California pushes left, Texas to the right, with US House control and Trump agenda in play
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
a minute ago
- Boston Globe
Republican bid to help Trump move past Epstein falls flat
On Monday, Representative James Comer, Republican from Kentucky, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, said the Justice Department would begin sharing its Epstein records with his panel by Friday. He also suggested the release of the documents would take some time, all but ensuring that questions about the Epstein affair will drag on for weeks. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up At the same time, Democrats, in some cases with the help of Republicans, have laid a series of procedural traps that will make it all but impossible for the GOP to avoid confronting the issue again when Congress reconvenes in September. 'We're going to keep the pressure up — 100 percent,' Senator Ruben Gallego, Democrat from Arizona, said at an event in Iowa this month. 'As often as we can, until we know exactly what happened, why it happened.' Advertisement Even with Congress in recess, the Epstein case continues to generate attention in Washington. On Monday, William Barr, who was President Trump's attorney general when Epstein died, testified in a closed-door deposition for the Oversight Committee. Lawmakers of both parties concede the Trump administration could quiet the furor over the Epstein files on Capitol Hill and nationwide by simply releasing them to the public. Comer's statement on Monday was the only public indication to date that it might do so. All the while, several efforts connected to Epstein, a disgraced financier who was found dead in his prison cell in 2019, have been percolating and threaten to disrupt a busy month in which Congress also faces a Sept. 30 deadline to fund the government and avert a shutdown. Chief among them may be a maneuver led by Representive Thomas Massie, Republican fron Kentucky, who is a frequent Trump critic, to try to force a floor vote on the release of the files. Such a vote would thrust Republicans into a politically thorny position between Trump and constituents who are unhappy with the administration's handling of the case. Before leaving Washington, Massie and Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, filed what is known as a discharge petition, which allows any member of the House to force legislation to the floor if a majority of members — 218 — sign on. Because of arcane procedural rules, the pair cannot start collecting signatures until they return in September, but they appear to have more than enough support to succeed. The timing all but guaranteed that the issue would hang over lawmakers throughout the August recess and that Republican leaders would be forced to address it when they returned. While they could try to table the effort, several rank-and-file Republicans earlier this year blocked a similar attempt to circumvent a measure that had majority support. Advertisement So far, 43 other lawmakers, 11 of them Republicans, have signed on to Massie and Khanna's initiative. Last week, the pair announced plans for a news conference with victims of Epstein and his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, to be held outside the Capitol on lawmakers' second day back from their break. Democrats on the powerful House Rules Committee, a panel controlled by the speaker that determines which legislation reaches the floor, also plan to continue pressuring Republicans over the issue. Republican leaders never found a solution to the committee's impasse, which led them to send the House home a day ahead of schedule. But they seemed to take solace in the Trump administration's request that federal judges release transcripts of grand jury testimony in three cases related to Epstein and Maxwell. Both House Speaker Mike Johnson and Representative Steve Scalise, the number two Republican, suggested such a move might help alleviate concerns, adding that the House could not address the Epstein files while the courts were weighing in. 'That process is underway right now,' Johnson said last month. 'Now, we've got to zealously guard that and protect it and make sure it's happening. And if it doesn't, then we'll take appropriate action when everybody returns here.' Yet so far, federal judges in two of those three cases have denied the government's requests. A judge overseeing Maxwell's case said that the Justice Department's suggestion that grand jury testimony 'would bring to light meaningful new information' was 'demonstrably false.' A third judge, who oversaw Epstein's 2019 case, is still considering whether to unseal grand jury materials connected to that prosecution. Advertisement And Republicans and Democrats alike have argued that the grand jury testimony falls far short of the promise that Attorney General Pam Bondi and other top officials had made. Instead, they have turned to legal maneuvers meant to force the Justice Department to provide the Epstein files to Congress. This month, the Oversight Committee issued a subpoena to Bondi asking the Justice Department to give the committee its files related to Epstein and Maxwell by Tuesday. Comer, a staunch Trump ally, was forced to send the subpoena after a small group of Republicans joined Democrats in voting to approve it at a subcommittee meeting last month. On Monday, he told reporters he was confident that 'we're going to get the documents,' citing 'productive' conversations with the Justice Department. Senate Democrats have already started to pressure Republicans over the matter using a little-known and infrequently tested maneuver to try to force Bondi to turn over the Epstein files. Under a provision of federal law, government agencies are required to hand over relevant information if any five members of the Senate's chief oversight committee requests it. Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York, the minority leader, and seven other Democrats had asked the Justice Department to give them Epstein-related materials by Aug. 15. They also asked that a briefing be held for the committee's staff before the end of the month. So far, the committee has not received any material, and the briefing has not been scheduled, according to two people familiar with the matter who said they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Advertisement Schumer has said Democrats are prepared to seek legal recourse if the Trump administration does not meet the letter's deadlines. On Friday, he began publicly pressuring Senator John Thune, Republican from South Dakota, the majority leader, to appoint a lawyer who would defend the Senate's legal authority for congressional oversight. 'If he chooses complicity — we'll take them to court ourselves,' Schumer wrote in a social media post. This article originally appeared in .
Fast Company
a minute ago
- Fast Company
Newsmax agrees to pay $67 million in defamation case over false 2020 election claims
The conservative network Newsmax will pay $67 million to settle a lawsuit accusing it of defaming a voting equipment company by spreading lies about President Donald Trump's 2020 election loss, according to documents filed Monday. The settlement comes after Fox News Channel paid $787.5 million to settle a similar lawsuit in 2023 and Newsmax paid what court papers describe as $40 million to settle a libel lawsuit from a different voting machine manufacturer, Smartmatic, which also was a target of pro-Trump conspiracy theories on the network. Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis had ruled earlier that Newsmax did indeed defame Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by airing false information about the company and its equipment. But Davis left it to a jury to eventually decide whether that was done with malice, and, if so, how much Dominion deserved from Newsmax in damages. Newsmax and Dominion reached the settlement before the trial could take place. The settlement was disclosed by Newsmax on Monday in a new filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. It said the deal was reached Friday. A spokesperson for Dominion said the company was pleased to have settled the lawsuit. The disclosure came as Trump, who lost his 2020 reelection bid to Democrat Joe Biden, vowed in a social media post Monday to eliminate mail-in ballots and voting machines such as those supplied by Dominion and other companies. It was unclear how the Republican president could achieve that. The same judge also handled the Dominion-Fox News case and made a similar ruling that the network repeated numerous lies by Trump's allies about his 2020 loss despite internal communications showing Fox officials knew the claims were bogus. At the time, Davis found it was 'CRYSTAL clear' that none of the allegations was true. Internal correspondence from Newsmax officials likewise shows they knew the claims were baseless. 'How long are we going to play along with election fraud?' Newsmax host Bob Sellers said two days after the 2020 election was called for Biden, according to internal documents revealed as part of the case. Newsmax took pride that it was not calling the election for Biden and, the internal documents show, saw a business opportunity in catering to viewers who believed Trump won. Private communications that surfaced as part of Dominion's earlier defamation case against Fox News also revealed how the network's business interests intersected with decisions it made related to coverage of Trump's 2020 election claims. At Newsmax, employees repeatedly warned against false allegations from pro-Trump guests such as attorney Sidney Powell, according to documents in the lawsuit. In one text, even Newsmax owner Chris Ruddy, a Trump ally, said he found it 'scary' that Trump was meeting with Powell. Dominion was at the heart of many of the wild claims aired by guests on Newsmax and elsewhere, who promoted a conspiracy theory involving deceased Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez to rig the machines for Biden. Though Trump has insisted his fraud claims are real, there's no evidence they were, and the lawsuits in the Fox and Newsmax cases show how some of the president's biggest supporters knew they were false at the time. Trump's then-attorney general, William Barr, said there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Trump and his backers lost dozens of lawsuits alleging fraud, some before Trump-appointed judges. Numerous recounts, reviews and audits of the election results, including some run by Republicans, turned up no signs of significant wrongdoing or error and affirmed Biden's win. After returning to office, Trump pardoned those who tried to halt the transfer of power during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and directed his Department of Justice to investigate Chris Krebs, a former Trump cybersecurity appointee who had vouched for the security and accuracy of the 2020 election. As an initial trial date approached in the Dominion case earlier this year, Trump issued an executive order attacking the law firm that litigated it and the Fox case, Susman Godfrey. The order, part of a series targeting law firms Trump has tussled with, cited Susman Godfrey's work on elections and said the government would not do business with any of its clients or permit any of its staff in federal buildings. A federal judge put that action on hold, saying the framers would view it as 'a shocking abuse of power. '
Gizmodo
a minute ago
- Gizmodo
Despite Online MAGA Freakout About Her Jeans, Sydney Sweeney's New Movie Bombs
A couple of weeks ago, American Eagle launched a new ad campaign for its blue jeans line that featured actress Sydney Sweeney. In one of the ads, Sweeney weirdly broached the topic of genetics (she said, and I quote: 'genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue'), but, for the most part, the ads seems to be about how great Sweeney's posterior looks when she's wearing the company's denim. Not long after the jeans ads aired, the internet collectively lost its mind. One TikToker compared the ad to 'Nazi propaganda' and, soon, NPR had dubbed it the 'ad campaign that launched a thousand critiques.' CNN asked what America had 'learned' from the Sweeney 'situation.' Vox used the episode to wax eloquent about the 'unsettling legacy of the blonde bombshell.' Dr. Phil and Lizzo both got upset—for different reasons—and America's president, in a move that was very on-brand for him, issued a mispelling-strewn statement calling 'Sidney' the 'HOTTEST.' Meanwhile, a number of high-profile MAGA folks (including J.D. Vance, Charlie Kirk, and Ted Cruz) attempted to commandeer the topic, and use it to engineer a backlash to the supposed backlash to Sweeney's ads. Meanwhile, Rolling Stone magazine unveiled a timeline of America's conservatives efforts to 'claim' Sweeney for themselves as a cultural icon. Based on the national conversation we were all just forced to have about Sweeney and her jeans, one would've thought MAGA's collective lust for Sweeney could have easily been translated into hefty box office numbers for her newest movie, Americana. After all, if middle America is now collectively salivating over Sweeney, wouldn't they want to go see her every chance they get? Apparently that's not how things worked out, however. Sweeney's new movie only garnered some $500,000 during its opening weekend, The Hollywood Reporter has noted. Film critics have been lukewarm to positive about the film, with Vulture calling it 'a '90s-style ensemble crime movie that engages in a sly exploration of the iconography and mythology we use to define the country' and noting that the film is not 'particularly political' but that it is 'blessed with a fairly strong cast.' However, Americana's real problem would appear to be less the fact that its lead actress's brand endorsements have stirred up controversy and more about the fact that most people haven't heard of it. I go to the movies a lot, and am generally aware of the upcoming developments at my local cinema, and I can't say that I'd even seen an ad for Americana or heard much about it prior to writing this article. The movie's ad, which seems to offer a run-of-the-mill comedic crime romp, doesn't have much of a partisan bent. The internet is not a real place, but not infrequently, through a kind of alchemical magic, it can produce real-world events. Sometimes the web can stir up so much ideological turmoil that it spills offline and into the real world (just look at January 6th, if you need an example). The problem is that no one really cared that deeply about the American Eagle ad in the first place. A few pissed off leftist people online and a gaggle of MAGA commentators attempted to get everyone to care about it, and the news media carried the story into our collective consciousness, if only to have something somewhat entertaining to write about instead of the incessant horrors visited upon us daily by the Trump administration. For Fox News, it was a way to avoid talking about the incessant horrors visited upon us daily by the Trump administration, in a different way. Still, despite the best efforts of a select few to make the Great Jeans War of 2025 happen, America's heart just wasn't in it. A recent poll from The Economist/YouGov showed only 12 percent of Americans found the ad 'offensive.' We've been through a solid half-decade of having our minds messed with by the Extremely Online, and America may have completely exhausted its moral panics.
