'It really is a smart move'

'Training Walz': Harris Brings Along VP Pick For Her First Sit-Down Interview

Robin DiAngelo Accused of Plagiarizing Parts of Her Dissertation

President Biden did so badly in the first debate against former President Trump that it sent him into an unrecoverable tailspin, forcing Democratic Party elite to stage a coup an install Vice President Kamala Harris as their nominee. But according to the attempted gaslighting from a largely anti-Trump panel during Tuesday’s CNN News Central, Trump didn’t actually win that first debate. Amid a conversation about the Trump and Harris campaigns agreeing to the rules of the upcoming ABC debate, former Harris communications director turned CNN commentator Jamal Simmons ridiculously claimed that Trump was 0-1 for general election debates against Democrats: Look, Trump right now is zero for one when it comes to debates. Right? He may think that he won that debate, but it might be that he actually lost the war because of that debate. Because after that debate Joe Biden left. And Joe Biden left, he ended up with Kamala Harris so he should be careful. That assertion drew open laughter from CNN Republican commentator Scott Jennings. “He literally ran a man who'd been in politics for 52 years out of his chosen profession over a debate,” he schooled Simmons. “I mean, look, I understand what you're arguing that you all traded in for a better candidate, but Trump won the debate.”     Simmons wouldn’t let the facts get in the way of his gaslighting. He went on to argue that Trump didn’t win the debate because he did so well that it forced Biden out and now he was running against his former employer: And for right now Donald Trump may have tactically won the debate, but strategically, it may have cost him the entire election because he ended up with a much better candidate than the one he was gained aiming for. And he's probably now a couple of points behind. CNN co-host Boris Sanchez stepped in not to fact-check Simmons but to give an opportunity to allow Never-Trump Republican Charlie Dent an opportunity to lend credence to his assertions: Charlie. I'm curious from your perspective because Scott is presenting it a certain way. Obviously, Jamal is making the argument that he, you know, Trump may have won the battle but lost the war but this idea that Trump won the last debate based on his own answers, based on his own responses. How much do you think his success had to do with what happened to Joe Biden rather than his own ability to stay on message and to drive points home to the American people? Dent admitted that “Joe Biden lost the debate” but added: “I don't know that Trump actually won it.” He went on to argue that it’s a step too far to acknowledge that Trump won the first debate: I mean, it's not like he made a whole lot of great point. He got caught in a lot of lies and false statements. So, he didn't do himself any damage. He looked reasonably controlled, but I wouldn't go so far as to say Trump won. I'd say that Biden just lost miserably because he demonstrated to the public that he did not seem to be fit and was incapable of serving another four years fully. I think that was a real issue. “So I wouldn't go so far as to say Trump won,” he concluded on the topic. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN News Central August 27, 2024 3:07:03 p.m. Eastern (…) BRIANNA KEILAR: She wants to show that he has an impulse control problem. And Jamal, I wonder what you think about this news when it comes to mics. JAMAL SIMMONS: Well, first of all, we're taking Donald Trump's word for it, so I'm going to just take that with a grain of salt. But let's assume that it's true. It might just be true that Harris campaign was trolling Trump, you know, looking for a way to get under his skin every day. And it does seem like if you pay attention to some of the social media that's out there, that they are really doing a very good job at just needling him every single day. They’re playing a lot of offense on this campaign. And that's the kind of thing that Democrats want to see and it’s kind of thing that, I think, ultimately –ultimately hurts Trump. Look, Trump right now is zero for one when it comes to debates. Right? He may think that he won that debate, but it might be that he actually lost the war because of that debate. [Laughter form Scott Jennings, puts hands over face] Because after that debate Joe Biden left. And Joe Biden left, he ended up with Kamala Harris so he should be careful. SCOTT JENNINGS: Zero for one, Jamal? Jamal, my brother and colleague, zero for – He literally ran a man who'd been in politics for 52 years out of his chosen profession over a debate. I mean, look, I understand what you're arguing that you all traded in for a better candidate, but Trump won the debate. [Laughter] He is not zero for one. Are you saying he actually did so well, that he did badly? SIMMONS: But this is exactly the problem with campaign's. Very often people are focused on the minutiae of what it means in this attack or that attack. But the question is, are you wearing the fundamental argument? And for right now Donald Trump may have tactically won the debate, but strategically, it may have cost him the entire election because he ended up with a much better candidate than the one he was gained aiming for. And he's probably now a couple of points behind. BORIS SANCHEZ: Charlie. I'm curious from your perspective because Scott is presenting it a certain way. Obviously, Jamal is making the argument that he, you know, Trump may have won the battle but lost the war but this idea that Trump won the last debate based on his own answers, based on his own responses. How much do you think his success had to do with what happened to Joe Biden rather than his own ability to stay on message and to drive points home to the American people? CHARLIE DENT: Well at the time, I thought that Trump did not lose the debate. I thought Joe Biden lost the debate. I don't know that Trump actually won it. I mean, it's not like he made a whole lot of great point. He got caught in a lot of lies and false statements. So, he didn't do himself any damage. He looked reasonably controlled, but I wouldn't go so far as to say Trump won. I'd say that Biden just lost miserably because he demonstrated to the public that he did not seem to be fit and was incapable of serving another four years fully. I think that was a real issue. So I wouldn't go so far as to say Trump won. (…)

The pro-free speech CEO of Rumble and X owner Elon Musk messaged their support for protecting speech, as France arrested a fellow tech leader for refusing to increase censorship on his platform. French authorities arrested Telegram CEO Pavel Durov on Saturday, allegedly for not censoring enough so-called “criminal activity” on his platform, but many have expressed doubt that that is the real reason. Noting the ongoing assault on free speech, both Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski and Musk made numerous posts suggesting that Durov’s arrest is a continuation of an anti-freedom assault from yet another European power.  Pavlovski expressed concern for Durov and vowed to stand up to anti-free speech French authorities. “France has threatened Rumble, and now they have crossed a red line by arresting Telegram’s CEO, Pavel Durov, reportedly for not censoring speech,” Pavlovski posted on X. He continued, “Rumble will not stand for this behavior and will use every legal means available to fight for freedom of expression, a universal human right. We are currently fighting in the courts of France, and we hope for Pavel Durov’s immediate release.”  In a separate post, Pavlovski commented, “... France arrests Telegram CEO[.] Free speech is under major assault and I will not stop fighting for it.” For his part, Musk commented, “Very worrying[.]” Pavlovski hinted that the attack on free speech won’t end with Telegram. The Rumble CEO shared a post made by tech entrepreneur and investor David Sacks indicating X will be the anti-free speech elites’ next target. The post showed a list of four companies, with the first two — TikTok and Telegram — crossed out. X and Rumble were the other companies listed. “This is where we are… “ Pavlovski wrote. Musk agreed, writing in response, “Yes.”  Musk also tweeted a clip of Durov discussing freedom of speech with podcast host Tucker Carlson, commenting, “#FreePavel.” The clip included Durov saying, “We love the fact that Elon bought Twitter.” He described X as becoming “more pro-freedom of speech.” Musk described the global assault on free speech online as indicative of the “Dangerous times” society is currently facing.  Indeed, Musk posted repeatedly about the free speech crisis. “POV: It’s 2030 in Europe and you’re being executed for liking a meme,” he tweeted. Musk further shared GrokAI’s summary of Durov’s arrest, arguing the arrest occurred because of lack of moderation (ie., censorship) on Telegram. “Check out this ad for the First Amendment. It is very convincing,” Musk captioned the Grok summary. He also posted a meme of the Founding Fathers, writing, “The 2nd amendment is the only reason long-term that the 1st amendment will be upheld.” After Durov’s arrest, Telegram rebuked the French authorities for trying to strong-arm the company’s leadership, saying, “‘It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform.’” The platform further noted, “Telegram’s CEO Pavel Durov has nothing to hide and travels frequently in Europe.” According to Fraceinfo, Durov “was under the threat of a French research warrant issued on the basis of a preliminary investigation by the Obmin, the Minor Office specializing in combating violence against minors under the national director of the French judicial police … [and t]he investigation is now in the hands of the national cyber unit of the gendarmerie and the national anti-fraud office, for suspicions of offences ranging from fraud to drug trafficking, cyberbullying, organized crime and the glorification of terrorism” [translated from French to English utilizing a web translator]. French President Emmanuel Macron has since responded to criticism, posting a defense of France’s actions on X. “France is deeply committed to freedom of expression and communication, to innovation, and to the spirit of entrepreneurship. It will remain so,” Macron wrote in relevant part. Later in the response, he elaborated, “The arrest of the president of Telegram on French soil took place as part of an ongoing judicial investigation. It is in no way a political decision. It is up to the judges to rule on the matter.” But Pavlovski would have none of it. “When you say you are committed to freedom of expression, you are lying,” he wrote on X. “We have a letter from France that proves this, without a doubt. We had to shutdown Rumble in France because you have NO committment [sic] to freedom of expression.” France is not the only governmental authority trying to erect an Orwellian censorship apparatus to control the flow of information online, and Telegram is not alone in being targeted. Both X and Rumble have been targeted by European Union authorities too, with demands for increased censorship. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide an equal platform for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

The CEO of Meta just wrote to the House Judiciary Committee to confess to government-Big Tech censorship collusion. Mark Zuckerberg wrote a letter to committee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) to state that the Biden-Harris White House, the FBI, and other government entities specifically coordinated with Meta (owner of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads) to achieve censorship of COVID-19 information and the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. The “government pressure was wrong” and “I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” the Big Tech CEO wrote. “Another day, and yet another admission of censorship. Absolutely incredible,” noted MRC Free Speech America Director Michael Morris. “Zuckerberg gets no credit for fessing up to his platform’s anti-American censorship efforts long after it impacted the 2020 election and after the Supreme Court has already weighed in — and incorrectly ruled — on the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts to collude with Big Tech to censor Americans in Murthy v. Missouri, a case in which his latest admission could have weighed heavily. Zuckerberg, instead, remained mum until just now, after he’d been caught and called out, and when his admission doesn't much matter anymore.” Zuckerberg first explained the Biden-Harris administration’s insistence on COVID-19 censorship. “In 2021, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn't agree,” Zuckerberg wrote. He continued by expressing regret that Meta was “not more outspoken about” his company’s part in, and the Biden-Harris administration’s pressure to, silence free speech. “I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction — and we’re ready to push back if something like this happens again,” Zuckerberg vowed.  Meta’s platforms, especially Facebook and Instagram, continue to censor users, however, as MRC’s unique CensorTrack database shows. One major point of contention is the 2020 Big Tech censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, censorship which an MRC poll indicates swayed the election in favor of then-candidate for president Joe Biden. “[T]he FBI,” Zuckerberg wrote, “warned us about a potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Burisma” before the 2020 election, and Meta subsequently crushed the laptop scandal with the claim that it was just such disinformation. That, Zuckerberg admitted to Jordan, was an incorrect response. “It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story.”  Zuckerberg concluded by discussing his infamous “Zuckerbucks” funding of elections in 2020, but did not admit the funds were possibly used to swing races in favor of Democrats, asserting instead that the funding was “designed to be non-partisan.”  Meta has a storied history of election interference. MRC Free Speech America foundFacebook interfered in elections 39 times since 2008. The House Judiciary Committee reacted to the letter by exulting on X, “Big win for free speech.” In contrast, in a statement published on Politico, the Biden-Harris White House tried to justify its anti-free speech pressure on Facebook. “When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this Administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety,” the statement babbled. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide an equal platform for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

CNN announced on Tuesday during The Situation Room that they had won the unofficial sweepstakes between the liberal media broadcast and cable networks to score the first sit-down interview with the uber-sheltered Vice President Kamala Harris since she was coronated the Democrat Party’s presidential candidate on July 21 after President Biden was forced out. Chief political correspondent Dana Bash will conduct the interview and, with running mate Tim Walz sitting in (as a crutch), it will be taped Thursday for a primetime special at 9:00 p.m. Eastern.     “We are learning that CNN will hold an exclusive interview with Kamala Harris, her first since becoming the Democratic Party presidential nominee. Her running mate Tim Walz will join as well for the first interview. This is also their first interview together as the Democratic ticket,” announced fill-in host Alexander Marquardt, who’s still somehow on-air despite facing a serious defamation suit for allegedly smearing a decorated veteran. CNN political director David Chalian shared the key details: [An interview] now is happening on CNN with our colleague Dana Bash, our anchor and chief political correspondent, down in Georgia. Harris and Walz are going on this bus tour starting tomorrow in Georgia. The interview will take place on Thursday. It will air as a primetime special at 9:00 p.m. Eastern here on CNN on Thursday. And as you noted, it is, of course, the first joint interview that the Democratic nominee and the vice presidential nominee are doing together.  Chalian sounded like the liberal tool that he’s always been, gushing over this as the “next sort of important hurdle for Kamala Harris and her campaign to jump, which is after a very successful six weeks here since she became the Democratic nominee, coalesced the party behind her, raised a ton of money, injected enthusiasm, got a running mate, pulled off a convention”. Chalian saw no reason to criticize Harris for avoiding the press, simply observing that Thursday will be “the first time she’s going to take questions in a — in a concerted effort like this, in an interview format since Joe Biden, six weeks ago, upended this entire race by making that historic decision to bow out of his campaign, endorse his Vice President, Kamala Harris, and that sent her on to these lasts six weeks here.” Marquardt even provided Team Harris’s spin, excusing her silence since “it’s been a busy 30-plus days” for her. The two then dismissed any possibility voters care that she’s been so cagey (click “expand”): CHALIAN: Yes, so I don’t think voters look at it like we do and say, oh, you — ‘do an interview’, ‘do an interview’, ‘take more questions’ — MARQUARDT: [Inaudible] perhaps afterwards, perhaps when something — CHALIAN: — we in the press love that — but exactly, but I do think voters learned valuable information from candidate seeking the highest office in the land about how they think in these unscripted moments and how they think through a pressing challenge or question that they are being asked, so they are valuable to voters. And, in fact, you know, Kamala Harris had a bit of a rough go with one of these big interviews out of the gate as Vice President. She sat down with NBC’s Lester Holt and she had some answers about whether or not why she hadn’t yet visited the border and her response to those questions have been, obviously, area of Republican critique, but throughout her first-year as vice president an area of Democratic concern about Harris’s performance. She obviously has worked to address much of that and we’ve seen a far different Harris in these last six weeks on the campaign trail, a far more surefooted Harris. But now is the opportunity to hear her ruminate allowed with Dana asking her about her policy positions, her plans for the future, her plans for the country in an unscripted setting. And of course, to see the Democratic ticket with each other — interacting with each other. As for what issues Bash will discuss, Chalian argued that the questions (read: softballs) will include “the most important issues, time and again in every poll, the economy is number one above all, the cost of living, those are things that Kamala Harris herself addressed in that speech in North Carolina a couple of weeks ago, but to flesh that out, no doubt.” He conceded “there are a whole host of issues of policy positions, both foreign policy and domestically that we just haven’t heard from her yet in this capacity as the Democratic nominee.” Before shifting to a commercial break and the real issue they care about (the new, superceding Trump indictment in D.C.), Marquardt brought in correspondents Kristen Holmes and Eva McKend for how both campaigns will look to shape the interview. McKend showed her hackery: This from CNN's Eva McKend reacting to her network winning the Kamala Harris interview sweepstakes, is low-key why she's an underated journalist in terms of being a liberal hack pic.twitter.com/VgJpfcNSG2 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) August 27, 2024 To see the relevant transcript from August 27, click “expand.” CNN’s The Situation Room August 27, 2024 5:01 p.m. Eastern ALEXANDER MARQUDT: But first to some other breaking news in the presidential race. We are learning that CNN will hold an exclusive interview with Kamala Harris, her first since becoming the Democratic Party presidential nominee. Her running mate Tim Walz will join as well for the first interview. This is also their first interview together as the democratic ticket. Let’s bring our CNN political director David Chalian. So, David, what are we learning? DAVID CHALIAN: Yeah. I mean, we have been waiting to see this next sort of important hurdle for Kamala Harris and her campaign to jump, which is after a very successful six weeks here since she became the Democratic nominee, coalesced the party behind her, raised a ton of money, injected enthusiasm, got a running mate, pulled off a convention. All of that though Alex, very scripted. Now, a couple other things coming up. They said they were going to schedule an interview — a sit-down interview, an extensive interview before the end of the month. That now is happening on CNN with our colleague Dana Bash, our anchor and chief political correspondent, down in Georgia. Harris and Walz are going on this bus tour starting tomorrow in Georgia. The interview will take place on Thursday. It will air as a primetime special at 9:00 p.m. Eastern here on CNN on Thursday. And as you noted, it is, of course, the first joint interview that the Democratic nominee and the vice presidential nominee are doing together. But it’s also her first interview, the Vice President, as the Democratic candidate. This is the first time she’s going to take questions in a — in a concerted effort like this, in an interview format since Joe Biden, six weeks ago, upended this entire race by making that historic decision to bow out of his campaign, endorse his Vice President, Kamala Harris, and that sent her on to these lasts six weeks here. And there are a lot of questions that have been lingering out there for her to answer as we go into this fall campaign. MARQUARDT: In speaking with the campaign, they’ve made the point that you just did. It’s been a busy 30 plus days. She’s had a lot to do, not least of which was last week at the DNC, but as you note, that was all very scripted. So how much more revealing can an interview like this before the voters and I guess more importantly for those undecideds who are still going to be making up their minds in the next few weeks? CHALIAN: Yes, so I don’t think voters look at it like we do and say, oh, you — ‘do an interview’, ‘do an interview’, ‘take more questions’ — MARQUARDT: [Inaudible] perhaps afterwards, perhaps when something — CHALIAN: — we in the press love that — but exactly, but I do think voters learned valuable information from candidate seeking the highest office in the land about how they think in these unscripted moments and how they think through a pressing challenge or question that they are being asked, so they are valuable to voters. And, in fact, you know, Kamala Harris had a bit of a rough go with one of these big interviews out of the gate as Vice President. She sat down with NBC’s Lester Holt and she had some answers about whether or not why she hadn’t yet visited the border and her response to those questions have been, obviously, area of Republican critique, but throughout her first-year as vice president an area of Democratic concern about Harris’s performance. She obviously has worked to address much of that and we’ve seen a far different Harris in these last six weeks on the campaign trail, a far more surefooted Harris. But now is the opportunity to hear her ruminate allowed with Dana asking her about her policy positions, her plans for the future, her plans for the country in an unscripted setting. And of course, to see the Democratic ticket with each other — interacting with each other. MARQUARDT: And, as political director, you’re certainly going to have a hand in helping Dana with those questions and formulating those. What do you think are some of the issues that Dana is going to have to focus on? CHALIAN: Listen, I think it is pretty clear from all the surveys out there what the American people are focused on. The — the most important issues, time and again in every poll, the economy is number one above all, the cost of living, those are things that Kamala Harris herself addressed in that speech in North Carolina a couple of weeks ago, but to flesh that out, no doubt. And it is what we hear day in and day out from Donald Trump and JD Vance on the campaign trail on the issue of the economy. It’s what we see both the Harris and Trump campaigns spending all their advertising money on right now, sort of going back and forth in these battleground states on the airwaves over the economy. So, that’s issue number one for voters, but there are a whole host of issues of policy positions, both foreign policy and domestically that we just haven’t heard from her yet in this capacity as the Democratic nominee.  MARQUARDT: So, this debate is can be happening on Thursday, which is — CHALIAN: It’s an interview, yep. MARQUARDT: — excuse me. Yes, it’s an interview. But it’s happening just two weeks before the September 10 debate. So this will be her first unscripted moment essentially, since the DNC — CHALIAN: Yeah. MARQUARDT: — and in this — in this interview fashion. CHALIAN: Exactly.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will likely still appear on the ballot in some key swing states even though he suspended his independent bid for the presidency last week.According to officials, RFK Jr. will be on the ballot in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada because he did not withdraw his name in time.'He wants to leave to go support the two party system, (and that) goes against the very reason he was our candidate to begin with.'RFK Jr. was slated to be the nominee for the Natural Law Party in Michigan. Since the party already nominated him and the primary has closed, he cannot remove his name from consideration, Axios reported."Minor party candidates cannot withdraw, so his name will remain on the ballot in the November election," said Cheri Hardmon, senior press secretary for Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson."The Natural Law Party held their convention to select electors for [RFK Jr.]. They cannot meet at this point to select new electors since it's past the primary."Natural Law Party chair Doug Dern is frustrated with Kennedy, claiming he helped raised the profile of the party but will now likely sink its prospects in the future."The (Natural Law Party) has been under the radar for decades, and (Kennedy) has brought us national attention," Dern told Bridge Michigan in an email."He wants to leave to go support the two party system, (and that) goes against the very reason he was our candidate to begin with. If he comes off it weakens our chances to maintain ballot access."According to state law, Kennedy will need to earn at least 24,679 in this year's election to permit the Natural Law Party to appear on the ballot in Michigan in future elections, Bridge Michigan claimed. After endorsing former President Donald Trump, a Republican, for president this year, Kennedy may not reach that threshold.The Wisconsin Elections Commission has reached a similar conclusion.Last Friday, the day he suspended his campaign, RFK Jr. requested that his name be removed from the Wisconsin ballot. However, the WEC voted 5-1 on Tuesday to refuse the request, claiming that candidates may not decline nomination after filing to appear on the ballot, WKOW reported.Republican Robert Spindell, the WEC vice chair, cast the lone dissenting vote.Some on the WEC expressed misgivings about including RFK Jr. on the ballot and introduced a motion to keep him off, but that motion was defeated 3-3. Green Party candidate Jill Stein will remain on the ballot as well.RFK Jr. will also likely appear on the ballot in Nevada, where state law requires candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot within seven business days of the filing deadline, the Nevada Independent reported. To comply with that statute, RFK Jr. would have had to withdraw his name by August 20, three days before he suspended his campaign.The Nevada Independent and Bridge Michigan noted that a lawsuit could still force or allow their respective states to remove Kennedy's name. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has done a complete 180 and endorsed Republican candidate Donald Trump — which could have the potential to change the election entirely. While RFK Jr. is only taking his name off the ballot in battleground states, Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” believes that if you lean toward the side of medical freedom, the right choice would be to cast a vote for Trump. “He is telling you, he is communicating that ‘I’m endorsing Donald Trump because Donald Trump of the two candidates is more likely to advocate for public health and for ridding the public health apparatus in this country of corruption, advocating for the health of the future of our children, and so get behind this guy,’” Stuckey says. While Trump was behind Operation Warp Speed, he was against mandating the vaccines that resulted from it — which is a far cry from the Biden administration, which oversaw the firings of skeptical Americans across the country when they refused to take the experimental jab. “I think the fact that he is now willing to link arms with someone like RFK [Jr.] is actually a really good indication of where he stands now on public health,” Stuckey comments, noting that Trump echoed this sentiment in his speech following RFK Jr.’s endorsement. “Today I’m repeating my pledge to establish a panel of top experts working with Bobby to investigate what is causing the decades long increase in chronic health problems and childhood diseases, including autoimmune disorders, autism, obesity, infertility, and many more,” Trump told the crowd as RFK Jr. stood by his side. While children’s health is a cause everyone can get behind, Stuckey believes this is an incredible way to reach suburban moms. “I think that is an amazing message for suburban moms, because a lot of moms were voting for RFK [Jr.],” Stuckey says. “I knew that there was a sizable portion of the conservative suburban moms that were willing to look past RFK [Jr.]’s views on abortion considering Trump’s moderate views on abortion.” RFK Jr. has also put his own spin on Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan, telling reporters that he wants to “Make America Healthy Again, and so does President Trump.” “This whole thing of RFK [Jr.] joining Trump was absolutely a victory,” Stuckey says. “Democrats, they feel like they had this amazing DNC where Planned Parenthood was right outside offering free abortion and free vasectomies for people.” “Twenty-five plus babies were aborted through medication abortion right outside the DNC,” she continues. “That’s just child sacrifice, that alone should be a reason not to vote for Democrats.” By waiting until after the DNC was over for RFK Jr. to make his announcement, “They completely sucked the air out of the DNC enthusiasm and magic that they felt like they had after the DNC.” Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Former President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday he and Vice President Kamala Harris have agreed to the same rules that were in place for the first debate with President Joe Biden.Harris' campaign had been lobbying for some changes to the debate, despite previously declaring that the "debate about debates is over." Not having the microphones muted when the other candidate is speaking was one change the campaign sought. That rule was made at the insistence of Biden's campaign."I have reached an agreement with the Radical Left Democrats for a Debate with Comrade Kamala Harris. It will be Broadcast Live on ABC FAKE NEWS, by far the nastiest and most unfair newscaster in the business, on Tuesday, September 10th, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Rules will be the same as the last CNN Debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden," Trump posted on Truth Social.'Trump should stop hiding behind the mute button.'The debate will be held in Philadelphia on September 10. "The Debate will be 'stand up,' and Candidates cannot bring notes, or 'cheat sheets.' We have also been given assurance by ABC that this will be a 'fair and equitable' Debate, and that neither side will be given the questions in advance (No Donna Brazile!)," he continued. "Harris would not agree to the FoxNews Debate on September 4th, but that date will be held open in case she changes her mind or, Flip Flops, as she has done on every single one of her long held and cherished policy beliefs. A possible third Debate, which would go to NBC FAKE NEWS, has not been agreed to by the Radical Left. GOD BLESS AMERICA!" — (@) As late as Monday, Harris' campaign was still pushing for the microphones to be unmuted and attempted to goad Trump into agreeing with them.Brian Fallon, Harris campaign senior communications adviser, posted on X that Trump "should reject his handlers’ attempts to muzzle him via a muted microphone. The VP is ready to debate Trump live and uncensored. Trump should stop hiding behind the mute button."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!