talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-15--The Most Shameless Promoters Of The Bogus ‘Biden Emails’ Disinfo Campaign

Since the New York Post dropped a whopper of an attempted hit job on Joe Biden , mainstream conservatives have circled together to create an echo chamber to promote the article .
Nothing in the story – from premise to conclusion – adds up , and it fails on its own terms .
Even the person that Biden was alleged to have met with publicly said last year that he met with Kurt Volker , President Trump ’ s top envoy for the Ukraine crisis .
Separately , the New York Times reported on Wednesday that American spooks have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attack on Burisma last year after “ picking up chatter that stolen Burisma emails would be leaked in the form of an ‘ October surprise . '
” All of this has since become mixed up in part with conservative faux concern around the legitimate question of whether massive platforms like Twitter and Facebook should be able to throttle access to the story .
That ’ s a complicated question worthy of discussion , none of which you will find on what ’ s below : a list of the most shameless promoters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bizarre Ukraine disinformation dump .
The biggest offender here is the big boy himself : President Trump .
As if on cue , President Trump called the story a “ smoking gun , ” though it ’ s not clear of what wrongdoing , and also promoted a Fox News segment that regurgitated the story ’ s allegations .
He also made the story a centerpiece of his Iowa campaign rally Wednesday night .
Trump used the article as the basis for a charge that Biden is “ a corrupt politician who shouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the presidency.
” Other big promoters are the chief instigators of the story : Rudy Giuliani and Steve Bannon .
Remember , it was Bannon who tipped the Post off to the existence of the supposed hard drive , and Giuliani who gave the paper a copy .
The indicted Bannon has used his daily show – War Room : Pandemic – to relentlessly promote the story .
The former Trump campaign chairman , who once derided Don Trump Jr. as “ someone who believes everything he reads on Breitbart , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they believed that the New York Post wouldn ’ t have gone through the story “ with a fine-toothed comb before publishing.
” Giuliani , predictably , has hyped the story and played into the drip-drip notion of the reporting , saying that there ’ s “ much more to come ” with the election three weeks away .
Sen. Ron Johnson ( R-WI ) , a chief promoter of disinformation that helps the President , told Fox News on Wednesday that his committee considered the source of the story a “ whistleblower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ in the process of validating the information he provided.
” Separately , Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-TX ) has boosted the story online , including one comment saying that it reveals “ graft in the Biden dynasty.
” But he has taken it a step further with complaints that Twitter blocked access to the link , vowing to keep the story alive by issuing a subpoena to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee next Friday .
Over in the House , the situation is much the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) of House Intelligence Committee fame retweeted the story , while Rep. Jim Jordan ( R-OH ) expressed outrage over Facebook limiting access to the story .
In a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg , Jordan described the article as “ explosive ” and relevant to “ the upcoming presidential election , ” demanding answers from Zuckerberg over the decision to throttle access .
McEnany has also used the social media platforms ’ decision to limit access to the story as a way of keeping it alive , suggesting that it makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said on Wednesday that “ there is plenty of evidence to suggest Joe Biden knew good and well what Hunter Biden was doing—using his connections to enrich himself and the Biden family ” – a comment retweeted by White House communications director Alyssa Farah .
a video encapsulating the story ’ s conclusions , asking the bogus ( and un-premised ) question of “ Why did you let Hunter do it ?
” Separately , Trump campaign comms director Tim Murtagh boosted the story in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politico ’ s write-up to keep the story moving .
It remains unclear whether the emails in question are real or not and , if they ’ re authentic , what exactly it is that they prove .
But the cherry on the cake here are the D.C. professional conservatives who keep the whole show running : justifying the current administration while wielding it as a tool to achieve their judicial goals .
Take Hugh Hewitt , who anticipated the story ’ s path by initially promoting it as a question about how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ editor Rich Lowry appears to have commissioned a write-up of the story ’ s conclusions in part as a way around the platforms ’ decision to throttle access .
Here he is promoting it below :

Since the New York Post dropped a whopper of an attempted hit job on Joe Biden, mainstream conservatives have circled together to create an echo chamber to promote the article.
Nothing in the story – from premise to conclusion – adds up, and it fails on its own terms. Even the person that Biden was alleged to have met with publicly said last year that he met with Kurt Volker, President Trump’s top envoy for the Ukraine crisis.
Separately, the New York Times reported on Wednesday that American spooks have been contacting people with knowledge of a hack attack on Burisma last year after “picking up chatter that stolen Burisma emails would be leaked in the form of an ‘October surprise.'”
All of this has since become mixed up in part with conservative faux concern around the legitimate question of whether massive platforms like Twitter and Facebook should be able to throttle access to the story.
That’s a complicated question worthy of discussion, none of which you will find on what’s below: a list of the most shameless promoters of the New York Post’s bizarre Ukraine disinformation dump.
President Trump
The biggest offender here is the big boy himself: President Trump.
As if on cue, President Trump called the story a “smoking gun,” though it’s not clear of what wrongdoing, and also promoted a Fox News segment that regurgitated the story’s allegations.
So terrible that Facebook and Twitter took down the story of “Smoking Gun” emails related to Sleepy Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in the @NYPost. It is only the beginning for them. There is nothing worse than a corrupt politician. REPEAL SECTION 230!!! https://t.co/g1RJFpIVUZ — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 14, 2020
He also made the story a centerpiece of his Iowa campaign rally Wednesday night.
Trump used the article as the basis for a charge that Biden is “a corrupt politician who shouldn’t even be allowed to run for the presidency.”
The cronies
Other big promoters are the chief instigators of the story: Rudy Giuliani and Steve Bannon.
Remember, it was Bannon who tipped the Post off to the existence of the supposed hard drive, and Giuliani who gave the paper a copy.
The indicted Bannon has used his daily show – War Room: Pandemic – to relentlessly promote the story. The former Trump campaign chairman, who once derided Don Trump Jr. as “someone who believes everything he reads on Breitbart,” asked viewers with a slight grin whether they believed that the New York Post wouldn’t have gone through the story “with a fine-toothed comb before publishing.”
Giuliani, predictably, has hyped the story and played into the drip-drip notion of the reporting, saying that there’s “much more to come” with the election three weeks away.
The Congressional GOP
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), a chief promoter of disinformation that helps the President, told Fox News on Wednesday that his committee considered the source of the story a “whistleblower,” and said that his staff was “in the process of validating the information he provided.”
Separately, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has boosted the story online, including one comment saying that it reveals “graft in the Biden dynasty.”
But he has taken it a step further with complaints that Twitter blocked access to the link, vowing to keep the story alive by issuing a subpoena to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee next Friday.
BREAKING: Sen. @tedcruz says that the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Tuesday to subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and that he will testify next Friday. pic.twitter.com/SEZsAzbxFO — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) October 15, 2020
Over in the House, the situation is much the same.
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) of House Intelligence Committee fame retweeted the story, while Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) expressed outrage over Facebook limiting access to the story. In a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Jordan described the article as “explosive” and relevant to “the upcoming presidential election,” demanding answers from Zuckerberg over the decision to throttle access.
White House press shop
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany also latched onto the article, posting screenshots of the supposed emails on Twitter, in a tweet that has since been deleted.
McEnany has also used the social media platforms’ decision to limit access to the story as a way of keeping it alive, suggesting that it makes Silicon Valley look like Pyongyang.
Censoring political speech is what you’d expect in countries like China, North Korea, or Iran — NOT America. This should scare every single American who values free and open discourse. Do NOT let Big Tech silence YOU‼#TwitterCensorship — Kayleigh McEnany (@PressSec) October 15, 2020
Separately, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said on Wednesday that “there is plenty of evidence to suggest Joe Biden knew good and well what Hunter Biden was doing—using his connections to enrich himself and the Biden family” – a comment retweeted by White House communications director Alyssa Farah.
The Trump campaign
The Trump campaign immediately pushed outgot
a video encapsulating the story’s conclusions, asking the bogus (and un-premised) question of “Why did you let Hunter do it?”
As scandal grows, we're asking Joe Biden: Why did you let Hunter do it? pic.twitter.com/QZopjLNuCs — Team Trump (Text VOTE to 88022) (@TeamTrump) October 15, 2020
Separately, Trump campaign comms director Tim Murtagh boosted the story in a somewhat subtler way, playing into Politico’s write-up to keep the story moving.
Politico: "Biden’s campaign would not rule out the possibility that the former VP had some kind of informal interaction with Pozharskyi" pic.twitter.com/ulCv3hgCIO — Tim Murtaugh – Download the Trump 2020 app today! (@TimMurtaugh) October 14, 2020
It remains unclear whether the emails in question are real or not and, if they’re authentic, what exactly it is that they prove.
Movement conservatives
But the cherry on the cake here are the D.C. professional conservatives who keep the whole show running: justifying the current administration while wielding it as a tool to achieve their judicial goals.
Take Hugh Hewitt, who anticipated the story’s path by initially promoting it as a question about how people reacted.
This is a blockbuster story from @nypost. Watch and see if any cable news channels carry it: https://t.co/gd2baCW51h There will be questions and caution about authentication, but if @nytimes can run w/ pilfered bits of @realDonaldTrump tax returns, @NYPost can run w/this. — Hugh Hewitt (@hughhewitt) October 14, 2020
Similarly, National Review editor Rich Lowry appears to have commissioned a write-up of the story’s conclusions in part as a way around the platforms’ decision to throttle access. Here he is promoting it below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Biden Leaves Door Open On Court Expansion Based On How ACB Confirmation Goes

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden signaled on Thursday night that he was open to adding seats to the Supreme Court depending on how the Senate GOP ’ s rushed confirmation process of SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett plays out .
During Biden ’ s town hall on ABC News , moderator George Stephanopoulos pressed the Democrat on court expansion , of which he has previously said he was “ not a fan.
” Biden told Stephanopoulos that his position “ depends ” on how the process is “ handled ” by Senate Republicans as they aim to ram through Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ November 3 .
“ It depends on how much they rush this , ” he said , also jabbing at GOP senators for fixating on filling late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s seat instead of working on COVID-19 relief .
“ If they vote on it before the election , you are open to expanding the court ?
” Stephanopoulos asked .
“ I ’ m open to considering what happens from that point on , ” the Democratic candidate replied .
Biden pledged to formally announce his stance on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that voters “ have a right to know where I stand.
” “ And they ’ ll have a right to know where I stand before they vote , ” he told Stephanopoulos .

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden signaled on Thursday night that he was open to adding seats to the Supreme Court depending on how the Senate GOP’s rushed confirmation process of SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett plays out.
During Biden’s town hall on ABC News, moderator George Stephanopoulos pressed the Democrat on court expansion, of which he has previously said he was “not a fan.”
Biden told Stephanopoulos that his position “depends” on how the process is “handled” by Senate Republicans as they aim to ram through Barrett’s confirmation before the election on November 3.
“It depends on how much they rush this,” he said, also jabbing at GOP senators for fixating on filling late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat instead of working on COVID-19 relief.
“If they vote on it before the election, you are open to expanding the court?” Stephanopoulos asked.
“I’m open to considering what happens from that point on,” the Democratic candidate replied.
Biden pledged to formally announce his stance on the issue before Election Day, stating that voters “have a right to know where I stand.”
“And they’ll have a right to know where I stand before they vote,” he told Stephanopoulos.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Trump Shares Fake News Story In Attempt To Go After Twitter

President Donald Trump on Friday shared a fake report from a known news satire website in a seeming effort to bash Twitter for its efforts to block a proliferation of misinformation on its platform about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden .
The story tweeted by the President early Friday morning was published by The Babylon Bee — a self-described satire site — and stated that Twitter had “ shut down its entire social network ” Thursday to curb the spread of negative press about Biden .
Trump appeared to hope that his followers might take the satirical story with some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this has never been done in history .
This includes his really bad interview last night .
Why is Twitter doing this .
Bringing more attention to Sleepy Joe & Big T. ” The President ’ s tweet follows an effort by Twitter and other social media platforms to block users from sharing an unfounded article that appeared in the New York Post about Biden and his son Hunter that has been fueled by Russian disinformation .
The remarks come hours after President refused to disavow a far-right conspiracy group during an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadly defended his sharing of misinformation on Twitter and other social media platforms .
Trump was pressed on the issue Thursday by “ Today ” show anchor Savannah Guthrie who asked about his recent efforts to share false theories about his Democratic opponent .
“ Just this week , you retweeted to your 87 million followers a conspiracy theory that Joe Biden orchestrated to have SEAL Team 6 kill to cover up the fake death of Osama Bin Laden .
Now why would you send a lie like that to your followers ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a retweet , ” Trump said .
“ That was an opinion of somebody and that was a retweet .
People can decide for themselves.
” “ I don ’ t get that , you ’ re the president , you ’ re not someone ’ s crazy uncle who can just retweet whatever , ” Guthrie said .
Trump insisted that somehow by retweeting a post he was not culpable for the impact of its contents on his millions of followers .

President Donald Trump on Friday shared a fake report from a known news satire website in a seeming effort to bash Twitter for its efforts to block a proliferation of misinformation on its platform about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
The story tweeted by the President early Friday morning was published by The Babylon Bee — a self-described satire site — and stated that Twitter had “shut down its entire social network” Thursday to curb the spread of negative press about Biden.
Trump appeared to hope that his followers might take the satirical story with some seriousness when he tweeted: “Wow, this has never been done in history. This includes his really bad interview last night. Why is Twitter doing this. Bringing more attention to Sleepy Joe & Big T.”
The President’s tweet follows an effort by Twitter and other social media platforms to block users from sharing an unfounded article that appeared in the New York Post about Biden and his son Hunter that has been fueled by Russian disinformation.
The remarks come hours after President refused to disavow a far-right conspiracy group during an NBC town hall event on Thursday and broadly defended his sharing of misinformation on Twitter and other social media platforms.
Trump was pressed on the issue Thursday by “Today” show anchor Savannah Guthrie who asked about his recent efforts to share false theories about his Democratic opponent.
“Just this week, you retweeted to your 87 million followers a conspiracy theory that Joe Biden orchestrated to have SEAL Team 6 kill to cover up the fake death of Osama Bin Laden. Now why would you send a lie like that to your followers?” Guthrie asked.
“That was a retweet,” Trump said. “That was an opinion of somebody and that was a retweet. People can decide for themselves.”
“I don’t get that, you’re the president, you’re not someone’s crazy uncle who can just retweet whatever,” Guthrie said.
Trump insisted that somehow by retweeting a post he was not culpable for the impact of its contents on his millions of followers.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Trump Keeps Claiming Ignorance About QAnon But People Aren’t Buying It

President Donald Trump on Thursday refused to disavow QAnon , a group that has been labeled by the FBI as a domestic terror threat .
Repeatedly pressed about the group during an NBC town hall with “ Today ” Show anchor Savannah Guthrie , Trump again claimed he knows very little about the QAnon theory that places him at the center as savior fighting a cult of “ deep state ” Democrats running a satanic pedophile ring .
“ Can you just once and for all state that this is not true and disavow QAnon in its entirety ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about QAnon , I know very little , ” Trump said , appearing to take a stance that he has repeatedly used in the past to suggest that if he doesn ’ t know something he can ’ t be held accountable .
After Guthrie offered an explanation of the right-wing conspiracy group , President Trump appeared to further defend QAnon , suggesting that Guthrie ’ s description couldn ’ t be taken as fact and that “ I know nothing about it , I do know they are very much against pedophilia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But I know nothing about it.
” The President further evaded and ultimately refused Guthrie ’ s request that he condemn the group by appearing to boost Qanon — again selectively emphasizing “ that they ’ re very strong against pedophilia.
” “ I agree with that , ” he said , while refusing to acknowledge the unfounded claims pushed by its supporters .
Trump has frequently promoted unfounded claims from accounts aligned with QAnon on Twitter , often sharing posts from QAnon sympathizers and supporters .
In July , he defended his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Georgia with a record of promoting QAnon theories and making racist and anti-Semitic remarks .
Then in August , he sang a similar tune of ignorance about the group and appeared to even embrace support from the group .
“ I don ’ t know much about the movement other than I understand they like me very much , which I appreciate , ” Trump said in August .
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff , who has questioned the threat posed by President Trump ’ s apparent dangerous alliances in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory .
The Biden campaign quickly responded to Trump ’ s refusal to disavow the group .
Deputy Biden campaign manager , Kate Bedingfield in a statement suggested the President had failed to denounce QAnon in “ a false alternate reality of his own making ” — criticizing the last minute event with NBC after Trump refused a virtual debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden .
Last month Biden said that the President ’ s penchant for conspiracies and sympathizing with supporters of those theories is “ mortifying.
” “ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Biden told reporters at an event in September .
“ If the President doesn ’ t know better , which he has to know better , then my Lord , we ’ re in much more trouble than I ever thought we were , ” he added .

President Donald Trump on Thursday refused to disavow QAnon, a group that has been labeled by the FBI as a domestic terror threat.
Repeatedly pressed about the group during an NBC town hall with “Today” Show anchor Savannah Guthrie, Trump again claimed he knows very little about the QAnon theory that places him at the center as savior fighting a cult of “deep state” Democrats running a satanic pedophile ring.
Here’s video of Trump refusing to denounce QAnon at the NBC town hall pic.twitter.com/BmSHGYSlxO — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 16, 2020
“Can you just once and for all state that this is not true and disavow QAnon in its entirety?” Guthrie asked.
“I know nothing about QAnon, I know very little,” Trump said, appearing to take a stance that he has repeatedly used in the past to suggest that if he doesn’t know something he can’t be held accountable.
Critics on Twitter called his bluff:
Trump knows about QAnon. He has regularly retweeted QAnon accounts. He has endorsed candidates who openly embrace its dangerous lunacy. Last night, he refused to condemn it. And the FBI considers it a domestic terrorism threat that has already spurred many serious violent crimes. — Brian Klaas (@brianklaas) October 16, 2020
“I don’t know anything about David Duke.” “I don’t know who the Proud Boys are.” “I know nothing about QAnon.” If Trump is really as ignorant as he says he is, maybe he shouldn’t be president. pic.twitter.com/If14Tk3jGN — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) October 16, 2020
After Guthrie offered an explanation of the right-wing conspiracy group, President Trump appeared to further defend QAnon, suggesting that Guthrie’s description couldn’t be taken as fact and that “I know nothing about it, I do know they are very much against pedophilia, they fight it very hard. But I know nothing about it.”
The President further evaded and ultimately refused Guthrie’s request that he condemn the group by appearing to boost Qanon — again selectively emphasizing “that they’re very strong against pedophilia.”
“I agree with that,” he said, while refusing to acknowledge the unfounded claims pushed by its supporters.
Trump has frequently promoted unfounded claims from accounts aligned with QAnon on Twitter, often sharing posts from QAnon sympathizers and supporters.
In July, he defended his decision to endorse a GOP congressional candidate in Georgia with a record of promoting QAnon theories and making racist and anti-Semitic remarks.
Then in August, he sang a similar tune of ignorance about the group and appeared to even embrace support from the group.
“I don’t know much about the movement other than I understand they like me very much, which I appreciate,” Trump said in August.
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, who has questioned the threat posed by President Trump’s apparent dangerous alliances in the past condemned the President for amplifying the theory.
This isn’t hard: QAnon is a crazy, dangerous, fringe conspiracy theory. I denounce it. Trump refuses to say the same — simply because most of its followers support him. Worse, Trump amplifies QAnon, which can lead to real world consequences and violence. Enough already. — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) October 16, 2020
The Biden campaign quickly responded to Trump’s refusal to disavow the group.
Deputy Biden campaign manager, Kate Bedingfield in a statement suggested the President had failed to denounce QAnon in “a false alternate reality of his own making” — criticizing the last minute event with NBC after Trump refused a virtual debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
Last month Biden said that the President’s penchant for conspiracies and sympathizing with supporters of those theories is “mortifying.”
“It’s embarrassing. And it’s dangerous,” Biden told reporters at an event in September.
“If the President doesn’t know better, which he has to know better, then my Lord, we’re in much more trouble than I ever thought we were,” he added.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Outraged Conservatives Cry ‘Interrogation’ Over Trump’s Town Hall Moderator Asking Tough Questions

President Donald Trump , having bailed on a debate with his Democratic challenger Joe Biden , had a town hall moderated by NBC News anchor Savannah Guthrie on Thursday night instead at the same exact time Biden was holding a town hall of his own on ABC News .
Though NBC had come under fire for providing Trump his desired platform ( and time slot ) after he torpedoed plans to face Biden head-on , Guthrie grilled the President on his tax returns , COVID-19 diagnosis , and refusal to condemn white supremacy , thus proving that Trump wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he might ’ ve faced during a debate–much to the fury of his conservative buddies .
“ NBC fake news did their best to just ambush President Trump at tonight ’ s town hall , ” Fox News host Sean Hannity declared on his program .
“ He pretty much debated Savannah Guthrie .
And what we all witnessed was not journalism , it was a political debate with the morning host of the “ Today Show ” serving as , well , Joe Biden ’ s surrogate.
” Fox News host Laura @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Guthrie asked “ was combative or in some way adversarial.
” “ Savannah Guthrie acted as if she were Trump ’ s debate partner , not the moderator , not an interviewer , ” Ingraham said .
“ And she clearly had to prove her liberal bonafides tonight .
”

President Donald Trump, having bailed on a debate with his Democratic challenger Joe Biden, had a town hall moderated by NBC News anchor Savannah Guthrie on Thursday night instead at the same exact time Biden was holding a town hall of his own on ABC News.
Though NBC had come under fire for providing Trump his desired platform (and time slot) after he torpedoed plans to face Biden head-on, Guthrie grilled the President on his tax returns, COVID-19 diagnosis, and refusal to condemn white supremacy, thus proving that Trump wasn’t going to escape the tough questions he might’ve faced during a debate–much to the fury of his conservative buddies.
“NBC fake news did their best to just ambush President Trump at tonight’s town hall,” Fox News host Sean Hannity declared on his program. “He pretty much debated Savannah Guthrie. And what we all witnessed was not journalism, it was a political debate with the morning host of the “Today Show” serving as, well, Joe Biden’s surrogate.”
Fox News host Laura Ingraham complained that “almost every question” Guthrie asked “was combative or in some way adversarial.”
“Savannah Guthrie acted as if she were Trump’s debate partner, not the moderator, not an interviewer,” Ingraham said. “And she clearly had to prove her liberal bonafides tonight.”
Other conservatives had similar complaints:
Our media is corrupt. ABC treated Joe Biden with kid gloves and refused to even ask about the New York Post reporting. NBC grilled @realDonaldTrump and acted as though they were debating him. The silver lining is the American people can easily see who can handle the heat! — Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) October 16, 2020
I just switched to NBC since ABC is in a commercial. Savanah Guthrie has interrupted Trump in these 60 seconds more than Stephanopulos has done to Biden in 40 mins. NBC is an interrogation. ABC is a picnic. — Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) October 16, 2020
Even Joe Biden didn’t interrupt @realDonaldTrump this many times in the first debate. — Jason Miller (@JasonMillerinDC) October 16, 2020
This was billed as a town hall, not a debate with Savannah Guthrie. I truly don't care about Savannah Guthrie's personal views and could stand to hear about 100% less of them. — Mollie (@MZHemingway) October 16, 2020
Savannah Guthrie makes a good case for Joe Rogan as a moderator . Her hostility and aggressiveness is a case study in media hostility to conservatives. Trump did an amazing job calmly taking her on. — Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) October 16, 2020
20 minutes of tonight’s town hall were wasted by Guthrie debating President @realDonaldTrump. Ridiculous. — Students For Trump (@TrumpStudents) October 16, 2020


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--SCOTUS Set To Weigh Trump Census Power Grab Before Inauguration

The Supreme Court announced plans to review President Trump ’ s anti-immigrant apportionment policy on a timeline that could give him a decision on its legality before , in the event of a Trump defeat this November , he is forced to leave office .
The court will hear arguments on the case — where a lower court has already declared the policy illegal — on November 30 .
The Justice Department had previously asked the Supreme Court , if it was to hold oral arguments in the dispute , to do so on a timetable that would allow for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schedule announced Friday fits with that request .
The case is considered a legal longshot for the administration .
But it ’ s one with major implications if Trump can secure enough votes from the court — which by then will likely include his latest nominee , Judge Amy Coney Barrett — to let him implement the policy .
Trump is seeking to remove undocumented immigrants from the count used to determine how many House seats each state gets .
Doing so would allow him to shrink the congressional representation of immigrant rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whiter , more Republican-leaning parts of the country .
The lower court said that Trump ’ s proposal violates laws passed by Congress that dictate aspects of the census process .
Those laws say explicitly that apportionment should be based on “ total population.
” The challengers to the policy also argue that it violates the Constitution ’ s mandate that a “ whole number of persons ” make up the count for apportionment .
The lower court did not address the constitutionality of Trump ’ s policy .

The Supreme Court announced plans to review President Trump’s anti-immigrant apportionment policy on a timeline that could give him a decision on its legality before, in the event of a Trump defeat this November, he is forced to leave office.
The court will hear arguments on the case — where a lower court has already declared the policy illegal — on November 30.
The Justice Department had previously asked the Supreme Court, if it was to hold oral arguments in the dispute, to do so on a timetable that would allow for a decision by early January. The schedule announced Friday fits with that request.
The case is considered a legal longshot for the administration. But it’s one with major implications if Trump can secure enough votes from the court — which by then will likely include his latest nominee, Judge Amy Coney Barrett — to let him implement the policy.
Trump is seeking to remove undocumented immigrants from the count used to determine how many House seats each state gets. Doing so would allow him to shrink the congressional representation of immigrant rich states while boosting the electoral advantages of whiter, more Republican-leaning parts of the country.
The lower court said that Trump’s proposal violates laws passed by Congress that dictate aspects of the census process. Those laws say explicitly that apportionment should be based on “total population.” The challengers to the policy also argue that it violates the Constitution’s mandate that a “whole number of persons” make up the count for apportionment. The lower court did not address the constitutionality of Trump’s policy.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--ICYMI: Your TPM Weekend News Roundup

ICYMI: Your TPM Weekend News Roundup

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement to TPM that when the Census Bureau gives the President the 2020…

The California State Bar is arguing that recent criminal charges against John Eastman in Fulton County, Georgia should not prevent…


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--EXCLUSIVE: Ross Commits To Protocols That Make It Harder For Trump To Mess With Census

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement to TPM that when the Census Bureau gives the President the 2020 census data for congressional apportionment , it will make that data public at the same time .
The statement commits the Trump administration to following a decades-long tradition of simultaneously releasing and transmitting the numbers , encouraging public confidence that the data will not be secretly manipulated by the White House .
For months , former Census officials and other census observers have been on the lookout for signals that the Trump administration might deviate from these long-established protocols .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department and the Census Bureau a detailed list of questions about its plans for the apportionment process .
“ I have no further comment on the ongoing litigation , but we will release this Census data publicly , and in keeping with past practice , will do so simultaneously with its delivery to the President , ” Ross said in a response provided to TPM on Friday afternoon .
After a follow up from TPM , the Commerce Department confirmed that Ross was referring to the total population counts , the apportionment calculations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the event the Supreme Court gives a green light , the immigration data that Trump is requesting so that he can exclude undocumented immigrants from apportionment process .
A lower court has declared the exclusion of undocumented immigrants from the apportionment count illegal .
Not long after TPM received the initial statement from Ross , the Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in that case on a timetable that could let it resolve the dispute before early January .
The gambit , if okayed by the Supreme Court , would allow Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while boosting the political power of whiter , Republican-leaning parts of the country .
It has been blocked by a lower court .
Even amid the legal uncertainty , the Census Bureau has been moving forward on assembling data on undocumented immigrants .
Recent developments in the various census-related court cases have suggested that the Bureau is having trouble collecting reliable data on undocumented immigrants beyond those that can be linked to ICE detention records , which would be a relatively small number of people .
In the meantime , census advocates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what data the Census Bureau will be providing the White House if and when the White House seeks to execute this plan .
There are concerns that the Bureau will be pressured to provide data that do not meet the Bureau ’ s normal quality standards due to a White House desire to maximize how much it can screw over blue states .
Seeing what data the White House will be working with will help the public understand whether those concerns are warranted — or if there are any other tactics the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to manipulate the count for the benefit of Republicans .
“ Whatever is released from the Bureau to the Commerce Department to the White House , those data products need to be released to the American people , ” Denice Ross — a senior fellow with the National Conference on Citizenship , who worked on census issues in post-Katrina New Orleans — told TPM .
A separate statement from the Census Bureau to TPM signaled that the Bureau is also not 100 percent sure it can meet the statutory Dec. 31 deadline for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The Census Bureau is working hard to process the data in order to deliver complete and accurate state population counts as close to the December 31 , 2020 , statutory deadline as possible , ” the statement said .
That deadline was a flashpoint in a recent court battle over the Trump administration ’ s moves to expedite the census count .
At the beginning of the pandemic , it requested that Congress extend that deadlines by four months given the ways the COVID-19 outbreak was disrupting the survey .
But over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reverse itself on that request — a move many believe indicated a desire to implement the immigrant apportionment policy before Inauguration Day , in case Trump lost the election .
The apportionment policy and the reversal on the count timeline are both examples of what has been a pattern for this administration : an approach to the census that seems to prioritize a political agenda over the count ’ s accuracy .
The administration ’ s caginess on how the apportionment process will work was most recently documented in a New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ messages identified by the Times , as well as other public and private chatter coming out of the administration had fueled fears that the White House will be able further manipulate the numbers in a way not known to the public .
For the last 50 years , the Commerce Secretary and the Census director have held a press conference to announce both the population totals and the Bureau ’ s apportionment calculations on the same day those numbers are sent to the President .
That has helped the public maintain confidence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tampering with numbers before sending them to Congress .
Justice Department filings and other chatter coming out of the administration have suggested that this time , the White House may run the apportionment calculations instead of the Bureau .
Not everyone was convinced by Ross ’ commitment , and there are other examples where the White House has reversed on official commitments about the census .
“ The Commerce Department is being sketchy , limiting its comments to following past practices.They are not indicating if they will add new twists to the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wouldn ’ t be surprised if they do something completely new and different a few days or weeks later , ” Jeff Wice , a redistricting lawyer and adjunct professor at New York Law School , told TPM .
This article has been updated .

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement to TPM that when the Census Bureau gives the President the 2020 census data for congressional apportionment, it will make that data public at the same time.
The statement commits the Trump administration to following a decades-long tradition of simultaneously releasing and transmitting the numbers, encouraging public confidence that the data will not be secretly manipulated by the White House.
For months, former Census officials and other census observers have been on the lookout for signals that the Trump administration might deviate from these long-established protocols. On Thursday, TPM sent the Commerce Department and the Census Bureau a detailed list of questions about its plans for the apportionment process.
“I have no further comment on the ongoing litigation, but we will release this Census data publicly, and in keeping with past practice, will do so simultaneously with its delivery to the President,” Ross said in a response provided to TPM on Friday afternoon.
After a follow up from TPM, the Commerce Department confirmed that Ross was referring to the total population counts, the apportionment calculations that they produce, and, in the event the Supreme Court gives a green light, the immigration data that Trump is requesting so that he can exclude undocumented immigrants from apportionment process.
A lower court has declared the exclusion of undocumented immigrants from the apportionment count illegal. Not long after TPM received the initial statement from Ross, the Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in that case on a timetable that could let it resolve the dispute before early January.
The gambit, if okayed by the Supreme Court, would allow Trump to diminish political representation for immigrant-rich states, while boosting the political power of whiter, Republican-leaning parts of the country. It has been blocked by a lower court.
Even amid the legal uncertainty, the Census Bureau has been moving forward on assembling data on undocumented immigrants. Recent developments in the various census-related court cases have suggested that the Bureau is having trouble collecting reliable data on undocumented immigrants beyond those that can be linked to ICE detention records, which would be a relatively small number of people.
In the meantime, census advocates have been clamoring for full transparency on what data the Census Bureau will be providing the White House if and when the White House seeks to execute this plan. There are concerns that the Bureau will be pressured to provide data that do not meet the Bureau’s normal quality standards due to a White House desire to maximize how much it can screw over blue states.
Seeing what data the White House will be working with will help the public understand whether those concerns are warranted — or if there are any other tactics the White House could in theory try to use to manipulate the count for the benefit of Republicans.
“Whatever is released from the Bureau to the Commerce Department to the White House, those data products need to be released to the American people,” Denice Ross — a senior fellow with the National Conference on Citizenship, who worked on census issues in post-Katrina New Orleans — told TPM.
A separate statement from the Census Bureau to TPM signaled that the Bureau is also not 100 percent sure it can meet the statutory Dec. 31 deadline for delivering the data to the president.
“The Census Bureau is working hard to process the data in order to deliver complete and accurate state population counts as close to the December 31, 2020, statutory deadline as possible,” the statement said.
That deadline was a flashpoint in a recent court battle over the Trump administration’s moves to expedite the census count. At the beginning of the pandemic, it requested that Congress extend that deadlines by four months given the ways the COVID-19 outbreak was disrupting the survey. But over the summer, the White House appeared to reverse itself on that request — a move many believe indicated a desire to implement the immigrant apportionment policy before Inauguration Day, in case Trump lost the election.
The apportionment policy and the reversal on the count timeline are both examples of what has been a pattern for this administration: an approach to the census that seems to prioritize a political agenda over the count’s accuracy.
The administration’s caginess on how the apportionment process will work was most recently documented in a New York Times report this week. The mixed messages identified by the Times, as well as other public and private chatter coming out of the administration had fueled fears that the White House will be able further manipulate the numbers in a way not known to the public.
For the last 50 years, the Commerce Secretary and the Census director have held a press conference to announce both the population totals and the Bureau’s apportionment calculations on the same day those numbers are sent to the President. That has helped the public maintain confidence that the White House wasn’t then tampering with numbers before sending them to Congress.
Justice Department filings and other chatter coming out of the administration have suggested that this time, the White House may run the apportionment calculations instead of the Bureau.
Not everyone was convinced by Ross’ commitment, and there are other examples where the White House has reversed on official commitments about the census.
“The Commerce Department is being sketchy, limiting its comments to following past practices.They are not indicating if they will add new twists to the process or state population totals for reapportionment. I wouldn’t be surprised if they do something completely new and different a few days or weeks later,” Jeff Wice, a redistricting lawyer and adjunct professor at New York Law School, told TPM.
This article has been updated.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--MI Secretary Of State Bans Open Carry Of Guns At Polling Places On Election Day

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson on Friday issued a ban on open carry of firearms at polling sites on Election Day .
“ The presence of firearms at the polling place , clerk ’ s office ( s ) , or absent voter counting board may cause disruption , fear , or intimidation for voters , election workers , and others present , ” Benson wrote in her directive .
Under the rule , open carry will be prohibited in a polling place or within 100 feet of its entrance and exit .
Benson said in a statement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eligible Michigan citizens can freely exercise their fundamental right to vote without fear of threats , intimidation or harassment.
” “ Prohibiting the open-carry of firearms in areas where citizens cast their ballots is necessary to ensure every voter is protected , ” the Michigan official stated .
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel backed the restriction , asserting that “ an armed presence at the polls is inconsistent with our notion of a free democracy.
” Benson ’ s ban comes on the heels of the FBI announcing last week an alleged domestic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) allegedly over her restrictions on business operations amid COVID-19 .
Several of the alleged suspects of the scheme were members of a militia group called “ the Wolverine Watchmen .
”

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson on Friday issued a ban on open carry of firearms at polling sites on Election Day.
“The presence of firearms at the polling place, clerk’s office(s), or absent voter counting board may cause disruption, fear, or intimidation for voters, election workers, and others present,” Benson wrote in her directive.
Under the rule, open carry will be prohibited in a polling place or within 100 feet of its entrance and exit.
Benson said in a statement that she was “committed to ensuring all eligible Michigan citizens can freely exercise their fundamental right to vote without fear of threats, intimidation or harassment.”
“Prohibiting the open-carry of firearms in areas where citizens cast their ballots is necessary to ensure every voter is protected,” the Michigan official stated.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel backed the restriction, asserting that “an armed presence at the polls is inconsistent with our notion of a free democracy.”
Benson’s ban comes on the heels of the FBI announcing last week an alleged domestic terrorist plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) allegedly over her restrictions on business operations amid COVID-19. Several of the alleged suspects of the scheme were members of a militia group called “the Wolverine Watchmen.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Biden Beats Ratings-Obsessed Trump In Viewers During Competing Network Town Halls

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden ’ s town hall on Thursday garnered more viewers than President Trump ’ s alternate primetime event on NBC , according to Nielsen .
Biden ’ s town hall averaged 13.9 million viewers on Thursday night , significantly trumping the President ’ s average of 10.6 million viewers on the competing NBC network .
The ratings figures come after NBC was widely criticized for holding the competing event , offering President Trump a time slot after he refused the Commission on Presidential Debate ’ s proposed virtual format for a second face off with his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diagnosis on Oct. 2 .
Perhaps even more surprising , per CNN , is that the Trump town hall was simulcast by two of NBC ’ s cable channels , MSNBC and CNBC , but even when those channels are included in the total , the ratings for Biden ’ s town hall still win out .
On MSNBC , Trump reached 1.74 million viewers , and on CNBC , about 671,000 viewers , according to Nielsen .
Cable channels included , Trump ’ s audience average expands to 13 million — still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s average audience total on ABC .
Notably , Nielsen ’ s early ratings measure viewers tuning in from televisions and do not count live-streaming numbers from phones , tablets , computers and other devices — figures that are expected to be released later in the day .
While surprising perhaps to both campaigns and many political commentators , Biden ’ s ratings strength has been intensifying for months as he deepens his lead in national polls — much to the chagrin of the ratings-obsessed Trump .
Before his 2016 presidential bid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NBC , hosting shows like “ The Apprentice ” and touting high performance for the network .
That marked fixation on optics and ratings has continued and was palpable from the earliest days of his presidency when he famously exaggerated attendance at his inauguration in 2017 .
But when the TV ratings have failed him , Trump has called foul , claiming when Nielsen reported higher turnout for the Democratic National Convention that “ Online Streaming Numbers ” hadn ’ t been counted in the released numbers .
But as the Associated Press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single universal standard for measuring all the various ways the town halls were streamed , both live and on-demand .
Neither event reached anywhere near the ratings achieved during the Sept. 29 presidential debate in Cleveland , Ohio , which Nielsen has said drew an estimated 73.1 million viewers who tuned in across 16 networks .

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s town hall on Thursday garnered more viewers than President Trump’s alternate primetime event on NBC, according to Nielsen.
Biden’s town hall averaged 13.9 million viewers on Thursday night, significantly trumping the President’s average of 10.6 million viewers on the competing NBC network.
The ratings figures come after NBC was widely criticized for holding the competing event, offering President Trump a time slot after he refused the Commission on Presidential Debate’s proposed virtual format for a second face off with his Democratic opponent after he announced a COVID-19 diagnosis on Oct. 2.
Perhaps even more surprising, per CNN, is that the Trump town hall was simulcast by two of NBC’s cable channels, MSNBC and CNBC, but even when those channels are included in the total, the ratings for Biden’s town hall still win out. On MSNBC, Trump reached 1.74 million viewers, and on CNBC, about 671,000 viewers, according to Nielsen. Cable channels included, Trump’s audience average expands to 13 million — still roughly 1 million viewers shy of Biden’s average audience total on ABC.
Notably, Nielsen’s early ratings measure viewers tuning in from televisions and do not count live-streaming numbers from phones, tablets, computers and other devices — figures that are expected to be released later in the day.
While surprising perhaps to both campaigns and many political commentators, Biden’s ratings strength has been intensifying for months as he deepens his lead in national polls — much to the chagrin of the ratings-obsessed Trump.
Before his 2016 presidential bid, Trump had been a staple of NBC, hosting shows like “The Apprentice” and touting high performance for the network.
That marked fixation on optics and ratings has continued and was palpable from the earliest days of his presidency when he famously exaggerated attendance at his inauguration in 2017.
But when the TV ratings have failed him, Trump has called foul, claiming when Nielsen reported higher turnout for the Democratic National Convention that “Online Streaming Numbers” hadn’t been counted in the released numbers.
But as the Associated Press previously pointed out, there is no single universal standard for measuring all the various ways the town halls were streamed, both live and on-demand.
Neither event reached anywhere near the ratings achieved during the Sept. 29 presidential debate in Cleveland, Ohio, which Nielsen has said drew an estimated 73.1 million viewers who tuned in across 16 networks.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Are These Five States (And A Territory) Ready For A Pandemic Election?

The election is a scant three weeks away , and a new surge in COVID-19 cases is upon us .
We continue our state-by-state look at how election officials are trying to keep voting safe in the pandemic .
On tap for this week are : Idaho , Indiana , Nebraska , North Dakota , South Dakota , and Puerto Rico .
Where have election officials worked out the kinks of their summer primaries ?
And where has the chaos already begun to infect the general ?
Here ’ s this week ’ s installment of our survey , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve examined .
Idaho held a historic all-mail primary this May , which produced the highest turnout in 40 years .
All told , 335,037 residents voted — an enormous strain on Idaho ’ s vote-by-mail infrastructure , given that the 2018 general election only saw 161,830 mail-in ballots cast .
Accordingly , there were some significant glitches .
Ada County , the state ’ s most populous , had to reissue 7,000 ballots due to errors such as including a candidate who ’ d withdrawn , or sending thousands of nonpartisan ballots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There were also delays in processing the massive influx of ballots , as elections offices were severely understaffed .
The Ada County elections clerk attributed the problems to extremely late notice from the Secretary of State ’ s office about the switch to the all-mail election ( just two days before federal law required the first ballots to be sent ) and the introduction of an online ballot request system , which brought in a tsunami of requests .
For the general election , there will be some in-person voting options , along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has also installed drop boxes , and beefed up its elections staff .
Republicans are likely to retain their domination in the state .
Their incumbents have comfortable chances of holding on to their U.S. Senate and House seats , and Republicans have a supermajority in both chambers of the legislature .
Democrats are seeing some rays of hope in the state though : it ’ s grown in population with new arrivals by 2.1 percent since 2019 , and the enormous turnout for this year ’ s Democratic primary suggests significant enthusiasm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make voting safer in the primary , Indiana officials have resisted similar measures in the general — even as the state is experiencing a major uptick in COVID-19 .
Voter advocates have had to go to court to open up absentee voting — but their success has been mixed .
Most recently , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit reversed a judge ’ s decision to extend the receipt deadline for mail-in ballots .
A quirk in Indiana law requires those ballots to make it to election officials by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in-person voting sites remain open for several more hours .
When Common Cause Indiana , a voting rights group , looked at the numbers in just two Indiana counties from the June primary , more than 2,000 ballots were tossed because they missed the noon Election Day deadline .
“ Because we expect a much larger volume of mail-in voting in the general election , the potential is tens of thousands of people having their ballot rejected because it does not arrive in the county election office by noon , ” Julie Vaughn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indiana , told TPM .
Her group also secured a ruling that ’ s been allowed to stand ordering that election officials give absentee voters the opportunity to fix deficiencies on their ballots .
But perhaps the biggest issue of all is that the state is refusing to let COVID-19 alone count as an excuse to vote absentee in the general , even though officials granted that waiver in the primary .
“ It ’ s hard to tell that we ’ re voting during a pandemic here in Indiana , because we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Vaughn said .
Early in-person voting has featured record turnout and long lines at voting sites all over the state .
Among the most closely watched races is the contest for state Attorney General , where Democrats are hoping to break up the domination the GOP has over the statewide government .
Democrats are also aiming to end the Republican supermajority in the state House , which allows GOP lawmakers to easily sidestep Democratic procedural tactics that could slow down their agenda .
Republican Gov .
Eric Holcomb appears likely , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As in plenty of states around the country , Nebraska broke records in the middle of a pandemic this summer : An unprecedented surge of mail-in voting for the state ’ s May primary elections made up the bulk of a historic turnout .
Around 471,000 people voted in those elections , smashing the previous 1972 primary record of 413,000 .
Around 80 % of those votes were cast on mail-in ballots , the Lincoln Journal-Star noted .
In Douglas County , the state ’ s most populous , Election Commissioner Brian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ registered voters , beating the previous record of 27 % in 2006 despite this year ’ s pandemic , the Omaha World-Herald reported .
The vast majority of votes , 85 % of the county ’ s total , came in early ballots , either mailed or dropped off at elections offices .
One poll inspector described primary day to the World-Herald as “ smooth as silk ” : People wore masks as requested , thousands of poll workers ( including a few dozen Nebraska National Guard volunteers ) allowed polling sites to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting and the heavy vote-by-mail number alleviated pressure on in-person polling places .
( It likely helped that all voters received applications to vote by mail , and that an online tool let them confirm that their ballots had reached elections officials . )
Drop boxes played a large role as well : Though present in past elections , the receptacles ’ footprint is significant this year .
In addition to ballots themselves , voters can put their voter registration forms and ballot requests in drop boxes if they want to skip the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the city ’ s public libraries now host drop boxes .
And unlike in the past , voters in every county can utilize 24/7 drop boxes outside their local elections office .
Still , there are pitfalls , including a potential time crunch : The deadline to request a mail-in ballot is Oct. 23 , but ballots are due on Nov. 3 and will not be accepted later , even if they ’ re postmarked on-time .
And the Nebraska ACLU sprang into action last month after learning that the state had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weren ’ t eligible to vote .
The Cornhusker State offers some legitimate presidential intrigue this year : Nebraska and Maine are the only states that award electors by congressional district , and according to recent polling , Joe Biden could easily pick off one Electoral College vote if he flips NE-2 , the congressional district covering Omaha .
( Trump won the district ’ s elector by two points in 2016 . )
Sen. Ben Sasse ( R-NE ) seems on course for reelection , but some intense criticism of the President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than we know .
Among the state ’ s ballot measures : A proposed cap on payday loan interest rates , and a bid to remove language from the state ’ s constitution allowing for slavery as a criminal punishment .
North Dakota is unique in that it does not require voter registration ; it implements instead a voter ID law for anyone who shows up at the polls .
The lack of traditional voter rolls meant that the state had to get creative when it sought to transform its April primary into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those who voted by mail in the primary signed up to receive mail ballots in the general , according to the state chapter of the League of Women Voters , and anyone else who wants to can download and submit an absentee ballot application .
Election officials do make an attempt to contact voters if discrepancies arise on their absentee ballots .
Because the election officials can not begin opening and processing the ballots until the day before the election , it ’ s expected that the results will take at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to report .
As for in-person voting , early voting is an option , but how it ’ s offered varies county to county .
But spotty internet and mail service in some parts of the state , combined with a complicated process for applying to vote absentee , have some advocates worried about voter access in the pandemic , even if the state doesn ’ t have the kind of races that attract national attention .
“ We ’ re a deep red state and nobody ’ s really worried that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deep red state , no matter what happens , so there isn ’ t too much sound and fury , ” Carol Sawicki , the treasurer of North Dakota ’ s League of Women Voters , told TPM .
Of particular concern are the barriers to the ballot the state ’ s Native American community faces — barriers that have been exacerbated by the pandemic .
Postal service is very unpredictable in tribal areas — a reality North Dakota Republicans were accused of weaponizing a few years ago when they added a requirement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those IDs have a residential address associated with them .
( Because tribal residents often lack a formal street address , many used P.O .
boxes instead .
Lawsuits challenging the residential address requirement were settled this year with an agreement creating a state program to assign to Native American households the formal addresses required by the law . )
If Native American voters can not depend on the mail to deliver their ballots , they might be stuck traveling several miles instead to a drop-off location .
The group North Dakota Native @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from state officials on whether a proposed program to collect and submit ballots in tribal communities would be lawful .
The state was dodgy in its response to the request , so the group is not moving forward with the program out of fear the ballots would be ultimately rejected .
The group has also had to limit its tradition of in-person activities to encourage voting and facilitate ballot access in tribal lands due to the pandemic , director Nicole Donaghy told TPM .
South Dakota has taken a partial approach towards adapting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and some hiccups are expected for this year ’ s election in the sparsely populated state .
In theory , the state is prepared : it sent out absentee ballot applications to all South Dakotans .
But in practice , voters have no way to cure defects , so ballots can remain rejected en masse , as seen in the state ’ s primary .
Though South Dakota has relatively low stakes in the national race , with its presidential electoral votes and Senate seat likely to go for the GOP , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bucked the President ’ s fear-mongering around vote-by-mail .
Officials did successfully run the state ’ s primary elections after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic , but not without a significant number of absentee ballots being rejected .
The state ’ s big COVID-related reform has been to send virtually every voter an absentee ballot application .
In the primary elections in the spring , that was partly a success : votes were counted in a timely manner .
But they didn ’ t go without a hitch .
The state ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncounted due to supposed defects in the ballots , though state auditors — who oversee elections and count votes in South Dakota — don ’ t tell voters whether ballots are defective .
But the amount of absentee ballots cast in the general election is expected to be huge for the state : Secretary of State Steve Barnett said on Tuesday that more than 100,000 South Dakotans ’ votes have been received by local auditors — more than the total number of absentee ballots cast in the 2016 election .
Auditors will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absentee ballots before Election Day itself , but will only count the votes come Nov. 3 .
South Dakota hasn ’ t extended its registration periods for the election , nor does it offer online registration or online tools to request a ballot .
Rather , voters have to fill out a form to do so , though all South Dakotans can vote absentee without having to provide any sort of excuse .
Barnett has said that the state will need poll workers come Election Day to count the ballots , so the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in some delay for the results .
Puerto Rico ’ s primary elections this August were the most dysfunctional in the U.S. : As the morning hours ticked by , stacks of ballots sat undelivered miles away from polling places , where voters in some cases waited fruitlessly all day .
Eventually , the territory ’ s Supreme Court stepped in , ruling that there would be a second round of voting the following weekend in affected areas .
“ It is the most baffling , embarrassing thing that Puerto Ricans have ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ correspondent on the island , David Begnaud .
“ It literally was a devastating day for democracy on the island.
” With a new elections commissioner in place and and at least some COVID-19 flexibility won in a lawsuit — voters over 60 can vote early or by mail as of September — the territory is seeking to avoid a similar catastrophe this time around .
The mess was , in a sense , indicative of Puerto Rico ’ s politics in recent years .
The now-resigned elections commissioner , Juan Ernesto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the now-resigned Gov .
Ricardo Rosselló of the pro-statehood Partido Nuevo Progresista ( PNP ) , who left office after explosive leaked chats prompted a massive popular protest movement — RickyLeaks .
The unelected governor who took over after Rosselló , PNP ’ s Wanda Vázquez , was subsequently defeated in the rescheduled primary election .
Given all that happened afterward , it ’ s quaint to think that in May , Vázquez was behind the newsiest question on this year ’ s ballot — another statehood referendum .
Unlike past referendums @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yes or no ” vote , and there won ’ t be other options listed on the ballot .
That ’ s led critics to dismiss the plebiscite as cynical electorialism , an effort to juice PNP candidates ’ numbers without providing any actionable mandate for the broader statehood movement .
Interestingly , the main opposition party ( the Partido Popular Democrático , PPD ) has not called for a boycott of the vote , as it did for the last referendum in 2017 .
The vote may backfire given voters ’ frustration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , professor of Latin American , Caribbean and U.S. Latino studies at SUNY Albany .
“ If turnout is low , and less than 50 % of registered voters support statehood , that ’ s not a particularly compelling argument for the party , ” he said .
In addition to the referendum and the governorship , Puerto Ricans this year will decide on the potential reelection of Puerto Rico ’ s “ resident commissioner ” — the island ’ s non-voting congressional delegate — Jenniffer González-Colón .
( No matter what Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ricans still can ’ t vote for president . )

The election is a scant three weeks away, and a new surge in COVID-19 cases is upon us. We continue our state-by-state look at how election officials are trying to keep voting safe in the pandemic.
On tap for this week are: Idaho, Indiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Puerto Rico.
Where have election officials worked out the kinks of their summer primaries? And where has the chaos already begun to infect the general?
Here’s this week’s installment of our survey, and check out the other states we’ve examined.
Idaho
Idaho held a historic all-mail primary this May, which produced the highest turnout in 40 years. All told, 335,037 residents voted — an enormous strain on Idaho’s vote-by-mail infrastructure, given that the 2018 general election only saw 161,830 mail-in ballots cast.
Accordingly, there were some significant glitches. Ada County, the state’s most populous, had to reissue 7,000 ballots due to errors such as including a candidate who’d withdrawn, or sending thousands of nonpartisan ballots when voters had requested Democratic ones. There were also delays in processing the massive influx of ballots, as elections offices were severely understaffed. The Ada County elections clerk attributed the problems to extremely late notice from the Secretary of State’s office about the switch to the all-mail election (just two days before federal law required the first ballots to be sent) and the introduction of an online ballot request system, which brought in a tsunami of requests.
For the general election, there will be some in-person voting options, along with the vote-by-mail route. The state has also installed drop boxes, and beefed up its elections staff.
Republicans are likely to retain their domination in the state. Their incumbents have comfortable chances of holding on to their U.S. Senate and House seats, and Republicans have a supermajority in both chambers of the legislature. Democrats are seeing some rays of hope in the state though: it’s grown in population with new arrivals by 2.1 percent since 2019, and the enormous turnout for this year’s Democratic primary suggests significant enthusiasm among liberals.
Indiana
After taking some steps to make voting safer in the primary, Indiana officials have resisted similar measures in the general — even as the state is experiencing a major uptick in COVID-19.
Voter advocates have had to go to court to open up absentee voting — but their success has been mixed. Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit reversed a judge’s decision to extend the receipt deadline for mail-in ballots. A quirk in Indiana law requires those ballots to make it to election officials by noon on Election Day, even though in-person voting sites remain open for several more hours. When Common Cause Indiana, a voting rights group, looked at the numbers in just two Indiana counties from the June primary, more than 2,000 ballots were tossed because they missed the noon Election Day deadline.
“Because we expect a much larger volume of mail-in voting in the general election, the potential is tens of thousands of people having their ballot rejected because it does not arrive in the county election office by noon,” Julie Vaughn, the policy director for Common Cause Indiana, told TPM.
Her group also secured a ruling that’s been allowed to stand ordering that election officials give absentee voters the opportunity to fix deficiencies on their ballots. But perhaps the biggest issue of all is that the state is refusing to let COVID-19 alone count as an excuse to vote absentee in the general, even though officials granted that waiver in the primary.
“It’s hard to tell that we’re voting during a pandemic here in Indiana, because we are not really making accommodations for voters,” Vaughn said.
Early in-person voting has featured record turnout and long lines at voting sites all over the state.
Among the most closely watched races is the contest for state Attorney General, where Democrats are hoping to break up the domination the GOP has over the statewide government. Democrats are also aiming to end the Republican supermajority in the state House, which allows GOP lawmakers to easily sidestep Democratic procedural tactics that could slow down their agenda. Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb appears likely, but not guaranteed, to win re-election.
Nebraska
As in plenty of states around the country, Nebraska broke records in the middle of a pandemic this summer: An unprecedented surge of mail-in voting for the state’s May primary elections made up the bulk of a historic turnout. Around 471,000 people voted in those elections, smashing the previous 1972 primary record of 413,000. Around 80% of those votes were cast on mail-in ballots, the Lincoln Journal-Star noted.
In Douglas County, the state’s most populous, Election Commissioner Brian Kruse recorded a 35% turnout among registered voters, beating the previous record of 27% in 2006 despite this year’s pandemic, the Omaha World-Herald reported. The vast majority of votes, 85% of the county’s total, came in early ballots, either mailed or dropped off at elections offices.
One poll inspector described primary day to the World-Herald as “smooth as silk”: People wore masks as requested, thousands of poll workers (including a few dozen Nebraska National Guard volunteers) allowed polling sites to stay open and, crucially, early voting and the heavy vote-by-mail number alleviated pressure on in-person polling places. (It likely helped that all voters received applications to vote by mail, and that an online tool let them confirm that their ballots had reached elections officials.)
Drop boxes played a large role as well: Though present in past elections, the receptacles’ footprint is significant this year. In addition to ballots themselves, voters can put their voter registration forms and ballot requests in drop boxes if they want to skip the mail. In Lincoln, all eight of the city’s public libraries now host drop boxes. And unlike in the past, voters in every county can utilize 24/7 drop boxes outside their local elections office.
Still, there are pitfalls, including a potential time crunch: The deadline to request a mail-in ballot is Oct. 23, but ballots are due on Nov. 3 and will not be accepted later, even if they’re postmarked on-time. And the Nebraska ACLU sprang into action last month after learning that the state had incorrectly told some former felons that they weren’t eligible to vote.
The Cornhusker State offers some legitimate presidential intrigue this year: Nebraska and Maine are the only states that award electors by congressional district, and according to recent polling, Joe Biden could easily pick off one Electoral College vote if he flips NE-2, the congressional district covering Omaha. (Trump won the district’s elector by two points in 2016.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) seems on course for reelection, but some intense criticism of the President this week implies things may be closer than we know. Among the state’s ballot measures: A proposed cap on payday loan interest rates, and a bid to remove language from the state’s constitution allowing for slavery as a criminal punishment.
North Dakota
North Dakota is unique in that it does not require voter registration; it implements instead a voter ID law for anyone who shows up at the polls.
The lack of traditional voter rolls meant that the state had to get creative when it sought to transform its April primary into an all-mail election. Some 75 percent of those who voted by mail in the primary signed up to receive mail ballots in the general, according to the state chapter of the League of Women Voters, and anyone else who wants to can download and submit an absentee ballot application.
Election officials do make an attempt to contact voters if discrepancies arise on their absentee ballots. Because the election officials cannot begin opening and processing the ballots until the day before the election, it’s expected that the results will take at least one or two days after Nov. 3 to report.
As for in-person voting, early voting is an option, but how it’s offered varies county to county.
But spotty internet and mail service in some parts of the state, combined with a complicated process for applying to vote absentee, have some advocates worried about voter access in the pandemic, even if the state doesn’t have the kind of races that attract national attention.
“We’re a deep red state and nobody’s really worried that we’re not going to be a deep red state, no matter what happens, so there isn’t too much sound and fury,” Carol Sawicki, the treasurer of North Dakota’s League of Women Voters, told TPM.
Of particular concern are the barriers to the ballot the state’s Native American community faces — barriers that have been exacerbated by the pandemic. Postal service is very unpredictable in tribal areas — a reality North Dakota Republicans were accused of weaponizing a few years ago when they added a requirement to the state voter ID law that those IDs have a residential address associated with them. (Because tribal residents often lack a formal street address, many used P.O. boxes instead. Lawsuits challenging the residential address requirement were settled this year with an agreement creating a state program to assign to Native American households the formal addresses required by the law.)
If Native American voters cannot depend on the mail to deliver their ballots, they might be stuck traveling several miles instead to a drop-off location.
The group North Dakota Native Vote tried to get an advisory opinion from state officials on whether a proposed program to collect and submit ballots in tribal communities would be lawful. The state was dodgy in its response to the request, so the group is not moving forward with the program out of fear the ballots would be ultimately rejected.
The group has also had to limit its tradition of in-person activities to encourage voting and facilitate ballot access in tribal lands due to the pandemic, director Nicole Donaghy told TPM.
South Dakota
South Dakota has taken a partial approach towards adapting its voting procedures for the COVID-19 pandemic, and some hiccups are expected for this year’s election in the sparsely populated state. In theory, the state is prepared: it sent out absentee ballot applications to all South Dakotans. But in practice, voters have no way to cure defects, so ballots can remain rejected en masse, as seen in the state’s primary. Though South Dakota has relatively low stakes in the national race, with its presidential electoral votes and Senate seat likely to go for the GOP, the state’s Republicans have publicly bucked the President’s fear-mongering around vote-by-mail. Officials did successfully run the state’s primary elections after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, but not without a significant number of absentee ballots being rejected.
The state’s big COVID-related reform has been to send virtually every voter an absentee ballot application. In the primary elections in the spring, that was partly a success: votes were counted in a timely manner. But they didn’t go without a hitch. The state’s primary saw 1,200 absentee ballots go uncounted due to supposed defects in the ballots, though state auditors — who oversee elections and count votes in South Dakota — don’t tell voters whether ballots are defective. But the amount of absentee ballots cast in the general election is expected to be huge for the state: Secretary of State Steve Barnett said on Tuesday that more than 100,000 South Dakotans’ votes have been received by local auditors — more than the total number of absentee ballots cast in the 2016 election.
Auditors will be able to take preliminary steps to process absentee ballots before Election Day itself, but will only count the votes come Nov. 3. South Dakota hasn’t extended its registration periods for the election, nor does it offer online registration or online tools to request a ballot. Rather, voters have to fill out a form to do so, though all South Dakotans can vote absentee without having to provide any sort of excuse. Barnett has said that the state will need poll workers come Election Day to count the ballots, so the coming surge of absentee votes could result in some delay for the results.
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico’s primary elections this August were the most dysfunctional in the U.S.: As the morning hours ticked by, stacks of ballots sat undelivered miles away from polling places, where voters in some cases waited fruitlessly all day. Eventually, the territory’s Supreme Court stepped in, ruling that there would be a second round of voting the following weekend in affected areas.
“It is the most baffling, embarrassing thing that Puerto Ricans have ever seen happen,” said CBS News’ correspondent on the island, David Begnaud. “It literally was a devastating day for democracy on the island.”
With a new elections commissioner in place and and at least some COVID-19 flexibility won in a lawsuit — voters over 60 can vote early or by mail as of September — the territory is seeking to avoid a similar catastrophe this time around.
The mess was, in a sense, indicative of Puerto Rico’s politics in recent years. The now-resigned elections commissioner, Juan Ernesto Dávila, was appointed to that role by the now-resigned Gov. Ricardo Rosselló of the pro-statehood Partido Nuevo Progresista (PNP), who left office after explosive leaked chats prompted a massive popular protest movement — RickyLeaks. The unelected governor who took over after Rosselló, PNP’s Wanda Vázquez, was subsequently defeated in the rescheduled primary election.
Given all that happened afterward, it’s quaint to think that in May, Vázquez was behind the newsiest question on this year’s ballot — another statehood referendum. Unlike past referendums, this one is a straight “yes or no” vote, and there won’t be other options listed on the ballot. That’s led critics to dismiss the plebiscite as cynical electorialism, an effort to juice PNP candidates’ numbers without providing any actionable mandate for the broader statehood movement.
Interestingly, the main opposition party (the Partido Popular Democrático, PPD) has not called for a boycott of the vote, as it did for the last referendum in 2017. The vote may backfire given voters’ frustration with the PNP, said Pedro Cabán, professor of Latin American, Caribbean and U.S. Latino studies at SUNY Albany.
“If turnout is low, and less than 50% of registered voters support statehood, that’s not a particularly compelling argument for the party,” he said.
In addition to the referendum and the governorship, Puerto Ricans this year will decide on the potential reelection of Puerto Rico’s “resident commissioner” — the island’s non-voting congressional delegate — Jenniffer González-Colón. (No matter what Donald Trump and Mike Pence think, Puerto Ricans still can’t vote for president.)


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-16--Massive Unemployment Just One ‘Great Part Of American Capitalism’ Kudlow Insists

White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow is likely aware that the COVID-19 pandemic has led to millions of Americans losing their jobs , including nearly 900,000 new unemployment claims just last week .
But that massive surge in joblessness , he said Friday , is just part of what makes American capitalism great !
“ The talk is that a lot of folks became unemployed , most regrettably , but they ’ re sticking with it and they ’ re going out and starting new businesses , ” Kudlow told Fox Business Network host Stuart Varney .
“ They ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that ’ s the great part of American capitalism : Gales of creative destruction !
” Kudlow was referring to data on applications to start new businesses , which he said “ are soaring.
” He cited a recent Wall Street Journal report on the matter , but didn ’ t specify further .
One economist cited in a recent Journal report on the uptick in new business applications hedged that they were “ nowhere near the pace needed ” to keep up with the massive number of businesses shutting their doors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ really nowhere near enough to make up the massive shortfall in overall employment , ” Adam Ozimek , chief economist at the freelancing-focused website Upwork , told The Washington Post ’ s Jeff Stein Friday .
Kudlow ’ s comment came as part of a larger discussion on the stalled stimulus negotiations in Washington .
Around 8 million people have plunged into poverty in recent months , but Kudlow said it was unlikely that another stimulus deal would be executed before Election Day .
“ You ’ ve only got 18 days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even if you made a deal , it would be almost impossible to execute ” before then , Kudlow told Varney .
President Donald Trump has been all over the place on stimulus talks , flipping from calling for more stimulus to tweeting , “ I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election ” last week .
Then , on Thursday , Trump said he wanted a large stimulus package — “ go big or go home ” — but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entertain the idea .
In a town hall event Thursday night , Trump first blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) for holding things up , then said he himself hadn ’ t pressed Senate Republicans for a deal .
“ So far , they have not said they would , ” Guthrie pressed .
“ Because I haven ’ t asked them to , because I can ’ t get through Nancy Pelosi , ” Trump said .

White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow is likely aware that the COVID-19 pandemic has led to millions of Americans losing their jobs, including nearly 900,000 new unemployment claims just last week. But that massive surge in joblessness, he said Friday, is just part of what makes American capitalism great!
“The talk is that a lot of folks became unemployed, most regrettably, but they’re sticking with it and they’re going out and starting new businesses,” Kudlow told Fox Business Network host Stuart Varney.
“They’re going to be small businesses, but that’s the great part of American capitalism: Gales of creative destruction!”
WH Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow: “A lot of folks who became unemployed … they’re going out and starting new businesses … That’s the great part of American capitalism. pic.twitter.com/YXr2Nz21Ky — The Recount (@therecount) October 16, 2020
Kudlow was referring to data on applications to start new businesses, which he said “are soaring.” He cited a recent Wall Street Journal report on the matter, but didn’t specify further. One economist cited in a recent Journal report on the uptick in new business applications hedged that they were “nowhere near the pace needed” to keep up with the massive number of businesses shutting their doors this year.
The self-employment numbers are “really nowhere near enough to make up the massive shortfall in overall employment,” Adam Ozimek, chief economist at the freelancing-focused website Upwork, told The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein Friday.
“Not even close,” Ozimek added.
.@ModeledBehavior: “Self-employment is absolutely helping us to adapt to the pandemic … But it’s really nowhere near enough to make up for the massive shortfall in overall employment that we still have. Not even close.” Federal unemployment supplement expired months ago — Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) October 16, 2020
Kudlow’s comment came as part of a larger discussion on the stalled stimulus negotiations in Washington. Around 8 million people have plunged into poverty in recent months, but Kudlow said it was unlikely that another stimulus deal would be executed before Election Day.
“You’ve only got 18 days [before the election], so even if you made a deal, it would be almost impossible to execute” before then, Kudlow told Varney.
President Donald Trump has been all over the place on stimulus talks, flipping from calling for more stimulus to tweeting, “I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election” last week.
Then, on Thursday, Trump said he wanted a large stimulus package — “go big or go home” — but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has said he isn’t willing to entertain the idea.
In a town hall event Thursday night, Trump first blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for holding things up, then said he himself hadn’t pressed Senate Republicans for a deal.
“I’m ready to sign a big beautiful stimulus,” he told NBC News’ Savannah Guthrie
“Are Senate Republicans with you?” Guthrie asked.
“They’ll go,” Trump responded.
“So far, they have not said they would,” Guthrie pressed.
“Because I haven’t asked them to, because I can’t get through Nancy Pelosi,” Trump said.