truthout--2020-10-30--Trump’s Attacks on Mail-In Voting in Las Vegas Could End Up at the Supreme Court

The Trump campaign and Nevada Republicans have asked a state court to stop Nevada from counting its mailed-in ballots in the diverse Las Vegas/Clark County jurisdiction .
The suit joins a wide range of GOP attempts to shut down the counting of such votes in swing states like Nevada , Wisconsin , Michigan , Pennsylvania , North Carolina and Florida .
The Republicans ’ pretext seems to be over how the ballots are scrutinized .
But the real reason could lie in the fact that Clark is the state ’ s most diverse county , with more than 31 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 10 percent Asian American .
As Trump well knows , citizens of color tend to vote in ways he does not like .
With no credible legal basis , the Nevada lawsuit is among the many clear signs that Trump and the Republicans are committed to relentlessly sabotaging the popular vote .
With another extreme Trumpist just joining the Supreme Court , there ’ s little doubt the Trump campaign intends to move this and other lawsuits in Nevada and elsewhere as far as they can , hoping to delay the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe harbor ” of its right-wing Supreme Court majority .
If SCOTUS eventually approves one or more such assaults on voting by mail , and succeeds in hopelessly complicating the requirements for counting mailed-in ballots , as Trump is trying to do in Nevada , the ultimate decision in this election could be shifted from millions of voters to the right-wing judges on the Supreme Court .
In the face of the pandemic , Nevada has ordered ballots mailed to all registered voters .
In the eyes of the Trump Republicans , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raising the terminal specter of a functional democracy .
It forms the basis for a public election that could proceed smoothly , and could quickly provide a fair outcome that reflects the real intent of the general electorate .
Trump has been infamously sabotaging the U.S .
Postal Service , delaying many of the ballots ’ returns .
But Nevada ’ s ballots were mailed out weeks ago .
Trump has also injected chaos into the process , screaming at every turn that the election is “ fraudulent.
” GOP attacks have focused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots , working to discard even those postmarked on or even prior to November 3 , but which arrive late .
Court decisions on these and other issues have become a toxic morass of contradictory rulings , with “ acceptable ” procedures varying wildly from state to state , all awaiting final rulings from a heavily politicized SCOTUS .
As elsewhere , the universal ballot mailing has been strongly endorsed by Nevada ’ s duly elected governor , by its legislature ( the first in U.S. history with a majority of women ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such procedures have been standard practice in Colorado , Utah , Oregon , Washington and Hawaii for many years .
When the bill passed the Nevada legislature and was signed by its governor in early August , Trump sued .
Nevada ’ s Republican Secretary of State , Barbara Cegavske , moved to dismiss , arguing that , “ Absent a concrete and particularized injury to plaintiffs , the court has no jurisdiction to intervene in election preparations .
Because Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts from which one might reasonably infer that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not hypothetical , the court should dismiss their claims for lack of jurisdiction.
” In other words — Nevada to Trump : drop dead .
As per its legislation , the state has already begun counting ballots .
As they are coming in almost entirely on paper , they will be counted almost entirely on digital scanners , which can produce an extremely accurate and rapid vote count .
Trump has trailed consistently in Nevada ’ s public opinion polls .
With a fair vote count , he is widely expected to lose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 by about 2.5 percent .
But now that he ’ s added another right-wing extremist to the Supreme Court , Trump is certain to use this suit as a vehicle to undermine the Nevada election — and with it , the nation ’ s as a whole .
Any legal basis on which Trump might claim fraud or personal injury from Nevada ’ s relatively smooth conduct of this year ’ s election would be pure partisan fantasy .
Solidly supported by its top officials , any Supreme Court attack on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to derive from a full-frontal attack on vote by mail itself , one that could resonate throughout the swing states that are likely to decide the election .
That Trump himself votes by mail would be deemed as being of no consequence .
The six right-wingers who now dominate the Court might choose to use this procedural challenge as a pretext by which the idea of mailing ballots to registered voters and counting them quickly and efficiently could be found to be somehow unworkable .
In other words , the Court would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ’ s voting .
There would be just one clear beneficiary : Donald Trump .
It would be the clearest , most egregious partisan judicial attack on democracy since the founding of the republic .
But given the personnel now on the Court , it ’ s an entirely possible outcome .
Neil Gorsuch , Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett have all been appointed by Trump .
Along with Kavanaugh and Barrett , John Roberts was an active partisan in the infamous Bush v. Gore decision trashing the popular will in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush despite his having lost the public vote .
Clarence Thomas voted in favor of that decision from the bench .
Hard-rightist Samuel Alito can be expected to join any decision meant to further the dictatorial powers of Donald Trump .
The SCOTUS trashing of deadline extensions in the various states did get a comeuppance in the case of Vermont , when Brett Kavanaugh was forced to correct an erroneous characterization of the state ’ s rules and procedures .
But its assault on equitable distribution of drop boxes , ID and witness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fines before being allowed to vote and other selective limitation of the franchise has been unrelenting .
Like Trump himself , the six SCOTUS rightists appear to have no moral or ethical qualms about undermining the will of the American public in an election based on democratic principles and practices .
How the public would react to the official sabotage of this year ’ s election with no real legal basis remains to be seen .
But if the Court conjures some pretext to destroy Nevada ’ s and other swing states ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and disqualifying ballots that arrive late , it will be 2000 all over again .
It will replay Bush v. Gore , with which the SCOTUS majority — and a disenfranchised American public — is so familiar .
Doing that could render the 2020 election a smoldering ruin .
The question would then become : How would the public react to the dictatorial destruction of the last vestiges of U.S. democracy ?

Part of the Series Voting Wrongs
The Trump campaign and Nevada Republicans have asked a state court to stop Nevada from counting its mailed-in ballots in the diverse Las Vegas/Clark County jurisdiction. The suit joins a wide range of GOP attempts to shut down the counting of such votes in swing states like Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida.
The Republicans’ pretext seems to be over how the ballots are scrutinized. But the real reason could lie in the fact that Clark is the state’s most diverse county, with more than 31 percent Latinx citizens, 13 percent Black and about 10 percent Asian American. As Trump well knows, citizens of color tend to vote in ways he does not like.
With no credible legal basis, the Nevada lawsuit is among the many clear signs that Trump and the Republicans are committed to relentlessly sabotaging the popular vote. With another extreme Trumpist just joining the Supreme Court, there’s little doubt the Trump campaign intends to move this and other lawsuits in Nevada and elsewhere as far as they can, hoping to delay the vote counting in swing states to the “safe harbor” of its right-wing Supreme Court majority.
If SCOTUS eventually approves one or more such assaults on voting by mail, and succeeds in hopelessly complicating the requirements for counting mailed-in ballots, as Trump is trying to do in Nevada, the ultimate decision in this election could be shifted from millions of voters to the right-wing judges on the Supreme Court.
In the face of the pandemic, Nevada has ordered ballots mailed to all registered voters. In the eyes of the Trump Republicans, this is the ultimate act of terror, raising the terminal specter of a functional democracy. It forms the basis for a public election that could proceed smoothly, and could quickly provide a fair outcome that reflects the real intent of the general electorate.
Trump has been infamously sabotaging the U.S. Postal Service, delaying many of the ballots’ returns. But Nevada’s ballots were mailed out weeks ago.
Trump has also injected chaos into the process, screaming at every turn that the election is “fraudulent.” GOP attacks have focused strongly on deadlines for acceptance of mailed-in ballots, working to discard even those postmarked on or even prior to November 3, but which arrive late.
Court decisions on these and other issues have become a toxic morass of contradictory rulings, with “acceptable” procedures varying wildly from state to state, all awaiting final rulings from a heavily politicized SCOTUS.
As elsewhere, the universal ballot mailing has been strongly endorsed by Nevada’s duly elected governor, by its legislature (the first in U.S. history with a majority of women) and by its secretary of state. Such procedures have been standard practice in Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii for many years.
When the bill passed the Nevada legislature and was signed by its governor in early August, Trump sued. Nevada’s Republican Secretary of State, Barbara Cegavske, moved to dismiss, arguing that, “Absent a concrete and particularized injury to plaintiffs, the court has no jurisdiction to intervene in election preparations. Because Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts from which one might reasonably infer that an injury is actual and imminent, not hypothetical, the court should dismiss their claims for lack of jurisdiction.”
In other words — Nevada to Trump: drop dead.
As per its legislation, the state has already begun counting ballots. As they are coming in almost entirely on paper, they will be counted almost entirely on digital scanners, which can produce an extremely accurate and rapid vote count.
Trump has trailed consistently in Nevada’s public opinion polls. With a fair vote count, he is widely expected to lose a state carried by Hillary Clinton in 2016 by about 2.5 percent.
But now that he’s added another right-wing extremist to the Supreme Court, Trump is certain to use this suit as a vehicle to undermine the Nevada election — and with it, the nation’s as a whole.
Any legal basis on which Trump might claim fraud or personal injury from Nevada’s relatively smooth conduct of this year’s election would be pure partisan fantasy. Solidly supported by its top officials, any Supreme Court attack on the conduct of Nevada’s election would have to derive from a full-frontal attack on vote by mail itself, one that could resonate throughout the swing states that are likely to decide the election.
That Trump himself votes by mail would be deemed as being of no consequence. The six right-wingers who now dominate the Court might choose to use this procedural challenge as a pretext by which the idea of mailing ballots to registered voters and counting them quickly and efficiently could be found to be somehow unworkable.
In other words, the Court would undermine virtually the entire basis of this year’s voting. There would be just one clear beneficiary: Donald Trump.
It would be the clearest, most egregious partisan judicial attack on democracy since the founding of the republic.
But given the personnel now on the Court, it’s an entirely possible outcome.
Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett have all been appointed by Trump. Along with Kavanaugh and Barrett, John Roberts was an active partisan in the infamous Bush v. Gore decision trashing the popular will in the 2000 election that enthroned George W. Bush despite his having lost the public vote. Clarence Thomas voted in favor of that decision from the bench. Hard-rightist Samuel Alito can be expected to join any decision meant to further the dictatorial powers of Donald Trump.
The SCOTUS trashing of deadline extensions in the various states did get a comeuppance in the case of Vermont, when Brett Kavanaugh was forced to correct an erroneous characterization of the state’s rules and procedures. But its assault on equitable distribution of drop boxes, ID and witness requirements, the demand that ex-felons pay fines before being allowed to vote and other selective limitation of the franchise has been unrelenting.
Like Trump himself, the six SCOTUS rightists appear to have no moral or ethical qualms about undermining the will of the American public in an election based on democratic principles and practices.
How the public would react to the official sabotage of this year’s election with no real legal basis remains to be seen.
But if the Court conjures some pretext to destroy Nevada’s and other swing states’ vote-by-mail systems by stopping the ballot counting and disqualifying ballots that arrive late, it will be 2000 all over again. It will replay Bush v. Gore, with which the SCOTUS majority — and a disenfranchised American public — is so familiar.
Doing that could render the 2020 election a smoldering ruin.
The question would then become: How would the public react to the dictatorial destruction of the last vestiges of U.S. democracy?
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-30--Don Jr. Wrongly Claims the Coronavirus Death Rate Is “Almost Nothing”

Donald Trump Jr. , the president ’ s son , falsely asserted that coronavirus deaths in the United States are down to “ almost nothing ” during an interview with Fox News ’ s Laura Ingraham on Thursday night .
Trump Jr. derided critics of his father who have noted the president ’ s failure to adequately address the pandemic in the U.S. “ These people are truly morons , you know what I mean ?
” Trump Jr. said on the program .
He belittled critics further , arguing that they were focusing on coronavirus case counts instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fit a supposed agenda .
“ Why aren ’ t they talking about deaths ?
Because the number is almost nothing , ” Trump Jr. said .
“ Because we ’ ve gotten control of this thing .
We understand how it works.
” Trump Jr. is wrong .
More than 234,000 Americans have died since the start of the crisis , with more than 1,000 deaths recorded in each of the past three days .
The current seven-day average of new deaths sits at 828 as of October 29 , a 16 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump Jr. is also wrong to dismiss the significance of daily case counts .
This metric is important because it can indicate the likely trajectory for deaths from the virus .
For example , when the seven-day daily case average jumped up to more than 69,000 cases on July 20 ( from about 27,000 daily cases on average a month prior ) , the seven-day average of daily deaths , which had been at 817 that same day , went up to 1,171 by August 1 , a 41 percent increase .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,000 for three weeks thereafter .
The virus is clearly not under control in the U.S. either .
The current seven-day daily average of new cases being reported is at 77,733 — nearly a 43 percent increase from where it stood two weeks prior .
And on Thursday , the U.S. reported its highest ever rate of cases reported in a single day , exceeding 90,400 new positive diagnoses .
Experts expect both new daily cases and the rate of deaths from COVID-19 to continue trending upward in the months ahead .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Evaluation ( IHME ) at the University of Washington , which has been cited by the White House in the past , the U.S. total death count from coronavirus will likely reach over 328,000 by January 1 .
At that time , daily death counts will reach around 2,200 per day as well , the IHME model predicts — a rate that hasn ’ t been seen since spring .

One respected health model projects that daily deaths in the U.S. will exceed 2,200 by New Year’s Day.
Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, falsely asserted that coronavirus deaths in the United States are down to “almost nothing” during an interview with Fox News’s Laura Ingraham on Thursday night.
Trump Jr. derided critics of his father who have noted the president’s failure to adequately address the pandemic in the U.S.
“These people are truly morons, you know what I mean?” Trump Jr. said on the program.
He belittled critics further, arguing that they were focusing on coronavirus case counts instead of death rates because it didn’t fit a supposed agenda.
“Why aren’t they talking about deaths? Because the number is almost nothing,” Trump Jr. said. “Because we’ve gotten control of this thing. We understand how it works.”
Trump Jr. is wrong. More than 234,000 Americans have died since the start of the crisis, with more than 1,000 deaths recorded in each of the past three days. The current seven-day average of new deaths sits at 828 as of October 29, a 16 percent increase from two weeks prior.
Trump Jr. is also wrong to dismiss the significance of daily case counts. This metric is important because it can indicate the likely trajectory for deaths from the virus.
For example, when the seven-day daily case average jumped up to more than 69,000 cases on July 20 (from about 27,000 daily cases on average a month prior), the seven-day average of daily deaths, which had been at 817 that same day, went up to 1,171 by August 1, a 41 percent increase. The seven-day average of daily deaths remained above 1,000 for three weeks thereafter.
The virus is clearly not under control in the U.S. either. The current seven-day daily average of new cases being reported is at 77,733 — nearly a 43 percent increase from where it stood two weeks prior. And on Thursday, the U.S. reported its highest ever rate of cases reported in a single day, exceeding 90,400 new positive diagnoses.
Experts expect both new daily cases and the rate of deaths from COVID-19 to continue trending upward in the months ahead. According to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington, which has been cited by the White House in the past, the U.S. total death count from coronavirus will likely reach over 328,000 by January 1.
At that time, daily death counts will reach around 2,200 per day as well, the IHME model predicts — a rate that hasn’t been seen since spring.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-30--WH Chief of Staff Allegedly Gave Taxpayer Funds to Wife’s Friend’s Campaign

White House chief of staff Mark Meadows appears to have tapped into federal resources to help a friend of his wife ’ s raise money for her campaign to fill his congressional seat , government records show .
The revelation sharpens questions that election law experts raised in Salon ’ s previous report on Meadows ’ possible use of tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds for personal expenses after announcing he would not seek re-election , a crime that earned prison time for former Rep. Duncan Hunter , R-Calif. As Salon previously reported , Meadows ’ congressional campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 15 for parking fees on Jan. 21 of this year at the Grove Park Inn & Resort in North Carolina .
However , Meadows himself was in Washington that day , where he spoke with press during a break in President Trump ’ s Senate impeachment trial .
Meadows ’ wife , Debbie , however , was on the last day of a four-day swing through Meadows ’ former district in western North Carolina , holding a series of fundraisers for her friend , Lynda Bennett , a candidate for the seat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave .
A Bennett campaign invitation from the time says that Debbie Meadows and Bennett would visit North Asheville , Forest City , Waynesville , Rutherfordton , Biltmore Forest and Hendersonville , all communities in the district .
On the 21st they hit Gregory ’ s Original in Rutherfordton , followed by a private event in Biltmore Forest and then the Hendersonville Country Club .
Curiously , the Bennett campaign ’ s Federal Election Commission filings disclose no lodging , meal , mileage or event expenses during Debbie Meadows ’ junket , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that food and beverages would be served at all the events .
The Bennett campaign also received no contributions from anyone over those four days of a supposed fundraising trip , with the exception of Mark Kolokotrones , a California-based financier and Heritage Foundation member , who maxed out to Bennett ’ s primary and general election funds on Jan. 21 .
Congressional records show that a field representative for Mark Meadows ’ congressional office , Jordan Whisnant , reported $ 155.25 in auto mileage expenses for Jan. 17 through Jan. 22 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taxpayer-funded congressional Members ’ Representational Allowance ( MRA ) .
Whisnant , a federal employee , logged a total of 310.5 miles over the five-day period of with Debbie Meadows ’ district visit .
Whisnant also charged a $ 21 meal on Jan. 22 , the day after the tour ended .
“ It ’ s a violation of both House Ethics and House Administration Committee rules to use MRA funds for campaign purposes , ” Brett Kappel , a top government ethics expert and attorney at Harmon Curran , told Salon .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reach of the House Ethics Committee , but his staffers ( who are still manning the office for the 11th congressional district of North Carolina under the supervision of the Clerk of the House ) could be on the hook if they knew about or participated in this misappropriation of congressional funds.
” The House Ethics Committee did not immediately reply to Salon ’ s request for comment .
Neither Mark nor Debbie Meadows personally contributed to Lynda Bennett ’ s campaign .
But Debbie Meadows and Polly Jordan , the wife @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican and friend of the Meadowses , held another round of events with Bennett in North Carolina in the first week of February .
Whisnant logged another $ 125 in auto mileage around that time .
The Meadows campaign also paid aide Henry Mitchell more than $ 5,000 for “ field representative mileage ” in five installments between January and March — including $ 1,592 for that first week of February .
“ There ’ s still campaign work that can be done as a campaign winds down .
It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around to help out , ” Libowitz said of those expenses .
“ But at 58 cents a mile , back-of-the-envelope math has it at 900 miles some weeks .
That ’ s a ton of driving.
” It ’ s not clear why Mitchell was putting on so many miles , or where .
Around that time , however , Bennett ’ s fundraising had flagged .
At the same time , the Republican primary to replace Meadows had begun to grow chaotic , with Bennett facing a number of candidates , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show that as Bennett ’ s fundraising slipped , Meadows began channeling money to her campaign through two of his other groups : his leadership PAC , Your Voice Counts ; and his PAC , the House Freedom Fund .
Your Voice Counts gave $ 848.56 to the Bennett campaign on Feb. 4 , the day after the early February events featuring Debbie Meadows and Polly Jordan , according to federal filings , and an even $ 2,000 on April 15 , two weeks after Meadows officially resigned from Congress to join the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Freedom Fund contributed significantly more money , funneling more than $ 100,000 to Bennett ’ s campaign — nearly 20 % of her total fundraising haul , according to FEC records .
Her bid for the House also received $ 22,600 from the Senate Conservatives Fund , former South Carolina senator Jim DeMint ’ s PAC .
The Meadows campaign itself reported giving $ 4,000 to Bennett ’ s campaign , half of it for the Republican primary and half for the general election .
The donations came on March 5 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become White House chief of staff .
“ Since the Meadows campaign maxed out to Bennett , if Meadows covered any additional expenses , they would add up to excessive in-kind contributions to the Bennett campaign , ” Kappel told Salon .
“ But expenses to pay staff , consultants or vendors for work that was done for the Meadows committee — as opposed to the Bennett campaign — would be permissible.
” In the end , Meadows ’ efforts were not enough for Bennett , who lost her June 23 primary to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same day , however , the Meadows campaign — which had long since closed up shop , with Meadows three months into his White House tenure — reported a $ 2,300 payment to Henry Mitchell , the aforementioned field representative , for “ management consulting.
” One week later , on the last day of the Meadows ’ campaign ’ s official existence , it reported a $ 600 expense at a Safeway grocery store .
Campaigns are prohibited by law from spending money on personal expenses , including meals and groceries .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beginning that Meadows was trying to tip the scales in his district in Bennett ’ s favor , according to Politico , and observers have noted a number of coincidences .
Bennett announced her candidacy on Dec. 19 , 2019 , just hours after Meadows first shared the news of his retirement — the day before the filing deadline to run for Congress , and two days after the deadline that prevents state officeholders from changing elections .
Further , the Meadows and Bennett campaigns , along with Right Women PAC , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only three political committees in the U.S. to report payments to a company called Tower Digital .
That company was founded by Meadows ’ brother , who seems to have registered the Bennett campaign ’ s web domain name in October 2019 , two months before Meadows announced he would not seek re-election .
Perhaps most telling , Debbie Meadows — who is believed to have a personal connection Trump after she stood by him in the wake of the “ Access Hollywood ” revelations in the waning days of the 2016 election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his endorsement for Bennett , which he provided on June 4 .
Cawthorn ’ s primary victory was a rare loss for a Trump endorsee , and at least a minor black eye for the president .
Meadows seems to have moved on .
His most recent filing shows that on Oct. 6 , he gave $ 50,000 to his wife ’ s PAC , Right Women .
She transferred $ 5,000 to Cawthorn ’ s campaign that same day .
The next day , however , Right Women spent $ 290 on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Sept. 4 , the PAC dropped about twice that amount at the exclusive in-house restaurant .
Normally the White House mess is strictly reserved for high-level officials such as cabinet members and other dignitaries , but the president ’ s chief of staff would have no problem getting in .

White House chief of staff Mark Meadows appears to have tapped into federal resources to help a friend of his wife’s raise money for her campaign to fill his congressional seat, government records show.
The revelation sharpens questions that election law experts raised in Salon’s previous report on Meadows’ possible use of tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds for personal expenses after announcing he would not seek re-election, a crime that earned prison time for former Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.
As Salon previously reported, Meadows’ congressional campaign committee spent $312 on food and $15 for parking fees on Jan. 21 of this year at the Grove Park Inn & Resort in North Carolina. However, Meadows himself was in Washington that day, where he spoke with press during a break in President Trump’s Senate impeachment trial.
Meadows’ wife, Debbie, however, was on the last day of a four-day swing through Meadows’ former district in western North Carolina, holding a series of fundraisers for her friend, Lynda Bennett, a candidate for the seat that Meadows had recently announced he would leave.
A Bennett campaign invitation from the time says that Debbie Meadows and Bennett would visit North Asheville, Forest City, Waynesville, Rutherfordton, Biltmore Forest and Hendersonville, all communities in the district. On the 21st they hit Gregory’s Original in Rutherfordton, followed by a private event in Biltmore Forest and then the Hendersonville Country Club.
Curiously, the Bennett campaign’s Federal Election Commission filings disclose no lodging, meal, mileage or event expenses during Debbie Meadows’ junket, even though the Bennett campaign’s invite said that food and beverages would be served at all the events.
The Bennett campaign also received no contributions from anyone over those four days of a supposed fundraising trip, with the exception of Mark Kolokotrones, a California-based financier and Heritage Foundation member, who maxed out to Bennett’s primary and general election funds on Jan. 21.
Congressional records show that a field representative for Mark Meadows’ congressional office, Jordan Whisnant, reported $155.25 in auto mileage expenses for Jan. 17 through Jan. 22 — funds taken out of Meadows’ taxpayer-funded congressional Members’ Representational Allowance (MRA). Whisnant, a federal employee, logged a total of 310.5 miles over the five-day period of with Debbie Meadows’ district visit. Whisnant also charged a $21 meal on Jan. 22, the day after the tour ended.
“It’s a violation of both House Ethics and House Administration Committee rules to use MRA funds for campaign purposes,” Brett Kappel, a top government ethics expert and attorney at Harmon Curran, told Salon. “Obviously Meadows is now out of the reach of the House Ethics Committee, but his staffers (who are still manning the office for the 11th congressional district of North Carolina under the supervision of the Clerk of the House) could be on the hook if they knew about or participated in this misappropriation of congressional funds.”
The House Ethics Committee did not immediately reply to Salon’s request for comment.
Neither Mark nor Debbie Meadows personally contributed to Lynda Bennett’s campaign. But Debbie Meadows and Polly Jordan, the wife of Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican and friend of the Meadowses, held another round of events with Bennett in North Carolina in the first week of February. Whisnant logged another $125 in auto mileage around that time.
The Meadows campaign also paid aide Henry Mitchell more than $5,000 for “field representative mileage” in five installments between January and March — including $1,592 for that first week of February.
“There’s still campaign work that can be done as a campaign winds down. It’s not out of the ordinary to keep someone around to help out,” Libowitz said of those expenses. “But at 58 cents a mile, back-of-the-envelope math has it at 900 miles some weeks. That’s a ton of driving.”
It’s not clear why Mitchell was putting on so many miles, or where. Around that time, however, Bennett’s fundraising had flagged. At the same time, the Republican primary to replace Meadows had begun to grow chaotic, with Bennett facing a number of candidates, some to her right.
FEC filings show that as Bennett’s fundraising slipped, Meadows began channeling money to her campaign through two of his other groups: his leadership PAC, Your Voice Counts; and his PAC, the House Freedom Fund.
Your Voice Counts gave $848.56 to the Bennett campaign on Feb. 4, the day after the early February events featuring Debbie Meadows and Polly Jordan, according to federal filings, and an even $2,000 on April 15, two weeks after Meadows officially resigned from Congress to join the White House, records show.
The House Freedom Fund contributed significantly more money, funneling more than $100,000 to Bennett’s campaign — nearly 20% of her total fundraising haul, according to FEC records. Her bid for the House also received $22,600 from the Senate Conservatives Fund, former South Carolina senator Jim DeMint’s PAC.
The Meadows campaign itself reported giving $4,000 to Bennett’s campaign, half of it for the Republican primary and half for the general election. The donations came on March 5, the day after Trump announced Meadows would become White House chief of staff.
“Since the Meadows campaign maxed out to Bennett, if Meadows covered any additional expenses, they would add up to excessive in-kind contributions to the Bennett campaign,” Kappel told Salon. “But expenses to pay staff, consultants or vendors for work that was done for the Meadows committee — as opposed to the Bennett campaign — would be permissible.”
In the end, Meadows’ efforts were not enough for Bennett, who lost her June 23 primary to pro-Trump political newcomer Madison Cawthorn. That same day, however, the Meadows campaign — which had long since closed up shop, with Meadows three months into his White House tenure — reported a $2,300 payment to Henry Mitchell, the aforementioned field representative, for “management consulting.”
One week later, on the last day of the Meadows’ campaign’s official existence, it reported a $600 expense at a Safeway grocery store. Campaigns are prohibited by law from spending money on personal expenses, including meals and groceries.
Republican operatives in North Carolina speculated from the beginning that Meadows was trying to tip the scales in his district in Bennett’s favor, according to Politico, and observers have noted a number of coincidences. Bennett announced her candidacy on Dec. 19, 2019, just hours after Meadows first shared the news of his retirement — the day before the filing deadline to run for Congress, and two days after the deadline that prevents state officeholders from changing elections.
Further, the Meadows and Bennett campaigns, along with Right Women PAC, founded by Debbie Meadows, are the only three political committees in the U.S. to report payments to a company called Tower Digital. That company was founded by Meadows’ brother, who seems to have registered the Bennett campaign’s web domain name in October 2019, two months before Meadows announced he would not seek re-election.
Perhaps most telling, Debbie Meadows — who is believed to have a personal connection Trump after she stood by him in the wake of the “Access Hollywood” revelations in the waning days of the 2016 election — personally called the president to solicit his endorsement for Bennett, which he provided on June 4. Cawthorn’s primary victory was a rare loss for a Trump endorsee, and at least a minor black eye for the president.
Meadows seems to have moved on. His most recent filing shows that on Oct. 6, he gave $50,000 to his wife’s PAC, Right Women. She transferred $5,000 to Cawthorn’s campaign that same day.
The next day, however, Right Women spent $290 on food and beverage at the White House. On Sept. 4, the PAC dropped about twice that amount at the exclusive in-house restaurant. Normally the White House mess is strictly reserved for high-level officials such as cabinet members and other dignitaries, but the president’s chief of staff would have no problem getting in.


truthout--2020-10-30--Trump Ramps Up Deportations to Haiti Despite Massive Risk of COVID Spread

Refugees ’ rights organizations on Thursday said the Trump administration has been ramping up deportations of Haitians and asylum-seekers from several African countries in the weeks before Election Day , sending hundreds of people back to countries where they may face gang and political violence and potentially spreading the novel coronavirus in places that lack infrastructure to cope with outbreaks .
Calling the deportation flights “ death flights ” in the midst of the United States ’ worsening coronavirus pandemic , the immigrant rights group Witness at the Border told The Guardian that 12 flights to Haiti have been recorded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one or two flights every four weeks in previous months .
The administration has arranged the deportations under Title 42 of the 1944 Public Health Services Law .
The White House has used the law , which allows the government to take emergency action to prevent the “ introduction of communicable diseases , ” to deport more than 200,000 immigrants this year , according to The Guardian .
The CDC has said there is no reason to use the law to protect the health of Americans or asylum-seekers , but the outlet reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s close adviser on immigration policy , “ insisted on it.
” Under U.S. public health guidelines , detained asylum seekers and immigrants must be held in a way that allows for social distancing and must be tested prior to boarding a deportation flight , but Guerline Jozef , president of the Haitian Bridge Alliance ( HBA ) , told The Guardian that safety protocols have been all but abandoned .
“ Once they arrive back in Haiti , they are just left to fend for themselves , ” Jozef told the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Haitians who have been deported recently are families with young children and babies .
“ I believe that they are trying to deport as many people as possible prior to the elections.
” In April , the Trump administration was accused of “ actively and knowingly spreading the coronavirus to Central America through deportation ” as officials resumed flights to countries including Guatemala , El Salvador , and Honduras , even as the U.S. became the epicenter of the global pandemic .
The Guatemalan government said at the time that at least three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Covid-19 upon arrival .
The collapse of Haiti ’ s economy since the 2010 earthquake there has led to crumbling infrastructure , the weakening of democracy , and a rise in gang violence .
HBA reported that the current “ chaos and disorder ” in Haiti has created conditions that make it nearly impossible to reintegrate deported nationals into society .
In addition to Haitians , asylum-seekers from Cameroon , Congo , and several other African countries have been deported in recent weeks .
“ The disregard for human life could not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights organizer Ellie Hutchinson Cervantes .

A law intended to prevent the spread of disease has been used to deport more than 200,000 immigrants this year.
Refugees’ rights organizations on Thursday said the Trump administration has been ramping up deportations of Haitians and asylum-seekers from several African countries in the weeks before Election Day, sending hundreds of people back to countries where they may face gang and political violence and potentially spreading the novel coronavirus in places that lack infrastructure to cope with outbreaks.
Calling the deportation flights “death flights” in the midst of the United States’ worsening coronavirus pandemic, the immigrant rights group Witness at the Border told The Guardian that 12 flights to Haiti have been recorded in October so far, up from one or two flights every four weeks in previous months.
BREAKING: NEW #DEATHFLIGHTS #ICEAir REPORT, September & YTD. Sept: record # of likely DEPORTATION flights (96) & total flights (444) during #covid_19. 706 likely deportation flights YTD to 18 countries in LA & Carib. Sept. was 2nd highest month of year. https://t.co/Y2urH1LuQf — Witness At The Border (formerly Witness Tornillo) (@WitnessBorder) October 7, 2020
The administration has arranged the deportations under Title 42 of the 1944 Public Health Services Law. The White House has used the law, which allows the government to take emergency action to prevent the “introduction of communicable diseases,” to deport more than 200,000 immigrants this year, according to The Guardian.
The CDC has said there is no reason to use the law to protect the health of Americans or asylum-seekers, but the outlet reported that Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump’s close adviser on immigration policy, “insisted on it.”
Under U.S. public health guidelines, detained asylum seekers and immigrants must be held in a way that allows for social distancing and must be tested prior to boarding a deportation flight, but Guerline Jozef, president of the Haitian Bridge Alliance (HBA), told The Guardian that safety protocols have been all but abandoned.
“Once they arrive back in Haiti, they are just left to fend for themselves,” Jozef told the outlet, adding that a majority of Haitians who have been deported recently are families with young children and babies. “I believe that they are trying to deport as many people as possible prior to the elections.”
In April, the Trump administration was accused of “actively and knowingly spreading the coronavirus to Central America through deportation” as officials resumed flights to countries including Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, even as the U.S. became the epicenter of the global pandemic. The Guatemalan government said at the time that at least three nationals deported from the U.S. tested positive for Covid-19 upon arrival.
The collapse of Haiti’s economy since the 2010 earthquake there has led to crumbling infrastructure, the weakening of democracy, and a rise in gang violence.
HBA reported that the current “chaos and disorder” in Haiti has created conditions that make it nearly impossible to reintegrate deported nationals into society.
In addition to Haitians, asylum-seekers from Cameroon, Congo, and several other African countries have been deported in recent weeks.
The administration is ramping up deportations ahead of the election, especially of Black migrants. This month, ~700 Haitians, Congolese, and Cameroonian migrants have been deported back to life-threatening situations. The disregard for human life could not be more blatant. pic.twitter.com/6sdUgswKdq — Ellie Hutchison Cervantes (@ellie_rhc) October 26, 2020
“The disregard for human life could not be more blatant,” tweeted immigrant rights organizer Ellie Hutchinson Cervantes.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.