Connect with us

News

When a Trump rally t-shirt is more than just a shirt

Published

on

When a Trump rally t-shirt is more than just a shirt

A vendor sells 2024 Donald Trump campaign souvenirs at the Turning Point Action USA conference in West Palm Beach, Florida, on July 15, 2023.

Giorgio Viera/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Giorgio Viera/AFP via Getty Images

Trump rallies involve a lot of merch – vendors will sometimes set up overnight before a rally, preparing for the huge crowds. There are hats, socks, flags, buttons and, especially, t-shirts.

I go to a lot of these rallies. In the middle of it all, I’ve gotten a little obsessed with this one particular shirt.

Miranda Barbee bought one in the hours before a Trump rally on the beach in Wildwood, New Jersey, and held it up, reading aloud.

Advertisement

“I just bought this shirt for $20. It says ‘Biden sucks, Kamala –’ what does that even — ‘swallows’? I didn’t even see the front! That is so funny.” She flipped it around. “And the back says, ‘F**k Joe and the Hoe.’”

She and the friend she came with laughed.

“I honestly didn’t know the front said that,” Barbee added. “But I think that’s hilarious.”

These shirts have been sold prominently at recent rallies – vendors who specialize in these particular shirts often stand right outside the entrances and exits, catching the eyes of the streams of Trump fans.

They’re not official campaign apparel. When asked for comment, a campaign spokesperson didn’t address the shirts directly, instead pointing to a Biden official campaign shirt (slogan: “Free on Wednesdays”) that pokes fun at Donald Trump’s legal troubles.

Advertisement

Still, I wanted to know: why? Why do these shirts exist, and who’s buying them? Sooner or later, I had spent so much time thinking about it, I wanted to know if there was anything to be learned here.

The infamous Hillary Clinton nutcracker

“The Hillary Nutcracker & Corkscrew Bill”, a boxed set of a nutcracker and bottle corkscrew were available for sale during the 2009 holiday season.

Paul J. Richards/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Paul J. Richards/AFP via Getty Images

Sexism isn’t exactly new in politics.

Consider America’s decades of Hillary-Clinton hatred. One t-shirt slogan around the time of her 2008 presidential campaign read “I wish Hillary had married O.J.,” referring to O.J. Simpson who famously faced trial for his wife’s murder. He was acquitted.

And then there was the Hillary Clinton nutcracker…described gleefully by MSNBC’s Willie Geist in 2007 as “a Hillary doll with serrated stainless steel thighs that, well, crack nuts.” To this, Tucker Carlson — then also of MSNBC — responded, “When she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs” and declared that he would be buying one.

Advertisement

Over the years, Michelle Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Sarah Palin would also be the targets of demeaning, often obscene merchandise.

But still, the open lewdness of the Trump t-shirts. That’s new, right? I asked Tim Miller, a Republican strategist who worked for Jon Huntsman and Jeb Bush’s presidential campaigns.

“It’s not like you couldn’t find a guy standing outside the RNC in 2012 selling some misogynistic Hillary stuff. It was there, but just the intensity of it,” he said, “just how crass it is, it’s definitely a category difference.”

That crassness has been around from the beginning at Trump rallies. As my colleague Don Gonyea reported in 2016, vendors then were selling shirts reading, “Hillary sucks, but not the way Monica does.”

The difference between parties

“What’s different about Donald Trump is that his campaign is not particularly worried about this type of misogyny being attached to his campaign, because at least to date, it hasn’t hurt him that much,” explained Kelly Dittmar, director of research for the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

Advertisement
A vendor sells t-shirts at a May 1, 2024, Trump rally in Freeland, Michigan.

A vendor sells t-shirts at a May 1, 2024, Trump rally in Freeland, Michigan.

Danielle Kurtzleben/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Danielle Kurtzleben/NPR

Advertisement

One example: Even after a jury found him civilly liable for sexual abuse last year, polls didn’t budge.

Part of what’s going on is partisan, Dittmar adds — a reflection of an existing gender gap.

“I think there’s more kind of internal policing among Democrats about the fact that ‘this is contrary to our brand and it hurts us, by the way, with the constituency that is our most reliable one, which is women.’”

Furthermore, she says, this kind of language is often particularly directed at women of color, like Kamala Harris. The word “ho’” on the shirt undeniably makes this about race as well as sex.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Dittmar says, the Republican base is majority-men.

“And of course,” she said, “of the women who do support [Republicans], they are more likely to say that this is just, you know, a joke.”

That was true of voter Christena Kincaid, who talked to me just after she had bought one of these shirts at a rally in Freeland, Michigan.

“It’s just a slang. That’s all it is,” she said. “It’s a goofy – it is a little over the top. I get it. But they’re just words.”

That idea, that they’re just words, fits with Trump’s brand as an anti-PC crusader who “tells it like it is,” which has involved loudly insulting women, from Clinton to Megyn Kelly to Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Advertisement

But also, the idea that words don’t matter that much – that echoes the response to the infamous Access Hollywood tape, which Trump’s defenders shrugged off as “locker room talk.”

Trickle-down incivility

Rina Shah is a political strategist and a former Republican congressional aide, and a Republican who opposes Trump. She told me she thinks the shirts very much matter.

“If we’re allowing our kids to see this visually, even if it’s contained at a rally, the person who wears that shirt at that rally isn’t just going to wear that one day,” she said. “This flavor of incivility is permeating our nation’s social fabric.”

I did ask Bob Berger, who I met at that Freeland, Mich., rally, about wearing the shirt outside of a rally.

“Are you worried about offending anyone when you wear it?” I asked.

Advertisement

“No.”

“Do you think you’ll be careful where you wear it? Like around, I don’t know, grandkids?” I continued.

“Oh, maybe around the grandkids. I probably would be,” he replied.

What Rina Shah said about Trump’s incivility trickling down to his supporters seems true, whether it’s via clothing or simply their willingness to get nasty in talking about Biden and Harris.

“As much as I hope Joe Biden gets arrested, whatever, is not in office anymore. I’m like, we’re still stuck with the bitch.  I don’t want her either,” said Barbee, the voter I met at that New Jersey rally, referring to Harris.

Advertisement

I asked her: Does that language feel demeaning to you as a young woman – using words like bitch?

“I mean, she is a bitch,” she responded.

On top of that, you can also see all this — the t-shirt slogans, the cuss words, Trump’s vulgarity — as a marker of a gap in American politics: A yawning partisan gap in attitudes about gender.

“Those differences in gender beliefs are going to make it more permissible or not to put forth these types of messages without some sort of a backlash or pushing down,” Dittmar of Rutgers University said.

Studies have found that Trump voters — including women — in 2016 were particularly likely to have beliefs that political scientists term “hostile sexism.” Furthermore, some found that these beliefs were prominent in a way they weren’t in 2012. Those “hostile sexist” beliefs include, for example, the idea that women are too easily offended.

Advertisement

Barbee, at that New Jersey rally, the voter who talked to me the longest about her shirt, echoed some of those beliefs.

“I feel like feminism is becoming like a huge thing these days, but I also feel like it’s – people are overly sensitive, like they’re reacting to things they shouldn’t be reacting to. “

It’s an attitude that’s been around for a long time. But her new t-shirt? That represented something new.

News

After 2 failed votes, Mike Johnson unveils new plan to extend key U.S. spy powers

Published

on

After 2 failed votes, Mike Johnson unveils new plan to extend key U.S. spy powers

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., takes questions at a news conference at the Capitol on Tuesday.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Speaker Mike Johnson, R.-La., is forging ahead with his latest proposal to renew a key American spy power. His bill, revealed Thursday, is largely unchanged from a previous plan which failed in a series of overnight votes earlier this month.

The program at center of the debate, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), is set to expire on April 30.

FISA 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to intercept the electronic communications of foreign nationals located outside of the United States. Some of the nearly 350,000 foreign targets whose communications are collected under the provision are in touch with Americans, whose calls, texts and emails could end up in the trove of information available to the federal government for review.

Advertisement

For almost two decades, privacy-minded lawmakers from both parties have sought to require specific court approval before federal law enforcement can conduct a targeted review of an American’s information gathered through the program. The lack of any such warrant requirement helped sink an effort last week to extend the program for 18 months, as well as a separate vote on a five-year renewal. 

Trump officials, like those in past administrations, have argued that such a warrant requirement would overburden law enforcement and endanger national security. Johnson’s latest proposal would reauthorize the program for three years, but does not include a warrant requirement. Instead, the bill calls for the FBI to submit monthly explanations for reviews of Americans’ information to an oversight official as well as criminal penalties for willful abuse, among other tweaks.

“I am willing to risk the giving up of my Rights and Privileges as a Citizen for our Great Military and Country,” the president wrote on Truth Social last week, advocating for the program to be extended without changes. “I have spoken with many in our Military who say FISA is necessary in order to protect our Troops overseas, as well as our people here at home, from the threat of Foreign Terror Attacks. It has already prevented MANY such Attacks, and it is very important that it remain in full force and effect.”

Glenn Gerstell, who served as general counsel at the National Security Agency during the Obama and first Trump administration, says Johnson’s reforms look like an attempt to find a middle ground.

“There’s not a lot of really substantive changes to the statute, but some gestures are made to people who are worried about privacy and civil liberties,” Gerstell said. “It seems like a pretty reasonable compromise that is going to be satisfactory to the national security agencies and yet at the same time represents some gesture to the privacy advocates.”

Advertisement

“This is not a reform bill and it’s not a compromise,” Elizabeth Goitein, a privacy advocate and senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, wrote on X. “It’s a straight reauthorization with eight pages of words that serve no serious purpose other than to try to convince members that it’s NOT a straight reauthorization.”

A bipartisan reform deal is still out of reach

Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, told NPR on Wednesday, before the release of Johnson’s new proposal, that lawmakers were working on a bipartisan solution. He said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was in touch with Johnson on the issue.

“There’s a lot of work being done here,” Himes said. “We’re sort of working out a process that will be inclusive rather than exclusive.” Himes said he was negotiating with Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and constitutional law scholar, on a reform proposal they hoped could preserve and reform the program — reauthorizing it with bipartisan support.

But Johnson’s new bill appears to fall short of the inclusive approach Himes hoped for.

NPR obtained a memo written by Raskin to his colleagues urging them to oppose the bill, which he said “continues the disastrous policy of trusting the FBI to self-police and self-report its abuses of Section 702 and backdoor searches of Americans’ data.”

Advertisement

“FBI agents can still collect, search, and review Americans’ communications without any review from a judge,” Raskin wrote.

FBI agents must receive annual training on FISA and are generally barred from searching for information about people in the U.S. if the goal of the search is to investigate general criminal activity, rather than find foreign intelligence information, and those searches need approval from a supervisor or an attorney. 

Republican hardliners — who sunk Johnson’s last reauthorization attempt — also don’t all appear to be on board for Johnson’s latest revision. Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, a past chair of the Freedom Caucus, said “we’re not there yet” in a video he shared to X on Thursday.

“I didn’t take an oath to defend FISA, I didn’t take an oath to defend the intelligence community,” Perry said. “We can’t have them spying on American citizens and, when they do, there has to be accountability and I haven’t seen any that I’m satisfied with yet.”

The House Rules committee meets Monday morning, the first step toward advancing the renewal bill toward a vote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

Published

on

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.

Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.

A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.

The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.

The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”

Advertisement

Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”

But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.

In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.

Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.

Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.

Advertisement

Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.

Continue Reading

News

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Published

on

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.

The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.

The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.

Advertisement

According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.

Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.

“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”

Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.

The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.

Advertisement

Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending