Texas Weekly Online

Texas-trans-white
Menu
Menu

Author: shailender

Judge with intimate ties to Dem Party’s key Russia Hoax players behind latest anti-Trump decision

Judge with intimate ties to Dem Party’s key Russia Hoax players behind latest anti-Trump decision

The judge who ordered President Donald Trump‘s name removed from the Kennedy Center is married to an attorney who has represented a former anti-Trump FBI lawyer, served as counsel to the House Jan. 6 committee and currently represents former President Joe Biden — relationships that Trump blasted as clear conflicts of interest following the ruling. Trump claimed in a heated Truth Social post that U.S. District Court of D.C. Judge Christopher Cooper’s wife, Amy Jeffress, a former Obama-era Justice Department attorney turned top lawyer of Trump’, encouraged her husband to reject Trump’s Kennedy Center renovation plans and remove his name from the building. He pointed to Jeffress’ past and current clients, which include some of his most prominent critics, as evidence that she is “a Radical Left Democrat” who is influencing her husband to rule against him. “Trump Hating Judge wants to keep it open because his wife probably told him to do so!” Trump wrote of Cooper, referring to his rejection of Trump’s plans to close the Kennedy Center for two years for renovations. FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS TRUMP’S NAME REMOVED FROM KENNEDY CENTER, SAYS ONLY CONGRESS CAN RENAME IT Cooper issued his ruling on May 29, finding that the Kennedy Center board exceeded its legal authority when it voted to rename the institution to include Trump’s name. He ruled that only Congress can change the institution’s name based on the Kennedy Center’s founding statute, which makes clear that the venue is dedicated to President John F. Kennedy. Trump also alleged Jeffress “doesn’t use the ‘Cooper’ name because they, as a couple, don’t want people to know that she has a Conflict of Interest with an important Judge.” The president pointed to Jeffress’ professional background, which included serving as a counselor to Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama administration. Trump and his allies have accused the Obama administration of politicizing intelligence about Russian interference in the 2016 election and promoting allegations of ties between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin. The FBI named its investigation into Russia’s alleged ties to Trump’s campaign Crossfire Hurricane. WHO IS NORM EISEN? MEET THE ANTI-TRUMP ATTORNEY REPPING FBI AGENTS SUING THE DOJ Thousands of text messages exchanged between Peter Strzok, a senior investigator on the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane probe, and his then-lover Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer and adviser to Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, became public in 2018. Although Page was not involved in the Russia investigation, the pair’s anti-Trump messages prompted criticism from some who argued the exchanges revealed political bias within the FBI. Jeffress represented Page during congressional scrutiny of the FBI’s handling of its investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for official State Department business. Page was not involved in the Clinton email investigation itself. She later represented Page again in a civil lawsuit against the FBI and the Justice Department, in which she argued that the disclosure of the text messages was improper. Years later, Jeffress served as outside counsel to the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, advising members on legal issues involving evidence, witness testimony and executive privilege claims. The committee examined the causes of the riot, efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and Trump’s actions leading up to the attack. TRUMP’S NAME ADDED TO KENNEDY CENTER FOLLOWING UNANIMOUS BOARD VOTE TO RENAME HISTORIC BUILDING The president also pointed to Jeffress’ law firm, Hecker Fink LLP, formerly known as Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP, which represented E. Jean Carroll in her civil lawsuit against him. Since July 2025, Jeffress has served as Biden’s personal attorney and is representing the former president in a lawsuit seeking to block the Justice Department from releasing transcripts and audio recordings of Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents. “Amy is totally wired into the Left System, from her husband down, and it is impossible for me to be treated fairly,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “He has a total Conflict of Interest, and should be brought up on charges for not revealing these facts.” Appointed by President Barack Obama, Cooper has served on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C., since 2014. The criticism facing Cooper is not the first time he has been accused by Trump or his allies of having a potential conflict of interest. Cooper previously drew scrutiny during Special Counsel John Durham’s prosecution of former Clinton campaign-linked attorney Michael Sussmann, with critics arguing that he should have recused himself because his wife, attorney Amy Jeffress, represented former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, a figure tied to the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation. The Sussmann case stemmed from Durham’s probe into the origins of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Prosecutors alleged that Sussmann falsely told the FBI he was not acting on behalf of any clients when he presented allegations about a purported communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank during the 2016 election. Cooper rejected Sussmann’s effort to dismiss the case before trial and allowed Durham’s prosecution to proceed, but a jury ultimately acquitted Sussmann in May 2022 after a two-week trial overseen by Cooper. Fox News Digital reached out to Cooper’s office, Jeffress, a representative for former President Joe Biden, Page, a representative for Garland, and Hecker Fink LLP for comment. Cooper and Jeffress have been married since 1999. Their wedding was officiated by former Biden Justice Department Attorney General Merrick Garland, who at the time was a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

GOP leverages ICE funding package to make Trump’s controversial $2B fund ‘never exist’

GOP leverages ICE funding package to make Trump’s controversial B fund ‘never exist’

Senate Republicans may need more convincing from the Trump administration that the “anti-weaponization” fund is officially dead, even after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche spelled out its doom on Tuesday.  Many Republicans demanded that the administration make it crystal clear that not only was the nearly $2 billion fund done, but that it would never come back. And at stake is a multibillion package to fund immigration enforcement operations.  During a closed-door meeting Tuesday, Senate Republican leadership assured members that Blanche would lay out the fate of the fund, and hoped that it would be enough to quell dissent among the ranks.  TRUMP ADMIN BACKS OFF CONTROVERSIAL $2B FUND, CLEARING PATH FOR STALLED GOP IMMIGRATION BILL And he did during a hearing in the House, where he repeatedly said that the administration was not moving forward with the fund. “The reasons for the fund, I think, remain as important as they were before, but we are not moving forward with the fund,” Blanche said.  The fund was announced last month as part of a settlement between the Trump family and the Internal Revenue Service, and pitched as a mechanism for people who felt they were targeted by the government to get a financial kickback. Republicans were concerned that without proper guardrails, people convicted of assaulting police officers during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot on Capitol Hill could access the taxpayer cash flow. Some in the GOP wanted President Donald Trump to come out and officially kill the fund.  “I assume if Blanche is saying it, the president must agree,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said. GOP DEMANDS TRUMP KILL CONTROVERSIAL $2B FUND BEFORE REVIVING ICE FUNDING PACKAGE But some Republicans want an even more concrete show from the administration that it’s actually dead and gone.  “I’m not sure that’s gonna be good enough for some people,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said.  Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., contended that if the administration really meant it, it would support legislation to permanently prevent the fund from returning in any form. He planned to push an amendment to the broader, roughly $70 billion reconciliation package that would make sure of that. “I just feel like we just need to do a Wayback Machine and just pretend like this never existed and take whatever steps are necessary to make sure it can never exist or disperse,” Tillis said. “Not in the current environment.”  Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said that Blanche previewed his remarks on the fund to him, and hoped that it would be enough to unite the fractured Republicans to move forward with budget reconciliation this week.  GOP’S PRIMED FOR PRIMARY SEASON PAYBACK ON TRUMP’S MOST AMBITIOUS, CONTROVERSIAL POLICY “I think, as I’ve conveyed to you before, everything comes down to a function of math,” Thune said. “It’s do we have the votes? Do we have 50 votes to execute on getting a bill like that across the floor? Because we have to have Republicans hanging together in order to do that.” Republican leadership hopes to launch the process on Wednesday in order to get the roughly $70 billion package to the House by the end of the week.  Some Republicans are hopeful that it will be enough to get the process back on track.  “If it goes like we’re told it will go, well, there’s a reasonable possibility, then we will move pretty quickly to the reconciliation,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said.  Part of the issue is that if Republicans aren’t on the same page, several Democratic amendments that would both tackle the fund and halt momentum for the package could pass. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was one of several critics of the fund, and she hoped that Blanche would make it “crystal clear that the administration is not going to proceed” with the issue. Whether she or others in the same camp would vote against amendments remained an open question.  “I’m not going to predict what’s gonna happen to a very fluid situation,” Collins said.

Spencer Pratt surges to runoff in LA mayor’s race after angry voters send message to Karen Bass

Spencer Pratt surges to runoff in LA mayor’s race after angry voters send message to Karen Bass

Reality television personality Spencer Pratt appears on track to clear a key hurdle in Los Angeles’ mayoral race as he seeks to unseat incumbent Mayor Karen Bass in November. Bass, who has led the city since 2022 amid a turbulent stretch rocked by her response to wildfires, advanced to a runoff after failing to secure a majority of the vote in Tuesday’s primary election. With no candidate surpassing the 50% threshold, the top two finishers will face off in a November runoff. The anticipated runoff is a symbolic blow to Bass, who was endorsed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., and former Vice President Kamala Harris and has spent decades serving California in a series of elected Democratic offices. Pratt, a first-time candidate known for the MTV reality show “The Hills,” was running in second place as of Wednesday morning. REALITY TV STAR SPENCER PRATT TESTS LA VOTERS’ APPETITE FOR POLITICAL OUTSIDER “Obviously, God wanted five more months of me exposing the failures of our mayor,” Pratt gloated to reporters as the returns came in Tuesday evening.  Pratt has relentlessly hammered Bass on issues that have long plagued the city, including fire recovery, street homelessness and crime. The insurgent candidate holds Bass personally responsible for devastating wildfires that destroyed more than 18,000 structures in the city, including his Pacific Palisades home.  Pratt’s surge appears to have shut out Los Angeles City Council member Nithya Raman, a former ally of Bass who challenged the incumbent from the left and was once viewed as a threat to her bid for a second term. Raman is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and has argued for steering the city in a more progressive direction. Raman has not yet conceded despite running well behind Bass and Pratt as of Wednesday morning. Pratt, a registered Republican, faces an uphill battle to defeat Bass in November if he advances to the runoff election. Less than 20% of voters in the heavily Democratic city identify with the GOP, though Los Angeles’ mayoral contest is officially nonpartisan.  KAREN BASS GRILLED OVER BROKEN HOMELESSNESS PROMISE, BLAMES BUREAUCRACY FOR SLOWED PROGRESS Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who represents a San Diego-anchored seat, told Fox News Digital that Pratt has won a following in the mayoral contest due to widespread voter discontent with Bass’ leadership. “He’s catching fire among ardent historic Democrat voters because Karen Bass has been so ineffective,” Issa said in an interview. “And every time she opens her mouth, she’s talking about more of the same to people who have seen their streets, both crime-ridden and in fact … ineffectively managed.”  Bass, conversely, argues that her leadership is leading Los Angeles in the right direction. “Los Angeles is at a turning point. After decades of rising homelessness, under-built housing and a shrinking police force, it’s Mayor Karen Bass who finally stepped up to change how City Hall works,” Bass’ website reads. “Homelessness is down, more housing is being built, and the LAPD is hiring new officers,” it also claims. Fox News Digital’s Leo Briceno contributed reporting.

Jeffries declines to back Wasserman Schultz as Black leaders revolt over district switch

Jeffries declines to back Wasserman Schultz as Black leaders revolt over district switch

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., is facing mounting backlash from some Black leaders over her decision to seek re-election in a majority-minority district, a move that appears to be costing her support from the highest-ranking Black Democrat in Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., declined to endorse Wasserman Schultz’s re-election bid Tuesday after she entered the race for the plurality-Black district, where she faces four Black opponents in the Aug. 18 primary. “Haven’t made a decision, as it relates to that particular race,” the lead Democrat said at a news conference when asked if he supports Wasserman Schultz’s run for the Fort Lauderdale-based seat. Jeffries said he’s spoken to Wasserman Schultz, a member of his leadership team, about the race, but stopped short of offering his support. REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: DEMOCRATS SAY THEY CAN STILL FLIP THE HOUSE DESPITE GOP REDISTRICTING GAINS IN THE SOUTH “Everybody has a right to run where they see fit. They’ve got to make their case to the people that they hope to represent moving forward,” he said. “I think we all recognize the sensitivities of the moment in terms of an unprecedented Jim Crow-like assault on Black political representation that has been unleashed by the Supreme Court’s outrageous decision to gut the Voting Rights Act,” he added, invoking the court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, which curbed the use of race in the drawing of electoral districts and spurred redistricting in several Republican-led states affecting majority-minority districts represented by Black Democrats.  “And it’s an environment that all of us need to be sensitive to as we move forward,” he said. Jeffries’ comments come as Wasserman Schultz seeks to weather fierce criticism from some local Black leaders over her decision to run in the district. The seat has been represented by a Black lawmaker for more than three decades. Elijah Manley, a progressive Gen-Z activist running in the Democratic primary, slammed Wasserman Schultz in a statement posted to social media. “First, she said the CBC [Congressional Black Caucus] encouraged her to run. The CBC Chair said they did not,” Manley wrote. “Then she went on TV and said that Leader Jeffries was supporting her. Jeffries just declined to endorse her.” “It is not a good day to be named Debbie Wasserman Schultz in Florida’s 20th District,” he continued. DESANTIS SIGNS FLORIDA REDISTRICTING MAP TO POTENTIALLY FLIP 4 HOUSE SEATS RED Wasserman Schultz, however, will likely have a significant fundraising advantage over her primary opponents. Her campaign account has more than $2.5 million in the bank, according to recent Federal Election Commission filings. Former Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., previously occupied the solidly blue seat before she resigned amid an expulsion threat and House Ethics Committee investigation earlier this year. Cherfilus-McCormick is running again for the seat despite facing a pending criminal trial tied to allegedly stealing more than $5 million in disaster relief funds, among other charges. Former Broward County Mayor Dale Holness and musician Luther Campbell are also vying for the Democratic nomination. Florida Republicans carved up Wasserman Schultz’s safe Democratic seat as part of a new GOP-friendly congressional map signed into law in May. Wasserman Schultz previously served as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, during which her tenure was rocked by the release of internal emails disparaging Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign. She first won election to the House in 2004. Fox News Digital reached out to the Wasserman Schultz campaign before publication.

WATCH: Dem scolds Homeland Security chief to ‘calm down’ after hearing derails over alleged ‘pattern’

WATCH: Dem scolds Homeland Security chief to ‘calm down’ after hearing derails over alleged ‘pattern’

A Senate Appropriations Committee hearing was derailed Tuesday after Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin got into a heated exchange, prompting the Democrat to tell Mullin to “calm down.” Van Hollen, who is best known for flying to El Salvador to meet with controversial illegal immigrant and alleged gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia, accused the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of having a “pattern” of abuse while enforcing immigration law. He pointed to several recent DHS-involved shootings, including those involving Venezuelan national Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis and activists Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota. Mullin pushed back against the allegation as an “exaggeration of words,” saying, “When you say there’s a pattern, there’s not a pattern.” “Oh, I would say three in a row is a pattern,” retorted Van Hollen, to which Mullin shot back, “No, sir… a pattern of three people when we average 1,900 a day is not a pattern.” TRUMP ADMINISTRATION NAMES ROSARIO ‘PETE’ VASQUEZ TO SERVE AS NEXT US BORDER PATROL CHIEF Van Hollen insisted “there was a pattern.” As the two talked over each other, Van Hollen shook his head, saying, “Let’s get out the dictionary, put your semantics aside, the reality is this is a big problem.” He pressed Mullin to commit to sharing evidence from the federal officer-involved shootings to Minnesota authorities. “It sounds like you’re not willing to share evidence with the state authorities who are trying to get to the bottom of this. And I will just say, Mr. Secretary, that given the statements that came out of this administration, including the White House, it is hard to trust this administration to do an independent investigation,” said Van Hollen. “But yet you trust your last administration?” Mullin fired back. “I’m just saying if we’re calling an apple what an apple is and an orange what an orange is, don’t sit there and start cherry-picking one administration to believe and another administration not to believe,” Mullin continued. In response, Van Hollen raised his hands and said, “Mr. Secretary, just, just please calm down.” MARKWAYNE MULLIN GOES OFF ON DEMS’ ‘GARBAGE’ MEMORIAL DAY ‘POLITICAL STUNT’ AT ICE FACILITY During the hearing, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., pressed Mullin to commit to abiding by court orders, citing a federal judge’s claim that DHS had violated just under 100 orders in Minnesota. Murphy also criticized DHS for “spending money like stone drunk sailors,” including on “the massive detention centers that you are building.” Murphy asked Mullin, “Now that you are on the job, can you commit to us that if a court judges something ICE is doing, something DHS is doing as illegal, unconstitutional, tells you to stop, that you will comply with the court order?” Mullin answered, “We will never break the Constitution, and we’re not going to break the law, but we’re going to enforce our nation’s laws, and we’re going to enforce the laws that you guys passed and that we implement. We will never go outside that. And if we do, we’ll hold each other accountable for that.” “But that doesn’t sound like the same thing as committing that you will obey a court order,” pressed Murphy. “Will you, or will you not implement court orders?” GOP DEMANDS TRUMP KILL CONTROVERSIAL $2B FUND BEFORE REVIVING ICE FUNDING PACKAGE In response, Mullin said, “If we didn’t think courts were politicized, then I would probably be able to answer that. But we see courts over and over again that use their bench for their political opinion, not just the rule of law.” He chided Murphy, saying, “Don’t put words in my mouth,” adding, “What I’m saying is we will enforce the law, and we’re never going to break the Constitution.” Looking aside to his colleagues on the committee, Murphy remarked, “Listen, if you’re a Republican or Democrat on this committee, you should be really, really freaked out.” “We should be really concerned about the rulings that come out of the courts, and how often they get overturned,” retorted Mullin.