Welcome back in for Al’s Afternoon Tea, our chance to sit and sample some of the latest news. In fact, after a brief look at some headlines, we’re going to kick back and enjoy a respite from the hard news with some lighter campaign anecdotes and history. I have “high hopes” for this serving of Tea.

Yes, TIME Admits, Kamala Harris Does Want to Give Illegal Immigrants in Custody Taxpayer-Funded Sex Changes

“Now she wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens who are in prison!” 

It sounded so asinine when Donald Trump said it during Tuesday’s debate that TIME magazine reflexively (that’s the best possible spin we can give it) or dishonestly (more likely) called it false.

One massive problem: It is flat-out true. Harris said so explicitly on an ACLU questionnaire during the 2019 campaign. On Wednesday, TIME was forced to issue a retraction.

This is one of the greatest corrections in history, from @TIME magazine:https://t.co/LV2won82DI pic.twitter.com/bl8mUKXgHC

— Tim Murtaugh (@TimMurtaugh) September 11, 2024

As Fox News noted, TIME wasn’t the only media outlet thinking the claim was so crazy that Trump had to be lying. Take The New Yorker’s Susan Glasser.

Trump made history last night for sure. Who will ever forget him ranting on stage about immigrants eating people's dogs? Or insisting that the Vice President 'wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in jail'?

My piece on Trump's too-crazy moment:…

— Susan Glasser (@sbg1) September 11, 2024

Community Notes showed her the light pretty quickly.

More amusing is former CNN analyst Mark Lamont Hill.

"She wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens who are in prison" is the WILDEST thing I've ever heard in any debate. EVER.

— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) September 11, 2024

After all, it was CNN that broke that story on Monday.

But let’s not lose the headline. Kamala Harris wants YOU to pay for sex-changes — for illegal immigrants who have been arrested.

What, Me Worry? Secret Service’s Latest Screw-Up in Plot to Kill Trump

Just two months after the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, a Pakistani man with ties to Iran was charged in a plot to kill the former president and other top officials. The U.S. Department of Justice announced the charges Tuesday. The suspect, Asif Merchant, went so far as to recruit and pay people he thought were assassins, but thankfully turned out to be undercover law enforcement officers.

The Secret Service knew of the Iranian plot before the attack on Trump in Butler, Penn., making the ghastly security failures there even that much more astonishing — and suspicious.

Don’t take my word for it, though. Melania Trump herself smells a rat. “There is definitely more to this story,” she says, “and we need to uncover the truth.”

Fox News reports that acting Secret Service Director Ronald L. Rowe — who had been responsible for many of the decisions denying Trump the needed protection — is giving a classified briefing to Congress today on the assassination attempt. Meanwhile, Rowe has reportedly urged the high-ranking Secret Service official who was in control of planning protection for Trump, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris to quietly retire, a source told Fox News. Both Assistant Director Michael Plati and Rowe should have been loudly and unceremoniously fired.

But what do we say? The only people the Biden administration has ever fired turned out to be his dogs.

None of this is going to restore any confidence in the Secret Service. Their 9/11 commemoration of the victims of the terrorist attack on Wednesday included the 19 terrorists themselves.

“The flag hanging in our headquarters is a solemn reminder of 9/11 and our mission’s purpose ” a now-deleted Secret Service post said. “A testament to freedom and sacrifice, it honors all 2,996 lives lost, including our own Master Special Officer Craig T. Miller & Special Agent in Charge Charles L. Friend.”

The innocent people killed in the 9/11 attacks numbered 2,977.

And now — as promised — we lighten things up.

Company That Makes Audio Earrings Allegedly Worn by Kamala Harris Makes Capitalist Hay Over the Controversy

Sue me, I love fun campaign stories.

The internet was abuzz Wednesday morning with photos and speculation that Kamala Harris was wearing audio earrings — specifically, NOVA H1 Audio Earrings — during the presidential debate Tuesday night, in which both candidates were allowed to have only a pad of paper and a pen with them at the podium.

No one can deny the resemblance.

Wireless Audio Earrings Company Responds to Rumors Kamala Harris Wore Earpiece During Presidential Debate

Whoa… https://t.co/KOgvVxSado

— Vigilant News (@VigilantNews) September 12, 2024

I was going to mention the story yesterday, but decided against it. A friend who used to act in infomercials once told me that having someone talking to you in your ear while you are talking is a skill very difficult to master — a point echoed yesterday by The Stream’s Jay Richards.

An earpiece when you're trying to speak extemporaneously would be confusing. Having the ability to listen to cues from an earpiece while constructing coherent sentences in a debate would be a serious skill in itself. https://t.co/YEPUry8CQ1

— Jay W. Richards (@DrJayRichards) September 11, 2024

It would be easier for Harris to understand beforehand that she wasn’t going to be asked any tough questions and for her to memorize canned answers to the softballs lobbed her way. (She’s already demonstrated an ability to do that; just look at all the similar hand gestures and pause points in the many times she has delivered the “unburdened by what has been” line in different speeches around the country.) And besides, the lies that were coming out of her mouth Tuesday night were more important than whatever lines might have been fed into her ear.

However, like any good and fun-spirited capitalist company, the German-based company that makes the NOVA H1 Audio Earrings, Icebach Sound,  jumped at the chance to make the most of the moment.

“We do not know whether Mrs. Harris wore one of our products,” representatives told Just the News on Wednesday. “The resemblance is striking and while our product was not specifically developed for the use at presidential debates, it is nonetheless suited for it.”

In fact, in the interest of bipartisanship, they are rushing to make a men’s version for Donald Trump. “The choice of colour is a bit challenging, though, as orange does not go well with a lot of colours.”

In such a bitter campaign, we do need levity. Besides, Icebach Sound is keeping with a long tradition of companies cheerfully trying to make a buck during American presidential campaigns and administrations. Does anyone remember “Billy Beer,” in honor of Jimmy Carter’s brewskie-loving brother? Or how about the whiskey in log cabin-shaped bottles from the E. C. Booz distillery to help promote William Henry Harrison’s 1840 campaign? As Joseph Cummins notes in his book Anything for a Vote, this is actually how the word “booze” joined the American lexicon.

For the record, Harris didn’t need voices in her ear. She had the moderators in her pocket. But it is fun to speculate what she might have been told. “Don’t laugh! Don’t laugh! For gosh sakes, don’t laugh!”

Taylor Swift Endorsement Is Hardly History’s First

Another tradition of American presidential campaigns is the celebrity endorsement. Though Taylor Swift is getting lots of press for her endorsement of Kamala Harris, she’s hardly the first famous singer to weigh in on an election. In fact, the tradition goes back over a century to Al Jolson backing Warren G. Harding in the 1920 race. According to History.com, Jolson even wrote and performed a song that became the official GOP campaign song, “Harding, You’re the Man for Us.”

Forty years later, the legendary Frank Sinatra famously backed John F. Kennedy in his run for the White House. Ol’ Blue Eyes turned the song “High Hopes” into an anthem for JFK’s successful campaign. (It was successful in part because of Sinatra’s mob friends, but that’s another story.)

While Swift’s endorsement is being billed as the biggest celebrity endorsement ever, that honor probably goes to Babe Ruth — and not just because of the Bambino’s girth. According to History.com, the Yankee icon backed Democrat Al Smith in his 1928 battle against Herbert Hoover. This was a big deal because Al Smith was the first Catholic nominated for president by a major party, and he faced all manner of religious bigotry. Ruth, himself a Catholic, took to the airwaves during the campaign, telling fans, “What a wonderful thing it is to think that … there is a chance for every boy to get to the top in America, whether he wants to be a president or a ball player.”

That was back when Democrats didn’t crinkle their noses at the American dream.

We leave the final word on the Taylor Swift endorsement to The Babylon Bee

Woman Who Made Career Singing About Her Bad Choices Endorses Kamala https://t.co/ElRh1qua7t pic.twitter.com/NRvZMaFb0g

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) September 11, 2024

On the Stream Menu

John Z weighs in on the presidential debate: “Trump Debated Not a Candidate, But a Whole Elite Machine.” 

Daniel Flynn asks, “Kamala Harris Wouldn’t Prosecute Cop-Killing Terrorists. Why?”

Al Perrotta is The Stream’s Washington bureau chief, coauthor with John Zmirak of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration, and coauthor of the counterterrorism memoir Hostile Intent: Protecting Yourself Against Terrorism.