The National Working Committee (NWC) of the All Progressives Congress (APC) has annulled the declaration of Dennis Idahosa as the party flag bearer in the forthcoming Edo State governorship election
The NWC during its emergency meeting held late Tuesday, at the party’s National Secretariat, announced that the primary election process remains incomplete and has scheduled Thursday, February 22, 2024, for the completion of the exercise.
In a one paragraph statement, signed by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, the NWC delibrated over the report and decleared the election inclonclusive.
the statement read, “At its emergency meeting held today, Tuesday, February 20, 2024, to consider the report on the Edo State Governorship Primary Election, the National Working Committee (NWC) deliberated on the report and resolved that the Edo State Governorship Primary Election has not been completed, and has now fixed Thursday February 22, 2024 for the completion of the Primary Election Process.”
Recall that the chairman of the APC primary election committee and Imo State Governor, Hope Uzodimma, had announced Idahosa’s victory with 40,483 votes, defeating nine other contestants.
However, conflicting reports emerged as the returning officer of the electoral committee, Stanley Ugboaja, declared Monday Okpebholo as the winner of the party’s ticket.
Another claim was made by Ojo Babatunde, who said he was representing the returning officers in all the local governments and declared Anamero Dekeri as the winner.
Edo Primary: APC Rejects Uzodinma’s Declaration Of Idahosa As Winner, Announces Date To Complete Exercise is first published on The Whistler Newspaper
Following a $355 million court ruling against his business empire, former President Donald Trump lashed out, blaming President Joe Biden, his likely opponent in November.
In a Feb. 16 statement posted to his Truth Social platform, Trump’s campaign referred to the case as the “Crooked Joe Biden-directed New York AG Witch Hunt,” vowing to “fight Crooked Joe Biden’s weaponized persecution at every step.”
Trump often describes cases against him as “election interference” or “political,” including the federal prosecution in the election interference case headed by Special Counsel Jack Smith. But this specific attack by Trump directed at New York Attorney General Letitia James is particularly misleading because she is a state elected official who does not take direction from federal leaders.
We interviewed four former state attorneys general. They told us that, in that role, it’s not uncommon to communicate with federal officials, but that such contacts hardly amount to an official from one level of government “directing” what an official from another level of government does in an investigation or prosecution.
We contacted the Trump campaign to ask for his evidence but received no reply.
In the civil fraud case Trump referred to, New York State Supreme Court Justice Arthur F. Engoron ruled against Trump, concluding that Trump, Trump’s business and affiliated people had committed fraud by falsely inflating the value of his assets. Engoron ordered them to pay more than $450 million including interest. Trump is appealing the ruling.
James signaled she would investigate Trump in 2018
During her 2018 campaign for attorney general, James made several public statements announcing her intent to investigate Trump, though she didn’t specify the type of case she would file.
During a September 2018 debate, James was asked, “What is your view of the proper basis required to start an investigation?” And how, a moderator asked, would she guard against a rush to judgment “against someone, whether it’s an average, unknown New Yorker or Donald Trump and his associates?”
In her answer, James replied, “We need to follow his money.”
In November 2018, after James won, she said, “Oh, we’re going to definitely sue him. We’re going to be a real pain in the ass. He’s going to know my name personally.”
In March 2019, James opened an investigation into Trump after his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, testified before Congress that Trump’s annual financial statements had inflated the values of Trump’s assets. James filed the lawsuit against Trump in 2022.
James’ investigation started before Biden became the Democratic presidential front-runner in spring 2020 and well before he became president Jan. 20, 2021. In 2018, Biden was a professor of practice at the University of Pennsylvania; he announced his candidacy in April 2019.
So, from the timeline alone, Trump’s assertion that Biden “directed” James’ case is nonsensical.
James visited the White House for events
In our search for Trump’s evidence, we noted that Trump has linked James to Biden in previous remarks, saying she had visited Biden at the White House.
“Letitia James visited Joe Biden in the White House numerous times during the Trump witch hunt,” Trump said in January as the civil fraud trial was wrapping up. Trump called it a “conspiracy” to help Biden politically.
She did make three visits, but they were hardly a secret.
In each case, James went to the White House for widely attended events in her official capacity, according to White House visitor logs:
An April 8, 2022, event saluting the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson. The visitor log shows 448 people attended the event, including five Democrats serving as state attorneys general. James posed for a photo with attorneys general from Illinois and Nevada. Although the visitor logs said James met with Biden, the president made public remarks on the lawn and the White House told PolitiFact that he did not meet with attendees individually. This video shows after Biden’s remarks he walked away from the crowd.
A July 18, 2023, meeting with Vice President Kamala Harris on fentanyl policy. A statement released by the White House after that event said Harris convened attorneys general from seven states and the District of Columbia for a conversation on efforts to disrupt the supply chain for the deadly drug and improve responses to overdoses. Twenty-six people attended the event, the log shows; Biden was not among them.
An Aug. 31, 2023, event with Harris honoring Black women holding elected office across the country. The National Organization of Black Elected Legislative Women and the Higher Heights Leadership Fund co-hosted the event, at Harris’ home. The visitor log showed 243 people attended the event, including James, who is Black. Biden did not attend.
Would a state attorney general and a president coordinate?
Bob Butterworth, who was a Democratic attorney general in Florida from 1987 to 2002, said in a telephone interview that attorneys general may coordinate joint investigations with officials in other states or from federal agencies such as the FBI.
However, Butterworth said, “I can’t ever recall being directed by a president. I think they have better things to do.”
Bill McCollum, a Republican attorney general in Florida from 2007 to 2011, said there are occasions when state attorneys general coordinate with federal regulators or the U.S. Justice Department on investigations. But he added that he had no way to know whether that happened in this case.
“No state AG can be directed to do anything by any federal official other than a federal judge,” McCollum told PolitiFact in an email. “Of course, the president could ask a state AG to do something, but states are sovereign and cannot be mandated to do things by the federal government, which only has the powers delegated to it by the Constitution and amendments thereto.”
James Tierney, a Democratic former Maine attorney general who has taught about state attorneys general at Columbia University, Harvard University and New York University, said state and federal governments do coordinate enforcement actions, for everything from prosecuting a drug cartel to challenging a corporate merger.
But both Tierney and Scott Harshbarger, a Democrat who served as attorney general in Massachusetts, agreed that Trump’s suggestion that Biden directed James was entirely unsupported. The notion is “absurd,” Harshbarger said.
Our ruling
Trump said Biden “directed New York AG Witch Hunt” into Donald Trump’s real estate.
The timeline of James’ actions conflict with Trump’s statement. James said several times on the campaign trail in 2018 that she would investigate Trump; once she took office in March 2019, she launched the investigation. Biden was not the Democratic front-runner until spring 2020 and was not sworn in as president until January 2021.
Past attorneys general said state attorneys general do sometimes coordinate with federal officials, but they said they see no evidence that Biden “directed” James’ investigation.
We rate this statement False.
RELATED: More than 1,000 fact-checks of Donald Trump
The mineral fluoride, at the right dose, has been shown to reduce the risk of tooth decay. Based on studies demonstrating this in children drinking naturally fluoride-containing water, individual cities in the U.S. began to add fluoride to tap water beginning in 1945.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and multiple expert groups endorse water fluoridation as a safe way to reduce tooth decay, including the American Dental Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
However, a Feb. 4 post from independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on X, formerly known as Twitter, made a sweeping claim about fluoride’s effects on the nervous system. “As president. I’m going to order the CDC to take every step necessary to remove neurotoxic fluoride from American drinking water,” the post said.
Kennedy, who has a history of advocating against water fluoridation, accompanied his claim about fluoride’s neurotoxicity with a link to a Law360 article about testimony in a trial that has been unfolding in a San Francisco-based federal district court. The case was brought against the Environmental Protection Agency by nonprofit organizations and other plaintiffs and alleges that fluoridation poses “an unreasonable risk of injury to health” under a version of Toxic Substances Control Act amended in 2016. The plaintiffs are asking the EPA to disallow adding fluoride to drinking water.
Other popular social media posts have also referenced the trial, claiming that “multiple studies confirm fluoride is a neurotoxin that violates the Toxic Substances Control Act and reduces IQ in kids.”
But the data on water fluoridation and neurotoxicity are less clear-cut than social media posts by Kennedy or others make them out to be.
Some studies — many of them done in areas of the world with naturally high levels of fluoride in their water supplies well above the optimally recommended level — suggest a possible association between greater levels of fluoride exposure during pregnancy or early childhood and reduced IQ in children. But many scientific experts have said the evidence for this association is weak.
The EPA has argued that there isn’t strong or consistent evidence fluoridation at recommended levels lowers IQ — in line with the general sentiment held by the CDC and various expert groups that water fluoridation is safe.
U.S. Regulation of Fluoride in Water
On a federal level in the U.S., the Public Health Service first recommended fluoridation of tap water in 1962. However, the decision on whether to add fluoride to tap water is up to states and municipalities. As of 2020, around 63% of Americans received fluoridated water.
Exposure to fluoride in early childhood is known to cause dental fluorosis, a condition most often characterized by mild discoloration of the teeth. The AAP says that it is safe to mix baby formula with fluoridated tap water, although consuming fluoride isn’t necessary for babies under 6 months old and comes with a small risk of dental fluorosis.
According to the CDC, experts have concluded there isn’t an association between recommended water fluoridation and any other negative health impacts.
Based on evidence of skeletal problems when people are exposed to quite high levels of fluoride over time, the Environmental Protection Agency has set an upper limit of 4 mg per liter for fluoride in tap water from public water systems. However, the agency recommends that fluoride levels in tap water be kept below 2 mg per liter to protect from dental fluorosis. The fluoride level recommended by the Public Health Service to improve dental health is below these limits — at 0.7 mg per liter.
Beyond fluoridated water, sources of fluoride can also include such items as black tea or swallowed toothpaste. It is generally only present in very small amounts in food, although fluoridated salt or milk rather than fluoridated water are used in some non-U.S. countries.
Draft Report Wasn’t Meant to Evaluate Water Fluoridation Safety
In a Feb. 6 post, also on X, Kennedy elaborated on his fluoridation claims, referencing a draft report from the National Toxicology Program that has been a focus of the case against the EPA. A final version of the report has not been published.
“The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has declared, ‘… the data support a consistent inverse association between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ,’” Kennedy’s post said, quoting from an outdated version of a meta-analysis document associated with the report and leaving out some context. A meta-analysis is a type of study in which researchers gather the available data on a topic and combine it to attempt to draw a larger conclusion.
But the NTP report was not meant to establish whether water fluoridation at typical levels was safe and looked at fluoride exposure from any source and at any level. Scientists who reviewed the draft for the NTP expressed concerns that the sentence Kennedy quoted did not make this clear.
michaelheim / stock.adobe.com
The NTP’s reports “are used by other federal agencies as a starting point for further study to determine if there is a risk to humans, and at what exposure level,” a spokesperson from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, which houses the NTP administratively, told us via email. The fluoride report “is not a risk assessment, and therefore, does not determine the safety of fluoride.”
Kennedy also claimed in his post that the NTP report had been “hidden from the public.” The NIEHS spokesperson told us that the report is still being revised and that publication was delayed by the NTP director, who tasked a working group with reviewing the many comments and criticisms of the document.
Multiple groups of experts — from both within and outside the government — reviewed various drafts of the report, saying they had concerns that its conclusions were not properly supported. A recurring area of concern was whether the authors of the NTP report had sufficiently made clear that their overall conclusions on fluoride’s effects on IQ might not apply to the lower levels of fluoride found in properly fluoridated drinking water.
“The authors point to their inclusion of studies with low fluoride levels but provide no interpretation of the evidence at these levels,” wrote the working group assembled to review criticisms of the report. “Rather, the authors provide a single statement in the Abstract that encompasses all studies: ‘The data support a consistent inverse association between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ’. This may overstate the evidence provided by studies with low exposure.”
Evidence on Water Fluoridation and IQ Is Limited
David Savitz, an epidemiologist at Brown University who studies the effects of environmental exposures on reproductive health, led a group of experts that reviewed two early versions of the NTP report. This group was convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which provides independent advice on scientific topics to help the government set policies.
Savitz testified in the trial as a witness for the EPA, zeroing in on four long-standing cohort studies looking at prenatal and early-life exposures to fluoride via various sources, including fluoridated water but also fluoridated salt. These studies evaluated fluoride exposures at levels most relevant to the discussion of water fluoridation. They all provided measurements of fluoride in the urine of pregnant women and assessed their children using cognitive tests.
“There is not at this time a consistent indication of there being an association present, let alone a causal association,” Savitz said during Feb. 7 testimony, speaking of IQ and fluoride exposure in the “range of interest.”
The OCC and INMA studies, respectively performed in Denmark and Spain, found no link between increased urinary fluoride levels and reduced cognitive test scores. A study in women in Mexico, called ELEMENT, found an association between increased urinary fluoride levels during pregnancy and reduced cognitive test scores in children.
The MIREC study, of women in Canada, “in my view is mixed,” Savitz said. “In the aggregate results, which is I think where one starts, it’s very limited in indicating a potential adverse effect.” But it did show “notable sex differences,” he said. The study stated that increased fluoride in the urine of pregnant women was associated with reduced IQ scores in boys.
Other researchers have criticized some of the methods and conclusions of the MIREC study, writing, for instance, that it was unclear whether the researchers planned their assessment by sex prior to starting the study. Doing unplanned subgroup analyses can lead to false-positive results, the researchers wrote.
Authors of some other recently published meta-analyses have also discussed the limited evidence on fluoride’s neurotoxicity — particularly for people drinking water with the recommended 0.7 mg of fluoride per liter.
A 2021 meta-analysis published in Scientific Reports found that exposure to high levels of fluoride was associated with lower IQ but did not find a link between exposure to low levels of fluoride and neurological problems. The researchers defined high fluoride exposure as above 2 mg per liter and low exposure as between 0.5 and 1 mg per liter. The researchers ultimately concluded that the quality of the evidence was low overall and did not allow them “to state that fluoride is associated with neurological damage,” even at relatively high doses.
Another meta-analysis, published in 2023 in Environmental Research, did conclude that studies indicated fluoride exposure was associated with lower IQ in children, potentially starting at 1 mg per liter or lower. But the researchers also noted problems with the quality of the studies that had been done, finding that those showing the greatest negative impact of fluoride were at a high risk of bias. Bias occurs when there is some systematic error that leads a study’s findings to be incorrect — such as confounding factors that would make a relationship seem real when it is not. The single study found to be at low risk of bias did not find a negative effect of fluoride on IQ.
Finally, a study published in the journal Public Health in 2023, which only evaluated studies in which people were exposed to levels of fluoride 1.5 mg per liter and lower, did not identify a relationship between fluoride levels and IQ in various analyses. “These meta-analyses show that fluoride exposure relevant to community water fluoridation is not associated with lower IQ scores in children,” the researchers concluded.
The Stakes of Ending Fluoridation
In the case against the EPA, lawyers are not allowed to discuss the benefits of water fluoridation. But amid calls to halt fluoridation, experts told us, a discussion of the potential impacts is warranted.
Lindsay McLaren, a professor of community health sciences at the University of Calgary, looked at what happened after the city of Calgary stopped fluoridating its water in 2011. She also has reviewed other research on the impacts of stopping fluoridation. (Calgary will resume water fluoridation later this year.)
“At least in the settings that have been studied, if you cease community water fluoridation, children’s oral health declines,” McLaren said. This particularly affects children who do not have good access to dental care.
“Tooth decay is not an innocuous problem,” McLaren said. “It causes pain, it can get infected, it can make it so that it hurts to eat, kids might have trouble concentrating in school.” She added that in extreme cases tooth decay can lead young children to need surgery under general anesthesia, which comes with known risks.
“The reason why we put fluoride in water is because it has a demonstrable positive impact on dental health,” Dr. Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale School of Medicine, told us. In addition to reducing cavities and improving overall dental health, it “has downstream effects as well because bad dental health can cause general health problems, heart disease, etc,” he said. Novella has written about anti-fluoride claims for many years on his blog and on the website Science-Based Medicine, which he founded.
Novella said that while data indicate potential neurotoxicity from fluoride at high doses, fluoridation at recommended levels “hasn’t been shown to be an actual risk in the real world.”
“You have to show that it’s causing an unacceptable risk that’s greater than the benefit at the dose people are actually getting exposed to,” he said, which is not what the data shows.
Editor’s note: SciCheck’s articles providing accurate health information and correcting health misinformation are made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The foundation has no control over FactCheck.org’s editorial decisions, and the views expressed in our articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation.
The Warriors are expected to convert Lester Quinones to a standard NBA contract, allowing the team to play the wing without worrying about a games played limitation.
Quinones, 23, was the 2023 Most Improved Player in the G League. In the weeks leading up to the All-Star break, he’d earned a regular role in Golden State’s rotation, surpassing Moses Moody in the pecking order while on a two-way deal.
In nine February games, Quinones is averaging 7.1 points in 19.6 minutes per game. The 6-foot-5 shooting guard rebounds well for his size and has shot 39.6% on 3s this year.
ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the Warriors’ intention to convert his contract, citing Quinones’ agents.
Players on a two-way contracts are permitted to be active for 50 regular season games. Quinones has played in 19 games and has been active for 28 overall, meaning a standard deal will remove any stress on whether or not he can suit up.
Quinones went undrafted out of Memphis in 20222 but latched on with the Warriors organization on a two-way deal. The Warriors waived him in October of that year, but he quickly signed with the G League Santa Cruz Warriors team. He made his NBA debut last spring and has proven himself as an NBA-caliber player this year.
The details of Quinones’ contract weren’t immediately clear and the team hasn’t made an official announcement. According to ESPN salary cap expert and former front office executive Bobby Marks, the Warriors have until Feb. 22 to sign a player to their 14th roster spot vacated by the Cory Joseph trade. Golden State can back-fill Quinones’ two-way slot until the March 4 deadline.
A new study found that Black women are victims of homicide at disproportionally higher rates in 30 states. (Photo by South_agency via Getty Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto)
by Alexa Spencer
Black women are, on average, six times more likely to be murdered than white women, according to a new report. The rates are even higher depending on where the women live and during what time period.
The analysis, conducted by Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, analyzed two decades of homicide trends for women ages 25 to 44. Published in the Lancet on Feb. 7, the study included data from 1999 to 2020.
Three main findings:
Homicide rates for Black women were notably higher in all 30 states that were analyzed, with the biggest differences occurring in states with the highest racial inequities.
The greatest disparity was in Wisconsin between 2019 and 2020, where Black women were 20 times more likely to be murdered than white women.
Black women were more likely to be killed by gunfire, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest.
Bernadine Waller, a postdoctoral research fellow in the Psychiatry Department at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, and lead author of the paper, said in a statement that, “As a scholar whose research examines intimate partner violence, I have long known that there were disparities in homicide rates between Black and white women.”
However, “to uncover the fact that Black women are murdered at rates as high as 20 to 1 is heart-breaking and underscores the urgent need to make substantive structural shifts,” Waller said.
Black Women and Fatal Shootings
Overall, women in general were twice as likely to be killed by firearms in 2019 to 2020, compared to 1999 to 2003. Still, Black women were more likely than white women to be killed by gunfire.
Rates of fatal shootings for Black women increased over time compared to white women. In 2020, Black women in the Northeast were three times more likely to be killed by a firearm, six times more in the Midwest, and one and a half times more in the South. Western states were excluded due to a small sample size.
Addressing Structural Racism
The findings suggest a link between high homicide rates and racial inequities; such as educational attainment, unemployment, and wealth distribution. In order to prevent high rates of homicide among Black women, structural racism must be reduced, the university wrote.
States with the greatest disparities in homicide rates were in parts of the nation with a high number of people with low socioeconomic status living close together — areas that also tend to have histories of slavery, lynching, and where Black Lives Matter protests took place during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Focusing on historical structural racism’s long-lasting legacy in the U.S. is imperative,” Victoria A. Joseph, co-author of the paper and a data analyst at the Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, said in a statement.
“Efforts aimed at reducing disproportionate homicide deaths among Black women can be implemented through addressing the role of structural racism when it comes to policies and practices that increase Black women’s risk and lessen Black women’s access to much-needed resources.”
Operatives of the Adamawa State Police Command attached to Crack Squad, in collaboration with Hunters of Baka Gombi, have rescued a 16-year-old girl that was recently kidnapped.
The rescued victim, identified as Aisha Saidu, was kidnapped three days ago from Buma Village of Shani local government Area, Borno State.
According to a press release made available to THE WHISTLER by the Command’s spokesman, SP Suleiman Nguroje, on Tuesday, the young girl who is now receiving medical attention, got rescued after the police got a hint on the whereabouts of the kidnappers.
Nguroje said the police in collaboration with the hunters stormed the kidnappers’ den located at Fotta village, Gombi Local Government Area and arrested a three man gang.
He gave the names of the suspects as: Alhaji Habu, 41 years, a resident of Fotta Village, Gombi Local Government Area.
Adamu A Buba, 36-year-old resident of Tawasa Village, Gombi Local Government Area and Lawali Ahmadu 38 years, a resident of Fotta Village, Gombi Local Government Area.
Suspected kidnappers
The spokesman said: “The suspects were all arrested at a certain House that is situated at a remote side of Fotta Village where they camped their kidnapped female victim and demanded eight million naira (N8,000,000) ransom.”
He explained that the Commissioner of Police, CP Dankombo Morris, assured that “criminals of such attitude will never escape arrest, and will never have opportunity to succeed in their nefarious activities anywhere within the State.
“He calls on members of the public to give timely information to police, especially those with questionable characters.”
Police, Hunters Rescue 16-Year-Old Kidnapped Female Victim In Adamawa is first published on The Whistler Newspaper
Could Michelle Obama be making a comeback to the White House — this time as president?
For years, conservative media has peddled the notion that the former first lady has presidential ambitions. As recent concerns about President Joe Biden’s age and fitness for office have grown and the November election nears, the rumor mill is back in action.
The theory suggests Biden will drop out or be forced out of the race and Michelle Obama will replace him as the Democratic Party’s 2024 presidential nominee. The claims have gained prominence as pundits, leading politicians and podcast hosts amplify them.
The theory has roots in conspiracy theories about the Deep State. On Feb. 9, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick posted on X, “I’ve said for over a year many times that Joe Biden would not be on the ticket and Michelle Obama would be the likely nominee. It’s clear the Democrat deep state run by Barack Obama knew they had to take him down to give them a chance in November.”
Patrick posted the comments a day after Special Counsel Robert Hur released a report about Biden’s handling of classified documents and portrayed Biden as having a faulty memory, a potentially politically damaging characterization in a reelection year.
Conservative activist Benny Johnson also described the Obama theory during a Jan. 9 episode of his show with guest Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.
“There is a trend going around, a lot of whispers, that Joe Biden is there to survive through the primary season,” Johnson said. “So, there is no primary for the Democrats and nobody has a chance to run against Michelle Obama and nobody has a chance to actually run against whoever they have chosen. Then, then, you do the switcheroo in the spring.”
Greene responded, “I think it is very possible.” She also called Biden’s presidency “(Barack) Obama’s third term” and said of the former first lady: “She owns Joe Biden’s policies. She owns the Biden administration. She owns the failure. She owns the Green New Deal. She owns the inflation. She owns the wide-open border.”
PolitiFact contacted Michelle Obama’s office. Her spokesperson declined to comment and referred us to recent news articles that show Michelle Obama dispelling the theory.
Since 2012, Michelle Obama has repeatedly denied rumors that she will run for the presidency. No publicly available information supports the claim that she will run for president.
Keneshia Grant, a Howard University associate political science professor, said Michelle Obama might be a target of this speculation because of partisan political panic.
“It might be that people who have this worry would like for Trump to win, and they are trying to think about maybe the one person who might be able to beat Donald Trump,” she said, “and they think that this is the one person who could do it.”
Public figures amplify the claim
Greene and Texas’ Patrick were the most recent in a line of current and former politicians and political candidates making similar comments:
Last September, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, speculated, “In August of 2024, the Democrat kingmakers (will) jettison Joe Biden and parachute in Michelle Obama.”
Sarah Palin, former Republican vice presidential nominee and former Alaska governor, wrote on X last September, “Don’t be surprised. But I still say it’ll be Michelle O’ #2024Election. Biden’s out.”
Speaking on Fox News this month after the release of Hur’s report, former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy said, “I do think what they are planning for is to sideline Biden as the nominee, trod in a different puppet. Which is what leads me to the likely conclusion that it is going to be someone like Michelle Obama.”
No one making the claim has presented any evidence to support it. And Biden has rebutted notions that he’s unable to continue in the job.
Some social media claims go even further, invoking the longstanding, racially charged conspiracy theory that Michelle Obama is a man and would be the first transgender nominee or president.
When Barack Obama posted Feb. 14 on X wishing Michelle a happy Valentine’s Day, one person responded, “Raise your hand if you think Michelle should run for president!” with a meme that said “Michelle Obama ‘24.” In response to the meme, another person wrote, “Oh, I think its fantastic idea. First fully (diversity, equity and inclusion) president. Black, gay AND trans!!”
Michelle Obama has long denied a desire to run for president
When a student asked in 2012 whether Michelle Obama would consider running for president, she said “absolutely not.”
“One of the things you learn about yourself as you get older are what are your strengths and what are your interests, and for me, it’s other stuff, that is not being the president,” Obama said.
In 2016, as speculation grew again, then-President Barack Obama dismissed the notion that his wife would take over the White House. “Let me tell you, there are three things that are certain in life. Death, taxes, and Michelle is not running for president.”
In 2017, Michelle Obama dismissed the speculation: “I wouldn’t ask my children to do this again, because when you run for higher office, it’s not just you. It’s your whole family.”
In 2022, when asked in a BBC interview whether there is any question she detests, Obama said there was. It’s, “Are you going to run for president?”
“No I am not,” she said.
In 2023, she told Oprah Winfrey (who has also repeatedly denied rumors about running for president), “I have never expressed any interest in politics. Ever.”
As the recent rumors surfaced, David Alexrod, a close friend of the Obamas, told CNN, “She is not someone who likes politics … I have as much chance of dancing in the Bolshoi Ballet next year.”
As first lady, Michelle Obama was highly visible to voters but sat outside the divisive partisan environment. This afforded her a unique national name recognition and popularity among voters.
“That she is not a politician is exactly why she is popular,” Howard University’s Grant said. “She is a person who we know, a person who we trust but a person who doesn’t have the baggage of previous political statements or political decisions.”
In a January interview with podcast host Jay Shetty, Obama said she was “terrified” about the upcoming 2024 election and what it could mean for democracy as Donald Trump appears to be closing in on the GOP nomination. But Obama did not say she was motivated to run for office.
The unlikely road for Michelle Obama to become the 2024 Democratic nominee
Even if Michelle Obama were to express interest in the presidency, many other logistical things would have to fall into place for her candidacy to become a reality — such as the Democratic ticket having a vacancy.
If there is a vacancy prior to the August Democratic convention in Chicago, the delegates Biden has amassed during the primaries could decide to give their votes to a candidate whose political philosophy is similar to Biden’s. For that candidate to be Michelle Obama, that would mean she would have to declare an interest in being chosen. Rep. Dean Phillips of Minnesota, Biden’s remaining Democratic challenger, could make a pitch to delegates to back him instead.
If the vacancy occurs between the convention and election day, the Democratic National Committee has the power to name a presidential nominee — likely (but not mandated) to be Biden’s running mate Kamala Harris. The chairperson of the DNC, Jaime Harrison, was selected for the job by Biden. If Harris were elevated to the presidential slot, the DNC would also name a vice presidential nominee.
Senior Correspondent Louis Jacobson and Staff Writer Marta Campabadal Graus contributed to this story.
RELATED: What happens if Joe Biden or Donald Trump leaves his party’s ticket?
Oakland A’s broadcasting history was made for the second time in the last week when Chris Caray, the great-grandson of legendary announcer Harry Caray, was hired as a play-by-play announcer for their games on NBC Sports California.
The 24-year-old Caray, who joins pioneering A’s play-by-play announcer Jenny Cavnar on television broadcasts, becomes the fourth generation of his family to work as an MLB broadcaster. And, 54 years after Harry Caray announced games for Oakland, Caray becomes the first announcer in Oakland A’s history to follow a family member behind the microphone as a regular broadcaster.
New Oakland A’s TV play-by-play announcer Chris Caray (Courtesy of NBS Sports California).
Caray’s father, Chip, is the TV play-by-play voice for the St. Louis Cardinals. Chris Caray’s grandfather, Skip, called games for the Atlanta Braves for 32 years. Harry Caray, Chris’ great-grandfather, was a winner of the Hall of Fame’s Ford C. Frick Award for excellence in baseball broadcasting. Harry Caray spent most of his career calling St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago White Sox and Chicago Cubs games, but he spent the 1970 season announcing Oakland A’s games.
“Ever since I was a 12-year-old kid, I dreamed of becoming a major league broadcaster,” Chris Caray said Tuesday in a release announcing the hire. “Now, I’m thrilled that that dream has come true.”
The 24-year-old Caray joins Cavnar and former A’s pitcher Dallas Braden in Oakland’s TV booth. Cavnar was hired a few days ago, becoming the first woman to handle primary play-by-play duties in major league history.
Caray, along with his twin brother, Stefan, most recently handled play-by-play duties for Double-A Amarillo in the Arizona Diamondbacks’ system, and the Arizona Fall League. Chris Caray has a journalism degree from the University of Georgia.
WASHINGTON – On Tues., FEMA announced that federal disaster assistance has been made available to the state of Washington by President Joe Biden to supplement recovery efforts in the areas affected by wildfires from Aug. 18 – 25, 2023.
The President’s action makes federal funding available to affected individuals in Spokane County. Assistance can include grants for temporary housing and home repairs, low-cost loans to cover uninsured property losses and other programs to help individuals and business owners recover from the effects of the disaster.
Federal funding is also available to state, tribal and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and debris removal in Spokane County.
Federal funding is also available on a cost-sharing basis for hazard mitigation measures statewide.
Lance E. Davis has been named the Federal Coordinating Officer for federal recovery operations in the affected areas.
Individuals and business owners who sustained losses in the designated areas can begin applying for assistance by registering online at www.DisasterAssistance.gov, by calling 1-800-621- 3362 or by using the FEMA App. If you use a relay service, such as video relay service (VRS), captioned telephone service or others, give FEMA the number for that service.
