In an unanimous ruling handed down on Friday morning, January 17 in TikTok v. Merrick B. Garland, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a TikTok ban that is scheduled to go into effect on Sunday, January 19 unless ByteDance — the video sharing platform's owner in Mainland China — divests itself.

National security and legal experts were quick to weigh in on the ruling. MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin stressed that the High Court viewed the ban as a "national security" matter, not a First Amendment issue.

On MSNBC, former federal prosecutor Berit Berger said that even if President-elect Donald Trump, after being sworn in as president, says he won't enforce the ban, businesses will be unlikely to take comfort in that.

READ MORE: 'He's mad': GOP reps say ousted intel chair now 'never going to vote' for Johnson’s bills

Berger told MSNBC's Ana Cabrera, "The Supreme Court's opinion was very clear. It was very direct….. They didn't leave a lot of wiggle room…. The penalties are incredibly severe for these companies."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) told NBC News he was "disappointed" by the ruling, describing it as a violation of First Amendment rights.

X, formerly Twitter, has been full of reactions to the 9-0 ruling.

Michael Lucci, founder and CEO of State Armor Action, tweeted, "UNANIMOUS" with a link to the per curiam in TikTok v. Merrick B. Garland.

Lucci had previously noted the claims of TikTok/ByteDance attorney Noel Francisco, which were made in the case's oral arguments earlier in the month. "Noel Francisco, the attorney for TikTok and ByteDance, bizarrely claims the U.S. government 'has no valid interest in preventing foreign propaganda,'" Lucci wrote on Jan. 10.

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

Ajit Pai, former director of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), tweeted, "BREAKING: Supreme Court upholds that law requiring ByteDance divestiture of #TikTok is constitutional. 'Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,' and 'the challenged provisions [of the law] do not violate petitioners' First Amendment rights.'"

Tech specialist Brian Krassenstein posted, "Should Trump overturn this?" But civil rights attorney Andrew C. Laufer told him, "He can't. It's a law passed by Congress. POTUS can't EO it away. It would have to be repealed…. It's already law. The time to veto passed after Biden signed it into law."

Rush Doshi, director of the CFR China Strategy Initiative and a professor at Georgetown University, applauded the SCOTUS ruling and argued that the justices were correct to see it as a "national security" matter.

Doshi tweeted, "The Supreme Court is out with a unanimous decision upholding the TikTok legislation. They correctly realized this law was content agnostic and that national security concerns were justified. The Biden Administration should enforce and not leave this to Trump, who won't."

Doshi also wrote, "After this decision, if no one enforces the TikTok legislation, and if TikTok’s CEO is on the dais at the inauguration, it’s pretty clear we are not a serious country."

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Virginia) also emphasized the "national security" element of the the Court's decision, tweeting, "Glad to see the Supreme Court confirm that it’s legal to compel a sale of TikTok. Let me be clear – I don’t want to see TikTok banned either, but we can’t allow it to continue under its current adversarial ownership. It must be sold to protect our data and national security."

Upfront Ventures' Mark Suster wrote, "Big victory for national security. Unanimous decision by Supreme Court to ban or sell TikTok…. Reminder: China doesn’t allow US social media for the same reason."

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson posted, "Today’s Supreme Court decision to uphold the ban on TikTok marks a tremendous victory for the American people and the protection of our national security. This ruling sends a clear message that safeguarding Americans’ data from the influence of the Chinese Communist Party is not negotiable. This ruling also gives the Trump Administration all the leverage it needs to negotiate a deal with TikTok that does not compromise on American values. South Carolina stands firm in its commitment to protecting the privacy and security of our citizens, and we applaud this decisive step towards keeping our nation safe."

READ MORE: 'Severe economic downturn': Why MAGA’s pro-tariff arguments 'will backfire'

After President Jimmy Carter's death at the age of 100 on December 29, 2024, President-elect Donald Trump argued that one of Carter's biggest mistakes was giving the Panama Canal to Panama back in 1977.

The Panama Canal, opened in 1914, is an artificially created waterway linking the Caribbean Sea with the Pacific Ocean. And it is now managed by the Panama Canal Authority, which is owned by the Panamanian government.

But Trump believes the Panama Canal should revert to full U.S. control.

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

CNN journalists Phil Mattingly and Andrew Seger, in an article published on January 17, stress that some Panamanian officials are puzzled by Trump's desire to retake the Panama Canal — as they thought the matter was settled long ago. And they are struggling to understand Trump's motivations.

Jorge Eduardo Ritter, Panama's former minister of foreign affairs, told CNN, "I don't like to disregard what President Trump says, because when he says something, he might not mean exactly what he is saying, but he is looking for something…. This fixation with Panama — I sense that something is going to happen. I don't think it's going to be a military invasion or he will take over the Canal, but something is going to happen."

According to Mattingly and Seger, one of the things current and past Panamanian officials find puzzling about Trump's interest in Panama is that he "paid little attention to the country in his first term."

Trump, they note, never nominated a U.S. ambassador to Panama during his first administration and instead, relied on a "holdover" from the Barack Obama years.

READ MORE: Canada's fight with Trump isn't just economic — it's existential

Ilya Espinosa de Marotta, the Panama Canal Authority's deputy administrator, told CNN, "Why now? Hong Kong has been here since '97. We’ve been running the canal for 25 years. We've been very transparent — you can know this is run 100 percent by Panamanians, so why now? It puzzles me."

READ MORE: 'Severe economic downturn': Why MAGA’s pro-tariff arguments 'will backfire'

Read the full CNN article at this link.

President-elect Donald Trump and others in the MAGA movement are arguing that tariffs will encourage U.S. manufacturing, benefit the economy, and promote job creation. Trump is proposing 25 percent across-the-board tariffs on all goods imported into the United States from Mexico and Canada, and he favors aggressive tariffs with products manufactured in Mainland China as well.

In an op-ed published by Politico on January 15, Matthew C. Klein — co-author of the 2020 book "Trade Wars Are Class Wars: How Rising Inequality Distorts the Global Economy and Threatens International Peace" — lays out some reasons why the tariffs Trump is proposing will not create the U.S. manufacturing renaissance he says they will.

Klein makes it clear that he is "sympathetic" to Trump's complaints about the decline of U.S.-based manufacturing, which, the author says, threatens the U.S. from both a "prosperity" standpoint and a "national security" standpoint. And he acknowledges that "the global trading system has failed many workers in the U.S. and elsewhere."

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

But Klein is highly critical of the tariffs Trump is proposing, arguing that the president-elect "needs to think harder about the tools he wants to use" and avoid creating a "severe economic downturn."

"Several of the policies Trump and his advisers have floated — primarily universal tariffs — risk making things worse, or, at best, will do nothing to revive American manufacturing or improve the lives of its workers," Klein warns. "Prosperity is not zero-sum, and just because we inflict pain on trading partners doesn't mean we'll benefit. More likely, punitive measures will backfire."

According to Klein, the "net effect" of tariffs "depends on how easily American workers and factories can ramp up production of goods that are currently imported."

"For goods where U.S. demand is relatively low but domestic capacity is rising rapidly thanks to government subsidies, such as battery electric vehicles, the benefits of tariffs could outweigh the costs," Klein explains. "At the other extreme would be tariffs on imports of goods where demand is strong and domestic capacity is extremely constrained, such as coffee beans. There, tariffs would be closer to a sales tax that takes money from American consumers to reduce the federal budget deficit."

READ MORE: Canada's fight with Trump isn't just economic — it’s existential

Klein adds, "In the middle are goods that Americans could make more of, but only by moving workers and machines away from other activities: more U.S.-made t-shirts, but fewer childcare workers. Unfortunately, the incoming administration does not seem to appreciate these nuances."

READ MORE: 'He's mad': GOP reps say ousted intel chair now 'never going to vote' for Johnson’s bills

Matthew C. Klein's full Politico op-ed is available at this link.

Donald Trump Jr. recently visited Greenland to promote his father's proposals for the island, a Danish territory.

President-elect Donald Trump proposes buying Greenland, but Greenland Prime Minister Múte B. Egede is adamantly opposed and maintains that the island "is not for sale." And the older Trump insists that acquiring Greenland is a matter of "national security" for the United States.

Trump Jr. hosted a lunch at the Hotel Hans Egede in Nuuk, where Greenlanders were seen wearing red MAGA hats. But according to the hotel's chief executive, Jørgen Bay-Kastrup, many of them were not hardcore MAGA supporters, but rather, homeless people chosen at random.

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

The Guardian's Miranda Brant reports that Bay-Kastrup said Trump Jr. “just met them in the street and invited them for lunch, or his staff did."

Bay-Kastrup, who is Danish, added, "But I don't think they knew who they were inviting. That, of course, was a little bit strange to us because we saw guests that we have never seen in our hotel before — and will probably never see again because it's out of their economical means."

According to Bay-Kastrup, "They were just, 'Hey, somebody invited us for lunch; let's go and join him.' I think they found out later who it was."

But Arthur Schwartz, an ally of Trump Jr., denies that the group of men were homeless.

“Do you think Donald Trump Jr was wandering around Greenland inviting homeless people … to lunch, or do you realise that the suggestion sounds so beyond the pale ridiculous that you should feel stupid even asking the question?" Schwartz asked.

READ MORE: 'He’s mad': GOP reps say ousted intel chair now 'never going to vote' for Johnson’s bills

Read The Guardian's full article at this link.

When Republican President-elect Donald Trump begins his second term this Monday, January 20, his party will have small majorities in both branches of Congress. Tax policy will be among Trump's legislative priorities, but according to The Hill's Alexander Bolton, getting Republicans in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives to reach an agreement may be challenging in the weeks ahead.

Bolton, in an article published on Friday, January 17 — only three days before Trump's inauguration — reports, "House conservative proposals to raise corporate taxes to offset the cost of President-elect Trump's tax package are going over like lead balloons in the Senate, where Republicans are warning their House counterparts to back off. The Senate GOP argues that hiking corporate taxes could dampen economic activity, lead to foreign takeovers of U.S. corporations and result in job loss."

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma) is among the GOP senators who opposes House proposals to increase corporate tax rates.

READ MORE: 'He’s mad': GOP reps say ousted intel chair now 'never going to vote' for Johnson’s bills

Bolton quotes Mullin as saying, "Absolutely not. We were trying to be competitive on the world stage when we dropped it to 21 percent. To raise that is not the way to get an economy going."

Members of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, Bolton notes, have proposed raising the cap on SALT (state and local tax) deductions "for individuals and families by restricting state and local tax deductions for corporations." But Mullin and other Senate Republicans, according to Bolton, are rejecting that proposal as well.

"To offset SALT," Bolton quotes Mullin as saying, "we don't raise corporate taxes to do that. That's not how we do that. Corporate taxes is the people that employ individuals. It doesn't just affect large corporations."

Meanwhile, in the House, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) — a major budget hawk — is open to increasing the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 25 percent.

READ MORE: Scathing analysis exposes MAGA's 'illusion of populism' as a total 'con job'

Roy told The Hill, "I'm on the record as saying everything should be on the table, and I'm on the record of having said, 'Why should we just allow corporate taxes to stay in place, or think about lowering them, if.… we're not doing what we need to do on the individual tax rate side or if we're not balancing the budget or being deficit neutral?'"

READ MORE: Shocking revelation: Hospital chain owes more than $1B — without enough cash to make payroll

Read The Hill's full article at this link.

In the Lone Star State, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick expressed his disappointment when State Rep. Dustin Burrows defeated State Rep. David Cook in a contentious battle for speaker of the Texas House of Representatives. Republicans have majorities in both branches of the Texas Legislature, but Burrows received enough Democratic votes to defeat Cook (who was supported by far-right Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton).

Although Burrows is a conservative Republican, he isn't as far to the right as Cook. MSNBC's Ja'han Jones describes Burrows as the "less Trumpy" of the two.

In his January 16 column, Jones details the efforts of Christian nationalists to sway the speaker vote — which he describes as a troubling demonstration of their quest to control government.

READ MORE:'Cringe': Legal expert explains how Senate Dems dropped the ball with Trump AG pick

Jones notes that before the speaker vote was held, Christian nationalists gathered outside for a prayer meeting. And one of them called for evangelical fundamentalists to "take charge and authority" over the Texas Legislature and exercise "jurisdiction over the affairs of men."

Separately, Christian nationalists, the Texas Tribune's Robert Downen reported, entered the Capitol Building and called for protection from the "Jezebel" spirit. One of them, Landon Schott of the Mercy Culture Church, declared, "Pray for the fear of the Lord to come into this place."

"Jezebel," Jones observes, "has been deployed by Christian nationalists as a racist and sexist slur against powerful women, such as Vice President Kamala Harris."

"This unabashed display of Christian nationalism is a warning about the theological rule that far-right Republicans are looking to install in Texas, and potentially elsewhere," Jones warns. "In a ReidOut Blog post shortly after Election Day, I wrote about how Christian extremists are champing at the bit over the power they expect they'll be given by the incoming Trump Administration. And as they seek to impose their will, there’s little reason to believe they’ll stop at the Lone Star State."

READ MORE: 'Hope bending the knee was worth it': Nikki Haley mocked after Trump's 'birdbrain' barb

Ja'han Jones' full MSNBC column is available at this link.

In Los Angeles County, at least 24 people have died from the devastating wildfires that have destroyed countless homes and business. That's the direct death toll: climate scientist Jeff Masters believes that the "eventual death toll from the disaster" is "likely to be far, far, higher" when the "health effects from the toxic smoke from the fires are fully realized."

Many liberals and progressives are citing the L.A. wildfires as a sobering reminder of the threat climate change poses. But quite a few MAGA Republicans and right-wing media pundits are blaming "woke policies" for the destruction.

One of those Republicans is Sen. Tommy Tuberville, who told Fox News competitor Newsmax that Californians "don't deserve anything" from the federal government "unless they show us they’re gonna make some changes" and reject "woke policies."

READ MORE: 'Cringe': Legal expert explains how Senate Dems dropped the ball with Trump AG pick

But Alabama's other Republican U.S. Senator, Katie Britt, has very different views on the wildfires.

During an interview on Tuesday, January 14, Politico's Jonathan Martin noted that some Republicans are calling for aid to California to be conditional.

But Britt responded, "I think what we need to be doing right now is standing firmly with the people of California, letting them know they have our prayers, they have our support — and that we stand ready to be thoughtful about ways that we can help in making sure that they have the resources they need…. I think the people of California need to know that America stands with them."

Britt recalled losing her own home in 2011, when it was destroyed by an Alabama tornado.

READ MORE: Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

"Everything you have is gone," the conservative senator remembered.

READ MORE: 'Hope bending the knee was worth it': Nikki Haley mocked after Trump's 'birdbrain' barb

Watch Jonathan Martin's interview with Sen. Katie Britt below or at this link.

Less than a week from now — on Monday, January 6, 2025 — Donald Trump will once again become president of the United States. And he will return to the White House with small Republican majorities in both branches of Congress as well as a 6-3 GOP-appointee supermajority on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Senate confirmation hearings have already been held for some of Trump's presumptive nominees, including former Fox News host Pete Hegseth (Trump's pick for defense secretary) and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (the president-elect's choice for U.S. attorney general).

In an article published on January 16, The Hill's Brett Samuels lays out some reasons why Trump's second term could have a greater impact than his first.

READ MORE:Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

"This Trump knows more about how Washington works," Samuels explains. "Trump 1.0 wanted to change Washington, but Trump 2.0 is set up better to succeed. And the president-elect is equipped with a highly capable chief of staff in Susie Wiles, who has infused more discipline into his operation…. Trump's team retains its outsider appeal, and the frenzy that was a defining element of Trump's first term is unlikely to disappear. But it's also a team with more insiders who can reach into the halls of American power."

Samuels continues, "One of Trump's top allies now is tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, the richest person in the world. Other tech and business titans, including Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, are signaling they want to work with Trump, underscoring how the next four years won't be like the president-elect's first four in office."

Sean Spicer, the first of four White House press secretaries during Trump's first term, stresses that the president-elect is in a much different "environment" than he was eight years ago.

Spicer told The Hill, "When it comes to the three big things — the people, the process and the priorities — these guys are in a totally different league than we were in 2016…. It's not just lessons learned. It has to do with the environment."

READ MORE: 'Hope bending the knee was worth it': Nikki Haley mocked after Trump's 'birdbrain' barb

Samuels notes that in 2017, Trump "frequently clashed with" then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) — whereas in 2025, he has an "established relationship with" Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana).

"Trump has also met, in recent weeks ,with Republicans in the Senate and House to ensure he has the full backing of the GOP upon taking office," Samuels observes. "And he'll have a cavalcade of outside supporters pushing his agenda, in the form of think tanks, conservative media influencers and powerful allies such as Musk, who has already hinted he could use his enormous wealth and megaphone to pressure Republicans who do not back Trump's agenda."

Samuels adds, "Taken together, these factors amount to a second Trump term that will feature many of the same players but look drastically different in its ability to implement his agenda, especially in its early days."

READ MORE: 'Cringe': Legal expert explains how Senate Dems dropped the ball with Trump AG pick

Read The Hill's full article at this link.

During the United States' 2024 presidential race, Democratic nominee and Vice President Kamala Harris laid out a variety of reasons why she believed that Republican Donald Trump's policies would be terrible for working-class Americans if he won — from health care to tax policy to tariffs. But right-wing media outlets repeatedly attacked Harris as an "elitist," praising Trump as the "populist" in the race — which, in the end, President-elect Trump narrowly won.

Salon's Amanda Marcotte examines the MAGA movement's "populism" in a scathing article published on January 16, arguing that Trump and MAGA's alliance with billionaire tech bros exposes their "populism" as an "illusion."

"Trump's Diet Coke addiction has long been used by the grifter-in-chief to sell his fans on the big lie of his career: that, beneath all the private jets and over-the-top gilded decor, he's a 'regular' guy just like them," Marcotte observes. "He, too, houses the sugar-free caffeinated beverages as a vague gesture towards 'health' in between housing vegetable-free greasy meals of cheap hamburgers and sugary desserts. He must be an ordinary, salt-of-the-earth man! After all, he drinks a product found at every common supermarket."

READ MORE: Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

Marcotte adds, "Never mind that Trump would never sully himself by entering a grocery store. He pays people to do that for him."

Trump, the Salon journalist laments, is able to "trick" MAGA voters "into thinking the rich former reality TV star is one of them."

"On Tuesday, (January 14)," Marcotte observes, "NBC News reported that tech billionaires Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg will all have prominent seats on the platform at Trump's inauguration. The symbolism is unmistakable."

Marcotte continues, "Those seats are usually reserved for family members, former presidents, and prominent politicians. Giving those seats to billionaires signals loudly that this is a new era of oligarchy, without even an attempt to feign allegiance to pre-Trump notions of government for and by the people. President Joe Biden was alarmed enough to make this issue the focal point of his final speech in office."

READ MORE: Why this Trump nominee is 'a pleasant surprise' for Dems

During a recent appearance on the New Republic's "Daily Blast" podcast, economist and former New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was vehemently critical of Trump's "extremely regressive economic program" — warning that "working-class voters are going to face higher prices and upper-income voters are going to benefit from tax cuts."

"Sure, you may never be able to retire or own a home," Marcotte laments, " but it seems the r-word is coming back into fashion! I'd call that a bad trade-off."

READ MORE: Economist Paul Krugman explains why Trump voters are being 'brutally scammed'

Amanda Marcotte's full article for Salon is available at this link.

During a confirmation hearing on Wednesday, January 15, Senate Democrats and Republicans questioned former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi — President-elect Donald Trump's pick for U.S. attorney general. The hearing came only a day after the confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth, the former Fox News host who Trump has chosen for defense secretary.

Elizabeth Warren, Jacky Rosen, Kristen Gillibrand, Mazie Hirono and other Democratic senators grilled Hegseth with a vengeance, making it obvious that they see him as woefully unqualified to lead the Pentagon. But MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, in a biting opinion column, argues that Democrats dropped the ball when they questioned Bondi and didn't do nearly enough to highlight her flaws.

"Though Bondi's confirmation may be as good as sealed," Rubin laments, "it doesn't mean (Senate Judiciary) Committee members' questions were unimportant. On the contrary, this was Democrats' opportunity to showcase Bondi's history of election denialism, willingness to excuse January 6 offenders, and the limits, if any, to her fidelity to her former client, Trump, whom she defended in his first impeachment trial."

READ MORE: Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

Rubin continues, "Many of those Democratic senators, including Sens. Dick Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse and Amy Klobuchar, are themselves experienced former federal and/or state prosecutors….. Yet sadly, through questions that would make courtroom veterans and young prosecutors alike cringe, some Committee members allowed a prepared Bondi to elude clear statements about many of those concerns."

The MSNBC legal analyst argues that "one of the most glaring examples" of Democrats dropping the ball during the hearing came when Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois "engaged Bondi about whether Trump lost the 2020 election."

Rubin points out that "a smooth Bondi offered many of the right bromides, noting that she 'accept(s) the results" of that election and that Joe Biden is our president" — and Durbin, according to Rubin, failed to show how much of an election denier she was in 2020.

"Whitehouse, the (Senate Judiciary) Committee's sharpest observer of legal ethics, or lack thereof, similarly stumbled when asking Bondi to pledge the Department of Justice would never have, much less enforce, the sort of enemies list FBI nominee Kash Patel has boasted of on TV," Rubin writes. "Sure, Whitehouse got Bondi's assurance that, if confirmed, she would never have a so-called enemies list. But his insistence on form obscures a larger problem: Neither Trump nor anyone else in his administration needs an actual list to exact retribution by prosecution."

READ MORE: Why this Trump nominee is 'a pleasant surprise' for Dems

Lisa Rubin's full MSNBC column is available at this link.

President-elect Donald Trump is known for his fascination with crime dramas. According to CBS News, his favorite movies include Francis Ford Coppola's "The Godfather" and Martin Scorsese's "Goodfellas."

Interactions between U.S. presidents and organization crime figures is the focus of author Eric Dezenhall's book "Wiseguys and the White House: Gangsters, Presidents and the Deals They Made."

Dezenhall discusses a range of presidents, from Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Joe Biden.

READ MORE: 'Understand language!' Marjorie Taylor Greene walks back Trump promise with snippy remark

But The Guardian's Martin Pengelly quotes Dezenhall as saying that “the thing that makes Trump different from all of the other presidents is he's the only one who has been shockingly open about talking about" crossing paths with mob figures along the way.

The author said of Trump, "To him, it's a branding thing. Everybody else is running from the mob context. Trump, he's on Letterman, telling you he knows them. And not only does the public not punish him for it, they elected him twice. They're fine with it. And yet, the idea that somebody would run for office using mafia connections as part of their branding is really something to behold."

Pengelly notes that in 2023, photos of Trump talking to major mob figures "surfaced" —including Philadelphia mob boss Joey Merlino and John Alite, an infamous hit man for the Gambino crime family of New York City.

During a 2013 appearance on "The Late Show," Pengelly recalls, Trump told host David Letterman that he "really tried to stay away from" organized crime "as much as possible” but added, "Growing up in New York and doing business in New York, I would say there might have been one of those characters along the way…. I have met, on occasion, a few of those people. They happen to be very nice people."

READ MORE: Why this Trump nominee is 'a pleasant surprise' for Dems

Read The Guardian's full article at this link.

The fatal shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson and the indictment of suspect Luigi Mangione on multiple charges are bringing considerable attention to the practices of health insurance companies in the United States — practices that, many doctors and medical experts say, are egregious, abusive and dangerous to the wellbeing of patients.

One surgeon who is speaking out is Austin, Texas-based Dr. Elisabeth Potter, who revealed she was in surgery with a breast cancer patient when she got a call from a United Healthcare representative. The patient was under anesthesia, and Potter had to leave the operating room in order to talk to the United employee — who wanted her to justify keeping the patient hospitalized overnight.

Potter revealed, "So, I scrubbed out of my case, and I called UnitedHealthcare — and the gentleman said he needed some information…. Wanted to know her diagnosis and whether her inpatient stay should be justified."

READ MORE: Luigi Mangione prosecutors risk 'full acquittal' after first major 'mistake': legal expert

In a scathing opinion column published on January 15, The Guardian's Arwa Mahdawi argues that Potter's horror story shows that health insurance companies have gone into "full-on villain mode."

"Just when you think you can't hear anything worse about the insurance industry," Mahdawi laments, "a new horror story comes out. There's been an uptick in stories about insurers limiting coverage of prosthetic limbs and questioning their medical necessity, for example…. And last week, a plastic surgeon called Dr Elisabeth Potter — a specialist in reconstructive surgery for breast cancer patients who have had mastectomies — went viral on TikTok for claiming she had to step out of an operation, where another surgeon was also present, because a health insurance representative demanded proof it was necessary."

Mahdawi continues, "According to Potter, her patient was under anesthesia when she got an urgent phone call from UnitedHealthcare while in the operating room…. Potter explained to the insurance representative that her patient had breast cancer — something he apparently didn’t know because someone else in a 'different department' had that information. This is why health insurance executives get paid so much money, you see. They structure their companies in complicated ways that mean you have to go through at least 50 different people in different departments to try and sort out a claim; in the end, a certain percentage of people just give up because the process is so laborious."

Potter's "horror story," Mahdawi emphasizes, "is yet another reminder of just how frustrated everyone, from doctors to patients, is with the profit-driven health insurance industry in the U.S."

READ MORE: These 6 charts expose the 'rotten' depravity of US health insurance companies

"Yet, despite this palpable anger, there seems to be no appetite by those at the top to change the system," the Guardian columnist observes. "Indeed, it looks likely that Donald Trump's administration will shrink Medicaid — a government system which helps low-income people access healthcare at a reduced cost or for free — and insurance companies will up their use of AI to deny coverage."

Mahdawi continues, "Mangione should absolutely be facing consequences for what he is alleged to have done, but there should also be more legal consequences for those pushing predatory health insurance practices. Killing people with paperwork instead of a gun doesn't make you any less of a murderer."

READ MORE: 'Burdened by diseases': Study details what's wrong with American healthcare

Arwa Mahdawi's full column for The Guardian is available at this link.

Former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on his cases against President-elect Donald Trump contains two volumes: one on his election interference case, the other on his Mar-a-Lago/classified documents case.

Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, cleared the way for the release of the election interference volume — which came out on Tuesday, January 14. But the other volume remains unreleased, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is saying that Cannon "lacks the authority" to block its release.

Meanwhile, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, Trump's co-defendant in the classified documents case, are trying to keep that volume from coming out.

READ MORE: Pam Bondi refuses to say Trump legitimately lost the 2020 election in confirmation hearing

In an article published on January 15, Law & Crime's Jerry Lambe explains, "While the cases against Trump have been dismissed due to longstanding DOJ policy against indicting and prosecuting a sitting president, that is not so for his co-defendants in the classified documents case, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira…. Nauta and De Oliveira have been imploring the courts to prohibit the Justice Department from allowing the second volume of Smith's report to be viewed in chambers 'by the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees upon their request and agreement not to release any information from Volume Two publicly.'"

Lambe adds, "The duo have argued that releasing Smith's report, even in such a limited fashion, would unconstitutionally prejudice their due process rights."

The DOJ is still being led by outgoing U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, but that will change soon — as Trump's second term as president will begin on Monday, January 20. And if Trump has his way, Garland will be replaced by former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi — who was questioned by Democrats and Republicans during a Senate confirmation hearing on January 15.

Lambe reports, "The DOJ, on Tuesday, argued that Cannon should reject the request from Nauta and De Oliveira, asserting that the release of the report to certain members of Congress would not harm their ability to defend against the allegations while also arguing that Cannon lacks the authority to enforce an injunction on the report."

READ MORE: 'Political hacks and thugs': Trump fumes as Jack Smith report details 'criminal efforts'

In a January 14 court filing, DOJ wrote, "First, Defendants Nauta and De Oliveira cannot establish that the Department of Justice's intention to make Volume Two of the Final Report available for in camera review by the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will cause Defendants any harm, much less irreparable harm as required to obtain emergency relief. Second, Defendants cannot establish that injunctive relief is appropriate on the merits because this Court lacks the authority to intrude on the Attorney General's prerogative to manage the Justice Department's interactions with Congress, and there exists no other basis to enjoin the Department."

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Read the full Law & Crime article at this link.

Editor's Note: This headline has been updated.

Republican Michael Allen, known for his focus on national security, has been aggressively promoting John Ratcliffe for CIA director.

But according to Politico sources, he is being ousted from President-elect Donald Trump's transition orbit because he once hosted a fundraiser for former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming).

A member of Trump's transition team, interviewed on condition of anonymity, told Politico that Allen did a "fine job" promoting Trump's nomination of Ratcliffe for CIA director.

READ MORE: Pam Bondi refuses to say Trump legitimately lost the 2020 election in confirmation hearing

"Still," Politico's Daniel Lippman reports in an article published on January 13, "the ouster appeared to be further evidence of efforts within the president-elect's orbit to purge Republicans who have supported outspoken critics like Cheney, who voted to impeach Trump and served on the House January 6 Committee."

Allen, interviewed by Politico, didn't get into the details about being ousted. And he told the publication, "I was happy to pitch in. Ratcliffe will make a great CIA director, and I’m looking forward to President Trump's term."

But a transition official, quoted anonymously, told Politico, "There are all sorts of purity tests in this new administration, more so than in the first term."

After the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol Building, Liz Cheney blamed Trump for the attack and was relentless in her criticism of him. And in the 2024 presidential race, Cheney campaigned for Vice President Kamala Harris — who was also endorsed by her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney.

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

Read the full Politico article at this link.

President-elect Donald Trump continues to double down on his argument that the United States needs to acquire Greenland, a Danish territory, as a matter of "national security." But Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede maintains that Greenland "is not for sale."

Bloomberg News opinion columnist Javier Blas, known for his focus on energy, is highly critical of Trump's argument for acquiring Greenland. And he slams Trump's claims about the island's resources as "utter nonsense" in his January 15, column.

"As with every tall tale, the story starts from a grain of truth," Blas argues. "The island of about 60,000 people, a self-ruling territory of Denmark, has some mineral deposits, some of which are even large. That's unsurprising. Geologically, the island is an extension of the North American continent, and we know that the U.S. and Canada do enjoy a significant mineral endowment."

READ MORE: SD congressman drafts bill to authorize Trump’s potential purchase of Panama Canal

Blas cites a Danish geological survey from 2023, noting that it "warns that Greenland has very little chance of developing its commodity deposits due to high production costs."

Blas points out that the "hyperbole around Greenland and commodities has a 50-year long history."

"Back in the 1970s," the Bloomberg columnist explains, "the interest was about oil. The craze resurfaced in the early 2000s after oil and iron ore prices surged. Suffice to say the island doesn't pump a barrel of oil, and the miner that planned to develop an iron ore deposit went into bankruptcy."

Blas continues, "Now, it's an eagerness to tap 'a lot of great natural resources' — in the words of Vice President-elect JD Vance. But here, it really depends on your definition of 'a lot' — certainly, using my definition, it doesn’t qualify. It's not even close."

READ MORE: The real reason Trump is pushing for acquiring Greenland: analysis

Javier Blas' full Bloomberg News column is available at this link (subscription required).

David Sacks, the tech entrepreneur who co-hosts the "All-In Podcast," is President-elect Donald Trump's pick for the White House's AI and cryptocurrency czar. But in 2021, Sacks — according to CNN's Andrew Kaczynski — was highly critical of Trump and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Kaczynski reports that Sacks blamed Trump for the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol Building and didn't hesitate to call him out repeatedly on X, formerly Twitter.

"CNN's KFile counted at least 20 tweets from Sacks — mostly criticisms of Trump from 2021 — that have since been deleted, including one mocking Trump and praising his then-presidential rival Ron DeSantis that was deleted by June 2023," Kaczynski explains in a KFile column published on January 14. "Among other deleted tweets were those that criticized people who refused to wear masks during the COVID-19 pandemic, including one from April 2021 linked to a since-deleted blog post where Sacks said in April 2020 that mask wearing should be mandated by law."

READ MORE: New alarm raised over Trump AG pick Pam Bondi

Kaczynski continues, "But the majority of deleted tweets from Sacks focused on the January 6 riot. Several referred to the riot at the Capitol as an 'insurrection.' Another took aim at Trump's false election rhetoric."

In a January 9, 2021 tweet, Sacks wrote, "When a party loses an election, it needs to look in the mirror and ask what it did wrong. Trump failed to do that in 2020. Many Democrats failed to do that in 2016. It's always easier to invent conspiracy theories than to accept defeat. We shouldn't let them get away w/ that."

Then, on January 11, 2021, Sacks tweeted, "Speech can be regulated under the First Amendment in ways that would have taken down the most incendiary tweets of Trump and the other rabble-rousers." And four days later, Sacks wrote, "What happened at Capitol was an outrage. Incitement is not 1A protected."

But now, according to Kaczynski, Sacks is saying he was wrong to criticize Trump in January 2021.

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Sacks told Salon, "January 6 was a psyop designed to make President Trump look bad. I learned the truth, I updated my views and my X account. Apparently CNN thinks it’s a scandal that I temporarily believed some of their fake news."

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Andrew Kaczynski's full KFile column for CNN is available at this link (subscription required).

Senate confirmation hearings for President-elect Donald Trump's administration nominees are now underway. And on Wednesday, January 15 — the day after a confirmation hearing for Trump defense secretary pick Pete Hegseth — Democratic and GOP senators will question former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump's choice for U.S. attorney general.

Trump originally had former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) in mind for that position, but he picked Bondi after Gaetz — who is controversial even among Republicans — withdrew from consideration.

In an article published ahead of Bondi's confirmation hearing, Salon's Russell Payne examines Bondi's years as Florida attorney general and reports that she is "drawing renewed scrutiny over the friendly positions her office took on businesses that donated to Republican organizations."

READ MORE: New alarm raised over Trump AG pick Pam Bondi

"Bondi's career as Florida attorney general, while defended by Republicans, was marred by repeatedly dropping lawsuits against companies that donated to the Republican State Leadership Committee and the Republican Attorneys General Association, two organizations that supported Bondi," Payne explains. "The RSLC works to 'recruit, train, and elect' Republican officials for state-level offices and RAGA does the same, though it is specifically focused on supporting Republican attorney generals around the country."

In 2014, according to Payne, Bondi's office "dropped a lawsuit against the travel booking website Expedia over an alleged scheme to withhold taxes in Florida."

"The decision to drop the lawsuit came after Expedia donated more than $190,000 to the RSLC and RAGA between 2011 and 2014," Payne notes. "While Bondi denied that the company's 'access' had any 'bearing' on the decision to drop the suit, it is part of a pattern of behavior."

According to a report from the watchdog group Accountable.US, Bondi's years as Florida attorney general were "marred by financial conflicts of interest as corporate interests endowed the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) and the Republican State Leadership Committee."

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Accountable.US Executive Director Tony Carrk told Salon, "Pam Bondi frequently played favorites with big corporate donors and political insiders at the expense of everyday consumers, patients and the public good. Nothing indicates Bondi would change her office-peddling modus operandi as America's top justice official, which would be part and parcel with President-elect Trump's agenda of further rigging the system in favor of wealthy corporate interests."

READ MORE: 'Prosecutors will be prosecuted': Pam Bondi vowed DOJ 'deep state' will be 'cleaned out'

Read Russell Payne's full Salon article at this link.

White evangelical Christian fundamentalists are among Donald Trump's most ardent supporters, and the president-elect also enjoys strong support from some prominent figures in the tech world — including X.com owner Elon Musk and PayPal founder Peter Thiel. Meanwhile, Amazon's Jeff Bezos and Facebook/Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, both of whom were critical of Trump in the past, made an effort to curry favor with him after he won the 2024 election.

Mother Jones' Kiera Butler, in an article published on January 15, describes a Trump-friendly trend that brings the evangelical and tech worlds together: Christian fundamentalist tech bros.

Butler cites 24-year-old Augustus Doricko, who runs the startup Rainmaker, as an example.

READ MORE: 'Attention seeking loser': Crockett takes aim at Mace after challenge to fight in committee hearing

"Last year," Butler reports, "PayPal founder Peter Thiel's foundation granted Doricko a Thiel Fellowship, a grant awarded annually to a select group of entrepreneurs who have foregone a college degree in order to pursue a tech-focused business venture….. (Doricko) believes his work manifests God’s will."

Doricko, according to Butler, "is just one example within a rising tide of American Christianity that appears to be cresting in California's tech enclaves."

"Recent news stories have described a new generation of tech bros flocking to church in the famously secular San Francisco Bay Area and Silicon Valley, discovering Christianity through PayPal founder and billionaire investor Peter Thiel, and investing in a Christ-centered real estate enclave in rural Kentucky," Butler explains. "There are the usual reasons for this surging interest in Christianity like yearning for community and searching for the greater meaning of life…. But there are other forces at play, which revolve around a very specific kind of Christianity: that of the TheoBros, a group of mostly Millennial and Gen Z, ultra-conservative men, many of whom proudly call themselves Christian nationalists."

Butler continues, "Among the tenets of this branch of Protestant Christianity — known as reformed or reconstructionist — is the idea that the United States should be subject to biblical law. While the TheoBros' beliefs are extreme — many of them think women shouldn't be able to vote, and that the Constitution has outlived its usefulness and we should instead be governed by the Ten Commandments — their movement is moving out of the fringe."

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

TheoBros, according to Butler, favor "hypermasculine aesthetics" — including a group of tech bros in El Segundo, California who call themselves the Gundo Bros.

Butler notes, "The Gundo Bros have a way of casually mixing the realms of tech, masculinity, and Christianity…. Many of the Gundo Bros have benefitted from the largesse of tech investor Marc Andreessen, a major Trump supporter, friends with Elon Musk and Peter Thiel, and close adviser to Trump's newly convened Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE….. The TheoBros’ mingling with MAGA elites is likely just getting started."

READ MORE: How fear of 'critical thinking' drives Christian nationalists’ 'rising authoritarianism': ex-evangelical

Kiera Jones' full article for Mother Jones is available at this link.

One of two volumes of former U.S. Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith's final report on his cases against Donald Trump was released early Tuesday morning, January 14: the volume focusing on his election interference case against the president-elect. The other volume addresses the Mar-a-Lago/classified documents case.

Never Trump conservative David Frum, a former George W. Bush speechwriter, examines in Smith's report in an article published by The Atlantic the day of its release. And Frum's takeaway is that the report underscores the "post-constitutional moment" the United States is facing.

"No prosecution will now take place…. Instead, the special counsel’s report delivers a confession of the helplessness of the U.S. government," Frum writes. "Smith asserts that the evidence was sufficient to convict Trump of serious crimes — and then declares the constitutional system powerless to act: The criminal is now the president-elect, therefore his crime cannot be punished."

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Frum continues, "The report suggests that if the law had moved faster, then Trump today would be a convict, not a president. But the law did not move fast. Why not? Whose fault was that? Fingers will point, but the finger-pointing does not matter. What matters is the outcome and the message."

Trump, Frum notes, "swore to uphold the Constitution in January 2017" but "violated that oath in January 2021."

" Now, in January 2025, he will swear it again," Frum laments. "The ritual survives. Its meaning has been lost…. Now comes the Smith report with its simpler answer: If a president wins reelection, he has immunity for even the worst possible crimes committed during his first term in office."

Frum adds, "The incentives contained in this outcome are clear, if perverse. And they are deeply sinister to the future of democracy in the United States."

READ MORE: 'Humiliation will escalate': Foreign diplomat says 'hamstrung' Rubio won’t last long as sec of state

David Frum's full article for The Atlantic is available at this link (subscription required).

On Tuesday, January 14, former Fox News host Pete Hegseth — President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for secretary of defense — was questioned by a long list of Democratic and GOP senators. And some of the most biting questions came from Democratic Sens. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kristen Gillibrand of New York State, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii.

Duckworth, herself a military veteran, set out to demonstrate that he was unqualified to lead the Pentagon and was chosen primarily because of his loyalty to Trump.

In an MSNBC column published that day, historian/author Ruth Ben-Ghiatt (who teaches at New York University) argues that Trump had specific motivations in his decision to pick Hegseth for defense secretary. Not only is Hegseth a devoted Trump loyalist, she emphasizes, but also, he shares the president-elect's "wrongheaded" views on the U.S. Armed Forces.

READ MORE: 'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

"Like all authoritarian leaders," Ben-Ghiat explains, "Trump values personal loyalty above experience and competence. Yes, Hegseth is a decorated Army National Guard veteran who served overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. But his time as a Fox News host, his staunch defense of Trump's falsehoods, such as Trump's claim that he won the 2020 election, and his personal profile as a seeming rule breaker and rogue personality most likely counted more in Trump's judgment."

The historian/author adds, "In a normal democratic system, Hegseth would never be considered for the post of defense secretary. He has no experience leading any large organization, let alone one as large as the Pentagon."

Hegseth, according to Ben-Ghiat, reflects the "values and intentions of" Trump's "incoming administration" — and that includes his support of "Christian nationalists" and a belief that "women shouldn’t be allowed in combat situations."

Hegseth's "lack of qualifications," Ben-Ghiat argues, would "most likely help create an autocrat’s dream."

READ MORE: 'Humiliation will escalate': Foreign diplomat says 'hamstrung' Rubio won't last long as sec of state

"In 2025, the next defense secretary may also preside over a potential radical change in the military’s role in American society — one that could corrode the integrity of the institution if its members are required to commit acts of violence against civilians," Ben-Ghiat warns. "It's no wonder, then, that to sell this authoritarian vision of the military to the American people, Trump has chosen a smooth-talking weekend host of a network that is trusted by his base."

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

Ruth Ben-Ghiat's full MSNBC column is available at this link.

Although Paul Krugman retired from his New York Times column after almost 25 years, the liberal economist is still keeping busy and making media appearances — including an interview with The New Republic's Greg Sargent posted on January 14.

Trump aggressively campaigned on the economy last year. But Krugman, during an appearance on The New Republic's podcast, laid out a variety of reasons why he believes Trump voters will suffer economically after he returns to the White House.

Krugman told host Greg Sargent, "A lot of people are going to get brutally scammed. Those are his most fervent supporters…. Probably the local business elites are the most fervent MAGA types out there — more so even than the working class, but that doesn't mean that Trump cares about their interests. Small businesspeople are the people that he's, all through his life, hired as contractors and then not (paid), right? Scamming people like that is what his whole life has been (about)."

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

Small businesses and consumers, the economist warned, will suffer the consequences if Trump follows through on the aggressive tariffs and mass deportations he is proposing.

"Trump has really radical policy ideas," Krugman told Sargent. "I obviously think they're terrible, but they are radical. He wants Smoot-Hawley-level tariffs. He wants mass deportations. He wants to take away the independence of the Federal Reserve. How do you justify all of that when we're pretty much a Goldilocks economy?"

Trump hammered President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris relentlessly over inflation during his 2024 campaign, but Krugman warned that the tariffs Trump is proposing will be quiet inflationary.

The economist told Sargent, "If we take the totality of stuff that Trump seems to want to do — he wants to raise tariffs but cut taxes on high incomes — it's basically working-class voters (who) are going to face higher prices and upper-income voters (who) are going to benefit from tax cuts. This really is very much contrary to their interests, then you add in all the other stuff. Even more than usual for a Republican, he appears to have an extremely regressive economic program in mind — one that really will effectively redistribute income away from working-class voters to the top."

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

Listen to The New Republic's full podcast interview with Paul Krugman at this link or read the transcript here.

In addition to doubling down on his promise to impose a 25 percent across-the-board tariff on all Canadian goods coming into the United States, President-elect Donald Trump is calling for Canada to become "the 51st state."

Canadian officials, both liberal and conservative, are responding that while they consider the U.S. a valuable ally, they have no desire to become part of the U.S. On January 7, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted, "There isn't a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States. Workers and communities in both our countries benefit from being each other’s biggest trading and security partner."

In an article published by The New Republic on January 14, John Last — a Canadian journalist who now lives in Italy — lays out a variety of reasons why it would be unrealistic for Canada to become the 51st state.

READ MORE:DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

"No one, least of all Canadians, knows how seriously to take all this," Last explains. "On the one hand, joining Canada to the United States is effectively a legal impossibility. Put aside the fact that 80 percent of Canadians don't want it — rewriting the Canadian Constitution in any capacity would require the consent of the 20 percent that live in French-speaking Québec, who have succeeded many times in holding the country hostage over much smaller matters than total cultural dissolution."

Many Trump defenders in the U.S. are dismissing Trump's talk of acquiring Canada as mere "trolling." And quite a few Canadian officials and journalists are responding humorously.

Last points out, however, that "privately, many Canadians" are "scared sh-----s" by Trump's threats.

"Beneath all of these reactions was a fluttering heartbeat of dread," Last argues. "What if he actually means it? In the flood of explainers and Q&As since Trump's imperialistic musings, experts have generally rallied around the idea that all his madness is merely posturing — an attempt to intimidate opponents in Russia and China, or extract reasonable concessions from allies like investment in border protections…. In situations like these, one can never be sure what exactly is motivating Trump."

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

John Last's full article for The New Republic is available at this link.

On Tuesday morning, January 14, confirmation hearings for Pete Hegseth — President-elect Donald Trump's controversial pick for defense secretary — got underway. And some of the most aggressive questioning came from Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (D-New York).

Although Gillibrand politely thanked Hegseth "for your service" in the military, she made it clear that she had "many concerns about [his] record" and the former Fox News host's past statements about women serving in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Gillibrand told Hegseth, "They are so hurtful to the men and women who are currently serving in the U.S. military, harmful to morale, harmful to good order and discipline. If you are saying that women shouldn't be serving in the military — and I'm going to read you your quotes because the quotes themselves are terrible — you will have to change how you see women to do this job well. And I don't know if you are capable of that."

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

The senator noted specific comments from Hegseth that "denigrated active-duty service members."

"We have hundreds, hundreds of women who are currently in the infantry — lethal members of our military serving in the infantry," Gillibrand told Hegseth. "But you degrade them. You say: We need moms, but not in the military, especially in combat units so specific to Senator [Tom] Cotton's (R-AR) question."

The senator stressed that the training for women entering the military is, in fact, quite rigorous.

Hegseth maintained that he has "never disparaged women serving in the military" and is only opposed to having "standards lowered." But Gillibrand hammered away at him relentlessly over past comments saying that women should not serve in combat roles.

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

Watch the full video below or at this link.

The recent spending battle in Congress saw major infighting among Republicans over the United States' debt ceiling. President-elect Donald Trump called for ending the debt ceiling, but Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and other GOP budget hawks maintained that the U.S. must do a lot more to lower its federal deficit.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), another budget hawk, was so incensed over the spending deal that he was the lone Republican who refused to vote in favor of keeping Rep. Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) as speaker when a new Congress was seated on January 3.

The spending bill that was signed into law by outgoing President Joe Biden was a stopgap measure that Johnson supported.

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

But according to Punchbowl News' Jake Sherman, Johnson said he "wants to extend the debt limit for the entirety of Trump's presidency."

In a January 14 post on X, formerly Twitter, Sherman reported that Johnson also "said it would be 'costly' — meaning Democrats would exact a price for their votes."

Sherman tweeted, "ALSO: JOHNSON said he's 'agnostic' whether the debt limit rides on reconciliation or elsewhere. He’s discussing [with] [H]ouse [Republicans] today, he said."

President-elect Donald Trump has not backed down from insisting that the United States needs to acquire Greenland, a Danish territory, "for national security purposes."

But Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede maintains that Greenland "is not for sale," and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has said the same thing.

Trump is refusing to rule out the possibility of using military force against Denmark, a longtime U.S. ally and member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). And he is threatening to "tariff Denmark at a very high level" if it interferes with his desire to acquire Greenland.

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

Economists, including former New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, are warning that the 25 percent across-the-board tariffs Trump plans to carry out against Mexico and Canada would be highly inflationary and terrible for U.S. consumers.

Similarly, The Hill's Joseph Choi reports that a tariff against Denmark could make two widely used drugs, Ozempic and Wegovy, even more expensive in the United States.

"Danish multinational pharmaceutical giant Novo Nordisk is the sole owner of semaglutide, the active ingredient in both Ozempic and Wegovy," Choi explains in an article published on January 14. "A month’s supply of Ozempic is close to $1000 without insurance, though manufacturer coupons and patient assistance programs are available."

Anyone who watches MSNBC and CNN frequently has been inundated with ads for Wegovy and Ozempic (whose jingle borrows the melody from the band Pilot's 1975 hit "Magic"). And according to Choi, Novo Nordisk "was estimated to be responsible for half of Denmark's gross domestic product growth in 2024."

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

Choi reports, "According to census data available through November, pharmaceutical products accounted for roughly 30 percent of Danish imports coming in through U.S. ports in 2024. Polling from KFF last year found that 1 in 8 U.S. adults said they’ve tried a GLP-1 drug like Ozempic, including nearly half of those with diabetes and a quarter of people with heart disease."

READ MORE: 'New level of shamelessness': Johnson slammed over response on California aid

Read The Hill's full article at this link.

During a joint session of Congress on Monday, January 6, outgoing Vice President Kamala Harris certified her own loss in the United States' 2024 presidential race. Harris oversaw the counting of electoral votes for the Donald Trump/JD Vance ticket, and unlike Trump after the 2020 election, she made no attempt to delegitimize her political opponent.

President-elect Trump will return to the White House on January 20, and Vance will be sworn in as vice president.

Since the 1970s, vice presidents have been living in a U.S. Naval Observatory residence in Washington. And according to CBS News, Harris "has not extended an invitation for a formal sit-down or tour" of the mansion where VP-elect Vance, his wife Usha Vance and their children will be living.

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

CBS News' Jennifer Jacobs reports, "In November, Usha Vance, via intermediaries, reached out to staff for the home's current occupants, Harris and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, seeking details including what they would need to childproof it. Ewan, Vivek and Mirabel Vance are all under the age of eight. The questions were initially rebuffed by a Harris political appointee."

Jacobs continues, "But there has since been communication between the Vance team and Navy aides who oversee the residence. Before Christmas, Navy officials provided an overview of the house to discuss the layout of the residence, logistics and practicalities of the move-in, and to help answer any questions the Vances had, a person familiar with the call said."

The Daily Beast's Leigh Kimmins puts it this way: Harris "has reportedly snubbed her successor, JD Vance, by not inviting him for a tour of his new digs."

Jacobs notes, however, that according to "people close to Harris," she "was never afforded an opportunity to visit the home before she was sworn in in 2021."

READ MORE: 'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

"Harris did not move into the Naval Observatory residence until April 2021, about three months after being sworn in, because the house was in need of repairs," Jacobs reports.

READ MORE: 'New level of shamelessness': Johnson slammed over response on California aid

Read the full CBS News article at this link.

During his 2016 campaign, Donald Trump drew scathing criticism from Democrats as well as Never Trump conservatives because of inflammatory rhetoric about immigrants. Yet part of Trump's message — bringing manufacturing jobs back to the United States in big numbers — resonated with enough voters for him to win key swing states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Trump was voted out of office in 2020 only to be voted back into office in 2024, and the economy was a major focus of his fourth and most successful presidential campaign (Trump first ran for president in 2000 as a Reform Party candidate but dropped out of the race in February).

In an opinion column published on January 14, the Washington Post's Aaron Blake emphasizes that Trump failed to live up to his 2016 campaign promises and lists some 2024 campaign promises that may also be unrealistic.

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

Blake notes that in 2024, Trump promised to "end birthright citizenship."

"Trump might well sign such an order," the Post columnist explains. "But it might well fail to pass legal muster, given the 14th Amendment to the Constitution has long been understood to bestow birthright citizenship — and such a move would require another constitutional amendment."

Blake points out that Trump promised to "increase auto production to record highs" in 2024.

But according to the columnist, "The record year for auto production was more than 13 million in 1999. The country produces about 3 million less than that, meaning it would require a huge, almost instantaneous manufacturing spike that seems quite unlikely."

READ MORE: 'Complete waste of time': Georgia Republicans reopen investigation into Fani Willis

Blake argues that although Trump's promised to "stop illegal immigration" to the U.S., "getting illegal immigration to zero is nearly impossible."

Trump, Blake explains, promised to "launch a mass deportation program" on his first day in office, but the columnist notes that "given the procedural and legal issues involved in such a gargantuan effort, having a full plan in place so quickly could prove difficult."

READ MORE: 'New level of shamelessness': Johnson slammed over response on California aid

Aaron Blake's full Washington Post column is available at this link (subscription required).

Donald Trump's second presidency is less than a week away, and on Monday, January 20, he will return to the White House with Republicans in control of both branches of Congress. Moreover, Republicans control many state legislatures, and the GOP still has a 6-3 supermajority on the U.S. Supreme Court.

In an article published on January 14, Salon's Chauncey DeVega takes a blunt, candid look at what may lie ahead with the second Trump Administration and interviews a "range of experts." And some of them are quite pessimistic.

Political strategist/podcast host Cheri Jacobus told DeVega, "Since Election Day, we've seen our institutions that we already knew were floundering, now openly selling out to the coming fascism and the authoritarian Trump regime, with MSNBC's Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski groveling their way down to Mar-a-Lago to kiss the ring and beg for mercy and with ABC News and George Stephanopoulos settling a defamation case brought by Trump. The case was extremely winnable for ABC News, yet they groveled their way to Trump to beg for mercy — and, of course — access."

READ MORE: 'Complete waste of time': Georgia Republicans reopen investigation into Fani Willis

Jacobus continued, "Trump and his administration and agents and other enablers will crash the Biden economy — one of the best in decades — to 'rebuild' it again — except they will only keep the first half of the promise. There will be no rebuilding. There will only be mass looting of our tax dollars, greasing of palms, favors to help the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the destruction of the middle class, further ensuring we cannot fight back."

SUNY Fredonia sociology professor Randolph Hohle predicts that Trump's second administration will be "four long years."

Fredonia told DeVega, "I don't think we will see good policy for a while. Even if it's just hyperbole, Trump's obsession with immigration and the border is not a productive economic policy and doesn't do anything for working people. Allowing the Big Tech robber barons to dictate a regulatory environment over AI, quantum computing, and energy won't be good for the country."

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) education professor Peter McLaren argues that Trump's opponents have good reason to be feeling "fear, anger, and despair."

McLaren, who is originally from Canada, told DeVega, "Surely, I thought, voters could see the obvious: Trump was a fascist. But then, like a lightning bolt, it struck me — most Americans simply didn't care. The realization was crushing — a bitter truth about the apathy of my adopted country."

READ MORE: DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

Dr. Justin Frank, a former psychiatry professor at the George Washington University Medical Center, urges Americans to take care if their mental health during Trump's second term.

"If we devolve into the nightmare that Trump's return to power will mean for the country," Frank told DeVega, "we must try to keep a larger perspective. This means maintaining our relationships with friends and family and the larger community. We should strive to find those happy times amidst what will be so much darkness and pain."

READ MORE: 'New level of shamelessness': Johnson slammed over response on California aid

Chauncey DeVega's full article for Salon is available at this link.