thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--How Politics And Bureaucracy Halted The Promise Of The Abortion Pill

Getty Images The abortion pill was supposed to decentralize abortion care .
Instead , patients are still forced to travel long distances to abortion clinics to pick it up .
Colloquially called the abortion pill , mifepristone is taken in combination with another drug , misoprostol , and allows patients under 10 weeks pregnant to have an abortion in the privacy of their home , instead of inside an abortion clinic .
Reproductive rights activists lobbying for the drug envisioned a future where women could have the pills prescribed by their primary physician and dispensed at their local pharmacy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normal health care .
Rigorous research has shown that medication abortion is safe and effective , and over 3.7 million women have used it to end their pregnancies since its approval .
These days , about 40 % of abortions in the U.S. are done using medication .
Still , mifepristone is still treated as a dangerous drug , over the objections of a growing chorus of medical organizations and Democratic lawmakers .
In May , reproductive health care providers successfully sued the FDA to temporarily block the requirement that patients obtain medication @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , patients in some states are able to access medication abortion via telemedicine , though the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to block the lower court ruling .
At the same time , some anti-abortion rights Republican lawmakers , such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas , are pushing to have the drug removed from the market entirely .
At the time , I was the policy advocacy director for my organization and I had been campaigning to get the pill to the U.S. for several years .
The most visceral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FDA staff felt about violence .
I had been going to FDA meetings on all kinds of women ’ s health issues for years .
Usually we would take the subway , walk through a parking lot , enter the FDA building and take the elevator down to a basement area to their conference rooms .
It would be just another government meeting .
This meeting was in a different , secured location .
They were so concerned about safety that all of us who wanted to go to the meeting had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get screened before getting on the shuttle bus .
Then we had to go through another set of federal marshals and get screened again before we could get into the room where the meeting was held .
The FDA ’ s fear of violence wasn ’ t unjustified .
There had been violent attacks against abortion providers and threats made against FDA officials .
FDA spokespeople at that time were counseled not to use their names for fear of becoming targets .
We knew we were going into this really fraught situation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor , I remember thinking , “ We did it !
We did it !
” My heart raced .
But then , almost immediately , things started to go off the rails .
They started talking about restricting it to only doctors who already provide abortion , which undermines the whole idea of it becoming more available .
The idea was that it could be prescribed by any physician .
I thought the restrictions would be gone in a couple of years .
When I was talking with our contacts inside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Let ’ s keep it with trained abortion doctors right at the beginning and then there ’ ll be no complications , and then it ’ ll be okay to loosen the rules and let any doctor prescribe it because we ’ ll have it established that it ’ s safe .
If the original approval was an ankle bracelet , REMS was the prison .
Nothing ever gets out of REMS .
As a longtime women ’ s health activist , I ’ m not aware of any drug that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s been put in , because it ’ s designed for dangerous drugs .
It ’ s completely wrong .
It ’ s medically unjustifiable and politically motivated and has been for 20 years .
I have some empathy for people in the FDA who are buffeted by political stresses and strains and anti-abortion legislators .
I understand that they get a lot of pressure .
But in the end , we need them to do their job , and their job is to be honest about the drugs they regulate , regardless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , whether it ’ s abortion care whether it ’ s chemotherapy , whether it ’ s obesity drugs .
In this case , they ’ re not being intellectually honest with the world about the safety of the use of medication abortion .
About a week after we all went home due to coronavirus , we started wondering , how are women going to get to the clinic ?
Dammit , we should just tell the FDA , they need to drop the REMS .
Early in April we wrote a letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations saying , drop it , drop it right now , drop it in a hurry because it ’ s urgent , and drop it forever because it ’ s a settled question , it is not needed to protect the safety of pregnant patients .
We hope there will be a shift in the political climate that makes it clear to the FDA that they will be free to go by the science and their actions will be understood as being science-based .
They might get political criticism , but they won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ budget cut or leader muzzled or something like that .
If I wasn ’ t optimistic , I wouldn ’ t have stayed working in women ’ s health over 30 years .
I ’ m not optimistic about the coming days .
But I ’ m still optimistic about eventually getting the abortion pill out of these restrictions .

The abortion pill was supposed to decentralize abortion care. Instead, patients are still forced to travel long distances to abortion clinics to pick it up. Getty Images
Twenty years ago today, the Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone, a drug used to terminate early pregnancies that held the promise of revolutionizing abortion care in the U.S.
Colloquially called the abortion pill, mifepristone is taken in combination with another drug, misoprostol, and allows patients under 10 weeks pregnant to have an abortion in the privacy of their home, instead of inside an abortion clinic. Reproductive rights activists lobbying for the drug envisioned a future where women could have the pills prescribed by their primary physician and dispensed at their local pharmacy, transforming abortion into just another part of normal health care.
Advertisement
And yet, in the year 2020, that vision has not come true.
Rigorous research has shown that medication abortion is safe and effective, and over 3.7 million women have used it to end their pregnancies since its approval. These days, about 40% of abortions in the U.S. are done using medication. Still, mifepristone is still treated as a dangerous drug, over the objections of a growing chorus of medical organizations and Democratic lawmakers.
Because mifepristone is subject to a special set of FDA restrictions known as a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), medication abortion is highly regulated. In most cases, patients seeking the drugs must drive to their closest abortion clinic, which may be hours away depending on the state, to get the medicines.
The coronavirus pandemic has brought into stark relief the consequences of the restrictions. Patients have been forced to travel long distances in violation of stay-at-home orders to obtain drugs that could easily be sent in the mail.
In May, reproductive health care providers successfully sued the FDA to temporarily block the requirement that patients obtain medication abortion in-person during the pandemic. Currently, patients in some states are able to access medication abortion via telemedicine, though the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to block the lower court ruling. At the same time, some anti-abortion rights Republican lawmakers, such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, are pushing to have the drug removed from the market entirely.
Advertisement
To understand the history of medication abortion in the U.S., HuffPost spoke to Cynthia A. Pearson, executive director of the National Women’s Health Network, who campaigned for the abortion pill to be approved in the 1990s.
You testified at the FDA meeting in 1996 where an advisory committee recommended the approval of medication abortion. What do you remember from that day?
At the time, I was the policy advocacy director for my organization and I had been campaigning to get the pill to the U.S. for several years. The most visceral memory I have is the fear that the FDA staff felt about violence. I had been going to FDA meetings on all kinds of women’s health issues for years. Usually we would take the subway, walk through a parking lot, enter the FDA building and take the elevator down to a basement area to their conference rooms. It would be just another government meeting.
This meeting was in a different, secured location. They were so concerned about safety that all of us who wanted to go to the meeting had to first park at a hotel and get screened before getting on the shuttle bus. Then we had to go through another set of federal marshals and get screened again before we could get into the room where the meeting was held. The FDA’s fear of violence wasn’t unjustified. There had been violent attacks against abortion providers and threats made against FDA officials. FDA spokespeople at that time were counseled not to use their names for fear of becoming targets. We knew we were going into this really fraught situation.
At the time the committee voted in favor, I remember thinking, “We did it! We did it!” My heart raced. But then, almost immediately, things started to go off the rails. They started talking about restricting it to only doctors who already provide abortion, which undermines the whole idea of it becoming more available. The idea was that it could be prescribed by any physician.
Advertisement
It took four years to finally get approved, and once it was, medication abortion was subject to a whole host of restrictions. What did you think when that happened?
By that time, mifepristone had been approved in dozens of countries, used by millions of women and the safety record was already well known.
I thought the restrictions would be gone in a couple of years. When I was talking with our contacts inside the FDA in 1996, the message was: Let’s keep it with trained abortion doctors right at the beginning and then there’ll be no complications, and then it’ll be okay to loosen the rules and let any doctor prescribe it because we’ll have it established that it’s safe.
It was really short-sighted, the idea that avoiding complications would avoid a political backlash. There was always going to be a political backlash! People who oppose abortion oppose any kind of abortion, safe or not. They believe it’s wrong. It was a misguided strategy.
In 2007, when the REMS program was begun, mifepristone was added to the list of drugs requiring special oversight. What impact did that have?
Advertisement
If the original approval was an ankle bracelet, REMS was the prison. Nothing ever gets out of REMS. As a longtime women’s health activist, I’m not aware of any drug that has gotten out of REMS once it’s been put in, because it’s designed for dangerous drugs.
REMS is not a bad program. It’s designed for drugs that have proven efficacy but have some pretty serious dangers. So guidance is needed to maximize the risk-benefit ratio. But mifepristone is not a dangerous drug.
How does it make you feel, seeing medication abortion still regulated in such a strict way, after 20 years of evidence on its safety?
It’s completely wrong. It’s medically unjustifiable and politically motivated and has been for 20 years. I have some empathy for people in the FDA who are buffeted by political stresses and strains and anti-abortion legislators. I understand that they get a lot of pressure. But in the end, we need them to do their job, and their job is to be honest about the drugs they regulate, regardless of whether it’s a vaccine, whether it’s abortion care, whether it’s chemotherapy, whether it’s obesity drugs. In this case, they’re not being intellectually honest with the world about the safety of the use of medication abortion.
Tell me about your recent campaign to end the REMS on medication abortion.
About a week after we all went home due to coronavirus, we started wondering, how are women going to get to the clinic? Dammit, we should just tell the FDA, they need to drop the REMS. Early in April we wrote a letter to the FDA commissioner signed by 83 organizations saying, drop it, drop it right now, drop it in a hurry because it’s urgent, and drop it forever because it’s a settled question, it is not needed to protect the safety of pregnant patients.
Advertisement
I got no response, not even an acknowledgment that I sent the letter. I then asked for a meeting; no acknowledgment that I asked for a meeting.
I’ve interacted with multiple commissioners appointed by Republicans and Democrats, and I’ve never, ever in all these years had an FDA commissioner’s office not even acknowledge that I sent a message or request for a meeting.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump Went Even Further Than Other Uber-Rich To Shrink Taxes

ASSOCIATED PRESS President Donald Trump speaks about coronavirus testing during an event in the Rose Garden of the White House , Monday , Sept. 28 , 2020 , in Washington .
( AP Photo/Evan Vucci ) So say tax experts in the wake of a New York Times report Sunday that found that Trump paid only $ 750 in taxes in both 2016 and 2017 — and none at all in 11 of the 18 years that the newspaper examined .
U.S. tax law has long been kind to big real estate developers .
It allows them myriad legal loopholes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax bills .
The law became even kinder to them after Trump ’ s Republican allies in Congress pushed through his $ 1.5 trillion tax overhaul , which took effect in 2018 .
The Times reviewed Trump ’ s tax returns for 2000 through 2017 , so its report didn ’ t capture the impact of the 2018 law .
But Martin Sullivan , chief economist at Tax Analysts , said : “ It is much easier now for a real estate developer to avoid taxes that it was five years ago.
’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developers could claim losses more quickly and easily than other businesses — and more easily delay or avoid reporting profits to the Internal Revenue Service .
Even if they fall behind on their debts , if their creditors forgive their debts , they face fewer tax penalties than other investors do .
Trump took full advantage of those tax breaks when he was unable to handle his debts on his failing Atlantic City casinos in the 1990s and early 2000s .
Even so , experts say it ’ s unclear whether all his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the IRS has raised questions about some of Trump ’ s claims — in particular , a whopping $ 72.9 million federal tax refund that he sought and received and “ business deductions for expenses that really look like personal expenses.
’ ’ The Times reported , for example , that Trump has claimed a 200-acre family retreat in Bedford , New York , as an investment , thereby allowing him to write off property taxes .
And he has used what the Times called “ unexplained ’ ’ consulting payments to reduce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 70,000 in hair styling expenses during his TV show “ The Apprentice.
’ ’ Economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman at the University of California , Berkeley , found that in 2018 billionaires faced a small burden than did the working class for the first time in 100 years : The richest 400 Americans paid an overall tax rate of 23 % — including federal , state and local taxes — compared with 24.2 % for the bottom 50 % .
Wealthy families typically try to transfer some of their assets during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their heirs , something they can do legally in a variety of ways .
As assets go , real estate is one of the most flexible options .
A key provision in the 2018 tax law delivered a steep tax break for a kind of business set up by owners of profitable firms , including Trump and his family .
The law allowed a 20 % deduction against income taxes for businesses whose profits are taxed at the owner ’ s personal income rate .
They ’ re known as “ pass-through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the owner ’ s personal tax bucket .
Trump himself has owned about 500 entities structured as pass-throughs , according to his lawyers .
This has made the Trump Organization less a single business than a grab-bag of units drawing on the fancier parts of the tax code : sole proprietorships and limited-liability partnerships .
Beyond wealthy individuals , the Trump tax law also made it easier for big corporations to avoid paying income taxes , now at a 21 % rate .
Despite making billions in profits , a number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax bills , giving them effectively a negative tax rate .
Some of the companies that have done this in recent years according to their public filings include Amazon , General Motors , IBM and Netflix .

President Donald Trump speaks about coronavirus testing during an event in the Rose Garden of the White House, Monday, Sept. 28, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) — The tax-avoidance strategies that President Donald Trump capitalized on to shrink his tax bill to essentially zero are surprisingly common among major real estate developers and other uber-wealthy Americans.
Yet Trump characteristically pushed those strategies to the limit, perhaps to the breaking point.
So say tax experts in the wake of a New York Times report Sunday that found that Trump paid only $750 in taxes in both 2016 and 2017 — and none at all in 11 of the 18 years that the newspaper examined.
Advertisement
“The things that Trump did are typical of wealthy businesspeople and particularly wealthy real estate developers,’’ said Steve Wamhoff, director of federal tax policy at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
Still, Wamhoff noted, Trump claims “the special breaks and loopholes that are available in the tax code and sometimes just takes them to a whole new level.”
U.S. tax law has long been kind to big real estate developers. It allows them myriad legal loopholes and breaks that can significantly shrink their tax bills. The law became even kinder to them after Trump’s Republican allies in Congress pushed through his $1.5 trillion tax overhaul, which took effect in 2018.
The Times reviewed Trump’s tax returns for 2000 through 2017, so its report didn’t capture the impact of the 2018 law. But Martin Sullivan, chief economist at Tax Analysts, said: “It is much easier now for a real estate developer to avoid taxes that it was five years ago.’’
Advertisement
Even before the 2018 law, developers could claim losses more quickly and easily than other businesses — and more easily delay or avoid reporting profits to the Internal Revenue Service. Even if they fall behind on their debts, if their creditors forgive their debts, they face fewer tax penalties than other investors do.
Trump took full advantage of those tax breaks when he was unable to handle his debts on his failing Atlantic City casinos in the 1990s and early 2000s. Even so, experts say it’s unclear whether all his actions were permissible.
“There are a lot of things that Trump has done that may exceed what is allowed by the law,” Wamhoff said.
He noted that the IRS has raised questions about some of Trump’s claims — in particular, a whopping $72.9 million federal tax refund that he sought and received and “business deductions for expenses that really look like personal expenses.’’
The Times reported, for example, that Trump has claimed a 200-acre family retreat in Bedford, New York, as an investment, thereby allowing him to write off property taxes. And he has used what the Times called “unexplained’’ consulting payments to reduce his business taxes. Trump even claimed $70,000 in hair styling expenses during his TV show “The Apprentice.’’
Advertisement
Then again, said Sullivan at Tax Analysts, defining legitimate business expenses is typically a “murky’’ issue.
Hair styling is a clearly a personal matter for an everyday office worker. But for a television personality, it would be a legitimate business expense.
Experts note that such outsize tax advantages for the most privileged businesspeople serve to widen the nation’s economic inequality.
Economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman at the University of California, Berkeley, found that in 2018 billionaires faced a small burden than did the working class for the first time in 100 years: The richest 400 Americans paid an overall tax rate of 23% — including federal, state and local taxes — compared with 24.2% for the bottom 50%.
Wealthy families typically try to transfer some of their assets during their lifetime to ease the tax burden on their heirs, something they can do legally in a variety of ways. As assets go, real estate is one of the most flexible options.
Advertisement
That said, there’s a fine line between tax avoidance and abuse.
A key provision in the 2018 tax law delivered a steep tax break for a kind of business set up by owners of profitable firms, including Trump and his family. The law allowed a 20% deduction against income taxes for businesses whose profits are taxed at the owner’s personal income rate. They’re known as “pass-through” companies because their profits are funneled into the owner’s personal tax bucket.
Those businesses span a huge range, from the local florist and family-owned restaurant to law firms, hedge funds and privately held large firms — such as real estate companies and the Trump family’s property empire.
Trump himself has owned about 500 entities structured as pass-throughs, according to his lawyers. This has made the Trump Organization less a single business than a grab-bag of units drawing on the fancier parts of the tax code: sole proprietorships and limited-liability partnerships.
Beyond wealthy individuals, the Trump tax law also made it easier for big corporations to avoid paying income taxes, now at a 21% rate. Despite making billions in profits, a number of them receive tax rebates exceeding their income tax bills, giving them effectively a negative tax rate. Some of the companies that have done this in recent years according to their public filings include Amazon, General Motors, IBM and Netflix.
Apple, the most valuable company in the world, has used the the tax code to avoid paying billions in U.S. taxes by deploying a complex setup involving subsidiaries in Ireland.
Advertisement
More recently, embedded in the $2.3 trillion pandemic rescue package speedily enacted in March is a tax break piggybacked onto the earlier break for “pass-through” companies. Experts say it helps mostly millionaires.
The new change in the tax code would deliver nearly 82% of its benefits to about 43,000 taxpayers earning more than $1 million yearly, according to an estimate from nonpartisan congressional tax analysts. And it would cost U.S. taxpayers $86 billion this year by reducing tax revenue captured by the government, the Joint Committee on Taxation calculated earlier this year.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Democrats Have A Leg Up In The Political Fight Over Amy Coney Barrett

Democrats are developing a clear advantage in the political fight over President Donald Trump ’ s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court , with public polling showing opposition to the Senate rushing her confirmation , the focus of the fight shifting to friendlier political terrain and Republicans openly wishing for Democratic missteps .
There is little Democrats can do to stop Barrett ’ s nomination from moving forward if Republicans remain unified behind her .
But Barrett ’ s views against the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and abortion rights could harm both Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Senate .
The strategies for both parties are fairly obvious : Democrats , led by presidential nominee Joe Biden , plan to relentlessly spotlight Barrett ’ s views against Obamacare and argue she is part of a Republican plan to kill protections for people with preexisting conditions .
Republicans intend to engage in pure power politics and will attempt to bait Democrats into attacking the religion or lifestyle of Barrett , a 48-year-old mother of seven and former law professor at Notre Dame .
Republicans initially hoped the Supreme Court vacancy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ruth Bader Ginsburg could energize their base and help shift the election ’ s focus away from the coronavirus pandemic to friendlier partisan territory .
Democratic messaging discipline , however , has so far kept the debate focused on health care , the issue that helped them take control of the U.S. House in 2018 and still affords them a massive advantage today .
“ President Trump sees a chance to fulfill his explicit mission : steal away the vital protections of the ACA from countless families that have come to rely on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security , the lives of those they love , ” Biden said on Sunday in his hometown of Wilmington , Delaware .
The court is set to hear a lawsuit ― viewed as frivolous by all but the most conservative legal experts ― on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act not long after the election .
Trump ’ s Justice Department has supported the lawsuit , which would kill the law that helped reduce the number of uninsured Americans to record lows .
Biden ’ s focus on health care was echoed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alabama Sen. Doug Jones , the most vulnerable member of Congress , said Friday that Trump was aiming to “ throw our health care system into even greater turmoil ” with the nomination .
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , the most progressive member of the chamber , said Republicans “ now want to ram through a Supreme Court nominee who will vote to destroy the Affordable Care Act , kick millions off their health care , and eliminate protections for preexisting conditions.
” Democrats also began airing ads linking the nomination to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court controlled by Donald Trump could overturn the Affordable Care Act by the end of this year , ” a narrator warns in a new ad from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the election for the GOP-held seat in southern Illinois ’ 13th Congressional District .
“ Rodney Davis won ’ t help us .
He votes with Trump.
” Republicans , meanwhile , are desperate to change the subject and seem to be goading Democrats to attack Barrett ’ s religious beliefs , perhaps recalling that they received a political boost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after he was accused of sexual assault .
( Multiple GOP operatives suggested Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono , a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee , might go after Barrett ’ s Catholicism . )
Republicans had hoped for other benefits from the nomination .
They believed it could help boost their incumbent senators in GOP-leaning states by forcing voters back to their partisan corners , and could provide a fundraising boost to at least partially offset the tens of millions of dollars Democratic candidates and groups raised in the hours and days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a 53-47 majority in the Senate , and most acknowledge the Supreme Court vacancy does not help Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner , Arizona Sen. Martha McSally or Maine Sen. Susan Collins , all of whom are trailing in public polling .
But the GOP was hopeful it could help Sens .
Joni Ernst in Iowa , Thom Tillins in North Carolina , Steve Daines in Montana and others in conservative states .
So far , that has not shown up in polls .
Public surveys released this week showed Democratic candidates leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two states likely to determine the Senate majority , and a close race in South Carolina , a deeply conservative state where Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham finds himself in an unexpectedly tight battle for reelection .
Few Republicans have released fundraising totals in recent days , even if many GOP operatives believed the announcement of Trump ’ s nominee would lead to a windfall .
In multiple appearances on Fox News over the past week , Graham openly begged the audience for donations to help counteract the mounting war chest of Jamie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is outspending on television ads by large margins .
“ Help me .
They ’ re killing me , money-wise .
Help me , ” Graham told Sean Hannity ’ s audience on Thursday night .
Republicans could still make gains .
Democrats could misstep , either in their treatment of Barrett or in the procedural roadblocks they are deploying to slow down her confirmation .
Or Barrett ’ s performances in Judiciary Committee hearings could turn into cash windfalls .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Democrats are developing a clear advantage in the political fight over President Donald Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, with public polling showing opposition to the Senate rushing her confirmation, the focus of the fight shifting to friendlier political terrain and Republicans openly wishing for Democratic missteps.
There is little Democrats can do to stop Barrett’s nomination from moving forward if Republicans remain unified behind her. But Barrett’s views against the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and abortion rights could harm both Trump’s reelection and Republican chances of holding control of the Senate.
Advertisement
The strategies for both parties are fairly obvious: Democrats, led by presidential nominee Joe Biden, plan to relentlessly spotlight Barrett’s views against Obamacare and argue she is part of a Republican plan to kill protections for people with preexisting conditions. Republicans intend to engage in pure power politics and will attempt to bait Democrats into attacking the religion or lifestyle of Barrett, a 48-year-old mother of seven and former law professor at Notre Dame.
Republicans initially hoped the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg could energize their base and help shift the election’s focus away from the coronavirus pandemic to friendlier partisan territory. Democratic messaging discipline, however, has so far kept the debate focused on health care, the issue that helped them take control of the U.S. House in 2018 and still affords them a massive advantage today.
“President Trump sees a chance to fulfill his explicit mission: steal away the vital protections of the ACA from countless families that have come to rely on them for their health, their financial security, the lives of those they love,” Biden said on Sunday in his hometown of Wilmington, Delaware.
Biden’s statement on Barrett’s nomination on Saturday was almost entirely devoted to health care and noted that the nominee “has a written track record of disagreeing with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act.”
Advertisement
The court is set to hear a lawsuit ― viewed as frivolous by all but the most conservative legal experts ― on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act not long after the election. Trump’s Justice Department has supported the lawsuit, which would kill the law that helped reduce the number of uninsured Americans to record lows.
Polls from both the New York Times and Washington Post released Sunday showed Biden with a steady and substantial lead over Trump, and more trusted by a majority of voters to pick the new Supreme Court justice.
Biden’s focus on health care was echoed by nearly every major Democratic figure. Alabama Sen. Doug Jones, the most vulnerable member of Congress, said Friday that Trump was aiming to “throw our health care system into even greater turmoil” with the nomination. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the most progressive member of the chamber, said Republicans “now want to ram through a Supreme Court nominee who will vote to destroy the Affordable Care Act, kick millions off their health care, and eliminate protections for preexisting conditions.”
Democrats also began airing ads linking the nomination to the health care fight. “A Supreme Court controlled by Donald Trump could overturn the Affordable Care Act by the end of this year,” a narrator warns in a new ad from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the election for the GOP-held seat in southern Illinois’ 13th Congressional District. “Rodney Davis won’t help us. He votes with Trump.”
Advertisement
Another ad, from the liberal nonprofit group Piedmont Rising, attacks North Carolina GOP Sen. Thom Tillis for “rushing an appointment on to the Supreme Court who will vote to overturn on our healthcare.”
Republicans, meanwhile, are desperate to change the subject and seem to be goading Democrats to attack Barrett’s religious beliefs, perhaps recalling that they received a political boost from the nomination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh after he was accused of sexual assault. (Multiple GOP operatives suggested Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, might go after Barrett’s Catholicism.)
Trump attempted to gin up controversy during a press conference on Sunday night, citing a New York Times op-ed by a Catholic leftist and unnamed comedians who he said were engaging in “disgraceful” attacks on Barrett’s faith.
Republicans had hoped for other benefits from the nomination. They believed it could help boost their incumbent senators in GOP-leaning states by forcing voters back to their partisan corners, and could provide a fundraising boost to at least partially offset the tens of millions of dollars Democratic candidates and groups raised in the hours and days following Ginsburg’s death.
Republicans have a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and most acknowledge the Supreme Court vacancy does not help Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner, Arizona Sen. Martha McSally or Maine Sen. Susan Collins, all of whom are trailing in public polling. But the GOP was hopeful it could help Sens. Joni Ernst in Iowa, Thom Tillins in North Carolina, Steve Daines in Montana and others in conservative states.
Advertisement
So far, that has not shown up in polls. Public surveys released this week showed Democratic candidates leading in Iowa and North Carolina, the two states likely to determine the Senate majority, and a close race in South Carolina, a deeply conservative state where Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham finds himself in an unexpectedly tight battle for reelection.
Few Republicans have released fundraising totals in recent days, even if many GOP operatives believed the announcement of Trump’s nominee would lead to a windfall. In multiple appearances on Fox News over the past week, Graham openly begged the audience for donations to help counteract the mounting war chest of Jamie Harrison, his Democratic opponent, who is outspending on television ads by large margins. “Help me. They’re killing me, money-wise. Help me,” Graham told Sean Hannity’s audience on Thursday night.
Republicans could still make gains. Democrats could misstep, either in their treatment of Barrett or in the procedural roadblocks they are deploying to slow down her confirmation. Or Barrett’s performances in Judiciary Committee hearings could turn into cash windfalls.
But for the moment, the majority of the benefits from the Supreme Court battle have accumulated to Democrats.
President Donald Trump announces Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at the White House, Sept. 26. Carlos Barria / Reuters


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump Needs To Win The Election To Keep His 'Get Out Of Jail Free' Card

Trump ’ s tax returns and his refusal to release them have been the subject of political scrutiny since he decided to run for president in 2015 .
But they have caused him legal and financial problems for even longer : For the last decade , he has faced an Internal Revenue Service audit over a $ 72.9 million tax refund he claimed in 2010 .
The IRS did not respond to requests for comment Monday about whether the audit had been temporarily halted .
And there is no evidence that the president himself played any role in slowing it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pause .
( Trump ’ s own appointee to head the IRS has disputed the assertion that he can not release tax records because of the audit . )
That it may have been paused , however , points to one of the clearest trends of the Trump presidency : his efforts to use his presidency to avoid legal scrutiny and prop himself up financially , as if his residence in the White House is his own personal “ get out of jail free ” card .
Citing legal opinions from the Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Counsel , Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly asserted that he can not be prosecuted while he serves as president , a claim they argue shields him from scrutiny in federal , state and even civil litigation .
In turn , he has so far escaped consequences for accusations of sexual assault , alleged defamation and questions about his finances .
The president has taken every step possible to bend or break the law to serve his personal and financial interests .
Donald Sherman , Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday are “ consistent with what we ’ ve seen throughout the Trump presidency , which is that the president has taken every step possible to bend or break the law to serve his personal and financial interests , ” said Donald Sherman , the deputy director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington , a government watchdog group .
Still , the court ’ s ruling made it unlikely that the documents would be turned over before the election .
Vance ’ s subpoena , which requests eight years of Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pending , thanks to an appeal from Trump .
The ruling also forced congressional Democrats to return to lower courts to argue that their efforts to subpoena Trump ’ s tax returns met the legal test Chief Justice John Roberts outlined in the case .
And in September , Attorney General William Barr sought to intervene to protect Trump from a defamation suit brought by author E. Jean Carroll , who accused the president of raping her in the 1990s .
The Justice Department argued it could do so because Trump was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidency when he called Carroll a liar ― the claim that prompted the defamation suit .
The contention that Trump was acting in an official capacity may grant him immunity from a defamation claim .
But “ because he controls the executive branch , he can use Bill Barr and the attorney general ’ s office to try to make sure that the federal government is not investigating , and he ’ s doing that , ” Painter said .
“ As long as he ’ s in the presidency , he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal government from investigating him and his businesses by abusing his power and hoping the courts will back him up.
” Manigault Newman alleged in a 2018 tell-all book that the Trump campaign and RNC also paid former Trump associates to sign NDAs .
She provided evidence that Lara Trump offered her $ 15,000 a month to work for the reelection campaign in exchange for signing an NDA covering her time in the White House .
Other former Trump associates and family members paid by the campaign include Trump ’ s former bodyguard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 500,000 for unspecified consulting work .
The tax returns obtained by the Times do not specify to whom Trump owes the money .
But foreign creditors , in particular , are unlikely to call on a U.S. president who wields significant influence to repay loans immediately .
Although Trump lists his creditors on required financial disclosures ― including Deutsche Bank , the large German financial institution ― that doesn ’ t tell the full story , Painter said : Trump ’ s debt raises significant concerns about whom he owes money to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The New York Times’ detailing of two decades of President Donald Trump’s federal tax returns Sunday didn’t just expose how little Trump has paid in taxes. It also further exposed Trump’s personal stakes in November’s election, making it even clearer that the president sees a second term as a way to avoid potential prosecution and the burden of the mountainous debts he has amassed.
Trump’s tax returns and his refusal to release them have been the subject of political scrutiny since he decided to run for president in 2015. But they have caused him legal and financial problems for even longer: For the last decade, he has faced an Internal Revenue Service audit over a $72.9 million tax refund he claimed in 2010.
Advertisement
The Times report raises questions about whether Trump violated federal law in evading taxes and offers a lens into why Trump has fought so hard to shield the returns from public view, legal and ethics experts said.
“Donald Trump’s financial records are the Rosetta Stone for understanding the depth of his corruption and crimes,” Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime personal attorney, said in a Monday interview with Yahoo News. “The more it is unraveled, the more he will unravel. It’s the reason he’s fought so hard to keep it under wraps.”
The New York Times revealed two decades of President Donald Trump's tax returns Sunday, documents the president has tried to keep shielded from public view throughout his time in office. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
The Times report also raised the possibility that the IRS audit has been “paused” because Trump is president, suggesting that this case may not be resolved until his time in office concludes.
Advertisement
The IRS did not respond to requests for comment Monday about whether the audit had been temporarily halted. And there is no evidence that the president himself played any role in slowing it down if it indeed was put on pause. (Trump’s own appointee to head the IRS has disputed the assertion that he cannot release tax records because of the audit.)
That it may have been paused, however, points to one of the clearest trends of the Trump presidency: his efforts to use his presidency to avoid legal scrutiny and prop himself up financially, as if his residence in the White House is his own personal “get out of jail free” card.
Citing legal opinions from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly asserted that he cannot be prosecuted while he serves as president, a claim they argue shields him from scrutiny in federal, state and even civil litigation. In turn, he has so far escaped consequences for accusations of sexual assault, alleged defamation and questions about his finances.
All of this gives the president tremendous incentive to remain in office.
“The president has taken every step possible to bend or break the law to serve his personal and financial interests.” - Donald Sherman, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
The details of the returns the Times published Sunday are “consistent with what we’ve seen throughout the Trump presidency, which is that the president has taken every step possible to bend or break the law to serve his personal and financial interests,” said Donald Sherman, the deputy director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a government watchdog group.
Advertisement
“I think it confirms that he will likely continue to use the government, the tools of the government and his status as president to shield him from legal scrutiny,” he added.
Trump’s attorneys have routinely deployed that defense in cases involving the president’s tax returns, particularly in New York, where Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance has sought records similar to those the Times revealed on Sunday.
Legal experts regard Trump’s defense as dubious, and in July, the Supreme Court twice rejected arguments that he was immune from congressional and legal subpoenas for financial records that could have forced him to release tax returns that may have revealed evidence of tax evasion and other illegal behavior.
Still, the court’s ruling made it unlikely that the documents would be turned over before the election. Vance’s subpoena, which requests eight years of Trump’s tax records, is still pending, thanks to an appeal from Trump. The ruling also forced congressional Democrats to return to lower courts to argue that their efforts to subpoena Trump’s tax returns met the legal test Chief Justice John Roberts outlined in the case.
Trump and his lawyers have deployed the immunity defense, too, in multiple defamation cases involving sexual assault allegations against the president: In May, the president’s attorneys argued that Summer Zervos, a woman who accused Trump of groping and kissing her, could not proceed with a defamation suit against the president because he is immune from prosecution while in office.
Advertisement
And in September, Attorney General William Barr sought to intervene to protect Trump from a defamation suit brought by author E. Jean Carroll, who accused the president of raping her in the 1990s. The Justice Department argued it could do so because Trump was “acting within the scope” of the presidency when he called Carroll a liar ― the claim that prompted the defamation suit. The contention that Trump was acting in an official capacity may grant him immunity from a defamation claim.
The Supreme Court’s rejection of the argument that Trump is immune from investigative scrutiny simply because he is president was a setback for his legal team, said Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who served as the chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration.
But “because he controls the executive branch, he can use Bill Barr and the attorney general’s office to try to make sure that the federal government is not investigating, and he’s doing that,” Painter said. “As long as he’s in the presidency, he can ― I believe illegally ― keep the federal government from investigating him and his businesses by abusing his power and hoping the courts will back him up.”
Attorney General William Barr has deployed the Department of Justice to defend Trump from accusations of defamation, essentially backing up the president's claims that he's immune from legal scrutiny while in office. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Trump’s position also provides him with another entity to protect himself from scrutiny: his campaign arm. He has spent donations to his official campaign committee and the Republican National Committee on legal fees for himself, his adult children and his staff, as detailed by The New York Times.
Advertisement
Campaign funds helped pay for lawyers for Trump family members and close associates when special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury summoned them for questioning in the Russia investigation. The campaign also paid the legal team that represented Trump during his impeachment trial in the Senate. Donor money has also paid lawyers to countersue former employees like Sam Nunberg, Cliff Sims, Omarosa Manigault Newman and Jessica Denson for allegedly breaching nondisclosure agreements.
Manigault Newman alleged in a 2018 tell-all book that the Trump campaign and RNC also paid former Trump associates to sign NDAs. She provided evidence that Lara Trump offered her $15,000 a month to work for the reelection campaign in exchange for signing an NDA covering her time in the White House. Other former Trump associates and family members paid by the campaign include Trump’s former bodyguard Keith Schiller, who has been paid $500,000 for unspecified consulting work.
All of these payments help Trump by keeping him and his family from spending their own money on the legal expenses while silencing critics, both real and potential.
The Times report also revealed that Trump has amassed as much as $300 million in debt that is scheduled to come due over the next four years, suggesting that the president may struggle to meet his financial burdens in the near future unless he can remain in the White House.
The tax returns obtained by the Times do not specify to whom Trump owes the money. But foreign creditors, in particular, are unlikely to call on a U.S. president who wields significant influence to repay loans immediately. Although Trump lists his creditors on required financial disclosures ― including Deutsche Bank, the large German financial institution ― that doesn’t tell the full story, Painter said: Trump’s debt raises significant concerns about whom he owes money to and what leverage they may have over the president.
Advertisement
“He’s in a very precarious financial situation,” Painter said. “And we don’t know who the creditors really are. Because if Deutsche Bank makes a loan, you have no idea whether Deutsche Bank has the risk attached to that loan, or whether somebody else has made a commitment to Deutsche Bank to take on a piece of that, or all of it.”
That poses national security and other risks to the United States and also highlights the legal and financial uncertainty Trump and his web of businesses may face if he loses in November.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump Really Wanted Ivanka As His 2016 Running Mate, According To Rick Gates

According to a new book from Trump ’ s former deputy campaign manager Rick Gates , the president initially suggested that Ivanka Trump , Trump ’ s eldest daughter and senior adviser , should be his running mate in June 2016 when his campaign aides began discussing the matter , Bloomberg News reports .
“ I think it should be Ivanka .
What about Ivanka as my VP ?
” Trump reportedly asked an assembled group that included Ivanka Trump and her husband , Jared Kushner , who is also a Trump senior adviser .
“ All heads turned toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We all knew Trump well enough to keep our mouths shut and not laugh , ” Gates wrote , according to Bloomberg ’ s account of the book .
“ He went on : ‘ She ’ s bright , she ’ s smart , she ’ s beautiful , and the people would love her !
’ ” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee were then considered for the ticket , but they took their names out of the running .
According to Gate ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign chairman and Gate ’ s former business partner , Paul Manafort , suggested someone like then-Indiana Gov .
Mike Pence “ who could bring balance to the ticket.
” “ But Trump said , ‘ Look , I don ’ t like any of these people , ’ ” Gates wrote .
“ Once again , he said , ‘ I think it should be Ivanka.
’ ” According to Gates , Trump was so convinced that the Republican Party would embrace his daughter that his team even polled the idea twice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finally settled on Pence after he regaled Trump with a “ vicious and extended monologue ” about Bill and Hillary Clinton during a meeting later that summer , according to The Washington Post .
Rick Gates leaves federal court in Washington , D.C. , in February 2018 .
His book “ Wicked Game : An Insider ’ s Story on How Trump Won , Mueller Failed , and America Lost , ” is set to be released in October .
In February 2018 , Gates pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work he and his former business partner , Manafort , did for pro-Russian political forces in Ukraine before joining Trump ’ s team .
Despite being sentenced to 45 days in jail , three years of probation , a $ 20,000 fine , and cooperating extensively in special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s Russia investigation , Gates ’ book is reportedly not a tell-all , unlike the offering from Trump ’ s former personal attorney Michael Cohen , “ Disloyal : A Memoir.
” Rather , Gates defends the president and tells the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put him in the Oval Office , according to the Post .
Gates told the Post that he does not know if Trump would have seriously put his daughter ’ s name on the ticket , but included the anecdote in his book because he believes it ’ s exemplary of the type of unconventional thinking that makes Trump an appealing candidate to some .
He also believes it highlights Trump ’ s commitment to his family and illuminates his brand of loyalty — which is ensuring that those closest to him support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and assets that Trump cared most about , ” Gates told the Post .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
It seems that Vice President Mike Pence was not President Donald Trump’s No. 1 pick for his No. 2.
According to a new book from Trump’s former deputy campaign manager Rick Gates, the president initially suggested that Ivanka Trump, Trump’s eldest daughter and senior adviser, should be his running mate in June 2016 when his campaign aides began discussing the matter, Bloomberg News reports.
“I think it should be Ivanka. What about Ivanka as my VP?” Trump reportedly asked an assembled group that included Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, who is also a Trump senior adviser.
Advertisement
“All heads turned toward her, and she just looked surprised. We all knew Trump well enough to keep our mouths shut and not laugh,” Gates wrote, according to Bloomberg’s account of the book. “He went on: ‘She’s bright, she’s smart, she’s beautiful, and the people would love her!’”
Ivanka Trump introduced her father at the Republican National Convention, where he delivered his acceptance speech as the Republican presidential nominee in August. Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images
Gates said that Trump’s team nixed the idea of Vice President Ivanka Trump, who at the time was a 34-year-old fashion and real estate executive with no political experience.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee were then considered for the ticket, but they took their names out of the running. According to Gates’ account, Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman and Gates’ former business partner, Paul Manafort, suggested someone like then-Indiana Gov. Mike Pence “who could bring balance to the ticket.”
Advertisement
“But Trump said, ‘Look, I don’t like any of these people,’” Gates wrote. “Once again, he said, ‘I think it should be Ivanka.’”
According to Gates, Trump was so convinced that the Republican Party would embrace his daughter that his team even polled the idea twice.
She didn’t poll “tremendously high, but higher than we expected,” he wrote. “And that only added to the seriousness of her consideration.”
Then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump visited his Scottish golf course with his daughter Ivanka Trump in 2015. Jeff J Mitchell via Getty Images
It was apparently Ivanka Trump herself who eventually put a stop to the blatantly nepotistic concept, telling her father it wasn’t a good idea.
Advertisement
“And he capitulated,” Gates wrote.
According to Gates, Donald Trump finally settled on Pence after he regaled Trump with a “vicious and extended monologue” about Bill and Hillary Clinton during a meeting later that summer, according to The Washington Post.
The White House did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.
“This is not true and there was never any such poll,” Tim Murtaugh, the Trump campaign’s communications director, told the Post on Monday.
Rick Gates leaves federal court in Washington, D.C., in February 2018. His book “Wicked Game: An Insider’s Story on How Trump Won, Mueller Failed, and America Lost,” is set to be released in October. ASSOCIATED PRESS
In February 2018, Gates pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and lying to federal investigators about lobbying work he and his former business partner, Manafort, did for pro-Russian political forces in Ukraine before joining Trump’s team.
Despite being sentenced to 45 days in jail, three years of probation, a $20,000 fine, and cooperating extensively in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, Gates’ book is reportedly not a tell-all, unlike the offering from Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen, “Disloyal: A Memoir.”
Advertisement
Rather, Gates defends the president and tells the story of how he and others helped put him in the Oval Office, according to the Post.
Gates told the Post that he does not know if Trump would have seriously put his daughter’s name on the ticket, but included the anecdote in his book because he believes it’s exemplary of the type of unconventional thinking that makes Trump an appealing candidate to some. He also believes it highlights Trump’s commitment to his family and illuminates his brand of loyalty — which is ensuring that those closest to him support only his agenda or “the values and assets that Trump cared most about,” Gates told the Post.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Police Confiscated Brad Parscale’s Guns After His Wife Alleged Abuse

More details emerged Monday about the arrest of former Donald Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale , who surrendered to Florida police Sunday after his wife called 911 to say he was threatening to harm himself .
According to newly released reports from Fort Lauderdale police about Sunday ’ s arrest , officers confiscated 10 guns from the home he shares with his wife , Candice Parscale , who told police she and her husband had been arguing when he pulled out a handgun and loaded it .
She also reportedly told police that Parscale had been distressed and violent toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noticed several large sized contusions on both of her arms , her cheek and forehead , ” Detective Steven Smith wrote in his report , according to the Miami Herald .
“ When I asked how she received the bruising , [ she ] stated Brad Parscale hits her.
” The police report also includes testimony from Candice Parscale that she heard a gunshot after she fled the house Sunday , but later said it could have simply been a car backfiring .
When officers reached Parscale on the phone out of concern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reportedly sounded drunk and refused to leave the house , according to the police report obtained by several media outlets .
He was tackled and handcuffed when he eventually came outside with a beer in hand , and police took possession of two shotguns , two rifles , a .22 caliber revolver and five handguns from the home .
Parscale was Trump ’ s reelection campaign manager until July , when he was demoted to a senior adviser just four months ahead of the election amid the president ’ s lagging poll numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Need help ?
In the U.S. , call 1-800-799-SAFE ( 7233 ) for the National Domestic Violence Hotline .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More details emerged Monday about the arrest of former Donald Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale, who surrendered to Florida police Sunday after his wife called 911 to say he was threatening to harm himself.
According to newly released reports from Fort Lauderdale police about Sunday’s arrest, officers confiscated 10 guns from the home he shares with his wife, Candice Parscale, who told police she and her husband had been arguing when he pulled out a handgun and loaded it.
Advertisement
She also reportedly told police that Parscale had been distressed and violent toward her in recent weeks.
“I noticed several large sized contusions on both of her arms, her cheek and forehead,” Detective Steven Smith wrote in his report, according to the Miami Herald. “When I asked how she received the bruising, [she] stated Brad Parscale hits her.”
He has since been involuntarily hospitalized, South Florida’s Sun Sentinel reported.
The police report also includes testimony from Candice Parscale that she heard a gunshot after she fled the house Sunday, but later said it could have simply been a car backfiring.
When officers reached Parscale on the phone out of concern he still might harm himself, he reportedly sounded drunk and refused to leave the house, according to the police report obtained by several media outlets. He was tackled and handcuffed when he eventually came outside with a beer in hand, and police took possession of two shotguns, two rifles, a .22 caliber revolver and five handguns from the home.
Advertisement
Parscale was Trump’s reelection campaign manager until July, when he was demoted to a senior adviser just four months ahead of the election amid the president’s lagging poll numbers and a disastrous rally in Oklahoma.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--2020 U.S. Census Will End On Oct. 5 Despite Court Order, Commerce Secretary Says

MediaNews Group/Reading Eagle via Getty Images via Getty Images Reading , PA - September 25 : A detail photo of the information table for the 2020 Census .
Outside the 3rd and Spruce Recreation Center in Reading Friday afternoon September 25 , 2020 where the City of Reading held an event to encourage people to fill out the census .
ORLANDO , Fla. ( AP ) — U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross says the 2020 census will end Oct. 5 , despite a federal judge ’ s ruling last week that the head count of every U.S. resident should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to a tweet posted on the Census Bureau ’ s website Monday .
The tweet said the ability for people to self-respond to the census questionnaire and the door-knocking phase when census takers go to homes that haven ’ t yet responded is ending Oct. 5 .
The announcement came as a virtual hearing was being held in San Jose , California , as a follow-up to U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh ’ s preliminary injunction .
The injunction ordered last week suspended the Census Bureau ’ s deadline for ending the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ automatically reverted the deadline back to an older Census Bureau plan in which the deadline for ending field operations was Oct. 31 .
The new Oct. 5 deadline doesn ’ t necessarily violate the judge ’ s order because the injunction just suspended the Sept. 30 deadline for field operations and a Dec. 31 deadline the Census Bureau has for turning in figures used for determining how many congressional seats each state gets in a process known as apportionment .
Koh asked federal government attorneys during Monday ’ s hearing to provide documents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the head count on Oct. 5 was made .
When a federal government lawyer suggested that the decision making was a moving target without any records , the judge asked , “ A one sentence tweet ?
Are you saying that is enough reason to establish decision-making ?
A one sentence tweet ?
” Koh said in her ruling last Thursday that the shortened schedule ordered by President Donald Trump ’ s administration likely would produce inaccurate results that would last a decade .
She sided with civil rights groups and local governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the U.S. Department of Commerce , which oversees the statistical agency , arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the counting ends this month .
Attorneys for the federal government said they were appealing the decision .
During hearings , federal government attorneys argued that the head count needed to end Sept. 30 in order to meet a Dec. 31 deadline for handing in figures used for deciding how many congressional seats each state gets in a process known as apportionment .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross says the 2020 census will end Oct. 5, despite a federal judge’s ruling last week that the head count of every U.S. resident should continue through the end of October, according to a tweet posted on the Census Bureau’s website Monday.
The tweet said the ability for people to self-respond to the census questionnaire and the door-knocking phase when census takers go to homes that haven’t yet responded is ending Oct. 5.
Advertisement
The announcement came as a virtual hearing was being held in San Jose, California, as a follow-up to U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh’s preliminary injunction. The injunction ordered last week suspended the Census Bureau’s deadline for ending the head count on Sept. 30, which automatically reverted the deadline back to an older Census Bureau plan in which the deadline for ending field operations was Oct. 31.
Reading, PA - September 25: A detail photo of the information table for the 2020 Census. Outside the 3rd and Spruce Recreation Center in Reading Friday afternoon September 25, 2020 where the City of Reading held an event to encourage people to fill out the census. MediaNews Group/Reading Eagle via Getty Images via Getty Images
The new Oct. 5 deadline doesn’t necessarily violate the judge’s order because the injunction just suspended the Sept. 30 deadline for field operations and a Dec. 31 deadline the Census Bureau has for turning in figures used for determining how many congressional seats each state gets in a process known as apportionment.
Koh asked federal government attorneys during Monday’s hearing to provide documents on how the new decision to end the head count on Oct. 5 was made. When a federal government lawyer suggested that the decision making was a moving target without any records, the judge asked, “A one sentence tweet? Are you saying that is enough reason to establish decision-making? A one sentence tweet?”
Advertisement
Koh said in her ruling last Thursday that the shortened schedule ordered by President Donald Trump’s administration likely would produce inaccurate results that would last a decade. She sided with civil rights groups and local governments that had sued the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Department of Commerce, which oversees the statistical agency, arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the counting ends this month.
Attorneys for the federal government said they were appealing the decision. During hearings, federal government attorneys argued that the head count needed to end Sept. 30 in order to meet a Dec. 31 deadline for handing in figures used for deciding how many congressional seats each state gets in a process known as apportionment.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump’s Tax Revelation Could Tarnish Image That Fueled Rise

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The bombshell revelations that President Donald Trump paid just $ 750 in federal income taxes the year he ran for office and paid no income taxes at all in many others threaten to undercut a pillar of his appeal among blue-collar voters and provide a new opening for his Democratic rival , Joe Biden , on the eve of the first presidential debate .
Trump has worked for decades to build an image of himself as a hugely successful businessman — even choosing “ mogul ” as his Secret Service code name .
But The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he paid just $ 750 in federal income taxes in 2016 , the year he won the presidency , and in 2017 , his first year in office .
He paid no income taxes whatsoever in 10 of the previous 15 years , largely because he reported losing more money than he made , according to the Times , which obtained years ’ worth of tax return data that the president had long fought to keep private .
The development comes at a particularly precarious moment for Trump , whose Republican campaign is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s handling of the pandemic .
It hands Biden an easy attack line heading into Tuesday ’ s debate .
And with early voting already happening in some states and Election Day just over a month away , Trump may be running out of time to turn his campaign around .
“ Donald Trump needs this election to be about Joe Biden as a choice , ” said longtime GOP consultant Alex Conant .
“ This keeps the focus squarely on Trump ’ s character and the chaos going into the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate.
” Of course , Trump has repeatedly faced — and survived — devastating turns that would have sunk any other politician .
That includes , most notably , the stunning “ Access Hollywood ” tape released in October 2016 , in which Trump was recorded bragging about kissing and groping women without their permission .
The video ’ s release came just two days before Trump was set to face then-candidate Hillary Clinton in their second debate and was considered a death knell to his campaign at the time .
At this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already underway in many states and so few voters still undecided , it is unclear whether any new discoveries about Trump would make any difference .
Trump ’ s support over the years has remained remarkably consistent , polls over the course of his presidency have found .
Yet the tax allegations go to the very heart of Trump ’ s appeal , especially among the blue-collar voters in states like Pennsylvania , Wisconsin and Michigan who propelled him to the presidency in 2016 .
Trump was supported by about two-thirds of white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an analysis by the Pew Research Center , versus only about 2 in 10 nonwhite noncollege graduates .
Even today , when asked to explain their support for Trump , voters often point to his success in business as evidence of his acumen .
And they often repeat his talking point that he gave up a great deal to serve as president , citing his sacrifice as evidence that he ran for the job not out of self-interest , but because he cares about improving the lives of people like them .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in private jets from one luxury property to another and paying less in taxes than millions of Americans with far more modest lifestyles could prompt a backlash similar to the one 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney faced after he was secretly recorded at a closed-door fundraiser saying that the 47 % of Americans who don ’ t pay income taxes were “ dependent upon government ” and would never vote for him .
In addition to the news about Trump ’ s annual payments , the Times found that many of his best-known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported huge losses , and that , as he faces an uphill battle for reelection , his finances are under particular stress thanks to “ hundreds of millions of dollars in debt coming due that he has personally guaranteed.
” Trump is also under audit over a $ 72.9 million tax refund that could cost him more than $ 100 million if the IRS rules against him , the Times revealed .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — The bombshell revelations that President Donald Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes the year he ran for office and paid no income taxes at all in many others threaten to undercut a pillar of his appeal among blue-collar voters and provide a new opening for his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, on the eve of the first presidential debate.
Trump has worked for decades to build an image of himself as a hugely successful businessman — even choosing “mogul” as his Secret Service code name. But The New York Times on Sunday revealed that he paid just $750 in federal income taxes in 2016, the year he won the presidency, and in 2017, his first year in office. He paid no income taxes whatsoever in 10 of the previous 15 years, largely because he reported losing more money than he made, according to the Times, which obtained years’ worth of tax return data that the president had long fought to keep private.
Advertisement
The development comes at a particularly precarious moment for Trump, whose Republican campaign is struggling to overcome criticism of the president’s handling of the pandemic. It hands Biden an easy attack line heading into Tuesday’s debate. And with early voting already happening in some states and Election Day just over a month away, Trump may be running out of time to turn his campaign around.
“Donald Trump needs this election to be about Joe Biden as a choice,” said longtime GOP consultant Alex Conant. “This keeps the focus squarely on Trump’s character and the chaos going into the most important night of the campaign, the debate.”
Of course, Trump has repeatedly faced — and survived — devastating turns that would have sunk any other politician. That includes, most notably, the stunning “Access Hollywood” tape released in October 2016, in which Trump was recorded bragging about kissing and groping women without their permission. The video’s release came just two days before Trump was set to face then-candidate Hillary Clinton in their second debate and was considered a death knell to his campaign at the time.
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told “Fox & Friends” on Monday that Democrats are replaying “the same playbook they tried in 2016 — the same playbook that the American people rejected and will do so again.”
Advertisement
At this point in the race, with voting already underway in many states and so few voters still undecided, it is unclear whether any new discoveries about Trump would make any difference. Trump’s support over the years has remained remarkably consistent, polls over the course of his presidency have found.
Yet the tax allegations go to the very heart of Trump’s appeal, especially among the blue-collar voters in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan who propelled him to the presidency in 2016. Trump was supported by about two-thirds of white voters without college degrees, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center, versus only about 2 in 10 nonwhite noncollege graduates.
Indeed, in a Gallup poll from February 2016, Republicans who wanted to see Trump win their party’s nomination cited his experience as a businessman as the second-most important reason they backed him, surpassed only by his status as a nonpolitician and an outsider.
Even today, when asked to explain their support for Trump, voters often point to his success in business as evidence of his acumen. And they often repeat his talking point that he gave up a great deal to serve as president, citing his sacrifice as evidence that he ran for the job not out of self-interest, but because he cares about improving the lives of people like them.
But the image of a man flying around in private jets from one luxury property to another and paying less in taxes than millions of Americans with far more modest lifestyles could prompt a backlash similar to the one 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney faced after he was secretly recorded at a closed-door fundraiser saying that the 47% of Americans who don’t pay income taxes were “dependent upon government” and would never vote for him.
Advertisement
″(M)y job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,” Romney said.
Roughly half of Americans pay no federal income taxes, but the average income tax paid in 2017 was nearly $12,200, according to the IRS.
Democrats wasted no time in seizing on the news, with the Biden campaign’s online store already selling stickers saying “I paid more income taxes than Donald Trump” on Sunday night.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer tweeted an emoji calling on followers to raise their hands “if you paid more in federal income tax than President Trump.”
$750.
Seven hundred fifty dollars.
SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS.
That’s why he hid his tax returns.
Because the whole time, he wasn’t paying taxes. But you were.
Plumbers and teachers and fast food workers and accountants were (and still are) paying for his lifestyle.
$750. — Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) September 27, 2020
Advertisement
“That’s why he hid his tax returns. Because the whole time, he wasn’t paying taxes. But you were,” added Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
And Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, said the new report highlights the importance of the House Democratic lawsuit against the Trump administration to access Trump’s tax returns.
“This reporting shines a stark light on the vastly different experience people with power and influence have when interacting with the Internal Revenue Service than the average American taxpayer does,” he said in a statement.
In addition to the news about Trump’s annual payments, the Times found that many of his best-known businesses, including his golf courses, reported huge losses, and that, as he faces an uphill battle for reelection, his finances are under particular stress thanks to “hundreds of millions of dollars in debt coming due that he has personally guaranteed.” Trump is also under audit over a $72.9 million tax refund that could cost him more than $100 million if the IRS rules against him, the Times revealed.
The development comes after Biden recently stepped up his efforts to paint Trump as a charlatan who has lied to his working-class supporters. In contrast, Biden has tried to highlight his own middle-class upbringing.
Advertisement
The election, Biden has said, is “Scranton vs. Park Avenue,” pitting Biden’s boyhood hometown in Pennsylvania against Manhattan, where Trump built his branding empire and reality television career.
“This clearly plays straight into that contrast that Biden has opened up,” said Joe Trippi, a veteran strategist of multiple Democratic presidential campaigns.
Trippi said coming into the debate, Biden now has something he can concretely point to as he tries to sway the slim margin of voters who remain undecided.
“You move a few points of working class voters, and you’re talking about Biden winning in places like Ohio,” Trippi said.
Conant, who worked on Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign, noted how defensive Trump became when Rubio, during a primary debate, charged that Trump “would be selling watches in Manhattan” had he not inherited tens of millions of dollars from his father, Fred.
Advertisement
Trump raised an index finger in the air, yelling, “No, no, no, no,” as he sought to interrupt Rubio and insisted that he had instead borrowed money. “That is so wrong,” he said.
“So long as this campaign is all about Trump,” Conant said, “he’s going to lose.”
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump Wrote Off Ivanka Payments As 'Consulting Fees' On His Taxes: New York Times

President Donald Trump wrote off payments to his daughter Ivanka as a tax deduction for “ consulting fees , ” according to a revelatory New York Times investigation into the president ’ s taxes published Sunday night .
The reporting , drawn from tax returns obtained by outlet , reveals the extent to which Trump avoided paying taxes .
He wrote off myriad business expenses as deductions , ranging from property taxes to legal fees to $ 70,000 for hairstyling .
“ There appears to be a closer-to-home explanation for at least some of the fees : Mr. Trump reduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member as a consultant , and then deducting the fee as a cost of doing business , ” the Times wrote .
The reporters matched up the tax records with Ivanka Trump ’ s financial disclosures , filed when she became a White House senior adviser .
They found that more than $ 700,000 in payments she disclosed pertaining to a consulting company were the same amount as the tax deductions for “ consulting fees ” on a pair of hotel projects listed on the Trump Organization ’ s tax records .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top executive at the Trump Organization , not an outside consultant .
People close to Trump ’ s businesses “ were not aware of any outside consultants who would have been paid , ” the Times reported .
The reporters believe this is likely a common practice Trump has used to avoid paying taxes , and could potentially be a way to have paid his adult children without incurring gift taxes .
“ If the payments to his daughter were compensation for work , it is not clear why Mr. Trump would do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reduce his own tax liability , ” they wrote .
Among the many other revelations in the Times ’ report : between 2011 and 2014 , Trump paid $ 0 in income taxes ; in both 2016 and 2017 , he paid only $ 750 in income taxes ; and years of failed business ventures and bankruptcies have left him with $ 421 million of debt and loans .
For years , Trump has refused to release his tax returns , something every president since Richard Nixon has done .
During his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not disclose his tax information because he was under IRS audit .
In response , the IRS said that being under audit does not bar anyone from releasing their tax information .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump wrote off payments to his daughter Ivanka as a tax deduction for “consulting fees,” according to a revelatory New York Times investigation into the president’s taxes published Sunday night.
The reporting, drawn from tax returns obtained by outlet, reveals the extent to which Trump avoided paying taxes. He wrote off myriad business expenses as deductions, ranging from property taxes to legal fees to $70,000 for hairstyling.
Advertisement
He also wrote off as “consulting fees” related to his businesses.
“There appears to be a closer-to-home explanation for at least some of the fees: Mr. Trump reduced his taxable income by treating a family member as a consultant, and then deducting the fee as a cost of doing business,” the Times wrote.
The reporters matched up the tax records with Ivanka Trump’s financial disclosures, filed when she became a White House senior adviser. They found that more than $700,000 in payments she disclosed pertaining to a consulting company were the same amount as the tax deductions for “consulting fees” on a pair of hotel projects listed on the Trump Organization’s tax records.
At the time, Ivanka Trump was a top executive at the Trump Organization, not an outside consultant. People close to Trump’s businesses “were not aware of any outside consultants who would have been paid,” the Times reported.
The reporters believe this is likely a common practice Trump has used to avoid paying taxes, and could potentially be a way to have paid his adult children without incurring gift taxes.
Advertisement
“If the payments to his daughter were compensation for work, it is not clear why Mr. Trump would do it in this form, other than to reduce his own tax liability,” they wrote.
Among the many other revelations in the Times’ report: between 2011 and 2014, Trump paid $0 in income taxes; in both 2016 and 2017, he paid only $750 in income taxes; and years of failed business ventures and bankruptcies have left him with $421 million of debt and loans.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Jill Biden Slams Query On Husband's Gaffes: A Word 'You Cannot Even Say' After Trump

The former second lady of the U.S. talked to CNN ’ s Jake Tapper on Sunday and refused to entertain a question about gaffes made by her spouse .
Immediately , she shut him down : “ Oh , you can ’ t even go there .
After Donald Trump , you can not even say the word gaffe.
” She went on to say , “ Nope .
Done .
It ’ s gone , ” leading Tapper to ask , “ The gaffe issue is over ?
” As Tuesday ’ s first debate between the two candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been making disparaging remarks about Joe Biden ’ s mental state and age ( the two are only a few years apart ; Trump is 74 , Biden 77 ) .
In addition to calling his challenger nicknames like “ Sleepy Joe ” and “ Slow Joe , ” Trump and his campaign put out an ad asking “ Did something happen to Joe Biden ?
” It compared clips of Biden “ verbally stumbling ” in 2020 to smoother appearances he made in 2015 and 2016 .
Last week , Trump told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know where the hell he is ” and “ doesn ’ t know he ’ s alive.
” At another campaign rally Saturday night in Pennsylvania , Trump called Biden a “ dumb guy.
” I will be strongly demanding a Drug Test of Sleepy Joe Biden prior to , or after , the Debate on Tuesday night .
Naturally , I will agree to take one also .
His Debate performances have been record setting UNEVEN , to put it mildly .
Only drugs could have caused this discrepancy ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realDonaldTrump ) September 27 , 2020 Biden and his campaign scoffed at Trump ’ s insults and accusations , saying in a statement that the former vice president “ intends to deliver his debate answers in words .
If the president thinks his best case is made in urine he can have at it .
We ’ d expect nothing less from Donald Trump , who pissed away the chance to protect the lives of 200K Americans when he didn ’ t make a plan to stop COVID-19.
” During the CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her husband is “ ready ” to go up against Trump in the debate .
“ Oh , my gosh , yes , he ’ s ready .
You know , one of the things I am excited for is when the American people see Joe Biden up there on that stage , they ’ re going to see what a president looks like , someone who is , like I ’ m saying , calm , steady , strong , resilient , ” she said .
“ It ’ s like night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And so I can ’ t wait for the American people to see Joe , to see that statesman up there in front of the American public .
”

Jill Biden has no time for people calling out her husband, Democratic presidential Joe Biden, and his mistakes “after Donald Trump.”
The former second lady of the U.S. talked to CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday and refused to entertain a question about gaffes made by her spouse.
Tapper said to Biden: “Your husband has been known to make the occasional gaffe.”
Immediately, she shut him down: “Oh, you can’t even go there. After Donald Trump, you cannot even say the word gaffe.”
Advertisement
She went on to say, “Nope. Done. It’s gone,” leading Tapper to ask, “The gaffe issue is over?”
“Over, so over,” she responded.
CNN’s @jaketapper to Jill Biden: “Your husband has been known to make the occasional gaffe…”
Biden: “You can’t even go there. After Donald Trump you cannot even say the word gaffe.” #CNNSOTU pic.twitter.com/bBInkVhm6L — State of the Union (@CNNSotu) September 27, 2020
As Tuesday’s first debate between the two candidates has drawn near, Trump increasingly has been making disparaging remarks about Joe Biden’s mental state and age (the two are only a few years apart; Trump is 74, Biden 77).
In addition to calling his challenger nicknames like “Sleepy Joe” and “Slow Joe,” Trump and his campaign put out an ad asking “Did something happen to Joe Biden?” It compared clips of Biden “verbally stumbling” in 2020 to smoother appearances he made in 2015 and 2016.
Last week, Trump told supporters in Pittsburgh that Biden “doesn’t know where the hell he is” and “doesn’t know he’s alive.” At another campaign rally Saturday night in Pennsylvania, Trump called Biden a “dumb guy.”
Advertisement
And in a tweet this weekend, the president questioned whether Biden is on drugs.
I will be strongly demanding a Drug Test of Sleepy Joe Biden prior to, or after, the Debate on Tuesday night. Naturally, I will agree to take one also. His Debate performances have been record setting UNEVEN, to put it mildly. Only drugs could have caused this discrepancy??? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 27, 2020
Biden and his campaign scoffed at Trump’s insults and accusations, saying in a statement that the former vice president “intends to deliver his debate answers in words. If the president thinks his best case is made in urine he can have at it. We’d expect nothing less from Donald Trump, who pissed away the chance to protect the lives of 200K Americans when he didn’t make a plan to stop COVID-19.”
During the CNN interview, Jill Biden told Tapper that her husband is “ready” to go up against Trump in the debate.
“Oh, my gosh, yes, he’s ready. You know, one of the things I am excited for is when the American people see Joe Biden up there on that stage, they’re going to see what a president looks like, someone who is, like I’m saying, calm, steady, strong, resilient,” she said. “It’s like night and day between the two candidates. And so I can’t wait for the American people to see Joe, to see that statesman up there in front of the American public.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Sacha Baron Cohen Filmed 'Borat 2' When No One Was Paying Attention

It ’ s no joke : A “ Borat ” sequel may soon be on the way .
Actor Sacha Baron Cohen somehow managed to film a sequel to his 2006 comedy during the pandemic and he ’ s currently screen testing the film , according to Collider .
The plot for the new film is still a secret , according to IGN , which noted that the title reportedly submitted to the Writer ’ s Guild of America website ( and since removed ) doesn ’ t provide many clues : “ Borat : Gift of Pornographic Monkey to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recently Diminished Nation of Kazakhstan.
” Sources who ’ ve seen test screenings of the film told The Film Stage that the relationship between President Donald Trump and financier Jeffrey Epstein and the coronavirus play a big part in the film .
Many famous figures , including Vice President Mike Pence and Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani , reportedly have cameos , but the website says one as-yet-unrevealed scene could derail the career of a well-known political figure .
Back in July , Giuliani was participating in what he believed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House response to the pandemic when a man came in wearing a pink bikini with lace underneath a translucent mesh top .
The former New York City mayor told Page Six that the man “ had the beard , bare legs , and wasn ’ t what I would call distractingly attractive.
” Giuliani , who said he was a “ Borat ” fan , said he didn ’ t immediately recognize the “ screaming and yelling ” actor , and “ thought this must be a scam or a shake-down , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The actor then ran away , according to the mayor .
No release date for the film has been announced , but Collider speculated that it might have been financed by “ a deep-pocketed streamer .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
It’s no joke: A “Borat” sequel may soon be on the way.
Actor Sacha Baron Cohen somehow managed to film a sequel to his 2006 comedy during the pandemic and he’s currently screen testing the film, according to Collider.
The plot for the new film is still a secret, according to IGN, which noted that the title reportedly submitted to the Writer’s Guild of America website (and since removed) doesn’t provide many clues: “Borat: Gift of Pornographic Monkey to Vice Premiere Mikhael Pence to Make Benefit Recently Diminished Nation of Kazakhstan.”
Advertisement
Sources who’ve seen test screenings of the film told The Film Stage that the relationship between President Donald Trump and financier Jeffrey Epstein and the coronavirus play a big part in the film.
Many famous figures, including Vice President Mike Pence and Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, reportedly have cameos, but the website says one as-yet-unrevealed scene could derail the career of a well-known political figure.
Earlier this summer, Giuliani told reporters about his encounter with Cohen.
Back in July, Giuliani was participating in what he believed to be a sit-down interview about the White House response to the pandemic when a man came in wearing a pink bikini with lace underneath a translucent mesh top.
The former New York City mayor told Page Six that the man “had the beard, bare legs, and wasn’t what I would call distractingly attractive.”
Advertisement
Giuliani, who said he was a “Borat” fan, said he didn’t immediately recognize the “screaming and yelling” actor, and “thought this must be a scam or a shake-down, so I reported it to the police.”
The actor then ran away, according to the mayor.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--Trump Griped Americans Weren't Paying Enough Taxes In 2012

Although the self-proclaimed billionaire reportedly paid just $ 750 in federal income taxes in 2016 and nothing in some previous years , he was griping to “ Fox & Friends ” back in 2012 that his fellow Americans weren ’ t paying enough .
A video clip from that year unearthed by Media Matters For America editor John Whitehouse features the then-future president railing against a tax system that he said allowed low-income Americans to pay less in taxes than the wealthy .
That was a big talking point during the 2012 presidential campaign after then-Republican nominee Mitt Romney released @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 14.1 % tax rate .
In the “ Fox & Friends ” clip , co-host Steve Doocy pointed out that half of the country doesn ’ t pay federal income tax and tossed this softball to Trump : “ Is that fair ?
” “ No , it ’ s not , ” Trump responded .
“ It ’ s even more than that , as I understand it , and it ’ s not fair , ” he said .
A little context : During the 2012 campaign , Romney was secretly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 47 % of then-President Barack Obama ’ s supporters “ believe that they are entitled to health care , to food , to housing.
” Trump apparently had a problem with that , based on tweets he posted that year .
Trump also seemed miffed that Obama paid what he considered to be an insufficient amount of tax on his presidential salary , adding , without irony : “ Do as I say not as I do.
” @ BarackObama who wants to raise all our taxes , only pays 20.5 % on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Do as I say not as I do .
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) April 13 , 2012 Obama in 2011 paid $ 162,074 in federal taxes on gross income of $ 789,674 , according to the return he released that year .
Trump has broken his promises to release his own taxes , but The New York Times reported on Sunday that he paid no federal income taxes that year .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Irony, thy name is Donald Trump.
Although the self-proclaimed billionaire reportedly paid just $750 in federal income taxes in 2016 and nothing in some previous years, he was griping to “Fox & Friends” back in 2012 that his fellow Americans weren’t paying enough.
A video clip from that year unearthed by Media Matters For America editor John Whitehouse features the then-future president railing against a tax system that he said allowed low-income Americans to pay less in taxes than the wealthy.
Advertisement
That was a big talking point during the 2012 presidential campaign after then-Republican nominee Mitt Romney released tax returns showing he paid an effective 14.1% tax rate.
In the “Fox & Friends” clip, co-host Steve Doocy pointed out that half of the country doesn’t pay federal income tax and tossed this softball to Trump: “Is that fair?”
“No, it’s not,” Trump responded. “It’s even more than that, as I understand it, and it’s not fair,” he said.
Roll the video!
Here's Trump and Fox & Friends in 2012 complaining that too many Americans don't pay enough in taxes pic.twitter.com/CxBp2ixJq0 — John Whitehouse (@existentialfish) September 28, 2020
Advertisement
A little context: During the 2012 campaign, Romney was secretly recorded telling an audience of donors that 47% of then-President Barack Obama’s supporters “believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing.”
Trump apparently had a problem with that, based on tweets he posted that year.
HALF of Americans don't pay income tax despite crippling govt debt...http://t.co/gDAUj0Kt — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 23, 2012
Trump also seemed miffed that Obama paid what he considered to be an insufficient amount of tax on his presidential salary, adding, without irony: “Do as I say not as I do.”
@BarackObama who wants to raise all our taxes, only pays 20.5% on $790k salary. http://t.co/bqF26mQf Do as I say not as I do. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 13, 2012
Obama in 2011 paid $162,074 in federal taxes on gross income of $789,674, according to the return he released that year.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-28--'Crying Nazi' Chris Cantwell Found Guilty Of Extortion, Interstate Threats

A jury in Concord , New Hampshire , on Monday found the racist podcaster guilty of extortion and interstate threats related to a threatening message he sent fellow neo-Nazi Benjamin Lambert , aka “ CheddarMane , ” in 2019 , in an attempt to extort information about rival neo-Nazi Andrew Casarez , aka “ Vic Mackey.
” “ So if you don ’ t want me to come and fuck your wife in front of your kids , then you should make yourself scarce , ” Cantwell allegedly wrote in the 2019 message .
“ Give me Vic , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 39-year-old New Hampshire man gained a small degree of notoriety as the “ crying Nazi ” after appearing in videos related to the infamous white supremacist rally in Charlottesville , Virginia , in 2017 .
In the first video , a Vice News documentary , Cantwell proudly shows off his weapons and pledges to “ fucking kill these people if we have to , ” dismissing the killing of 32-year-old counterprotester Heather Heyer as “ more than justified.
” In the second video , which he uploaded to YouTube days later , Cantwell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the police on multiple felonies for his role in the violence .
“ I don ’ t want to [ go to jail ] , ” he says , crying .
“ I don ’ t think I should .
I honestly think that I have been law-abiding.
” Cantwell is also expected to face a civil trial this spring for his role in the Charlottesville violence .
More than two-dozen neo-Nazis have been named in the federal lawsuit , brought by the nonpartisan , nonprofit Integrity First for America .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Cantwell ’ s long history of violence and bigotry , ” IFA Executive Director Amy Spitalnick said in a media statement after the guilty verdict Monday .
“ It ’ s particularly powerful that this verdict was handed down on Yom Kippur ― the Jewish day of atonement ― against a neo-Nazi defendant who has made antisemitism central to his violence .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Crying Nazi” Chris Cantwell is headed to prison.
A jury in Concord, New Hampshire, on Monday found the racist podcaster guilty of extortion and interstate threats related to a threatening message he sent fellow neo-Nazi Benjamin Lambert, aka “CheddarMane,” in 2019, in an attempt to extort information about rival neo-Nazi Andrew Casarez, aka “Vic Mackey.”
Casarez’s identity was unknown at the time.
“So if you don’t want me to come and fuck your wife in front of your kids, then you should make yourself scarce,” Cantwell allegedly wrote in the 2019 message. “Give me Vic, it’s your only out.”
Advertisement
The charges carry a maximum sentence of 22 years.
The 39-year-old New Hampshire man gained a small degree of notoriety as the “crying Nazi” after appearing in videos related to the infamous white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017.
In the first video, a Vice News documentary, Cantwell proudly shows off his weapons and pledges to “fucking kill these people if we have to,” dismissing the killing of 32-year-old counterprotester Heather Heyer as “more than justified.”
In the second video, which he uploaded to YouTube days later, Cantwell tearfully tells viewers he’s wanted by the police on multiple felonies for his role in the violence.
“I don’t want to [go to jail],” he says, crying. “I don’t think I should. I honestly think that I have been law-abiding.”
Advertisement
Cantwell is also expected to face a civil trial this spring for his role in the Charlottesville violence. More than two-dozen neo-Nazis have been named in the federal lawsuit, brought by the nonpartisan, nonprofit Integrity First for America.
“Today marks an important step toward accountability for Cantwell’s long history of violence and bigotry,” IFA Executive Director Amy Spitalnick said in a media statement after the guilty verdict Monday.