Trump taps acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling for permanent role pending Senate confirmation
President Donald Trump on Monday nominated acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling to serve as U.S. labor secretary, sending his pick to the Senate for confirmation. If confirmed, Sonderling would formally assume the Cabinet post after leading the Labor Department on an acting basis since former Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer’s departure in April. He would continue overseeing the department’s efforts to enforce federal labor laws, administer workforce programs and implement the administration’s employment agenda. “It is my Great Honor to announce that I am nominating Keith E. Sonderling, the outstanding Acting United States Secretary of Labor, to be permanent,” Trump announced on Truth Social. “Keith previously served as Deputy Secretary and Chief Operating Officer and, during my First Term, worked at the U.S. Department of Labor as the Acting and Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division. “Throughout his career, Keith has proven his dedication to delivering strong results for the Hardworking People of our Country, and I know he will do an incredible job in his new role,” Trump added. ACTING LABOR SECRETARY SONDERLING: A FAST-TRACK WAY TO GET A JOB WITHOUT COLLEGE DEBT Chavez-DeRemer left the Labor Department in April, when the White House announced Sonderling would serve as acting labor secretary. ACTING LABOR SECRETARY SONDERLING: A FAST-TRACK WAY TO GET A JOB WITHOUT COLLEGE DEBT Chavez-DeRemer’s departure came after a whistleblower complaint accused her of having an affair with a member of her security detail, drinking on the job, creating a hostile work environment and directing staff to perform personal errands at taxpayer expense. The Labor Department’s inspector general is investigating the allegations, which also include claims that Chavez-DeRemer’s husband made unwanted advances toward department officials and that family members routinely sent personal requests to young staffers, according to previous Fox News Digital reporting. ACTING LABOR SECRETARY SONDERLING: A FAST-TRACK WAY TO GET A JOB WITHOUT COLLEGE DEBT Reporting on the complaints indicates Chavez-DeRemer requested staff perform private errands for her and her husband, including picking up dry cleaning, purchasing wine and cleaning out the secretary’s closet, while allegedly using threats to ensure compliance. Meanwhile, other complaints alleged drinking on the job and keeping stashes of liquor around the office, according to the New York Post, which first reported the complaints in January. Chavez-DeRemer has denied the allegations. Fox News Digital’s Louis Casiano contributed to this report.
Emotion and feelings: How Democratic Socialists’ congressional insurgency could come back to bite them
It’s a Democratic identity crisis. Democratic Socialists of America are on the charge, running hot off their wins in the New York Democratic primaries last week. Their victories in multiple Congressional seats – felling both Reps. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., and Dan Goldman, D-N.Y. – signals that the party is ready to move on from the same old, same old. Espaillat chaired the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Goldman was a key House staffer during the first impeachment of President Donald Trump. “Even Dan Goldman’s not good enough for them,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Fox. “That is how radical it’s become.” MAMDANI-BACKED SOCIALISTS LOOK TO TAKE NEW YORK PLAYBOOK NATIONWIDE AFTER PRIMARY VICTORIES Some moderate Democrats are trying to distance themselves from the left. “That’s not the same brand of politics that we have. We’re not those type of Democrats,” said Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., who represents a battleground district. “There’s a new group of Democratic Socialists who are socialists who are not commonsense Democrats. Who are not interested in getting things done. They’re interested in throwing bombs. Not actually solving problems,” said Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J. LURCHING LEFT: MAMDANI-BACKED CANDIDATES OUST ESTABLISHMENT DEMOCRATS Some Democrats are worried how far left candidates command more attention than those in the middle. Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-Mich., worries that the outsized attention garnered by the left sends the wrong impression to voters. “What they don’t want is divisiveness. They don’t want screaming and yelling,” said McDonald Rivet. Mainstream Democrats feel trapped in the middle as the left – specifically the New York City left – wields an outsized media and political megaphone. “Those candidates would not have won in Virginia where I live,” said Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va. Republicans believe they are primed to nationalize the midterms. Republicans can do that by highlighting the extreme views of Democratic Socialists who captured primary victories in New York City. The GOP wants to portray their opponents as veering left. “These are board-certified communists, right?” asked Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan. “They want no police. They want no private property.” President Trump capitalized on the Democratic outcomes in his home city. “The Democrat party is in big trouble because this isn’t stopping with New York,” he forecast. VICTORIES BY MAMDANI-BACKED CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES SPOTLIGHTS GROWING RIFT IN DEMOCRATIC PARTY This shakeup has progressive leaders demanding transformation at the top. “You’re going to see, I think, people voting for new leadership and to change their representation,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. The Democratic Party tapped Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., to deliver their official response to President Trump’s 2025 State of the Union speech. Slotkin is a moderate who won in a battleground race in 2024 – even as the President prevailed in the Wolverine State. But during an appearance on SiriusXM, Slotkin insists on a Democratic Party management switch. “If people can’t understand that the game has fundamentally changed and they can’t adapt, then they need to let others,” said Slotkin. “The old models do not work for people.” Republicans believe House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is vulnerable after the DSA elected their candidates over his preferred picks in New York City. “I think Hakeem Jeffries’ friends and neighbors gave him a big middle finger,” said House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky. “If you lose three elections in your hometown, that’s a pretty big slap in the face.” He added that Democrats “are going further and further to the left to the point where they are full-blown, card-carrying socialists.” And then there is the anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, and in some cases, antisemitic take by some of these candidates. Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio, is a moderate Democrat from a swing district. He’s Jewish and one of the most pro-Israel Democrats in the House. “There are some on the left who use Israel the way that some on the right use immigrants or trans kids as a way to divide. And I think it’s terrible. It’s also just not what voters want us talking about,” said Landsman. HOUSE DEMOCRAT LASHES OUT WHEN GRILLED ON WHETHER SOCIALIST VICTORIES WOULD THREATEN DEM UNITY Yours truly tangled with Rep. John Larson, D-Conn. – who once chaired the House Democratic Caucus. I pressed him about what the party would do about some candidates “who are too far to the left.” “What does that mean? That’s your statement. Did the people of New York vote?” queried Larson. I assured him that they did. “Is that democracy?” asked Larson. “But if some of them are antisemitic,” I countered. “Is that a democracy?” continued Larson. “Will you stand by people if they have antisemitic views?” I followed up. Larson finally addressed my inquiry. His answer crystallized the schism the Democratic Party now faces. “I’m against antisemitism, if that’s your question,” Larson declared. The fact that Democrats are now facing this debate robs them of valuable time on economic issues. Landsman argued that voters would prefer candidates to stick to groceries and the price of gas. Gottheimer echoed Landsman on kitchen table subjects. “We should be focused on ways to actually solve problems like that. Not coming in here and using tea party tactics and trying to divide up the country and pray to socialist ideals,” said Gottheimer. So what is the party to do? DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB “They’re our nominees. We’re going to support them. We’re going to welcome them. They’re going to be part of our caucus and we’re going to unite behind Leader Jeffries,” said Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Oversight panel. But that doesn’t address the fissures. It doesn’t address how voters may perceive the party. And it doesn’t establish if these new Democratic nominees will work on behalf of the party to raise money and advocate for Democrats across the board. Or, will they become professional bomb throwers – ala what the right has endured for a while. “It’s going to be a lot harder to get
Trump unloads after Supreme Court upholds late mail-in ballots in Mississippi
President Donald Trump on Monday blasted a Supreme Court opinion upholding a Mississippi law that allows mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day to be counted. The ruling in Watson v. RNC pitted Trump against some of the justices he appointed and dealt a blow to his push for stricter election rules by upholding Mississippi’s practice of counting late-arriving mail-in ballots. The decision also prompted a rebuke from one of the Republican senators Trump singled out in a scathing response, after the senator noted he already supports legislation requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump nominee, rebuked Republicans’ arguments in the case, writing that as long as Election Day is the statutorily required date on which a vote is submitted and that “election-day statutes do not set a deadline for ballot receipt.” Trump fired back hours later on Truth Social, calling the case a “tremendous loss” for voters’ rights and saying the ruling means Congress must moot it immediately by passing the SAVE America Act. SUPREME COURT RULES ON MAIL-IN BALLOTS RECEIVED AFTER ELECTION DAY The bill, led by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, in the House and Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., in the Senate, would require nationwide voter ID and essentially ban no-excuse mail-in balloting. “It is more important than ever to pass the SAVE America Act,” he said. TRUMP’S SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWS SIGNS OF LIFE IN THE SENATE DESPITE REPUBLICAN REVOLT “There is no excuse for a politician, or otherwise, to be against the above three requirements,” he said, citing voter-ID, proof-of-citizenship, and only distributing mail-in ballots to military members, the sick and disabled and those voters traveling away from their home precinct on Election Day. “There is only one reason to oppose — cheating,” he said, adding that the House approved the SAVE Act in three different iterations. “In a time when there is a powerful Communist movement taking place in our country, one more dangerous than World War I, World War II, Pearl Harbor, or Sept. 11, all Dumocrats (sic) and our five Republican Senate Hold Outs, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Bill Cassidy, and Mitch McConnell must vote to save our country.” WATCH: HAWLEY FUMES AFTER 4 GOP SENATORS HELP SINK TRUMP-BACKED VOTER ID LAW Fox News Digital reached out to Senate leaders John Thune, R-S.D., and Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., as well as each of the senators Trump mentioned. Cassidy incredulously replied that the president may need to fact-check his missive, as the Louisiana Republican is a co-sponsor of the SAVE Act. “I don’t know which staffer misled you, but thank you for your attention to this matter,” Cassidy said, mimicking Trump’s signature statement-closer. Trump and Cassidy have sparred in other respects, but the two appear in agreement on the bill’s contents. However, Cassidy added that it is “irresponsible” to postpone a now-paused Housing bill signing until the SAVE Act is passed because people deserve “relief… for the high cost of housing.” SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER Thune’s office declined further comment, while McConnell’s acknowledged receipt and said the former majority leader would share any comment if he has one in the interim. While Trump grouped all Democrats in opposition, one maverick member of the minority has signaled he would support a pared-down version that would require voter ID. “If the GOP wants real reform over a show vote––put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE,” Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman said in a recent statement. “Keep it basic: PHOTO ID to vote. Stop turning this into a Christmas list and attacking vote-by-mail.” If the Senate were to approve the House-passed version of the SAVE Act, it could upend or at least moot parts of the Supreme Court’s Watson decision. Calls for the SAVE America Act’s passage mounted in the weeks before the decision as critics pointed to California’s ballot tabulation process after actor Spencer Pratt was overtaken by socialist Councilwoman Nithya Raman, D-Los Feliz, and eliminated from the runoff. Critics also cited the slow pace at which Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton were declared general election candidates for governor after a crowded primary.
WATCH: Bill Maher says Vance interview critics wouldn’t be happy unless he ‘punched him in the nose’
Liberal comedian Bill Maher dismissed backlash that he went too easy on Vice President JD Vance during their recent interview, arguing that critics wouldn’t have been satisfied unless the conversation had ended in a physical altercation. “They would never be happy unless JD Vance walked out and I punched him in the nose,” Maher told Fox News Digital. “That’s the only thing that would satisfy certain people.” He continued, “I don’t play that game. I like to actually talk to people.” BILL MAHER’S DIRE MIDTERM ELECTION WARNING TO DEMS AFTER ‘REALLY CRAZY’ SOCIALISTS WIN PRIMARIES Maher faced criticism after Friday’s episode of “Real Time with Bill Maher” interviewing Vance as some argued he failed to challenge the vice president aggressively enough on political issues. “For someone who spends every Friday night railing against the Trump administration, he treated its vice president with kid gloves,” an article in Variety claimed. The two discussed the rise of socialism in the Democratic Party after three far-left progressive candidates won in New York’s primary elections last week. They spoke on how that impacts the trajectory of both sides of the aisle heading into November’s midterms, with Maher even admitting his vote could flip Republican with the direction the Democratic Party has moved toward. BILL MAHER TELLS JD VANCE DEMOCRATIC RADICALISM ON ISRAEL AND SOCIALISM COULD PUT HIS VOTE ‘IN PLAY’ Maher walked the red carpet at the Kennedy Center Sunday night as he accepted the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor, where he spoke to reporters about his conversation with Vance. The comedian, whose political commentary has often put him at odds with Trump and other Republicans, said his opinion of the vice president didn’t change after his interview, as he “talks to these guys all the time,” referring to politicians and Republicans. He shared that his conversations with Republicans usually go well. “Everybody’s a monster till you talk to them,” he said in reference to his interviews with Republicans. He continued, “Are there things we’re never going to agree on? Yeah.” BILL MAHER CALLS OUT TRUMP’S ‘BULLS—‘ TRUTH SOCIAL POST ATTACKING HIM Maher pressed Vance during the interview on the Trump administration’s refusal to concede to losing the 2020 election, claiming it was “rigged” by fraudulent voting, interference and censorship in the election against former President Joe Biden. But Maher still commended Vance for coming on his show, sharing with Fox News Digital on Sunday that despite their disagreements, conversations with politicians like Vance don’t typically turn “hateful.” “They’re happy warriors,” he said in regards to Vance and other Republicans he has interviewed. “You hit them with three really, really hard-hitting things that say ‘you can’t keep doing it,’ and they just answer it,” Maher said. “They evade it. But they don’t hold it against you. It doesn’t turn hateful.”
Alito blasts latest SCOTUS ballot ruling as invitation to ‘voter fraud’ risks
Justice Samuel Alito cautioned on Monday that the Supreme Court’s decision to allow ballots received after Election Day to be counted could lead large sections of the public to view elections as illegitimate. While Alito had legal concerns with the majority’s ruling, arguing that they misinterpreted when the “electorate’s choice” occurs, he closed his dissent by issuing a practical warning. Allowing late-arriving ballots to determine the outcomes of elections long after Election Day will, according to Alito, severely damage the trust Americans place in their electoral system. “Not only is today’s decision inconsistent with statutory text, legal context, historical practice, and precedent; it also threatens to produce lamentable consequences,” he wrote. “The majority’s holding spawns a slurry of troubling election-law questions and risks further undermining Americans’ confidence in election integrity.” SUPREME COURT RULES ON MAIL-IN BALLOTS RECEIVED AFTER ELECTION DAY Alito went on to describe a hypothetical scenario where the outcome of a presidential election hinges on a single state that allows late-arriving mail ballots to be counted. In the scenario described by the justice, one candidate leads by 15,000 votes on election night only for the opposing candidate to slowly gain votes and, a few days before electors are scheduled to vote, pull ahead by just under 100 votes. “If the apparent winner the morning after the election ends up losing due to late arriving ballots, charges of a rigged election could explode,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh also noted during the case’s oral arguments. Alito didn’t simply claim that the ruling could affect how people view elections; he argued that it could open the door for fraud. SUPREME COURT RULES ON MAIL-IN BALLOTS RECEIVED AFTER ELECTION DAY “Today’s decision leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine Americans’ faith in the integrity of this country’s elections. Diverse sources have recognized that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud,” Alito continued. “In 2005, a committee chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker found that absentee voting was ‘the largest source of potential voter fraud’ in American elections.” While instances of voter fraud carried out using mail-in ballots have been recorded, there is no evidence that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 or 2024 presidential elections. Democrats, meanwhile, argue that allowing states to process ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive afterward, is essential to ensuring that all eligible voters have a say in who governs them. SUPREME COURT RULES ON MAIL-IN BALLOTS RECEIVED AFTER ELECTION DAY “I’m relieved the Supreme Court is not interfering with Washington’s mail-in ballot system,” Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., wrote on X. “If you work a shift job, have young kids, or live out in the woods, you can’t just knock off for the day to go stand in line at a polling place. For decades, Washington’s secure vote by mail system has made it easy for these folks to participate in democracy and make their voice heard.” The majority, however, did not address whether allowing late ballots to be counted was good policy, stating that such a consideration is outside the scope of what the court has authority to rule on. “Finally, plaintiffs assert that requiring ballots to be received by Election Day protects election integrity and increases voter confidence in election results,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote. “As we have said time and again, however, policy arguments are properly directed to legislatures, not courts.”
Trump says he will ‘continue the fight’ after Supreme Court declines to review Carroll abuse verdict
President Donald Trump appeared surprised after the U.S. Supreme Court said it would not hear his appeal of a $5 million verdict that found he sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll and later defamed her. The high court declined to take up the case, leaving the $5 million judgment in place. In 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in 1996 inside a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room, awarding her $5 million. In 2024, another jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in a separate defamation case over Trump’s denials and attacks after she accused him. The justices did not provide an explanation for Monday’s decision. “Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to ‘review’ a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met (Decades old celebrity photo line, standing with her husband, does not count!),” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “I will continue the fight against this Weaponization and Lawfare Case against me, including the ridiculous claim of Defamation, with all of my power and strength.” TRUMP REQUESTS E JEAN CARROLL $83M JUDGMENT STAY FOR PENDING SUPREME COURT ACTION ON PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY “This Case is really against the United States of America, and all it stands for,” he added, “and should never be allowed to happen to another President, or Candidate to be!” Trump’s attorneys argued that the trial judge violated federal evidence rules by admitting the infamous Access Hollywood tape — in which Trump is heard bragging about grabbing women by their genitals — and by allowing the jury to hear from two other women who accused Trump of sexual assault, allegations he denies. Carroll’s lawyers countered that the women’s testimony was relevant because the allegations were highly similar, and they noted that Judge Lewis Kaplan’s evidentiary decisions aligned with legal precedents across the country. FEDERAL APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS $83.3M E. JEAN CARROLL JUDGMENT AGAINST TRUMP “Today’s Supreme Court decision affirms once and for all the jury’s unanimous verdict that President Donald J. Trump sexually assaulted and defamed E. Jean Carroll. His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed, and today’s ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions,” said Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney. In a separate statement, Trump’s legal team stated: “The American People stand with President Trump as they demand an immediate end to all of the Witch Hunts, including the Democrat-funded travesty of the Carroll Hoaxes. President Trump will keep winning against Liberal Lawfare, as he continues to focus on his mission to Make America Great Again.” In his Truth Social post, Trump also accused New York state lawmakers of explicitly targeting him. “New York State created a Law, for an instant speck of time, going back many decades, in order to wrongfully ‘nab’ me,” he wrote. “It was tailor-made, and this Injustice cannot be allowed to stand!” The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Iowa Dem who touted ‘strong work ethic’ misses more than half of her House votes
Lindsay James, a state legislator and Democratic candidate for Congress in Iowa, missed over half of her votes in the state’s House of Representatives this past year, records show. In 2026, James missed 177 of 342 votes, according to the legislature’s records, accounting for 51.7% of the whole. The absences clash with assurances James made about how her campaign might impact her legislative duties and has opened her up to Republican-led criticisms that she has prioritized her potential role instead of the one she has now. “Lindsay James promised Iowans that campaigning wouldn’t distract her from the job she was elected to do. That didn’t last long,” Emily Tuttle, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said. DEM REP MIKIE SHERRILL SKIPS 145 HOUSE VOTES AS NJ GOVERNOR’S RACE HEATS UP “James chose her own political ambitions over showing up for work, proving that when given the choice between serving constituents and serving herself, she puts herself first,” Tuttle continued. James’ campaign said that she has a track record of representing constituents well. “Lindsay has always fought for Iowa families, taking on corporate greed and predatory landlords and writing the bill to cap the cost of insulin,” Jackson Smith, a spokesperson for the campaign, said in a statement to Fox. “While Lindsay listens to and works for the Iowans making impossible economic choices caused by Joe Mitchell and his Washington allies, Mitchell has been using his campaign cash to party with Washington insiders and will be a rubber stamp for the policies raising Iowa families’ costs,” Smith said, referring to Joe Mitchell, a former state representative and a Republican candidate for the seat. At the outset of her campaign, James told viewers in an interview that she would continue to prioritize her work in the House of Representatives despite intentions to campaign “full-time.” “Full-time campaigning and, of course, fulfilling my important work in the Iowa legislature,” James said when asked whether she would also continue working as a minister. “You know me, I have a pretty strong work ethic at the capitol, early, very late, providing for my constituents. That will never stop. That’s just who I am and how I’m wired,” James said. Even so, James, who first joined the Iowa House in 2019, has missed several key votes in the chamber. LAKEN RILEY ACT ROILS NJ GOVERNOR’S RACE AS 2 DEMS SKIP ROLL: ‘THE MORE SOMEONE CAMPAIGNS THE LESS THEY VOTE’ Instead of voting on a bill to limit screen time for students in schools, she held a campaign event in Cedar Rapids on April 20, roughly two hours from Des Moines. Just ten days later, James also missed a vote on whether to make animal torture a felony on April 30 to host a meet-and-greet at a brewery in Decorah, Iowa. In a third case, she also skipped the chamber’s consideration of whether to lower property taxes in order to host another candidate activity in Dubuque — a three-hour drive from the capitol. James recently won a Democratic primary earlier this month as she wages a campaign to fill the seat currently held by Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa. SWALWELL’S ‘I SHOULD BE WORKING’ GYM, POOL VIDEOS RESURFACE AS DEM RIVAL HAMMERS HIS MISSED HOUSE VOTES Hinson, who has represented the district since 2021, announced she would not seek reelection as she pursues a Senate seat to replace outgoing Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa.
Embattled Maine Democrat deadlocked with Collins despite controversies in key Senate race, new poll shows
Graham Platner, the populist Democratic Senate nominee in Maine, is in a virtual dead heat in a crucial Senate showdown with longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins, according to a new poll. Platner, the embattled candidate who has been facing a slew of controversies, stands at 49% support among likely voters questioned in a New York Times/Portland Press Herald/Siena poll released on Monday, with Collins at 47%, and 3% of respondents undecided or refusing to answer. Platner’s two-point edge is within the survey’s sampling error, meaning the contest is virtually tied. Collins, a moderate Republican who at times votes against President Donald Trump’s agenda, is running for a sixth six-year term in the Senate. The high-profile and likely combustible and expensive race is among a handful that will determine if the GOP holds onto its slim Senate majority in November’s midterm elections. Republicans currently control the chamber 53-47 and flipping the Senate seat in left-leaning Maine is a key part of the Democrats’ path to retake the majority. GAME ON IN KEY SENATE RACE AS PLATNER CAPTURES DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION Platner, a military combat veteran and oyster farmer who is backed by progressive champions Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Rep. Ro Khanna of California, earlier this month easily defeated two longshot rivals in Maine’s Democratic Senate primary. Platner, who advocates an economically populist agenda as he takes aim at corporate influences and advocates for the working class, also topped two-term Democratic Gov. Janet Mills in the primary. The governor’s name remained on the ballot even though Mills, who had been backed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, suspended her bid this spring after significantly trailing Platner in fundraising and polling. Platner’s victory also came as he was facing one of the roughest stretches of his bid for the U.S. Senate. He was playing defense the past couple of months amid multiple controversies. They included inflammatory online comments made on Reddit, a well-publicized and now covered-up tattoo on his chest that resembled a Nazi symbol, recent reports that he exchanged sexually explicit messages with several women while married, and allegations from ex-girlfriends of a history of rape fantasies, heavy drinking and violent episodes. Platner has called the allegations of violence untrue. THE TEN RACES THAT WILL DETERMINE THE SENATE’S MAJORITY A day before the primary, a former high-level staffer from the Platner campaign wrote in the Washington Post that Platner “is not someone who would be good for Maine or for the country.” The mounting controversies grabbed plenty of attention and triggered some Democrats in the nation’s capital to question whether Platner was damaged goods, but didn’t stop him from riding a populist wave to capture the nomination. More than 9 in 10 Platner supporters questioned in the poll said they had heard about his controversies but that their vote for him was based on where he stands on the issues. Platner, who has acknowledged his battle with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from his three tours of duty in the war in Iraq with the Marines and one tour with the Army National Guard in Afghanistan, apologized for his controversial Reddit posts after some of them made headlines last fall soon after he launched his Senate campaign. And Platner has said he got the skull and crossbones tattoo in 2007 while drinking with fellow Marines stationed in Croatia. He said that he covered up the tattoo with a new design after learning last year that it resembled a Nazi symbol. But allegations from an ex-girlfriend raise questions about Platner’s timeline regarding knowledge of the tattoo. In his primary night victory speech, Platner emphasized that he’s a changed man. “If you believe, as I do, that we can change our politics and change our country, then you must also believe that people can change,” Platner told the crowd. “And the reason I believe that is because I have lived it. And the reason that I have lived it is because of my wife.” DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB The new poll, conducted June 19-26, suggests Platner is having some difficulty winning over some voters who want the Democrats to take back power in Congress. Fifty-four percent of respondents said they’d like to see the Democrats win back the Senate majority in the midterms, five points higher than the 49% who are supporting Platner. And Collins is capturing 10% of voters who prefer the Democrats control the Senate. The poll also indicates that a majority of Maine voters don’t believe Platner has “good character” or the “right kind of moral values” and nearly half say he’s too extreme. By contrast, more than 6 in 10 say Collins has “good character” and the “right kind of moral values” and only a third said she was too extreme for Maine. Meanwhile, some Democratic respondents worried that the 41-year-old Platner, who has never held elective office, would be “too inexperienced.” But there are also warning signs for Collins. A majority questioned said they thought the senator would be too supportive of Trump and even some of her own supporters worry that the 73-year-old Collins is too old to be an effective senator. The senator voted to convict Trump in his second impeachment trial, in 2021, soon after the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. And early last year she opposed the confirmation of now-Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. But she is also remembered for her 2018 vote to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, which eventually helped the court’s conservative majority overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that had legalized abortion nationwide. Beating Collins won’t be easy. Six years ago, public opinion polls indicated the senator was headed to defeat, but Collins defied expectations and won re-election by topping then-Democratic state House Speaker Sara Gideon by nine points. The new survey is the latest to indicate Platner with a slight edge over Collins, although a
Obama takes new swipe at Founding Fathers ahead of America’s 250th birthday: ‘Deep flaw’
Former President Barack Obama took aim at the Founding Fathers ahead of America’s 250th anniversary, saying they held a “deep flaw” for their ties to slavery despite being “geniuses.” “I think sometimes we get confused in thinking that these two stories are separate. They’re intertwined, right? Which is why it’s possible for me to be a great admirer of George Washington, and also acknowledge he was a slaveholder,” said Obama in an interview Sunday with MSNOW. The 44th president’s appearance comes as most Americans prepare to celebrate the nation’s 250th birthday on Saturday with patriotic events across the country, while Obama is using the milestone to deliver a more cautionary message about the state of American democracy. OBAMA KNOCKS FOUNDERS AT PRESIDENTIAL CENTER DEBUT BEFORE AMERICA’S 250TH: ‘FELL TERRIBLY SHORT’ “That does not negate [Washington’s] greatness, it simply acknowledges that there’s a profound deep flaw in these Founding Fathers who were also geniuses and gave us these tools,” Obama said. “It’s that we’re this mixed bag, we’ve got contradictions. And embody the country’s contradictions,” he added. OBAMA KNOCKS FOUNDERS AT PRESIDENTIAL CENTER DEBUT BEFORE AMERICA’S 250TH: ‘FELL TERRIBLY SHORT’ Obama has been making many media appearances leading up to and following the opening of his presidential center in Chicago earlier this month. The expansive center includes a museum, library branch, community programming and is intended as a legacy project tied to Obama’s political roots on Chicago’s South Side. OBAMA KNOCKS FOUNDERS AT PRESIDENTIAL CENTER DEBUT BEFORE AMERICA’S 250TH: ‘FELL TERRIBLY SHORT’ During the center’s opening ceremony, which attracted former presidents and Hollywood elites, Obama took a swipe at the founders. “The success of this experiment was never a given,” Obama said in his speech, referring to the nation’s founding. “In forming our union, the founders fell terribly short of the Declaration’s promise, leaving slavery intact, allowing states to restrict the franchise to white men who owned property. But in drafting a Constitution and a Bill of Rights, they did have the foresight, the genius, to provide us with a framework that allows each generation to make our union more perfect,” he added. Fox News Digital reached out to Obama’s office for additional comment on Monday. During Obama’s early political rise, researchers found that some of his White ancestors had owned slaves in the U.S., a discovery that has resurfaced periodically in political discourse, including in 2019 comments by then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “While a relative owned slaves, another fought for the Union in the Civil War,” then-Obama spokesman Bill Burton confirmed to the Associated Press in 2007 of the future president’s family history.
Thomas, Gorsuch target landmark ruling Trump says protects the ‘fake news’
Two of the Supreme Court‘s conservative justices criticized the majority’s decision not to take up attorney Alan Dershowitz’s defamation case against CNN, saying the high court missed an opportunity to revisit a controversial 1960s defamation precedent. The dissent from the court’s conservative wing effectively called on the justices to revisit long-standing libel precedent, echoing President Donald Trump’s 2016 calls to loosen U.S. libel laws. Dershowitz, who has represented famous figures like Trump, O.J. Simpson and Leona Helmsley, claimed CNN deceptively edited a snippet of his defense during Trump’s first impeachment trial about “quid pro quo[s]” to make it sound like he said the opposite of his fuller statements and used that clip to damage his reputation. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch — appointees of Presidents George H.W. Bush and Trump, respectively — criticized their colleagues for relying on the “actual malice” standard in evaluating whether CNN defamed Dershowitz, arguing the standard is not rooted in the Constitution and instead was created in the Supreme Court’s landmark 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. ISRAELI PM NETANYAHU INITIATING DEFAMATION LAWSUIT AGAINST NEW YORK TIMES OVER CONTROVERSIAL ‘DOG RAPE’ STORY “Predictably, Dershowitz did not prevail under that exacting standard, which this Court created in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Dershowitz now asks this Court to overrule Sullivan and related precedents,” the conservatives wrote. Dershowitz also reacted to the dissent in remarks to Fox News Digital, calling the majority’s standard “impossible” to overcome. “All the judges agreed that CNN lied about me,” he said Monday. “But the majority ruled, over dissents, that I had to prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence— an impossible standard that I believe will be overruled in years to come.” The Sullivan case arose after a Montgomery, Alabama, commissioner sued the Times for libel over a full-page advertisement criticizing how the city treated civil rights protesters. An Alabama jury awarded damages to L.B. Sullivan even though he was not mentioned by name in the ad. The Supreme Court later reversed the ruling, holding that a public official cannot prevail in a defamation case unless he proves the statement was made with “actual malice” — knowing it was false or acting with reckless disregard for the truth. “The actual-malice standard for public figures bears no relation to the text, history, or structure of the Constitution,” Thomas and Gorsuch wrote Monday in Dershowitz’ case. “Instead, the founding generation believed that, if anything, public figures had stronger claims for damages when they were defamed.” As one historical example, Thomas and Gorsuch pointed to the Sedition Act of 1798, which imposed a far lower threshold for defamatory statements about public officials. Then-Rep. Matthew Lyon, D-Vt., was prosecuted under the law for characterizing President John Adams as someone with “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation and selfish avarice” during American tensions with France. JUDGE DISMISSES TRUMP’S $10B DEFAMATION LAWSUIT AGAINST THE WALL STREET JOURNAL OVER EPSTEIN STORY President Thomas Jefferson allowed that law to expire in 1801 and pardoned many caught in its net. More recently, Trump has called for loosening U.S. libel laws, echoing concerns similar to those expressed by Thomas and Gorsuch about the court’s defamation jurisprudence. While running for president in 2016, Trump pledged to “open up our libel laws” if elected to pursue the ideological conglomerate he often labels “fake news.” SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER Journalists who “write purposefully negative and horrible and false articles — we can sue them and win lots of money,” Trump said. He has often singled out defendant CNN more than most – famously warring regularly with its then-White House correspondent, podcaster Jim Acosta. During one 2017 incident, Acosta repeatedly interrupted Trump during a news conference, leading the president to demand he not “be rude.”.” Trump informed Acosta that he would not be taking a question from him because “you are fake news.” “We’re going to open up libel laws, and we’re going to have people sue you like you’ve never got sued before,” Trump said at the 2016 event, going on to further name-drop the Times and Washington Post. The ruling, along with Trump’s own lawsuit against the Ted Turner-founded network over its use of the term “Big Lie” to describe his claims about the 2020 election, leaves open the possibility that the court could revisit Sullivan, though such a shift appears unlikely in the near term. Fox News Digital reached out to CNN for comment on the dissent.