New College scores millions in Florida’s budget amid DeSantis revamp

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida GOP lawmakers this week supported the drastic changes Gov. Ron DeSantis is seeking to transform New College of Florida into a conservative-leaning school by agreeing to send more than $34 million to the school and backing a slate of controversial trustees who are now leading it.

The money is meant to provide scholarships for enticing potential students, help with building repairs and bolster school operations. The DeSantis-picked trustees, meanwhile, were confirmed by Republican state senators to run the school and have already made a noticeable impact on the Sarasota campus to the dismay of students, faculty and Democrats.

“We are investing in New College,” state Rep. Jason Shoaf (R-Port St. Joe), the House’s higher education budget chief, said on the floor Thursday. “With the new board, and the new direction, we want to … [invest] in their success so we have another great institution on our list.”

Florida’s annual legislative session proved to be a successful one for New College under the guidance of DeSantis, who in January appointed six new trustees to reshape the school as a “Hillsdale of the South” — a reference to the conservative Christian liberal arts college in Michigan. The moves contributed to the DeSantis administration’s fight against “wokeness” and “indoctrination” in the state’s higher education system, the subject of several high-profile reforms proposed during session.

To help carry out that mission at New College, GOP leaders in the Legislature are poised to send a historic level of cash there — even going above and beyond what DeSantis wanted.

All told, the school landed more than $34 million in the state budget lawmakers are on the cusp of finalizing this week.

The pot includes a specific $25 million carve-out, $10 million more than DeSantis requested, of which $5 million must be put aside for student scholarships. This comes in addition to a $15 million special budget allocation lawmakers approved earlier this year that New College is already using to offer $10,000 scholarships for prospective students.

New College also scored a further $9.3 million in a different funding pocket for remodeling two buildings.

Lawmakers are confident the cash infusion will help turn around a state university that has historically struggled with enrollment and lagged behind other schools in meeting the state’s performance standards. Three years ago, House lawmakers considered merging New College into Florida State University in part because of the cost of producing graduates at the school was higher compared to others.

“We’ve got to make it competitive with the other colleges — it’s been very difficult to do that,” Senate budget chief Doug Broxson (R-Gulf Breeze) told reporters Monday.

Interim school president Richard Corcoran pledged that the state funding will be used to “create a beautiful, unrivaled and preeminent public university.”

“For the first time in nearly 20 years, the state has appropriated a historic amount of funding to New College of Florida,” Corcoran, a former Republican House speaker and state education commissioner, said in a statement. “This is in stark contrast to the last few years when the legislature was considering merging the college because of its lack of performance.”

In addition to dedicating cash to the school, senators on Thursday granted final approval to the six trustees appointed by DeSantis to reshape new college. The trustees include Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist who has advised DeSantis on critical race theory, and Matthew Spalding, a constitutional government professor and vice president at Hillsdale College’s Washington, D.C., campus.

Although the group is only now being officially approved by the Senate, its members have already made a sizable mark on the Sarasota campus in five months, amid objections and protests from students and faculty.

One of their initial moves was ousting the school’s president and replacing her with Corcoran, who is earning a $699,000 annual salary. Since that first board meeting, the DeSantis trustees have dismantled diversity, equity and inclusion programs at New College — a possible sign of what’s to come at other universities under legislation that is currently awaiting the governor’s signature.

The trustees also recently denied tenure to five faculty members, a move that spurred one trustee — the faculty representative — to quit the board on the spot and later resign as a professor. And this week, the school fired its librarian, who said the termination seemed like a “deliberate and targeted attack on our students."

The New College appointees were approved by senators in a broad vote encompassing dozens of candidates from various boards. There were no comments from any lawmakers. Throughout session, though, Democrats have railed against the DeSantis picks, echoing concerns of students and faculty at New College, who suggest the trustees are unqualified and leading a “hostile takeover.”

“The new trustees at New College of Florida are dangerous to free speech and free thought — and the Florida Legislature is only emboldening their efforts to dismantle the future of Florida’s only public liberal arts university,” Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book (D-Plantation) said in a statement. “This rubber-stamp confirmation is yet another attack on higher education and academic freedom.”

But Republicans disagree and are advocating significant changes at New College to reverse years of poor performance.

“The governor is committed to getting New College refocused on academics and truth,” Bryan Griffin, press secretary for DeSantis, said in a statement. “We appreciate the legislature supporting this initiative and will continue to ensure Florida’s institutions of higher learning offer world-class, quality education.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/3dnOcLQ
via IFTTT

Read More

In Trump rape trial, both sides rest their cases

NEW YORK — Lawyers for Donald Trump and E. Jean Carroll, the woman who has accused him of raping her, both rested their cases Thursday in the civil trial over Carroll’s battery and defamation lawsuit.

Carroll called 11 witnesses since the trial started last Tuesday. Trump’s lawyers called none, and his lawyer said the former president waived his right to testify. But while playing golf in Ireland on Thursday, Trump told reporters he intended to return to the U.S. to “confront” Carroll at the trial.

Trump’s surprise declaration prompted U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, in the final moments of Thursday’s court proceeding, to grant Trump until Sunday evening to tell the court if he wants to testify in his own defense, a step that would require the judge to permit him to re-open his case.

The trial does not meet on Friday. If Trump does not testify, lawyers will make closing arguments on Monday, and then the case will go to the jury.

Trump has not attended the trial in Manhattan federal court — though jurors did watch parts of a videotaped deposition in which Trump denied knowing Carroll and defended his infamous comments about sexual assault in the “Access Hollywood” tape.

Carroll, a writer and former advice columnist, has accused Trump of raping her in a dressing room at luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s. Trump has denied the accusations, calling her story a “hoax” that “never happened.”

In Ireland on Thursday, Trump attacked both Carroll and Kaplan.

“I have to go back for a woman that made a false accusation about me and I have a judge who’s extremely hostile,” Trump told reporters while golfing in Doonbeg, County Clare, according to The Guardian.

“I’m going to go back, and I’m going to confront this woman. This woman is a disgrace and it shouldn’t be allowed to happen in our country.”

In court on Thursday, Kaplan told Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina that he would allow him until 5 p.m. on Sunday to make “a motion on behalf of Mr. Trump to reopen his case for the purpose — and the sole purpose — of testifying as a witness in this case.”

“I am not saying I will grant it,” Kaplan added. “If it is made, I will consider it.”

If Trump’s lawyer doesn’t file a motion by the deadline, the judge said, then “that ship has irrevocably sailed.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/b2mj3xA
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden is expected to tap Air Force chief to be nation’s next top military officer

President Joe Biden is expected to nominate Gen. C.Q. Brown, the Air Force’s top officer and the first Black person to lead any branch of the military, to succeed Gen. Mark Milley as the next Joint Chiefs chair, two people familiar with the discussion said on Thursday.

If confirmed, Brown would become the second Black Joint Chiefs chair in the nation’s history, after the late Colin Powell.

Biden hasn't given Brown the official stamp, and it's unclear when he plans to make an announcement, said the people, a Democratic lawmaker and a congressional aide familiar with the White House’s planning, both of whom were granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

“When President Biden makes a final decision, he will inform the person selected and then announce it publicly," a spokesperson for the National Security Council said when asked for comment. "That hasn’t happened yet.”

Brown’s reputation and command experience in both the Pacific and the Middle East made him the odds-on favorite to be Milley’s heir apparent dating back to the Trump administration. But his appointment seemed less of a sure thing in recent months, as the White House seriously considered Gen. David Berger, the Marine Corps commandant, for the top job.

He rose through the ranks as the sole Black pilot in classrooms filled with white men, an experience he spoke about in an emotional video after George Floyd’s death in the summer of 2020.

Those who know Brown say he has the right experience to keep the military focused on its top priority: China. Brown’s most recent command experience was in the Pacific, as chief of Pacific Air Forces.

Brown also commanded troops in the Middle East, as head of U.S. Air Forces Central Command, and was serving in Europe when Russia illegally annexed Crimea in 2014, as a director of operations for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration at U.S. Air Forces in Europe. He was confirmed unanimously by the Senate for his current role as Air Force chief of staff in August, 2020.

Brown would be the first Air Force officer to become Joint Chiefs chair since retired Gen. Richard Myers, who held the position until 2005, an almost 20-year drought.

If confirmed to the chairmanship, Brown would become the top military adviser to a commander in chief who’s balancing the China threat with the need to equip the Ukrainian military with munitions, drones, missiles and other high-end equipment. That mission is in a state of flux, as the U.S. and other Western allies pivot from sending their own stocks of weapons to replenishing their armaments back home — all while making sure Kyiv has enough weaponry to fight off Russia in the months ahead.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/9z7ys6r
via IFTTT

Read More

Opinion | Trump’s Election Denialism Is Already Winning

Presidents of the United States who have lost elections generally don’t go on to dominate their parties and win the office again.

Donald Trump has found a work-around, by denying he was defeated in 2020. This effort has been overwhelmingly successful among its target audience of Republican voters and has tilted the playing field of the 2024 nomination battle in his favor.

Trump has made himself the incumbent in exile, the sitting president in the hearts and minds of his supporters, the martyr of shadowy forces (so shadowy, in fact, that they can’t be readily identified) and the true heir chiseled out of his rightful throne by an unscrupulous pretender.

This creates a terrible dilemma for Trump’s opponents: How do you run against a defeated president without noting the highly relevant fact that he was, ahem, defeated?

A new CBS Poll underlines the dynamic. The top-line numbers, with Trump ahead of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis by 58 to 22 percent nationally, aren’t all that different from the latest Fox News poll of the Democratic race, with President Joe Biden leading Democratic candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., 62 to 19 percent.

CBS also asked what attributes Republicans would like to see in a nominee. Sixty-one percent want a candidate who says Trump won in 2020. That desire among Republican voters inherently favors Trump, since no one is going to be as adamant and outlandish in maintaining that Trump won than Trump himself.

Among voters supporting Trump, three-quarters say a reason that they are backing him is that he actually won in 2020.

It wasn’t crazy to think that this view would fade over time after the 2020 election, as passions cooled and as Republicans felt less defensive of the former president. Perhaps most Republicans don’t think that there was honest-to-goodness fraud in 2020, and instead merely believe the rules and the press coverage were unfair — in other words, their answers to pollsters should be taken seriously, not literally.

Even if this is so, it will still require finesse on part of Trump’s opponents when addressing 2020. And it may well be that Republicans are simply being literal.

Insisting the election was stolen and convincing his party of this claim has worked for Trump on multiple levels — first and foremost, as a salve to his ego; in the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, as the rationale for trying to overturn the result; and ever since, as the necessary condition for his come-back (if that’s the right word, since he never left).

Trump has ruled out of bounds one of the most telling critiques of him for Republican primary voters. Throwing at him that he lost a winnable election in 2020 should be the easiest criticism to make. It doesn’t require departing with him on substance or attacking his character. It needn’t involve condemning him for January 6. It should have, in theory, equal appeal to Trump fans and Trump skeptics, all of whom have a shared interest in defeating Biden. The argument can be swaddled in warm sentiments: “You did so much good and were such a brave fighter as president, Donald, so it’s a real shame you lost. But you did. And we can’t afford to lose again. Sorry.”

Trump’s contention that he actually won, and his intense bond with his supporters, creates the real possibility that making this case against him will boomerang, though.

On Trump’s terms, which are widely accepted in the party, admitting the legitimacy of the 2020 election marks someone as a sell-out to the establishment, a political moderate and a weakling rather than a fighter. It also constitutes an affront to Trump, and therefore a kind of personal attack.

The broad feeling among Republicans is that they don’t want to hear anything disparaging about Trump. In the same poll, CBS News asked what voters would want to see in the 2024 GOP nominee if he or she isn’t Trump. Only 7 percent said they want someone who criticizes Trump. Another 56 percent said they want someone who doesn’t talk about Trump, and 37 percent said they want someone who shows loyalty to him. A crushing total of more than 90 percent of Republicans want silence or acquiescence from a GOP nominee when it comes to his or her predecessor.

This makes trying to get by Trump in the GOP primaries not just a balancing act, but the political equivalent of performing Philippe Pettit’s walk between the Twin Towers while playing Yankee Doodle on a ukulele.

The presidential candidates opposing Trump have to choose whether to accept Trump’s version of 2020, to avoid talking about the matter, to dodge by saying the election was “rigged” without calling it stolen or to tell the truth. The temptation to pull up somewhere short of the last option will be strong, but it’s hard to see how anyone defeats Trump without going there.

If it’s accepted that Trump supposedly beat Biden in 2020, well, then, he’s basically owed another shot at it, and, as a two-time winner of presidential elections, there’s not much of a case that he has an electability problem.

DeSantis has talked lately of the GOP’s “culture of losing,” an oblique, if obvious reference to Trump. If the governor feels he has to pull his punches before he actually gets in the race, that’s understandable. To deal with this issue only indirectly would be a mistake, though. Trump alienated swing voters, lost his last election and has grasped at any conspiracy theory to try to cover his tracks. DeSantis attracted swing voters, won his last election and doesn’t have anything he needs to feel ashamed about. That’s an enormous difference, and it should figure prominently in the governor’s campaign.

Give Trump this: He doesn’t necessarily accept public opinion as it is but tries to shape it. Although there’d be widespread Republican doubts about the 2020 election no matter what he said, the belief that it was stolen wouldn’t be as deep and pervasive without his persistent (and deceptive) advocacy. He’s changed the landscape in his favor, and his opponents simply accept it at their peril.

For Trump to lose the nomination, what should be his chief vulnerability needs to be a vulnerability — and his Republican opponents must try to make it one.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/YGETQCe
via IFTTT

Read More

Is Justin Trudeau ready for the fight?

OTTAWA, Canada — Four thousand Liberals have two things top of mind as they huddle here for their biennial convention: Pierre Poilievre and the next election.

The Conservative is a feisty and unifying force who wants to be Canada’s next prime minister. He trounced the competition in last summer’s leadership race and mobilized thousands of party members as he heralded a new era of right-wing politics.

He fires up the Liberals, too.

Poilievre won’t physically be at the convention, but nor will he be far — fuel for chit chat at boozy receptions and the motivation for any strategizing that takes place. All of it forces a question, whether said out loud or not: Is Justin Trudeau ready for the fight?

The prime minister will make his case in a headline speech that opens the convention on Thursday night.

Greg MacEachern, a Liberal lobbyist and former Parliament Hill staffer, sums up the state of play using a well-worn adage most recently deployed by President Joe Biden at the White House Correspondents' Dinner: “Don’t compare me to the all-mighty, compare me to the alternative.” Top-line figures in a new poll from Abacus Data — 33 percent Conservatives, 31 percent Liberals — suggest an election today would be tight. Factor in the margin of error and the race between Liberals and Conservatives is a statistical tie.

But it’s the trends below the surface that should give party rank and file pause as they chatter away in the bars and backrooms of Ottawa. The negatives have worsened since the 2021 election: For the PM. For the government. And on the direction of the country.

Average voters appear to have lost the thread the Liberals are spinning.

“I don't get a sense that they have a clear understanding of exactly what the government's plan is,” says Abacus pollster David Coletto. “They probably hear things about battery plants and investments in a green economy — and I would suspect most people support that kind of thing, but they don't see a connection between those specific events and outcomes and the broader kind of story that the Liberals want to be able to tell.”

Overall, signs point to a likely Conservative win unless something changes.

Helming the party for roughly a decade, Trudeau has accumulated his share of baggage, something that would typically raise obvious questions of succession.

There was his family's holiday visit in 2016 to the island in the Bahamas owned by the Aga Khan. There was the time he allegedly pressured his justice minister to give a get-out-of-jail-free card to a Quebec-based engineering giant that faced bribery charges. There was the bombshell publication later in 2019 of photos in which Trudeau wore blackface.

More and more recently, Poilievre and his Conservatives are asking whether the three-term government is deserving of another.

But so far, few Liberals are talking openly about ending the Trudeau era and starting fresh. Broach the point with insiders, and they’ll all tell you the same thing.

“Justin Trudeau is a huge asset for the Liberal Party,” says MacEachern.

Even so, the convention also offers future leadership aspirants a chance to gladhand and expand their support base. Mélanie Joly, Canada’s foreign minister and rumored contender in a race down the road, is hosting a reception at a trendy bar.

She is also the opening act for Trudeau's speech on Thursday evening, where insiders expect a rousing call-to-action to energize the base.

As the convention opened, the Hill was abuzz with a Radio-Canada story that claimed the Prime Minister's Office told another potential aspirant, Defense Minister Anita Anand, to slow her roll.

How the party and its leaders communicate their message will be a constant refrain on and off the convention floor. The governing party has yet to earn much credit on some of the big issues it has shoveled money into fixing — the cost of living, child care, housing and health, for example.

The gathering poses plenty of opportunities to re-tune.

Dan Arnold, a former head of polling in the Prime Minister's Office who has attended every party convention since Paul Martin was elected leader in 2003, hails from Alberta — a traditionally weak spot for Liberals.

He says the confab offers delegates a chance to take their message directly to the party's powerbrokers. "It is good to have that prairie voice more in people's faces," he says, where they can have a "direct conversation in a hospitality suite with somebody in the PMO."

There is work to be done in the Prairies.

Labor Minister Seamus O'Regan reflected on the party's weakness in western provinces on stage at the Public Policy Forum's recent Canada Growth Summit. And he elaborated on his remarks about the 2019 federal election in an interview with POLITICO.

"The Liberal Party was thrown out of Alberta and Saskatchewan. We lost [Cabinet minister] Ralph Goodale in Wascana. That was big. And you really have to ask yourself, 'Well, what do we do?' " he said.

O'Regan, who served as Canada’s natural resources minister, acknowledges the political challenges of heralding a clean energy transition — especially in Alberta.

"Workers felt marginalized and patronized. You gotta watch that,” he said. “If you were driven to lower emissions in this country, if you really do believe that Canada can be a leader in this field, then workers are not 'that thing over there in that part of the country that we’ve got to kind of deal with.'"

The first in-person convention in four years will also offer delegates an opportunity to formally influence party policy. They'll debate 36 resolutions, including a pitch to boost annual defense spending to C$32 billion and "massively invest in renovating NORAD infrastructure."

Delegates will also debate lowering the voting age to 17 and introducing a guaranteed basic liveable income.

The government has spent considerable resources responding to the war in Ukraine, countering the Inflation Reduction Act's green subsidies, and checking off items on the confidence-and-supply deal with the NDP that keeps the minority-status Liberals in power.

Some backroom chatter will focus on pivoting a reactive policy agenda to a more proactive offer and an election platform.

Most Liberal delegates despise their freedom-evangelizing foe. But they acknowledge Poilievre’s uncanny ability to raise piles of cash in pursuit of ending Trudeau's time as prime minister.

The Conservative leader won’t be near the convention floor, but he’s still going to force some uncomfortable conversations.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/4A51Wpi
via IFTTT

Read More

Sinema and Tillis pitch two-year border patch as Trump-era policy expires

A Trump-era policy is set to expire next week, sparking warnings of an increase of migrants along the southern border. And now, a bipartisan pair of senators is trying to buy the Biden administration more time.

Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) are working on legislation that would grant a temporary two-year authority to expel migrants from the United States similar to what is currently allowed under Title 42, a law that permits the U.S. to deny asylum and migration claims for public health reasons, a Sinema aide told POLITICO.

The aide noted that a key distinction is that the extension being proposed by Tillis and Sinema, which was first reported by POLITICO, does not rely on a public health order, making it functionally different from the Trump-era program that Biden kept in place.

The legislation would provide protections for migrants whose return to their home countries would threaten their life, freedom, or expose them to torture. It also provides protections for migrants with acute medical needs, according to a Sinema aide.

The legislation would need at least 60 votes to pass the Senate, making it all but guaranteed that it won't pass before Title 42’s expiration, and it faces an uphill climb more broadly in a chamber that has struggled in recent years to find consensus on border and immigration issues.

And it comes as the House is set to vote on its own sweeping border and immigration proposal next week. But it’s not meant to be a response to that bill — with aides and senators involved noting that Sinema, Tillis and others are holding broader talks on a separate track — but instead is in response to the looming May 11 date for the expiration of the Trump-era authority.

The end of Title 42 has sparked fierce criticism from Republicans, as well as warnings from some Democrats who worry that the administration doesn’t have the resources positioned along the U.S.-Mexico border to be able to process an increase in migrants seeking entry into the United States.

Eleven Senate Republicans — including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — sent a letter to Biden Wednesday urging him to reverse course and keep Title 42 in place. Graham, in a press conference on Wednesday, compared the end of Title 42 to “being hit by a slow moving truck in Kansas."

"I'm asking them to find an acceptable substitute for Title 42," he added.

The administration had initially planned to end the Trump-era program on May 23, 2022. But the policy got tied up in a lengthy court battle as Republicans made an effort to keep the authority in place. The Biden administration then announced in February that the end of the Covid-19 pandemic public health emergency would also terminate Title 42.

But the issue is rife with potential political trip wires for the Biden administration, who faced public urging from Democrats over the past year to keep the program in place. Tillis and Sinema offered an amendment late last year that, among other provisions, would have extended Title 42 and boosted border funding. The proposal failed but got support from several senators up for reelection in 2024 in red and purple states: Sens. Sinema, Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).

Asked whether he would support a two-year expulsion authority similar to Title 42, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) told reporters on Thursday that he’s instead been “working on getting the resources” border officials need if Title 42 goes away.

“We’re looking at other options. Right now I’ve been focused on getting the resources they need for when May 11 comes,” said Kelly, who previously voted for the duo’s amendment last year.

Manchin, who like Sinema hasn’t yet announced if he will run for reelection, called the end of Title 42 a “shame” and appeared frustrated by Congress’ inability to legislate on the border.

“I think the border has to be secure, period. … It’s a disaster at the border,” Manchin said in a brief interview, asked about steps the administration or lawmakers should take.

The administration has been ramping up its response to the policy ending as they face concerns about being able to respond to a potential increase sparked by both the end of Title 42 and the upcoming summer season.

The administration announced late last month that it would establish immigration processing centers throughout Latin America to help slow down the number of migrants coming to the U.S.

And earlier this week the administration announced it would add another 1,500 active-duty troops to the southern border to deal with the influx of migrants expected with the expiration of Title 42.

The additional troops, which are being sent to fill a request from the Department of Homeland Security, will fill “critical capability gaps,” including detection and monitoring, data entry and warehouse support. They will be there for up to 90 days, after which military reservists or contractors will do the work.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/YUGNEus
via IFTTT

Read More

Trump will not present defense case in Carroll trial

NEW YORK — Donald Trump won’t present a defense case in a civil rape trial in Manhattan federal court, his lawyer said Wednesday.

Lawyers for the former president had been poised to call one witness in his defense — a psychiatrist — but that person proved unable to testify due to a medical issue, according to Trump lawyer Joe Tacopina.

Trump is being sued by E. Jean Carroll, a writer, for battery and defamation. Carroll alleges Trump raped her in a dressing room at luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s. Trump has denied the allegation, calling her claim a “hoax,” and saying it “never happened.”

Tacopina said earlier this week that Trump himself also won’t take the witness stand.

The former president hasn’t attended the trial, which began last week, but on Wednesday jurors did see a 20-minute portion of his videotaped deposition, recorded in October 2022.

On screen, Trump appeared somewhat sullen, answering questions with his arms folded on a table in front of him and his shoulders hunched. He called Carroll’s allegation “the most ridiculous, disgusting story.”

“It’s just made up,” he said.

On Wednesday, the jury also heard testimony from a clinical psychologist, Leslie Lebowitz; Carroll’s sister, Cande Carroll; and Natasha Stoynoff, a writer who has alleged Trump sexually assaulted her in 2005.

During Stoynoff’s testimony, jurors were shown a clip of the “Access Hollywood” tape, a recording from 2005 in which Trump boasts, “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” adding: “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”

Carroll’s lawyers are expected to show another portion of the deposition to jurors Thursday.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/d5bkq9H
via IFTTT

Read More