Rep. Jamie Raskin sent a letter
to Donald Trump’s transition team on Friday, seeking “clear assurance that the Trump-Vance Transition will require that all nominees receive a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check before they are considered by the Senate.”
The letter comes a little more than a week after the Trump transition team finally signed an agreement
with the Department of Justice allowing the team to “submit names for background checks and security clearances.” Trump’s team has dragged its feet signing what are normally standard transition documents, including an ethics agreement
Trump himself signed into law.
“I request that the Trump-Vance Transition commit immediately to requiring all nominees to undergo FBI background checks before they are considered by the Senate,” Raskin reiterated, adding that the nominees must also ”submit to vetting before they are afforded any access to classified information.”
In his current capacity as the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, the Maryland Democrat notes that “reports indicate that some nominees may be refusing to undergo FBI background checks before the Trump Administration takes office,” referencing reports
that Trump’s crew might look to a third-party private group for background checks as a way around the FBI.
Raskin, who will be the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee
in January, also asks about the influence of Boris Epshteyn and his role on the transition team, asking for any relevant documents pertaining to Trump top legal adviser, in the wake of reports
that Epshteyn has taken money in exchange for promoting people for positions in the upcoming administration.
“This is precisely the type of permissive environment in which individuals with undisclosed and unvetted security vulnerabilities can engage in nefarious conduct that could risk American security,” Raskin’s letter adds.
Recently Sens. Richard Durbin of Illinois and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island have asked
for the nominees who will appear in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to retain any correspondence they have had with Epshteyn.
New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is making it clear that her state will not be part of Donald Trump’s mass deportation plan. In an interview with Newsweek
on Friday, she vowed to stand firm against the president-elect’s proposals, aligning with other Democratic state leaders who are determined to block efforts to send the National Guard to carry out mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.
“We’ll use every legal tool at our disposal to challenge mass deportations, and we’ll join with other states in doing so because there is strength in numbers,” Lujan Grisham said. ”I will not assign the New Mexico National Guard to assist with mass deportations that break up families and wreak havoc on our economy in New Mexico.”
Lujan Grisham’s statement adds to a growing chorus of opposition from leaders across the country.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes has referred
to Trump’s proposed migrant camps as “concentration camps.” She is also concerned that mass deportations could violate due process
, or the constitutional mandate that government officials follow proper legal procedures before depriving an individual of life, liberty, or property, according to the National Constitution Center.
“The problem with that is it leads to abuses,” Mayes said of Trump’s mass deportation plans, and argued that Trump should instead focus on “violent cartel members” inside the U.S.
On Tuesday, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker also vowed to resist incoming border czar Tom Homan’s threatened deportations, saying he and Trump don’t have the authority
to proceed with mass deportations.
“We have laws that protect undocumented immigrants, and we’re going to follow the law. I’m concerned that the Trump administration and his lackeys aren’t,” Pritzker said at a press conference. However, He did note some exceptions
, though.
“Violent criminals who are undocumented and convicted of violent crime should be deported,” Pritzker said. “I do not want them in my state. I don’t think they should be in the United States.”
Chicago will be the first place
targeted for deporting undocumented migrants after Trump is sworn in, according to Homan. Pritzker publicly vowed to protect Illinois residents last month at a press conference.
Remember Pritzker saying, “You come for my people, you come through me
” in the days after the election? Later, he helped spearhead
an organization called Governors Safeguarding Democracy, joining with fellow Democrats readying their fight by sharing information and resources.
The incoming Trump administration has also set its sights on California. But the border state, a longtime Trump target
, is pushing back against his planned deportations. On Tuesday, Sen. Alex Padilla criticized
them as “extremist” during a Judiciary Committee hearing.
Padilla also called on Congress to pass his Citizenship for Essential Workers Act
, which would expedite a pathway to citizenship for the over 5 million immigrant workers deemed essential by the Trump administration during the COVID-19 crisis. According to a press release from Padilla, these workers “kept Americans healthy, fed, and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has also been vocal about his department’s plans to push back against mass deportations in the Golden State, with the strong backing of Gov. Gavin Newsom
.
“We are ready to file,” he said
, referring to a potential lawsuit. “We have been thinking about and preparing and readying ourselves for the possibility of this moment for months.”
Meanwhile, amidst a bribery indictment, it appears that New York City Mayor Eric Adams has acquiesced to Trump’s plan after meeting
with Homan on Thursday.
“We’re going to protect the rights of immigrants in the city that are hard-working, giving back to the city in a real way. We’re not going to be a safe haven for those who commit repeated violent crimes against innocent migrants, immigrants and long-standing New Yorkers,” Adams said.
As Daily Kos reported last month, Democratic governors
have a handful of options to push back against mass deportations, including executive order authority directing states not to intervene. But sheriffs can go outside this sort of sanctuary-city jurisdiction.
As governors and other local leaders join together to oppose mass deportations, it’s becoming apparent that states will be the de facto battleground for shaping U.S. immigration policy.
Right-wing wraith Laura Ingraham took some time away from attacking teachers
to beg pop star Taylor Swift to perform at Donald Trump’s inauguration.
“Call Trump and offer to perform at the inauguration,” Ingraham said during her Fox News show Thursday night, in “advice” directed toward Swift. “It’d be smart for Taylor Swift—and another great moment of unity for the country.”
Ingraham didn’t elaborate on what she meant by “smart.” It could be read either as a threat or as a smart business move for Swift, whose Eras Tour just completed its historically successful run
.
Ingraham’s sweaty plea to Swift isn’t surprising. The pop megastar has been an obsession of Trump
and the right for some time. They have weaved conspiracy theories such as Swift being a “deep-state” psychological operation
meant to destroy Trump. When Swift endorsed Harris in this year’s presidential election, the right freaked out
about it.
For all of their culture-war BS, it seems very clear that the right wishes that any of the most popular cultural music icons of the past 60 years were willing to be paid off to like them. From Fleetwood Mac
to Beyoncé
, from Springsteen
to Bad Bunny, megastars past and present have almost never backed Republicans. And Trump has made that distinction all the clearer
.
Earlier this week, Daniel Penny was acquitted of homicide
in the killing of Jordan Neely, a Black unhoused man, on the New York City subway in 2023. And Vice President-elect JD Vance has invited Penny to commingle with him and felon-elect Donald Trump at the Army-Navy football game on Saturday
“Daniel’s a good guy, and New York’s mob district attorney tried to ruin his life for having a backbone,” Vance posted on X
. “I’m grateful he accepted my invitation and hope he’s able to have fun and appreciate how much his fellow citizens admire his courage.”
Penny’s case was instantly polarizing. Outcries
from minority communities and their allies called for legal retribution over Neely’s death. To them, Neely’s death was both avoidable and being treated differently, given he was an unhoused Black man.
“Jordan Neely was murdered,” New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posted on X
shortly after the killing. And after New York City Mayor Eric Adams pushed back against her phrasing, Ocasio-Cortez elaborated in an interview with The Cut
, saying, “I would like everyone to pretend [Neely] was their son. I would like anyone to look at that video [of his killing], see their son, and see if they would say the same thing.”
However, conservative painted Penny as a hero, highlighting his past as a Marine and arguing his right to self-defense. And his actions became a talking point for right-leaning outlets and politicians.
“I’ll take a million court appearances and people calling me names and people hating me, just to keep one of those people from getting hurt or killed,” Penny said
to Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro the day after his acquittal.
And while many X users applauded Vance for inviting Penny to the football game, others called out the odd celebration of someone who, while acquitted, still had a role in the death of another man.
“Yay let’s go hang out with a killer at a football game,” tweeted
one account.
Kyle Rittenhouse, left, with backwards cap, walks along Sheridan Road in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug. 25, 2020, with another armed civilian.
Penny’s case and the public’s reaction are reminiscent of Kyle Rittenhouse’s case. Rittenhouse was found not guilty
in the 2020 fatal shooting of two unarmed men
and the wounding of a pistol-wielding third during protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
At the time, tensions were extremely high following a police officer’s murder of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man. Protesters were taking to the streets to express their anger and heartbreak.
Later, at his trial, Rittenhouse claimed he’d traveled to Kenosha with other armed friends to protect private property from being destroyed during the unrest.
The case sparked outrage, which Trump happily stoked.
“If he didn’t pull that trigger, that guy that put the gun to his head, in one-quarter of a second he was going to pull the trigger,” Trump said in a 2021 interview
with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, who once reportedly pointed a gun
at a fellow political analyst following an on-air debate.
Trump invited Rittenhouse to Mar-a-Lago, telling Hannity that Rittenhouse was a “really nice young man
.”
Making a jab at the dead and wounded, Trump added, “[Rittenhouse] was a fan, unlike the other guy.”
Election denier and MyPIllow CEO Mike Lindell is suing a New York City-based cash advance company, saying he was tricked into borrowing $1.6 million at a 409% annual interest rate
. In the filing
, Lindell claims he, and other business entities tied to him, borrowed more than $1.5 million “with daily payments of $45,225.82, which yields a total amount to be paid of $2,261,290.76,” from Cobalt Funding Solutions.
The filing also alleges that Cobalt added an upfront cost of $124,760 (and 87 cents) “origination fee.” According to Law & Crime
, the filing is “almost an exact replica” of the lawsuit Lindell filed in October
against two other New York-based lenders, Lifetime Funding and CapSpot Financial.
In both lawsuits, Lindell describes
the lending and borrowing system as “predatory,” arguing that the companies’ manipulated the contracts to bypass statutory maximum interest rate laws. “[D]espite the disclaimers in the Agreement and the incorporated guaranty, no actual sale of receipts ever took place, and the form Agreement is merely a sham intended to evade the applicable usury law.”
Coincidentally, Sen. Elizabeth Warren has spent a good deal of her career
trying to gain support from the more conservative members of Congress to go after payday lenders
, which generally offer short-term, high-cost loans to poor Americans. And from the Leopards Eat My Face files, it was Donald Trump’s pick as the interim head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Mick Mulvaney, who put a pause on a rule
that would restrict payday lenders and the kinds of high-interest-rate loans Lindell is decrying now.
Lindell, a Trump-supporting election denier who once boasted of spending money
to defend people like convicted former Colorado election clerk and recorder Tina Peters
, has been reeling from financial issues since the 2020 election. Most of his issues, like fellow election-denier Rudy Giulian
i, stem from mounting legal fees
in connection to his election denialism
.
Last year, Lindell said he borrowed $10 million
to keep his businesses afloat. Lindell was then ordered to pay $5 million
to computer forensics expert Robert Zeidman, who disproved Lindell’s claims that his election data showed interference by China in the 2020 election.
In October, Lindell said he was broke
. His lawyers filed a motion saying that they were owed “millions of dollars” from Lindell, and could no longer work for free.
It would be great if Lindell got his buddy Trump to go after predatory loan practices, but he won’t. Instead, Trump will likely funnel taxpayer money to Lindell the way he did last time—giving him money for saying he would do a thing that he didn’t actually do
.
President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team recently recommended that he scrap a crash-reporting requirement
for self-driving cars—which probably has nothing to do with the fact that Elon Musk, Tesla’s CEO, is a close ally of Trump.
In an internal document obtained by Reuters
, Trump’s team described the reporting condition as a mandate for “excessive” data collection and suggested eliminating it. Relatedly, the team also recommended that the incoming Trump administration “liberalize” regulations on automatic vehicles and enact “basic regulations” that would empower more development in the industry.
Supporters of the crash-reporting rule have argued that axing it could hamstring the federal government’s ability to investigate and regulate the safety of automated driving systems. But Tesla and other automakers
have long opposed the rule. Musk, for his part, has suggested that the requirement unfairly targets his company’s vehicles. According to sources who spoke with Reuters, Tesla’s executives have discussed with Musk the need to push for scrapping the crash-reporting requirement.
Of course, if Trump’s administration kills this requirement, Tesla would be the new policy’s largest beneficiary. Since June 2021, there have been more than 2,700
crashes among vehicles equipped with self-automated systems, and of those, more than half (1,570) were reported by Tesla, according to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
.
Moreover, a Reuters analysis of data from the NHTSA found that Tesla’s crash data accounted for 40 out of the 45 fatal crashes reported to the agency through Oct. 15.
One Tesla accident investigated by the NHTSA was a fatal accident that took place in Virginia in 2023, according to Reuters. In this instance, a driver using Tesla’s “Autopilot” feature collided with a tractor-trailer. The NHTSA also used the data to look into another 2023 wreck
, in California, where a Tesla on “Autopilot” struck a firetruck, killing the driver and injuring a passenger and four firefighters.
There could be dire consequences without the crash-reporting rule. In a statement to Reuters, the NHTSA noted collecting this data is critical to evaluating the safety of self-driving cars. Former agency employees also said that such data was imperative to past investigations that led to a recall of more than 2 million Teslas
. Without the data, the NHTSA will struggle to detect crash patterns, the former employees said.
Reuters could not assess Musk’s role in drafting this recommendation, if he had one at all. But it’s suspicious timing considering he spent more than a quarter of a billion dollars
helping Trump and other Republicans get elected in November, and was recently given a toothless
, planned advisory commission on government efficiency—where he’ll seemingly have the freedom
to propose slashing even more regulations.
Aaron Siri, an attorney for failed presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., filed a petition to get
the federal government to rescind its approval for the polio vaccine, despite decades of the medicine being administered to prevent the spread of the disease.
Donald Trump has nominated
Kennedy to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, and Siri is now assisting Kennedy in vetting health officials.
The New York Times reported
that Siri submitted his petition to the government in 2022 and has sought to prevent the government from distributing 13 additional vaccines. Siri has also filed lawsuits to oppose mandates for vaccines used to fight the COVID-19 virus and has brought in vaccine scientists for hostile depositions in cases opposing the use of vaccines. The majority of the petitions he has filed have been on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network, a major anti-vax nonprofit, run by a close ally of Kennedy’s.
In the 1940s and ’50s, before a polio vaccine was available, the United States suffered through
multiple polio epidemics. Children were particularly vulnerable to polio, which can cause permanent paralysis and death in the most extreme cases. Many who suffered from polio were forced into confinement in a restrictive iron lung
.
In response to these outbreaks, Americans faced major disruptions of their daily living as public facilities like swimming pools and sporting events had to be closed or canceled to prevent the spread of the disease.
After the vaccine became available in the ’50s the nation and most of the world adopted a policy of frequent and widespread vaccination. Polio infections in the U.S. went from 16,000 cases per year to zero in 2020.
Rescinding the vaccine would likely lead to new polio outbreaks, experts say
. Many who are carrying the virus do not demonstrate symptoms and could easily transmit the infection to others which would not be noticed until paralysis began.
Kennedy has promoted vaccine conspiracies
for years, most notably the false claim that there is a connection between autism and vaccination. Despite his unscientific claims—or perhaps because of them—Trump has chosen to put him in charge of public health for millions of people, and opened the door to fringe figures like Siri influencing domestic and global health.
The billionaires’ respective decisions to open their pocketbooks to the incoming president come as other tech leads and media moguls have similarly begun to soften their approach
toward Trump—despite his promise to exact vengeance on news outlets
that anger him. On Thursday, Rolling Stone
reported that Trump’s lieutenants are planning more personal lawsuits and legal threats against news outlets during his second White House stint.
News of Bezos’ planned seven-figure donation was first reported by the Wall Street Journal
. But this isn’t the first time Amazon has donated to Trump; it donated a much smaller amount
—$57,746—to his inauguration in 2017.
In addition to the donation, Bezos is also reportedly planning to make
the pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago next week. With this action, Bezos joins the likes of Google CEO Sundar Pichai
and “Morning Joe
” hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, the couple and cohosts of MSNBC’s flagship political morning program.
Notably, Trump has had a mostly tumultuous relationship with a lot of these people and their respective businesses. With Google, Trump claimed in 2018 that the search engine was “rigged
” to hide positive news about him.
Trump also repeatedly clashed with Bezos during his first administration
—including taunting The Washington Post owner over his divorce
and the media outlet he heads. In 2017, the president-elect tore into The Washington Post and accused the newspaper of making up news in addition to being a “lobbyist weapon” for Amazon. Trump even went as far as to say that The Washington Post “fabricated
” facts about a report detailing his decision to cut off U.S. aid to anti-government rebels in Syria.
“He told me there was nobody like Trump on Facebook. But at the same time, and for whatever reason, steered it against me,” read an excerpt from “Save America
,” a Trump-authored coffee-table book. “We are watching him closely, and if he does anything illegal this time he will spend the rest of his life in prison—as will others who cheat in the 2024 Presidential Election.”
The most recent moves from these media and tech billionaires suggest that they want to have a smoother relationship with Trump as he prepares for his second term. Altman, a cofounder of the artificial intelligence company, told “Fox News Sunday” earlier this month
that he’s looking forward to collaborating with Trump’s administration.
But the donation pledge from Bezos is particularly eyebrow-raising given that he oversees a newspaper that will be covering Trump’s presidency, in what should be unbiased reporting. In November, Bezos was one of the first billionaires to congratulate Trump
on his win.
Notably, Bezos isn’t the only media mogul who is seemingly warming to Trump. According to The New York Times
, Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong killed an op-ed column that was critical of Trump’s recent Cabinet picks. Soon-Shiong reportedly told his paper’s editorial board that it could only publish the piece if it ran another editorial with an opposing view.
Beyond the spiked editorial, CNN
also reported that pressure from Soon-Shiong is causing some of the paper’s editors to make certain opinion section headlines “more bland.”
The fact that certain legacy media brands are showing sympathy toward Trump hasn’t gone unnoticed by the president-elect, who once labeled the mainstream press “fake news
.”
“The media’s tamed down a little bit. They’re liking us much better now, I think,” Trump said on Thursday
after ringing the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange. “If they don’t, we’ll have to just take them on again, and we don’t want to do that.”
Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s embattled nominee to lead the Department of Defense, is now flip-flopping on bigoted positions he has held.
Politico reports that Hegseth told Republican senators on Thursday that he backs allowing gay people to serve
in the military. This a stark change
from the view he took in his 2024 book, “The War on Warriors,” where he claimed that the repeal of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy—which banned gay service members from serving openly—was a “gateway” to advancing a “Marxist” agenda.
In his meetings with senators, Hegseth also reportedly praised women serving in the armed forces. But in a November podcast appearance, Hegseth said
, “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated.”
The shift in Hegseth’s rhetoric has come while he tries to win the votes of female Republican senators, most notably Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Susan Collins of Maine. And it seems to be working, with Ernst signaling openness
to voting to confirm him.
But Hegseth’s comments undermine the bluster that brought him to Trump’s attention. As with many of his other Cabinet nominees, Trump came to know
Hegseth from his frequent appearances on Fox News. In those appearances, Hegseth often wore his bigotry on his sleeve.
Hegseth’s flip-flops have accompanied a slew of negative stories being unearthed about him, increasing pressure on Republican senators, who could face blowback for backing the pick.
A recently released poll
from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research underlines this. In the poll, fielded Dec. 5-9, only 2 in 10 Americans support Hegseth’s nomination, though 4 in 10 say they don’t know enough about him. However, Hegseth has support from roughly a third of Republicans, while 16% oppose his nomination.
Those anemic numbers follow the disclosures
that Hegseth has been accused of sexual assault, described as abusive by his own mother, and has faced allegations of public drunkenness and mismanagement of funds at a conservative veterans’ charity.
Now, in addition to those damning charges, Hegseth appears unable to stand by his own words when it comes to currying favor with the powerful.
