Smirky Jesse Watters Takes Tucker’s Slot Tonight, and Here’s Why It’s Going to Suck

Fox News anchor Jesse Watters, who has a long history of racism, sexism, and general grossness, makes his debut Monday night hosting the coveted 8 p.m. slot.

Fox has been looking to revitalize the prized evening slot, which has seen viewer numbers nose-dive after the network unceremoniously fired its star Tucker Carlson. Watters isn’t exactly an upgrade though. Both men peddle conspiracy theories, stoke outrage, and push general bigotry.

Here’s a look back at some of Watters’s worst moments.

1. He called unhoused people an “invasive species.”

Watters has repeatedly attacked unhoused people for … not having a home. “Being that our studio is here in New York, we’re witnessing a major problem, something all cities are dealing with: the deranged and dangerous homeless,” he said in September. “West Coast cities are so bad, you don’t even know whether you’re in Fallujah or L.A. In Portland, the homeless have become an invasive species.”

He has also called for unhoused people to be institutionalized, and even encouraged people to get rid of squatters by burning down the buildings they were taking shelter in.

2. He pushed the “great replacement theory” on air.

Watters accused President Joe Biden of using Covid-19 as part of the “great replacement,” which the Southern Poverty Law Center defines as a “racist conspiracy narrative [that] falsely asserts there is an active, ongoing, and covert effort to replace white populations in current white-majority countries.”

“We had a million Americans die from Covid-19, and Joe Biden just brought in a million illegal aliens to take their place,” Watters said in June.

3. He mocked Asian people in a racist segment in New York’s Chinatown.

During the presidential debate in October 2016, Donald Trump criticized China multiple times. In response, Watters headed to New York’s Chinatown to interview people on how they felt about it.

Watters’s interviews, if you can call them that, were packed with Asian stereotypes. He nonsensically combined different Asian cultures and implicitly mocked people for seemingly not speaking English. He later apologized by saying the segment was meant to be “tongue-in-cheek,” but only after he faced intense backlash for the racist tropes.

4. He rarely includes context or actual facts in his coverage.

Watters regularly excludes key context from stories he covers. In October, he shared a clip of Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asking White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre about oil companies. In Watters’s clip, Jean-Pierre appears to give a confused and vague response. “We wanted to show you the rest of her answer, but she didn’t make any sense,” Watters said.

But the full clip shows Jean-Pierre giving Doocy a complete answer and even pointing out that he has already asked her that question.

Watters also spread disinformation about the case of the 10-year-old girl from Ohio who had to travel out of state for an abortion. When his claims were debunked, Watters then falsely insisted that the girl hadn’t needed to travel out of Ohio.

5. He let the air out of a colleague’s tires so he could drive her home and hit on her.

Watters has openly boasted about the time he flirted with a colleague by vandalizing her car. In April 2022, he bragged on air about letting the air out of a Fox news associate producer’s tires, forcing her to accept a ride home from him. Watters, who is now 45, was 39 and married at the time. The producer was 25.

But it’s OK, because he and the producer are now married.

While not a direct comment on his journalistic abilities, it’s a pretty clear comment on Watters’s character.

Kevin McCarthy thinks that speaking out even remotely against a state that is committing apartheid is morally objectionable—and even worth censure. He also thinks RFK Jr. saying Covid-19 was specifically designed not to harm Jews is tolerable. Got it?

The speaker of the House made his stance clear on Monday while answering questions from the press.

McCarthy called out the Democrats, telling the party to “take action” against members like Representative Pramila Jayapal, who called Israel a “racist state.” Then, in the next beat, McCarthy defended inviting to Congress a presidential candidate who has spread antisemitic conspiracy theories.

As a reminder, last week, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claimed that Covid-19 was “targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people,” while sparing those who are “Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.”

Conversely, as a reminder, Israel has committed decades of human rights abuses, engaged in land dispossession and home demolition, upheld separate systems of law, and maintained a militarized police state against Palestinians.

McCarthy finds criticism of the latter deplorable, but apparently it’s still OK to welcome RFK Jr., a Republican pawn spreading antisemitism, to a House committee meeting next week on the federal government’s role in censorship.

“I don’t think censoring somebody is actually the answer here,” said the House speaker behind the successful Republican-led effort to remove Representative Ilhan Omar from the Foreign Affairs Committee for the high crime of speaking out against Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

The episode comes as a few Democrats speak out against the U.S. Congress rolling out the red carpet for Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who once called Jewish intermarriage “a plague.”

Herzog is set to deliver a speech to a joint session of Congress Wednesday, where he will stand in front of Vice President Kamala Harris, who, as Palestinian-American writer and political scientist Yousef Munayyer pointed out, is married to a Jewish man.

The bipartisan group of prominent Democrats and Republicans formed recently to fight the outside group No Labels’ efforts to prop up a third-party presidential ticket has taken a big step in showing it’s ready to go to war: It created a new super PAC to raise money to stop No Labels.

The super PAC, called Citizens to Save Our Republic, also announced new polling results on Monday, the same day Senator Joe Manchin is in New Hampshire for an event with former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman. The event is part of No Labels’ rollout of a set of moderate policy positions on hot-button topics like abortion.

Citizens to Save Our Republic’s polling of 5,700 registered voters nationwide showed that in a three-way race among Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and a No Labels ticket, Trump would win with 40 percent of the vote while Biden got 39 percent of the vote, with the No Labels candidate getting about 21 percent of the vote.

No Labels has maintained that its work to prop up a “Unity Ticket” is not meant to scuttle Biden’s chances of winning a second term, but polling—except that done by No Labels—has consistently shown that such a ticket would effectively only boost Trump.

Citizens to Save Our Republic is led by former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt. It also announced that it has recruited some big names to its cause, like former Defense Secretaries Chuck Hagel and Bill Cohen and former senator and presidential candidate Bill Bradley. The letter in which the polling results were released was signed by more than a dozen Democrats and Republicans, including Stuart Stevens, Joe Trippi, Matt Bennett, Sam Brown, Howard Gutman, and Bill Kristol.

The super PAC’s formation is yet another sign of just how serious the prospect of a No Labels ticket is to the outcome of the 2024 election. Other groups, like the center-left Third Way and the progressive MoveOn.org, have been eyeing No Labels’ move to set up a third-party ticket. Thus far, No Labels has not landed a candidate, but Manchin’s decision to headline a No Labels event in New Hampshire is a clear sign that he’s toying with the idea of running for president on the No Labels ticket rather than running for reelection in West Virginia, where he trailed GOP Governor Jim Justice by more than 20 points in a late May poll.

Democrats are forcing Republicans’ hand on George Santos after introducing a resolution on Monday to censure the embattled freshman congressman.

The resolution, introduced by Representative Richie Torres, is privileged, meaning it has to be acted on. If Torres calls for a vote on the measure, then a vote must be held within 48 hours. This is the second time Democrats have introduced a privileged resolution on Santos over his many, many lies, moving in May to expel him from Congress. Republicans managed to refer that resolution to the House Ethics Committee.

“I have a message to House Republicans who, for too long, have been protecting Mr. Santos, who has disgraced the United States Congress,” Torres said when announcing the censure resolution on Twitter. “Stop treating Mr. Santos as untouchable. The time has come for Congress to hold him accountable.”

The resolution lists more than a dozen of Santos’s many lies, such as his fabricating the bulk of his professional and educational résumé—including that he received a volleyball scholarship for college. The resolution also calls out Santos’s lies that his grandparents were Holocaust survivors, his mother died in the 9/11 attack, and four of his employees were killed in the Pulse nightclub shooting. He also lied about founding an animal rescue charity and producing the disastrous Broadway musical Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark.

Santos has been federally charged with 13 counts of various types of financial fraud, to which he has pleaded not guilty. He agreed to a deal with Brazilian authorities investigating him for financial fraud, and he is still under investigation by the House Ethics Committee.

Republicans, who have stood staunchly by Santos, were able to squash the previous resolution against him by arguing that the Ethics Committee probe hadn’t yet concluded. But the motion to censure has no effect on the Ethics Committee’s work, so it will be harder to argue down.

Santos could well be censured, as many of his fellow Republicans have called on him to resign over his falsehoods. This vote could actually prove important for Republican representatives, particularly from New York, who won in districts that went for President Joe Biden in 2020.

The majority of Santos’s constituents and New York voters in general want him out. New York Republicans who don’t vote against him could face a reckoning next November.

Robert Kennedy Jr. made a lot of people scratch their heads when he announced he was running for president as a Democrat. But even more bizarre is his list of donors, who are almost entirely Republican.

The bulk of Kennedy Jr.’s donors have previously given only to Republican candidates, according to the investigative newsletter Popular Information. Despite the conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer running on the Democratic ticket, less than a quarter of his donors have a history of donating blue.

Kennedy Jr.’s campaign received the maximum donation of $6,600 from 96 individuals through the end of June. Among those donors, 37 previously have only given to Republican federal candidates, according to a Popular Information analysis of Kennedy Jr.’s Federal Election Commission filings. Thirty have no history of political donations, and only 19 of those donors are Democratic.

One donor is Mark Dickson, an aerospace businessman who has donated more than $450,000 to the GOP since 2015. A hefty $400,000 went to Donald Trump’s committee Trump Victory alone. Another donor is Keith Sheldon, a car dealership executive who donated to Trump in 2016 and 2020, as well as to Trump-endorsed candidate Herschel Walker in 2022.

Kennedy Jr. has also received donations from Purple Good Government, a PAC controlled by David Sacks. Sacks moderated the bizarre Twitter Space between Kennedy Jr. and Sacks’s good friend Elon Musk, and he has publicly backed Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s presidential bid.

It’s actually no surprise that the right loves Kennedy Jr. He has openly embraced many of their talking points, such as that vaccines cause autism and that Covid-19 is the fault of Chinese people and Jewish people. He also initially agreed to speak at the far-right Moms for Liberty summit, although he ultimately backed out.

“We’re in a holy war. And I will tell you this: Because we’re willing to die in the holy war, we will make them die in the holy war.”

This is what neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes, who had dinner with Republican front-runner Donald Trump less than one year ago, said at an “America First” rally in West Palm Beach on Sunday.

“They will go down—we have God on our side—and they will go down with their Satanic master,” he continued. “They have no future in America. The enemies of Christ have no future in this world.”

Again, Fuentes had dinner with Trump in Florida last November. Neither Trump nor DeSantis—nor most of the Republican Party, for that matter—criticized Fuentes after learning what he stands for.

Fuentes’s comments on Sunday were livestreamed to some 5,000 people on Rumble. It’s unclear how many people were actually in the crowd, but in-person tickets for the rally went at $50 a pop, with $1,000 netting guests a special private dinner too. And the room of largely socially isolated boys with apparently nothing better to spend their money on roared in applause at Fuentes’s pledge to “make them die in the holy war.”

Elsewhere in the rally, Fuentes kicked out a heckler who questioned his previous support for far-right conspiracy theorist and January 6–inciter Ali Alexander, who allegedly propositioned teenage boys for sex and solicited nude photos and videos from them.

“Oh, security, get him out,” Fuentes said, with his finger pointed, unsurprisingly not engaging with the question. “Thank you, everybody,” Fuentes said to the crowd, appreciating the mob’s boos to drown out the uncomfortable inquiry.

Fellow far-right streamer Ethan Ralph—who was convicted of disseminating “revenge porn” of the mother of his child and ex-girlfriend, and separately is on bad terms with Fuentes—claimed that there were “36 cars total at Fuentes Rally 2 lmfao,” guessing there were about “144 ppl.”

Meanwhile, the rally seems to have, perhaps, given others some concern too. “!!” Elon Musk replied to a tweet with screenshots of the event’s comment section on Rumble.

The comments included remarks such as, “HITLER FAILED US BY NOT FINISHING THE JOB,” “WITHOUT LIES ISLAM DIES,” and “Jew rapists,” as well as eager use of a vicious slur against Jewish people.

But given the content, one may wish Musk’s consequent amplification of the tweet would’ve included more explicit concern than just an exclamation.

Fuentes’s comments, of course, are not aberrant. Fuentes was previously banned from social media outlets for violent rhetoric about people of color, women, Jewish people, immigrants, LGBTQ people, Covid-19, and much more. He has also proudly said he’s “just like Hitler” (whom he has also called “a pedophile … also really fucking cool”), and that “Catholic monarchy, and just war, and crusades, and inquisitions” are much better than democracy.

Such a character is set to be headlining a College Republicans convention at the end of July.

Donald Trump is planning to completely overhaul how the government works if he wins the 2024 presidential election, which would clear the way for him to do pretty much whatever he wants.

“What we’re trying to do is identify the pockets of independence and seize them,” Russell Vought, who ran the Office of Management and Budget under Trump, told The New York Times.

One of the central parts of Trump’s fascist plan to consolidate power is to bring independent agencies under presidential control, including the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates television and internet companies, and the Federal Trade Commission, which enforces antitrust law and consumer protection rules.

But that’s not all: Trump also wants to be able to impound funds, meaning refuse to spend money appropriated for programs he doesn’t like. The tactic was banned under Richard Nixon, but Trump insists on his campaign website that presidents have a constitutional right to impound funds. He says he will reinstate the practice, even though it could spark a lengthy legal battle.

He also plans to eliminate employment protections for tens of thousands of civil servants, making them easier to replace. He would then purge intelligence agencies, the State Department, and the defense agencies of officials whom he has deemed members of “the sick political class that hates our country.”

Trump has already said he would launch a criminal investigation into President Joe Biden if he takes back the White House. But his new plans would go a step further and centralize power under the executive branch.

It’s unclear just how much of this Trump would get away with. Congress could pass laws to block him, and many of his plans would certainly get locked up in the court system. But the point is less whether he can succeed and more that Trump is willing to do absolutely anything to get and stay in power.

He has already shown a willingness to act with impunity. Trump repeatedly claimed that presidents can declassify materials whenever they want, “even by thinking about it.” And now, even after he’s been federally indicted for allegedly mishandling classified documents, he still insists he’s done nothing wrong.

Turns out that billionaire Harlan Crow’s relentless gift-showering (read: warm, beautiful friendship) toward Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wasn’t enough on its own—it was also part of a tax break bonanza for the Republican megadonor.

Once again, ProPublica has revealed even more troubling details about the billionaire’s shady dealings with one of the most powerful members of the U.S. government. It seems that Crow has, for years, likely pretended that his 162-foot yacht, the Michaela Rose, was a chartering business in order to avoid paying taxes—and Thomas’s voyages on the ship helped maintain the facade.

Decades ago, Crow and his family had formed a company, Rochelle Charter Inc., in order to lease out their superyacht, ProPublica details. And from data between 2003 to 2015, the company reported losing money in 10 of the 13 years; the net losses reached nearly $8 million, with about half flowing to Harlan himself. The deductions helped the family offset income elsewhere, saving the Crows from paying taxes. The pattern echoes what billionaires often do with their private jets (which, of course, was another vehicle used by Crow to taxi Thomas and the justice’s family around the world).

The yacht tax breaks, among other loopholes, enabled Crow to pay an average income tax rate of 15 percent during the time period, lower than that of many middle-class workers in America.

The kicker is that while these sorts of deductions can only be had by a purported business operator, it doesn’t seem like the Michaela Rose was a legitimate business pursuit. ProPublica spoke to about a dozen former crew members of the ship, and none of them said they were aware of the superyacht ever being chartered. Cross-checking that with schedules for three different years, the boat seemingly was only ever used to cruise Crow’s family, friends, and executives of his company around.

And that’s not all. As recently as 2019, an attorney representing the supposed yacht chartering company, Rochelle Carter, filed an application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Success with such an application requires basic things like, you know, showing that the Michaela Rose was actually being used commercially.

The attorney attached a brochure as proof. “This magnificent yacht has cruised the oceans of the world with a graceful and gentle motion found only on the most superior seagoing vessels,” the pamphlet said, boasting of the boat’s “fine, seakindly hull” and “mahogany paneled formal dining room” that seats 16. But, ProPublica notes, it said nothing about chartering.

The USPTO was, naturally, not satisfied, up until the attorney provided new supposed evidence—screenshots from websites like Superyachts.com and LiveYachting.com, showing “links and references to yacht ‘Charter’ services offered in connection with Applicant’s MICHAELA ROSE mark,” according to the attorney. The USPTO caved and approved the trademark. As ProPublica points out, neither website actually guarantees that the ship was a business. The former hosts profiles for hundreds of ships—regardless of whether they can be chartered. The latter just encouraged users to contact a broker to find out if a boat could be chartered.

“Based on what information is available, this has the look of a textbook billionaire tax scam,” Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden told ProPublica. “These new details only raise more questions about Mr. Crow’s tax practices, which could begin to explain why he’s been stonewalling the Finance Committee’s investigation for months.”

Such a scandal adds to the Mount Everest of malfeasance festering within Crow and Thomas. Thomas has received secret and lavish gifts for decades from the Nazi memorabilia–collecting billionaire and GOP donor Harlan Crow, including luxurious island-hopping excursions on superyachts, tuition payments for his grandnephew’s private schooling, and even a secret deal in which Crow bought Thomas family property and proceeded to upgrade it while Thomas’s mother still lived in it. Separately, meanwhile, Thomas’s aide collected Venmo payments, allegedly for a “Christmas Party” hosted by the justice, from a string of high-rolling lawyers with cases before the Supreme Court.

The blood between Representatives Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene has gotten so bad that their colleagues are worried the two will get into a fistfight “at any moment.”

The once–work besties have been at each other’s throats for months, with Greene calling Boebert a “little bitch” on the House floor and Boebert voting to oust Greene from the House Freedom Caucus. And things are nowhere close to settling down.

“A fistfight could break out at any moment,” Tennessee Representative Tim Burchett told The Daily Beast.

He then creepily added that, as a fan of professional wrestling, “it’s entertaining to think that a fistfight could break out at any movement. I kind of dig that.”

Another Republican lawmaker told The Daily Beast that while it’s certain the two women will eventually attack each other, it’s unclear who will win. “They will be nailing that coffin shut,” the lawmaker said, “and one of them is still in there kicking and screaming!”

Greene and Boebert seemed to be good friends when they both first arrived on Capitol Hill, but they have since ruptured pretty spectacularly. They first began to diverge over continuing aid for Ukraine: Boebert supported it, while Greene was opposed.

Greene has also ingratiated herself with establishment Republicans, although both women still embrace far-right beliefs. Things came to a head during the interminable vote for speaker of the House in January. The pair reportedly got into a massive argument in a Capitol bathroom, when Greene accused Boebert of taking money from McCarthy for her reelection campaign but then refusing to vote for him for speaker.

But things started to get really ugly in June, when Boebert introduced articles of impeachment against Joe Biden under a privileged resolution, meaning there had to be a vote on the measure within two days (the measure ultimately was referred to a committee and is still there). Greene had introduced articles of impeachment against Biden in May, which have also yet to go anywhere. Greene publicly accused Boebert of copying her articles and ended up confronting her colleague on the House floor.

“I’ve donated to you, I’ve defended you. But you’ve been nothing but a little bitch to me,” Greene reportedly told Boebert in the middle of the House floor. “And you copied my articles of impeachment after I asked you to co-sponsor them.”

Boebert got her revenge a few weeks later, when she voted alongside the majority of the House’s far-right contingent to boot Greene from the Freedom Caucus. Greene’s comments to Boebert were apparently a major factor in the group’s decision.

This may bite the caucus in the butt, though. Greene was a strong fundraiser for the group, and she has proven to be a powerful influence among establishment Republicans. She could easily turn the rest of the GOP against the caucus.

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds on Friday signed into law a six-week abortion ban, turning it into a political spectacle at a conservative summit with several 2024 hopefuls, in a move widely seen as a bid for vice president.

She held the signing ceremony at the conservative Family Leadership Summit, where 2024 Republican candidates including Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Asa Hutchinson, and Vivek Ramaswamy were interviewed by erstwhile Fox News host Tucker Carlson earlier in the day. (Ron DeSantis is also on deck.)

Reynolds saw this as the perfect opportunity to make a show of taking away people’s health care, signing the bill on a stage with dozens of people.

State lawmakers passed the radical ban, which targets people before they know they are pregnant, overnight Tuesday, after Reynolds called a special session with the sole purpose of banning abortion. The new law is hugely unpopular, with hundreds of Iowans showing up at the state Capitol to protest the bill as it was being debated.

Many suspect that Reynolds is vying for a vice presidential nod. During testimony on Tuesday, one constituent called her out for using the abortion ban to “score political points.”

The law will ban nearly all abortions in Iowa. It technically makes exceptions for rape, but only if the attack is reported to law enforcement or a health provider within 45 days. There are also exceptions for incest and for cases where the fetus is nonviable or the pregnancy puts the patient’s life at risk. However, as reporter Jessica Valenti pointed out, the rules for an exception could put the patient’s life further at risk.

Even if a patient is miscarrying, they can only get an abortion if the fetus’s heartbeat has stopped. In many cases, waiting for fetal demise is what causes patients to develop sepsis.

Although the law goes into effect immediately, it could be blocked in a matter of days. A group that includes the ACLU of Iowa, Planned Parenthood North Central States, and local abortion provider the Emma Goldman Clinic sued to block the law the day after it passed the state legislature. A district court judge said he hoped to issue a ruling on Monday.

The lawsuit asks the court to assess the abortion ban’s constitutionality. Reynolds had previously signed a six-week abortion ban in 2018, but that measure was struck down the following year in the courts. After Roe v. Wade was overturned, Reynolds asked the courts to reinstate the 2018 ban, but the state Supreme Court was deadlocked on the issue and left a law banning abortion after 20 weeks in place. The new law could be struck down in the same manner as the first six-week ban.