thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Poll: Americans Say Trump Should Wait To Nominate Ginsburg Replacement

Roughly half , 49 % , say Trump should wait so that whoever wins the election can nominate Ginsburg ’ s replacement .
Another 36 % say he should immediately nominate a replacement .
They say , 44 % to 37 % , that presidents in the final year of their term should generally wait until after the election to handle any Supreme Court vacancies .
Americans are split in their confidence that Trump has the ability to choose good nominees for the Supreme Court : 44 % say they ’ re at least somewhat confident , 44 % that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all confident , and the rest that they ’ re not sure .
Polling on a rapidly developing political event faces the inherent challenge of trying to capture a moving target ― opinions are liable either to shift or to further solidify as both parties stake out positions and make their arguments to the public .
Trump said he would announce a nominee on Saturday , and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( Ky. ) quickly followed the announcement of Ginsburg ’ s death with the promise that Trump ’ s nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floor ” of the Republican-majority Senate .
After reading that Republicans prevented Garland from receiving a hearing , Americans were relatively divided on what the Senate should do today .
Forty percent said that , if Trump announces a nominee before the election , the Senate should hold a vote on that nominee , with 36 % saying it should not vote .
Those answers may reflect some uncertainty about the confirmation process : Roughly a quarter were unsure , with both Democrats and Republicans less unified in their position about a Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on what action Trump should take .
Polling taken immediately after the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia four years ago showed considerable variation , based on wording of questions .
In a HuffPost/YouGov survey conducted at that time , 53 % of Americans said Obama should immediately nominate a replacement to the Supreme Court , 34 % said he should let the next president nominate a replacement , and the remainder were unsure .
Subsequent HuffPost/YouGov polling found the public generally supportive of Senate hearings to consider Garland .
When Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced relatively little opposition .
In a 2017 HuffPost/YouGov poll , Americans said 40 % to 23 % that the Senate should vote to confirm Neil Gorsuch as a Supreme Court justice .
In a July 2018 HuffPost/YouGov survey , Americans said 38 % to 33 % that the Senate should hold confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh prior to that year ’ s midterm elections .
After reading that Republicans blocked Garland from receiving a hearing in 2016 , however , they said 41 % to 33 % that Democrats would be justified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How It Could Affect The Presidential Election Trying to gauge the electoral impact of the looming confirmation fight requires answering two questions .
The first : To what extent does the Supreme Court become a salient issue ?
The second : Which candidate benefits more if it does , either by invigorating their existing supporters or by attracting new ones ?
A substantial bloc of voters say they care about the Supreme Court : 44 % call the issue very important to their presidential vote .
A slim 53 % majority of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important , compared to 37 % of Republican voters ― marking a change from 2016 , when Republicans were more likely to say the issue was very important .
In 2018 , other polling taken during the Kavanaugh confirmation battle also found Democratic voters outstripping their GOP counterparts in concern about the Supreme Court .
That ’ s one way of gauging focus on an issue .
When voters are asked to choose their top three issues from a list , rather than rating the importance of one in isolation , the current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fifth of voters , 21 % , now say the Supreme Court will be one of their top issues in the upcoming election , up from 12 % in July , but still far behind the economy ( 42 % ) , the coronavirus outbreak ( 41 % ) and health care ( 34 % ) .
Similar percentages of Democratic and Republican voters ― 18 % and 22 % , respectively ― cite it as a top-three issue .
Democratic voters rank the Supreme Court behind the coronavirus , health care , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues ; Republican voters rank it behind the economy , immigration , health care and coronavirus .
As was the case with Kavanaugh ’ s confirmation in 2018 , any immediate speculation about the electoral impact is likely to be just that ― speculative .
The next few weeks will show whether there ’ s any change in the polls in terms of either voters ’ preference between the candidates , or their relative levels of enthusiasm .
What Americans Say About The Supreme Court Reuters/Ipsos : Sixty-two percent “ of American adults @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the winner of the Nov. 3 matchup between Trump and Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden , while 23 % disagreed and the rest said they were not sure .
Eight out of 10 Democrats ― and five in 10 Republicans ― agreed that the appointment should wait until after the election.
” YouGov “ snap poll ” : About “ half of registered voters ( 51 % ) do not believe President Trump should appoint a new Supreme Court justice before the presidential inauguration in January 2021 .
If President Trump does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are split on whether the Senate should confirm the nominee ( 45 % ) or not ( 48 % ) .
” Morning Consult/Politico : “ Compared to a week ago , the share of Democratic voters who said the Supreme Court was ‘ very important ’ in deciding whom to vote for in the November elections jumped 12 percentage points to 60 percent , while the share of Republicans who said the same increased marginally ... Fifty percent said the winner of the presidential election should fill the vacancy because of the @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Americans say by a 13-point margin that President Donald Trump should allow the winner of the presidential election to nominate a replacement for the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds.
Roughly half, 49%, say Trump should wait so that whoever wins the election can nominate Ginsburg’s replacement. Another 36% say he should immediately nominate a replacement. They say, 44% to 37%, that presidents in the final year of their term should generally wait until after the election to handle any Supreme Court vacancies.
Advertisement
Views are deeply divided along partisan lines. Democrats say by a 70-point margin that Trump should allow the election’s winner to nominate a replacement, while Republicans say by a 54-point margin that Trump should announce his nominee immediately.
Americans are split in their confidence that Trump has the ability to choose good nominees for the Supreme Court: 44% say they’re at least somewhat confident, 44% that they’re not very or not at all confident, and the rest that they’re not sure.
Polling on a rapidly developing political event faces the inherent challenge of trying to capture a moving target ― opinions are liable either to shift or to further solidify as both parties stake out positions and make their arguments to the public. Trump said he would announce a nominee on Saturday, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) quickly followed the announcement of Ginsburg’s death with the promise that Trump’s nominee would “receive a vote on the floor” of the Republican-majority Senate.
Democratic lawmakers and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden have strenuously objected, pointing to the GOP’s decision to block a vote on Obama-era Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland months ahead of the 2016 election.
Advertisement
After reading that Republicans prevented Garland from receiving a hearing, Americans were relatively divided on what the Senate should do today. Forty percent said that, if Trump announces a nominee before the election, the Senate should hold a vote on that nominee, with 36% saying it should not vote. Those answers may reflect some uncertainty about the confirmation process: Roughly a quarter were unsure, with both Democrats and Republicans less unified in their position about a Senate vote than they were in their opinions on what action Trump should take.
Results of a new HuffPost/YouGov survey on the Supreme Court. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
How Polling From Past Years Compares
Polling taken immediately after the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia four years ago showed considerable variation, based on wording of questions. In a HuffPost/YouGov survey conducted at that time, 53% of Americans said Obama should immediately nominate a replacement to the Supreme Court, 34% said he should let the next president nominate a replacement, and the remainder were unsure. Subsequent HuffPost/YouGov polling found the public generally supportive of Senate hearings to consider Garland.
Results of a new HuffPost/YouGov survey on the Supreme Court. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
When Trump eventually filled the vacancy, his nominee faced relatively little opposition. In a 2017 HuffPost/YouGov poll, Americans said 40% to 23% that the Senate should vote to confirm Neil Gorsuch as a Supreme Court justice. In a July 2018 HuffPost/YouGov survey, Americans said 38% to 33% that the Senate should hold confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh prior to that year’s midterm elections. After reading that Republicans blocked Garland from receiving a hearing in 2016, however, they said 41% to 33% that Democrats would be justified in blocking Kavanaugh from receiving a hearing.
Advertisement
How It Could Affect The Presidential Election
Trying to gauge the electoral impact of the looming confirmation fight requires answering two questions. The first: To what extent does the Supreme Court become a salient issue? The second: Which candidate benefits more if it does, either by invigorating their existing supporters or by attracting new ones?
A substantial bloc of voters say they care about the Supreme Court: 44% call the issue very important to their presidential vote. A slim 53% majority of Democratic voters say it will be very important, compared to 37% of Republican voters ― marking a change from 2016, when Republicans were more likely to say the issue was very important. In 2018, other polling taken during the Kavanaugh confirmation battle also found Democratic voters outstripping their GOP counterparts in concern about the Supreme Court.
That’s one way of gauging focus on an issue. When voters are asked to choose their top three issues from a list, rather than rating the importance of one in isolation, the current picture looks somewhat different. About a fifth of voters, 21%, now say the Supreme Court will be one of their top issues in the upcoming election, up from 12% in July, but still far behind the economy (42%), the coronavirus outbreak (41%) and health care (34%). Similar percentages of Democratic and Republican voters ― 18% and 22%, respectively ― cite it as a top-three issue. Democratic voters rank the Supreme Court behind the coronavirus, health care, the environment, the economy and social issues; Republican voters rank it behind the economy, immigration, health care and coronavirus.
The issue appears to be mildly favorable to Joe Biden: By a 6-point margin, 46% to 40%, voters say they think Biden would do a better job than Trump in choosing nominees for the Supreme Court.
As was the case with Kavanaugh’s confirmation in 2018, any immediate speculation about the electoral impact is likely to be just that ― speculative. The next few weeks will show whether there’s any change in the polls in terms of either voters’ preference between the candidates, or their relative levels of enthusiasm.
Advertisement
What Americans Say About The Supreme Court
Americans rate the Supreme Court positively by a roughly 2-to-1 margin, with 51% viewing it favorably and just 25% viewing it unfavorably. Republicans rate it favorably by a 57-point margin, while Democrats rate it favorably by a slimmer 8-point margin.
A 61% majority of Americans approve of Ginsburg’s tenure as a justice, with just 16% disapproving and the rest unsure. Democrats approve by a 77-point margin, and Republicans by a more modest 19-point margin. Female Democrats are especially warm in their support: roughly three-quarters strongly approve of Ginsburg’s work, compared to 55% of male Democrats.
What Other Polls Show
Reuters/Ipsos: Sixty-two percent “of American adults agreed the vacancy should be filled by the winner of the Nov. 3 matchup between Trump and Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden, while 23% disagreed and the rest said they were not sure. Eight out of 10 Democrats ― and five in 10 Republicans ― agreed that the appointment should wait until after the election.”
YouGov “snap poll”: About “half of registered voters (51%) do not believe President Trump should appoint a new Supreme Court justice before the presidential inauguration in January 2021. If President Trump does appoint someone—as he has indicated he will—voters are split on whether the Senate should confirm the nominee (45%) or not (48%).”
Morning Consult/Politico: “Compared to a week ago, the share of Democratic voters who said the Supreme Court was ‘very important’ in deciding whom to vote for in the November elections jumped 12 percentage points to 60 percent, while the share of Republicans who said the same increased marginally...Fifty percent said the winner of the presidential election should fill the vacancy because of the proximity to Election Day.”
Advertisement
Democratic firm Navigator Research: “A majority say whoever wins the election in November should be responsible for nominating a replacement, rather than that Trump should nominate a replacement immediately. ... The most convincing reasons to delay confirmation until after the election are prioritizing the pandemic response and Senate Republicans pushing through a Justice after refusing to hold hearings for Obama’s nominee.”
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey, using the menu at the top to select survey questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroups:
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Sept. 19 to Sept. 22 among U.S. adults, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--RBG And The Young Women Who Loved Her

RBG And The Young Women Who Loved Her

A friend texted 17-year-old Leyla Fern King the news .
She didn ’ t want the high school senior to find out while mindlessly scrolling through social media .
She thought she should hear it first from someone who cares .
“ Hi love , I have some bad news , ” she texted King .
“ RBG died .
I don ’ t know if you heard , but I found out half an hour ago , and I know you were as invested in her career as I was.
” King first started looking up to Ruth Bader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extracurricular leadership program she was involved with got to participate in a Q & A with the Supreme Court justice .
King remembers Ginsburg as being diminutive but commanding of the room , staying until the audience ’ s last question was answered and peppering her stories with witty quips .
The teen , a member of her school ’ s student court , began to connect Ginsburg ’ s experiences to her own .
King had spent her first year on student court as the youngest and only girl , and she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If I had been more aware of her at the time , I think it would have given me more confidence , ” King said over the phone from her home in St. Louis .
“ She inspired me to speak more freely with my opinion.
” Ginsburg loomed large in American culture during the final years of her life , perhaps no larger than in the minds of young women in K-12 schools and beyond .
These women , more than half a century Ginsburg ’ s junior and born @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , say the justice ’ s experiences fighting gender discrimination remains relevant today .
The justice died last Friday at the age of 87 , after serving as the second woman ever to be confirmed on the Supreme Court .
These young women , who grew up reading children ’ s books about her and dressing up as her — right down to the collar — have spent the past few days reflecting on her legacy .
“ I think that Sept. 18 we should have Ruth Bader Ginsburg Day , just like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day and other people who have their own day , ” said 12-year-old Michele Threefoot , who went viral several years ago after dressing up as Ginsburg for her school ’ s Superhero Day and even received a letter of support from the justice .
Ava Farquhar dressed up as Ginsburg for her high school senior photo ID .
She first learned about Ginsburg while listening to “ More Perfect , ” a podcast about the Supreme Court .
The 19-year-old has since gone on to study engineering at Michigan Technical University , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % men .
She learned about Ginsburg ’ s death on the radio while riding in the car with a friend .
“ I ’ ve become more radical in believing she was a personal hero because she was one of the only women in her law class , ” Farquhar said .
“ She fought for me to be here so I could fight to make it more inclusive for other girls on campus.
” King is now the chief justice on her student court , but it took about three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voicing her opinions in the setting — a confidence that Ginsburg always seemed to have , she said .
In the wake of Ginsburg ’ s death , both King and Farquhar said they are scared about what will happen to the composition of the Supreme Court , about having one less person they admire in power .
But the justice will help live on in their future decisions .

Leyla Fern King dresses up as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, complete with a white collar and gavel. Photo courtesy of Leyla Fern King
A friend texted 17-year-old Leyla Fern King the news. She didn’t want the high school senior to find out while mindlessly scrolling through social media. She thought she should hear it first from someone who cares.
“Hi love, I have some bad news,” she texted King. “RBG died. I don’t know if you heard, but I found out half an hour ago, and I know you were as invested in her career as I was.”
Advertisement
King first started looking up to Ruth Bader Ginsburg two summers ago, when an extracurricular leadership program she was involved with got to participate in a Q&A with the Supreme Court justice. King remembers Ginsburg as being diminutive but commanding of the room, staying until the audience’s last question was answered and peppering her stories with witty quips. The teen, a member of her school’s student court, began to connect Ginsburg’s experiences to her own. King had spent her first year on student court as the youngest and only girl, and she was often timid about voicing her thoughts.
“If I had been more aware of her at the time, I think it would have given me more confidence,” King said over the phone from her home in St. Louis. “She inspired me to speak more freely with my opinion.”
Ginsburg loomed large in American culture during the final years of her life, perhaps no larger than in the minds of young women in K-12 schools and beyond. These women, more than half a century Ginsburg’s junior and born into a world far kinder to women, say the justice’s experiences fighting gender discrimination remains relevant today.
The justice died last Friday at the age of 87, after serving as the second woman ever to be confirmed on the Supreme Court. These young women, who grew up reading children’s books about her and dressing up as her — right down to the collar — have spent the past few days reflecting on her legacy.
Advertisement
“I think that Sept. 18 we should have Ruth Bader Ginsburg Day, just like Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Presidents Day and other people who have their own day,” said 12-year-old Michele Threefoot, who went viral several years ago after dressing up as Ginsburg for her school’s Superhero Day and even received a letter of support from the justice.
Twelve-year-old Michele Threefoot calls Ginsburg one of her heroes. Photo courtesy of Krista Threefoot
Ava Farquhar dressed up as Ginsburg for her high school senior photo ID. She first learned about Ginsburg while listening to “More Perfect,” a podcast about the Supreme Court. The 19-year-old has since gone on to study engineering at Michigan Technical University, a school that is comprised of 70% men. She learned about Ginsburg’s death on the radio while riding in the car with a friend.
Farquhar said she thinks of Ginsburg every time she is the only girl in the room, a frequent occurrence at her STEM-focused school.
“I’ve become more radical in believing she was a personal hero because she was one of the only women in her law class,” Farquhar said. “She fought for me to be here so I could fight to make it more inclusive for other girls on campus.”
Advertisement
Farquhar is now a leader in three women’s organizations on campus, with the aim of making sure “no woman feels like she doesn’t belong at the table.”
“I draw a direct line between my activism and her work,” she said of Ginsburg.
Ava Farquhar dresses up as Ginsburg. Photo courtesy of Ava Farquhar
King is now the chief justice on her student court, but it took about three years before she felt comfortable and confident in voicing her opinions in the setting — a confidence that Ginsburg always seemed to have, she said.
“I look at her as a role model in that sense, in a lot of senses,” King said.
In the wake of Ginsburg’s death, both King and Farquhar said they are scared about what will happen to the composition of the Supreme Court, about having one less person they admire in power. But the justice will help live on in their future decisions.
“She influenced American history in such a positive and impactful way, and that’s something I want to do in my life,” King said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Mourners Honor Ginsburg At Supreme Court

Roberts spoke Wednesday during a private ceremony in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court .
After the ceremony , Ginsburg ’ s flag-draped casket was placed at the top of the court ’ s front steps so that the public can pay their respects to the second woman to serve on the Supreme Court in line with public health guidance for the coronavirus pandemic .
Thousands of people are expected to pay their respects throughout the day to the women ’ s rights champion , leader of the court ’ s liberal bloc and feminist icon who died last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flag-draped casket arrived at the court at 9:30 a.m. and was carried into the court ’ s Great Hall , past her former law clerks who lined the steps .
Inside , the court ’ s remaining eight justices , all of them wearing masks , were together for the first time since the building was closed in March and they resorted to meetings by telephone .
Because of the pandemic , however , chairs for the justices were spaced apart .
Ginsburg will lie in repose for two days at the court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , before that , argued six cases for gender equality in the 1970s .
Ginsburg ’ s casket will be on public view from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Wednesday and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Thursday .
Since her death Friday evening , people have been leaving flowers , notes , placards and all manner of Ginsburg paraphernalia outside the court in tribute to the woman who became known in her final years as the “ Notorious RBG.
” Court workers cleared away the items and cleaned the court plaza and sidewalk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Inside , the entrance to the courtroom , along with Ginsburg ’ s chair and place on the bench next to Roberts , have been draped in black , a longstanding court custom .
These visual signs of mourning , which in years past have reinforced the sense of loss , will largely go unseen this year .
The court begins its new term Oct. 5 , but the justices will not be in the courtroom and instead will hear arguments by phone .
On Friday , Ginsburg will lie in state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do so and only the second Supreme Court justice after William Howard Taft .
Taft had also been president .
Rosa Parks , a private citizen as opposed to a government official , is the only woman who has lain in honor at the Capitol .
Ginsburg will be buried beside her husband , Martin , in a private ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery next week .
Martin Ginsburg died in 2010 .
She is survived by a son and a daughter , four grandchildren , two step-grandchildren and a great-grandchild .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ added another layer of tumult to an already chaotic election year .
Trump and Senate Republicans are plowing ahead with plans to have a new justice on the bench , perhaps before the Nov. 3 election .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Chief Justice John Roberts says the words that best describe the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg are “tough, brave, a fighter, a winner” but also “thoughtful, careful, compassionate, honest.”
Roberts spoke Wednesday during a private ceremony in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court. After the ceremony, Ginsburg’s flag-draped casket was placed at the top of the court’s front steps so that the public can pay their respects to the second woman to serve on the Supreme Court in line with public health guidance for the coronavirus pandemic.
Advertisement
Thousands of people are expected to pay their respects throughout the day to the women’s rights champion, leader of the court’s liberal bloc and feminist icon who died last week at 87.
The flag-draped casket of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg arrives at the Supreme Court in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020. Ginsburg, 87, died of cancer on Sept. 18. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) ASSOCIATED PRESS
“Her voice in court and in our conference room was soft, but when she spoke people listened,” Roberts said
Ginsburg’s flag-draped casket arrived at the court at 9:30 a.m. and was carried into the court’s Great Hall, past her former law clerks who lined the steps.
Advertisement
Inside, the court’s remaining eight justices, all of them wearing masks, were together for the first time since the building was closed in March and they resorted to meetings by telephone. Because of the pandemic, however, chairs for the justices were spaced apart.
Ginsburg will lie in repose for two days at the court where she served for 27 years and, before that, argued six cases for gender equality in the 1970s. Ginsburg’s casket will be on public view from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Wednesday and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Thursday.
Nearly 500 members of the public had gathered to pay their respects Wednesday morning.
The flag-draped casket of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is carried up the steps of the Supreme Court in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020. Ginsburg, 87, died of cancer on Sept. 18. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh) ASSOCIATED PRESS
Since her death Friday evening, people have been leaving flowers, notes, placards and all manner of Ginsburg paraphernalia outside the court in tribute to the woman who became known in her final years as the “Notorious RBG.” Court workers cleared away the items and cleaned the court plaza and sidewalk in advance of Wednesday’s ceremony.
Inside, the entrance to the courtroom, along with Ginsburg’s chair and place on the bench next to Roberts, have been draped in black, a longstanding court custom. These visual signs of mourning, which in years past have reinforced the sense of loss, will largely go unseen this year. The court begins its new term Oct. 5, but the justices will not be in the courtroom and instead will hear arguments by phone.
Advertisement
On Friday, Ginsburg will lie in state at the Capitol, the first woman to do so and only the second Supreme Court justice after William Howard Taft. Taft had also been president. Rosa Parks, a private citizen as opposed to a government official, is the only woman who has lain in honor at the Capitol.
Ginsburg will be buried beside her husband, Martin, in a private ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery next week. Martin Ginsburg died in 2010. She is survived by a son and a daughter, four grandchildren, two step-grandchildren and a great-grandchild.
Ginsburg’s death from cancer has added another layer of tumult to an already chaotic election year. Trump and Senate Republicans are plowing ahead with plans to have a new justice on the bench, perhaps before the Nov. 3 election.
Only Chief Justice Roger Taney, who died in October 1864, died closer to a presidential election. Lincoln waited until December to nominate his replacement, Salmon Chase, who was confirmed the same day.
When Scalia, Ginsburg’s closest friend on the court, died unexpectedly in 2016, Republicans refused to act on President Barack Obama’s high-court nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.
Advertisement
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Republicans Plot Quick Confirmation Of Trump's Supreme Court Nominee

Although Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) hasn ’ t laid out a schedule yet , Republicans are aiming to hold a final vote on a nominee to replace the liberal icon shortly before the Nov. 3 election , according to The Associated Press .
Two weeks of confirmation hearings would occur sometime in mid-October .
That timeline would be extremely aggressive compared with the process for recent Supreme Court appointments , including the two previously made by Trump .
The Senate did not begin hearings for Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017 until 47 days after his nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearings for Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 until 56 days after his nomination was announced .
“ For me , it would be , ” Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana said when asked by reporters on Tuesday if proceeding with hearings next month would allow him enough time to prepare .
The senator added that the schedule could be altered .
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) has been pressing the case that Republicans are guilty of the rankest hypocrisy by pushing to confirm a Supreme Court justice with a presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as their excuse for blocking then-President Barack Obama 's high court nominee that year .
The GOP Senate majority is paying little heed to Schumer 's complaint .
Trump has openly admitted he wants to fill the vacancy before the Nov. 3 election because he thinks the Supreme Court will have to weigh in on a disputed election , suggesting he plans to take legal action if the results show he has lost to Democrat Joe Biden .
“ This scam that the Democrats are pulling ... will be before the Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation is not a good situation , ” Trump said at an event at the White House on Wednesday , referring to mail-in voting he has repeatedly and falsely attacked as illegitimate .
Democrats know they can do little procedurally to stop Trump ’ s nominee from being confirmed in the face of what appears to be a mostly united GOP Senate caucus , but they ’ re planning on fighting anyway ― or at least trying to show supporters they ’ re putting up a fight .
After it quickly became clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump , McConnell and the vast majority of other Senate Republicans would push to quickly fill her seat , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) has been loudly arguing that they are “ destroying the institution ” by confirming a justice in a presidential election year ― something they objected to and successfully thwarted in 2016 , when Barack Obama was president .
On Tuesday , Schumer invoked an obscure rule that allows any senator to prevent committees from meeting two hours after the chamber comes into session each day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Senate shouldn ’ t continue so long as Republicans wanted to proceed with the confirmation effort .
Schumer ’ s reversal highlights the debate among Democrats as they gear up for the Supreme Court fight .
Some support grinding the Senate to a halt and boycotting the entire confirmation process as illegitimate out of the principle Republicans laid out in 2016 when they blocked Obama ’ s high court nominee .
Others favor grilling Trump ’ s nominee on the issues and frame their confirmation as hugely consequential for health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environment , and other top issues ― all with an eye to influencing the looming election .
“ I ’ ve been around here a few years ; you can slow things down but you can ’ t stop them ” said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois .
“ And there comes a point , we use whatever tools we have available , but ultimately there will be a vote.
” Durbin , who sits on the Judiciary Committee that would hold the confirmation hearings , said he did not support boycotting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to demonstrate to the public the nominee ’ s views on important topics .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Republicans plan a speedy confirmation process for President Donald Trump’s pick to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, proceeding on the assumption they’ll support someone whose name has not yet been announced and submitted to the Senate.
Although Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hasn’t laid out a schedule yet, Republicans are aiming to hold a final vote on a nominee to replace the liberal icon shortly before the Nov. 3 election, according to The Associated Press. Two weeks of confirmation hearings would occur sometime in mid-October.
Advertisement
That timeline would be extremely aggressive compared with the process for recent Supreme Court appointments, including the two previously made by Trump. The Senate did not begin hearings for Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017 until 47 days after his nomination was announced. It did not begin hearings for Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 until 56 days after his nomination was announced.
Republicans serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is tasked with vetting judicial nominees, defended proceeding with a truncated schedule that would provide only two weeks for preparations for the hearings after Trump reveals his pick on Saturday.
“For me, it would be,” Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana said when asked by reporters on Tuesday if proceeding with hearings next month would allow him enough time to prepare. The senator added that the schedule could be altered.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee also said she was fine with speedy action on the nominee, saying, “We’re going to get our nominee. We’ll do our hearings.”
Advertisement
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has been pressing the case that Republicans are guilty of the rankest hypocrisy by pushing to confirm a Supreme Court justice with a presidential election looming after using the 2016 vote as their excuse for blocking then-President Barack Obama's high court nominee that year. The GOP Senate majority is paying little heed to Schumer's complaint. Caroline Brehman via Getty Images
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative federal appellate judge and Notre Dame law professor, is widely seen as a frontrunner for the job.
Trump has openly admitted he wants to fill the vacancy before the Nov. 3 election because he thinks the Supreme Court will have to weigh in on a disputed election, suggesting he plans to take legal action if the results show he has lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
“This scam that the Democrats are pulling ... will be before the Supreme Court, and I think having a 4-4 situation is not a good situation,” Trump said at an event at the White House on Wednesday, referring to mail-in voting he has repeatedly and falsely attacked as illegitimate.
Democrats know they can do little procedurally to stop Trump’s nominee from being confirmed in the face of what appears to be a mostly united GOP Senate caucus, but they’re planning on fighting anyway ― or at least trying to show supporters they’re putting up a fight.
Advertisement
After it quickly became clear following Ginsburg’s death of Friday that Trump, McConnell and the vast majority of other Senate Republicans would push to quickly fill her seat, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been loudly arguing that they are “destroying the institution” by confirming a justice in a presidential election year ― something they objected to and successfully thwarted in 2016, when Barack Obama was president.
On Tuesday, Schumer invoked an obscure rule that allows any senator to prevent committees from meeting two hours after the chamber comes into session each day. He said that business as usual in the Senate shouldn’t continue so long as Republicans wanted to proceed with the confirmation effort.
He dropped the objection on Wednesday after Republicans cried foul about senators not being able to receive an election security briefing from Trump administration officials that Schumer had previously demanded.
A senior Democratic aide said Schumer, in backing away from his procedural ploy, also wanted to “highlight the Trump administration’s bungled federal response” to the coronavirus pandemic during a Wednesday hearing in the Senate health committee that featured Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top health officials.
“And there comes a point, we use whatever tools we have available, but ultimately there will be a vote.” - Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Advertisement
Schumer’s reversal highlights the debate among Democrats as they gear up for the Supreme Court fight. Some support grinding the Senate to a halt and boycotting the entire confirmation process as illegitimate out of the principle Republicans laid out in 2016 when they blocked Obama’s high court nominee. Others favor grilling Trump’s nominee on the issues and frame their confirmation as hugely consequential for health care, women’s rights, the environment, and other top issues ― all with an eye to influencing the looming election.
So far, the latter strategy seems to be winning out within the Democratic caucus.
“I’ve been around here a few years; you can slow things down but you can’t stop them” said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois. “And there comes a point, we use whatever tools we have available, but ultimately there will be a vote.”
Durbin, who sits on the Judiciary Committee that would hold the confirmation hearings, said he did not support boycotting that process. He called the hearings an opportunity to demonstrate to the public the nominee’s views on important topics.
Another Democratic committee member, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, agreed that procedural tactics wouldn’t block confirmation of Trump’s nominee. “I don’t think there’s like a triple secret tactic that we’ve been keeping in our back pocket since Gorsuch and Kavanaugh that we haven’t used yet,” he told HuffPost.
Still, Democrats are expected to employ every parliamentary trick they can to try to slow the confirmation process and put a spotlight on the GOP hypocrisy.
Advertisement
On Wednesday, Schumer made a parliamentary inquiry on the Senate floor, asking if historical precedent existed for a Supreme Court nominee being confirmed between the month of July and Election Day.
Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.), the presiding officer at the time, said records “do not show such a precedent,” yielding Democrats a rhetorical win, at least.
Democrats could seek to delay a committee vote on the nominee by one week using a privilege customarily granted to the minority. That, in turn, would delay the full Senate vote. But Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the committee’s chairman, may not decide to follow that custom.
The general consensus among Republicans is that it is more politically advantageous for Trump and the party’s other candidates got a final vote on the nominee to occur before the election.
“There are things in here that they’re clearly just going to sweep aside,” Durbin told reporters on Wednesday. “They’re hell-bent on getting this done as fast as possible. They think it helps Donald Trump get re-elected.”
Advertisement
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said Democrats’ hands were tied to a large degree because of the power Graham wields as committee chairman.
“There’s no legitimacy to it, no matter who the nominee is there. This process has been robbed of legitimacy,” he told HuffPost.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Lawmakers Don’t Have To Disclose Federal Loans. 2 Democrats Want To Change That.

Steve Helber/ASSOCIATED PRESS Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand wants to amend a law she authored eight years ago to include disclosure requirements on federal subsidies , loans , grants and contracts .
There ’ s just no way of really knowing when these high-ranking federal officials apply for the very government loans , subsidies or grants they had a hand in creating — and how much they ’ re getting .
Outside of press reports and incomplete data reported by the Treasury Department and the Small Business Administration , there ’ s no law requiring those in government to disclose the federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the two lawmakers proposed a bill to require members of Congress , high-ranking staff and those in the judicial and executive branches who apply for a financial benefit from the government to report it — the same way current law requires them to report the sale of a stock .
“ I think unfortunately many of my colleagues engage in this kind of corrupt activity and , whether it ’ s purposeful or negligent , it ’ s wrong and it needs to be clarified that they can ’ t be writing legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislation that readily undermines people ’ s faith in our democracy , ” Gillibrand said in an interview .
“ It looks like self-dealing , and it looks like pocket lining.
” But Gillibrand and Porter say the law didn ’ t go far enough to root out other forms of corruption .
The STOCK Act 2.0 , as they ’ re calling it , would expand the reporting requirements and also establish a public website , which would be searchable , downloadable and easily accessible , showing any federal benefits going toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason that we have to disclose information about our income and our assets , for the same reason we have campaign finance disclosures , this is asking people the more important question , which is : Are you using your government position for the public interest or for you own self-interest ?
” Porter said in an interview .
This has taken on particular relevance during the pandemic .
As HuffPost ’ s Molly Redden reported , there have been 20-plus loans that have been linked to businesses with ties to lawmakers — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first round of funding for the program .
The Paycheck Protection Program , which Congress created as part of its $ 2 trillion stimulus package passed in late March , ran out of money by mid-April , two weeks after launching , leaving hundreds of thousands of small businesses in the lurch until Congress voted to pass additional funding .
But members of Congress didn ’ t seem to experience any delays in getting funds .
On April 5 , two days after the loan program got off the ground , Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McDonald ’ s franchises in Oklahoma secured a loan of $ 1 million to $ 2 million , and Rep. Vicki Hartzler ( R-Mo . )
, who owns a tractor dealership with her husband , got a loan of between $ 350,000 and $ 1 million through the program .
Within a week of the program launching , Rep. Vern Buchanan ( R-Fla. ) , one of the top 10 wealthiest members of Congress , received a loan of between $ 2 million and $ 5 million for his car dealership .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ received $ 5.6 million through two PPP loans for casino and resort businesses in Nevada and Colorado after the SBA decided to extend the loans to the small gaming industry .
“ Roger Williams ... was telling Secretary Mnuchin and Federal Reserve Chair [ Jerome ] Powell that small businesses are doing fine .
Well , maybe yours is doing fine because you got a PPP loan while a whole bunch of other small businesses struggled to , ” Porter , who sits on the House Financial Services Committee , told HuffPost , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distorts members ’ understanding of what it ’ s like to be an American trying to get help from these programs — how hard it can be to get through the application process.
” The economy hasn ’ t gotten better for many .
Though unemployment claims have slowed since hitting historic highs in late March and April , tens of millions of Americans remain on unemployment assistance and the pandemic continues to take a toll on working-class Americans .
Small businesses continue to close in the thousands .
In an Economic Impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ ve closed as of the end of August — nearly 100,000 of which have reported they will not be reopening .
Porter has been out front in calling for the Treasury Department and SBA to release full data on who has applied for PPP loans , and exactly how much they ’ re getting .
But the Treasury Department has been reluctant to do so ; Mnuchin has argued the details are private information .
Instead , the department released the names of recipients and a range of loan amounts they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 10 million .
“ If you ’ re doing it for good honest reasons — you have had a family farm for generations and would normally get subsidies — that ’ s not the kind of corrupt activity we ’ re looking for , ” she said .
“ We ’ re looking for activity that is unfair , that is taking advantage of a position they have.
” The fight to get more transparency around the financial dealings of elected officials , their administrations and their close aides is certainly not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush , said this is one measure that ’ s part of a much larger problem , including elected officials owning individual stocks and Trump ’ s refusal to separate from his own businesses .
“ Now , all they do is require you to disclose that you own the company and then the company can roam around the place , apply for federal government loans or money from Vladimir Putin .
We don ’ t know what they get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would kick them off their individual stocks , I wouldn ’ t kick them off their family farms , but we ought to at least be aware of the conflict of interest .
”

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand wants to amend a law she authored eight years ago to include disclosure requirements on federal subsidies, loans, grants and contracts. Steve Helber/ASSOCIATED PRESS
It’s well known that lawmakers, Cabinet members and their families have secured millions of dollars in federal funds to support their own businesses through programs like the Paycheck Protection Program, the federal loan scheme set up to support struggling employers during the coronavirus pandemic.
There’s just no way of really knowing when these high-ranking federal officials apply for the very government loans, subsidies or grants they had a hand in creating — and how much they’re getting. Outside of press reports and incomplete data reported by the Treasury Department and the Small Business Administration, there’s no law requiring those in government to disclose the federal funds they collect.
Advertisement
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) want the data.
On Wednesday, the two lawmakers proposed a bill to require members of Congress, high-ranking staff and those in the judicial and executive branches who apply for a financial benefit from the government to report it — the same way current law requires them to report the sale of a stock.
“I think unfortunately many of my colleagues engage in this kind of corrupt activity and, whether it’s purposeful or negligent, it’s wrong and it needs to be clarified that they can’t be writing legislation and can’t be benefiting from legislation that readily undermines people’s faith in our democracy,” Gillibrand said in an interview. “It looks like self-dealing, and it looks like pocket lining.”
The bill, provided exclusively to HuffPost in advance, would expand on the STOCK Act, a 2012 law that Gillibrand co-authored requiring high-ranking federal government officials to report equities, bonds, derivatives and mortgages bought and sold within a month. The STOCK Act, which passed with bipartisan support and was signed by President Barack Obama, was intended to catch government officials engaging in insider trading.
“The intention of the legislation is to create transparency... so voters can decide whether their activities are corrupt or not.” - Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Advertisement
But Gillibrand and Porter say the law didn’t go far enough to root out other forms of corruption. The STOCK Act 2.0, as they’re calling it, would expand the reporting requirements and also establish a public website, which would be searchable, downloadable and easily accessible, showing any federal benefits going toward these officials.
“For the same reason that we have to disclose information about our income and our assets, for the same reason we have campaign finance disclosures, this is asking people the more important question, which is: Are you using your government position for the public interest or for you own self-interest?” Porter said in an interview.
This has taken on particular relevance during the pandemic. As HuffPost’s Molly Redden reported, there have been 20-plus loans that have been linked to businesses with ties to lawmakers — and nearly all of them happened within the first round of funding for the program. The Paycheck Protection Program, which Congress created as part of its $2 trillion stimulus package passed in late March, ran out of money by mid-April, two weeks after launching, leaving hundreds of thousands of small businesses in the lurch until Congress voted to pass additional funding.
But members of Congress didn’t seem to experience any delays in getting funds. On April 5, two days after the loan program got off the ground, Republican Rep. Kevin Hern’s group of McDonald’s franchises in Oklahoma secured a loan of $1 million to $2 million, and Rep. Vicki Hartzler (R-Mo.), who owns a tractor dealership with her husband, got a loan of between $350,000 and $1 million through the program.
Within a week of the program launching, Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), one of the top 10 wealthiest members of Congress, received a loan of between $2 million and $5 million for his car dealership. Democratic Rep. Susie Lee’s husband received $5.6 million through two PPP loans for casino and resort businesses in Nevada and Colorado after the SBA decided to extend the loans to the small gaming industry.
Advertisement
Rep. Roger Williams (R-Texas), who is among the top 20 wealthiest members of Congress, secured a loan of between $1 million and $2 million. In a congressional hearing Tuesday with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Williams referred to himself “as somebody on Main Street” and said the “economy is pretty good right now, and it’s getting better.”
Rep. Roger Williams (R-Texas), one of the richest members of Congress, received a coronavirus business assistance loan of $1 million to $2 million. Jacquelyn Martin/ASSOCIATED PRESS
“Roger Williams... was telling Secretary Mnuchin and Federal Reserve Chair [Jerome] Powell that small businesses are doing fine. Well, maybe yours is doing fine because you got a PPP loan while a whole bunch of other small businesses struggled to,” Porter, who sits on the House Financial Services Committee, told HuffPost, responding to Williams. “It also distorts members’ understanding of what it’s like to be an American trying to get help from these programs — how hard it can be to get through the application process.”
The economy hasn’t gotten better for many. Though unemployment claims have slowed since hitting historic highs in late March and April, tens of millions of Americans remain on unemployment assistance and the pandemic continues to take a toll on working-class Americans. Small businesses continue to close in the thousands. In an Economic Impact Report from Yelp, 163,735 businesses indicated they’ve closed as of the end of August — nearly 100,000 of which have reported they will not be reopening.
Porter has been out front in calling for the Treasury Department and SBA to release full data on who has applied for PPP loans, and exactly how much they’re getting. But the Treasury Department has been reluctant to do so; Mnuchin has argued the details are private information. Instead, the department released the names of recipients and a range of loan amounts they received, from $150,000 up to $10 million.
Advertisement
The STOCK Act 2.0, doesn’t stop at the coronavirus relief efforts. It includes any government program that distributes a benefit of value, such as subsidies or government contracts.
In 2017, the Environmental Working Group found that more than 30 lawmakers from both parties and their immediate family members collected upward of $15 million in federal farming subsidies, while farm bill negotiations were ongoing. Because of a lack of disclosure requirements, it’s impossible to know which members also collected crop insurance subsidies.
Gillibrand wants to be clear that the intent is not to prevent government officials from benefiting from federal funds altogether.
“If you’re doing it for good honest reasons — you have had a family farm for generations and would normally get subsidies — that’s not the kind of corrupt activity we’re looking for,” she said. “We’re looking for activity that is unfair, that is taking advantage of a position they have.”
“The intention of the legislation is to create transparency... so voters can decide whether their activities are corrupt or not,” Gillibrand added.
Advertisement
The fight to get more transparency around the financial dealings of elected officials, their administrations and their close aides is certainly not new to Congress. Richard Painter, who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, said this is one measure that’s part of a much larger problem, including elected officials owning individual stocks and Trump’s refusal to separate from his own businesses.
“Now, all they do is require you to disclose that you own the company and then the company can roam around the place, apply for federal government loans or money from Vladimir Putin. We don’t know what they get,” Painter said. “I would kick them off their individual stocks, I wouldn’t kick them off their family farms, but we ought to at least be aware of the conflict of interest.”
“President Trump talks about Jefferson and Washington talking about their big plantations and farms and somehow that’s not a conflict, but of course it was. They used slave labor. It was a tragic conflict for our country.” - Richard Painter, former White House ethics lawyer
Painter added, “President Trump talks about Jefferson and Washington talking about their big plantations and farms and somehow that’s not a conflict, but of course it was. They used slave labor. It was a tragic conflict for our country. These financial conflicts have real consequences for our government.”
The original STOCK Act drew bipartisan support. But this revamped proposal does not have Republican support yet. Gillibrand said, however, that she expects to see Republicans get on board.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Sean Hannity's Bestselling Book Got A Boost From The GOP

It ’ s not clear how much of that spending was for Hannity ’ s book , but Salon reported it was at least $ 145,000 .
A representative for Porchlight Books told Salon , which first pointed out the FEC filings , that the RNC ’ s orders for “ Live Free or Die ” matched an Aug. 5 spending report of $ 26,100 and an Aug. 19 spending report of $ 119,250 .
A Barnes & Noble spokesperson told HuffPost that it could not comment on the nature of purchases .
Books-A-Million and the RNC did not respond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead of his book ’ s Aug. 4 release when fundraising emails from “ Trump Headquarters ” offered “ priority access ” to copies of “ Live Free or Die ” signed by Hannity to supporters who made a donation of $ 75 or more .
Despite the network ’ s supposed rules barring employees from participating in campaign events , Fox News referred HuffPost to the book ’ s publisher when pressed at the time on their star ’ s involvement with the president ’ s campaign .
Sean Hannity lauded President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media while on stage with the president at a campaign rally in Cape Girardeau , Missouri , in November 2018 .
It ’ s not unusual for a political campaign to tie books to donations , but it is unusual for a major news network host to join such fundraising efforts .
Hannity has a history of disregarding that norm ― and he ’ s been slapped on the wrist for it in the past .
In 2016 , following Hannity ’ s featured appearance in an ad from the Trump campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be permitted to appear in any other promotional materials for the remainder of the election season .
Then in 2018 , after he joined President Donald Trump onstage at a Missouri rally , the network told HuffPost that it “ does not condone any talent participating in campaign events.
” Hannity ’ s book , which topped Amazon ’ s bestseller list too , also got a personal promo from the president himself to his more than 85 million Twitter followers .
Donald Trump Jr. ’ s new self-published book , “ Liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrangement with the RNC and could possibly make up another portion of that August spending .
The committee confirmed to The Hill in July that it would pre-order copies of the book for donors .
However , the Porchlight spokesperson told Salon that the RNC did not make any bulk orders for Trump Jr. ’ s book ; the two other retailers and the RNC did not comment .
The RNC bought copies of Trump Jr. ’ s latest book for less than $ 20 each before offering them as mementos for donations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times reported in August .
The use of Hannity ’ s book followed a similar formula , the Times wrote .
Trump Jr. ’ s 2019 book , “ Triggered , ” skyrocketed to the top of the New York Times bestseller list upon publication last year , after the RNC spent almost $ 95,000 buying copies before it was published .
It appeared on the list with a dagger symbol , signifying that bulk sales contributed to its ranking .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sean Hannity’s new book, which debuted atop the New York Times nonfiction bestseller list, got a boost from the Republican National Committee.
Records from the Federal Election Commission show that the RNC spent over $400,000 in August on “donor mementos” from Barnes & Noble, BooksAMillion.com and Porchlight Books.
Advertisement
It’s not clear how much of that spending was for Hannity’s book, but Salon reported it was at least $145,000.
A representative for Porchlight Books told Salon, which first pointed out the FEC filings, that the RNC’s orders for “Live Free or Die” matched an Aug. 5 spending report of $26,100 and an Aug. 19 spending report of $119,250.
A Barnes & Noble spokesperson told HuffPost that it could not comment on the nature of purchases. Books-A-Million and the RNC did not respond to questions.
Hannity came under fire ahead of his book’s Aug. 4 release when fundraising emails from “Trump Headquarters” offered “priority access” to copies of “Live Free or Die” signed by Hannity to supporters who made a donation of $75 or more. Despite the network’s supposed rules barring employees from participating in campaign events, Fox News referred HuffPost to the book’s publisher when pressed at the time on their star’s involvement with the president’s campaign.
Advertisement
Sean Hannity lauded President Donald Trump and slammed other members of the media while on stage with the president at a campaign rally in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, in November 2018. Jeff Roberson/ASSOCIATED PRESS
It’s not unusual for a political campaign to tie books to donations, but it is unusual for a major news network host to join such fundraising efforts. Hannity has a history of disregarding that norm ― and he’s been slapped on the wrist for it in the past.
In 2016, following Hannity’s featured appearance in an ad from the Trump campaign, Fox News said he would not be permitted to appear in any other promotional materials for the remainder of the election season. Then in 2018, after he joined President Donald Trump onstage at a Missouri rally, the network told HuffPost that it “does not condone any talent participating in campaign events.”
Hannity’s book, which topped Amazon’s bestseller list too, also got a personal promo from the president himself to his more than 85 million Twitter followers.
Donald Trump Jr.’s new self-published book, “Liberal Privilege,” had a similar promotional arrangement with the RNC and could possibly make up another portion of that August spending. The committee confirmed to The Hill in July that it would pre-order copies of the book for donors. However, the Porchlight spokesperson told Salon that the RNC did not make any bulk orders for Trump Jr.’s book; the two other retailers and the RNC did not comment.
Advertisement
The RNC bought copies of Trump Jr.’s latest book for less than $20 each before offering them as mementos for donations over $75, The New York Times reported in August. The use of Hannity’s book followed a similar formula, the Times wrote.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Outrage Erupts After Decision In Breonna Taylor Case: 'So, No One Is Responsible?'

Scores of celebrities and public figures joined the chorus of voices crying out on Wednesday after a grand jury in Louisville , Kentucky , declined to return murder charges against any of the police officers involved in the killing of Breonna Taylor .
Taylor , a 26-year-old Black medical worker , was shot in her home in the early hours of March 13 after Louisville police served a “ no-knock ” warrant and entered her apartment with a battering ram .
Taylor ’ s boyfriend , Kenneth Walker , called 911 and shot at the intruders in self-defense with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The plainclothes officers responded by firing more than two dozen times , killing Taylor .
Police believed a suspect in a drug ring ― who did not live there and , as they later learned , had already been arrested ― was having packages delivered to that address .
Authorities announced Wednesday that no charges would be filed against two of the white officers , Sgt .
Jonathan Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove .
The other police officer on the scene , Detective Brett Hankison , was charged with three counts of first-degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shots fired inside Taylor ’ s home .
The charges were related to the bullets that penetrated neighboring apartments .
“ There will be celebrities , influencers and activists who have never lived in Kentucky who try to tell us how to feel , suggesting they understand the facts of this case , and that they know our community and the commonwealth better than we do , ” Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said when announcing the decision on Wednesday .
“ But they do not.
” Celebrities , influencers and activists did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clooney , who said that as a Kentucky native , he was ashamed of the decision .
“ I was born and raised in Kentucky .
Cut tobacco on the farms of Kentucky .
Both my parents and my sister live in Kentucky .
I own a home in Kentucky , and I was there last month , ” Clooney said in a statement provided to several news outlets .
“ The justice system I was raised to believe in holds people responsible for their actions .
Her name was Breonna Taylor and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bed by 3 white police officers , who will not be charged with any crime for her death .
I know the community .
I know the commonwealth .
And I was taught in the schools and churches of Kentucky what is right and what is wrong .
I ’ m ashamed of this decision.
” Hey @ kyoag we don ’ t have to live in Louisville to know how you dropped the ball on this .
# BreonnaTaylor was a citizen of the world and that ’ s why you will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the globe .
✊🏻 — Bryan Greenberg ( @ bryangreenberg ) September 23 , 2020 I ’ ve been lost for words today !
I ’ m devastated , hurt , sad , mad !
We want Justice for Breonna yet justice was met for her neighbors apartment walls and not her beautiful life .
Was I surprised at the verdict .
Absolutely not but damnit I was & still am hurt and heavy hearted !
I send — LeBron James ( @ KingJames ) September 24 , 2020 The white supremacist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s life from us must be abolished for the safety and well being of our people .
# BreonnaTaylor # SayHerName # AbolishThePolice — Colin Kaepernick ( @ Kaepernick7 ) September 23 , 2020 God bless Breonna ’ s family and all who knew and loved her .
Her tragic death compounded by the violence of silence and inaction by the city she called home is more than any of them should have to endure .
https : //t.co/fcDmIWHlDS — Ava DuVernay ( @ ava ) September 23 , 2020 Brett Hankison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NEXT to Breonna Taylor & not for KILLING HER .
He 's fired for shooting into BREONNA TAYLOR 'S apartment & not for KILLING HER .
This is systemic racism .
Property is worth more than a Black woman .
https : //t.co/abVLkTqg1s pic.twitter.com/CwflSjR42h — W. Kamau Bell ( @ wkamaubell ) September 23 , 2020 The system did not fail today .
It did exactly what it was built to do .
We don ’ t need another system .
Systems don ’ t create community .
We need humane people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the health , safety and welfare of humanity , without devaluing Black lives .
— Be A King ( @ BerniceKing ) September 23 , 2020 '' To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a state of rage almost all of the time . ''
James Baldwin .
# BreonnaTaylor pic.twitter.com/CUcRcEsXCE — COMMON ( @ common ) September 23 , 2020 They never get it right and that does n't make it hurt any less .
Breonna Taylor should still be with us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tired of this shit .
— Matthew A. Cherry ( @ MatthewACherry ) September 23 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Scores of celebrities and public figures joined the chorus of voices crying out on Wednesday after a grand jury in Louisville, Kentucky, declined to return murder charges against any of the police officers involved in the killing of Breonna Taylor.
Taylor, a 26-year-old Black medical worker, was shot in her home in the early hours of March 13 after Louisville police served a “no-knock” warrant and entered her apartment with a battering ram. Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, called 911 and shot at the intruders in self-defense with a registered gun, striking one officer. The plainclothes officers responded by firing more than two dozen times, killing Taylor. Police believed a suspect in a drug ring ― who did not live there and, as they later learned, had already been arrested ― was having packages delivered to that address.
Advertisement
Authorities announced Wednesday that no charges would be filed against two of the white officers, Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove. The other police officer on the scene, Detective Brett Hankison, was charged with three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment.
But not for the shots fired inside Taylor’s home. The charges were related to the bullets that penetrated neighboring apartments.
“There will be celebrities, influencers and activists who have never lived in Kentucky who try to tell us how to feel, suggesting they understand the facts of this case, and that they know our community and the commonwealth better than we do,” Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said when announcing the decision on Wednesday. “But they do not.”
Celebrities, influencers and activists did indeed express their disdain, including George Clooney, who said that as a Kentucky native, he was ashamed of the decision.
Advertisement
“I was born and raised in Kentucky. Cut tobacco on the farms of Kentucky. Both my parents and my sister live in Kentucky. I own a home in Kentucky, and I was there last month,” Clooney said in a statement provided to several news outlets.
He continued:
“The justice system I was raised to believe in holds people responsible for their actions. Her name was Breonna Taylor and she was shot to death in her bed by 3 white police officers, who will not be charged with any crime for her death. I know the community. I know the commonwealth. And I was taught in the schools and churches of Kentucky what is right and what is wrong. I’m ashamed of this decision.”
Other prominent politicians, activists, athletes and Hollywood figures, including Kerry Washington, LeBron James, Padma Lakshmi, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Dan Levy, Colin Kaepernick, Mia Farrow, Ava DuVernay, Bernice King and Viola Davis, spoke up:
Dear God No! Why does an empty apartment have more value than an innocent black woman’s life? #BreonnaTaylor https://t.co/vakKVrMnHO — Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) September 23, 2020
Hey @kyoag we don’t have to live in Louisville to know how you dropped the ball on this. #BreonnaTaylor was a citizen of the world and that’s why you will continue to see our protests of injustice across the globe. ✊🏻 — Bryan Greenberg (@bryangreenberg) September 23, 2020
Advertisement
I’ve been lost for words today! I’m devastated, hurt, sad, mad! We want Justice for Breonna yet justice was met for her neighbors apartment walls and not her beautiful life. Was I surprised at the verdict. Absolutely not but damnit I was & still am hurt and heavy hearted! I send — LeBron James (@KingJames) September 24, 2020
So, no one is responsible for killing #BreonnaTaylor ? — Mia Farrow (@MiaFarrow) September 23, 2020
Bulls--- decision!!! BLACK LIVES MATTER!!! Cannot be said enough times. https://t.co/HOrDQzHJ0d — Viola Davis (@violadavis) September 23, 2020
The white supremacist institution of policing that stole Breonna Taylor’s life from us must be abolished for the safety and well being of our people. #BreonnaTaylor #SayHerName #AbolishThePolice — Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) September 23, 2020
God bless Breonna’s family and all who knew and loved her. Her tragic death compounded by the violence of silence and inaction by the city she called home is more than any of them should have to endure. https://t.co/fcDmIWHlDS — Ava DuVernay (@ava) September 23, 2020
Advertisement
Brett Hankison is indicted for shooting into the apartment NEXT to Breonna Taylor & not for KILLING HER.
He's fired for shooting into BREONNA TAYLOR'S apartment & not for KILLING HER.
This is systemic racism.
Property is worth more than a Black woman. https://t.co/abVLkTqg1s pic.twitter.com/CwflSjR42h — W. Kamau Bell (@wkamaubell) September 23, 2020
The system did not fail today.
It did exactly what it was built to do.
We don’t need another system.
Systems don’t create community.
We need humane people who work in the interest of justice and for the health, safety and welfare of humanity, without devaluing Black lives. — Be A King (@BerniceKing) September 23, 2020
The American people are sick and tired of brutal police killings without consequences. It’s time to fundamentally reform our racist and broken criminal justice system, end qualified immunity and hold police officers accountable. #BreonnaTaylor — Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) September 23, 2020
"To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a state of rage almost all of the time." James Baldwin. #BreonnaTaylor pic.twitter.com/CUcRcEsXCE — COMMON (@common) September 23, 2020
I don’t have the words. #BreonnaTaylor and her family deserve justice. https://t.co/1Vu1zwetVi — Mandy Moore (@TheMandyMoore) September 23, 2020
Advertisement
They never get it right and that doesn't make it hurt any less. Breonna Taylor should still be with us and her family deserved justice today. Tired of this shit. — Matthew A. Cherry (@MatthewACherry) September 23, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Wild Brown Bear Tunnels Into The Alaska Zoo And Kills Popular Alpaca

ANCHORAGE , Alaska ( AP ) — A wild brown bear tunneled under perimeter fencing and killed a popular alpaca at the Alaska Zoo in Anchorage , officials said Wednesday .
It was killed a day later by wildlife officials .
The bear had been hanging around the zoo , knocking over trash bins and breaking bear-proof latches before it got under the fence early Sunday when the facility was closed to the public .
“ It went through the zoo and killed our older male alpaca , Caesar , ” executive director Patrick Lampi said .
“ He was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 16-year-old alpaca had arrived at the zoo when he was a year old .
Alaska Fish and Game officials helped search the zoo for the bear after it killed Caesar .
They used forward-looking infrared scopes , but the bear had left the zoo .
“ We made sure that all of our animals were where they belong , all our bears were still in their enclosure and our tigers and all the other animals were unharmed , ” Lampi said .
Fish and Game officials set up cameras to watch for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second time it came back .
Lampi said everyone was sorry the bear had to be put down .
The zoo is located in near the foothills of the Chugach Mountains .
“ There are occasionally bears in the area but they are usually not a problem , ” Lampi said .
“ This one just had developed some bad habits .
”

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A wild brown bear tunneled under perimeter fencing and killed a popular alpaca at the Alaska Zoo in Anchorage, officials said Wednesday. It was killed a day later by wildlife officials.
The bear had been hanging around the zoo, knocking over trash bins and breaking bear-proof latches before it got under the fence early Sunday when the facility was closed to the public.
“It went through the zoo and killed our older male alpaca, Caesar,” executive director Patrick Lampi said. “He was a crowd favorite.”
Advertisement
He aaid the 16-year-old alpaca had arrived at the zoo when he was a year old.
Caesar’s companion, a younger alpaca named Fuzzy Charlie, escaped and was found unharmed.
Alaska Fish and Game officials helped search the zoo for the bear after it killed Caesar. They used forward-looking infrared scopes, but the bear had left the zoo.
“We made sure that all of our animals were where they belong, all our bears were still in their enclosure and our tigers and all the other animals were unharmed,” Lampi said.
Fish and Game officials set up cameras to watch for the bear to return. It was killed the second time it came back.
Lampi said everyone was sorry the bear had to be put down.
“It was kind of a bizarre incident,” he said.
The zoo is located in near the foothills of the Chugach Mountains.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--Louisville Cop Reportedly Disparaged Protesters In Message To Fellow Officers

A police major in Louisville , Kentucky , reportedly sent a message to her officers last month saying that the people protesting racial injustice and police brutality “ do not deserve a second glance or thought from us ” and will be washing cars , working at Walmart or living in their parents ’ basements “ for their entire life.
” The message obtained by the Courier Journal was allegedly written by Maj. Bridget Hallahan , who oversees the Louisville Metro Police Department ’ s Fifth Division .
The Courier Journal published its contents on Wednesday ― the same day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lack of charges against officers involved in the high-profile shooting death of Breonna Taylor .
“ These ANTIFA and [ Black Lives Matter ] people , especially the ones who just jumped on the bandwagon ‘ yesterday ’ because they became ‘ woke ’ ( insert eye roll here ) , do not deserve a second glance or thought from us .
Our little pinky toenails have more character , moral , and ethics , than these punks have in their entire body , ” Hallahan wrote , according to the Courier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their level .
Do not respond to them .
If we do , we only validate what they did .
Don ’ t make them important , because they are not .
They will be the ones washing our cars , cashing us out at the Walmart , or living in their parents ’ basement playing [ Call of Duty ] for their entire life.
” Do n't make them important , because they are not .
They will be the ones washing our cars , cashing us out at the Walmart , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playing [ Call of Duty ] for their entire life .
An anti-protester message allegedly written by Maj. Bridget Hallahan of the Louisville Metro Police Department “ There is currently no recourse we have for incidents involving the doxing of officers or their families , ” the message reads , according to the Courier Journal .
“ What we can do is speak up against them and put the truth out there .
Through the [ Public Information Office ] and the LMPD [ Facebook ] page , we will come back at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them and everyone else know they are lying .
We will print the facts .
I will see to it.
” This is the second disparaging message sent within the police department that has been revealed this week .
Sgt .
Jonathan Mattingly ― who was one of the officers involved in the Taylor shooting ― wrote an email to his fellow officers early Tuesday railing against “ thugs ” and claiming that he and his colleagues “ did the legal , moral and ethical thing that night.
” “ You DO NOT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The position that allows thugs to get in your face and yell , curse and degrade you , ” Mattingly , who is white , wrote in a 2 a.m. email to about 1,000 officers , according to Vice News .
Mattingly ’ s attorney later confirmed to several news outlets that his client sent the email .
Police executed a botched raid early on March 13 at the apartment of Taylor , a Black medical technician , and her boyfriend Kenny Walker , who were both asleep .
They entered under a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that did not involve Taylor or Walker .
Mattingly was one of three officers who fired over 20 gunshots , several of which hit the 26-year-old woman and killed her .
Walker , a legal gun owner who said he did not hear the police announce their presence before breaking into the apartment , shot Mattingly once in the leg .
Detective Brett Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment ― a felony that comes with a potential prison sentence of up to five years under Kentucky law .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neighboring apartments , not those shot inside Taylor ’ s .
No murder charges were filed against any of the three cops ― in fact , Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove were not charged at all .
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said that he would not be releasing the grand jury report due to an ongoing FBI investigation , but that the officers were “ justified in their use of force.
” Ben Crump , an attorney for Taylor ’ s family , said in a tweet that the decision to not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ outrageous and offensive .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A police major in Louisville, Kentucky, reportedly sent a message to her officers last month saying that the people protesting racial injustice and police brutality “do not deserve a second glance or thought from us” and will be washing cars, working at Walmart or living in their parents’ basements “for their entire life.”
The message obtained by the Courier Journal was allegedly written by Maj. Bridget Hallahan, who oversees the Louisville Metro Police Department’s Fifth Division. The Courier Journal published its contents on Wednesday ― the same day that the city faced widespread protests over the lack of charges against officers involved in the high-profile shooting death of Breonna Taylor.
Advertisement
“These ANTIFA and [Black Lives Matter] people, especially the ones who just jumped on the bandwagon ‘yesterday’ because they became ‘woke’ (insert eye roll here), do not deserve a second glance or thought from us. Our little pinky toenails have more character, moral, and ethics, than these punks have in their entire body,” Hallahan wrote, according to the Courier Journal.
“Do not stop to their level. Do not respond to them. If we do, we only validate what they did. Don’t make them important, because they are not. They will be the ones washing our cars, cashing us out at the Walmart, or living in their parents’ basement playing [Call of Duty] for their entire life.”
“Don't make them important, because they are not. They will be the ones washing our cars, cashing us out at the Walmart, or living in their parents' basement playing [Call of Duty] for their entire life.” - An anti-protester message allegedly written by Maj. Bridget Hallahan of the Louisville Metro Police Department
In addition to disparaging protesters, Hallahan reportedly claimed without specifics or evidence that officers and their families have been “doxed” by people who don’t like being ordered around by police.
Advertisement
“There is currently no recourse we have for incidents involving the doxing of officers or their families,” the message reads, according to the Courier Journal. “What we can do is speak up against them and put the truth out there. Through the [Public Information Office] and the LMPD [Facebook] page, we will come back at them on their own page to let them and everyone else know they are lying. We will print the facts. I will see to it.”
The police department did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment, though Sgt. Lamont Washington told the Courier Journal that the department is looking into the matter.
This is the second disparaging message sent within the police department that has been revealed this week. Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly ― who was one of the officers involved in the Taylor shooting ― wrote an email to his fellow officers early Tuesday railing against “thugs” and claiming that he and his colleagues “did the legal, moral and ethical thing that night.”
“You DO NOT deserve to be in this position. The position that allows thugs to get in your face and yell, curse and degrade you,” Mattingly, who is white, wrote in a 2 a.m. email to about 1,000 officers, according to Vice News. Mattingly’s attorney later confirmed to several news outlets that his client sent the email.
New: LMPD Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly (who is being investigated as part of Breonna Taylor’s case) sent an email to around 1,000 officers at 2am that calls protestors thugs, complains about the government enforcing civil rights violations, and claims this is "good versus evil” pic.twitter.com/VcuyPDP790 — Roberto Aram Ferdman (@robferdman) September 22, 2020
Advertisement
Police executed a botched raid early on March 13 at the apartment of Taylor, a Black medical technician, and her boyfriend Kenny Walker, who were both asleep. They entered under a warrant as part of a narcotics investigation that did not involve Taylor or Walker. Mattingly was one of three officers who fired over 20 gunshots, several of which hit the 26-year-old woman and killed her. Walker, a legal gun owner who said he did not hear the police announce their presence before breaking into the apartment, shot Mattingly once in the leg.
Last week, Taylor’s family reached a $12 million settlement in their wrongful death lawsuit against the city. The family had also hoped for manslaughter charges against the officers, but the grand jury did not agree.
Detective Brett Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment ― a felony that comes with a potential prison sentence of up to five years under Kentucky law. The charges were tied to shots fired into neighboring apartments, not those shot inside Taylor’s. No murder charges were filed against any of the three cops ― in fact, Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove were not charged at all.
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said that he would not be releasing the grand jury report due to an ongoing FBI investigation, but that the officers were “justified in their use of force.” Ben Crump, an attorney for Taylor’s family, said in a tweet that the decision to not charge any of the officers with murder was “outrageous and offensive.”
Mattingly and Cosgrove have been on paid administrative leave since Taylor’s death; Hankison was fired in June after a police department review found that he had “wantonly and blindly” fired 10 rounds into Taylor’s apartment.
Advertisement
Fists raised, #Louisville protesters take Kentucky St and Hancock St intersection following #BreonnaTaylor announcement. pic.twitter.com/HIrurV0PJe — Rae Hodge (@RaeHodge) September 23, 2020
Taylor’s death was one of several high-profile police killings of Black people this year. After protests spread nationwide in response to the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis this May, many activists called for renewed attention to Taylor’s case, noting that the deaths of Black women often don’t get the same level of public outrage.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-09-23--'Tiger King' Star Carole Baskin Sued For Defamation By Former Assistant

ORLANDO , Fla. ( AP ) — Carole Baskin , who became a pop culture sensation due to Netflix ’ s docuseries “ Tiger King , ” is being sued for defamation by a former assistant .
As part of the lawsuit , the daughters of Baskin ’ s former husband are seeking more information about what happened to their father , who disappeared mysteriously more than two decades ago .
The amended complaint to an earlier lawsuit was filed Tuesday in state court in Tampa by Don Lewis ’ three daughters , Donna Pettis , Lynda Sanchez , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former assistant , Anne McQueen .
It also names Baskin ’ s current husband and her tiger rescue sanctuary as defendants .
The lawsuit said that Baskin defamed McQueen by posting a video diary entry on YouTube earlier this month in which she says McQueen played a role in Lewis ’ disappearance .
Those statements and embezzlement allegations also were made on Baskin ’ s website , “ bigcatrescue.org , ” the lawsuit said .
The lawsuit also is seeking what is known as a “ pure bill of discovery , ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gathered before a civil complaint is filed .
“ Despite contentions to the contrary , the truth has never been explored in any court and there is a good faith basis to believe the truth will open up many viable remedies , ” the lawsuit said .
The pure bill of discovery “ will be useful to identify potential defendants and theories of liability and to obtain information necessary for meeting a condition precedent to filing suit , ” the lawsuit said .
Lewis ’ s disappearance remains an open case .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced that his office was seeking new leads following the popularity of Netflix ’ s “ Tiger King : Murder , Mayhem and Madness.
” The documentary is about Joseph Maldonado-Passage , also known as “ Joe Exotic , ” a former Oklahoma zookeeper .
He was convicted of trying to hire someone to kill Baskin , who had tried to shut him down , accusing the Oklahoma zoo of abusing animals and selling big cat cubs .
In retaliation , Maldonado-Passage raised questions about Lewis ’ disappearance .
The documentary extensively covered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killed her husband and possibly fed him to her tigers .
Baskin , who founded Big Cat Rescue , has never been charged with any crime and released a statement refuting the accusations made in the series .
Baskin , who is a contestant on the show , “ Dancing With The Stars ” this season , said nothing when judges of the TV dance competition made references in jest to the belief that Lewis was killed and fed to the tigers at her sanctuary , the lawsuit said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Carole Baskin, who became a pop culture sensation due to Netflix’s docuseries “Tiger King,” is being sued for defamation by a former assistant. As part of the lawsuit, the daughters of Baskin’s former husband are seeking more information about what happened to their father, who disappeared mysteriously more than two decades ago.
The amended complaint to an earlier lawsuit was filed Tuesday in state court in Tampa by Don Lewis’ three daughters, Donna Pettis, Lynda Sanchez, and Gale Rathbone, as well as his former assistant, Anne McQueen. It also names Baskin’s current husband and her tiger rescue sanctuary as defendants.
Advertisement
The lawsuit said that Baskin defamed McQueen by posting a video diary entry on YouTube earlier this month in which she says McQueen played a role in Lewis’ disappearance. Those statements and embezzlement allegations also were made on Baskin’s website, “bigcatrescue.org,” the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit also is seeking what is known as a “pure bill of discovery,” which allows information in a case to be gathered before a civil complaint is filed.
“Despite contentions to the contrary, the truth has never been explored in any court and there is a good faith basis to believe the truth will open up many viable remedies,” the lawsuit said.
The pure bill of discovery “will be useful to identify potential defendants and theories of liability and to obtain information necessary for meeting a condition precedent to filing suit,” the lawsuit said.
Advertisement
Lewis’s disappearance remains an open case. In March, Hillsborough County Sheriff Chad Chronister announced that his office was seeking new leads following the popularity of Netflix’s “Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness.”
The documentary is about Joseph Maldonado-Passage, also known as “Joe Exotic,” a former Oklahoma zookeeper. He was convicted of trying to hire someone to kill Baskin, who had tried to shut him down, accusing the Oklahoma zoo of abusing animals and selling big cat cubs.
In retaliation, Maldonado-Passage raised questions about Lewis’ disappearance. The documentary extensively covered Maldonado-Passage’s repeated accusations that Baskin killed her husband and possibly fed him to her tigers. Baskin, who founded Big Cat Rescue, has never been charged with any crime and released a statement refuting the accusations made in the series.
Baskin, who is a contestant on the show, “Dancing With The Stars” this season, said nothing when judges of the TV dance competition made references in jest to the belief that Lewis was killed and fed to the tigers at her sanctuary, the lawsuit said.
Lawyers for Baskin said Wednesday they couldn’t comment on pending litigation.