Two of former President Trump’s top allies in the House of Representatives are in Atlanta on Wednesday to mobilize Black voters ahead of his November rematch with President Biden.

Reps. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, and Byron Donalds, R-Fla., are hosting an event called ‘Congress, Cognac, and Cigars’ at a cigar lounge in the Peach State alongside former ESPN host Sage Steele.

An invitation to the event obtained by Fox News Digital billed it in all capital letters as ‘a real conversation about the Black male vote, leadership, and how they will impact the 2024 election.’

Hunt told Fox News Digital in an interview that Black voters, particularly in a state like Georgia, are going to be ‘paramount’ in deciding the winner of the next presidential race.

‘The thing is, in the past, the Republican Party has not done a very good job of going to these communities, articulating why our policies are in the best interest of the Black community,’ Hunt said. ‘Black issues are American issues. We just need voices to go articulate that.’

‘You don’t have to vote for Democrats anymore because your mama and your grandmother and your parents told you to do it. The Republican Party right now is in your best interest. If you hate what’s going on at the border, if you hate what’s happening with inflation, if you hate crime, I’m telling you that … electing [Trump] and getting him back in office is definitely going to be in your best interest.’

It’s part of a wider strategy for Trump to win 25% to 35% of the Black male vote, Hunt said. Black voters were critical to Biden’s 2020 Democrat primary and general election victories and will likely play a critical role in the fall race.

Multiple exit polls show Trump having won 19% of Black male voters in 2020, though the vast majority of Black voters still went for Biden.

‘That’s the highest that we’ve ever seen in modern history for a Republican president,’ Hunt said. ‘We need to add about five or six percentage points and grow from what we did four years ago. And given the environment that we’re in right now, we think we can accomplish that.’

Their first ‘Congress, Cognac, and Cigars’ event took place in Philadelphia. Hunt said the next one would be in Milwaukee, the site of next month’s Republican National Convention.

Hunt said the previous event showed him that Republicans could potentially make some headway with Black women, who overwhelmingly voted for Biden in 2020 as well.

‘The biggest takeaway from that event is – again, Byron and I have been really focused on Black men, but there were Black women in that room that raised their hand and stood up and said, ‘Don’t forget about us. I’m a Black woman, I’m voting for President Trump, and I’m fed up with this, too. And I’m not saying you’re going to get as many of us as you are men, but what I am saying is, don’t just cater these events to Black men; cater them to the Black community,’’ the lawmaker said.

Opinions on what questions should or should not be asked on Thursday night are everywhere. Hundreds of pundits have already spoken and written quite a lot on this, including me.

There are subjects which ought to be asked and some that ought not to be asked, by CNN’s Dana Bash and Jake Tapper and by this election cycle’s future debate moderators. I’ll deal with the latter category of question Thursday. First, the ‘should be asked’ queries. 

I’ve worked with both of CNN’s hosts on GOP presidential primary debates and have a good understanding of the process they are undertaking based on that experience. But my understanding is imperfect because the CNN of 2015-2016 is very different from that of today. Both Bash and Tapper are professionals but CNN executives, producers, and directors as well as its ‘newsroom culture’ have all changed in the past eight years, just as has the country, and I’m not privy to those changes inside the network. 

I am also not a prophet or the son of a prophet, and don’t have a crystal ball, so I have no idea what the many rehearsals and inputs and the news business blender of a legion of CNN employees and the hosts will come up with for Thursday night. 

But the stakes are so high for the network that it must weigh carefully the urgent need to fairly conduct the proceeding. If on Friday we are talking about ‘Dana Bash did this’ or ‘Jake Tapper said that,’ it will be a massive fail on the network’s part. They have a huge role to play in election 2024, but it should be one that very few people outside of the network remember. 

On Thursday morning I’ll be writing about what Bash and Tapper should not be discussing as they put issues in the form of questions. Today, though, focus on what they should be asking. 

It is only a 90-minute debate, and it includes two commercial breaks. Subtract the welcome and the closing statements, and we are talking about 80 to 85 minutes of time for President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump to speak to each other and the roughly 150 million Americans who will begin voting in three months. (Illinois, Minnesota, South Dakota and Virginia are among the states that allow early voting in late September. There may be others. Ballotpedia has a good run down of the various dates when the election actually begins.

These 80+ minutes matter a great deal to the voting, and thus to our collective future, so the candidates should be talking almost all of the time. 

The best debate would be built on very short questions that mirror the concerns of Americans: inflation; immigration; Israel’s war in Gaza and the possible expansion of that war to Lebanon; the war in Ukraine; the threats China poses to the U.S. and our allies; the perceived infirmity of President Biden and the prosecutions of former President Trump; and the future of our Republic. Those eight topics cover the broad issue sets facing the country as it chooses between Biden and Trump. 

If the moderators tailor their (hopefully very) short questions to those eight areas, then Bash and Tapper will have done the job most Americans want them to do: Set the table and let the two candidates talk. Stay out of the way. 

Examples of concise questions that are free of agendas: ‘Inflation has been an issue since you took office President Biden. Is it over? Will interest rates start to fall and keep falling?’ 

‘You have said many things about the border and immigration, President Trump. What do you want voters to know about your plans for the many millions of people who are in the country without invitation and contrary to law?’

‘What is the best policy for the United States to pursue vis-a-vis Israel and Iran and all of Iran’s proxies?’

‘We’d like to ask both of you about your ages, as whichever one of you takes the oath of office next January, you would end that term as the oldest president in American history. Are you fit to do the job and should voters be concerned about your age?’

You can figure out straightforward questions on the other ‘big issues,’ and then evaluate the job the moderators do based on your own expectations. It really isn’t that difficult to get out of the way of the candidates. 

I don’t care if one or the other of the candidates utters a whopper: It isn’t the job of Bash and Tapper or the moderators at the second of their meetings or of the meeting between Vice President Kamala Harris and whomever Trump selects as his running mate, to ‘fact check’ anyone in real time. That way lies deep damage for the network and ruin for the host who presumes to opine mid-debate on ‘the facts,’ even if one or the other says something akin to ‘America never landed on the moon.’ That’s for the entire country to decide after the debate. 

There will be an ocean of commentary pouring out across the land. The moderators Thursday and in subsequent debates do not have to, and should resist any temptation to insert their opinions on the validity or completeness of the candidates’ answers. They may take a rhetorical punch from one or both men. ‘This is the business we’ve chosen,’ said Hyman Roth in The Godfather Part 2.  A Trump tattoo is hardly new, just as a Biden roundhouse at a reporter has many precedents. The job is not to react. To press on. The clock will. 

90 total minutes isn’t a lot of time. The audience wants fairness from the moderators. That’s all. 

Ask yourself: Who refereed the three fights between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier?

You might know the names of Arthur Mercante, Tony Perez and Carlos Padilla Jr. but the overwhelming majority of people who recall those epic boxing battles don’t. Which is how it should be after every two-way battle. Ring the bell, keep time, and go home hoping you aren’t the subject of a career-ending faceplant. 

Hugh Hewitt is host of ‘The Hugh Hewitt Show,’ heard weekday mornings 6am to 9am ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh wakes up America on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable hosted by Brett Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990.  Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.

House Republicans are using three key government funding bills to pass conservative priorities on abortion, diversity and drag performances. 

The House is expected to consider appropriations bills this week funding the Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the State Department and foreign operations for fiscal year 2025.

It’s part of an ambitious schedule House GOP leaders have laid out to have their 12 individual appropriations bills passed by August recess.

But in addition to funding the government by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, Republicans are also eyeing the spending race as an opportunity to get at least some conservative social policies over the line before the November election, when they risk losing the House majority. 

That includes pushing for former President Trump’s border wall – there is $600 million in the DHS appropriations bill for funding its construction, along with a policy provision to force Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to erect physical barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border as quickly as possible.

Both the DHS and defense bills also block their respective funds from being used for abortion services. 

The defense bill stops use of ‘paid leave and travel or related expenses of a servicemember or their dependents to obtain an abortion or abortion-related services,’ according to the House Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee.

The former prohibits federal dollars from being used to perform abortions for noncitizen detainees of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Likewise, that bill also stops funding from going toward transgender health care-related measures for ICE detainees.

The defense spending bill also bans funding from being used for programs like drag queen story hour, and prevents hiring of drag performers as military recruiters. The subcommittee’s bill summary argues such programs ‘bring discredit upon the military.’

All three bills expected for consideration this week block federal dollars from going toward diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. It’s a priority House Republicans also pushed for in the last spending fight, which resulted in the shutdown of the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

Similarly, the defense and DHS bills place restrictions on those departments enacting critical race theory (CRT) programs.

While defense and DHS spending are set to get modest bumps in fiscal year 2025, Republicans are aiming to slash spending at the State Department.

House Republicans are working toward a topline of roughly $1.6 trillion in discretionary government funding. GOP leaders are guided by last year’s Fiscal Responsibility Act, a deal struck between then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and President Biden to raise the debt ceiling and limit federal spending.

But unlike last year, when the final numbers were inflated by McCarthy and Biden’s side deals, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole, R-Okla., and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pledged to forge ahead on the topline number alone.

The defense bill and DHS bill are seeing roughly $9 billion and $3 billion increases from 2024, respectively, while the State Department bill is an 11% cut from last year.

All three are being considered by the House Rules Committee on Tuesday, the last stop before a bill faces a chamber-wide vote. Democrats have already come out in opposition to the House GOP’s plans, however.

Biden threatened to veto all three spending bills in a statement of administration policy on Monday.

‘Rather than respecting their agreement and taking the opportunity to engage in a productive, bipartisan appropriations process to build on last year’s bills, House Republicans are again wasting time with partisan bills that would result in deep cuts to law enforcement, education, housing, health care, consumer safety, energy programs that lower utility bills and combat climate change, and essential nutrition services,’ the White House said.

‘The draft bills also include numerous, partisan policy provisions with devastating consequences, including harming access to reproductive health care, threatening the health and safety of… (LGBTQI+) Americans, endangering marriage equality, hindering critical climate change initiatives, and preventing the Administration from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.’

Presidential debates matter, but not always in the ways that the participants think. Seven years after the first ones, in 1960, Richard Nixon admitted that he felt his lack of proper makeup was a big factor in his losing the 1960 election to JFK. In reality, there was probably no amount of makeup that would have helped Nixon overcome the radiant clarity of his opponent. 

In perhaps the most famous moment of presidential debates, between President Reagan, then age 73, and former Vice President Walter Mondale, Reagan famously said, ‘I want you to know also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.’ 

What may easily be overlooked in this seminal moment in debate history is not only the way that Reagan turned a seeming disadvantage into an advantage, but also the charm and humor and ease with which he did so. I am one who always felt Reagan’s acting skills were underrated, and they always served him well as president.

Flash forward to now, and this week’s upcoming CNN Presidential Debate simulcast on Fox Newsbetween former President Donald Trump and current President Joe Biden. If last weekend’s rally in Philadelphia is any indication, where Trump made cognitive comparisons between his unscripted dynamic Teleprompter-free style and Biden’s more wooden, halting manner (Trump also said Biden falls off the stage, etc.), it is clear that Trump intends to use both humor and bluster to attack his opponent directly.

But should President Biden’s or President Trump’s mental acuity or cognitive ability be fair game during the CNN Presidential Debate and what about their respective ages? (Trump is 78, Biden is 81). 

The answer is that mental acuity should be on the docket but not age. Ability and fitness to serve are important in leadership positions but are not always directly proportional to age. Keep in mind that we are talking about the highest office in the land, and that, despite a multitude of presidential advisers, mental alacrity remains at the top of the list when it comes to the rapid decisions necessary to protect this country, especially in a crisis. 

I think that Trump has a point when he says his unscripted articulations speaks to the point of cognitive prowess. When I interviewed him in 2020, he had no notes, did not seek the questions in advance, and in fact it was his complex, nuanced answers that impressed me, far more than his self-proclaimed results of a cognitive test of recall, ‘person, woman, man, camera, TV.’ 

When it comes to President Biden, the concerns come not from age or what the White House says are ‘doctored videos,’ or ‘cheap fakes,’ but more of a sense of increasing hesitancy, periods of confusion or problems of recall where he temporarily forgets the names of leaders including most recently Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas.

Should a debate be a forum to test cognitive ability and executive function, should the two debaters be able to contest what each other says directly, or should this be a debate in terms of dueling soliloquies only? I think the answer is obvious. We need to see the candidates in sharp contrast, with the more direct the interactions the better. 

President Biden is a good debater, as is former President Trump. President Biden’s last physical a few months ago lists him in excellent physical condition but does not specifically include cognitive testing or an MRI of the brain, and Trump has not recently released such testing either. But a debate is a good forum to assess alacrity, nimbleness, command, wisdom, and yes, even humor and wit. 

Charisma and personality have always influenced voters from the days of Reagan back to JFK, where no amount of makeup could have helped a wooden perspiring Nixon. And then, as now, the voters will decide.

Former President Obama is again stepping in to help lock up votes and dollars during the home stretch of President Biden’s quest for the White House, apparently having ditched the concerns that reportedly made Obama wary of Biden’s candidacy in 2020.

Biden’s rematch with former President Trump features a second encore from Obama, whose celebrity and status with Democratic donors has been a financial and public relations boon to Biden at a time when the president is facing increasing questions about his record, plans and cognitive abilities.

‘I take great pride in what the Biden administration has accomplished,’ Obama said during a recent event with Biden and late-night host Jimmy Kimmel at the Peacock Theater in Los Angeles. ‘And it’s a reminder that we don’t have to just vote against something in this election. We have somebody to worry about. And there’s a whole agenda that we should be concerned about.’

He continued, ‘But we can take pride in affirming the extraordinary work that Joe has done. And we want to make sure that we build on that and then pass it on to the next president rather than have a president who wants to reverse the progress that has been made.’

Obama’s comments were part of a ritzy fundraising event at which the Biden campaign pulled in a whopping $30 million as Hollywood stars such as George Clooney and Julia Roberts took the stage in support of the 46th president. The dollar total shattered previous Democratic fundraising records.

Biden is gearing up for a difficult rematch against Trump this year, with polling showing Biden with a two-point advantage over Trump, which is well within the margin of error.

Biden said in April last year that he’d ‘finish the job’ and run for re-election, and the announcement was soon followed by a series of high-profile fundraising events with Hollywood stars, elites at the highest echelons of American society and industry, and notably Obama. 

Obama’s appearance in Los Angeles this month was not the first time his attendance helped bring in millions for Biden. 

The 44th president, as well as former President Bill Clinton, joined Biden at Radio City Music Hall in New York in March for another star-studded fundraiser, this time hosted by actress Mindy Kaling. During the event, late-night host Stephen Colbert moderated a conversation with Biden, Obama and Clinton, while special guests such as Queen Latifah, Lizzo and Ben Platt also appeared.

That event pulled in more than $26 million, according to the campaign at the time. 

Obama has also recorded campaign videos with Biden this election cycle and held conversations with Biden regarding the structure of the campaign heading into 2024, according to various media reports.

Obama’s 2024 fundraising efforts mirror his actions when he stepped in to help boost Biden in 2020, including an $11 million fundraiser that marked the duo’s first such event together since the Obama administration. Obama went on to hit the campaign trail in support of Biden in the leadup to Election Day, which included issuing a scathing assessment of Trump.

‘Trump cares about feeding his ego. Joe cares about keeping you and your family safe,’ Obama said in Flint, Michigan, just days before the 2020 election.

Obama added, ‘He’s still worried about his inauguration crowd being smaller than mine. It really bugs him. He’s still talking about that. Does he have nothing better to worry about? Did no one come to his birthday party as a kid? Was he traumatized?’

But long before joining Biden on the campaign trail – or even endorsing his former running mate – Obama cautioned Biden against seeking the White House, citing fears that the campaign could ‘damage his legacy,’ according to a 2019 New York Times report.

‘You don’t have to do this, Joe, you really don’t,’ Obama reportedly told Biden.

‘Win or lose, they needed to make sure Mr. Biden did not ‘embarrass himself’ or ‘damage his legacy’ during the campaign,’ the New York Times reported, citing two people with knowledge of the conversation.

Obama remained coy for a long while about who he would endorse, saying he would not back anyone during the primary. As Democratic contenders such as Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the primary race and cleared a path for Biden, however, Obama finally endorsed his former veep in August 2020.

Obama said in a video at the time that ‘Joe has all the qualities we need in a president right now,’ noting that choosing him as his running mate in both the 2008 and 2012 elections was ‘one of the best decisions I ever made.’

But even the process by which Obama landed on Biden as his vice presidential pick got off to a rocky start.

Biden made a series of gaffes before becoming Obama’s running mate, including in 2007 when Biden was about to declare his own run for the White House. On the eve of his announcement, Biden described Obama to a reporter as ‘the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.’

Despite Biden’s comment, he and Obama soon developed and strengthened their professional relationship, culminating in Biden being selected as Obama’s VP.

Obama could continue bolstering Biden’s campaign this election cycle as recent donation data shows Trump closing his campaign’s fundraising gap with Biden’s campaign. 

Biden previously had a massive fundraising advantage over Trump in the 2024 race for the White House, but recent windfalls following Trump’s conviction in his New York criminal trial have essentially erased Biden’s lead, Fox News Digital reported this weekend. 

Trump and the Republican National Committee in May notched their second consecutive month outraising Biden and the DNC, all while not yet launching a general election ad buy. Biden’s campaign, conversely, has spent at least $65 million on ad purchases.

‘The campaign appreciates President Obama’s help and support,’ a Biden campaign spokesperson told Fox News Digital when reached for comment. 

The House of Representatives is expected to pass a bill on Tuesday aimed at blocking countries that receive U.S. foreign aid from sending money to the Taliban.

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., introduced his No Tax Dollars for the Taliban Act late last year. If passed, it would force the State Department to report out which countries give aid to the Taliban – which has ruled Afghanistan since 2021 – that also get U.S. assistance.

It would also force the secretary of state to weigh if those countries should keep getting American dollars and develop a strategy to discourage them from continuing aid to the Taliban.

‘It’s just obscene that any money would get to the Taliban,’ Burchett told Fox News Digital in an interview on Tuesday. ‘We are $35 trillion in debt and do not need to be funding our enemies one bit.’

He argued that foreign cash being funneled to the Taliban is, in effect, wasting U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Burchett, the vice chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s subcommittee on the Middle East, also accused the State Department of being deliberately vague about how many federal dollars total have gone to the Taliban.

‘If this was an oversight of them, funding our enemies, that just tells you they have zero management and zero quality control at all, they don’t know what’s going on,’ Burchett said. ‘They obviously – somebody knows what’s going on, and those people need to be out.’

Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan nearly three years ago, the U.S. has provided over $2.8 billion to address the humanitarian crisis there, according to a Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) report released in May.

Republican national security hawks were outraged, arguing that at least some of that funding likely fell into the Taliban’s hands.

‘It is unacceptable for any U.S. funding to benefit the Taliban. The Biden administration must take immediate action to prevent U.S. taxpayer dollars from going to the Taliban,’ House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said at the time.

House GOP leaders are putting the bill up for a vote under suspension of the rules, which is generally referred for noncontroversial legislation that’s expected to get bipartisan support.

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department for comment on the bill and Burchett’s accusations.

Although the official meeting between Israeli and U.S. officials was canceled on Thursday, June 20, due to tensions between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Biden over policy disagreements regarding the Gaza war, an ‘informal meeting,’ between Israeli intelligence officials and the U.S. national security adviser Jake Sullivan still took place. 

The meeting was deemed too important to cancel for any reason, as it focused on Iran’s nuclear bomb. According to Axios, this emergency high-level meeting was convened to discuss new information about Iranian scientists’ computer modeling efforts to develop nuclear weapons. 

This revelation could dramatically change the assessments of the U.S. intelligence community, which since 2007 have suggested that Iran is not actively involved in making the atomic bomb.

On April 2, 2015, Biden’s old boss, President Obama, described the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as ‘a robust and verifiable deal’ that would supposedly ‘peacefully prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,’ during his historic speech in the White House Rose Garden addressing the Iran nuclear deal.

However, there were neither ‘robust verifications’ nor even ‘simple verifications’ in place. Iran manipulated the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the world, even mocking them repeatedly on Iranian state TV and media for trusting the mullahs and its IRGC.

Fast-forward nine years, and Biden’s Iran policy – if any policy exists – seems to be based on providing ‘life support’ for the JCPOA, which was a dead-on-arrival case. Even in his interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestia, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said: ‘[JCPOA] exists only on paper and means nothing… Nobody applies it, nobody follows it!’ 

This represents a significant failure of the Obama-Biden administration’s foreign policy.

On June 14, the G-7 world leaders warned the regime of Iran over its escalating nuclear program in the final statement of their gathering in Italy. On the same day, the United Nations’ atomic watchdog revealed that Iran is installing and starting cascades of advanced centrifuges.

Given the regime’s behavior over the past 45 years, it’s clear that the supreme leader, whose loyalty to Russian anti-West aggression is unmistakable, is accelerating efforts to achieve nuclear weapons as quickly as possible. This is the same person who ordered the IRGC to launch multiple attacks on Israel with over 300 missiles and drones two months ago and now aims to equip those missiles with nuclear warheads. 

Additionally, his ally, Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Israel’s neighboring terrorist group Hezbollah, recently threatened Israel and Cyprus, a member of the European Union, with missiles provided by Iran. 

When you piece all these elements together, the full picture becomes evident: The ayatollah seeks to obtain a nuclear bomb to fulfill his promise of wiping Israel off the map.

Coinciding with the first presidential debate in the United States, there will be a sham presidential election in Iran. It’s laughable to even call it an election. 

The supreme leader selects super loyal candidates through the Guardian Council, which he appoints himself, making his vote the only real one in determining the next president. This time, all six candidates are IRGC officials who will follow orders to develop a nuclear weapon even before the next U.S. election, which the regime fears might see Donald J. Trump – who killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani and JCPOA – return as the 47th U.S. president. 

The supreme leader aims to join the nuclear club before Biden leaves office and before Netanyahu can clear Gaza and Lebanon of Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorists. Can’t you see it?

CNN has already set the stage for an unfair debate between former President Trump and President Biden by selecting a debate moderator with a ‘history of anti-Trump lies’ and abruptly ending an interview with the campaign’s spokeswoman on Monday morning, according to the Trump campaign.

‘CNN cutting off my microphone for bringing up a debate moderator’s history of anti-Trump lies just proves our point that President Trump will not be treated fairly in Thursday’s debate. Yet President Trump is still willing to go into this 3-1 fight to bring his winning message to the American people, and he will win,’ Trump national press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital on Monday morning. 

Leavitt was abruptly cut off during an interview with CNN host Kasie Hunt on Monday morning, after criticizing CNN hosts Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, who will moderate Thursday’s debate between Trump and Biden. 

‘That’s why President Trump is knowingly going into a hostile environment on this very network, on CNN, with debate moderators who have made their opinions about him very well known over the past eight years. And their biased coverage of him,’ Leavitt said on CNN, previewing the debate.

‘So I‘ll just say my colleagues, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, have acquitted themselves as professionals as they have covered campaigns and interviewed candidates from all sides of the aisle. I‘ll also say that if you talk to analysts of previous debates, that if you’re attacking the moderators, you’re usually losing,’ Hunt responded.

As Hunt tried to redirect the interview back to previewing the debate, Leavitt said it would take just a few minutes to pull up examples of Tapper’s anti-Trump rhetoric across the years. 

‘Ma’am, I’m going to stop this interview if you’re going to continue to attack my colleagues,’ Hunt said, before Leavitt continued that she was ‘stating facts’ about what CNN hosts have previously said about Trump. 

‘I’m sorry, guys, we’re going to come back out to the panel,’ Hunt said. ‘Karoline, thank you very much for your time. You are welcome to come back at any point. She is welcome to come back and speak about Donald Trump, and Donald Trump will have equal time to Joe Biden when they both join us later this week in Atlanta for this debate.’

Hunt followed up on X Monday morning that when guests join her show, they must ‘respect my colleagues.’  

‘​​You come on my show, you respect my colleagues. Period. I don’t care what side of the aisle you stand on, as my track record clearly shows,’ Hunt posted. 

A CNN spokesperson told Fox News Digital on Monday morning that Tapper and Bash are ‘well respected veteran journalists who have covered politics for more than five decades combined.’

‘They have extensive experience moderating major political debates, including CNN’s Republican Presidential Primary Debate this cycle. There are no two people better equipped to co-moderate a substantial and fact-based discussion and we look forward to the debate on June 27 in Atlanta,’ the spokesperson continued. 

Trump had already predicted that the upcoming debate on CNN had a 90% chance of being unfair toward him, highlighting there was still a ‘good 10% chance’ moderators Tapper and Bash would be fair. 

‘Fake [Jake] Tapper and lots of other people that were involved on CNN, [the Biden campaign] wanted to be seated, which I didn’t like. I said we should stand and I think we won that point,’ Trump said on Logan Paul’s ‘IMPAULSIVE’ podcast earlier this month. ‘But I would have agreed to whatever I had agreed to because they didn’t want to do it. They thought that I wouldn’t do it because it’s CNN, but I’ve done plenty of CNN. I did a town hall not so long ago with CNN that worked out well. But I think they’ll be fair. I think they’re gonna try to be fair. As fair as they can be.’

‘But I think that it’s important for there to be a debate. So [the Biden campaign] said, ‘You want to debate?’ ‘Yep, I’ll accept. You don’t even have to tell me.’ Then they said CNN, they said the different people that are involved, but let’s see what happens. I used to get along with [debate moderator] Jake Tapper. We’ll see what happens, but it doesn’t matter. Whatever it is, it is,’ Trump continued. 

‘They might be [fair],’ Trump added. ‘I’d say a good 10% chance.’

Tapper has a long history of espousing anti-Trump rhetoric, including trying to link Trump to Adolf Hitler, as Leavitt mentioned in her brief remarks on CNN Monday. In December, Tapper tied Trump to Hitler following the 45th president’s remark that illegal immigrants were ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’

‘With four weeks until Ohioans cast the nation’s first votes in the 2024 presidential race, the dehumanizing rhetoric of Adolf Hitler is once again alive and well on the national political stage. This time, of course, in the United States. This time, given life by former president and current Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, whose thoughts on immigrants were made shockingly crystal clear over the weekend,’ Tapper said before playing the clip of Trump’s remarks. ‘If you were to open up a copy of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf,’ you would find the Nazi leader describing the mixing of non-Germans with Germans as poisoning. The Jew, Hitler wrote, quote, ‘poisons the blood of others.”

Back in 2020, Tapper also eulogized Trump’s loss to Biden, declaring that ‘for tens of millions of our fellow Americans: their long national nightmare is over.’

‘It’s been a time of extreme divisions, many of the divisions caused and exacerbated by President Trump himself,’ Tapper said at the time. 

‘It’s been a time of several significant and utterly avoidable failures, most tragically, of course, the unwillingness to respect facts and science and do everything that could be done to save lives during a pandemic. It has been a time where truth and fact were treated with disdain,’ he continued. ‘It was a time of cruelty where official inhumanities such as child separation became the official shameful policy of the United States. But now the Trump presidency is coming to an end.’

Tapper also shamed Trump after his COVID diagnosis in 2020, arguing it was ‘was a demonstration of a wanton disregard for human life’ and that Trump became a ‘symbol of his own failures.’ At the start of the pandemic, Tapper claimed Trump ‘continues to lie to the American people’ about COVID testing.

Trump held a rally in Philadelphia over the weekend on Temple University’s campus, and told Fox News before it that holding campaign events is ‘really the best strategy’ to prepare for Thursday’s debate. 

‘We have all these people out here and they are screaming questions. I look forward to the debate,’ Trump said.

He added that he’s confident ahead of the debate, while noting he’s not worried about Biden’s preparations for Thursday. Biden traveled to Camp David last Thursday, where he is anticipated to remain until the debate, preparing with senior officials. 

‘Well, I think if he prepares, he’ll be fine. Then he will forget it within about an hour after preparing. So, we’ll see what happens. We’ll see what happens,’ Trump said.

Fox News Digital’s Hanna Panreck and Joseph Wulfsohn contributed to this report.