Latest news with #BillClinton
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Fox News
James Carville warns Democrats not to get baited into discussing woke issues: 'You're going to look silly'
Democratic strategist James Carville advised Democratic leaders Thursday not to get distracted by woke issues and instead begin to stick it to President Donald Trump where it really hurts. In the latest episode of his Politics War Room podcast, the former adviser to Bill Clinton said he believes his party should focus on hitting Trump over the excesses of his $3.3 trillion "big, beautiful bill," and warned them not to let the Republican Party distract them with radical issues they're on the wrong side of politically, like trans rights. "Don't let them go there. And the public is with you," he said, urging his party to stay on target. The strategist began by noting how opposition to the "big, beautiful bill" – which Congress passed and Trump signed earlier this month – is one of the Democratic Party's strongest issues to run against the GOP at the moment. "If I were the Democrats, I'd say, 'Look, why don't we have a campaign about issues this time,'" he said. "We're always talking about how we have personalities. This is one of those rare moments where Republicans and Democrats agree on the topic, and that is – Is the big, beautiful bill good or bad?" "That is an argument that the Democrats cannot lose, OK?" Carville added. "They can't lose it." Trump's legislation passed with zero support from any Democratic Party members in either chamber of Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., labeled the bill "cruel" during floor remarks that lasted hours, pointing to Medicaid and SNAP reforms that reports suggest would remove millions of beneficiaries from the programs. "This is a rare time in American politics that we have an agreement on what the number one issue should be," Carville said, adding, "This is a really good opportunity for Democrats to look big and talk about something that really, really matters to people." He also noted that if Democratic leaders focus upcoming elections on this issue, there is "no way" they can lose those. Following those points, co-host Al Hunt argued that the GOP will start hammering radical left issues, like the trans issue, to distract from the weaknesses of their spending bill. However, Carville said he doesn't think Democratic figures will fall for it this time. "I think at this point, you're going to look silly if you go to trans stuff, okay? I think that idea has, like, come and gone," he said about the GOP continuing to make hay of those issues. "I think the Democrats realize they're not going to say anything stupid on this again." Still, he warned the Democratic Party, "Just don't let them take you there. They're going to try anything they can, but don't let them go there."
Fox News
6 hours ago
- Business
- Fox News
Trump Solving America's Problems
As seen on Gutfeld!, Bill Clinton's frequent Epstein miles. Also, Greg discusses Trump's trade deal with the EU. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit FOX News Radio
Washington Post
8 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Washington Post
Robert Reich has some choice words for ‘bullies'
Question: What do Donald Trump, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Robert Reich and 'It's a Wonderful Life' have in common? Answer: All were released to the American public in 1946. Another question: What did those four baby boomers fail to accomplish? Answer: 'To stop the bullies,' according to Reich. 'Some of us even contributed to the brutality.'
Newsweek
a day ago
- Business
- Newsweek
SNAP Lawsuit Against Trump Admin Gets Clinton Judge
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton has been assigned to preside over a high-profile lawsuit brought by a coalition of states challenging the Trump administration's efforts to collect personal data from participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). On July 29, 2025, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney, who has served in the Northern District of California since 1995 and currently holds senior status there, has been assigned to the case. Newsweek has sent email requests for comment to attorneys representing each of the twenty states, the federal agency, and attorneys for the administration. Why It Matters The lawsuit at the center of the case challenges a federal directive requiring states to turn over detailed personal information about SNAP recipients to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Filed by attorneys general from 20 states, the District of Columbia, and Kentucky, the suit argues that the USDA's demand for data—including names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status—oversteps legal boundaries and risks unauthorized sharing with other federal agencies. The plaintiffs contend the mandate violates federal privacy laws and the Administrative Procedure Act. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. GETTY What To Know State of California et al v. United States Department of Agriculture et al, challenges the federal mandate requiring states to provide the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) with sensitive personal information about all SNAP recipients dating back to January 2020. The legal challenge comes in response to a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump that directed federal agencies to expand interagency data sharing. Following that order, the USDA began requesting extensive SNAP data from state agencies, warning that noncompliance could jeopardize federal funding for state-run SNAP programs. The attorneys general claim that the USDA's actions force states into a legal and financial dilemma: either comply with what they consider an illegal federal directive or risk losing millions in SNAP funding. The lawsuit seeks to block enforcement of the USDA's demand and to prohibit the transfer of SNAP recipient data to agencies not directly involved in the program's administration, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Government Efficiency. The USDA has not yet publicly detailed its rationale for the data request or how the collected information would be used. How many People Use SNAP? Nationally, SNAP peaked at over 43 million in September 2020 and served an average of 41.7 million people per month in FY 2024. In New York, about 2.9 million people received SNAP benefits in May 2025, roughly 14.7% of the state's population. Of those, nearly 1 million were children. Nationally, more than 55 percent of SNAP recipients are in families with children. Although non-citizens are generally not eligible to receive SNAP for themselves, federal law allows them to apply on behalf of U.S. citizen children. The plaintiffs contend that the administration's policy change could disproportionately impact mixed-status families by exposing them to increased scrutiny or enforcement and that the USDA's demand for data that includes names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status is unlawful and exceeds the agency's authority. They argue that the data could be improperly shared with other federal agencies, particularly those involved in immigration enforcement. According to the lawsuit, such a requirement violates both the Administrative Procedure Act and federal laws that restrict the use and disclosure of SNAP data. What People Are Saying New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a press release dated July 28, 2025: "Families should be able to get the food assistance they need without fearing that they will be targeted by this administration," adding: "I will not allow the SNAP benefits that millions of New Yorkers count on to be put at risk. We are suing today to stop this illegal policy and protect New Yorkers' privacy and access to food assistance." The same day, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell pointed out in a press release: "In fact, the USDA itself has described SNAP as having "one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government." Adding: "Those systems do not require, and have never required, that states turn over sensitive, personally identifying information about millions of Americans without any meaningful restrictions on how that information is used or shared with other agencies." California Attorney General Rob Bonta said: "President Trump continues to weaponize private and sensitive personal information—not to root out fraud, but to create a culture of fear where people are unwilling to apply for essential services," adding: "This unprecedented demand for SNAP data violates state and federal privacy laws. California will not comply. We'll see the President in court." What Happens Next No hearings have been scheduled, and the case remains in its early stages. Judge Chesney's assignment adds a notable element to the proceedings, as the court prepares to consider arguments over federal authority, data privacy, and administrative law. The case could have significant implications for the privacy rights of SNAP recipients, particularly in the states and jurisdictions involved in the lawsuit. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, it could limit the federal government's ability to collect or use personal information from individuals enrolled in federally funded food assistance programs.
Fox News
a day ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Charlamagne tha God slams 'liberal media' for ignoring Bill Clinton's ties to Epstein
Charlamagne tha God of the Breakfast Club on Tuesday slammed the "liberal media" for ignoring former President Bill Clinton's past ties with Jeffrey Epstein. "You know, it's interesting, too, 'cause it's just funny how the news works 'cause Bill Clinton, you know, wrote a letter to Jeffrey Epstein as well for his birthday, but nobody's talking about that. And Jeffrey Epstein had a picture of Bill Clinton in a dress in high heels in his New York mansion, but nobody's talking about that," Charlamagne said. He continued, "My thing is this. I don't care who's on the list. Everybody got to go. Burn it all down. Like, that's just simple as that. Mutually assured destruction. Whoever's on that list need to go. Nobody needs to be protecting pedophiles." Charlamagne's comments, which were first flagged by Mediaite, came after President Donald Trump said that those asking about the late financier Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking case should direct their attention to Clinton and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. Trump's remarks come a day after U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell in Florida amid heightened scrutiny about the case after the Trump administration announced it would not unseal investigation materials concerning Epstein. "You ought to be speaking about Larry Summers. You ought to be speaking about some of his friends that are hedge fund guys," Trump told reporters Friday while departing for Scotland. "They're all over the place. You ought to be speaking about Bill Clinton." Trump then accused Clinton of visiting Epstein's private island. Trump said he'd never visited the island before. Clinton has also denied that he has ever visited the island. In his new memoir "Citizen," released in 2024, Clinton said he'd never gone to the island and that he wished he'd never even met Epstein in the first place. Spokespeople for Summers and Clinton did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. Summers previously served as treasury secretary for Clinton, as well as the director of the National Economic Council for former President Barack Obama. Neither Summers nor Clinton have been accused of engaging in any illegal conduct in connection with his ties to Epstein. Charlamagne said party affiliation is irrelevant to the issues associated with Epstein. The co-host of "The Breakfast Club," Morgan Wood pushed back on Charlamagne. "And you know, to that point though, you know, Clinton is not the president right now. You know, if he was, you think that. Anyway, I think he would still be under scrutiny if he was the president right now," Wood said. "I don't care what party they are. No. Period. No, he wouldn't because liberal media wouldn't push the issue. Oh, okay. Well, this comes as, speaking of liberal media," Charlamagne responded.
