Politics
Opinion: Why would a rape survivor endorse Donald Trump?
Before getting his head bitten off by Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace on Sunday, ABC News “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos had asked her a perfectly reasonable question.
Why, as a rape survivor, he wondered, would you support someone for president who sexually abuses women?
Opinion Columnist
Robin Abcarian
Stephanopoulos had just played a 2019 clip of Mace, then a member of the South Carolina Legislature, speaking emotionally about having been raped at 16, how ashamed she had been and how long it took her to come forward because she was scared no one would believe her. She was asking state lawmakers, in the most personal way, to carve an exception for rape and incest into a draconian anti-abortion bill, which they did.
Describing Mace’s testimony as “candid and courageous,” Stephanopoulos asked why, given that history, she would support former President Trump.
“Judges and two separate juries have found him liable for rape and for defaming the victim of that rape,” Stephanopoulos said. “How do you square that endorsement of Donald Trump with the testimony we just saw?”
That circle can only be squared on Planet MAGA, where nothing the former president has ever done is considered disqualifying. In the surreal exchange that followed, Mace repeatedly accused Stephanopoulos of trying to shame her as a rape victim, and declared that his very question would make it more difficult for rape survivors to come forward.
“I live with shame, and you’re asking me a question about my political choices trying to shame me as a rape victim,” said Mace, “and I find it disgusting.”
“It’s not about shaming you,” Stephanopoulos replied. “It’s a question about Donald Trump.”
How I hate to write this, but I don’t think I have ever seen a woman invoke the rape card like this. So disingenuous. So damaging.
And before you start yelling about how Trump was not technically found guilty of having raped E. Jean Carroll, it’s important to remember that even the judge in that case said that what Trump did to Carroll all those years ago in a Bergdorf dressing room was, indeed, rape.
“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote. “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
Not content to accuse Stephanopoulos of trying to shame her, Mace also accused Carroll of trivializing sexual assault by making a small joke about how she might spend the $83 million she was awarded by the juries in her two defamation cases.
“And quite frankly, E. Jean Carroll’s comments, when she did get the judgment, joking about what she was gonna buy?” said Mace. “It makes it harder for women to come forward when they make a mockery out of rape.”
I’m just guessing here, but I think news that a victim’s attacker has to pay her millions of dollars in damages for saying she lied about it might inspire others to come forward. Maybe even in droves.
Anyway, what Carroll said hardly trivialized rape: “I’d like to give the money to something Donald Trump hates,” Carroll said on “Good Morning America” in January. “If it will cause him pain for me to give money to certain things, that’s my intent. Well, perhaps a fund for the women who have been sexually assaulted by Donald Trump.”
On Sunday, to her credit, Carroll refused to tangle with Mace, instead posting on X that she wished Mace well.
“And,” Carroll added, “I salute all survivors for their strength, endurance, and holding on to their sanity.”
That was a neat trick Mace tried to pull off — trying to shame Carroll while declaring herself to be the real shaming victim.
Mace is not the only high-profile Republican lawmaker to disingenuously invoke rape to support Trump.
Last week, Alabama Sen. Katie Britt’s much maligned response to President Biden’s State of the Union speech raised rape in a totally bizarre way. Britt, whose histrionic presentation instantly became fodder for “Saturday Night Live,” implied that Biden’s border policies were to blame for the sex trafficking of a Mexican woman who, as it happens, was actually exploited in Mexico during the George W. Bush administration.
“The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoe box of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end,” Britt said, her voice trembling with emotion. “We wouldn’t be OK with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.”
I doubt Britt believed what she was saying, just as I doubt Mace really believed that Stephanopoulos was trying to shame her. This is political theater at its worst
In Mace’s case, trying to turn the tables on Stephanopoulos was a convenient way of deflecting her obvious hypocrisy, and the hypocrisy of all the family-values-professing types who embrace the reelection of the twice-impeached former president who is still facing 91 felony counts for a wide variety of crimes, and who has bragged — please, let’s not forget — that he can grab women by the genitals with impunity.
Like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and countless other Republicans, Mace once condemned Trump, blamed him for the insurrection and declared he was unfit for office.
Her change of heart came about, she told Stephanopoulos, because “I listened to my voters in South Carolina, and they have moved beyond Jan. 6.”
But she never explained why, as an outspoken advocate for survivors of rape, she supports a man judged to be guilty of that very misdeed.
That, I would suggest, is because she can’t. Her only defense, as she demonstrated last week, is a nonsensical offense.
Politics
ActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: The embattled head of a Democratic fundraising behemoth is headed for a congressional grilling next month over allegations of fraudulent donations on its platform.
ActBlue’s CEO Regina Wallace-Jones will testify in a public hearing before the House Administration Committee on June 10, a committee spokesman told Fox News Digital.
Wallace-Jones’ agreement to testify comes as ActBlue faces mounting scrutiny over whether it misled Congress regarding foreign donations on its payment processing platform.
“Ms. Wallace-Jones allegedly misled our committee at the outset of our investigation into ActBlue’s fraud prevention standards,” House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said in a statement. “It’s past time we set the record straight and got answers for the American people. I look forward to hearing her testify.”
House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., holds a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 10, 2025. (Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)
DEM FUNDRAISING GIANT ACTBLUE ROCKED BY ALLEGATIONS IT MISLED CONGRESS ABOUT FOREIGN DONATIONS
The statement referenced an explosive report in The New York Times earlier this year that said ActBlue’s then-outside counsel warned Wallace-Jones in 2023 the group may have misrepresented facts to Steil’s committee about its vetting of potentially illegal foreign donations.
Under U.S. law, foreign nationals who are not lawful permanent residents are generally prohibited from donating to candidates seeking federal office or political action committees.
Steil previously requested that Wallace-Jones testify before his committee on May 19. The invitation was met with outrage from ActBlue’s lawyers, who dismissed the committee action as a “partisan attack.”
But Republicans have pointed to documents that ActBlue has allegedly withheld in response to subpoenas issued in 2025, which Steil has characterized as “deliberately incomplete.”
All five current or former ActBlue employees who appeared in depositions with the committee invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination a combined 146 times, according to an interim staff report released in April by House Republicans.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones, a delegate from California, wears a U.S.-flag themed outfit ahead of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago, Ill., on Aug. 19, 2024.
TEXAS AG PAXTON SUES DEM FUNDRAISING PLATFORM ACTBLUE, ALLEGING ‘FRAUDULENT AND FOREIGN DONATIONS’
The House Administration Committee has been probing ActBlue’s fraud prevention safeguards since 2023, when Steil’s panel investigated the group’s failure to require credit card verification value (CVV) when processing payments.
“Given ActBlue’s demonstrated history of misleading Congress, there is considerable reason to believe that ActBlue may have deliberately withheld this responsive material to impede our investigation,” Steil and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in a letter to Wallace-Jones in April.
In the letter, the senior Republicans also directed ActBlue to produce a trove of documents related to its vetting of political contributions from abroad.
Wallace-Jones has denied making false statements to Congress. The group’s lawyers have previously characterized the investigation as politically motivated and contended that ActBlue has been forthright with the committee.
Amid the GOP scrutiny, ActBlue has experienced a wave of resignations from senior legal and compliance staff.
An election countdown calendar hangs at the ActBlue fundraising office in Somerville, Mass. (Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The June hearing notice immediately follows the House Administration Committee advancing legislation to crack down on fraudulent political donations, including illegal contributions from foreigners. The campaign finance measure cleared Steil’s panel unanimously on Thursday.
“It’s a positive sign that people are beginning to take this risk and this threat seriously,” the Wisconsin Republican told Spectrum News.
Politics
The Steyer campaign pays influencers. Their posts don’t always make that clear
WASHINGTON — In recent weeks, several social media influencers have popped up in online feeds touting the California gubernatorial campaign of billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer.
Some complain about the price of gasoline. Others mention environmental concerns. One cites her newfound sobriety as evidence that people can change — a nod to Steyer’s self-proclaimed metamorphosis from hedge fund titan to scourge of big corporations.
“I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire, but look at the policies you guys,” said one content creator on TikTok with the user name Jaz R. “Hear me out. I know Tom Steyer is a billionaire, but he also is for the people.”
The posts include direct-to-the-camera appeals, with personal details interwoven into messages of support for Steyer. An influencer goes for a stroll as onscreen text touts Steyer’s policies. Some seek to convey authenticity, if occasionally ham-fistedly; one influencer mispronounces Steyer’s last name.
What they do not include is a disclosure that their creators were paid by the Steyer campaign to produce the videos, according to a complaint filed this week with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission and a Times review of the posts.
The complaint alleges that the Steyer campaign failed to notify the influencers it hired of their obligation to inform their audience when their posts have been sponsored by the campaign.
California passed a law in 2023 requiring that influencers disclose if they have been paid to create promotional content for or against a candidate or ballot measure, one of the few jurisdictions in the country with such a requirement. There is no such requirement at the federal level.
“Every time there’s a new technology, you have to create legislation that requires them to disclose,” said state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), who sponsored the bill.
Violating the law doesn’t carry criminal, civil or administrative penalties, but the FPPC can take influencers who break the law to court and ask a judge to force them to comply.
The complaint was filed by two California women — political influencers themselves — who said they noticed a number of new accounts that suddenly started posting similar-sounding videos promoting Steyer earlier this month.
“They had the exact same language, they had the same talking points,” said Beatrice Gomberg, who worked with Kaitlyn Hennessy in their digital sleuthing efforts.
The FPPC did not comment on the complaint.
Steyer’s campaign appears to have relied on paid influencers more than any candidate for governor, according to the most recent campaign finance filings.
That spending represents only a small fraction of the massive campaign war chest Steyer has seeded with nearly $180 million of his own money. But the complaint highlights the growing degree to which political candidates have come to seek out the authenticity that social media influencers seem to offer.
Steyer campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said the campaign had properly followed the rules in hiring influencers and that the campaign is “confident” that Gomberg and Hennessy’s complaint is “baseless.”
“Creators make their living generating content. The campaign believes in compensating people for their time and work product and has paid creators to generate content,” Liao said in a statement. “Payments for creator content are disclosed in campaign finance reports, and we notify creators we directly work with of their disclosure requirements.”
While many of the new Steyer influencers have few followers, Steyer’s campaign disclosed in its most recent campaign finance report that it had paid thousands of dollars to numerous social media influencers with massive audiences, the Sacramento Bee reported.
Several of the videos produced by these popular social media personalities also failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign, according to the complaint and The Times’ review of the content.
But even accounts with few followers can still have a big impact if they are producing a steady stream of content supporting Steyer, said veteran California political strategist Mike Madrid.
“What they’re trying to do is trip the algorithm,” he said. “It looks like it has a bigger audience than it really does. It’s taking the concept of astroturfing into the digital age.”
Gomberg and Hennessy said they became friends after meeting at an April campaign event for Xavier Becerra, Steyer’s chief Democratic rival in the race, who holds a narrow advantage over Steyer in several recent political polls.
The pair have been prolific social media supporters of Becerra’s campaign ever since, though they insist they are not being paid for their efforts.
They said they discovered that many of the new pro-Steyer accounts seemed to be run by influencers — mostly women — who had previously created different social media accounts to hawk other products.
One of the pro-Steyer influencers had an online portfolio listing numerous clients, including the Steyer campaign and a gummy designed to boost arousal, according to the complaint and the Times review of the publicly accessible website.
The pair said they stumbled on an advertisement placed by a vendor for the campaign on a platform used by creators to find work. The advertisement indicated that creators would be paid $10 for each post, with bonuses for posts that amassed large viewership.
The vendor who posted the ad did not respond to a request for comment.
The advertisement has since been updated to say that it pays $1,000 per month and that creators will have to disclose that it is paid content.
As Gomberg and Hennessy dug deeper, they determined that some of the influencers promoting a candidate for governor weren’t even based in California.
A TikTok account using the handle jess.votes, for example, appears to be connected to a woman registered to vote in Florida. Other accounts were connected to women who indicated elsewhere that they were based in Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan.
Several influencers who created seemingly paid content promoting Steyer did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Times.
The brouhaha over paid social media content is just the latest instance of the growing political impact of online creators.
Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor — and congressional career — came to an end after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. A pair of influencers had publicly raised concerns about Swalwell’s behavior and helped connect victims with journalists who produced highly detailed reports of the allegations.
The California law requires influencers to disclose in a political post’s audio or text that it was sponsored and who paid for it.
The onus is on the creators to make the disclosure, but campaigns are required to tell them that they must do so. Despite passage of the law, the issue has so far remained largely under the radar.
“I have dozens of candidates and campaigns and I have not heard this issue come up one time,” said a campaign finance lawyer who requested anonymity because they represent numerous candidates with active campaigns.
Gomberg and Hennessy said that they were driven to call attention to potential violations of the disclosure requirements because of their concern about the corrosive influence such paid content could have if left unchecked.
“You have people who have trust in these creators,” Hennessy said. “You have a responsibility to your audience.”
Politics
Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
new video loaded: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
By Ana Swanson, Nour Idriss, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam
May 15, 2026
-
World10 minutes agoColin Jost Says ‘SNL’ Rejected Joke About Pete Hegseth Reading ‘Pulp Fiction’ Bible Verse Two Weeks Before It Happened in Real Life
-
Health40 minutes agoShe Lost 94 Pounds After Ditching Sugar—‘The Food Noise Vanished’
-
Lifestyle58 minutes ago‘Wait Wait’ for May 16. 2026: With Not My Job guest Ken Jennings
-
Education1 hour agoVideo: How We Tested Dog Leashes
-
Technology1 hour agoSnap, YouTube, and TikTok settle suit over harm to students
-
World1 hour agoSeveral injured after car plows into Italy crowd, driver stabs passerby: report
-
Politics1 hour agoActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
-
Health1 hour agoRudy Giuliani reveals he had ‘spiritual experience’ while in pneumonia-related coma