Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
April 10, 2026
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/court-orders-resentencing-for-tina-peters-but-says-trump-cant-pardon-her-state-crimes
I am strong supporter of the First Amendment. I am glad that the conviction was upheld. The same judge will now have to reconsider the sentence because some of Peters' statement may be protected speech. Normally statements made in court are not protected speech and I hope that the sentence is affirmed or at best not reduced materially
Deadline Legal Blog-Court orders resentencing for Tina Peters but says Trump can't pardon her state crimes
Colorado’s appeals court said her lengthy sentence “was based in part on improper consideration of her exercise of her right to free speech.”
Court orders resentencing for Tina Peters but says Trump can’t pardon her state crimes - MS NOW
— (@oc88.bsky.social) 2026-04-04T17:51:53.064Z
apple.news/A8YUuqsUdQ2i...
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/court-orders-resentencing-for-tina-peters-but-says-trump-cant-pardon-her-state-crimes
A Colorado state appeals court on Thursday ordered a new sentencing for Tina Peters in the former county clerk’s 2020 election interference case, reasoning that her almost nine-year term “was based in part on improper consideration of her exercise of her right to free speech.”
It’s a qualified win for Peters, because the appeals court still upheld her trial convictions for attempting to influence a public servant and conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failure to comply with requirements of the secretary of state.
The appeals court also said that President Donald Trump’s attempt to pardon her state crimes has no effect in her favor — the presidential pardon power is for federal crimes — and that she wasn’t immune from prosecution.
But the appeals court agreed with Peters that the trial judge violated her constitutional rights by punishing her for protected speech regarding alleged election fraud. The appeals court said the trial judge’s comments about her belief in the existence of such fraud in the 2020 election “went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing.” .....
The appeals court conceded that many of the trial judge’s statements were completely appropriate, including when it came to the judge’s view that Peters was motivated by self-promotion and self-interest.
“But several specific statements can be read only as the infliction of punishment because of Peters’s beliefs and statements about election fraud. For example, the court noted that her ‘words’ were particularly damaging because of the position of influence she held; and it noted that every time her beliefs were refuted, she would make a new claim,” the appeals court said. It sent the case back for a new sentencing but rejected Peters’ request to assign it to a different judge.
It’s a qualified win for Peters, because the appeals court still upheld her trial convictions for attempting to influence a public servant and conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failure to comply with requirements of the secretary of state.
The appeals court also said that President Donald Trump’s attempt to pardon her state crimes has no effect in her favor — the presidential pardon power is for federal crimes — and that she wasn’t immune from prosecution.
But the appeals court agreed with Peters that the trial judge violated her constitutional rights by punishing her for protected speech regarding alleged election fraud. The appeals court said the trial judge’s comments about her belief in the existence of such fraud in the 2020 election “went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing.” .....
The appeals court conceded that many of the trial judge’s statements were completely appropriate, including when it came to the judge’s view that Peters was motivated by self-promotion and self-interest.
“But several specific statements can be read only as the infliction of punishment because of Peters’s beliefs and statements about election fraud. For example, the court noted that her ‘words’ were particularly damaging because of the position of influence she held; and it noted that every time her beliefs were refuted, she would make a new claim,” the appeals court said. It sent the case back for a new sentencing but rejected Peters’ request to assign it to a different judge.
I am strong supporter of the First Amendment. I am glad that the conviction was upheld. The same judge will now have to reconsider the sentence because some of Peters' statement may be protected speech. Normally statements made in court are not protected speech and I hope that the sentence is affirmed or at best not reduced materially
April 10, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/hegseth-2676695364/
This judge is pissed
Judge hammers Hegseth for trying to sneak illegal press rules back in
Hegseth's "new" press rules were the same rules as before. Hegseth ignored the Court's ruling and this Judge was pissed.
A federal judge smacked down Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's new attempt to write rules for Pentagon correspondents, concluding that the department has once again infringed on the First Amendment.
— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-04-09T22:50:54.961Z
https://www.rawstory.com/hegseth-2676695364/
A federal judge smacked down Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's new attempt to write rules for Pentagon correspondents, concluding that the department has once again infringed on the First Amendment.
The issue stems from a controversial policy issued by the Pentagon that requires reporters to commit not to publish anything leaked in violation of department policy as a condition of obtaining credentials. This rule caused every mainstream news outlet, and even most right-wing news outlets, to pull out of the press pool, leaving just a group of far-right bloggers and MAGA activists.
Last month, U.S. Senior District Judge Paul Friedman ruled this was not allowed. However, plaintiffs challenging the policy asserted that the Pentagon's "interim" policy effectively violated the terms of Friedman's order — and in a lengthy, scathing ruling issued on Thursday, Friedman agreed.
"The problem for the defendants ... is that the Department has not in fact taken 'new' action, at least with respect to the proscription on the 'inducement of unauthorized disclosure,'" wrote Friedman. "To the contrary, as explained in detail below, that proscription contained in the Interim Policy amounts to — in the Department’s words — a 'clarification' of the prohibitions contained in the original Policy that this Court held to be unconstitutional ... The Department cannot simply reinstate an unlawful policy under the guise of taking 'new' action and expect the Court to look the other way."
The "interim" policy limiting what journalists can write about the Pentagon, he wrote, constitutes “the mark of an autocracy, not a democracy.”
"The Court cannot conclude this Opinion without noting once again what this case is really about: the attempt by the Secretary of Defense to dictate the information received by the American people, to control the message so that the public hears and sees only what the Secretary and the Trump Administration want them to hear and see," he wrote. "The Constitution demands better. The American public demands better, too."
The issue stems from a controversial policy issued by the Pentagon that requires reporters to commit not to publish anything leaked in violation of department policy as a condition of obtaining credentials. This rule caused every mainstream news outlet, and even most right-wing news outlets, to pull out of the press pool, leaving just a group of far-right bloggers and MAGA activists.
Last month, U.S. Senior District Judge Paul Friedman ruled this was not allowed. However, plaintiffs challenging the policy asserted that the Pentagon's "interim" policy effectively violated the terms of Friedman's order — and in a lengthy, scathing ruling issued on Thursday, Friedman agreed.
"The problem for the defendants ... is that the Department has not in fact taken 'new' action, at least with respect to the proscription on the 'inducement of unauthorized disclosure,'" wrote Friedman. "To the contrary, as explained in detail below, that proscription contained in the Interim Policy amounts to — in the Department’s words — a 'clarification' of the prohibitions contained in the original Policy that this Court held to be unconstitutional ... The Department cannot simply reinstate an unlawful policy under the guise of taking 'new' action and expect the Court to look the other way."
The "interim" policy limiting what journalists can write about the Pentagon, he wrote, constitutes “the mark of an autocracy, not a democracy.”
"The Court cannot conclude this Opinion without noting once again what this case is really about: the attempt by the Secretary of Defense to dictate the information received by the American people, to control the message so that the public hears and sees only what the Secretary and the Trump Administration want them to hear and see," he wrote. "The Constitution demands better. The American public demands better, too."
This judge is pissed
April 10, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/judge-rejects-pentagon-effort-to-restrict-press-access-says-it-smacks-of-autocracy
MaddowBlog-Judge rejects Pentagon effort to restrict press access, says it smacks of 'autocracy'
The Defense Department keeps trying to impose unnecessary limits on journalists. It keeps losing in court.
Judge rejects Pentagon effort to restrict press access, says it smacks of ‘autocracy’
— EUROPE SAYS (@europesays.bsky.social) 2026-04-10T16:00:21+00:00
https://www.europesays.com/2909851/
The first time Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon tried to impose restrictions on the free press, it lost…
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/judge-rejects-pentagon-effort-to-restrict-press-access-says-it-smacks-of-autocracy
The first time Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon tried to impose restrictions on the free press, it lost in court. When the Defense Department tried again, it failed again. Politico reported:
The problem began in earnest last fall when Hegseth and his team, as part of a larger offensive against journalism at the Pentagon, told news organizations that reporters wouldn’t be allowed to cover the department unless they agreed only to report information, including unclassified information, authorized for release by the administration.....
Last month, Friedman ruled against the Pentagon’s restrictive press access policy, concluding that it violated the First Amendment and granted the government overly broad authority to control the press corps’ access. The court decision fueled some hope that conditions at the Defense Department might return to normal.
Those hopes were soon dashed. Hegseth’s team responded to the ruling by imposing new limits on media organizations, including closing a workspace used for years by journalists.
The case quickly went back to court, and the Pentagon lost again.
A federal judge has rejected Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s renewed effort to restrict press access to the Pentagon, calling it an attempt to dictate media coverage that smacks of ‘an autocracy, not a democracy.’
‘The curtailment of First Amendment rights is dangerous at any time, and even more so in time of war,’ U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman wrote Thursday. ‘The Constitution demands better. The American public demands better, too.’
The problem began in earnest last fall when Hegseth and his team, as part of a larger offensive against journalism at the Pentagon, told news organizations that reporters wouldn’t be allowed to cover the department unless they agreed only to report information, including unclassified information, authorized for release by the administration.....
Last month, Friedman ruled against the Pentagon’s restrictive press access policy, concluding that it violated the First Amendment and granted the government overly broad authority to control the press corps’ access. The court decision fueled some hope that conditions at the Defense Department might return to normal.
Those hopes were soon dashed. Hegseth’s team responded to the ruling by imposing new limits on media organizations, including closing a workspace used for years by journalists.
The case quickly went back to court, and the Pentagon lost again.
April 10, 2026
Vance was not in favor in this war but gave in to trump. Now Vance has to negotiate the real terms of the cease fire. Witkoff and Kushner will not be on any help.
Vance is headed to negotiations with Iran
White House officials say the vice president’s private dissent on the Iran war has cost him influence — even as he heads to Islamabad to negotiate a lasting ceasefire.
https://x.com/Frost16Frost/status/2042602015830819304
https://www.ms.now/news/vance-iran-war-ceasefire-talks-islamabad
Vice President JD Vance heads to Islamabad this weekend in a precarious position: hoping to negotiate a lasting end to a war in Iran he never wanted.
Vance has privately voiced opposition to the war for weeks — to Donald Trump and top White House aides — even as the president has pursued an aggressive military campaign, according to two White House officials granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal dynamics. Now he will lead the U.S. delegation in ceasefire talks with Iran — perhaps the highest-stakes assignment of his political career.....
Vance’s skepticism of foreign entanglements is no secret: He has long opposed U.S. military interventionism, and his unease with the Iran war is widely understood inside the administration.
That skepticism could actually be “advantageous” in the talks, according to a former Trump White House official familiar with internal dynamics. Negotiators on both sides are likely to believe that Vance genuinely wants a permanent ceasefire — which could lend credibility to the American position. ....
Vance, alongside Witkoff and Kushner, is set to meet with Iranian counterparts Saturday in Islamabad for in-person negotiations — the first such talks since a fragile ceasefire took hold.
Vance has privately voiced opposition to the war for weeks — to Donald Trump and top White House aides — even as the president has pursued an aggressive military campaign, according to two White House officials granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal dynamics. Now he will lead the U.S. delegation in ceasefire talks with Iran — perhaps the highest-stakes assignment of his political career.....
Vance’s skepticism of foreign entanglements is no secret: He has long opposed U.S. military interventionism, and his unease with the Iran war is widely understood inside the administration.
That skepticism could actually be “advantageous” in the talks, according to a former Trump White House official familiar with internal dynamics. Negotiators on both sides are likely to believe that Vance genuinely wants a permanent ceasefire — which could lend credibility to the American position. ....
Vance, alongside Witkoff and Kushner, is set to meet with Iranian counterparts Saturday in Islamabad for in-person negotiations — the first such talks since a fragile ceasefire took hold.
Vance was not in favor in this war but gave in to trump. Now Vance has to negotiate the real terms of the cease fire. Witkoff and Kushner will not be on any help.
April 10, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/u-s-inflation-surged-in-march-pushed-higher-by-the-effects-of-the-war-in-iran
MaddowBlog- U.S. inflation surged in March, pushed higher by the effects of the war in Iran
Trump told the public last week that there’s been “no inflation.” That was absurd at the time, and it’s worse now.
Trump, in his national address last week: There’s been “no inflation.â€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-04-10T13:05:41.803Z
Reality, this week: Yeah, about that....
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/u-s-inflation-surged-in-march-pushed-higher-by-the-effects-of-the-war-in-iran
On Thursday, core personal consumption expenditures price index, which is closely watched by the Federal Reserve to gauge inflation, offered more discouraging news. On Friday morning, things looked even worse. CNBC reported:
The data was entirely in line with expectations, but that won’t matter much to American consumers who are struggling with the highest CPI in two years. What’s more, inflation in March showed the highest one-month increase in prices in roughly four years, when oil prices spiked following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The price of gasoline, meanwhile, saw its largest one-month increase since 1967.
Consumer prices spiked in March as the Iran war sent energy costs soaring and took the Federal Reserve further from its inflation target, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report Friday. Underlying inflation, however, was relatively tame.
The consumer price index increased a seasonally adjusted 0.9% for the month, putting the annual inflation rate at 3.3%, pushed by a 10.9% surge in energy costs.
The data was entirely in line with expectations, but that won’t matter much to American consumers who are struggling with the highest CPI in two years. What’s more, inflation in March showed the highest one-month increase in prices in roughly four years, when oil prices spiked following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The price of gasoline, meanwhile, saw its largest one-month increase since 1967.
April 10, 2026
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/breaking-another-statement-from-melania
The Borowitz Report-BREAKING: Another Statement From Melania
BREAKING: Another Statement From Melania
— Powderkeg (@gloriapissedoff.bsky.social) 2026-04-10T13:09:46.583Z
open.substack.com/pub/borowitz...
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/breaking-another-statement-from-melania
BREAKING: In the early hours of Friday, when everyone else at the White House was fast asleep, Melania Trump made the following statement:
Good morning.
The lies linking me with the disgraceful Donald J. Trump need to end today.
The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather, I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation by linking me to the most hated man on the planet.
He be worst.
I have never been friends with Trump. I was invited to the same parties as him from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach. When I saw him at one of those parties, I realized it was a party full of grifters and low-lifes, and immediately left.
To be clear, I never had a relationship with Trump or his accomplices, JD Vance, Pete Hegseth, and especially Stephen Miller. The thought of having a relationship with any of them makes me want to hurl.
Numerous fake images and statements about Trump and me have been circulating on social media for years now. Be cautious about what you believe. These images and stories are completely false.
I am not a witness or a named witness in connection with any of Trump’s crimes. I was never involved in any capacity—I was not a participant, was never on Trump’s plane, and never visited his hideous Palm Beach club.
The false smears linking me to Trump from mean-spirited and politically motivated individuals and entities looking to cause damage to my good name to gain financially and climb politically must stop.
Now is the time for Congress to act. Trump is not alone. To commit his crimes he has had the help not only of the toadies in his Cabinet but from a pack of slimy oligarchs such as Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeff Bezos. I call for thorough, Nuremberg-style hearings to bring all of these despicable traitors to justice.
Then, and only then, will we have the truth.
Good morning.
The lies linking me with the disgraceful Donald J. Trump need to end today.
The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather, I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation by linking me to the most hated man on the planet.
He be worst.
I have never been friends with Trump. I was invited to the same parties as him from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach. When I saw him at one of those parties, I realized it was a party full of grifters and low-lifes, and immediately left.
To be clear, I never had a relationship with Trump or his accomplices, JD Vance, Pete Hegseth, and especially Stephen Miller. The thought of having a relationship with any of them makes me want to hurl.
Numerous fake images and statements about Trump and me have been circulating on social media for years now. Be cautious about what you believe. These images and stories are completely false.
I am not a witness or a named witness in connection with any of Trump’s crimes. I was never involved in any capacity—I was not a participant, was never on Trump’s plane, and never visited his hideous Palm Beach club.
The false smears linking me to Trump from mean-spirited and politically motivated individuals and entities looking to cause damage to my good name to gain financially and climb politically must stop.
Now is the time for Congress to act. Trump is not alone. To commit his crimes he has had the help not only of the toadies in his Cabinet but from a pack of slimy oligarchs such as Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeff Bezos. I call for thorough, Nuremberg-style hearings to bring all of these despicable traitors to justice.
Then, and only then, will we have the truth.
April 9, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/the-problems-with-the-white-house-using-foreign-steel-for-its-ballroom-project
MaddowBlog-The problem(s) with the White House using foreign steel for its ballroom project
This might seem like a simple story about hypocrisy, but a closer look suggests an even more important element.
The problem(s) with the White House using foreign steel for its ballroom project
— Erics_Mom 💙🌊 (@ericsmom2006.bsky.social) 2026-04-09T16:56:50.707Z
This might seem like a simple story about hypocrisy, but a closer look suggests an even more important element.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/the-problems-with-the-white-house-using-foreign-steel-for-its-ballroom-project
To the extent that Donald Trump’s social media platform reflects the president’s priorities, it’s tempting to think he cares a great deal about the domestic steel industry. In fact, just a month into his second term, he published an item complaining about the U.S. steel industry having been “decimated by global actors.”....
As is often the case, however, there seems to be a gap between the president’s public posturing and his private decisions. The New York Times reported:
....At first blush, this might appear to be a simple story about hypocrisy: Trump claims to champion U.S. steel, but given a chance to use it for his beloved ballroom, the Republican turned to the same foreign product he’s previously denounced.
But look closer at the story and a more controversial angle emerges.
Last fall at an event for ballroom donors, the president boasted that a “great steel company” had reached out to him about making a generous gift.
“He said, ‘Sir, I’d like to donate the steel for your ballroom,’” Trump told his audience, without identifying the person he allegedly spoke to. “I said, ‘Whoa, that’s nice.’ And I found out — ‘How much is the steel?’ I called the contractor. ‘Sir, it’s down for $37 million.’ I said, ‘This is a nice donation, right?’”
The president went on to assure his event’s attendees that this would be “great steel as opposed to garbage steel, because they dump a lot of garbage around. You know, steel is like everything else, including human beings. Steel could be high quality, and it can be low quality. He wants to make sure it’s high quality.”
What Trump neglected to mention was he was apparently referring to ArcelorMittal, a Luxembourg-based firm, which is donating steel produced in Europe for the structure of the ballroom project, according to the Times.....
A White House official suggested it was a coincidence that the donation and the tariff exemption happened within a few days of each other. Of course, if Team Trump, which has long struggled with allegations of systemic corruption, believes it’s earned the benefit of the doubt, it’s mistaken.
As is often the case, however, there seems to be a gap between the president’s public posturing and his private decisions. The New York Times reported:
President Trump has championed the U.S. steel industry, promising to strengthen it and to impose stiff tariffs on foreign metals to shield manufacturers from overseas competitors.
Yet the White House has secured tens of millions of dollars worth of donated foreign steel for Mr. Trump’s $400 million ballroom project, according to two people familiar with the plans who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive and private conversations.
....At first blush, this might appear to be a simple story about hypocrisy: Trump claims to champion U.S. steel, but given a chance to use it for his beloved ballroom, the Republican turned to the same foreign product he’s previously denounced.
But look closer at the story and a more controversial angle emerges.
Last fall at an event for ballroom donors, the president boasted that a “great steel company” had reached out to him about making a generous gift.
“He said, ‘Sir, I’d like to donate the steel for your ballroom,’” Trump told his audience, without identifying the person he allegedly spoke to. “I said, ‘Whoa, that’s nice.’ And I found out — ‘How much is the steel?’ I called the contractor. ‘Sir, it’s down for $37 million.’ I said, ‘This is a nice donation, right?’”
The president went on to assure his event’s attendees that this would be “great steel as opposed to garbage steel, because they dump a lot of garbage around. You know, steel is like everything else, including human beings. Steel could be high quality, and it can be low quality. He wants to make sure it’s high quality.”
What Trump neglected to mention was he was apparently referring to ArcelorMittal, a Luxembourg-based firm, which is donating steel produced in Europe for the structure of the ballroom project, according to the Times.....
A White House official suggested it was a coincidence that the donation and the tariff exemption happened within a few days of each other. Of course, if Team Trump, which has long struggled with allegations of systemic corruption, believes it’s earned the benefit of the doubt, it’s mistaken.
April 9, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/melania-trump-2676691830
Data expert delivers 'absolutely awful' news to Melania Trump: 'People don't care'
Melania is the least popular First Lady in the history of the US
First lady Melania Trump got some bad news on Thursday, courtesy of CNN data analyst Harry Enten: the American people dislike her more than any other first lady since polling on the topic began.
— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-04-09T19:00:47Z
https://www.rawstory.com/melania-trump-2676691830
First lady Melania Trump got some bad news on Thursday, courtesy of CNN data analyst Harry Enten: the American people dislike her more than any other first lady since polling on the topic began....
"Yeah, I would say that the American people really don't care for Melania Trump," said Enten, a reference to the infamous jacket she wore when touring a migrant detention facility in the first Trump administration.
"Take a look at this, all right?" said Enten. "Let's take a look at Melania Trump's net favorable ratings. Look at this. The lowest ever. The lowest ever. We're talking about, now, 12 points underwater. If you go back a little bit more than a year ago, she was three points above water. You go back at this point about this point in time, number one for Donald Trump, look at that, she was 30 points above water. So at this point, historic lows for Melania Trump. These numbers are absolutely awful."
"One of the questions is why why the shift now?" asked Bolduan. "But also, I guess, just looking, you need to look at this always in the historical context of how does she line up against other first ladies?"
"If we look at this historically, the worst ever, the worst ever at this point in term number two," said Enten. "Look at this. We got her at 12 points underwater. Look at the rest of these first ladies on the board right here. They're all way above water, 42 points above water for Michelle Obama, 46 above water for Laura Bush, 25 points above water for Hillary Clinton, who always — was not always the most popular, and 50 points above water for Nancy Reagan. And I even looked at Jill Biden's numbers at this point. And that presidency, of course, that was term one. She was above water as well. So this is the worst at this point in a presidency as well.,"
"Yeah, I would say that the American people really don't care for Melania Trump," said Enten, a reference to the infamous jacket she wore when touring a migrant detention facility in the first Trump administration.
"Take a look at this, all right?" said Enten. "Let's take a look at Melania Trump's net favorable ratings. Look at this. The lowest ever. The lowest ever. We're talking about, now, 12 points underwater. If you go back a little bit more than a year ago, she was three points above water. You go back at this point about this point in time, number one for Donald Trump, look at that, she was 30 points above water. So at this point, historic lows for Melania Trump. These numbers are absolutely awful."
"One of the questions is why why the shift now?" asked Bolduan. "But also, I guess, just looking, you need to look at this always in the historical context of how does she line up against other first ladies?"
"If we look at this historically, the worst ever, the worst ever at this point in term number two," said Enten. "Look at this. We got her at 12 points underwater. Look at the rest of these first ladies on the board right here. They're all way above water, 42 points above water for Michelle Obama, 46 above water for Laura Bush, 25 points above water for Hillary Clinton, who always — was not always the most popular, and 50 points above water for Nancy Reagan. And I even looked at Jill Biden's numbers at this point. And that presidency, of course, that was term one. She was above water as well. So this is the worst at this point in a presidency as well.,"
April 9, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/leading-white-house-economist-points-to-employment-boom-that-clearly-hasnt-happened
MaddowBlog-Leading White House economist points to 'employment boom' that clearly hasn't happened
A variety of words come to mind to describe the sharp decline in the Trump-era job market. “Boom” isn’t one of them.
Kevin Hassett, the top economist in the Trump White House, said with a straight face that there’s been “an employment boom.â€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-04-09T18:20:51.418Z
I know I should shrug off such nonsense, but I just couldn’t let this go.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/leading-white-house-economist-points-to-employment-boom-that-clearly-hasnt-happened
During Kevin Hassett’s latest appearance on Fox Business, the director of the National Economic Council got an earful from host Larry Kudlow about the state of the economy. (This was, incidentally, a rare instance in which the top economist in Donald Trump’s White House from his first term interviewed the top economist in Trump’s second term.)
....Right off the bat, while it’s true that a 4.3% unemployment rate is, in historical terms, quite low, it’s also true that when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, the same jobless rate was 4%. In other words, nearly a year and a half after the Republican administration got to work implementing its economic agenda, the unemployment rate has gotten worse, not better, making this an awkward subject for Trump loyalists to brag about......
What’s more, the unemployment rate isn’t the only relevant metric: According to the latest data released last week by the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. economy has added 321,000 jobs over Trump’s 15-month second term. Over the previous 15 months, however, the economy added roughly 1.9 million jobs.
A variety of words come to mind to describe such a sharp decline in the U.S. job market. “Boom” isn’t one of them.
Finally, the back-and-forth between Hassett and Kudlow seemed to miss the point entirely. If the two more recent Republican directors of the National Economic Council want to take a moment to explain why the unemployment rate has gotten worse, or why job growth has slowed so dramatically, they’re welcome to make their best pitch.
Instead, as polls show the public souring quickly on the president’s handling of the economy, the Republican economists pretended that failure deserves to be seen as success. If they hoped such happy talk would impress the American mainstream, they’re likely to be disappointed.
Kudlow to Hassett: "The unemployment rate is 4.3%, for heaven's sake! That's a boom, for God's sake!"
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-04-08T20:27:16.905Z
(The unemployment rate was 4% when Biden left office)
....Right off the bat, while it’s true that a 4.3% unemployment rate is, in historical terms, quite low, it’s also true that when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, the same jobless rate was 4%. In other words, nearly a year and a half after the Republican administration got to work implementing its economic agenda, the unemployment rate has gotten worse, not better, making this an awkward subject for Trump loyalists to brag about......
What’s more, the unemployment rate isn’t the only relevant metric: According to the latest data released last week by the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. economy has added 321,000 jobs over Trump’s 15-month second term. Over the previous 15 months, however, the economy added roughly 1.9 million jobs.
A variety of words come to mind to describe such a sharp decline in the U.S. job market. “Boom” isn’t one of them.
Finally, the back-and-forth between Hassett and Kudlow seemed to miss the point entirely. If the two more recent Republican directors of the National Economic Council want to take a moment to explain why the unemployment rate has gotten worse, or why job growth has slowed so dramatically, they’re welcome to make their best pitch.
Instead, as polls show the public souring quickly on the president’s handling of the economy, the Republican economists pretended that failure deserves to be seen as success. If they hoped such happy talk would impress the American mainstream, they’re likely to be disappointed.
April 9, 2026
https://x.com/DemocraticDeb/status/2042342191071101022
Labor secretary faces discrimination complaints tied to her husband's alleged misconduct
Source: MS NOW
At least three people have lodged formal workplace discrimination complaints against Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, alleging she created a toxic workplace and sought to retaliate against women who reported her husband for sexual misconduct in her office, according to two sources familiar with the allegations.
Two of the complaints were filed by young female staffers who have alleged that Chavez-DeRemer’s husband, Dr. Shawn DeRemer, subjected them to unwanted sexual touching late last year when they were working at U.S. Department of Labor offices.
MS NOW is not sharing the names of the two women to protect their identities during ongoing investigations of their claims. The Department of Labor, Lori Chavez-DeRemer and Shawn DeRemer did not immediately return requests for comment.
The allegations, filed as Equal Employment Opportunity complaints, portray Chavez-DeRemer as an agency leader who fostered a hostile workplace where staff feared punishment for speaking out or resisting directives they considered inappropriate. One of the complaints says the Labor Secretary also directed staff to perform personal chores for her, including cleaning out one of her clothing closets, according to one of the sources.
Read more: https://www.ms.now/news/labor-secretary-discrimination-complaints-misconduct-husband
https://x.com/DemocraticDeb/status/2042342191071101022
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 04:58 PMNumber of posts: 180,275