Politics
Trump has notched a list of once-unthinkable 'firsts.' Will they prevent him from winning?
Former President Trump stands on the verge of a series of firsts that once would have seemed unthinkable.
Winning a second term as president would make the Republican nominee the first occupant of the White House to be: a convicted felon, an adjudicated sexual offender, a twice-impeached federal office holder and a serial denier of election results that have been certified by the courts and Congress.
Trump has not only weathered those largely self-inflicted wounds, but persuaded somewhere approaching half of Americans to consider putting him back in the White House. For a significant share of Trump supporters it is his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, who is too extreme to lead the country.
Many Harris supporters express incredulity that Trump remains a viable candidate. But veteran political analysts said that, for mostly apolitical voters who don’t follow the news closely and who may decide the election, Trump’s repeated departures from political norms may have little practical effect on their daily lives.
The analysts say it is incumbent on Harris to use the closing days of the campaign to explain why Trump’s past failures should matter to them.
“I think for her it is about saying that this is a guy who brings chaos, who is unhinged, who is too out of control,” said Patrick Toomey, a partner in BSG, a Democrat-aligned polling firm. “With that and his crazy vendettas and penchant for retribution, will he ever be focused on delivering help for average Americans?”
A longtime Republican pollster agreed. Greg Strimple of GS Strategy Group said the best possible messengers to make that case to the small group of moderate and wavering voters are the phalanx of Republicans and former Trump administration officials who say Trump is unfit for office.
Former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, former national security advisor John Bolton, former White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly and Gen. Mark Milley — the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — are just a few of a large cadre of those who served during the Trump administration who have since signaled that they believe he is not fit to serve a second term. No other president in modern history has provoked so many high-level defections.
Strimple said those once handpicked by the former president to help him lead the country can deliver a powerful closing argument against Trump: “We saw it from the inside,” they can say. “And it’s worse than you think.”
“Trump right now is doing what he needs to do to be successful, and that’s making it an issues referendum on the last four years of Biden-Harris,” Strimple said. “She really needs to find a pivot to get this back onto a referendum [about] character and the leadership style of Donald Trump.”
The list is long of politicians who foundered after a single misstatement or damning personal revelation. Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s bid for the presidency disintegrated in 2011 after he froze on a debate stage when asked to name the three federal departments he had pledged to eliminate.
Trump’s misstatements became so frequent, and his insistence on spurning corrections so adamant, that much of the U.S. media pushed back harder. It became common for Trump not just to be accused of being wrong, but of intentionally lying.
By the time he left the White House in 2021, the Washington Post had cataloged 30,573 Trump falsehoods during his four years in office. That amounted to 21 erroneous claims a day — what the newspaper called a “tsunami of untruths.”
But Trump not only has transcended the fact-checking, he has turned his battles with the mainstream media, academics and other experts into a cudgel: Only he dared stand up to elites, who he contended did not understand, or care about, average Americans.
His most ardent followers see each ensuing condemnation from the media and the courts not as proof of guilt but as a continuation of a “witch hunt” against their hero. Evangelicals look past personal shortcomings because Trump delivered on his promise to overturn the abortion rights protected in Roe vs. Wade. Business leaders focus on tax cuts and deregulation. Working class Americans remember that prices were lower when Trump was president.
A partial list of some of Trump’s impolitic and scandalous moments and how he responded:
34 felony convictions
• In May, a New York jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts, involving his part in a cover-up of hush money payments to keep former adult film star Stormy Daniels from going public about having sex with him.
Trump is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 21. He continues to appeal, charging, among other things, that politics motivated prosecutors.
Jan. 6: Impeached and indicted
• On Jan. 6, 2021, having lost his November election against Biden, Trump urged his followers to march to the U.S. Capitol and “fight” as Congress voted to certify the result. His loyalists stormed the Capitol, injuring about 140 police officers, while he watched on TV. It took three hours before Trump said in a Rose Garden video that his followers should “go home now.”
Trump has repeatedly said he did nothing wrong because he told the crowd to march “peacefully and patriotically.” He recently reframed the melee as “a day of love.” But in his hourlong speech on Jan. 6, he invoked the word “fight,” or variations, 20 times, saying at one point: “We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”
The House voted to impeach Trump for inciting the insurrection, but the Senate acquitted him of the charges, allowing him to remain in office.
Special counsel Jack Smith led a federal investigation that resulted in Trump being charged with taking part in a scheme to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power. The prosecutor is trying to keep the case alive by showing that many of Trump’s actions fall outside so-called official acts that the U.S. Supreme Court has said should be immune from prosecution.
Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), continue to claim that Trump won in 2020 — a claim that dozens of courts and reviews have rejected.
Georgia election interference charges
• In early 2021, as Congress prepared to certify former Vice President Joe Biden’s victory over then-President Trump, he called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, making various claims about ballots being “shredded” and his supporters being denied a chance to vote. Without offering proof of widespread abuses, Trump insisted: “I just want to find 11,780 votes. I need 11,000 votes, give me a break.”
More than two years later, a grand jury in Fulton County, Ga., indicted Trump on charges of racketeering and other crimes, saying the former president had conspired to change the outcome of the 2020 election while participating in a “criminal enterprise.”
A judge later threw out some of the counts against Trump, saying prosecutors failed to provide enough detail about the underlying felony he was accused of committing. Trump contends the prosecution amounted to retaliation by a Democratic prosecutor, Fulton County Dist. Atty. Fani Willis. The case remains unresolved, in part because of the former president’s efforts to disqualify Willis.
Classified documents case
• In June 2023, a special counsel filed dozens of felony counts against Trump, accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents from his time in the White House. Special counsel Smith contended that Trump kept the documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., and then obstructed the FBI when federal agents tried to get the records back.
He pleaded not guilty and denied doing anything wrong. A federal judge appointed by Trump dismissed the case in July, saying that Smith had been improperly appointed by Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland instead of being confirmed by Congress.
Found liable for sexual abuse
• In May 2023, a New York jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996. She won a $5-million judgment. Earlier this year, a jury awarded an additional $83.3 million after concluding that the former president continued to defame Carroll on social media.
Trump’s lawyers have tried to have the verdicts thrown out, contending the trial court allowed jurors to hear improper and inflammatory evidence.
Ukraine and the first impeachment
• In 2019, Trump called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and suggested his government should launch an investigation into former Vice President Biden, his Democratic opponent, and Biden’s son Hunter. The request came at the same time that Trump was withholding crucial military aid to the struggling U.S. ally.
The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives impeached Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for what House prosecutors said was Trump’s attempt to strong-arm the Ukrainians.
Trump said the House’s investigation and impeachment amounted to “three years of sinister witch hunts, hoaxes, scams,” with Democrats “trying to nullify the ballots of tens of millions of patriotic Americans.” He was acquitted by the Senate.
A $355-million fraud judgment
• In February of this year, a judge ordered the former president to pay $355 million, plus interest, after concluding that Trump lied for years about his wealth on financial statements. Those documents were used to obtain loans to support his real estate empire.
Appellate court judges signaled last month that they may have sympathy for some of Trump’s arguments. They noted that none of the companies he did business with suffered financial harm and questioned whether the trial judge awarded too large a judgment.
Each time the media and other observers have predicted Trump had crossed a threshold he couldn’t survive, he has proved otherwise. It’s a pattern that has been repeated throughout Trump’s life: He has moved ahead, despite reports of marital infidelity, multiple business failures, half a dozen bankruptcies and the airing of a video in which he boasted that he could grab women “by the pussy.”
Trump’s odd behavior lands the same way. He makes speeches with long and sometimes nonsensical digressions. Just in recent days, he stopped a Q&A session near Philadelphia when a couple of people fainted, instead playing music for the crowd for more than half an hour while he swayed along on stage. He used a four-letter word to describe his opponent, Harris. And he ended a long digression about Arnold Palmer with a vulgar aside about the golf great’s anatomy.
But even some who describe themselves as exhausted with Trump’s misbehavior say they are more focused on other things. The two issues mentioned most commonly: Inflation and illegal immigration.
“All of these [Trump failures] should matter. But common-sense arguments, arguments that worked in the past have stopped working,” said Strimple, who recently has completed polling for the Cook Political Report. “Right now, Trump has successfully made it a referendum on the Biden-Harris administration.”
Strimple agreed with Toomey, the Democratic pollster, that Harris needs to put the focus back on Trump’s most outlandish statements and actions.
But to truly be the “change” candidate that she needs to be, Harris also must make much clearer how her presidency would be different from that of Biden, whom she has served with for four years, said Strimple, and Steve Schmidt, a one-time Republican political strategist and ardent Trump opponent.
Harris did serious damage to that effort when she went on “The View” this month and said that “not a thing that comes to mind” when she was asked if there was anything that she would have done differently from President Biden over the last four years, Schmidt said on his podcast, “The Warning.”
Harris later has said she would appoint a Republican to her Cabinet and focus on housing and small business in new ways, trying to distinguish herself from Biden.
But Schmidt urged her to do even more to make her independence clear.
“What people want to know is what she will do differently from Biden,” Schmidt said. “Unless and until you cross that bridge, you’re going to fall short on election day.”
Politics
Video: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
new video loaded: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
transcript
transcript
Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.
-
“Full pardon or commutation?” “Full pardon.”
By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff
June 4, 2026
Politics
Democrats split over Tlaib’s Lebanon measure as Republicans seize on Hezbollah omission
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Democrats splintered over a resolution seeking to block the U.S. from assisting Israel’s war against Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed terrorist group, on Thursday.
The measure, offered by progressive Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., would require President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Lebanon. For months, Israel and Hezbollah, a U.S.-designated terrorist group and Iranian proxy, have been at war in southern Lebanon, but the United States has not joined the conflict.
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., rejected the measure. Critics argued the resolution could aid Hezbollah and potentially hamstring U.S. military operations in the country.
Tlaib’s resolution failed 92-324, with more than half of House Democrats joining nearly all Republicans to vote it down.
The Lebanon war powers resolution divided Democrats, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., joining Republicans in rejecting the measure. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg)
REP RASHIDA TLAIB MOVES TO BLOCK US OPERATIONS IN LEBANON BUT IGNORES HEZBOLLAH
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., an Israel critic, was the lone Republican to support Tlaib’s measure. Meanwhile, Reps. Derek Tran, D-Calif., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., voted present.
House Democratic leaders said shortly before the vote they would oppose Tlaib’s resolution and work with the progressive lawmaker on a narrower measure exempting some U.S. military operations in the country. Their statement also denounced Hezbollah as a “violent terrorist organization” and a “sworn enemy of the United States.”
Tlaib, who has accused Israel of committing “ethnic cleansing” in Lebanon, did not mention Hezbollah in her resolution. She and other proponents of the measure also avoided discussing the Iranian proxy force during heated floor debate over the measure.
Republicans highlighted the omission and accused the legislation’s supporters of serving as “proxies for Hezbollah.”
“Apparently they don’t want to see Israel killing Hezbollah, even though it’s Hezbollah that is killing Israeli children, Israeli adults, Israeli elders,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., said Wednesday, referring to his Democratic colleagues.
Tlaib asserted that her resolution would only affect U.S. forces actively engaged in hostilities. Republicans, however, disputed that claim and suggested it would hurt U.S. efforts to counter Hezbollah.
“It doesn’t say anything about [whether] you can keep the Marines that are in the embassy,” Mast said, referring to the U.S. embassy in Beirut. “That’s a pretty big oversight. It doesn’t say anything about whether we can keep United States armed forces that are training missions with the LAF [Lebanese Armed Forces]. Again, pretty big oversight.”
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, attempted to bar U.S. forces from joining Israel’s war in Lebanon. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg)
RASHIDA TLAIB HIT WITH HOUSE CENSURE THREAT, ACCUSED OF ‘CELEBRATING TERRORISM’ IN PRO-PALESTINIAN SPEECH
The debate turned personal when Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, linked Tlaib to Hezbollah.
“Hezbollah is a terrorist organization … and its members are butchers that you like to hang out with to a certain extent,” the Ohio lawmaker said, referring to Tlaib.
A shouting match between the two then broke out, with Tlaib demanding that Miller’s remarks be stricken from the record.
The presiding chair ultimately complied with her request, but Miller doubled down on his remarks.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Yes, I said it. I own it, and I stand by it,” Mast said on behalf of Miller on the floor.
Tlaib’s failed war powers resolution comes as Iran has sought to tie Israel’s invasion of Lebanon to its ceasefire negotiations with the United States.
Hezbollah, which has long helped Iran project power in the region, rejected a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon’s government Thursday.
Politics
Senate rejects an initial attempt to ban Trump’s $1.8-billion ‘anti-weaponization’ fund
WASHINGTON — Initial efforts in the Senate failed Thursday to block the $1.8-billion fund that the Trump administration has sought to establish to pay people who claim the government wronged them, though further attempts were likely to come Thursday afternoon.
Republicans narrowly voted down a Democratic amendment to ban the payout fund and then Democrats killed a Republican amendment, which would have prohibited the use of federal money for the fund but would have sent $1.7 billion to the Justice Department’s fraud division.
It was the second effort in Congress to rebuke President Trump in two days, following the House vote Wednesday to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran.
The dueling amendments were proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). They were attached to the reconciliation bill that would fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol, a high priority for Republicans.
The votes came as the Senate began a “vote-a-rama,” during which lawmakers were expected to propose a stream of amendments to the immigration bill on various topics.
The Trump administration’s plan for the payment fund — widely seen as a way for Trump to compensate his political allies, including those who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — set off particular ire from some GOP lawmakers.
The plan has fueled growing unrest within parts of Trump’s party over his governance, compounded by the president’s endorsement of primary challengers to Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), as well as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), which angered some Republican senators.
Cassidy, who lost his primary and has since voiced strong opposition to Trump’s $1.8-billion fund, became a key player in the Thursday votes, voting down Schumer’s amendment but supporting Tillis’.
On Wednesday, Cassidy joined with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) to argue in a court filing that the $1.8-billion fund circumvents Congress’ authority and violates the Constitution’s spending and appropriations clauses.
“It is an unconstitutional attempt to spend the People’s money without Congressional approval,” Cassidy and Booker wrote in an amicus brief filed in the federal court case challenging the fund.
The fund was created by the Justice Department to settle a lawsuit brought by Trump against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Trump and his sons agreed to drop their personal lawsuit against the government in exchange for the creation of the $1.776-billion fund. Critics immediately questioned the plan, and it drew a rare backlash from Republicans.
In late May, GOP senators derailed plans to vote on the immigration bill over their displeasure with the payout fund and with Trump’s desire to use taxpayer funds for his planned White House ballroom. Senate Republicans removed the ballroom funding from the immigration package Wednesday, another setback for Trump.
The Trump administration sought to back away from its plans for the fund this week, following bipartisan outcry and a federal court ruling that temporarily blocked any payouts from the fund. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said Tuesday the administration would end its plans to move ahead with the concept.
But Trump on Wednesday told reporters he didn’t know whether the fund was dead, calling it “a beautiful thing.”
After Schumer proposed the first amendment to ban the fund Thursday morning, the Senate came to a standstill as three key Republican senators deliberated. Schumer framed his effort to ban the fund Thursday as a way to force a referendum on Trump’s plan.
The amendment “offers Republicans a choice: Do you support Donald Trump’s $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund, or do you want to protect the American people and their paychecks?” Schumer said on the Senate floor before the vote.
Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) urged Republicans to reject the amendment, saying Democrats were planning to “play so many games” on Thursday during the marathon session.
“We are going to fund immigration enforcement and border patrol, and I urge my Republican colleagues to stay united on that singular mission,” Moreno said.
The amendment failed after Cassidy voted against it. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and Dan Sullivan of Alaska voted in favor.
Schumer’s amendment was uniformly supported by Democrats, including California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.
Tillis, who also voted against Schumer’s amendment, immediately proposed his amendment. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) urged Democrats to oppose it, saying that the proposal would create “a new slush fund” by giving the money to the Justice Department.
“We heard over the last 48 hours that the acting attorney general said that this fund’s not moving forward. All this amendment does is codify what I believe the policy of the DOJ is,” Tillis said on the floor before voting began on his amendment. “This [fund] is unpopular, this administration has said they’re not moving forward with it; this is an opportunity for us to put it to bed.”
Responded Merkley: “Taking one slush fund and eliminating it and then creating a new slush fund still under control of the attorney general is not the way to go. The way to go is to get rid of these slush funds altogether.”
Trump has faced a recent string of failures, including the House vote Wednesday, a court ruling to remove his name from the Kennedy Center and a record-low approval rating among Americans as concern rises about economic issues, gas prices and Trump’s war with Iran.
On Wednesday, Trump lashed out against the four Republicans who backed the House war powers resolution, calling it “an unpatriotic thing” to do and calling the vote “meaningless.”
“They’re GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves. MAGA!!! President DJT,” Trump wrote.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, contributed to this report.
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour ago'Top Gun: Maverick' actor identified as victim stabbed to death in Tarzana
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoStorm chances return, which could impact Motor City Pride, graduations this weekend across Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoHilton campaigns in San Francisco as California primary votes still being counted
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoCrews cover up AT&T branding as stadium becomes
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoMiami leaders gather for FIFA World Cup Host Committee Gala
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoPackage fire outside Boston’s Museum of African American History under investigation
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoRockies beat reporter Patrick Saunders to leave Denver Post
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoSeattle granted NFL Franchise on this day 52 years ago