freebeacon--2020-11-02--In Maine Senate Race, Sara Gideon’s Ethics Violation Paid Off

One of the Democratic candidates on the receiving end of political contributions that earned Maine Democrat Sara Gideon a slap on the wrist from the state ethics commission is now in charge of a pro-abortion juggernaut that has spent six-figures in support of Gideon 's Senate run , according to campaign disclosures .
Emily Cain was running for U.S. Congress when she received illegal straw donations from Gideon , who was fined by the Maine Ethics Commission for using her corporate-funded leadership PAC to reimburse herself for personal political donations .
Now Cain is the executive director of EMILY 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endorsed Gideon and funneled nearly $ 280,000 in individual contributions to her campaign , according to Federal Elections Commission data .
Gideon 's donations , first reported by the Free Beacon last summer , were in clear violation of laws prohibiting political donors from making contributions in the name of another person or entity .
Maine disclosures showed that Gideon was openly using her PAC , which received money directly from Verizon , Walmart , and several other big-name corporations , to reimburse herself for donations such as the $ 1,250 she gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gideon said her illegal contributions were due to `` incorrect guidance '' she received from an adviser .
She was found guilty of ethics violation by the state 's ethics commission , which voted unanimously to fine her $ 500 for the straw donations .
Under Cain 's leadership , EMILY 's List has been one of Gideon 's biggest backers .
The group issued a day-one endorsement for Gideon 's campaign to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins in June 2019 , giving the candidate an early boost in the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group is not unwarranted—during Gideon 's tenure as House speaker , she has pushed through several pro-abortion bills .
She cosponsored and passed one law to authorize taxpayer-funded abortions and spearheaded others that expanded abortion access , even over pushback from fellow Democrats .
In addition to EMILY 's List , Gideon 's pro-abortion stance has appealed to other abortion groups , including NARAL and Planned Parenthood , which have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Gideon 's campaign for Senate .
Gideon faced several controversies involving her campaign finances .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ champion for the environment '' opposed to lobbyists , she has also raked in tens of thousands of dollars from oil magnates and lobbyists .
Gideon also faced additional ethics complaints this year for publishing unauthorized Facebook advertisements and illegally coordinating with a super PAC linked to Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer ( D. , N.Y. ) .
Neither EMILY 's List nor the Gideon campaign responded to a request for comment .

One of the Democratic candidates on the receiving end of political contributions that earned Maine Democrat Sara Gideon a slap on the wrist from the state ethics commission is now in charge of a pro-abortion juggernaut that has spent six-figures in support of Gideon's Senate run, according to campaign disclosures.
Emily Cain was running for U.S. Congress when she received illegal straw donations from Gideon, who was fined by the Maine Ethics Commission for using her corporate-funded leadership PAC to reimburse herself for personal political donations. Now Cain is the executive director of EMILY's List, a pro-abortion group that has endorsed Gideon and funneled nearly $280,000 in individual contributions to her campaign, according to Federal Elections Commission data.
Gideon's donations, first reported by the Free Beacon last summer, were in clear violation of laws prohibiting political donors from making contributions in the name of another person or entity. Maine disclosures showed that Gideon was openly using her PAC, which received money directly from Verizon, Walmart, and several other big-name corporations, to reimburse herself for donations such as the $1,250 she gave to Cain's failed 2016 congressional campaign.
Gideon said her illegal contributions were due to "incorrect guidance" she received from an adviser. She was found guilty of ethics violation by the state's ethics commission, which voted unanimously to fine her $500 for the straw donations.
Under Cain's leadership, EMILY's List has been one of Gideon's biggest backers. The group issued a day-one endorsement for Gideon's campaign to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins in June 2019, giving the candidate an early boost in the Democratic primary.
The support from the pro-abortion group is not unwarranted—during Gideon's tenure as House speaker, she has pushed through several pro-abortion bills. She cosponsored and passed one law to authorize taxpayer-funded abortions and spearheaded others that expanded abortion access, even over pushback from fellow Democrats. In addition to EMILY's List, Gideon's pro-abortion stance has appealed to other abortion groups, including NARAL and Planned Parenthood, which have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Gideon's campaign for Senate.
Gideon faced several controversies involving her campaign finances. While she has positioned herself as a "champion for the environment" opposed to lobbyists, she has also raked in tens of thousands of dollars from oil magnates and lobbyists. Gideon also faced additional ethics complaints this year for publishing unauthorized Facebook advertisements and illegally coordinating with a super PAC linked to Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.).
Neither EMILY's List nor the Gideon campaign responded to a request for comment.


freebeacon--2020-11-02--Whitehouse Eyes Attack on Conservative Donors in Democrat-Led Senate

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse ( D. , R.I. ) is urging Democrats to unmask GOP donors through a wide-ranging investigation into the conservative legal movement if they take control of the Senate after Tuesday 's election .
Legal conservatives are digging in for the fight , connecting his proposals with an ugly history of attacks on anonymous political activity and warning that such probes would trigger an in-kind response from the GOP .
Nor is their concern idle speculation , as the Rhode Island Democrat 's name was previously floated to lead the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee during Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` If we do get to control committees in the Senate and we have the ability to do real investigations instead of all the covering up that the Republican committees have done , then I think we need to start asking questions , like who wrote a $ 17 million check to pay for the ad campaigns that helped get Brett Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court , '' Whitehouse said during an Oct. 26 interview on MSNBC .
Such an attack puts left-wing groups at considerable risk .
A 2018 watchdog report found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dark money arms race , a trend that continues apace in the 2020 campaign .
Whitehouse critics are quick to seize on this point , noting that anonymous giving has powered a wide range of political movements .
In the long term , his tactics could chill giving around climate-change activism or LGBT rights , they say .
`` Sheldon Whitehouse is the new Joseph McCarthy , on a warpath to threaten and silence everyone he disagrees with , '' said Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network , an advocacy group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whitehouse had served during the civil-rights movement , he probably would have forced the NAACP to disclose its donors . ''
A lawyer with expertise in congressional investigations told the Washington Free Beacon that Whitehouse 's quest would trigger legal scrutiny .
`` A federal court would likely have serious concerns about the chilling effect on free political association of a congressional subpoena relating to political activity , '' the lawyer said .
`` Historically congressional committees have been extremely reluctant to conduct inquiries into the political or lobbying activities of any private @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reticent about investigating the donors to advocacy organizations because of the grave First Amendment concerns that would be associated with any such inquiry . ''
The general direction of Whitehouse 's proposed investigation is clear .
The senator laid out a road map for a future probe of conservative legal groups in a sprawling 50-page report published in May , honing in on dark money groups such as the Wellspring Committee and the Freedom and Opportunity Fund , among others .
Those groups , whose donors can not be identified through open sources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ JCN or Independent Women 's Voice , both of which have spent millions messaging and organizing in support of President Donald Trump 's judicial nominees .
Financial supporters of those and similar groups would be the top targets of the inquiry .
How the Judiciary Committee might get at that information is less clear .
With control of the Senate , Whitehouse and committee Democrats would be able to compel document production and testimony with the subpoena power .
Subpoenas would surely provoke a long legal struggle , however , with an uncertain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrangements are hardly unique by historical standards .
`` There is a rich history of anonymous speech in this country , and it has benefited causes across the political spectrum , '' said a conservative lawyer who has studied the history of anonymous political activity in the United States .
`` The abolitionist movement , the civil-rights movement , and the more recent movements for environmentalism and LGBT rights would have all been harmed by the kind of assault on donor privacy that Senator Whitehouse is threatening . ''
For example , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of association emerged during the civil-rights era , after state officials in Alabama tried to compel disclosure of the NAACP 's records , including rosters of members and supporters .
`` It is hardly a novel perception that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute [ an effective ] restraint on freedom of association , '' the Court 's decision in NAACP v. Alabama reads .
Whitehouse himself has substantial ties to dark money groups .
The Rhode Island Democrat has accrued almost $ 200,000 in campaign contributions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one of the 10 largest dark money groups in terms of spending during the 2016 election cycle .
The league did not return requests for comment for this story .
Other big left-wing spenders such as Priorities USA and Arabella Advisors depend on donor anonymity to pump tens of millions of dollars into political and advocacy campaigns .
Arabella sits atop a multilayered chain that runs a left-wing judicial group called Demand Justice , whose goal is to reach parity with conservative activity around judicial nominations .
Priorities has spent almost $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The right 's legal establishment is a longtime hobby horse of the Rhode Island Democrat , who has accused an array of attorneys , cause-lawyering outfits , and advocacy groups of playing an elaborate long game to seize control of the federal judiciary and deliver victories for monied Republican interests .
Whitehouse did not respond to a request for comment .

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.) is urging Democrats to unmask GOP donors through a wide-ranging investigation into the conservative legal movement if they take control of the Senate after Tuesday's election.
Legal conservatives are digging in for the fight, connecting his proposals with an ugly history of attacks on anonymous political activity and warning that such probes would trigger an in-kind response from the GOP. Nor is their concern idle speculation, as the Rhode Island Democrat's name was previously floated to lead the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee during Justice Amy Coney Barrett's nomination hearings.
"If we do get to control committees in the Senate and we have the ability to do real investigations instead of all the covering up that the Republican committees have done, then I think we need to start asking questions, like who wrote a $17 million check to pay for the ad campaigns that helped get Brett Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court," Whitehouse said during an Oct. 26 interview on MSNBC.
Such an attack puts left-wing groups at considerable risk. A 2018 watchdog report found that progressive groups have eclipsed conservatives in the dark money arms race, a trend that continues apace in the 2020 campaign. Whitehouse critics are quick to seize on this point, noting that anonymous giving has powered a wide range of political movements. In the long term, his tactics could chill giving around climate-change activism or LGBT rights, they say.
"Sheldon Whitehouse is the new Joseph McCarthy, on a warpath to threaten and silence everyone he disagrees with," said Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network, an advocacy group Whitehouse regularly targets. "If Senator Whitehouse had served during the civil-rights movement, he probably would have forced the NAACP to disclose its donors."
A lawyer with expertise in congressional investigations told the Washington Free Beacon that Whitehouse's quest would trigger legal scrutiny.
"A federal court would likely have serious concerns about the chilling effect on free political association of a congressional subpoena relating to political activity," the lawyer said. "Historically congressional committees have been extremely reluctant to conduct inquiries into the political or lobbying activities of any private group. And they have been especially reticent about investigating the donors to advocacy organizations because of the grave First Amendment concerns that would be associated with any such inquiry."
The general direction of Whitehouse's proposed investigation is clear. The senator laid out a road map for a future probe of conservative legal groups in a sprawling 50-page report published in May, honing in on dark money groups such as the Wellspring Committee and the Freedom and Opportunity Fund, among others. Those groups, whose donors cannot be identified through open sources, funneled money to public-facing groups like JCN or Independent Women's Voice, both of which have spent millions messaging and organizing in support of President Donald Trump's judicial nominees. Financial supporters of those and similar groups would be the top targets of the inquiry.
How the Judiciary Committee might get at that information is less clear. With control of the Senate, Whitehouse and committee Democrats would be able to compel document production and testimony with the subpoena power. Subpoenas would surely provoke a long legal struggle, however, with an uncertain outcome.
Legal conservatives say their financial arrangements are hardly unique by historical standards.
"There is a rich history of anonymous speech in this country, and it has benefited causes across the political spectrum," said a conservative lawyer who has studied the history of anonymous political activity in the United States. "The abolitionist movement, the civil-rights movement, and the more recent movements for environmentalism and LGBT rights would have all been harmed by the kind of assault on donor privacy that Senator Whitehouse is threatening."
For example, a watershed Supreme Court case on the freedom of association emerged during the civil-rights era, after state officials in Alabama tried to compel disclosure of the NAACP's records, including rosters of members and supporters.
"It is hardly a novel perception that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute [an effective] restraint on freedom of association," the Court's decision in NAACP v. Alabama reads.
Whitehouse himself has substantial ties to dark money groups. The Rhode Island Democrat has accrued almost $200,000 in campaign contributions from the League of Conservation Voters since 2005, one of the 10 largest dark money groups in terms of spending during the 2016 election cycle. The league did not return requests for comment for this story.
Other big left-wing spenders such as Priorities USA and Arabella Advisors depend on donor anonymity to pump tens of millions of dollars into political and advocacy campaigns. Arabella sits atop a multilayered chain that runs a left-wing judicial group called Demand Justice, whose goal is to reach parity with conservative activity around judicial nominations. Priorities has spent almost $100 million over the current election cycle.
The right's legal establishment is a longtime hobby horse of the Rhode Island Democrat, who has accused an array of attorneys, cause-lawyering outfits, and advocacy groups of playing an elaborate long game to seize control of the federal judiciary and deliver victories for monied Republican interests.
Whitehouse did not respond to a request for comment.


freebeacon--2020-11-02--Dem AG Assures Trump Defeat

Dem AG Assures Trump Defeat

Pennsylvania 's Democratic attorney general Josh Shapiro , who is responsible for enforcing state election law , said that President Donald Trump will not win the commonwealth .
`` If all the votes are added up in PA , Trump is going to lose .
That 's why he 's working overtime to subtract as many votes as possible from this process , '' Shapiro tweeted Saturday .
Shapiro said Sunday that he would defeat any Republican legal challenges to the election .
In an interview with the Washington Post , he also accused Trump of actively undermining the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` He ’ s doing that because he knows that if all legal eligible votes are counted , he ’ s more likely than not going to come out on the losing side here in Pennsylvania , '' he said .
Shapiro 's comments preview what is likely to be a tight contest in Pennsylvania , a swing state that could be the deciding factor in the presidential election .
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is narrowly favored to win the state , but most polls fall within the margin of error .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor of an extended three-day grace period for accepting mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania .
Businesses in major cities are boarding up and preparing for expected violence in the aftermath of the election .

Pennsylvania's Democratic attorney general Josh Shapiro, who is responsible for enforcing state election law, said that President Donald Trump will not win the commonwealth.
"If all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose. That's why he's working overtime to subtract as many votes as possible from this process," Shapiro tweeted Saturday.
If all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose. That’s why he’s working overtime to subtract as many votes as possible from this process. For the record, he’s 0-6 against us in court. We’ve protected voting rights. Now, ignore the noise—vote!https://t.co/mN8t6TDud7 — Josh Shapiro (@JoshShapiroPA) October 31, 2020
Shapiro said Sunday that he would defeat any Republican legal challenges to the election. In an interview with the Washington Post, he also accused Trump of actively undermining the election because he cannot win Pennsylvania.
"He’s doing that because he knows that if all legal eligible votes are counted, he’s more likely than not going to come out on the losing side here in Pennsylvania," he said.
Shapiro's comments preview what is likely to be a tight contest in Pennsylvania, a swing state that could be the deciding factor in the presidential election. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is narrowly favored to win the state, but most polls fall within the margin of error.
The Supreme Court ruled last week in favor of an extended three-day grace period for accepting mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania.
Businesses in major cities are boarding up and preparing for expected violence in the aftermath of the election.


freebeacon--2020-11-02--FACT CHECK: Video of Obama Making Three-Point Shot Lacks Crucial Context

Former president Barack Obama , who almost singlehandedly ensured the election of Donald Trump by persuading Joe Biden not to run in 2016 , has posted a widely circulated video on social media .
Obama 's video is of himself , obviously , and shows the former POTUS draining a three-point shot on a basketball court .
The video clip , which has racked up more than 15 million views on Twitter , is selectively edited to make it seem as though Obama is a talented basketball player—as though he made the shot on his first attempt before walking off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result , crucial context is missing that could give the viewer a more thorough understanding of the facts at hand .
As discussed in a previous Washington Free Beacon fact check , Obama is not very good at sports .
He does not , for example , know how to throw a baseball correctly .
His alleged basketball prowess , widely touted by ill-informed pundits , appears to be yet another liberal myth , as evidenced by the following full-length video of the former president attempting to impress some children by making a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the 2013 clip , Obama made less than 10 percent of the shots he attempted .
Compare that to the 100 percent success rate depicted in his viral post on social media .
At best , the video uses deceptive editing to promote a false reality .
At worst , Obama 's closing message to the American people ahead of this crucial election is a nefarious lie .
Obama 's effort to deceive the voting public earns our harshest possible rating : Four Clintons .

Former president Barack Obama, who almost singlehandedly ensured the election of Donald Trump by persuading Joe Biden not to run in 2016, has posted a widely circulated video on social media. Obama's video is of himself, obviously, and shows the former POTUS draining a three-point shot on a basketball court.
FACT CHECK:
The video clip, which has racked up more than 15 million views on Twitter, is selectively edited to make it seem as though Obama is a talented basketball player—as though he made the shot on his first attempt before walking off the court in triumph. As a result, crucial context is missing that could give the viewer a more thorough understanding of the facts at hand.
As discussed in a previous Washington Free Beacon fact check, Obama is not very good at sports. He does not, for example, know how to throw a baseball correctly. His alleged basketball prowess, widely touted by ill-informed pundits, appears to be yet another liberal myth, as evidenced by the following full-length video of the former president attempting to impress some children by making a shot on the White House basketball court.
In the 2013 clip, Obama made less than 10 percent of the shots he attempted. Compare that to the 100 percent success rate depicted in his viral post on social media. At best, the video uses deceptive editing to promote a false reality. At worst, Obama's closing message to the American people ahead of this crucial election is a nefarious lie. Obama's effort to deceive the voting public earns our harshest possible rating: Four Clintons.


freebeacon--2020-11-03--The Best of Biden on the 2020 Campaign Trail

Before announcing his campaign for president , Joe Biden received some expert advice from his former boss , Barack Obama : `` You do n't have to do this , Joe , you really do n't . ''
Yet here we are .
Now that Election Day is finally upon us , it 's worth looking back on the meandering , discombobulated misadventure that has comprised the third presidential campaign of Joe Biden 's 47-year career in public office .
Biden , who will turn 78 later this month , did n't always demonstrate what most casual observers would consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a presidential candidate .
For example , he occasionally forgot he was running for president and frequently struggled with rudimentary math , claiming to have arrived in the U.S. Senate `` one hundred and eighty years ago '' and mourning the `` over 120 million dead from COVID . ''
When he was n't taking refuge in his basement , Biden waged a tireless campaign against the English language , touting the superiority of `` truth over facts '' and pledging to mobilize `` true wind in gnash of a d'pressure .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , particularly the phrase `` end of quote , '' which is not traditionally spoken aloud .
What he lacked in basic cognitive function , however , Biden made up for with the blind rage of a senior citizen lashing out at a Wendy 's cashier .
Reporters , podcast hosts , members of the public , and even his own supporters were on the receiving end of the former VP 's violent outbursts .
`` Look , fat , '' he famously addressed an attendee at one of his campaign events .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he asked a CBS reporter .
Win or lose , Biden can hold his head high knowing that Obama was a fool to urge him not to run and content himself with the friendships and memories he made along this incredible journey .

Before announcing his campaign for president, Joe Biden received some expert advice from his former boss, Barack Obama: "You don't have to do this, Joe, you really don't."
Yet here we are. Now that Election Day is finally upon us, it's worth looking back on the meandering, discombobulated misadventure that has comprised the third presidential campaign of Joe Biden's 47-year career in public office.
Biden, who will turn 78 later this month, didn't always demonstrate what most casual observers would consider the minimum level of mental dexterity required of a presidential candidate. For example, he occasionally forgot he was running for president and frequently struggled with rudimentary math, claiming to have arrived in the U.S. Senate "one hundred and eighty years ago" and mourning the "over 120 million dead from COVID."
When he wasn't taking refuge in his basement, Biden waged a tireless campaign against the English language, touting the superiority of "truth over facts" and pledging to mobilize "true wind in gnash of a d'pressure." He was occasionally baffled by teleprompters, particularly the phrase "end of quote," which is not traditionally spoken aloud.
What he lacked in basic cognitive function, however, Biden made up for with the blind rage of a senior citizen lashing out at a Wendy's cashier. Reporters, podcast hosts, members of the public, and even his own supporters were on the receiving end of the former VP's violent outbursts. "Look, fat," he famously addressed an attendee at one of his campaign events. "Are you a junkie?" he asked a CBS reporter.
Win or lose, Biden can hold his head high knowing that Obama was a fool to urge him not to run and content himself with the friendships and memories he made along this incredible journey.


freebeacon--2020-11-03--Supreme Court Gives GOP Reason for Optimism in Post-Election Lawsuits

Republican-controlled legislatures in battleground states are likely to play a deciding role in any post-Election Day legal disputes .
It 's hard to anticipate just what a post-election legal fight will involve .
However , many pre-election lawsuits to reach the Supreme Court have involved a particular fault-line : On the one side is a state legislature , which sets the rules and procedures for the election ; and on the other is a state court , which relaxes or alters those procedures , citing other state law sources and the coronavirus pandemic as justification .
If that pattern holds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ optimism .
So far , a short-handed Supreme Court has sided with state judges in such cases , allowing their late-breaking adjustments over the objections of GOP lawmakers and the Trump campaign .
Justice Amy Coney Barrett , however , may hold a fifth vote in favor of the GOP-controlled legislatures .
Republicans control both legislative chambers in such critical states as Arizona , Florida , Pennsylvania , North Carolina , and Wisconsin .
One emergency election appeal that reached the Supreme Court from Pennsylvania illustrates the pattern , possibly presaging post-election events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislature set an 8:00 p.m. Election Day deadline for all mail-in ballots .
A Pennsylvania state court extended that deadline by three days , invoking a provision of the state constitution that says elections should be conducted in a manner that protects voting rights `` to the greatest degree possible . ''
In a short separate statement , Justice Samuel Alito lamented that the original Election Day deadline had been displaced .
He pointed to a section of the Constitution that provides federal election rules `` shall be prescribed in each State by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provisions of the federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures , not state courts , the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature , '' Alito wrote .
Justice Brett Kavanaugh took the same position in an emergency appeal from Wisconsin decided two days earlier , making four justices who think the state legislatures ought to have the upper hand .
Had Barrett been on the Court in late September , she might have provided a fifth vote to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Her participation in a future case could mean that election rules written by GOP lawmakers will determine scuffles over recounts or tardy absentee ballots .
State officials in Pennsylvania indicated they will segregate late-arriving mail-in votes from all other ballots in case they are the subject of future lawsuits .
Chief Justice John Roberts has thus far voted with the liberal wing and sided with state judges .
In a terse , one-paragraph opinion from late October , Roberts said state judges should have the final word when applying state constitutions to election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justices , Justice Elena Kagan said the courts ought to supervise state legislatures writing voting laws to protect constitutional rights .
`` If there is one area where deference to legislators should not shade into acquiescence , it is election law , '' Kagan wrote .
`` For in that field politicians ' incentives often conflict with voters ' interests—that is , whenever suppressing votes benefits the lawmakers who make the rules . ''
For her part , Barrett is facing intense pressure to recuse herself from any case touching the election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ currently unclear .
Democrats say President Donald Trump has created the appearance of bias by connecting her nomination with the prospect of a contested election .
A recusal motion greeted the new justice just hours into her tenure .
Lawyers representing the Luzerne County Board of Elections in the emergency Pennsylvania appeal said a 2009 case required her recusal .
In that case , a state court judge was deciding on a case in which his top campaign contributor had a multimillion-dollar stake .
A 5-4 Court said the Constitution required the judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influence in placing the judge on the court created `` objective and reasonable perceptions '' of bias .
The Luzerne County council subsequently voted to withdraw the motion .
Barrett managed to duck the Pennsylvania appeal given the timing , and she did not participate in a conference the justices held Friday to discuss pending petitions .
A Court spokeswoman said Barrett has been using her time to get up to speed on the cases the justices will hear in the coming days , which include weighty disputes over health care , LGBT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or not the calendar may again be an ally for Barrett if a politically fraught appeal reaches the justices is unclear .
While only two members of the Bush v. Gore Court are still on the bench , several of the justices are intimately familiar with contested elections .
Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett did legal work for the Bush campaign during 2000 's infamous Florida recount .

Republican-controlled legislatures in battleground states are likely to play a deciding role in any post-Election Day legal disputes.
It's hard to anticipate just what a post-election legal fight will involve. However, many pre-election lawsuits to reach the Supreme Court have involved a particular fault-line: On the one side is a state legislature, which sets the rules and procedures for the election; and on the other is a state court, which relaxes or alters those procedures, citing other state law sources and the coronavirus pandemic as justification. If that pattern holds, President Donald Trump has reason for optimism.
So far, a short-handed Supreme Court has sided with state judges in such cases, allowing their late-breaking adjustments over the objections of GOP lawmakers and the Trump campaign. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, however, may hold a fifth vote in favor of the GOP-controlled legislatures. Republicans control both legislative chambers in such critical states as Arizona, Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.
One emergency election appeal that reached the Supreme Court from Pennsylvania illustrates the pattern, possibly presaging post-election events. In that dispute, the state legislature set an 8:00 p.m. Election Day deadline for all mail-in ballots. A Pennsylvania state court extended that deadline by three days, invoking a provision of the state constitution that says elections should be conducted in a manner that protects voting rights "to the greatest degree possible."
In a short separate statement, Justice Samuel Alito lamented that the original Election Day deadline had been displaced. He pointed to a section of the Constitution that provides federal election rules "shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof."
"The provisions of the federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures, not state courts, the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature," Alito wrote.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh took the same position in an emergency appeal from Wisconsin decided two days earlier, making four justices who think the state legislatures ought to have the upper hand.
Had Barrett been on the Court in late September, she might have provided a fifth vote to maintain the original Election Day deadline. Her participation in a future case could mean that election rules written by GOP lawmakers will determine scuffles over recounts or tardy absentee ballots.
State officials in Pennsylvania indicated they will segregate late-arriving mail-in votes from all other ballots in case they are the subject of future lawsuits.
Chief Justice John Roberts has thus far voted with the liberal wing and sided with state judges. In a terse, one-paragraph opinion from late October, Roberts said state judges should have the final word when applying state constitutions to election rules. Speaking for the three liberal justices, Justice Elena Kagan said the courts ought to supervise state legislatures writing voting laws to protect constitutional rights.
"If there is one area where deference to legislators should not shade into acquiescence, it is election law," Kagan wrote. "For in that field politicians' incentives often conflict with voters' interests—that is, whenever suppressing votes benefits the lawmakers who make the rules."
For her part, Barrett is facing intense pressure to recuse herself from any case touching the election, and her decision in the matter is currently unclear. Democrats say President Donald Trump has created the appearance of bias by connecting her nomination with the prospect of a contested election.
A recusal motion greeted the new justice just hours into her tenure. Lawyers representing the Luzerne County Board of Elections in the emergency Pennsylvania appeal said a 2009 case required her recusal.
In that case, a state court judge was deciding on a case in which his top campaign contributor had a multimillion-dollar stake. A 5-4 Court said the Constitution required the judge's recusal because the donor's significant influence in placing the judge on the court created "objective and reasonable perceptions" of bias. The Luzerne County council subsequently voted to withdraw the motion.
Barrett managed to duck the Pennsylvania appeal given the timing, and she did not participate in a conference the justices held Friday to discuss pending petitions. A Court spokeswoman said Barrett has been using her time to get up to speed on the cases the justices will hear in the coming days, which include weighty disputes over health care, LGBT rights, and religious freedom. Whether or not the calendar may again be an ally for Barrett if a politically fraught appeal reaches the justices is unclear.
While only two members of the Bush v. Gore Court are still on the bench, several of the justices are intimately familiar with contested elections. Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett did legal work for the Bush campaign during 2000's infamous Florida recount.


freebeacon--2020-11-03--CONFIRMED HOTTIES: Amy Coney Barrett and Other Babes of the Federal Judiciary

Aggrieved libs , who claim to support female hotness , threw a massive tantrum when Amy Coney Barrett was nominated @ @ @ @ @ but they could n't prevent her confirmation as the hottest and most fashionable justice in @ @ @ @ @ sizzling ascension to the High Court inspired the Free Beacon research department to scour the @ @ @ @ @ in search of female talent .
Please enjoy the following list of judicial babes .

Aggrieved libs, who claim to support female hotness, threw a massive tantrum when Amy Coney Barrett was nominated to the Supreme Court, but they couldn't prevent her confirmation as the hottest and most fashionable justice in American history.
Barrett's sizzling ascension to the High Court inspired the Free Beacon research department to scour the ranks of the federal judiciary in search of female talent. Please enjoy the following list of judicial babes.
Nancy E. Brassel (U.S. District Court)
Sherri Lydon (U.S. District Court)
Shireen Matthews (U.S. District Court Nominee)
Annemarie Carney Axon (U.S. District Court)
Silvia Carreño-Coll (U.S. District Court)
Holly Lou Teeter (U.S. District Court)
Jill Otake (U.S. District Court)
Jodi W. Dishman (U.S. District Court)
Allison Jones Rushing (U.S. Court of Appeals)
Amy Coney Barrett (U.S. Supreme Court)


freebeacon--2020-11-05--Winners and Losers of The 2020 Election (So Far)

Election Day finally happened on Tuesday , but as of Wednesday most of the key races remained too close to call .
The lack of clarity , however , does not preclude an advanced analysis of the partial results .
Even with many votes left to be counted , the election has already produced a number of clear winners and pathetic losers .
Scroll down to learn more .
The biggest winner of Election Night , by far .
If he wins , he 'll Make American Great Again , Again .
If he loses , he will have already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ famous person on Earth , as well as president of the United States .
He will have achieved an unprecedented level of success in just a single term in office and will go down in history as one of the most illustrious leaders of the modern era .
Plus , he 's still the frontrunner in 2024 .
Either way , mission accomplished !
Just days after quarterbacking the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett , the Senate majority leader dominated his Democratic challenger , Amy McGrath , who raised tens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who apparently hate money almost as much as they hate Mitch McConnell .
Regardless of who wins the presidency , it is now increasingly likely that Republicans will retain control of the Senate , where McConnell 's benevolent reign of terror can proceed apace .
Millions of Hispanics were instantly reclassified as `` white , '' mostly by aggrieved libs , after it became clear that Trump would increase his share of the Hispanic vote significantly compared with 2016 .
The president also managed to win a larger percentage of the non-white vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That 's great news for Americans who value racial diversity but bad news for the `` woke '' libs who favor racial division .
Barack Obama promised to promote racial harmony ; Trump has actually done it .
At least in the short term .
Trump 's failure to secure a decisive win on Election Night means that Antifa thugs have temporarily postponed their plans to desecrate America 's cities in `` protest '' against his reelection .
That 's a good thing .
Trump could still win , so it 's probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a little longer just to be safe .
Joe Biden could n't deliver an overwhelming victory—as foretold by the `` experts . ''
He could still lose .
That 's great news for Hillary Clinton , whose 2016 loss to Trump was assessed by many to be the result of her unique deficiencies as a candidate and as a human being .
The 2020 results suggest perhaps the Democratic Party 's unique deficiencies as a political organization are to blame .
Congrats !
They are going to be so owned if Trump wins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this was not the overwhelming repudiation they would have liked .
If Republicans hold the Senate , that means at least two more years of Mitch McConnell confirming judges on the reg , and absolutely no chance of any radical structural reforms being enacted .
The polling in 2016 was way off .
In an effort to correct those mistakes , professional pollsters ruthlessly scrutinized their methodologies and made the necessary changes .
That 's what they told us , anyway .
At this point , we should consider the possibility that these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea what they 're doing .
This year 's polls were even less accurate than in 2016 .
Congrats !
They gave millions of dollars to a bunch of ex-GOP grifters who wooed them with their `` edgy '' ad campaigns , and promised to make a difference by taking down Trump 's `` enablers '' in the Senate .
The grifters are laughing all the way to the bank , while Mitch McConnell , Joni Ernst , Susan Collins , Lindsey Graham , and ( probably ) Thom Tillis are laughing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winner # 3 above .
Trump 's growing support among minority voters ought to raise serious questions about whether the Democratic Party 's race-obsessed `` woke '' rhetoric is little more than a masturbatory dog whistle for educated white liberals .
Using the word `` Latinx , '' which most actual Hispanics have never heard , might impress the New York Times editorial board , but it does n't bring voters to the polls .

Election Day finally happened on Tuesday, but as of Wednesday most of the key races remained too close to call. The lack of clarity, however, does not preclude an advanced analysis of the partial results. Even with many votes left to be counted, the election has already produced a number of clear winners and pathetic losers. Scroll down to learn more.
BIGGEST WINNERS
1) Donald Trump
The biggest winner of Election Night, by far. If he wins, he'll Make American Great Again, Again. If he loses, he will have already accomplished his goal of becoming the most famous person on Earth, as well as president of the United States. He will have achieved an unprecedented level of success in just a single term in office and will go down in history as one of the most illustrious leaders of the modern era. Plus, he's still the frontrunner in 2024. Either way, mission accomplished!
2) Mitch McConnell
Just days after quarterbacking the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Senate majority leader dominated his Democratic challenger, Amy McGrath, who raised tens of millions of dollars from liberal donors who apparently hate money almost as much as they hate Mitch McConnell. Regardless of who wins the presidency, it is now increasingly likely that Republicans will retain control of the Senate, where McConnell's benevolent reign of terror can proceed apace.
3) Racial Diversity
Millions of Hispanics were instantly reclassified as "white," mostly by aggrieved libs, after it became clear that Trump would increase his share of the Hispanic vote significantly compared with 2016. The president also managed to win a larger percentage of the non-white vote than any Republican candidate since 1960. That's great news for Americans who value racial diversity but bad news for the "woke" libs who favor racial division. Barack Obama promised to promote racial harmony; Trump has actually done it.
4) Law and Order
At least in the short term. Trump's failure to secure a decisive win on Election Night means that Antifa thugs have temporarily postponed their plans to desecrate America's cities in "protest" against his reelection. That's a good thing. Trump could still win, so it's probably best to keep those storefronts boarded up a little longer just to be safe.
Update: Never mind.
5) Hillary Clinton
Joe Biden couldn't deliver an overwhelming victory—as foretold by the "experts." He could still lose. That's great news for Hillary Clinton, whose 2016 loss to Trump was assessed by many to be the result of her unique deficiencies as a candidate and as a human being. The 2020 results suggest perhaps the Democratic Party's unique deficiencies as a political organization are to blame. Congrats!
BIGGEST LOSERS
1) The Libs
They are going to be so owned if Trump wins. Even if he doesn't, this was not the overwhelming repudiation they would have liked. If Republicans hold the Senate, that means at least two more years of Mitch McConnell confirming judges on the reg, and absolutely no chance of any radical structural reforms being enacted.
2) The Experts
The polling in 2016 was way off. In an effort to correct those mistakes, professional pollsters ruthlessly scrutinized their methodologies and made the necessary changes. That's what they told us, anyway. At this point, we should consider the possibility that these so-called "experts" really have no idea what they're doing. This year's polls were even less accurate than in 2016. Congrats!
3) Lincoln Project Donors
They gave millions of dollars to a bunch of ex-GOP grifters who wooed them with their "edgy" ad campaigns, and promised to make a difference by taking down Trump's "enablers" in the Senate. The grifters are laughing all the way to the bank, while Mitch McConnell, Joni Ernst, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, and (probably) Thom Tillis are laughing all the way to the Senate.
4) Court Packers
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. See winner #2.
5) Race Hucksters
See winner #3 above. Trump's growing support among minority voters ought to raise serious questions about whether the Democratic Party's race-obsessed "woke" rhetoric is little more than a masturbatory dog whistle for educated white liberals. Using the word "Latinx," which most actual Hispanics have never heard, might impress the New York Times editorial board, but it doesn't bring voters to the polls.


freebeacon--2020-11-05--Voters Crush Progressive Ballot Initiatives Across the Country

Major progressive referenda faced defeat Tuesday evening , with a series of rebuttals at the polls capping a night of uncertainty and disappointment for Democrats across the country .
California voters , while decisively handing their national endorsement to Democrats , beat back ballot initiatives to abolish cash bail and end the state 's ban on affirmative action in higher education admissions .
In bright-blue Illinois , meanwhile , voters defeated a plan , spearheaded by the state 's Democratic governor , to implement a progressive income tax .
Although faring poorly in general , progressive-backed ballot initiatives did well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ embraced expanded drug decriminalization and legalization .
Nonetheless , major defeats for left-leaning proposals add , alongside polling misses and still-razor-thin races for the presidency and Senate , to the overall sense of surprising failure for Democrats on Tuesday evening .
Far from the blue wave many predicted , voters ' responses to liberal politicians and policies indicate the narrow measure of approval with which any eventually ensconced Democratic coalition might govern .
California , which has one of the most expansive systems of ballot initiatives and referenda in the nation , played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leading the pack was Proposition 16 , which asked Californians to repeal the state 's constitutional ban on the use of affirmative action in government , including in public college admissions , and which earned the endorsement of national Democrats , including vice presidential hopeful Kamala Harris .
But California voters Wednesday conclusively defeated the measure , with 56 percent opposed .
Californians similarly signaled their opposition to further criminal justice `` reform , '' with a majority as of Wednesday having rejected a proposal that previously passed the state legislature and would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replace it with judges ' assessments of risk , including a standard release for those convicted of misdemeanor offenses .
And voters also backed Proposition 22 , which would permit rideshare drivers to be treated as independent contractors—a blow to the state 's restrictive regime for gig workers .
Beyond the Golden State , Illinois voters trounced a proposed `` fair tax , '' a major blow to billionaire governor J.B. Pritzker , who spent $ 60 million campaigning to overturn the provision in Illinois 's constitution that prohibits a graduated income tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejected a proposal to transition to a `` ranked-choice voting '' system of the sort favored by progressives , while Floridians approved a $ 15 minimum wage but rejected a top-two runoff system .
Tuesday also gave voters in two states a chance to sound off on abortion , an increasingly important issue as a conservative majority on the Supreme Court raises the possibility of the overturn of Roe v. Wade .
Voters in Colorado rejected a ban on abortions after 22 weeks , but Louisianans approved a proposal that adds language to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no legal right to an abortion .
Progressive priorities did enjoy one major victory on Tuesday evening , as advocates of drug decriminalization and legalization scored decisive wins across the country .
Oregon became the first state in the union to explicitly decriminalize small possession of all hard drugs , including methamphetamine and heroin , while the District of Columbia decriminalized certain psychedelic plants .
Voters in Arizona , Montana , South Dakota , and New Jersey legalized recreational marijuana , while voters in Mississippi assented to marijuana for medical uses .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 15—a dramatic increase from the first recreational legalization in 2012 .

Major progressive referenda faced defeat Tuesday evening, with a series of rebuttals at the polls capping a night of uncertainty and disappointment for Democrats across the country.
California voters, while decisively handing their national endorsement to Democrats, beat back ballot initiatives to abolish cash bail and end the state's ban on affirmative action in higher education admissions. In bright-blue Illinois, meanwhile, voters defeated a plan, spearheaded by the state's Democratic governor, to implement a progressive income tax.
Although faring poorly in general, progressive-backed ballot initiatives did well in some jurisdictions, particularly as voters embraced expanded drug decriminalization and legalization.
Nonetheless, major defeats for left-leaning proposals add, alongside polling misses and still-razor-thin races for the presidency and Senate, to the overall sense of surprising failure for Democrats on Tuesday evening. Far from the blue wave many predicted, voters' responses to liberal politicians and policies indicate the narrow measure of approval with which any eventually ensconced Democratic coalition might govern.
California, which has one of the most expansive systems of ballot initiatives and referenda in the nation, played home to several major progressive defeats. Leading the pack was Proposition 16, which asked Californians to repeal the state's constitutional ban on the use of affirmative action in government, including in public college admissions, and which earned the endorsement of national Democrats, including vice presidential hopeful Kamala Harris. But California voters Wednesday conclusively defeated the measure, with 56 percent opposed.
Californians similarly signaled their opposition to further criminal justice "reform," with a majority as of Wednesday having rejected a proposal that previously passed the state legislature and would eliminate cash bail in the state and replace it with judges' assessments of risk, including a standard release for those convicted of misdemeanor offenses. And voters also backed Proposition 22, which would permit rideshare drivers to be treated as independent contractors—a blow to the state's restrictive regime for gig workers.
Beyond the Golden State, Illinois voters trounced a proposed "fair tax," a major blow to billionaire governor J.B. Pritzker, who spent $60 million campaigning to overturn the provision in Illinois's constitution that prohibits a graduated income tax. Voters in Massachusetts, meanwhile, rejected a proposal to transition to a "ranked-choice voting" system of the sort favored by progressives, while Floridians approved a $15 minimum wage but rejected a top-two runoff system.
Tuesday also gave voters in two states a chance to sound off on abortion, an increasingly important issue as a conservative majority on the Supreme Court raises the possibility of the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Voters in Colorado rejected a ban on abortions after 22 weeks, but Louisianans approved a proposal that adds language to the state constitution explicitly stating that there is no legal right to an abortion.
Progressive priorities did enjoy one major victory on Tuesday evening, as advocates of drug decriminalization and legalization scored decisive wins across the country. Oregon became the first state in the union to explicitly decriminalize small possession of all hard drugs, including methamphetamine and heroin, while the District of Columbia decriminalized certain psychedelic plants.
Voters in Arizona, Montana, South Dakota, and New Jersey legalized recreational marijuana, while voters in Mississippi assented to marijuana for medical uses. Those results bring total legal states up to 15—a dramatic increase from the first recreational legalization in 2012.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--GOP Women Fuel House Gains

GOP Women Fuel House Gains

More than 20 Republican women are headed to the House , including six who flipped seats to the GOP on election night .
Rep. Elise Stefanik , a New York Republican who spearheaded the post-2018 push to recruit women candidates , called Tuesday night 's results a `` smashing success '' and a sign that Democrats do not have a monopoly over women 's votes .
`` It was the night of Republican women , '' Stefanik told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` Despite the media and the [ Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ] issuing demeaning comments and saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outcome .
We are going to have incredible women who have earned this victory themselves in these districts in the next Congress . ''
Republicans may break their previous record of 25 Republican congresswomen in the House , a stunning turnaround for a party that worked to improve its recruitment among minorities and women after it lost control of the lower chamber in 2018 .
Women played a major role in defeating several high-profile House Democrats .
Maria Elvira Salazar , a Cuban-American former TV anchor for Telemundo , defeated Florida Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House official .
Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma and Yvette Herrell of New Mexico also won by ousting freshman Democrats .
The GOP 's congressional gains surprised election experts and national Democrats alike , many of whom saw 2020 as an opportunity for Democrats to consolidate control of the lower chamber .
Instead , GOP women fueled a Republican offensive that chipped away at Democratic control of the House , winning six out of the seven races that flipped House seats to Republican control .
Although a GOP takeover of the lower chamber remains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shocked House Democrats , prompting one of them to call it a `` dumpster fire . ''
In addition to success in the House , Republican women running for Senate also had a promising night .
Four out of five Republican women senators running for reelection—including top Democratic targets Sens .
Susan Collins ( Maine ) and Joni Ernst ( Iowa ) —kept their seats and will be joined by Wyoming Senate candidate Cynthia Lummis in the next Congress .
Georgia senator Kelly Loeffler also advanced to the state 's runoff , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activists moved to bolster female candidates following the party 's 2018 losses .
The Winning for Women Action Fund , created in the wake of the 2018 midterms with the goal of advancing Republican women candidates , said Tuesday 's success can be attributed to strong recruitment at the local and national level .
`` Many of the Democrat women elected last cycle were out of touch with their districts , '' spokeswoman Olivia Perez-Cubas said .
`` Republican women stepped up to challenge them like never before and offered voters a real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women across the country are making historic gains . ''
The victories doubled the number of pro-life female lawmakers in Congress , according to a count by the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List .
The organization , which included races that have yet to be formally called , said that 13 pro-life women won election to the lower chamber and all 11 pro-life female representatives successfully defended their seat .
The ascension of pro-life women stands in stark contrast to the 2018 election , which propelled pro-abortion Democrats to power .
`` We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the races are called , we will have a record number of pro-life women serving in the next Congress , '' Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement .
`` These gains are a repudiation of abortion extremism and further evidence that life is a winning issue in politics . ''
Stefanik cited three reasons for the success of the Republican women strategy—issuing a vigorous `` call to action '' to inspire candidates to run , guiding candidates through the primaries , and helping their campaigns build up the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donations .
She also said the victory of several female Democrats in 2018 fired up many Republican women to run , as they saw that the Democratic establishment did not represent the views of all women .
`` One interesting theme in my early conversations with these women candidates on the Republican side is that [ they said ] the party of Nancy Pelosi does not represent the vast majority of women in America , '' Stefanik said .
`` The Democratic Party does not have a monopoly on women candidates or women @ @ @

More than 20 Republican women are headed to the House, including six who flipped seats to the GOP on election night.
Rep. Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican who spearheaded the post-2018 push to recruit women candidates, called Tuesday night's results a "smashing success" and a sign that Democrats do not have a monopoly over women's votes.
"It was the night of Republican women," Stefanik told the Washington Free Beacon. "Despite the media and the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] issuing demeaning comments and saying it wasn't possible, look at the outcome. We are going to have incredible women who have earned this victory themselves in these districts in the next Congress."
Republicans may break their previous record of 25 Republican congresswomen in the House, a stunning turnaround for a party that worked to improve its recruitment among minorities and women after it lost control of the lower chamber in 2018. Women played a major role in defeating several high-profile House Democrats. Maria Elvira Salazar, a Cuban-American former TV anchor for Telemundo, defeated Florida Democrat Donna Shalala, a former Clinton White House official. Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma and Yvette Herrell of New Mexico also won by ousting freshman Democrats.
The GOP's congressional gains surprised election experts and national Democrats alike, many of whom saw 2020 as an opportunity for Democrats to consolidate control of the lower chamber. Instead, GOP women fueled a Republican offensive that chipped away at Democratic control of the House, winning six out of the seven races that flipped House seats to Republican control. Although a GOP takeover of the lower chamber remains unlikely, the series of stinging defeats shocked House Democrats, prompting one of them to call it a "dumpster fire."
In addition to success in the House, Republican women running for Senate also had a promising night. Four out of five Republican women senators running for reelection—including top Democratic targets Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Joni Ernst (Iowa)—kept their seats and will be joined by Wyoming Senate candidate Cynthia Lummis in the next Congress. Georgia senator Kelly Loeffler also advanced to the state's runoff, which will be held in January.
Conservative activists moved to bolster female candidates following the party's 2018 losses. The Winning for Women Action Fund, created in the wake of the 2018 midterms with the goal of advancing Republican women candidates, said Tuesday's success can be attributed to strong recruitment at the local and national level.
"Many of the Democrat women elected last cycle were out of touch with their districts," spokeswoman Olivia Perez-Cubas said. "Republican women stepped up to challenge them like never before and offered voters a real voice. As a result, Republican women across the country are making historic gains."
The victories doubled the number of pro-life female lawmakers in Congress, according to a count by the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List. The organization, which included races that have yet to be formally called, said that 13 pro-life women won election to the lower chamber and all 11 pro-life female representatives successfully defended their seat. The ascension of pro-life women stands in stark contrast to the 2018 election, which propelled pro-abortion Democrats to power.
"We expect when all votes are counted and the races are called, we will have a record number of pro-life women serving in the next Congress," Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. "These gains are a repudiation of abortion extremism and further evidence that life is a winning issue in politics."
Stefanik cited three reasons for the success of the Republican women strategy—issuing a vigorous "call to action" to inspire candidates to run, guiding candidates through the primaries, and helping their campaigns build up the necessary infrastructure to attract big-name endorsements and donations. She also said the victory of several female Democrats in 2018 fired up many Republican women to run, as they saw that the Democratic establishment did not represent the views of all women.
"One interesting theme in my early conversations with these women candidates on the Republican side is that [they said] the party of Nancy Pelosi does not represent the vast majority of women in America," Stefanik said. "The Democratic Party does not have a monopoly on women candidates or women voters."


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Supreme Court Hears First Religious Liberty Case Since Barrett Confirmation

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a Catholic adoption agency 's discrimination suit against Philadelphia , the first major religious liberty case to appear before the Court since Judge Amy Coney Barrett 's confirmation .
In 2018 , Philadelphia ended its contract with Catholic Social Services because the adoption agency does not place children with same-sex couples , which the city claims violates its anti-discrimination rule .
Catholic Social Services sued , arguing that the policy reflected sincere religious expression and is protected by the Constitution .
The agency also pointed out that it had never been put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same-sex couples , a point conservative justices latched on to during oral arguments .
`` If a same-sex couple ever came to Catholic Social Services , Catholic Social Services would refer that couple to another agency that works with same-sex couples so that the couple could participate and be foster parents , '' Justice Brett Kavanaugh said .
`` No same-sex couple has ever come to Catholic Social Services for participation in this program , and therefore Catholic Social Services policy has never actually denied any same-sex couple the opportunity to be foster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in favor of the city , finding it did not violate the agency 's religious-freedom rights because its rule applied to all adoption agencies .
Catholic Social Services successfully appealed the case to the Supreme Court .
The agency may benefit from the Court 's newly minted conservative majority .
Barrett 's appointment is expected to shift the Court to the right on religious liberty cases , but Philadelphia lawyers faced tough lines of questioning from Democratic appointees as well .
Justice Stephen Breyer echoed Kavanaugh 's point that no same-sex couple had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed a complaint against it .
Justice Elena Kagan noted that the Free Exercise Clause protects the agency 's right to practice its religious beliefs .
Kagan asked the city about a clause in the agency 's contract allowing the city commissioner to make an exemption for the agency 's religious beliefs .
She said that if the exemption exists , the law is not neutrally applicable and should allow for religious exemptions .
`` You ca n't get out of it so easily—that as long as there is an exemption , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as you could rely on it in the future , [ then ] there is not neutrality here , '' she said .
The city 's defense argued that the adoption agency is performing a governmental function and should not be exempt from anti-discrimination laws .
`` [ Catholic Social Services ] says the Constitution compels the city to give it a different contract .
There is no precedent for such a thing , '' lawyer Neal Katyal , who argued for the city , said .
`` The government has broad powers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that stand in the government 's shoes performing government functions . ''
Lori Windham , senior counsel at the religious-liberty firm Becket Law , argued the case for the plaintiffs .
She said the city has needlessly punished its oldest adoption agency and harmed prospective parents and foster children .
As Philadelphia faces a shortage crisis in foster homes , `` religious organizations should be free to serve the public , regardless of their beliefs , '' she said .
`` All of the justices were interested in finding a way to allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious liberty , '' she told reporters after oral arguments .
She said that the city government 's targeting of the adoption service could mean it will go after other private religious institutions , including parochial schools .
A decision in the case , Fulton v. City of Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , is expected by the end of June 2021 .

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a Catholic adoption agency's discrimination suit against Philadelphia, the first major religious liberty case to appear before the Court since Judge Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation.
In 2018, Philadelphia ended its contract with Catholic Social Services because the adoption agency does not place children with same-sex couples, which the city claims violates its anti-discrimination rule.
Catholic Social Services sued, arguing that the policy reflected sincere religious expression and is protected by the Constitution. The agency also pointed out that it had never been put in a position to deny service to same-sex couples, a point conservative justices latched on to during oral arguments.
"If a same-sex couple ever came to Catholic Social Services, Catholic Social Services would refer that couple to another agency that works with same-sex couples so that the couple could participate and be foster parents," Justice Brett Kavanaugh said. "No same-sex couple has ever come to Catholic Social Services for participation in this program, and therefore Catholic Social Services policy has never actually denied any same-sex couple the opportunity to be foster parents."
Lower courts have ruled in favor of the city, finding it did not violate the agency's religious-freedom rights because its rule applied to all adoption agencies. Catholic Social Services successfully appealed the case to the Supreme Court.
The agency may benefit from the Court's newly minted conservative majority. Barrett's appointment is expected to shift the Court to the right on religious liberty cases, but Philadelphia lawyers faced tough lines of questioning from Democratic appointees as well.
Justice Stephen Breyer echoed Kavanaugh's point that no same-sex couple had ever applied to the agency, nor filed a complaint against it. Justice Elena Kagan noted that the Free Exercise Clause protects the agency's right to practice its religious beliefs.
Kagan asked the city about a clause in the agency's contract allowing the city commissioner to make an exemption for the agency's religious beliefs. She said that if the exemption exists, the law is not neutrally applicable and should allow for religious exemptions.
"You can't get out of it so easily—that as long as there is an exemption, as long as it exists, as long as you could rely on it in the future, [then] there is not neutrality here," she said.
The city's defense argued that the adoption agency is performing a governmental function and should not be exempt from anti-discrimination laws.
"[Catholic Social Services] says the Constitution compels the city to give it a different contract. There is no precedent for such a thing," lawyer Neal Katyal, who argued for the city, said. "The government has broad powers to impose conditions on contractors like CSS that stand in the government's shoes performing government functions."
Lori Windham, senior counsel at the religious-liberty firm Becket Law, argued the case for the plaintiffs. She said the city has needlessly punished its oldest adoption agency and harmed prospective parents and foster children. As Philadelphia faces a shortage crisis in foster homes, "religious organizations should be free to serve the public, regardless of their beliefs," she said.
"All of the justices were interested in finding a way to allow same-sex couples to foster while also protecting religious liberty," she told reporters after oral arguments.
She said that the city government's targeting of the adoption service could mean it will go after other private religious institutions, including parochial schools.
A decision in the case, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is expected by the end of June 2021.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Democratic Revenge Pornographer Heads to Kansas State House

A Democrat who has admitted to publicizing pornographic images of underage girls without permission is headed to the Kansas House @ @ @ @ @ Coleman ousted state representative Stan Frownfelter by an almost 2-1 margin , but his bid @ @ @ @ @ that he had harassed young girls and circulated a naked photo of another teen .
@ @ @ @ @ slapp [ ing ] and chok [ ing ] '' en ex-girlfriend .
Coleman also @ @ @ @ @ wearing masks in the hopes they would contract COVID-19 .
Coleman ’ s campaign was @ @ @ @ @ summer after he briefly announced that he would withdraw from the race and allow Frownfelter @ @ @ @ @ ballot .
He quickly reversed course and defeated Frownfelter , who ran a write-in-campaign , @ @ @ @

A Democrat who has admitted to publicizing pornographic images of underage girls without permission is headed to the Kansas House of Representatives.
20-year-old Aaron Coleman ousted state representative Stan Frownfelter by an almost 2-1 margin, but his bid was marred by his admission that he had harassed young girls and circulated a naked photo of another teen. Coleman also copped to "slapp[ing] and chok[ing]" en ex-girlfriend.
Coleman also urged Republican candidates to avoid wearing masks in the hopes they would contract COVID-19.
Coleman’s campaign was marred by confusion over the summer after he briefly announced that he would withdraw from the race and allow Frownfelter to replace him on the ballot. He quickly reversed course and defeated Frownfelter, who ran a write-in-campaign, on Tuesday night.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Early Exit Polls Show Trump Performed Historically Well With Jewish Voters

President Donald Trump performed historically well among Jewish voters in Tuesday night 's contested presidential election , receiving the highest portion of the Jewish vote for any Republican candidate since 1988 , according to early exit polling .
Trump won 30.5 percent of the Jewish vote , up from the 24 percent he received in 2016 , according to the Republican Jewish Coalition , which conducted an analysis of national exit polls along with analyst groups Basswood Research and McLaughlin & Associates .
The poll included 600 registered voters nationwide who identified as Jewish .
The president won 43 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a historic high , according to polls conducted by the New York Times and Associated Press .
This helped Trump clinch the state and remain competitive in the race as several states continue to count ballots .
The poll also indicates that Jewish voters are increasingly willing to vote Republican despite the plurality of Jews historically voting Democratic .
The RJC sees these inroads as critical to GOP candidates in contested states such as Florida .
`` There is no doubt that in this election , when Donald Trump won in the key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 points , the Jewish vote was critical to his victory , '' RJC executive director Matthew Brooks said in a statement on the organization 's exit polling .
As with much of the country , Jewish voters polled by the RJC said the economy and domestic issues are their chief concerns .
Nearly 95 percent of respondents said they made up their minds about who to vote for well in advance of Election Day .
The coronavirus pandemic and `` character of the candidate '' also were top considerations for Jewish voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general American public .
Just 8 percent of those polled cited Israel as their top voting issue , showing foreign policy did not largely factor into their decision making .
Respondents ranged in age from 18 to over 65 .

President Donald Trump performed historically well among Jewish voters in Tuesday night's contested presidential election, receiving the highest portion of the Jewish vote for any Republican candidate since 1988, according to early exit polling.
Trump won 30.5 percent of the Jewish vote, up from the 24 percent he received in 2016, according to the Republican Jewish Coalition, which conducted an analysis of national exit polls along with analyst groups Basswood Research and McLaughlin & Associates. The poll included 600 registered voters nationwide who identified as Jewish.
The president won 43 percent of the Jewish vote in Florida, a historic high, according to polls conducted by the New York Times and Associated Press. This helped Trump clinch the state and remain competitive in the race as several states continue to count ballots. The poll also indicates that Jewish voters are increasingly willing to vote Republican despite the plurality of Jews historically voting Democratic. The RJC sees these inroads as critical to GOP candidates in contested states such as Florida.
"There is no doubt that in this election, when Donald Trump won in the key battleground state of Florida by fewer than 3 points, the Jewish vote was critical to his victory," RJC executive director Matthew Brooks said in a statement on the organization's exit polling.
As with much of the country, Jewish voters polled by the RJC said the economy and domestic issues are their chief concerns. Nearly 95 percent of respondents said they made up their minds about who to vote for well in advance of Election Day.
The coronavirus pandemic and "character of the candidate" also were top considerations for Jewish voters, much like the rest of the general American public. Just 8 percent of those polled cited Israel as their top voting issue, showing foreign policy did not largely factor into their decision making. Respondents ranged in age from 18 to over 65.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Fearless Reporters Fact-Check Trump’s Proclamation of Victory

President Donald Trump declared himself the winner of the election early Wednesday , leading to furious media declarations that that @ @ @ @ @ David Rutz is senior writer at the Washington Free Beacon .
He was previously a @ @ @ @ @ in Atlanta and has done freelance sports reporting for the Washington Post .
He graduated @ @ @ @ @ and lives in Marietta , Ga. His Twitter handle is @ DavidRutz .
He can @ @ @ @ @ freebeacon.com .

President Donald Trump declared himself the winner of the election early Wednesday, leading to furious media declarations that that was not the case.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Trump to Demand Recount in Wisconsin

Trump to Demand Recount in Wisconsin

The Trump campaign announced that it will `` immediately '' request a recount in Wisconsin , a crucial state for Republicans where Democratic nominee Joe Biden currently holds a razor-thin lead .
`` The President is well within the threshold to request a recount and we will immediately do so , '' campaign manager Bill Stepien said in a Wednesday statement .
Biden leads Trump in the state by about 20,000 votes—0.7 percent of 3.2 million ballots cast—according to the New York Times .
Under Wisconsin law , a campaign must be within 1 percent to request a recount , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million should the current margin hold .
The cost is refunded if the recount changes the election 's outcome .
Trump earned a surprise narrow victory in the state in 2016 , defeating failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton by about 23,000 votes .
Green Party nominee Jill Stein successfully pushed for a recount , which cost $ 1.8 million .
Trump 's win was reaffirmed .
In his statement , Stepien also criticized the `` ridiculous public polling '' in Wisconsin , where Biden was projected to defeat Trump by 6.7 points , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He cited `` reports of irregularities '' in the state 's vote tabulation that could call the result into question .
`` Despite ridiculous public polling used as a voter suppression tactic , Wisconsin has been a razor thin race as we always knew that it would be , '' Stepien said .
`` There have been reports of irregularities in several Wisconsin counties which raise serious doubts about the validity of the results . ''
The campaign has also filed suit to stop vote-counting in Michigan where Republicans have been denied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Trump , who pulled off an upset victory in the state in 2016 , trails Biden by fewer than 50,000 votes .
`` President Trump ’ s campaign has not been provided with meaningful access to numerous counting locations to observe the opening of ballots and the counting process , as guaranteed by Michigan law , '' Stepien said in a release .
`` We also demand to review those ballots which were opened and counted while we did not have meaningful access .
President Trump is committed to ensuring that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and everywhere else . ''
Trump 's reelection campaign likely hinges on scoring a victory in at least one of the two Rust Belt states .

The Trump campaign announced that it will "immediately" request a recount in Wisconsin, a crucial state for Republicans where Democratic nominee Joe Biden currently holds a razor-thin lead.
"The President is well within the threshold to request a recount and we will immediately do so," campaign manager Bill Stepien said in a Wednesday statement.
Biden leads Trump in the state by about 20,000 votes—0.7 percent of 3.2 million ballots cast—according to the New York Times. Under Wisconsin law, a campaign must be within 1 percent to request a recount, which will cost Trump roughly $3 million should the current margin hold. The cost is refunded if the recount changes the election's outcome.
Trump earned a surprise narrow victory in the state in 2016, defeating failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton by about 23,000 votes. Green Party nominee Jill Stein successfully pushed for a recount, which cost $1.8 million. Trump's win was reaffirmed.
In his statement, Stepien also criticized the "ridiculous public polling" in Wisconsin, where Biden was projected to defeat Trump by 6.7 points, according to the Real Clear Politics average. He cited "reports of irregularities" in the state's vote tabulation that could call the result into question.
"Despite ridiculous public polling used as a voter suppression tactic, Wisconsin has been a razor thin race as we always knew that it would be," Stepien said. "There have been reports of irregularities in several Wisconsin counties which raise serious doubts about the validity of the results."
The campaign has also filed suit to stop vote-counting in Michigan where Republicans have been denied "meaningful access to numerous counting locations." Trump, who pulled off an upset victory in the state in 2016, trails Biden by fewer than 50,000 votes.
"President Trump’s campaign has not been provided with meaningful access to numerous counting locations to observe the opening of ballots and the counting process, as guaranteed by Michigan law," Stepien said in a release. "We also demand to review those ballots which were opened and counted while we did not have meaningful access. President Trump is committed to ensuring that all legal votes are counted in Michigan and everywhere else."
Trump's reelection campaign likely hinges on scoring a victory in at least one of the two Rust Belt states.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Dems Fail to Unseat Top Kavanaugh Backer Susan Collins

Republican senator Susan Collins won a tough reelection campaign in Maine , beating out well-funded Democratic rival Sara Gideon on Tuesday .
Gideon called Collins to concede on Wednesday afternoon after the Republican took a 51-42 lead with 85 percent of precincts reporting .
The AP has yet to declare a winner in the race , but Collins holds a comfortable lead even as Democrat Joe Biden won the state 52-44 .
The Republican victory in a Senate race that pollsters saw as favorable for Democrats has thrown cold water on Democratic ambitions to secure control of the upper chamber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote in favor of confirming Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 , using the vote to solicit support from liberal megadonors .
The strategy worked to an extent , helping Gideon bring in nearly $ 70 million this cycle , more than double the money Collins raised .
Gideon 's campaign , however , faced repeated allegations that the candidate broke campaign finance rules and struggled to explain compromising votes from her divisive four-year tenure as the speaker of the Maine House of Representatives .
The Democrat 's campaign , launched in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rocky start when the Washington Free Beacon reported that Gideon illegally used money from her leadership PAC to compensate herself for personal donations to congressional candidate Emily Cain , prompting the state 's ethics watchdog to levy a fine .
Cain went on to become executive director of pro-abortion EMILY 's List—one of Gideon 's top donors in 2020 .
The candidate also faced questions about her time in the Maine legislature after it emerged that Gideon killed two attempts to prohibit female genital mutilation in Maine and squashed an ethics probe into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her Democratic colleagues sexually abused teen girls .
This will be Collins 's fifth term in the U.S. Senate .

Republican senator Susan Collins won a tough reelection campaign in Maine, beating out well-funded Democratic rival Sara Gideon on Tuesday.
Gideon called Collins to concede on Wednesday afternoon after the Republican took a 51-42 lead with 85 percent of precincts reporting. The AP has yet to declare a winner in the race, but Collins holds a comfortable lead even as Democrat Joe Biden won the state 52-44. The Republican victory in a Senate race that pollsters saw as favorable for Democrats has thrown cold water on Democratic ambitions to secure control of the upper chamber.
Democrats attacked Collins's decision to vote in favor of confirming Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, using the vote to solicit support from liberal megadonors. The strategy worked to an extent, helping Gideon bring in nearly $70 million this cycle, more than double the money Collins raised. Gideon's campaign, however, faced repeated allegations that the candidate broke campaign finance rules and struggled to explain compromising votes from her divisive four-year tenure as the speaker of the Maine House of Representatives.
The Democrat's campaign, launched in June 2019, got off to a rocky start when the Washington Free Beacon reported that Gideon illegally used money from her leadership PAC to compensate herself for personal donations to congressional candidate Emily Cain, prompting the state's ethics watchdog to levy a fine. Cain went on to become executive director of pro-abortion EMILY's List—one of Gideon's top donors in 2020. The candidate also faced questions about her time in the Maine legislature after it emerged that Gideon killed two attempts to prohibit female genital mutilation in Maine and squashed an ethics probe into how she handled allegations that one of her Democratic colleagues sexually abused teen girls.
This will be Collins's fifth term in the U.S. Senate.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--With Boost From Hispanic Voters, Republicans Flip Two House Seats in Florida

Florida Republicans enjoyed down-ballot success in Tuesday 's election , bolstered by Hispanic support and President Donald Trump 's victory in the state .
Ex-firefighter Carlos Gimenez and journalist Maria Elvira Salazar defeated Reps. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell ( D. ) and Donna Shalala ( D. ) , respectively , in Florida 's two southernmost districts .
The two will join a growing Florida Republican delegation buoyed by massive turnout from a coalition of Venezuelan , Cuban , and Puerto Rican voters .
A former president of the Clinton Foundation , Shalala served her South Florida district for one term before Salazar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 points .
Shalala suffered on the campaign trail from an inability to distance herself from the socialist wing of her party , which she decried on multiple occasions .
Shalala herself acknowledged the presence of socialism within the Democratic Party ’ s coalition .
Fellow freshman congresswoman Mucarsel-Powell fell to Gimenez 52-48 .
The representative suffered from associations with radical Democrats , once inviting an `` # AbolishICE '' advocate to serve as a panelist during a town hall she hosted .
Mucarsel-Powell also drew scrutiny for her husband ’ s ties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who has faced criminal allegations of embezzlement , bribery , and murder , paid Mucarsel-Powell ’ s husband hundreds of thousands of dollars for legal work through his businesses .
The two Republicans join Congress after a groundswell of Republican support in South Florida , an area where the Trump campaign focused heavily in the final days of the campaign .
President Trump was able to make inroads in Democratic strongholds in the Sunshine State .
As of Wednesday morning , he trailed former vice president Joe Biden 53-46 in Miami-Dade County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 .
With a 51-48 lead over Biden in a state he won with only 48 percent of the vote in 2016 , the president 's statewide numbers have improved from four years ago .

Florida Republicans enjoyed down-ballot success in Tuesday's election, bolstered by Hispanic support and President Donald Trump's victory in the state.
Ex-firefighter Carlos Gimenez and journalist Maria Elvira Salazar defeated Reps. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D.) and Donna Shalala (D.), respectively, in Florida's two southernmost districts. The two will join a growing Florida Republican delegation buoyed by massive turnout from a coalition of Venezuelan, Cuban, and Puerto Rican voters.
A former president of the Clinton Foundation, Shalala served her South Florida district for one term before Salazar ousted her by a margin of nearly 3 points. Shalala suffered on the campaign trail from an inability to distance herself from the socialist wing of her party, which she decried on multiple occasions. Shalala herself acknowledged the presence of socialism within the Democratic Party’s coalition.
Fellow freshman congresswoman Mucarsel-Powell fell to Gimenez 52-48. The representative suffered from associations with radical Democrats, once inviting an "#AbolishICE" advocate to serve as a panelist during a town hall she hosted. Mucarsel-Powell also drew scrutiny for her husband’s ties to a Ukrainian oligarch. The oligarch, who has faced criminal allegations of embezzlement, bribery, and murder, paid Mucarsel-Powell’s husband hundreds of thousands of dollars for legal work through his businesses.
The two Republicans join Congress after a groundswell of Republican support in South Florida, an area where the Trump campaign focused heavily in the final days of the campaign. President Trump was able to make inroads in Democratic strongholds in the Sunshine State. As of Wednesday morning, he trailed former vice president Joe Biden 53-46 in Miami-Dade County, which he lost by 30 points in 2016. With a 51-48 lead over Biden in a state he won with only 48 percent of the vote in 2016, the president's statewide numbers have improved from four years ago.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--MSNBC’s Joy Reid Calls Clarence Thomas ‘Uncle Clarence’

MSNBC host Joy Reid used a racial slur Wednesday against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas , calling him `` Uncle Clarence . ''
`` If somehow [ the Trump campaign ] manage to stumble into the Supreme Court , do any of you guys trust Uncle Clarence and Amy Coney Barrett and those guys to actually follow the letter of the law ?
No , '' she said .
`` It is a completely politicized Supreme Court that you ca n't just trust that they 're going to do the right thing . ''
The `` Uncle Tom '' slur @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cabin and is a derogatory term for an African-American man viewed as overly deferential to whites .
The staunchly liberal Reid has also referred to `` Uncle Clarence '' in a pair of recent tweets .
Reid also came under fire in 2017 and 2018 after homophobic blog posts she wrote from the 2000s came to light .
She later denied she had written some of them and blamed hackers for inserting the offensive content onto her blog .
But she also admitted there was no proof any hacking occurred .
Her star @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MSNBC .
Formerly a weekend host , Reid was promoted to hosting the weekday show The Reidout in July , and she has helped lead MSNBC 's political coverage throughout the year .

MSNBC host Joy Reid used a racial slur Wednesday against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, calling him "Uncle Clarence."
"If somehow [the Trump campaign] manage to stumble into the Supreme Court, do any of you guys trust Uncle Clarence and Amy Coney Barrett and those guys to actually follow the letter of the law? No," she said. "It is a completely politicized Supreme Court that you can't just trust that they're going to do the right thing."
The "Uncle Tom" slur derives from the novel Uncle Tom's Cabin and is a derogatory term for an African-American man viewed as overly deferential to whites. The staunchly liberal Reid has also referred to "Uncle Clarence" in a pair of recent tweets.
Reid also came under fire in 2017 and 2018 after homophobic blog posts she wrote from the 2000s came to light. She later denied she had written some of them and blamed hackers for inserting the offensive content onto her blog. But she also admitted there was no proof any hacking occurred.
Her star, however, has since risen at MSNBC. Formerly a weekend host, Reid was promoted to hosting the weekday show The Reidout in July, and she has helped lead MSNBC's political coverage throughout the year.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Texas Voters Again Reject Wendy Davis

Texas Voters Again Reject Wendy Davis

Rep. Chip Roy ( R. , Texas ) defeated progressive media darling Wendy Davis on Tuesday , marking the Democrat 's second consecutive loss since her famous 2013 pro-abortion filibuster .
Roy led Davis by 6 points when the Associated Press called the race early Wednesday morning .
The Democrat 's campaign in many ways mirrored her 2014 failed gubernatorial bid—she proved popular with national liberal donors but ultimately failed to win over the district 's voters .
Roughly 84 percent of Davis 's campaign cash came from out-of-district donors , including max contributions from the Soros family and billionaire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Davis also saw substantial support from national abortion groups , with Planned Parenthood Action Fund , EMILY 's List , and NARAL Pro-Choice America combining to funnel more than $ 52,000 to the Democrat 's campaign .
Davis is most famous for her 11-hour filibuster of a pro-life bill as a state lawmaker in 2013 .
The move earned Davis rave reviews from liberal media pundits , who gushed over pink Mizuno sneakers she wore during the filibuster .
The Washington Free Beacon purchased those sneakers in Davis 's 2016 estate sale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ item for the Free Beacon months later .
Davis 's filibuster sparked her 2014 campaign against Republican governor Greg Abbott .
She lost by more than 20 points .

Rep. Chip Roy (R., Texas) defeated progressive media darling Wendy Davis on Tuesday, marking the Democrat's second consecutive loss since her famous 2013 pro-abortion filibuster.
Roy led Davis by 6 points when the Associated Press called the race early Wednesday morning. The Democrat's campaign in many ways mirrored her 2014 failed gubernatorial bid—she proved popular with national liberal donors but ultimately failed to win over the district's voters.
Roughly 84 percent of Davis's campaign cash came from out-of-district donors, including max contributions from the Soros family and billionaire Democratic megadonors Eli Broad and Lynda Resnick. Davis also saw substantial support from national abortion groups, with Planned Parenthood Action Fund, EMILY's List, and NARAL Pro-Choice America combining to funnel more than $52,000 to the Democrat's campaign.
Davis is most famous for her 11-hour filibuster of a pro-life bill as a state lawmaker in 2013. The move earned Davis rave reviews from liberal media pundits, who gushed over pink Mizuno sneakers she wore during the filibuster.
The Washington Free Beacon purchased those sneakers in Davis's 2016 estate sale. The Democrat signed the historic fashion item for the Free Beacon months later.
Davis's filibuster sparked her 2014 campaign against Republican governor Greg Abbott. She lost by more than 20 points.


freebeacon--2020-11-04--Steve Daines Dashes Liberal Hopes in Montana

Sen. Steve Daines ( R. , Mont . )
defeated top Democratic recruit Steve Bullock in a race national Democrats hoped would help deliver the Senate majority in 2020 .
Daines led Bullock by nearly 7 points when the Associated Press called the race early Wednesday morning .
Bullock—who called running for Senate `` an absolute no '' in 2019—launched his campaign just hours before the state 's March filing deadline after meeting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D. , N.Y. ) and former president Barack Obama .
His entrance in the race boosted liberal hopes of flipping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ successful gubernatorial reelection bid in 2016 , even as President Donald Trump won Montana by more than 20 points .
Daines painted Bullock as too liberal for the state following the Democrat 's failed presidential campaign .
Bullock in 2018 declared his support for an array of gun-control measures , earning him an `` F '' rating from the National Rifle Association .
Daines highlighted the rating throughout the race , prompting an unsuccessful ad campaign from Schumer and an astroturf hunting group designed to defend Bullock on guns .
Bullock also scrambled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports that he paid female staffers less than men and threatened female state employees during his tenure as governor .
The Democrat attempted to defend his record in the closing days of the race .
He released an ad in which four of his taxpayer-funded female employees railed against `` secret money groups '' for criticizing `` the way Steve Bullock ran his office . ''
Bullock 's loss comes despite a strong fundraising advantage—the Democrat raised roughly $ 43 million in the race , compared with Daines 's $ 27 million .

Sen. Steve Daines (R., Mont.) defeated top Democratic recruit Steve Bullock in a race national Democrats hoped would help deliver the Senate majority in 2020.
Daines led Bullock by nearly 7 points when the Associated Press called the race early Wednesday morning.
Bullock—who called running for Senate "an absolute no" in 2019—launched his campaign just hours before the state's March filing deadline after meeting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and former president Barack Obama. His entrance in the race boosted liberal hopes of flipping the seat, as Bullock led a successful gubernatorial reelection bid in 2016, even as President Donald Trump won Montana by more than 20 points.
Daines painted Bullock as too liberal for the state following the Democrat's failed presidential campaign. Bullock in 2018 declared his support for an array of gun-control measures, earning him an "F" rating from the National Rifle Association. Daines highlighted the rating throughout the race, prompting an unsuccessful ad campaign from Schumer and an astroturf hunting group designed to defend Bullock on guns.
Bullock also scrambled to defend his record with women following reports that he paid female staffers less than men and threatened female state employees during his tenure as governor. The Democrat attempted to defend his record in the closing days of the race. He released an ad in which four of his taxpayer-funded female employees railed against "secret money groups" for criticizing "the way Steve Bullock ran his office."
Bullock's loss comes despite a strong fundraising advantage—the Democrat raised roughly $43 million in the race, compared with Daines's $27 million.