Ilhan Omar condemns shootings at Jewish Museum
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Thursday condemned the fatal shooting at the Capital Jewish Museum in a statement on X after Fox & Friends played a clip of her earlier in the day declining to offer a response to the violent event.
'I am appalled by the deadly shooting at the Capital Jewish Museum last night. Holding the victims, their families, and loved ones in my thoughts and prayers,' Omar wrote in a post on X.
'Violence should have no place in our country,' she added.
Outside of the Capitol on Thursday morning, an interviewer asked Omar if she would provide her reaction to the D.C. shooting.
She responded, 'I'm going to go for now.'
Fox News' Ainsley Earhardt shook her head while watching the video, in awe that 'she didn't even say 'condolences for the family.''
Right wing commentators slammed Omar for the recorded response.
'Ilhan Omar REFUSES to condemn the assassination of Israeli diplomats in DC last night Omar is an ISLAMIC TERRORlST who needs to be deported back to Somalia. NOT IN CONGRESS,' Nick Sortor wrote in a post on X.
Republican lawmakers have criticized Ohmar, a Muslim and naturalized U.S. citizen, for supporting Palestine amid the war in Gaza.
Freshman Rep. Brandon Gills (R-Texas) also circulated a petition to deport Omar for aiding fellow immigrants.
Omar has openly denounced President Trump's deportation policies and signed on to letter with fellow members of Congress to support the release of green card holder Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian advocate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?
The President of the United States of America and one of the world's most influential billionaires are at odds after months of collaboration. The confrontation escalated Thursday with Elon Musk saying Trump would have lost the election without him in a post on X. President Donald Trump in turn referred to his former senior advisor as "the man who lost his mind" in a Friday morning ABC News phone interview. Republican Trump allies are now also speaking out against Musk. Musk's breakup with the administration has been public and is well-documented, with Trump and the Tesla CEO trading calculated jabs like pro boxers. The underlying reason behind the sudden intense feud is a serious cause of concern for some American car buyers. "Clean Coal" has been a popular buzzword for not one but two presidential campaigns for Donald Trump. So, Elon Musk's initial choice to stand beside a global warming skeptic as the CEO of a clean energy and automotive company was puzzling to say the least. At first, Musk's involvement with the administration was seen by many as mutually beneficial, since the CEO could potentially reap the benefits of government contracts for Tesla and SpaceX. The general public quickly soured to the idea of the eccentric CEO playing a key role in the administration. By April 8, Tesla stock had nosedived 41.50% from its January 2 share price. Tesla dealers have been attacked and vandalized while other Americans have staged peaceful protests against Musk's involvement in government and role at the Department of Government Efficiency. So, why would a guy who once wore a "Trump Was Right About Everything" hat suddenly publicly oppose his new bill? The short answer is, the two don't see eye to eye on the automotive industry's most controversial powertrain option. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill could decimate Tesla. President Donald Trump's stance and actions against EV adoption in America includes: Supporting the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which suggests phasing out a federal EV tax credit that would benefit thousands of Tesla buyers Claiming former President Joe Biden's EV mandate "would kill 40% of the auto industry's jobs", according to Ordering the shut down of many federal electric vehicle chargers and pausing massive federal EV fleet purchases, according to Elon Musk (and Tesla's) stance and actions for EV adoption in America: Elon Musk bio says "Tesla's mission has been to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" Musk claimed "the world does need electric cars" during a 60 Minutes interview and factory tour, asserting that Tesla has a crucial role in the future of EVs Tesla has collaborated with Ford, GM, Stellantis, Rivian, Volkswagen, Honda, Acura, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota and more to provide Tesla Supercharger access to EVs, making them easier to charge for American drivers Tesla stock recently plummeted in response to the feud between Trump and Musk. The President has also threatened Musk's government contracts amidst the dispute. The bill appears to be the focal point of the rift, but the two clearly have different ideas on what America's future should be. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk may have been able to join forces over their mutual stances on certain conservative points and a hatred of bureaucracy, but their White House tag team was short-lived. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill directly undermines some of the actions Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency have taken since the two united. Trump is 78 years old and expresses a desire to bring America back to a golden age of manufacturing before globalism outsourced American jobs and created a reliance on foreign trade. He also speaks about returning the country to an age where mining and drilling for fossil fuel production were prioritized over environmental concerns. Musk, on the other hand, is a 53-year-old futurist who strives to make humans a multi-planetary species and has made a fortune from innovation and technological disruption. At a glance, the issue seems to be about the One, Big, Beautiful Bill attacking Tesla's bottom line but the two polarizing figures are fundamentally different in terms of future aspirations. Based on Trump's falling out with several former members of the first Trump administration and Musk's known adversarial nature in the private sector, this could be the end for, arguably, the most fascinating duo of 2025. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Donald Trump vs Elon Musk: Could Tesla, EVs be at the art of the feud?
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Ohio budget moves closer to doing away with elected county coroners
Jun. 6—For now, the Ohio Senate is going along on an Ohio House plan to make county coroners appointed by county commissioners instead of being elected by county voters. But, while the Senate didn't change the House's proposal in its initial draft of the state's two-year operating budget, Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, told reporters that there's still a chance the Senate could eliminate the House's proposal when it amends the budget next week. McColley said he put a request out for those in his caucus with strong feelings on the matter to weigh in. "If members feel strongly that it should go back to the way that it is under current law, then there's a possibility to see an amendment here in the omnibus," McColley told this news outlet. "We didn't see a lot of members — we saw some — but we didn't see a lot of members asking for it to be changed back." The Senate is expected to make those amendments on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. The change could be consequential in counties where county commissioners and the coroner are different political parties. In Montgomery County, for example, the elected coroner is a Republican while Democrats hold two of the three seats on the county commission. The House's primary advocate for the change, county commissioner-turned-lawmaker Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, has framed the change as necessary to solve a scarcity issue. "It's really hard to find folks that want to serve as a coroner at all, it's even harder to find folks who are willing to be the coroner and want to run a political campaign to do so," Stewart said in April. But the proposed change is opposed by Ohio State Coroners Association, whose Executive Director David Corey told this outlet that he's still hopeful that former coroners in the Ohio Senate, like Sen. Matt Huffman, R-Tipp City, will help the Senate reverse course. "Commissioners already have the authority to appoint a physician to be coroner if no one runs," Corey said. "So they already have this authority — so why subject this as a blanket on everyone?" Corey noted that commissioners also already have the authority to contract out with different county coroner offices if there's no elected coroner and the commission cannot find an in-county physician that wants to be appointed. "We don't really know what (problem) the House is trying and the Senate are trying to fix ... other than chipping away at other elected officials," Corey said. Corey said the idea is "wrought with potential problems," and speculated that coroners appointed by commissioners might be more beholden to those officials than they are to the public. He said appointees could also be fired at will, which would make it harder for a coroner to stand up to the commission in budget negotiations or other high-stakes situations. "We just think it's a horrible precedent," Corey said. Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, whose home county of Cuyahoga is one of two counties in the state where the position is already appointed following a local vote, told this outlet that she didn't like the sound of applying the idea to every coroner in the state. "You want the coroner to feel like they can have a lot of pressure on them," Antonio said. "If they're appointed, then it's almost like they have an affiliation to the person that appointed them." She said this could lead to undue influence. "I think we, probably in the long run, would be better off continuing to have them be elected," Antonio said. ------ For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening. Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Musk feud presents 'unprecedented' dynamic compared to past Trump disputes: expert
The ongoing feud between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, his one-time "special government employee," has brought an "unprecedented" dynamic compared to other famous disputes, long-time Democratic political strategist and Fox News contributor Jacques DeGraff said. After somewhat muted rumblings from Musk about why he opposed a Trump-endorsed Republican spending package, the DOGE leader launched complaints after Trump began firing back this week, including threats aimed at Musk's business revenue. "It's unprecedented, but the reality is that what makes it a singular moment in history is that no single figure has ever been able to say, 'I made a president and then (fell) out with that individual," DeGraff told Fox News Digital Friday. "There have been groups, there have been individuals who wanted to pretend that they did, but the record is clear. And, I mean, this man (Elon) brought his son into the Oval Office. He wore a hat and didn't wear a suit to the Oval Office. He clearly had carte blanche. … The president, in effect, did a Tesla ad in the Rose Garden … and now they've fallen out in life." DeGraffe, who has been a political advocate and strategist for years, quipped that, ordinarily, "we would have to go to family court," adding "what's the court here?" Trump is no stranger to quarrels with his staff. During his first term, his relationship soured with his National Security Advisor, John Bolton, and his press secretary, Anthony Scaramucci, after they diverged on different issues and publicly criticized Trump. But, for DeGraffe at least, this quarrel has "distinguished itself from anything in the past." One major difference he pointed to is the implications for both parties in this spat. "Tesla stock has dropped $150 billion, Trump stock has dropped but it also occurs at the same time as this legislation and so that is going to have – no matter how it turns out – it's going to have massive political and public policy implications for the country," DeGraffe said. "So this is no small dispute." DeGraffe also contended that this is "the first time" there has been a major deviation from Trump "from the MAGA side of the aisle." He suggested the split could be bad news for Trump and others who hope to see the GOP's budget package pass the finish line in its current form. "This major split will allow other players to take positions other than the party line, and it gives them room and comfort and cover in order to do so," DeGraffe suggested. "Will senators who follow Musk, or, better yet, disagree with Musk, face intensely funded primaries? "That's a consideration that everyone involved will have to take. … As a lifelong Democrat, I'm sitting with my bowl of popcorn saying, 'Go at it.' Because anything that slows this horrific legislation has got to be good news to the rest of the country." However, while DeGraffe sees the Trump-Musk feud as having wide-ranging and lasting implications, GOP political strategist Dallas Woodhouse says he thinks the feud is unimportant to most Republicans. "I am currently at the North Carolina State GOP convention, and this is not a topic of concern among activists," Woodhouse said. "No doubt it makes for funny and entertaining X posts, but the GOP faithful are laser-focused on growing the new diverse GOP/Trump winning coalition."
