CNN’s “Inside Politics,” host Dana Bash pushed House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries aggressively on the ongoing government shutdown and questioned his party’s role in resolving the impasse.
Bash repeatedly challenged Jeffries’s narrative that Democrats were ready to negotiate, suggesting instead that the real paralysis lay within Democratic leadership’s own demands.
At one point, Bash pressed Jeffries: “You say you want to talk, but Speaker Johnson apparently hasn’t been given permission to meet with you — have you tried knocking on his door, walking down the hall?”Jeffries responded that Republicans had cut off communication, arguing that informal meetings would not be fruitful without willingness on the part of congressional leadership.
But Bash would not let the exchange end there.
She pressed whether the Democratic proposal — which included extending Affordable Care Act subsidies and reversing GOP healthcare cuts — was negotiable, or whether it was a nonstarter.Jeffries maintained that Democrats remained open to bipartisan solutions but insisted Republicans had gone “radio silent.”
The tension escalated when Bash framed a question in a blunt, almost confrontational tone: “You could probably take a few steps… have you tried that?”
At several junctures, Bash’s questioning seemed designed to corner Jeffries into accountability, undermining his attempt to shift blame entirely to Republicans.
She also raised the inconsistency of Jeffries’s position, pointing out that what he called “negotiable” may not actually be open to compromise if Democrats hold firm on all their demands.
Jeffries attempted to shift the blame back, saying Republicans had repeatedly tried to repeal the ACA and were unwilling to extend subsidies without structural changes.
Bash followed up by asking whether he would support a one-year extension of those subsidies if Republicans would allow it.
Jeffries demurred, saying he was not ready to accept that narrow fix without broader action.
Through the interview, Bash adopted a skeptical posture toward Jeffries’s narrative — something that conservatives seized on as evidence that even legacy media are now pushing back harder on Democratic talking points.
Conservatives applauded Bash’s refusal to act as a passive conduit for official messaging. One commentator called the moment a turning point in media deference.
Social media users echoed the sentiment: “Even leftist CNN’s Bash shuts down Jeffries’ shutdown whine — caught off guard with brutal challenge.”
The exchange also undercut Jeffries’s argument that Democrats were trying to negotiate in good faith.
Bash sought to expose whether those overtures were real or rhetorical cover.
From a conservative vantage, this marked a welcome line of questioning from mainstream media — one that forces Democratic leaders to defend their posture rather than allowing them to dominate the narrative unchallenged.
The interview ended without a clear breakthrough, but the dynamic was telling: more pressure on Jeffries, less room for him to stick to the standard talking points.
In the coming days, this exchange may be referenced by Republicans as evidence that Democratic leaders aren’t being upfront about what they’re willing or unwilling to give up in negotiations.
Newsom’s Polling Among Key Constituencies Lags Behind Vance: Report
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, often criticized by Republicans for his state’s high taxes and strict pandemic policies, has emerged as an early frontrunner for Democrats in the 2028 presidential race, according to recent polling.
A Yahoo News/YouGov survey conducted Sept. 2 shows Newsom leading the Democratic field with 21% support among registered Democrats. But Vice President JD Vance, expected to be the Republican nominee, is already eyeing opportunities to exploit Newsom’s weak spots in national polling.
The survey found Vice President Kamala Harris close behind at 19%, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at 12%, and former Transportation
Secretary Pete Buttigieg at 10%. With Newsom at the top of the early field, analysts say it is important for conservatives to begin assessing both his strengths and vulnerabilities ahead of 2028.
Although Newsom has maintained a lead in Democratic primary polling for several months, his national approval ratings remain weak. A Sept. 9 Cygnal survey of 1,500 likely voters found him with a net approval rating of -5, with 38% approving and 43% disapproving.
The survey also highlighted Newsom’s struggles with key constituencies critical to winning swing states. His weakest numbers came from non-college voters, who disapproved of him by a 21-point margin, 48% to 27%.
That gap is wider than Vice President Kamala Harris’s 13-point loss among non-college voters in 2024, underscoring a long-standing Democratic concern over eroding support within this demographic in battleground states such as Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, the Daily Torch
reported, citing the data.
Swing voters could pose a significant challenge for the California governor. A recent survey shows him trailing by 12 points among this group, with 41% disapproving and 29% approving of his performance.Independents and non-affiliated voters narrowly backed Kamala Harris over Donald Trump in 2024, 49% to 46%. Presently, a record 43% of Americans identify as independents, surpassing both Democrats and Republicans at 28% each. Analysts warn that Newsom’s lack of appeal among swing voters could seriously undermine his prospects in 2028 as more Americans move away from the two major parties.
Another constituency Newsom is struggling with is men, notably college-educated men, who voted for Kamala Harris over President Trump by a single percentage point in 2024, 49 percent to 48 percent according to National Election Pool
data. College-educated men disapprove of Newsom 49 percent to 46 percent.
Another hurdle for Newsom is winning over highly active voters — those who participated in all four of the most recent major elections. While this group has leaned left in recent cycles, they remain unconvinced by the California Democrat. His approval rating among high-propensity voters is slightly underwater at 44%, compared to 46% who disapprove.
Newsom also faces skepticism among some black voters, particularly those who attend religious services regularly. The survey found that 16% of black Democrats who worship monthly or more view him unfavorably, a potential challenge in early primary states such as South Carolina, the data show.
“The next presidential election is just over three years away and a great deal can shift before then, but early polling hints at Newsom’s weak spots with key constituencies, particularly non-college voters and independents,” the outlet reported.
“If 2028 results in a standoff between Gov. Gavin Newsom and Vice President JD Vance, there is also an opportunity for Vance to increase his margins with highly active voters and religious Black voters according to the survey. Newsom leads the Democratic primary for now, but he has serious deficits as a candidate beyond the liberal coastal states,” the Daily Torch concluded.
Newsom sparked controversy on Saturday after his team posted a cryptic message directed at Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Newsom’s press team issued a statement that many interpreted as a threat toward Noem.
The post read, “Kristi Noem is going to have a bad day today. You’re welcome, America.”
Several X users quickly compared the message to ominous comments made online before the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Also, acting US Attorney Bill Essayli in California referred the matter to the Secret Service.
The political ascent of New York progressive Zohran Mamdani has hit an immediate roadblock following his high-profile threat against President Donald Trump. The newly elected official, whose victory was fueled by aggressive rhetoric, quickly drew the attention of the former President, who issued a stark warning regarding Mamdani’s political viability and the financial realities of New York City.
The confrontation highlights the deep ideological chasm currently fracturing New York politics and underscores the precarious position of a new administration that must now reconcile radical spending promises with a rapidly shrinking tax base.
Mamdani’s victory acceptance speech was characterized by highly aggressive rhetoric, including a direct challenge to the former President.
In his speech, Mamdani issued a combative warning: “So hear me, President Trump, when I say this: To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.”
This rhetoric, which some New York Democrats deemed “crazy,” was an immediate attempt by Mamdani to solidify his image as the uncompromising anti-Trump figurehead.
Donald Trump responded to the threat with characteristic scorn, combining a historical critique of Mamdani’s ideology with a clear political warning.
The Ideological Dismissal: Trump framed Mamdani’s progressive platform as inherently flawed, stating: “For a thousand years, communism has not worked. It just, communism or the concept of communism has not worked. I tend to doubt it’s going to work this time.”
The Political Threat: Crucially, Trump used his potential influence over federal funding as leverage, cautioning that Mamdani “has to be a little bit respectful of Washington, because if he’s not, he doesn’t have a chance of succeeding.”
Trump cemented the power dynamic, stating that Mamdani should be reaching out to the federal government, not issuing threats.
Mamdani’s ambitious campaign promises—including “city-run grocery stores, free buses, universal child care, a rent freeze”—rely on massive financial resources, which are rapidly eroding due to an ongoing taxpayer flight from New York.
The newly elected mayor’s platform is built on the promise of making goods and services “free” by aggressively taxing the wealthy and corporations. However, this model faces immediate challenges:
Shrinking Tax Base: The overall New York area has seen a mass exodus of an estimated one million people since the COVID era, with approximately 700,000 fleeing New York City specifically. These departing residents are the very high-earners whose taxes Mamdani needs to fund his agenda.
The Double Bind: Trump’s warning about federal purse strings becomes doubly important. Mamdani needs federal money to compensate for the fleeing tax dollars, yet his confrontational style risks antagonizing the political figures who control that funding.
A major moment of vulnerability for Mamdani came immediately after the election when he quickly pivoted from campaigning to fundraising. Despite his platform of providing “free stuff,” his transition team issued an urgent call for donations:
The U-Turn: Mamdani’s campaign, having previously told supporters to “stop sending us money” during the election phase, abruptly reversed course: “You can start again. This transition requires staff, research, and an infrastructure… So, I hope you’ll make a donation.”
The Perception: This rapid move to ask for money immediately after securing a win fuels the skepticism that his socialist platform is unsustainable without constant, urgent financial infusions.
In a clear demonstration of political awareness, Mamdani quickly pivoted his focus to optics and political coalition building, recognizing that women were the driving force behind his victory.
The Mandate:
Election data shows Mamdani won with 84% of women aged 18 to 29 and 65% of women aged 30 to 44. This overwhelming support group was critical to his success.
The Response: Mamdani immediately unveiled an all-female transition team, including highly experienced leaders like former First Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer, Lena Khan (FTC), and Melanie Hartzog (Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services).
The Statement: This move is not merely about optics; it is a strategic statement aimed at validating the constituency that delivered his victory and signaling a departure from the “old boys club rules” of previous administrations.
The aggressive nature of Mamdani’s political debut mirrors a concerning trend in American politics where ideological purity and confrontation are prioritized over compromise and civility, as evidenced by the recent victory of Virginia’s Jay Jones.
The Unacceptable Rhetoric: Jay Jones, who won the Virginia Attorney General race, was exposed for past messages where he advocated for violence against political opponents’ children, suggesting that their death would make Republicans change their views.
The Shocking Indifference: Despite this psychotic and totalitarian rhetoric being made public, a significant portion of Virginia voters were either unconcerned or deemed the comments “not disqualifying.”
The Lesson: This event highlights the deep polarization where many political actors view the opposition not just as rivals, but as enemies who deserve to be harmed, validating the fears that political discourse has devolved into total warfare.
The Mamdani-Trump clash and the unsettling Jay Jones victory underscore the ideological and financial turbulence facing the country.
Mamdani’s strategy is clear: embrace the confrontation and consolidate the progressive base. However, this ideological purity comes with a high price tag. With the tax base fleeing and federal funds uncertain, Mamdani faces the immediate challenge of proving that his socialist ideology is a viable governing philosophy and not simply a recipe for fiscal disaster.
As the political mask “slowly comes off,” the true test for Mamdani will be whether he can transform his combative campaign rhetoric into stable, successful governance, or if New York City is simply entering another chapter of ideological chaos.
A retired New York City financier once known as the “right-hand man” of billionaire George Soros has been indicted on charges of abusing women.
According to the New York Post, Howard Rubin, 70, allegedly used his Manhattan penthouse as a “secret sex dungeon” at the center of the case.
In a statement released Thursday, the Justice Department said Rubin and his assistant, Jennifer Powers, have been charged with trafficking and transporting women across state lines for sexual
The newly elected mayor’s platform is built on the promise of making goods and services “free” by aggressively taxing the wealthy and corporations. However, this model faces immediate challenges:
Shrinking Tax Base: The overall New York area has seen a mass exodus of an estimated one million people since the COVID era, with approximately 700,000 fleeing New York City specifically. These departing residents are the very high-earners whose taxes Mamdani needs to fund his agenda.
The Double Bind: Trump’s warning about federal purse strings becomes doubly important. Mamdani needs federal money to compensate for the fleeing tax dollars, yet his confrontational style risks antagonizing the political figures who control that funding.
A major moment of vulnerability for Mamdani came immediately after the election when he quickly pivoted from campaigning to fundraising. Despite his platform of providing “free stuff,” his transition team issued an urgent call for donations:
The U-Turn: Mamdani’s campaign, having previously told supporters to “stop sending us money” during the election phase, abruptly reversed course: “You can start again. This transition requires staff, research, and an infrastructure… So, I hope you’ll make a donation.”
The Perception: This rapid move to ask for money immediately after securing a win fuels the skepticism that his socialist platform is unsustainable without constant, urgent financial infusions.
In a clear demonstration of political awareness, Mamdani quickly pivoted his focus to optics and political coalition building, recognizing that women were the driving force behind his victory.
The Mandate:
Election data shows Mamdani won with 84% of women aged 18 to 29 and 65% of women aged 30 to 44. This overwhelming support group was critical to his success.
The Response: Mamdani immediately unveiled an all-female transition team, including highly experienced leaders like former First Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer, Lena Khan (FTC), and Melanie Hartzog (Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services).
The Statement: This move is not merely about optics; it is a strategic statement aimed at validating the constituency that delivered his victory and signaling a departure from the “old boys club rules” of previous administrations.
The aggressive nature of Mamdani’s political debut mirrors a concerning trend in American politics where ideological purity and confrontation are prioritized over compromise and civility, as evidenced by the recent victory of Virginia’s Jay Jones.
The Unacceptable Rhetoric: Jay Jones, who won the Virginia Attorney General race, was exposed for past messages where he advocated for violence against political opponents’ children, suggesting that their death would make Republicans change their views.
The Shocking Indifference: Despite this psychotic and totalitarian rhetoric being made public, a significant portion of Virginia voters were either unconcerned or deemed the comments “not disqualifying.”
The Lesson: This event highlights the deep polarization where many political actors view the opposition not just as rivals, but as enemies who deserve to be harmed, validating the fears that political discourse has devolved into total warfare.
The Mamdani-Trump clash and the unsettling Jay Jones victory underscore the ideological and financial turbulence facing the country.
Mamdani’s strategy is clear: embrace the confrontation and consolidate the progressive base. However, this ideological purity comes with a high price tag. With the tax base fleeing and federal funds uncertain, Mamdani faces the immediate challenge of proving that his socialist ideology is a viable governing philosophy and not simply a recipe for fiscal disaster.
As the political mask “slowly comes off,” the true test for Mamdani will be whether he can transform his combative campaign rhetoric into stable, successful governance, or if New York City is simply entering another chapter of ideological chaos.
A retired New York City financier once known as the “right-hand man” of billionaire George Soros has been indicted on charges of abusing women.
According to the New York Post, Howard Rubin, 70, allegedly used his Manhattan penthouse as a “secret sex dungeon” at the center of the case.
In a statement released Thursday, the Justice Department said Rubin and his assistant, Jennifer Powers, have been charged with trafficking and transporting women across state lines for sexual
encounters with Rubin.
A bank fraud charge was lodged against Rubin “in connection with misrepresentations made to a bank in the course of financing Powers’s mortgage for the Texas home of Powers and her husband,” according to the
“It is in this secret sex dungeon that Rubin, now 66, is accused of having committed violent acts and sexual assault against a number of women, including actual Playboy playmates. A civil trial, with six of his seven alleged victims seeking at least $18 million, is scheduled for November,” The Post reported.
Among other alleged acts of deprivation, The Post reported that Rubin has been accused of “beat[ing a woman’s] breasts so badly that her right implant flipped” — an injury so severe that, according to court documents, her “plastic surgeon was not even willing to operate on her breasts.”
Prosecutors allege Rubin paid women up to $5,000 for BDSM encounters. However, several women contend they never consented to the level of violence and humiliation they say he carried out during those sessions.
Another plaintiff claims that, while Rubin allegedly had her bound in his ‘dungeon,’ he told her “I’m going to rape you like I rape my daughter” and then, according to the complaint, forced sex on her against her will.
“Rubin has three children with his estranged wife, including at least one daughter,” The Post added.
“I thought he was a nice guy. He was a nebbishy Jewish guy and totally normal. I was surprised to hear about him having that apartment [with a sex dungeon],” a trader who worked with Rubin at Soros Fund Management, created by billionaire investor George Soros, told The Post.
“As alleged, the defendants used Rubin’s wealth to mislead and recruit women to engage in commercial sex acts, where Rubin then tortured women beyond their consent, causing lasting physical and/or psychological pain, and in some cases physical injuries,” Joseph Nocella Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York said in the DOJ release.
“Today’s arrests show that no one who engages in sex trafficking, in this case in luxury hotels and a penthouse apartment that featured a so-called sex ‘dungeon,’ is above the law, and that they will be brought to justice. Human beings are not chattel to be exploited for sex and sadistically abused, and anyone who thinks otherwise can expect to find themselves in handcuffs and facing federal prosecution like these defendants,” he added.
“For many years, Howard Rubin and Jennifer Powers allegedly spent at least one million dollars to finance the commercial sexual torture of multiple women via a national trafficking network. The defendants allegedly exploited Rubin’s status to ensnare their prospective victims and forced them to endure unthinkable physical trauma before silencing any outcries with threats of legal recourse,” stated FBI Assistant Director in Charge Christopher G. Raia.
“The FBI will continue to apprehend any trafficker who sexually abuses others for twisted gratification,” he added.
“This was not a one-man show. While Rubin dehumanized these women with abhorrent sexual acts, Powers is alleged to have run the day-to-day operations of the enterprise and got paid generously for her efforts,” said Harry T. Chavis, Jr., IRS investigative special agent in charge.