When Brittany, a 41-year-old single mom in Tennessee, recently underwent a recertification process for benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, she was told that because of her income she no longer qualified for the $500 a month she had been getting for herself and her two children. It didn’t make sense to Brittany, who asked to go by her first name because of privacy concerns: She makes $16 an hour as a medical assistant. Between the cost of rent, gas and groceries, she worries how she will manage Christmas for her kids. “If there wasn’t breakfast and lunch available at school, we probably would be hungry some of that time throughout the month,” she said.

Brittany’s children receive free school meals, which have always helped schools and families meet children’s nutritional needs and overall health. As the effects of H.R. 1, which included the largest cuts to SNAP in history, continue to hit households amid an affordability crisis, those school meals are increasingly a lifeline. And those vital programs are under threat as well.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, more than 1.5 million children have lost access to SNAP since H.R. 1 was signed into law. As the school year began, families were paying more for groceries on top of increased costs for school supplies, and schools, many facing cuts to resources, have been working to close gaps. But the effects of SNAP cuts are stretching beyond homes and into schools, where teachers are noticing hunger affecting students’ ability to learn.

Kolbe Ricks, a teacher and coach at a Texas school where more than 90% of students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, said every teacher she knows has a snack drawer, because if kids aren’t fed, they can’t learn.

“Cuts to SNAP hurt school meals,” said Erin Hysom, a senior child nutrition policy analyst at the Food Research & Action Center. “The cuts to SNAP will not only increase hunger in homes, but they’ll also increase hunger in the classroom.”

Ebony Webster, a mom and an educator in Colorado, doesn’t qualify for SNAP benefits. But, she said, “I don’t make enough to buy school food” for her three children. Colorado’s recent expansion of its school breakfast and lunch program, Healthy School Meals for All, could not come at a better time for her family. “I am grateful as a mom that my kids can get breakfast and lunch for free,” she said.

In the classroom, she has noticed students asking for more food, or for leftovers of a friend’s meal. Sometimes the free school meals are the only ones students get, she said. Webster is a board member of the Southeast Food Coalition, which partners with the nonprofit group Hunger Free Colorado. With SNAP access decreasing, she has seen an increase in community need for food pantries. “The lines are longer, the big groups are bigger, because there’s a need and it’s worse now than before,” she said.

Kolbe Ricks, a teacher and coach at a Texas school where more than 90% of students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, said every teacher she knows has a snack drawer, because if kids aren’t fed, they can’t learn. “So when kids come to class hungry, we have to feed them, if we want them, one, to just be taken care of as humans, but two, if we want them to actually be ready to learn,” she said.

Using an Amazon wish list, Ricks’ family, friends and wider community helped her supply snacks for her students this year. She never says no, but students have to ask, just to make sure it’s not a free-for-all where food ends up going to waste. The box, which she estimated had about $200 to $300 worth of snacks, was completely wiped out within the first nine weeks of school. The school and its parent-teacher association have partnered with a local organization to set up events offering to distribute free fruit and vegetables. At the first, people were lined up before it opened, and the food was gone in about 30 minutes.

“I just wish people realize how harmful it is to further marginalize people that are already struggling with resources,” Ricks said. “You don’t need to know the details of their story, like this kid that didn’t eat for two days because their family couldn’t buy groceries — you shouldn’t have to hear that in order to want to help people.”

When schools pass policies that provide healthy school meals for all, teachers report better classroom behavior, fewer visits to the school nurse, and improved attendance and math and reading scores.

In Baltimore, Cindy Camp cares for her 91-year-old mother and her 9-, 11- and 14-year-old grandchildren while their mother faces health challenges. The grandchildren get free lunch at school, and the family sometimes visits its food resource center. “They love to go there and they get the off-brand green beans,” Camp said. “Sometimes I use the dry milk. Sometimes the off-brand macaroni and cheese has come in handy.”

“Without SNAP, we would not make it at all,” Camp said.

For families with children in school, the cuts and increased barriers to accessing SNAP benefits create a twofold struggle: Losing SNAP benefits increases hunger at home, and the cuts can also affect a school’s ability to feed children. According to Hysom, children who live in households that receive SNAP benefits are automatically eligible for free school meals. A process known as “direct certification” links eligible children to free school meals without the need for a separate application. This removes the paperwork burden for both schools and families, Hysom explained, and lessens stigma and shame.

“So when children fall off SNAP rosters, first and foremost, their direct link to free school meals is severed,” Hysom said. “Eligible children will fall through the cracks.”

As more children lose SNAP access and aren’t directly certified, that in turn has an impact on a school’s overall ability to implement the Community Eligibility Provision, which lets schools serving families with low incomes offer free breakfast and lunch to all students at no charge. Offering all students free school meals is the most efficient way to operate a school nutrition program, Hysom said, and when a school adopts a CEP, or a state passes a school-meals-for-all policy, participation in school meals increases.

A report from the School Nutrition Association found that school districts that must charge for meals report increased school meal debt and more students going hungry. Loss of free school meals would also create a significant cost burden to families, according to the Center for American Progress, deepening an already existing crisis.

Amy Evans, a Title I reading intervention assistant in Illinois, said her school still qualifies under the Community Eligibility Provision. But her school is still seeing the impact of the reduction in SNAP benefits for families. “It just affects everything,” Evans said. “Because if you lose your eligibility for SNAP, then you lose your eligibility for school meals, then you lose eligibility for registration and sports fees and all of those other things that people could qualify for.”

It’s a crisis, but not one without solutions, according to experts. When schools pass policies that provide healthy school meals for all, teachers report better classroom behavior, fewer visits to the school nurse, and improved attendance and math and reading scores, said Hysom. “We know the solution to ending school day hunger,” she said. “It’s offering all children free school meals. The way they do that is repealing the SNAP cuts and passing the Universal School Meals Program Act.”

What’s perhaps most concerning is that this is only the “tip of the iceberg,” according to Hysom. There are already reports of schools losing the Community Eligibility Provision in Kentucky, Florida, Texas and other states. The fallout of this crisis is still unfolding, hurting schools and families alike. “The negative effects of these SNAP cuts are going to be felt by children and in schools for years to come,” Hysom said.

The post SNAP cuts are hurting schools too — and the crisis is growing appeared first on MS NOW.

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* The highest oil prices since April: “Oil prices rose further on Friday, as hostilities across the Middle East continue to raise fears in the energy markets that the oil supply from the region would remain throttled. The price of Brent crude, the international oil benchmark, jumped above $117 a barrel on Friday, taking its increase for the week to almost 6 percent.”

* A relatively quiet hurricane season is picking up: “Vance became a hurricane Friday and the National Hurricane Center said it would strengthen rapidly as it nears Mexico’s Pacific Coast. Vance was a Category 1 hurricane with maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (150 kph) as it churned about 455 miles (730 kilometers) south-southwest of Acapulco, and could become a major Category 3 hurricane before the end of Friday, the center said.”

* The Starlink matter is not yet resolved: “Ukrainian interceptors still cannot use the internet at high speed to shoot down Russian attack drones or conduct mid-strike operations as of Friday morning, Ukrainian officials and a drone operator said, despite U.S. President Donald Trump saying SpaceX founder Elon Musk had lifted speed restrictions on his Starshield service.”

* A twisted sense of entitlement: “Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday cited genetics to declare that Russians and Ukrainians are ‘one people’ and reiterated his claim to Ukrainian territory, saying, ‘I think that it is not their territory but the historical territory of Russia.’”

* There’s a sentence I didn’t expect to read: “First lady Melania Trump has brokered a ceasefire deal between Russia and Ukraine in the war-ravaged city of Oleshky to allow for humanitarian aid and the evacuation of civilians, the White House announced on Friday. The localized ceasefire is set to begin Oct. 29.” (Let’s note that the White House announces a lot of things, many of which aren’t true.)

* In the Middle East: “Israeli soldiers shot and killed two men who the military said had launched an attack near the city of Hebron in the occupied West Bank on Friday morning. At least five people were injured, including some critically. A few hours later, Israel ordered the army to prepare for a full closure of the West Bank.”

* Keep an eye on this one: “The Department of Justice on Friday charged two former top FBI officials with lying to Congress about their involvement in the agency’s investigation into Hunter Biden. The charges against Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, who worked on the FBI’s now-disbanded Foreign Influence Task Force, stem from a brief they gave to members of Congress about the task force’s investigation of Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden.”

* Heartening scientific research: “A groundbreaking vaccine reduced the risk of death or recurrence of melanoma by almost half, an encouraging signal for a treatment seeking federal approval that has boosted the fortunes of drugmakers Moderna and Merck and could usher in a new wave of cancer treatments.”

* And The New York Times published a fascinating report on the Pentagon setting up review boards at bases around the world, specifically designed to kick transgender troops out of the military. Uniformed service members on these panels, however, keep doing the opposite, agreeing to keep the trans troops rather than firing them.

Have a safe weekend.

The post Friday’s Mini-Report, 10.23.26 appeared first on MS NOW.

Welcome back, Deadline: Legal newsletter readers. Supreme Court justices were off the bench this week because they’re in between their October and November hearing sessions. But they still made plenty of news, in both their written work and public comments.

They started by adding two potent cases to a docket that is growing this term in both size and importance. Following last week’s agreement to review a discovery dispute over Elon Musk’s purported government efficiency effort, on Monday the court added two more appeals: on race in middle school admissions and congressional authority to ban home distilling. The court will keep adding cases throughout the year, with all the rulings in argued cases typically coming by July.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch were together again, speaking out for the second week in a row about a case the court refused to hear. Last week, Gorsuch joined Sotomayor to lament what they saw as unjust prosecution. This week, the Trump appointee joined the Obama appointee to critique what they saw as constitutional problems with car seizures in Chicago. It’s not new for this duo to team up in a certain type of case that lends itself to bipartisan agreement, but they have been ramping up that agreement so far this term.

Sotomayor’s statement appeared on the order list, which, as regular readers know, is an important document that announces the latest actions on pending petitions. That’s where we learned about the two new cases that the court took up and the (much longer) list of cases the court rejected. It takes four justices on the nine-member bench to grant review, and the court denies most petitions.

But Sotomayor’s statement reminds us that the justices occasionally offer their thoughts even when, as here, they agree with the denial but still find it important to highlight broader issues. These writings help us understand the justices’ priorities and what new cases the court might take up in the future.

Another sort of signal came from Justice Samuel Alito, who didn’t explain himself but noted that he wanted to review one of the petitions the court denied on the list. The failed petition came from Missouri officials who wanted the court to revive a rule that registered sex offenders must put signs on their doors for Halloween that read, “No candy or treats at this residence.” An appeals court said the rule wrongly compelled speech under the First Amendment. Although Alito merely noted, without explanation, his difference of opinion, the vote fits with his overall approach, because he generally backs law enforcement and has split from his colleagues in other First Amendment disputes.

Alito had company later in the week when the court rejected the Trump administration’s request to immediately enforce its preferred policy on gender-affirming care in prison. The justices did not explain the rare (albeit temporary) win for transgender people at a court that has ruled against them in a series of other cases. But whatever the justices were thinking, we know it wasn’t unanimous, because Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas both indicated (also without explanation) that they wanted to grant the government’s request.

Justice Elena Kagan made news outside her written work, with an appearance at a law school in Washington, D.C., the sort of speaking engagement that the justices will do from time to time. Kagan, who was dean of Harvard Law School before she became a justice, gave her GOP-appointed colleagues a failing grade when it comes to democracy. Reprising impassioned criticisms of rulings on voting and campaign finance that she has made in dissenting opinions, the Obama appointee said the court “has kind of blinded itself to the very deleterious effect of their rulings on how the political system works and has created a democracy that does not work as well as it should.”

Kagan apparently agreed with her colleagues this week in an election case, when the Supreme Court granted a Republican-backed request from New Hampshire to block the use of student IDs for voting in the midterms. In a brief unsigned order, the high court chided a lower court judge for, as the justices saw it, improperly interfering with state rules right before an election. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only one to publish a dissent, in which she contended the judge was justified in trying to protect voting rights.

The justices are still off the bench for another week, as they are set to return to the courtroom in November to hear the next batch of regularly scheduled arguments. But as Election Day approaches on Nov. 3, they will continue to field unscheduled emergency applications on voting and whatever else comes their way.

Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration’s legal cases.

The post SCOTUS Week in Review: Back to school, home spirits and a rare decision appeared first on MS NOW.

The police officer who fatally shot a 1-year-old boy in Mississippi as his mother was holding him resigned this week, the mayor of the city where it happened confirmed on Friday.

The officer — identified in public records as Hunter Foster by local media outlet Action News 5 — offered his resignation to the Senatobia Board of Aldermen on Wednesday, Mayor Greg Graves said. Foster’s departure came two days after the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office announced that investigators had determined his use of force in the June shooting of the infant, Kohen Wiley, was “justified,” and a day before the city’s public safety department released officers’ body camera footage of the shooting.

The members of the Senatobia Board of Aldermen did not immediately respond to requests for comment from MS NOW on Friday.

The body camera footage, obtained by MS NOW, sheds more light on what happened on the afternoon of June 14, when officers were summoned to the Walmart to review security footage of a man who was allegedly sexually harassing customers, according to an investigation report that also released Thursday. While officers were reviewing the footage, a store employee interrupted them to report that two people — later identified as Kohen’s mother, Vellesiya Wiley, and a friend — were fleeing, according to the report and the footage.

The video from Foster’s body camera shows him running outside with other officers and approaching the car as the driver — Wiley’s friend — backs up and collides with another vehicle. The driver then moves forward, and Foster runs toward the front of the car and puts out his hand, which hits the hood. He appears to fire his gun multiple times, causing some of the glass in the passenger-side window to shatter. The driver then collided with another car, briefly slowed, and then sped off.

A statement released by the state Department of Public Safety the day of the shooting said the women had been accused of shoplifting, and the officer shot his gun after police tried to stop the car “but the driver drove in the direction of the officers, almost striking one.”

But the family’s legal team has disputed the conclusion that the driver was endangering the officers. An independent autopsy conducted by forensic psychologist Roger Mitchell and released by the family’s legal team to MS NOW in July found that the baby was shot through the side of his body, which the lawyers argued was an indicator that the car was not driving toward the officers. Wiley, Kohen’s mother, has said she held the baby up to show officers he was in the car before they shot him.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing Kohen’s family, said in a statement that Foster’s resignation is “hardly a step toward accountability, and it is certainly not justice.” He said the legal team will continue seeking Foster’s decertification — which would prevent him from working as a law enforcement officer in the state — as well as a federal investigation.

“Turning in a badge does not erase responsibility for taking a life, and it will not end our fight for justice for Kohen and his family,” Crump added.

At a news conference on Thursday, Crump said the officers were “excessive from the very start,” noting that several of them had surrounded the car with their guns drawn before the shooting took place, despite the fact that Wiley’s friend had only been accused of stealing diapers.

“Shoplifting diapers is a misdemeanor,” he said. “It does not warrant the death penalty.”

Crump has alleged racism was at play in the incident: Foster is white, the redacted case files release Thursday confirm, and Kohen and his mother are Black. Mississippi Today and The New York Times previously reported that Foster allegedly made racist remarks toward two co-workers, one of whom is Black and the other of whom is white and has a child with a Black partner.

It is unclear why Foster resigned. His lawyer, Martin Zummach, declined to comment to MS NOW on Foster’s resignation. In a statement provided to NBC News, Zummach said Foster “resigned for the good of the city and the police department and to permit the process of healing.”

“He is still shocked and sickened that a baby died and emphatically denies knowing a child was in the car or in the front seat and had no idea that those fleeing were suspected of shoplifting,” Zummach said, according to NBC News.

The post Police officer resigns months after he fatally shot 1-year-old in Mississippi appeared first on MS NOW.

MS NOW’s Michael Steele slammed Donald Trump’s “11th-hour move” ahead of the midterm election, as the Department of Justice sued Alaska, seeking to delay certification of the state’s Senate election in the event the Republican incumbent loses.

On Thursday, the department asked a federal court to block certification of the results if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses by fewer votes than another candidate, Daniel J. Sullivan, receives. Alaska courts have allowed the other Sullivan to remain on the ballot. The Justice Department is arguing that voters could confuse the two candidates, and that such confusion could potentially affect the outcome of what is expected to be a close race against Democratic nominee Mary Peltola.

“Every step this administration is taking, all the lies that they have told the American people about their sense of making sure elections are fair and free, have just all led to this,” Steele said Friday, shortly after the lawsuit became public.

“The Weeknight” co-host called Attorney General Todd Blanche “the worst of the worst” and said the Justice Department was doing the president’s bidding. Steele argued that the Constitution leaves election administration to the states and that “the federal government and the Department of Justice have absolutely zero role here.”

Trump has previously criticized Alaska’s “crazy voting system.” The state uses a ranked-choice system, in which voters list their candidates in order of preference. If no one wins a majority of first-choice votes, the last-place candidate is eliminated and those votes go to voters’ next choices until one candidate wins.

Steele said the lawsuit shows that Republicans are “afraid” because they have “done jack to give the voters a reason to vote for them.”

“So now, in the 11th hour, they’re going to go and try to manipulate an outcome that’s already foretold by the voters who started early voting, who are already in the game,” he added.

Steele predicted that voters would see through Republican efforts and that the party would get “their you-know-what’s handed to them” on Election Day.

“They have sown and built mistrust in the system that’s coming back to bite them, because we do not trust them. We do not trust their word. We know you’re lying to us,” he said. “And now you’re going to have to reap what you sowed.”

You can watch Steele’s comments in the clip at the top of the page.

The post Michael Steele blasts Trump’s ‘11th-hour’ lawsuit targeting Alaska Senate race appeared first on MS NOW.

Before I walked into Milwaukee County Stadium in 1982, I had never been to a professional sporting event. I was 9 years old, and I can vividly recall being overwhelmed by the lights and the number of people there. The first-place Milwaukee Brewers were playing the Oakland A’s, and Rickey Henderson tied the record for most stolen bases in a season. The Brewers would go on to play in the World Series that year, losing to the St. Louis Cardinals in an epic seven-game series, and even though we didn’t get to celebrate a championship, I imagined a full life of cheering on a winning team.

It was the last time the Brewers would make the playoffs for 26 years. During that time, I grew hardened, believing I would die before I ever saw the Brewers return to the World Series. Bad personnel moves and a payroll that couldn’t match the league’s top-tier teams made winning seem like mere folly. Fans showed up at the games to cheer on the racing sausages more than the actual players on the field.

Yet when the Brewers and Tampa Bay Rays open the World Series on Friday, both teams’ highest-paid players will earn salaries rivaling the price of the animatronic bird that Kelly Clarkson so desperately desired. Neither franchise spends like a superpower. Neither plays in a media capital. And neither got here by doing what most of baseball has decided is the only way to win.

It would be tempting to cast these two teams as rebels against the analytics nerds, a pair of stubborn traditionalists sticking it to the spreadsheet. It would also be wrong.

The Brewers won a franchise-record 103 games, then swept the two-time defending champion Los Angeles Dodgers — a hedge fund masquerading as a baseball team — in the National League Championship Series. Milwaukee is making its first World Series appearance since 1982. The Rays, meanwhile, went 98-64 for the best record in the American League. They did it on a payroll that ranks 25th in baseball and in what is arguably the sport’s toughest division.

It would be tempting to cast these two teams as rebels against the analytics nerds, a pair of stubborn traditionalists sticking it to the spreadsheet. It would also be wrong. The Rays are perhaps the most analytically obsessive organization in professional sports. They treat roster construction the way a quant treats arbitrage. The Brewers’ pitching staff finished second in baseball in strikeouts, because Milwaukee believes in velocity and spin rate as devoutly as anyone in Silicon Valley believes in disruption. Nobody here is burning copies of “Moneyball.”

What these teams have figured out is subtler and more interesting. Analytics is a tool, not a philosophy. And the data, read honestly, keeps pointing back to things your Little League coach told you for free.

Look at how they score. Milwaukee and Tampa Bay finished first and second in the league in batting average. Both were top five in stolen bases. Both were top seven in ERA. The Brewers were tied for second-to-last in home runs, yet they finished second in all of baseball in runs scored. That last fact should be impossible in the modern game, where the prevailing theory holds that you swing as hard as you can, accept the strikeouts and wait for the three-run homer. Milwaukee kept putting the ball in play, taking the extra base and making the defense prove it could make a throw.

This is the real lesson of “Moneyball,” which was never entirely about on-base percentage. It was about finding what the market undervalues. In 2002, that was walks. In 2026, after a generation of front offices poured money into training hitters to focus on exit velocity and launch angles, the undervalued asset turns out to be the player who makes contact. Or the one who can play three positions. Or who goes first-to-third on a single. When every team bids up the same skill, the bargain bin overflows with fundamentals.

Call it situational hitting, tight defense and multidimensional players. Not long ago, that was just called “baseball.” It is also, not incidentally, more fun to watch. A ball in play is a play. A strikeout, a walk or a solo homer is an event the other eight fielders watch like spectators.

Contrast this with the New York Yankees, who have spent roughly the GDP of Lithuania assembling a lineup of lumbering sluggers. Their approach is built on the assumption that baseball is a home run derby with occasional defensive interruptions. It produces impressive highlight reels and October collapses in roughly equal measure.

Call it situational hitting, tight defense and multidimensional players. Not long ago, that was just called “baseball.” It is also, not incidentally, more fun to watch.

A lesson here extends well beyond the diamond. American institutions have spent the last decade optimizing for the home run. In politics, the cable news haymaker, the floor speech engineered for clips, the fundraising email written in all caps are all big swings meant to circumvent the actual work of legislating. Both parties have come to treat governing as something staffers do between appearances: passing a budget on time, staffing an agency competently and filling the potholes are the sacrifice bunts of public life. Nobody makes a highlight package out of them, and so nobody gets paid to do them.

But the scoreboard does not care about the highlight package. Teams that strike out 1,600 times a year still lose in October to pitchers who can deliciously locate pitches on the corners. And governments that specialize in outrage still find, eventually, that outrage does not deliver the mail. Competence is unglamorous until it becomes the only thing that matters.

The Brewers and Rays have shown that you can use every modern tool available and still respect what the old tools were for. Data told them where the inefficiencies were. Discipline let them exploit those inefficiencies. That combination is rarer than it should be, in baseball and everywhere else.

So whichever team wins, the 2026 World Series will crown a franchise that refused to confuse flash with substance. In a culture that increasingly prefers entertainment to competence, that alone qualifies as a revolutionary act, even if it looks a lot like the game your grandfather used to watch.

The post Why the Brewers-Rays World Series matchup is a revolution for Major League Baseball appeared first on MS NOW.

Everywhere I turn lately – from management advice to TikTok – someone is warning us about “manipulative” people: a friend who heaps on guilt, a boss who keeps you purposely off-balance, a coworker who plays mind games. For a word we use so freely, though, how many of us could actually explain what makes a behavior manipulative?!

The American Psychological Association defines manipulation as behavior designed to “exploit, control, or otherwise influence others to one’s advantage.” It’s not a diagnosis. Nor is it a wrapper for every difficult interaction; someone can be demanding, rude, persistent, defensive or wildly annoying without being manipulative. It’s defining action comes in steering or trying to load your decision. A manipulative person uses guilt, pressure, distortion, selective information to steer what you think, feel or do in a direction that benefits them.

So say your boss wants you to stay late. A direct way for them to ask you might be: “Could you stay an hour or two longer tonight and help me finish this?” A manipulative approach tries to engineer a specific response from you, by adding on: “You’re really the only person on this team I can count on.” Notice how the latter works on your identity and loyalty so you’ll agree – plus flattery’s being used to make saying no harder.

The manipulator doesn’t always “own” outright what they ultimately want either, it may only be suggested. For example a manager could ‘hint’ that you’re being difficult in order to make you fall in line. Everyone else is getting behind the new initiative, why can’t you?

That’s why one of the most helpful ways to spot manipulation is to notice when you’re experiencing a sense of unwelcome pressure from someone coming off as directive. Therapist Darlene Lancer, JD, LMFT explains the challenge perfectly “You might have a gut feeling of discomfort or anger, but on the surface the manipulator may use words that are pleasant, ingratiating, reasonable, or that play on your guilt or sympathy, so you override your instincts and don’t know what to say.”

The thing is, you don’t have to psychoanalyze each person in the next cubicle or even figure out if someone’s a certified manipulator. Instead notice when you’re feeling at a disadvantage and compelled to hurriedly decide, second guess your take, or defend yourself against something that shouldn’t need defending.

Here are three classic manipulator types – not just the moves they make – but the mistake they’re hoping you’ll make!

1. The Urgency Dealer

Everything is suddenly critical to this person. They need your input ASAP – or my favorite, they send “??” when you haven’t answered quickly enough. Their urgency has a funny way of becoming your emergency.

The mistake they hope you’ll make: React or say yes before you assess.

They’re bulldozing you matters because the faster you respond, the less of your full judgement you bring to the decision. Pressure narrows the creativity, accuracy and room we give ourselves to think. In fact, researchers found that those under low time pressure are more likely to identify correct answers – and to feel confident in those answers – than those under high time pressure.

Which helps explain why “I need this right now” can be such an effective lever for a manipulator – and such a lore to the one being manipulated. So before jumping to agree to something (or even buying into a faux urgency), ask:

“What specifically do you need from me – and what specifically needs to happen now?”

Or:

“If I move this up, something else will need to move back. I’ll need to figure that out first and come back to you.”

If the person gives you one of those “Everything is on fire and needs to be handled yesterday…” answers, that’s a great entrée into another of my favorite questions:

“What’s driving the urgency here?”

Maybe there is a legitimate escalation or something really did catch fire. Great – now you know that and can come to a conclusion based on your own agency, limits, and ability to give. But sometimes a person’s “emergency” looks…well – quite different once they have to explain it out loud.

2. The Reality Rewriter

This manipulator revises what was agreed to, said or decided upon. They challenge you (usually confidently) about your recollection of events, tilting their retelling in a direction that favors them. This is why someone who was a perfectly capable, confident professional at 11am can find themselves distraught and self-questioning as they analyze an interaction on their drive home at 5pm (not that I know anything about that!).

People who rewrite reality may say “You misunderstood…” or “We said you were handling that” or “I definitely told you the deadline changed.” Now, as long as there are humans, there will be misunderstandings: two people can absolutely remember the same conversation differently.

What I’d pay attention to is a pattern where the revised version keeps granting them an upper hand – and repeatedly leaves you responsible or on your heels.

The mistake a rewriter hopes you’ll make is that you’ll keep arguing using their words against yours. Just think, once you’re arguing from two different memories, they have infinite room to dispute the details. That’s why it’s so important if you have a relationship with a manipulator like this that you create backup: you have another teammate or manager involved in the plan or timeline (as a witness), and you put plans and timelines in writing.

That could be as concise as:

“Confirming that after today’s client meeting, I’ll own the client analysis, and you’ll have the final slides ready by Thursday at noon.” Simplicity works best here, no need for a scary Per our conversation… email with seven people copied!)

Just make the agreement visible, then, if the story changes later:

“Let’s pull up what we agreed to last Thursday so we’re working from the same information.”

Dates, roles, names, and emails help. It also shows people you pay attention to what gets decided and that you expect peoples’ agreements to hold.

3. The Button-Pusher

This person knows just how to throw you off by taking you down a peg or making a dig. They can put you in your place by questioning your expertise in front of other people – as in:

“I’m not sure you really understand the bigger picture here” or demeaning you: “Well, I guess they’ll let anyone lead these projects now.”

They can also escalate situations by taking a swipe at your emotional state:

“Wow, look at you getting all worked up about this!”

Blood boiling, right?

The mistake they hope you’ll make: Defend yourself on command.

This is such a clear trap to spot once you recognize it and yet it’s still easy to get ensnared in because it feels like your credibility and status is being questioned. A button pusher hopes that when they question your competence, that you’ll get riled and start reciting your credentials. The move is that they toss a grenade into the room and you are the one doing the scrambling!

Researchers have found that provocation registers to us as a form of social threat, which makes it hard to resist the urge to act. Not just that, they discovered that retaliation can actually feel rewarding to the brain, which explains why taking the bait becomes so tempting.

So if a cutting comment has you scrambling to defend, fire back or prove ‘em wrong, congratulations on being human.

Now, your job is to get your best thinking and your grounded center back. One of my favorite responses to an undermining comment is:

“Sounds like you have a pretty firm opinion about that.”

Then STOP. Or try:

“What did you mean by that?”

And wait, allowing silence and potentially awkwardness to exist. There’s something wonderfully empowering about making people explain the words they just chose!

They may clarify, backpedal or suddenly hear how obnoxious the comment sounded. Either way, don’t then come in and tidy or smooth things. They’re responsible for them, you’re responsible for you.

Watch What They’re Steering You Toward

Here’s a self-check I hope you’ll keep in your back pocket: What is this interaction making me more likely to do? Notice you’re not asking, What’s wrong with this person?!, you’re focusing on something much more useful: Where am I being steered?

Manipulation gets a lot less mysterious when you bring some open curiosity to it. It also changes the manipulator’s dance steps when you maintain a peer to peer interaction style. You’re not deferring, buying into their (over)confidence, nor are you treating their perspective as The Truth. You’re staying on equal footing where their intensity doesn’t dictate your next move.

The post The 3 most manipulative coworkers (and the mistakes they hope you’ll make) appeared first on MS NOW.

Among the more amazing things about Donald Trump’s crusade against Rep. Ilhan Omar is how utterly brazen it is. The president and his team could at least try to keep up appearances, to maintain some kind of pretense that the scrutiny of the Minnesota Democrat is legitimate — but the Republican officials have largely decided not to bother.

On the contrary, Trump publicly demanded an investigation into a political opponent — which is itself an abuse — all the while making clear that he hoped to strip Omar of her citizenship and to deport a sitting congresswoman who dared to cross him. Soon after, federal departments did as they were directed to do, in pursuit of the president’s stated goal.

“It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say,” Barack Obama said in a statement. “But that’s exactly what the Trump Administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.”

Despite highly dubious evidence of wrongdoing, federal agents seized the laptop, cellphone and passport of a sitting member of Congress, at which point the president who demanded this probe received a highly unusual briefing from Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.

While there’s still no evidence that the Minnesotan has done anything wrong, Trump took some time during his Thursday night rally in Iowa to insist that Omar resign. The Republican added that “the Democrat [sic] Party has conceded her seat” and she will no longer be permitted to serve in Congress.

Trump calls for Ilhan Omar to immediately resign & says, "please inform our great Speaker, James Michael Johnson that the Democrat Party has conceded her seat … she will not be allowed to me a member of that body any longer"Trump's crowd in Iowa then starts chanting "Lock her up! Lock her up!"

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-10-23T00:27:55.342Z

At that point, as if on cue, his followers chanted, “Lock her up! Lock her up!”

After the event, the president published a statement to his social media platform, again calling on Omar to “IMMEDIATELY resign from Congress,” adding that someone should inform House leaders that the congresswoman has “openly admitted to FRAUD, and she will not be legally allowed to be a Member of this August Body.”

In reality, of course, Omar has not “openly admitted” to any wrongdoing and has repeatedly denied the White House’s allegations. No one has conceded their seat — Omar is likely to be re-elected in 11 days — and she is absolutely still permitted to serve on Capitol Hill, doing the job Americans in her district elected her to do.

I have no idea what, if anything, will come of this relentless campaign. Given that Team Trump also ordered an investigation into Omar’s records in his first term and that probe was eventually abandoned for lack of evidence, the president might want to temper his expectations.

But that this is happening at all reflects unmistakable authoritarian tactics.

“The investigation of her is a chilling example of the federal government using its immense power to silence a critic,” the editorial board of The New York Times explained. “It is an affront to free speech, the rule of law and American ideals.”

The editorial added, “In the case of Ms. Omar, the administration has gone back more than a quarter-century to investigate a prominent critic. If her naturalization can be revisited, it suggests that no naturalized citizen is safe. It also indicates that the federal government can go searching for any decades-old problem to hound somebody who has criticized the White House. Those are the tactics of authoritarian societies.”

The post Trump’s crusade against Ilhan Omar follows a familiar authoritarian playbook appeared first on MS NOW.

My answer to last week’s “Ask Jordan” question about the (lack of) congressional power over pardons generated follow-up questions. On top of this week’s question about presidential immunity, I’m answering two of them briefly below for this special mailbag edition.

As always, submit your questions on this topic and any others through this form.

“So. … If Congress impeaches Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump cannot pardon him? REALLY?!” — Joyce Carpenter

Hi Joyce,

Trump could pardon Hegseth (or anyone else) for any federal crimes, which would save him from prosecution. But the president couldn’t use the pardon power to save Hegseth (or anyone else) from impeachment proceedings. That’s because the Constitution says presidents can issue pardons for “Offences against the United States” but not for “Cases of Impeachment.”

“I’m disappointed in your answer about pardons. Why didn’t you mention that the pardoned person IS considered guilty of whatever the pardon is for. Or do I have that wrong?” — Richard

Hi Richard,

You have that wrong — or, at least, not necessarily right in all cases.

To be sure, the Supreme Court said in an oft-cited 1915 case that a pardon “carries an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it.” But that was more of a statement made in passing than an announcement of a binding rule going forward.

As a federal appeals court pointed out more recently, “not every acceptance of a pardon constitutes a confession of guilt.” For example, the appeals court noted that presidents can pardon people they think are innocent. They can even grant posthumous pardons, which led the court to observe that “a deceased individual cannot confess his guilt.”

Please submit “Ask Jordan” questions through this form for a chance to have your question featured in a future edition of the Deadline: Legal newsletter.

The post Ask Jordan: Pardon mailbag on Hegseth and admissions of guilt appeared first on MS NOW.

The CEO of Turning Point USA’s independent offshoot in the United Kingdom is facing scrutiny after he was recorded discussing murder-for-hire abilities.

The scandal surrounding Jack Ross is inconvenient, to put it mildly, for a conservative movement that has sought to portray liberals as the primary culprits for sowing deadly violence. After TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated last year, the MAGA movement shamelessly used the killing to encourage a federal crackdown on liberals and to demonize liberalism itself as a vector for political violence.

According to a new report from Al Jazeera, part of an investigation called “Contract Killers and the Far Right,” Ross was shown on camera discussing his ability to coordinate paid acts of violence with a right-wing extremist named Allan Nesbitt.

According to the report:

Ross made clear that he and Nesbitt had a long history together. Ross was filmed by our undercover reporter agreeing to pay Nesbitt thousands of pounds to stage a fake political rally designed to show support for the lifting of UK sanctions against Zimbabwe.

Ross also told Al Jazeera’s undercover operative that for “a certain amount,” Nesbitt and his contacts could arrange physical attacks, saying they could “kick the f*** out of someone. They can start cutting people’s faces up. That’s another amount. They can stab someone,” Ross said. “They can shoot someone. They could kill someone.”

Al Jazeera reported that Ross “denied our findings ‘completely,’ telling us that everything he said to our undercover reporter was not meant seriously.” Turning Point UK, which was launched by Kirk and operates independently of its U.S. affiliate, and TPUSA didn’t immediately respond to MS NOW’s requests for comment.

Despite the “I was just joking about murder” defense, Ross has already been suspended from the U.K.’s Conservative Party. And according to The Guardian, police in Scotland are looking into the matter.

The silence from Republicans on this is telling. It almost goes without saying that if the CEO for an offshoot of, say, the NAACP or the activist group Indivisible were recorded discussing paid opportunities for murder and other violence, conservatives would be airing the footage constantly.

Yet it seems this macabre story is of little interest to MAGA world. The hypocrisy here is clear as day.

The post Turning Point UK’s CEO under scrutiny after being recorded discussing murder-for-hire appeared first on MS NOW.

The Department of Justice on Friday charged two former top FBI officials with lying to Congress about their involvement in the agency’s investigation into Hunter Biden.

The charges against Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, who worked on the FBI’s now-disbanded Foreign Influence Task Force, stem from a brief they gave to members of Congress about the task force’s investigation of Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden.

According to a copy of the criminal complaint obtained by MS NOW, prosecutors accuse Floris and Benavides of providing “materially false information about their awareness of and involvement in the FBI’s investigations into Hunter Biden,” including about the origins of Biden’s laptop, in an attempt to impede the congressional probe.

Floris said she was not involved in discussions about Biden while on the task force, the complaint states, while Benavides said he first learned on Wikipedia that the FBI had obtained Biden’s laptop.

“Lying to Congress by senior FBI officials strikes at the heart of our system,” FBI Director Kash Patel said on X.

Floris’ attorneys slammed the “nonsense charges” against her and accused the DOJ of seeking to “push a false narrative for a shot at political points.”

“Nikki Floris is a patriot. She served our nation as a dedicated FBI intelligence officer for nearly 20 years. Yet today, the DOJ has accused her falsely of a crime on the say-so of politicians, not on the facts,” her attorneys said in a statement. “It’s no coincidence the government is filing these nonsense charges now, years later, on the eve of an election.”

A lawyer for Benavides did not immediately respond to MS NOW’s request for comment.

Biden’s laptop has been the subject of great speculation since The New York Post published, just weeks before the 2020 election, emails from the laptop’s hard drive that purportedly showed proof that Joe Biden was corrupt.

The Post said that it obtained a copy of the hard drive from President Donald Trump’s then-personal attorney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. But there was widespread suspicion that the emails were part of a Russian disinformation operation.

Notably, the charges against Floris and Benavides did not come from an indictment by a grand jury in Washington, where several cases brought by U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro’s office have failed to result in indictments.

Fallon Gallagher contributed to this report.

The post DOJ charges two ex-FBI officials with lying about Hunter Biden investigation appeared first on MS NOW.

This is the Oct. 23, 2026, edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.

Eleven days.

In 11 days, Americans vote.

People can’t afford their lives right now, whether it’s buying groceries, paying for healthcare, or gassing up the truck. Despite workers struggling more every day, Republicans have picked quite a closing argument for this year’s race.

We expect distractions and October surprises in the final days of a campaign. But I never expected Republican leaders to openly flaunt their status as the party of pedophile protectors.

This week, Republicans smeared Amy Acton — a woman who survived child rape — and Donald Trump called it “pay dirt.” He praised Acton’s mother, the rapist’s wife, for showing “a lot of courage.”

Some courage.

Acton’s mother fled the state with the man charged with raping her 12-year-old daughter. She abandoned her children and never saw them again. But the Republican Party defines that as “courage.”

In Texas, a man sexually abused a young boy, and Attorney General Ken Paxton tried to hand him an Epstein-style sweetheart deal. One day in jail.

James Talarico now calls Paxton a “pedophile protector.” And this week, from Ohio to Texas to the White House, Republicans sided with rapists, pedophiles, and their protectors over the young victims they tortured.

Covering for pedophiles seems to have become a nasty habit for Trump’s Republican Party.

Voters swept them into power partly on their promise to release all of the Epstein files. But the president and Republicans broke that promise and buried the files instead. Congress voted almost unanimously to release them all, but the administration still sits on millions of them — including damning accusations against President Donald Trump himself.

Epstein’s survivors kept begging for the truth to come out. Congress went home.

For years, right-wing conspiracy theorists accused Democrats and Hollywood stars of sex trafficking and pedophilia. Then a jury found their beloved cult leader liable for sexual abuse in a New York courtroom. Then this week, Trump attacked a rape victim, proving again John Heilemann’s rule that most of what the president says is either confession or projection.

Eleven days. Voters are watching.

***

Tonight in Milwaukee, the Brewers and the Rays open a World Series that will crown a first-time champion. The last time that happened was 1980, when Tug McGraw struck out Willie Wilson to end the Phillies’ 97-year wait. Before that, it was 1920, the year Cleveland’s Bill Wambsganss turned the only unassisted triple play in Series history. The Brewers’ own broadcaster is recommending Maalox to make it through.

Here’s what else is going on this weekend:

In Washington tonight, the National Zoo hosts Night of the Living Zoo, a 21-and-over Halloween party. Expect open bars, animal-inspired tarot readings, and after-hours visits with the great cats and reptiles. Tomorrow, the Smithsonian’s Air and Scare brings trick-or-treating, Star Wars characters, and a costume runway show to the Udvar-Hazy Center near Dulles Airport.

In Boston on Saturday, the Doggone Halloween Pet Parade turns Downtown Crossing into a catwalk (so to speak!) for costumed canines. By 3 p.m., expect to congratulate — and pet — the winners in categories ranging from Scariest Costume to Best Dog and Child Duo.

In Brooklyn tomorrow, the Botanic Garden’s Fall Harvest Festival offers peak foliage, live music, pumpkin carvers, a cider garden, and an afternoon costume parade. Dress code: your best flannel.

Philadelphia celebrates Filipino American History Month this weekend with Taste of the Philippines, a free rain-or-shine festival of food, music, and shopping at Cherry Street Pier. Afterward, head to Oaks for the Pennsylvania Chocolate and Coffee Festival and a (bitter)sweet finish.

In Miami, haunted houses have competition. On Saturday night, the Friends of Cape Florida transform a trail at Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park on Key Biscayne into a Haunted Hike, complete with staged scares, costumed performers, and a carnival for the faint of heart.

Just outside Chicago, the village of Forest Park — where the dead outnumber the living — hosts its 14th annual Casket Races (!). Teams push helmeted riders in coffins on wheels down a 585-foot course, vying for speed, style, and, for the least ambitious, a trophy for “dead last.”

In Los Angeles tomorrow, Hollywood Forever Cemetery hosts its 27th annual Día de los Muertos celebration, with elaborate altars, Aztec and folklórico dancers, and festivities from noon to midnight. ¡Que vivan los muertos!

And in Austin, Formula One rolls into the Circuit of the Americas for the United States Grand Prix. Max Verstappen arrives fresh off a long-awaited Singapore win, but all eyes are on Mercedes’ Kimi Antonelli, who leads the standings by 102 points and could clinch his first championship on Sunday.

LETTERS FROM OUR READERS

Joe, thank you for your brief essay on the history of Western civilization. In a handful of paragraphs, you nicely crystallized the key concepts behind what has led to the successful rise and spread of democracy. Unfortunately, you didn’t have room to expound on the concomitant fragility of the process, the dedication, patience, and constant vigilance necessary to assure its survival. Lately, we have taken our eyes off the ball, and we are now paying the price. Rebuilding will be costly in both financial and human terms, and will require principled rededication to the ideals of democracy. I just hope we still have the fortitude within us to accomplish that!

— Peter H., Rancho Mirage, Calif.

Peter, Hillary Clinton told Mika last week at the Forbes-Know Your Value 30/50 Summit that this republic can be saved, but we’ve got to start turning things around now.

I believe we will. And I know we have much hard work in front of us. But we Americans will do it!

My mother and three older sisters brought me up to respect women. Who in God’s name instilled the disgusting responses supporting Vivek Ramaswamy’s video ad about the abuse of Amy Acton during her childhood? Trump and JD Vance are the ringleaders, and anyone else who is not condemning this ad are all guilty of moral turpitude and of violating the acceptable standards of any society.

— Michael P., Sarasota, Fla.

These Republican leaders have spent the past decade undermining the most basic rules of human decency. What they are doing in Ohio this week is a new low.

I have confidence American voters will show Republicans in 11 days that they have had enough, and will turn back to voting for candidates who hold those traditional values that made America great.

Is there any reliable data that proves that all the hateful political ads we are bombarded with for MONTHS actually work? I know they don’t work for my family, and I think most Americans are smart enough to see through them for what they are — partisan attacks that have nothing to do with how a candidate will perform or what a candidate believes. Listening to political strategists justify these ads as a “story arc” makes me sick — the ads tell us nothing positive about any candidate and honestly make me question the ethics and morals of any candidate that would allow these ads to be run on their behalf.

— Anonymous

We will find out in 11 days.

For the sake of our country, let us pray these hateful attacks, funded by trillionaires and billionaires, do not prove to be more powerful than the good people who volunteer for candidates, knock on doors, and build the framework of successful campaigns.

As I have been listening or reading about the current news, I have become so demoralized with how the Republicans are accepting the same demeanor of vulgarity, falsehoods, and vile comments Trump has stated within the last week. As Mika stated, “Whether it’s in Ohio in the governor’s race or in our foreign policy, we’re seeing moral depravity play out in real time.” How did a good portion of this country become so mean and hateful?

— Peggy R., Santa Fe, N.M.

Peggy, that is a question historians will be asking themselves for generations to come.

With Trump openly siding with Putin and Russia re: Ukraine, why is it not considered aiding and abetting of the enemy, considering we know that Russia is supplying Iran with weapons/info that have killed/injured our troops? It’s mind-boggling that few are talking about his aiding a known hostile country of the U.S. in these terms.

— Sandra S., Lagunitas, Calif.

Earlier this week, I said that if any other president or political aide had said about Vladimir Putin what Donald Trump and Steve Witkoff said this week, they would be considered traitors to America. It is hard to believe that my former party devolved from being champions of Western civilization and democratic freedom to being apologists for the worst tyrants and dictators on the globe. But they have. I believe there will be a political reckoning in 11 days.

I am so disheartened about Ukraine. I believe that Americans would care if someone with money and power could see a video speaking to regular Ukrainians about their daily lives. It needs to be brought home to Americans how inhumane Russia is to Ukraine. Many do not realize that Putin and China’s leader are helping Iran against our troops and our president is coordinating with our enemies. I wish there was a quick way this could be shown to all Americans. I believe that most Americans would understand the crisis. It is a war that is far away and has to be made real by interviews and getting to know the real story. It doesn’t matter what side of politics you are on. Seeing the tragedy in a way that connects would help Ukraine. It would also show that the president does not have our interest at heart, but is working with our enemies.

— Kate K.

Completely agree, Kate!

It seems that throughout this midterm election cycle, we have forgotten that Senate control is vital, at least because many judicial appointments and Supreme Court confirmations may occur in the last two years of the current presidential term. This issue alone underscores the need to vote in the next election.

— Anonymous

I could not agree with you more. While most are predicting the House of Representatives will have Democratic leadership next year, the Senate will remain up for grabs until election night.

Democrats will win Georgia and North Carolina, but need to also do well in Texas, Kansas, Ohio, Alaska, and Maine. We will probably be up late on Nov. 3 to see how many of those races break.

Polls are always misleading. Yes, they show facts as of today but the actual poll is when the voter goes behind the curtain and votes. All other polls before are meaningless. Still 35% are backing the Republicans. When breaking it down, 35% are voting for Trump as most of those up for re-election back the president. So the real poll results will be Nov. 4, when all votes are counted.

— Bruce M., Moncton, New Brunswick

As Tom Brokaw always said, stop looking at polls and let the voters have their say. Then report on what Americans tell you on Election Day!

The post Joe Scarborough: “Covering for pedophiles seems to have become a nasty habit for Trump’s Republican Party” appeared first on MS NOW.

While many Republican candidates are keeping Donald Trump at arm’s length, Iowa’s Joe Mitchell has moved in a far more obsequious direction, despite running in one of the nation’s most competitive congressional districts.

The 29-year-old former state representative, hoping to succeed Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson in Iowa’s 2nd District, joined the president during a rally Thursday night and offered the kind of gushing praise Trump likes to hear. Mitchell said Trump has “kept this country more safe than any other president, ever,” before expressing outrage that Trump hasn’t been given a Nobel Peace Prize.

It was at that point when the Iowan decided to give the president a different honor — one he had made up.

Joe Mitchell gives Trump "the man of the century" award (that he just made up)

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-10-23T01:40:34.634Z

Mitchell held up a framed certificate and said, “So what I came up with, Mr. President, is a new award. It’s called the ‘Man of the Century Award.’” The congressional hopeful went on to insist that Trump has “fought more for humanity and for America than any other president ever” and has become “the greatest president we’ve ever had.”

The president accepted the certificate, handed it to an aide and continued with his rally.

Time will tell whether locals in one of the nation’s true toss-up House races are impressed with such sycophancy, but the presentation got me thinking about the larger pattern: Trump has struggled to earn the kind of awards he desperately wants, but he has managed to receive all kinds of fake honors.

Earlier this year, for example, several coal industry executives and miners in hard hats presented Trump with a trophy that labeled him the “Undisputed Champion of Beautiful Clean Coal.”

This was not an isolated incident. Shortly after Trump lost his re-election bid in 2020, the National Republican Senatorial Committee made up an honor for him called the Champion for Freedom Award.

More recently, after the president’s begging didn’t lead to a Nobel Peace Prize, soccer’s global governing body, FIFA, concocted its own peace prize in the hopes of making Trump feel better.

A month after Trump picked up a trophy from coal industry representatives, House Speaker Mike Johnson held an event in which he announced another made-up honor, called the America First Award. The Louisiana Republican then handed the president, the first recipient, with a giant eagle statue.

Let this be a lesson to those hoping to curry favor with the White House: If you haven’t already visited a store that makes trophies and prizes, you’re making a mistake.

This post updates our related earlier coverage.

The post ‘Man of the Century’: Republicans keep presenting Trump with made-up awards appeared first on MS NOW.

MS NOW’s Joe Scarborough called it a “devastating week” for Republicans, whom he said keep dealing themselves “one self-inflicted wound after another” by embracing the “personality cult” around President Donald Trump despite his sinking poll numbers.

On Thursday evening in Sioux City, Iowa, Republican congressional candidate Joe Mitchell presented Trump with a self-created “Man of the Century Award.” Mitchell, who is locked in a tight race for Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, told the crowd that Trump had done “more for humanity and for America than any other president ever.”

“They’ve never given you the Nobel Peace Prize, by the way, which is a disgrace. So what I came up with, Mr. President, is a new award. It’s called the Man of the Century award,” Mitchell said before handing Trump a gold-framed certificate.

On Friday’s “Morning Joe,” Scarborough questioned why a Republican who is facing a competitive election would tie himself to a president as voters struggle with the cost of living.

“Gas prices, just at a level now that most Americans can’t afford to pay,” he said. “Diesel prices over $6: it’s just absolutely crushing truck drivers, crushing farmers, crushing working Americans, crushing all Americans. Rent, too high — Americans can’t afford it. Interest rates continue to skyrocket. Economic indicators, all being radically adjusted downward. Groceries costing more than ever before.”

Scarborough said the “personality cult” around Trump has “evolved to such a point” that, even with the party’s future at stake, many Republicans are “still trying to kiss up to a guy with a 31% approval rating.”

View this post on Instagram

Instead of addressing voters’ concerns, Republicans are catering to the president’s ego, Scarborough said. He pointed to Americans “who can’t afford their groceries, who can’t afford gas to fill up their their gas tanks to get to work” and “who are getting crushed by tariffs, who are getting crushed by cuts in health care.”

“I say none of this with any glee,” he continued, warning that Republicans’ loyalty to Trump is producing “one self-inflicted wound after another” as voters struggle with prices, healthcare and the economy.

You can watch Scarborough’s full comments in the clip above.

The post Scarborough: Trump’s ‘Man of the Century’ award is another GOP ‘self-inflicted wound’ appeared first on MS NOW.

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* In Mississippi’s unexpectedly interesting U.S. Senate race, former Vice President Kamala Harris headlined a rally in support of local prosecutor Scott Colom, the Democratic nominee.

“Mississippi matters!” Harris shouted to thunderous cheers at Thursday’s event.

The rally came on the heels of Donald Trump’s political operation confirming that the president will hold a rally on Monday in hopes of boosting Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, who’s struggling to a surprising degree in a race the GOP long assumed would be easy.

The news coincides with an Axios report that said Senate Republicans are so concerned about the Mississippi race that it’s “weighing a cash infusion” for the contest.

* In Maine’s closely watched U.S. Senate race, the latest Fox News poll found Democrat Troy Jackson and incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins tied, with each garnering 49% support.

* In Kansas’ closely watched U.S. Senate race, incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Marshall has finally sold his house in Florida. The sale was finalized the same day early voting began in Kansas.

* In Texas’ closely watched U.S. Senate race, The New York Times reported that a covert Russian influence operation is targeting Democratic state Rep. James Talarico’s candidacy as part of an apparent effort to boost Republican state Attorney General Ken Paxton.

* Speaking of Texas, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott recently boasted about endorsements he received from several Democratic sheriffs, but The New Republic reported that some of them deny having endorsed the GOP incumbent.

* While voter turnout is expected to be strong in New Hampshire this year, there is a new hurdle for voters to keep in mind: The Supreme Court granted New Hampshire’s emergency request to block the use of student IDs for voting in the midterms.

* Over the first two weeks of October, Republican megadonor Elon Musk invested an additional $76 million to boost GOP candidates. Five months after the billionaire publicly vowed to curtail his campaign spending, Musk has now donated more than $442 million to advance the Republican cause in the 2026 cycle.

* Speaking of Republican megadonors, billionaire Jeff Yass has now invested nearly $110 million to boost GOP candidates in the midterms. Yass is also the top donor to Vivek Ramaswamy, the Republican’s gubernatorial nominee in Ohio.

* And speaking of Ramaswamy, to appreciate the scope of the controversy surrounding his scandalous attack ad, it’s worth noting that 10 sitting Democratic female governors issued a joint statement on Thursday, condemning the candidate’s vile commercial as “an insult to survivors everywhere.”

The post Friday’s Campaign Round-Up, 10.23.26: Kamala Harris rallies for Colom in Mississippi appeared first on MS NOW.

After months of arguments, a state judge in Alaska ruled in late June that retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan could run against incumbent Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, overturning the ruling from the Alaska Division of Elections. A few months later, after the first round of balloting, state election officials finalized the top four candidates for Alaska’s unique system, and both Dan Sullivans advanced to the general election.

That Donald Trump and his political team are worried about the race is obvious, but what the president’s team is doing about it is another matter entirely.

Late Thursday, Trump’s Justice Department filed a preemptive lawsuit that intends to block certification of the Senate race — but only if the Republican incumbent loses while the rival with the similar name remains on the ballot.

As The Associated Press reported, the litigation kicks off “what many have feared could become a lengthy battle between the U.S. government and states over certifying an election where the president’s party is struggling.”

What’s more, it’s entirely possible that former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola will win this race and the efforts by Trump’s DOJ will determine whether she’s seated — and which party ultimately holds a majority in the Senate.

The lawsuit is a dramatic escalation, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. At a White House event in early September, the president publicly urged Attorney General Todd Blanche to pursue a case in Alaska specifically focused on the competing candidates with nearly identical names.

Last week, Trump went further, claiming that federal authorities were “looking into” the matter and pushing assorted conspiracy theories for which there was no evidence. As recently as Wednesday of this week, the president used his social media platform to publish a statement that read, in part, “Dan S. Sullivan is leading by a lot, but this is CHEATING in an Election, and the Judge that allowed this to happen should be ashamed of himself. We are looking at powerful legal options to remove the fraudulent Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. from the Ballot, and holding the Democrats accountable for their Election Interference, in the pursuit of Justice and Fairness.”

The statement included obvious falsehoods — most recent polling in Alaska shows the Republican incumbent trailing, not “leading by a lot” — and there is nothing to suggest Democratic officials have engaged in “election interference,” other than championing their party’s nominee.

Nevertheless, there have long been concerns that the Trump administration might try to derail election results it doesn’t like, and the DOJ’s new lawsuit regarding Alaska suggests those concerns are well grounded.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

The post Trump administration sues to block possible Democratic win in Alaska Senate race appeared first on MS NOW.

Federal agents took possession of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s laptop and personal cellphone when they raided her Washington home last week. While some members of the GOP leadership team have taken potshots at the Minnesota Democrat, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., ought to stand up for her rights as a congresswoman — now.

Pay no attention to the flimsy allegations driving the Trump administration’s investigation into Omar’s immigration paperwork. (The Washington Post reported said allegations were investigated and abandoned years ago.) What we have is the executive branch raiding a member of Congress’s home because of her race and politics. And yet, Politico reported Wednesday that Johnson had not instructed the House’s top lawyer, Matthew Berry, to intervene on Omar’s behalf.

What we have is the executive branch raiding a congressmember’s home because of her race and politics.

MS NOW host Chris Hayes, who interviewed Omar for “All In” on Thursday, raised her attorneys’ claim that the Justice Department violated her rights as a member of the House. Article I, Section 6, clause 1 of the Constitution protects all members of Congress from being prosecuted for “any Speech or Debate in either House.” Supreme Court rulings and other precedents have extended that protection to almost all “legislative acts” federal lawmakers undertake when drafting laws and ruled that it shields their staffers and any documents produced as part of their official duties.

Omar said the agents who searched her home asked her to sign a document essentially waiving her rights under the speech and debate clause.

“That was obnoxious,” she said. “I just I couldn’t understand why they would think that I would sign such a thing.”

The legislative branch has an incentive to call out what happened to Omar. Lawmakers need the freedom to openly debate ideas and policies, especially those the president favors, without the threat of the chief executive jailing them for disagreeing. That’s why the House as an institution has often intervened and fought to protect its members from executive overreach — even if it means lawmakers crossing the aisle.

Federal investigators seized the phone of Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., in August 2022 as they investigated President Donald Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Perry was one of the House Republicans most involved with Trump’s attempt to discard enough Electoral College votes to triumph after losing the 2020 election.

The House filed a motion in early 2023 to access sealed material case to ensure that Perry’s speech and debate clause rights were protected. Soon after, Berry, the House’s general counsel, filed an amicus brief arguing that the speech and debate clause applied to the contents of Perry’s phone and any “informal fact gathering” he might have been doing. Though Perry’s early involvement with Trump’s scheme to overturn the election made him a valid target for investigation, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and House Minority Whip Kathleen Clark, D-Mass., signed off on the House’s intervention. According to the rules of the House, their support wasn’t necessary, but a bipartisan front sent a powerful message to the courts.

It’s because of Perry’s case that personal phones are now considered an extension of lawmakers’ offices. Accordingly, Omar is within her rights to review the materials seized to ensure any legislative work stays out of the DOJ’s hands.

Republicans have spent four years hammering special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, especially his subpoenas of some members’ phone records (though not the actual contents of those calls). Just last month, the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee accused Smith and the Biden-era DOJ of violating the speech and debate clause in the process.

The House GOP should keep that same energy for Attorney General Todd Blanche and the seizure of Omar’s devices. But House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, a fellow Minnesotan, told Fox News that he was all for the investigation without raising any separation of powers concerns. And with a potentially rocky midterms looming, Johnson may be afraid that coming to Omar’s defense will cost him his leadership over the GOP caucus.

But no matter how useful Omar is to the GOP as a foil, Johnson should instruct Berry to ensure that Omar’s rights as a legislator are being protected. Even if Emmer and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise disagree, Johnson voting with Jeffries and Clark would be enough to set the ball rolling. While he may seem to act like a member of the White House staff, Johnson’s responsibility to protect the rights and privileges of Ilhan Omar, House representative, should supersede any misgivings he holds against Ilhan Omar, Democrat.

The post Mike Johnson needs to speak up for Ilhan Omar appeared first on MS NOW.

WASHINGTON (AP) — First lady Melania Trump has brokered a ceasefire deal between Russia and Ukraine in the war-ravaged city of Oleshky to allow for humanitarian aid and the evacuation of civilians, the White House announced on Friday.

The localized ceasefire is set to begin Oct. 29.

The White House said that the first lady had initiated the discussions and that she and a representative worked directly with Russian and Ukrainian leadership to define the terms of the ceasefire. There has been no immediate comment from the Ukrainian or Russian governments.

Trump has made children in conflict one of her signature issues as first lady, hosting a U.N. Security Council meeting on the issue earlier this year. She also has personally written to Russian President Vladimir Putin to work to reunite children displaced by the war with their families.

Food and medical supplies have been scarce for months in Oleshky, which sits on the Dnipro River, separating Ukrainian forces from the city’s Russian occupiers. There’s no electricity, heat or running water. Roads leading from town are mined and dotted with burned-out cars. Menacing drones buzz overhead.

Once a city of about 24,000, Oleshky was captured by Moscow’s forces on the first day of their full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Its buildings were shelled and burned, and its infrastructure damaged. Further calamity struck in June 2023 when floodwaters inundated the city after the Kakhovka Dam collapsed from an explosion that an Associated Press investigation found was likely caused by the Russian military, killing hundreds of residents.

Those left in the battered city along Ukraine’s southeastern front face death from hunger or disease as another harsh winter looms. Ukraine has appealed repeatedly for a local ceasefire to organize evacuations. Russia, which as the occupying power is obligated by international law to ensure civilians under its control have what they need to survive, had made no commitment.

The post Melania Trump helps forge ceasefire deal in Russian-occupied town, White House says appeared first on MS NOW.

“If Donald Trump defies court orders because the Supreme Court said he cannot be prosecuted for actions he takes as president, could those people who carry out his illegal requests be prosecuted or fined even though they are acting on his orders?” — Kit Read

Hi Kit,

Maybe.

The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Trump v. United States only dealt directly with criminal immunity for presidents, holding that they have at least presumptive immunity for all official acts, as well as absolute immunity for acts within their “conclusive and preclusive” constitutional authority.

What all that means in practice hasn’t been fully fleshed out. It would take a follow-up case to clarify the ruling’s limits, and it’s unclear if or when such a case will come.

At any rate, the court focused on presidents in that ruling. It did not grant immunity to aides acting on the president’s behalf.

Yet, while arguments have been made against subordinate immunity, it’s technically an open question that the justices haven’t decided one way or the other.

So the answer to your question at the moment is: maybe.

But you might wonder: What could the argument be for immunizing presidential underlings?

One scholarly account argued that the logic of the immunity ruling “renders the President’s subordinates absolutely immune for a potentially broad range of official acts, even if those acts are otherwise unlawful.” That’s because if the president has complete power over executing the law, then, the argument goes, subordinate actions that implement that power are lawful, as opposed to being unlawful but immune from prosecution.

As with clarifying the immunity ruling’s limits as it applies to presidents, whether the Supreme Court will decide the subordinate immunity question depends on the court taking an appeal that raises that issue in the future. And as with presidential immunity itself, there is no clear candidate for an appeal the court would take to answer that question.

Either way, if a president wants to ensure that any of his henchmen won’t be federally prosecuted, he could always pardon them.

Please submit “Ask Jordan” questions through this form for a chance to have your question featured in a future edition of the Deadline: Legal newsletter.

The post Ask Jordan: Does presidential immunity extend to subordinates who carry out illegal orders? appeared first on MS NOW.

Any story about a family dispute is bound to be complex, but the politics surrounding Vivek Ramaswamy’s abhorrent attack ad are relatively straightforward. Amy Acton, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee in Ohio, was allegedly raped by her stepfather when she was a child.

Her Republican opponent, Ramaswamy, is trying to weaponize this in despicable fashion, pushing a campaign commercial that features Acton’s estranged mother, who sided with the stepfather even after his arrest and stayed with him until his death.

But in recent days, it’s become clear that this ad has taken on far greater significance than one commercial in one gubernatorial election. As The New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg summarized in her latest column:

It’s quite a feat, in this numb and debased era, to create a political advertisement so shocking and indecent that people from across the political spectrum feel the need to denounce it. The Ohio gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who has long fashioned himself as a kind of Donald Trump 2.0 — younger and brainier but just as brash — has managed it.

By releasing what may be the most disgusting ad in American political history, he’s done more than just reveal his own low character. He’s opened a kind of proxy debate on the right about whether a post-Trump conservatism should try to reclaim some base-line morality or continue along its current smashmouth course.

Donald Trump has changed his party and his nation’s politics in a great many ways, but among the most important shifts is the degree to which the president has championed the politics of cruelty and dishonor. There are messages — from attack ads to speeches to social message postings — that Republican officials used to avoid, even when they agreed with the underlying point, in part to avoid backlash and in part to maintain their public reputations and credibility.

In recent years, however, those scruples have been cast aside. GOP officials and candidates no longer hedge on depraved messaging: After having seen Americans twice elevate a malicious television personality to the nation’s highest office, they now routinely echo his amorality and cynicism, seeing it as a way to satisfy the party’s far-right base, to advance their own ambitions or both.

Most decent people can and will agree that Ramaswamy’s attack ad is indefensible, but the ad has also taken on totemic value.

“What the ad represents … is an opening salvo in the post-midterms fight for the Republican Party’s future,” Politico’s Jonathan Martin explained. “It’s a battle that will accelerate next year but may not culminate until the 2030s. Put simply, what sort of party does the GOP want to be — and what will the market bear?”

Trailing in polls and short on options, Ramaswamy made his choice, and the stain on his character is likely to be permanent. What the Ohioan might not have anticipated, however, is just how much his disgusting tactic has divided his own party.

Several prominent Republicans in the state, including outgoing Gov. Mike DeWine, have publicly condemned the ad, and others outside of Ohio have taken similar steps. Former GOP presidential contender Nikki Haley, for example, said via social media that Ramaswamy is “a bad guy.” A day later, Rep. Ashley Hinson, the party’s Senate hopeful in Iowa, called the commercial “absolutely terrible.”

On the other side, there’s the White House, where the politics of cruelty and dishonor still thrive, and where there are Republican leaders who still believe repugnant messaging will dominate for the foreseeable future.

JD Vance, for example, declared this week that he’s “a little bit disgusted,” not by Ramaswamy’s gutter politics, but by members of his own party who are “whining” about civility.

The vice president’s reaction itself drew swift rebukes — The Bulwark published a piece that described Vance as a “sociopath” — but that didn’t stop Trump from picking up where his vice president left off.

On Wednesday, the president told reporters he didn’t “know anything about it,” before shifting gears and talking about how important he considers it to see a mother “hate her daughter that much.”

A day later, Trump went much further and spent much of Thursday defending the ad, urging Ramaswamy to keep running it, demanding the public take the underlying claims “seriously” and at Iowa rally, predicting that the ad would work in the GOP candidate’s favor.

In other words, Trump took care to keep dividing Republicans — with less than two weeks remaining, during the early voting period — in one of the nation’s most important gubernatorial races, by leaning into support for one of the most repulsive campaign ads in recent memory.

Election Day is 11 days away. Watch this space.

The post Ramaswamy’s vile ad is dividing the Republican Party. Trump is leading the wrong side. appeared first on MS NOW.