Connect with us

The Dictatorship

The shutdown blunder that Chuck Schumer may never live down

Published

on

The shutdown blunder that Chuck Schumer may never live down

Democrats seem to have been outplayed by Republicans when it comes to managing the latest government shutdown battle. And perhaps their biggest mistake was underestimating House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. By a 54-46 vote on Friday night, the Senate approved the funding bill to keep the government open that the Republican-controlled House had passed on Tuesday.

As bad as passing the continuing resolution would be, I believe a government shutdown is far worse.

Senate minority leader chuck schumer

This shutdown cycle was not without drama. On Thursday, the evening before the deadlineSenate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer reversed the position he’d taken earlier in the week and vowed to help pass the House’s short-term continuing resolution bill. This must have been a tough call for the New York Democrat. As Schumer wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times“As bad as passing the continuing resolution would be, I believe a government shutdown is far worse.”

And while Schumer did not ultimately vote yes on the bill itself, his advocacy and yes vote on the cloture motion likely secured Friday night’s outcome.

On Friday morning at least, the Democrats were torn into two camps: fight Trump tooth and nail, which would lead to a shutdown and the potential chaos and pain that would bring, or swallow a partisan CR and at least keep the lights on. There were also specific fears that a shutdown would allow President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to accelerate some of their most aggressive agenda items, including mass federal layoffs and governmental reorganizing. “Musk has already said he wants a shutdown, and public reporting has shown he is already making plans to expedite his destruction of key government programs and services,” said Schumer from the Senate floor on Thursday.

Schumer calculated ultimately the Democrats would be blamed for the impact on “the most vulnerable Americans, those who rely on federal programs to feed their families, get medical care and stay financially afloat. Communities that depend on government services to function will suffer.”

However, in many ways, the die had already been cast. On Tuesday night, Johnson passed the spending bill with nearly unanimous GOP support. And then promptly sent his members home.

The speaker certainly had some help from both the president and White House officials. Trump himself was working the phoneswhile Vice President JD Vance reportedly “assured Republican members that Trump would continue cutting federal funding with his Department of Government Efficiency initiative and pursue impoundment — that is, holding back money appropriated by Congress.”

Johnson is often thought of as the accidental speaker. And it’s true that he was pulled out of quasi-obscurity after the caucus took down his predecessor Kevin McCarthy just 17 months ago. At the time of his elevation, Johnson had no leadership experience, and the political class had very low expectations. But he had Trump in his corner.

(Trump did blow up a bill in December carefully negotiated by Johnson and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries. But Johnson eventually prevailed, with Democratic votes, and a spending bill was passed.)

Last December’s funding bill was always a temporary stopgap measure that would only fund the federal government through March 13, 2025. More surprising was that Johnson was able to get the House to pass its budget outline last monthwith only losing a single vote. This should have served as a canary in the coal mine moment for Democrats.

The real blunder Schumer made was miscalculating just how good Johnson has become at playing political hardball. The thought of Johnson passing a six-month continuing resolution with just Republican votes seemed highly unlikely last year, and that was what both Jeffries and Schumer were counting on. They were operating on the premise that, just like with the last CR, Republicans were going to need Democratic votes to get the bill to the president’s desk, leaving room for negotiations.

Johnson defied the odds and passed the CR, losing just one Republican vote, and picking up an extra yes vote from Maine Democrat Jared Golden. That left Schumer floundering, and with only one option to keep the government open.

There is a lesson to be learned here, and now would be a good time for Democratic leadership — as well as Senate Majority Leader John Thune — to recognize Johnson’s skills. They don’t have to like him or agree with him, but going forward they should respect him, and maybe even fear him.

Susan Del Pure

Susan Del Percio is a Republican strategist and a political analyst for NBC News and BLN.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

What the DOJ’s Southern Poverty Law Center indictment is really about

Published

on

ByMichael Edison Hayden

As one of the most high-profile employees of the Southern Poverty Law Center for five years — and as someone who has been outspokenly critical of the organization — I never once heard of the program that allegedly involved paying sources within the Ku Klux Klan, National Alliance and Aryan Nations until the Justice Department published its indictment this week.

What I did hear, frequently, was people in the MAGA movement saying we were some kind of criminal syndicate — part of a sustained propaganda effort to delegitimize the work we did tracking and labeling extremist groups.

Although I find the notion of paying extremists distasteful, even unethical, the indictment feels like the culmination of years of pro-Trump activists consuming and amplifying that kind of propaganda. And, the SPLC, for its part, has called these charges “false allegations.”

One quote from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s press conference about the charges against the SPLC stood out to me as particularly absurd:

“The SPLC is manufacturing racism to justify its existence,” he said on Tuesday afternoon.

Imagine, for a moment, believing the SPLC — or any other civil rights organization — needed to fraudulently manufacture racism to sell it in today’s America. Just two months ago, the president shared an artificial intelligence-generated video depicting his Black predecessor and his predecessor’s Black wife as primates. In early 2025, the Trump administration suspended refugee admissions from majority non-white countries while investing in a special program to fast-track white South African Afrikaners into the United States. Racism is not a rare commodity in this country to be manufactured — it’s cheap and easy to find.

A closer look at the indictment raises more red flags. For one, the KKK, National Alliance and Aryan Nations have been largely defanged for years. You rarely hear those names now unless you’re a historian focused on the white supremacist movement. That doesn’t rule out the possibility of criminal wrongdoing on its own, but it does show that this DOJ, in 2026, had to reach back as far as 2013 to find a relatively obscure SPLC program — one that, as a former spokesperson, I had never even heard of.

Another issue is the indictment’s suggestion that the SPLC played a role in planning the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, based on the claim that an informant was “part of a leadership group.” The idea that an informant could have planted the seed for a gathering of white supremacists of that magnitude is completely implausible. We don’t need to speculate about the origins of that deadly event: Unite the Right was effectively a sequel to a similar rally in Charlottesville in May 2017, driven by widespread outrage within the movement over the removal of Confederate statues. Unicorn Riot preserved reams of Discord logs attesting to it.

The indictment feels like the culmination of years of pro-Trump activists consuming and amplifying that kind of propaganda.

So, leaving open the possibility that something comes out in the trial that I don’t know about yet, these charges look like a piece of political theater to shore up a wayward MAGA base beleaguered by the scandal around Jeffrey Epstein and an increasingly unwieldy debacle in Iran. It’s a MAGA base that understands the SPLC as one of the primary villains in its propaganda stories and enjoys seeing it suffer.

But if the DOJ argues that paying informants furthers hate, and that this makes the use of paid informants fraudulent, won’t the SPLC’s lawyers simply demonstrate how those efforts contributed to these groups no longer being around? If the SPLC propped up the National Alliance to defraud donors, why is it essentially defunct? Why does the once robust Aryan Nations group no longer exist?

If you’ve read this far and assumed I have an incentive to support my former employer, I don’t. I have a different life now — with a book out, a podcast and teaching. After producing some of the SPLC’s more notable investigative stories from 2018 to 2023, I’ve repeatedly criticized them in media appearances.

As chronicled in my book, “Strange People on the Hill,” the SPLC settled with me out of court after I raised allegations of racial discrimination and union busting against them. I have also publicly accused the organization of deliberately taking a lower profile during President Donald Trump’s second term — hoping to evade the kind of targeting that is befalling it now. The SPLC has done many things over the years, good and bad. It has been invaluable in tracing how MAGA brought fringe racist ideas into the mainstream conservative movement. It has also been clumsy, reactionary and, at times, foolish. This program involving paid informants may indeed be one of those clumsy and foolish chapters.

But to understand why a weaponized DOJ might choose this particular case amid all of the white-collar crimes it isn’t pursuing in America today, you first need to understand the narrative that’s been built around the SPLC for years — and how useful it has become to the corrupt men who run this country.

Michael Edison Hayden

Michael Edison Hayden is a leading expert on far-right extremism in the United States. His debut book, “Strange People on Blue Light News”— a chronicle of a West Virginia town in the five years following a white nationalist group’s purchase of a local castle — will be published by Bold Type Books/Hachette on April 7, 2026. Hayden also co-hosts the podcast, “Posting Through It,” with new episodes released every Monday and Thursday.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Judge temporarily strikes down Virginia’s redistricting referendum

Published

on

Judge temporarily strikes down Virginia’s redistricting referendum

A Virginia judge on Wednesday blocked the certification of a redistricting referendum that allows the state to redraw its congressional and legislative maps, less than 24 hours after voters approved the measure.

The rulingissued by Tazewell County Circuit Court, halts state officials from finalizing the results of the ballot measure, which sought to overhaul Virginia’s redistricting process.

This latest move prevents the Virginia Department of Elections and other officials from implementing the new redistricting referendum unless it is overturned by a higher court.

Other states attempting similar redistricting moves have faced lengthy legal battlesleaving the ultimate outcome uncertain.

Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley ruled Wednesday that the redistricting referendum violated parts of Virginia’s Constitution, including how such amendments must be approved and submitted to voters.

Hurley said the proposal had not been properly authorized by the General Assembly before being submitted to voters. The judge also called the ballot language “flagrantly misleading” and did not accurately describe the measure to voters.

The attorney general’s office said in a statement that it plans to immediately appeal the decision.

“As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Attorney General Jay Jones said in a statement. “We look forward to defending the outcome of last night’s election in court.”

Redistricting has long been a contentious issue in Virginia, as in many states, with debates often centered on partisan gerrymandering and the fairness of electoral maps.

The move was considered a victory for Democrats and could offer a potential boost for the party as they head into the midterms because the proposed redraw could expand their advantage to 10-1.

For now, the judge’s order leaves Virginia’s redistricting process unchanged and raises new questions about the viability of reform efforts moving forward. Both sides are likely to press ahead with a prolonged legal fight.

The Virginia Supreme Court paused an earlier rulingby Hurley ahead of the referendum, which allowed Tuesday’s vote to move forward while it reviews the case, which remains pending.

Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Kalshi suspends 3 political candidates for betting on own elections

Published

on

Kalshi suspends 3 political candidates for betting on own elections

The prediction market Kalshi has suspended and fined three political candidates after an internal investigation found they placed bets on the outcomes of their own elections.

It marks one of the most significant steps yet by a U.S. prediction market to police insider behavior as the industry rapidly expands ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Prediction markets, which allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to real-world outcomes, have surged in popularity but remain under intense scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators. Prediction markets can be opened for any world event from election results to economic indicators to whether President Donald Trump will drink water during the State of the Union.

The candidates include Matt Kleina candidate in the Democratic primary for Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District; Ezekiel Enriquezwho competed in the Republican primary for Texas’ 21st Congressional District; and Mark Morana former Democrat running as an independent candidate in Virginia’s U.S. Senate primary.

The three cases involved what Kalshi has described as “political insider trading,” violating exchange rules approved by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates how platforms like Kalshi operate and are designed to prevent insider trading and conflicts of interest in event-based markets.

Kalshi said the candidates violated its rules by trading on markets in which they had direct influence. Under Kalshi’s policies, individuals who can affect the outcome of an event, such as candidates in their own races, are prohibited from participating in related contracts.

Five-year suspensions and financial penalties were imposed on all three individuals, according to regulatory documents. Klein and Enriquez accepted responsibility through settlements, resulting in reduced sanctions. Disciplinary action was taken against Moran, who acknowledged placing a wager on his own candidacy in what he described as an attempt to draw attention to perceived flaws in the system.

“Finally, one of the moments I’ve been waiting for. YES, I did bet ~$100 on myself on Kalshi because I wanted to get caught…,” Moran said in a lengthy poston X.

“I traded $100 on myself, knowing this would happen (also knowing that I wouldn’t be vying for the democratic nomination) and the attention it would create to highlight how this company is destroying young men and as Senator I will go after Kalshi,” he said.

Klein was fined $539.85, Enriquez received a $784.20 penalty and Moran faces the largest fine at $6,229.30.

“Just like in traditional financial markets, bad actors will try to cheat. Regulated exchanges must constantly evolve and adapt their systems to address insider threats,” Bobby DeNault, the head of enforcement and legal counsel at Kalshi, said in a press release. “These three cases are an example of how developing proactive engineering solutions can help identify illicit trading activity.”

Kalshi said the suspensions underscore its commitment to maintaining fair markets. The company had already moved in recent months to tighten restrictionsincluding plans to preemptively block politicians and athletes from trading on their own campaigns or sporting events. Those measures came amid mounting bipartisan concern in Washington that prediction markets could enable insider trading or manipulation if left unchecked.

The controversy surrounding the three candidates isn’t the first wave of enforcement actions. Earlier this year, Kalshi penalizeda California gubernatorial candidate and a social media influencer for similar violations.

Regulators are also paying closer attention. The CFTC has increased its scrutiny of insider trading cases, while states and federal lawmakers consider new restrictions on the industry. Congress is also considering legislationthat could impose new limits on prediction markets or restrict participation by certain groups, including elected officials and government employees.

Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending