Jasmine Crockett mocks Trump, says he's threatened by her ‘effective' message
The progressive congresswoman appeared on the iHeartMedia Podcast 'Outlaws with TS Madison' on Monday, where she addressed her rise to prominence in the Democratic Party and how that has made her a target for criticism.
Crockett said she doesn't pay attention to those who question her credentials or insult her before specifically addressing her beef with Trump.
'Dealing with Trump —Trump likes to dog whistle. Essentially, what he's done is tried to put a target on my back,' she began.
Crockett went on to mock Trump for paying attention to her, claiming it was because the president felt threatened by her 'effective' rhetoric.
'But Donald Trump, dropping the name of someone who literally is only just now entering her second term in Congress, kind of tells you who is trying to get on whose level, right? He's the president of the United States. I can guarantee you if I was somehow sitting in the White House I wouldn't be worried about no random nobody young person that is in the House,' she continued.
3 Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett attends the 29th Annual Webby Awards at Cipriani Wall Street on May 12, 2025 in New York City.
Getty Images The Webby Awards
'But the reality is that he knows that my message is effective, he knows that the things I'm saying are true, and he knows that he can't just 'fake media' me, 'fake news' me.'
'He knows that people, even who aren't Democrats, listen to what I have to say, because No. 1, I make it plain, and No. 2, I always make sure I back up my information and challenge somebody to find what I'm giving them is false, and that is what's most threatening to him,' Crockett added.
'Because he's been used to Democrats who keep their heads down and do the work. But I do the work while also talking my talk and walking my walk.'
3 U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a swearing-in ceremony for the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 28, 2025.
REUTERS
On Sunday, Crockett told a surprised local reporter in Dallas that 'Republicans walk up to me and tell me how much they like me.'
The left-wing lawmaker has frequently traded barbs with the president.
On her X account, Crockett has gone as far as to label Trump a 'buffoon' and a 'mofo,' the abbreviated version of the word 'mother—-er.'
Trump has mocked the idea of Crockett being the future of the Democratic Party and called her 'low IQ.'
3 Crockett said that Trump only pays attention to her because the president felt threatened by her 'effective' rhetoric.
Fox News
While speaking at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner in April, Trump took another swipe at the progressive lawmaker, saying her party was in 'serious trouble' if they were 'going to rely on Crockett to bring them back.'
Crockett told late-night host Jimmy Kimmel in April, 'It says a lot when you're supposed to be the leader of the free world, and you're worried about a sophomore in the House. I'm just saying.'
The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
8 minutes ago
- Forbes
Go Back To The Office, But Bring Your Own Snacks. Blame Congress.
I ncreasingly, companies have been asking (or demanding) that employees return to the office, claiming that it fosters a stronger company culture and enhances productivity. To woo employees back, or to make sure they're not angry/hangry when ordered back, companies have been expanding perks such as on-site gyms, childcare facilities, and, of course, free food and beverages. Beginning January 1, the food part will be more expensive for employers, meaning more of them could revert to B.Y.O.S (Bring Your Own Snacks). Congressional Republicans, who extended so many other tax breaks (and added some new ones) in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) President Donald Trump signed on July 4th, decided they would allow a current deduction for employers who provide meals and snacks to expire—except that is, for certain employees, such as those working in restaurants and in Alaskan fishing vessels and fish processing facilities. (No, we're not making it up. The fishy part was one of the concessions Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski extracted from her Republican colleagues for her crucial support.) Before Trump's first term tax cuts—the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)—employers who provided meals for their employees—and the employees who benefited from them—were entitled to tax breaks under one of two sections of the tax code. Under section 119 of the tax code, employees are not taxed on on-site meals provided by employers for the employer's convenience. For tax purposes, whether meals are for the convenience of the employer depends on all the facts and circumstances, but typically means that there's a substantial business reason other than to provide the employee with additional pay (the exclusion doesn't apply to cash allowances instead of meals). So feeding employees who would otherwise be gone too long at distant lunch spots would be deductible for the employer and not taxed to the worker. Even if the meals couldn't be considered for the employer's convenience, they might still be tax-favored under Section 132(e) of the tax code as a de minimis fringe benefit—something so small or inconsequential as to not be worthy of attention. For tax purposes, it means something that has so little value that accounting for it would be unreasonable or administratively impracticable. Typically, this includes items such as coffee, doughnuts, or soft drinks, as well as occasional meals provided to allow employees to work overtime (although how coffee could be considered so inconsequential as not to be worthy of attention is a mystery to me). The de minimis exclusion also applied in most cases to restaurants' staff meals—the kind you see in The Bear . (Technically, it's deductible if the facility's annual revenue equals or exceeds its direct operating costs. Direct operating costs include the cost of food, beverages, and labor costs for cooks and waitstaff, and others who provide services primarily on the premises.) Note that the meals that qualified for the convenience of the employer and the food provided under the de minimis fringe benefit weren't (and still won't be) taxable to the employees. That was a win-win, since employees were not taxed on the perk and employers got a deduction. Trump 1.0: TCJA The TCJA made several changes to the tax treatment of meals and entertainment expenses. Entertainment expenses were disallowed. Plus, that 2017 law created section 274(o), which, beginning in 2026, disallows 100% of the deduction for expenses for food or beverages provided to employees, as well as expenses for the operation of certain eating facilities for employees. As part of the Congressional pattern of frontloading tax goodies and backloading tax pain, the TCJA provided that through 2025, 50% of the cost of on-site employee meals would be deductible (provided it was for the employer's convenience). And, although de minimis snacks aren't considered meals, they were also 50% deductible under the TCJA rules. Trump 2.0: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act The new tax law extended many expiring tax provision in TCJA, but did not extend the rules that had temporarily allowed deductions for snacks and employer convenience perks. Both are now set to expire at the end of the year, which means that U.S. companies that provide snacks, coffee, or on-site meals at the office will no longer receive a tax deduction for doing so. You might think that it was just an oops—that Congress forgot that the provision might expire. But that's not the case. OBBBA didn't roll back the provision for all industries—two notable exceptions have been carved out. One exception applies to very specific businesses—those on a fishing vessel, fish processing vessel, or fish tender vessel, or at a facility for the processing of fish for commercial use or consumption located in the U.S. north of 50 degrees north latitude, and is not located in a metropolitan statistical area. It might not surprise you to learn that the only state north of 50 degrees north latitude is Alaska. Notably, the lobster industry wasn't similarly spared; Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was a no vote on OBBBA. A second exception applies to establishments that sell food and beverages to customers and also provide meals to their employees—in other words, restaurants. The restaurant industry can continue deducting employee meal expenses for kitchen and waitstaff. As for everybody else? Businesses outside of the Alaskan fishing industry and restaurants may be out of luck now, but Congress apparently thinks it's worth it. The Joint Committee on Taxation found that eliminating the deduction will raise $32.5 billion over the next decade. That might not seem like a lot of money in a law that includes tax cuts that will reduce federal revenues by $4.475 trillion between 2025 and 2034. But consider this: The $25,000 tax deduction for tips, which lasts only through 2028, costs just $32 billion. And here's the weird part, the cost of throwing holiday parties for employees will still be 100% deductible. As for business meals—if say, an employee is taking a potential client to dinner—that is now, and will still be, 50% deductible. Will Employers Care About A Deduction Lost? Food at the office can be a big draw for employees. A 2023 survey found that 80% of workers say catered meals encourage them to come into the office. And anyone who is a regular reader knows that the pull of free coffee and a snack can get me in the door. Plus, let's face it: Sometimes the little, consumable things make a big difference, with 98% of employees saying free meals at work made them feel appreciated. Nearly two-thirds of those who receive free meals say it helps them eat healthier food, and over half (55%) of those who don't receive free meals say they would feel less stressed if they did. For employers, the small act of providing food to busy employees goes a long way towards retention. The survey—which we should point out was sponsored by EZCater, which delivers food to workplaces—found that seven out of ten tax professionals said they'd be more likely to stay at their company if they received free meals during the busy season. On the employer side, investing in employees' meals benefits overall well-being, work performance, and, importantly, employee retention. How much difference will the loss of the tax deduction make? That remains to be seen, but no doubt some employers will be putting out the B.Y.O.S. sign. More from Forbes Forbes IRS Issues Guidance On New Deductions For Seniors, Tips, Overtime And Car Interest By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes What The One Big Beautiful Bill Act Will Mean For You And Your Business By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes Questions About The New Tax Bill? Taxgirl Has Answers By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes This Barely Used Child Care Tax Break For Employers Just Got An Overhaul By Danielle Chemtob
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Everyone Hates Alina Habba So Much She's About to Be Out of a Job
Alina Habba, Trump's shamelessly biased personal lawyer, will soon be out of the job he gave her. The president appointed Habba, who defended him in his hush-money and E. Jean Carroll defamation cases, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey in March. The role was for 120 days, allowing Habba to bypass Senate confirmation. But those 120 days are up next Tuesday, and all signs currently point to Habba not getting officially confirmed, as New Jersey Senators Andy Kim and Cory Booker have sworn to block her nomination. A source close to the situation told The New Jersey Globe that Habba admitted to her staff on Thursday that she's not sure what's next. 'I don't know what's going to happen, and I'm grateful for my time. This is an amazing office, and I hope I can stay,' she reportedly said. The end of Habba's DA tenure prevents one of Trump's most ardent supporters from grasping even more power. Her history indicates that she would have only used her role to blindly carry out the president's agenda. In October, amid the tragedy of Hurricane Helene, Habba falsely claimed that the Biden-Harris administration left 'babies floating in the water.' Fox News of all outlets checked her live on air. When Trump fell fast asleep during his own trial, Habba chalked it up to him having tired eyes. 'President Trump, he reads a lot,' she said. 'He's been sitting there, as he's forced to, at the threat of going to jail if he's not sitting there, for what I assume would be a very mundane day.' She demonstrated a shocking lack of legal expertise at that same trial when she clearly misunderstood what 'due process' entailed. And in March, she said that the thousands of military veterans that DOGE fired were simply unfit. New Jersey seems to be safe from Habba's sheer incompetence for the time being. Only time will tell if she remains in Trump's orbit or fades into MAGA obscurity. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's on a roll. Why isn't he smiling? Answer: Jeffrey Epstein
Congress last week handed over the power of the purse to President Donald Trump without even a thank-you-for-your-service in return as the Supreme Court cleared the way for him to slash the workforce at the Education Department and, presumably, elsewhere. So why isn't the president smiling? Answer: Jeffrey Epstein. After continuing to amass unprecedented power in the White House, steamrolling a compliant Congress and being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by world leaders more eager to flatter than confront him, Trump finds himself flummoxed by the case of a disgraced financier who died in a jail cell six years ago. Epstein's ghost is beginning to haunt the White House. The very tools that helped win Trump two terms − the openness to conspiracy, the distrust of elites, the eruption of a viral moment − have now turned to bedevil him. In this case, the assertion this month by the Justice Department and the FBI that the Epstein case was over and done with was met by derision and disbelief among some of the president's most loyal supporters. After all, such influential MAGA voices as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon had been insisting for years that Epstein's suicide was suspicious and his powerful associates hidden. A week ago, Trump told his supporters to "not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about." He followed up by denouncing his supporters who were upset with the case as "weaklings" who had "bought into this bulls***, hook, line and sinker." Those instructions didn't sway many in his political base. Then he directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to release the investigation's grand-jury testimony, a step that can only be ordered by a judge. Now Trump has filed a lawsuit for libel and slander against the Wall Street Journal, its publisher, two of its reporters, and News Corp founder and former friend Rupert Murdoch. At issue is its story that Trump sent a "bawdy" 50th-birthday letter to Epstein in 2003, decorated with a crude drawing of a woman's naked body that used his distinctive signature to suggest pubic hair. More: Trump: Epstein grand jury records unlikely to satisfy critics "Happy Birthday − and may every day be another wonderful secret," it reportedly said. Trump called the article "false" and demanded damages "not to be less than $10 billion." But he acknowledged on the social-media platform Truth Social that the release of grand-jury testimony isn't likely to settle things. [N]othing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request," he railed. "It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!" A furor that swamps Medicaid cuts and Elmo's future A purported "Epstein client list" and the dark suspicion that powerful people are being protected has created a political firestorm stronger than the prospect of cutting an estimated 12 million people off Medicaid or the proposal to end federal funding for Elmo. The cuts in health care for the poor were part of the "Big Beautiful Bill" that Congress passed July 3 −, extending Trump's first-term tax cuts, increasing spending on border security and slashing funds for Medicaid, food stamps and green energy. On Friday, July 18, Congress approved $9 billion in spending cuts in foreign aid and public broadcasting, Muppets included. The so-called recission package deleted funding Congress had previously approved and reflected the Capitol's voluntary retreat from its constitutional power to decide how tax money should be spent. In the past, the tactic has rarely succeeded. In the future, the White House budget office said more such cuts would be on their way. But that consequential debate got less ink and fueled less furor than the Epstein saga. Trump's attempt to convince Americans that there is nothing to see here is likely to be an uphill battle. In a Reuters/Ipsos Poll, 69% of Americans said they thought the federal government was hiding details about Epstein's clients. Only 6% said information wasn't being hidden. The rest weren't sure. The poll, taken July 15-16, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3% for all adults and 6% for subgroups. Those who see a conspiracy afoot included a 55% majority of Republicans. Only about a third of those in the GOP, 35%, approved of how Trump is handling the issue. Overall, just 17% approved, his lowest rating on any issue. The long lifespans of conspiracy theories One lesson of Trump's political career is this: Once you've persuaded people there's fire behind the smoke, it's hard to convince them that the air has been cleared. When Barack Obama ran for the White House in 2008, Trump repeated debunked allegations that the Illinois senator had been born in Kenya and wasn't eligible to be elected president. After Obama had served two terms in the White House, a Morning Consult poll found a third of Republicans still believed that falsehood. Since the 2020 election that Trump lost, he has repeated disproven allegations that the election was rigged against him. When the 2024 campaign was getting underway, a CNN poll found that 69% of Republicans and those who "leaned" to the GOP believed Joe Biden's win wasn't legitimate, that the election had been stolen. And Epstein? Welcome or not, he may be sticking around for a while. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Epstein backlash is souring Trump's winning streak
