Mad Mad News

LIVE ABOVE THE MADNESS

MMN Editor

Is Your Social Security Taxable? Where Your State and Income Put You

Filed Under: Money.com, SUCCESS

Social Security can be a significant income source for many people in retirement. But it’s important to understand whether — and how much — taxes will chip away at your benefits.
Your location and income play key roles in determining how much you’ll have to pay, if you even get taxed at all. Here’s how to figure out whether your benefits will be taxed and how to determine which rate to expect.

Must Read

You’re probably eligible to save money on car insurance. Compare rates for your ZIP code with this free — and fast — tool from Money.
These 6 hacks can help seniors save money on things they’re already buying.
Meet your financial goals faster: Take this free, no-obligation quiz to get matched with an advisor today.

How federal taxes are determined
The combined-income formula is the federal test that determines if your benefits are eligible for taxation. It requires adding up your modified adjusted gross income, tax-exempt interest and one-half of your Social Security benefits.
For single filers, if your combined income is below $25,000, you don’t pay federal taxes on your benefits. If you are in the $25,000 to $34,000 range, up to 50% of your benefits may be eligible for taxation. Finally, you may be eligible for up to 85% of your benefits being taxed if your combined income exceeds $34,000.
The math works differently for married couples. If their combined income is under $32,000, none of their benefits are taxed. The $32,000 to $44,000 threshold results in up to 50% of your benefit being taxed, and earning more than $44,000 in combined income results in up to 85% of your benefits being eligible for taxation.
How state taxes are determined
Most states do not tax benefits, including Washington, D.C. Only eight states tax benefits, and most of them have income-based exemptions.
Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont are the only states that tax Social Security, but you may be exempt depending on your age and income.
What else to know about the taxes on Social Security
While up to 85% of your benefit may be eligible for taxation if you are in the highest threshold, that doesn’t equate to a 85% tax rate. Any amount of your benefit that is eligible for taxation goes through the same tax rates as ordinary income.
Couples and single filers can file Form W-4V to withhold a portion of every Social Security check for taxes. While it results in less income right now, it also prevents an April surprise in the form of a big tax bill.
People who do not withhold any of their benefits over time risk a large tax bill that they may not be able to pay. Anticipating your tax rate and withholding some of your Social Security makes it easier to plan around taxes when April arrives.
And remember, you don’t have to guess how much you’ll owe in taxes on your Social Security benefits. You can put last year’s numbers into the IRS Publication 915 worksheet to see how much you will owe. It offers a valuable snapshot of what you can expect to pay so that you can be better prepared.

Never miss a Money story.

Join 700,000+ readers who get the latest financial news and advice delivered daily for free. Subscribe to our newsletters.

Russert All But Offers Land Acknowledgment in Defending California

Filed Under: Commentary Culture Investigations

MS NOW via SnapStream

MS NOW’s co-host Luke Russert questioned the names on California voter lists during Tuesday’s The Weeknight, and did all but offer a land acknowledgment in emphasizing the state’s Hispanic roots and past as past of Mexico.In anticipation of California Democratic Senator Alex Padilla’s comments on Trump’s preparation for the upcoming midterm elections, Russert used the DOJ’s compilation of names connected to potential voter fraud in the state to assume racially motivated attacks.Co-host Michael Steele claimed California would resist the DOJ’s attempts to turn over voter records. This led to Russert’s question: “…What names are on that list?”Russert attempted to make the age-old, emotional stronghold that the administration’s attempts of uncovering voter deception was to target Americans with Latino heritage. Before referencing Latino surnames that Trump could use to link potential noncitizen voters, Russert answered his own question by linking his own familial ties to California:And I think in a state like California, I mean, my wife’s family is from there. She had family members who are in California who was part of Mexico. What are the names of the cities in California? Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, right?  So, if we have a list of names and you have Gonzalez on there, you have Gallegos on there. What are we getting at? There’s Latino names in California, and we are going to match them up against other places?The irony? Liberal, elitist outlets often revisit the “stolen land” narrative during public events or ceremonies in discussion of indigenous identity. Yet, that historical context was absent. Instead, Russert flipped the conversation to make the argument that an individual’s Mexican ancestry automatically gives them the right to vote in elections, no matter their voter status:And so, I look at that and I just go, this is an administration that’s going to hone in on specific names? Who was there first? I mean, that’s a serious question, right? Who’s more Californian?Apparently, California’s history is only worth remembering when it fits the liberal media’s narrative.The transcript is below. Click “expand” to read:MS NOW’s The WeeknightOctober 27, 20267:04:10 p.m. Eastern(…)MICHAEL STEEL: What they’re trying to do here, Luke, is just manufacture a list of names, and to justify that and to really sort of confirm their suspicions, they want the list from California. Now, California is very strict about its list. It does not, I can tell you, as a former state official, states protect those lists.Even though, yeah, your campaign, Symone, may call and say, hey, we want to spend some money to get a list, that data is selected. It’s not everything about the voters that you want to get your hands on. So, it matters. Those voter rolls matter because they contain a lot of information.LUKE RUSSERT: And who, what names are on that list?STEEL: Right!RUSSERT: Right? And I think in a state like California, I mean, my wife’s family is from there. She had family members who are in California who was part of Mexico. What are the names of the cities in California? Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, right?So, if we have a list of names and you have Gonzalez on there, you have Gallegos on there. What are we getting at? There’s Latino names in California, and we are going to match them up against other places?And so, I look at that and I just go, this is an administration that’s going to hone in on specific names? Who was there first? I mean, that’s a serious question, right? Who’s more Californian?(…)

Obama admin first launched the investigation into Ilhan Omar’s alleged brother marriage

Filed Under: THE NEWS

The investigation into whether Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., married her brother in an alleged immigration fraud scheme in 2009 began under former President Barack Obama in 2016, Fox News Digital has confirmed.A U.S. Attorney in Minnesota, appointed by then-President Joe Biden, eventually shut down the probe in 2021, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital.Now, the issue has been thrust back into the spotlight as part of a new federal investigation into the Somali-born congresswoman, part of which centers on whether she or her father committed immigration fraud on her application to become a U.S. citizen.REP ILHAN OMAR’S IMMIGRATION HISTORY FACES NEW SCRUTINY AS FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS SUBPOENA RELATIVESSources previously told Fox News Digital that Omar’s “real name” is Ilhan Nur Said Elmi. In a federal court document, she was called “Ilhan Omar Nur Said Elmi, a/k/a Ilhan Omar.”In 2009, Omar, then a U.S. citizen, legally married a man with that surname, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. The pair officially split in 2017.The New York Times first reported that Obama’s FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began the probe in the summer of 2016, and that officials “found some evidence that [the marriage] was fraudulent.” The Times reported that the investigation concluded when officials decided the potential felony crime was past the statute of limitations.OMAR’S DELETED TWEET COULD GIVE CLUE ON ALLEGED MARRIAGE TO HER BROTHERDespite his own administration’s investigation into Omar at the time she was running for the Minnesota House, Obama condemned the renewed probe, which included a Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) raid on her Washington, D.C. home on Oct. 12. Federal authorities confiscated her passport, personal phone and computer in the raid.”It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say,” Obama wrote in an X post after the raid earlier this month. “But that’s exactly what the Trump Administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.”OBAMA’S LENGTHY REACTION TO OMAR INVESTIGATION TRIGGERS INSTANT BACKLASH: ‘SPARE ME’Obama claimed the Trump administration was targeting Omar because she is a vocal critic of the current president.”Think about that,” Obama said in the post. “The full weight of the federal government is being brought down on a law-abiding elected official because she has dared to criticize the president.”175 DEMOCRATS DEMAND TRUMP ADMIN STOP ILHAN OMAR INVESTIGATION, WARN IT COULD HURT HER RE-ELECTION BIDOmar has frequently called the allegations that she married her brother a conspiracy theory promulgated by the political right, including in a statement to Fox News Digital regarding the new investigation last week.”Rep. Omar has repeatedly and unequivocally denied this baseless, disgusting conspiracy theory,” an Omar spokesperson said. “This is a desperate political smear designed to distract from Trump’s failed presidency and two years of Republican failure in Congress. And it’s disgraceful that the media continues to give this lie oxygen.”The same spokesperson did not immediately respond to a Thursday morning request for comment.Fox News Digital’s Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.

FOX One launches interactive election hub with real-time polling and race analysis for midterms

Filed Under: THE NEWS

FOX One unveiled a new interactive election experience on Thursday that will give users unprecedented access to results, polling, and analysis.FOX One, Fox Corporation’s wholly-owned direct to consumer streaming service, announced the new election experience developed in partnership with FOX News Media, designed to give viewers more context and more local relevance as results come in for the upcoming midterm elections.”Election night is expected to be among the most demanding live events we cover. The results don’t arrive in order, and no two viewers are following the same set of races,” Amit Dudakia, SVP & Head of Product at FOX Direct to Consumer, said in a statement. MAPPED: TRUMP’S NONSTOP CAMPAIGN BLITZ SWEEPS KEY STATES”With FOX One, we’re keeping coverage from Fox News and FOX Stations at the center and building the context around it, so viewers aren’t toggling between a stream and a second screen to understand what just happened,” Dudakia added. “The reporting stays front and center and the answers come to you.”The features will roll out on FOX One in the lead-up to Election Day, and the full experience will be available as election coverage begins.Hundreds of House, Senate, gubernatorial and local races will be called across every time zone on Nov. 3, and the story of the night is rarely told by any single one of them.FOX One’s tool is built for exactly this kind of live event, as results break in parallel, a race in one state could reframe the math in another and what matters most to viewers may be a ballot measure in their own county.FOX NEWS POWER RANKINGS: SOUTH CAROLINA MOVES TO TOSS-UPFox News Channel and FOX Local Stations’ election coverage will anchor the experience.FOX One will add a layer of real-time context drawn from Fox News’ industry-leading election coverage and data capabilities, aggregating results, polling and race analysis into the viewing experience itself, so viewers can follow the night at the national level and the local level at the same time.Feature highlights debuting on the platform for the 2026 midterm elections include a command center, an election hub offering a curated destination for the full breadth of FOX’s election coverage, and an in-house built data platform.Ask FOX, the in-app companion for the questions a live event raises in the moment, will feature an Elections Mode that lets viewers ask election-specific questions and get clear, sourced answers in real time. When election coverage begins, the command center is the first thing living room viewers will see when opening FOX One. The live stream holds the center of the screen while a surrounding set of widgets carries the context, including voter polling, race-by-race results and Fox News insights on the night’s key contests, all updating in real time. SENATE CONTROL IS A COIN FLIP — AND DEMOCRATS’ PATH RUNS THROUGH TRUMP COUNTRYThe election hub will include video on battleground races, key ballot measures and the contests shaping control in Washington, editorially programmed by Fox News and Fox News Digital. The Hub also surfaces coverage from FOX’s local stations based on viewer’s markets, so viewers in Los Angeles see what is on the ballot only in Los Angeles.Elections Mode is being powered by “ElectionAI” – a new AI technology platform deployed for this Election cycle that was developed in-house by FOX News Media, allowing for real-time answers to Election-related questions.CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTUREThe results, polling and insights across all FOX One experiences are powered by a single, unified data layer that FOX built alongside FOX News Media, unifying multiple election data sources into a single real-time feed for the app experiences. It is the same underlying infrastructure that also powers live context across FOX One’s sports and news programming.Product features are subject to device compatibility, content and other restrictions.

Kamala Harris Tells New Hampshire Crowd Democrats Must Expand the Supreme Court and ‘Be Ruthless’ If They Win (VIDEO)

Filed Under: THE NEWS

Former Vice President Kamala Harris told a New Hampshire audience that expanding the Supreme Court to 13 justices and taking a hard look at the Electoral College must be “first priorities” for Democrats if they regain power, and that the party needs to “be ruthless” to get it done.
Speaking during a live taping of the “My Body. My Pod.” podcast with Mini Timmaraju of Reproductive Freedom for All in Manchester on Saturday while campaigning for Senate nominee Chris Pappas, Harris acknowledged her proposals would be “controversial coming from me” before laying them out.
“We have to expand the Supreme Court. Let’s expand it to 13 because we have 13 circuit courts,” she said, according to reporting by NH Journal.
Harris continued, “We also need to take a critical look at the Electoral College, fight for statehood for Puerto Rico and D.C. We need to overturn Citizens United. These have to be first priorities.”
To achieve them, she added, “We have to be ruthless.”
Harris explained that by ruthless she meant having “the backbone to actually act on accountability and consequence, because a harshly worded letter ain’t gonna get it.”
WATCH:

The remarks clearly preview what Harris and the Democrats intend to do if they win back the House and Senate.
Court packing, installing additional justices to shift the current 6-3 conservative majority, has been a priority for Harris since the Court shifted under President Donald Trump’s appointments.
Congress sets the Court’s size by statute. It has been fixed at nine since 1869.
Expanding the size will require only a simple majority if Democrats control both chambers and the White House, or enough Senate votes to overcome a filibuster.
Critics, including some Democrats, have long warned that the move would turn the Court into a permanent political prize and erase more than 150 years of stability.
Pappas himself has said he does not support expansion, calling it a “never-ending tug-of-war,” though he voted against a constitutional amendment to lock the number at nine.
Harris’ call to “reexamine the Electoral College” is another longstanding Democrat priority that would effectively remove small and rural states from having any sway in presidential elections.
She has repeatedly said the popular vote “has to matter.”
Changing or abolishing the Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment, a higher bar than court packing, but statehood for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico could be accomplished by statute and would add reliably Democratic Senate seats and electoral votes.
Overturning Citizens United, the 2010 decision that treated independent political spending as protected speech, would likewise require either a new Court majority or a constitutional amendment.
In a separate interview around the same time with MeidasTouch’s Aaron Parnas, Harris advised Democrats against pursuing a third impeachment of President Trump if they retake the House, saying the votes for conviction do not exist in the Senate and that limited resources should instead go to investigations and “accountability.”
Harris again used the word “ruthless,” and said Democrats should be “uncompromising” about restoring Medicaid cuts and other priorities rather than “being genteel about the relationships.”

The post Kamala Harris Tells New Hampshire Crowd Democrats Must Expand the Supreme Court and ‘Be Ruthless’ If They Win (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.