly deport over the objection of judges and, in cases involving alleged Venezuelan gang members and Salvadoran man Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Supreme Court. Denaturalization cases have traditionally been rare and in past decades focused on ferreting out former Nazis who fled to the United States after World War II under false pretenses. But the approach gradually changed after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Aided by technological advances that made it easier to identify people and track them down, the number of denaturalization cases has gradually increased. It was the Obama administration that initially seized on the issue, launching what was called Operation Janus, which identified more than 300,000 cases where there were discrepancies involving fingerprint data that could indicate potential fraud. But the process is slow and requires considerable resources, with the first denaturalization as a result of Operation Janus secured during Trump's first term in January 2018. That case involved Baljinder Singh, originally from India, who had been subject to deportation but later became a U.S. citizen after assuming a different identity. In total, the first Trump administration filed 102 denaturalization cases, with the Biden administration filing 24, according to the Justice Department spokesperson, who said figures for the Obama administration were not available. The new Trump administration has already filed five. So far, the Trump administration has prevailed in one case involving a man originally from the United Kingdom who had previously been convicted of receiving and distributing child pornography. The Justice Department declined to provide information about the other new cases. Overall, denaturalization cases are brought against just a tiny proportion of the roughly 800,00 people who become naturalized citizens each year, according to the Department of Homeland Security. 'Willful misrepresentation' The government has two ways to revoke citizenship, either through a rare criminal prosecution for fraud or via a civil claim in federal court. The administration outlined its priorities for civil enforcement in a June memo issued by Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate, which listed 10 potential grounds for targeting naturalized citizens. Examples range from 'individuals who pose a risk to national security' or who have engaged in war crimes or torture, to people who have committed Medicaid or Medicare fraud or have otherwise defrauded the government. There is also a broad catch-all provision that refers to 'any other cases ... that the division determines to be sufficiently important to pursue.' The denaturalization law focuses on 'concealment of a material fact' or 'willful misrepresentation' during the naturalization proceeding. The ACLU's Zafar said the memo leaves open the option for the Trump administration to at least try to target people based on their speech or associations. 'Even if they don't think they really have a plausible chance of succeeding, they can use it as a means to just harass people,' she added. The Justice Department can bring denaturalization cases over a wide range of conduct related to the questions applicants for U.S. citizenship are asked, including the requirement that they have been of 'good moral character' in the preceding five years. Immigration law includes several examples of what might disqualify someone on moral character grounds, including if they are a 'habitual drunkard' or have been convicted of illegal gambling. The naturalization application form itself asks a series of questions probing good moral character, such as whether the applicant has been involved in violent acts, including terrorism. The form also queries whether people have advocated in support of groups that support communism, 'the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship' or the 'unlawful assaulting or killing' of any U.S. official. Failure to accurately answer any of the questions or the omission of any relevant information can be grounds for citizenship to be revoked. In 2015, for example, Sammy Chang, a native of South Korea who had recently become a U.S. citizen, had his citizenship revoked in the wake of his conviction in a criminal case of trafficking women to work at a club he owned. The government said that because Chang had been engaged in the scheme during the time he was applying for naturalization, he had failed to show good moral character. But in both civil and criminal cases, the government has to reach a high bar to revoke citizenship. Among other things, it has to show that any misstatement or omission in a naturalization application was material to whether citizenship would have been granted. In civil cases, the government has to show 'clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence which does not leave the issue in doubt' in order to prevail. 'A simple game of gotcha with naturalization applicants isn't going to work,' said Jeremy McKinney, a North Carolina-based immigration lawyer. 'It's going to require significant materiality for a judge to strip someone of their United States citizenship.' Targeting rap lyrics In his June 26 tweet, Ogles attached a letter he sent to Attorney General Pam Bondi asking her to consider pursuing Mamdani's denaturalization, in part, because he 'expressed open solidarity with individuals convicted of terrorism-related offenses prior to becoming a U.S. citizen.' Ogles cited rap lyrics that Mamdani wrote years ago in which he expressed support for the 'Holy Land Five.' That appears to be a reference to five men involved in a U.S.-based Muslim charitable group called the Holy Land Foundation who were convicted in 2008 of providing material support to the Palestinian group Hamas. Some activists say the prosecution was a miscarriage of justice fueled by anti-Muslim sentiment following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Ogles' office and Mamdani's campaign did not respond to requests seeking comment. Speaking on Newsmax in June, Ogles expanded on his reasons for revoking Mamdani's citizenship, suggesting the mayoral candidate had 'failed to disclose' relevant information when he became a citizen, including his political associations. Ogles has alleged Mamdani is a communist because of his identification as a democratic socialist, although the latter is not a communist group. The Trump administration, Ogles added, could use a case against Mamdani to 'create a template for other individuals who come to this country' who, he claimed, 'want to undermine our way of life.' (Even if Mamdani were denaturalized, he would not, contrary to Ogles' claim, automatically face deportation, as he would most likely revert his previous status as a permanent resident.) In an appearance on NBC's ' Meet the Press' on June 29, Mamdani said calls for him to be stripped of his citizenship and deported are 'a glimpse into what life is like for many Muslim New Yorkers and many New Yorkers of different faiths who are constantly being told they don't belong in this city and this country that they love.' Targeting Mamdani for his rap lyrics would constitute a very unusual denaturalization case, said Taufa, the immigration lawyer. But, she added, 'they can trump up a reason to denaturalize someone if they want to.' McKinney, a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the relatively low number of denaturalization cases that are filed, including those taken up during Trump's first term, shows how difficult it is for the government to actually strip people of their citizenship. 'But what they can be very successful at is continuing to create a climate of panic and anxiety and fear,' he added. 'They're doing that very well. So, mission accomplished in that regard.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Senate passes Labor motion sanctioning Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi for Gaza sign protest
Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi was sanctioned after the upper house agreed her decision to protest during the governor general's address to parliament on Tuesday was 'utterly disrespectful'. Faruqi held a sign urging sanctions against Israel while governor general Sam Mostyn addressed parliament. In a statement to Guardian Australia after the Senate motion passed, Faruqi accused Labor of 'cracking down on people who speak out against a genocide, while ignoring the perpetrator'
