Tag: donald trump
Joyce Beatty

CNN Reveals Trump's 'Effing Crazy' Call To Kennedy Center Board Meeting

CNN anchor Kasie Hunt reports President Donald Trump called into his hand-picked Kennedy Center board, shrieking orders to close the Kennedy Center unless he is allowed to put his name on the JFK Kennedy Center building.

“One source told me today that the president himself called into the board meeting and yelled at members, including Democratic Congresswoman Joyce Beatty, whose lawsuit prevented the president's name from being added to the center's exterior,” reported Hunt on Tuesday.

“Another source telling [us] that the heated exchange between Trump and Beatty was, ‘effing crazy,’ with the president blaming the congresswoman for getting the courts involved, saying she was responsible for the downfall of the Kennedy center, according to a person familiar with the matter.”

Trump announced just moments earlier that the Kennedy center board had voted to close the cultural institution, effective immediately. The president also insisted in the post that the renovations to the center won't begin until his name is added to the building. This, after a federal judge prevented the board's latest attempt to do just that.

Hunt then turned to attorney Norm Eisen, who is representing Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH) in her lawsuit against the Trump administration.

“President Trump and his hand-picked cronies on this board are taking the Kennedy Center hostage, and they will not allow it to thrive unless his name is placed upon it. But that's illegal. Kasey,” Eisen said. “Congresswoman Beatty has been fighting this from day one. … She stood up for the law, for the, success of the Kennedy Center. And she stood her ground as we've been doing in court. One last thing. They can vote all they want to shut it down. There is a court order that the Kennedy Center cannot be closed, uh, precisely because of these shenanigans. We're going to keep fighting until we get the Kennedy Center back on its feet — and never with Donald Trump’s name on it.”

Hunt then turned to conservative panelist Scott Jennings, asking him to “help [her] understand — as the possible future White House Press Secretary,” why Trump cared about this amid rising gas prices and voter anger.

“Well, I assume it's because he cares about it,” answered Jennings. “We have a president who actually cares about the arts community, cares about the Kennedy Center. There's strong documentary...closing it...documentary evidence that it needs renovations.”

“But he’s closing it,” Hunt countered. “He's refusing to fund it unless they put his name on the outside of it.”

“Well, it needs to be taken care of. look, he's—”

“But he could take care of it without his name on it,” Hunt blared.

“Look, you asked me why, and I'm telling you: It's because he cares about it,” Jennings insisted.

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet

Right-Wing Media Mock AI Concerns By Citing Climate 'Alarmism' And COVID 'Hysteria'

Right-Wing Media Mock AI Concerns By Citing Climate 'Alarmism' And COVID 'Hysteria'

Right-wing media are following President Donald Trump in dismissing calls to slow down AI development in the wake of multiple hacking incidents as a “hoax,” comparing concerns over AI to “climate change apocalyptic talk” and “COVID hysteria” including support for vaccines.

Reports have surfaced in recent months that rogue AI agents from OpenAI anonymously hacked into AI startup Hugging Face servers and into software service RubyGems. As Reuters explained: “Many incidents where AI agents from developers such as OpenAI and rival Anthropic have hacked or attempted to access external systems have heightened concerns over the increasing capacity of AI models and developers' ability to contain them.” On September 12, both Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman publicly called for a slowdown in AI development, with Altman announcing that his company would be delaying its initial public offering until 2027.

Trump vehemently rejected the idea of an AI slowdown in a series of Truth Social posts on September 14, calling the push for caution a “hoax,” “scam,” and a “SICK conspiracy.” Trump wrote: “The people that say AI is going to destroy the World, and that Data Centers are bad for your neighborhood, are the same people that said, just a short time ago, that the World would be extinguished by ‘Climate Change.’”

The claim that climate scientists’ predictions have failed is not borne out by the evidence — warnings about greenhouse gases causing more warming have now come to pass, with over a decade of record-breaking heat and thousands of excess deaths across Europe in climate-driven heat waves this year alone.

Nonetheless right-wing media followed Trump’s lead, comparing concerns about unregulated AI development with supposedly fabricated climate change warnings and COVID-19 pandemic safety measures like vaccines. (In reality, researchers have repeatedly proven that vaccines limited the spread of COVID-19 during the pandemic, reduced the rate of severe complications and death, and continue to be a safe, effective treatment.)

On his September 14 radio show, Fox host Sean Hannity accused former President Barack Obama of “urging Democrats to fearmonger AI just like Democrats fearmongered and flat-out lied about global warming,” claiming those concerns “turned out to be bunk.” Hannity then reassured his listeners that Trump said that “the U.S. has already put guardrails in place to regulate and prosecute AI companies.”

Dismissing AI warnings on his Daily Wire podcast, Ben Shapiro stated, “This is pretty redolent of the climate change apocalyptic talk. Like all the ice caps were going to be gone, the polar bears were all going to drown, all the rest of it.”

Fox host Will Cain referenced climate change while discussing AI warnings: “Vested interests did stop nuclear [power] and set it back half a century. And that same playbook of fears played out with climate change and COVID. So now, what is so scary about AI?”

Downplaying the “AI apocalypse alarm” during Fox’s The Five, co-host Jesse Watters referenced both climate change and the COVID vaccine, asking, “If I told you the world was going to end if you didn't take this vax, what would you do? Or if the world was going to end because of global warming, what would you do? Same thing's happening here — some people get rich and we all still survive.”

Fox’s Laura Ingraham echoed Watters’ comments later that evening, saying AI concerns reminded her of “the first several months of COVID hysteria.” She later evoked “fearmongering about climate change, same thing. Al Gore's film, Inconvenient Truth, oh my God. That still echoes in politics today.”

Hannity rounded out Fox's evening coverage with yet another comparison of AI fears to climate change and the pandemic.

Decrying “the climate alarmist cult religion,” Hannity said, “Al Gore was preaching from the pulpit of climate alarmism. … All these predictions have come and gone and the time frame he said it would happen, none of it came true.”

“We were lied to about COVID at a high level,” he added. “I just don't trust the government at all in that sense. But I trust America enough that we would use this for good.”

However, the over-the-top comparisons are not limited to Trump and right-wing media dismissing AI concerns. Joe Allen, previously the “transhumanism editor” on former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, opposed AI at a debate held in Dallas during last week's GOP midterm convention by bizarrely referencing “algorithmic immigrants.” Semafor reported:

“You look at the data center, this incubator for algorithmic immigrants,” he said. “They’ve already broken out and invaded other companies. These immigrants are out of control.”
Allen was speaking at Forum, a policy discussion staged at a stylish venue fifteen minutes from the convention center to give the new American right an opportunity to debate some of the policy issues currently dividing it— in particular, the tension between populism’s activist promises and traditional small government, and the rise of artificial intelligence.

(Allen’s opponent at the debate, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, reportedly “compared complaints about AI to the ‘Black Lives Matter hysteria,’ and suggested they were driven by ‘psyops from China.’”)

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Mike Davis

In MAGA Republican Rhetoric, Racism Is Now A Feature, Not A Bug

Racism is no longer a deal breaker — in life or in politics.

It’s a tough truth to face, especially, I admit, for someone whose family members used nonviolence to fight dangerous civil rights battles, forcing a resistant America to live up to its ideals.

But it’s a truth that must be faced. The problem is, not too many are willing to call the backsliding out for what it is. We live in a world where racist words and actions are couched in euphemisms like “racially insensitive” or “racially tinged,” when those words or actions are noticed at all.

Maybe if we all close our eyes and pretend, racism will disappear, as Supreme Court Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asserted when he wrote the majority opinion eviscerating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in the 2013 Shelby decision: “Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

Remembering that as a young attorney in 1982, Roberts wrote that the landmark act represented “the most intrusive interference imaginable by federal courts into state and local processes,” it seems he was just playing the long game.

Today, being called a racist is worse than actual racism.

Consider Vice President JD Vance’s well-received speech at the recent Republican convention/Trump rally in Texas, with reports essentially proclaiming “A GOP Star Is Born.”

His applause line — “We were tired of being called racists for noticing that our country was becoming dirtier and poorer and less safe and less prosperous” — was couched in the language of policy difference over issues such as immigration, crime and culture, instead of being called out as hateful rhetoric that would not have been out of place at a white nationalist rally.

For the man next in line to the presidency, this was not a one-off. This is the guy who spread lies that residents of his home state — at the time legal residents revitalizing Ohio cities and towns — were eating people’s pets. Hard-working men, women and children of Haitian descent paid and continue to pay the price.

I expect to see the ambitious Vance’s words in future campaign ads, maybe alongside images of white South Africans strolling the red carpet the Trump administration has laid down for them.Then, there’s Mike Davis, who is not some random social media blowhard, but a Republican leader, lawyer and Trump ally. Davis worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee under GOP Chair Charles E. Grassley and now leads a group called the Article III Project, which claims to “fight leftist lawfare” and “fearlessly defend” conservative judges.

His recent X post, ostensibly critiquing a speaker at a socialism conference, but containing a message that was clearly designed for a broader audience, was as offensive as it was cliched: “Dear Bitching Minorities: Here’s my proposal for your reparations: One-way tickets anywhere. 6 months of living expenses. Renounce your U.S. citizenship. Never come back. Good luck. You’ll need it. (Especially with that nappy-ass head of hair.)”

So, he wants the people who built this country, who continue to contribute to its prosperity, to just go away? Not a chance.

Unfortunately, there is also no chance that Davis will suffer consequences for his hate or his weird obsession with hair texture.

In today’s GOP, he might just get support and a push to run the Smithsonian, where the stellar visionary Lonnie Bunch, who recently announced his resignation, has served as secretary. I’m sure Davis would love to censor the museums that tell America’s beautiful, horrible, triumphant story, replacing the exhibits with a comic-book whitewash so his racist post would make some kind of twisted sense.

What I haven’t heard are condemnations from GOP elites or media questions asking every Republican at a microphone if he or she supports the Davis solution for making America whiter.

That’s opposed to the inquisition that greets Democrats, asking them to comment on the latest extremist rant from streamers and social media warriors.

The thing is, Republicans could make inroads with more Black voters, if only they pretended to care about them as Americans, or just as human beings.

My mother was a Maryland Republican and elections official who was proud to vote for GOP candidates such as Sen. Charles Mathias. He worked for civil rights, clashed with the Nixon and Reagan administrations over justice policies and was called “the conscience of the Senate” by its Democratic leader, Mike Mansfield. But those days, when party members bucked leadership over issues and actually had a conscience, are in the past.

Not that Democrats are pure of heart when it comes to respecting or just acknowledging one of the party’s most loyal group of voters.

When Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico of Texas recently said, in an interview on MS NOW, that his party has taken Black voters for granted, he got credit for saying out loud what many were already thinking.

Listening carefully would help. Recent history proves Black voters could have saved the party some trouble if only it had paid attention.

In 2022, some Pennsylvania voters pointed out possible character flaws in Senate Democratic primary candidate John Fetterman, who while mayor of Braddock detained a Black jogger while holding a shotgun, and then refused to apologize or simply acknowledge how badly that scenario could have played out.

When the party placed South Carolina first on its primary calendar, and received some pushback from critics who downplayed the importance of the state’s Black Democratic voters, labeling them establishment and controlled by the church and Rep. James E. Clyburn, it was noted by folks who’ve had to be strategic — in voting and in life.

And remember who warned Democrats that Michael “Stop and Frisk” Bloomberg was never going to come close to the presidency, with so many base voters reminding everyone about the hell he put a lot of young Black and brown New Yorkers through when he was mayor.

“Vote for the Democrat, what choice do you have?” may not be the motivation many Democrats think it is.

That is, unless Republicans continue to proudly unleash the racist rhetoric that seems a feature, not a bug, of the party in 2026.

Mary C. Curtis has worked at The New York Times, The Baltimore Sun, The Charlotte Observer, as national correspondent for Politics Daily, and is a senior facilitator with The OpEd Project. She is host of the CQ Roll Call “Equal Time with Mary C. Curtis” podcast. Follow her on X @mcurtisnc3.

Reprinted with permission from Roll Call

Why Is Trump Still Boosting AI? Because He Has Nothing Except The Bubble

Why Is Trump Still Boosting AI? Because He Has Nothing Except The Bubble

Will AI transform the economy? The jury is still out on that one: So far there is little evidence for either the massive job losses or the soaring productivity growth industry leaders threatened/promised, but it’s still early days.

But AI does seem to be transforming U.S. politics. I can’t think of a technology that has inspired so much hate across such a wide political spectrum. Even the leading AI companies are warning about the dangers of their technology and pleading for government regulation to slow it down.

Which makes it more than puzzling that Donald Trump is going all in on AI, claiming that concerns about its dangers are a “hoax” and opposing any kind of regulation.

In so doing, he’s taking a wildly unpopular position. Here’s recent polling from UMass Amherst:

Notice that even a large part of Trump’s base is deserting him on this issue, with a quarter of Republicans disapproving.

So why is Trump posting stuff like this?

Robert Reich has a good post on the subject, urging us to follow the money: As he notes, members of the Trump family have personal financial stakes in the industry. And one motive one should never, ever dismiss in current U.S. affairs is Trump’s personal greed.

I would, however, add two more points.

First, I think Reich is too glib in dismissing the idea that Trump imagines that he knows what he’s doing. “It can’t be,” Reich writes, “that he knows very much about AI.” But does he know that he doesn’t know? That Truth Social post above, in which Trump declares himself perfectly able to manage this wild new technology because he is a “STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT”, is like a textbook illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which incompetent people are highly confident in their own judgment because they’re too incompetent to realize that they’re incompetent.

Second, it’s important to realize how much Trump needs an AI boom.

Trump came into office believing that his tariffs would produce a huge boom in “manly” jobs. In fact, job growth has been weak — and more than all the job gains have gone to women. Meanwhile, tariffs have driven up consumer prices.

And then there’s the Iran war, which has been an economic as well as a strategic disaster. Diesel prices are now well above $6 a gallon. Trump officials love to say that gasoline was over $5 a gallon under Biden, which was true — for one week.

Yet one thing did seem to be going right under Trump II. Enthusiasm for AI was generating a huge investment boom and supporting stock prices. Trump officials, notably Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary — who Edward Luce of the Financial Times now dubs “the Pete Hegseth of the Treasury” (ouch) — had taken to claiming that AI will solve all their problems, ending inflation by reducing costs and curing the budget deficit by generating huge economic growth.

The backlash against AI, then, is taking away the one thing the Trumpists thought they had going for them. So in a way it’s understandable that Trump is trying desperately to hold on to the magic (and possibly endangering the future of humanity, but he doesn’t care about that.)

But of course it won’t work. The AI boom, once Trump’s last remaining political asset, is now a huge liability.

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former professor at MIT and Princeton who now teaches at the City University of New York's Graduate Center. From 2000 to 2024, he wrote a column for The New York Times. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Paul Krugman.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World