Sen. Tuberville: Biden and Harris must protect Trump as much as they can

lead image

White House rejects Trump’s accusations of violent rhetoric

lead image

Democrats have spent much of the 2024 campaign reminding Americans of what happened on Jan. 6, 2021. But on Capitol Hill, some are already growing concerned about Jan. 6, 2025.

They are hoping that Kamala Harris will win in November and they’ll flip the House, too — meaning it would likely be Hakeem Jeffries holding the speaker's gavel as the process of certifying a Harris victory gets underway.

But it’s another scenario that is nagging top House Democrats — that Speaker Mike Johnson might keep his majority as Harris wins and find himself in a position where he could obstruct the counting of electoral votes and possibly throw the election to the House under the constitutional provisions of the 12th Amendment.

Johnson, after all, led House Republicans in filing an amicus brief after the 2020 election asking the Supreme Court to essentially overturn swing-state results, an effort personally blessed by Donald Trump. Now, he’s leading a charge suggesting that undocumented immigrants are voting en masse in what Democrats view as a coordinated effort to sow doubt in the election and lay the groundwork for mischief.

“It would be silly to ignore the history here,” said Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee who has led his party’s pushback on GOP voting claims.

Adding to the anxiety is that Johnson, in the post-election period, might also be in a leadership dogfight where he might be compelled to prove his mettle to MAGA-minded members — not to mention Trump himself — by pledging to challenge the election results.

A Johnson aide dismissed the Democratic concerns as an attempt to raise money to flip the House and said they were part of an alarmist narrative that helped lead to the two assassination attempts targeting Trump.

Other Republicans close with Johnson told us they doubted the speaker would succumb to Trump’s wishes so easily. They noted he withstood MAGA pressure on Ukraine funding, and they drew a distinction between writing a legal brief as a back-bencher and moving to overturn the will of voters as a constitutional officer.

Other roadblocks are in place, as well: For one, it will be Harris, as vice president, who will actually preside over the certification of electoral votes, as Mike Pence famously did in 2021. And under a 2022 rewrite of the Electoral Count Act, the law governing the process, it’s now much harder to object to the counting of votes. Rather than a single member, it now requires 20 percent of each chamber to proceed with an objection.

Yet Democrats are still fearful, fretting over unresolved ambiguities in the Constitution and in the law surrounding the certification process, as well as the fact that Johnson could be in charge for Republicans come Jan. 6.

They fear his constitutional-law background, conservative movement bona fides and aw-shucks demeanor could make him uniquely formidable in a contested-election scenario — sharp enough to come up with novel legal arguments that could throw the election to the House and savvy enough to get his members on board.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the Democratic constitutional law expert who tangled with Johnson over his 2020 brief, paraphrased the ancient Greek poet Hesiod: “He has the muses say something like, ‘We know how to tell the truth when we want to tell the truth. And when we want to tell lies, we know how to tell lies that seem like the truth.’ And that's how I view Johnson’s jurisprudence.”

“He can state what the Constitution really says — and then he knows how to make polished arguments for Trump that are utterly false and would gut our constitutional system,” Raskin (D-Md.) said.

While Raskin and other Democrats were loath to speculate about how exactly Johnson and other Republicans could possibly wreak electoral havoc after voting is done, the following concerns have circulated on Capitol Hill:

— That Johnson could try to rewrite the rules that govern the Jan. 6 vote-counting session. For the past century or so, the two chambers have unanimously adopted boilerplate, bipartisan procedures for the count. Johnson could decide to try to write his own, inserting provisions that would open up new avenues to challenge the results, or simply refuse to adopt a process at all, creating ambiguity and doubt.

— That Johnson could muster enough Republicans to object to certain contested slates of electors — and, if the GOP also holds the Senate, possibly gather the votes to throw those slates out. If neither candidate receives 270 electoral votes, the House could have authority under the 12th Amendment to choose the winner.

— That Johnson could delay the vote-counting session. While the Jan. 6 date is written in law, it’s the speaker who has to call the House to order first. Democrats worry that Johnson could essentially push pause — much as Trump allies worried after the 2020 election that then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi might do the same and go to the courts. (A related fear: What if there is no speaker at all on Jan. 6 — as there was two years ago, when Kevin McCarthy was struggling to win the gavel?)

— That Johnson could challenge the Electoral Count Act entirely. Under a novel legal theory, he could ask a court to rule that the law on the books cannot bind Congress from exercising its power under the Constitution — again defaulting to the process laid out in the 12th Amendment.

Democratic suspicions about Johnson are nothing new. When Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) moved earlier this year to kick Johnson out as speaker, Democrats faced a dilemma on whether to protect him on a key procedural vote. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the House select Jan. 6 panel, warned her colleagues to think carefully before helping a man they’ve derided as an “election denier.”

Most Democrats, including Lofgren, swallowed their concerns and voted to keep Johnson. Now some fear that warning will be ringing in their ears. Just hours after the vote, Johnson told POLITICO he had no regrets about his 2020 amicus brief: “I would do the exact same thing today if the circumstances were presented, because I feel like I have a duty.”

“The Supreme Court dodged the question — perhaps they calculated that the answer was so profound, it would be so unsettling, and it was not worth them addressing,” he said. “But … I thought that was an important question to pose to the court.”

Jeffries blessed the decision to protect Johnson, and some Democrats are looking to him to intervene with Johnson and head off any post-election drama. The two leaders have struck up a surprisingly warm personal and professional relationship, and Johnson has previously spoken about their shared faith and rapport.

One Johnson ally also pointed out that Johnson is also close with Pence, another conservative Christian who fell out of Trump’s favor when refused to do his bidding on Jan. 6, 2021. This person predicted that while Johnson would try to stay in MAGA’s good graces after the election, he would not go rogue in the way Democrats fear.

Again, these worst-case scenarios are all quite unlikely — starting with the improbability of a situation where Harris wins and Republicans have majorities in both chambers. But the chances for havoc during the electoral vote count four years ago seemed unthinkable, too.

So Democrats aren’t leaving anything to chance. Senior lawmakers are already privately meeting to game-plan for all the different ways the post-election period could go sideways. They’re also raising their worries with donors, urging them to give generously to make sure the party flips the House and nips any potential drama in the bud.

“I have faith in people,” Morelle said, sharing his belief that Johnson would “do the right thing” in a contested scenario. “But we’re prepared for any eventuality and … we’ll be in a position to press forward and make sure there’s a peaceful transfer.”

Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.

Like this content? Sign up for POLITICO's Playbook newsletter.

© Francis Chung/POLITICO

In the aftermath of the apparent second attempted assassination on former President Donald Trump, the Chicago Police Department has honed its attention on Trump International Hotel and Tower, located in downtown Chicago.

A spokesperson for the Chicago Police Department said the agency doesn't divulge the exact number of patrols but acknowledged that they are giving Trump’s flagship Illinois property “special attention with the appropriate resources.”

Security at Mar-a-Lago has also been increased, but the day after a man was apprehended at Trump’s Palm Beach golf course, it's unclear whether additional security measures had been taken at the former president’s golf courses, hotels and residential towers across the country.

POLITICO reached out to nine properties in five states — and most of them did not return requests for comment or said the security level has not changed. The uncertain nature of any additional security protocols at the businesses Trump owns — and often frequents himself — is an important data point in the conversation about whether he should receive increased security, given the recent threats to his life.

The Secret Service — which has come under fire for its handling of the first attempted assassination on Trump at a July rally — partners with local law enforcement to carry out security plans to protect the nation’s most important political leaders.

In New York City, the New York Police Department was a visible presence Monday morning around Trump Tower with several marked police vehicles parked around the perimeter of the skyscraper and uniformed officers at the entrance. Pedestrians and tourists, however, were permitted to walk past and pose for photos at the entrance as usual.

Requests to NYPD spokespeople about increased or enhanced security at Trump Tower and other properties in New York City were not returned. Requests to Trump Organization attorney Alan Garten about the same were also not returned.

There has been no increased security by the Los Angeles County sheriff, which oversees law enforcement at Rancho Palos Verdes, the city where Trump National Golf Club is located. Trump held a press conference at the course on Friday. The watch commander at the sheriff’s Lomita station told POLITICO that neither the club nor Secret Service has requested additional measures. The club’s general manager did not return a call requesting comment.

A Bedminster police spokesperson said: "We just cannot speak to anything on security at or around the property."

Requests for comment at Trump’s properties in Nevada, Virginia, Florida and Washington, D.C., were not returned.

Acting Director of the Secret Service Ronald Rowe Jr., speaking at a press conference Monday, defended the level of security provided for Trump as the president engaged in an “off the record” round of golf, meaning that the former president’s schedule was not made public.

“What we did yesterday was exercise our emergency plan based on the number of tactical assets and the highest level of protection that we are providing,” Rowe said.

Following the attempted assassination on Trump at a Pennsylvania rally in July, Rowe said he ordered a “paradigm shift” that worked on Sunday when Secret Service officials spotted a man with a gun along the Mar-a-Lago golf course.

“But the way we are positioned right now in this dynamic threat environment, it has given me guidance to say, you know what, we need to look at what our protective methodology is,” he said.

Dustin Racioppi, Melanie Mason, Gary Fineout and Paul Demko contributed to this report.

© Francis Chung/POLITICO

The toxic political climate and a complex web of threats — punctuated by Sunday’s apparent assassination attempt on Donald Trump — is putting an extraordinary strain on the national security officials tasked with safeguarding American democracy.

Security experts say sharp polarization and increasingly hateful political rhetoric — fanned by foreign adversaries and supercharged by social media — have combined to test the nation’s ability to protect its candidates and institutions.

“The 2024 presidential election is taking place at a time when the U.S. is facing the most complex, dynamic, and dangerous threat environment I’ve experienced in the 40-plus years that I’ve been working in law enforcement, homeland security, and national security,” said John Cohen, a former senior Homeland Security intelligence and counterterrorism official.

“We’re facing cyber, physical, and other threats by foreign and domestic threat actors, and what’s different today is how they have fully embraced the power of the internet,” Cohen added.

He said security and law enforcement professionals have been slow to adapt to these changes.

After Sunday’s incident, Republicans were quick to call for increased security measures for the former president.

Other factors have combined to drive up the intensity of the moment: the emergence and surprising political strength of Kamala Harris, the first woman of color to lead a national ticket, after President Joe Biden dropped his reelection bid; the compressed election calendar resulting from Harris’ late entry into the race; the pileup of criminal charges that Trump has battled for a year; and election meddling by Iran (through hacking) and Russia (through disinformation).

Though every recent election cycle has featured some of these challenges, especially foreign interference, rarely has there been a moment when they’ve all collided at once — requiring the Secret Service to weigh a daunting blend of foreign and domestic threats.

John Sandweg, a partner at Nixon Peabody and former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, called the 2024 cycle “an unprecedented time, at least in modern history, in terms of the demands that are on their resources.”

Election season is always challenging for the Secret Service because agents must protect people who are barnstorming the country — so while they guard Trump on his golf course, they must also plan ahead for rallies, campaign stops, and other appearances in unfamiliar venues that raise unique security concerns. The failures that allowed one would-be assassin’s bullet to strike Trump’s ear at a July rally in Butler, Pa., have been a constant reminder that the vaunted agency can still simply screw up.

Ryan Williams, a former aide to Mitt Romney who worked on his presidential bids, said in an interview that the violence directed toward Trump is like nothing he’s seen in his lifetime and that he fears the attempts on the former president’s life could inspire copycat shooters.

“We could potentially see that now in politics,” Williams said. “It’s scary because you can’t protect everybody in politics. There are hundreds of congressmen and senators and high-profile people — it’s just not possible to secure them all if this is what’s going to happen.”

Law enforcement agencies are also operating in an environment of deep distrust, stoked by Trump’s longtime attacks on the FBI and Justice Department amid the deluge of investigations and indictments he’s faced in recent years.

Some Republicans, like Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), called for the feds to stay out of the investigation into Sunday’s incident, saying instead that Florida authorities — under the leadership of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis — should be the ones digging into the latest apparent attempt on Trump’s life. DeSantis obliged, announcing that Florida would do its own probe. But the criminal case against the suspect, identified as Ryan Routh, is a federal case being handled by the Justice Department.

Republicans have also renewed claims that Trump is receiving insufficient protection from the Secret Service, despite Trump’s own praise of the agency for its handling of the latest incident. Biden, for his part, denounced the attack and said he had directed that the Secret Service provide “every resource, capability and protective measure necessary to ensure the former President’s continued safety.”

Trump is expected to move forward with all campaign events previously scheduled this week, including stops in Michigan, New York, Washington, D.C. and North Carolina between Tuesday and Saturday. He was scheduled to receive a briefing from the acting director of the Secret Service on Monday afternoon in Palm Beach.

While Trump has railed for years against the Justice Department and the FBI as an ominous “deep state,” he has not criticized the Secret Service (which is a component of the Department of Homeland Security) or local law enforcement agencies. In public and private conversations after Sunday’s incident, Trump reiterated his support for the Secret Service and local sheriff’s office, while seeking to project an image of strength and resolve about continuing his campaign activities.

Questions remain about whether, if Trump were the sitting president, the roads surrounding the golf course would have been closed while he was playing on Sunday. But aides say that there had been a noticeable uptick in Secret Service security measures since the Butler shooting: a larger motorcade, stricter protocols for those flying on Trump’s plane and increased emergency medical staff traveling with him.

The Butler shooting is still the subject of intense scrutiny— both for how a lone shooter was able to position himself to get a clear shot at Trump despite obvious signs of danger minutes before the attack, and for the shooter’s motive, which remains a mystery two months later.

“I think there’s a hatred in our politics that wasn’t there before. The political rhetoric is sharper and more hateful today,” said Gordon Heddell, a retired assistant director at the Secret Service, who spent 28 years at the agency.

“Social media sites play a pivotal role in their capacity to initiate and further lies and conspiracy theories. Advanced technologies make it easier for an assassin to operate. The availability of high-powered military-style weapons and the ability to move about the country freely; and before you know it, the challenges facing the Secret Service have gone way up,” he added.

The proliferation of social media, in particular, has exacerbated challenges. They’ve allowed foreign adversaries to cloak subversive activity through anonymous accounts that amplify divisive messages and cultural conflicts; they allow disinformation to dilute reality and conspiracy theories to take root. And social media platforms have struggled to provide open forums for debate while combating violent rhetoric.

Already, Iran has been eyed as the culprit behind a hack-and-leak effort that penetrated the Trump campaign.

Cohen said the Secret Service is a leader in analyzing people’s behavior to predict if they pose a threat to protectees. But, he added, federal law enforcement officials need to face fewer constraints in viewing and analyzing public social media posts. It’s a complex policy issue, he said, given constitutional and legal protections that Americans enjoy. But intelligence and law enforcement personnel need to be able to do more.

“Sadly, what all too often is the case is that we fail to recognize the warning signs, we fail to respond rapidly to an emerging threat, and the outcome is very often much more tragic,” Cohen said. “Law enforcement needs the technical capabilities and the authorities to review online content associated with threat actors more broadly than they are doing today.”

Lisa Kashinsky contributed to this report.

💾

© Joe Raedle/Getty Images

GOP reacts to second Trump assassination attempt

lead image

Bob Casey’s Senate campaign in Pennsylvania says it won’t renew an ad that drew a complaint from the widow of a U.S.-based journalist who was killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018.

The campaign said in a statement Friday that it sympathizes with the widow of Jamal Khashoggi, but didn't plan to immediately pull the ad, which uses the image of the journalist to criticize opponent Dave McCormick for ties to the Saudi government.

Campaign spokesperson Maddy McDaniel said that the ad, which the widow said was insensitive, would be cycled out next week as planned.

“There is no dispute that David McCormick demanded his hedge fund show support and loyalty to Mr. Khashoggi’s murderers, all to protect his own business interests,” spokesperson McDaniel said. “We have the utmost sympathy for what Mrs. Khashoggi has experienced.”

She said the campaign spoke with the widow, Hanan Elatr Khashoggi, who says the ad is insensitive and incorrectly identifies her late husband as an American.

“The commercial is a very painful reminder of how my husband died, and as you can imagine, I have been traumatized every day for the past 6 years,” Hanan Elatr Khashoggi said in an email to Casey’s Senate office obtained by POLITICO. “I take no position on the politics of your Senate race, but I am dedicated to correcting misconceptions about my late husband.”

Jamal Khashoggi, who had written columns critical of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for The Washington Post, was killed by officials of the government of Saudi Arabia inside the consulate — an incident that caused a serious breach in relations between the U.S. and its longtime ally.

U.S. intelligence officials later determined the killing had been authorized by Prince Mohammed, the de facto ruler of the kingdom.

In the ad, the Casey campaign alleges that McCormick, a wealthy Republican businessman, “demanded his hedge fund stay loyal to the murderers to protect their investments” in Saudi Arabia.

The widow objected to the characterization of her husband as an American, since he was a Saudi citizen who lived in the U.S., or any mention of him at all and discussed the issue with the campaign along with her lawyer, Randa Fahmy — a donor and self-described “good friend” of McCormick.

© Matt Rourke/AP

Every week political cartoonists throughout the country and across the political spectrum apply their ink-stained skills to capture the foibles, memes, hypocrisies and other head-slapping events in the world of politics. The fruits of these labors are hundreds of cartoons that entertain and enrage readers of all political stripes. Here's an offering of the best of this week's crop, picked fresh off the Toonosphere. Edited by Matt Wuerker.

Kamala Harris’ campaign left Philadelphia on Tuesday night eager for another showdown against Donald Trump. The former president, once eager to schedule a second debate, seemed not so sure.

Trump, whose debate performance was widely panned as chaotic and peppered with falsehoods, insisted Wednesday morning that he’d been the victor against Harris. Another debate, Trump suggested, would hand the vice president another bite at the apple.

“The first thing they did is ask for a debate because when a fighter loses, he says ‘I want a rematch,’” Trump said Wednesday morning on “Fox & Friends.” Pushed on whether he would agree to another debate, the former president said: “I’d be less inclined to because we had a great night, we won the debate, we had a terrible network.”

Trump bashed ABC News, which hosted the debate, as “the most dishonest news organization” and called Tuesday’s debate — during which moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis repeatedly fact-checked Trump — “three to one” and “a rigged deal.” Still, he characterized his performance as “one of my better debates, maybe my best debate.”

That Harris and Trump would appear on stage at all was for a time an open question amid squabbling over when, where and how they would meet — for the first time — on the debate stage. The former president had called for multiple debates, including one on Fox News on Sept. 4 — an offer Harris rebuffed. Trump then threatened to drop out of the ABC News debate, then the campaigns squabbled over the rules, the main snag being whether each candidate’s microphone would be muted while the other spoke.

Harris, whose team had fought for unmuted mics but ultimately relented, still appeared to try to interrupt Trump even with her volume turned down. At one point, Trump shut her down, saying “I’m talking now … does that sound familiar?" — a reference to Harris’ 2020 debate with Mike Pence when she cut off a Pence interruption by saying “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking.”

“She wanted a moment like she did with Mike Pence,” Trump said Wednesday, “but I actually got that moment too, I won that too because she was talking while I was speaking quite a bit actually.”

Late Tuesday, Harris’ campaign released a statement calling for a second debate and Fox News offered to host one moderated by Martha MacCallum and Bret Baier “while early in-person voting gets underway in multiple battleground states,” on Oct. 9 in Arizona, Oct. 15 in Georgia or Oct. 16 in North Carolina.

“Seems like the American people would love another opportunity to see these candidates. It’s been such a short window and they deserve as many opportunities as possible,” MacCallum said during the network’s post-debate coverage. “We certainly hope they will take us up on that.”

But Trump on Wednesday appeared to reject the network’s offer, saying “I wouldn’t want to have Martha and Bret.” Although he said he “probably” wouldn’t agree to any more debates, he said he would consider right-wing pundits Sean Hannity, Jesse Watters and Laura Ingraham — Fox News opinion hosts who are sympathetic to the former president.

“I didn’t think Martha and Bret were good last night,” he added, as the “Fox & Friends” hosts scrambled to steer the conversation elsewhere. "Fox & Friends" co-host Brian Kilmeade defended the anchors, saying they would "do a phenomenal job" and telling Trump "you would find them extremely fair."

Harris campaign spokesperson Quentin Fulks affirmed Wednesday on CNN that Harris “is open to a debate in October.”

“But if I were Donald Trump,” he said, “I would not want to debate Kamala Harris.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misspelled Fox News anchor Bret Baier's first name.

💾

Former President Donald Trump’s plan to have Elon Musk lead a government efficiency commission would vault the world’s richest man to an unprecedented role: American oligarch.

The details of the commission and Musk’s involvement are still vague, but any formal role in government would give greater influence to the billionaire owner of Tesla, Space X, satellite company Starlink and the social media platform X — signature ventures that have benefited from federal contracts, tax credits and government incentives.

“This is like red lights blaring, all kinds of conflicts of interest,” said Danielle Brian, president of the Project on Government Oversight.

Beyond the possible competing interests, Musk’s potential foray into government would represent a striking development for the tech titan, who would essentially have a role at the highest levels of business, manufacturing, media and Washington.

At the same time, handing Musk a position in his potential administration would fit neatly into Trump’s approach to government. The former president tapped billionaires Wilbur Ross and Steven Mnuchin to serve in his Cabinet, though they had far lower public personas as Musk — and less to gain directly from their involvement.

“Musk is the latest example of a totally gearheaded, engineering-brained, Silicon Valley guy who looks at government and says ‘How hard can it be? Let me at it and I can solve it for you,’” said Peter Leyden, founder of the strategic foresight firm Reinvent Futures and a former managing editor at Wired. “There’s been many of these characters before and he’s just the latest.”

Musk firmly planting himself into politics is not surprising to those who have watched him move from electric car innovator to space entrepreneur to owner of X (and online troll of liberals). But tech experts say Washington may be tricky terrain for a Silicon Valley businessperson unaccustomed to the complexities of federal bureaucracy.

“He’s always been a contrarian,” said Will Rinehart, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. “He’s worked on electric cars when no one cares about electric cars. He’s worked on space when no one cared about space.”

“That has pushed him into this space where being a contrarian has this value for me.”

Musk has described himself in the past as a moderate but shifted his allegiance to Trump, formally endorsing him after the attempted assassination in July.

“I look forward to serving America if the opportunity arises,” Musk wrote on X, “No pay, no title, no recognition is needed.”

Like Trump, Musk has expressed hostility toward government oversight — particularly in California.

The billionaire had long-running feuds with the state’s deep-blue government and has often tussled with the state’s powerful labor interests. Early in the pandemic, he defied local public health orders and continued manufacturing cars at Tesla’s Fremont plant in spite of the threat of Covid-19 — later suing to block what he called “fascist” restrictions and threatening to move the headquarters out of state.

He ended up moving some company’s operations to Texas later that year, but continued to grow Tesla’s footprint in California. He made similar threats of withdrawal earlier this year when, outraged over new protections for LGBTQ+ youth, he vowed to move X and SpaceX to the Lone Star State. Last month, he announced the social media platform would shutter its offices in downtown San Francisco, relocating employees to nearby Palo Alto and San Jose.

Musk has also faced legal scrutiny for his labor practices at both Tesla and X. A California judge found that he and other Tesla executives violated labor laws in 2017 and 2018 by sabotaging attempts to organize workers. Hundreds of former Twitter employees sued him after his $44 billion acquisition of the social media platform in 2022, accusing him of failing to pay severance.

Lorena Gonzalez, head of the California Labor Federation, for years has traded barbs with the billionaire. She noted that state lawmakers often viewed Musk as a positive for the state — giving Tesla millions in subsidies and touting it as a marquee California company.

“His product was often kind of labeled as enviro,” she said. “But there was nothing about him that suggested he was a progressive or liberal.”

Musk did not respond to a request for comment.

Musk’s push into national politics grew with his 2022 purchase of Twitter, which he later renamed X. He immediately oversaw mass layoffs and implemented a new vision promoting free speech — reforms that brought partisan criticism he was enabling misinformation and harassment on the platform. Under Musk’s leadership, X’s valuation has plummeted and investors lost over $24 billion.

At the Reboot conference Thursday, hosted by the right-leaning tech think tank Foundation for American Innovation, attendees were largely indifferent or inattentive to Musk’s audacious pledge to lead Trump’s commission.

Patrick Blumenthal, founder of the Anomaly venture capital fund, suggested that given its apparent lack of relation to any of Musk’s tech projects it reflected a certain level of dilettantism not uncommon in the tech world.

“Tech and politics, to some extent, I think are incompatible,” Blumenthal said. “But you have an industry full of intelligent people, so it’s inevitable that some of them will want to see if that intellect works in another arena.”

© Pool photo by Kirsty Wigglesworth

Every week political cartoonists throughout the country and across the political spectrum apply their ink-stained skills to capture the foibles, memes, hypocrisies and other head-slapping events in the world of politics. The fruits of these labors are hundreds of cartoons that entertain and enrage readers of all political stripes. Here's an offering of the best of this week's crop, picked fresh off the Toonosphere. Edited by Matt Wuerker.

Hackers apparently breached the social media accounts of Lara and Tiffany Trump on Tuesday, distributing what the former president’s son said were two fake posts touting a family cryptocurrency venture.

The posts on the social network X appeared to come from the accounts of Lara Trump, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, and Tiffany, the younger of the former president’s two daughters.

Eric Trump quickly declared them a hoax in his own X post.

“This is a scam!!!” Eric Trump said. “@LaraLeaTrump and @TiffanyATrump‘s Twitter profiles have been compromised!!” The posts by Lara Trump and Tiffany Trump were then deleted.

Eric Trump then posted “@twitter was amazing” and the accounts of Lara and Tiffany Trump were locked down “within minutes.”

It was an embarrassing breach for the family considering former President Donald Trump’s close relationship with Elon Musk, who acquired the platform previously known as Twitter in 2022 and supports him in the presidential race.

Both phony posts referenced World Liberty Financial, a Trump family cryptocurrency project that has yet to formally launch. The former president, who has called himself the first ‘crypto president’ and whose campaign is receiving substantial contributions from the industry, teased its announcement in a video released last week.

An official account for World Liberty Financial confirmed the hack in a separate post on X. “ALERT: Lara’s and Tiffany Trump's X accounts have been hacked. Do NOT click on any links or purchase any tokens shared from their profiles,” the company said. “We're actively working to fix this, but please stay vigilant and avoid scams!”

World Liberty has itself been the target of scammers ahead of its launch. The Independent, a British newspaper, reported Monday that cyber criminals have drawn tens of thousands of users to a counterfeit version of the site.

The breach comes nearly a month after the Trump campaign confirmed some of its internal communications were compromised. U.S. intelligence officials said that Iran was responsible for the hacks that targeted officials on the Trump campaign and also to hack the Harris campaign as well.

X had no immediate comment.

© Alex Brandon/AP

Political cartoons from the desk of Matt Wuerker.

The controversy around Donald Trump’s visit to a memorial service at Arlington National Cemetery earlier this week has once again thrust the military to the forefront of the 2024 presidential contest.

What was intended to highlight a potential vulnerability on Kamala Harris’ vice presidential record — the U.S. military’s pullout from Afghanistan in 2021, during which 13 American service members were killed and dozens more were injured — backfired on Trump, as his campaign faced allegations of physically pushing a cemetery staff member and breaking federal law in using cemetery grounds for political purposes.

It’s the latest incident in recent weeks of the military being used as a political cudgel on the campaign trail, in a race where neither presidential candidate served in the military but both selected veterans as their running mates.

It’s part of a decadeslong political playbook.

“There's always, I think, a political instinct to lean into respect for the U.S. military, because it's a binding moral foundation,” said Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-Mass.), who served in the Marines before running for office. “That's why attacks based on disrespect for it are tempting for political operators.”

Sometimes those incidents included real national security and military decisions, especially for incumbent presidents and their cabinets, but not always.

Think back to scandals that still reverberate in the American political imagination: Benghazi, the 2012 attack on U.S. facilities in Libya that became a major political liability for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton; the vote to go to war with Iraq, which followed Clinton and President Joe Biden for decades; and the “Swift Boat campaign” against John Kerry’s military record that’s become political shorthand for an unfair attack.

In 1992, George H.W. Bush slammed his opponent, Bill Clinton, as a draft dodger. In 1988, Michael Dukakis bashed Bush for the Iran–Contra Affair and staged a photo-op in a tank to cast himself as a capable military leader — though the plan went sideways when his huge helmet and grin looked more silly than strong. Bush, a World War II hero, ran an ad of the photo that helped sink the Democrat’s campaign.

“Dukakis, of course, was doing that to show that he was tough and cared about national security, but he looked goofy in the hat, and it just it backfired on him,” said Peter Feaver, a Duke University professor who previously served as an aide for the White House National Security Council. “And I would say Trump has struggled mightily with this as well, in terms of meeting the ceremonial moment with the seriousness, the respect, the circumspection, reflection that the moment requires.”

“Presidents have to pass the commander-in-chief test,” Feaver added. “They have to meet some minimum threshold that yes, they could be trusted to be commander in chief, they could be trusted with the nuclear arsenal, with the lives of our men and women who serve in uniform.”

The Army said in a statement Thursday that while Trump was at a wreath-laying ceremony to honor service members who were killed during the Afghanistan pullout, at the invitation of some of the service members’ families, members of Trump’s campaign team “abruptly pushed aside” and “unfairly attacked” a staff member who had attempted to stop a campaign photographer from taking photos of Trump at the service members’ grave sites. The campaign was “aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds,” the Army said, defending its staffer.

NPR first reported the incident. The staffer is not pressing charges, according to the Army, which considers the matter closed.

Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said in a statement defending the former president’s visit that there “has been no greater advocate for our brave military men and women” than Trump. Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung directed POLITICO to a 2020 Biden campaign ad that shows the president standing at a service member's grave.

Harris campaign spokesperson Michael Tyler called the Arlington incident “pretty sad” but “not surprising” in a CNN interview on Wednesday, and spokesperson James Singer referred POLITICO to the line in the vice president’s Democratic National Convention speech last week promising to “fulfill our sacred obligation to care for our troops and their families, and I will always honor and never disparage their service and their sacrifice.”

When President Joe Biden was still the Democratic nominee, Trump’s campaign aired an ad showing the president checking his watch at a 2021 ceremony honoring the soldiers who died during the Afghanistan withdrawal. And at the Republican National Convention last month, some of the service members’ family members appeared on stage to slam him.

“When you're honoring those who have passed, who’ve died in service of their country, that is the most ceremonial [part of the presidency] to the point it’s often talked about in sacred terms: ‘Hallowed ground,’ ‘It’s holy,’” Feaver said. “The people who want to be president need to show that in that moment, they can rise to the occasion.”

With Harris replacing Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket, her role in the Afghanistan withdrawal is likely to be raised by Republicans through Election Day.

“It’s going to be a very significant liability [for Harris], particularly when she says ‘I was the last person in the room and I absolutely approved of the plan,’” said veteran Republican strategist Charlie Gerow. “That, to me, is game, set and match on that score.”

Trump’s campaign has also sought to undermine the service record of Harris’ running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, whom Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, has accused of “stolen valor.” Walz, who served for 24 years in the Minnesota National Guard and retired from the military to run for Congress shortly before his troop deployed to Iraq, has brushed aside the criticism.

“My record speaks for itself,” he said Thursday on CNN.

The critiques on Walz’s service record echo back to the 2004 presidential campaign, when then-candidate George W. Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard was questioned. That scandal culminated in CBS News publishing a series of documents the network’s source had fabricated — the basis for the 2015 film “Truth.” During the same campaign, John Kerry’s record was also questioned in a “swift boat” attack engineered by Chris LaCivita, who now serves as a senior adviser to Trump’s campaign.

But Trump is also vulnerable when it comes to service members and veterans, with a track record that includes reports that he called them “suckers and losers” — which he denies — and saying Sen. John McCain, who was a prisoner of war, was “not a war hero” because of his capture. Earlier this month, Trump drew criticism from veterans groups for saying the country’s top civilian honor was “much better” than its top military honor because the service members who receive the latter are “in very bad shape” or “dead.”

“Those are things he can’t erase — those are stains, indelible stains, and nothing Vance says or does can overcome that,” Feaver said.

But Gerow said he doesn’t think it will impact Trump’s share of the military vote. “It didn't make any difference in the previous two cycles. He won the lion's share of the veteran vote and the military vote, and I think he'll do it again this time,” he said.

© Alex Brandon/AP

Every week political cartoonists throughout the country and across the political spectrum apply their ink-stained skills to capture the foibles, memes, hypocrisies and other head-slapping events in the world of politics. The fruits of these labors are hundreds of cartoons that entertain and enrage readers of all political stripes. Here's an offering of the best of this week's crop, picked fresh off the Toonosphere. Edited by Matt Wuerker.

AUSTIN, Texas — A Latino voting rights group called Monday for a federal investigation after its volunteers said Texas authorities raided their homes and seized phones and computers as part of an investigation by the state’s Republican attorney general into allegations of voter fraud.

No charges have been filed against any targets of the searches that took place last week in the San Antonio area. Attorney General Ken Paxton previously confirmed his office had conducted searches after a local prosecutor referred to his office “allegations of election fraud and vote harvesting” during the 2022 election.

Some volunteers whose homes were searched, including an 80-year-old woman who told her associates that agents were at her house for two hours and took medicine, along with her smartphone and watch, railed outside an attorney general’s office in San Antonio against the searches.

“We feel like our votes are being suppressed,” Roman Palomares, national president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, said Monday. “We’re going to get to the bottom of it.”

The investigation is part of an Election Integrity Unit that Paxton formed in his office. Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment. The federal Justice Department declined to comment.

At least six members had their homes searched, Palomares said. They included Manuel Medina, a San Antonio political consultant, who claimed his home was searched for several hours while agents seized documents, computers and cellphones. Medina is the former head of the Bexar County Democratic Party and is working on the campaign of Democratic state House candidate Cecilia Castellano, whose home was also searched.

Nine officers also entered the home of volunteer Lidia Martinez, 80, who said she expressed confusion about why they were there.

“They sat me down and they started searching all my house, my store room, my garage, kitchen, everything,” Martinez said, and interrogated her about other members, including Medina.

The search warrant ordered officials to search any documents related to the election and to confiscate Martinez’s devices.

“I’m not doing anything illegal,” Martinez said she told agents. “All I do is help the seniors.”

Voter fraud is rare, typically occurs in isolated instances and is generally detected. An Associated Press investigation of the 2020 presidential election found fewer than 475 potential cases of voter fraud out of 25.5 million ballots cast in the six states where Trump and his allies disputed his loss to Democratic President Joe Biden.

© AP

With just 15 days left until the scheduled Sept. 10 presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, negotiations between their two campaigns have hit an impasse over whether the candidates’ microphones will be muted when it is not their turn to speak, according to four people familiar with the issue.

In June, President Joe Biden’s campaign came to an agreement with Trump’s: There would be two debates — CNN’s on June 27 and ABC’s on Sept. 10 — conducted by mutually negotiated rules. One of the Biden team’s demands — which the Trump team agreed to — was that microphones “will be muted throughout the debate except for the candidate whose turn it is to speak,” as CNN announced on June 15.

But Biden is no longer running for president. And Harris’ campaign wants the microphones to be hot at all times during the ABC debate — as has historically been the case at presidential debates.

“We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates’ mics should be live throughout the full broadcast,” Brian Fallon, the Harris campaign’s senior adviser for communications, tells POLITICO. “Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own. We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button.”

Privately, the veep’s team believes that Harris can get Trump to lose his cool and say something impolitic on mic.

“She's more than happy to have exchanges with him if he tries to interrupt her,” one person familiar with the negotiations tells Playbook. “And given how shook he seems by her, he's very prone to having intemperate outbursts and … I think the campaign would want viewers to hear [that].”

For its part, the Trump campaign sees this all as a bait and switch. They want the ABC debate governed by the CNN rules — even though those rules were agreed to by the Biden campaign, not the Harris campaign.

“Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate. The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules,” Jason Miller, senior adviser for Trump told Playbook last night. “If Kamala Harris isn’t smart enough to repeat the messaging points her handlers want her to memorize, that’s their problem. This seems to be a pattern for the Harris campaign. They won’t allow Harris to do interviews, they won’t allow her to do press conferences, and now they want to give her a cheat-sheet for the debate. My guess is that they’re looking for a way to get out of any debate with President Trump.”

Trump later told reporters Monday that he hoped to move forward with the same rules as the June debate, but “it doesn’t matter to me, I’d rather have it probably on.”

“But the agreement was that it would be the same as it was last time. In that case, it was muted,” Trump told reporters at a stop in Northern Virginia. “I didn’t like it the last time but it worked out fine. I mean, ask Biden how it worked out — it was fine. And I think it should be the same.”

Fallon posted on social media a clip of Trump's brief Monday comments, taking it as an agreement to have the mics on, though the Trump campaign has not made it official.

“Always suspected it was something his staff wanted, not him personally. With this resolved, everything is now set for Sept 10^th,” he wrote on X.

Trump on Sunday night openly questioned whether he'll take part in the ABC-hosted event, suggesting the network might be biased, without mentioning anything about the microphone contretemps.

Trump himself has suggested additional debates with Harris, governed by rules different from the CNN standard — including proposing a Fox News-hosted debate on Sept. 4 with “a full arena audience,” as Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this month. (The CNN debate had no in-person viewers.)

The no-live-mics stance is also at odds with the Trump campaign’s demand in the 2020 campaign, when it wanted microphones to remain on as the then-president faced Joe Biden.

“It is our understanding … that you will soon be holding an internal meeting to discuss other possible rule changes, such as granting an unnamed person the ability to shut off a candidate’s microphone,” Trump’s then-campaign manager, Bill Stepien, wrote to the Commission on Presidential Debates on Oct. 19, 2020. “It is completely unacceptable for anyone to wield such power … This is reminiscent of the first debate in 2016, when the President’s microphone was oscillated, and it is not acceptable.”

As for Miller’s assertion that Harris wanted a seated debate with notes, Fallon pushed back vigorously. “All three parties (Trump, Harris and ABC) have agreed to standing and no notes, and we never sought otherwise,” Fallon said. A separate person familiar with the negotiations laughed when we asked if Harris ever asked to be seated, saying it wasn’t true.

At the time it accepted ABC’s invitation, the Harris campaign did so while making clear to the network that the rules themselves were up for debate. And if this current snag is any indication, that debate is far from settled.

Irie Sentner contributed to this report.

© Julia Nikhinson/AP

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul pushed back Friday against Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s suggestion that the governor’s weakness at the top of the ticket in the Empire State cost Democrats the House.

“I’ll tell you this, no governor in the history of the state of New York has worked harder to elect members of Congress than I have,” Hochul told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “We are going to win this on the ground because I know how to do this. I now have the chance to focus on this.”

In an interview with POLITICO on Thursday, Pelosi blamed Hochul’s closer-than-expected victory in New York’s 2022 gubernatorial race for Democrats inability to maintain their House majority in that year’s elections. New York Republicans flipped four Democratic-held seats in those midterms, races where critics have suggested that Hochul may have been a drag on down-ballot candidates.

Asked about that claim by Pelosi, the governor flatly replied “I don’t agree with that.”

Hochul cited her efforts to begin raising money for New York’s Democratic Party and pour it into local counties, as well as ongoing coordination with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and hundreds of staffers across 35 offices.

Pelosi said Thursday that she hadn’t spoken to Hochul about this year’s races but had consulted with Jeffries as recently as that morning. She emphasized the importance of the “three M’s: mobilization, message, money.”

Hochul acknowledged Friday she can “laser focus” on key purple districts — including Hudson Valley, Syracuse, Central New York and Long Island — now that “I’m not a candidate this year myself.”

“We’re going to win these races and win strong,” she said.

© J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Democratic kingmaker Nancy Pelosi has come to be pegged as the chief force behind President Joe Biden’s decision to step down from his reelection campaign — a claim that she refuses to dignify much.

While Pelosi no longer wields the Speaker’s gavel, its absence hasn’t done much to stifle her power within the party. She’s not only the first female Speaker of the House but also one of the most talented political tacticians of her generation.

POLITICO’s senior political columnist and politics bureau chief Jonathan Martin sat down with the Speaker Emerita at the CNN-POLITICO Grill on the last day of the Democratic National Convention.

JMart and Pelosi covered what state Pelosi believes to be key to retaking the House; how a President Kamala Harris would need to govern; that time when party transcended heritage in her snub of a New York Republican; her relationship with successor Hakeem Jeffries and what she really thinks of that DIY pin of her image that floated around the convention.

© Rod Lamkey Jr. for POLITICO

Every week political cartoonists throughout the country and across the political spectrum apply their ink-stained skills to capture the foibles, memes, hypocrisies and other head-slapping events in the world of politics. The fruits of these labors are hundreds of cartoons that entertain and enrage readers of all political stripes. Here's an offering of the best of this week's crop, picked fresh off the Toonosphere. Edited by Matt Wuerker.

‘Actually pretty good’: Moore eats Chicago-style chardog with Pritzker

lead image

Project 2025 roasts, a Walz pep talk, and Oprah: DNC night 3 highlights

lead image

‘We’re good’: Josh Shapiro dispels talk of rift with Fetterman

lead image

Chicago mayor claps back at Vance over attack on Chicago crime

lead image

Last night at the Democratic National Convention, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders urged Americans to support Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign for the presidency.

Simple enough? Well, maybe not.

Any astute observer knows that Sanders has a notoriously testy relationship with the Democratic establishment. And he’s been sparing in his words of praise for Harris’ campaign so far.

Meanwhile, the constituencies where Sanders has polled strongly for years — young people, minorities, and progressives — were among the weak points in President Joe Biden’s coalition that led many Democrats to scream for his replacement.

Now, with just 75 days until the election, those same Democrats are betting that Kamala Harris and Tim Walz can shore up these key factions. And they’re asking Bernie for help.

With that in mind, Playbook co-author and Deep Dive host Ryan Lizza spoke to Sanders at the CNN-Politico Grill to get a more honest reflection on the Harris campaign than what you’ll hear in a DNC stump speech.

In their conversation, they talked about whether he thinks Joe Biden should have stepped aside in the first place; how Democrats can win back young people, minorities, and progressives; as well as where he agrees with Harris’s policies, and where he thinks she needs to come a little in his direction to win.

© Rod Lamkey Jr. for POLITICO

Harris' Deputy campaign manager: 'Young voters are critical'

lead image

A District of Columbia councilmember known for promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories has been arrested on charges that he accepted over $150,000 in bribes in exchange for using his elected position to help companies with city contracts, according to court records unsealed on Monday.

Trayon White Sr., a Democrat who ran an unsuccessful mayoral campaign in 2022, was arrested on a federal bribery charge by the FBI on Sunday. He is expected to make his initial court appearance on Monday.

White’s chief of staff and spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment.

An FBI agent’s affidavit says White agreed in June to accept roughly $156,000 in kickbacks and cash payments in exchange for pressuring government agency employees to extend two companies’ contracts for violence intervention services. The contacts were worth over $5 million.

White, 40, also accepted a $20,000 bribe payment to help resolve a contract dispute for one of the companies by pressuring high-level district officials, the affidavit alleges.

An FBI informant who agreed to plead guilty to fraud and bribery charges reported giving White gifts including travel to the Dominican Republic and Las Vegas along with paying him bribes, the FBI said.

White, who has served on the D.C. council since 2017, represents a predominantly Black ward where the poverty rate is nearly twice as high as the overall district. He is running for re-election in November against a Republican challenger.

White was one of two D.C. council members whom Mayor Muriel Bower defeated two years ago in the Democratic primary. White, a former grassroots community activist, was a protégé of former Mayor Marion Barry, who also represented the same ward as White on the council.

In March 2018, White posted a video on his Facebook page claiming that an unexpected snowfall was because of “the Rothschilds controlling the climate to create natural disasters.” The Rothschilds, a Jewish family that was prominent in the banking industry, are a frequent subject of conspiracy theories.

At the time, White said he was unaware that the weather-related conspiracy theory is antisemitic. A video later surfaced of White pushing a similar conspiracy theory during a meeting of top city officials. He posed a question based on the stereotypical premise that the Rothschilds controlled the World Bank and the federal government.

Associated Press writer Ashraf Khalil contributed to this report.

💾

© Brian Stukes/Getty Images

Kamala Harris’ campaign is bolstering its communications team, bringing on two seasoned operatives from the White House for the final three-month sprint.

Ian Sams, the White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, will join Harris’ campaign in a senior spokesperson role, according to two sources familiar with the moves granted anonymity to discuss personnel matters.

And principal deputy White House communications director Kristen Orthman is moving to the campaign to serve as senior adviser for strategic planning.

Herbie Ziskend will move into Orthman’s role at the White House for the final months of President Joe Biden’s term, the sources confirmed.

Sams, known as an assertive and punchy flack, worked on Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign. When Biden took office in 2021, he first worked at the Department of Health and Human Services on messaging related to the administration’s pandemic response. He moved to the White House in 2023, after Republicans reclaimed a majority in the House, and was tasked with responding to GOP and Special Counsel investigations.

Orthman’s resume includes stints working for former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s 2020 bid and the Democratic National Committee before she joined the administration in 2023.

The moves reflect the broader shift in focus and diversion of White House resources toward the campaign since Harris replaced Biden atop the ticket last month. Sams and Orthman will join an already deep communications team in Wilmington that has had to mesh in recent weeks with the vice president’s own top press aides, Brian Fallon and Kirsten Allen.

With the departure of senior adviser Anita Dunn earlier this month, White House communications director Ben LaBolt and Ziskend — who both cut their teeth working for Barack Obama — are expected to lead the West Wing’s communications shop through the end of Biden’s term.

© Andrew Harnik/AP

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign announced on Friday his transition team will be co-chaired by two major donors and allies, Linda McMahon, the former head of his Small Business Administration, and Howard Lutnick, the chairman and CEO of financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald.

Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance and Trump’s two adult sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, will serve as honorary chairs, the campaign said in a press release.

The decision to tap McMahon — the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) and the board chair at America First Policy Institute — signals AFPI, the conservative think tank that was formed by Trump administration officials after he lost the 2020 election could have an influential role in shaping a second term for the former president.

AFPI, often described as a Republican “White House in waiting,” is led by former domestic policy council director Brooke Rollins and is home to several top Trump administration officials. In a statement, Rollins praised McMahon as “a leader who knows how to build and lead large organizations.”

“She knows business. She knows policy. She knows America. She knows what works and how to lay the foundation for a new administration that will put the needs of America First and reclaim our country,” he said.

Lutnick, a billionaire, is a major donor and fundraiser for Trump. The CEO is fresh off of hosting a fundraiser at his Hamptons home for Trump where he raised millions for the GOP presidential nominee.

The Trump Vance 2025 Transition Inc, will be a 501c4 organization separate from the campaign.

“The 2024 GOP Platform to Make America Great Again is a forward-looking agenda that will deliver safety, prosperity and freedom for the American people. My administration will deliver on these bold promises,” Trump said in a statement. “We will restore strength, competence and common sense to the Oval Office. I have absolute confidence the Trump-Vance Administration will be ready to govern effectively on Day One.”

The announcement of Trump’s transition team comes as the Trump campaign has worked to steady itself after President Joe Biden stepped down from the 2024 election. The subsequent creation of a ticket featuring Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has reenergized the Democratic Party and effectively erased the polling lead Trump had enjoyed over Biden.

Trump’s move to name leaders for his transition team comes relatively late in the presidential campaign. Back in 2016, Trump announced Chris Christie as his transition chair in May, though he wound up removing the then-New Jersey governor from the role within days of winning the election.

McMahon and Lutnick will be tasked with overseeing the vetting and hiring of political appointees and of crafting policy proposals and executive orders Trump could implement starting on day one of his administration.

While Trump’s official transition efforts have just been announced, conservative organizations have worked behind the scenes for months to collect resumes and craft policies should the former president return to the White House. Trump has sought to distance himself from some of those efforts, in particular the work at Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. The GOP nominee has said he knows “nothing about Project 2025,” and has called some of its policy recommendations “absolutely ridiculous,” even though the efforts involve at least 140 people who worked in the Trump administration according to a review by CNN.

💾

© AFP via Getty Images