Archive

2024

Browsing

Miami tight end Cam McCormick was granted a ninth year of playing college football, he announced Thursday on social media.

McCormick suffered season-ending injuries in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 and petitioned the NCAA for an extra year in September.

He missed three of those years due to an ankle injury, tore his Achilles in 2021, and was also hospitalized with rhabdomyolysis after intense workouts in 2017.

“I love my teammates, my coaches, and the University of Miami,” McCormick said. “Despite the challenges, I want to finish what we started together. The bond we share is everlasting and makes it all worthwhile.”

The 25-year-old McCormick enrolled at Oregon in January 2016 and spent seven years there, earning a bachelor’s and master’s degrees before transferring to Miami.

Some other notable players in the same 2016 recruiting class include Rashaun Gary, Nick Bosa, Ed Oliver, Dexter Lawrence, and Trevon Diggs: all are currently on NFL rosters.

McCormick caught eight passes for 62 yards in 13 games last season for Miami.

“Cam is an amazing young man of service, a great athlete, hard worker, and a natural-born leader,” Miami head coach Mario Cristobal said in a statement. “His return is a testament to his character and the values he brings to our team. We are excited to have him back for the upcoming season.”

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

New England coach Jerod Mayo did something, well, brave during his first press conference as Patriots head coach. He talked about race.

The most interesting part of his meeting with the media on Wednesday was when the conversation veered into race, specifically, when Mayo was asked about being the first Black head coach in Patriots history. Owner Robert Kraft was asked about that.

‘I’m really colorblind, in terms of, I know what I feel like on Sunday when we lose,’ Kraft said. He added that he hired Mayo because the coach was the best person for the job and it’s simply coincidental that Mayo is Black. ‘He happens to be a man of color,’ Kraft said, ‘but I chose him because I believe he’s best to do the job.’

That is the standard answer good people give to the complicated issue of race. I don’t see color. I see performance. That is an intensely naive view but it’s a view many people possess.

Mayo wasn’t having any of it. And here comes the brave part. Mayo politely, but firmly, contradicted the man who just hired him, and someone who is one of the most powerful people in all of sports. It was a remarkable moment.

‘I do see color,’ Mayo said. ‘Because I believe if you don’t see color, you can’t see racism.’

Bingo.

He didn’t stop there. Mayo was asked about the historic significance of his hiring.

‘You better believe it,’ he said. ‘Being the first Black coach here in New England means a lot to me.’ He added: ‘…You have to take ideas from other people: Black, white, green, yellow…it really doesn’t matter. Old, young. One thing you’ll notice about me, in our interaction as we continue to go, is, I don’t like echo chambers. I want people around me that are going to question my ideas, or question the way we have done things in the past…’

It’s difficult to put into words how big a deal this was for Mayo to say. No one knows how good a coach he’ll be, but Mayo speaking honestly about race, during his introductory presser, in New England of all places, is a remarkable moment.

To understand why it’s a big deal look no further than some of the comments under the Patriots’ social media account on X, formerly Twitter. Lots and lots and lots of racist responses, to be sure, but also people saying Mayo shouldn’t talk about race.

And that’s why what Mayo did is so important and, yes, brave. It may seem like a simple thing to say that seeing race is important, because in order to solve this country’s dire racial issues, you have to first identify them. Duh.

But one of the great paradoxes of race in America is how tens of millions of people ignore it. They think that by not talking about it, or criticizing people who do, somehow it will just go away. It doesn’t. Racism is poison and the only way to combat it is fight it head on. Discuss it. Acknowledge it.

Just as Mayo did.

It’s obviously too early to know what kind of coach Mayo will be. In the end, what will matter most is how much he wins. Winning Super Bowls was the standard in New England with Bill Belichick. If Mayo wins, he’ll be remembered for that. If he loses, he’ll be remembered for that.

It’s also true that in the NFL the fall is steeper for Black head coaches. The criticism harsher. The standards different. This is the case for many Black Americans across many professions. It could be for Mayo as well.

But for now, for right now, Mayo isn’t putting his views about race or, in essence, his Blackness, aside for the job. He’s telling the truth about race and showing guts that many, many people don’t have.

In that way, he’s already winning.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Tomlin said he was feeling better to discuss certain topics with the media, a far different attitude from when he walked away from a postgame press conference after Pittsburgh lost 31-17 to the Buffalo Bills in the AFC wild card game.

‘I’m in a much better mood today. Anyone have any contract questions?’ said Tomlin, who just completed his 17th season with the team and has one year left on his deal.

The reason for Tomlin’s sudden departure from his availability on Monday, he says, was because end-of-season press conferences weren’t appropriate to discuss that topic. He added that he ‘certainly could have handled that situation better than I did.’

“Yes, I expect to be back. I’d imagine those contract things are gonna run their course,” Tomlin said. “Art and I have a really good, transparent relationship. We communicate continually, often. I don’t imagine it’s gonna be an issue and I imagine it’s gonna get done in a timely manner at the appropriate time, but my mindset is to coach this team.’

NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more.

Tomlin also said the team will hire an offensive coordinator from the outside, after firing Matt Canada midseason.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Jim Harbaugh isn’t the only former Stanford football coach the Los Angeles Chargers have interviewed.

The Chargers had an in-person interview with David Shaw, the team announced Thursday.

Shaw previously coached at Stanford from 2011-2022. He replaced Harbaugh at the university in 2011 when Harbaugh left to be the head coach of the San Francisco 49ers. Shaw was also the offensive coordinator under Harbaugh at University of San Diego (2006) and Stanford (2007-2010).

The Chargers interviewed Harbaugh for their head coaching vacancy earlier this week.

Shaw, 51, also has experience as an offensive quality control coach with the Philadelphia Eagles (2007) and Raiders (1998–2000), in addition to being Raiders quarterbacks coach (2001) and serving on the Baltimore Ravens coaching staff (2002–2005).

NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more.

This is the second known NFL interview in as many seasons for Shaw. He interviewed for the Denver Broncos head coaching job last year before the team hired Sean Payton.

Shaw compiled a 96-54 record in 12 seasons at Stanford. He is the winningest head coach in program history. He guided the Cardinal to three Pac-12 conference titles and two Rose Bowl wins during his tenure.

The Chargers are in the midst of an expansive head coaching and general manager search following the December firings of head coach Brandon Staley and general manager Tom Telesco. The Chargers also interviewed former Tennessee Titans head coach Mike Vrabel on Thursday, the team announced. Former Minnesota Vikings head coach Leslie Frazier and former Arizona Cardinals head coach Steve Wilks are two of the other experienced coaches the Chargers have interviewed.

The team has also interviewed offensive and defensive coordinators such as Cincinnati Bengals OC Brian Callahan and Ravens DC Mike Macdonald, among others.

Follow USA TODAY Sports’ Tyler Dragon on X @TheTylerDragon.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — A U.S. House subcommittee hearing aimed at refining the draft of a possible college-sports bill drew significant interest and participation from legislators on Thursday, but provided few clues about a path forward.

Republicans and Democrats basically agreed that Congress needs to get involved in addressing the wide array of issues that have been raised by college athletes becoming able to make money from their name, image and likeness (NIL). However, significant differences remain about how to do that.

Draft legislation is being offered by Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., who chairs House Energy and Commerce Committee’s innovation, data and commerce subcommittee — the panel that met Thursday in what was billed as legislative hearing. That’s a step up from an educational hearing, one of which the subcommittee held last March. But it’s short of a mark-up.

How the hearing unfolded

In his opening remarks Thursday, Bilirakis said he wants to file a bill “as soon as possible” because it’s needed “to save college sports as we know it.” And NCAA President Charlie Baker — part of a witness panel that also included three college athletes — continued to make the association’s case for a federal law that would, among other goals, resolve a patchwork of state NIL laws, provide the NCAA with some legal protection from antitrust lawsuits and prohibit athletes from becoming employees of their schools based on their participation in sports.

A 3½-hour session ensued, with questions coming from 19 of the 23 subcommittee members and eight more members of the full committee.

Along the way, Democrats made clear there would be a long road ahead in the House. And Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., a former Division I college volleyball player and a long-standing advocate of athletes’ rights, said afterward she does not think a measure with an antitrust exemption or provision barring athletes from becoming school employees would pass in this Congressional session.

Bilirakis’ current draft would prohibit athletes from becoming school employees, and it would provide a specific form of antitrust protection that is narrower than the type for which the NCAA has been lobbying.

“It’s hard to imagine in this Congress, getting to an agreement on an antitrust exemption — on employment,” Trahan said. “That’s not going to pass both chambers and … Democrats and Republicans won’t come together on that one.”

Among the athletes who testified Thursday, Radford women’s volleyball player Meredith Page and Michigan softball player Keke Tholl, expressed reservations about the prospect of becoming employees while UCLA football player Chase Griffin said that based on the effort and hours they put in every week, football players “operate as employees currently.”

Other points of conflict

Variously, Trahan and fellow Democrats Jan Schakowsky, Ill.; Debbie Dingell, Mich.; and Frank Pallone, N.J., said they want to see a bill that addresses athletes’ medical coverage, health and safety standards, athletes right collectively bargain and greater Title IX enforcement.

Baker noted that under new NCAA rules that will take effect in August, all NCAA athletes will have access to health care coverage for athletically related injuries for two years after their college careers end and that Division I schools will be required to provide enhanced health and well-being services.

He also discussed his recent proposal for a new competitive subdivision whose schools would be required to put at least $30,000 into “an enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of their athletes while remaining in compliance with Title IX. The proposal also would allow schools to make NIL deals with athletes, which Baker described as another way to enhance gender equity, as opposed to schools’ NIL collectives, which have tended to have a focus on football players.

The rub here is that the current version of Bilirakis’ draft would prohibit schools from having NIL deals with athletes.

In addition, Bilirakis’ draft calls for the creation of an independent, non-governmental, self-regulating organization that would oversee NIL activities. That organization would require registration by agents, by collectives and by third parties, which the draft defines as an entity that makes NIL payments to athletes, meaning a company that wants to have an NIL deal with an athlete presumably would have to register.

Griffin, the UCLA quarterback, criticized that idea, saying it would potentially discourage companies from doing business with athletes.  “No other student is subject to” that type of regulatory arrangement, which he said would preserve the “outdated NCAA model.”

Baker, in his written testimony, also pushed back against the outside NIL oversight entity, saying the association believes that “schools, conferences and the NCAA — as opposed to a federalized structure – are best positioned to govern college sports.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex., a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, has said he opposes an outside entity. He remains in negotiations with Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J.; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jerry Moran, R-Kan., over draft proposals that they have circulated in that chamber.

Bilirakis, nevertheless, remained upbeat about his proposal’s future.

He said in a statement Thursday night: “We heard productive feedback directly from student athletes, committee members, and other key witnesses during today’s hearing. We have momentum and I look forward to incorporating this input as we work to pass legislation that will achieve our goal of codifying NIL rights, protecting student athletes, and preserving the integrity of college sports.

‘I remain confident that we will strike the right balance and continue to advance a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on my bill that achieves these primary objectives.”

What else was discussed

With so many members taking part in the hearing, college-sports issues other than Bilirakis’ draft were bound to come up — and they did.

Conference realignment criticism and concerns: Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Tex., pressed Baker about the scheduling and travel issues that athletes will face after conference realignments have set the stage with the Big Ten and Atlantic Coast conferences now stretching from coast to coast. He asked about the importance of addressing that rather than NIL.

‘The issue you’re raising is a legitimate one,” replied Baker, who then raised the possibility of competition being scheduled in a fashion under which multiple teams would travel to the same location and play more than one game over the course of a weekend.

 ► How an adverse judgement in an antitrust damages case would affect college sports: Rep. John Joyce, R-Pa., asked about what would happen if the NCAA and Power Five conferences lose in the House/Prince antitrust case, which could result in a multi-billion-dollar damages award for athletes and former athletes.

Baker said such a payment would be “applied probably across most of college sports” rather than being absorbed centrally by the NCAA.

In 2016, when the association settled the damages portion of another antitrust case for just over $208 million, the NCAA Board of Governors decided to fund the settlement from NCAA reserves and that no conference or school was required to contribute.

Transgender athletes participating in college sports: Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., and Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., both pressed Baker on this issue, with Cammack asking Baker, largely rhetorically, how the NCAA can “maintain credibility” on Title IX while it allows “biological men to compete” in women’s sports.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

As the NFL postseason progresses from the wild-card round to this weekend’s divisional games, the wheat is separating from the chaff – and this is certainly true from a quarterbacking perspective. This year could also mark a turning point in the league’s history, given not only the fresh blood at the game’s – and arguably team sports’ – most important position but also the sterling silver opportunity at hand. (And the playoff crucible definitely didn’t look too hot for newcomers C.J. Stroud and Jordan Love in their postseason debuts.)

“When we’ve needed it most, I feel like just throughout the entire season, and now in this moment, he’s the leader we need him to be,” Texans coach DeMeco Ryans said of Stroud earlier this week.

“He’s the player that we need him to be. His demeanor on the field, off the field, is exactly what you want out of a starting quarterback.”

And it’s also what the NFL wants and needs following the departure of so many established field generals in recent offseasons.

Tom Brady took his seven rings with him into retirement last year, underscoring the current lack of championship experience among the league’s quarterback fraternity. His departure left five active quarterbacks who have won the Super Bowl – and a combined six times. Two of those QB1s, the Los Angeles Rams’ Matthew Stafford and Cleveland Browns’ Joe Flacco bowed out of the running for another ‘chip’ on wild-card weekend, joining Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson as observers of the 2023 playoffs the rest of the way.

NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more.

So that leaves seven quarterbacks with a shot to join two-time MVP Patrick Mahomes behind that velvet rope as Super Bowl 58 draws ever nearer. And all of them are currently playing extremely well, none you’d necessarily count out the way you might have Philadelphia’s Jalen Hurts, Pittsburgh’s Mason Rudolph or Miami’s Tua Tagovailoa prior to the wild-card round given their personal or collective circumstances going into the playoff openers.

So which of the eight quarterbacks playing this weekend engenders the most championship faith? The least, relative to their counterparts anyway? Here’s our confidence meter, ranked highest to lowest, heading into the playoff quarterfinals:

1. Patrick Mahomes, Kansas City Chiefs

Sure, you have to acknowledge that the 2023 season was his worst statistically since becoming a starter in 2018 – his record (10-6), touchdown percentage (4.5%), yards per game (261.4) and passer rating (92.6) all career worsts while his 14 interceptions are the most he’s ever thrown. Still, Mahomes was able to put together a Pro Bowl season despite the dearth of experience (and wealth of drops) among his wideouts along with TE Travis Kelce having a subpar year – at least relative to his ridiculously lofty bar. Yet Mahomes looked pretty good (262 yards, TD) in subzero temperatures against the Dolphins last weekend while running his all-time playoff record to 12-3. He’s also about to catch the Bills with two additional days of rest and at a time when Buffalo is likely fielding a patchwork linebacking group. Sunday will be Mahomes’ first-ever playoff game on the road, Super Bowls classified as neutral sites, but he’s 2-0 in the postseason against the Bills and with gaudy numbers to boot (351.5 passing yards per game, 6 TD passes, 0 INTs, 75.6% completion rate, 125.2 QB rating). This may not be the greatest Chiefs squad Mahomes has ever played for, though it surely is defensively – that factor plus his experience making it virtually impossible to trust any of these other quarterbacks more.

2. Brock Purdy, San Francisco 49ers

From an efficiency standpoint – and he’s only played in 28 NFL games, including playoffs – he’s off to a historically good start with a 111.3 career passer rating. Purdy was exceptionally surgical in 2023, leading the league with a 113.0 mark. Like anyone, he has the occasional clunker, notably his four-pick debacle against the Ravens on Christmas night. But Purdy wouldn’t face Baltimore again before the Super Bowl, and he should have his entire supporting cast at his disposal – also a key indicator he’ll perform at optimum capability, as he did in last year’s postseason before being injured early in the NFC title game at Philadelphia. Purdy will be facing a Packers coaching staff well versed in what the 49ers like to do schematically. But Kyle Shanahan’s offense is operating arguably at its highest stratum in the coach’s seven seasons, and the primary players (Purdy included) have been able to focus on body maintenance and self-scouting most of the past three weeks, even while Shanahan ran some intense practices during the bye week. If rust has been sidestepped, Purdy and Co. should be primed to bust some heads.

3. Baker Mayfield, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Don’t misconstrue this as a hot take that a team which won nine regular-season games is about to go all the way. But let’s credit Mayfield, who isn’t the big question mark here, either. He’s been dealing in big games, typically well, going back to his time at the University of Oklahoma. Monday night’s precision performance against the Eagles (337 yards, 3 TDs) – and, yes, the Eagles “defense” helped – upped Mayfield’s playoff record to 2-1. He’d be undefeated had the Browns gotten a break or two in their divisional loss at Kansas City three years ago. Nevertheless, Mayfield has a 102.7 passer rating in postseason, including a 7-to-1 TD-to-INT ratio. And on the heels of his best NFL campaign, he and the Bucs are playing with house money – and certainly good enough to continue cashing in as they head to Detroit’s Ford Field.

4. Josh Allen, Buffalo Bills

The AFC East champions are undefeated when he doesn’t turn the ball over this season … unfortunately that’s only included four games, though Monday’s wild-card win over Pittsburgh was one of them – Allen throwing for three TDs and sprinting 52 yards for another. His 22 giveaways in 2023 paced the AFC, his 18 picks the most of his career. Yet there’s always that very notable other side of the coin with Allen, and that meant a league-high 44 TDs produced (29 passing, 15 rushing) during the regular season. But he’s not easy to trust given his mistakes essentially render the Bills average – Buffalo going 8-6 in 2023 when he turned the ball over. His 4-4 playoff record breaks down to 3-1 when he’s turnover free, but 1-3 otherwise. Allen is a microcosm of this franchise in recent years, so often on the cusp of elite status but just never able to get over the Lombardi Trophy hump. But taking down Mahomes and Co. for the first time in postseason Sunday afternoon could be quite the springboard.

5. Jared Goff, Detroit Lions

Aside from Mahomes, he’s the only other quarterback left in the field who’s played on Super Sunday – though Goff’s disappointing showing in Super Bowl 53 helped lead the Rams to trade him for Stafford two years later. And don’t forget, Los Angeles HC Sean McVay even opted to start John Wolford over Goff in a playoff game three years ago. Yet Goff wound up relieving injured Wolford in that wild-card game at Seattle and played quite well off the bench in a victory. And he’s gotten increasingly better from that point forward, notably in Sunday night’s defeat of his old LA buddies, when he connected on 22 of 27 attempts for 277 yards and a TD. Beating McVay and Stafford had to feel like personal vindication for Goff, much as he tried to downplay it. Will facing the Bucs allow him to play even freer? Or could a letdown set in? Goff wasn’t exactly consistent week to week in 2023, but he was fantastic at Tampa in Week 6 (353 yards, 2 TDs). He’s got a great shot to lead the Lions to just their second NFC championship game, though it remains to be seen if he can sustain a heater that carries them to their first Super Bowl.

6. Lamar Jackson, Baltimore Ravens

He’s almost certainly about to add a second MVP award to his trophy case, thanks in large part to his development as a passer this season, when Jackson hasn’t been so quick to bolt the pocket. Yet make no mistake, he’s still lethal on the move, his 821 rushing yards pacing all quarterbacks in 2023 … even if it’s only the third-highest total of his six-year career. Of course the crux of the issue with Jackson has been his inability to deliver in postseason, the signal-caller prevailing in just one of his four starts and never advancing beyond the divisional round. The last time the Ravens were the AFC’s top seed – 2019, when Jackson won his first MVP – they were blown out 28-12 at home by Tennessee. The demise of that 14-2 team, one of the best statistically in NFL history, wasn’t solely the responsibility of Jackson – but his limitations as a passer were exposed that night. In four postseason starts, he’s completed 55.9% of his throws with a rating of 68.3, far below his regular-season marks (64.5% and 98.0, respectively). Jackson has only produced four playoff TDs (3 passing, 1 rushing) against seven turnovers (5 INTs, 2 fumbles). Time to find out if his progression this season translates to the league’s second season.

7. Jordan Love, Green Bay Packers

Could he have looked more comfortable taking Dallas’ vaunted D apart Sunday, completing 16 of 21 throws for 272 yards and three TDs? His 157.2 passer rating was a playoff record for the Pack … and they’ve had some decent guys behind center over the years. And lately, Love appears as if he’s destined to add his name to the Herber-Starr-Favre-Rodgers lineage. He’s been nearly flawless over the past nine games (seven of them Green Bay wins), passing for 21 TDs against one INT with a completion rate of 71% and QB rating of 116.6. And, unlike Rodgers last season, Love seems perfectly in sync with HC Matt LaFleur and the Pack’s young corps of pass catchers, whether dropping the ball in the bucket to wide-open targets or rifling it into the end zone to “covered” ones. Like Purdy, he’ll have to overcome the fact that San Francisco’s D knows what’s coming – the Niners trying to eliminate Green Bay for the third time in five seasons.

8. C.J. Stroud, Houston Texans

Through one week of playoffs, he’s tied with Love as the NFL’s top-rated passer at 157.2. No quarterback has been drafted earlier – second overall in Stroud’s case – yet won a playoff game as a rookie. And he was magnificent in a 45-14 dissection of Cleveland and its top-ranked defense, passing for a playoff rookie record three TDs while connecting on 16 of 21 throws for 274 yards – Stroud becoming the youngest (22 years, 102 days) quarterback ever to win a postseason game. Yet the sample size is one. Saturday, Stroud will experience playoff football on the road for the first time – 19 weeks after his NFL debut in Baltimore, when he passed for 242 yards in a 25-9 loss … for whatever that’s worth now. He throws a beautiful ball, hangs in the pocket on deep drops and rarely turns it over. And if he continues playing without fear, why couldn’t he beat the Ravens and a defense that surrendered the fewest points in the league this season and take the Texans to their first AFC championship game?

***

Follow USA TODAY Sports’ Nate Davis on X, formerly Twitter @ByNateDavis.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Calling all Buffalo Bills fans.

For the second week in a row, the Bills are calling on fans to help shovel snow at Highmark Stadium in preparation for the Bills’ AFC divisional playoff game against the Kansas City Chiefs on Sunday afternoon.

‘We’re going to need some snow shovelers (again)!’ the Bills wrote on social media Thursday. ‘Help get Highmark Stadium ready for our Divisional Round playoff game.’

Sunday’s kickoff, scheduled for 6:30 p.m. ET, is forecast to be 20 degrees, according to Accuweather, much warmer than the Bills’ 31-17 wild-card round victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers that was rescheduled to Monday due to severe weather in Western New York. But the National Weather Service projects 2-8 inches of snow to accumulate on Friday and Saturday leading into the playoff matchup.

BILLS VS CHIEFS WEATHER FORECAST: Is any snowexpected in Buffalo?

NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more.

That’s where the Bills Mafia comes into play.

The Bills are seeking help on Friday, starting at 2 p.m. ET into the evening. Helpers will be compensated $20 an hour and provided a ‘comfortable warm break’, the team added.

To work, helpers will need to be 18 years or older with a proper photo identification, weather-appropriate gear, including gloves, scarves, hats, boots and coats, in addition to a shovel if available. If you don’t have your own shovel, one will be provided, the Bills said.

Buffalo is not the first franchise to ask its fanbase for help. The Green Bay Packers have asked their fans to help shovel snow at Lambeau Field multiple times across the years, most recently in 2020.

Last week, the Bills relied on volunteer shovelers to prepare the stadium for the Bills’ rescheduled game against the Steelers on Monday after a winter storm dumped around 17 inches of snow in the Buffalo area. Volunteer Logan Eschrich shared social media footage of himself and the ‘snowcrew’ attempting to make headway in ‘whiteout conditions.’

“It would have been absolutely impossible (to play). We could barely see the next row down from us. And unfortunately, it’s still that way,” Eschrich told the Associated Press. “We made progress shoveling, but not much at all.”

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Former President Donald Trump is on Fox News’ Sean Hannity Thursday night in New Hampshire, just days before the Granite State’s first-in-the-nation primary.

The interview airs Thursday on Fox News Channel starting at 9 p.m. ET.

Trump, who solidified his standing as the frontrunner in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race after winning the Iowa caucuses Monday night, now has his sights set on New Hampshire.

Trump traveled to the Granite State this week after he dominated his GOP opponents in Iowa by winning 98 of 99 counties. He collected 20 delegates in the state. 

Based on polling, Trump could see similar results after Tuesday’s primary. He leads opponents by double digits.

A daily tracking poll released Thursday morning by Suffolk University, the Boston Globe and NBC10 Boston shows Trump with 50% support among those likely to vote in the New Hampshire primary.

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who served as ambassador to the United Nations during the Trump administration, stands at 36%, with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at just 6%.

In that same poll, 4% of respondents said they were undecided, with 1% saying they would back a different candidate altogether.

Another poll released hours earlier from Saint Anselm College also had Trump with a 14-point lead over Haley, with DeSantis in single digits.

While Trump is ahead by double digits in most New Hampshire polls, one recent poll shows Trump and Haley neck and neck.

A poll from American Research Group Inc. released Tuesday shows Trump and Haley tied at 40% among the state’s likely Republican primary voters.

Independents can vote in the Republican primary in the state, which could be beneficial to Haley, who some have cast as a more moderate Republican option. 

Moderate voters in the Granite State are highly influential, and the state’s independents — who can vote in either major party primary — have long played a crucial role in New Hampshire’s storied presidential contest.

Nevertheless, according to the RealClearPolitics Average between Jan. 3 and Jan. 10, Trump holds a double-digit lead over Haley and DeSantis.

And beyond New Hampshire, Trump holds an even stronger lead.

In Nevada, which holds its primary contests in early February, Trump sits at 69%, which is 58.5 points ahead of DeSantis, who has 10.5% of the vote, according to the RealClearPolitics Average from Sept. 29 through Jan. 8.

And in Haley’s home state of South Carolina, which votes Feb. 24, Trump is up 30.2 points at 52%, with Haley in second place at 21.8% and DeSantis polling at 11%, according to the RealClearPolitics Average from Oct. 18 through Jan. 3.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

President Biden raised eyebrows Thursday when he appeared to confuse a woman with whom he took a photo for a Democrat North Carolina congresswoman who wasn’t in attendance.

‘I want to mention Congresswoman Deborah Ross, where’s Deborah?’ Biden asked the audience in North Carolina during a Thursday speech.

‘I just had my picture taken with her, that’s probably why she left,’ Biden continued, sparking a laugh from the crowd.

‘Oh, she couldn’t be here, actually,’ Biden continued. ‘That’s not true. I got it mixed up.’

It is unclear who Biden took a picture with and who he got ‘mixed up.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Rep. Ross’s office for clarification but did not immediately receive a response. 

Conservatives on social media quickly jumped on the comment as a troubling sign of Biden’s mental sharpness.

Biden’s remark also prompted social media users to bring up a previous gaffe in which the president appeared to forget about the death of Indiana Rep. Jackie Walorski when he asked where she was on stage after her death.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters 14 times that Biden wasn’t confused about whether Walorski was alive and in the room but rather he had her ‘top of mind’ because he would meet with her family later that week.

Biden has been widely criticized by conservatives for his age since becoming president, including by those who have openly questioned his mental sharpness.

Seventy-six percent of voters agreed Biden is ‘too old’ to serve a second term, compared to 48% who said the same about 77-year-old former President Trump, according to a poll late last year.

Biden has consistently held several closed-door meetings with his top donors to alleviate their concerns heading into the 2024 election, including worries about his age and energy, according to a recent report.

The White House has sternly defended Biden’s mental acuity on multiple occasions, including in November when Jean-Pierre said she ‘would put the president’s stamina, the president’s wisdom, ability to get this done on behalf of the American people against anyone, anyone on any day of the week.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Former President Trump said he believes the U.S. Supreme Court will ‘intervene’ and rule in his favor by keeping him on 2024 primary ballots across the nation despite challenges, telling Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he has faith that the justices on the high court are ‘not going to take the vote away from the people.’

Trump sat down for an exclusive interview in New Hampshire with Fox News’ Sean Hannity. The interview aired Thursday night on Fox News Channel and came just days before the Granite State’s first-in-the-nation primary, set for Tuesday, Jan. 23.

Several states, like Maine and Colorado, are looking to remove Trump from the 2024 GOP primary ballot in the state, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution, or the ‘disqualifications clause.’

That clause bars individuals who have ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion’ against America, or aided those engaged in such, from holding office.

Trump has never been charged with insurrection.

‘We put on three great justices, and you have some other great justices up there, and they’re not going to take the vote away from the people,’ Trump said.

Trump, as president, nominated three justices who were confirmed to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court: Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

‘You saw in the history of the Iowa primary – it goes back a long time – I won by the most,’ Trump said. ‘Nobody’s ever won, as you know … there’s nobody even close. I doubled up and more than doubled up.’

Trump dominated the Iowa caucuses, winning 98 of 99 counties. He lost one county by one single vote. Trump collected 20 delegates in the state.

‘I’m sure the Supreme Court is going to say we’re not going to take the vote away from the people,’ Trump said.

But the former president said that it is President Biden who is ‘a threat to democracy.’

‘Biden is a threat to democracy, is an absolute threat to democracy, and he’s very dangerous for a couple of reasons,’ Trump said.

The former president said Biden is ‘grossly incompetent, which is the No. 1 reason’ but said the president is ‘actually in his own way.’

‘It’s not him. It’s the people that surround him,’ Trump said. ‘You got some very bad people surrounding him at that desk.’

Trump said the people running the Department of Justice are ‘young, and they’re smart, and they’re communists, and they’re Marxists, they’re fascists, and they’re running this country.’

‘They’re running it right into the ground,’ Trump said.

But returning to the Supreme Court, Trump said, ‘I don’t think the Supreme Court would do it because … you can’t take the vote. I am leading in every poll. I am leading Biden, but I am leading the remaining Republicans.’ 

Trump said the Supreme Court has ‘two votes that are very important coming up.’

‘One, as we discussed, we call it Colorado or whatever, but you know, I really believe they’re going to leave the people to vote again,’ Trump said. ‘It’s hard to imagine they would do, and most states have already approved it, and as you know, very few states have done that.’

Trump said ‘this is Colorado and a couple of others at this moment.’

But Trump also said the Supreme Court is considering ‘immunity for the president of the United States.’

‘And I’m not talking about myself,’ Trump said. ‘I’m talking about any president has to have immunity because if you take immunity away from the president — so important — you will have a president that’s not going to be able to do anything, because when he leaves office, the opposing party president, if it’s the opposing party, will indict the president for doing something that should have been good.’

Trump used an example of former President Obama dropping ‘missiles, and they ended up hitting a kindergarten or a school or the apartment house.’

‘A lot of people were killed,’ Trump said. ‘Well, if that’s the case, he’s going to end up being indicted when he leaves office. He meant well. The missile went in the wrong direction.’ 

Trump also pointed to Biden.

‘Look at Biden. What would happen to Biden? He’s killed our country with his policies,’ Trump said. ‘The border is a disaster. Everything he does is a disaster.’

Trump pointed to the Biden administration’s withdrawal of U.S. military and assets from Afghanistan, calling it ‘the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country, giving $85 billion worth of equipment, killing our soldiers, wounding horribly our soldiers, leaving people behind.’

‘Well, when he leaves office, if he doesn’t have immunity now, I think it’s horrible what he did, but he probably, I don’t know, it’s hard to believe, but he probably meant well,’ Trump said. ‘But the man is incompetent, but you have to leave immunity with the president.’ 

He added, ‘If a president is afraid to act because they’re worried about being indicted when they leave office, a president of the United States has to have immunity, and the Supreme Court is going to be ruling on that.’

Trump said if presidents don’t have immunity, ‘no president is going to act.’

‘You’re going to have guys that just sit in office and are afraid to do anything,’ Trump said.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., is expected to issue a ruling in the case brought by Trump, who is seeking to have the charges against him stemming from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation dismissed. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Trump and his lawyers are arguing that he should be immune from prosecution because he was serving as president of the United States as he pushed to investigate the results of the 2020 election.

If the appeals court rules against Trump, the matter will come before the U.S. Supreme Court.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS