Thinking before you speak publicly is an important skill. Idaho State Sen. Dan Foreman, a conservative Republican, apparently did not get the memo.

As Boise State Public Radio, an NPR affiliate, reported on Thursday, a “meet the candidates” forum was held on Tuesday evening in Kendrick, a town with a population of about 300. Foreman attended, as did others running for District 6 state House and Senate seats. (Idaho has 35 legislative districts, each with one senator and two representatives.)

After Trish Carter-Goodheart, a Democrat running for a House seat, pointed out that discrimination and racism exist in Idaho, Foreman reportedly lost his temper and told her to “go back where you came from.”

Among the various problems with that statement, Carter-Goodheart happens to be a member of the Nez Perce tribe, which has a reservation smack in the middle of District 6. She was where she came from. Foreman, as the radio piece noted, was born in Illinois. (Foreman did not respond to Boise State Public Radio for comment.)

Foreman is not the only Western politician to make offensive remarks about Native Americans recently—Republican US Senate candidate Tim Sheehy admitted to doing the same, and his Democratic rival, incumbent Jon Tester, has made it a campaign issue.

Tester: The statement you made degrades Native Americans. You're a big guy, apologize. 

Sheehy: Do you apologize for opening the border? 

Tester: I didn't open the border. When we had a opportunity to fix the border, you said we want to play politics with this pic.twitter.com/FRbM23aD3R

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 1, 2024

Republican Rep. Lori McCann—who is running against Carter-Goodheart—told the radio station that she agrees with her opponent’s assessment of what happened, which Carter-Goodheart summarized in a statement released on Wednesday:

Last night, I entered what should have been a respectful and constructive public candidate forum. Instead, I was met with hateful, racist remarks from State Senator Dan Foreman, who screamed at me to “go back where you came from.”

The question on the floor was about a state bill addressing discrimination. One of the candidates responded, claiming that “discrimination doesn’t exist in Idaho.” When it was my turn to speak, I calmly pointed out that just because someone hasn’t personally experienced discrimination doesn’t mean it’s not happening. Racism and discrimination are real issues here in Idaho, as anyone familiar with our state’s history knows. I highlighted our weak hate crime laws and mentioned the presence of the Aryan Nations in northern Idaho as undeniable evidence of this reality.

That’s when Sen. Foreman lost all control. His words to me: “I’m so sick and tired of this liberal b*llsh*t! Why don’t you go back to where you came from?!”

I stayed. I stayed because I wanted to show our community that I can, and will, handle difficult, unpleasant situations. After the forum, several members of the crowd came up to me and offered their support, apologizing for Sen. Foreman’s behavior. But it’s not the people in the crowd who need to apologize.

I need to thank the women who stood with me against this hate: Representative Lori McCann, Kathy Dawes, and Moscow City Councilwoman Julia Parker. You had my back when it mattered, and I appreciate your strength and solidarity.

What happened last night was a reminder of why this election matters. I am a proud member of the Nez Perce tribe, fighting to represent the land my family has lived on for generations. People like Dan Foreman do not represent our diverse community, and I will continue to stand against the hatred and racism they spread. Our state deserves better. Our community deserves better. We deserve better.

Less than a week before Melania Trump is set to release her memoir, the former first lady appeared to break ranks.

“Melania Trump passionately defends abortion rights in upcoming memoir,” read the headline. The Guardian, which had obtained an early copy, went on to include excerpts that see Melania declaring it an “imperative” to guarantee a woman’s autonomy. “Restricting a woman’s right to choose whether to terminate an unwanted pregnancy is the same as denying her control over her own body,” she reportedly writes. “I have carried this belief with me throughout my entire adult life.”

These views, of course, appear in direct opposition to the extreme anti-abortion record of her husband, Donald Trump, as he seeks to return to the White House. They arrive as the former president, who frequently boasted of his singular role in helping to overturn Roe v. Wade, contorts himself on an issue that has proven electorally diabolical for Republicans.

So in comes Melania—and with her, one of the most persistent storylines of the Trump era: Donald Trump may be an extremist but the women around him are supposedly a moderating force. His wife in particular, with her projected sense of mystery and speculation that she is the silent victim of an awful man, has served as a convenient vehicle for this narrative.

If people do still indeed invest in the fiction that Melania is a covert champion of progressive values, that she is the defiant, least-awful member of MAGA, then haven’t the last eight years shown how useless she is?

It was a strange thing to believe in the first place. But with nearly a decade of evidence proving otherwise, it strikes me as equal parts baffling and damning that the narrative survives. In fact, countless people have posted the Guardian‘s excerpt without context on social media, as if it’s a bombshell. (The Guardian posted another excerpt this morning in which Melania claims she tried to convince Trump to abandon his administration’s family separation policy, again without much skepticism.)

Then, a familiar news cycle: National news outlets repeated both headlines. Here’s CBS News, airing the conclusion that this is an unmistakably pro-choice message from the former first lady:

@cbsmornings

Former First Lady Melania Trump voices support for abortion rights in her new memoir, saying there is “no room for compromise when it comes to this essential right that all women possess from birth. Individual freedom.”

♬ original sound – CBS Mornings

Now to be clear, it may very well be true that Melania harbors secret pro-choice views. But should we care? The former first lady—who eagerly pushed pernicious birther lies about Barack Obama—has always been a willing contributor to her husband’s rot, a longstanding complicity that most recently featured Melania giving air to conspiracy theories surrounding Trump’s shooting. Experts have warned such partisan exploitation could lead to retaliatory violence.

But if people do still indeed invest in the fiction that Melania is a covert champion of more progressive values, that she is somehow the defiant, least-awful member of the MAGA kingdom, then haven’t the last eight years shown how feckless she is? After all, Roe is gone; family separations occurred but “I really don’t care, do u?”; and a return to the White House is all but certain to be far worse.

Still, fiction or not, there are books to sell and cryptic videos to film. Meanwhile, the media seems perfectly fine, even happy, to keep laundering this grift. Just apparently not for $250,000.

In a debate-night surprise, climate science got near-top billing during the vice presidential face-off between Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. JD Vance in New York on Tuesday, as the sprawling impacts of Hurricane Helene, which killed at least 160 people, were still being felt across the Southeast.

Just after an opening that addressed the escalating crisis in the Middle East, CBS moderator Norah O’Donnell noted that climate change is only making storms like Helene worse and asked Vance if he agreed with Donald Trump’s assertion that climate change is a “hoax.” Vance, in a pattern that repeated across the night, couldn’t bring himself to contradict the former president.

Instead, he pointed a finger at his opponents. If Democrats “really believe that climate change is serious,” he argued, “what they would be doing is more manufacturing and more energy production in the United States of America.” That’s because, he said, America is the “cleanest economy in the entire world” in terms of “carbon emissions” per “unit of economic output.” He also pushed for investing in nuclear and natural gas.

It’s unclear what Vance meant by “unit of economic output.” But by most metrics, the US is not a clean economy. The US has among the highest carbon emissions per capita, one of the highest total annual emissions, a mediocre record on carbon emissions per dollar of GDP, and was most recently ranked 34th in the world in its Environmental Performance Index, a measure of a country’s environmental stewardship, including climate change mitigation.

Walz countered that the Biden-Harris administration has made “massive investments” in green technology—the “biggest in global history“—with the Inflation Reduction Act. The law, Walz said, has created 200,000 jobs across the country. (As CNN noted in its fact-check of the debate, some of those jobs may be promised, but not yet created; it’s difficult to come up with an exact figure of jobs sparked by the IRA.)

As for Hurricane Helene, both Vance and Walz shared their condolences with the victims of the flooding. As Vance said, “It’s an unbelievable, unspeakable human tragedy.”

Hurricane Helene wreaked havoc across the Southeast over the past several days, leaving more than 60 people dead and providing a chilling example of how climate change is worsening storms.

Since the hurricane made landfall in northern Florida on Thursday, it killed at least 64 people, including 1-month-old twins and their 27-year-old mother in Georgia, and a couple in their 70s and a 6-year-old relative who drowned in North Carolina, the Associated Press reported Sunday. North Carolina was particularly hard hit, with western parts of the state receiving more than two feet of rainfall, leading to the closure of about 300 roads, according to federal authorities.

The storm also brought more than a foot of rain to parts of Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, as well as massive power outages, including, at one point, in 40 percent of South Carolina, the AP reports. As of Sunday afternoon, there were more than 2.2 million power outages across the Southeast, with more than 870,000 in South Carolina and more than 600,000 in Georgia, according to PowerOutage.us.

In a statement Saturday, President Joe Biden said he was “deeply saddened by the loss of life and devastation” that Helene wrought, adding, “As we turn toward recovery efforts, we will make certain that no resource is spared to ensure that families, businesses, schools, hospitals, and entire communities can quickly begin their road to rebuilding.”

Before the storm made landfall, Biden approved emergency aid requests from the governors of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, and sent 1,500 federal personnel to the region, according to information the White House released Friday. On Sunday, the Federal Emergency Management Agency announced that Biden had approved major disaster declarations for North Carolina and Florida, unlocking more aid for both states.

“Doug and I are thinking of those who tragically lost their lives and we are keeping all those who loved them in our prayers during the difficult days ahead,” Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement Saturday, adding that she had been briefed on the situation by FEMA officials and would continue receiving regular updates.

On CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell blamed climate change for the storm’s rapid intensification—and warned that the devastation was a harbinger of what’s to come in our increasingly warming planet. “In the past, when we would look at damage from hurricanes, it was primarily wind damage, with some water damage, but now we’re seeing so much more water damage, and I think that is a result of the warm waters, which is a result of climate change,” Criswell said.

At Tuesday’s vice presidential debate between Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) and Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), something will be missing: on-air fact-checking.

The Associated Press reports that moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan of CBS will not point out the candidates’ inaccuracies during the 90-minute debate, scheduled to take place in New York City at 9 p.m. Eastern. Instead, the network says the candidates can fact-check each other and that its misinformation unit, consisting of about 20 people, will provide real-time fact-checking during the debate in an online live blog and on-air afterwards.

The network’s plan garnered extensive, immediate criticism from reporters and press watchers alike. Some journalists accused CBS of failing to live up to its mission, while others charged that they were bowing to Trump’s camp, which attacked ABC News moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir for pointing out Trump’s many lies in his debate earlier this month against Kamala Harris. Trump falsely claimed, for example, that Democrats execute babies after they’re born and that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating peoples’ house pets. Following the debate, CNN reported that Harris lied once, about the historical significance of the unemployment rate under Trump, while Trump lied more than 30 times.

There are a few questions to consider before judging the significance of CBS’s move: Can on-air, live fact-checking actually shape viewers’ opinions about a candidate’s trustworthiness, or has it indeed become part of the culture wars? Also, how many debate viewers will actually visit the CBS website or tune in to watch the post-debate fact-check?

Particularly in these times, journalists have to do more than give the candidates a pair of microphones and let them have at it.

But even without these answers, critics of CBS have a point, considering that Vance also has an extensive record of flat-out lying. Recall, for example, that Vance unleashed the lie about Haitian immigrants eating pets in Springfield, leading to Trump repeating it on the debate stage to tens of millions of viewers. And before Trump named Vance his running mate, the Hillbilly Elegy author was one of the many Republicans who went on television to question the 2020 election results—despite the fact that more than 60 lawsuits the Trump campaign filed questioning the integrity of the election were found to be without merit.

Particularly in these times—when the Republican candidate for the presidency is a convicted felon who tried to subvert the 2020 election and still refuses to admit his loss—journalists have to do more than give the candidates a pair of microphones and let them have at it. As Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein wrote in 2019, “Journalists can’t just dispassionately chronicle two equally valid ‘sides.’ A free press needs (and is needed by) lowercase-d democracy. We can’t exist without it.”

On Tuesday, US District Judge R. David Proctor ruled in an injunction that part of Alabama’s voter suppression law SB1—state legislation that made it a felony to assist disabled people in requesting and filling absentee ballots—was an unenforceable violation of the federal Voting Rights Act. The rest of SB1, which nominally targets the practice of “ballot harvesting,” will remain intact for the time being.

SB1, which was enacted in March, prohibited “any person from ordering, requesting, collecting, prefilling, obtaining, or delivering an absentee ballot application or absentee ballot of a voter.” The law also established criminal penalties for people who assisted others with absentee voting.

In April, the Alabama NAACP, the state chapter of the League of Women Voters , Greater Birmingham Ministries, and the Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program sued Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and other state government officials, asking for an injunction.

As their lawsuit points out, the US Code explicitly protects people’s rights to receive assistance while voting:

Any voter who requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write may be given assistance by a person of the voter’s choice, other than the voter’s employer or agent of that employer or officer or agent of the voter’s union.

In his opinion, Proctor acknowledged that SB1 disproportionately affected disabled and low literacy voters: “SB 1 unduly burdens the rights of Section 208 voters to make a choice about who may assist them in obtaining and returning an absentee ballot,” the judge wrote.

In a statement released after Proctor’s decision, the plaintiffs celebrated the injunction as a positive step in upholding democracy.

We’re glad that the district court has sided with the rights of the voters and is committed to promoting voting accessibility. Our democracy works best when everybody can participate in it, and this ruling prevents the enforcement of a cruel law that would have suppressed the voices of blind, disabled, and low literacy voters.

Is the end in sight?

If Trump loses to Vice President Kamala Harris in November—which is a real possibility, if recent polls are accurate—he does not plan to run again in 2028, he said in an interview that aired Sunday.

“No, I don’t,” Trump told Sharyl Attkisson, host of Full Measure, when she asked if he thinks he would run again in four years if he loses the next election. “No, I don’t. I think that that will be it. I don’t see that at all. Hopefully we’re going to be successful.”

Is he serious? Time will tell… but don’t hold out hope: While Trump appeared to (finally) recently acknowledge he lost the 2020 election—as dozens of court cases affirmed—he quickly walked that back at the debate against Harris earlier this month, telling the moderators that he was being sarcastic. “I don’t acknowledge [losing] at all,” he added.

If Trump does back out of running for president again in the future, many in the GOP will be thrilled.

As I have covered, scores of onetime high-level Republican officials have been openly defecting from the party, announcing their plans to vote for Harris over Trump—including many former Reagan, Bush, and Trump staffers. On Sunday, more joined in, signing a bipartisan open letter endorsing Harris over Trump, writing, “Vice President Harris defends America’s democratic ideals, while former President Donald Trump endangers them.” Of the more than 700 current and former national security officials who signed on, more than 180 are Republicans or independents, which includes some who changed their affiliation after Trump took the reins of the GOP, according to one of the organizers.

Things seem to be going great for Vice President Kamala Harris when it comes to two key data points any politician obsesses over: cash and favorability ratings.

A new NBC News poll out today shows Harris with a 5-point lead over former President Donald Trump among registered voters nationally, who prefer her to him 49 to 44 percent. That’s a big jump from July, when NBC polling found Trump leading Biden 45 to 43 percent. Not only that, the new poll shows Harris’ favorability rating soared 16 points since July, with particular spikes coming from voters under 30 and Black and Hispanic voters. NBC notes that this marks the largest increase for any politician in the network’s polling since George W. Bush saw a post-9/11 surge.

NEW: Kamala Harris’ favorability has jumped 16 points since July, the largest increase for any politician in NBC News polling since George W. Bush’s standing surged after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.@SteveKornacki breaks down the numbers from latest @NBCNews poll. pic.twitter.com/Zc84Q4cXkM

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) September 22, 2024

Harris also outraised Trump 4-to-1 in August, according to new filings from the Federal Election Commission released Friday, which show that her campaign took in $189 million, while his brought in $44 million. Harris has been a boon for Democratic fundraising since President Joe Biden dropped from the ticket in July: As my colleagues and I reported, she raised more than $80 million in her first 24 hours and $200 million in her first week campaigning; her campaign also raised $540 million during its first month and more than $80 million during the Democratic National Convention.

The Harris campaign is not sitting on its cash, having spent nearly $174 million last month, while Trump spent about $61 million. As the New York Times reported Friday, some of the campaigns’ spending gap is reflected in the money they’re putting towards digital operations, with the Harris campaign splashing out on more than $12 million on Facebook and Instagram advertising during the week of the debate, while the Trump campaign spent well under $1 million. Trump’s spokespeople told the Times that the campaign is spending less because they can reach people for free at rallies—though that’s a risky bet, given that Trump can’t be counted on to stick to a script… or facts.

After reporting by ProPublica this week revealed that two women in Georgia died as a result of abortion bans, Trump is feeling the heat.

The stories led to widespread condemnation, including from Vice President Kamala Harris, who—as my colleague Pema Levy wrote—highlighted the stories of the women, Amber Thurman and Candi Miller, during campaign stops in Georgia and Michigan this week. “The reality is, for every story we hear of the suffering under Trump abortion bans, there are so many of the stories we’re not hearing,” Harris said.

This is probably why Trump—who appointed three of the five Supreme Court justices who overruled Roe v. Wade—had a late-night, all-caps meltdown on Truth Social on Friday, in which he implausibly promised that American women will be better off if he is reelected. “WOMEN WILL BE HAPPY, HEALTHY, CONFIDENT AND FREE!” Trump posted. “YOU WILL NO LONGER BE THINKING ABOUT ABORTION,” he added, before repeating his well-worn litany of lies—including that everyone wanted Roe overruled and that Democrats are executing babies after birth (that’s a crime known as homicide… and it’s not happening).

WOMEN ARE POORER THAN THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO, ARE LESS HEALTHY THAN THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO, ARE LESS SAFE ON THE STREETS THAN THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO, ARE MORE DEPRESSED AND UNHAPPY THAN THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO, AND ARE LESS OPTIMISTIC AND CONFIDENT IN THE FUTURE THAN THEY…

— Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) September 21, 2024

“I WILL PROTECT WOMEN AT A LEVEL NEVER SEEN BEFORE,” Trump concluded. “THEY WILL FINALLY BE HEALTHY, HOPEFUL, SAFE, AND SECURE. THEIR LIVES WILL BE HAPPY, BEAUTIFUL, AND GREAT AGAIN!”

On Saturday, Trump gave an in-person version of the rant, at a rally in North Carolina (at which Trump-endorsed gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson was not present, in the wake of his latest epic scandal).

Trump reads his bizarre Truth Social rant: So let's talk about our great women. Women have gone through a lot. Women are poorer than they were four years ago. Are less healthy than they were four years ago … You will no longer be thinking about abortion pic.twitter.com/4oryV835Lb

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 21, 2024

All this is a bit rich coming from a man who was found liable for sexual assault; caught on tape bragging about committing sexual assault; found guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records to hide that he paid off a porn star with whom he allegedly had sex while his wife, Melania, was tending to their four-month-old son; and who has a known history of making misogynistic attacks on women he finds threatening. And as for Trump’s claim that women will “no longer be thinking about abortion” if he’s reelected? That’s unlikely, given that he could very well enact a federal abortion ban, and given that abortion bans nationwide have unleashed a health care apocalypse and put vulnerable women in even greater danger.

As Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.) put it on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday morning, “That’s just ludicrous.”

“This guy just doesn’t understand what the average woman is confronting in her life in this country,” she added.

“He's just deranged.”@GovWhitmer hits former President Donald Trump over his recent comments on abortion in an interview with CNN’s @jaketapper. “I think this guy just doesn't understand what the average woman is confronting in her life in this country.” pic.twitter.com/PY04FziWb2

— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) September 22, 2024

“Trump thinks he can control women—he’s wrong,” Harris-Walz campaign Senior Spokesperson Sarafina Chitika said in a statement. “He’s terrified that women across the country will vote like our lives and freedoms depend on it, because they do. Women aren’t stupid. We see Trump’s Project 2025 agenda for what it is: an extreme plan to ban abortion nationwide and threaten access to IVF and birth control.”

Trump’s alleged conversion to feminism did not appear to last long: About 12 hours after his pledge to make women great again, he called MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle a “‘dumb as a rock’ bimbo” in another rant.

Update: At a rally in North Carolina on Saturday, Trump backed away from another debate, saying “The problem with another debate is that it’s just too late. Voting has already started.”

Vice President Kamala Harris accepted an invitation from CNN to debate Donald Trump for a second time on October 23. Now the ball is in the former president’s court.

I will gladly accept a second presidential debate on October 23.

I hope @realDonaldTrump will join me. https://t.co/Trb8HUBsDh

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) September 21, 2024

After getting trounced by Harris in their first debate earlier this month, Trump initially ruled out a second face-off. “THERE WILL BE NO THIRD DEBATE!” he posted on Truth Social two days after the candidates faced off on ABC. But by that Friday, he seemed more open to the idea. “Maybe if I got in the right mood, I don’t know,” he told reporters during a news conference in California.

Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon said in a statement that “Donald Trump should have no problem agreeing to this debate.”

Trump’s performance in the last debate was largely characterized by a series of malicious and incoherent lies. As my colleague David Corn wrote:

He tossed out—often in a hard-to-follow jumble of words that probably could only be deciphered by his true devotees—one debunked lie after another. Undocumented immigrants are stealing and eating people’s pets in Ohio. (“I see people on television talking about it,” he said as way of confirmation.) And undocumented migrants are violently taking over apartment complexes in Colorado. Doctors in Democratic states are executing babies after they are born. Crime is down throughout the world but increasing in the United States. Everyone—Democrats, Republicans, and all legal scholars—wanted Roe v. Wade overturned. Harris and the Democrats are scheming to confiscate all guns. Joe Biden has pocketed money from Ukraine and China. Harris is a “Marxist” and hates Jews, Arabs, and Israel. He has had no connection to Project 2025. Nancy Pelosi was responsible for the violence on January 6. Top professors at the Wharton School have praised his tariffs plan (which many economists have said will lead to inflation and unemployment). The economy when he was president was the best ever.

Trump, apparently, saw this as a win. “In the World of Boxing or UFC, when a Fighter gets beaten or knocked out, they get up and scream, ‘I DEMAND A REMATCH, I DEMAND A REMATCH!’ Well, it’s no different with a Debate. She was beaten badly last night. Every Poll has us WINNING,” he wrote on Truth Social.

Whether or not Harris and Trump face each other again, their running mates Tim Walz and JD Vance will take part in a debate on October 1, hosted by CBS News.

In her latest video, Mother Jones video creator Kat Abughazaleh traces the history of former President Donald Trump’s dangerous lie that some states allow parents to “execute” babies in so-called “post-birth abortions.”

“You can look at the governor of West Virginia,” Trump said during last week’s debate, prompting an incredulous head shake from Vice President Kamala Harris. “He said the baby will be born and we will decide what to do with the baby. In other words, we’ll execute it.”

Northam, of course, did not say that. Trump wasn’t even correct about his own right-wing smear. His reference was to a wildly out-of-context quote from former Virginia governor Ralph Northam (not West Virginia). Northam’s 2019 radio appearance, in which he explained the tragic medical emergencies that can result in late-term abortions, has since been selectively edited by Republicans and used to claim their opponents are permitting infanticide—a lie that has been repeated with relish across Fox News, again and again.

As Kat explains, “There’s no such thing as a ‘post-birth’ abortion. These procedures are extremely rare and reserved for cases where the mother’s life is in danger or when a fatally ill or deformed baby needs palliative care.” In this video, Kat shows how this wasn’t Trump’s first time exploiting these tragedies, which are “designed to demonize grieving mothers and doctors,” while clarifying the facts about late-term abortion care that are too often lost to political noise. She notes that less than one percent of abortions occur after 21 weeks of pregnancy.

“By limiting abortion access in the first place, whether it’s totally or at the six-week mark, or by making parents jump through hoops just to get the medical care they need,” Kat explains, “Republicans are ensuring that there will be more cases that require traumatic medical intervention than if people were allowed to have control over their bodies in the first place.”

At a somber memorial event held Wednesday at Engine Company 4/Ladder Company 15 fire station in lower Manhattan, former president Donald Trump appeared to bring a special guest: 9/11 conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer.

The appearance of Loomer, a far-right social media shit-poster with a long record of bigotry, follows her travel with Trump to Tuesday’s presidential debate between the former president and Vice President Kamala Harris.

But her attendance at a 9/11 remembrance event proved especially shocking. Last year, Loomer shared a video to Twitter that claimed the infamous terrorist attack was an “inside job.” Alongside the video, Loomer shared her false belief that the plane hijackings and resulting terrors were merely a ploy to allow the US government to surveil Americans moving forward.

“These actions destabilized the Middle East and allowed for the alphabet agencies to begin their campaign of WEAPONIZED GOVERNMENT AND MASS SURVEILLANCE against the American people,” Loomer wrote in June 2023.

Nearly 3,000 people died as a direct result of the attacks in 2001, including more than 2,500 civilians and firefighters at the World Trade Center in New York City; 184 people at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia; and 40 passengers and crew members of Flight 93, which crashed in an empty field in western Pennsylvania. Thousands more have contracted illnesses believed to be linked to their time near the wreckage of the attacks, according to a government program that compiles data on survivors.

Further, more than 240,000 people have been killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan war-zone areas since the War on Terror began. Of those, more than 70,000 were civilians.

Beyond spreading lies about 9/11, Loomer has previously described herself as a “proud Islamophobe.” She has also called Islam a “cancer on humanity.” Though the purpose of her recent travel with Trump is unclear, Loomer appears to be angling for what one may call an “inside job” in a second Trump Administration, after coming close to a job in his 2024 campaign.

Two Trump campaign staffers reportedly got in a fight with an official at Arlington National Cemetery on Monday during a wreath-laying ceremony to honor soldiers who died in the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan. (NPR first reported the incident on Tuesday.)

The cause? Trump’s staff allegedly wanted to ensure he’d be photographed honoring the troops, even though federal law “prohibits political campaign or election-related activities,” including photographers, at the cemetery, according to an Arlington National Cemetery spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Trump’s team did manage to turn the event into an opportunity for content, producing and posting a video to their TikTok account, set to somber music, that suggests the soldiers’ deaths were President Joe Biden’s fault. As of Wednesday afternoon, it had more than 6.6 million views. (The video was also posted on Trump’s Instagram page, which posted other footage from the event, too; Trump’s senior advisor Dan Scavino also shared videos on his X page.)

@realdonaldtrump

Should have never happened.

♬ original sound – President Donald J Trump

“We can confirm there was an incident, and a report was filed,” a cemetery spokesperson said Wednesday. They declined to elaborate further on who was involved in the alleged incident or with what agency the report was filed “to protect the identity of the individual involved.” They did not immediately respond to an inquiry about whether the TikTok video violates the federal law in question. On Thursday, an Army spokesperson released new details about the incident, claiming a cemetery employee “was abruptly pushed aside” when trying to enforce the rules against political activity. “Consistent with the decorum expected at ANC, this employee acted with professionalism and avoided further disruption,” the statement continued, adding that while the incident was reported to police, the employee declined to press charges; The New York Times reports the employee was worried about retaliation from Trump supporters

“This incident was unfortunate, and it is also unfortunate that the ANC employee and her professionalism has been unfairly attacked,” the statement said. “ANC is a national shrine to the honored dead of the Armed Forces, and its dedicated staff will continue to ensure public ceremonies are conducted with the dignity and respect the nation’s fallen deserve.”

The Trump team tried to shut down the claims, with Communications Director Steven Cheung denying on Wednesday that a “physical altercation” occurred and claiming that the team had permission to have a photographer present. “The fact is that a private photographer was permitted on the premises and for whatever reason an unnamed individual, clearly suffering from a mental health episode, decided to physically block members of President Trump’s team during a very solemn ceremony,” Cheung added. He did not immediately respond to follow-up questions Wednesday, nor did the Arlington National Cemetery spokesperson respond to requests for comment on Cheung’s claims.

Cheung also pointed to a post from Trump War Room—an X account run by the campaign—featuring a statement from families of the fallen soldiers expressing their “heartfelt thanks and appreciation” to the former president for his presence at the cemetery.

Trump has not always been respectful of the military. Trump reportedly called Americans who died in war “suckers” and “losers.” (Former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly confirmed the statement was true last year.) Trump famously attacked the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a Purple Heart recipient who served in the Navy and spent several years as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War. “He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured,” Trump said of McCain. “I like people who weren’t captured.”

After the most recent incident, Trump’s former Defense Secretary, Mark Esper, could not hide how he felt in response to the former president’s latest alleged disrespect to the memory of fallen soldiers. “There is no more hallowed ground in this nation than Arlington Cemetery,” Esper told CNN. “Bottom line, the principle is that no person or party on either side should ever use Arlington National Cemetery or any of our cemeteries or battlefields for partisan political purposes.”

Trump SecDef Esper tells me he’s “anxious” to see what comes of Arlington investigation- “Bottom line: The principle is that no person or party, either side, should ever use Arlington National Cemetery – or any of our cemeteries or battlefields – for partisan political purposes.” pic.twitter.com/zazLTDGPUQ

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) August 28, 2024

Update, Aug. 29: This post was updated with a new statement and details provided by an Arlington National Cemetery spokesperson.

When his uncle Donald became president, Fred Trump III—whose son William, due to a rare genetic mutation, has seizures and an intellectual disability—saw an opportunity to advocate for disability rights.

In a Time excerpt of his forthcoming book All in the Family, Fred Trump revealed a disturbing conversation with the then-president following a White House meeting in which he discussed how expensive caring for people with complex disabilities can be. Donald Trump said of some disabled people, his nephew recounted, “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.”

Time said that it had reached out to Donald Trump for comment about his nephew’s allegations but received no response.

It wasn’t the only concerning conversation Trump’s nephew alleged that they had. When a Trump family medical fund for William’s medical and living expenses was running low, Fred said his uncle told him, “He doesn’t recognize you. Maybe you should just let him die and move down to Florida.”

“The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.”

It wouldn’t be the first time Donald Trump has made offensive comments about disabled people. He infamously made fun of a reporter’s disability at a 2015 rally. But it’s still even more shocking to hear from a close relative that he clearly does not value the life of his own disabled family member.

Biden’s weekend donor cash splash hit like a tidal wave, according to the president’s campaign on Sunday morning. Attracted by celebrities like Jimmy Kimmel, Julia Roberts, and George Clooney for a glamorous Hollywood event, party-goers coughed up $30 million, breaking records for the Democratic Party’s largest single fundraiser ever, according to the campaign.

Pre-event commitments were already at a record-smashing $28 million before any of the celebs turned up. Saturday’s event surpassed a New York City fundraiser that raised $26 million in March.

During this weekend’s event, attendees were treated to live performances, and comedian Jimmy Kimmel moderated a conversation with President Biden and former President Barack Obama, touching on topics like the Supreme Court and, of course, Trump. Ticket prices for the Saturday night event ranged from $250 to $500,000, while smaller donors paid $20 to watch virtually, according to CBS.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Julia Roberts (@juliaroberts)

The battle for the biggest campaign war chest is running hot. While Biden has generally been considered to have the bigger cash advantage, Trump is also aggressively raising money and attracting significant amounts. His conviction in the “hush money” trial unleashed a $52.8 million deluge to his coffers in 24 hours, according to his campaign.

On Tuesday, the North Carolina GOP Representatives passed a mask ban on private property in a crackdown on protesters, even as a new subvariant of coronavirus spreads across the United States. The vote was 69 for the measure and 43 against It now goes to the governor’s desk.

Last week, the House of Representatives modified the bill to allow “a medical or surgical grade mask for the purpose of preventing the spread of contagious disease,” keeping some aspects of the health exemption for mask-wearing. But, on public or private properties, like at grocery stores or at a workplace, people can be required to remove masks if requested.

The bill, which was drafted in response to people wearing masks at Pro-Palestinian protests and encampments, can be passed by the General Assembly even if Democratic Governor Roy Cooper vetoes it through an override.

Democrats in North Carolina spoke against the bill before the vote. Democratic State Rep. Maria Cervania also said that the bill says people can only wear masks for contagious diseases, which ignores people who need to wear them for allergies or are immunocompromised. Later, Democratic State Rep. Pricey Harrison said she’s nervous about not being allowed to wear a mask for her asthma and is also worried about people of color being targeted for mask-wearing.

Many healthcare professionals have expressed concerns that their patients would not be able to stay safe against the spread of Covid-19 and other infectious diseases. Dr. Diana Cejas, a University of North Carolina pediatric neurologist who survived cancer and a stroke, told Mother Jones last month:

“Some of our legislators have made the argument that this ban won’t apply to those of us who mask for medical reasons, but I think that we all know that won’t be true. We already face scrutiny and outright harassment at times for the ‘crime’ of trying to protect ourselves from illness, particularly us disabled and chronically ill people of color and those with other marginalized identities.”

Some types of masking are still allowed, like costume masks on Halloween.

On Tuesday, a federal jury in Delaware convicted Hunter Biden of three felonies related to federal gun crimes. In 2018, while in recovery, the now-president’s son wrote on paperwork for a gun purchase that he did not abuse illegal drugs. President Joe Biden said last week that he would not pardon his son if he was convicted.

During the trial, Biden’s former romantic partners spoke about his struggles with crack cocaine addiction. His daughter also said she could not vouch for his sobriety at the time he purchased a firearm. Biden’s defense attorney argued that Biden did not lie when he said he was not abusing illegal substances, as he was sober and recovering at the time. The jurors, it appears, were not convinced by those assertions.

The defense attorney’s arguments do bring up a contentious issue: When can someone struggling with addiction or past institutionalization for mental health be considered safe enough to purchase a firearm? Mental health professionals can play a role in these decisions, but as psychiatrist Dr. Paul Appelbaum told me recently, that determination can be complicated:

When you’ve got a process for restoring gun rights, at some point down the road, these will frequently involve evaluation by a psychiatrist or another mental health professional to assess the extent to which an individual remains sufficiently dangerous to themselves, or to other people, that it would be unwise to restore their gun rights.

There are no good assessments of approaches that provide certainty with regard to a person’s likelihood of using a gun in an inappropriate way in the future, so mental health professionals are often in a difficult situation.

Hunter Biden faces another federal trial later this year on unrelated tax fraud charges.

After officials repeatedly warned that they would consider stopping the flow of weapons to Israel if it pressed forward with a ground invasion into Rafah, the Biden administration announced it would nonetheless attempt to send more than $1 billion in additional weapons to Israel, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday night, citing congressional officials.

The Journal reports that the latest package “includes the potential transfer of $700 million in tank ammunition, $500 million in tactical vehicles, and $60 million in mortar rounds.” Congress will have to approve the latest package.

The latest announcement comes as something of an about-face for the White House: Just last week, President Biden made headlines after he told CNN that he would stop shipping certain weapons to Israel if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proceeds with a major ground invasion of Rafah—which Israeli forces have already seemingly begun, leading nearly 450,000 people to flee the area since May 6, according to the latest numbers from the United Nations. 

White House Spokesperson John Kirby added Thursday that Biden does not believe “smashing into Rafah” will help take out Hamas. Nonetheless, Israel is reportedly moving in. The Washington Post on Tuesday reported that Israeli tanks are coming closer to urban areas; yesterday, State Department Spokesperson Vedant Patel told reporters, “We do not want to see a major operation into Rafah, and we have not seen one yet that we would take issue with.”

On Sunday, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken confirmed on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that the US recently halted the delivery of 3,500 so-called “dumb bombs” to Israel. But Blinken made clear that the administration was still allowing most weapons exports.

Representatives for the State and Defense departments, and the White House, did not immediately respond to requests for comment and questions about how they will ensure Israel uses the latest round of weapons in compliance with international humanitarian law and President Biden’s recent comments.

Last Friday, the State Department released a delayed report examining the Israeli army’s conduct and use of US provided-weapons. The department found that “it is reasonable to assess” that Israel has deployed the weapons “in instances inconsistent with its [international humanitarian law] obligations or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm.” That report also said American officials “do not currently assess that the Israeli government is prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance” to Gaza—though that’s at odds with the experiences of more than 20 humanitarian organizations operating on the ground.

Netanyahu, for his part, refuses to face the reality of the humanitarian toll of the war on civilian Palestinians, arguing that a continued military operation is essential to defeat Hamas. “The humanitarian catastrophe that has been spoken of has not been realized, nor will it,” he said in a statement today. 

Workers on the ground paint a different picture. Twenty aid groups signed onto a letter today condemning world leaders’ failures to act to stem the humanitarian crisis and halt the Israeli invasion into Rafah, writing that “further advancement of the military invasion…will lead to the total collapse of lifesaving services.”

The International Rescue Committee said Tuesday that its emergency medical team was supposed to enter Gaza through the Rafah crossing on Monday but was unable. “What we are witnessing in Rafah is nothing less than a humanitarian catastrophe,” Kiryn Lanning, IRC team lead for the occupied Palestinian territory, said in a statement. “The ongoing Israeli bombardment, combined with the closure of the Rafah crossing, has led to critical fuel shortages and severe movement restrictions, paralyzing all humanitarian operations.”

The U.N. Secretary-General called yesterday for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza and for the release of all hostages,” and said the Rafah crossing should be re-opened immediately to allow for “unimpeded humanitarian access throughout Gaza.” 

In the meantime, as a volunteer nurse at Rafah’s only maternity hospital told me last week, medical professionals are scrambling to care for injured patients, pregnant people, and vulnerable newborns with a shortage of basic supplies and fears for their safety.

“There is no safe place in Gaza from a healthcare perspective—and beyond,” she said.

At a rally in Wildwood, New Jersey on Saturday, former President Donald Trump made many questionable comments.

He called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg “Fat Alvin.” He claimed migrant children “don’t speak English.” And he said that, if he’s re-elected, he will deport pro-Palestinian, antiwar protesters.

“When I’m president, we will not allow our colleges to be taken over by violent radicals, and if you come here from a violent country and try to bring jihadism, or anti-Americanism, or antisemitism to our campuses, we will immediately deport you. You’ll be out of that school,” Trump said, to the crowd’s cheers. (You can watch the full comments for yourself at the 1:30:41 mark.) 

This is not the first time Trump has made similar promises: Back in the fall, he said he “will implement strong ideological screening for all immigrants,” and that those who “sympathize with jihadists” and “want to abolish Israel…[are] not coming into our country.” He added: “We aren’t bringing in anyone from Gaza.” 

Trump vows to deport pro-Palestinian college campus protesters pic.twitter.com/lEeZpdHW3l

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 11, 2024

The comments come amid Republican-led efforts to brand all anti-war protesters as supporters of terrorism and a continued push to criminalize protest. 

Last week, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) re-upped an effort he first made last fall to deport protesters who have “endorsed or espoused the terrorist activities of Hamas” or other anti-Israel terrorist organizations. Rubio wrote a letter to the secretaries of the State and Homeland Security departments to initiate “expedited deportation proceedings” for participants in “antisemitism and pro-Hamas protests.” Earlier this month, Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-Tx.) introduced what her office calls the “Hamas Supporters Have No Home Here Act,” which would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow for the deportation of people “charged with any crime related to their participation in pro-terrorism or antisemitism rallies or demonstrations.” 

These efforts seem to ignore the reality on the ground: As my colleagues and I have reported, many protesters and organizers have said they condemn antisemitism and have insisted that gatherings on campuses—including some in which administrators have called the cops—have been peaceful. 

Some of those on the right condemning all anti-war protesters have gone beyond calling for enforcement. Last month, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said people “who get stuck behind the pro-Hamas mobs blocking traffic” should “take matters into your own hands to get them out of the way.” (He later claimed he wasn’t endorsing violence.) And earlier this month, Cotton introduced a bill called the “No Bailouts for Campus Criminals Act” that would make anyone convicted of a crime in connection with a campus protest ineligible for student loan relief.

It’s hard not to see these latest measures as more bad faith attempts by the right to criminalize protest, as my colleague nia t. evans has written, and to  dismiss participants as “outside agitators.” But the real danger this time lies in the fact that the presumptive GOP nominee is also in on it—and that the latest efforts fit squarely within his extremist anti-immigrant agenda.

Gov. Kristi Noem has had a tough stretch…of her own making. 

Ahead of the publication of her new book last week, No Going Back, the South Dakota Republican has been on a clean-up tour after it emerged that she included an anecdote about killing her own puppy and another that falsely boasted of meeting North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. In interviews promoting the book, Noem snapped at reporters who asked about the inconsistencies and suggested President Biden’s dog should also be killed.

This weekend, new challenges emerged for Noem closer to home. As of Friday, six of South Dakota’s nine tribes have voted to ban her from their lands, according to the Associated Press, which reports that the off-limits area amounts to 20 percent of the state. Members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe unanimously voted to bar Noem on Friday, citing comments she made earlier this year alleging, without evidence, that “some tribal leaders…are personally benefiting from the cartels being there,” and that Native “kids don’t have any hope” and “don’t have parents who show up and help them.” 

Earlier this week, the Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe banned Noem. The Oglala, Rosebud, Cheyenne River and Standing Rock Sioux tribes previously enacted bans, according to the South Dakota Searchlight. 

“How dare the Governor allege that Sioux Tribal Councils do not care about their communities or their children, and, worse, that they are involved in nefarious activities?” Oglala Sioux tribe President Frank Star Comes Out said last month.

Noem also angered tribal leaders by showing up uninvited to an April meeting between the tribes and the federal government, an appearance one tribal leader blasted as a “publicity stunt,” the Searchlight reported. 

A spokesperson for Noem did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Mother Jones on Sunday. But as political scientist Cal Jillson told the AP, the latest feud may be to Noem’s benefit.

“I’m sure that Gov. Noem doesn’t mind a focus on tensions with the Native Americans in South Dakota,” Jillson said, “because if we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about her shooting the dog.”