logo
'Pod Save America' Obama bros want to see Democrats totally cut off aid to Israel

'Pod Save America' Obama bros want to see Democrats totally cut off aid to Israel

Fox News20 hours ago
"Pod Save America" co-host and former Obama spokesperson Tommy Vietor said he hopes for a "total mindset change" in military support for Israel on Tuesday.
Though Vietor emphasized that Hamas committed an "evil act of terror" against Israel, he, along with his fellow podcast hosts, believed that Israel was guilty of "dehumanizing" the people in Gaza. As a result, Vietor said that any Democratic presidential candidate needs to campaign to end federal aid to the country.
"The thing I want to see Democrats at least calling for is cutting off military assistance to Israel. It's a rich country, by the way. They don't need our $3 billion a year," Vietor said.
He acknowledged former President Barack Obama previously signed a deal to provide aid to Israel while in office but argued that Democrats should take this opportunity to "correct it."
"I would like to see talk about sanctioning Israeli government officials who use genocidal rhetoric or who talk about ethnic cleansing openly. We should support a ceasefire resolution at the UN. We should demand that international press be allowed into the Gaza Strip to report on what's happening without an IDF minder. It's insane that the press still can't go into Gaza and cover what's happening," Vietor said.
He continued, "And I also think there has to be a total mindset change in the Democratic Party. When the war ends, we are not going back to the pre-October 7th status quo, because it's not where the party is. It's not where the world is. We are not going to shovel billions a year in military aid. We're not going to veto every effort to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN. We should not take money from AIPAC."
"I will hold out hope for better political leadership in the US and in Israel, but we have to also recognize that the Biden-era, hug-Bibi-Netanyahu strategy has to be thrown in the trash can for f---ing ever," Vietor added.
Former Obama speechwriter Jon Lovett agreed that there will have to be a "shift" in the Democratic Party that would include "putting far more pressure on Israel." Fellow Obama aide Jon Favreau also called cutting off military aid to Israel the "least" the U.S. can do after its actions.
Though Lovett and Vietor said Democrats need to press harder against Israel, several Democratic lawmakers have already openly attacked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel's actions during its ongoing war against Hamas.
Last month, members of the House's progressive "Squad," including Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., denounced Netanyahu as a "war criminal" after his government launched attacks on Tehran and surrounding areas.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove
What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove

The Intercept

timea few seconds ago

  • The Intercept

What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove

Emil Bove, the nominee to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is sworn in before his confirmation hearing in the Senate on June 25, 2025, in Washington. Photo: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images President Donald Trump's second term has so far been a constant barrage of unconstitutional actions and illegal orders. So it was thus no surprise when the Senate on Monday confirmed Trump's former personal lawyer and Justice Department lackey, Emil Bove, to a lifetime appointment on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That 50 Republican senators would install this fascist bootlicker to one of the most powerful judicial positions in the land for life is, as MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann put it, 'a nail in the coffin' for a system of checks and balances on authoritarian presidential overreach. There's a risk, however, after a grave blow like this to legal, political, and constitutional norms, that liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order will mourn the wrong thing. Bove's appointment confirms something worse than the Republican embrace of lawlessness. He represents the Republicans' use and abuse of our fraught constitutional order for the purposes of enacting profound, life-denying, and long-lasting injustices to uphold a white nationalist regime. Liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order risk mourning the wrong thing. Calling on the restoration of preexisting norms of law and constitutionality to reverse course will be, at best, insufficient. After all, liberal reliance on a system of order above justice helped deliver us Trump and his jurist enablers in the first place. This is not to understate how appalling it is that Bove has been appointed a federal judge. 'It is one thing to put lab-designed Federalist Society members on courts across the country — and, to be clear, several of Trump's nominees from his first administration went far beyond that,' wrote legal journalist Chris Geidner when Trump nominated Bove, 'but it is another thing altogether to name a lawless loyalist to a federal appeals court.' Geidner called Bove's confirmation a 'line that cannot be crossed.' It has now been crossed. Bove is perhaps best known as the Justice Department official who dismissed corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams — a decision that led more than 10 Justice Department attorneys to resign in protest. He fired federal prosecutors who had worked on January 6 cases. According to three Justice Department whistleblower accounts, Bove also told federal attorneys that they 'would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you'' and ignore orders blocking the administration from sending immigrants to El Salvador's gulag. Over 900 former Justice Department attorneys, identifying with both parties, wrote letters opposing Bove's judgeship. Yet Republican senators refused to hear whistleblower testimony and dismissed the widespread concerns about Bove as Democratic meddling. As usual, they did what the president asked. Bove's new, permanent position assures more serious harms to come. Given how few cases are heard by the Supreme Court, the 3rd Circuit is most often the final voice in the law for cases from Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Bove has made unwaveringly clear that, for him, the law is the president's will. This position is now standard in the Republican Party and all too consistently affirmed by a Supreme Court majority committed to unitary executive theory to vest authoritarian powers in Trump's hands. Earlier this month, Geidner posted on social media that 'should Bove be confirmed — which he should not be — he should immediately be the subject of an impeachment inquiry should Dems retake Congress.' Based on his actions at the Department of Justice, there are ample grounds to call for impeachment. Democrats should vow to do this immediately. Senate Democrats carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. Senate Democrats, after all, carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. His seat should have been filled by Biden nominee, Adeel Mangi, who would have been the first Muslim judge on a federal appeals court. Instead of shutting down vile, Islamophobic Republican attacks against Mangi, Senate Democrats allowed the smears to gain ground and eventually stood down on the nomination. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday said, 'To confirm Mr. Bove is a sacrilegious act against our democracy.' He did not mention that, when he was Senate majority leader, he permitted a relentless Islamophobic campaign to tank Mangi, a qualified nominee, which left the judge's seat open for Trump's taking. The Democratic establishment may lament Bove's confirmation as 'a dark, dark day,' but we have no reason to think that this party leadership will bring us toward the light. Geidner's suggestion — to pursue impeachment — would be the very least that Democrats can do. What they should already be doing is using every tool in their power to hinder Trump's deportation machine. Given the Democrats' own vile embrace of harsh border rule, I am not holding my breath. The judges who have continued to push back directly against Trump's illegal actions, meanwhile, remain a crucial constraint on some of the administration's worst attacks on our rights. These judges are under unprecedented attack. On the same day Bove was confirmed, Trump's Justice Department filed a baseless misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. In March, Boasberg issued an order to block deportation flights to El Salvador under Trump's invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act — the very sort of order that Bove reportedly told attorneys to say 'fuck you' to. In an obscene retaliatory escalation, the Justice Department's complaint claims that Boasberg's alleged comments — that the administration could trigger a 'constitutional crisis' by disregarding court orders — 'have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.' The complaint says that the administration has 'always complied with all court orders.' The idea that it constitutes judicial misconduct to suggest otherwise, despite clear evidence of the executive's disregard for certain unfavorable court orders, is the sort of authoritarian logic that obviates concerns about a constitutional crisis in the worst way: There can be no crisis if fascist rule silences all constitutional pushback. Then the problem is not a constitutional order in crisis, but a fascist order without opposition. This is not yet the state of affairs. The courts — certain courts, at least — are not yet a dead end. It should be increasingly clear, however, that they will not deliver us from fascism either. As legal scholar Aziz Rana wrote earlier this year, the left should 'strongly back litigation efforts and condemn Trump's defiance of the courts,' but not because the courts are a terrain of liberatory struggle. Rana is clear that 'the reason to oppose Trump's violation of court orders is not out of a general faith in judges or constitutional norms,' but because they are a tool, however limited, for protecting people and holding the administration to account. The affront at the heart of Bove's confirmation is not that he does not respect the law — although that should no doubt be disqualifying for a judge. If that's where we object, however, we risk lionizing a criminal legal system that also gives rise to racist policing and mass incarceration. Bove's violence lies primarily in his commitment to a form of injustice that ensures impunity for the corrupt and powerful, while the poorest and most vulnerable are treated as wholly disposable. The infamous advice Bove allegedly gave to ignore court orders over deportations was a 'fuck you' to the Constitution and the rule of law, yes, but above all it was a 'fuck you' to the over 200 men who were rounded up, kidnapped, shaved, beaten, and tortured in a foreign gulag without any recourse. It was a 'fuck you' to human beings. It should go without saying that the constitutional order in and of itself has never in practice guaranteed equality and justice for all. The constitutionalization of slavery's abolition and many basic civil rights protections took extraordinary social struggle and political work. The successful dismantling of the constitutional right to an abortion took decades of political organizing, too. Nothing in the Constitution guarantees progress. 'The great social movements of the past, from abolition to civil rights, labour to women's suffrage, famously called for the defiance of unjust court judgments that sustained slavery, segregation and disenfranchisement, or criminalized union organizing,' Rana noted. 'Considering the current right-wing control over the courts, the left may find itself in a similar place in the coming years, calling for civil disobedience of judicial authority.' With judges like Bove in place, such action will likely be all the more necessary.

Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run
Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run

USA Today

timea few seconds ago

  • USA Today

Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run

'For now, my leadership – and public service – will not be in elected office,' she said, after explaining she didn't intend to enter the race for California governor in 2026. WASHINGTON – Former Vice President Kamala Harris won't be running for California governor in 2026– but is not ruling out another bid for the White House. The two-time Democratic presidential candidate, who abruptly took over as her party's nominee in the 2024 general election, said in a surprise announcement on July 30 that she would not compete in next year's gubernatorial race. What Harris, who currently lives in Southern California with her husband Doug Emhoff, did not say was whether she'd decided about running for president in 2028. 'For now, my leadership – and public service – will not be in elected office,' she said. 'I look forward to getting back out and listening to the American people, helping elect Democrats across the nation who will fight fearlessly, and sharing more details in the months ahead about my own plans.' A source familiar with her thinking said Harris, 60, did not pass on a gubernatorial campaign in order to clear a path to run for president in 2028. But the person noted that Harris also did not close the door on running for president. And it would have been politically impossible for her to seek both elected offices. The next governor of California will take office at the beginning of 2027, around the same time that Harris would need to be gearing up for a presidential bid were she to compete again. Another factor: Harris is currently writing a book, two people with knowledge of her plans said, and is expected to go on tour. More: Burdened by what had been: Kamala Harris couldn't convince voters "She can do anything she wants to do, but she owes us nothing. And I hope she spends some time with the kids and Dougie, maybe teaches. I'm ready to go read the book,' longtime Harris ally Bakari Sellers said. 'She's a talent and 2028 could be it. Or 2032. Whatever she decides. She's young." The announcement adds an additional wrinkle to the decision-making process for Democrats with national ambitions who were forced to take a back seat to Harris last year, when former President Joe Biden quit his reelection campaign and endorsed his sitting vice president as his replacement. Harris lost in a landslide to President Donald Trump, whom she characterized on the trail as an acute threat to democracy in the face of robust evidence that the electorate was primarily concerned about inflation and the economy. She also came under criticism in the abbreviated campaign for refusing to distance herself from Biden, whose mental fitness and age have faced even greater scrutiny since he left office. In her statement on the California governor's race, Harris said the country is in a 'moment of crisis' because the nation's politics, government and institutions have frequently failed the American people. 'As we look ahead, we must be willing to pursue change through new methods and fresh thinking – committed to our same values and principles, but not bound by the same playbook,' Harris said. 'She could still drop the hammer' The announcement took even some of her closest political allies by surprise. 'I was anticipating an announcement for governor, because she would be good at it, and I thought she still wanted to get back in that fryer right now,' said Sellers, a co-chair of Harris' first presidential campaign. Harris allies said they do not know which way Harris would come down on a 2028 presidential bid, but they were glad to see her commit to remaining politically active. 'I think we'll all be waiting with bated breath to see what her next steps are,' former Biden and Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said. Chavez Rodriguez worked for Harris in her Senate office and on her bid for the 2020 presidential nomination before joining Biden's team. She worked as a senior aide at the White House and ran his reelection campaign. She said she believes Harris is focused on 'figuring out what she can do in the moment…given the challenges that we're facing in the immediate, and what I know will be even more challenges coming up.' Glynda Carr, president of Higher Heights, which works to expand Black women's political power and backed Harris' 2020 presidential bid, said her campaign had inspired other women to run. 'I am on team Kamala Harris in whatever she decides to do,'' Carr said, noting that Harris can lead outside of having an elected office. 'I'm on team 'Kamala, private citizen,' team 'Kamala, candidate.'' Jaime Harrison, the former chair of the Democratic National Committee, said he would like to see Harris campaign for Democrats running for office in 2026, especially in the South. He encouraged his party to stay focused on overturning Republicans' narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and winning governorships. 'It's good to have her out there, and I'm sure, as she goes around the country, she'll make up her mind about what she wants to do about 2028. But we can't think about 2028 until we get to 2026,' Harrison said. As for what it all means for possible candidates such as former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, the answer is simple, Sellers said. 'Nothing, because she could still drop the hammer on all of them if she wants to run for president,' the Harris ally said. 'She'll beat all of them if she decides.'

The Boy Who Cried Hoax
The Boy Who Cried Hoax

New York Times

timea minute ago

  • New York Times

The Boy Who Cried Hoax

President Trump isn't just trying to change the subject; he's also trying to rewrite history — or maybe I should say reality. Earlier this month — while Trump was struggling to answer questions about his long friendship with Jeffrey Epstein — Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, released a report purporting to show that senior Obama administration officials participated in a 'treasonous conspiracy' in 2016 that was designed to hurt the incoming Trump administration. Last week the Justice Department piled on. It announced that it was creating a 'strike force' to 'assess' Gabbard's evidence and 'investigate potential next legal steps.' For his part, Trump reposted a fake video depicting former President Barack Obama's arrest. And he's kept on posting. Days later he reposted a meme that Photoshopped Obama into the infamous white Bronco from O.J. Simpson's police chase in 1994, with JD Vance and Trump himself Photoshopped into police cars. It's tempting to write these developments off as nothing more than ploys to direct the base away from the ongoing Epstein saga by playing one of MAGA's greatest hits: the claim that Trump was the victim of a witch hunt, that the establishment attempted to destroy him even before he began his first term. For those who followed the Russia investigation in its many manifestations, Gabbard's report was an obvious red herring. It hinged on the claim that there was 'no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count.' But the actual vote count was never the basis for the allegations against Russia. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store