Politics
Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power
One of the most important political stories in American history — one that is particularly germane to our current, tumultuous time — unfolded in Los Angeles some 65 years ago.
Sen. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had just received his party’s nomination for president and in turn he shunned the desires of his most liberal supporters by choosing a conservative out of Texas as his running mate. He did so in large part to address concerns that his faith would somehow usurp his oath to uphold the Constitution. The last time the Democrats nominated a Catholic — New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928 — he lost in a landslide, so folks were more than a little jittery about Kennedy’s chances.
“I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk,” Kennedy told the crowd at the Memorial Coliseum. “But I look at it this way: The Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment.”
The most important part of the story is what happened before Kennedy gave that acceptance speech.
While his faith made party leaders nervous, they were downright afraid of the impact a civil rights protest during the Democratic National Convention could have on November’s election. This was 1960. The year began with Black college students challenging segregation with lunch counter sit-ins across the Deep South, and by spring the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee had formed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was not the organizer of the protest at the convention, but he planned to be there, guaranteeing media attention. To try to prevent this whole scene, the most powerful Black man in Congress was sent to stop him.
The Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was also a warrior for civil rights, but the House representative preferred the legislative approach, where backroom deals were quietly made and his power most concentrated. He and King wanted the same things for Black people. But Powell — who was first elected to Congress in 1944, the same year King enrolled at Morehouse College at the age of 15 — was threatened by the younger man’s growing influence. He was also concerned that his inability to stop the protest at the convention would harm his chance to become chairman of a House committee.
And so Powell — the son of a preacher, and himself a Baptist preacher in Harlem — told King that if he didn’t cancel, Powell would tell journalists a lie that King was having a homosexual affair with his mentor, Bayard Rustin. King stuck to his plan and led a protest — even though such a rumor would not only have harmed King, but also would have undermined the credibility of the entire civil rights movement. Remember, this was 1960. Before the March on Washington, before passage of the Voting Rights Act, before the dismantling of the very Jim Crow laws Powell had vowed to dismantle when first running for office.
That threat, my friends, is the most important part of the story.
It’s not that Powell didn’t want the best for the country. It’s just that he wanted to be seen as the one doing it and was willing to derail the good stemming from the civil rights movement to secure his own place in power. There have always been people willing to make such trade-offs. Sometimes they dress up their intentions with scriptures to make it more palatable; other times they play on our darkest fears. They do not care how many people get hurt in the process, even if it’s the same people they profess to care for.
That was true in Los Angeles in 1960.
That was true in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.
That is true in the streets of America today.
Whether we are talking about an older pastor who is threatened by the growing influence of a younger voice or a president clinging to office after losing an election: To remain king, some men are willing to burn the entire kingdom down.
YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow
Politics
Video: Democratic Lawmakers Say They Face New Round of Federal Inquiries
new video loaded: Democratic Lawmakers Say They Face New Round of Federal Inquiries
transcript
transcript
Democratic Lawmakers Say They Face New Round of Federal Inquiries
By Wednesday, at least five Democratic lawmakers said they received new inquiries from federal prosecutors regarding a video they published in November. In the video, they urged military service members not to follow illegal orders.
-
I’m Senator Elissa Slotkin. Senator Mark Kelly. Representative Chris Deluzio. Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander. Representative Chrissy Houlahan. Congressman Jason Crow. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. He’s using his political cronies in the Department of Justice to continue to threaten and intimidate us. We took an oath to the Constitution, a lifetime oath. When we joined the military. And again, as members of Congress, we are not going to back away. Our job, our duty is to make sure that the law is followed.
By Jamie Leventhal and Daniel Fetherston
January 15, 2026
Politics
Noem names Charles Wall ICE deputy director following Sheahan resignation
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem announced Thursday via X that longtime U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorney Charles Wall will serve as the agency’s new deputy director as enforcement operations intensify nationwide.
“Effective immediately, Charles Wall will serve as the Deputy Director of @ICEGov,” wrote Noem. “For the last year, Mr. Wall served as ICE’s Principal Legal Advisor, playing a key role in helping us deliver historic results in arresting and removing the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens from American neighborhoods.”
Wall replaces Madison Sheahan, who stepped down earlier Thursday to pursue a congressional run in Ohio. Her departure left ICE leadership in transition at a moment when the agency has faced increasing resistance to enforcement efforts and heightened threats against officers in the field.
The move comes as the Trump administration intensifies immigration enforcement against murderers, rapists, gang members and suspected terrorists living illegally in the U.S., even as sanctuary jurisdictions and activist groups seek to block or disrupt ICE actions.
DHS DEMANDS MN LEADERS HONOR ICE DETAINERS, ALLEGES HUNDREDS OF CRIMINAL ALIENS HAVE BEEN RELEASED UNDER WALZ
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced Thursday that Charles Wall will serve as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deputy director. (Getty Images/Alex Brandon)
ICE officials said Wall brings more than a decade of experience inside the agency.
“Mr. Wall has served as an ICE attorney for 14 years and is a forward-leaning, strategic thinker who understands the importance of prioritizing the removal of murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members, and terrorists from our country,” Noem added.
Wall most recently served as ICE’s principal legal advisor, overseeing more than 3,500 attorneys and support staff who represent the DHS in removal proceedings and provide legal counsel to senior agency leadership.
He has served at ICE since 2012, previously holding senior counsel roles in New Orleans, according to DHS.
‘WORST OF THE WORST’: ICE ARRESTS CHILD PREDATOR, VIOLENT CRIMINALS AMID SURGE IN ANTI-AGENT ATTACKS
Madison Sheahan stepped down as ICE deputy director on Thursday. (Sean Gardner/Getty Images)
DHS has described the appointment as part of a broader effort to ensure ICE leadership is aligned with the Trump administration’s public safety priorities.
The leadership change comes as ICE operations have drawn national attention following protests in Minneapolis after the ICE-involved fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good on Jan. 7.
Administration officials have repeatedly emphasized that ICE’s focus remains on what they describe as the “worst of the worst” criminal illegal aliens, warning that local resistance and political opposition increase risks for officers carrying out enforcement duties.
ICE has recently created a specific landing page where these ‘worst of the worst’ offenders can be viewed with names and nationalities attached.
DHS has described the appointment as part of a broader effort to ensure ICE leadership is aligned with the Trump administration’s public safety priorities. (Ron Jenkins/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“I look forward to working with him in his new role to make America safe again,” Noem concluded.
ICE did not immediately provide additional comment to Fox News Digital.
Politics
Trump administration’s demands for California’s voter rolls, including Social Security numbers, rejected by federal judge
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit demanding California turn over its voter rolls, calling the request “unprecedented and illegal” and accusing the federal government of trying to “abridge the right of many Americans to cast their ballots.”
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee based in Santa Ana, questioned the Justice Department’s motivations and called its lawsuit demanding voter data from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber not just an overreach into state-run elections, but a threat to American democracy.
“The centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration which would inevitably lead to decreasing voter turnout as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose,” Carter wrote. “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy.”
Carter wrote that the “taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece by piece until there is nothing left,” and that the Justice Department’s lawsuit was “one of these cuts that imperils all Americans.”
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Thursday.
In a video she posted to the social media platform X earlier Thursday, Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon — who heads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division — said she was proud of her office’s efforts to “clean up the voter rolls nationally,” including by suing states for their data.
“We are going to touch every single state and finish this project,” she said.
Weber, who is California’s top elections official, said in a written statement that she is “entrusted with ensuring that California’s state election laws are enforced — including state laws that protect the privacy of California’s data.”
“I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration’s disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote,” Weber said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office called the decision another example of “Trump and his administration losing to California” — one day after another court upheld California’s congressional redistricting plan under Proposition 50, which the Trump administration also challenged in court after state voters passed it overwhelmingly in November.
The Justice Department sued Weber in September after she refused to hand over detailed voter information for some 23 million Californians, alleging that she was unlawfully preventing federal authorities from ensuring state compliance with federal voting regulations and safeguarding federal elections against fraud.
It separately sued Weber’s counterparts in various other states who also declined the department’s requests for their states’ voter rolls.
The lawsuit followed an executive order by President Trump in March that purported to require voters to provide proof of citizenship and ordered states to disregard mail ballots not received by election day. It also followed years of allegations by Trump, made without evidence, that voting in California has been hampered by widespread fraud and voting by noncitizens — part of his broader and equally unsupported claim that the 2020 presidental election was stolen from him.
In announcing the lawsuit, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in September that “clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” and that the Justice Department was going to ensure that they exist nationwide.
Weber denounced the lawsuit at the time as a “fishing expedition and pretext for partisan policy objectives,” and as “an unprecedented intrusion unsupported by law or any previous practice or policy of the U.S. Department of Justice.”
The Justice Department demanded a “current electronic copy of California’s computerized statewide voter registration list”; lists of “all duplicate registration records in Imperial, Los Angeles, Napa, Nevada, San Bernardino, Siskiyou, and Stanislaus counties”; a “list of all duplicate registrants who were removed from the statewide voter registration list”; and the dates of their removals.
It also demanded a list of all registrations that had been canceled due to voter deaths; an explanation for a recent decline in the recorded number of “inactive” voters in California; and a list of “all registrations, including date of birth, driver’s license number, and last four digits of Social Security Number, that were canceled due to non-citizenship of the registrant.”
Carter, in his ruling Thursday, took particular issue with the Justice Department’s reliance on federal civil rights laws to make its case.
“The Department of Justice seeks to use civil rights legislation which was enacted for an entirely different purpose to amass and retain an unprecedented amount of confidential voter data. This effort goes far beyond what Congress intended when it passed the underlying legislation,” Carter wrote.
Carter wrote that the legislation in question — including Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 — was passed to defend Black Americans’ voting rights in the face of “persistent voter suppression” and to “combat the effects of discriminatory and unfair registration laws that cheapened the right to vote.”
Carter found that the Justice Department provided “no explanation for why unredacted voter files for millions of Californians, an unprecedented request, was necessary” for the Justice Department to investigate the alleged problems it claims, and that the executive branch simply has no power to demand such data all at once without explanation.
-
Montana6 days agoService door of Crans-Montana bar where 40 died in fire was locked from inside, owner says
-
Technology1 week agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Delaware1 week agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Dallas, TX1 week agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Virginia6 days agoVirginia Tech gains commitment from ACC transfer QB
-
Iowa1 week agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Montana6 days ago‘It was apocalyptic’, woman tells Crans-Montana memorial service, as bar owner detained
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek