Hakeem finally found his red line

Backstory (earlier today)
 

Yeah, bullshit.

Sad, but true.

Trump has removed a racist video he posted to social media late Thursday night that depicted former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes.

[...]

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to NBC News' request for comment Friday morning with a statement: “This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from 'The Lion King.' Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public."

[...]

While the White House initially defended the video, it was met with swift backlash — including from Republicans, who said it was "unacceptable" and "racist" and asked Trump to take it down and apologize. It was removed shortly before noon on Friday.

[...]

South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, the only Black Republican in the upper chamber, sharply denounced the president on X, writing, "Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House. The President should remove it."

Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., wrote, "Even if this was a 'Lion King' meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this. The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake: remove this and apologize.

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who faces a competitive re-election race, also criticized Trump. "The President’s post is wrong and incredibly offensive — whether intentional or a mistake — and should be deleted immediately with an apology offered," he wrote on X.

[...]

Even after the post was removed, several GOP lawmakers continued to weigh in and call for an apology. Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, called the images "offensive, heart breaking, and unacceptable," while Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., said the post was "a grave failure of judgment and is absolutely unacceptable from anyone — most especially from the President of the United States."

Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, meanwhile, noted the time it took to remove the "blatantly racist and inexcusable" post. "It should never have been posted or left published for so long," he wrote on X.

  NBC

Yes, but he didn't apologize. He blamed it on an unnamed staffer.

The roughly minute-long video focused on false election fraud claims about the 2020 presidential election, but at the end it suddenly flashed to a clip of the Obamas' faces superimposed on the heads of cartoon apes as the song "The Lion Sleeps Tonight" by The Tokens played in the background.

The imagery, which evokes long-standing racist tropes against Black people, comes during Black History Month, which honors the accomplishments and contributions of Black Americans.

[...]

In an exclusive interview this week "NBC Nightly News" anchor Tom Llamas asked Trump about election conspiracy theories he has promoted on social media. Trump said he doesn't believe all of them.

“Do you believe that stuff?” Llamas asked.

“No, no. No. No. … I sometimes will… retruth” those claims, Trump replied.

Inciting his base with bullshit he doesn't even believe. Such a vile, depraved man.

UPDATE 02/07/2026:

UPDATE 02/07/2026:

He says he posted it, but he didn't see the whole thing.  Still didn't apologize.

Tim Scott's bogus defense of the Big Beautiful Bill

 

Debanking ban

 

Building on his commitment to address debanking, Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.), is leading his fellow Banking Committee Republicans in introducing legislation to curtail the weaponization of federal banking agencies by eliminating the ability for regulators to use reputational risk as a component of supervision. Chairman Scott’s Financial Integrity and Regulation Management Act will eliminate all references to reputational risk as a measure to determine the safety and soundness of regulated financial institutions.

  Senate.gov

Weaponization? Sounds like a very sound reason to assess risk to me. Trump's financial and business reputation has kept most banks from dealing with him.

Senate Republicans on Wednesday moved to allow payment apps like Venmo and PayPal to return to ideological debanking—repealing a rule implemented in December by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The rule also required the apps to create a smooth process for dispute resolution when fraudulent activity occurs. Repeal of the rule would leave users of the apps in limbo, as the laws protecting consumers would still be in place, but the rule enforcing the law—and the bureau with the capacity to enforce it—would not.

The vote on Wednesday afternoon won the support of every Senate Republican who voted, with the exception of Josh Hawley of Missouri, who has regularly broken with his party in support of populist economic policies. The resolution to repeal the rule did not require the typical 60 votes to move forward, meaning Republicans could repeal the debanking rule with just 51 votes and without needing Democratic support.

In order for the repeal to go into effect, the House also has to pass a companion measure, HJ Resolution 64, sponsored by Republican Rep. Mike Flood. With Democrats in opposition to repeal, only a handful of Republicans would need to vote no to block the effort.

  Dropsite

Do not hold your breath. Or even bother to hope.

The CFPB rule, which took years to implement due to Wall Street opposition, covers any nonbank financial institution that sees at least 50 million transactions annually and is not a small business. In other words, simply accepting payment for a service would not trigger the rule, but if the app allows money to move from one party to another—as is the case with Google Pay, Apple Pay, Zelle, and others—then the app would be required to follow the relevant laws. The company formerly known as Twitter would be covered if it added such a service, as owner Elon Musk has signaled it intends to do. The same is the case with WhatsApp, which has similarly discussed allowing users to make such transactions. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Musk—who doubles as a White House employee—fought hard for the elimination of the CFPB.

[...]

Sen. John Hoeven, a Republican from North Dakota, said that he supported repeal of the rule because the CFPB had pushed its authority too far. Asked if he was worried that conservatives could be debanked as a result, he said he wasn’t sure. “I guess I'm not familiar enough with that to know to answer,” he said, an hour before the vote.

[...]

Rep. Rick Scott, who oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in American history before becoming a senator from Florida, said he would support final passage of the repeal. “I support it,” he said. “I think it makes sense. I’ve gone through each of these. We’ve got to continue to look at all these regulations.”

Asked if he was worried conservatives would be debanked, he said, “I don’t think they will be.”

Well, not the ones in power anyway.

There will be no consumer protections in Trump's America.

The Senate has voted to overturn key regulations that granted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau supervision over payment services operated by platforms such as PayPal, Google, and Apple.

The largely party-line 51-47 vote on Wednesday is part of a broader campaign by the Trump administration to defang the CFPB, an agency created through the landmark Dodd-Frank financial reform of 2010 and championed by progressives like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) was the only Republican joining Democrats in opposing the resolution.

  MSN

Hard to believe Josh Hawley was on the right side of an issue. He's normally on the far right side.

While the legislation must still go through the House for a vote, its passage in the Senate is a key step towards reversing the Biden-era rule, which was finalized in November.

A roster of idiots

source

“I ran for leader with one mission: to fundamentally change how the Senate operates and upend the status quo so we can actually start representing the voters who put us here. When I announced, I said that we are in a moment where we need dramatic change. The voters confirmed that last week when they elected President Trump and Republicans took the majority in both chambers of Congress with a clear mandate,” [Rick Scott] said in a statement after losing the vote for Senate majority leader.

He added, “While it isn’t the result we hoped for, I will do everything possible to make sure John Thune is successful in accomplishing President Trump’s agenda. I would also like to thank John Cornyn for running a great race.”

[...]

Thune has served as Senate Republican whip, the No. 2-ranking position in the Senate GOP leadership, since 2019, and largely managed operation of the Senate floor since McConnell suffered a concussion from a fall in 2023.

He received 29 votes, to Sen. John Cornyn’s (R-Texas) 24. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) had been knocked out of the running on an earlier ballot.

  The Hill

Is Ted Cruz the only Republican Senator less liked than Rick Scott?

Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) [faced] a barrage of opposition from Trump allies ranging from Tucker Carlson to Sean Hannity.

[...]

Hard-line conservatives are abandoning their plan to nominate a challenger to Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) bid for the gavel during Wednesday’s internal House GOP elections, opting for a different protest strategy to showcase resistance to his leadership, two sources familiar with the matter told The Hill.

The plan B being plotted by the House Freedom Caucus would involve forcing a secret, recorded vote on Johnson’s nomination, according to the sources, who were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive internal deliberations.

Because Johnson is running unopposed, the conference could nominate him for the top job by voice vote, which Republicans did in 2016 to give former Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) the nod. Hard-liners, however, want to force a recorded vote — and avoid a voice vote — to make their reservations regarding Johnson’s leadership clear. One of the sources said members would have the ability to write in a candidate if they wanted to.

The strategy is a change from Tuesday afternoon, when conservatives were discussing plans to nominate an alternative candidate to Johnson for Speaker during Wednesday’s internal GOP elections. Those on the right flank were discussing whom to nominate. One source told The Hill three people were prepared to throw their hat in the ring.

  The Hill

Trump backs the Christo-fascist Johnson.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 01:24 pm:

Thune has never gotten along with Trump. He called on Trump to drop out of the race when the Access Hollywood tape broke in 2016. He was harshly critical of Trump in the wake of J6 - so much so that Trump endorsed Thune’s primary opponent in 2022. Thune then returned the favor by endorsing Tim Scott in the presidential primary against Trump. When asked if he would support Trump if he was the nominee, Thune refused to answer, saying only “I hope we will have better options.”

Thune had the backing of his mentor Mitch McConnell.

  Meidas Touch

I heard someone say that in the battle between Trump/Scott and McConnell/Thune you should bet on McConnell. I didn't think so. I would have lost.  Gladly.

John Cornyn was also in the race, which threatened to split the establishment vote, allowing MAGA challenger Rick Scott to make it into the runoff. But it was not to be as Scott finished 3rd on the first ballot, then Thune narrowly defeated Cornyn in the final vote.

[...]It was reported that Trump wanted to endorse Scott, but knew he didn’t have the votes so he didn’t want to back him only to be publicly humiliated. But Musk backed him, along with all the far-right MAGA Senators. The MAGA meltdown after the vote was fun to watch.

Are they TRYING to lose votes?

Like abortion was, right?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 10:07 pm:

Thomas Farr update

He may never even get a final vote.

[Tim Scott, R-SC] will oppose Thomas Farr to be a District Court judge, effectively killing the nomination on the Senate floor. It's the second judge the Senate's lone African-American GOP senator has tanked this year over their views and actions on race.

In a statement on Thursday afternoon, Scott cited "lingering concerns about issues that could affect [Farr's] decision-making process as a federal judge" in opposing Farr. It was a reference to Farr's alleged connection to former Sen. Jesse Helms' intimidation campaigns against black voters.

[...]

After voting to advance Farr's nomination on Wednesday, Scott, Rubio and Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) began re-examining the nomination following the Washington Post's publication of a Justice Department memo detailing Farr's connection to Helms's campaigns. Helms’ campaign sent postcards targeting African-American voters that suggested they were not eligible to vote. Farr was a lawyer for the campaign at the time.

[...]

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) also opposed the nomination, though it was part of his stand against all judicial nominees in order to force a vote on a bill to protect special counsel Robert Mueller. And all Democrats came out early against the nomination, as they were trying desperately to sway Scott and other squeamish Republicans to block Farr's lifetime appointment over his voting rights record.

[...]

Rubio and Collins had already endorsed Farr earlier in the week, but there were signs that his nomination was in jeopardy earlier Thursday, when the Senate delayed a final vote on the judge to next week. In addition to Scott, Murkowski and Collins said that they were undecided Thursday, even after Murkowski's office said she did not intend to block the nominee.

[...]

All three senators voted to move forward with the nomination Wednesday during a procedural vote. But Scott showed signs of hesitation, voting an hour after the scheduled time and sounding increasingly dour in his comments.

[...]

"The Senate does not have the votes to confirm Farr, and hopefully it never will," said Derrick Johnson, the president of the NAACP. "He should never be confirmed."

Donald Trump and Rod Rosenstein Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) office referred questions about whether the vote on Farr will still occur next week to the White House, which did not immediately comment.

  Politico

I'm guessing Mitch will not bring it to a vote if he knows he doesn't have enough to win.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.