Connect with us

Politics

Newsom’s wife lashes out at Trump after he rips ’60 Minutes’ host: ‘Internalized misogyny’

Published

on

Newsom’s wife lashes out at Trump after he rips ’60 Minutes’ host: ‘Internalized misogyny’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

California’s “First Partner,” Jennifer Siebel Newsom, ripped into President Donald Trump after his contentious “60 Minutes” interview with the female host, slamming the president for “speak[ing] to a woman journalist with that level of contempt.”

The interview included a contentious back-and-forth between Trump and Norah O’Donnell over her questions about the shooter from this past weekend’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, with President Trump calling O’Donnell a “disgrace” and “disgraceful” amid the interview.

Trump’s comments came after O’Donnell was reading excerpts from the shooter’s alleged manifesto, which described the president as a “rapist,” “pedophile” and “traitor,” O’Donnell recounted during her talk with the president Sunday evening.

“My family and I watched the 60 Minutes interview with Donald Trump and Norah O’Donnell last night, and we were shocked. Seeing a president speak to a woman journalist with that level of contempt — and a clear allergy to facts — is disturbing, though at this point not unexpected given his pattern of behavior,” California Governor Gavin Newsom’s wife said in a scathing X post on Monday.

Advertisement

TRUMP REVEALS A ‘BIG POLITICIAN ON THE OTHER SIDE’ ASKED TO HUG HIM AFTER DINNER SHOOTING

Jennifer Siebel Newsom, California’s first partner, speaks during a Gender Equity Summit in Sacramento, California, US, on Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2025. Bloomberg’s Emily Chang meets California’s First Couple, Governor Gavin Newsom and Jennifer Siebel Newsom, and visits their home in Marin County and offices in Sacramento to see how they work together. (Photo: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)  (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“But that is the problem,” she continued. “Because when that level of disrespect from the highest office in the country repeats itself, it starts to trickle down into our culture and define what power looks like, shaping how boys and plenty of men see women and girls and what they come to accept as normal behavior.”

Fox News digital reached out to the White House and to representatives for Governor Newsom and his wife, but did not receive a response in time for publication.

Trump’s “60 Minutes interview came Sunday evening after authorities identified the suspect as 31-year-old Cole Allen, of Torrance, Calif. Authorities indicated Allen had prepared a manifesto outlining his intent, which included anti-Trump and anti-Christian rhetoric on social media. O’Donnell, during the interview, read alleged portions of the document that alluded to concerns about Trump being a sexual abuser and a traitor, leading to a defensive reaction from Trump.

Advertisement

“I was waiting for you to read that because I knew you would because you’re horrible people,” Trump answered. “Horrible people. Yeah, he did write that. I’m not a rapist. I didn’t rape anybody.”

UNEARTHED CLIP EXPOSES SHOCKING CLAIM BY NEWSOM’S WIFE ABOUT INMATES AT VIOLENT CALIFORNIA PRISON

“Do you think he was referring to you?” O’Donnell asked.

Norah O’Donnell on the new set of CBS Evening News with Norah ODonnell in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 16, 2022.  (T.J. Kirkpatrick/CBS via Getty Images)

“I’m not a pedophile. You read that crap from some sick person? I got associated with all…stuff that has nothing to do with me,” Trump continued. “I was totally exonerated. Your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones that were involved with, let’s say, Epstein or other things. But I said to myself, ‘You know, I’ll do this interview and they’ll probably…’ I read the manifesto. You know, he’s a sick person. But you should be ashamed of yourself reading that because I’m not any of those things.”

Advertisement

O’Donnell interrupted to argue that she was quoting the alleged gunman’s words, but Trump continued to call her “disgraceful.”

“You shouldn’t be reading that on ’60 Minutes.’ You’re a disgrace. But go ahead. Let’s finish the interview,” Trump said.

NEWSOM TRIES TO GIVE TRUMP THE BIDEN TREATMENT, SAYS HE’S ‘NOT ALL THERE’

Trump’s “disgrace” comments garnered widespread attention online, including from Siebel Newsom, who said after the interview that the “culture of misogyny” exhibited by Trump “is on all of us, and it has to end.”

US President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House in Washington, DC, shortly after a shooting incident at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on April 25, 2026. (Mandel Ngan / AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

“Add in rhetoric rooted in political division, amplified by a digital ecosystem that rewards outrage and misinformation, and this cultural norm of hate, othering, and misogyny becomes pervasive,” Siebel Newsom continued. “Behavior that should be challenged gets normalized; what should raise concern is amplified and cheered on. It’s no wonder we have a culture that normalizes dominance and aggression toward women and girls, which not only silences them but also leads to internalized misogyny in others.”

However, conservatives rallied around Trump.

“What’s really disgusting about this clip is Norah O’Donnell’s fake innocent surprise: ‘oh you think he was referring to you?’ She knows perfectly well that every day some fellow Democrat like Ted Lieu calls Trump a pedophile and rapist,” said New York Post columnist Miranda Devine in response to pushback on Trump’s interview comments.

“Their white supremacy lies ran out of steam so this is the new hoax. Rich from a party that protects illegal alien child molesters.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

“Norah O’Donnell may have reached the low point in disgusting and inhumane demagoguery disguised as journalism,” added former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich. “The idea that you would take the vicious dishonest and disgusting words of a would be killer who had been blocked by the Secret Service but would otherwise have killed a lot of people and you would dignify them by putting them on the air and asking the President of the United States to comment is about as destructive as anything a major reporter has done in a long time.”

Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the US House of Representatives, speaks during the third day of Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States, on July 17, 2024. (Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Gingrich said O’Donnell “should be fired for demeaning her entire profession and being the mouthpiece of a would-be killer.”

Politics

Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez Try Boosting Progressives in Red Districts

Published

on

Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez Try Boosting Progressives in Red Districts

Randy Villegas’s campaign for Congress in California would feel right at home in a liberal district. A self-described populist who supports Medicare for all, he proudly promotes his endorsements from progressives including Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

But Mr. Villegas is not running in a Democratic bastion like San Francisco or Los Angeles. Instead, he’s mounting an ambitious campaign in California’s conservative Central Valley against Representative David Valadao, a battle-tested Republican.

Republicans have eagerly seized on Mr. Villegas’s candidacy, deriding him as a socialist who is out of step with the district while secretively spending money to boost his primary campaign over a more moderate Democrat to ensure that Mr. Valadao winds up with what they appear to consider an easier opponent.

Mr. Villegas is unfazed.

“What we have right now is a populist message that is resonating across the board,” he said in an interview, insisting that his message of refusing corporate dollars and fighting for universal health care transcended party lines and was hitting home in his battleground district. After all, he said, “who you voted for in the 2024 election” was irrelevant to health challenges such as valley fever, diabetes or cancer.

Advertisement

As Democrats fight for control of Congress, prominent left-wing politicians including Mr. Sanders of Vermont and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez of New York are increasingly inserting themselves into primary races to elevate progressives in competitive battleground districts.

That’s a departure from the progressive playbook of years past, which generally focused on backing candidates in deep-blue turf where campaigns tended to focus more on liberal ideology and less on electability in general-election contests.

The effort aims to rebut the conventional wisdom that running moderate Democrats who appeal to centrists and Republicans with middle-of-the-road policies is the best strategy in competitive races. Now, progressives are saying that candidates with policies aimed at helping working families and critiquing the wealthy can win anywhere.

Running candidates who “have the guts to stand up for the working class,” Mr. Sanders said in an interview, should be a “winning formula in almost every part of the country.”

This year, Mr. Sanders has backed a slate of candidates in competitive House and Senate races who promote working-class bona fides and espouse populist policies, even if not all describe themselves as progressive.

Advertisement

The list includes Sam Forstag, a smoke jumper in Montana; Bob Brooks, a retired firefighter in Pennsylvania; Brian Poindexter, an ironworker in Ohio; Rebecca Cooke, a small-business owner in Wisconsin; Abdul El-Sayed, a former county health director in Michigan; and Graham Platner, an oysterman in Maine.

In the competitive districts that also featured fierce Democratic primaries, some Sanders-backed candidates have already prevailed over moderate opponents this spring, including Mr. Poindexter, Mr. Platner and Mr. Brooks.

Of Mr. Sanders’s 16 congressional endorsements so far this election cycle, seven are in races considered at least somewhat competitive — a departure from his four endorsements in competitive congressional races out of 35 total in the 2024 and 2022 election cycles.

Jeremy Slevin, a senior adviser to Mr. Sanders, acknowledged that the senator’s strategy had shifted this year. It was influenced, Mr. Slevin said, by the success of Mr. Sanders’s “Fighting Oligarchy” rallies last year in conservative regions, which emboldened his view that his ideology resonated widely.

Mr. Sanders will rally for Mr. Platner in Maine this weekend. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, who declined to comment, will appear with Mr. Forstag next week at a rally in Missoula, Mont.

Advertisement

The strategy is not without its detractors.

Matt Bennett, the executive vice president of Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank, argued that the track record of successful Democratic campaigns showed that moderate politics were the correct formula in competitive districts.

“This notion that tacking sharply to the left is going to bring out this mythical band of voters who are just waiting to be mobilized by fairly radical ideas is a complete fantasy,” he said.

Mr. Bennett said he feared a scenario where a progressive in a competitive general election race became an easy, “unelectable” target for the right — pointing to 2018 losses by Kara Eastman in Nebraska and Dana Balter in New York, both progressives who fell short against Republicans in crucial swing districts.

Progressives, for their part, still harbor grudges over past instances when Democrats eschewed candidates from the left who might have won with more party support.

Advertisement

Bill Hyers, a progressive Democratic strategist, remembered a battleground 2022 Oregon contest in which establishment PACs responsible for electing Democrats to the House chose not to spend heavily to help Jamie McLeod-Skinner, a progressive who had upset an establishment Democrat in a primary. Ms. McLeod-Skinner ended up losing to her Republican opponent by just two percentage points.

The left flank of the party, Mr. Hyers said, has grown tired of seeing the traditional “generic white guy” candidate fail to excite voters and lose elections.

“It’s not working anymore, so why would we sit aside while you continually screw something up?” he said. “How about we have an agenda, say what we’re going to do, and have people who are real people?”

Mr. Forstag acknowledged that many of the voters he’s courting in western Montana — where Representative Ryan Zinke, a Republican, is retiring — are not supporters of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. But he said her core beliefs on affordable housing, health care and child care would resonate across party lines.

“We do not have to agree on every single issue,” he said in an interview.

Advertisement

Mr. Forstag, a union leader, spent four years as a smoke jumper, a specialized type of firefighter for the U.S. Forest Service who parachutes in to fight wildfires. He said his inspiration for running came last year when thousands of Forest Service employees were fired as part of the Trump administration’s push for government efficiency. He spoke at the “Fighting Oligarchy” rally last year in Missoula, where Mr. Sanders and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez drew nearly 7,500 people.

Mr. Forstag dismissed the idea that moderate candidates were Democrats’ best options in red or purple districts.

“A lot of the people that Democrats have run across the country have been losing,” he said. “So we need to change something.”

He faces several Democratic primary opponents, including Ryan Busse, a former nominee for governor, and Matt Rains, a rancher and army veteran who is running as a moderate.

Mr. Rains argued that moderate Democrats had the better track record of courting swing voters in Montana, where, this year, the eventual Democratic nominee is likely to face Aaron Flint, a radio host who is leading the Republican primary.

Advertisement

Democrats aligning with progressives such as Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Mr. Rains said, offered Republicans fodder to paint Democrats as far-left radicals.

“We don’t need to give them more ammunition to do that,” he said. “It feels like we’re going to shoot ourselves in the foot by leaning way too far to the left and not being able to identify with the average Montanan.”

In California, Mr. Valadao’s Central Valley district includes Bakersfield and some liberal areas that Democrats added during redistricting to make it more competitive. But it is still a contest with a razor-thin margin, and Dr. Jasmeet Bains, a state assemblywoman running against Mr. Villegas in the Democratic primary, argues that she is the better fit for the region.

Ms. Bains is known as a Valleycrat — a term for a more moderate Democrat in the Central Valley — and has slammed Mr. Villegas as “Radical Randy,” saying he has “endorsed socialist-run health care.”

Ms. Bains declined an interview request. Her campaign provided a statement highlighting her local roots and declaring that “the Valley doesn’t care about party labels, and they deserve better than politicians who only offer empty promises.”

Advertisement

Mr. Villegas called Ms. Bains “Republican-lite,” noting that both she and Mr. Valadao had accepted money from corporate donors. “It’s not even this fight about left versus right — it’s bottom versus top,” he said.

The Democratic establishment put its thumb on the scale in some of these races earlier this month, when the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee endorsed candidates in contested primaries. It aligned with Mr. Sanders in some places, endorsing Mr. Brooks in Pennsylvania. But it also backed Ms. Bains.

Mr. Sanders dismissed the group’s involvement.

“The establishment Democrats live in their world — they collect a lot of money from wealthy people,” he said. “We live in a different world.”

Taylor Robinson and Leo Dominguez contributed reporting.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

AOC tells New Yorkers to ‘pull up’ to Alabama during rally speech behind bulletproof glass

Published

on

AOC tells New Yorkers to ‘pull up’ to Alabama during rally speech behind bulletproof glass

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is taking heat from southern conservatives after she delivered a fiery speech in Montgomery, Alabama, last week, demanding that northern progressives “pull up to the South.”

Speaking at the “All Roads Lead to The South” rally May 16, the prominent “Squad” member claimed the U.S. was not a true democracy until the 1960s when the Voting Rights Act was passed, and took direct aim at the Supreme Court, accusing the high court under Chief Justice John Roberts of being “part of that long history of regression and repression in America.”

Ocasio-Cortez then issued a highly controversial call to action, demanding that “the North” travel to red states like Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee and Mississippi to fight what she described as political injustice.

She doubled down on social media following the event, writing, “If you’re not from these states, it’s time to pull up.”

Advertisement

AOC SLAMS ‘OPPRESSED’ TRUMP STATES WHILE TOUTING NYC SERVICES DESPITE $5B DEFICIT AND TRANSIT CRIME SPIKE

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) speaks during a news conference on April 29, 2026 outside the U.S. Capitol. (Tom Brenner/Getty Images)

Her rhetoric was quickly slammed by conservatives on social media, with many pointing out the irony of the congresswoman urging people to “pull up” while she stood heavily protected during her speech behind bulletproof glass.

Conservative podcaster Todd Spears went viral with a TikTok reaction video that racked up 1 million views, mocking Ocasio-Cortez’s security setup.

“[Pull up] and do what? Help us get the boat off the trailer, like cut the grass, track a deer in the woods?” Spears said. “Roll up and do what exactly? Because you’re standing behind, like, pope glass in your own hometown. You come down here starting that s—, you better bring a tank. That’s not a good idea. You stay where you’re at.”

Advertisement

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaks to reporters during an election night rally in Brooklyn, New York, on Nov. 4, 2025, as initial projections declare Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani the winner for New York City mayor. (Reuters/Jeenah Moon)

AOC SPENT OVER $53K IN CAMPAIGN FUNDS ON LUXURY HOTELS IN 2025: ‘CARPETBAGGER’

Spears also criticized the divisive nature of her remarks, writing in the video caption that “AOC talking about the North ‘rolling up’ on the South and Alabama, like this is still the 1860s, is wild.”

“Maybe politicians should spend less time trying to divide Americans and more time fixing the mess we already have,” he added.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaks to reporters after Mahmoud Khalil arrived at Newark Liberty International Airport on June 21, 2025. (Michael Karas/NorthJersey.com)

Advertisement

Another TikTok creator, Kei Bennett, whose video garnered more than 800,000 views, warned Ocasio-Cortez’s supporters not to take the bait.

“I want to issue a stern warning so you do not take her advice and pull up on Alabama,” Bennett said, jokingly citing local dangers ranging from wild hogs and bayou gators to locals who “will not hesitate to unite and get you the f— up out of here.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Bennett, who has more than half a million followers on the platform, warned the congresswoman’s followers that “down here in the South we don’t call cops, we call coroners,” adding, “Stay your a– up there, leave us alone. We ain’t bothering nobody.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump says U.S., Iran are ‘getting a lot closer,’ but questions remain about concessions

Published

on

Trump says U.S., Iran are ‘getting a lot closer,’ but questions remain about concessions

President Trump said Saturday that the United States and Iran have agreed on the basic terms of an agreement to end the two countries’ nearly three-month-long war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“An Agreement has been largely negotiated,” Trump wrote in a social media post. “Final aspects and details of the Deal are currently being discussed, and will be announced shortly. In addition to many other elements of the Agreement, the Strait of Hormuz will be opened.”

Iran’s state television network quoted Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei as saying the draft pact will be a “framework agreement” that defers talks toward limiting Iran’s nuclear program until later. Trump did not mention the nuclear issue in his statement.

If that is the form the deal takes, it would represent at least a short-term concession from the president, who initially demanded a definitive end to Iran’s nuclear program as the price of peace.

Trump has also relaxed an earlier U.S. demand that Iran give up its right to enrich uranium and says he would be satisfied with a deal to “suspend” enrichment for 20 years.

Advertisement

Those signs of U.S. flexibility have raised alarm from Iran hawks, reportedly including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They say they fear Trump is so intent on restoring the flow of oil from the gulf that he might agree to a deal that falls far short of U.S. goals.

Mark Dubowitz, a leading critic of past agreements with Iran, said he worries that Trump might settle for “a foolish agreement” to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“I’m concerned that the administration is looking to cut some ‘Phase One’ deal” in which Iran is given “significant sanctions relief in exchange for agreement to reopen the strait,” he said in an interview Friday. “I think that would be a foolish agreement. Iran would get real money, but they could continue to close the strait any time they wanted simply by making threats.”

Robert Kagan, a conservative foreign policy scholar at the Brookings Institution, wrote that a deal to reopen the strait while deferring the nuclear issue would amount to a U.S. “surrender.”

“On the present trajectory, Iran will emerge from the conflict many times stronger and more influential than it was before the war,” Kagan wrote in the Atlantic.

Advertisement

When the war began in February, Trump said he wanted not only to end Iran’s nuclear activities and destroy its ballistic missile program, but bring about regime change as well.

Instead, the nuclear talks have focused on narrower, more achievable goals: a “suspension” of nuclear enrichment for 20 years or less and removal or destruction of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, the essential ingredient for a nuclear weapon.

“A basic agreement shouldn’t be impossible to achieve,” said John W. Limbert, who worked on Iran policy at the State Department for three decades, and was one of the American hostages seized by Iranian militants in 1979. “The deal would be some kind of verifiable limits on the nuclear program in return for economic relief.”

“The fact that we’re talking about a suspension of all enrichment, and the question is whether it will be five years, 20 years or halfway in between — that’s important,” said Nate Swanson, an Iran expert who worked at the National Security Council under President Biden and Trump. “That sounds like you really have the basis for an agreement. … But don’t fool yourself to think that completely addresses the situation.”

Swanson said other issues, including Iran’s nuclear research and its advanced ballistic missiles, haven’t been addressed.

Advertisement

Despite signs of progress toward an agreement, the gaps between the two countries remain large.

Part of the problem is that both sides appear to believe they have won the war, said Danny Citrinowicz, a former Iran analyst at Israel’s defense intelligence agency.

Trump and other U.S. officials frequently assert that the United States has gained the upper hand by destroying Iran’s navy, air force and many of its missiles.

But the Iranians use a different scoring system, Citrinowicz said.

“Iran does not measure success the same way Washington often does,” he wrote in an email. “From Tehran’s perspective, simply holding firm in the face of American pressure can be framed as a win.”

Advertisement

“Tehran believes time is working against Trump politically and strategically,” he added. “Iran is prepared for prolonged confrontation; the United States, far less so.”

And even if a negotiated agreement is reached, the deals under discussion now won’t resolve all the conflicts between the two countries.

“An interim deal to buy time [is] probably where we end up,” Swanson said. “Buying time is not a bad thing. Ending a war is not a bad thing. But it’s not a comprehensive solution.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending