Politics
MAGA-friendly centrists are yada yada-ing over Trump’s threats
In a classic “Seinfeld” episode, George Costanza’s new girlfriend abbreviates her dialogue by saying “yada yada yada,” often eliding the most pertinent parts of a story. George adopts the habit, too, and he and his girlfriend end up yada yada-ing over “little” details like criminality and an untimely death. It’s hilarious and patently absurd — the conversational equivalent of burying the lede in journalism.
This is what a lot of self-identified heterodox political commentators do when they talk about former President Donald Trump. You can see it often on “Real Time With Bill Maher” panels, hear it on any number of “politically homeless” podcasts or read it daily on scores of Substack sites. These ostensible independents view “the establishment” — which includes everything from centrist Democrats to anti-Trump conservatives to non-right-wing media — as the true threat to freedom and the American way. They might concede Trump’s vulgarity is distasteful or that he’s sometimes incompetent and often incoherent, but when it comes to confronting his incorrigible criminality, corruption, racism and misogyny, and his relentless dishonesty on matters both trivial and existential, they typically yada yada past the gory details and pivot into pathological whataboutism and both-sidesism.
I could list so many more of his outrageous, inexcusable words and deeds, but it wouldn’t matter. Yada yada yada to all that, Trump’s useful centrists will argue.
In just the past 30 days, Trump has helped whip up a racist, xenophobic furor against Haitian immigrants in Ohio based on lies; suggested that people who criticize Supreme Court justices should be imprisoned; and mused that police should be allowed free rein to commit wanton violence on retail thieves over the course of “one real rough, nasty” day. I could list so many more of his outrageous, inexcusable words and deeds, but it wouldn’t matter.
Yada yada to all that, Trump’s useful centrists will argue. Only the humorless, Trump Derangement Syndrome-afflicted could possibly take the former president’s rhetoric seriously: “That’s just Trump being Trump, shooting from the hip, flying off the handle, being funny in his uniquely Trumpian way that triggers the hated establishment.”
Last week, Judge Tanya Chutkan released special counsel Jack Smith’s 165-page brief laying out evidence that he says shows Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election was a private matter and not in the capacity of a sitting president. (The Supreme Court ruled this summer that a president acting in his or her capacity as president is essentially immune from prosecution.) It’s all there: Trump knew he lost the election very early, but Smith’s filing says he engaged in numerous criminal acts to overturn it anyway. Smith’s brief says he also encouraged the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, refused pleas from his own staff to call for calm, and after being told by an aide that Vice President Mike Pence’s life was in danger thanks to his own instigations, he reportedly replied, “So what?”
As I’ve previously written, if Trump hadn’t ever given his riot-inciting speech on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, he still attempted a self-coup through alleged fraud, intimidation and threats of violence. But high-profile MAGA-adjacent “independents” have spent the past four years yada yada-ing away the whole thing as an unfortunate and brief act of mob violence. Some have even suggested it might have actually been a trap laid by Democrats.
So don’t expect to hear anything louder than throat clearing about the Smith brief (if even that) from Trump’s useful centrists. They’re still having a fit over Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz’s stupid, discrediting lie about being in Hong Kong during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests (he was most likely in Nebraska at the time).
As someone who is actually without a political tribe — in that I don’t neatly fit into any ideological box and feel no need to carry water for either party — I’ve concluded that Trump is, by leaps and bounds, the greater threat to American democracy and rationality.
And yet, I still say go ahead and nail Walz on his lies. Make him squirm. Hold Vice President Kamala Harris’ feet to the fire on any of her untrue or misleading statements, too. Make all power-hungry politicians feel uncomfortably accountable when they mislead the public.
And then look back at Trump. On the ledger of politicians’ falsehoods, do statements like Walz’s mistruths about whether he was in China 35 years ago (he claims he “misspoke”) even remotely measure up to Trump’s attempted self-coup or his racist incitements against immigrants?
As someone who is actually ‘politically homeless’ … I’ve concluded that Trump is, by leaps and bounds, the greater threat to American democracy and rationality.
At the vice presidential debate last week, Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, refused to answer the direct question of who won the 2020 election. You’d think a true political independent — no matter how much they’re triggered by the “woke” or the “establishment” — would see Vance’s nonanswer as a craven cop-out, given how thoroughly adjudicated the legitimacy of the 2020 election has already been. But not if you’re Free Press columnist Abigail Shrier, who lamented during the debate“Dear Lord, more January 6 questions?!”
Heaven forfend a candidate for the second-highest office in the land, whose running mate tried to steal the previous election, be asked about it. We nonpartisans really ought to just move on, I guess.
Many anti-anti-Trumpers yada yada’d through 2022’s”https://www.thedailybeast.com/your-grandkids-will-care-about-the-jan-6-hearings-even-if-you-dont” target=”_blank”>Jan. 6 Committee hearings — where remarkable video evidence and testimony from ex-Trump White House officials (including Trump’s own daughter) and other Republicans laid bare Trump’s grand conspiracy to overturn a free and fair election. Trump and his allies have also spent the past four years plotting to do it again — and thanks to state-level election overhauls and a sympathetic judiciary, they’re much better equipped to do so now. Also poisoning the discourse are pro-Trump billionaires like Elon Musk and Peter Thielwho publicly spread the fiction that Democrats are cheating — already, they say — to win the 2024 election. Axios recently reported, “Through public remarks, Truth Social screeds and more than 100 preemptive lawsuits, Donald Trump is assembling a detailed catalog of excuses for rejecting the results of the 2024 election — if he loses.”
Yada yada yada, Walz lied about parts of his biography.
I used to think Trump-sympathetic nonpartisans suffered from a failure of imagination. Ever since Trump’s escalator descent in 2015, warnings that Trump could do unthinkable things (like try to steal an election he lost, then preemptively discredit the next one) have been dismissed as the panicked bleatings of basic establishment Chicken Littles.
But Trump is a known quantity in 2024. He was president. He’s been the GOP nominee three consecutive times. He’s been convicted of felonies and found liable for sexual abuse. He’s threatening to use the Department of Justice to jail his political rivals.
At what point do Trump-sympathetic independents think it’s OK to take Trump at his word when he promises to do horrible things — like once again pre-emptively attempting to overturn an election based on nothing?
Go ahead and nail Walz on his lies. Make him squirm. Hold Kamala Harris’ feet to the fire on any of her untrue or misleading statements, too.
To be clear, I’m not here to police anyone’s political preferences. It’s perfectly respectable to be a nonpartisan who thinks Harris and Democrats are worse. But you can’t credibly make the case that Dems are worse by blithely waving away Trump’s most egregious offenses.
I’ve”https://www.thedailybeast.com/new-antifa-book-only-bougie-wimps-oppose-left-wing-violence-against-fascists?ref=author” target=”_blank”>unequivocally criticized left-wing excesses and liberal threats of censorshipas well as Biden’s and Harris’ records. And yet, I’m reminded of the late legendary libertarian humorist P.J. O’Rourkewho despite leaning right his entire adult life, explained his vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump in 2016 on the basis that “she’s wrong about absolutely everything, but she’s wrong within normal parameters.”
Yes, you can reject political tribalism and still choose a side in an election. But if your criticisms of Trump, MAGA and Republicans are rare, trivial and half-hearted — and you denounce Trump opponents (including those exiled from the center and the right) as TDS-afflicted liberals — you’re not politically tribeless and you’re not fearlessly independent. You’ve got a tribe; it’s Trump’s, and you’re a reputation sanitizer for his presidential campaign.
Anthony L. Fisher is a senior editor and writer for BLN Daily. He was previously the senior opinion editor for The Daily Beast and a politics columnist for Business Insider.
Politics
Political operatives with Trump ties raked in millions of dollars in commissions from DHS ad campaign
Two companies with ties to veteran political operatives received at least $23 million in commissions for their role in the controversial Department of Homeland Security ad campaign that helped lead to Secretary Kristi Noem’s ouster.
One of the firms, Safe America Media, received at least $15.2 million and was formed last February just a few days before it was awarded the limited-bid contract to work on the overall $220 million, taxpayer-funded ad campaign, according to an internal DHS memo and three people familiar with the contracts who were granted anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the contracts. Safe America Media was run by Republican operatives Mike McElwain and Patrick McCarthy, who have ties to a firm that did extensive media buying on President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign.
The second firm, People Who Think, received at least $7.7 million from its 10 percent commission on a portion of the $220 million, according to the memo, which was written by DHS Deputy Under Secretary for Management Paul Stackhouse, and reviewed by Blue Light News. People Who Think was co-founded by Jay Connaughton, who did work for Trump’s 2016 campaign and has reportedly worked for other conservative politicians and causes.
The March 3 DHS memo noted there was only a “limited competition” for the awarded contracts because of the “urgent and compelling need” for the ad campaign. It also stated that People Who Think’s 10 percent commission for international advertising and Safe America Media’s 12 percent commission for domestic advertising was below the industry norm of 15 percent.
Besides military recruiting efforts and Covid-19-related campaigns, the DHS ads were the most expensive U.S. government marketing campaign in the last 10 years, Bloomberg reported.
The information about the contracts add new details to the ongoing fallout over DHS’s $220 million ad campaign, which included a video of a cowboy-hat clad Noem riding a horse at Mount Rushmore. It also highlights how political operatives were awarded contracts worth millions of dollars with seemingly little oversight or guardrails — including from President Donald Trump, who White House officials have said did not sign off on the ad campaign.
The ads became a sore spot within the White House, including with Trump, because they fed into a perception that Noem used her position to set herself up for a future political run.
“Safe America Media submitted a proposal for and was awarded a contract to support DHS’s nationwide public awareness campaign, and committed substantial resources to meet an accelerated timeline on budget,” Safe America Media lawyer Joseph Folio said in a statement to Blue Light News. “We look forward to providing additional information to address inaccuracies in the public reporting and ensure the record accurately reflects the scope and context of that work.” It’s unclear what he is referring to and a spokesperson didn’t respond to a follow-up question.
McCarthy, McElwain and Connaughton didn’t respond to requests for comment and People Who Think could not be reached for comment. A spokesperson for DHS declined to comment.

Republican Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Kennedy of Louisiana, along with Democrats, grilled Noem when she testified before Congress in early March about the DHS ad campaign. At one point during the hearing, a clearly frustrated Tillis threatened to halt all Senate business if Noem refused to provide information about immigration enforcement in his home state, while Kennedy probed Noem about the ads and derided them for only being “effective in your name recognition.”
Noem has defended the campaign by saying the ads helped encourage two million immigrants to self-deport and thus saved billions of dollars.
Noem was also asked during the hearing about the Strategy Group,which worked to make some of the ads for Safe America Media. The Strategy Group is run by Ben Yoho, the husband of Noem’s former right-hand communications aide Tricia McLaughlin. McLaughlin has said she recused herself from the campaign, and DHS general counsel James Percival has backed her up publicly on questions about the matter and said she was not involved in selecting subcontractors.
In a response to inquiries from Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), both members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Yoho said his company was only hired as a subcontractor by Safe America Media for ad production worth $226,000.
Asked about his role in this ad campaign, Yoho referred Blue Light News to the letter.
Welch’s office told Blue Light News that they have talked with legal representatives for People Who Think and Safe America Media but have not yet received responses to their questions. They said they expect to hear from them soon.
Safe America Media LLC placed some of the DHS ads through Strategic Media Services Inc., which received more than $269 million from Trump’s campaign in 2024, according to FEC records. SMS used the same office address on corporate registrations between 2013 and 2021 as Designated Market Media Inc., which McElwain is the president of.
SMS didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Politics
Pritzker helped a Black woman become senator. Some Black leaders are still mad at him.
Congressional Black Caucus members, after a stinging loss in the Illinois Democratic Senate primary, are training their ire on Gov. JB Pritzker — and saying it’s on him to rehabilitate the relationship.
After Pritzker’s outsized financial support for Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton helped lift her to victory, lawmakers vented frustrations that his money unfairly tilted the race in her favor and away from their candidate, Rep. Robin Kelly, a CBC member who finished a distant third. And as Pritzker eyes a 2028 presidential bid, some members, cognizant that the path to winning the Democratic Party’s nomination will run through the caucus, signaled they won’t forget that he crossed them this round.
“He has to justify what he did,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). “I’m sure at some point if he decides to run, he’ll have to come with that justification. As to whether or not it has merit or not, remains to be seen.”
Pritzker’s money helped put Stratton on the path to becoming just the sixth Black senator in U.S. history. But by boxing out Kelly, he frayed his relationship with the caucus, which holds significant sway over which candidates break through with Black voters — a large and powerful voting bloc the billionaire governor will need if he chooses to run for the White House.
“Keep in mind, the Democratic candidate for president that prevails has to go through [the CBC],” said Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio). “The CBC is very strategic and so if there is an issue … we will lay out our framework for what it will take” to get our endorsement, she added.
Many top CBC officials are in no rush to make the first move to mend fences.
“We don’t need to reach out to the governor,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, adding that the group is focused on midterm races and delivering House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries the speaker’s gavel.
“Others are going to have to reach out to us,” he said of Pritzker. “Those conversations happen when those conversations happen.”
Pritzker’s political arm issued a statement in response saying he was “proud” to support Stratton, Illinois’ first Black lieutenant governor: “With only six black women having served in the U.S. Senate throughout its history, Gov. Pritzker supported his partner in governance because he’s worked side by side with her for almost a decade and knows she will deliver for the people of Illinois,” Jordan Abudayyeh, Pritzker’s spokesperson, said.
His team did not address questions about CBC members’ concerns, but did point to Rep. Jim Clyburn, the powerful South Carolina Democrat, saying ahead of the election that Pritzker was “free to support” anyone.
Clyburn on Wednesday told Blue Light News he would “expect” for Pritzker to support his No. 2 and that he was not focused on 2028.
Still, lawmakers’ veiled threats lay bare the difficulties Pritzker could face beyond Tuesday’s primary. And they underscore the duality the CBC is navigating as high-profile defeats of their members in Illinois and Texas raise questions about their political influence — even as they celebrate Stratton’s victory.
In interviews with more than a dozen CBC members on Wednesday, they made clear their irritation is not with Stratton, who many said will be welcomed into the caucus if she wins as expected in November. Their indignation rests solely with Pritzker, who they accused of playing kingmaker by pouring millions of dollars into propping up Stratton.
Tensions flared between the powerful legislative voting bloc and the billionaire governor in early March. CBC Chair Yvette Clarke lashed out at Pritzker, saying she was “beyond frustrated” with the governor for “tipping the scales” a nod to his funneling of $5 million from his super PAC to help catapult Stratton into contention with Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who for much of the primary was leading in the polls and started with a massive cash advantage.
Many CBC members, and Clarke specifically, took Pritzker’s presence in the race as a snub to Kelly, who had a long-standing beef with Pritzker after he worked to oust her as chair of the Illinois Democratic Party in 2022. While both Kelly and Pritzker were said to have moved beyond it, the Senate campaign reopened old wounds.
Clarke issued a statement — some 12 hours after the Illinois Senate primary was called — to congratulate Stratton on her victory, calling it “a significant moment for Illinois and the nation that calls for unity” before pivoting to praise Kelly.
The CBC chair on Wednesday said she and Pritzker had not spoken.
“I’m sure there’ll be a moment where we’ll have a conversation,” Clarke said. When asked if she felt like she needed to initiate a conversation with the governor, she responded tersely. “No, I don’t.”
Former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, the first Black woman elected to the body in U.S. history, endorsed Stratton in the race. She took issue with CBC members’ intense focus on the governor’s role in the process instead of the historic outcome, and said the group seemed more focused on backing its own than expanding Black representation.
“To weigh in on this race was just backwards,” she told Blue Light News. “[Kelly] was a member of the caucus and so it’s understandable on that level. But at the same time, Juliana deserved at least something from that group.”
Many current CBC members refrained from attacking Pritzker directly, however — another sign of the complex politics at play. Congressional Democrats want Pritzker’s billions to help bankroll their bid to retake control of the House and make Jeffries, the minority leader and New York Democrat, the first Black speaker. They’ve already been working him behind the scenes.
“I’ve already reached out to Governor Pritzker,” said Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), a former CBC chair. “I’ve talked to him this morning, in fact, and I’ll talk to him in the weeks and months to come, because I have one objective: to win this House, to help win the Senate, and to make sure we end the chaos that’s coming out of this administration.”
Others took pains to separate their evaluation of Pritzker’s role in propelling Stratton to victory from any campaign he may run in 2028, suggesting they were willing to reset the relationship.
“You will still have to show your bona fides, and you still will have to make your case as to why the CBC and Black people should take you into consideration. So we have reset it,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said. “Good for him, for her, but that has no bearing on the 2028 race.”
Shia Kapos contributed to this report.
Politics
Judge orders restoration of Voice of America
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to restore the government-run Voice of America’s operations after it had effectively been shut down a year ago, putting hundreds of employees who have been on administrative leave back to work.
U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth gave the U.S. Agency for Global Media a week to put together a plan for putting Voice of America on the air. It has been operating with a skeleton staff since President Donald Trump issued an executive order to shut it down.
A week ago, Lamberth said Kari Lake, who had been Trump’s choice to lead the agency, did not have the legal authority to do what she had done at Voice of America. In Tuesday’s decision, Lamberth ruled on the actions she had taken to respond to Trump’s order, essentially shelving 1,042 of VOA’s 1,147 employees.
“Defendants have provided nothing approaching a principled basis for their decision,” Lamberth wrote.
There was no immediate comment on the decision by the agency overseeing Voice of America. Lake had denounced Lamberth’s March 7 ruling, saying it would be appealed. Since then, Trump nominated Sarah Rogers, the undersecretary of state for public diplomacy, to run USAGM. That requires Senate approval, a step that was not taken with Lake.
Patsy Widakuswara, Voice of America’s White House bureau chief and a plaintiff in the lawsuit to restore it, said she is deeply grateful for the decision.
“We are eager to begin repairing the damage Kari Lake has inflicted on our agency and our colleagues, to return to our congressional mandate, and to rebuild the trust of the global audience we have been unable to serve for the past year,” she said.
“We know the road to restoring VOA’s operations and reputation will be long and difficult,” she said. “We hope the American people will continue to support our mission to produce journalism, not propaganda.”
Voice of America has transmitted news coverage to countries around the world since its formation in World War II, often in countries with no tradition of a free press. Before Trump’s executive order, VOA had operated in 49 different languages, broadcasting to 362 million people.
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics11 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week




