Saturday, November 07, 2026

Idiot of the Week

First up, Katie Phang.



Idiot of the Week?  

Chump.


Manhattan prosecutors told a New York appeals court that a “mountain of evidence” supports President Donald Trump’s 34 felony convictions, as his lawyers argued the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling should undo them, All Rise News reports.
Reporter Adam Klasfeld writes that a five-judge panel of the Appellate Division, First Department, weighed whether the immunity decision applies retroactively to the verdict in the hush-money case, which centered on falsified business records tied to payments to Stormy Daniels. Trump’s lawyers, led by Sullivan & Cromwell’s Robert Giuffra, argued the jury saw evidence the ruling bars, including posts from his official Twitter account and testimony from aides like Hope Hicks.

He's a damn loser and a convicted felon and he keeps appealing.  He thought he might get a pardon if a Republican had been elected governor on Tuesday but that didn't happen.  See Ruth's "Losers Chump and Debra Messing" for more on that.  He needs to stop wasting all of his time on lawsuits.  He's just a piece of garbage.  He's dookie you step in and then have to scrape off your shoe.



President Donald Trump's personal attorneys ripped a federal judge in New York over his "erroneous" and "wrong" decisions — one day after the jurist died.
District Judge Alvin Hellerstein died on Wednesday of natural causes at the age of 92. He had been presiding over high-profile cases in the Southern District of New York, including the prosecution of ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and Trump's appeal for his "hush money" case to be moved from state court to federal court.
Hellerstein's rejections of Trump's requests drew fire from the president's personal defense team on Thursday.
"Throughout this litigation, both [the Manhattan District Attorney's Office] and the district court have grasped for different, meritless reasons to wrongly deny President Trump—the chief federal officer—a federal forum to adjudicate his substantial federal defenses," wrote Robert J. Giuffra Jr. in a 43-page filing.
Giuffra argued that Hellerstein and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office's "ever-shifting justifications for keeping this case in state court cannot obscure what has always been clear: the President of the United States may invoke the federal forum that Congress expressly authorized for precisely these extraordinary circumstances. The district court erred in concluding otherwise."

Shut up.  He's a convicted felon.  He's appealed and appealed.  It's over.  


And so is Chump.


Watching him on Wednesday was so hilarious.  He was talking about one of his construction projects and didn't have his sneer and he wasn't barking.  For a moment, reality finally registered with the thick headed dementia patient:  He's not popular.  America doesn't love him.  We want him gone. 


He's an idiot.  And he suffered a historic loss on Tuesday.  He's the Idiot of the Week and probably the Idiot of the Year and the Idiot of the Century. 

Here's C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"

Friday, November 6, 2026.  It's been a bad news week for Chump, Democrats prepare to take over Congress in January and are hiring investigative staff, US House Rep Robert Garcia speaks about what the results mean, Senator Elizabeth Warren writes about what the results mean, all eyes on Priss Pot Pete Hegseth and will he be in or out, and much more. 




As Ben (MEIDASTOUCH) notes above, his arch has been blocked by a federal judge.  It has not been a good week for him.  He's still reeling from the midterms. 

In an analysis on the races for seats in the House of Representatives, THE NEW YORK TIMES notes:

As of Thursday evening, Democrats have won 253 seats to Republicans’ 155. And that seat advantage could continue to grow for Democrats as more districts report results (27 races have not yet been called).

The president’s party often loses seats in a midterm election, but this is the largest victory by either party in half a century.

Democrats are set to have at least 71 more seats than Republicans and will now enter the next session of Congress with a sizable majority in both the House and Senate.


The largest victory by either party in half a century?  

What a rebuke to Chump.  The American people have spoken. 




Democratic officials are celebrating.  And on the other side?  



A civil war is brewing inside the Trump administration after Republicans suffered crippling midterm losses, with insiders scrambling to assign blame and find someone to take the fall.
President Donald Trump has publicly said he has no plans to make Cabinet changes in the wake of Tuesday’s disastrous elections, which saw Democrats romp to victory in once-reliable red states, clawing back control of both the House and Senate. Instead, Trump faulted GOP candidates, congratulated Democrats and appeared eager to move on to other issues, like his White House ballroom.
But behind the scenes, the atmosphere is tense. Offensive and defensive maneuvers are being made: officials are searching for a suitable scalp, while seeking to insulate themselves from a potential purge.
Among the key players reportedly caught up in the turmoil are Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The White House, however, has said the administration remains focused on “what matters.”


Of the four noted, Hegseth is the most vulnerable.  




He's been nothing but scandals.  A new one, in fact, has emerged. Christopher Buchanan (DAILY BEAST) reports: 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s wife was paid by a consulting firm representing a weapons manufacturer that works with the Department of Defense, a new report has revealed.
Jennifer Hegseth, an unofficial Pentagon adviser to her husband, indicated on a disclosure form that Watchtower Strategy, an influential Trump-aligned public affairs firm that counts defense contractor Lockheed Martin among its clients, paid her for consulting, Politico reports.
Jennifer, a former Fox News producer, has already been exposed for embedding herself in daily DOD operations, raising questions about a potential conflict of interest within the Pentagon.

How much scandal can a drama queen like Priss Pot Pete survive?  Who knows.  Kathryn Wilkens (MEDIAITE) notes:

A Trump administration official reportedly believes Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth knows his days at the Pentagon are numbered following Republicans’ widespread midterm election losses.
“I think he probably knows he’s dead but would like an exit sufficiently dramatic that it gives him a launching pad to run for POTUS,” the unnamed official told CNN in a report published Wednesday.
The assessment comes as Republicans search for someone to hold responsible for the party’s loss of both the House and Senate, with Hegseth facing mounting criticism over his role in President Donald Trump’s war with Iran.
According to CNN, several Republicans believe Hegseth persuaded Trump to launch the military campaign without adequately preparing for its consequences. Some now view the defense secretary as a potential target of blame for the election results, even as Trump continues to stand by him.
“If the president is serious about anyone taking responsibility for it, it’s Pete Hegseth,” one Republican close to the White House told CNN. “Pete has been either dishonest or incorrect — neither of which are acceptable — about timelines, goals and objectives since the beginning.”

Before the midterms, US House Rep Thomas Massie introduced articles of impeachment on Hegseth.  This prompted Speaker of the Closet Mike Johnson to immediately send the House home so that it would not be voted on.  The midterms are over and the House will have to return.  Massie says that when they do return, he will be focused on his articles of impeachment.  


Marc Caputo (AXIOS) notes four reasons Chump might force Priss Pot out:

1. The impeachment threat. Democrats already have tried to impeach Hegseth, and with their new House majority in January, those efforts could intensify. The last thing Trump wants is a series of distracting impeachment hearings focused on Hegseth's rocky tenure — and, inevitably, Trump's decision to attack Iran.
"Tonight would have looked very different without the Iran war," one administration official told Axios late Tuesday. "I believe you'll ultimately see POTUS hold Pete Hegseth accountable, and that will play out in the lame duck," a reference to the period between the midterms and the new Congress' first day, Jan. 3.
2. Trump needs a scalp. Presidents have a long history of shaking up their administrations after disastrous midterms. George W. Bush notably ousted Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the 2006 elections.
It wouldn't be surprising to see Trump make a high-profile personnel change after a defeat of this magnitude. Hegseth, whose tenure has been marked by controversy, is one potential target.
"Somebody's gotta take the fall, and Pete is moving to the top of the list," a U.S. official said.
3. The lame-duck window. If Trump is going to replace Hegseth, there's a compelling reason to do it before January. Confirmations in a Democrat-controlled Senate will be impossible. That gives Trump a narrow window to push through a new defense secretary while Republicans still hold the majority.
"No one's getting confirmed" in the new Congress, a senior White House official said. "We're operating under that premise."
4. A potential soft landing. There also is a conceivable exit ramp for Hegseth: Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn is about to become that state'e governor, and she will have the power to appoint a replacement to her Senate seat. Hegseth owns a home in Tennessee, giving him a connection there.
Trump expressed approval for the idea Wednesday: "I actually think he'd be very popular if he did that. But I haven't heard that at all."


Many Republican lawmakers and allies alarmed by Tuesday’s wipeout are moving swiftly to pin blame for the election results on Hegseth, arguing behind the scenes that he played a chief role in convincing Trump to attack Iran with no exit strategy -- and no plan for managing the inevitable political fallout.
The knives-out campaign comes despite private acknowledgement from House and Senate GOP strategists that the party’s problems extended far beyond the war, triggering 2008-level losses that will take years to reverse. But for now, party leaders --  and many in their ranks --  remain unwilling to directly blame Trump for their woes.
Even among House Republicans who survived Tuesday’s onslaught, there’s zero expectation they will suddenly break from the president with two years left in his term. Yet that fealty does not extend to Hegseth, the combative defense secretary who has made few friends on Capitol Hill since taking over command of the Pentagon.




The calls for Hegseth to be fired have grown so loud that even Chump admits the calls are happening.  Ross Ibbetson (DAILY MAIL) reports: 

Donald Trump has admitted he is fielding calls urging him to fire Pete Hegseth, but insists he will keep his Defense Secretary, hours after the Daily Mail revealed he was quietly asking advisers whether to ditch him.
'I have every intention to keep him,' the president told ABC News.
But he conceded the Pentagon chief has critics in his ear. 'I get these calls, you know, about him. I don't understand why,' Trump added.
The public show of support sits awkwardly with the picture insiders gave the Daily Mail, who said Trump spent Wednesday working the phones and asking a handful of close advisers whether Hegseth should keep his job.
Those sources now expect him to be gone before the new Congress is sworn in, a deadline driven less by the President's anger than by Senate arithmetic.
'Trump is making phone calls, contemplating it,' said a senior Republican.
Trump admitted it would be easier to confirm a new Defense Secretary before Democrats take control of the Senate in January.

THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC ADVOATE notes that, appearing on MS NOW, THE NEW YORK TIMES' "Maggie Haberman’s analysis focused on the political exposure of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after the GOP’s reported midterm defeat. She said Trump could remove Hegseth and blame him for the Iran war, describing that as a potentially easy move for the president."  Holly Baxter (INDEPENDENT) plays out the possibilities:

The best-case scenario is that Peacocking Pete resigns quietly from the Cabinet and takes up Blackburn’s seat in Tennessee. But would he?
It would, in many respects, be an elegant escape route. Hegseth could leave the Pentagon with his dignity nominally intact, Trump could appoint a replacement while Republicans still control the Senate, and the defense secretary would no longer be in office when Democrats are seated at the beginning of 2027. As a senator, Hegseth would not be subject to impeachment as a cabinet official. He could also avoid becoming the central character in a highly publicized fight over the war.
There is another possibility: that Trump decides to let the impeachment process run. He has always enjoyed a political fight, particularly one in which he can portray himself and his allies as victims of Democratic persecution. Allowing Hegseth to become the subject of an impeachment campaign could give the White House a useful new grievance, while allowing the president to demonstrate that he is standing by a loyalist in the face of what he would inevitably describe as partisan attacks. It would also give Trump time to work out whether Hegseth is more useful to him as a sacrificial offering or as a continuing defender of the Iran war.
The danger is that a congressional investigation could expose even more about the decision-making behind the war. And I think most of us who saw the flag, fist and bomb emojis proliferating on that Signal chat can believe that the decision-making was more “grade-schoolers get handed the PlayStation controls” than “mature and restrained debate”.

That's Hegseth.  Rubio?  Nick Hilden (ALTERNET) notes: 

On Thursday, new bombshell reporting revealed that one of President Donald Trump's top Cabinet officials may be preparing to resign. According to GOP insiders who spoke with the Independent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio appears to be leaving the administration in order to protect himself from midterm blowback as he ramps up a 2028 presidential run.
As the Independent explains, "Even before the disastrous midterm results -- when the Republicans lost both the House and the Senate -- senior party sources in the US and senior figures in the UK government told the Independent that Mr Rubio could quit his senior role in President Donald Trump’s administration. The sources doubled down on the expectation after the midterms gave a damning indictment of the Trump presidency, with the Democrats seizing Republican strongholds such as Kansas and Texas. Mr Rubio is one of up to five members of MrTrump’s current Cabinet who are thought to be preparing to 'run for the hills' in the aftermath of the midterms humiliation. One Washington insider told the Independent that Mr Rubio needs to 'distance himself from the Iran war and pin that one on Trump.'" Sources say that Trump may also lay the blame on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth -- whose impeachment is being called for even by members of his own party — with Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles also targeted as potential scapegoats.

JD Vance is not going anywhere.  Chump's going to have to be really irritated to try to force him out.  But many are saying his 2028 hopes are over.  Mike noted last night Republican Newt Gingrich had said that the midterms destroyed JD's chances.  Bennito L. Kelty (RAW STORY) notes Democrats James Carvillel, Mark McKinnon and Aidan Kohn-Murphy on the podcast POLITICS WAR ROOM dismissed Vance's chances as well ("walking wounded").  Mataeo Smith (IRISH STAR) notes: 

Former Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie balked at the possibility of Vice President JD Vance running for president, saying he would "reek with the stink of Donald Trump."
Vance has not ruled out a potential run in 2028, but President Trump has refused to endorse him publicly and critics don't believe he has the charisma to secure the White House. Christie echoed this sentiment but suggested Republicans' crushing defeat in Tuesday's midterms only adds more hurdles. Vance said in June that he would determine whether to run after the midterm elections
During an interview with Times Radio, Christie said: "JD Vance has no other credential other than to be Donald Trump's vice president. He only spent a short two years in the U.S. Senate and has no other relevant experience to be president of the United States. Quite frankly, I think he will reek of Donald Trump and his further actions between now and Election Day 2028. I don't feel like JD Vance is the right leader for our party, and I certainly don't think he has any chance of being elected president of the United States."


Douglas Kriner, a professor of American institutions at Cornell University, said that Tuesday was hardest on the vice president.
“If I was a Republican hopeful not currently in the administration, I’d be breathing a sigh of relief and saying I had a good night,” Kriner told Newsweek.
Vance and Trump defended Ramaswamy’s decision to air the controversial ad calling her a liar. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, called the ad “deeply troubling,” and it came off the air days before the election.
“He got his act of contrition in first but no apology for his own conduct in Ohio,” Brendan O’Leary, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, told Newsweek about Vance’s post. “The decision to blame the war and Israel will be noted.”




Matthew Rozsa (ALTERNET) explores the case for ousting Wiles here.  While people wait to see what will happen to Priss Pot, Rubio or Wiles, one official has resigned. Hafiz Rashid (THE NEW REPUBLIC) explains: 

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon is leaving the Trump administration.
Fox News reports that Dhillon resigned Thursday following Democrats’ landslide victory in the midterm elections. She reportedly told allies that she planned to leave after the elections, according to Bloomberg Law.
Dhillon is the first top official to leave the Trump administration following the election. She overhauled her division at the DOJ to actually weaken civil rights, and on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, said, “Either DEI will end on its own or we will kill it.” She also staffed the civil rights office with the worst lawyers, including people with criminal records, misconduct allegations, a love of conspiracy theories, and a history of hacking election sites. Dhillon also led a sweeping campaign to force states to turn over sensitive voter information, a crusade repeatedly shut down in court.
In September, Dhillon proudly announced that the DOJ had dropped more than 50 desegregation cases, most of which were in Southern states with Jim Crow histories. On her watch, the office focuses on everything but civil rights, looking at election rolls, immigration, and alleged antisemitism on college campuses.





In January, members of Congress are sworn in and Democrats will be in charge of the House and the Senate.  What will that mean?  Julie K. Brown and Claire Healy (MIAMI HERALD via THE STATE COLUMBIA) note:

Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but his ghost continues to haunt American politics.
In the run-up to the midterms, candidates spent millions on campaign ads that attempted to tie candidates to sexual abuse, pedophilia or Epstein. Epstein’s survivors traveled the country with an exhibit containing Department of Justice files bound into thousands of physical volumes on the case. Several of them campaigned against members of Congress who failed, initially, to support the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Polls, meanwhile, consistently show that roughly three quarters of Americans disapprove of the way the Epstein case is being handled by the Trump administration. Most Americans want all the government files released and believe that there should be accountability for others involved in Epstein’s crimes.
Now it’s the Democrats’ turn.
[. . .]
Ten days ago, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also formally called for an independent counsel to investigate Trump’s involvement with Epstein as well as the administration’s “cover up” of the Epstein files. The Committee released a 53-page report titled, “We Have Certain Things in Common, Jeffrey’: The Case Against Donald Trump Emerging in the Epstein Files and DOJ’s Desperate Efforts to Cover It Up.”
[. . .]
The Judiciary Committee report listed five women who have “directly accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company or presence,” including a new sex allegation against Trump by a former Miss Switzerland contestant who told the Committee that Trump brutally raped her during one of his beauty pageants events in 1993.
Trump has repeatedly denied any involvement in Epstein’s crimes, and the White House slammed the report as politically motivated - as it was released almost a week before the midterms. A White House spokeswoman claimed the women’s accounts were false and that Trump had already been exonerated.
The American public is not so convinced that Epstein’s crimes, as Trump has long claimed, are a “hoax.”
Survivors deserve answers, and hopefully, Washington will be up to task, victim advocates say.

That's in the new year.  As of right now?  Malcolm Ferguson (THE NEW REPUBLIC) notes:

Republican Representative Thomas Massie says he has enough support to force a vote on his second Epstein Transparency Act.
“When we return next week, we’ll get 218 signatures for Epstein Files Transparency Act II, which guarantees a vote,” Massie wrote Thursday on X. “Survivors will be able to get their own records, State Attorneys General can prosecute crimes, and we can take the DOJ to court for keeping critical files hidden.”
Massie, who has made an enemy of Trump by opposing the Iran war and pushing for the full release of the Epstein files, first passed the Epstein Transparency Act in November of last year. And though President Trump signed it into law, Massie, Democrats, and a few Republicans argue that his administration didn’t fully abide with what the act required.
“The Department of Justice has flagrantly and consistently ignored EFTA’s disclosure requirements,” Massie wrote earlier this summer in his announcement of the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, co-sponsored by Democratic Senators Ben Ray Luján and Jeff Merkley, and Democratic Representatives Ro Khanna and Teresa Leger Fernández.






Amna Nawaz:

With Democrats set to take control of the House, they're making plans to use their majority not only to advance legislation, but also ramp up congressional oversight.

Our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, has more.

Liz Landers:

California Congressman Robert Garcia, who is expected to become the new chairman of the House Oversight Committee, says Democrats have plans to move quickly with a series of investigations when the new Congress takes office in January. These could include reviews into the Jeffrey Epstein files, the Trump family financial dealings, and immigration enforcement.

Congressman Garcia joins us now.

Congressman, welcome back to the program.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA):

Sure. Happy to be here.

Liz Landers:

On election night, you posted this two-word statement on X: "Lawyer up."

Do you think the election results have given Democrats a mandate to investigate the Trump administration?

Rep. Robert Garcia:

I think they have, and especially because, right now, when you think about the key issue, which is affordability, in large part, the reason why people can't afford to pay the gas, the groceries, they're struggling with the rent or the mortgage is because the Trump family continues to enrich themselves, steal people's wealth, and enrich their billionaire friends and donors.

They continue to support companies and CEOs that are ripping off the American public. And so we have to, of course, focus on affordability, but there also has to be accountability and there has to be justice. There has to be justice for families that are being picked up by ICE agents and that are removing due process from the system.

There has to be justice for the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. So there's a lot of work to do, but I think there's definitely a mandate to ensure we have accountability and affordability.

Liz Landers:

You have said that you have been preparing for these investigations for months and you're not starting from scratch here. What is the first thing you expect to investigate and how quickly will those subpoenas go out?

Rep. Robert Garcia:

Look, the first issue for us is going to be around the Trump family and the clear corruption. This is the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States.

When you have the president making billions from these crypto schemes, you have Jared Kushner getting $2 billion from the Saudis for his investment firm just after leaving the White House. Don Jr., his entire wedding being paid for by a Russian oligarch, him sitting on boards of companies that get contracts from the Pentagon, I mean, this is really serious stuff.

And the American public are looking at their own bills and seeing costs go up when they go to the supermarket, yet they're seeing the Trumps get richer. And so that's a real contrast, and that's a real issue for us to take on. People want solutions. They want accountability.

Liz Landers:

When it comes to the Epstein files, what more is there to learn and what documents have not been released?

Rep. Robert Garcia:

Look, I think, first, we want to center our work on justice for the survivors. Half of the Epstein documents, of the files have not been released to the public, even though Trump -- even though we know that Trump has tried to create confusion, calling this a hoax, and Todd Blanche saying they're going to release documents, and then they don't.

So we still have half of the files have not been released. We need more information from the Epstein estate. We need -- the co-conspirators that were involved with Jeffrey Epstein, there needs to be real accountability for them. If you abused, trafficked, raped women and children, and you're walking around with no sort of justice, that has to end.

There has not been a single, not one public hearing on the Epstein investigation in the Congress. And that's going to end when we take over the Oversight Committee.



Back to the incoming Congress, what else might Democrats probe in the new year?  Matthew Chapman (RAW STORY) notes:

Top congressional Democrats have been reading a 181-page dossier that urges them to go after hundreds of executives and companies once they hold power next year, The Washington Sun reported on Thursday.
The document, written by the think tank Groundwork Collaborative and reviewed by the Sun, argues the party should aggressively investigate big corporations, among them tech giants, AI labs, natural gas companies, private prisons and nursing home operators.
The Sun said it was spearheaded by former staffers for Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Multiple sources say House Democrats on the Judiciary and Oversight committees have been reviewing it, along with Warren, caucus leaders, and chiefs of staff for incoming senators.
The plan pictures a run of hearings where executives are pressed to resign or repay consumers, on topics such as landlord junk fees, AI and online sports gambling, credit card pricing and grocery chains’ use of shopper data. Groundwork’s Alex Jacquez said Trump controversies like the Qatari jet and Reflecting Pool renovation are “not interesting or motivating to anybody but hard-core Democrats,” and urged focusing on corporations voters blame for high prices.

Questions also surround Chump's presidential library.  Democrats are preparing for the transfer of power.  David Edwards (RAW STORY) reports:

House Judiciary Committee Democrats began hiring investigators a day after their party flipped more than two dozen seats to take control of the House.
The committee’s Democratic staff is seeking counsels and professional staff members for “policy, oversight, investigative, and legislative work” in the next Congress, which begins in January, according to its website. The posting says experience conducting investigations is valued for oversight jobs.
“Didn’t take long,” Scott MacFarlane, MeidasTouch’s chief Washington correspondent, wrote on X Wednesday, adding that committee Democrats were hiring investigators “as they gear up to launch probes of Trump 2.0.”
Committee Democrats have no subpoena power in the minority, and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the panel’s top Democrat, said his earlier inquiries into Middle East envoy Jared Kushner went unanswered, MS NOW reported last week.
Raskin is expected to chair the committee in January, and chairs control subpoenas in most cases, according to a client alert from the law firm Jenner & Block. The investigators hired now could then pursue those unanswered questions with subpoenas to back them up.

From the House Judiciary Committee to the judiciary itself, Chump's administration continues to lie to the courts and the courts continue to tire of this nonsense and obstruction. Joe Patrice (ABOVE THE LAW) reports:

Federal judges traditionally don’t have to ask the DOJ’s number 3 if they’re kidding. But Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward is nothing if not a trailblazer.
And the trail he’s blazing involves clear cutting a whole forest of ethical norms and presumptions of DOJ integrity.
Last Friday, in the ongoing court battle over the administration’s capricious destruction of the East Potomac Golf Course, Woodward told Judge Ana Reyes that he didn’t “recall the court asking a question as to whether we were wanting to come up with a plan,” per the Independent. Given that the only reason Judge Reyes called Woodward to court in the first place was to get to the bottom of the administration’s plan — and why it seems to be at odds with what government lawyers told the court — the judge asked whether he was kidding. As Bloomberg Law News reported, the judge added: “Seriously, Mr. Woodward, come on.”
He did not, ultimately, get serious. By the end of Friday’s hearing in DC Preservation League v. Department of Interior, Reyes had opened a formal inquiry into whether Justice Department and Interior officials and lawyers made material misrepresentations to the court. She proposed assigning the matter to a special master… unless DOJ would rather Reyes do it herself.
Perhaps she just wanted to check if the DOJ is as obtuse as it pretended to be.


On the Republican side of Congress, Senator Chuck Grassley announced he's not going anywhere.  William Vaillancourt (DAILY BEAST) notes: 

Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley says he has no plans to resign, despite there being concerns in his party that a Democratic governor will choose his replacement if he dies in office.
Questions about the future of the oldest member of Congress have been raised after Democrat Rob Sand won Iowa’s gubernatorial race to replace Republican Kim Reynolds. But the 93-year-old Grassley, first elected to the Senate in 1980, says he will not step down.
“Senator Grassley is not resigning,” a spokesperson told the Daily Beast. “He remains committed to delivering for the people of Iowa, who overwhelmingly elected him to a six-year term in 2022.”

93 years old.  Yes, we need a mandatory retirement age for the US Senate.  (The House?  House members aren't elected to six year terms, they're elected to two year terms.  Not saying I'd oppose a mandatory retirement age for the House but I am saying the Senate issue needs to be addressed.)  US House Rep Mike Johnson will not attempt to become the Minority Leader.  He will end his (mis)leadership with Speaker of the Closet.  US House Horror Jim Jordan has announced his intent to seek the Minority Leader.  John Casey (RAW STORY) notes:

And then there is Ohio State and the allegations that he enabled a widespread sex abuse scandal during his time there. Critics argue that he is following directly in the footsteps of another former GOP leader accused of abuse, former House Speaker and wrestling coach Dennis Hastert.
Longtime readers of Raw Story know I have written about Jordan many times over the years, and those columns have been forceful. I wrote about his years as an assistant wrestling coach at Ohio State, from the late 1980s into the mid-1990s, when team doctor Richard Strauss was sexually abusing student-athletes.
Ohio State's own independent investigation found that Strauss abused at least 177 students, and the university's count of abuse instances has since climbed to nearly 1,500. Many of those victims were wrestlers.
Jordan says he never knew. But a long line of former wrestlers say otherwise. They say the abuse was an open secret and that they raised it with coaches, including Jordan. In the HBO documentary Surviving Ohio State, survivors again spoke with raw courage about what happened to them and who they say looked away.
I wrote then that Jordan abandoned those men when they needed him most. I've called him a liar. I've said he doesn't belong in Congress. I haven't changed my mind. Jordan has never been held accountable, and that is another outrage in itself.

Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:


“Now, Democrats must deliver. Yes, even with Donald Trump in the White House.”

Op-Ed in TIME Magazine

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) published an op-ed in TIME Magazine laying out lessons from the 2026 midterm elections and the next steps for Democrats to deliver for the American people. 

Read the full op-ed here and below: 

TIME Magazine – Sen. Elizabeth Warren: Why Democrats Won the Midterms

November 5, 2026

Democrats won their largest congressional victory since the 1976 Watergate election—overwhelmingly flipping both the House and Senate. And while the dance music is still playing, a debate has already burst forward over whether those election results were merely a rebuke of President Donald Trump’s failures, and whether it was progressives or moderates who produced the secret recipe for Democrats’ success.

These are the wrong questions. Anyone seeking to understand the midterm’s lessons should start here: Democrats won by being populist economic fighters who were unafraid to call out the corrupt politicians and corporate interests who have rigged the system at the expense of everyone else.

Now, Democrats must deliver. Yes, even with Donald Trump in the White House.

In 2024, Trump swept back into power, declaring he would cut costs on “Day 1” and bragging he would “end inflation and make America affordable again.” Instead, Trump and Republicans took a wrecking ball to the economy, cutting health care to finance tax breaks for rich people and giant corporations, imposing chaotic tariffs, and launching a war with Iran. With astonishing brazenness, Trump has attempted to reengineer the federal government into a corruption machine designed to rake in profits for himself, his family, and his cronies.

In the most competitive 2026 races, in blue, purple, and red states, including places like Texas and South Carolina that have not elected Democrats statewide for decades, Democrats won by recognizing Americans’ economic pain, denouncing Washington corruption that has made a rigged economy worse by favoring giant corporations over working people, and by pledging to upend this system.

Democrats relentlessly and rightfully criticized Trump’s economy, but we also made a much deeper point—and it struck home. The first Democratic Governor of Texas in 30 years, Gina Hinojosa, said, “The one fight in this country is about economic power.” Red-state winners like Sherrod Brown, James Talarico, and Jon Ossoff called out a “rigged” system. In South Carolina, Annie Andrews pledged to take on “big insurance, big tech, big pharma, and the utility monopolies.” Josh Turek promised to fight for Iowans, “not for billionaires and large corporations.” Chris Pappas declared to New Hampshire voters in his victory speech: “Tonight’s results are a wake-up call for the corporate special interests and billionaires who have been rigging the economy.”

Just campaign rhetoric? Nope. Across the country, Democrats stood up for big policy changes like increasing the federal minimum wage, expanding child care, reining in Big Tech, data centers, and AI, and reforming health care. We came with plans—specific policies to dismantle a rigged system and beat back concentrated corporate power. 

From Mary Peltola in Alaska to Roy Cooper in North Carolina, Democrats called for blocking grocery store mergers that drive up prices. Both Iowa’s Josh Turek and Texas’ James Talarico promised to break up vertical integration between insurance companies, pharmacy benefit managers, and pharmacies. Maine’s Troy Jackson and Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed beat Republicans by proudly campaigning for Medicare for All. And plenty more Democrats like Lindsay James (IA), Zach Dembo (KY), Denise Powell (NE), and Jamie Ager (NC) flipped Republican seats after demanding a public insurance option that is available to all Americans. Not long ago, trying to flip a seat from red to blue by promising to raise taxes on the rich was considered unthinkable. But Democrats did just that—and won.

None of this happened without Democrats putting in the work to earn the trust of voters. Our new housing affordability law—that Donald Trump refused to sign—was a critical proof point. And in races from Kentucky to Indiana to South Carolina, candidates loudly proclaimed their support for blocking private equity from gobbling up housing. Annie Andrews and Kansas’s Adam Hamilton specifically campaigned on cracking down further on Wall Street ownership of single-family homes than the historic provisions that passed Congress this summer.

Now it’s time to act. Donald Trump says he wants to work with Democrats. We should force him to do that on the affordability and corruption issues that drove this election—or call his bluff. I’m ready to team up with any Republican who is listening to the American people. But if Congressional Republicans won’t join us to deliver relief for working families, Democrats will do it without them. 

Some Democrats have already argued that it’s wasted energy to send bold policy changes to the Trump White House. I think that’s just plain wrong. It would be a breach of faith with the people from South Carolina to Texas, who voted for us to address costs and corruption, to spend the next two years waiting for some future Democratic trifecta to hopefully deliver meaningful change. Trump says he welcomes the nickname “Mr. Veto.” Well, let’s test that out by passing legislation the American people support to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.

First, stop Trump’s war. Second, cut costs. Democrats have power on spending bills that require our votes, and we should use it. No more funding for a forever war with Iran. Cancel the looming cuts to health insurance and nutrition benefits put in place by Republicans last summer. The reconciliation budget process also allows us to pass big chunks of legislation without a single Republican vote, so we should reverse Republican health care cuts, expand health care coverage, and fund universal child care. Third, pay for it by putting a little fairness back in the system. We can start with canceling the tax breaks Trump and the Republicans handed out to corporations, ultra-millionaires, and billionaires. 

Next, where Democrats agree reconciliation is not an option, like with bills to ban stock trading by federal officials or crack down on Trump’s corruption in plain sight, Democrats should put the bills up for a vote. Let the Republicans decide if they want to stay tied to such corruption and, if they do, then let’s clear away Senate filibuster rules and pass the laws anyway.

Finally, accountability. Congress has the power to hold Donald Trump and his cronies accountable for ripping off the American people to make themselves richer. Big Tech CEOs, Wall Street executives, and giant corporations should prepare to answer tough questions and face meaningful consequences if they have broken the law. 

Democrats won this election by claiming we are on the side of working people, and working people are counting on us to deliver. 

Americans need Democrats to deliver now, not in two years. 

###




The following sites updated:





Posted by at

Friday, November 06, 2026

Chump and Vance - two losers on a losing streak

 First up, Katie Phang.




Donald Trump’s odd behavior leading up to the midterms has been revealed.
The 80-year-old president, whose party took a historic beating on Tuesday, fluctuated between shrugging off the nationwide elections and emphasizing their importance, according to reports in The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.
In the months before the contests that would ultimately mark a repudiation of his second term, Trump told aides he didn’t care about them, a senior administration official who spoke with him told the Journal. The official said Trump thought foreign policy and his legacy mattered more than domestic affairs.
Americans’ affordability concerns didn’t register with Trump, this same official said. When aides told him in the spring and summer that voters took issue with his handling of it, he called the polling fake and, in one meeting, mentioned that he won the 2016 election without commissioning any polls.
Around late summer, the Times reported, Trump seemed insistent that the midterms actually did matter.
“We’ve gotta win. Anything we gotta do,” he told advisers privately on some occasions.
Other times, his interest was distant.
“It says something very nice about me that they just can’t win without me,” he reportedly told aides.
Trump, in trying to sell Ohio Sen. Jon Husted, kept talking about his body. This, he told advisers, was making Husted more “interesting” to the electorate. Husted lost.

He can tell advisors whatever he wants but we know the truth -- he was attracted to Husted just like he was attracted to _____ ______ the soap opera actor he was rumored to have had an affair with in the 80s.  Brenda Alexander (ALTERNET) notes:

President Donald Trump is reportedly delusional about the extent of his role in the GOP’s devastating defeat in the 2026 midterm elections. White House correspondent Kristen Holmes gave CNN’s Jake Tapper intel on what Trump believes fueled the loss. Trump says it’s because his name wasn't on the ballot and that others are to blame. In the days leading up to Election Day, Trump’s biggest ask of his MAGA base was that supporters treat it as though he were on the ballot. But despite his efforts to rally his loyalists, the results didn’t go his way.
“Behind the scenes, we’ve seen an enormous amount of finger-pointing and blame-shifting,” Holmes told Tapper. “In terms of the president himself, he has continued to say, and that includes behind closed doors, that he believes the reason Republicans lost was not a rebuke of him, but because, in fact, he was not actually on the ballot,” Holmes added.
Trump has claimed in his comments since the fallout that had he been on the ballot, he would have come out victorious. Holmes says Trump points to his rallies as proof of his popularity, but argues they are not an accurate measure of his public support.

Chump.  Did he take Miss Sassy down with him?  Dace Potas (USA TODAY) believes so: 

Election night was nothing short of a massacre for Republicans. Americans flatly rejected President Donald Trump's second term, handing Democrats commanding majorities in both the House and the Senate. Democrats even won statewide in Republican strongholds like Texas, Kansas and South Carolina.
The immediate impact is that the rest of Trump's second term becomes a headache for Republicans. Democrats will open investigations in the House, block nominations in the Senate and ride the momentum into their campaign to retake the White House in 2028.
But the long-run impact for Republicans is even more interesting. The 2028 election cycle has begun, and the midterm results have upended the GOP primary before anyone has even declared for the presidential race.
Anyone tied to Trump's second term is going to see their electoral odds poisoned. Tariffs, the war with Iran, immigration enforcement and the administration's other failures are going to haunt many of 2028's most likely candidates.
Vice President JD Vance is the one most wounded by the Nov. 3 results.
Vance entered Election Day as the 2028 favorite, and betting markets still rank him there, even after his odds of winning the Republican presidential nomination on Kalshi fell from 35% on Nov. 1 to about 30% on Nov. 4. But it's becoming increasingly hard to see his path to victory in a general election – and maybe even in the Republican primary.

Ha ha.  Miss Sassy may have just gotten knocked out of the 2028 race.  That would be so wonderful and so fitting.  In 2016, JD knew Chump was a grifter.  In 2024, he sold his soul to stand next to Chump.  Ha ha.  Steve Contorno (CNN) notes: 

Vice President JD Vance’s seemingly straightforward path to succeeding President Donald Trump suddenly looks much murkier.
The Republican shellacking in Tuesday’s midterm elections has quickly triggered a public reckoning within the GOP over Trump’s place in the future of the party — one that threatens to complicate Vance’s efforts to consolidate party support behind a widely anticipated White House bid.
Vance appeared to recognize the danger Wednesday morning, blaming the party’s sweeping losses on the war with Iran and distancing himself from Trump’s unpopular foreign policy decisions. In a lengthy post on X, Vance appeared to sketch out what the foundations for his own 2028 platform, centered on ending the war, tackling affordability, refocusing on domestic challenges and reconsidering America’s relationship with Israel.
“To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be,” he wrote. “Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.”
But there are already signs that there may be a widening lane for someone outside the administration to seize the nomination in 2028.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich wrote Wednesday on X that “the scale of the Republican defeat is so great that it makes the race for the GOP presidential nomination wide open.” In the post, he ripped Vance for defending an ad from Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy that featured the estranged mother of his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton. The ad received bipartisan blowback and on Tuesday, Acton defeated Ramaswamy.

Newt Gingrich is calling JD out.  Grasp that.  Newt is calling JD out.  Ha!  

Here's C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"

Thursday, November 5, 2026.  Chump is the lame duck president, Dems huge wins on Tuesday continue to roll the Republican Party, more Republicans feel comfortable calling Chump out, Chris Hayes observes a good note from Tuesday's elections, Priss Pot Pete Hegseth is the person everyone watches to see if Chump will fire him or Congress will impeach him, and much more. 





Chump is in denial over the GOP defeats on Tuesday.  The midterms were a huge rebuke.  For the last two years, the White House spokespeople -- especially the human dugong -- have responded to Chump's fall in the polls by insisting that the only poll that mattered was the 2024 election which they then mischaracterize as a landslide (not a landslide, Chump got 49% of the vote).  So now they'll have to take these results as the only poll that matters -- if they had any honesty or consistency.  (They don't.)


Peggy Flanagan won Tuesday night becoming the first Native American woman to be elected to the US Senate, let's note some of her speech:

You just beat Donald Trump again. And you know what? America did too.
No more. You said no more war. No more health care cuts. No more taking food away from children and seniors. No more selling this country off to the highest bidder.
And you said no more masked goons shooting our neighbors and terrorizing our communities.
You said no more ballrooms, no more bombs, or tax breaks for billionaires. The grift stops now.
And taking back our country from the grip of the most corrupt administration in our nation's history starts tonight.
Because all across this state and all across this country, people are saying enough is enough.
They're saying that working people deserve an economy and a country that finally works for them, not Donald Trump and his billionaire besties.
There were many factors producing the midterm wipe out.  There was the economy which Chump destroyed.  Inflation at the grocery stores, gas prices sky rocketing at the pump.

[. . .]
So the name you voted for on the ballot says Peggy Flanagan. But my Ojibwe name is "Speaks in a Loud and Clear Voice Woman."
I am a proud daughter of the White Earth Nation, and my family is the Wolf Clan. And the role of our clan is to ensure we never leave anyone behind.
And that's been the purpose of our campaign. We refuse to let this country leave anyone behind.
And here's the deal. Our campaign didn't begin in a Washington, D.C., conference room, but at a kitchen table in St. Louis Park.
And it grew. It grew in the basement of the Hibbing Public Library, next to the Bob Dylan exhibit. In cafés, in churches, the VFW, barns, garages, union halls, and living rooms.
And at the darkest hour, in the weeks and months after Donald Trump was elected, when he still looked unbeatable, you took the boldest action imaginable.
You showed up.


And as she noted, there were a number of reasons people voted the way they did.  There was ICE.  David Gilmour (MEDIAITE) notes Joe Scarborough's remarks on ICE 

For people in the White House that are watching right now, that’s the price of ICE.  It's what we warned you all along. We take no happiness in this happening because this happened because you brutalized Hispanics in a way that I told you personally was going to destroy you politically! I told you that! I told you it would destroy you politically. I warned you, you can't do that.  Secure the borders, but you can't rove through neighborhoods terrorizing Americans, beating up Hispanics, killing Americans. This is what happened! Texas happened! And good luck Republicans ever getting that back. Because guess what? It's not just the White House who is responsible for the brutalization of these people, it's people like Susan Collins, who lost last night, who went along with it, went along for the ride!  "‘But I put an amendment on!" No, no, you really didn't. It didn't work! They're not wearing your body cams. So all of you Republicans that went along with the killing of Americans, the killing of Hispanics, the imprisonment, the sending to internment camps of Hispanics -- Texas, that's for you!  That's what you did! 

Joe is right.  


There was also the economy.

Chump ruined the economy with tariffs which led to inflation.  He ruined it with his war on immigrants which destroyed businesses -- including construction.  He ruined it with his war of choice on Iran which led to increased prices at the pump and which added to the inflated prices at the grocery store.  Chump seemed to possibly grasp a fraction of that, Matthew Loh (BUSINESS INSIDER) quotes Chump telling FOX "NEWS", ""I don't think it's the war, I think it's the gas prices."  It's also the war, Chump.  You promised not to start wars and you got votes for that.  Then you started the war with Iran (after your war on Venezuela).  

Monday night, former US House Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene (who broke with Chump over Epstein) told CNN, "I think it's a complete referendum on Donald Trump --  his betrayal --  where he promised no more foreign wars and to bring world peace, not releasing the Epstein files.  And also, not listening to everyday Americans who are saying, 'We cannot afford the cost of living, we cannot afford health insurance, we cannot afford these high prices of gas and diesel.' While he is constantly bragging about a ballroom and his big donors and having these big, fancy dinners, as if he cannot relate to the American people."



There were other motivators.  People were tired of Chump's corruption, they were tired of his attacks on We The People and our Constitution.  

And there was AI.  Jiaxing Li and Selena Li (REUTERS) note, "Data center opponents were among the biggest winners of the Democrats' landslide victories in the US midterm elections, pointing to a shifting public mood on AI and, investors said, a possible slowdown of the boom that has propelled US economic growth and stock markets."  Alex J. Rouhandeh (NEWSWEEK) also notes data centers, "Republicans were not the only big losers of the 2026 midterms—the AI industry lost as well. After data centers became the focus of numerous campaigns, lawmakers with records most in favor of accelerating AI adoption were most likely to be among the defeated incumbents."



AILSA CHANG, HOST:

We've been talking a lot about who was on the ballot yesterday, but now we're going to talk about what, because there was one issue that did remain prominent throughout this entire election.

(SOUNDBITE OF MONTAGE)

UNIDENTIFIED CANDIDATE #1: Stop data centers.

UNIDENTIFIED CANDIDATE #2: Fight against this unchecked development of data centers.

UNIDENTIFIED CANDIDATE #3: The noise, the dust and the fact that this is being built in their own backyards.

UNIDENTIFIED CANDIDATE #4: Make sure these data centers don't flood our communities and raise our electric rates.

CHANG: All right. We're hearing the voices there of a few candidates talking about data centers on social media ahead of Election Day. Almost 30 jurisdictions voted to ban or restrict data centers. And many Democratic candidates who promised to curb data center growth won their governors' races. Reporter Molly Taft is with me now. They're a senior writer for WIRED. Welcome.

MOLLY TAFT: Thanks for having me.

CHANG: Let's talk about all these different ballot measures that did pass. I mean, there were a lot of promises from governors-elect to limit data centers. Can you just walk us through the range of the different approaches that voters chose?

TAFT: Generally, I think you would be hard-pressed to find someone who said what's happening right now is totally fine. Everyone should be fine with unchecked development. A lot of people weighed in at least for some kind of regulation of the industry. The data center industry itself has said, look, people are having a really strong reaction to data center development. We are totally open to being regulated.

CHANG: Yeah.

TAFT: So it's a big range - right? - from let's regulate an industry that was previously unregulated, all the way over to let's pause development. Which we did see a handful of pretty high-profile candidates actually propose moratoriums.

CHANG: Let's talk about one of those examples. Texas, which is a...

TAFT: Yes.

CHANG: ...Major data center hub. The new governor-elect there, a Democrat, Gina Hinojosa, she wants a moratorium on all new data center projects. How do you think that's going to shake out in Texas?

TAFT: Over the past year, until very recently, the government of Texas welcomed them with open arms, right? Governor Greg Abbott was very open to data center development, was very excited about it until a couple of months ago when he was facing a tough reelection campaign and he started to walk back some of his previous statements. But what's remarkable for me is that Gina Hinojosa actually campaigned about Abbott being too soft on data centers. She said he's not doing enough.

So if you look at her platform, there's kind of a little bit of room to interpret what she actually wants for Texas. You could have a little bit more of an industry-friendly moratorium. Or you could go all the way - right? - and really impose extremely strict regulations on the industry. So the real question is going to be balancing industry interests, allowing some development to go through and then also responding to what your voters actually want out of you. This is kind of a big landscape for politicians.






The voters rejected Trumpism.  They rejected its hatred of fellow citizens and its targeting of them.  Daniel Villarreal (LGBTQ NATION) notes:

MS NOW host Chris Hayes eloquently described the blue tsunami of Democratic wins in last night’s midterm elections as a “repudiation” of the Republicans’ “grossness” and “cruelty” of attacking transgender people.

“I was really upset by the the grossness and the cruelty of the closing message of Republicans in Michigan about the things they said about Abdul El-Sayed,” Hayes said in a recent broadcast, “but also the attack on trans folks that has just become so toxic and so common and so cruel and so ceaseless.”

“It was every ad, every ad. You watch a Sunday football game, and it was, ‘These people are the reason. This is the problem. This is the thing you have to think about.’ And they pumped hundreds of millions of dollars. And I saw Republicans, hardcore Republicans, when asked in man-on-the-street interviews, ‘What are you voting for?’ It’s, ‘I want to get you know boys out of girls’ sports.'”

“And to see the repudiation of that approach specifically, when that pollution was pumped into the discourse with hundreds of millions of dollars, like that people are like, ‘I don’t care about that and I reject that,’ there’s, like, some salvaging of decency for people that are our neighbors and our friends and our loved ones, who are a tiny minority of this population, who somehow have become the ritualized scapegoat for an entire political party that spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to make everyone fear and hate them,” Hayes said.



Since the polls closed on Tuesday what's been taking place?  Apportioning blame.  Nancy Cook and Katherine Doyle (WASHINGTON POST) report:

The recriminations among Republicans began before breakfast Wednesday, as many laid blame for the GOP’s stunning midterm losses on President Donald Trump, and White House officials countered by pointing fingers at anybody but the president.
In private calls and texts, Republicans lamented strategies they now view as inadequate -- like an unprecedented mid-decade redistricting gambit in southern states -- that failed to make up for actions by the president that they view as politically damaging, like launching a war with Iran and dismissing popular anger over high gas prices.
“At the end of the day, this is mostly the fault of the president and an incompetent White House that pushed every single limit, and the voters responded in kind,” said one GOP strategist involved in midterm races, who like others in this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to candidly assess the election outcome.
“We haven’t done s--- to bring the prices down,” said another Republican strategist. Referring to Trump’s penchant for praising certain GOP physiques, he added: “It turns out voters weren’t voting on the best ass.”




"I think much of what we are seeing tonight is a reflection of Trump's agenda, particularly our continued involvement in Iran, high gas prices, inflation and the lack of focus on issues affecting everyday Americans," a statewide Republican official told Scripps News.
"It sounds a little ironic, but I am nonetheless optimistic for the future because Trump's going to be gone in two years," Republican candidate Bobby Charles told POLITICO.
Charles lost to Democrat Hannah Pingree in Maine's governor's race.


And it's not just Republicans in Congress.  Tara Suter (THE HILL) notes:

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board cast much of the blame on President Trump for GOP losses Tuesday, as Democrats are poised to take control of both the House and Senate.
“Republicans may console themselves that midterm defeats in second presidential terms are common. But this was more than a normal defeat," the board wrote in a piece published early Wednesday.
"The loss of Senate seats and governorships in states that had become GOP redoubts will have ramifications for years to come," it continued. "So will the cascading losses down ballot in state legislatures."
“True to form, President Trump is already blaming everyone else, but he is the main architect of this rout," the board added.




Republicans are sick of Chump too.  That's Republican voters, that's Republican outlets, that's Republican elected officials.  Stephanie Kaloi (MEDIAITE) notes:

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) blamed President Donald Trump’s push for redistricting for the GOP’s midterm election results Tuesday night.

Tillis told CBS News:

So I think a part of what we missed here were national themes applying in the fingerprints we call state elections. And I know it wasn’t going to play well in North Carolina. What I didn’t see coming is, I think, probably the spreading out of some of our Republican base with redistricting, which I said was a bad idea.

With a negative environment, a typical negative environment would have been bad enough. But with this wage sort of trend we see tonight, I think it’s putting some of our, what I thought were safer races, even in North Carolina, at risk. And that’s unfortunate. We’ve got great members I’d like to see go back to the Capitol.

The president began backing redistricting efforts across several states in 2025. 


That was Chump's idea.  All it did in real time was anger a lot of people.  How did it do in the midterm elections? 


Despite making new maps to boost Republican candidates in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Alabama, and Utah, voters in those states by and large still chose Democrats to represent them.
For more than a year, local legislators in the Lone Star State were explicitly pushed by Donald Trump and his allies to forgo tradition and create a new congressional map for the 2026 election. State Republicans complied, carving up five historically Democratic districts into supposedly MAGA-friendly inventions.
But the plan backfired spectacularly. Republicans lost four of the five supposedly GOP-friendly seats they had created, as well as another two of their own.
Alabama voters also rejected the state GOP’s gerrymandering efforts, opting to send Democratic Representative Shomari Figures back to Congress.
Earlier this year, Governor Ron DeSantis redrew 20 of Florida’s 28 U.S. House districts. At the time, four newly created districts were expected to turn red. But they didn’t, and Florida Democrats remain poised to retain their targeted seats. Representatives Jared Moskowitz, Kathy Castor, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz were able to fend off Republican challengers, while first-time candidate Pia Dandiya outcompeted Republican nominee Casey Askar. The results for Florida’s ninth congressional district have not yet been called, though Democratic Representative Darren Soto has a slight lead.



MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST:

Today is a day for all of the superlatives. Unbelievable, unprecedented, stunning - just a few of the words being used to describe Democratic victories across the country in midterm elections.

AILSA CHANG, HOST:

And just to recap, Democrats won majorities in both houses of Congress, picking up at least seven seats in the Senate. Two races in Mississippi and Alaska are still too close to call. Democrats also took control of the House, flipping more than two dozen seats, with races yet to be called.

KELLY: They also picked up five governorships. They captured control of at least nine state legislative houses. So how did they do it? And what might Democratic control of Congress look like? Those are a couple of the questions I'm going to put now to NPR White House correspondent Emily Feng, congressional reporter Eric McDaniel and senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro. We got a whole team here. Domenico, I'm going to throw you the question that I had waking up this morning. Did the Democrats win or did the Republicans lose?

DOMENICO MONTANARO, BYLINE: Yeah, it's not really an either-or. Clearly, the overriding factor, though, was Donald Trump. I mean, his unpopularity, the war in Iran, rising prices, the growing gap between the uber-rich and the middle class. I mean, some $12 billion spent on this election while other people are struggling to buy gas. All of that together created a huge backlash, maybe call it a Trump-lash. Democrats, though, also did recruit very good candidates. You don't win in places like Iowa, Texas, Kansas as Democrats without candidates who can make the most of the moment and be good fits for their states. They showed real level of authenticity. That will give them a big opportunity to show what Democrats did wasn't just a big midterm asterisk.

KELLY: And one more to you, Domenico, because we've been talking a lot, you and I, about polling these last few weeks. Were the polls going to work? Could we trust them? In the end, they did all right.

MONTANARO: In the end, they did do OK. You know, they pointed in the right direction. If anything, they underestimated Democratic support. But we don't know how many people decided late, you know, after when the polls had been conducted before the election. And things usually do break in one direction in midterms. It happened in 2006. It happened again in this election. Polls predicted Democrats plus 8 on the generic congressional ballot. It wound up being bigger, closer to plus 13, which is massive and no one would have believed it beforehand. Even with the underestimation, all the signs were there for a pretty big wave with what the polls were showing, but people were rightfully cautious given the polling errors we've seen over the past decade that had underestimated Republican support.

KELLY: Yeah.

MONTANARO: It's just very difficult in this age, when there's been such a major political realignment, to poll.

KELLY: Eric McDaniel, you cover Congress.

ERIC MCDANIEL, BYLINE: Indeed, I do.

KELLY: Lucky you. Here's my question to you. What happens immediately? Because Republicans still control the House and the Senate for the next couple months. Does anything change between now and January?

MCDANIEL: Well, I mean, it only gets harder for Republicans, right? They've got a narrow majority right now in the House, a small majority in the Senate. But good luck to them getting every one of those folks who lost back into Washington to pass legislation on a party-line basis. There's not a lot of incentive...

KELLY: Yeah.

MCDANIEL: ...To come back to town. And that's important stuff. That's government funding. That's more money for the Iran war. They also have to figure out what their leadership looks like next. Our friend Barbara Sprunt is reporting that current Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, he won't seek reelection as the top House Republican. That sets up a battle between at least two folks, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Steve Scalise of Louisiana. Jim Jordan's pugnacious. He's a brawler. He could be dispositionally well suited to counter Democrats' investigation-heavy agenda. Scalise is sort of a party man. He's a committed Trump ally, but generally seen as less pugnacious than Jordan.

But - and this is speculation on my part - I think there's probably an appetite for someone willing to take a more Trump-skeptical stance as a party leader - right? - given the mollywhopping voters just delivered the party because of the president.

KELLY: Yeah. And then agenda? I mean, how do we expect Democrats are going to use their newfound majorities come January?

MCDANIEL: They'll act on the things they campaigned on. That's cost of living. That's perceived political corruption. They talk about cost of living from healthcare to housing. But with Trump still in the White House, I don't expect that those bills will absolutely become law. In perceived public corruption, expect bills on lawmaker stock trading and then investigations into investigations into investigations - every part of Trump's life from his administration's agenda and the extent of his relationship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The likely incoming House oversight chair, Robert Garcia, Democrat of California, posted on Twitter last night, simply, lawyer up.

KELLY: Lawyer up. Sounds ominous. Emily Feng, hop in here. What's the mood at the White House like today?

EMILY FENG, BYLINE: Yeah, so I am at the White House today. It's quiet, but it's also surreal, and that's because the president has had one public event so far today, and it was not about the election. It was to talk about his East Wing ballroom construction project. He had hundreds of construction workers who were building it come in. And at this event, he spent most of his time talking about the quality of the marble that he was using and his new helipad and really not about the election. However, last night, a White House official told NPR that the mood watching these results come in was, quote, "defiant at the White House." And then today, Trump's Truth Social media account shared a picture of a red hat with the word veto written on it because Trump has said he is going to veto most bills brought to him by a Democratic Congress.

More broadly, the sense I get is the mood in the Republican Party is one of confusion and of soul searching. As my colleagues have just pointed out, these midterms were a big rebuke of Trump himself. He has been quick to point out he was not literally on the ballot, but voters rejected his policies, you know, his economic policies and tariffs, the war in Iran. And even his own vice president today, JD Vance, broke with Trump and wrote on X that he thinks one of the primary reasons behind Republican losses was the war in Iran. So today, when Trump was celebrating, you know, the last steel ceiling beam that was being put in place in the ballroom project, reporters asked him if he regretted, perhaps, the Iran war costing the GOP the House and the Senate, and he said this.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Probably it's true, but at the same time, if I had it to do again, I'd have to do it again because long-term, it's the only answer. You can't let Iran have a nuclear weapon.

KELLY: Interesting. So, I mean, Emily, is there any sign, any indication that President Trump might be willing to change course with the war in Iran?

FENG: He seemed to soften his stance a little today. He said today he could end the war, quote, "anytime" he wanted. He said last night on Fox & Friends that he would still strike Iran, though, if Iran, quote, "does not behave." But also that the two countries could have a diplomatic ending to this, that they could sign something to end the war. He has warned that any new major strikes would happen after the midterms, but he's already said he will not use nuclear weapons. He told Politico last night he does not need to use nuclear weapons against Iran.

KELLY: Eric, back to you. One of the outgrowths of the war in Iran has, of course, been high diesel prices, high gas prices. Affordability, affordability, affordability, which was a huge factor in the election, we're told.




Gains were made throughout the country Tuesday night.  Mariana Alfaro and Steve Thompson (WASHINGTON POST) note gender:
 
Women will lead more states as governors and represent more congressional districts than at any time in American history come January.
The blue wave putting Democrats back in control of Congress is also creating a House Democratic caucus that looks much more like the nation, in terms of gender, than ever before. Democratic women’s gains also widen a significant gap between the number of Democratic women and Republican women in power.
For the first time, next year, more than 100 Democratic women will serve in the U.S. House, according to Associated Press race calls and a tally by the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.





Now you go your way, baby, and I'll go mine
Now and forever, 'til the end of time
I'll find somebody new, and baby, we'll say we're through
And you won't matter anymore
 
You won't matter anymore?  That would be the man Mike dubbed FettyCrap -- John Fetterman.  Tuesday's election results gave Democrats control of the Senate and not by one vote so FettyCrap is not needed.  Jordan King (NEWSWEEK) explains: 


Democratic Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman has lost his unique leverage in Washington now that his party has pulled off a blue wave in the midterm elections.
The Democratic Party was handed control of the House and the Senate on Tuesday, dramatically reshaping Congress for the country.
In Pennsylvania, Fetterman has wielded the power of being the deciding vote in what was a narrowly divided Senate, as a Democrat willing to break with his party. But Democratic Senate gains across the country on Tuesday have pushed their seats from a minority of 47 to a majority of at least 54, after flipping at least seven seats, as of early Wednesday morning.
This means Fetterman, who has long faced criticism from wings of his party for obstructing the Democratic agenda by voting with Republicans, will now have less power to force his party to listen to the views he represents.
Pennsylvania state Representative Malcolm Kenyatta was one of several who celebrated this as a win, writing in a post on X: “We just Fetterman proofed the U.S. Senate.”


Yesterday, Sam Stevenson (NEWSWEEK) began the media's focus on the 2028 presidential election -- on the Democratic Party side he noted Senator Jon Ossoff, Governor Josh Shapiro, Governor JB Pritzker, former Vice President Kamala Harris, outgoing Governor Gavin Newsom, former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg and US House Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Again, Chump is now a lame duck.  





Turning to Priss Pot Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense's role was being addressed as the midterm votes were coming in.  Shomik Sen Bhattacharjee (BENZINGA) noted: 

Anthony Scaramucci predicted Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth could be out of President Donald Trump‘s administration within days, responding to a journalist’s question about whether the Pentagon chief would survive the week.
"Under but way under by year-end," Scaramucci, a former White House Communications Director, wrote in an X post, responding to The New Yorker journalist Susan Glasser, who asked, "over/under on Hegseth lasting the week?"
His remarks come as Hegseth faces criticism over the Iran war, military leadership shake-ups and previous security controversies.



Tom Latchem (DAILY BEAST) noted yesterday morning: 

Some believe Hegseth, a prominent driver of the ongoing eight-month conflict, could be sacrificed as the president searches for someone to blame. Trump has already been privately canvassing allies for their assessments of Hegseth’s performance, the outlet reported.
White House insiders are said to believe Hegseth has been overly optimistic about the conflict, which began in February and has triggered soaring energy prices and mounting anger across the U.S.
An earlier report by The Atlantic claimed Trump was also questioning the judgment of Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, over the botched military campaign.

And Bart Jansen (USA TODAY) noted yesterday morning, "Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth faces impeachment accusations when Congress returns after the midterm elections and others, including President Donald Trump, could be investigated for alleged misconduct as Democrats return to power."  By yesterday afternoon,  Jennifer Jacobs (CBS NEWS) was reporting:

President Trump has been asking advisers around him and on the phone whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should stay in his job, following Republicans' catastrophic losses Tuesday night, multiple sources familiar with the matter tell CBS News. 
Some White House aides have predicted some of the blame for GOP midterm losses will be trained on Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of U.S. Central Command, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, who both played big roles in guidance on the Iran war.
Still, other sources said the president hasn't decided to replace Hegseth. Before the election, Democrats were already trying to impeach Hegseth, and the likelihood of an impeachment effort could increase with Democrats holding strong majorities in both chambers. 
Vice President JD Vance is blaming the war for the GOP defeat. "The reason we lost is the war," he said in a lengthy post on X Wednesday morning. 




Let's wind down with this from Senator Ron Wyden's office:

WASHINGTON, DC – Today Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01) and Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley demanded an investigation into Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents for slashing a couple’s tires in Hillsboro.

The couple was observing and recording ICE agents in a supermarket parking lot on October 7, 2026, before multiple masked ICE agents in three vehicles tailed the couple, boxed them in, and repeatedly stabbed and slashed their tires before driving away. A video of the incident can be viewed here.

“ICE agents cannot act with impunity,” the lawmakers wrote. “The First Amendment protects the right to observe, gather information, and record law enforcement officers performing their duties in public. These constitutional protections are necessary for the public to learn about and freely debate the government’s actions, including potential misconduct, and demand accountability when necessary.”

The lawmakers noted that there have been many documented cases of excessive use of force and intimidation tactics against peaceful community members and legal observers by ICE in Oregon and across the country. They called for the Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security to immediately investigate the Oct. 7 incident in Hillsboro, identify the agents involved, and preserve all evidence, so that those responsible may be disciplined.

“Without videos from bystanders, observers, journalists, and protestors, the public would never know the full scale of federal retaliation against those who seek to document ICE activity,” the lawmakers wrote.

Bonamici, Wyden, Merkley, and Dexter also recently raised concerns about the lack of access to counsel for individuals detained by ICE and what appear to be new protocols for bypassing the Portland ICE facility entirely. That letter can be found here.

The full letter about the Oct. 7 incident can be read here and below:

Dear Inspector General Cuffari:

We write to request an investigation into an alarming incident that occurred on October 7, 2026, in which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents harassed, intimidated, and retaliated against a couple in Hillsboro, Oregon for engaging in First Amendment activities. The incident occurred when our constituents observed and recorded ICE agents in a supermarket parking lot. Soon thereafter, multiple masked ICE agents in three vehicles recklessly tailed the couple, boxed them in, and dangerously vandalized their vehicle by repeatedly stabbing and puncturing one of their tires before driving away.1

ICE agents cannot act with impunity. The First Amendment protects the right to observe, gather information about, and record law enforcement officers performing their duties in public.2 These constitutional protections are necessary for the public to learn about and freely debate the government’s actions, including potential misconduct, and demand accountability when necessary.

Since President Trump returned to office in January 2025, federal ICE agents across the country have repeatedly failed to respect rights afforded under the Constitution, especially the First Amendment. We have seen many documented cases of excessive use of force and intimidation tactics by ICE in Oregon, including federal agents needlessly deploying tear-gas and other projectiles against peaceful community members as well as driving erratically and verbally threatening legal observers. This pattern of irresponsible and illegal behavior from federal agents is also evident across the country. For example, federal agents in Memphis, Tennessee harassed observers by swerving at them, tailing them, boxing them in, and pulling them over without reasonable suspicion; sitting outside of their homes; and assaulting and arresting them.3 In Los Angeles, federal agents fired crowd control weapons into the heads and other sensitive areas of observers, journalists, and protestors. A judge later granted an injunction against this behavior4 and found that the plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that DHS had a policy of retaliating against people who record the activities of agents.5

Most troubling, federal immigration agents killed Alex Pretti while he was peacefully recording and protesting ICE’s actions.6 Through all of this, the Trump administration has repeatedly covered up officer misconduct and obstructed investigations.7 To this day, there is no evidence that the federal government has meaningfully investigated Mr. Pretti’s killing, with his parents noting that “at every turn, they have ignored us, misled us and shielded Alex’s killers.”8 This reckless behavior and senseless violence endangers everyone across the country and does not advance ICE’s mission of enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.

Without videos from bystanders, observers, journalists, and protestors, the public would never know the full scale of federal retaliation against those who seek to document ICE activity.

We hereby demand that your offices immediately undertake an investigation of the October 7, 2026, incident in Hillsboro, Oregon outlined above. Please identify the ICE agents involved and preserve all relevant evidence so the officers can be disciplined and prosecuted as appropriate.

Further, we request that you undertake a comprehensive investigation of the pervasive pattern of ICE agents acting unlawfully and retaliating against individuals exercising their First Amendment rights. We ask that you work with Congress to make lasting changes to ICE training, oversight, and accountability. The rights of our constituents must not be jeopardized any longer.

Sincerely,

###




The following sites updated:


Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)