Talking Points Memo: Trump Administration Loses Plot During ‘Free Speech’ Struggle Session

Hello it’s the weekend. This is The Weekender ☕️

To some extent, every new excess by the Trump administration is unsurprising to us, the writers and editors of Talking Points Memo, and, I imagine, to you, our readers. These guys told us what they were going to do, after all. It sounded authoritarian. Trump’s own former military leaders said he was “fascist.” But given that priming, we heavy consumers of news can, I think, sometimes lose track of how far the Trump administration has gone, even by its own standards.

Nicole on Thursday flagged an interview with CNBC during which FCC director Brendan Carr outlined his belief that both his agency and the “media ecosystem” overall are in the midst of a “massive shift” given the “permission structure that President Trump’s election has provided.”

“And I would simply say we’re not done yet with seeing the consequences of that,” Carr said.

“Will you only be pleased when none of these comedians have a show on broadcast television?” CNBC anchor David Faber asked.

“No, it’s not any particular show or any particular person,” Carr replied. “It’s just we’re in the midst of a very disruptive moment right now, and I just, frankly, expect that we’re going to continue to see changes in the media ecosystem.”

Carr and the rest of the Trump administration have tried to get a lot of mileage out of the whole idea that the 2024 election represented a substantiation of an American cultural “vibe shift” post-COVID (though Carr’s talk of a new, Trumpian “permission structure” is a particularly chilling way to articulate that idea).

But setting aside that Trump’s electoral victory was, in the end, not that large, are Trump’s leaders in government still doing what they understood themselves to have won permission to do?

“This was all in Project 2025, btw,” an actor from “Glee” tweeted, and Carr at 11:43 p.m. replied with that GIF of Jack Nicholson nodding with an ecstatic, unhinged look, a seeming affirmation that, yes, this was all the plan.

But was it? Carr, in fact, wrote the FCC chapter of Project 2025. There was nothing about revoking broadcast licenses or using the “Equal Time” rule in creative ways, as he has threatened to do with “The View,” a program that is seemingly his next ABC-broadcast target. “The FCC should promote freedom of speech,” his chapter of Project 2025 began.

That’s an ideal his party is now seemingly somewhat confused about. Early this week, Pam Bondi got in trouble for trying to distinguish anti-Charlie Kirk “hate speech” from “free speech.” “An FCC license, it’s not a right. It really is a privilege,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) told Semafor on Thursday. “Under normal times, in normal circumstances, I tend to think that the First Amendment should always be sort of the ultimate right. And that there should be almost no checks and balances on it. I don’t feel that way anymore,” she added. Other Republicans took the opposite side of the issue, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) of all people calling Carr’s tactics “right out of Goodfellas.”

It’s in these moments where the Trump administration and its allies lose the plot — when they do an about-face on the same ideas they bear hugged in weeks and months and years prior, casting about for enemies to punish — that the MAGA coalition frays a bit, straining under the weight of cognitive dissonance. We saw the same thing with Trump’s short-lived war on Iran and, much more so, with his aggressive insistence that there was nothing important going on with that Jeffrey Epstein guy. The cause of ending cancel culture launched a thousand MAGA-aligned influencer careers; it is the supposed raison d’être of entire MAGA-friendly publications. Now that the government they serve has turned the page on free speech, what do they do?

It’s not just the MAGA faithful. Booting a late-night host watched by millions from the air over some muddled remarks about your slain political ally is the kind of thing that gets the attention of the “normies” who have decided to tune out from the whole lurid spectacle of American democracy in 2025. (Ditto for revising childhood vaccine recommendations while confessing you’re not even totally clear what you’re voting on.)

Ten years into this, only fools predict we’ve reached the beginning of the end of Donald Trump. And that’s not what I’m saying. But moments like these are not good for Trump’s already limited base of support, and bring us toward the next chapter of America’s authoritarian experiment, whatever that chapter may be.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/the-weekender/the-trump-admins-free-speech-struggle-session

Roll Call: Republicans move to change Senate rules to speed confirmation of some nominees

Facing insurmountable backlog, Thune moves to allow consideration of multiple nominees as a group

Senate Majority Leader John Thune took the first procedural step Monday toward changing the chamber’s rules to speed up the confirmation of lower-level Trump nominees, saying the move is necessary to combat obstruction from Democrats.

Democrats this Congress have forced the GOP majority to use valuable floor time on procedural votes, slowing down the confirmation process and leaving spots unfilled in the Trump administration.

Republicans argue Democrats are destroying a Senate tradition of quickly confirming noncontroversial nominees regardless of the party of the president. But Democrats contend the posture is a needed negotiating tool as Trump has burned through government norms and at times embraced an authoritarian attitude of executive power.

Thune, R-S.D., late Monday asked for immediate consideration of an executive resolution that would authorize the en bloc consideration in executive session of certain nominations. In order to place it on the calendar, he said, he objected to his own request.

The resolution now lies over one calendar day. A copy of the resolution was not immediately available Monday night.

Thune said in a floor speech earlier Monday that after Trump’s eight months in office this term, no civilian nominee has been confirmed by voice vote.

He compared that to other presidents: George W. Bush and Barack Obama each had 90 percent of their civilian nominees confirmed on voice vote, and Trump in his first term and Biden had more than 50 percent.

“It’s time to take steps to restore Senate precedent and codify in Senate rules what was once understood to be standard practice, and that is the Senate acting expeditiously on presidential nominations to allow a president to get his team into place,” Thune said.

Thune said Republicans would seek to speed up confirmations. The change would apply to nominees at the sub-Cabinet level and not Article III judicial nominees, he said.

The objective, he said, was “confirming groups of nominees all together so the president can have his team in place and so the Senate can focus on the important legislative work in its charge.”

The Senate would have to take another 600 votes before the end of the year to clear the current backlog of nominees on the calendar and at committee, Thune said.

“That’s more votes than this record-breaking Senate has taken all year up until now,” Thune said. “There is no practical way that we could come close to filling all the vacancies in the four years of this administration, no matter how many hours the Senate works.”

Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., slammed the GOP effort, warning Republicans that they would come to regret the decision to “go nuclear.”

“What will stop Donald Trump from nominating even worse individuals than we’ve seen to date, knowing this chamber will rubber-stamp anything he wishes?” Schumer said.

The move is the latest in a history of changing Senate rules to lower vote thresholds in the chamber.

Under then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Republicans in 2017 removed the 60-vote requirement for confirming Supreme Court justices as they sought to confirm Neil M. Gorsuch.

Years before, in 2013, Senate Democrats did away with that vote threshold for other judicial nominees.

Since the start of the second Trump administration, some Senate Democrats have sought to use the lower-level confirmations as a pressure point.

In May, Schumer announced a hold on all Justice Department nominees after the administration agreed to accept a plane from Qatar. That move from Schumer prevented U.S. attorney nominees from moving forward on voice votes.

The same month, Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, put a hold on Trump’s pick for U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida.

Durbin also warned he might do so for other U.S. attorney nominees who reach the Senate floor.

In February, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, announced he was putting a blanket hold on all Trump administration State Department nominees over the shuttering of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Just ram King Donald’s incompetent appointees through the process!

https://rollcall.com/2025/09/09/republicans-move-to-change-senate-rules-to-speed-confirmation-of-some-nominees

Slingshot News: ‘It Sends A Message’: Kristi Noem Makes Freudian Slip, Admits Trump’s Border Wall Is Nothing But Political Theater During House Hearing

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/it-sends-a-message-kristi-noem-makes-freudian-slip-admits-trump-s-border-wall-is-nothing-but-political-theater-during-house-hearing/vi-AA1M2sVD

Guardian: Texas attorney general wants students to pray in school – unless they’re Muslim

Ken Paxton, who is running for US Senate, is urging schools to say the Lord’s Prayer as a Republican law goes into effect

Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general running for US Senate, has long believed in school prayer. Now, he’s prescribing precisely what type of prayer he wants the state’s 6 million public school students to recite.

“In Texas classrooms, we want the Word of God opened, the Ten Commandments displayed, and prayers lifted up,” Paxton said in a statement on Tuesday, encouraging students to say “the Lord’s Prayer, as taught by Jesus Christ”.

The press release included the full text of the Lord’s Prayer as it is written in the King James version of the Bible, the latest example of Paxton and other Texas officials seeming to endorse Christianity over other faiths.

“Twisted, radical liberals want to erase Truth, dismantle the solid foundation that America’s success and strength were built upon, and erode the moral fabric of our society,” Paxton said. “Our nation was founded on the rock of Biblical Truth, and I will not stand by while the far-left attempts to push our country into the sinking sand.”

Paxton’s statement was released as Senate Bill 11 went into effect across Texas; it’s a piece of Republican legislation allowing schools to set aside time for “prayer and reading of the Bible or other religious texts” during the school day. Critics have condemned the bill as an attempt to imbue a secular public education in the state with the practice of Christianity, in violation of the US constitution’s separation of church and state.

“They’re blowing right through separation of church and state,” said Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.

“They have no respect for other faiths. And in fact, that includes a lot of Christians who don’t agree with this far-right version of Christianity. They’re trying to indoctrinate children into this agenda and it’s outrageous, and it’s breaking one of the most important constitutional principles we have in this country with the first amendment and the separation of church and state.”

Beirich added that Paxton, along with figures in Washington DC, such as the House speaker, Mike Johnson, were “people who believe that this country is a Christian nation, that Christianity should have primacy”.

Paxton’s office did not respond to a request for comment about whether he was trying to push Christianity on Texas’s public school students.

It is instructive, however, to revisit how Paxton once reacted to a report of Muslim students praying in a Dallas-area school. In 2017, the attorney general’s office published an open letter to the superintendent of schools in Frisco, Texas, expressing “concerns” over Muslim students at Liberty high school using a spare classroom to pray during school hours.

“It appears that the prayer room is ‘dedicated to the religious needs of some students’,” the letter stated, quoting an article in the school’s newspaper, “namely, those who practice Islam.”

In a subsequent press release, Paxton’s office stated: “Recent news reports have indicated that the high school’s prayer room is … apparently excluding students of other faiths.”

Again, “recent news reports” seemed to refer to a single article in the high school newspaper.

But that article, written by an 11th-grader, made no mention of the room being off-limits to students of other faiths. Rather, the article quotes the principal observing how “the trademark of what makes Liberty High so great” is the “diversity” of the faiths and cultures on campus.

“As long as it’s student-led, where the students are organizing and running it, we pretty much as a school stay out of that and allow them their freedom to practice their religion,” the principal said.

Had Paxton’s office checked with the school district before publishing its open letter, school officials would have noted the spare classroom was available for all students – not just Muslims – to practice their faith.

Paxton, it seemed, had tried to create a culture-war controversy out of thin air.

“It is unfortunate that our state’s top law enforcement officer would engage in a cheap Islamophobic publicity stunt that could very well result in increased bullying of Muslim students and the creation of a hostile learning environment,” the Texas chapter of the Council of American-Islamic Relations (Cair) said in a statement at the time.

That Paxton once fearmongered about Muslims praying in class but is now encouraging students to say the Lord’s Prayer is consistent with his particular brand of Christian nationalism or dominionism, which seeks to erode any wall between church and state, establishing a government run according to a far-right interpretation of Christian scripture.

During his time in public office, Paxton has received considerable financial support from a coterie of ultraconservative west Texas billionaires who, as ProPublica reported, have made the state into “the country’s foremost laboratory for Christian nationalist policy”.

On Thursday, Paxton announced he would appeal a “flawed ruling by a federal judge” that stopped another Christian nationalist piece of legislation from going into effect, this one requiring Texas schools to display the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms.

“The Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of American law, and that fact simply cannot be erased by radical, anti-American groups trying to ignore our moral heritage,” Paxton seethed in another statement.

“There is no legal reason to stop Texas from honoring a core ethical foundation of our law, especially not a bogus claim about the ‘separation of church and state,’ which is a phrase found nowhere in the Constitution.”

Paxton’s wife publicly accused him of disobeying the seventh commandment – “Thou shall not commit adultery” – earlier this summer while stating in a divorce petition that he had had an extramarital affair.

His Christian nationalist statements this week, Texas political observers have noted, might be an attempt to repair his reputation, and to shore up ultraconservative support in his battle to unseat John Cornyn in the US Senate.

If his agenda, and the GOP’s broader Christian nationalist agenda, is allowed to move forward, Beirich said, it will be “absolutely punishing for people of other faiths”.

In a statement to the Guardian, the Texas chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, was wary of Paxton’s insistence that students say the Lord’s Prayer in public schools: “Although protecting religious freedom in schools would be a noble pursuit, Attorney General Paxton’s rhetoric and his history of anti-Muslim bigotry raises the obvious suspicion that his embrace of religious liberty will not extend beyond his own claimed faith.

“If Attorney General Paxton wants schools to set aside time for praying and reading scripture, that must include time for Texas Muslims to read the Quran, Jewish students to read the Torah, and on and on,” the group added.

“Only if students of all faiths can freely worship on the same terms without any coercion or favoritism from the government will the Constitution be upheld.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/07/texas-ken-paxton-christians-muslims

Slate: A Senator Just Unapologetically Declared the U.S. a White Homeland

America, he says, isn’t an idea—and isn’t for everyone.

A Sitting Senator Just Went Full Mask-Off White Nationalist

On Nov. 19, 1863, Abraham Lincoln delivered one of the greatest speeches in American history, the Gettysburg Address. It opened “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

On Tuesday, Eric Schmitt, the junior senator from Missouri, declared that Lincoln was wrong.

“What is an American?” This was the question Schmitt posed at the fifth annual National Conservatism Conference in Washington. His answer is that the nation is fundamentally not based on the idea of equality or freedom or any other ideal. Nor is it accessible to people of all races and religions. It is fundamentally, he told an assembled crowd, a white homeland.

The white Europeans who settled America and conquered the West “believed they were forging a nation—a homeland for themselves and their descendants,” he said. “They fought, they bled, they struggled, they died for us. They built this country for us. America, in all its glory, is their gift to us, handed down across the generations. It belongs to us. It’s our birthright, our heritage, our destiny. If America is everything and everyone, then it is nothing and no one at all. But we know that’s not true. America is not a ‘universal nation.’ ”

The implications of this vision are serious. This is a repudiation of our Constitution and the core of a national identity that includes all its citizens. It means that to be American is not about citizenship at all. “What is an American?” Schmitt asked. It is a white person. America is a white homeland that organically binds together white people of the past, present and future. And its policies must be guided for their benefit if they are to succeed.

“A strong, sovereign nation—not just an idea but a home, belonging to a people bound together by a common past and a shared destiny.”

Schmitt makes clear that the problem of immigration is not that people violate the rules or that the rules are not enforced. It is about immigration per se, about non-Europeans stealing the birthright of the descendants of America’s original white Christian settlers. This includes German settlers like Schmitt’s ancestors, a group at one time considered nonwhite, but not the Black slaves who built much of the country and whose roots here largely predate his own, nor countless other ethnic groups who have made significant contributions to this nation.

“We Americans are the sons and daughters of the Christian pilgrims that poured out from Europe’s shores to baptize a new world in their ancient faith,” he said. “Our ancestors were driven here by destiny, possessed by urgent and fiery conviction, by burning belief, devoted to their cause and their God.” Their idol, he declares, is Andrew Jackson. “Their trust was in the Lord,” but their cause was not necessarily more righteous. They destroyed the Native Americans, he claims, because they were superior in strength and perseverance. This is a fascist vision of natural selection favoring the group with racial and cultural superiority.

Make no mistake. This is a revolt against Lincoln, a revolt against the idea of a nation built on the proposition that all men are created equal. “America is not just an abstract proposition,” he repeats over and over, clearly referencing Lincoln. The left, he asserts, is “turning the American tradition into a deracinated ideological creed,” an idea literally stripped of its racial foundation. It is stealing the country from the “real American nation”: the pilgrims, the pioneers and the settlers who “repelled wave after wave of Indian war band attacks” to build this country. “It belongs to us. It’s our birthright, our heritage, our destiny.”

Nonwhite people do appear in his vision, but only as the usurpers of our white nation and its resources. They are the “Indians,” whom he portrays as savages who succumbed to the superior ability of their white destroyers. They are Barack Obama and his supporters, who scorned the white patriots for remembering a country “that once belonged to them.” They are the people tearing down Confederate statues and removing Confederate names from buildings, streets, and forts, turning “yesterday’s heroes into today’s villains.” They are the people behind the “George Floyd riots,” as he describes them, “anarchists [who] looted and defaced and tore down statues and monuments all across the country.”

Here, it is quite clear who constitutes “us” and “them” in this Manichaean vision of the American nation. “When they tear down our statues and monuments, mock our history, and insult our traditions, they’re attacking our future as well as our past,” he said. “But America does not belong to them. It belongs to us. It’s our home. It’s a heritage entrusted to us by our ancestors. It’s a way of life that is ours, and only ours, and if we disappear, then America, too, will cease to exist.”

Even Christianity itself is eclipsed here. Christianity is meaningful only as a marker of the whiteness of the people who embody it. There is no gratitude here, except for the white founders who bequeathed this nation to their biological descendants by achieving its manifest destiny and taking it. There is no obligation here. No grace. No Christian mercy. No reckoning with past crimes, and particularly not with the dispossession of Native Americans or the enslavement of Africans, both of which are literally celebrated.

That conference—despite the protestations of its founder, the Israeli scholar Yoram Hazony—has been promoting blood-and-soil nationalism since its first iteration in 2019. That year, University of Pennsylvania Law professor Amy Wax argued, “Our country would be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites.” She worried about our “legacy” population, white Americans, being overrun by nonwhite immigrants who, she said, innately lacked the capacity to adapt to Western culture.

In 2024 the senior senator from Missouri, Josh Hawley, gave the keynote speech at the conference. Hawley celebrated Christian nationalism as the core idea animating America. He warned against “cosmopolitans” and “globalists,” both famous tropes for Jews, threatening our country.

This year, Schmitt, a sitting senator, outdid them both. Schmitt opened by reiterating the antisemitic tropes of his senior colleague. America is threatened by the “elites,” he declared, “who rule everywhere but are not truly from anywhere.” This is the “rootless cosmopolitan” trope at the heart of modern antisemitism. They serve “global liberalism” and “global capital” and support mass migration, he continued, a nod to the “great replacement” theory, which blames Jews for replacing white Americans with nonwhite immigrants.

Though he repeats his predecessor’s implicit antisemitism, he went even further with his explicit advocacy of the U.S. as a white homeland.

This speech, and this conference, demonstrates once again that the MAGA coalition’s endgame is about not just fighting illegal immigration, affirmative action, and “DEI.” It is about not just the alleged destruction of nonracial civic nationalism by liberals and their proactive efforts to achieve equity. It is ultimately about a white (Christian) nationalist vision of America that claims ownership of power and resources for white (Christian) Americans alone. All others are here on sufferance and must remember their place as such.

That a sitting U.S. senator should make such a speech without shame or pushback by his party highlights the extent to which it represents where that party now stands.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/09/eric-schmitt-white-nationalism-national-conservatism-conference.html

NBC News Exclusive: DOJ says names of two associates Epstein wired money to should stay secret

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/exclusive-doj-says-names-of-two-associates-epstein-wired-money-to-should-stay-secret/vi-AA1M1Am0


I’ll bet these two are pals of Trump, if not Trump himself.

The coverup continues!

MSNBC: Republicans are probing Wikipedia, a longstanding MAGA target

House Republicans are probing the online encyclopedia over claims of foreign manipulation, anti-Israel bias and antisemitism.

House Republicans have launched an investigation into Wikipedia, a long-standing target of conservative criticism.

For several months, Elon Musk and other conservatives have waged a campaign to portray the online encyclopedia as an oppressive tool of leftist manipulation.

Now a House committee is investigating allegations of “anti-Israel bias” at Wikipedia.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer of Kentucky and South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace, who leads a subcommittee on cybersecurity, sent a letter to Wikipedia’s CEO demanding data, documents and answers to questions stemming primarily from allegations — laid out in a March Anti-Defamation League report — that Wikipedia editors were permitting anti-Israel rhetoric and antisemitic themes to spread on the platform.

Wikipedia officials have refuted the report, saying it included “unsupported and problematic claims.” But the letter says the report “raised troubling questions about potentially systematic efforts to advance antisemitic and anti-Israel information in Wikipedia articles related to conflicts with the State of Israel.” The lawmakers also reference an Atlantic Council report that found pro-Kremlin forces have used artificial intelligence tools to help whitewash and rewrite the story of Russia’s war with Ukraine.

“The House Oversight Committee is investigating manipulation efforts to determine the role and methods of foreign individuals, those at academic institutions subsidized by United States taxpayer dollars, as well as Wikipedia’s awareness and response,” according to a release from Comer’s office.

The lawmakers clearly want to target specific Wikipedia editors. Along with any documents related to state-sponsored efforts to manipulate Wikipedia entries, they’re demanding “records showing identifying and unique characteristics of accounts (such as names, IP addresses, registration dates, user activity logs) for editors” whose conduct has been evaluated by Wikipedia’s committee for resolving editorial disputes.

A spokesperson for the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, told The Hill that it welcomes “the opportunity to respond to the Committee’s questions and to discuss the importance of safeguarding the integrity of information on our platform.”

The investigation is sure to raise questions, considering that Republicans have spent the past several years denouncing anti-misinformation efforts and demonizing efforts to root out foreign manipulation campaigns such as those that have been known to thrive on MAGA-friendly platforms like the Musk-owned X.

https://www.msnbc.com/top-stories/latest/house-republican-wikipedia-israel-bias-probe-rcna228120

Alternet: ‘Turning people against him’: Trump’s approval is ‘cratering’ on every major issue

Barely more than one-third of Americans approve of how President Donald Trump is doing his job, and on key issues, his support is underwater.

Just thirty-seven percent of Americans give President Trump good marks overall, while more than half the country, fifty-five percent, disapprove, according to the latest Quinnipiac University national poll.

The partisan divide is large, with 84% of Republicans saying he is doing a good job, and 98% of Democrats saying he is not. The majority of independents, 58%, agree with Democrats and disapprove.

Just less than three in ten women (29%) approve of President Trump’s performance, while 46% of men do.

On crime, the majority (54%) disapprove of Trump’s performance, just 42% approve.

On the economy, fewer than four in ten (39%) approve, and 57% disapprove.

Similarly, on trade, just 38% approve, while 56% disapprove.

On his efforts to end the Ukraine war, a majority (52%) disapprove, while just 40% approve.

“Voters have little confidence in President Trump’s effort to broker peace in Ukraine, and most voters don’t trust Vladimir Putin to keep a peace deal if one were reached,” Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy wrote. “And though the president has ruled out putting U.S. troops in the war theater to keep the peace, four out of 10 voters would support it,”

And two-thirds of Americans (67%) disapprove of his handling of the Epstein files.

According to the non-partisan group Political Polls, this is Trump’s lowest approval rating in this term.

Critics and strategists weighed in.

Mike Madrid, the top Republican Latino political consultant, remarked, “Brutal poll results for Trump. Just brutal.”

“Striking” is how The New Republic’s Greg Sargent described the poll’s finding on Trump deploying the National Guard, and he noted that Trump’s “overall approval on crime is cratering.”

“Predictably, Trump’s terrible overreach is again turning people against him in an area where he was previously perceived as strong, just as on immigration and the economy,” wrote Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff to U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA). “Per Quinnipiac, independents oppose his DC occupation 61-34. Overall: 56-41 against.”

https://www.alternet.org/trump-approval-2673933698

Raw Story: California just ‘flipped the script’ on GOP after major ‘bluff’ was called: report

California “bluffed” its way into flipping the script on Republicans and Donald Trump, according to a new report.

Politico on Saturday published a story called, How California bluffed its way into a redistricting war with Trump, in which the outlet quotes “nearly 50 people involved with the effort” who “shared details with POLITICO about the tightly guarded process.”

California is currently in the process of potentially altering its district maps in response to Texas’ redistricting. But it started off as a “bluff,” according to reporters.

“When word got out that Texas might undertake an extraordinary mid-decade redistricting at Donald Trump’s behest, a handful of top California Democratic operatives floated an idea to Rep. Zoe Lofgren: Could California respond in kind?” according to the weekend report. “Lofgren, the chair of California’s 43-member Democratic delegation, consulted in June with a trusted data expert who dismissed it as absurd — a foolhardy end-run around the state’s popular redistricting panel with no guarantee of yielding enough blue seats to fully offset Texas. Deterred by those misgivings, California Democrats instead spent weeks putting up a front, dangling the threat of a countermove without making any real plans to do so.”

The piece quotes Lofgren as saying, “It seemed to me worth a bluff… If the Texans and Trump thought they’d go through all of this and they’d end up not gaining anything, maybe they would stop.”

She then added, “But they didn’t stop… They just doubled down.”

However, the bluff soon met reality.

“So did California Democrats, especially Gov. Gavin Newsom. In a matter of weeks, they bluffed themselves into the marquee political contest of Trump’s second term, a high-voltage fight to shape the outcome of the 2026 midterms and the remaining years of his presidency,” according to the outlet.

Summing up, the reporters wrote, “In the end, 87 of 90 Democrats voted to put the maps on the ballot — a display of consensus that [Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas] said was made possible by the California-under-siege mentality that had been building up ever since Trump re-took the White House.”

“It’s Whac-a-mole. We’ve been trying to play defense,” Rivas reportedly added. “But we finally just threw up our hands and said, ‘We’ve got to flip the script.’”

Read more here.

https://www.rawstory.com/california-flips-the-script-gop

Sacramento Bee: Multiple Republicans Join Democrats on Immigration Bill

Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) and other Republican lawmakers have backed the Dignity Act, a bipartisan bill aimed at overhauling the immigration system. The legislation aims to provide legal status for undocumented immigrants, bolster border security, and reform visa policies. If passed, the act would lead to significant changes to current immigration laws, reflecting a push for comprehensive reform.

Salazar said, “It takes a lot of courage to step up and say that you might be part of the solution.” She added, “They did break the law. They are illegals or undocumented.”

Salazar stated, “But they have been in the country for more than five years, contributing to the economy. Those people, someone gave them a job, and they are needed because we need hands in order to continue being the number one economy in the world.”

The Dignity Act grants legal status to undocumented immigrants, reforms asylum screening for better legal access, sets up Latin American processing centers to reduce risky migration, creates STEM PhD work visas, and boosts ICE accountability.

The Dignity Act has received backing from several Republican lawmakers. It also gained support from Democrats like Veronica Escobar (D-TX) and Adriano Espaillat (D-NY).

Escobar (D-TX) said, “I have seen firsthand the devastating consequences of our broken immigration system, and as a member of Congress, I take seriously my obligation to propose a solution. Realistic, common-sense compromise is achievable, and is especially important given the urgency of this moment. I consider the Dignity Act of 2025 a critical first step to overhauling this broken system.”

Immigration attorney Rosanna Berardi questioned the bill’s viability, citing conflicts with enforcement policies under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Critics argued it could undermine efforts to curb unauthorized migration.

Immigration attorney Rosanna Berardi said, “Without congressional action to roll back many of the core immigration elements of H.R. 1—especially the funding and restrictions around detention, deportations, and parole—there’s really no practical space for the Dignity Act’s approach. However, I do think this framework could help create bipartisan conversations focused on creating easier work-visa access and temporary status for migrant workers in industries like agriculture, hospitality, health care and manufacturing.”

Salazar emphasized the need for a comprehensive strategy to meet labor demands and maintain economic stability. If enacted, the legislation would likely spark a reevaluation of national immigration policies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/multiple-republicans-join-democrats-on-immigration-bill/ss-AA1L3St5