logo
Was Sen. Padilla's Removal From a DHS Briefing Justified? Andrew McCarthy Weighs In

Was Sen. Padilla's Removal From a DHS Briefing Justified? Andrew McCarthy Weighs In

Fox News12-06-2025
Andrew McCarthy, Fox News Contributor, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and author of Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency, joined The Guy Benson Show today to weigh in on Senator Alex Padilla's removal from a DHS briefing, and McCarthy explained why Padilla's claims of oversight don't hold legal water when he isn't in the legislature. McCarthy also unpacked the legal merits of President Trump's mobilization of the National Guard in California amid the LA riots, pushing back on claims from Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass that the move is unlawful. Finally, McCarthy and Benson sounded the alarm on NYC Councilman Zohran Mamdani's radical leftist positions and discussed the risks if Mamdani is elected to be the mayor of NYC. Listen to the full interview below.
Listen to the full interview below:
Listen to the full podcast below:
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Justice Kagan Won 70% of the Time
Justice Kagan Won 70% of the Time

Wall Street Journal

time17 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

Justice Kagan Won 70% of the Time

Here's a figure that might surprise: Justice Elena Kagan, the Supreme Court's leading liberal, was in the majority of 70% of this term's non-unanimous outcomes. To compare, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, stout conservatives, were each at 62%, tied with Justice Sonia Sotomayor. They were a tick above Justice Neil Gorsuch's 61%. That's according to the end-of-term statistics compiled by the website SCOTUSblog. Also notable: 42% of rulings this year were unanimous, which is down slightly from the past two years, but it isn't far from the average of the past two decades. Another 24% of cases produced lopsided decisions, 8-1 and 7-2 (or else 7-1 with a recusal).

Trump Floats a Mass Deportation ‘Temporary Pass'
Trump Floats a Mass Deportation ‘Temporary Pass'

Wall Street Journal

time18 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

Trump Floats a Mass Deportation ‘Temporary Pass'

If you're confused about the Trump Administration's mass deportation policy, join the club. First it was the full Stephen Miller, deporting every illegal in the land. Then there was going to be a reprieve for the agriculture and hospitality industries, then it was back to the full Miller. On Sunday the President said he now wants a 'temporary pass' for some businesses. 'I don't back away,' Mr. Trump said on Fox News Sunday Morning Futures. 'What I do have, I cherish our farmers. And when we go into a farm and we take away people that have been working there for 15 and 20 years, who were good, who possibly came in incorrectly. And what we're going to do is we're going to do something for farmers where we can let the farmer sort of be in charge. The farmer knows he's not going to hire a murderer.' He's right about that. Employers need good workers, and it's crazy policy for the U.S. government to raid businesses in order to drag away someone who arrived here illegally but has been a reliable employee for years. 'But you know, when you go into a farm and you set somebody working with them for nine years doing this kind of work, which is hard work to do and a lot of people aren't going to do it, and you end up destroying a farmer because you took all the people away—it's a problem,' Mr. Trump added. 'You know, I'm on both sides of the thing. I'm the strongest immigration guy that there's ever been, but I'm also the strongest farmer guy that there's ever been, and that includes also hotels and, you know, places where people work, a certain group of people work.'

The Great Budget Baseline Con
The Great Budget Baseline Con

Wall Street Journal

time18 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

The Great Budget Baseline Con

The Senate on Monday began its 'vote-a-rama' on amendments to the tax bill, and it was scheduled to go deep in the night. But before we see the final product, it's worth rehearsing one more time one of the greatest distortions of this budget debate—to wit, that the Senate bill is a fiscal blowout because it will increase the federal deficit by $3.3 trillion over 10 years. That's the official Congressional Budget Office 'score' of the bill, but it's only true if you assume that Congress was going to tolerate a $4.5 trillion tax increase. That would be the result if the 2017 tax reform expired at the end of this year, as most of the individual tax provisions are scheduled to do. Congress was never going to allow that. Even Democrats support extending most of the 2017 individual cuts except the lower 37% top marginal rate. Senate Republicans correctly argue that the bill's cost should be measured against a more realistic baseline, which assumes that existing tax rates and policy continue. In any rational world, changes in the law would be scored against current policy. But in Washington they are scored against CBO's current-law 'baseline,' which assumes that the 2017 tax cuts will expire. Voila, $3.3 trillion in new deficits over 10 years.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store