Mark Halperin says Sen. Fetterman's behavior warrants major concerns as Dems turn on him
'I will say on Fetterman, I really don't understand why Republicans are being so outspoken,' Halperin said on Monday's 'The Morning Meeting' on his 2WAY platform.
Some Republicans have contended Fetterman is being smeared because he's moderated his politics.
'Is it genuine? Because they think he's a great guy getting a bad shake? Are they trying to recruit him to switch parties or are they just trying to make mischief with the Democrats?' Halperin asked.
'But I can tell you, behind the scenes, Fetterman's behavior warrants the commentary it's gotten plus more. I can tell you that.'
Fetterman, who suffered a massive stroke in 2022 and has been open about his struggles with depression, was the target of a brutal New York Magazine report out this month, in which current and former staffers alleged the senator had engaged in erratic behavior and become 'almost impossible to work for.'
Once a progressive darling, Fetterman has since found himself at odds with the far-left wing of the Democratic Party because of his outspoken support for Israel, border security and occasional willingness to work with the Trump White House.
Speculation that Fetterman's mental health was in decline continued after an Associated Press (AP) report alleged he had an outburst during a meeting on May 1 with teachers' union representatives from his state, where he repeated himself and shouted, 'Everybody is mad at me' and 'Why does everyone hate me, what did I ever do?'
Journalist Mark Halperin revealed on 'The Morning Meeting' on his 2WAY platform that questions are being raised about Sen. John Fetterman's mental acuity.
REUTERS
The Philadelphia Inquirer also published a report this month that painted a picture of Fetterman as disengaged and troubled.
Fetterman has repeatedly shut down questions about his fitness for office and dismissed the New York Magazine report as a 'hit piece.'
In response to the AP report, Fetterman's office previously sent Fox News Digital several comments from the senator in which he neither confirmed nor denied the outburst but said: 'Here's what is true: We had a spirited conversation about our collective frustration with the Trump administration's cuts to our education system.'
Halperin said, 'I will say on Fetterman, I really don't understand why Republicans are being so outspoken.'
Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP
Amid the scathing reports, several of Fetterman's colleagues on Capitol Hill have defended the senator and argued that there is a coordinated smear campaign against him.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., conceded that he wasn't a medical expert, but it seemed to him that Democrats were turning on Fetterman because he had bucked his party on several key issues.
'A few short years ago, Fetterman was like this godsend in Pennsylvania. And he came here, and they realized that Fetterman's his own man. He's gonna speak his mind, and he's gonna say it the way that it is or the way he feels like it is anyways, and they can't control him,' Mullin said.
'And the Democrats are all about controlling the party. And so, if you're speaking away from them, it's doomsday for you,' he added.
Fetterman and Halperin did not respond to Fox News Digital's requests for comment on Tuesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
17 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Photos of Texas redistricting standoff as Democrats flee state
A standoff in Texas over redrawn U.S. House maps escalated as dozens of Democratic lawmakers fled the state to block a vote on a redrawn congressional map sought by President Donald Trump to shore up Republicans' 2026 midterm prospects. ___ This is a photo gallery curated by AP photo editors.
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
California, New York signal they're moving forward with redistricting
California and New York are signaling they will move forward with plans to redraw congressional lines as Democrats look to counter the Texas GOP. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) said on Monday that Democrats are pursuing a plan to put mid-decade redistricting before voters, which could be 'triggered' by what happens in Texas. And New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), appearing alongside Texas Democrats who fled to her state over the proposed maps on Monday, embraced exploring 'every option' to redraw congressional lines. Both states, however, face challenges with their plans and are unlikely to have new maps before next year's midterm elections, when Republicans will be defending their narrow 219-212 House majority. 'What Texas has done now is that: If you drive the car all the way off the cliff, there's no road. And I don't know if they realize exactly how far they may have pushed some other actors around the country,' said Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University who founded the database 'All About Redistricting.' Texas Republicans' proposed redistricting plan, which is backed by President Trump and could net the GOP several more congressional seats, prompted Texas Democrats to flee their state and break quorum, depriving the chamber of the numbers it needs to function. But while their move, which comes with significant legal and political hurdles for the participating state legislators, puts a pause on state House business, it's unlikely to kill the proposal altogether. As a result, Democrats are eyeing opportunities to cancel out would-be Republican gains in the Lone Star State by redistricting to their benefit elsewhere. Newsom told reporters on Monday that California is charging ahead with preparations for potential redistricting ahead of the midterms 'in response to the existential realities that we're now facing.' 'We're going to fight fire with fire,' Newsom said. 'We also will punch above our weight in terms of the impact of what we're doing, and I think that should be absorbed by those in the Texas delegation. Whatever they are doing will be neutered here in the state of California.' Leaders in the blue stronghold are considering a plan that would put mid-decade redistricting before voters during a special election this November, contingent on whether Texas moves forward with gerrymandered maps. 'It's cause and effect, triggered on the basis of what occurs or doesn't occur in Texas,' the governor said. The plan would maintain the framework of California's independent redistricting commission but 'allow for this mid-census redistricting to occur just for congressional maps in 26, 28 and 30,' before revering to the existing system, Newsom explained. Sara Sadhwani, a current member of the redistricting commission that redrew California's lines in 2021 and a politics professor at Pomona College, said she stands by the Golden State's current maps as 'a real win for democracy and for fair redistricting.' 'However, certainly, as other states are going to engage in gerrymandering, extreme gerrymandering, it subverts the voices of Californians and American voters broadly speaking,' she said. 'I can understand why Democrats would want to fight back.' Sadhwani predicted that Newsom and the California legislature would need to 'campaign heavily' if it goes through with the plans for a special election, due to the popularity of independent redistricting at both the state and local levels. Politico reported on Tuesday that former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is ready to campaign against the plan. 'No doubt the governor and the legislature would have their work cut out for them to convince voters that this is the right move,' Sadhwani said. California could be Democrats' best hope to counter Texas, as other states are even more unlikely to implement changes by 2026. Hochul on Monday said she's exploring options to redraw New York congressional lines 'as soon as possible,' working on a legislative process and reviewing legal strategies 'to stop this brazen assault.' 'You have to fight fire with fire,' she said, adding 'all's fair in love and war.' 'For Republicans, they could potentially be [in] a situation where there are no safe seats. They're vulnerable everywhere,' said Democratic strategist Basil Smikle, a former executive director of the New York State Democratic Party. 'This is a problem of the president and the party's own making because you want to play cute by doing this in Texas. Why would you think that that's not going to happen everywhere? That you're not going to give leave to Democratic governors to do the same thing?' Smilke said. But in New York, where House maps were struck down by a court in 2022 for giving a partisan advantage to Democrats, there are hurdles for mid-decade redistricting. The state uses a redistricting commission, and maps are subject to the state legislature's approval. The state constitution would also need amending, and that process requires two consecutive sessions before heading to voters — so Democrats wouldn't have time to change things before 2026. Mid-decade changes in the Empire State would be 'very tricky, both politically and practically,' said Jonathan Cervas, the redistricting expert who redrew New York's congressional lines in 2022. He was appointed by the state supreme court as a neutral special master after the earlier maps were tossed. 'It's very unlikely to happen, certainly before the next election,' Cervas said. 'It may not happen at all, because voters may reject the idea of giving up their system that is created for the purposes of creating a more even playing ground for voters.' Meanwhile, the Texas developments are reverberating in other GOP states too. Ohio is set to push forward with redistricting that could impact two Democrat-held House seats, while Florida Republicans have floated their own plans to redraw lines. Other blue states besides California and New York are also weighing their options. Leaders of Maryland and New Jersey have left the door open, though there would be fewer seats to grab in the smaller blue states. There could also be a path forward for Democrats in Illinois, where there's more mid-cycle flexibility. Illinois might be able to get 'creative' with its approach to redrawing lines and squeeze the existing three GOP-held seats, Levitt suggested. But an aggressive gerrymander in the Prairie State could backfire, suggested Cervas, 'because then you cut the margins of the Democratic seats too thin and risk losing some of them, too.' 'All that boils down to is that there are few legal ways for Democrats to counteract Texas, and there are very few practical ways of doing it as well,' he added. These conversations come against the backdrop of a 2019 ruling by the Supreme Court that excessive partisan gerrymandering is a political issue, rather than a question for federal courts. 'When you don't have recourse … you do exactly what's going on here, which is the [Texas] Democrats leave town and Democrats elsewhere try to figure out how to punch back,' Levitt said. Despite the challenges, efforts to engage in tit-for-tat redistricting aren't exactly a shock to experts as both parties fret over thin margins in Congress and the high-stakes midterm season ahead. 'Politics is really on a knife's edge, where the control of Congress and our political institutions really comes down to just a few seats. And so trying to get advantage wherever you can, from political parties' perspective, makes a lot of sense,' Cervas said. 'Redistricting is a relatively inexpensive way to increase your [electoral] power, compared to the politics of shaking hands and winning over voters.'
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump administration escalates probes of rivals with Russia grand jury
The Trump administration's launch of a grand jury probe into Obama-era officials marks an escalation in its use of the justice system to go after political adversaries, amid mounting pressure to release the Epstein files. It's the first sign the Justice Department is acting on criminal referrals made by Trump intelligence officials, including after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused officials of a 'treasonous conspiracy' related to Russian interference in the 2016 election. The documents released by her office, however, do not appear to back that claim, instead largely showing officials discussing what they acknowledged shortly after the election — that Russia was never able to manipulate vote totals. Nonetheless, the White House broke with the practice of maintaining secrecy around grand jury proceedings, confirming the probe in pointing to 'the compelling case' outlined by Gabbard, which they argue 'exposed clear and blatant weaponization by corrupt intelligence officials acting at the behest of the Democrat Party and likely former President Obama.' The White House further argues the Obama officials 'worked to sabotage the Trump administration.' 'It doesn't get more serious than this. This is a criminal conspiracy. The evidence is clear there's a criminal conspiracy here and nobody is above the law,' Mike Davis, an ally of President Trump who runs The Article III Project, said on Fox News. The administration's attempts to focus attention on the Russia findings come as Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi face pressure, including from many Republicans, to release more information related to the case of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. Among the possible targets are former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who in a joint op-ed blasted the accusations against them as 'patently false' while falsely minimizing Russia's 2016 efforts. 'Every serious review has substantiated the intelligence community's fundamental conclusion that the Russians conducted an influence campaign intended to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election,' the two wrote. 'Contrary to the Trump administration's wild and baseless claims, there was no mention of 'collusion' between the Trump campaign and the Russians in the assessment,' they added. CIA Director John Ratcliffe said beyond Clapper and Brennan, he also made referrals for former FBI Director James Comey as well as Hillary Clinton. Critics argue that launching a grand jury probe is yet another instance of Trump weaponizing the government against his political foes. He has previously revoked security details from those he disagrees with, targeted universities that do not align with his administration's policies and gone after law firms with ties to Democrats. And over the weekend, the Office of the Special Counsel acknowledged a probe into former special counsel Jack Smith. The court action quickly prompted criticism that the Trump administration was abusing the Justice Department. 'Trump – 'the hunted' – has indeed become the hunter – facts and law, be damned. These folks are using the court of law to shape the court of public opinion. They're also making a mockery of grand jury secrecy rules, which are in part designed to protect uncharged individuals,' Anthony Coley, who served as a spokesman for the Obama Justice Department, wrote on X. The probe comes after Bondi announced the creation of a 'Strike Force' to investigate claims related to the 2016 election. It's not clear where the grand jury has been empaneled — a detail that could matter in the Democrat-heavy jury pool of Washington, D.C., which might be skeptical of claims of wrongdoing in an election Trump won. It's also not clear what conduct it might be exploring. Republicans have, at turns, accused intelligence officials of lying to Congress in the prior reviews of Russia's interference in the 2016 election and the intelligence community response. But the documents supplied by Gabbard — which accuse leaders of 'suppression of intelligence' — largely show figures like Clapper discussing how Russia was not able to manipulate the vote even as the adversary tried to sow chaos in the 2016 election. Gabbard also released a previously classified House Intelligence Committee Republican assessment that called into question whether Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help Trump win; however, all assessments found the country was seeking to impact the election. Trump on Tuesday denied that he had any involvement in the Justice Department's decision to open a grand jury investigation, though he has not hidden his approval of the move. 'Pam is doing a great job,' Trump said on CNBC of Attorney General Pam Bondi. 'I have nothing to do with it. I will tell you this, they deserve it. I was happy to hear it.' Davis, who runs the conservative advocacy group the Article III Project, argued those being investigated could face potential perjury charges related to their previous testimony about Russian interference in the 2016 election. He also pointed to potential conspiracy charges, arguing that the alleged ongoing 'cover-up' would mean that the statute of limitations has not expired. 'I would say to these lawfare Democrats, lawyer up,' Davis said on Fox News. 'Because justice is definitely coming.' Some lawmakers have said any eventual charges could actually be fruitful in fighting the claims forwarded by Gabbard and others. 'The reason I want her to bring charges is that there is not a court in the United States that will do anything other than to laugh hysterically over the bulls‑‑‑ that Tulsi Gabbard is peddling right now,' Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Hill last month when the DNI first began releasing documents. 'They're not dumping documents. They're making up lies,' Himes added. The issue of Russian interference in the 2016 election has been a fixation for Trump for roughly eight years, as he has repeatedly claimed he was the victim of 'spying' and politically motivated probes around Russia's influence campaigns. Gabbard's findings, and the decision to launch a grand jury investigation, also carry political ramifications for the White House. Some Democrats, including a spokesperson for Obama, have dismissed the Russia claims as an attempt at distracting from the Epstein controversy. 'The real politicization is the calculated distortion of intelligence by administration officials, notably Mr. Trump's directors of national intelligence and the C.I.A., positions that should be apolitical,' Brennan and Clapper wrote in their op-ed. 'We find it deeply regrettable that the administration continues to perpetuate the fictitious narrative that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election.'
