Dropped Donald Trump Nominee Spat At During Live TV Interview
Ed Martin — the Jan. 6 Capitol rioters-representing lawyer who President Donald Trump on Thursday dropped as his pick for U.S. attorney for D.C. — was spat at by a passerby during a live interview with NewsMax.
The far-right MAGA supporter was talking about his nomination being nixed when a woman walking her dog approached him, shouted 'you are Ed Martin,' spat at him and then walked off saying, 'You are a disgusting man.'
NewsMax shared footage of the moment on social media:
Trump abandoned his backing of Martin after it became clear he likely wouldn't get confirmed in the Senate.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said he wouldn't support Martin over his defense of Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol back in 2021.
Trump said he was 'disappointed' to scuttle Martin's shot at the job but that 'we have somebody else that will be great.' Later in the day, Trump named Fox News' Jeanine Pirro as interim U.S. attorney in America's capital.
Right-Wing Pundit Torches Trump's U.K. Deal With 1 Brutal Word
Trump Stuns With Bold Confession About New Top Nominee
Commerce Secretary's Love Bombing Of Trump To His Face Leaves Viewers Squirming
'What's Going On?!?': Seth Meyers Cracks Up Over Trump's Awkward Moment With U.K. PM
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
30 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Will Venezuela, Mexico benefit from Iran war oil price surge? Yes, but no
The conflict in Iran has triggered speculation that soaring global oil prices could deliver a windfall for Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia and other Latin American oil producers. But surprisingly, most oil experts say that's not likely to happen. Analysts from Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and other financial institutions say oil prices could surge beyond $100 a barrel if Iran were to interrupt oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, which handles about 25% of world oil shipments. But most are quick to add that the impact of such disruption would probably be limited and short-lived. First, there is an oversupply of oil in world markets, partly because the global economy is growing more slowly than expected due to President Trump's tariff wars. Five days after Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, world oil prices remained below their 2024 average of $80 per barrel, according to a Deutsche Bank analysis. Second, Iran is a relatively small oil exporter, producing about 3% of the world's output. And due to U.S. and European sanctions, Iran sells 90% of its oil to a single country — China. If Iran's oil production stopped, it would affect mainly China, although it currently has high oil inventories. Third, in the most catastrophic scenario — if Iran were to block the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for U.S. or European actions in support of Israel — Washington would most likely intervene militarily to reopen that vital trade passage. And China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states — rhetoric aside — would probably welcome a reopening of their oil supply lanes, analysts say. Francisco J. Monaldi, director of the Latin America Energy Program at Rice University's Baker Institute, told me that in the worst-case scenario — an extended disruption of the Strait of Hormuz that dramatically drives up world oil prices — there would be a 'net gain' for Latin American oil exporters. 'Guyana, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador and even Brazil and Argentina, to some extent, would see a positive impact on their balance sheets,' Monaldi told me. 'Mexico has become a net oil importer, but higher prices would also benefit Pemex's [state-owned oil company's] revenues.' He added, 'Of course, such gains could be somewhat offset by negative secondary effects, like a global recession. But the net outcome for these countries would be an important surge in their revenues and exports.' However, when I asked Monaldi about the chances of a prolonged disruption of oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, he said that it's unlikely to happen. The U.S. Navy would re-open that shipping lane immediately, and oil prices would soon return to normal, he added. 'We could see a temporary spike in oil prices, but there shouldn't be a long-term impact,' he concluded. By the same token, oil importers such as Chile, Cuba and other Caribbean countries would have to spend more money in the short run to make their purchases, but their pain may not last too long. Interestingly, the World Bank, which earlier this month issued a report forecasting a major slowdown in the U.S. and global economy — partly due to Trump's tariffs — is not anticipating changes in its economic projection as a result of the Iran war. Valerie Mercer-Backman, the lead author of the Latin American section of the World Bank's forecast, told me that despite the latest Iran conflict, the general trend was toward a 'slight decline' in world oil prices. The war may produce a temporary spike, 'but we don't see that the latest geopolitical events will have a major impact on our forecast,' she said. This brings me back to the conclusion that the Venezuelan dictatorship — perhaps Latin America's biggest potential winner of a global oil price hike — along with Colombia and Mexico may get, at best, a brief respite if the Iran war disrupts world oil shipping lanes. But it's not likely to be enough to help Venezuela emerge from its severe economic crisis or to solve the current troubles of Mexico and Colombia. Don't miss the 'Oppenheimer Presenta' TV show on Sundays at 9 pm E.T. on CNN en Español. Blog:
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court upholds Tennessee law restricting gender-affirming care for minors
Washington — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Tennessee law that restricts access to gender-affirming care for minors experiencing gender dysphoria, a decision that is likely to have broad implications for access to medical treatments for transgender youth in half of the country. In the case of U.S. v. Skrmetti, high court ruled 6-3 to reject the challenge brought by the Biden administration, three families and a physician who had argued that Tennessee's law violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law. The court concluded that the state's measure, which is known as SB1 and was enacted in 2023, does not run afoul of the 14th Amendment. "Our role is not 'to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic' of the law before us, but only to ensure that it does not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment. Having concluded it does not, we leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. The court's majority found that Tennessee's law is not subject to a heightened level of judicial review and satisfies the most deferential standard, known as rational basis. "We are asked to decide whether SB 1 is subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause," Roberts wrote. "We hold it is not. SB1 does not classify on the bases that warrant heightened review." The three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, were in dissent. Sotomayor read her dissent from the bench. The court, Sotomayor wrote, "obfuscates a sex classification that is plain on the face of this statute, all to avoid the mere possibility that a different court could strike down SB1, or categorical healthcare bans like it." Joined in her dissent by Kagan and Jackson, she continued: "The court's willingness to do so here does irrevocable damage to the Equal Protection Clause and invites legislatures to engage in discrimination by hiding blatant sex classifications in plain sight. It also authorizes, without second thought, untold harm to transgender children and the parents and families who love them." The Tennessee law Tennessee's law prohibits medical treatments like puberty blockers or hormone therapy for transgender adolescents under the age of 18. The state is one of 25 with laws that seek to restrict access to gender-affirming care for young people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The case, U.S. v. Skrmetti, marked the first in which the Supreme Court stepped into the politically charged debate over health care for transgender youth. In addition to the state prohibitions, President Trump has issued executive orders that address what he calls "gender ideology." One declares that it is the federal government's policy to recognize "two sexes, male and the female," and the second threatens federal funding for medical institutions that offer gender-affirming care to young people under the age of 18. Mr. Trump's proposals are being challenged in the federal courts. Known as SB1, Tennessee's law prevents health care providers from administering puberty blockers or hormone therapy if they're meant to enable "a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor's sex." The state had argued that it has a "compelling interest in encouraging minors to appreciate their sex, particularly as they undergo puberty," and in barring treatments that "might encourage minors to become disdainful of their sex." Shortly before the law took effect, three families with transgender children and a physician who provides the treatments to patients with gender dysphoria challenged the ban in federal court, arguing it is unconstitutional. The Biden administration then intervened in the case. A federal district court blocked the law, finding that it discriminates based on sex and transgender status. A divided panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit then reversed that decision and allowed Tennessee's ban to take effect while legal proceedings continued. The appeals court evaluated the law under rational-basis review, the most deferential of the tiers of judicial scrutiny. But the Biden administration and the families had argued Tennessee's ban should be subject to a more stringent level of review, known as heightened scrutiny, because it draws lines based on sex and discriminates based on transgender status. But Tennessee had argued that the state aims to protect young people from the consequences of the medical treatments, which it said are risky and unproven. The state said it was setting age- and use-based limits on medical care and exercising its authority to regulate medicine. Access to gender-affirming care has become a flashpoint in the culture wars, as half of the states have in recent years enacted laws that limit the availability of the medical interventions. Many of those same states have also enacted measures prohibiting transgender athletes from competing in women's sports. The court's decision The Supreme Court's conservative majority found that Tennessee's law classifies on the basis of age and medical use, since treatments like puberty blockers and hormones can be administered to treat certain conditions, but not gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder or gender incongruence. Classifications that turn on age or medical use are subject to only rational-basis review, the least demanding level of judicial review, it said. "Under SB 1, no minor may be administered puberty blockers or hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence; minors of any sex may be administered puberty blockers or hormones for other purposes," Roberts wrote. The majority said that Tennessee had "plausible reasons" for restricting access to gender-affirming care that brought its inquiry over the law's constitutionality to an end, namely concerns about the health risks. The justices said they wouldn't second-guess the legislature over the lines that the ban draws. "Recent developments only underscore the need for legislative flexibility in this area," Roberts wrote, pointing to a report from England's National Health Service that evaluated the evidence regarding the use of puberty blockers and hormones and characterized it as "remarkably weak." "This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field," he wrote. "The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound. The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best." Roberts concluded that the court's role is only to ensure that the law does not violate the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. Teen questioned after family's quadruple murder Iranians evacuate capital Tehran, some say the regime is frightened Parents, brother of slain Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman speak about her death
Forbes
33 minutes ago
- Forbes
InnovationRx: The Dangers Of RFK Jr.'s Vaccine Advisory Committee
In this week's edition of InnovationRx, we look at the dangers of RFK Jr.'s vaccine advisory committee, how Trump's visa ban bars foreign doctors, the first FDA-approved transcontinental telesurgery and more. To get it in your inbox, subscribe here. Dr. Robert Malone, one of the new members of the vaccine advisory committee, has promoted unproven treatments for Covid-19 and measles. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s remaking of the vaccine advisory committee represents a clear and present danger to public health. Last week, RFK Jr. disbanded the entire 17-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, known as ACIP. He then replaced the ousted members with eight people of his own choosing. The new members include Robert Malone, a former mRNA researcher who parlayed conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines during the pandemic and has promoted unproven, alternative treatments for both Covid and measles. Other advisors include Martin Kulldorff, also an opponent of Covid shots and co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated a herd immunity approach to the pandemic. The speed at which these new members were chosen raised red flags among experts. Until now, potential ACIP appointees were often vetted in a lengthy process that took more than a year to ensure they were qualified and didn't face any potential conflicts of interest. However, several of the new ACIP members don't have any expertise in vaccines or infectious disease, and two of them served as paid experts in a lawsuit against Merck involving its HPV vaccine. The new members are expected to convene at a scheduled ACIP meeting in Atlanta next week. The committee has been giving advice to doctors and patients on vaccination for 60 years. That advice is used by local governments for help in developing policies for schools that keep children safe and by health insurers to determine which vaccines they'll pay for and which they won't. The stakes of this advice is high because vaccination saves lives. Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that giving routine vaccinations to children saved 1.1 million lives between 1994 and 2023. The shots also prevented about 508 million illnesses and 32 million hospitalizations in that time period. This past March, 6,653 foreign citizens, educated at foreign medical schools, matched to internships at American hospitals, according to data from the NRMP. Hasiba Karimi was supposed to be seeing patients at a Harrisburg, Pennsylvania hospital in just a few weeks. She is one of 144 foreign-born international medical school graduates who were slated to start their first year of residency in Pennsylvania this year, and are part of a solution to the critical shortage of doctors in the United States. But she won't be stateside anytime soon. That's because Karimi, who lives in Canada and got her medical education in Turkey, was born in Afghanistan. She was scheduled for an H-1B visa appointment on June 9, the same day President Donald Trump's executive order barring individuals from 19 specific countries from entering the United States took effect. While the order outlines some exceptions—including for diplomatic visas; athletes, coaches and relatives traveling for competitions; and for ethnic and religious minorities 'facing persecution in Iran'—it does not carve out an exception for doctors. So now Karimi, who spent years building her experience and resume to win this internship, can only wait and hope. 'One in four pediatric residents in the USA are international medical school graduates, and they are filling those spots in the most underserved communities that American graduates are not even applying to,' says Sebastian Arruarana, a resident physician at the Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, and an advocate for international medical graduates. 'If this is not solved, who will take care of our children?' Read more here. A gene editing therapy for severe hemophilia B showed promising results in a new study published last week in the New England Journal of Medicine. Between 2010 and 2012, 10 patients who had severe hemophilia B caused by a defect in their DNA that prevented their bodies from making Factor IX, a key blood clotting agent, received the therapy manufactured by St. Jude Research. The treatment they received included the correct gene. Prior to treatment, the patients required regular injections of Factor IX in order to prevent bleeding episodes. The NEJM study found that more than a decade later, the patients who received this gene therapy were still producing Factor IX. Seven of the patients were able to discontinue injections while the others were able to significantly reduce the amount needed. All reported far fewer bleeding incidents with no significant side effects from the medication. Because gene therapies are so expensive (often in the millions of dollars) a big question is whether a single administration can last without the need for additional doses. This study's findings show that it's possible for a treatment to remain durable for more than a decade, which is an encouraging finding for this class of medicine. Plus: 23andMe founder Anne Wojcicki will buy back the assets of the company from bankruptcy. She beat out Regeneron Pharmaceuticals with a $305 million bid. And Caris Life Sciences went public on Wednesday, raising $494 million at an expected valuation of more than $5 billion. Digital health startup Sword Health raised $40 million led by General Catalyst at a valuation of $4 billion. The company said it plans to use the new capital to expand its services to mental health care. It announced the launch of a new product, called Mind, that it said would combine an AI 'therapist' with human professionals. On Sunday, a patient in Angola received surgery for his prostate cancer. The team that performed the operation, meanwhile, was in Orlando, Florida–about 7,000 miles away. This was the first intercontinental operation of its kind to be approved by the FDA for a clinical trial of remote robotic surgery. The purpose of the test was to see if robotic surgery of this type could be performed at that distance using fiberoptic cables. The procedure was a success, which could pave the way for more remote procedures, increasing healthcare access in countries lacking in doctors and other resources. The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Tennessee ban on transgender care for minors. The justices voted 6-to-3 that limiting access to treatments such as puberty blockers for those under the age of 18 was not sex discrimination. The ruling, written by Justice John Roberts, comes as the Trump Administration has attacked transgender rights and could have an effect on two dozen other states with similar laws on the books. Leading medical groups endorse treatments for gender dysphoria. A federal judge ruled that hundreds of NIH grant terminations were 'void and illegal.' 'I have never seen racial discrimination by the government like this,' Judge William Young said from the bench. A coalition of academic groups proposed an alternative for NIH indirect cost reform in response to the Trump Administration's proposed slashing of billions in research overhead payments. Sarepta and Roche stopped the use of Duchenne muscular dystrophy therapy gene therapy Elevidys following two patients' deaths. The governor of Oregon signed a law enacting the country's strictest limits on private equity takeovers of medical practices. Germany's BioNTech agreed to buy rival CureVac to boost cancer research in $1.25 billion deal. South Africa built a medical research powerhouse. Trump's budget cuts have demolished it – and could threaten global progress on everything from heart disease to HIV. Digital startup Tennr raised $101 million at an undisclosed valuation to expand development of its software platform, which lets healthcare services automate and manage their faxes. (Yes, faxes–they're still a thing in healthcare.)
