thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Officiant At Superspreader Maine Wedding Is An Anti-Mask Evangelical

On Aug. 6 , Bell , who is also a pilot , tweeted that he was flying to marry a couple in Northern Maine .
He presided over the wedding ceremony at the Tri Town Baptist Church in East Millinocket on Aug. 7 .
Afterward , about 65 people gathered for a reception at Big Moose Inn , exceeding the state ’ s 50-person limit for indoor gatherings .
Guests at the wedding did not wear masks or stay socially distanced , according to the Bangor Daily News .
There ’ s no indication that a member of Calvary Baptist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reception .
The church thinks that some of its members contracted COVID-19 from an inn employee , according to the NCLL ’ s statement .
( The inn has confirmed that at least two of Big Moose Inn ’ s employees have tested positive since the reception . )
During the service posted to YouTube , Bell told his congregation that he believes “ God , not government , ” would control the pandemic , according to WGME .
The pastor reportedly downplayed the severity of the coronavirus and cautioned against getting inoculated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Instead of relying on vaccines , Bell said he is trusting in God , “ the one that has the power to remove pestilences , ” The Boston Globe reported .
Bell reportedly told church members that they could wear masks if they wanted to , but that he also wanted people “ to have the liberty to have done your own research ” and that “ masks are kind of like trying to keep a mosquito out of a chain-link fence , ” according to the Globe .
“ I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the churches to do , ” Bell said in his sermon .
“ They want us to shut down , go home and let people get used to that just long enough until we can finally stop the advancing of the Gospel.
” Both Tri Town Baptist Church , where the wedding ceremony was held , and Bell ’ s Calvary Baptist Church appear to be independent fundamentalist Baptist churches .
IFB churches can be loosely connected by pastors ’ networks , but for the most part , they don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other American religious groups ― which means pastors have complete autonomy to dictate how closely their churches abide by state and local coronavirus restrictions .
While practices vary from church to church , independent fundamental Baptists share several core beliefs , according to Christianity Today : that the Bible is the divinely inspired and inerrant word of God , for example , and that people should use only the King James Version of the text .
Independent fundamental Baptists also have a countercultural streak that differentiates them from mainstream evangelicals , often refraining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contemporary worship music .
Many also choose to home-school their kids .
Bell and his family have received several death threats “ due to some media misinformation , ” the NCLL said in its statement .
“ We live in a highly charged culture , and people are taking misinformation and threatening violence based on that misinformation .
The church has had to eliminate several outreach programs and much of its on-line presence for security reasons .
Acts of violence against houses of worship are a major problem in American society .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The officiant at a rural Maine wedding that turned into a deadly COVID-19 “superspreader” event is an evangelical Christian pastor who has railed against his state’s coronavirus regulations and whose own church experienced an outbreak, according to local media reports.
As the now-infamous wedding reception’s impact spread through Maine, Pastor Todd Bell, of Calvary Baptist Church in Sanford, cast doubt on the effectiveness of masks, allowed congregational singing, and disseminated misinformation about the severity of COVID-19.
Advertisement
The church has retained a Christian legal defense nonprofit, National Center for Life and Liberty (NCLL), to help defend its “right to meet” during the pandemic.
“The authority of a local Christian church, a Jewish synagogue, or a Muslim mosque to gather for their respective religious services is a time-honored part of our nation’s history since its inception,” the nonprofit wrote in a statement obtained by HuffPost. “These religious activities are also fully protected under the First Amendment to our United States Constitution.”
On Aug. 6, Bell, who is also a pilot, tweeted that he was flying to marry a couple in Northern Maine. He presided over the wedding ceremony at the Tri Town Baptist Church in East Millinocket on Aug. 7. Afterward, about 65 people gathered for a reception at Big Moose Inn, exceeding the state’s 50-person limit for indoor gatherings. Guests at the wedding did not wear masks or stay socially distanced, according to the Bangor Daily News.
Twitter / @Preachertbell / Screenshot
Advertisement
Over 270 coronavirus infections and eight deaths have now been traced back to that wedding, The Associated Press reported. Several people who had no association with the wedding party, and who live more than 100 miles away, fell ill.
Bell and six families from Calvary Baptist Church attended the wedding. Ten cases of COVID-19 have since emerged at Bell’s church, the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed to the AP last week.
The Maine CDC is still investigating whether the outbreak at Calvary Baptist Church is connected to the wedding outbreak and did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment.
There’s no indication that a member of Calvary Baptist Church brought the virus to the wedding reception. The church thinks that some of its members contracted COVID-19 from an inn employee, according to the NCLL’s statement. (The inn has confirmed that at least two of Big Moose Inn’s employees have tested positive since the reception.)
The church is still holding services and taking precautions to reduce the spread of COVID-19, “including extra sanitation and social distancing, as is reasonable,” the statement read.
Advertisement
The NCLL declined to respond to HuffPost’s inquiries about whether Calvary Baptist Church is also adopting other safety precautions, such as limiting attendance, meeting outdoors, discontinuing communal indoor singing and requiring congregants to wear masks.
On Sept. 11, WGME reported that the church is actually encouraging congregants not to wear masks.
This past Sunday, the congregation was joined by Jay Allen, a long shot Republican congressional candidate who has opposed mask-wearing policies. In a Facebook post, Allen called Bell a “freedom fighter” who is being persecuted and “villainized.”
“Pastor Todd Bell is being condemned for daring to live his life to the fullest and encouraging others to do the same,” Allen wrote.
On Aug. 30, one day after the Maine CDC confirmed coronavirus cases among its congregants, Calvary Baptist Church posted a video of an in-person service to its YouTube page. In the now-deleted video, a choir performed indoors without masks, CBS affiliate WGME reported. Maine’s public health guidelines “strongly” discourage choirs from performing during the pandemic. Indoor choir performances have been linked to COVID-19 outbreaks around the world.
Advertisement
During the service posted to YouTube, Bell told his congregation that he believes “God, not government,” would control the pandemic, according to WGME. The pastor reportedly downplayed the severity of the coronavirus and cautioned against getting inoculated once a vaccine for COVID-19 is developed. Instead of relying on vaccines, Bell said he is trusting in God, “the one that has the power to remove pestilences,” The Boston Globe reported.
Bell reportedly told church members that they could wear masks if they wanted to, but that he also wanted people “to have the liberty to have done your own research” and that “masks are kind of like trying to keep a mosquito out of a chain-link fence,” according to the Globe.
“I’ll tell you what the world wants all the churches to do,” Bell said in his sermon. “They want us to shut down, go home and let people get used to that just long enough until we can finally stop the advancing of the Gospel.”
The day after the video was posted, Bell retweeted a link to an article promoting the debunked theory that only 6% of previously reported COVID-19 deaths were actually due to the coronavirus.
Both Tri Town Baptist Church, where the wedding ceremony was held, and Bell’s Calvary Baptist Church appear to be independent fundamentalist Baptist churches. IFB churches can be loosely connected by pastors’ networks, but for the most part, they don’t have the hierarchical denominational structures that unite other American religious groups ― which means pastors have complete autonomy to dictate how closely their churches abide by state and local coronavirus restrictions.
Advertisement
While practices vary from church to church, independent fundamental Baptists share several core beliefs, according to Christianity Today: that the Bible is the divinely inspired and inerrant word of God, for example, and that people should use only the King James Version of the text. Independent fundamental Baptists also have a countercultural streak that differentiates them from mainstream evangelicals, often refraining from engaging in pop culture and even contemporary worship music. Many also choose to home-school their kids.
Calvary Baptist Church has an affiliated school, Sanford Christian Academy. As of Sept. 11, the school was meeting in person and not requiring students to wear masks.
Pastor Todd Bell, of Sanford’s Calvary Baptist Church, officiated at a Maine wedding that has become a "superspreader" event. Twitter / Screenshot/ @Preachertbell
Ensuring that churches can remain open with minimum restrictions has been a key priority for many conservative Christian legal defense groups during the pandemic. These groups have painted the debate as primarily an issue of religious liberty, rather than of matter of protecting public health.
Maine courts have upheld state restrictions on religious services. In May, a federal judge ruled against Calvary Chapel Bangor, which was seeking an exemption to the state’s coronavirus restrictions.
Advertisement
The NCLL, which is representing Calvary Baptist Church, is led by David Gibbs, a lawyer who is known nationally for representing the parents of Terri Schiavo, a severely brain-damaged Florida woman at the center of a “right to die” case that animated religious conservatives in the mid-2000s.
Bell and his family have received several death threats “due to some media misinformation,” the NCLL said in its statement. “We live in a highly charged culture, and people are taking misinformation and threatening violence based on that misinformation. The church has had to eliminate several outreach programs and much of its on-line presence for security reasons. Acts of violence against houses of worship are a major problem in American society.”
The NCLL did not respond to HuffPost’s request to point to and correct the alleged “misinformation.”
Calvary Baptist Church has deactivated its YouTube and Facebook accounts, as well as its website. A local homeless shelter that used the church’s kitchen has cut ties with the church as a result of the congregation’s “noncompliance” with the state’s guidelines.
In Maine, more than 5,100 people have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and 140 have died since the outbreak began, according to the state CDC.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Migrant Women To Stop Seeing Doctor Accused Of Mass Sterilizing Without Consent: ICE

Dr. Mahendra Amin faces allegations that he administered hysterectomies and other procedures that women held at the Irwin County Detention Center didn ’ t seek or fully understand .
Amin has seen at least 60 detained women , said Andrew Free , a lawyer working with other attorneys to investigate medical care at Irwin County , on Tuesday .
Bryan Cox , a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement , confirmed that Amin would no longer see patients , but declined to comment further , citing an ongoing investigation by the Department of Homeland Security ’ s inspector general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement defending Amin , saying he “ is a long-time member of the Irwin County Hospital medical staff and has been in good standing for the entirety of his service to the Irwin County community.
” The statement did not address Amin ’ s role as chief executive of MGA Health Management , a company that began managing the Irwin County Hospital in 1996 , according to the hospital ’ s website .
According to the statement , Amin operated on two detained women who were referred to the hospital for hysterectomies .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ general counsel , did not respond to questions about whether Amin performed hysterectomies in cases where the women had a different initial referral .
Clark also did not say how many other procedures he had performed that could jeopardize a woman ’ s ability to have children , including the removal of fallopian tubes or ovaries .
The allegations against the doctor were first revealed in a complaint filed last week by a nurse at Irwin County Detention Center .
The nurse , Dawn Wooten , alleged that many detained women were taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ uterus collector ” because of how many hysterectomies he performed .
The Associated Press on Friday reported that at least eight women since 2017 had been taken to see Amin for gynecological treatment .
Free said Tuesday that a team of lawyers had heard from dozens of more women raising concerns about the doctor .
“ It ’ s long past time to stop sending women to this physician and to companies that provide services on his behalf , ” he said , adding that he was concerned women detained at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming forward about the doctor .
Scott Sutterfield , an executive at LaSalle Corrections , which operates the detention center , said the company would not “ take or threaten any action ” against detainees who report information “ in good faith .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
HOUSTON (AP) — Immigration authorities have stopped sending detained women to a rural Georgia gynecologist accused of performing surgeries without consent, a government spokesman said Tuesday.
Dr. Mahendra Amin faces allegations that he administered hysterectomies and other procedures that women held at the Irwin County Detention Center didn’t seek or fully understand. Amin has seen at least 60 detained women, said Andrew Free, a lawyer working with other attorneys to investigate medical care at Irwin County, on Tuesday.
Advertisement
Bryan Cox, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, confirmed that Amin would no longer see patients, but declined to comment further, citing an ongoing investigation by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general.
The Irwin County Hospital issued a statement defending Amin, saying he “is a long-time member of the Irwin County Hospital medical staff and has been in good standing for the entirety of his service to the Irwin County community.”
The statement did not address Amin’s role as chief executive of MGA Health Management, a company that began managing the Irwin County Hospital in 1996, according to the hospital’s website.
According to the statement, Amin operated on two detained women who were referred to the hospital for hysterectomies. Heath Clark, the hospital’s general counsel, did not respond to questions about whether Amin performed hysterectomies in cases where the women had a different initial referral. Clark also did not say how many other procedures he had performed that could jeopardize a woman’s ability to have children, including the removal of fallopian tubes or ovaries.
Advertisement
Scott Grubman, a lawyer for Amin, did not respond to a request for comment.
The allegations against the doctor were first revealed in a complaint filed last week by a nurse at Irwin County Detention Center. The nurse, Dawn Wooten, alleged that many detained women were taken to an unnamed gynecologist whom she labeled the “uterus collector” because of how many hysterectomies he performed.
The Associated Press on Friday reported that at least eight women since 2017 had been taken to see Amin for gynecological treatment. Free said Tuesday that a team of lawyers had heard from dozens of more women raising concerns about the doctor.
“It’s long past time to stop sending women to this physician and to companies that provide services on his behalf,” he said, adding that he was concerned women detained at the facility could potentially face retaliation for coming forward about the doctor.
Scott Sutterfield, an executive at LaSalle Corrections, which operates the detention center, said the company would not “take or threaten any action” against detainees who report information “in good faith.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Kayleigh McEnany Flails In Defense Of Trump Lie That COVID-19 ‘Affects Virtually Nobody’

“ It ’ s turning out it ’ s not just old people , ” he told journalist Bob Woodward @ @ @ @ @ released earlier this month .
“ Just today and yesterday , some startling facts came @ @ @ @ @ not just old – older .
Young people , too .
Plenty of young people.
@ @ @ @ @ to respond to the grim milestone of 200,000 COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. , McEnany @ @ @ @ @ issue by citing previous projections that deaths could reach 2 million .
“ The fact @ @ @ @ @ near that number is a testament to this president taking immediate action , ” she @ @ @ @ @ him up at night , thinking of even one life lost , ” she added @ @ @ @ @ will not publicly acknowledge or show remorse in response to the staggering number .

“It’s turning out it’s not just old people,” he told journalist Bob Woodward, according to recordings Woodward released earlier this month. “Just today and yesterday, some startling facts came out. It’s not just old – older. Young people, too. Plenty of young people.”
When asked on Tuesday to respond to the grim milestone of 200,000 COVID-19 deaths in the U.S., McEnany praised Trump and downplayed the issue by citing previous projections that deaths could reach 2 million.
“The fact that we have come nowhere near that number is a testament to this president taking immediate action,” she said.
“It keeps him up at night, thinking of even one life lost,” she added, but said the president will not publicly acknowledge or show remorse in response to the staggering number.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Former COVID-19 Task Force Member Rebukes Claim She Was Fired

A former member of the coronavirus task force who spoke out against President Donald Trump is denouncing her former boss ’ s claim that she ’ s merely a fired , disgruntled employee .
Olivia Troye , who was an aide to Vice President Mike Pence , defended herself Tuesday after retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg , Pence ’ s national security adviser , said he removed her from her positions .
“ The reason I fired her is because her performance started to drop , ” Kellogg said at a news conference Tuesday .
“ I ’ m the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Troye , who endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden last week because of Trump ’ s “ flat out disregard for human life ” during the COVID-19 pandemic , tweeted that Kellogg ’ s story is “ a bald faced lie ” and that she was actually asked to stay after handing in her resignation .
Sad that Gen. Kellogg is telling a bald faced lie to protect the President .
I resigned on my own accord & was asked to stay .
He never escorted me out .
He knows this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the colleagues who had worked so hard with me in spite of POTUS & I stand by that .
🇺🇸 https : //t.co/cQ8DTJI640 — Olivia of Troye ( @ OliviaTroye ) September 22 , 2020 She also shared a screenshot of an August post on her Instagram account showing a coin Kellogg gifted her when she left the job .
“ This gift is not the action of someone who did what Kellogg claims he did , ” Troye wrote .
I received this as a gift from Gen Kellogg & as you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gift is not the action of someone who did what Kellogg claims he did .
pic.twitter.com/N920c1OOml — Olivia of Troye ( @ OliviaTroye ) September 22 , 2020 Troye , who worked in Pence ’ s office for two years , made headlines Thursday when she went public with her concerns about Trump ’ s handling of the pandemic .
“ The president ’ s rhetoric and his own attacks against people in his administration trying to do the work , as well as the promulgation of false narratives and incorrect information of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a failure , ” she told The Washington Post .
Troye also spoke out in a video released by the group Republican Voters Against Trump , saying the president noted early in the pandemic that it was a good thing because he wouldn ’ t have to “ shake hands with these disgusting people , ” referring to voters .
“ What she has said I ’ ve never heard , ” Kellogg told reporters .
“ What bothers me about what Olivia said is , by insinuation , the disparagement of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the president of the United States.
” An interview Troye taped with NBC News is scheduled to be broadcast later Tuesday .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A former member of the coronavirus task force who spoke out against President Donald Trump is denouncing her former boss’s claim that she’s merely a fired, disgruntled employee.
Olivia Troye, who was an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, defended herself Tuesday after retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Pence’s national security adviser, said he removed her from her positions.
Advertisement
“The reason I fired her is because her performance started to drop,” Kellogg said at a news conference Tuesday. “I’m the one who escorted her off the compound.”
Troye, who endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden last week because of Trump’s “flat out disregard for human life” during the COVID-19 pandemic, tweeted that Kellogg’s story is “a bald faced lie” and that she was actually asked to stay after handing in her resignation.
Sad that Gen. Kellogg is telling a bald faced lie to protect the President. I resigned on my own accord & was asked to stay. He never escorted me out. He knows this. I wrote a note thanking all the colleagues who had worked so hard with me in spite of POTUS & I stand by that. 🇺🇸 https://t.co/cQ8DTJI640 — Olivia of Troye (@OliviaTroye) September 22, 2020
She also shared a screenshot of an August post on her Instagram account showing a coin Kellogg gifted her when she left the job. “This gift is not the action of someone who did what Kellogg claims he did,” Troye wrote.
Advertisement
I received this as a gift from Gen Kellogg & as you can see I appreciated it! This gift is not the action of someone who did what Kellogg claims he did. pic.twitter.com/N920c1OOml — Olivia of Troye (@OliviaTroye) September 22, 2020
Troye, who worked in Pence’s office for two years, made headlines Thursday when she went public with her concerns about Trump’s handling of the pandemic.
“The president’s rhetoric and his own attacks against people in his administration trying to do the work, as well as the promulgation of false narratives and incorrect information of the virus have made this ongoing response a failure,” she told The Washington Post.
Troye also spoke out in a video released by the group Republican Voters Against Trump, saying the president noted early in the pandemic that it was a good thing because he wouldn’t have to “shake hands with these disgusting people,” referring to voters.
Kellogg said Tuesday he’d never heard such remarks.
“What she has said I’ve never heard,” Kellogg told reporters. “What bothers me about what Olivia said is, by insinuation, the disparagement of the task force, the vice president, and the president of the United States.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--How A Supreme Court Vacancy Could Spell The End Of Legal Abortion

For almost 30 years on the Supreme Court , Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a vocal defender of abortion rights , framing the question of reproductive choice as one of gender equality .
“ This is something central to a woman ’ s life , to her dignity , ” she said at her 1993 confirmation hearing .
“ When government controls that decision for her , she ’ s being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.
” It depends who the nominee is .
The two front-runners at the moment are Barbara Lagoa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett .
Lagoa doesn ’ t have as long of a record on abortion , which may make her the less likely choice .
She could alienate social conservatives who share Sen. Josh Hawley ’ s angst .
[ Note : The Missouri lawmaker said in June that he would only vote to confirm Supreme Court nominees who say Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided . ]
Barrett , by contrast , would be expected to be a vote against Roe .
She has been more openly pro-life than most current members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so we have reason to think that she ’ s skeptical of Roe .
The question is , what would adding someone like her mean in terms of the balance of the court ?
The most immediate effect would be to change who the swing vote is on abortion .
At the moment , the swing vote is Chief Justice John Roberts .
Roberts has been more likely to vote with the liberals than any of his conservative colleagues .
As we ’ ve seen , while he is willing to rewrite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to abortion , he also has concerns about going too far , too soon .
[ Note : Roberts recently voted with the liberals in June Medical Services v. Russo to strike down an anti-abortion law in Louisiana , but left open the door to upholding future restrictions . ]
Roberts has almost tied himself to the mast about this idea of precedent .
It doesn ’ t mean he won ’ t overturn Roe or Casey .
[ Note : Planned Parenthood v. Casey established that states can regulate abortion as long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ undue burden ” on those seeking the procedure . ]
But for him to explain why Casey should go after writing an opinion about his commitment to precedent would be hard .
The most likely swing vote on abortion would probably become Justice Brett Kavanaugh .
Of the conservative dissenters in June Medical , Kavanaugh was the only one who was not prepared to say Louisiana ’ s law was fine .
He wanted to send the case back to the lower court for more facts .
He seems to share Roberts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reputation .
Having Kavanaugh as the swing would likely mean that the court would go further , faster in upholding abortion restrictions and moving toward the overruling of Roe , but maybe not that fast .
Justice Stephen Breyer has written a lot of important opinions on abortion in recent years , but his abortion jurisprudence is very facts-driven .
He digs into the sometimes spurious claims that legislators make in justifying abortion restrictions , and it ’ s his specialty to write about what ’ s wrong with those claims .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ writing about equality , it ’ s not really high-level constitutional theory .
Sonia Sotomayor is a possibility , she ’ s done that in other areas of the law .
Elena Kagan is probably the one of the savviest strategists on the court , not just among the liberals .
And so you would expect her if you ’ re talking about abortion and equality to be framing it in a way that ’ s designed to consolidate some kind of majority .
In that way , that ’ s Ginsburg ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even as an attorney , just interested in being right but also interested in getting the votes .
She was quite savvy about that and Kagan is too .
There have been two parallel strategies .
One is to push more absolute restrictions in the hope that the court will move quickly — we see this in the campaign for heartbeat bills .
[ Note : So-called “ heartbeat bills ” outlaw abortion at around six weeks of pregnancy , before many women even know they are expecting . ]
The more sophisticated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They favor cases that will limit abortion access dramatically , but more incrementally than an outright ban .
This includes laws banning dilation and evacuation , the most common procedure after the first trimester , limiting access to medication abortion , banning abortion at 15 or 20 weeks , and prohibiting abortion for certain reasons , such as in cases of race , sex or disability .
Moving incrementally will still make sense in the near term .
But these incremental restrictions could have a major impact , both symbolically and in practical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power to introduce some kind of ban before viability for the first time since Roe .
Others could put the most common or safe abortion technique for a particular group of patients out of reach .
I don ’ t think this is coming soon , but if enough conservative justices were added to the court , we might get to the point where anti-abortion lawyers seriously think about arguing that there ’ s a right to life .
Not just that there is no right to abortion , but that the Constitution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d be talking about abortion being illegal in New York as well as Alabama .
I mean , certainly more than I was .
It ’ s worth noting that there are other members of the liberal wing of the court who are older .
If you had two more conservative nominees , which is a possibility depending on the results of the 2020 election , that would make the overruling of Roe even more likely .
For the most part , Justice Clarence Thomas has been the lone clear voice for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one more conservative justice , that might not be true .
Neil Gorsuch has hinted that he thinks that way , but he usually hasn ’ t been as willing to join Thomas , or at least be as clear about what he thinks .
If you had enough conservative justices added to the court , and one more very conservative justice on abortion , it would certainly push things in this direction .

Illustration: Damon Dahlen/HuffPost; Photos: Getty Images
For almost 30 years on the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a vocal defender of abortion rights, framing the question of reproductive choice as one of gender equality. “This is something central to a woman’s life, to her dignity,” she said at her 1993 confirmation hearing. “When government controls that decision for her, she’s being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
That position guided her voting record up to her last reproductive rights case, which she participated in from her hospital bed in May. She used her voice, while weak, to castigate the Trump administration for undermining comprehensive birth control coverage.
Advertisement
Ginsburg’s reliable liberal vote on abortion rights is now gone. In her absence, Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to abortion, is expected to be contested. The future of legal abortion in the U.S. is facing its greatest threat in decades.
HuffPost spoke with Mary Ziegler, a professor at Florida State University and author of “Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present,” about the looming confirmation battle to replace Ginsburg and what might come next.
What do you expect to happen to abortion rights if a new conservative justice is confirmed?
It depends who the nominee is. The two front-runners at the moment are Barbara Lagoa of the 11th circuit and Amy Coney Barrett. Lagoa doesn’t have as long of a record on abortion, which may make her the less likely choice. She could alienate social conservatives who share Sen. Josh Hawley’s angst. [Note: The Missouri lawmaker said in June that he would only vote to confirm Supreme Court nominees who say Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.] Barrett, by contrast, would be expected to be a vote against Roe. She has been more openly pro-life than most current members of the court, including the conservative members, so we have reason to think that she’s skeptical of Roe.
The question is, what would adding someone like her mean in terms of the balance of the court? The most immediate effect would be to change who the swing vote is on abortion. At the moment, the swing vote is Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts has been more likely to vote with the liberals than any of his conservative colleagues. As we’ve seen, while he is willing to rewrite and even undo precedent when it comes to abortion, he also has concerns about going too far, too soon. [Note: Roberts recently voted with the liberals in June Medical Services v. Russo to strike down an anti-abortion law in Louisiana, but left open the door to upholding future restrictions.]
Advertisement
Roberts has almost tied himself to the mast about this idea of precedent. It doesn’t mean he won’t overturn Roe or Casey. [Note: Planned Parenthood v. Casey established that states can regulate abortion as long as they don’t impose an “undue burden” on those seeking the procedure.] But for him to explain why Casey should go after writing an opinion about his commitment to precedent would be hard.
The most likely swing vote on abortion would probably become Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Of the conservative dissenters in June Medical, Kavanaugh was the only one who was not prepared to say Louisiana’s law was fine. He wanted to send the case back to the lower court for more facts. He seems to share Roberts’ concerns about the court’s reputation. Having Kavanaugh as the swing would likely mean that the court would go further, faster in upholding abortion restrictions and moving toward the overruling of Roe, but maybe not that fast.
How important was Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the issue of abortion rights?
Ginsburg’s influence was significant because she helped articulate the idea that abortion was not just a question of autonomy and privacy and bodily integrity, but also of equality for women. She was the most concerned about the foundations that Roe laid for abortion rights, and the most invested in creating a better foundation.
While she was certainly the most powerful voice [on abortion rights], she was maybe not the most influential voice, because a lot of our actual abortion jurisprudence was a function of compromise reached by the justices in the middle, like Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy and David Souter.
In her absence, who will step into the role of defending abortion rights?
Justice Stephen Breyer has written a lot of important opinions on abortion in recent years, but his abortion jurisprudence is very facts-driven. He digs into the sometimes spurious claims that legislators make in justifying abortion restrictions, and it’s his specialty to write about what’s wrong with those claims. So while that’s a version of writing about equality, it’s not really high-level constitutional theory. Sonia Sotomayor is a possibility, she’s done that in other areas of the law. Elena Kagan is probably the one of the savviest strategists on the court, not just among the liberals. And so you would expect her if you’re talking about abortion and equality to be framing it in a way that’s designed to consolidate some kind of majority. In that way, that’s Ginsburg’s legacy. Ginsburg was not, even as an attorney, just interested in being right but also interested in getting the votes. She was quite savvy about that and Kagan is too.
Advertisement
Can you describe the anti-abortion movement’s legal strategy to overturn Roe, and do you think their approach will change now?
There have been two parallel strategies. One is to push more absolute restrictions in the hope that the court will move quickly — we see this in the campaign for heartbeat bills. [Note: So-called “heartbeat bills” outlaw abortion at around six weeks of pregnancy, before many women even know they are expecting.]
The more sophisticated players are still moving more cautiously. They favor cases that will limit abortion access dramatically, but more incrementally than an outright ban. This includes laws banning dilation and evacuation, the most common procedure after the first trimester, limiting access to medication abortion, banning abortion at 15 or 20 weeks, and prohibiting abortion for certain reasons, such as in cases of race, sex or disability.
Moving incrementally will still make sense in the near term. But these incremental restrictions could have a major impact, both symbolically and in practical terms. Many could give states the power to introduce some kind of ban before viability for the first time since Roe. Others could put the most common or safe abortion technique for a particular group of patients out of reach.
Advertisement
I don’t think this is coming soon, but if enough conservative justices were added to the court, we might get to the point where anti-abortion lawyers seriously think about arguing that there’s a right to life. Not just that there is no right to abortion, but that the Constitution protects fetal life. Then you’d be talking about abortion being illegal in New York as well as Alabama.
How worried are you personally about Roe getting overturned at this point?
I mean, certainly more than I was. It’s worth noting that there are other members of the liberal wing of the court who are older. If you had two more conservative nominees, which is a possibility depending on the results of the 2020 election, that would make the overruling of Roe even more likely.
For the most part, Justice Clarence Thomas has been the lone clear voice for the overturning of Roe. If you add one more conservative justice, that might not be true. Neil Gorsuch has hinted that he thinks that way, but he usually hasn’t been as willing to join Thomas, or at least be as clear about what he thinks. If you had enough conservative justices added to the court, and one more very conservative justice on abortion, it would certainly push things in this direction.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--As U.S. Surpasses 200,000 COVID-19 Deaths, Experts Warn Of 'Perfect Storm' Flu Season

More than 200,000 people have now died of the novel coronavirus in the United States , according to a Johns Hopkins University tally .
The U.S. reached the grim pandemic milestone on Tuesday — amid growing concerns among medical professionals of a potential “ perfect storm ” for both COVID-19 and influenza infections as temperatures begin to dip in the Western Hemisphere .
Doctors have been advising that adults and children older than 6 months get a flu vaccine as soon as possible to reduce the risk of catching the flu and to reduce the severity of symptoms if a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu vaccine will not protect someone from being infected with COVID-19 , experts say it will reduce the odds of someone contracting both viruses at the same time .
Fewer influenza cases will also reduce the burden on an overtaxed health care system .
With @ StatePharmacy we are engaging in @ NCSLorg # NCSLbc this week to work alongside state legislators in communicating the importance of the # fluvaccine to prevent a perfect storm of flu and # COVID19 .
# PharmacistFluFighters are here to help .
Learn more : https : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) September 15 , 2020 The U.S. has the highest cumulative number of COVID-19 cases worldwide — with more than 6.6 million infections — as well as fatalities .
India and Brazil , which have the second- and third-highest cases globally , have reported over 5.5 million infections and over 4.5 million infections to date , respectively .
Globally , the COVID-19 death toll has surpassed 965,000 .
More than 31 million people have been infected worldwide .
Though the coronavirus is deadlier than the flu , both illnesses have similar symptoms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An estimated 1 billion people worldwide get the flu yearly .
In the U.S. , tens of millions of people are sickened with the flu every year .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More than 200,000 people have now died of the novel coronavirus in the United States, according to a Johns Hopkins University tally.
The U.S. reached the grim pandemic milestone on Tuesday — amid growing concerns among medical professionals of a potential “perfect storm” for both COVID-19 and influenza infections as temperatures begin to dip in the Western Hemisphere.
Advertisement
Doctors have been advising that adults and children older than 6 months get a flu vaccine as soon as possible to reduce the risk of catching the flu and to reduce the severity of symptoms if a person does get infected.
Though the flu vaccine will not protect someone from being infected with COVID-19, experts say it will reduce the odds of someone contracting both viruses at the same time. Fewer influenza cases will also reduce the burden on an overtaxed health care system.
With @StatePharmacy we are engaging in @NCSLorg #NCSLbc this week to work alongside state legislators in communicating the importance of the #fluvaccine to prevent a perfect storm of flu and #COVID19. #PharmacistFluFighters are here to help. Learn more: https://t.co/wzBqrOo6yU pic.twitter.com/5xMBAlrjHx — NACDS (@NACDS) September 15, 2020
The U.S. has the highest cumulative number of COVID-19 cases worldwide — with more than 6.6 million infections — as well as fatalities. India and Brazil, which have the second- and third-highest cases globally, have reported over 5.5 million infections and over 4.5 million infections to date, respectively.
Advertisement
Globally, the COVID-19 death toll has surpassed 965,000. More than 31 million people have been infected worldwide.
Though the coronavirus is deadlier than the flu, both illnesses have similar symptoms, including fever, cough and body aches.
An estimated 1 billion people worldwide get the flu yearly. In the U.S., tens of millions of people are sickened with the flu every year.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--British Military Could Help Police Enforce New Coronavirus Rules, Says Boris Johnson

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said the military could be deployed in England to help with the enforcement of new coronavirus restrictions .
Speaking to U.K. lawmakers on Tuesday , the prime minister said there would now be “ greater police presence ” on the streets with “ the option to draw on military support where required.
” The move come after the government ’ s chief scientific and medical advisers warned there could be 50,000 U.K. cases a day by mid-October , with a daily death toll of 200 or more by mid-November if the current growth in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The U.K. already has the biggest official COVID-19 death toll in Europe — and the fifth largest in the world .
Johnson announced there would also be “ tighter ” enforcement of the new rules , as the fine for not wearing a face mask will rise to £200 ( about $ 250 ) .
The prime minister also ripped up his push to persuade people to go back to their offices and told the public to work from home if they can .
“ No British government would wish to stifle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have found necessary this year , ” he said .
“ So it now falls to each of us and every one of us to remember the basics — wash our hands , cover our faces , observe social distancing and follow the rules.
” Under the new measures , pubs , bars and restaurants in England will have to close by 10 p.m. each night and must operate as table service only from Thursday .
“ What we have seen from the evidence is that alas the spread of the disease does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more alcohol has been consumed , ” Johnson told the U.K parliament .
Businesses will be fined and could even be be closed if they breach the rules .
“ For the time being , this virus is a fact of our lives , and I must tell [ Parliament ] and the country that our fight against it will continue , ” he said .
The prime minister ’ s spokesperson said the military could be used to backfill certain police duties , such as office roles and guarding protected sites , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus response .
“ This is not about providing any additional powers to the military , or them replacing the police in enforcement roles , and they will not be handing out fines .
It is about freeing up more police officers , ” the spokesperson said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said the military could be deployed in England to help with the enforcement of new coronavirus restrictions.
Speaking to U.K. lawmakers on Tuesday, the prime minister said there would now be “greater police presence” on the streets with “the option to draw on military support where required.”
Advertisement
The move come after the government’s chief scientific and medical advisers warned there could be 50,000 U.K. cases a day by mid-October, with a daily death toll of 200 or more by mid-November if the current growth in the rate of infection is not halted.
The U.K. already has the biggest official COVID-19 death toll in Europe — and the fifth largest in the world.
Johnson announced there would also be “tighter” enforcement of the new rules, as the fine for not wearing a face mask will rise to £200 (about $250).
The prime minister also ripped up his push to persuade people to go back to their offices and told the public to work from home if they can.
Advertisement
“No British government would wish to stifle our freedoms in the ways that we have found necessary this year,” he said. “So it now falls to each of us and every one of us to remember the basics — wash our hands, cover our faces, observe social distancing and follow the rules.”
Under the new measures, pubs, bars and restaurants in England will have to close by 10 p.m. each night and must operate as table service only from Thursday.
“What we have seen from the evidence is that alas the spread of the disease does tend to happen later at night after more alcohol has been consumed,” Johnson told the U.K parliament.
Face masks will become compulsory for bar staff, shop workers, waiters and taxi drivers.
Businesses will be fined and could even be be closed if they breach the rules.
The number of people who can attend weddings will be halved, from 30 to 15.
A plan to allow small crowds to sports stadiums has been suspended.
Johnson said that the restrictions announced could remain in place for “perhaps six months.”
“For the time being, this virus is a fact of our lives, and I must tell [Parliament] and the country that our fight against it will continue,” he said.
The prime minister’s spokesperson said the military could be used to backfill certain police duties, such as office roles and guarding protected sites, so police officers can be out enforcing the virus response.
Advertisement
“This is not about providing any additional powers to the military, or them replacing the police in enforcement roles, and they will not be handing out fines. It is about freeing up more police officers,” the spokesperson said.
Johnson sad MPs will have the opportunity to debate the new coronavirus measures next week.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Are Glasses Wearers Less Likely To Catch COVID-19?

We all know by now that wearing a face mask can keep germs away from your nose and mouth .
But what about your eyes ?
Aren ’ t they letting in germs , too ?
For a new study , scientists in China wanted to find out how glasses-wearing impacts COVID-19 risk .
They analyzed data from 276 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Suizhou , China , from January to March this year to see how many wore glasses .
The number of COVID-19 patients in the hospital who wore glasses was lower ( 5.8 % ) than that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 31.5 % ) , they found .
Viruses like COVID-19 primarily enter the body through the nose and mouth , but it ’ s also thought the virus can infiltrate your system through the membranes in the eyes .
Researchers in China noticed the proportion of glasses-wearers among patients with coronavirus disease was small , so they wanted to investigate why this might be .
They studied all inpatients with COVID-19 in Suizhou Zengdu Hospital , China , from January 27 to March 13 2020 , to compare glasses-wearers ( those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a day ) with non-glasses-wearers .
A total of 276 patients with COVID-19 were enrolled onto the study .
Of these , 155 ( 56.2 % ) were male , and the median age was 51 .
All those who wore glasses for more than eight hours a day had myopia ( meaning they were short-sighted ) and included 16 of 276 patients .
In Hubei province , it ’ s thought the proportion of people who are short-sighted is 31.5 % , which was much higher than the proportion of patients with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggest as many as 80 % of the population in China have myopia .
Researchers concluded that the proportion of inpatients with COVID-19 who wore glasses for extended daily periods was smaller than that in the general population .
They suggested , therefore , that daily wearers of glasses may be less susceptible to COVID-19 .
But Dr. Amir Khan , a doctor for the NHS , cautions that this is just one study with a small sample size showing an association between wearing glasses and reduced COVID-19 rates , rather than direct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any firm conclusions from this would be entirely premature , but there are some things we can take note of , ” he wrote in an article for Al Jazeera .
Khan pointed out that the eyes “ may be an important route of entry to the body for the coronavirus ” , and noted there have been reports of patients having eye symptoms like conjunctivitis , which signals infection .
“ Theoretically , wearing glasses forms an extra barrier in front of our eyes , protecting them from an infected respiratory droplet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also stop us from touching our eyes , which is how the virus could enter the body if we had it on our hands .
That said , he points out that while goggles are appropriate to reduce the risk of catching COVID-19 in medical settings as they have a tight seal around the eye , glasses only offer protection to the front and sides .
Simon Kolstoe , a senior lecturer in evidence-based healthcare at the University of Portsmouth , says a controlled trial or test is now needed to firm this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow two carefully matched groups of people – some wearing glasses and some not wearing glasses – to see which group gets infected more often , ” he wrote in a piece for The Conversation .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
We all know by now that wearing a face mask can keep germs away from your nose and mouth. But what about your eyes? Aren’t they letting in germs, too?
For a new study, scientists in China wanted to find out how glasses-wearing impacts COVID-19 risk. They analyzed data from 276 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Suizhou, China, from January to March this year to see how many wore glasses.
Advertisement
The number of COVID-19 patients in the hospital who wore glasses was lower (5.8%) than that of the local population who wore glasses (31.5%), they found.
Viorel Kurnosov via Getty Images
Viruses like COVID-19 primarily enter the body through the nose and mouth, but it’s also thought the virus can infiltrate your system through the membranes in the eyes.
Researchers in China noticed the proportion of glasses-wearers among patients with coronavirus disease was small, so they wanted to investigate why this might be.
Advertisement
They studied all inpatients with COVID-19 in Suizhou Zengdu Hospital, China, from January 27 to March 13 2020, to compare glasses-wearers (those who wore glasses for more than eight hours a day) with non-glasses-wearers.
A total of 276 patients with COVID-19 were enrolled onto the study. Of these, 155 (56.2%) were male, and the median age was 51. All those who wore glasses for more than eight hours a day had myopia (meaning they were short-sighted) and included 16 of 276 patients.
In Hubei province, it’s thought the proportion of people who are short-sighted is 31.5%, which was much higher than the proportion of patients with COVID-19 who were short-sighted. Some reports suggest as many as 80% of the population in China have myopia.
Researchers concluded that the proportion of inpatients with COVID-19 who wore glasses for extended daily periods was smaller than that in the general population. They suggested, therefore, that daily wearers of glasses may be less susceptible to COVID-19.
But Dr. Amir Khan, a doctor for the NHS, cautions that this is just one study with a small sample size showing an association between wearing glasses and reduced COVID-19 rates, rather than direct cause and effect.
Advertisement
“To draw any firm conclusions from this would be entirely premature, but there are some things we can take note of,” he wrote in an article for Al Jazeera.
Khan pointed out that the eyes “may be an important route of entry to the body for the coronavirus”, and noted there have been reports of patients having eye symptoms like conjunctivitis, which signals infection.
“Theoretically, wearing glasses forms an extra barrier in front of our eyes, protecting them from an infected respiratory droplet,” he said. They might also stop us from touching our eyes, which is how the virus could enter the body if we had it on our hands.
“Theoretically, wearing glasses forms an extra barrier in front of our eyes.” - Khan
That said, he points out that while goggles are appropriate to reduce the risk of catching COVID-19 in medical settings as they have a tight seal around the eye, glasses only offer protection to the front and sides.
Advertisement
Simon Kolstoe, a senior lecturer in evidence-based healthcare at the University of Portsmouth, says a controlled trial or test is now needed to firm this up. “Ideally, this would follow two carefully matched groups of people – some wearing glasses and some not wearing glasses – to see which group gets infected more often,” he wrote in a piece for The Conversation.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Fauci Aide To Retire After Report Outs Him As RedState's Infamous Coronavirus Denier

An internal communications staffer at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ― the federal agency headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci ― said he will retire after a news report outed him as a right-wing blogger who alleged the coronavirus crisis is a “ massive fraud.
” Bill Crews has announced “ his intention to retire , ” NIAID spokesperson Kathy Stover told HuffPost in an email Tuesday .
News of the decision followed a Daily Beast report published Monday that unmasked him as “ streiff , ” the pseudonym he uses on Twitter and conservative blog RedState , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his tweets and RedState blog posts , Crews regularly bashes Fauci , the top infectious disease expert on the White House coronavirus task force , and the government ’ s response to a pandemic he characterized as a “ scare.
” In several writings , Crews called Fauci “ attention-grubbing and media-whoring , ” and a “ mask nazi ” for urging Americans to wear face masks to prevent the spread of the virus .
He ’ s called mask-wearing , a practice considered by public health experts to be essential during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In a June post for RedState , Crews suggested government officials responsible for the country ’ s coronavirus response should be executed .
“ I think we ’ re at the point where it is safe to say that the entire Wuhan virus scare was nothing more or less than a massive fraud perpetrated upon the American people by ‘ experts ’ who were determined to fundamentally change the way the country lives and is organized and governed , ” Crews wrote .
“ If there were justice , ” he added , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] few dozen of these fascists to the gallows and gibbet their tarred bodies in chains until they fall apart.
” NIAID ’ s Stover confirmed Daily Beast ’ s reporting is “ accurate , ” except for identifying Crews as a press officer for the institute .
Crews , in fact , worked for the internal communications department , she said .
“ Beyond that , I can ’ t offer any other details as it is now a personnel matter , ” Stover added .
Crews has worked for NIAID since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he has been involved with the site since 2004 .
There have been more than 6.8 million confirmed cases of the virus in the U.S. and nearly 200,000 deaths nationwide , according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University .
Globally , at least 965,000 coronavirus-linked deaths have been reported .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
An internal communications staffer at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ― the federal agency headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci ― said he will retire after a news report outed him as a right-wing blogger who alleged the coronavirus crisis is a “massive fraud.”
Bill Crews has announced “his intention to retire,” NIAID spokesperson Kathy Stover told HuffPost in an email Tuesday. News of the decision followed a Daily Beast report published Monday that unmasked him as “streiff,” the pseudonym he uses on Twitter and conservative blog RedState, which he was secretly managing.
Advertisement
In his tweets and RedState blog posts, Crews regularly bashes Fauci, the top infectious disease expert on the White House coronavirus task force, and the government’s response to a pandemic he characterized as a “scare.”
In several writings, Crews called Fauci “attention-grubbing and media-whoring,” and a “mask nazi” for urging Americans to wear face masks to prevent the spread of the virus. He’s called mask-wearing, a practice considered by public health experts to be essential during the pandemic, “a pseudo-religious cult.”
In a June post for RedState, Crews suggested government officials responsible for the country’s coronavirus response should be executed.
“I think we’re at the point where it is safe to say that the entire Wuhan virus scare was nothing more or less than a massive fraud perpetrated upon the American people by ‘experts’ who were determined to fundamentally change the way the country lives and is organized and governed,” Crews wrote.
Advertisement
“If there were justice,” he added, “we’d send [a] few dozen of these fascists to the gallows and gibbet their tarred bodies in chains until they fall apart.”
NIAID’s Stover confirmed Daily Beast’s reporting is “accurate,” except for identifying Crews as a press officer for the institute. Crews, in fact, worked for the internal communications department, she said.
“Beyond that, I can’t offer any other details as it is now a personnel matter,” Stover added.
Crews has worked for NIAID since 2007. According to his RedState profile, he has been involved with the site since 2004.
There have been more than 6.8 million confirmed cases of the virus in the U.S. and nearly 200,000 deaths nationwide, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Globally, at least 965,000 coronavirus-linked deaths have been reported.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Cindy McCain, Widow Of GOP Sen. John McCain, Endorses Joe Biden

Biden , she added , is the only candidate in the presidential race who “ stands up for our values as a nation.
” My husband John lived by a code : country first .
We are Republicans , yes , but Americans foremost .
There 's only one candidate in this race who stands up for our values as a nation , and that is @ JoeBiden .
— Cindy McCain ( @ cindymccain ) September 22 , 2020 Though McCain ’ s statement represents the first time she ’ s explicitly endorsed the former vice president , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
During the Democratic National Convention , McCain was featured in a clip that celebrated Biden ’ s friendship with her late husband , who died in 2018 of brain cancer .
“ They would just sit and joke , ” McCain said in the video of the two men , who developed a close friendship after meeting in the 1970s , when Biden was a young senator and John McCain served as his military aide during an overseas trip .
“ It was like a comedy show , sometimes , to watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McCain said at the DNC .
Like her husband , who ’ d been described as a “ critic in chief ” of the Trump administration , Cindy McCain has been similarly vocal in her criticism of President Donald Trump .
The couple ’ s daughter , Meghan McCain , has also been an outspoken critic of the president , who has often expressed his dislike for the late senator , once exclaiming that he didn ’ t consider the former Vietnam prisoner of war a hero .
“ I feel like right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my back , he doesn ’ t take a stand on things that are really important and we have a time of crisis , ” Cindy McCain told the Arizona Republic this week of her decision to back Biden .
“ I ’ m worried that this could go further than it should .
My point in getting on board with Joe is that he ’ s proven — he ’ s been there .
I ’ ve known him for 40 years .
I know his character and his leadership and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are very important to me .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Cindy McCain, widow of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), has officially endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for president.
“My husband John lived by a code: country first,” she wrote Tuesday on Twitter. “We are Republicans, yes, but Americans foremost.”
Advertisement
Biden, she added, is the only candidate in the presidential race who “stands up for our values as a nation.”
My husband John lived by a code: country first. We are Republicans, yes, but Americans foremost. There's only one candidate in this race who stands up for our values as a nation, and that is @JoeBiden. — Cindy McCain (@cindymccain) September 22, 2020
Though McCain’s statement represents the first time she’s explicitly endorsed the former vice president, she has gone to bat for Biden before.
During the Democratic National Convention, McCain was featured in a clip that celebrated Biden’s friendship with her late husband, who died in 2018 of brain cancer.
Advertisement
“They would just sit and joke,” McCain said in the video of the two men, who developed a close friendship after meeting in the 1970s, when Biden was a young senator and John McCain served as his military aide during an overseas trip.
“It was like a comedy show, sometimes, to watch the two of them,” Cindy McCain said at the DNC.
Like her husband, who’d been described as a “critic in chief” of the Trump administration, Cindy McCain has been similarly vocal in her criticism of President Donald Trump. The couple’s daughter, Meghan McCain, has also been an outspoken critic of the president, who has often expressed his dislike for the late senator, once exclaiming that he didn’t consider the former Vietnam prisoner of war a hero.
“I feel like right now the president doesn’t have my back, he doesn’t take a stand on things that are really important and we have a time of crisis,” Cindy McCain told the Arizona Republic this week of her decision to back Biden. “I’m worried that this could go further than it should. My point in getting on board with Joe is that he’s proven — he’s been there. I’ve known him for 40 years. I know his character and his leadership and his honor and his integrity and those things are very important to me.”
Trump responded to Cindy McCain’s endorsement by trashing her late husband and Biden.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Pentagon Gave Most Of Its $1 Billion Coronavirus Aid Package To Defense Contractors: Report

MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images Defense Secretary Mark Esper , with President Donald Trump , speaks on vaccine development on May 15 , 2020 , in the Rose Garden of the White House .
In March , when Congress allocated $ 1 billion dollars from its first coronavirus relief package to go to the U.S. Department of Defense , the expectation was that the funds would be spent on essential medical supplies needed for the department to help combat the deadly disease .
At the time ― and even now ― the United States was facing a shortage of critical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Post report , however , reveals the Trump administration gave a majority of the Pentagon ’ s billion-dollar coronavirus aid package to defense contractors to make things like Army uniforms , body armor and jet engine parts .
The report comes on the same day the U.S. surpassed 200,000 coronavirus deaths , the most of any nation , according to Johns Hopkins University .
Congress allocated the $ 1 billion in coronavirus aid for the Department of Defense in March to “ prevent , prepare for , and respond to coronavirus.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of millions of dollars from that fund was given to companies the DOD pays for shipbuilding , including the multibillion-dollar companies Rolls-Royce and ArcelorMittal .
The report also notes $ 80 million was awarded to a Kansas company that makes plane parts — air travel has slowed during the pandemic , and the company had already suffered from the nationwide grounding of Boeing 737 Max planes , a widely defective model .
On Tuesday afternoon , Democratic Representatives Barbara Lee ( Calif. ) and Mark Pocan ( Wis. ) said the Pentagon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contractors is “ unconscionable and should be investigated fully and prosecuted if warranted.
” In all , the report found at least one-third of the companies the Trump administration paid with the coronavirus medical supply funds had already been given loans through the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) Congress established for struggling businesses .
PPP loans , distributed by the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration and designed as an incentive for small business owners to keep employees on payroll during the pandemic , have been found to be unevenly distributed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ owners were largely neglected by the program , and a lawsuit alleges that banks giving out the loans favored larger businesses .
Reports on the pandemic ’ s economic impact show that large percentages of nonwhite business owners had to close their companies as the economy tanked under the weight of the pandemic .
Trump has publicly downplayed the impact of coronavirus since early this year , calling the virus a “ hoax ” contrived by the Democratic Party in February .
He has publicly opposed widespread testing and he has undermined health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of concern that acknowledging the virus will harm him politically .
In March , while states were pleading with the administration for help supplying strapped hospitals with critical supplies , Trump suggested they didn ’ t need it .
“ How do you go from using 10,000 to 20,000 [ masks ] to 300,000 ?
” Trump asked during a March press briefing .
“ Something ’ s going on .
Where are the masks going , are they going out the back door ?
” This month , audio released from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revealed that the president knew why hospitals were in need of these essential supplies , even as he publicly undermined their value .
“ It ’ s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus , ” Trump added , before admitting he ’ d always planned to downplay the impact of the virus .

Defense Secretary Mark Esper, with President Donald Trump, speaks on vaccine development on May 15, 2020, in the Rose Garden of the White House. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
In March, when Congress allocated $1 billion dollars from its first coronavirus relief package to go to the U.S. Department of Defense, the expectation was that the funds would be spent on essential medical supplies needed for the department to help combat the deadly disease. At the time ― and even now ― the United States was facing a shortage of critical items like N95 masks. A new Washington Post report, however, reveals the Trump administration gave a majority of the Pentagon’s billion-dollar coronavirus aid package to defense contractors to make things like Army uniforms, body armor and jet engine parts.
The report comes on the same day the U.S. surpassed 200,000 coronavirus deaths, the most of any nation, according to Johns Hopkins University.
Advertisement
Congress allocated the $1 billion in coronavirus aid for the Department of Defense in March to “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” But The Washington Post report revealed hundreds of millions of dollars from that fund was given to companies the DOD pays for shipbuilding, including the multibillion-dollar companies Rolls-Royce and ArcelorMittal.
The report also notes $80 million was awarded to a Kansas company that makes plane parts — air travel has slowed during the pandemic, and the company had already suffered from the nationwide grounding of Boeing 737 Max planes, a widely defective model.
On Tuesday afternoon, Democratic Representatives Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Mark Pocan (Wis.) said the Pentagon’s use of coronavirus aid for defense contractors is “unconscionable and should be investigated fully and prosecuted if warranted.”
JUST IN: Two members of Congress call for public hearings and investigation of @DeptofDefense using COVID-19 funding for "jet engine parts, body armor, and dress uniforms”https://t.co/aFIdQOcA8J pic.twitter.com/NKm0njfy7A — Paul Szoldra (@PaulSzoldra) September 22, 2020
Advertisement
In all, the report found at least one-third of the companies the Trump administration paid with the coronavirus medical supply funds had already been given loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Congress established for struggling businesses. PPP loans, distributed by the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration and designed as an incentive for small business owners to keep employees on payroll during the pandemic, have been found to be unevenly distributed. A May survey showed that nonwhite business owners were largely neglected by the program, and a lawsuit alleges that banks giving out the loans favored larger businesses. Reports on the pandemic’s economic impact show that large percentages of nonwhite business owners had to close their companies as the economy tanked under the weight of the pandemic.
Trump has publicly downplayed the impact of coronavirus since early this year, calling the virus a “hoax” contrived by the Democratic Party in February. He has publicly opposed widespread testing and he has undermined health officials’ recommendations that Americans wear masks out of concern that acknowledging the virus will harm him politically. In March, while states were pleading with the administration for help supplying strapped hospitals with critical supplies, Trump suggested they didn’t need it.
“How do you go from using 10,000 to 20,000 [masks] to 300,000?” Trump asked during a March press briefing. “Something’s going on. Where are the masks going, are they going out the back door?”
The Post report reveals Trump’s administration had already been working to redirect medical supply funds to defense contractors when Trump uttered those comments publicly on March 29.
Advertisement
This month, audio released from interviews between journalist Bob Woodward and Trump revealed that the president knew why hospitals were in need of these essential supplies, even as he publicly undermined their value.
During a private interview in February, Trump acknowledged that coronavirus posed a threat to public health: “You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed.”
“It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus,” Trump added, before admitting he’d always planned to downplay the impact of the virus.
Numerous hospitals continue to face shortages of essential medical supplies and health officials anticipate a spike in coronavirus cases as fall and winter approach.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Mitt Romney Supports A Vote On A Trump Supreme Court Nominee

“ The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees , ” Romney said in a statement .
“ Accordingly , I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President ’ s nominee .
If the nominee reaches the Senate floor , I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.
” Republicans now appear to have enough votes to move forward with a Trump nominee , even before one had been formally announced by the White House .
Romney said his decision “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test of ‘ fairness ’ which , like beauty , is in the eye of the beholder , ” and argued “ the historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party ’ s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.
” Only two Republican senators have called for a delay in filling the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s seat : Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska , both moderates who have a record of sometimes breaking with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP holding a 53-47 majority in the upper chamber , Democrats need at least two more Republicans to join them to stop a quick Supreme Court confirmation ― an unlikely scenario .
Collins said the nomination should be held for whichever candidate wins the presidential election , as was done in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia .
Murkowski said she wouldn ’ t support confirming a new justice until after the election ― leaving open the possibility of action on the vacancy in the lame-duck Congress .
Although Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hasn ’ t laid out a specific timeline , President Donald Trump is pushing for a vote on his nominee before Election Day , Nov. 3 .
He said on Monday that he could unveil his pick to replace Ginsburg , who died on Friday , as early as this week .
“ I think Susan Collins is very badly hurt by her statement .
... People are not going to take this , ” Trump said Monday in an interview on “ Fox & Friends , ” taking aim at one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is seeking reelection this year .
“ I think it ’ s going to help Cory , ” Trump said , describing the senator as “ loyal to the party ” and “ loyal to his state.
” Gardner , who has been a reliable vote for Trump in the Senate , said Monday that he would vote to confirm a Trump nominee for SCOTUS .
Most Republican senators made clear over the weekend that they wanted to move quickly to replace Ginsburg despite having previously said that Supreme Court vacancies should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
Confirming Trump ’ s nominee would ensure a 6-3 conservative majority among the justices .
Earlier this year , Romney was the only GOP senator to break with his party and vote to convict Trump in his impeachment trial for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to the president ’ s efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden .
The conservative senator and 2012 GOP presidential nominee has been an outspoken critic of Trump and Republican-led investigations into Biden .
“ My liberal friends have over many decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having a liberal court but that ’ s not written in the stars , ” Romney told reporters on Tuesday .
“ I know a lot of people are saying , ‘ Gosh we don ’ t want that change.
’ I understand the energy associated with that perspective.
” “ But its also appropriate for a nation that is , if you will , center-right to have a court which reflects center-right points of view which are again not changing the law from what it states but instead following the law and @ @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) said Tuesday that he supports the Senate voting on a Supreme Court nominee ahead of the November election, clearing the path for Republicans to solidify the court’s conservative majority.
“The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees,” Romney said in a statement. “Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
Advertisement
Republicans now appear to have enough votes to move forward with a Trump nominee, even before one had been formally announced by the White House.
Romney said his decision “is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder,” and argued “the historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.”
Only two Republican senators have called for a delay in filling the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat: Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, both moderates who have a record of sometimes breaking with their party’s leadership.
With the GOP holding a 53-47 majority in the upper chamber, Democrats need at least two more Republicans to join them to stop a quick Supreme Court confirmation ― an unlikely scenario.
Advertisement
Collins said the nomination should be held for whichever candidate wins the presidential election, as was done in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Murkowski said she wouldn’t support confirming a new justice until after the election ― leaving open the possibility of action on the vacancy in the lame-duck Congress.
Although Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hasn’t laid out a specific timeline, President Donald Trump is pushing for a vote on his nominee before Election Day, Nov. 3. He said on Monday that he could unveil his pick to replace Ginsburg, who died on Friday, as early as this week.
“I think Susan Collins is very badly hurt by her statement. ... People are not going to take this,” Trump said Monday in an interview on “Fox & Friends,” taking aim at one of the Senate’s most vulnerable incumbents who is seeking reelection this year.
The president rejected the notion that moving forward with a nomination before Election Day would harm the campaigns of GOP senators like Collins and Cory Gardner of Colorado.
“I think it’s going to help Cory,” Trump said, describing the senator as “loyal to the party” and “loyal to his state.”
Advertisement
Gardner, who has been a reliable vote for Trump in the Senate, said Monday that he would vote to confirm a Trump nominee for SCOTUS.
Most Republican senators made clear over the weekend that they wanted to move quickly to replace Ginsburg despite having previously said that Supreme Court vacancies should not be filled during a presidential election year. Confirming Trump’s nominee would ensure a 6-3 conservative majority among the justices.
Earlier this year, Romney was the only GOP senator to break with his party and vote to convict Trump in his impeachment trial for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to the president’s efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden. The conservative senator and 2012 GOP presidential nominee has been an outspoken critic of Trump and Republican-led investigations into Biden.
“My liberal friends have over many decades gotten very used to the idea of having a liberal court but that’s not written in the stars,” Romney told reporters on Tuesday. “I know a lot of people are saying, ‘Gosh we don’t want that change.’ I understand the energy associated with that perspective.”
“But its also appropriate for a nation that is, if you will, center-right to have a court which reflects center-right points of view which are again not changing the law from what it states but instead following the law and the constitution,” he added.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Trump Could Face Tax Fraud Probe, Manhattan Prosecutor Says For First Time

NEW YORK ( Reuters ) ― Manhattan ’ s district attorney said on Monday he might have grounds to investigate President Donald Trump and his businesses for tax fraud , as he seeks to persuade a federal appeals court to let him obtain Trump ’ s tax returns .
Lawyers for District Attorney Cyrus Vance made the assertion in a filing with the 2nd U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan , four days before it considers Trump ’ s request to block Vance ’ s August 2019 subpoena for the tax returns .
The lawyers said the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including misstatements about business properties , could justify a grand jury probe into possible tax fraud , insurance fraud and falsifying business records .
“ Even if the grand jury were testing the truth of public allegations alone , such reports , taken together , fully justify the scope of the grand jury subpoena , ” Vance ’ s lawyers wrote , without accusing Trump or his businesses of wrongdoing .
Among the reports Vance ’ s office cited were allegations that Trump routinely sent lenders financial statements that inflated his assets and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 2014 paid $ 400 million in cash for “ five houses , eight golf courses and a winery ” despite billions of dollars in debt .
They also included the case of Trump ’ s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen , who pleaded guilty to campaign finance and other charges , and testified to Congress it was common for the Trump Organization to falsify records when seeking loans .
Michael Cohen , former attorney to President Donald Trump , leaves his apartment building before beginning his prison term Monday , May 6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AP Photo/Kevin Hagen ) Vance had previously said his probe also related to reports of “ possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct ” at the Trump Organization , including possible insurance and bank fraud by the company and its officers .
Trump , a Republican , has said the subpoena from Vance , a Democrat , to his accounting firm Mazars USA for eight years of his personal and corporate tax returns was “ wildly overbroad ” and issued in bad faith to harass him .
The president made that argument after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier claim of immunity from criminal investigations while in the White House .
But lawyers for Vance said Trump ’ s arguments , including that the Mazars subpoena largely copied an earlier subpoena from Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives , were “ recycled ” from when he claimed immunity .
The lawyers called Marrero ’ s review “ meticulous , ” after Trump had accused the judge of dismissively rejecting his arguments as a “ back-door ” means to immunity .
Though the appeal was fast-tracked , it is unlikely the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s tax returns before the Nov. 3 election .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (Reuters) ― Manhattan’s district attorney said on Monday he might have grounds to investigate President Donald Trump and his businesses for tax fraud, as he seeks to persuade a federal appeals court to let him obtain Trump’s tax returns.
Lawyers for District Attorney Cyrus Vance made the assertion in a filing with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, four days before it considers Trump’s request to block Vance’s August 2019 subpoena for the tax returns.
Advertisement
The lawyers said the “mountainous” public allegations of misconduct, including misstatements about business properties, could justify a grand jury probe into possible tax fraud, insurance fraud and falsifying business records.
“Even if the grand jury were testing the truth of public allegations alone, such reports, taken together, fully justify the scope of the grand jury subpoena,” Vance’s lawyers wrote, without accusing Trump or his businesses of wrongdoing.
Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Trump, declined to comment on the filing.
Among the reports Vance’s office cited were allegations that Trump routinely sent lenders financial statements that inflated his assets and omitted debt-laden properties, and from 2004 to 2014 paid $400 million in cash for “five houses, eight golf courses and a winery” despite billions of dollars in debt.
They also included the case of Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty to campaign finance and other charges, and testified to Congress it was common for the Trump Organization to falsify records when seeking loans.
Advertisement
Michael Cohen, former attorney to President Donald Trump, leaves his apartment building before beginning his prison term Monday, May 6, 2019, in New York. AP Photo/Kevin Hagen) ASSOCIATED PRESS
Vance had previously said his probe also related to reports of “possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct” at the Trump Organization, including possible insurance and bank fraud by the company and its officers.
Trump, a Republican, has said the subpoena from Vance, a Democrat, to his accounting firm Mazars USA for eight years of his personal and corporate tax returns was “wildly overbroad” and issued in bad faith to harass him.
The president made that argument after the U.S. Supreme Court in July rejected his earlier claim of immunity from criminal investigations while in the White House.
Trump is now appealing U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero’s Aug. 20 ruling allowing the subpoena’s enforcement.
Advertisement
But lawyers for Vance said Trump’s arguments, including that the Mazars subpoena largely copied an earlier subpoena from Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, were “recycled” from when he claimed immunity.
The lawyers called Marrero’s review “meticulous,” after Trump had accused the judge of dismissively rejecting his arguments as a “back-door” means to immunity.
Oral arguments are set for Sept. 25 before a panel of three judges, all appointed by Democratic presidents.
Though the appeal was fast-tracked, it is unlikely the public will know what’s in Trump’s tax returns before the Nov. 3 election.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--For Republicans, The Real Question Is Why Wouldn’t They Fill That Supreme Court Seat?

WASHINGTON ― As Democrats demand explanations on how Republicans can push forward with a Supreme Court nomination with the election just weeks away , Republicans have a different question : Why wouldn ’ t they ?
Republicans generally and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in particular made filling the federal judiciary with as many conservative judges as possible a priority years ago .
They even made then-candidate Donald Trump agree to this as a condition of their support in 2016 .
Today , with Trump in danger of losing reelection in six weeks and Republicans in danger of losing their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see this as a now-or-possibly-never opportunity .
“ They could have this very good thing if they act now .
If they wait , they may not .
So , act now , ” said Amanda Carpenter , once a top aide to Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) .
Terry Sullivan , a GOP consultant who ran Sen. Marco Rubio ’ s 2016 presidential campaign , said that focusing on the high court also takes the attention off of other things .
“ My sense is that every smart political operative knows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Trump , Republicans will lose big .
And the absolute best way to change the narrative and distract the media and liberals is make it about this.
” Beyond the obvious benefits of moving quickly is the danger that even if Trump were to win on Nov. 3 , the fact that he would never again need Republican support or face the voters could make him an uncontrollable wild card .
“ The Republican Party has to confirm this judge now… .
If Trump wins reelection , all his appointments to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adhere to the Bill Barr loyalty standard , ” said Rick Tyler , who worked on Cruz ’ s 2016 presidential bid .
He added that he wouldn ’ t put it past Trump to nominate his own daughter .
“ Why not put a true loyalist on the court ?
Actually , Ivanka would be the perfect pick.
” Installing young judges , pre-screened and pre-approved by the conservative Federalist Society , has been common ground between social conservatives who want to see abortion rights overturned and the business community that wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to impose safety and environmental regulations .
While past Republican presidents and nominees have been seen as tacitly agreeing with those goals , conservatives ― particularly politically engaged evangelical Christians ― did not trust Trump , given his background of supporting Democrats and his checkered personal history .
Donald Trump greets Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as the president arrives to deliver the State of the Union address on Feb. 4 , 2020 .
Trump 's promise to name conservative judges secured his support from Republican leaders in 2016 .
But that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evaporates after Nov. 3 , regardless of the outcome .
With no more elections ahead of him , Trump could well choose whomever he wants , whether he has won a second term or is facing two months of lame-duck status .
“ While Republicans understand that getting another conservative justice on the court under a [ Joe ] Biden presidency is not possible , they also understand that it is equally unlikely under an unrestrained Trump second term , ” Tyler said .
Carpenter said a bigger impetus for McConnell to move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be unforgiving if , should Republicans lose both the White House and the Senate , they push forward with a nominee anyway in the lame-duck session .
“ The optics of , potentially , a defeated president and handful of beaten senators using their last votes to shove through a judge on a narrow party-line vote would damage the credibility of the court for generations , ” she said .
Norman Ornstein , a scholar with the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute who in recent years has become a harsh critic of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party ’ s rush to fill the seat has a much simpler and much more craven purpose : to make sure there is a strong Republican majority in the event of a contested election .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― As Democrats demand explanations on how Republicans can push forward with a Supreme Court nomination with the election just weeks away, Republicans have a different question: Why wouldn’t they?
Republicans generally and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in particular made filling the federal judiciary with as many conservative judges as possible a priority years ago. They even made then-candidate Donald Trump agree to this as a condition of their support in 2016.
Advertisement
Today, with Trump in danger of losing reelection in six weeks and Republicans in danger of losing their Senate majority, many in the party see this as a now-or-possibly-never opportunity.
“They could have this very good thing if they act now. If they wait, they may not. So, act now,” said Amanda Carpenter, once a top aide to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
Terry Sullivan, a GOP consultant who ran Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign, said that focusing on the high court also takes the attention off of other things. “My sense is that every smart political operative knows that if this election is about coronavirus or Trump, Republicans will lose big. And the absolute best way to change the narrative and distract the media and liberals is make it about this.”
Beyond the obvious benefits of moving quickly is the danger that even if Trump were to win on Nov. 3, the fact that he would never again need Republican support or face the voters could make him an uncontrollable wild card.
Advertisement
“The Republican Party has to confirm this judge now…. If Trump wins reelection, all his appointments to the courts, the Cabinet or otherwise will adhere to the Bill Barr loyalty standard,” said Rick Tyler, who worked on Cruz’s 2016 presidential bid. He added that he wouldn’t put it past Trump to nominate his own daughter. “Why not put a true loyalist on the court? Actually, Ivanka would be the perfect pick.”
Installing young judges, pre-screened and pre-approved by the conservative Federalist Society, has been common ground between social conservatives who want to see abortion rights overturned and the business community that wants to limit the government’s ability to impose safety and environmental regulations.
While past Republican presidents and nominees have been seen as tacitly agreeing with those goals, conservatives ― particularly politically engaged evangelical Christians ― did not trust Trump, given his background of supporting Democrats and his checkered personal history.
In May 2016, Trump released a list of conservative judges and promised he would choose from it when filling Supreme Court vacancies ― an unprecedented quid pro quo that evangelical Christians embraced.
Donald Trump greets Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as the president arrives to deliver the State of the Union address on Feb. 4, 2020. Trump's promise to name conservative judges secured his support from Republican leaders in 2016. OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images
Advertisement
Trump has continued to tout his adherence to that list, which has been twice updated, to woo conservatives in his reelection bid.
But that need to placate evangelicals or other conservatives evaporates after Nov. 3, regardless of the outcome. With no more elections ahead of him, Trump could well choose whomever he wants, whether he has won a second term or is facing two months of lame-duck status.
“While Republicans understand that getting another conservative justice on the court under a [Joe] Biden presidency is not possible, they also understand that it is equally unlikely under an unrestrained Trump second term,” Tyler said.
Carpenter said a bigger impetus for McConnell to move before the election is that public opinion will be unforgiving if, should Republicans lose both the White House and the Senate, they push forward with a nominee anyway in the lame-duck session.
“The optics of, potentially, a defeated president and handful of beaten senators using their last votes to shove through a judge on a narrow party-line vote would damage the credibility of the court for generations,” she said.
Advertisement
Norman Ornstein, a scholar with the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute who in recent years has become a harsh critic of the Republican Party, said Trump and the party’s rush to fill the seat has a much simpler and much more craven purpose: to make sure there is a strong Republican majority in the event of a contested election.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-22--Bob Woodward Predicts How Historians Will Look Back On The Trump Era

Journalist Bob Woodward said Tuesday that he believes future historians will be scratching their heads over what happened to America during President Donald Trump ’ s time in office .
The Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter was interviewed at the Citizen by CNN conference by the network ’ s president , Jeff Zucker , as part of his ongoing media blitz to promote his new book about Trump , “ Rage.
” The president admitted in taped interviews for the book that he was well aware of the deadly nature of the coronavirus in February , yet he continued to mislead the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday ’ s interview took place on a day when the U.S. passed the tragic milestone of 200,000 COVID-19 deaths .
The veteran journalist , whose reporting with Carl Bernstein on the Watergate scandal led to the 1974 resignation of President Richard Nixon , said he ’ d never seen anything akin to Trump ’ s administration in his coverage of nine presidents .
“ This impulse decision-making , I ’ ve never seen anything like it in the presidency or any other institution , where it ’ s this one-man band , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and do exactly what he wants , often giving no warning to his closest aides , ” he said , according to CNN .
Despite granting him 19 interviews , Trump has trashed Woodward since the release of unflattering details from the book .
Woodward concluded at the end of the book , based on interviews with senior government officials and Trump himself , that Trump was the wrong man for the presidency .
He said Tuesday that Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic was a “ monumental failure , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I know , are going to be writing about this for decades , ” he said .
“ And they ’ re going to say , what the F happened to America in 2016 , 2017 , 2018 , 2019 and 2020 ?
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Journalist Bob Woodward said Tuesday that he believes future historians will be scratching their heads over what happened to America during President Donald Trump’s time in office.
The Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter was interviewed at the Citizen by CNN conference by the network’s president, Jeff Zucker, as part of his ongoing media blitz to promote his new book about Trump, “Rage.” The president admitted in taped interviews for the book that he was well aware of the deadly nature of the coronavirus in February, yet he continued to mislead the public that it would magically disappear.
Advertisement
Tuesday’s interview took place on a day when the U.S. passed the tragic milestone of 200,000 COVID-19 deaths.
The veteran journalist, whose reporting with Carl Bernstein on the Watergate scandal led to the 1974 resignation of President Richard Nixon, said he’d never seen anything akin to Trump’s administration in his coverage of nine presidents.
“This impulse decision-making, I’ve never seen anything like it in the presidency or any other institution, where it’s this one-man band, and he’s going to say and do exactly what he wants, often giving no warning to his closest aides,” he said, according to CNN.
Despite granting him 19 interviews, Trump has trashed Woodward since the release of unflattering details from the book. Woodward concluded at the end of the book, based on interviews with senior government officials and Trump himself, that Trump was the wrong man for the presidency.
Advertisement
He said Tuesday that Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic was a “monumental failure,” Mediaite reported.
“The historians, I know, are going to be writing about this for decades,” he said. “And they’re going to say, what the F happened to America in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020?”