 |
 |
CLICK HERE TO DONATE FOR HURRICANE HELENE RELIEF |
New York City Mayor Eric Adams is vowing to defend himself against a yet-to-be-unsealed federal indictment as the embattled Democrat faces growing pressure to resign from office.
The indictment, first reported by the New York Times, is expected to be unsealed Thursday by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Damien Williams. The charges were not immediately clear but appeared to focus on whether Adams' mayoral campaign conspired with Turkey and other foreign governments to receive illegal campaign contributions during his 2021 mayoral run.
As news of the indictments broke, Adams released a video statement late Wednesday in which he vowed to fight the charges and remain in office, asking New York residents for "prayers and patience."
"I will fight these injustices with every ounce of my strength and my spirit," he says in the video, posted on YouTube, adding, "I am innocent," and he plans to request an "immediate trial so New Yorkers can hear the truth."
Adams, 64, was elected to lead the nation's most populous city nearly three years ago, pledging to reduce crime and guide the city out of the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, multiple investigations have swirled around Adams and senior administration officials over the past year, prompting the resignations of the city's police commissioner, health commissioner and schools chancellor. The investigations began in November 2023, when federal authorities searched the home of Adams' chief fundraiser, Brianna Suggs. Adams also had his electronic devices temporarily seized by investigators.
A retired NYPD captain, Adams has insisted for months that he "follows the law" and suggested that he has been targeted by federal investigators because he is Black. He is New York's second Black mayor.
The indictment, which makes Adams the first New York City mayor to be charged with federal crimes, has prompted a flurry of demands from fellow New York Democrats for him to step down.
"I do not see how Mayor Adams can continue governing New York City," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-Bronx, said in a statement on social media. "The flood of resignations and vacancies are threatening government function. Nonstop investigations will make it impossible to recruit and retain a qualified administration.”
State Senator Zellnor Myrie, a Brooklyn Democrat who is running for mayor, called news of the indictments a "sad day" for New York and "especially painful for so many Black New Yorkers who put our hope and faith in this mayor."
"We need a leader who is fully focused, without distraction, on the enormous challenges we face — from housing affordability to public safety," he said in a statement. "A mayor under the weight of a serious indictment can no longer do that — and today I am calling on him to resign."
"The mayor needs to resign for the good of the city. His legal fight is not our fight,” Scott Stringer, a former New York City comptroller and 2021 mayoral candidate, said in a statement. "While the mayor focuses on proving his innocence, the rest of us need to focus on the business of the city — building affordable housing, educating our kids, and keeping this city safe."
The influential New York Working Families Party, posted a statement also calling on Adams to resign, saying the indictments mean that he "can no longer govern" the city.
"He has lost the trust of the everyday New Yorkers he was elected to serve," the group said.
New York City Councilman Robert Holden, a Queens Democrat, said while Adams is "presumed innocent until proven guilty" there is "no way he can effectively lead with this cloud hanging over him."
"It's a sad day for New York City when a sitting mayor is indicted on federal charges," Holden, co-chairman of the Council's Common Sense Caucus, said in a statement. "While he is presumed innocent until proven guilty, there is no way he can effectively lead with this cloud hanging over him. With the challenges our city faces, he must step down for the good of New Yorkers."
(The Center Square) – The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty is out with a new report that says rolling back the limitations on collective bargaining included adopted more than a decade ago in Act 10 would cost local governments in Wisconsin nearly $500 million.
“At the time of Act 10’s passage, the legislation saved Wisconsin from pending financial ruin. As the federal government pulled back funding provided in the Great Recession, the state faced a budget deficit of more than $3.6 billion – the equivalent of nearly $5 billion today. Act 10 fixed the fiscal hole, and state and local budgets adjusted to the ‘new normal.’ There is little doubt that going back on the law would be ruinous for all levels of government,” the report states.
WILL’s Will Flanders said the nearly half-billion-dollar price tag for local governments includes:
● $113 million in new health insurance costs
● $360 million in new retirement benefit costs
● $12.7 million in new salary costs
“When faced with a budget shortfall, governments have two main options: raise additional revenue or cut services. It is not clear how this gap would be closed, but it is likely that a significant increase in the tax burden for Wisconsinites would be necessary,” the report adds.
The report looks at the cost projections for health insurance and retirement costs. It also notes that Act 10 never really slowed the pace of pay rises, acknowledging “Pay in 2012 – the last year prior to full Act
10 implementation – was $65,101 compared to $65,468 today. However, it seems the pay growth rate was arrested by the legislation. From 2000 to 2012, annual pay increases averaged about $241. From 2012 to 2022, pay increases averaged $46.”
The WILL report also quotes Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, who said ending Act 10 would be just as impactful as its implementation.
“It’s almost unfathomable how consequential it would be if Act 10 were repealed. I mean, we’ve made so much progress in the 10, 15 years since that was adopted,” Schoemann said. “It doesn’t matter if it’s here in Washington County, one of the most conservative places in Wisconsin or a place like the city of Milwaukee, the city of Madison, there have been huge reforms that have occurred at the local level since then. So to think about taking a step backwards in that way would be extraordinarily detrimental to our organization. And I think municipalities across the state of Wisconsin.”
WILL released a previous report on Act 10’s impact on public schools costs, That report said Act 10 has saved taxpayers more than $1.5 billion over the past decade-plus.
Act 10 is headed for a hearing before the Wisconsin Supreme Court after a Dane County judge questioned why and how lawmakers exempted certain public employees, like policemen and firefighters, from the law.
Haitians are not just arriving in Springfield, Ohio, but also in small rural towns nationwide as a result of several Biden-Harris administration policies.
Since fiscal 2021, more than 485,000 Haitian illegal border crossers, a record, have been reported by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The overwhelming majority were reported this fiscal year, nearly 216,000, compared to 48,727 in fiscal 2021.
Since fiscal 2021 through August, the majority have been apprehended at the southwest border of nearly 262,000, followed by nearly 221,000 nationwide and nearly 2,300 at the northern border, according to the data.
Additionally, since July, 205,000 Haitians have been released through the CHNV parole program, according to CBP data. Of the more than 765,000 illegal foreign nationals released into the country through the CBP One app, the top nationality is Haitian.Through these programs, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas also extended Temporary Permanent Status to them and granted work authorization.
All of these programs are illegal, state attorneys general who've sued to stop them, argue. U.S. House Republicans also cited them as among the many illegal actions Mayorkas caused them to impeach him. Mayorkas has since only expanded the programs and extended TPS.
When responding to the Haitian influx, local officials claim Haitians are there to work and are contributing to society despite claims by residents to the contrary.
The city of Springfield claims a "surge in our population over the last several years, primarily due to an influx of legal immigrants," suggesting that Springfield "is an appealing place for many reasons including lower cost of living and available work."
Springfield Mayor Bob Rue has said "my hands are tied in many ways" about the influx of Haitians, pointing to a designation they were given by the Biden-Harris administration. The TPS program "came from the White House and is a Homeland Security policy," he said at a recent city commission meeting.
Springfield residents have argued the overwhelming majority of Haitians are enrolling in welfare and not working; have caused increased crime andthere aren't enough police to deal with it; and residents are being killed by Haitian drivers. Rue has expressed concerns about the dangerous driving conditions, saying, "I have almost been hit myself."
In the last three years, Springfield's 50,000 population has swelled by roughly 20,000. City officials claim they are there "legally" through TPS through Feb. 3, 2026.
In Sylacauga, Alabama, residents have been demanding answers about busloads of Haitians being dropped into their community. At a Sept. 5 city council meeting, City Council President Tiffany Nix shut down a meeting and made the issue about race. "We have no reason to treat people differently because of how they look," she said. "There's no reason for us to discuss this any further." She also said, "I'm going to welcome anybody to Sylacauga that wants to come to Sylacauga," 1819 News reported.
Sylacauga resident David Phillips said, "there is no way the State Department can vet these people," adding that they were coming from a failed state and potentially dangerous.
Residents continue to speak out. At a Sept. 17 meeting, Nix said Haitians were there on 18-month visas. A meeting has also been scheduled with state and federal lawmakers.
In Coffee County, one resident claimed, "30,000 illegal aliens are scheduled to arrive in the first week of October, 1,000 of them in Baldwin County," and that human trafficking was involved, 1819 News reported. Enterprise City Councilman Greg Padgett posted a statement on Facebook saying, "Enterprise is not a sanctuary city; No elected officials have received bribes to allow Haitians into our city; No one informed the elected officials of our city about this program, how many are here, and for what purpose - so there has been nothing covered up." He also said they are "doing our best to obtain factual answers."
In Charleroi, Penn., the immigrant population has grown "by over 2,000% in just the last two years," primarily due to a Haitian influx, 11 News reported. Despite this creating a strain for the local school district, Charleroi Council Borough Manager Joe Manning told KDKA News, Haitians aren't "a drain on our resources, they don't cause problems."Charleroi Council President Kristin Hopkins-Calek said their community is "steeped in a rich history of immigration," and Haitians were making a positive contribution, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette reported.
Under current law, the majority of Haitians being released into the U.S. are inadmissible but have been ordered to be released by the Biden-Harris administration and given "notice to appear" documents for an immigration court hearing years into the future. The NTA states they are inadmissible, CBP officials have explained to The Center Square. Several U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security reports acknowledge their NTA inadmissible status and state their release, not removal, violates federal law established by Congress. If federal law were followed, House Republicans argue the large majority would be prohibited entry.
Many inadmissible Haitians became citizens of Mexico, Chile and other countries, living and working there for years prior to claiming asylum in the U.S., The Center Square has previously reported. Border Patrol and local Texas officials first realized this when what became 30,000 Haitians descended on Del Rio, Texas, in September 2021. Many left their passports and identifying documents – which show their citizenship was not Haitian – in Mexico, claiming they had none. The majority were released into communities nationwide, The Center Square reported.
(The Center Square) – A Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin want to avoid another fight to get off the ballot.
State Rep. Scott Krug, R-Nekoosa, who oversees the Assembly’s elections committee said on UpFront over the weekend that he wants to change the state law that keeps people on the ballot, almost no matter what.
"We can't force people to do things they don't want to do anymore, even if they wanted to do them earlier," Krug said.
Krug said there’s no victory in forcing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the November ballot even though he’s no longer running for president.
Kennedy has challenged Wisconsin’s ballot access law by arguing it creates two timelines for getting off the ballot. Kennedy says Wisconsin law sets one deadline for Republicans and Democrats to get off the ballot, while it sets another timeline for independent candidates.
A Dane County judge has already rejected Kennedy’s claim, but the Wisconsin Supreme Court was still considering Kennedy’s argument.
Krug said Kennedy has a point to be made.
"I think you saw in the court case they made a pretty strong First Amendment argument that it wasn't what he wanted to do any more, and we kind of forced him into it,” Krug explained. “So that would be the change, I would propose next session is just saying before that final meeting with WEC, let's define what qualified means on the ballot."
It is, however, unlikely Krug and his fellow Republicans will be able to change Wisconsin’s ballot laws. Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed almost every election legislation that lawmakers have sent him over the past four years.
The governor has said he will not sign any new laws that make it more difficult for people to vote.
"I think that's been the challenge we've had the last four years is helping people understand why and how they are working so closely with our clerks, getting information out, having a lot of hearings, a session about ideas and changes we wanted to make," Krug said during the weekend show. "Not a ton of changes got signed into state law, but I think everybody's awareness of how our election process works and how their interactions with their clerks can be handled really gives me a lot of confidence going into this last stretch of the election cycle, that it's safe and secure."
(The Center Square) – At the Wisconsin Election Commission’s request, the state’s Supreme Court agreed Friday to take up the petition to rule on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s lawsuit seeking his removal from the ballot, bypassing the court of appeals.
The decision follows the Dane County Circuit Court’s ruling Monday to keep Kennedy on the ballot.
“Given the need for a prompt resolution of this appeal, the court does not contemplate holding oral argument in this matter,” the court announced. “The court will endeavor to issue a written decision as expeditiously as possible.”
The action breaks with typical court procedure to reject premature petitions, leading Justices Rebecca Bradley and Annette Ziegler to issue a dissent.
“A majority of this court grants the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s (WEC) petition to bypass the court of appeals before the WEC has filed its response brief, despite the majority’s professed practice in prior cases of ‘generally den[ying] as premature petitions for bypass prior to the filing of briefs in the court of appeals,’ Bradley said Friday. “Such arbitrariness by courts is antithetical to the original understanding of the judicial role.”
Kennedy’s effort to remove himself from the state’s ballot has encountered setbacks for months. After withdrawing from the presidential race and endorsing former President Donald Trump, Kennedy had sent a letter Aug. 23 to the WEC, requesting his name be removed from the ballot.
But in its certification of presidential candidates five days later, the WEC voted 5-1 to put Kennedy’s name on the ballot, saying he had missed the Aug. 6 deadline for third party candidates to withdraw from the General Election. Following the decision, county clerks were authorized to begin printing ballots and Kennedy filed his lawsuit, which the Dane County Circuit Court struck down.
As Americans struggle with high inflationary costs, paying record high grocery costs and energy bills, Congress continues to allocate billions of dollars of taxpayer money to fund services for illegal border crossers living in U.S. cities.
Prior to the last budget funding showdown in March, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said in January that “any bill that does not secure the border is not acceptable.”
He also identified 64 examples of ways he says the Biden-Harris administration “worked to systematically undermine America’s border security.”
In February, House Republicans impeached Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas arguing he was derelict in his duty and violated the public trust by creating a border crisis. One month later, the majority of Republicans who voted to impeach him, passed a spending bill that funded programs he created they maintain are illegal.
While Americans complain about escalating crime caused by illegal border crossers who’ve inundated their communities, Congress funded the programs that brought them there – and are keeping them there – including DHS’ Shelter and Services Program grants funneling billions to primarily Democratic states, counties, cities as well as nonprofits.
Likewise, the U.S. Senate’s “strongest border security bill in history” the White House, Senate and House Democrats keep touting, co-authored by U.S. Sen. James Lankford, R-OK, allocated “an additional $1.4 billion in SSP funds, and provide additional needed tools and resources to respond to historic global migration,” DHS says – to fund caring for illegal border crossers released into the US.
DHS recently announced the latest round of SSP funding of $380 million—a drop in the bucket to overall spending authorized by Congress. This round “augments the $259.13 million in SSP grants that DHS distributed in April 2024 … which was authorized by Congress to support communities that are providing services to migrants,” DHS says.
The April DHS grant money was distributed after Congress in March passed a $1.2 trillion spending package to avoid a so-called government shutdown, despite Johnson’s and others’ claims, about requiring border security as a condition for passing it.
More than $780 million worth of SSP and the Emergency Food and Shelter Program – Humanitarian Awards grants were awarded in fiscal 2023 “which went to organizations and cities across the country,” DHS says. That’s after DHS awarded $640.9 million in fiscal 2024 “to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities,” also authorized by Congress.
Here are examples of fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024 grant recipients and the amounts they received.
The SSP grants are awarded in phases. One round in fiscal 2024, totaling $40.8 million, was awarded to:
City/County of Denver, $5.9 million;District of Columbia, $2.7 million;City of Chicago, $3.8 million;Commonwealth of Massachusetts, nearly $4.9 million;NYC Office of Management and Budget, $20.4 million;City of Philadelphia over $3 million.That’s after $275 million was awarded to 55 recipients in the attached spreadsheet. Top recipients in one round of funding include:New York City’s Office of Management and Budget, $38.8 million;Pima County, Ariz., $21.8 million;Catholic Charities, Diocese of San Diego of $19.5 million;Maricopa County, $11.6 million, among others.
Democratic-led cities also received large payouts in one round of funding:
Atlanta, $10.8 million;Chicago, $9.6 million;Denver, $5.8 million.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts also cashed in, receiving nearly $7 million; the District of Columbia received $8.7 million; Illinois, $9.6 million, all in one round of funding.
Democratic controlled El Paso County has long received federal money to coordinate transporting illegal foreign nationals north to New York City, Chicago and Denver, The Center Square reported; Austin and San Antonio followed suit flying north “guests coming from the border,” to “proactively manage the flow of people” out of their cities.
These grants exclude others awarded through numerous other federal agencies, including FEMA, U.S. Health and Human Services and others.
Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-FL, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-KY, and several House Freedom Caucus members argue Congress has a constitutional requirement to stop funding the border crisis. DeSantis, a Freedom Caucus member when he served in Congress, has asked, “How many congressmen rail against Biden’s transgressions yet still vote to fund them?”
Massie said in January that “in March, when funding expires, we can put a rider in the next bill that says none of the money hereby appropriated can be used to countermand border security measures of the states.”
This didn’t happen. The majority of Republicans voted to keep spending taxpayer money on these programs. By July, a U.S. House Judiciary Committee report highlighted examples of how Congress was still funding the border crisis.
In many battleground states, former President Donald Trump is in better position this election cycle compared to the same time in the 2020 election cycle when he lost to Joe Biden.
In six of the seven consensus states, Trump’s polling average is better than the same point four years ago. Ninety-three electoral college votes ride on Pennsylvania (19), North Carolina (16), Georgia (16), Michigan (15), Arizona (11), Wisconsin (10) and Nevada (six).
Biden won six of those states in 2020 – North Carolina was the exception – and the electoral college 306-232.
Polling information from Project 538 is included in the following state by state summaries.
Michigan
Michigan is a perfect example of this trend.
At this point in 2020, Biden led Trump by nearly 8%. This year, Vice President Kamala Harris leads Trump by only 1.8%, which is well within the margin of error.
Harris polls better than Biden when he was in the race in June and July. Michigan has the trifecta of Democrats for governor and majorities in both chambers of the Legislature.
Biden was leading Trump by 7.9% in polling heading into Election Day. He then won by just 2.8%.
This year, Harris' 5% behind Biden could be pivotal.
Arizona
Arizona is seeing a very similar trend to Michigan.
In 2020, Biden led Trump by an average of 4.8%. Compared to Trump’s lead today in the state of nearly 1%, polling has Trump up nearly 6% compared to his 2020 average.
Harris is still within the margin of error, usually about 3% to 4% on most polls.
Biden led the polls by 2.6% going into Election Day and won by 11,000 votes, or just 0.3%.
Georgia
In Georgia, Trump is polling just 0.4% ahead of Harris – down from 1.4% over Biden four years ago.
In 2020, Biden began leading Trump on Oct. 1. By Election Day, he was 1.2% ahead of Trump. The winning difference was about 11,000 votes, or just 0.2%.
Since 1980, this was only one of two times that the Republican presidential candidate lost in Georgia.
Nevada
While Harris is ahead of Trump in Nevada by 0.5%, it is 5% less than Biden's lead at the same time. Trump never led in polling in the final three months.
This election season, Trump has led the polls numerous times since early August.
In 2020, Biden was polling 5.3% ahead of Trump on Election Day. Yet, he won by only 2.4%.
North Carolina
North Carolina is particularly interesting. It has been the focus of both campaigns over the last few weeks, and Democrats believe they can win the state for the first time since Barack Obama won it in 2008.
Trump outperformed the polls here both four and eight years ago, winning the state twice.
In 2020, Biden was polling 1.8% ahead of Trump going into Election Day and lost by 1.3%. The Democrat never trailed in the final months, and was 1.2% ahead at this same time.
Trump has led all four polls in the last week since his debate against Harris, and his consensus lead is a slim 0.3%.
Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, Harris is polling 3% behind where Biden was polling at this point in 2020. She is leading Trump by 1.4%, while Biden was leading him by 4.8%.
On Election Day, Biden was nearly 5% ahead of Trump, and won by 1.2%.
Wisconsin
In Wisconsin, Trump has significantly narrowed Harris' recent lead.
At this point in 2020, Biden was leading by 6.7%, but he eventually finished on Election Day with polling a whopping 8.4% ahead of Trump. He won by just 0.8%.
This time around, Harris is ahead only 1.6%, or within the margin of error. Since August, Trump has slowly been narrowing her lead over him.
