Category Archives: Donald Trump

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) As the South Dakota Department of Health celebrates 50% of South Dakotas population age 16 or older receiving at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, Rep. Dusty Johnson called for more people to sign up.

Nearly a week after getting his vaccine, Johnson told KELOLAND News people should continue to look into the science and analyze the data about the vaccines themselves.

Johnson said Sanford Health officials told him last week, theres only been 22 reactions to more than 116,000 shots given.

That shows how safe this vaccine is, Johnson said. Showing people the facts, thats always a way to increase confidence.

CBS News published a story about Michigan polling on the vaccine, which showed 50% of Republicans and 25% of Democrats answered No or not sure about getting vaccinated.

A poll from Kaiser Family Foundation published at the end of March showed less people would wait and see when a COVID-19 vaccine would be available to them. The poll noted Republicans and white evangelical Christians were the most likely to say they will not get vaccinated, with almost 30% of each group.

South Dakotas lone lawmaker in the U.S. House of Representatives said leaders in America are leading by example on the importance of getting a vaccine.

Whether you trust Donald Trump, or Joe Biden, or Kristi Noem or Dusty Johnson, weve all gotten the vaccine, Johnson said. Every single one of us acknowledged that this is the right thing to do for us. Its the right thing to do for the United States of America.

Lets not the economy take another hit. Lets get rid of COVID-19. That means everybody getting the vaccine.

As of Monday, the South Dakota DOH was reporting 303,040 persons, not including federal data from Indian Health Service or Veteran Affairs, have received at least one dose of the vaccine.

Indian Health Service said as of April 6, 24,981 patients have received at least one dose of the vaccine. As of Monday, Veteran Affairs is reporting 16,620 persons are fully vaccinated.All combined, it equals 344,641 persons in South Dakota having at least one dose.

Johnson said recent history shows Americans are moving backwards in understanding science.

With regard to the vaccine, weve probably regressed in our knowledge base if anything, Johnson said. Just 10 years ago it was acknowledged that vaccines were among the greatest healthcare, medical breakthroughs in the history of humankind.

Johnson pointed out smallpox, serious infectiousdisease, was eliminated because it was a vaccine people around the world were willing to take.

We all want to get back to normal. That happens most quickly when people are willing to be part of a team and get the vaccine, Johnson said.

On Monday, President Joe Bidens Press Secretary Jen Psaki answered questions about how the federal government is working with states to encourage vaccinations.

Psaki said the administration is focused on fact-based messages with local communities. She said $3 billion has been invested in community-based organizations, which include faith-based organizations.

She noted theres PSAs on TV shows like the Deadliest Catch and added the administration is engaged with NASCAR and country music TV.

Were looking for a range of creative ways to get directly connected with white conservative communities, Psaki said. We wont always be the best messengers, but were still trying to meet people where they are, but also empower local organizations.

Read more:

Whether you trust Donald Trump, or Joe Biden, or Kristi Noem, or Dusty Johnson, weve all gotten the vaccine - KELOLAND.com

What do US presidents do once they leave the White House? Barack Obama kite-surfed with Richard Branson. Jimmy Carter returned to his peanut farm and found that it was $1m in debt. George W Bush got into painting.

Its early days, but Donald Trumps post-presidential life has been just like his presidency: non-traditional. Aside from setting up an eyebrow-raising new website, and releasing wannabe tweets as official statements, hes spent most of his time inside his new home at Mar-a-Lago, the giant and exclusive resort he owns in south Florida.

We know very little about what hes doing there, and after the unavoidable spectacle of his presidency, many people are probably comfortable with that. But for those still interested we decided to take a virtual holiday there, and look inside the gilded walls of Mar-a-Lago via the only way we could: Instagram.

Using the Instagram page that collects all the public posts geotagged Mar-a-Lago, anyone can comb through thousands of photos and videos to see whats been happening inside its gilded walls, and catch glimpses of what Trump has been up to.

We know already that he recently crashed a wedding, giving a speech where he railed against Biden and China before raising a toast to himself, and then the happy couple. But thats not everything. Heres what we found from guests photos:

Taking photos with fans is something all past presidents do. But there is still something unique about how Trump lives at his own resort, wakes up in the morning and walks throughout his new home taking photos with its paying members.

In one video uploaded recently from Mar-a-Lago, Trump suddenly appears as a couple pose for engagement photos. He was also spotted wandering around a car show on 21 March hosted at the resort. And in March he appeared at a fundraiser for the Big Dog Ranch Rescue, a charity linked to Lara Trump that was recently in the news for spending almost $2m at Trump-owned properties in the last seven years.

Trump has been mingling with Mar-a-Lago members for many years now. During his early presidency he even crashed a wedding right after receiving news of a North Korean missile test, while hosting the former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe. Trump told the wedding guests that he had bumped into the newlyweds earlier and tried to cajole Abe over to them. I said to the prime minister of Japan, I said, Cmon Shinzo, lets go over and say hello. Theyve been members of this club for a long time. Theyve paid me a fortune.

The House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, was the first top Republican to signal the party wasnt abandoning Trump after the attack on Capitol on 6 January, when he appeared in a photo with Trump at Mar-a-Lago three weeks later.

This seemingly opened the gates for Republicans to make the pilgrimage to Palm Beach and hobnob with Trump. Many of them have uploaded their photos with him to Instagram, or can be spotted in photos uploaded to the app. This includes the 25-year-old House representative from North Carolina Madison Cawthone, the former press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and the Republican extremist from Georgia Marjorie Taylor Greene.

On 13 March a delegation of Alabama Republicans also presented Trump with a framed resolution at Mar-a-Lago, which declared him one of the greatest and most effective presidents in the 245 year of this republic.

In many ways Mar-a-Lago is just another US venue where people dont wear masks. Given the lack of mask-wearing at Trumps White House, where he hosted at least one super-spreader event in the Rose Garden, its not surprising that many Mar-a-Lago guests are also mingling mask-free.

But theres something still striking about seeing so many maskless people inside a building owned by a former president who contracted Covid himself, had access to the best information about it, and whose mismanaged response to the crisis saw half a million Americans die from the virus.

In one video uploaded on 13 March, the charity fashion show for Big Dog Ranch, (called Wine, Women and Shoes) is in full swing inside a huge function room. The room seems to be filled with hundreds of people. Another photo shows a slide projected on to a screen that reads More than 47,000 lives saved since 2008, referring of course to the dogs.

None of the guests seem to be wearing masks, but the staff serving them are. Some may be vaccinated, but Covid is still very much a risk at Mar-a-Lago. The charity event took place just six days before the resort was partly closed due to an outbreak among its staff.

Unless you count the Trump family, Sylvester Stallone is the only celebrity Ive been able to find in photos taken at Mar-a-Lago. From the date and caption it looks like he was there having dinner on 6 March when he took a photo with a fellow guest.

In another photo uploaded less recently on 20 December, we can also see Roger Stone having a good time with another guest. Their caption on the photo reads Only positive comments please he was far nicer than someone else!

You may have seen the photo already of Trump posing with Stephen Miller in his Mar-a-Lago office its by no means exclusive to Instagram.

Seemingly set up to project an all-American work ethic (that we know from the last four years Trump doesnt have), whats most striking about the photo is the bottle of coke hidden behind Trumps phone. Two days earlier, Trump had called on his supporters to boycott companies speaking out about Georgias new voting law which, funnily enough, included Coke.

Originally posted here:

Whats Donald Trump up to these days? I tried to find out via Instagram - The Guardian

FormerPresident Donald Trumplost a great deal of money during his four years in theWhite House, new data shows.

Forbes released its annual billionaires list on Tuesday, which found the former president ranked at1,299. Last year, he was ranked at 1,001 and in 2019 at 715.

Trumps net worth was roughly $3.5 billion in 2017, according to the publication, dropping to $2.1 billion in 2020 and ending up around $2.4 billion in 2021.

Trump made it clear during his presidency on numerous occasions that he was not getting richer in the White House.

In 2019, for example, the former president estimated that it had cost him anywhere between $2 billion and $5 billion to serve as president.

"I wouldve made a fortune if I just ran my business I was doing it really well," Trump said at the time.

Trump still is the only billionaire to serve as president, Forbes noted.

Read more at FOXBusiness.com.

Former President Donald Trump endorsed Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson on Thursday, April 8, but the senator hasn't said if he's running for re-election.

Read the original here:

Donald Trumps net worth dropped by one-third during his presidency - FOX 6 Milwaukee

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Florida, U.S. February 28, 2021.

Octavio Jones | Reuters

Former President Donald Trump's political action committee has amassed a war chest of more than $85 million as he builds an operation meant to take on his enemies and possibly fuel another run for president in 2024.

Save America, Trump's leadership PAC, heads into the second quarter with that gargantuan sum of cash on hand, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter who declined to be named as the fundraising data has not been made public.

The PAC raised more than $30 million from late November through December, and finished last year with $31 million on hand, Federal Election Commission filings show.

This person did not say how much the PAC raised in the first quarter, noting that it files disclosures semiannually, which means the public likely won't see details on Trump's fundraising success until the summer. The total also does not include the cash on hand for other Trump-affiliated PACs, including the Trump Make America Great Again Committee.

Trump has significant resources to deploy as he looks to influence the 2022 midterm elections, when Republicans will try to make inroads in both the House and Senate. Democrats currently control both chambers of Congress.

Trump, however, has targeted Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and promised to back GOP "primary rivals who espouse Making America Great Again and our policy of America First." The former president turned on McConnell after the senator said Trump bore responsibility for the mob of his supporters that stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Trump is expected to speak at the Republican National Committee's spring retreat this weekend. He has not ruled out running for president again.

Meanwhile, Trump has become involved in the battle brewing between Republican lawmakers and corporations who have come out against a new law in Georgia that critics say restricts voting. The former president falsely claimed widespread fraud cost him the 2020 presidential election in the state, and urged Georgia officials to overturn President Joe Biden's win there.

"It is finally time for Republicans and Conservatives to fight backwe have more people than they doby far! Boycott Major League Baseball, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, JPMorgan Chase, ViacomCBS, Citigroup, Cisco, UPS, and Merck," Trump said in a statement Saturday.

Major League Baseball announced a day earlier that it would pull its All-Star Game out of Atlanta after Georgia's latest voting bill was signed into law by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp. MLB is reportedly moving the game to Colorado.

Trump's $85 million haul also arrives as he is reportedly looking to create his own social media network after being banned by both Twitter and Facebook.

More:

Former President Trump's PAC has $85 million on hand as he prepares for midterms and possible 2024 run - CNBC

Two writers discuss why satirizing Donald Trump is exceedingly difficult.

Will Mann: At the height of the 2016 presidential primary, right as there was the collective bafflement that hey, the host of The Apprentice could actually win the Republican nomination, comedy website Funny or Die released Donald Trumps The Art of the Deal: The Movie, a 50-minute presentation where Johnny Depp, under heavy prosthetics, played the then future-president. The film was released exclusively to the Funny or Die website on February 26, 2016.

I remember watching it and loving it at the time. It felt subversive, unapologetically in-your-face, and very much deliberately mocking its central target for ridicule. Moreover, at the end of it, Depps Trump comes from the future of 2017 to tell his 1980s counterpart that he will indeed become president one day. It seemed like a ludicrous joke at the time but instead became an eerie, all-too-prescient prediction, making the movie stand out even as comedy sought to capitalize on the Trump administration for the four years of its existence.

The film claims to be a TV movie-of-the-week written, directed, and starring Trump himself, and was considered long lost (it was preempted by Monday Night Football in 1988Trump was furious) until director Ron Howard, in a cameo, explains how he came across the original film reels. It turned up at a yard sale outside Phoenix, Arizona, Howard explains, claiming he had to physically wrestle it from a nice woman named Jenny, [who was] much stronger than she looked [and] very persistent. Once the presentation is over, Howard once again speaks to the camera and says Wow. That wasawful. I mean hauntingly bad, it kind of wants to make me rethink my passion for filmmaking. You know, we should probably pretend that this film, and in fact Donald Trump, never even existed.

The film features an all-star cast that includes Patton Oswalt as Merv Griffin; 30 Rocks Jack McBrayer as Trump Tower architect Der Scutt; Kristen Schaal as the voice of Trumps receptionist Gloria (whom Trump refers to solely as Deborah); Jacob Tremblay as the typical 80s kid Trump recounts his life story to; The Fonz himself, Harry Winkler, as former-New York City mayor Ed Koch; Christopher Lloyd as Back to the Futures Doc Brown; and even two of the hosts of my favorite podcast, How Did This Get Made?: Paul Scheer and Jason Mantzoukas. Depp as Trump walks a rotating cast of curious young boys through his life story and career, as the film recounts many of Trumps pre-presidential controversies, including the destruction of priceless Art Deco sculptures at the future site of Trump Tower and Trumps feud with former NFL commission Pete Rozelle (Andy Richter).

It all just felt like a minor coup at the time, more than just a gimmick. It leaned into its own inherent ridiculousness, such as when ALF was depicted as being the best man at Trumps wedding to first wife Ivana (Michaela Watkins). Funny or Die was sticking it to Trump through the power of satire. We simply thought the movie would be a chance to capitalize for what seemed to be a brief time in U.S. history where we were captivated by the prospect of Donald Trump actually running for president. They even got Kenny Loggins, known for classic 80s movie theme staples like Footloose, Im Alright from Caddyshack, and Danger Zone from Top Gun, to contribute a typically corny and 80s-sounding theme song. The song itself is surprisingly catchy and very evocative of the era, as well as the type of self-promotion Trump himself would indulge in.

Now, re-watching the movie 5 years after the fact feels like youre seeing a template for how many in the comedy field would address Trump in the four years of his administration that followed. I think its fair to say that you agree with that assessment?

Rigel Kaufman: If anyone is nave enough to think that the era of Donald Trump parody is finally over, is mistaken. The horse was beaten to glue long before Saturday Night Live sunk its anti-Midas clutches into it, yet the beating will continue long into the future. In The Art of the Deal: The Movie, that prophecy is spun, and the left-leaning politic of almost every creative outlet in the United States is showcased. As Donald Trump still lives and breathes, and his presence in a headline still gathers eyes, he will be a leading topic. Dissidents and the politically disillusioned are looking for a way to upset things, the easiest way being supporting things that establishments tell them to hate. Most Trump coverage is not positive. In other words, Hollywood probably helped to get Donald Trump elected, and continues to ensconce him as a pariah-Marilyn-Monroe.

Parody operates on a bell curve of exaggeration vs payoff. On the far left side of the curve, we have Johnny Depp as Donald Trump offering a child a steak that he pulled from his desk. On the far right side of the curve, him defending Hitler from criticismhard-hitting stuff, I know. And somewhere in the middle are the three or four actually funny moments in The Art of the Deal: The Movie, far too few to justify its 50-minute runtime, but enough to examine the framework that every attempt at Trump satirization has obeyed, and why fundamentally these have all been failures, both comically and as political rhetoric:

Impression: Donald Trump talks and looks a certain way, lets copy him.

Yuge, appending Ok? to the end of sentences, talking in exaggeration, gesticulating drawing a wire tight with both forefingers and thumbs, and your standard-fare haircut, suit, and tan gags. At once an elementary form of comedy and the only sphere in which the jokes ever land, because they at least mandate timing.

Current Events: Donald Trump did or said an outlandish thing recently, lets bring that in somehow. There are endless, endless lists of forced and genuine controversy, including but not limited to: dumping his container of koi food during the Shinzo Abe visit; being a Russian spy; saying 7/11 instead of 9/11; releasing his tax returns; golfing too much; enough people complaining about one of the businesses he owns; being impeached; refusing to condemn certain groups; condemning certain groups; saying something provocative to the press, etc. Strictly referential humor and every reference has had all novelty tapped. Nobody on either side of the aisle laughs at these jokes, they simply nod or shake their head with the same solemn frown.

Political Browbeating: Donald Trump is defined by a shortlist of politically incorrect stances, some of which are more or less topical right now; we must contest one or all of these. About as funny as government programming, these are the face-the-camera moments where the Trump fiction commits suicide ad nauseam. Whereas current events at least have the boon of the few days between when they happen and when theyre exhausted, these public service announcements are harped into the same pit of oblivion as words repeated out loud too many times: meaningless combinations of syllables that convey an idea independent from the words they form. If there were ever a panacea to clever humor, this would be it.

Tagline History: Quotable tidbits that still persist in the public memory: small loan of one million dollars. Sloganeering that tries and fails to be weaponized, instead coming off as cheap disparagement or catch-phrasing. Filler.

Name-calling: Self-explanatory.

Mann: I think that how you tie this in to how Trump has been depicted these past four years is very interesting. I think part of what made The Art of the Deal: The Movie stand out when it was initially released was that you had someone who was already a very well-known celebrity running for president. We already knew who he was, the type of person he was, and most, but not all, of the controversies that would be generated on the campaign trail. A media narrative didnt have to adapt or invent a character (think about what The Onion did in terms of depicting Joe Biden, whose jokes and characterization still follow him even now during his actual presidency), or ridicule a candidate once we started to understand who they were, a la Tina Feys depiction of Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live.

But what I appreciated about the movie at the time was that it acknowledged that Donald Trump was this bigger-than-life character who comes off, in both the movie and in real life, as a sleaze-ball and a doofus. He also feels intrinsically tied to the 1980s in particular, this sort of Gordon Gekko come to life, the embodiment of the decade of excess itself. The corny Kenny Loggins song, the 80s movie-of-the-week vibe, the constant appearances of celebrities and characters from pop culture, it all resonated because it felt like the movie was making fun of the way that Donald Trump saw himself.

But unfortunately, now it feels like the movie was playing into Trumps own narrative ever so slightly in order to upend it, make fun of it, and point out its inherent ridiculousness. For example, its odd to have scenes featuring Depp-as-Trump dancing and rapping with actors portraying the iconic 1980s rap group the Fat Boys. Then again, the man himself danced to a spoof of Drakes hit song Hotline Bling while hosting Saturday Night Live during his actual presidential run. Go figure.

But, as you previously noted, the movie also displays some of the difficulty in depicting a character as well-known and, to put it mildly, flawed as Trump. The meta-joke of the movie is that its a vanity project for him, and that notion is committed to fully. But that formula also prevents any sort of self-reflection or nuance. The Trump as depicted in The Art of the Deal: The Movie, is, for all intents and purposes, a caricature. That proves to be difficult to reconcile when, in a few short months, he becomes the new reality we are all collectively forced to deal with. His inherent ridiculousness was already pointed out even before this movie came out, and people, literally tens of millions of voters, still fell for it. What exactly does that say about the point the movie was trying to drive home?

In re-watching the film for the first time since its initial release recently, it definitely did not hold up as well as I was expecting, becoming a victim of diminishing returns. Moreover, the whole thing feels rather pass at this point. For example, it feels weird that ALF shows up, but Rudy Giuliani doesnt. Sure, there are moments that still ring true, such as when Trump keeps replacing the boys who ask him about his life story until he gets a white one. But, if anything, the movie feels like its the final capstone on who Trump used to be, pre-presidency. Trump-as-president was a different beast altogether, which makes this satire feel more toothless in retrospect. Your thoughts?

Kaufman: The problem which most people have already realized subconsciously, is twofold:

All of the political tropes are taken verbatim. Because the creators of this and every other Donald Trump parody have decided that political signaling is the most important part of their satire, modifying his positions too much for the sake of comedy muddies the waters. So instead, these are played as straight as possible. No minds are being changed, instead, positions are being fortified on both sides. And naturally, these arent funny. There is no subversion outside of occasional wordplay.

All of the non-political tropes are played up. The problem is Donald Trump is already an exaggerated person, and too much exaggeration is counterproductive to both humor and rhetoric. Trumps linguistic quirks are funny, having him shout them over a megaphone is annoying. Trumps appearance is funny, turning him into an orange clown with an afro is unneeded. Trump already throws out lots of childish insults, you dont need to have him call people stinky doo-doo heads.Humor, like most good things, is a difficult balancing act where things from the extremes of the bell curve must be pulled towards the middle to be made clever instead of hackneyed or bombastic. Parody and satire live or die by the subtle jabs that sneak up on you. Occupying a dissonant perspective that attempts to both persuade via ridicule and entertain via ridicule is not only impossible but will actively hamper your ability to do either. Perhaps the entire industry has by chance forgotten how to be funny and fallen prey to the same traps and tired frameworks all at once for five continuous years. It seems unlikely.

The individual problem is Donald Trumps humor potential is maximized when you hold up a mirror, and even then, the comedy was never a grand trove. The larger problem is humor demands novelty, subversion, and timing, which the Trump satires actively dispose of. The grand problem is that political humor has been circling the toilet for over a decade because all opinions both formal and farcical are coming almost exclusively from one quadrant of the political compass, in which the list of topics that are verboten is ever-growing, yielding content hegemony and the simultaneous politicization and sanitation of fictionat the peril of, at best, consumability, at worst, artistic freedom to be even slightly provocative.

If you're interested in writing for International Policy Digest - please send us an email via submissions@intpolicydigest.org

Read more here:

Revisiting 2016's 'Donald Trump's The Art of the Deal: The Movie' and the Comedy of the Trump Era - International Policy Digest

TipRanks

After a volatile first quarter, Q2 has kicked off in style, and the major indexes sit at or hover near all-time highs. The government bond market has also been steadying as yields have pulled back after rising higher earlier in the year, soothing investor fears that inflation could get out of hand. Moreover, the economic recovery seems to be gathering steam at a faster pace than anticipated. We had been expecting the data to improve about this time, and early signals are that the recovery is absolutely on track, said Hugh Gimber, J.P. Morgans global market strategist. This is the period where the forecast of a strong recovery in growth is starting to look more like the fact of a strong recovery in growth. Against this backdrop, the analysts at J.P. Morgan have pinpointed 2 names which they believe are set for strong growth in the year ahead; both are expected to handsomely reward investors with at least 80% of gains over the coming months. We ran them through TipRanks database to see what other Wall Street's analysts have to say about them. Tencent Music Entertainment (TME) Well start in China, where Tencent Music Entertainment is the offspring of Chinas giant online venture company, Tencent, and Spotify, the Swedish streaming company that makes music and playlists easy. Tencent Music has seen consistently strong sales and earnings for the past year, with the top line growing year-over-year in each quarter of 2020. The Q4 report showed $1.26 billion in the top line, the highest in the last two years, along with 12 cents per share in earnings, up 33% year-over-year. Strong streaming revenue, which showed 29% growth, helped drive the results. And, Tencent Music, through its variety of apps, is the top music streaming service in the Chinese online market as shown by the 40.4% yoy increase in paid subscribers during Q4. In its quarterly results, the company reported 4.3 million net new users in Q4, to reach 56 million active premium accounts across its apps. That said, the stock has pulled back sharply recently, as like many other high-flying growth names, worries regarding an overheated valuation have come to the fore. But pullbacks often spell opportunity, and covering the stock for JPM, Alex Yao notes the strong subscription growth, as well as the potential in the companys other businesses, online ads and long-form audio, for monetization. We believe TME is entering a healthy development cycle with successive growth engines: 1) music subscription remains the core revenue driver with consistent paying ratio improvement, 2) ads revenue ramps up quickly, and 3) active investments in long-form audio initiative, which could become a new growth driver in 2022 and afterwards," Yao noted. To this end, Yao puts a $36 price target on TME, suggesting a one-year upside of 84%, to back his Overweight (i.e. Buy) rating on the stock. (To watch Yaos track record, click here) Overall, TME has a thumbs up from Wall Street. Of the 11 reviews on record, 7 are to Buy, 3 are to Hold, and 1 says Sell, making the analyst consensus a Moderate Buy. The shares are priced at $19.50, and their $30.19 average price target implies an upside of 55% for the months ahead. (See TME stock analysis on TipRanks) Y-mAbs Therapeutics (YMAB) The next JPM pick were looking at is Y-mAbs, a late-stage clinical biopharma company with a focus on pediatric oncology. The company is working on the development and commercialization of new antibody-based cancer therapeutics. Y-mAbs has one medication Danyelza approved for use to treat neuroblastoma in children age 1 and over, and a broad and advanced pipeline of drug candidates in various stages of the clinical process, as well as five additional products in pre-clinical research stages. Having an approved drug is a holy grail for clinical biopharmaceutical companies, and in 4Q20 Y-mAbs saw considerable income from Danyelza. The company announced at the end of December that it had agreed to sell the Priority Review Voucher for the drug to United Therapeutics for $105 million. Y-mAbs will retain the rights to 60% of the net proceeds from the sale, under an agreement with Memorial Sloan Kettering. Also in December, the company announced a license agreement with SciClone. The partnership gives Y-mAbs and Danyelza an opening for treating pediatric patients in China. The agreement includes Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau, and is worth up to $120 million for Y-mAbs. The company has entered other agreements making Danyelza available in Eastern Europe and Russia. Danyelza is Y-mAbs flagship product, but the company also has omburtamab in advanced stages of the pipeline. This drug candidate saw a setback in October last year, when the FDA refused to file the company's Biologics License Application, proposed for the treatment of pediatric patients with CNS/leptomeningeal metastasis. Y-mAbs has been in steady communication with the FDA since then, with a new target date for the BLA at the end of 2Q21 or early in 3Q21. These two drugs one approved and one not yet form the basis of the JPM outlook on this stock. Analyst Tessa Romero writes, Our thesis revolves around the de-risked nature of the pediatric oncology pipeline. Our recent KOL feedback is enthusiastic about use of lead asset Danyelza in patients with high-risk neuroblastoma (NB). For second lead asset omburtamab in NB metastatic to the central nervous system (CNS/LM from NB), while the Refuse to File last year and subsequent regulatory delays were certainly disappointing, we still see a high probability of approval for the product in the 2Q/3Q22 timeframe Looking ahead, Romero sees an upbeat outlook for the company: Coupling our anticipation of a healthy launch for Danyelza, with regulatory/clinical momentum expected in the near- to mid-term, we see shares poised to rebound and see an attractive buying opportunity at current levels. The analyst puts a $52 price target on YMAB shares, implying an upside of 86% for the year ahead, and supporting an Overweight (i.e. Buy) rating. (To watch Romeros track record, click here) Overall, the Wall Street reviews break down 3 to 1 in favor of Buys versus Holds on Y-mAbs, giving the stock a Strong Buy consensus rating. The shares have an average price target of $61.25, suggestive of a 121% upside potential this year. (See YMAB stock analysis on TipRanks) To find good ideas for stocks trading at attractive valuations, visit TipRanks Best Stocks to Buy, a newly launched tool that unites all of TipRanks equity insights. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the featured analysts. The content is intended to be used for informational purposes only. It is very important to do your own analysis before making any investment.

See the rest here:

The National Archives won't be able to host Donald Trump's tweets on Twitter - Yahoo Tech

Donald Trump speaks during a farewell ceremony at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on Jan. 20.

Photographer: Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg

Photographer: Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg

Donald Trump and his lawyers should pay more than $65,000 in legal fees to Milwaukee County and face additional sanctions for filing a baseless lawsuit trying to overturn the result of the presidential election, Wisconsins biggest metropolitan area told a judge.

The former president never had a valid reason to sue to toss out Wisconsins 3.3 million votes, a long-shot effort that would have paved the way for the states GOP-dominated legislature to appoint a slate of electors more favorable to Trump, the county said in a filing Thursday in federal court in Milwaukee.

Trump never offered any legal or factual basis for his breathtaking request, and none exists, the county, a heavily Democratic area in a swing state, said in the filing. The relief he sought was entirely baseless and amply justifies the imposition of sanctions.

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers filed a similar request last week seeking $145,000 in legal fees incurred by the state. Trump and his allies sued unsuccessfully more than 60 times as they tried to overturn election results in battleground states like Wisconsin, which narrowly went for Joe Biden. A federal appeals court affirmed the rejection of Trumps Wisconsin case, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied review.

Read more: Trumps Effort to Hijack Wisconsin Election Could Cost Him

Also on Thursday, former Trump campaign attorney Sidney Powell asked a judge to deny a similar request for sanctions against her in a separate suit she filed in Wisconsin to overturn the election result. Powell represented a Trump voter in that case, which also failed. The state is seeking $106,000 in legal fees from Powell, saying her case alleging a vast voter-fraud conspiracy involving a complicit voting-machine company, foreign hackers and communist money was too far-fetched to justify it being filed.

But Powell, who was ditched by the Trump campaign after going public with the extent of her conspiracy theory, argues the request for fees comes too late and affronts common sense.

Defendants motion is, in essence, a request that the Court conduct a review and issue a decision on the merits of Plaintiffs evidence without trial or evidentiary hearing, Powell said. While the case was pending, Defendant aggressively opposed the Court hearing the evidence at all, much less deciding its merits.

Read More: Powell Sued by Dominion for $1.3 Billion Over Fraud Claims

(Updates with filing by Sidney Powell)

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.

View post:

Milwaukee Asks to Sanction Donald Trump Over 'Baseless' Election Lawsuit - Bloomberg

In this April 26, 2012 file photo, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio speaks during his weekly news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington.(Photo: Jacquelyn Martin, AP Photo)

John Boehnerleft Washington, D.C.over five years ago when he retired as Speaker of the House but he took his grudges with him.

The West Chester Republican's memoir due to be released on Tuesday, "On the House," slams Republicans, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump, among others. He also recounts the many times he tangled with other politicians and gives the public a peek behind the curtain at the cut-throat world of congressional politics.

It's once again made Boehner the talk of the political world, at least for this week.

Here are five takeaways from his memoir:

He put the responsibility for the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol on the shoulders of former President Trump, saying he's responsible for "that bloody insurrection."

"Trump incited that bloody insurrection for nothing more than selfish reasons, perpetuated by the (expletive) he'd been shoveling since he lost a fair election the previous November," Boehner wrote.

Trump's "refusal to accept the result of the election not only cost Republicans the Senate but led to mob violence."

Boehner uses the terms "crazy," "nutty," "Looneyville," and "Crazytown," when describing Congress during his time as speaker from 2011 to 2015.

He particularly questions the sanity of the current Republican Party.

Boehner describes the Republican Party's metamorphosis during the rise of Fox News and just before the election of Donald Trump as president.

"I dont think Ronald Reagan would recognize the Republican Party today," Boehner wrote.

A picture of Boehner's memoir, On the House(Photo: Scott Wartman/The Enquirer)

He has particular disdain for Republicans elected during the 2010 midterms, whom he describes as kooks and crazies.

"You could be a total moron and get elected just by having an R next to your name and that year, by the way, we did pick up a fair number in that category," Boehner wrote.

He described Fox News founder Roger Ailes as paranoid, with safe rooms to protect him from government spies and guards that were "combat-ready."

At one point he likened leading the Republican-controlled House to driving a "clown car."

"I pushed for spending cuts and entitlement reforms when they were unpopular," Boehner wrote. "Now I was being denounced by the talk show circuit as if I were a hippie with flip flops and beads plotting a socialist takeover of America."

While in office, Boehner found himself at odds with the new breed of Republicans, who frequently tried to oust him as speaker. Boehner wrote he's glad he's no longer in Congress.

"I dont even think I could get elected in todays Republican Party anyway," Boehner wrote."Just like I dont think Ronald Reagan could either."

Boehner in 1998 supported impeaching President Bill Clinton on perjury charges. It's a vote he wishes he could have back.

In my view, Republicans impeached him for one reason and one reason only because it was strenuously recommended to us by one Tom DeLay, Boehner wrote of the Texan who served in the party's House leadership. Tom believed that impeaching Clinton would win us all these House seats, would be a big win politically, and he convinced enough of the membership and the GOPbase that this was true."

Boehner directs much venom at Republican "bomb throwers" who he sees as more interested in appearing on Fox News than getting something accomplished. He singles out Texas Sen. Ted Cruz for some of his harshest criticism.

"There is nothing more dangerous than a reckless a**hole who thinks he is smarter than everyone else. Ladies and gentlemen, meet Senator Ted Cruz," Boehner wrote.

Read or Share this story: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/09/john-boehner-slams-donald-trump-republicans-and-talks-clinton-impeachment-memoirs/7155438002/

Original post:

Boehner blames Trump, regrets impeaching Clinton and other things we learned from his memoirs - The Cincinnati Enquirer

Charles R. Kessler, Crisis of the Two Constitutions: The Rise, Decline and Recovery of American Greatness (New York, NY: Encounter Books).488 pp; $29.95.

When woke mobs spun the outrage at George Floyds killing in late May into carte blanche for widespread lawlessness, Charles Kessler took to the New York Post calling out the 1619 Riots. Would labeling as a 1776 Riot the Capitol storming on January 6 overdo the cynicism?

Nikole Hannah-Jones, in all fairness, owned up to inciting more than the spray-painting of 1619 on Confederate monuments. The eponymous New York Times projects lead writer tweeted her delight at Kesslers implicating headline (itd be an honor), resting all lawbreaking by Antifa and BLM on the high moral ground of just redress. Kessler and the so-called West Coast Straussians at the Claremont Institute, on the defensive mission of Recovering the American Idea, have instead everything to lose from a descent into right-wing violence. Their embrace of Donald Trump as a nuclear option to reaffirm Americas Founding in the face of woke revisionism is looking increasingly like the gambit Kessler himself reckons it to be in Crisis of the Two Constitutions (2021). Whether he woke on January 7 to pangs of compunction depends on the line drawn between the anti-establishment instincts he happily egged on in Trump and his presidencys insurrectionary last gasp. One toll, though, is beyond contestthe nationalistic celebration of the Founders statesmanship that Claremont exists to impart is, for more Americans than pre-2016, stained by radicalism and tribalization.

Kessler founded Claremont on the eve of Ronald Reagans 1980 landslide to keep alive the thought of Leo Straussthus the arcane epithet. Yet the Institutes parallel crusade to vindicate the Founding from 1619-type indictments only became a conservative brand name in 2016. Its a brand synonymous with a bet that Trumps populist Americanismas famously schemed in the Flight 93 Election essay by Kesslers colleague Michael Antoncould provide a once-in-a-lifetime impetus to uphold the Constitution and the fundamental goodness of our country, inspiring a bulwark presidency against the administrative state and the woke rewriting of history. Since January 7, Trumpisms liberal executors in the media have been searching for mob inciter fingertips, predictably. But for even some of its East Coast allies, the bill for Claremonts 2016 gamble is coming due, with Joe Bidens victory hiking the interest. The healing presidencys day-one woke pandering has smacked of retribution, with collateral damage including the 1776 Commission on patriotic education that Kessler advised and Biden has since disbanded.

Kessler has anthologized his lifes key essays in the sweeping fashion of a magnum opus, but the books rollout in Trumps aftermath is eerily apposite. The result is an authoritatively sober assessment of Americas interlocked constitutional ills from a Claremonsters viewpoint and, right until his futile contestation of the November result, of Trumps own significance for the Right, which the author blames for ducking the hard cultural and constitutional questions that propelled his 2016 run. Yet the dead angles that Kessler indicts in mainstream conservatism are not the usual. Beyond realigning away from libertarian economics and neoconservative foreign policy, the cultural deplorables of Trumpian imagery, he diagnoses, cried out for an almost romantic, wrapped-in-the-flag patriotism, uncompromising with the elite post-nationalism of even some mainstream Republicans. Before Trumps primary win sent GOP worthies on a dizzying soul-search, Claremont was reputed as the solitary rock that progressives march through the liberal arts couldnt wash away, a nucleus of academic counterculture in the Californian wilderness. It has since been joined by other thriving bastionsHillsdale, run by the 1776 Commissions President and Claremont founder Larry P. Arnn, and Claes Ryns Center for the Study of Statesmanship at Catholic University, to name just two. Yet Claremont remains its own species in Conservative Inc., synonymous with a purist suspicion of fellow scholars who deserted the sinking ship of academia for comfortable think-tank jobs supplying spreadsheets and boilerplate journalese for the policy fight du jour. Kesslers mission all along has been keeping the tablets, as biblically metaphorized in another compendium co-authored with William F. Buckley, Jr. on Reagans last year in office.

Granted, august credentials were first wed to coherent Trump endorsements in the pages of the Claremont Review. Yet equating Kesslers journal with intellectual Trumpism, as some press reports have done, overlooks its longer record of taboo-breaking on issues such as immigration and multiculturalism. It also misses the Rights larger travails to anchor its ongoing realignment on firm footing. Trumpian academics would come closer, though another post-2016 new normal is the blurred boundaries between run-of-the-mill punditry and highbrow specialism. Beyond the Claremont-compatible American Greatness, The American Conservative, and the NatCons, a mosaic of scholarly outlets has stepped into the heterodox space first cleared by Kessler & co. These include American Affairs, Julius Kreins journal-type effort to wrestle the monopoly of sound trade, state aid and immigration policy from Reaganite pieties, and American Compass, a media-savvy, think-tank type version of the same led by Oren Cass. The common creed of these emerging cliques is a looser approach to state power in the service of partisan ends, yet Claremonsters are cut from a special cloth, their unique persuasion built around how those ends are built. While not dismissive of policy argumentssome cut their teeth as Reagan aidestheir relevance is in the Claremonsters mind dwarfed by the context of constitutional decay in which they occur. Focusing on them exclusively as the republics foundations shift underfoot amounts to another form of disconnect with the base, akin to what Hillsdales David Azerrad decries as fiddling while Rome burns.

In this view, out-of-tune policies are at worstsymptoms of a deeper straying across the intertwined whole of American law, sentiment, and imagination, away from an originalist understanding of the Founders institutional legacy, underpinned by a robust communitarian, didactic and religious ethic. Fine-tuning a given consensus will at best amount to a band-aid, with the deeper constitutional bullet wound likely to manifest itself elsewhere. This emphasis on regime politicsthe pursuit of ends towards which the American experiment itself is orderedis Kesslers wake-up call to the post-Trump Right, one where the wonk-sage chasm palpable between Claremont and the Kreins and Casses of the world is shaping up to be a realignment within the realignment. Newer voices, some even calling for a new national-populist vehicle to dislodge the GOP, have rallied onto Kesslers premise that a conservatism fit for conquering and keeping power needs more than occasional policy wins on the marginthat snatching the Republic from the throes of its progressive assaulters and dismounting the myopic hacks on the partys front-seat are of equal importance. Once niches so diverse as Adrian Vermeules common-good constitutionalism and the Catholic integralists he has inspired, to name just two, have been sucked into the post-Trump vortex by this heightening of the stakes. Yet these arent factions battling for the Trumpian soul so much as persuasions vying to leave an imprint on its afterlife, still up for grabs by a partisan figurehead. Though a poster child of Trumps cultural and educational agendaearning the National Humanities Medal in 2019Claremont seems in fact resigned to political orphanage. Its crusade against constitutional decay synthesizes the warring spirit of the GOPs crop of new leadersSenators Tom Cotton, Marco Rubio, Josh Hawleyand the old guards constitutional sensibilitiesSenators Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Ben Sassebut the events of early January have further deepened the gulf between these two groups.

So down to what comes the constitutional rot that so bedevils Claremont? Here again, much of the Rights future is gleaned from spotting Claremonts uniqueness not in its diagnosis of the status quootherwise identical to the standard Republican one since Barry Goldwaterbut in their belligerence in seeking to reverse it. As a first impression, the Institutes aloof stature amongst conservative mortals can mislead, its sincerity borne out by considerable investments in high-flying fellowships for constitutionalist jurists and pundits. For Claremont, the self-evident truths of natural equality of rights and governments just role in securing them isnt stump language, but a binding faith that should articulate all public life, lest its ultimate replacement by progressives competing philosophy of government ends the American experiment as we know it. Let alone the larger populace, these highbrow predicates may strike even Trumps base as abstract in an almost out-of-touch way, to say nothing of the instruction required to grasp their comparative significanceKessler was Harvey C. Mansfields doctoral student at Harvards government department in the early 1980s. Yet their erosion, Kesslers warning goes, is ultimately channeled in one form or another into normal politics, making Claremonts educational mission around the Founding principles a more defensively vital enterprise than the corporatist entre-soi of the Federalist Society, for instance.

If unaddressed, this philosophischer Kampf comes back to bite, also. That is Kesslers read of the connection between constitutional negligence and the Progressive waves spanning the twentieth century that threatens to accelerate in the twenty-first century, producing the altogether parallel constitutional culture alluded to by another Claremonsters broadside last year, Chris Caldwells The Age of Entitlement (2020). The role given to government in regulating American life since Woodrow Wilson, besides running roughshod over the Constitution, desensitizes Americans to its meaning, in turn feeding a vicious cycle of further assaults. When a Chronicle of Higher Education reporter asked for a one-sentence summation of Claremonts philosophy, Senior Fellow William Voegeli rung good-naturedly patronizingwe just happen to believe that governments just powers only stem from the consent of the governed.. Heightened woke morality and the credentialed expertise of unelected rulemakers, in this sense, have merely seized the vacuum of meaning left by the constitutionalist retreat diagnosed by Claremontbut the threat to the republics long-term viability is worse this time. The conservative habit of praising the Founding principles for little more than applause lines has spent their inner force, leaving us disarmed against the high moral ground of wokeism and the professed benevolence of the administrative state. The philosophical uprooting that both enemies thrive on is also fertile ground for cancel culture against old-fashioned patriotism, precisely enabling Trump to compensate his philistine ignorance of the Constitution with hard-edged bellicoseness la Claremont. His instinctive Americanismnot out of some abiding faith in the Founders truths but a self-interested reading of cultural tectonicsmade him neither better nor worse in Claremonts eyes than the fifteen other Republicans on that debate stage, but it did enlarge the toolkit. The stakes had never been higher, so the constitutional restorationists cheerfully rode the Trumpian Trojan horse.

The rest is here:

Donald Trump and the Art of the Faustian Deal - The National Interest

For all the predictions and talk of a slump in support among evangelicals, it appears Donald Trump's election loss was not at the hands of religious voters.

As an analyst of religious data, I've been crunching data released in March 2021 that breaks down the 2020 U.S. presidential election results by faith. And by and large there was very little notable change in the vote choice of religious groups between 2016 and 2020 in fact, for most faiths, support for Trump ticked up slightly. Instead, it was among those who do not identify with any religion that Trump saw a noticeable drop.

Despite exit poll data initially pointing toward a drop in white evangelical support for Trump in 2020, the latest data shows this not to be the case. The data is based on the Cooperative Election Study, which has become the gold standard for assessing vote choice because of its sample size and its ability to accurately represent the voting population of the United States.

In fact, with 80% of white evangelicals backing Trump in 2020, support actually ticked up from the 78% who voted for him four years earlier. Trump also saw two-point increases in the vote of nonwhite evangelicals, white Catholics, Black Protestants and Jews compared with four years ago.

These differences are not statistically significant, and as such it would be wrong to say it definitively shows Trump gained among religious groups. But it indicates that among the largest religious groups in the U.S., voting patterns in the November 2020 vote seemed to hold largely steady with four years earlier. Trump did not manage to win significantly larger shares, nor was winner Joe Biden able to peel away religious voters from the Trump coalition.

Losing the nonreligious

However, there are some interesting and statistically significant trends when you break down the data further. Nonwhite Catholics shifted four points toward Donald Trump. This fits with what we saw in places like the heavily Hispanic and Catholic Miami-Dade County, Florida, where Trump's overall vote share improved from 35% to 46% between 2016 and 2020.

Trump also managed to pick up 15 percentage points among the Mormon vote. On first glance this would appear a large jump. But it makes sense when you factor in that around 15% of the Mormon vote in 2016 went to Utah native and fellow Mormon Evan McMullin, who ran in that year's election as a third-party candidate. Without McMullin in 2020, Trump picked up Mormon voters as did Joe Biden, who did slightly better than Hillary Clinton had among Mormons.

There is also some weak evidence that the Republican candidate picked up some support among smaller religious groups in the U.S., like Hindus and Buddhists. Trump increased his share among these two groups by four percentage points each. But it is important to note that these two groups combined constitute only about 1.5% of the American population. As such, a four-point increase translates to only a very small fraction of the overall popular vote.

What is clear is that Trump lost a good amount of ground among the religious unaffiliated. Trump's share of the atheist vote declined from 14% in 2016 to just 11% in 2020; the decline among agnostics was slightly larger, from 23% to 18%.

Additionally, those who identify as "nothing in particular" a group that represents 21% of the overall U.S. population were not as supportive of Trump in his re-election bid. His vote share among this group dropped by three percentage points, while Biden's rose by more thanseven points, with the Democrat managing to win over many of the "nothing in particulars" who had backed third-party candidates in the 2016 election.

Looked at broadly, Trump did slightly better among Christians and other smaller religious groups in the U.S. but lost ground among the religiously unaffiliated. What these results cannot account for, however, is record turnout. There were nearly 22 million more votes cast in 2020 than in 2016. So while vote shares may not have changed that much, the number of votes cast helped swing the election for the Democratic candidate. A more detailed breakdown of voter turnout is due to be released in July 2021 by the team that administers the Cooperative Election Study; that will bring the picture of religion and the 2020 vote into clearer focus.

Ryan Burge, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Eastern Illinois University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

Continue reading here:

Trump held steady among believers at the ballot it was the nonreligious vote he lost in 2020 - Salon