🚨 Trump gets election news he FEARED as midterms approach

Added: 2026-05-11

[00:00:00]Got to start this week with the famous Oscar Wild quote. When the gods seek to punish us, they answer our prayers. What happened with the US Supreme Court and the Virginia Supreme Court may feel like a political answering of prayers for Republicans who were drowning politically in these $5 a gallon gasoline prices, these soaring food costs, and Trump's approval ratings being in the toilet. They needed a prayer answer, and they think they have one. But sometimes the short-term gain comes with an awful lot of long-term pain. And there's a sense that these court rulings, which have undone the gains and the progress of the civil rights era, which have notoriously and declaratively tried to disenfranchise or dilute the power of black votes, that this type of victory should never be celebrated as a victory, and that it will backfire. that a wave that it's already forming on behalf of Democrats is going to grow stronger and fiercer because of the court rulings. Let's look at South Carolina for example. Jim Klyber, the longtime Democratic congressman, is making the argument that if state leaders try to box him out, draw him out hastily, citing the Supreme Court, they may in fact be doing more damage to their own party. Here's Jim Klyber on CNN this weekend.

[00:01:20]So, let's talk about um the redistricting wars, the gerrymandering wars more broadly. President Trump kicked off this battle uh by urging Texas to redistrict and create more Republican leaning seats last year. Then Democrats decided to fight fire with fire. Um California came after that, Virginia, and more. After redrawing maps in in six states, Republicans now have approximately an eight seat advantage in these gerrymandering wars. What do you think this might mean come November?

[00:01:49]Might Republicans hold the House?

[00:01:54]>> Well, they might uh and they might not.

[00:01:57]Uh because I do believe uh that the voters uh in this country are watching very closely and they are feeling emotionally uh what the threat is uh to our future. And I do not believe that the majority of the voters in this country uh condone and will agree with what President Trump is doing. uh South Carolina, our delegation uh our house uh talked with him uh of the Senate I guess on day uh before yesterday, but the Supreme Court two years ago spoke to this district and said it was not unconstitutional, but the president says he wants them to redraw the lines anyway. All I'm going to say to that is be very careful what you pray for because what I do believe is that when they finish uh with the redistricting, there will be the possibilities of at least three Democrats getting elected here in South Carolina uh to the United States Congress.

[00:03:05]>> Oh, so you say you think that the redistricting they're doing in South Carolina could not only dilute your Democratic leaning district, but other Republican leaning districts. so as to make them more competitive. That's interesting.

[00:03:18]>> The week begins with legal challenges.

[00:03:20]In Tennessee, there's an NAACP lawsuit challenging the rapid redraw there, try as they try to dilute the voices of black voters in Tennessee. In Florida, there are at least three lawsuits filed challenging Governor Ronda Santis' redrawn lines. And in Virginia, there are efforts now to try to appeal that Supreme Court's decision. What's more, there are Democrats who are bullish.

[00:03:45]They can still win at least two of the four seats in play here. The seats they sought to swing. They think they can get at least two of them. But again, this is a galvanizing of black voters in a way they weren't galvanized weeks ago.

[00:03:59]According to Denver Wgleman, the former Virginia Republican congressman, who says what the Supreme Court did there should not be understated, should not be underappreciated for the power it may have unleashed in the electorate. All right, let's let's go through what the Supreme Court did because there's going to be an argument. There's going to be an argument the Supreme Court overturned the will of the people in Virginia. That there was a popular vote that passed with a noticeable majority and the state supreme court just said no to it. Um what's your take on it?

[00:04:31]>> I have been arguing with people all morning. Obviously those who lean right say of course this was unconstitutional this vote and it went against you know the specific um technical right boundaries and definitions of the vote.

[00:04:43]Those on the left will say hey it was a 4-3 vote. It was all about the interpretation of the technicality. And I wonder and I haven't done this yet. If I go back to the 4-3 vote who appointed who? Was it just a partisan vote? Just like you saw with Klay in the federal court and Rucho in 2019, which I can go over a little bit. So, sorry Scott, I love this topic of gerrymandering because I hate it so much, but I'm also worried about unilateral disarmament when it comes to what Trump started in Texas and the downstream effect. I would humbly submit that this vote could have been 43 the other way. Um, and then what would the argument be? So, I do have people I dearly love who I've been arguing with that I'm saying that what are the rules now, Scott. So if the voters overturned what they thought was a technicality that they should be able to overturn and vote for it, does it not matter? It obviously doesn't from the Scoa ruling the Supreme Court of Virginia. But on the other hand, we have now there's no backs stop. There's nothing to stop racial or partisan gerrymandering based on the 2019 ruling RUO in 2026 with Klay. So, I'm having this this sort of a guy who hates Gary Manner who thinks it's really a race to the bottom as a Virginia who against every moral code in my vote body voted yes. And I want to say that honestly right up front. I voted yes. Um because I saw what was happening. Um I don't even know how to square all this anymore because I'm not a lawyer. But if it's four to three and they're saying that a technicality overrides the rule of voters, I have a very tough time with it. even if that technicality might be specifically written on a prior vote.

[00:06:19]And I guess I'm um I'm just shaking my head, right? Looking at what Tennessee is doing. Look what what happened in Texas. Virginia with a very incredible independent commission is 6 to5. It stays that way. I try to respect the Virginia Supreme Court obviously, but um I'm having a tough time with it.

[00:06:35]I think there's a perception issue here that the court overturning the will of the people um on a technicality is going to piss people off in a general sense as a principle. People went out and voted.

[00:06:50]They took the time to go vote. If you want to knock this stuff down, knock it down before people go to the vote, before people go to the ballot box.

[00:06:58]I suspect this may fire people up in Virginia to to go out in November and vote.

[00:07:04]Yeah. The thing is, buddy is that, you know, when you're looking at some of the districts, you know, looking at 65 in Virginia, I think the best they can hope for is 74. And if you're looking at the what the downrange of Clay at the federal Supreme Court, my my question is, does the Scoa ruling even pass the Supreme Court liftment test of Clay?

[00:07:26]Now, if Virginia if the if it's if it actually is pushed up to the Supreme Court, if there's an appeal, does the Supreme Court of our of our nation say, "Hold on a second. That was unconstitutional anyway. You can't do that." Right? So, now I'm thinking now, so now what does a partisan court do?

[00:07:46]You have two partisan courts that voted down probably partisan lines. I don't want to give that up to Virginia because I do love my Commonwealth. But, you know, I think that we're to a point now that there are no rules. Um, and I think that's the the visceral anger. Well, we voted for this. Now, the Supreme Court says there's a technicality on the constitutional flowowns on whether we could vote on this when they didn't rule on it beforehand. Why didn't we get a ruling beforehand? It seems incredibly cowardly.

[00:08:12]Um, and I think that's the thing, too. I think that's the real anger.

[00:08:16]>> It seems disenfranchising. It seems like you've disenfranchised people in a way that's going to piss people off.

[00:08:23]Oh, let me tell you, buddy. I, you know, I was thrown out in a freaking church convention with people carrying Confederate flags. So, let me tell you, I know about disenfranchising people.

[00:08:33]And I think that's why I'm viscerally angry is that this is about disenfranchisement. If you look at the rulings on Klay and Rucho in 2019, that's the thing, Scott. I think people forget about 2019 where the Supreme Courts, you know, really said there's no there's no way to stop partisan gerrymandering. The courts have no say that. Now, they have no say in racial gerrymandering. Now, we had the Virginia Supreme Court saying, "Oh, there's a technicality. That vote doesn't count."

[00:08:55]People were like, "Wait a minute. Can the Republicans only win by subtraction, and I know that was the only way they could beat me as a former Republican was they couldn't let it go to a primary because I would have won." And that's the issue that you have right now is that subtraction is the way for the GOP.

[00:09:11]And I believe the Democrats and I would say even independent voters are thinking addition should be the way we go in a Republican, a democracy like we have.

[00:09:18]Jonathan Martin writes for Political magazine about this dynamic I've described. He writes, "In their rush to grab an extra seat or two, southern Republicans should consider what may happen to their 2024 gains with black voters. As Trump's numbers crater, he is potentially losing even more of the minority votes that helped push him past the finish line in 2024. Supercharging that are the decisions made by the courts. the remarkably rapid redrawing by Republicans. The Republicans have redrawn these maps in southern states so quickly, you to think that they were just chopping at the bit to dilute the voices of black voters. I have been part of rotisserie baseball league drafts that took longer than it took Tennessee to redraw their maps. And that's a concept that is not lost on the electorate. It will fire them up. I addressed this with Jen Saki on MS Now over the weekend.

[00:10:16]>> You in in addition to covering many things, Congress, Justice Department, all sorts of things, you've covered Virginia politics. So, while I have you, I got to ask you just about the news this morning. Um, we've been digesting that with political experts today. What do you make of the court ruling? How do you think Virginia will respond? Give us your sense. There was this idea, Jen, that there was going to be four Republican held seats that would swing Democratic under the new district lines.

[00:10:44]I still think there could be one or two that go Democratic from Republican held.

[00:10:48]So, they haven't necessarily lost four pickup opportunities. They may have lost two or three. That notwithstanding, there's a much bigger picture here.

[00:10:56]>> People in Virginia voted by the millions. Their voices were heard and now have been silenced. Doesn't that dovetail with what the Supreme Court did where they took people's voices away?

[00:11:07]And you want to talk about what starts a wave, a political wave in a year like this? A mass of people who think their voices have been silenced. That doesn't stop a wave that fuels one.

[00:11:19]>> We've certainly seen that to date. Scott McFarland, thank you for being here.

[00:11:22]>> A few other notes as the week begins.

[00:11:24]Pete Hgsets's on Capitol Hill on Tuesday to answer questions about his budget. is going to get pressed on that $25 billion estimate for what the cost of the war of Iran have been so far. Democrats think that's a remarkably low estimate. And we have Cash Patel on Capitol Hill later this week. Let's see if he gets questions about the collapsing staff levels inside the FBI, the morale issues, and about his drinking. Also worth noting, there's an Epstein public hearing staged by Democrats with Epstein survivors and relevant lawyers in Palm Beach. That's Tuesday. The Midas Touch Network will stream it for you live as it happens.

[00:12:02]The White House correspondents dinner arrestee Cole Tomas Allen is arraigned on the new superseding indictment or I should say on the new indictment with the new charges that happens Monday in Washington DC federal court. No fireworks expected there. But my reporting is that the defense, the federal defenders will seek to disqualify the US attorney Janine Piro, arguing that the Trump ally has made some disqualifying statements prejudicing the case. And that, oh, by the way, she was at the correspondence dinner and may be more of a witness than an able prosecutor in this case. I appreciate your comments and your suggestions about these court rulings and the disenfranchisement and the celebrating of disenfranchisement by Republicans. Mark writes, "Elections have consequences. If people don't get registered and vote, nothing will change." And Marus writes, "Race and political identity are entwined, and no Supreme Court ruling that states the opposite can change that basic fact." We want to thank you for watching. You can comment, share, and subscribe for exclusive reporting, breaking news 365 days a year right