Radical socialist New York City mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani is trying everything he can to win the upcoming election, even if it means "laundering" his otherwise very vocal "defund the police" stance.
According to the New York Post, the socialist frontrunner is apparently entertaining the idea of keeping tough-on-crime Jessica Tisch as NYPD commissioner, despite his radically opposite views on crime.
Mamdani's history of making statements that oppose everything Tisch stands for don't seem to matter as he's eyeying up the best way to convince as many as possible to vote for him.
The outlet noted that many "Big Apple elites" hope that by doing so, Mamdani can "sand off" his far-left edges.
Political operative Ken Frydman believes Mamdani is simply "laundering" his radical stances on crime and police in order to win the election.
“He’s laundering his radical stances, that’s what he’s doing," Frydman said.
"But he needs his defund-the-police voters to turn out again and cop-hating Tiffany Cabán is lurking," he added, referencing another socialist firebrand that is possibly in the running to take over the commissioner's spot if Mamdani wins.
The Post noted:
Tisch, a well-regarded public servant and billionaire heiress, has tried to stay above the partisan fray, despite a number of politicians trying to use her as a pawn.
Mayor Eric Adams picked Tisch in November to rebuild the NYPD’s standing — and his own — after his first three police commissioners respectively flamed out amid infighting, scandal and more infighting.
Many of New York's elite residents have urged Mamdani to keep Tisch as commish if he's elected mayor, as it seems to be a good political match.
For his part, Mamdani wouldn't confirm whether or not he would consider keeping Tisch.
"I believe that it’s premature to make any personnel commitments at this time, but it’s a consideration that is real — and it’s in keeping with the city that we’re fighting for," he recently stated.
Mamdani's social media posts are more than enough to show where he stands on the issues.
"Defund it. Dismantle it. End the cycle of violence," he once said about the NYPD, also calling it "corrupt" and "wicked."
The Post noted:
While Tisch arguably could be a bulwark against Mamdani’s radical impulses, Democratic political operative Hank Sheinkopf said she’d be hamstrung by the fact she ultimately serves at the pleasure of the mayor.
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker (D) pledged to keep opposing the Trump administration's policies even if President Donald Trump puts him "in jail," a fanciful scenario that came from Booker's own mind.
In an interview with MSNBC's Jen Psaki, Booker taunted Trump to arrest him after he singled out the senator for criticism.
Several Democrats have been arrested or detained while protesting Trump's hardline immigration policies, leading critics to accuse Trump of "authoritarianism."
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) was detained after disrupting a Department of Homeland Security press conference in June. The mayor of Newark -- a city Booker once led -- and New Jersey Congresswoman LaMonica McIver were both arrested over a scuffle outside an ICE facility in Newark.
Many say that Democrats are deliberately instigating these scenes for publicity. But Booker suggested that politicians in New Jersey are being targeted arbitrarily, and he could be next.
"My Congresswoman LaMonica McIver arresting her, my mayor they’ve arrested, they’re picking off, it seems, people that live in Newark that are in elected positions," Booker lamented.
"But I don’t care throw me in jail. Do what you have to do. I’m going to continue to stand up for what’s right," he said.
Booker concluded, “I’m hoping that when one person stands up and calls this out, it ignites the courage of another person and another person and another person. We have to at a time that our fundamental rights and freedoms, that the very democracy that we that we know is precious, is under attack by this president. We’ve got to have more people willing to stand up and fight and take him on.”
Trump did not mention arresting Booker when he criticized the senator this week over an anti-ICE bill.
The bill, which Booker introduced with Padilla, would require ICE agents to identify themselves and prevent them from wearing masks. ICE agents have faced rising threats from the left, with ten people charged with attempted murder over a recent ambush at a detention facility in Texas.
Trump said ICE agents require anonymity to do their jobs safely in the current political climate, which has seen Democrats compare ICE agents to Nazis.
"These officers are doing a tremendous job," Trump said. "They're great patriots. If you expose them because of, you know, statements like have been made by Democrat and others on the left, usually mostly, I think, probably exclusively, you put them in great danger, tremendous danger."
Booker is notorious for engaging in flamboyant political theater, setting a new record for the longest Senate speech in history earlier this year, although the stunt was quickly forgotten.
In his latest bid for publicity, Booker is indulging a fantasy of being arrested by the Trump administration. But we doubt Trump cares enough about Booker to satisfy this desire of his.
Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to dissent in a case that broke in President Trump's favor, underscoring her outlier status on the Supreme Court.
The court's newest member has shown "judicial abandon," law professor Jonathan Turley said in response to her latest free-wheeling dissent.
"This is part of a signature of what's becoming a type of judicial abandon that Jackson has towards the power of these courts," Turley told Fox and Friends.
The Supreme Court's 8-1 ruling lifted a lower court injunction that blocked Trump from laying off federal workers. The majority was sending a message to lower courts to rein themselves in, Turley said.
"This is six months of delay. It could have been much longer," he said. "The court is signaling, ‘We’re going to be on you very quickly if you continue to do these kinds of orders.’"
"This is another shot across the bow to lower courts," Turley said. "They’ve got to knock this off. They've got to stop with these injunctions."
Jackson was the only one to dissent, and she wasn't shy about criticizing her colleagues over what she saw as their readiness to please Trump.
"For some reason, this Court sees fit to step in now and release the President’s wrecking ball at the outset of this litigation," she wrote. "In my view, this decision is not only truly unfortunate but also hubristic and senseless."
Liberal Sonia Sotomayor, a normally reliable anti-Trump voice on the court, signaled that she would withhold judgment of Trump's plans until they are formally presented.
"On this occasion, Jackson is alone," he told Fox and Friends. "She couldn’t even get Justice Sotomayor to sign on to this dissent," Turley said.
Jackson has begun to draw attention for scorching, polemical opinions in cases that turn out in President Trump's favor. Critics of her writings say they read like undergraduate essays, offering up sweeping arguments couched in glib rhetoric.
Her undisciplined approach has brought stinging criticism from her own colleagues on the bench. In a widely publicized clash, Amy Coney Barrett mocked Jackson' sweeping embrace of judicial supremacy and her indifference to the work of legal analysis, which Jackson dismissed as "legalese."
“We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary,” Barrett wrote.
It has been observed that Jackson is by far the most talkative justice during oral arguments. She's clearly very opinionated, and that's fine, but maybe she would have fit in better at CNN or MSNBC.
The Supreme Court has cleared President Trump's efforts to dramatically downsize the federal workforce.
In an emergency ruling issued Tuesday, the highest court in the land rebuked a district judge who tried to stop Trump's mass layoffs at federal agencies. Those firings can now proceed, pending a legal battle.
“Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling is another definitive victory for the President and his administration. It clearly rebukes the continued assaults on the President’s constitutionally authorized executive powers by leftist judges who are trying to prevent the President from achieving government efficiency across the federal government,” White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement.
A district judge in San Francisco had frozen Trump's executive order calling for "reductions in force" at federal agencies, which was accompanied by a joint memo from the Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management implementing the directive.
In a short unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court lifted the injunction, finding Trump is likely to succeed on the argument that his order is lawful.
"Because the Government is likely to succeed on its argument that the Executive Order and Memorandum are lawful—and because the other factors bearing on whether to grant a stay are satisfied— we grant the application. We express no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan produced or approved pursuant to the Executive Order and Memorandum," the justices wrote.
The decision adds to a winning streak for Trump, who has received a string of favorable Supreme Court rulings upholding his executive power over immigration and other matters.
The Trump administration had blasted the district court's injunction, which required congressional approval before mass layoffs, as an affront to the president's authority over the executive branch.
"It interferes with the Executive Branch's internal operations and unquestioned legal authority to plan and carry out RIFs [reductions in force], and does so on a government-wide scale," Solicitor General John D. Sauer wrote to the Supreme Court.
The only justice to dissent from the Supreme Court's ruling, Ketanji Brown Jackson, accused her colleagues of "enthusiasm for greenlighting this President’s legally dubious actions in an emergency posture."
"This executive action promises mass employee terminations, widespread cancellation of federal programs and services, and the dismantling of much of the Federal Government as Congress has created it,” she wrote.
In a short concurring opinion, Sonia Sotomayor agreed with Jackson's view that federal restructuring must adhere to constraints set by Congress, but Sotomayor noted that Trump's order explicitly calls for restructuring to be “consistent with applicable law." Sotomayor withheld judgment, since Trump's specific agency plans are not currently in front of the court.
"[W]e thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law," Sotomayor wrote. "I join the court's stay because it leaves the district court free to consider those questions in the first instance."
The non-profits and labor unions who challenged Trump lamented the Supreme Court's decision as a "serious blow to our democracy."
Zohran Mamdani's SAT score has been made public, exposing his background to further scrutiny as he faces accusations of lying about his race.
The reporting adds another layer to an affirmative action scandal that could overwhelm his upstart campaign to be mayor of New York.
The Ugandan-born radical received a 2140 out of 2400 on the standardized test, which was below the median for Columbia University students at the time when he applied for admission, according to journalist Christopher Rufo. The bombshell is sure to raise questions about whether Mamdani tried to compensate for a below-average application when he ticked the box for "African American."
"African American" was popularized by black civil rights leader Jesse Jackson in the 1980s, and the term is widely understood to describe black people descended from former slaves.
Mamdani was born in Uganda, a country in East Africa, but has Indian heritage on both sides of his family. His father, Mahmood Mamdani, is a professor at Columbia.
The New York Times reported that Zohran Mamdani identified as "African American" when he applied to the school. Although he was rejected by Columbia in the end, his critics say he created a false impression about his race to score points with university admissions.
The Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in 2023, but it was widely practiced in 2009 when Mamdani applied to Columbia. At the time, the median Columbia student scored between 2110 and 2300 on the Math, Critical Reading and Writing sections of the SAT.
Mamdani's score of 2140 was on the low end for Columbia and likely above the median for black students, according to Christopher Rufo.
Mamdani's history is coming under a microscope after he won the Democratic primary in New York's mayoral election.
New York mayor Eric Adams, a black Democrat who is seeking re-election as an independent, has accused Mamdani of exploiting African-Americans' painful history for personal gain.
“The African American identity is not a checkbox of convenience. It’s a history, a struggle and a lived experience. For someone to exploit that for personal gain is deeply offensive,” Adams said last week.
Mamdani has responded to his critics with word games, insisting he is “an American who was born in Africa," and also suggesting his identity is just too complex to be labeled.
"Even though these boxes are constraining," Mamdani said, "I wanted my college application to reflect who I was."
In addition to checking the "African American" box, Mamdani specified "Ugandan" on the application and also signified he has "Asian" heritage.
Kamala Harris commemorated July 4th with a social media post taking an obvious jab at her former election rival, President Trump. While her lament for the state of the nation was unsurprising, Harris raised eyebrows with a cropped image that left Joe Biden out of the picture.
Whether intentional or not, Biden's exclusion from the scene underscores how quickly he has become a pariah among Democrats who would like nothing more than to leave his presidency in the past.
The photo shows Harris and her husband Doug Emhoff watching fireworks from the White House balcony.
"This Fourth of July, I am taking a moment to reflect. Things are hard right now. They are probably going to get worse before they get better," Harris wrote.
"But I love our country - and when you love something, you fight for it. Together, we will continue to fight for the ideals of our nation," she added.
Social media users criticized the bleak tone of Harris' message, and what some saw as pettiness toward her former boss.
"At least take his arm out of the shot when you crop it," one user wrote.
Rumors of tensions between Biden and Harris circulated frequently during his presidency, and Biden's insistence that he would have beaten Donald Trump in 2024 - something Harris was unable to pull off - has only widened a rift between Biden and his former running mate.
Biden endorsed Harris to take his place on the presidential ticket after a pivotal debate performance that effectively ended his political career. Rather than bow out gracefully, Biden put up a spirited fight with his own Democratic party before suspending his campaign.
It's a fight that is still, in a way, ongoing. With his presidency in shambles, Democrats are dismayed that Biden is still making the rounds of the media to defend his tarnished legacy.
There is nobody in the party who is liable to take greater offense to Biden's attempted comeback than Harris, who believes, like many Democrats, that Biden dragged her down to defeat with his quixotic dreams of re-election and stubborn refusal to face reality.
While Democrats have focused on blaming Biden, Harris' candidacy also had serious flaws. The vice president floundered in one interview after another, despite the efforts of the media to prop her up, much as they had done with Biden before he fell from favor.
Months after his presidency ended in disgrace, Biden has quickly become a historical footnote, to the point where even his vice president apparently doesn't feel any obligation to recognize his existence. But Republicans are pressing ahead with a probe into Biden's cognitive decline, to the annoyance of Democrats, who are appealing to Americans' desire to move on. While many would rather forget the Biden era, Republicans argue the public is entitled to know who was governing on Biden's behalf during a chaotic time for the nation.
As for Harris, she is testing the waters to run for governor of California, but Democrats are far from enthusiastic about the prospect.
President Donald Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill has already sparked legal actions on both sides of the aisle, and on the pro-gun side, several gun rights groups have already taken action on an important part of Trump's bill.
According to Newsweek, multiple gun rights groups and organizations have filed suit in an attempt to "dismantle what is left of the National Firearms Act (NFA)" after Trump's bill was signed into law.
The president's signature legislation reduced the "NFA's excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and any other weapons."
The gun rights groups argue that the new legislation eliminates the tax and as a result, the NFA should be eliminated.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including Gun Owners of America (GOA) dubbed the lawsuit the "One Big Beautiful Lawsuit" in their efforts to quash what's left of the NFA.
Newsweek noted:
The National Firearms Act was first enacted in 1934 to regulates firearms considered the most dangerous and crack down on gangland crime in the Prohibition era.
The law had imposed a $200 tax on machine guns and shotguns and rifles with barrels shorter than 18 inches, and also required the federal registration of these types of firearms.
The tax on certain weapons has been a point of contention for decades. Trump's bill reduced the tax to $0, and gun rights groups are essentially saying that there's no longer a need for the NFA as a result.
However, the tax still applies to machine guns and explosive devices, but has been eliminated dthe "$200 fee that gun owners are charged when purchasing silencers and short-barreled rifles."
🚨BREAKING🚨
GOA, @GunFoundation, & allies just filed our One Big Beautiful Lawsuit to gut the NFA.
On this Independence Day our team does what Congress failed to do—fight for gun owners. pic.twitter.com/OoReiCg5I7
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) July 5, 2025
Newsweek added:
The authors of the NFA "left no doubt that the NFA was an exercise of the taxing power, and the Supreme Court upheld it on that basis," says the lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Users across social media weighed in on the lawsuit.
"Will the case be able to move forward before the $0 tax is in effect in Jan 1st 2025?" one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Y’all know this has to get to SCOTUS before the Democrats increase the tax next time they have a chance? This has to be expedited big time. If they put the tax back it kinda moots the case. I’m not a lawyer so I might be wrong but this is how I understand it."
Only time will tell if the gun rights groups prevail in their efforts.
There's no limit as to what lengths the left-leaning establishment media will go to in order to attack and harass members of the Trump administration, and DNI Tulsi Gabbard just revealed bombshell proof of that.
According to Breitbart, Gabbard revealed this week that Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima has allegedly harassed members of her staff, sending shockwaves through Washington, D.C.
Even if half of the accusations Gabbard revealed are true, the WaPo reporter should be in a world of trouble, as they've allegedly gone way too far in attempting to obtain sensitive information.
Gabbard said in a statement that the reporter has used "burner phones" and other deceptive practices to gain information from members of the ODNI staff.
DNI Gabbard wrote in a bombshell social media post that she believes the reporter has repeatedly harrassed her staff, and provided plenty of details.
"@nakashimae appears to be actively harassing ODNI staff. Instead of reaching out to my press office, she is calling high level Intelligence Officers from a burner phone, refusing to identify herself, lying about the fact that she works for the Washington Post, and then demanding they share sensitive information," Gabbard wrote.
It has come to my attention that Washington Post reporter @nakashimae appears to be actively harassing ODNI staff. Instead of reaching out to my press office, she is calling high level Intelligence Officers from a burner phone, refusing to identify herself, lying about the fact…
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) July 3, 2025
She continued, "Apparently, publishing leaked classified material wasn't enough for the Washington Post, so now they’ve decided to go after the Intelligence professionals charged to protect it."
Gabbard went on to describe the situation as a "political op."
She concluded that the outlet should be "ashamed," demanding that the paper's management "put an end" to the situation immediately.
Users across social media had plenty to say about the situation.
"She and her entire family (every generation available) should be arrested and stripped of citizenship. Summarily deporting journalists is the simple solution," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Sounds like grounds for arrest."
Only time will tell if the reporter in question will face any consequences if the allegations are true.
A young man from Massachusetts was shot dead in Washington D.C. just after starting his summer internship for a Republican congressman.
21-year-old Eric Tarpinian-Jachym was caught in the middle of an incident of street violence Monday night. He died at a hospital the next day.
The college senior had recently joined the staff of Kansas Rep. Ron Estes (R-KS), who shared his condolences in a statement.
"I will remember his kind heart and how he always greeted anyone who entered our office with a cheerful smile," Estes said in a press release. "We are grateful to Eric for his service to Kansas' 4th District and the country."
The authorities have a grainy video of the shooting, which began as an "altercation" between two groups of individuals, one of whom was also shot, a 16-year-old male. Tarpinian-Jachym was caught in the crossfire, along with an adult female bystander.
The female victim is in stable condition, and the teenage victim is being treated for a damaged spine. Police confirmed that Tarpinian-Jachym was not an intended target. He succumbed to his injuries at a hospital Tuesday.
According to police, the suspects emerged from a vehicle and started shooting at a second group outside the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. Police believe the teenage victim was involved in the exchange, the Washington Post noted.
The killing occurred on a street corner in Shaw, a rough neighborhood in the generally affluent northwestern quadrant of D.C., which contains many of the city's safest and most desirable areas.
“We believe the two groups had an [earlier] altercation that did not result initially in gunfire,” D.C. Police Chief Pamela A. Smith said at a press conference.
Police have recovered the suspects' black Acura, but no arrests have been made yet. The police are offering $25,000 to anyone who can help them bring the perpetrators to justice.
The senseless killing highlights a continued crime problem in the nation's capital, where some members of Congress and their staffs have been victimized in brutal, random attacks.
There were 274 homicides in 2023, the city's highest murder rate in 25 years. While violent crime has fallen since then, the city has a long way to go: Tarpinian-Jachym was the 85th homicide victim this year, just a slight drop from 89 at the same time last year.
At a press conference Thursday, Democrat Mayor Muriel Bowser refused to comment on whether the intern's killing would spur political change. “Let’s stay on July Fourth,” she said.
Tarpinian-Jachym was a senior at University of Massachusetts at Amherst, where he was majoring in finance with a minor in political science. Lilliana Myers, who met him in a fellowship program with the conservative Fund for American Studies, said Tarpinian-Jachym was fun and ambitious.
President Trump has asked the Supreme Court to let him fire Democratic holdovers on the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
The three regulators, Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric, and Richard Trumka Jr., were all appointed by Joe Biden and have shown "hostility" to Trump's agenda, his lawyers told the Supreme Court. A district court in June ordered the Trump administration to reinstate the three regulators, who now make up the majority on the commission, after Trump fired them.
The Trump administration calls this another example of the judicial assault that has undermined Trump's authority since January, and they're asking the Supreme Court to stop the "court-ordered takeover" of the commission.
The three commissioners claim they are protected by federal law from being fired without cause. But Trump's Solicitor General John D. Sauer pointed to the Supreme Court's emergency ruling in Trump v. Wilcox, in which the court found the president "may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf."
The Supreme Court's May ruling allowed Trump to fire Biden appointees on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). In Wilcox, the justices echoed the Trump administration's concerns about executive power being undermined by rogue officials. As they wrote at the time, there is a greater risk in "allowing a removed officer to continue exercising the executive power than a removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty."
The Trump administration argues Wilcox should have stopped U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox from ordering a hostile takeover of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Maddox's ruling to reinstate the three Biden appointees was later upheld by an appeals court.
The district court effectively transferred control of the commission to individuals appointed by Trump's predecessor, despite Trump's "mandate of the people to exercise [the] executive power," Trump's Solicitor General John D. Sauer wrote.
"That plain-as-day affront to the President’s fundamental Article II powers warrants intervention now just as much as in Wilcox," Sauer wrote.
Upon their reinstatement, the Biden commissioners, who now make up a majority, "immediately moved to undo actions that the Commission had taken since their removal," Sauer wrote, resulting in "untenable chaos."
The Biden commissioners issued new policies contrary to Trump's agenda and fired staff Trump hired to enact his own policies. Biden holdover Richard Trumka Jr. - who was behind the infamous Biden effort to ban gas stoves - sent an email threatening staff to comply with the new majority's wishes.
"To the staff of the agenda planning committee, let me be clear: you are instructed to attend the meeting as usual," he wrote. "If you chose to ignore the directive of the Commission, I suggest you read the Court order and decide whether you want to personally violate it."
The Supreme Court dealt a major blow to activist judges last week with its ruling limiting nationwide injunctions, but the threat of an activist judiciary remains.
"It's outrageous that we must once again seek Supreme Court intervention because rogue leftist judges in lower courts continue to defy the high court's clear rulings," said White House spokesperson Harrison Fields.
"The Supreme Court decisively upheld the president's constitutional authority to fire and remove executive officers exercising his power, yet this ongoing assault by activist judges undermines that victory," he continued.
"President Trump remains committed to fulfilling the American people's mandate by effectively leading the executive branch, despite these relentless obstructions."