MAGA Republican Takes Shocking Stand on Netanyahu’s Speech to Congress

Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie is openly feuding with the pro-Israel lobby ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress.

The Republican representative, part of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, is the only GOP member who said he would boycott Netanyahu’s Wednesday speech.

“Today Congress will undertake political theater on behalf of the State Department. The purpose of having Netanyahu address Congress is to bolster his political standing in Israel and to quell int’l opposition to his war,” Massie wrote on X (formerly Twitter). “I don’t feel like being a prop so I won’t be attending.”

In response, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) quote-tweeted the representative’s post, slamming Massie for “standing with” progressives such as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders “against our ally Israel.”

Massie shot back, tweeting, “Call me anything you want. I still won’t be attending your war rally.”

This isn’t the Republican’s representatives first time feuding with AIPAC.

On matters of foreign policy and war, Massie often finds himself siding with House Democrats, which has earned him the scorn of pro-Israel groups. As John Nichols wrote for The Nation, “They recognize that he upends the claim that opposition to pro-Israel policies comes from ‘the extreme left.’”

During the Kentucky Republican primary in May, the AIPAC-affiliated United Democracy Project spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on attack ads against Massie. He responded by addressing the effort head-on, saying that the group “bought $300,000 of ads against me because I am often the lone Republican for freedom of speech, against foreign aid, and opposed to wars in the Middle East.” Massie won his primary with a massive 75 percent of the vote.

Massie also voted against both resolutions to censure Representative Rashida Tlaib, the only Palestinian American in Congress, over her comments about the war in Gaza. He helped to kill the initial motion to censure her, but the House passed a second motion a week later.

Massie has since teamed up with progressive House Democrats to condemn Israel’s attack on Iran, and he was accused by the White House of “virulent antisemitism” for an anti-Zionist tweet featuring a Drake meme.

Massie says charges against him of antisemitism are “simply not true” and that he was aiming to squash “open-ended support” for Israel’s war and efforts to shut down free speech.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to a joint session of Congress Wednesday afternoon, he might notice some empty seats. 

From Tea Party and House Freedom Caucus members to progressive Jewish leaders, here is an ongoing list of all the politicians planning to boycott Netanyahu’s speech so far: 

Senate

1. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
2. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
3. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
4. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
5. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
6. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
7. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
8. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
9. Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.)

House

10. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
11. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.)
12. Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas)
13. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.)
14. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
15. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)
16. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)
17. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.)
18. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)
19. Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.)
20. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.)
21. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.)
22. Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.)
23. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.)
24. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.)
25. Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.)
26. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.)
27. Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)
28. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
29. Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.)
30. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)
31. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)
32. Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)
33. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.)
34. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.)
35. Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.)
36. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)
37. Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.)
38. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.)
39. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.)
40. Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.)
41. Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.)
42. Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.)
43. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)
44. Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas)
45. Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.)
46. Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas)

Some politicians, such as Virginia Democratic Senator Tim Kaine and 
Vice President Kamala Harris, are missing the event due to previously scheduled commitments. But  both have called for Netanyahu to establish a cease-fire in Palestine and increase humanitarian aid into Gaza. 

Progressive Jewish Representative Becca Balint said that the speech will “serve as a distraction from the prime minister’s failure of leadership.” Her fellow progressive Vermont lawmaker Senator Bernie Sanders went further, calling Netanyahu a “war criminal” presiding over a “right-wing extremist government.”

Representative Jamie Raskin had previously said he would boycott the speech and instead meet with the families of Israeli hostages. He now plans to attend Netanyahu’s speech, but for a good reason. According to a press release, Raskin said he was asked by one of the hostages’ family specifically to attend. 

“As she put it, ‘I don’t want you to boycott his speech, I want you to go and confront his lies. That is how you can help us,’” he explained in his statement. 

Perhaps most surprisingly, Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a House Freedom Caucus member, will also boycott the speech. “Today Congress will undertake political theater on behalf of the State Department,” he wrote on X. 

“The purpose of having Netanyahu address Congress is to bolster his political standing in Israel and to quell int’l opposition to his war. I don’t feel like being a prop so I won’t be attending.”

This story has been updated.

Republicans have unleashed a slew of racist remarks about Vice President Kamala Harris, claiming that she is a “DEI” candidate, an explicitly racist dog whistle meant to suggest that her position is a result of her being a Black South-Asian woman, not because she’s actually qualified.

Fox News Business host Larry Kudlow went on a heated buzzword-salad rant Tuesday afternoon in which he couldn’t even keep his criticism of Harris straight. The only thing he knew was that Harris was “DEI,” but, ultimately, he didn’t seem sure about what that meant.

“And of course, her whole history is DEI. Diversity, uh exclusion, and equity. I mean, inclusion and equity. I mean, what does that tell you? It’s totally woke, and it’s anti-cops,” Kudlow said.

“So among all the other things, putting the economics aside: more DEI, defund the police, de– eliminate ICE, never even talked to the chiefs of the border patrol. I mean, really? How’s she gonna stand up to that?” A better question might be, how’s she gonna understand the question?

The racist smears against Harris on conservative news coverage began even before Biden had endorsed her as the Democratic nominee. Earlier this month, Sebastian Gorka, Donald Trump’s former deputy assistant, called her a DEI hire, as well as a particularly outdated slur during an appearance on Newsmax.

“She’s a DEI hire, right? She’s a woman! She’s colored. Therefore she’s gotta be good,” Gorka said sarcastically.

Wyoming Representative Harriet Hageman also credited Harris’s gender and race for her nomination for the vice presidency, amidst a slew of attacks on Tuesday.

“Well, I think she’s one of the weakest candidates I’ve ever seen in the history of our country,” said Hageman, claiming that Harris was “intellectually, just really kind of the bottom of the barrel.”

Hageman went on to criticize Harris’s handling of the border, before explaining what her actual problem with Harris seems to be.

“I think she was a DEI hire, and I think that that’s what we’re seeing. And I just don’t think that they have anybody else,” said Hageman.

On Monday, Representative Tim Burchett called Harris a “DEI hire” with an “abysmal” record, lamenting Biden choosing Harris in 2020. “What about white females? What about any other group? It just, when you go that route, you take mediocrity,” Burchett said.

That’s turning out to be Tennessee Republican’s favorite new insult. That same day, Burchett called former U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle a “DEI horror story,” suggesting that she had been improperly hired due to her gender.

Former United States Representative Adam Kinzingzer slammed Burchett for his racist, sexist remarks—and everyone else pushing the DEI claim—on CNN Tuesday.

DEI “is a disgusting dog whistle; it’s not even a dog whistle anymore, it’s an outright whistle,” Kinzinger said.

“Basically what they’re saying is only white men are deserving of certain positions, and I thought we got past that about 60 years ago in this country.”

Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin took advantage of a rare joint appearance on Fox News with House Oversight Chair James Comer, a Republican, to poke fun at his colleague on live television.

On Tuesday evening, Raskin and Comer appeared together on Special Report with Bret Baier for a segment called “Common Ground,” and Raskin began by criticizing Trump and defending Vice President Kamala Harris in her run for president.

Baier joked that “you can only do common ground so long” before asking Comer if it was time to “call for an end to the impeachment effort of President Biden?”

Comer said Republicans “did what we were supposed to do.”

“My job wasn’t to impeach. My job was to investigate, and I investigated and we turned over our findings to Speaker Johnson’s office,” Comer said. “He can determine what to do with that, but I believe the American people know a lot more about what the Bidens have done because of our work.”

Raskin replied with some sarcastic praise for his colleague.

“Well, I think Chairman Comer did a magnificent job exonerating Joe Biden of all the fraudulent charges that were raised against him in this Congress, and, of course, there was no high crime, no misdemeanor, and Joe Biden is a passionate public servant filled with integrity—”

Comer cut Raskin off. “Ah, I strongly disagree with that,” Comer said, laughing. “Nobody’s buying that. Nobody’s buying what he’s selling on that.”

“America’s buying it,” Raskin replied. “The reservoir of love for Joe Biden is deep and really bottomless in America.”

As the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, Raskin has frequently butted heads with Comer, particularly regarding the GOP’s fruitless attempt to impeach Biden, which ultimately ended with pointless criminal referrals to the Justice Department for the president and his son Hunter. The two were actually on Fox to discuss a rare point of agreement: that the head of the U.S. Secret Service, Kimberly Cheatle, needed to resign. They were successful, but it remains to be seen if they find another point of agreement, particularly as Republican attacks on Harris intensify.

As Trump desperately tries to separate his campaign from Project 2025, users on X have noted one big problem: J.D. Vance wrote the foreword to a forthcoming book by the plan’s lead author, Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts.

On the Amazon product page, the promotional material for the book, titled Dawn’s Early Light, highlights Roberts’s role in composing Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation proposal for a conservative overhaul of the federal government.

[The New Republic has obtained J.D. Vance’s full foreword for this book. Read it here.]

The product page also includes a favorable review from Vance. “Never before has a figure with Roberts’s depth and stature within the American Right tried to articulate a genuinely new future for conservatism,” the review says. “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lay ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.”

When the book first became available for preorder on June 19, Vance promoted it on X, writing, “I was thrilled to write the foreword for this incredible book, which contains a bold new vision for the future of conservatism in America.”

On the Amazon page for Dawn’s Early Light, the subtitle reads, “Taking Back Washington to Save America,” but an archived version of the page from June 19 indicates it was initially “Burning Down Washington to Save America.”

Inflammatory language in the blurb has also apparently been tamped down.

A sentence on the archived page that says the book “blazes a warpath for the American people to take back their country” now says it “blazes a promising path.” Another fiery sentence on the archived page read, “Just as a controlled burn preserves the longevity of a forest, conservatives need to burn down these institutions [the FBI, The New York Times, the Department of Education, etc.] if we’re to preserve the American Way of life.” It now says that those institutions “need to be dissolved if the American way of life is to be passed down to future generations.”

These changes, while slight, perhaps indicate a hope to dispel the emerging public perception that Project 2025 would wreak havoc on the country. Trump, undoubtedly aware of the plan’s growing unpopularity, has claimed, “I know nothing about Project 2025” and that “some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.”

But it will certainly be harder for the Republican ticket to distance itself from the Heritage Foundation manifesto come publication day in September.

Conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro likened the mounting excitement around Vice President Kamala Harris to pop star Taylor Swift, but of course, he meant it as an insult.

In an interview with Fox News’s Jesse Watters Tuesday night, Shapiro took aim at Harris by comparing her to one of the most popular musicians in the world.

“I’ve never seen this much manufactured enthusiasm for anyone, outside of maybe Taylor Swift,” Shapiro said. The Daily Wire co-founder noted that Harris had few qualifications “other than intersectional magic,” a pretty blatantly sexist and racist comment from the noted sexist and racist.

Shapiro’s dig may come back to haunt him, as Harris has demonstrated one important similarity to Swift: her ability to get out the vote.

In the two days following Joe Biden’s endorsement of Harris, Vote.org saw an intense surge of 38,500 new voter sign-ups, according to Politico. Most of the people who reportedly registered were 34 and under.

In October, Swift posted on Instagram for National Voter Registration Day, inspiring more than 35,000 new voters to sign up, a 23 percent increase in new registrations compared to the same day the previous year. As a result, conservatives began to take aim at the pop star as some kind of political lightning rod.

Thus far, there is little to suggest that anything about the vice president’s meteoric rise in popularity was “manufactured” by establishment Democrats.

Harris’s campaign has raised a whopping $126 million since Sunday, with more than 1.4 million grassroots donors contributing, according to a memo from the vice president’s team Wednesday. Nearly 2,000 people had applied to work for the Harris campaign within the first 24 hours of her candidacy, while more than 100,000 signed up to volunteer since Sunday, the team reported.

Donald Trump repeatedly used the n-word in a racist tirade over some car damage, according to a forthcoming memoir from his nephew, Fred C. Trump III.

In All in the Family: The Trumps and How We Got This Way, Trump III describes a moment in the early 1970s, when he was a preteen at his grandparents’ Queens house one afternoon and his uncle showed up. The Guardian obtained an early copy of the book, due to be released next week.

“Donald was pissed. Boy, was he pissed,” Trump III wrote. Trump showed his nephew his white Cadillac Eldorado convertible with a “giant gash, at least two feet long” in its canvas roof, and “another, shorter gash next to it.”

“‘N—s,’ I recall him saying disgustedly. ‘Look what the n—s did,’” Trump III quoted his uncle as saying. He added that Trump hadn’t actually seen where the damage to his car came from, but jumped “straight to the place where people’s minds sometimes go when they face a fresh affront. Across the racial divide.”

Trump III wrote that Queens was “one of the most diverse places on the planet” but that Jamaica Estates, where the Trumps lived, was affluent and largely white, and prejudice was common.

In Jamaica Estates, “If something bad happened,” Trump III writes, “they were the ones who did it. Almost certainly, it was them.”

Point-blank, Trump III asked in the book, “So, was Donald a racist?”

While “people have been asking for decades,” Trump III wrote, he noted that his uncle used the racial slur back when, he said, “people said all kinds of crude, thoughtless, prejudiced things,” adding, “Maybe everyone in Queens was a racist then.”

Trump has been accused of racism long before and since his entry into politics. In the 1970s, he and his father were sued by the federal government for discriminatory housing practices. When he was a casino owner, Black employees were ushered off the floors whenever Trump and his wife paid a visit. In the late 1980s, he sought the death penalty for the Central Park Five (who were found to be innocent), and as president he attacked NFL players kneeling in protest of racial inequality and refused to condemn white supremacists.

Recently, a producer on Trump’s reality show, The Apprentice, recounted a 2004 incident where Trump refused to hire Kwame Jackson, the Black finalist on the series’s first season, asking the show’s producers, “I mean, would America buy a n— winning?”

In the light of his uncle’s history, Trump III’s writings seem plausible. As Trump will likely face a Black woman in Vice President Kamala Harris, we will probably see racially questionable attacks from him and his campaign in the coming days. In fact, they’ve already started.

Elon Musk is denying reports that he plans to donate $45 million per month to support Trump’s candidacy, in more terrible news for the former president.

The Wall Street Journal had previously reported that Musk planned to make the staggering contributions to the pro-Trump political action committee America PAC. In an interview with right-wing influencer Jordan Peterson broadcast on X Tuesday, Musk told Peterson that the report “is simply not true. I’m not donating $45 million a month to Trump.

“Now, what I have done is I have created [the America PAC],” he continued. Earlier this month, The New York Times reported that the nascent super PAC, meant to support Trump’s election bid, could be “an avenue for Mr. Musk and his $250 billion fortune to potentially play a significant role in the 2024 presidential race” and has already raked in millions from “a tight-knit network of wealthy tech entrepreneurs,” including those close to Musk.

Later Tuesday evening, Musk further clarified, “I am making some donations to America PAC, but at a much lower level,” without providing a specific figure.

Musk, who endorsed Trump following the assassination attempt against him this month, told Peterson he does not subscribe to the “cult of personality” around Trump, but expressed his opinion that “the country would be better off with a Republican administration” due to his concerns about Democratic “censorship” and “DEI.”

Someone ought to break the news to Trump, who earlier this month bragged that he had read Musk “gives me $45 million a month,” adding, “We have to make life good for our smart people.”

Donald Trump is seriously pissed that President Joe Biden plans to address the nation Wednesday night, the first time he has spoken publicly directly since isolating for Covid-19 last week, ending his reelection campaign, and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris over the weekend.

There’s obviously a lot to talk about—but Trump (predictably) wants to talk too, even if he doesn’t have anything new to say.

In response to Biden’s announcement that he would address the country at 8:00 p.m.* on Wednesday to discuss “what lies ahead, and how I will finish the job for the American people,” the Trump campaign’s general counsel David Warrington sent letters to ABC, NBC, and CBS demanding that the former president be granted equal airtime, according to The New York Times.

In the letter, Warrington wrote that because Biden will likely address his endorsement of Harris, it “appears that President Biden’s speech will not be a bona fide news event, but rather, a prime-time campaign commercial.”

Warrington cited the Federal Communications Commission’s “equal time” rule, arguing that Trump should be given equal time for a “campaign speech.”

Under rules installed in the 1970s, news stations are no longer required to give equal time to candidates for “bona fide news events,” such as presidential speeches or news conferences. When that rule was implemented, critics noted that it gave an incumbent president an inherent advantage when it came to news coverage in an election cycle. If they had a problem with that, one can scarcely imagine how disturbed they’d be by how powerful the American president has become.

None of the outlets Trump’s team reached out to had responded by Tuesday night, and it’s unclear if they will. Maybe some of Trump’s meandering 92-minute address at last week’s Republican National Convention can carry over somehow?

All of this goes to show just how scared Trump is of his new opponent. Harris’s apparent edge has sent the former president on several tantrums in just the few days since her candidacy was announced, and scrambling for a way to get out of the next presidential debate.

Warrington also filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission over Harris’s so-called “heist” of Biden’s campaign’s $91.5 million war chest. But legal experts argue that she’s within her rights to take over the money because, as Biden’s running mate, she was named as a recipient on the principal campaign committee that raised the money.

*This article originally misstated the time of Biden’s speech.

Republicans are so desperate to attack Vice President Kamala Harris following Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential race that they’ve come up with a new flimsy plan: impeach her.

On Tuesday, Representative Andy Ogles formally introduced articles of impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors” over Harris allegedly mishandling the southern U.S. border.

In general, at least six bills were submitted in the House of Representatives Tuesday, either calling to “impeach” or “condemn” Harris or calling on Harris to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the Constitution and remove Biden from office with a Cabinet vote.

As Scott MacFarlane pointed out, none of these bills stand a chance of going anywhere, so their main purpose appears to be performative efforts to stir up the Republican base and make Harris look weaker. Harris’s popularity has skyrocketed in the last two days, netting a record fundraising haul for Democrats and causing Republicans to panic. Republicans have come up with weak talking points, as Trump is trying to weasel out of debating her and argue that Harris was part of a conspiracy to kill him.

In other words, Republicans are making wild attempts to find an attack that sticks to Harris and shifts the momentum back to Trump. The latest attempt (aside from unserious impeachment bills) appears to be an old GOP standby: an appeal to racism by attacking Harris’s record on crime as a prosecutor. Will it work?

As the legendary Walter Shapiro wrote for The New Republic in 2022, “It has become a Republican cliché: When the polls look ominous, the party often conjures the image of a menacing Black man.” But the 2024 electorate has lived through President Barack Obama, Black Lives Matter, and the protests of 2020. It remains to be seen if the racist attacks on Harris can top the groundswell of enthusiasm from young Americans.