The Right Wing

In his New York Times column and frequent appearances on MS NOW, journalist David French isn't shy about attacking President Donald Trump from the right. Like other Never Trump conservatives — from attorney George Conway to MS NOW's Nicolle Wallace to The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson — French believes that Trump and the MAGA movement have been terrible for the GOP and terrible for conservatism.

But French examines MAGA's belief system in his December 14 column for the Times. MAGA, according to French, believes that Trump is fighting to save the United States from a "death spiral" — and that combination of anger and "despair" is one of the things that makes MAGA and the "New Right" so dangerous.

"In this telling," French explains, "the 'strong men' of the American past had created a glorious and powerful nation. Our peace and prosperity had spawned a weak and feckless generation that had squandered America's strength and cultural identity, and now, it was time for hard men to arise to reclaim what was lost. This view of America's glorious past is indispensable to understanding MAGA's appeal — and the extremism of MAGA youth. After all, the slogan, 'Make America Great Again' implies the loss of greatness."

French continues, "This sense of loss provides the intellectual and — crucially — emotional foundation of the right's authoritarian turn. It's hard to overstate how much the New Right idealizes America's past. Online spaces are full of memes and images, for example, of families from the 1950s in idyllic settings, often with the caption, 'This is what they took from you.'"

The New Right, French observes, typically "contrasts its vision of a glorious past with a miserable present."

"Now, combine that hyperbole with smartphones and social media, and you've got a recipe for a nonstop sense of alarm," the conservative New York Times columnist warns. "I can open my Twitter feed and see video after video of outrageous conduct, and no amount of telling myself that these are isolated incidents in a nation of over 340 million people can blunt their emotional impact."

David French's full New York Times column is available at this link (subscription required).

In a November 20 column, conservative Washington Post opinion writer Marc A. Thiessen — best known for his frequent appearances on Fox News — sounded the alarm about white nationalist Nick Fuentes' relationship with the Republican Party and the MAGA movement. Thiessen warned Republicans that they will suffer politically if they don't distance themselves from "overt racists" like Fuentes.

Thiessen wrote, "Tucker Carlson's effort to bring neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes into the mainstream of the conservative movement is not only morally reprehensible; it is a path to political suicide for the right. Those defending or excusing Carlson's sane-washing of Fuentes need to ask themselves a simple question: Do they want to be a majoritarian movement or not?"

But in an article published on December 13, The Atlantic's Ali Breland laments that Fuentes is expanding, not reducing, his outreach.

Fuentes has a show that airs on the far-right Rumble online. Breland spent 12 hours watching it, and one of the journalist's takeaways is that Fuentes' "momentum" is real.

"Since Fuentes appeared on Tucker Carlson's podcast at the end of October," Breland explains, "Republican leaders have started to ask themselves just how much sway he has over the party. Fuentes has built an army of fans, who call themselves 'Groypers,' and his style of bigoted trolling has become the lingua franca of the young, ascendant right. Each episode I watched garnered at least 1 million views on Rumble. Fuentes has attracted attention for years, but as he's quick to remind his audience, he's operated from the fringes, pounding on the doors of mainstream conservatism and meeting fierce condemnation."

Breland adds, "Now, Fuentes has momentum — and based on what I saw, he's laying the groundwork to go even bigger."

The Atlantic staffer notes that Fuentes show on Rumble is "at the core of his political project."

"Each episode, after finishing his monologue, Fuentes begins a second segment: a mailbag-esque 'super chat' during which, for a minimum fee of $20, his fans can ask him questions," Breland observes. "Fuentes' financial situation is opaque, but he seems to bring in a significant amount of money from listener questions. I saw him receive sums as large as $1000 from a single donor, identified only by the username Zion_Don, who donated on four of the five nights I watched. In one episode, Fuentes accidentally shared his screen with the audience, revealing that he had made at least $5192 in the span of a few hours."

Breland adds, "The chat is just one of his several revenue streams. Fuentes repeatedly encouraged his audience to buy merch, including a $40 t-shirt that displays his face on the back…. Night after night, I watched Fuentes lay out his strategy for maintaining his momentum…. Fuentes has already infiltrated the right. Now, he's trying to make his movement a permanent fixture of it."

Read Ali Breland's full article for The Atlantic at this link (subscription required).

Like attorney George Conway, retired federal judge J. Michael Luttig is a prominent figure in the conservative legal movement who became an outspoken Never Trumper and rooted for Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in the United States' 2024 presidential election. Luttig repeatedly warned that if Donald Trump won, he would do everything he could to undermine the rule of law and push the U.S. in an authoritarian direction.

Trump is now almost 11 months into his second presidency, and Luttig is still sounding the alarm. During a "How to Fix It" vodcast posted on the conservative website The Bulwark on December 14, Luttig discussed his worries about Trump with host John Avlon (formerly of CNN) and former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson but also offered some solutions. Luttig and Johnson are now co-chairs of the American Bar Association's bipartisan Task Force on American Democracy.

Luttig warned that 2025's Republicans "almost universally favor more limited access to voting because they believe that the political demographics have moved away from them."

Luttig told Avlon and Johnson, "The president of the United States has literally corrupted America's democracy and its rule of law. For the first time in American history, John — in almost 250 years, America has never experienced anything like this at all. Not a single time in American history."

One of the solutions Luttig offered was "civics education."

The retired conservative judge told Avlon and Johnson, "For years now, there has been a decline in the civics knowledge of American citizens…. You cannot have a democracy that is enforced by partisans at the election booth. That, of course, is what has occurred over the past several cycles. We must fix this if we fix nothing else."

Johnson laid out some ideas to combat Americans' "distrust of government."

The former DHS secretary told Avlon and Luttig, "We talk about how Americans distrust their government…. Trust in government has spiraled downward. Americans are drowning in conspiracy theories; they're deeply suspicious of the institutions of government. I believe — we believe — that elected politicians today have had a lot to do with that. They have pandered to that level of suspicion with extreme rhetoric, appealing to the extreme right and extreme left. And so, a big part of what we believe needs to be done to restore our democracy is reincentivize political behavior."

Johnson continued, "The way you reincentivize political behavior is you get politicians incentivized to appeal to the political center as opposed to the political extremes. Open nonpartisan primaries is a big step in that direction."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

During his first presidency, Donald Trump bitterly clashed with some of his own appointees to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) — including former Attorneys General Bill Barr and Jeff Sessions. And ex-FBI Director Christopher Wray, another Trump appointee, resigned in late 2024 rather than waiting to be fired.

Trump, however, has made a point of only choosing MAGA loyalists for DOJ and FBI. Among them: U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino, and federal prosecutors Jeanine Pirro and Lindsey Halligan.

But on Monday, December 8, Trump loyalist Alina Habba announced her retirement from DOJ's District of New Jersey. And Salon's Garrett Owen, in an article published on December 14, reports that Trump keeps stumbling in his efforts to use DOJ as a tool of revenge against his foes.

"Trump's interim U.S. attorneys are failing one by one," Owen explains. "Alina Habba, his embattled top attorney for New Jersey, resigned on Monday. A former lawyer for Trump, she was found to be illegally serving in her interim role after continuing past her 120-day mark…. Lindsey Halligan, the president's former personal lawyer, was explicitly picked to indict and prosecute two of Trump’s most high-profile enemies: former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James…. James was ready to face a new indictment surrounding alleged mortgage fraud. But on December 4, a grand jury declined to indict her."

Owen continues, "The Justice Department then attempted to indict her for a third time — and the second time in one week — but they failed again. When the department will follow up with Comey is unclear. For the moment, it is missing a lawfully serving U.S. attorney."

Owen notes that although longtime DOJ prosecutors "cautioned against charging Comey due to insufficient evidence," Halligan "did it anyway."

"The Justice Department has no clear prosecutor," Owen observes. "Instead, it has questionable cases, indictments made possible only by manipulation that have drawn the ire of federal judges and cast what Trump wanted to be a highly-publicized case of political revenge into a fly-by-night legal circus."

Garrett Owen's full article for Salon is available at this link.

For most of his life, Doug Wilson — the 72-year-old pastor of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho — was a fringe figure even on the Religious Right. Wilson's Christian nationalist views were so extreme that he gained a reputation for being to the right of familiar evangelical fundamentalists like Liberty University's Rev. Jerry Falwell Sr., the Christian Broadcasting Network's Rev. Pat Robertson, and Pentecostal televangelist Jimmy Swaggart.

But during Donald Trump's second presidency, Wilson has become increasingly visible. Trump's allies, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, openly embrace Christ Church.

Religion News Service (RNS) reporter Tracy Simmons examines Wilson's growing prominence in the MAGA movement in an article published on December 12.

"Critics say that Christ Church's renown has less to do with the Almighty than with Wilson's dedication to Christian nationalism and his ties to like-minded officials in the Trump Administration and among its allies," Simmons explains. "Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has attended a Christ Church-affiliated congregation in Tennessee and has amplified Wilson's most controversial views, including his argument that women should not be allowed to vote. In the space of a month in April 2024, Wilson was interviewed by Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk on their respective podcasts."

Wilson, who believes that Christ Church is now "punching about our weight," started out as a Baptist but later moved to a severe form of Calvinism.

"Wilson came to national attention in 2003, when he organized a conference at the University of Idaho at Moscow about revolutions throughout U.S. history," Simmons explains. "Some in the community picked up on a booklet titled 'Southern Slavery, As It Was' that Wilson had co-authored some years earlier arguing that slavery, besides being allowed for in the Bible, was not as harsh in the antebellum South as is commonly portrayed. Soon, the campus and Downtown Moscow were plastered with flyers referring to Wilson’s university event as a 'slavery conference'…. To maximize his footprint in Washington, Wilson planted a church there this year, introducing what Wilson critic Kevin DeYoung called 'the Moscow mood' — cultural engagement 'with a spirit of … having fun while you’re doing it.'"

Read Tracy Simmons' full Religion News Service (RNS) article at this link.

Although MS NOW host Joe Scarborough is a blistering critic of President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement and rooted for Joe Biden in 2020 and Kamala Harris in 2024, the Never Trump conservative and former GOP congressman remains a staunch defender of pre-MAGA Reagan and Goldwater conservatism. The Republican Party, as Scarborough sees it, took a wrong turn when it went MAGA.

During a Friday, December 12 rant on MS NOW's "Morning Joe" — which he hosts with liberal Mika Brzezinski — Scarborough argued that Trump is dropping the ball badly on the economy and that Republicans are destined to suffer in the 2026 midterms if they echo Trump's claim that "affordability" is a Democratic "hoax."

Scarborough said of Republicans, "They are setting themselves up every single day for political disaster next year….. It is astounding to me."

The "Morning Joe" host stressed that while Wall Street millionaires and billionaires are doing well in the stock market, many everyday Americans are struggling because of high prices.

Scarborough told Brzezinski, "Bill Clinton was able to say to Americans, 'I feel your pain.' They believed him. He was extraordinarily successful as a politician for decades because of that…. Now, (Trump's) problem is we have a divided economy. You have the top 10 percent of Americans that account for over 50 percent of our GDP this past year."

The Never Trump conservative continued, "So, if the GDP is doing well and the stock market is doing well…. Working Americans, middle Americans, middle-class Americans who are struggling to get by —they're not feeling that part of the GDP. And so, Donald Trump can't feel their pain and has never claimed to feel their pain."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Ten and one-half months into his second presidency, Donald Trump continues to be dogged by the very thing that imperiled former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 election: inflation.

The United States, as liberal economist Paul Krugman has often noted, enjoyed record-low unemployment during Biden's presidency. But Trump hammered Biden and Harris relentlessly on inflation during the presidential race, and that messaging helped him pull off a narrow victory of roughly 1.5 percent in the popular vote. Now, Trump is the one facing voters who are frustrated over the economy.

In an article published by MS NOW on December 12, journalist Jack Fitzpatrick (formerly of Bloomberg News) stresses that Republicans need a unified message on "affordability" but are flailing badly.

"Republicans insist they have a plan to deal with affordability issues," Fitzpatrick explains. "The problem is, if you ask 15 Republicans in Congress what that plan looks like — as MS NOW did this week — you're likely to get 15 different answers. For most Republicans, the responses were divided into two camps: a new health care bill or the reconciliation package Republicans passed over the summer. Conservatives have pushed for a partisan follow-up to the reconciliation bill, pointing to proposals on health care and housing. But other Republicans are urging leaders to more vigorously sell voters on the tax cuts already enacted in July."

Fitzpatrick adds, "When pressed for a specific plan on affordability, however, no GOP lawmaker was able to point to a fully formed proposal — at least, not a single proposal."

Fitzpatrick reports that Reps. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisconsin) and Ralph Norman (R-South Carolina) are insisting that Republicans have a plan on high prices but aren't offering specifics. But MAGA Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) told MS NOW that GOP lawmakers "have to have more conversations and actually get something to the floor."

Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) told MS NOW, "Messaging is something that the House of Representatives — the Republicans in the House — need to do a better job on."

Sen. John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) believes that Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) needs to be a lot more proactive when it comes to pursuing a health care bill.

Kennedy told MS NOW, "I just think (Thune is) making a mistake — a big, big mistake. And we will look back and go, 'What planet were we living on?' Especially if the midterms don't go well for us."

Read Jack Fitzpatrick's full article for MS NOW at this link.

Ten and one-half months after returning to the White House, Donald Trump hasn't had nearly as many conflicts with administration officials and appointees as he did during his first presidency. Trump, this time, has made a point of picking MAGA loyalists who are unlikely to question him — unlike all the traditional conservatives he fired or forced out when he was in the White House before, from a secretary of state (Rex Tillerson) to two U.S. attorneys general (Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr) to a national security adviser (John Bolton) to a White House chief of staff (John F. Kelly).

But according to Salon's Heather Digby Parton, Trump may have some firings in mind for 2026.

"Staffing of the White House during the president's first term was famously a constant state of chaos; the list of resignations and dismissals was a mile long," Parton explains in an article published on December 11. "But as before, Trump rarely faced the people he was firing. FBI Director James Comey — whom Trump is currently attempting to put in prison — learned of his termination in May 2017 while watching cable news on a business trip to California. Trump never spoke to Comey personally, but he did order that the former director couldn't travel back to Washington, D.C. on the FBI plane, forcing Comey to take a commercial flight."

Parton continues, "Rex Tillerson, Trump's first secretary of state, was informed that he was fired while in the bathroom. In 2017, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was given the duty of firing Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci, adviser Steve Bannon and dozens of others, before being pushed out himself in December 2018. The president's second term has been different."

For his second presidency, Parton notes, Trump has chosen an "insufferable crowd of MAGA influencers, Fox News toadies and hardcore loyalists that have proved themselves to him over the course of the previous decade in the trenches." And many of them have been "egregiously unqualified."

"So far, this new approach has resulted in very little turnover," Parton observes. "There have been a couple of instances where someone hasn't worked out. But instead of firing them, he has taken to promoting people to different jobs…. But as we approach the first anniversary of Trump's second inauguration, rumblings of impending personnel changes are growing louder."

The Salon reporter continues, "Most are centered on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has produced the most scandals of any Trump appointee…. Last week, The Bulwark broke the story, since confirmed by other outlets, that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is also on the chopping block…. Finally, there's FBI Director Kash Patel, who seems to spend most of his time jetting around on the FBI plane with his country-singer girlfriend."

Heather Digby Parton's full article for Salon is available at this link.

A top FBI official struggled to explain his claim that Antifa is the “most immediate violent threat” America is facing, as he was challenged to provide details.

Former Trump FBI Director Christopher Wray stated in 2020 congressional testimony that Antifa is “not a group or an organization. It’s a movement or an ideology.” The BBC has explained that Antifa is “a loosely organized, leftist movement that opposes far-right, racist and fascist groups.”

“Antifa is short for anti-fascist,” BBC added. “It is a loose, leaderless affiliation of mostly far-left activists.”

House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie Thompson on Thursday asked Michael Glasheen, FBI National Security Operations Director, to describe “organizations that pose, on the domestic side,” the number one and number two threats to the homeland.

Glasheen asked for clarification.

“Any domestic terrorist organizations that poses a threat to the homeland as we speak,” Thompson replied.

Pointing to President Trump’s designation of Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, Glasheen said, “That’s our primary concern right now.”

He described Antifa as “the most immediate violent threat that we’re facing on the domestic side.”

“So, where is the Antifa headquartered?” Thompson pressed.

After a pause, Glasheen said: “What we’re doing right now —” before Thompson cut him off.

“Where, in the United States, does Antifa exist?” he asked. “If it’s a terrorist organization — and you’ve identified it as number one.”

“We are building out the infrastructure right now,” Glasheen responded.'

“So what does that mean?” Thompson pressed. “Where do they exist? How many members do they have in the United States as of right now?”

“Well, that’s very fluid,” Glasheen said, describing it as “ongoing,” before comparing the situation to Al Qaeda and ISIS.

“I asked one question, sir,” Thompson replied. “I just want you to tell us. If you said Antifa is the number one domestic terrorist organization, operating in the United States, I just need to know where they are, how many people. I don’t want a name. I don’t want anything like that. Just, how many people have you identified with the FBI, that Antifa is made of?”

“Well, the investigations are active,” Glasheen replied.

“Sir, you wouldn’t come to this committee and say something you can’t prove. I know. I knew you wouldn’t do that. But you did.”

Democratic Rep. Delia Ramirez (Ill.) lambasted Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a Thursday hearing before the House Homeland Security Committee, alleging she "lied" under oath to Congress.

During the hearing, Ramirez countered claims by both Noem and the Trump administration that Americans aren't being detained or deported by the Department of Homeland Security.

"Secretary Noem, you lie, and you lied to the American people. I will be including into the record an article by ProPublica from October 16th, 2025, entitled 'We found that more than 170 U.S. citizens have been held by immigration agents,'" Ramirez said.

Noem began smiling, and Ramirez interrupted her remarks, saying, "There's nothing [to smile] about US citizens" being detained. Noem started to speak, but Ramirez put up her hand, "I'm sorry. That's very inappropriate. Let me continue."

Ramirez played a video of Noem, during a press conference, claiming that the administration had "targeted the worst of the worst," including "violent criminals" who are "breaking our laws."

Ramirez then included in the record an NBC report saying 75,000 non-criminals have been arrested by Homeland Security.

"And it is your obligation as a member of the executive branch to honor decisions made by the highest court of the land. Yes or no, Secretary?" asked Ramirez.

Noem insisted they abide by all court orders.

Tensions between the Trump Administration and Venezuela escalated when, on Wednesday, December 10, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that an oil tanker had been seized off of the Venezuelan coast in the Caribbean. Three officials, interviewed on condition of anonymity, told the New York Times that the tanker was carrying Venezuelan oil.

The incident followed a series of U.S. military attacks on Venezuelan boats that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth allege were smuggling illegal drugs headed for the United States. Many critics of Trump's Venezuela policy are describing the attacks as "extrajudicial killings," alleging that the Trump Administration isn't following the rules of war.

Politico legal analyst Ankush Khardori, a former federal prosecutor for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), addresses the legality of the boat strikes in an article published on December 11.

"Perhaps not surprisingly, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and senior military leaders have faced the worst of the political uproar from the Trump Administration's boat strikes off the coasts of Central and South America," Khardori explains. "The campaign has produced at least 87 deaths and one of the few episodes of bipartisan pushback in Trump's second term following the revelation that the U.S. military conducted a 'double tap' strike on an alleged drug boat that intentionally killed two survivors of an earlier strike. But very serious questions about the legality of the effort in its entirety — even setting aside the double tap strike — should be directed at the Trump Administration's top lawyers."

Khardori continues, "In particular, there is a dubious, but still classified, memo that was reportedly produced over the summer by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel that signs off on the campaign and asserts that everyone in the chain of command is entitled to criminal immunity because the United States is said to be engaged in an armed conflict with drug cartels."

If any activity associated with the Venezuelan boat strikes are found to be illegal, Khardori warns, Trump officials won't enjoy the presidential immunity protections that Trump himself enjoys.

In its Trump v. the United States decision of 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, 6-3, that presidents enjoye absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for "official" acts but not "unofficial" acts committed while in office. The Nation's Elie Mystal, a scathing critic of the ruling, argued that it was dangerous because it give presidents "absolute" immunity rather than merely "qualified immunity."

Khardori notes that Trump v. the United States only offers immunity protections to Trump, not to others involved in the Venezuela operation.

"Trump may be immune from criminal prosecution in the U.S. thanks to the Supreme Court, but everyone else involved, in theory at least, faces the risk of federal prosecution in a future administration unless Trump at some point grants some or all of them a pardon," according to the former federal prosecutor. "For all of the Trump Administration's bravado, getting legal signoff for the boat strikes may not have been as simple as it now appears. Multiple media outlets have reported that proponents of the strikes were forced to push aside or ignore government lawyers who concluded that the military campaign is unlawful or otherwise questioned its legality."

Ankush Khardori's full article for Politico is available at this link.

Republicans are growing annoyed with President Donald Trump's pardons and commutations.

The Washington Post reported Monday that Trump has granted clemency to about 100 people accused of drug-related crimes in his first year in office.

“I wouldn’t have pardoned those people,” Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY) said of Reps. George Santos (R-NY), Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and Honduran President Orlando Hernández, NOTUS reported. “But I’m not president.”

The Cuellar pardon in particular reportedly triggered “buyer’s remorse” from Trump, who ranted on Truth Social that the Democrat showed “no loyalty” because he refused to switch parties.

Comer's comments come as the House Oversight Committee chair attacks former President Joe Biden’s pardons and commutations, arguing that any signed with an “automatic signature” are invalid and launching an investigation into the practice. NOTUS noted that his criticism of specific Trump cases suggests broader Republican unease with the current wave of pardons.

Comer claimed he has "always been an advocate for pardon reform."

Senate Judiciary Republican Thom Tillis (R-NC) said the pardons prompted “more fundamental questions about the people making the recommendations” to Trump, NOTUS said.

“I wouldn’t expect the president to go through the details of a pardon application,” he said. “But I do expect those who make the recommendations to, and I’ve got some concerns with some of them.”

Leading the effort is Ed Martin, the first political appointee to serve as pardon attorney at the Justice Department, who previously failed to win enough GOP support in the Senate to be confirmed as U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C. Still, lawmakers acknowledge they have little power to intervene because Article II of the Constitution gives the president broad authority over pardons and commutations.

“There’s nothing I can do about it,” confessed Judiciary Committee member Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) when speaking to NOTUS. “The people are already pardoned. I’m trying to spend my time on things I can do something about.”

“I find it kind of difficult to really weigh in on one pardon or another,” said House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA), “because you can probably in any individual case, you could say, ‘Well, of course, that person doesn’t deserve to get out of prison early.’ But that’s gonna be every pardon, pretty much.”

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) likewise called the commutation of Santos “wrong decision” in an October discussion with CNN.

“At least he’s doing it up front and during the presidency,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) told NOTUS of Trump’s pardons, “as opposed to waiting and granting 1000s of pardons at the very end of his presidency.”

Read the full report here.

MAGA Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina) is facing a major controversy because of her behavior at the Charleston International Airport on October 30, when — according to an internal investigation by airport police — she berated airport and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers, using demeaning insults and engaging in a profanity-filled rant.

The controversy escalated when Mace, on December 9, told CNN that "part of the report" was "actually falsified."

Mace discussed the incident some more during a Thursday, December 11 appearance on Fox Business. The MAGA congresswoman had a lot to say about security protections for Republican officials, but host Maria Bartiromo pushed for more details on what happened at the Charleston International Airport on October 30.

Mace doubled down on her claim that airport officials "did file a fictitious police incident report," adding, "Here's the thing, Maria: We have to take our security very seriously. If you're conservative, if you're well-known, if you have fought the transgender community like I have exponentially — in the wake of Charlie Kirk's public assassination — the death threats, the amount of political violence, the celebration of the killing of conservatives, is deeply disturbing."

The GOP lawmaker added that "when there is a security breach, one mistake can have devastating consequences."

But Bartiromo pressed Mace for more specifics, saying, "What I'm asking you is: What happened? You're suing the airport and American Airlines?"

Mace, in response, once again alleged that there was a "security breach" at the airport and claimed that the police report's account of her actions at the airport was "falsified."

Democratic lawmakers announced on Thursday that they want an investigation to uncover whether the Department of Justice has "tampered with" any of the investigatory files around the trafficking case of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

CBS's Scott MacFarlane reported that he spoke with Epstein survivors who fear the records had been "scrubbed, softened, or quietly removed before the public sees it."

The questions come after a whistleblower revealed to Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats that nearly 1,000 FBI personnel were tasked with sifting through the files.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) released a statement claiming the DOJ and FBI were tasked with searching through the Epstein files, looking for President Donald Trump's name.

"My office was told that these personnel were instructed to 'flag' any records in which President Trump was mentioned. ... Why were personnel told to flag records in which President Trump was mentioned?" Durbin asked in July letters to Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI director Kash Patel and deputy director Dan Bongino. "What happened to the records mentioning President Trump once they were flagged?"

A new bill passed by the House and Senate, and signed by Trump mandates that the government release all Epstein documents by Dec. 19 and only redact limited items.

"To reassure the American public that any files released have not been tampered with or concealed, the chain of custody forms associated with records and evidence in the Epstein files must be accounted for, analyzed, and released," the request sent Thursday said.

"There should absolutely be concern about the chain of custody of the Epstein files," Spencer Kuvin, a lawyer representing some of the Epstein survivors told CBS.

"These records have passed through too many hands, behind too many closed doors, for anyone to simply assume they're intact, unaltered, or complete," Kuvin explained. "Survivors have endured decades of secrecy, broken promises, and institutional protection of powerful men; they should not now be asked to trust a process with no independent verification."

Read the letter here.

Speaker Mike Johnson and his leadership team reportedly are “losing control” of the House floor.

That’s according to Punchbowl News and its cofounder, Jake Sherman, who report that what was once a rare occurrence, forcing votes via discharge petitions as a way to circumvent the Speaker — which was done to release the Epstein files — is becoming more commonplace.

“At this time, I am considering signing every discharge petition – whether I support the bill or not,” she wrote. “As a duly elected Member of Congress, I believe my colleagues should have the ability to bring legislation to the floor for a vote. Every Member deserves the right to represent their district and receive a recorded vote on their bills. This is a result of House leadership blocking Members from governing.”

It’s not just the discharge petitions, however.

“Being forced to bargain for GOP support during simple procedural votes. Calls to Cabinet secretaries from the House floor to help win over members. A prolonged debate on health care with a disengaged president. Potential retirements on the horizon,” Punchbowl reported. “This is the House Republican majority with less than 11 months until the midterm elections.”

Separately, some reports say up to 39 House Republicans could be out after this Congress by retiring or seeking other offices. Reporting on “Johnson’s Career Crisis,” Puck revealed that “one estimate puts the number as high as 20 new announcements” of Republicans exiting “in the coming weeks.”

Meanwhile, Punchbowl conceded, “we won’t say that the House is in total chaos. Total chaos is when members unleash censure resolutions against each other or a trio of House Republicans publicly claim Speaker Mike Johnson has no business running the chamber. That was last week.”

But it points to the “very tenuous reality” for Johnson and his leadership team, “as they navigate the post-shutdown climate with a soon-to-be-even-thinner three vote margin.”

What’s changed?

House Republicans used to be soldiers kept in line by “fear” of President Donald Trump. But that seems to have diminished along with his approval ratings. And, GOP lawmakers “took a beating” during last month’s elections. In short, many House Republicans may be starting to put their own careers over loyalty to the party.

Punchbowl detailed “a pair of episodes this week” that “demonstrate just how shaky the House GOP leadership’s control is.”

On the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a historically bipartisan exercise, “House Republicans struggled for more than an hour” just to “pass a rule to begin debate.”

Just to flip several conservatives, the Speaker of the House “had to call Secretary of State Marco Rubio from a room off the House floor” to obtain promises.

And in another instance, some moderate House Republicans wanting to get a bill on the floor to extend the Obamacare subsidies, “dropped a discharge petition to go over Johnson’s head” after being dissatisfied with the Speaker’s answer.

When Donald Trump launched his 2016 presidential campaign, the paleoconservative "America First" views that he expressed echoed Patrick Buchanan's isolationism and were a major departure from the hawkish Republican presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. And now-Vice President JD Vance echoed the "America First" outlook when, in July 2024, he said he didn't "really care what happens to Ukraine, or way or another."

But veteran GOP strategist Karl Rove, in an op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal on December 10, argued that American voters aren't as isolationist as America First proponents would like. And the article is getting a rave review from former Vice President Mike Pence.

On X, formerly Twitter, Pence described Rove's op-ed as a "great essay," noting that Rove addresses the question: "How isolationist are Trump's voters?"

"The newly released White House National Security Strategy raises again the question whether Americans are turning isolationist," Rove explains. "A recent poll suggests they aren't."

The poll that Rove references was conducted by the Ronald Reagan Institute.

"The 2025 survey produced some surprising results," Rove observes. "Sixty-four percent of Americans believe it's better for the U.S. to be more engaged and take the lead. Only 33 percent think it's better for the country to be less engaged and merely react to events. The partisan breakout was also counterintuitive. Seventy-nine percent of self-identified MAGA Republicans and 57 percent of Democrats supported greater U.S. engagement. Nor are Americans turning their backs on Europe and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Sixty-eight percent view NATO favorably, the highest share since the Reagan Institute began polling in 2018."

Rove continues, "Even more, 76 percent, support U.S. military force if a NATO ally is attacked, up from 71 percent in June. Most Americans — 59 percent — oppose withdrawing from NATO. Only 34 percent support leaving, and 1 in 5 withdrawal supporters changed their minds after being told NATO allies are increasing military spending."

Karl Rove's full Wall Street Journal op-ed is available at this link (subscription required).

The Indiana state legislature is set to vote on a new congressional map on Thursday that would favor the GOP, but after heavy pressure from the Trump White House, some critics of the move are "cautiously optimistic" that the map will fail as its opponents "dig in their heels," according to a new report from The Atlantic.

President Donald Trump has pushed for Republican-controlled states to redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterms, to give the party a leg-up and potentially avoid losing their House majority to Democrats. Such a map has already passed in Texas, and the process is underway in Florida, but recent victories by Democrats in off-year elections have given some red states pause, worried that their gerrymandered maps could backfire in the face of a major blue swing from voters.

Among these hesitant states has been Indiana. Ordinarily, the Hoosier State's GOP governor and supermajority in the legislature might ensure a very smooth passage of a new map. However, pressure from the White House received considerable pushback from the Indiana GOP, with The Atlantic's Russell Berman hearing from sources close to the debate that Trump's "push for mid-decade redistricting simply ran afoul of the small-c conservatism on which many Indiana Republican legislators still pride themselves."

Typically, congressional maps are only redrawn once a decade to reflect changes found in the latest census. Trump's demand for new maps comes right in the middle of the period between the 2020 and 2030 census surveys, leading to criticism that he is breaking from norms to grab power for the GOP in Congress.

One anti-redistricting advocate told Berman the reason why Indiana Republicans are opposing Trump's demands was "Midwesterners being midwestern," and preferring to play by the rules and stick to political norms. Indiana State Sen. Greg Walker concurred with that idea.

“I’m such a rule follower, it’s not even funny,” Walker.

The GOP state senator also claimed to have been the target of harassment efforts after he spoke out against redistricting, receiving unsolicited pizza deliveries and "swatting" calls at his home.

“I refuse to be intimidated,” Walker said. “I fear for this institution. I fear for the state of Indiana. And I fear for all states if we allow threats and intimidation to become the norm.”

According to Berman, opponents of the redistricting effort are now "cautiously optimistic" that this pushback will help kill the new congressional maps. One anonymous state GOP member said that their worries about opponents flip-flopping on the day of the vote were assuaged after conversations in which their colleagues said they would hold firm and vote "no."

When the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its controversial presidential ruling in Trump v. the United States in 2024, the criticism came not only from liberals like Justice Sonia Sotomayor — who was downright scathing in her dissent — but also, from Never Trump conservatives such as attorney George Conway and MS NOW's Joe Scarborough.

Many Never Trumpers believes that the Roberts Court is giving way too much power to the federal government's executive branch and is undermining its judicial and legislative branches in the process. And they are joining liberals, progressives, and centrist Democrats in saying that Trump, under the U.S. Constitution, is an elected official — not a king.

Another outspoken Never Trump conservative is David French, a New York Times opinion columnist and frequent guest on MS NOW. In a conservation with the Times' Emily Bazelon published on December 11, French discussed Trump v. Slaughter — a case dealing with a president's ability to fire employees of independent government agencies. The "Slaughter" is Rebecca Slaughter, who Trump fired from her position as a commissioner for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

French told Bazelon, "I don't think you can analyze Slaughter without thinking of the Court's larger separation of powers jurisprudence, which can be summarized (at least so far) as follows: The president's executive power doesn't include lawmaking, and Congress' legislative power doesn't include execution. And much mischief has occurred because Congress has delegated so much of its lawmaking power to the executive, while clinging to various ineffective checks, such as creating multi-member commissions. The result has been less democracy and more entrenched power in the executive branch, with much of that power immune from political accountability…. It has been dreadful for America to see so much lawmaking power concentrated in the presidency, and many of our worst fears regarding presidential power are rooted in decisions taken by Congress over many years to punt lawmaking to the presidency."

French, however, isn't totally pessimistic where the High Court is concerned. And according to the Never Trump conservative, it remains to be seen whether its GOP-appointed supermajority will honor checks and balances or undermine them.

"If the Supreme Court is going where I think it's going," French told Bazelon, "then I think it's going to help us recover our democracy. If not, then the parade of horribles could get quite extreme, quite fast."

David French and Emily Bazelon's conversation for the New York Times' opinion section is available at this link (subscription required).