Karine Jean-Pierre, the press secretary of the White House, has chosen not to address a statement made by New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) regarding the lack of computer knowledge among Black children in the Bronx.

During a press briefing on Wednesday, a reporter asked, “New York Gov. Kathy Hochul made a controversial comment yesterday… while discussing the need to bring AI jobs to Black ad brown communities. She said ‘Right now, we have young black kids growing up in the Bronx who don’t even know what the word computer is.’ What is the White House’s response to that?”

“I’m gonna be super mindful. I have not heard these comments, so I want to make sure I go back, read the comments, get a sense of what was happening here,” Jean-Pierre responded.

She added, “I just want to go back and see exactly… I know you’re reading an excerpt or a line from what she said, but I just want to be super, super mindful here.”

The reporter then asked, “Does the White House believe it is right to insinuate that Black kids don’t know what the word computer is?”

“I mean look, obviously we don’t think that is the right way to speak about young people in any way, in any form, but I do want to be mindful and to be fair here and to go back and hear exactly what she said,” Jean-Pierre responded.

Watch:

Q: "NY Gov. Kathy Hochul made a controversial comment yesterday…she said 'Right now, we have young black kids growing up in the Bronx who don't even know what the word computer is.' What is the White House’s response to that?"

KJP: "I'm gonna be super mindful. I have not heard… pic.twitter.com/0EH8BNMjiY

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) May 7, 2024

New Yorkers are prepared to take action against the pro-Hamas groups that have been causing chaos in the city. The situation escalated when vandals defaced the World War One Memorial in Central Park with anti-Semitic graffiti.

Furthermore, an individual set fire to an American flag at the foot of a monument dedicated to the courageous soldiers who fought for our freedom. In addition, a statue of General William Sherman was damaged near Grand Army Plaza.

Mayor Eric Adams of New York City has announced a reward of $15,000 for anyone who can provide information leading to the arrest of those responsible.

It is crucial for the public to realize that the pro-Hamas groups harbor animosity towards our nation. Their chants of “Death to America” should not be taken lightly. Their ultimate goal is to dismantle our way of life.

The NYPD has vowed to track down the perpetrators who desecrated the memorial. Furthermore, any foreign nationals involved should be promptly deported to their home countries.

Pro-Hamas “protestors” vandalized a WWI memorial and burned an American flag.

Disgusting.pic.twitter.com/TaANmsEQMl

— Congressman Troy E. Nehls (@RepTroyNehls) May 7, 2024

Pro-Hamas “protestors” vandalized a WWI memorial and burned an American flag.

Disgusting.pic.twitter.com/TaANmsEQMl

— Congressman Troy E. Nehls (@RepTroyNehls) May 7, 2024

Jonathan Turley, a legal analyst for Fox News, stated on America Reports that Judge Juan Merchan struggled to maintain order in the courtroom while Stormy Daniels was testifying in the trial involving former President Donald Trump’s New York business records.

Turley said:

“You know, the statement of the judge, that he’s surprised there isn’t a higher number of objections from the defense is baffling. The defense objected to putting her on the stand. They then objected to the scope of the questioning, and now the judge sounds like Claude Rains saying I’m shocked, shocked there’s a porn star in my courtroom. Well, you know, if you give a lot of scope to testimony, what did you expect? And the problem with what the judge has done here is that this is an entirely unnecessary witness. It is uncontested that there’s an NDA, whether what happened in their relationship, if there was one, is immaterial to how those payments were denoted by the Trump campaign. So the court had the opportunity repeatedly to say we are not going to take this courtroom through details of this relationship. If you want to establish a relationship occurred, do so. Establish the dates, it’s likely those facts could’ve been been stipulated to. So the prosecutors wanted to get salacious details out. This is a form of punishment. They are trying to use a witness for punitive purposes and in my view, political purposes, and this is what happens. It happened because the judge lost control of his courtroom.”

John Roberts said, “There seems to be no argument, Jonathan, that this was only to make Trump look like a bad guy. ”

Turley said, “You know, you really can’t have this cat walk backward. The judge knows that, the prosecutors know that, but what the prosecutors are arguing here is completely ridiculous.”

Watch:

Robert Hirschhorn, a jury consultant, informed CNN that the lack of evidence presented by the prosecution in the trial of former President Donald Trump could result in a “not guilty” verdict, despite the predominantly Democratic composition of the jury due to the Manhattan location.

Jeffrey McConney, a former Trump Organization controller, testified on Monday that Trump never instructed him to falsify documents, even when questioned by the defense. Hirschhorn emphasized that without more convincing evidence from the prosecution, even a Democratic jury is inclined to acquit Trump.

“Cases are won and lost on cross-examination, not direct examination,” Hirschhorn told host Kaitlan Collins. “And the fact that this witness said that he never had direction from Trump to falsify any records, that’s a huge problem for the prosecution’s case.”

Witness accounts have not yet confirmed key aspects of the prosecutors’ assertions regarding their attempts to demonstrate that Trump forged business records concerning his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen’s $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to keep quiet about allegations of a “sexual encounter.” Prosecutors claim that the payment before the 2016 election was a component of a “conspiracy” to sway the election results.

“This is the only person the prosecution could have to talk about the accounting side, at least so far,” Hirschhorn said about McConney. “He’s the highest one up so far from the Trump org side. He has not provided, Kaitlan, that crucial link between the crime and the defendant’s either knowledge about it or ordering that the documents be falsified. It’s a big problem, and I‘m telling you, if they don’t fix this problem, what you’re looking at is this kind of verdict, right here of a not guilty, even from a predominantly Democratic jury. They have to follow the evidence in the case. And if the state doesn’t link all this up, you‘re coming in with a not guilty.”

Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina responded to NBC host Kristen Welker’s challenge regarding his commitment to the 2024 presidential election results during his appearance on “Meet the Press.” The discussion revolved around the upcoming race between President Joe Biden and presumptive GOP nominee former President Donald Trump. Welker questioned Scott about his potential consideration as Trump’s vice president pick, highlighting the “fundamental difference” between Scott’s and Trump’s beliefs on the 2020 election results.

“There are clear facts here. President Trump himself said he expects this election to be fair. He expects it to be honest, and he expects to win. That’s what the presidential candidate should expect. I expect the exact same thing. Frankly, the American people agree with him. This is an issue that is not an issue. I’m not going to make it an issue,” Scott stated.

“Well, senator, will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024, bottom line?” Welker questioned.

“At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump. I’m excited to get back to low inflation, low unemployment —” Scott stated.

“Wait, wait senator, yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter who wins?” Welker interjected.

“That is my statement,” Scott noted.

“Just yes or no. Will you accept the election results of 2024?” Welker asked.

“I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president. You can ask it multiple times, Kristen. But —” Scott stated.

“Senator, just a yes or no answer,” Welker jumped in.

Watch:

The April jobs report from the Labor Department, released on Friday, did not bring favorable news for President Joe Biden’s economy. Despite several months of encouraging updates, the latest data indicates a potential slowdown in the labor market. While this development may have a positive impact on U.S. inflation in the long run, a weakened job market is not likely to enhance Biden’s prospects for re-election in November.

“Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 175,000 in April, and the unemployment rate changed little at 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today,” a news release from BLS said. “Job gains occurred in health care, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.”

The Biden administration may downplay the unemployment rate change as “minimal,” but the reality is that it increased from 3.8 percent in March. Furthermore, the economy only saw an addition of 175,000 jobs in April, following adjustments for seasonal variations, which was significantly lower than the 300,000 job gains in March. This figure fell short of economists’ predictions, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. Fox News highlighted that economists had forecasted 243,000 new jobs for April, making it the worst month for job creation since October. Wages also experienced a slower growth rate in April, rising by 3.9 percent compared to the 4.1 percent increase seen in March.

“Friday’s report is sure to stir immediate debate among economists and investors about whether the labor market is merely cooling in a welcome fashion or starting to show more serious strains under the pressure of higher interest rates,” the Journal suggested.

“Before Friday, recent data had shown remarkable stability in the labor market,” the report added.

The Journal reported an increase in stock futures following the release of the BLS report, possibly indicating investor optimism that inflation would be controlled by a slowing labor market. Nevertheless, the Journal highlighted that labor market conditions can change rapidly, particularly as the demand for workers has decreased. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell stated on Wednesday that he did not anticipate an immediate interest rate cut due to rising inflation rates.

A recent study conducted by Pew Research indicates a shift in support among Catholics in the United States, with more now leaning towards former President Donald Trump over President Joe Biden. The report shows that 55% of Catholics are in favor of or leaning towards supporting Trump, while only 45% support Biden. This marks a significant change from 2020 when Trump held a slight lead of 50% to 49%. Among Hispanic Catholics, Biden currently has a slight advantage with 49% supporting him compared to 47% for Trump. However, this still represents a notable shift towards Trump within this demographic, as a previous poll in 2020 showed 67% of Hispanic Catholics preferred Biden.

On the other hand, Protestants overwhelmingly support Trump, with around 60% backing him and only about 38% leaning towards Biden. Atheists, agnostics, and the religiously unaffiliated largely favor Biden, with approximately 69% indicating support for the Democratic incumbent, while only 28% express support for Trump. Despite Biden’s efforts to align himself with the Catholic faith, his stance on certain issues conflicting with Catholic teachings, such as pro-choice policies and gender ideology, has faced criticism from Catholic leaders.

Cardinal Wilton Gregory of Washington, D.C., has previously referred to Biden as a “Cafeteria Catholic,” accusing him of selectively emphasizing certain aspects of the faith while disregarding or contradicting others. Recent polls, including an exclusive USA TODAY/Suffolk University survey, show a close race between Trump and Biden, with Trump leading 40% to 38%, highlighting the volatility of the current political landscape.

“Nearly eight months out, the election is not set yet. One in four people surveyed said they might change their minds before November. That unsettled sentiment was bipartisan, including 14% of Biden voters and 15% of Trump voters,” USA Today reported.

The outlet added: “Most of those now backing a third-party candidate said they were open to changing their minds, among them 75% of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. supporters and 94% of Jill Stein supporters. That signals the potential erosion independent candidates often see as Election Day nears. It also provides a big opportunity for each major-party candidate to make his case to voters who are now reluctant to support him and to convince those voters that it would be dangerous or unwise to back the other guy.”

Concerns regarding immigration and challenges to democracy closely followed voters’ prioritization of inflation and the economy, which accounted for 29% of their vote, according to the poll. Abortion was the only other topic that reached double digits, with a 10% ranking. A separate survey indicates that Biden is falling further behind Trump on the issues that voters care most about in this election year. The ABC/Ipsos poll, conducted between March 8 and 9, revealed that 36% of respondents trusted Trump, compared to 33% who trusted Biden. Meanwhile, 30% stated that neither candidate had their trust.

When asked about their opinions on the job performance of both presidents, Trump received higher ratings than Biden on all issues except abortion and climate change. Trump garnered a favorable rating of 49% on the economy, while Biden received 37%. In terms of inflation, 45% approved of Trump, while only 31% approved of Biden. Regarding crime, Trump was viewed more favorably at 41%, compared to Biden’s 35%.

Similarly, on the topic of immigration, Trump received a favorable rating of 45%, while Biden trailed behind with 29%. Other pollsters have observed that as Biden’s administration continues to prosecute Trump, his polling numbers have strengthened. In fact, one pollster suggests that the ongoing prosecution of Trump is transforming him into the ‘Nelson Mandela of America’ – a wrongly persecuted martyr of significant proportions that could potentially propel him back into the White House.

Georgetown University law school professor Jonathan Turley has raised concerns regarding Judge Juan Merchan’s handling of former President Donald Trump’s hush money case in Manhattan. Turley specifically pointed out what he views as a potential “reversible error” in the judge’s decision-making process.

According to Turley, Merchan’s decision to allow prosecutors, led by Michael Colangelo, a former Biden administration official who previously served as acting associate attorney general, to claim that Trump violated federal election laws by making $130,000 in hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election may have been a misstep. It is worth noting that the Federal Election Commission concluded that these payments were not related to the campaign, and federal prosecutors in New York did not find any wrongdoing when they investigated the matter in 2018.

“I got to tell you, I think this judge may have already committed a reversible error,” Turley told “Fox and Friends” co-host Ainsley Earhardt. “He could try to amend it, he could try to change it in his instructions, but that jury has now been told repeatedly that there are federal election crimes here, strongly suggesting that the payment to Stormy Daniels did violate federal election laws. That’s just not true.”

He subsequently shifted his focus to Michael Cohen, the former personal lawyer of Donald Trump, who has been incarcerated for perjury but is anticipated to be a key witness for the prosecution.

“Michael Cohen is literally going to tell that jury, ‘Please send my client to jail for following my legal advice,’” Turley said. “All of the stuff that they are talking about, he set up, he structured this and told his client that, ‘we could do this.’”

“It’s a bizarre moment,” Turley added.

The Third Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals has made a significant ruling in a voting case that will have an impact on how Pennsylvania handles absentee ballots. This ruling serves as a strong affirmation of the integrity of the election process.

By a decisive vote of 9 to 4, the court rejected a review of a previous ruling that upheld the requirement for a specific date on absentee ballots. This decision supports the rejection of absentee ballots that are submitted after the deadline, which is a major victory for those who support strict election laws.

The case involved various organizations advocating for voters’ rights, such as the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania State Conference of NAACP branches. They challenged the rejection of absentee ballots that did not comply with the state law’s date requirement. The appellants argued that the date requirement was crucial in maintaining the integrity and orderliness of the voting process. This argument was supported by the Secretary of the Commonwealth and multiple county boards of elections.

When absentee votes are cast, problems can arise if dates are missing or if the information provided is inaccurate. Failure to meet the specific legal requirements, which often include a postmark date or the voter’s signature and date on an inner envelope, can lead to disqualification. It is important to note that different states and towns may have varying laws regarding this matter.

“Pennsylvania, like all other states, has devised a web of rules that qualified voters must follow to cast a ballot that will be counted. Mail-in and absentee voters, for their part, must sign and date the declaration printed on the return envelope containing their mail ballot,” Judge Ambro wrote.

“The date requirement, it turns out, serves little apparent purpose. It is not used to confirm the timely receipt of the ballot or to determine when the voter completed it. But the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ruled that dating the envelope is mandatory, and undated or misdated ballots are invalid under its state law and must be set aside,” Judge Ambro added.

“The provision does not apply to rules, like the date requirement, that govern how a qualified voter must cast his ballot for it to be counted,” the court wrote. “Accordingly, we reverse the District Court’s decision and remand for further consideration of the pending equal protection claim.”

HUGE WIN FOR ELECTION INTEGRITY IN PA

Absentee ballots missing dates will not be counted https://t.co/2lR7hAB07E

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) April 30, 2024

The civil lawsuit against former President Donald Trump over the January 6, 2021, riot was adjourned by a federal judge on Monday under a 19th-century law. This delay was sought by Trump and his legal team. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), the lead plaintiff in the suit, along with other Democrats, claimed they were hindered in their duties by the Capitol attack. The case, based on an 1871 act aimed at preventing the Ku Klux Klan from intimidating members of Congress, will continue with “immunity-related discovery” until September 11, 2024.

After the discovery phase, arguments on Trump’s entitlement to presidential immunity will be presented by both parties. This is a separate issue from the Supreme Court’s examination of presidential immunity from criminal lawsuits and could prolong the proceedings for several months.

If Trump is granted immunity, the case will be closed. However, if presidential immunity is not approved, further discovery is expected, and a trial may not start until after the inauguration in January 2025. Trump, known for seeking trial delays, may opt to seek federal court intervention to postpone the case until after his term ends.

Newsweek noted further:

“On December 4, 2023, Lee had released a statement in which she said “justice is owed to the Congressional staff, Capitol support staff, law enforcement, and members of Congress who feared for their lives on January 6, 2021. I look forward to seeing Mr. Trump in court.” MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Monday that a higher court, the Washington D.C. Circuit, had handed the case back to Mehta after reaffirming that “former presidents are entitled to civil immunity for acts even on the ‘outer perimeter’ of their official duties.”

“But they [the D.C. Circuit] held Trump had not yet shown his entitlement to such immunity and would instead have a chance to prove in the lower court that ‘his alleged actions in the run-up to and on January 6 were taken in his official capacity as President,’” she wrote.

“That opinion was handed down on December 1, 2023. And now, in the last days of April, Judge Amit Mehta, the district court judge to whom the case has been assigned, has allowed the parties to conduct ‘immunity-related discovery’ through September 11, 2024,” Rubin added.

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating presidential immunity, which has resulted in the suspension of the election fraud proceedings overseen by Tanya Chutkan, a district judge from D.C.

“Now think about the criminal case before Judge Chutkan: In a world where the Supreme Court similarly decides there must be further lower court proceedings to determine whether Trump can mount an immunity defense, can that case be tried before 2025? Increasingly, I think not—and that might be the only win Trump wants or needs,” Rubin wrote.