Breathtakingly Dumb - House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries Makes Worst Mistake of His Career
Law professor and Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley sharply criticized Virginia Democrats on Friday after the Supreme Court of Virginia struck down a proposed congressional map that would have heavily favored Democrats ahead of the midterm elections.
Turley made the remarks during an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity, hours after the court rejected the plan that critics said would have given Democrats an advantage in 10 of Virginia’s 11 congressional districts, Mediaite reported.
“I said this from the beginning, this will never, ever meet judicial scrutiny,” Hannity said. “Number one, the wording itself of the amendment was abusively biased. I think any objective person would say that, but that’s not even the main thing.”
Hannity argued the proposal failed because lawmakers did not follow Virginia’s constitutional procedures required to place such an amendment on the ballot.
“They have very strict constitutional procedures that they had to meet,” Hannity said. “They didn’t follow any of the procedures to get an amendment on the ballot, none of them!”
Turley agreed, saying the legal flaws in the proposal were significant and that Virginia historically has taken a stricter approach to redistricting than many other states.
“No, that’s absolutely right, Sean, and there was a host of problems, but the most glaring was that one,” Turley said. “Virginia was always the gold standard for gerrymandering. Virginia doesn’t like gerrymandering — makes it very difficult to do so.”
Turley said lawmakers attempted to rush the proposal through ahead of the midterms, but the state Supreme Court refused to approve it.
“So to get this through, they had to do a sort of bum’s rush to get this in before the midterm elections,” Turley said. “And the Supreme Court of Virginia said, ‘No, we’re not going to sign off on this.’”
Turley also targeted Gov. Abigail Spanberger, accusing her of abandoning earlier opposition to gerrymandering after taking office.
“Now, this was a face-planting of legendary size for Governor Spanberger,” Turley said. “She had previously assured voters that she was vehemently against gerrymandering.”
“And as soon as she was elected, she went to the hard left, and then asked and pushed through the most radical gerrymandering scheme in the country,” he added.
Hannity noted the campaign behind the proposal reportedly cost tens of millions of dollars, much of it fronted by a political action committee controlled by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. “Sixty-four million,” Hannity said during the exchange.
Turley argued the failed effort could politically damage Democrats in Virginia, particularly among independents and Republicans who viewed the proposal as an attempt to dilute their influence.
“In addition to the 64 million, they alienated half of this state,” Turley said. “A lot of Republicans and independents are not going to forget this.”
“They don’t view this as partisan; they view it as personal,” he continued. “You attempted to erase them in terms of representation.”
The discussion also turned to the national implications of the ruling and recent court decisions involving racial gerrymandering.
Hannity suggested Republicans could gain additional congressional districts nationwide as states revisit maps following Supreme Court rulings. Turley argued Democrats miscalculated by reopening the broader redistricting fight.
“This was just a breathtakingly dumb move by the Democrats,” Turley said. “When they began, when they went down this road, I wrote a column saying, you need to consider this because the Democratic states were already gerrymandered.”
Turley pointed to states such as California, Illinois and Massachusetts as examples where Democrats had already secured favorable district maps years earlier, limiting future opportunities for additional gains.
He also referenced the upcoming 2030 census and population migration trends benefiting Republican-led states.
“So the Democrats are looking at a colossal loss,” Turley said. “And I think that’s one of the reasons why they want to pack the Supreme Court and make radical changes to the constitutional system before it’s too late.”
Spencer Pratt SURGES POSTING VIRAL LA Animal Ad And THIS Happens As He NOW Leads Over Karen Bass FULL STORY: In a surprising twist in the Los Angeles mayoral race, reality TV star Spencer Pratt has surged ahead in the polls, challenging incumbent Mayor Karen Bass. As the election approaches, Pratt's campaign has gained momentum, resonating with voters through a viral animal welfare advertisement that highlights the plight of neglected animals in the city. This ad has sparked discussions about Bass's handling of the animal shelter crisis and homelessness in Los Angeles. With only days left until the election, Pratt's message is clear: he aims to bring about significant change by addressing these pressing issues. Meanwhile, Bass continues her campaign efforts, facing increasing pressure as the race tightens. The dynamics of this election have captured national attention, raising questions about celebrity influence in politics and the future of Los Angeles. - Trends.newsonline.biz
Spencer Pratt SURGES POSTING VIRAL LA Animal Ad And THIS Happens As He NOW Leads Over Karen Bass
In an unprecedented turn of events, the Los Angeles mayoral race has taken a dramatic twist as reality television star Spencer Pratt emerges as a serious contender against the incumbent mayor, Karen Bass.
The campaign has gained national attention, with Pratt wrapping up a media tour in New York City that has propelled him into the spotlight.
As the election date draws near, the race has become increasingly competitive, with recent polls indicating a neck-and-neck battle between Pratt and Bass.
Matt Finn, reporting from Los Angeles, highlights the tense atmosphere as both candidates ramp up their efforts to secure votes.
Karen Bass, the Democratic incumbent, has been actively campaigning, holding rallies and events to galvanize her supporters.
At a recent rally at the SEIU Union Building, Bass addressed her opponents, including Pratt, whom she referred to as a “TV reality star villain.”
Her remarks drew laughter from the crowd as she emphasized the importance of choosing a leader who truly cares for the community rather than a celebrity figure.
Bass’s campaign is focused on her experience and commitment to addressing the pressing issues facing Los Angeles, including homelessness and public safety.
However, Pratt’s campaign is gaining traction as he appeals directly to mothers and animal lovers, positioning himself as a candidate who will prioritize the needs of families and pets.
In a recent interview with Fox News, Pratt stated, “Moms are getting me elected because I’m saying, ‘Oh, as mayor, I’m going to enforce the law and make sure moms and kids can use their parks again.’”
He emphasized the need to combat illegal encampments and restore safety in neighborhoods, presenting himself as a candidate of change.
Pratt’s message resonates with voters who are frustrated with the current state of affairs in Los Angeles, particularly regarding homelessness and animal welfare.
His campaign has gained momentum thanks to a viral advertisement that highlights the plight of animals in the city’s shelters and on the streets, particularly in areas like Skid Row.
In the ad, Pratt draws a parallel between the unconditional love of dogs and the need for compassion towards all living beings, stating, “There’s a reason dog is just God backwards.”
He criticizes Bass for neglecting the animal crisis and vows to put an end to the suffering of animals in the city.
The advertisement has garnered significant attention on social media, with many praising Pratt for bringing attention to the issue of animal welfare.
As the polls tighten, Pratt’s campaign is reportedly outpacing Bass in fundraising, raising concerns for the incumbent as she intensifies her efforts to rally support.
Bass has been seen actively soliciting votes, providing instructions on how to vote and encouraging constituents to participate in the electoral process.
Amid the heightened competition, Pratt’s campaign continues to gain traction, with reports indicating that he has surpassed Bass in some polls, leading to a surge of excitement among his supporters.
With just days left until the election, the stakes are high, and the outcome remains uncertain.
Pratt’s campaign has sparked discussions about the influence of celebrity in politics and the potential for a reality TV star to become a legitimate political leader.
As both candidates prepare for the final push, the Los Angeles mayoral race is shaping up to be one of the most closely watched elections in recent history.
The implications of this election extend beyond Los Angeles, as it raises questions about the future of political leadership and the role of public figures in shaping policy.
In the coming days, voters will have the opportunity to make their voices heard and decide the future of their city.
With the election fast approaching, all eyes are on Los Angeles as the race unfolds.
As Spencer Pratt continues to gain momentum, the question remains: can a reality star truly lead a city, or will the political establishment prevail once again?
Regardless of the outcome, this election has captured the attention of the nation and may set the stage for future political dynamics in America.
The Los Angeles mayoral race serves as a reminder of the power of grassroots movements and the impact of public sentiment on the electoral process.
As the candidates make their final appeals to voters, the future of Los Angeles hangs in the balance, and the city awaits the decision of its residents.
