New Jackson County Prosecutor Melesa Johnson shares vision as term begins
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — For the first time in 13 years, Jackson County has a new prosecutor. Melesa Johnson, , arrives at a time violent and property crimes continue to be an issue in Jackson County.
She is already instituting some changes, including reinstating a prosecutor in each of the city's patrol stations. But , or from returning. She shares her vision on both fronts.
Missouri Gaming Commission talks timeline for online sports betting; new sheriff in Johnson County
Then, with , we're joined by . We talk pardon's, immigration, and whether the GOP majority is able to work with Democrats to 'govern' with a host of issues facing both chambers.
Julia's insights on this week's edition of '4 The People.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gets Delightfully Catty On Trump-Musk Split
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) played the feud between President Donald Trump and former DOGE henchman Elon Musk for laughs on Thursday. (Watch the video below.) Approached by Spectrum News 1 about the fracture in their bromance, the smiling AOC said: 'Oh man, the girls are fighting, aren't they?' The progressive lawmaker could be forgiven for a little regressive humor. She has been one of the Democrats' most vocal opponents of Trump's so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill' ― the legislation that actually ignited the Trump-Musk row. Musk called the spending measure an abomination and once Trump finally expressed his disappointment in the Tesla magnate and Trump mega-donor, things turned personal between the two. The bill is being ironed out in the Senate and would reportedly ax 11 million people off Medicaid over time. Ocasio-Cortez had made a similar prediction last month. 'When this country wakes up in the morning, there will be consequences to pay for this,' she said at the time. But perhaps she didn't see the bill resulting in the breakup of DC's premier platonic power couple. For a moment anyway, it was something to crack wise about. AOC on Musk and Trump: "the girls are fighting aren't they ?"💀 — Winter Politics (@WinterPolitics1) June 6, 2025 Stephen Colbert Spots The Musk-Trump Feud Moment That Proves 'Things Are Bad' 1 Subtle Barb In Trump-Musk Blow-Out Has Dana Bash Saying 'Wow, Wow, Wow' 'My Prediction': Jimmy Kimmel Reveals Ugly Next Phase Of Trump-Musk Feud
Associated Press
19 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order
BOSTON (AP) — Democratic state attorneys general on Friday will seek to block President Donald Trump's proposal for a sweeping overhaul of U.S. elections in a case that tests a constitutional bedrock — the separation of powers. The top law enforcement officials from 19 states filed a federal lawsuit after the Republican president signed the executive order in March, arguing that its provisions would step on states' power to set their own election rules and that the executive branch had no such authority. In a filing supporting that argument, a bipartisan group of former secretaries of state said Trump's directive would upend the system established by the Constitution's Elections Clause, which gives states and Congress control over how elections are run. They said the order seeks to 'unilaterally coronate the President as the country's chief election policymaker and administrator.' If the court does not halt the order, they argued, 'the snowball of executive overreach will grow swiftly and exponentially.' Trump's election directive was part of a flurry of executive orders he has issued in the opening months of his second term, many of which have drawn swift legal challenges. It follows years of him falsely claiming that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election was due to widespread fraud and an election year in which he and other Republicans promoted the notion that large numbers of noncitizens threatened the integrity of U.S. elections. In fact, voting by noncitizens is rare and, when caught, can lead to felony charges and deportation. Trump's executive order would require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, prohibit mail or absentee ballots from being counted if they are received after Election Day, set new rules for voting equipment and prohibit non-U.S. citizens from being able to donate in certain elections. It also would condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the strict ballot deadline. The hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Boston comes in one of three lawsuits filed against the executive order. One is from Oregon and Washington, where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail and ballots received after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by then. The provision that would create a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections already has been halted in a lawsuit filed by voting and civil rights groups and national Democratic organizations. In that case, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, the judge said the president's attempt to use a federal agency to enact a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voting usurped the power of states and Congress, which at the time was considering legislation that would do just that. That bill, called the SAVE Act, passed the U.S. House but faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Trump's executive order said its intent was to ensure 'free, fair and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion.' The Justice Department, in arguing against the motion by the attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, said the president is within his rights to direct agencies to carry out federal voting laws. The order tasks the U.S. Election Assistance Commission with updating the federal voter registration form to require people to submit documentation proving they are U.S. citizens. Similar provisions enacted previously in a handful of states have raised concerns about disenfranchising otherwise eligible voters who can't readily access those documents. That includes married women, who would need both a birth certificate and a marriage license if they had changed their last name. A state proof-of-citizenship law enacted in Kansas more than a decade ago blocked the registrations of 31,000 people later found to be eligible to vote. The two sides will argue over whether the president has the authority to direct the election commission, which was created by Congress as an independent agency after the Florida ballot debacle during the 2000 presidential election. In its filing, the Justice Department said Trump's executive order falls within his authority to direct officials 'to carry out their statutory duties,' adding that 'the only potential voters it disenfranchises are noncitizens who are ineligible to vote anyway.'
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The entirely predictable Trump-Musk divorce threatens Musk's business empire
Elon Musk's decision to go all in on Donald Trump never made much sense. His scorched-earth approach to breaking up with Trump is even harder to square. As a close Trump ally, Musk's actions inevitably affected Tesla – the biggest piece of his business empire and the maker of one of the most visible and expensive items that Americans can purchase: electric vehicles. First, Musk turned off Tesla's core customers, Democrats on the coasts, by pouring money and using his influence to help Trump return to the White House. Then he took a chainsaw to the federal workforce. Trump confirmed their relationship has soured, with Musk repeatedly blasting the president's sweeping domestic agenda bill in recent days and a public fight on social media on Thursday. Now, Musk's war of words with the president risk turning off the same Trump voters who may have considered buying a Tesla until this week. Not only that, but Tesla's ambitions for self-driving vehicles require government approval, something that no longer looks like a sure thing amid the Musk-Trump feud. Other Musk businesses like SpaceX are built on government contracts – contracts that Trump wasted no time threatening on Thursday. The past 12 months – with Musk marrying himself to the polarizing Trump brand and then breaking up with him – look like a textbook example of what a CEO should not do, especially a consumer-facing CEO. 'It's a bit of a head-scratcher that Musk is going so rogue-negative towards Trump so quickly. It's a potentially very hazardous path,' Dan Ives, a senior equity research analyst at Wedbush Securities and a longtime Tesla bull, told CNN in a phone interview on Thursday. The Musk-Trump break-up, playing out on the billionaires' respective social media platforms, was both entirely predictable and shocking nonetheless. After Musk blasted Trump's policy bill as a 'disgusting abomination' earlier this week, Trump suggested Musk has 'Trump derangement syndrome.' Musk responded by undercutting Trump's political prowess, saying: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election.' As two of the world's most powerful people continued to trade public barbs, Tesla shares dropped lower and lower. Tesla shares (TSLA) plummeted 14% on Thursday as the bromance between Trump and Musk imploded in front of the entire world. The selloff erased about $152 billion from Tesla's market value and $34 billion off Musk's net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Tesla shareholders are dismayed on multiple levels. First, Musk taking on the president so publicly could further shrink the car maker's customer base by angering Trump backers. 'You could end up alienating both sides of the aisle in the course of just a few months. When you're a consumer-facing company, that's the opposite of what you want to do,' Ives said. Secondly, Tesla relies on the federal government for tax credits and for approval of its controversial full-self driving technology, a green light that investors had been hoping for after the election. Neuralink, Musk's brain chip startup, is also reliant on FDA approval. Bigger picture, the Trump administration will help set the regulatory landscape for autonomous vehicles, not to mention artificial intelligence and other Musk priorities. And the president has not been shy about flexing the power of the federal government to hurt his opponents. 'You want Trump nice in the sandbox. You don't want Trump on your bad side,' Ives said. Bill George, an executive fellow at the Harvard Business School and former CEO of health tech company Medtronic, described the recent feud as a 'brutal breakup.' 'Never go to war with the president of the United States,' he said. 'There's going to be a lot of collateral damage to your business.' Trump threatened on Thursday to go after Musk's business empire. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social. 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it! SpaceX, Musk's privately held space company, relies heavily on federal contracts, especially from NASA. SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet recently won business from the Federal Aviation Administration to help the agency upgrade networks used to manage US airspace. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, founder of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute, said the lesson is not about CEOs taking political positions. 'The lesson here is that there is no honor among thieves. These are two mob bosses that have had a parting of ways. And now they are going to take each other down,' Sonnenfeld told CNN. Harvard Business School's George noted that Musk and Trump had been acting like 'best bros' just days earlier. 'The lesson here is that you can either work in government or run your business,' George said. 'But you can't do both.' Sign in to access your portfolio
