This man's memory is nuts!

Login to view embedded media

Trump Is Top Choice for Nearly 60% of GOP Voters, WSJ Poll Shows​

Support for DeSantis collapses in postdebate survey​

Donald Trump has expanded his dominating lead for the Republican presidential nomination, a new Wall Street Journal poll shows, as GOP primary voters overwhelmingly see his four criminal prosecutions as lacking merit and about half say the indictments fuel their support for him.

The new survey finds that what was once a two-man race for the nomination has collapsed into a lopsided contest in which Trump, for now, has no formidable challenger. The former president is the top choice of 59% of GOP primary voters, up 11 percentage points since April, when the Journal tested a slightly different field of potential and declared candidates.

The initial 2026 Rivals100 was just revealed. Take a look at the coverage:

Top 10 Countdown for 2026 class
Meet the initial five-stars in 2026
Tuesdays with Gorney: Thoughts on the 2026 rankings
Who's the top player at each position in 2026 class?
2026 Rivals100

Gasoline prices above ⬆️

Interestingly, the Gasoline price jump coincides with the CPI index level at the start of Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Note this index is up 78% since President Biden took office...

Even GOP Senators Are Clowning on McCarthy’s Biden Impeachment Inquiry​

Many Republicans are reportedly just as unhappy as Democrats with the decision to push forward with the inquiry, with one GOP senator calling it “a fool’s errand.”

AJ McDougall​

Breaking News Reporter
Updated Sep. 12, 2023 5:42PM EDT / Published Sep. 12, 2023 5:34PM EDT

The call is coming from inside the House—and the Senate.

Though it was hardly a surprise that the launching of a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden would be received icily by Democrats, it seems Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and his allies will also have to contend with discontented lawmakers within their own ranks.

A number of Senate Republicans who spoke to The Hill on Tuesday did not mince words about the announcement, with one anonymous legislator labeling it “a fool’s errand.”

“It’s a waste of time,” that senator said, explaining that, even if the House could force through a vote to impeach Biden, the Democrat-controlled Senate would never allow it to go through.


“Maybe this is just Kevin giving people their binkie to get through the shutdown,” they speculated, referring to a looming Sept. 30 deadline to pass a continuing resolution and stop the government from grinding to a halt.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) full-throatedly criticized the choice to move forward with an inquiry. “The bar for impeachment seems to get lower and lower every year,” she said, according to Reuters. She told other reporters that the process would distract from Congress’ ability to pass the dozen-odd bills needed to avert a shutdown.

Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the minority whip, was diplomatic in his response, telling reporters that he didn’t think “it’d be advantageous if this thing went further, with all the other things we have to do.”

Other Republican senators were less than enthusiastic about possible impeachment proceedings.


“I’m not for going through another damn trial to be honest with you,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) told CNN on Monday.

Tuberville said he didn’t believe House Republicans had “enough time” to see an impeachment through, given that 2024 is an election year. He warned his colleagues: “You better have an ironclad case… Make sure you got what you need to have. Don’t be guessing. Don’t just be throwing mud.”

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) called the move “frustrating,” sounding resigned as she pointed out to The Hill that she hadn’t seen any actual evidence of impeachable offenses. “I’m going to default to the position that the House is going to do what the House is going to do, and we’ll have to react to that,” she said.

The mood was similarly tepid in the other congressional chamber. Even members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, the body to which McCarthy was widely seen as capitulating in announcing the inquiry, weren’t satisfied. Mere minutes after the speaker’s announcement, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) slammed McCarthy for not having gone far enough.

“This is a baby step following weeks of pressure from House conservatives to do more. We must move faster,” he said from the House floor. Gaetz also shoehorned in a now daily threat that he would begin the process of attempting to oust McCarthy if he was not brought into “immediate total compliance” with the caucus’ demands.

Among the senators who did express support for the inquiry were Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN), Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), and Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT).

“It’s clear President Biden and his son have engaged in corruption,” Daines said, per Reuters. “I’ll let the House do its job, but I’ll be ready to be a juror if there’s an impeachment.”

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), the only Republican to vote to convict Donald Trump in his first impeachment trial, voiced cautious approval for a probe into Biden’s activities as president.

“The fact that the White House has been singularly silent and has coddled Hunter Biden suggests that an inquiry is not inappropriate,” he said. “That’s very different from an impeachment. Actual impeachment would require the evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor. That has not been alleged.”

Democrats, on the other hand, roundly and predictably denounced the inquiry. The best reaction of the day undoubtedly came from Sen. John Fetterman, who wiggled his fingers and made spooky noises when asked about it.

“Oh my God, really?” he wailed, his hands on his temples. “Oh my gosh. Oh, it’s devastating. Ooooh, don’t do it, please don’t do it. Oh no, oh no.” LOL!!!

GOP lawyer with ties to three Trump rivals enters 14th Amendment fray​

The attorney represents a private individual, not any of the campaigns, as he explores whether Trump should be ruled ineligible to run for president​

By Amy Gardner
Patrick Marley
and
Yvonne Wingett Sanchez
September 12, 2023 at 5:50 p.m. EDT

A Republican election lawyer with ties to three of former president Donald Trump’s GOP primary opponents has joined a crowded field of individuals and groups exploring whether the former president can be kept off the ballot for his role in fomenting the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Jason Torchinsky, a partner with the Virginia law firm Holtzman Vogel, has in recent days initiated conversations about the idea of trying to disqualify Trump with a range of figures, including a Democratic secretary of state, fellow election lawyers and a retired federal judge who has helped lead the push to question Trump’s eligibility, according to multiple people familiar with the calls, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

The lawyer’s involvement reflects the latest escalation in an emerging legal fight over a once-obscure provision of the Constitution. The tussle has produced surprising alliances, and analysts say it will probably end with a ruling on Trump’s eligibility from the Supreme Court.

Torchinsky’s firm has done legal work for the campaigns of former New Jersey governor Chris Christie and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, as well as for Never Back Down, the political action committee promoting the presidential campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Torchinsky, a longtime GOP election lawyer who has also represented the Republican National Committee, is researching the issue not for Trump’s rivals but for Jacob Harriman, the founder of a nonpartisan service organization called More Perfect Union, Harriman said in a statement to The Washington Post.

“It is critical to understand if there is a legitimate risk of nominating a candidate who could be deemed to be ineligible for office,” Harriman said. Torchinsky declined to comment.

The push to disqualify Trump adds to the already complicated web of legal battles consuming his 2024 campaign, which he is pursuing even as he faces four criminal prosecutions and several civil claims. One federal and one Georgia case accuse the former president of seeking to illegally overturn the 2020 election. Another federal case accuses him of mishandling classified documents after he left the White House. In New York, Trump is charged with falsifying business records in connection with hush money paid to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign.

Yet the debate about Trump’s eligibility reflects the growing anxiety among his critics that even as an alleged felon, he has a realistic chance of winning the election. Trump holds a commanding lead in polls over his Republican primary rivals, and national surveys show him neck and neck in a general-election showdown with President Biden.

At issue is a line in the 14th Amendment, ratified three years after the Civil War, to block from office any public official who had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” — intended to prevent traitorous former Confederates from regaining power.

That seemingly antiquated provision is at the center of multiple legal skirmishes across the country over the potentially explosive modern-day question of whether Trump should be declared ineligible to return to the White House.

Advocacy groups and individual voters in at least a dozen states have filed or explored filing lawsuits to block Trump from state ballots next year. Lawyers on both sides have predicted that the dispute may ultimately be resolved by the Supreme Court. Legal challenges have been filed in New Hampshire and Wisconsin, among other states, with election officials and interest groups saying many more are probably on the way. On Tuesday, a liberal group filed suit in Minnesota. Advocates have debated whether to focus on the primary or the general-election ballot.

Two attempted challenges, in Florida, have already been thrown out on the grounds that the groups of voters bringing the cases lacked standing. A case in Colorado, filed last week by a group of voters and the D.C.-based Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, may fare better on that principle given a state law that allows any voter to challenge a candidate’s eligibility.

In a sign of further escalation of the debate, the Trump campaign on Tuesday sent a letter to New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan (R) — signed by scores of Republican state lawmakers — urging him not to remove Trump from the ballot.

“There is no legal basis for these claims to hold up in any legitimate court of law,” the letter states. “The opinions of those perpetuating this fraud against the will of the people are nothing more than a blatant attempt to affront democracy and disenfranchise all voters and the former President.”

State election officials are monitoring the expected challenges but have not acted themselves to try to bar Trump from the ballot. Several said in interviews that they believe they have no power to do so under the laws of their states. Instead they are looking to the Supreme Court, they said, to decide such an important and divisive constitutional matter — and to do so quickly, before the election is fully underway.

“There are very serious legal scholars on both sides of the aisle who hold opposing understanding of this provision,” said Jena Griswold (D), the secretary of state in Colorado. “There needs to be some guidance from the courts.”

The issue rose to prominence last month when a pair of conservative law professors affiliated with the Federalist Society argued in a University of Pennsylvania Law Review article that Trump, who holds a wide lead in polls for the Republican nomination, doesn’t qualify to serve as president. They cited his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his false claims of fraud, his pressure on public officials to overturn results, his attempt to interfere with the counting of electoral college votes on Jan. 6, 2021, and his failure to act quickly to stop the Capitol attack that day.

“It is notable that more people died, and many more were injured, as a result of the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol than died or suffered injuries as a result of the attack on Fort Sumter,” William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas wrote, referring to the opening battle of the Civil War.

My column ...

Do you guys realize how foolish this looks?​

MTG and Gaetz Battle to Claim Credit for GOP’s Impeachment Inquiry​

Justin Rohrlich​

Reporter
Updated Sep. 12, 2023 2:45PM EDT / Published Sep. 12, 2023 2:44PM EDT

Octavio Jones/Reuters​

As House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) prepared to announce his endorsement of an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden that many mainstream Republicans have resisted, MAGA-fied legislator Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) duly gave himself credit. “When @SpeakerMcCarthy makes his announcement in moments, remember that as I pushed him for weeks, @kilmeade said I was: ‘Speaking into the wind’ on impeachment,” he posted on X (formerly Twitter). “Turns out, the wind may be listening!” Within minutes, Trump acolyte Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) shot back that she was the one who should actually get credit for McCarthy’s decision: “Correction my friend. I introduced articles of impeachment against Joe Biden for his corrupt business dealings in Ukraine & China while he was Vice President on his very first day in office. You wouldn’t cosponsor those and I had to drag you kicking and screaming to get you to cosponsor my articles on the border. Who’s really been making the push?” There has been no evidence released to date that proves the allegations Republicans have leveled at Biden.

State election chiefs look to courts to deal with Trump ballot challenges​

NBC News asked chief election officers in all 50 states and D.C. how they are dealing with the matter. The most common answer: They’re waiting for courts to figure it out.

Sept. 11, 2023, 12:33 PM CDT
By Nnamdi Egwuonwu and Emma Barnett

State election officers have a near-unified message about the possibility of challenges to Donald Trump’s eligibility for the ballot in 2024: We want nothing to do with this.

“I don’t think it’s the role of the secretary of state to make a judicial determination,” Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, a Republican, told NBC News. “My job is to create the process and the environment in the state of Missouri where candidates can run and the voters of the state of Missouri have the accessibility, the elections have security and credibility, so that the people of the state can make a decision.”

At issue is a rarely used provision of the U.S. Constitution — Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — which bars any person who took an “oath” to uphold the Constitution from holding public office if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the nation. Some critics of the former president have said that Trump should be disqualified from appearing on the presidential ballot because of this provision.

Secretaries of state in New Hampshire, Arizona, Michigan and Colorado have faced, or are preparing to face, legal challenges to Trump’s eligibility as they prepare state ballots for the upcoming Republican presidential primaries.



NBC News reached out to chief election officers in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Most are choosing not to weigh in on whether the insurrection clause in the 14th Amendment applies here.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal decrying the challenges and potential challenges as “merely the newest way of attempting to short-circuit the ballot box.”

Raffensperger’s office was at the center of Trump’s failed effort to overturn Georgia’s election results in 2020. A phone call between Trump and Raffensperger, during which the former president asked the secretary of state to find the number of votes he needed to overcome Joe Biden’s lead in the state, was among the evidence cited by Georgia prosecutors ahead of Trump’s indictment there.

“For a secretary of state to remove a candidate would only reinforce the grievances of those who see the system as rigged and corrupt. Denying voters the opportunity to choose is fundamentally un-American,” Raffensperger wrote.

Most other secretaries are declining to get into specifics, and some are also making it clear that their offices might not be the right venues for final decisions on the matter.

“At this time, we’re going to decline to comment on this matter,” said Alicia D'Alessandro, a spokesperson for New Jersey’s Democratic secretary of state, Tahesha Way.

A spokesperson for the North Carolina State Board of Elections Patrick Gannon said the board “generally does not comment on legal matters that may or may not come before it.”

And Rachel Soulek, elections director for South Dakota Secretary of State Monae Johnson, a Republican appointee, said the office is “aware of the situation” — and has no further comment.

Some are consulting legal experts for advice on the near-unprecedented issue that many assume will be decided by the courts.

“The process for challenging a candidate’s qualifications may only begin after the candidate files for office and is adjudicated by the court, not this Office,” said Cecilia Heston, a public information officer for Nevada Democratic Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, told NBC News’ Ali Velshi that “the arguments for disqualification are quite strong but we also have to recognize we are in uncharted territory here. … Courts have a critical role to play here, certainly the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, another Democrat, has the issue before her most immediately. A group of Republican and unaffiliated voters in the state filed a lawsuit last week against her, seeking to “challenge the listing of Respondent Donald J. Trump as a candidate on the 2024 Republican presidential primary election ballot and any future election ballot,” citing the 14th Amendment.

Griswold embraced the prospect of courts handling the issue.

“I look forward to the Colorado Court’s substantive resolution of the issues, and am hopeful that this case will provide guidance to election officials on Trump’s eligibility as a candidate for office,” she said in a statement.

Trump has started to weigh in on the challenges, calling them “nonsense” and “election interference.”

“This is like a banana republic,” Trump said in an interview with conservative radio host Dan Bongino last week. “And what they’re doing is, it’s called election interference. ... Now the 14th Amendment is just a continuation of that. It’s nonsense.”

Other election chiefs say state law restricts their ability to disqualify a candidate from the ballot, even if the candidate’s eligibility is in question. In Washington State, any effort to remove a candidate would have to begin with a petition from a voter.

“Washington state law provides that any registered voter can go to court to challenge a candidate’s placement on a ballot and ask a judge to remove a name on grounds of ineligibility,” said Derrick Nunnally, a spokesperson for Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, a Democrat.

Bryan Mills, the chief of staff for Vermont Democratic Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas, shared a similar sentiment. “While we continue to investigate, we believe the clearest reading of Vermont Law is that the office of the Secretary of State does not have statutory authority to deny access to the ballot, except in cases where a candidate fails to submit the required number of valid signatures,” he said.

Other elections officers feel discussions regarding the 14th Amendment are premature.

Debra O’Malley, the communications director for Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin, a Democrat, said that the office will not be making “any determination this early,” given the state’s final list of candidates will not be finalized until December.

Irrespective of when and how they choose to tackle the 14th Amendment debate, several election chiefs said their offices have faced an influx of messages from constituents regarding the issue.

In New Hampshire, the secretary of state’s office was flooded with hundreds of calls this month from Trump supporters seeking reassurance that the former president is going to be on the ballot next year, after conservative talk show host Charlie Kirk falsely told listeners the state is trying to sideline Trump.

Meanwhile, in South Carolina, election officials said they have received “numerous” questions from citizens. In North Carolina, Gannon said the state election board has “received a high volume of emails and several phone calls regarding the 14th Amendment over the past couple of weeks.”

Small interview group today. They brought up only three players and it was while Lincoln Riley was still talking and then into Alex Grinch's time, so I broke off and went over to Raesjon Davis and got two questions with Kyon Barrs while Jeff stayed with Riley and then got Grinch.

Uploading now ...

This GOP House is just a three ring circus. Defies logic.

Gaetz says impeachment inquiry falls short, threatens to hold votes daily to oust McCarthy​

By Joseph Konig and Corina Cappabianca Washington, D.C.
UPDATED 5:20 PM ET Sep. 12, 2023 PUBLISHED 12:44 PM ET Sep. 12, 2023

Minutes after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., announced an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden’s business dealings, Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz said the probe was not enough to satisfy his desires to use the powers of Congress to wage war on the president’s administration.

The far-right Republican lawmaker said if McCarthy did not give into his demands he would begin the process of ousting the speaker.

“I rise today to serve notice: Mr. Speaker, you are out of compliance with the agreement that allowed you to assume this role,” Gaetz said on the House floor. “The path forward for the House of Representatives is to either bring you into immediate total compliance or remove you pursuant to a motion to vacate the chair.”

“This is a baby step following weeks of pressure from House conservatives to do more. We must move faster,” he added.

On a press call after his remarks on the House floor, Gaetz said he would hold votes to kick McCarthy from leadership every day if necessary.

"We're going to have them regularly. I don't anticipate them passing immediately. But I think that if we have to begin every single day in Congress with the prayer, the pledge and the motion to vacate, then so be it," he said, adding if McCarthy brough a stopgap measure to keep the government funded beyond a Sept. 30 deadline, he would immediately initiate a vote.

Gaetz and others on the right-wing of the House delegation want major spending cuts in any deal with Biden.

Gaetz said he was angered by McCarthy not holding up his end of the bargain that convinced the right-wing of his party to either support his speaker candidacy or not stand in the way. He said he wants votes on term limits and balanced budgets, the release of footage from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, more investigations into Biden’s family -- specifically subpoenas of his son Hunter, who is the focus of the impeachment inquiry -- and the scrapping of a budget deal McCarthy cut with the president earlier this year.

“I will concede that the votes I have called for will likely fail: term limits, balanced budgets, maybe even impeachment,” Gaetz admitted on the House floor. “I am prepared for that eventuality because at least if we take votes, the American people get to see who's fighting for them and who's willing to tolerate more corruption.”

The Florida Republican said on the press call he was unsatisfied with the impeachment inquiry because "I have fallen for this mirage before," pointing to McCarthy's gestures of suppot to a potential impeachment of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, which has not materialized.

"I say it's put up or shut up time, not just for McCarthy," but also for Republican members of Congress who got concessions from the speaker during his election, Gaetz said.

"Because if if we aren't serious about bringing him into compliance with the deal, then we were never really serious about the deal in the first place," he added.

Gaetz said the deal, which has not been made public, could be made available by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, his fellow member of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus. He added the details he provided on the House floor and on the call were all in the agreement with McCarthy.

Earlier Tuesday, Gaetz appeared to take credit for pushing McCarthy to announce the inquiry after spending the weekend attacking the California Republican and threatening to remove him from leadership.

Due to House rules agreed to by McCarthy during the 15 rounds of voting it took to secure his speakership in January, any one member can initiate a vote to vacate, requiring the whole of Congress to vote again on who should lead the chamber. With a slim Republican majority, Gaetz said he would attempt to recruit Democrats to oust McCarthy, though some have already said they won’t join him in his plot.

“A motion to vacate might not pass at first, but it might before the 15th vote,” Gaetz said. “And if Democrats bail out McCarthy as they may do, then I will lead the resistance to this uniparty and the Biden-McCarthy-[House Democratic Leader Hakeem] Jeffries government that they are attempting to build.”

Gaetz declined to say if he spoke with former President Donald Trump, the GOP frontrunner in the 2024 presidential primary, before making his move. Trump has given McCarthy some support, but has urged the speaker to be more aggressive against Biden heading into next year's election. Gaetz is a major booster of Trump's campaign.

One thing Gaetz wants from the speaker is for Republicans to vote on defunding parts of the Department of Justice, including special counsel Jack Smith, who is prosecuting Trump in two criminal cases in Florida and Washington, D.C.

Login to view embedded media

Login to view embedded media
Utah-based linebacker Ephraim Asiata has become a priority target at the position for the Trojans over the last month, and he will get on campus for an official visit to USC this weekend. Asiata, the son of former Utah and NFL running back Matt Asiata, took official visits to Utah and BYU in June and remains focused on those two programs and now USC. Mason Cobb is someone he has leaned on throughout the process, so that gives the Trojans another connection to the three-star recruit. Asiata's relationship with Brian Odom is key in the entire picture, and is truly what led to him wanting to make the visit to LA this week.

I talked with him about the trip tonight, and you can read the full update at the link up top. I didn't include this quote in the story, but this is what he told it was like to receive an offer from USC a little over a month ago.

"We were in meetings at the time, but coach Odom had texted me that he was gonna call me. So I stepped out. We were on the phone for a good five minutes before before he finally offered me. Then, I just went into shock after that. I definitely was messing up my words, and didn't know what to say. It was cool. I just try to keep my mind straight, try not to get too heavy headed with that. I was excited just as much as my family was. I called them right after that and they were all excited. We were all pretty pumped up."

Login to view embedded media

We're collecting the list now, but as a starter, remember it's the OV for Ephraim Asiata:

Does Joe Biden Remember 9/11?​

Noah RothmanSeptember 11, 2023 7:00 PM
President Joe Biden delivers remarks to service members, first responders, and their families on the day of the 22nd anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, September 11, 2023. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)none

Joe Biden’s unsettling lapses are doubtlessly coming with increasing frequency now. The latest occurred in Alaska, where the president and his administration have prioritized promoting a domestic policy initiative over commemorating the anniversary of the September 11 attacks at one of the sites the terrorists targeted. There, Biden said the following:

Login to view embedded media

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday said House Republicans have "uncovered serious and credible allegations into President Biden's conduct" that will serve as the basis of an impeachment inquiry.

McCarthy gave a statement at the Capitol Tuesday detailing allegations of "abuse of power, obstruction and corruption" by Biden. He announced that Republicans would open an official impeachment inquiry into the president.

"Through our investigations, we have found that President Biden did lie to the American people about his own knowledge of his family's foreign business dealings. Eyewitnesses have testified that the president joined on multiple phone calls and had multiple interactions, dinners resulted in cars and millions of dollars into his sons and his son's business partners," McCarthy said.

Earlier, Fox News Digital confirmed that McCarthy will tell House Republicans today that beginning an impeachment inquiry against Biden is the "logical next step" for their investigations. An inquiry is the first step of the impeachment process, where evidence is gathered for the articles, or charges, of impeachment against an official.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

The presidential campaign of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. alleged that the Democratic National Committee is trying to prevent it from challenging President Joe Biden and will allow the incumbent to handily win the 2024 nomination.



In a news release issued this week, former Ohio congressman and Democrat presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich stated that he believes the Democratic National Committee (DNC) "has created a class of pledged delegates, called Party Leaders and Elected Officials, who are essentially the same as superdelegates, due to the amount of control the party exercises over elected officials."

"This puts the DNC, once again, in the position of overturning the will of voters across the United States. It is unclear how overturning the nation's majority vote could be interpreted as trusting the people," Mr. Kucinich, who is serving as Mr. Kennedy's campaign manager, added in the release.

Click to expand...

“The DNC consults closely with Julie Chávez-Rodríguez, Manager of Joe Biden's campaign. Given that, and the DNC’s commitment to neutrality in the primary process, we anticipate that Mr. Harrison will agree to the meeting," he also said.

Click to expand...

Further, he accused the DNC's re-ordering of state primaries in 2024's contest "would discount the votes of millions of Americans and limit the ballot access of millions more to mail-in voting only."

The DNC moved South Carolina to the top of the Democrats' 2024 primary schedule, saying that if states don't abide by the schedule, they could face penalties. Notably, then-candidate Biden's first primary victory during the 2020 contest occurred in South Carolina after he received a key endorsement from Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), a longtime power broker in the state.

It also means that primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada would come second for Democrats after South Carolina, while Georgia would come next after the other states—in early February. New Hampshire state laws stipulate that the Granite State be the first in the nation, and Georgia state law stipulates that it hold Republican and Democrat primaries on the same day. Under the DNC's rules, Georgia's GOP primary would be held on March 12, and its Democrat primary would come on Feb. 13.

For months, Mr. Kennedy has accused the DNC of trying to rig the primaries in favor of President Biden, accusing party officials of showing an unwillingness to hold a debate between him, the president, and other Democratic candidates.

Last week, Mr. Kucinich—who unsuccessfully ran for president as a Democrat in 2004 and 2008—also accused the DNC of essentially rigging the primary during a Fox News interview.

"Mr. Kennedy wants to make sure that every Democrat who votes in a primary, their votes will count, and that if you win a primary, that you win the delegates," Mr. Kucinich told Fox News late last week.

Click to expand...

"I know that sounds like a novel idea, but as Mr. Kennedy has pointed out, the DNC has arranged it so they can put extra delegates and stuff the ballot box in a primary and effectively, even if Mr. Kennedy were to get 60-70 percent, hand the election to Mr. Biden."

Click to expand...

He added:

"You can call this a 'heads we win, tails you lose' approach, and I don't think the American people will buy that."

Click to expand...

The campaign also said Mr. Kucinich sent two letters to the DNC's chairman, Jaime Harrison, requesting a meeting between his team and top DNC officials.

Officials with the DNC have not publicly responded to the Kennedy campaign's latest claims. The Epoch Times has contacted the DNC and Biden campaign for comment Tuesday.

Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Impeachment Timeline Is ‘Absurd’: GOP Rep​

GET REAL

Mark Alfred​

Breaking News Intern
Published Sep. 11, 2023 11:58AM EDT

REUTERS/Brian Snyder​

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-GA) calls for a swift impeachment of President Joe Biden are prompting eye-rolls even among her conservative allies in the house. GOP Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) blasted Greene’s pledge to hold up government funding until an impeachment vote is held, telling MSNBC on Sunday that “the idea that... she is now the expert on impeachment or that she is someone who should set the timing on impeachment is absurd.”

Buck is a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, which booted Greene from its ranks this July following internal strife—but that hasn’t appeared to curb her appetite for impeachment. Buck admitted that there is no evidence as of yet that Biden committed an impeachable offense. “The time for impeachment is the time when … there’s evidence linking President Biden to a high crime or misdemeanor. That doesn’t exist right now,” Buck told MSNBC anchor and former White House press secretary Jen Psaki.

On the show today they will be interviewing DC ALEX GRINCH, Outside WR Dennis Simmons, and RB MarShawn Lloyd.

Georgia special grand jury recommended charges against 39 people, including Sen. Lindsey Graham​

BY KATE BRUMBACK
Updated 5:47 PM CDT, September 8, 2023

There are many reasons Willis might have chosen not to charge all those recommended, including immunity deals with some, federal protections for others or insufficient evidence to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
ATLANTA (AP) — The special grand jury that investigated efforts by Donald Trump and others to overturn Georgia’s 2020 election results recommended indictments against twice as many people as the 19 ultimately charged by prosecutors, leaving South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham among those not indicted.

The grand jurors’ report released Friday showed they recommended racketeering charges against 39 people, including Graham, former U.S. Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia and former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn. Charging recommendations against others included false statements and writings, influencing witnesses and criminal solicitation to commit election fraud.

Released at the request of the special grand jury, the report provides insight into one of the most expansive investigations into Trump, who is also facing two federal indictments along with unrelated state charges in New York City. While critics have accused Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis of launching an unwieldy, overly broad investigation, the report suggests she used her discretion to streamline the case.

Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University who has been closely following the case, speculated that Willis took some of the special grand jury’s vote breakdowns into consideration when deciding who to ultimately go after.

“If you have a jury and a group of folks who have pored over evidence for eight months and there’s still a 50-50 divide or a two-thirds divide ... I don’t think that’s something that you’d look at and say, we have a high probability of a conviction there,” Kreis said.

Of the 19 people ultimately indicted, only one was not included in the special grand jury’s recommendations. A former White House aide who served as the director of Trump’s Election Day operations, Michael Roman, was involved in efforts to put forth a set of fake electors after the 2020 election.

The special grand jury accused Graham and others of violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations law -- a statute most commonly associated with mobsters -- saying they tried to overturn the state’s 2020 election, which Trump, the incumbent Republican, lost to Democrat Joe Biden. The South Carolina senator, who was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger shortly after the November election, and Raffensperger has said Graham asked him whether he had the power to reject certain absentee ballots.

Perdue and Loeffler were sitting U.S. senators who had failed to win enough votes in the November 2020 general election and were forced into a January 2021 runoff, which they ultimately lost to Democratic challengers. In the weeks after Trump lost and they were pushed into runoffs, they cast doubt on the validity of the election results.

In an interview on a right-wing cable news channel in mid-December 2020, Flynn said Trump “could take military capabilities” and place them in swing states and “basically rerun an election in each of those states.” He also traveled in November 2020 to the South Carolina home of conservative lawyer Lin Wood, where Wood has said meetings were held to discuss possible ways to influence the election results in Georgia and elsewhere. The special grand jury also recommended charges for Wood.

Trump, the early front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, blasted the report on his Truth Social site, saying, “They wanted to indict anybody who happened to be breathing at the time.”

Graham, who has denied wrongdoing, said, “It should never be a crime for a federal elected official, particularly the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who will have to vote to certify a presidential election, to question and ensure the integrity of that election.”

Loeffler, who has stayed involved in politics by founding and funding a Republican-aligned group called Greater Georgia, said she was speaking up for people who felt disenfranchised in the 2020 election. “Trying to jail your party’s leading political opponent ahead of 2024 is election interference. Speaking out in defense of election integrity is not,” she said on X, formerly Twitter.

Flynn pointed to his lawyer Jesse Binnall’s post on X: “General Michael Flynn will continue to fight for the truth, for America First principles, and for Donald Trump’s return to The White House in 2024.”

Wood, who testified to the special grand jury, said, “It seems unfair to me that I get smeared as someone that is recommended for indictment when the people with the power to look at the evidence and indict did not indict me.”

Representatives for Perdue didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Does anyone know how many players on offense and defense got 2nd Half reps?

It would also be nice to hear any evaluations on non starters did. Obviously, Duce had his opportunities, but what about other guys? How did they do?

With Alabama falling down in the poll after losing to Texas, USC moves up a spot.

Also, the Pac-12 became just the second conference to place as many as eight teams in an AP Top 25.

USC (5), Washington (8), Utah (12), Oregon (13), Oregon State (16), Colorado (18), Wazzu (23), UCLA (24)