talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--The 9 ‘Discarded’ Ballots In PA Were A Mistake, Not Fraud, State Election Chief Says

HARRISBURG , Pa. ( AP ) — It appears that an election worker ’ s decision to throw out nine military ballots in Wilkes-Barre , Pennsylvania , amounted to a mistake and not “ intentional fraud , ” the state ’ s top elections official said Wednesday .
Workers in the elections office in Luzerne County are getting training on handling mailed-in military and overseas ballots , Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar said during an online news conference .
“ The investigation is still going on , but from the initial reports we ’ ve been given , this was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a member of Democratic Gov .
Tom Wolf ’ s administration .
“ This was not intentional fraud .
So training , training , training.
” President Donald Trump has repeatedly brought up the nine ballots as what he calls evidence of election fraud in the past week , including two mentions during Tuesday night ’ s presidential debate .
The president first mentioned the ballots during a radio show appearance Thursday , hours before the Trump-nominated U.S. attorney in Harrisburg , Dave Freed , put out a news release about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deputy secretary for elections , said that in some cases , military and overseas ballots arrived in Luzerne County inside envelopes that do not clearly mark them as ballots .
The usual process when those types of ballots arrive is to immediately reseal them and store them securely with other mail-in and absentee ballots to await canvassing , he said .
“ So it sounds like it was confusion , ” Marks said .
The Department of State is working on training for Luzerne County elections workers on what to do when they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ That ’ s what needs to be tightened up , ” Marks said .
The unidentified worker , who officials have said was fired as a result , did not consult with others in the elections office , Marks said .
Investigators have not explained who recovered the ballots , described by Freed as “ discarded , ” or the process by which two of them were resealed .
Freed said the other seven were all cast for Trump .
Neither Freed nor the FBI has said whether criminal charges are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether those nine votes will be counted .

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — It appears that an election worker’s decision to throw out nine military ballots in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, amounted to a mistake and not “intentional fraud,” the state’s top elections official said Wednesday.
Workers in the elections office in Luzerne County are getting training on handling mailed-in military and overseas ballots, Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar said during an online news conference.
“The investigation is still going on, but from the initial reports we’ve been given, this was a bad error,” said Boockvar, a member of Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration. “This was not intentional fraud. So training, training, training.”
President Donald Trump has repeatedly brought up the nine ballots as what he calls evidence of election fraud in the past week, including two mentions during Tuesday night’s presidential debate.
The president first mentioned the ballots during a radio show appearance Thursday, hours before the Trump-nominated U.S. attorney in Harrisburg, Dave Freed, put out a news release about the investigation.
Jonathan Marks, the Pennsylvania deputy secretary for elections, said that in some cases, military and overseas ballots arrived in Luzerne County inside envelopes that do not clearly mark them as ballots.
The usual process when those types of ballots arrive is to immediately reseal them and store them securely with other mail-in and absentee ballots to await canvassing, he said.
“So it sounds like it was confusion,” Marks said.
The Department of State is working on training for Luzerne County elections workers on what to do when they find balloting material inside an unmarked envelope.
“That’s what needs to be tightened up,” Marks said.
The unidentified worker, who officials have said was fired as a result, did not consult with others in the elections office, Marks said.
Investigators have not explained who recovered the ballots, described by Freed as “discarded,” or the process by which two of them were resealed. Freed said the other seven were all cast for Trump.
Neither Freed nor the FBI has said whether criminal charges are possible, and it’s unclear whether those nine votes will be counted.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--Why Don’t Republicans Sound Excited That Their SCOTUS Picks Might Fulfill GOP Promises?

As a candidate in 2016 , President Trump vowed that if he got the chance to fill seats on the Supreme Court , a reversal of the monumental abortion rights decision Roe v. Wade would “ happen , automatically.
” But as his third Supreme Court nominee appears headed for the bench , he ’ s now trying to backpedal on the promise that his justices will overturn Roe .
“ There ’ s nothing happening there , ” Trump said at Tuesday ’ s debate , when former Vice President Joe Biden said that the rush to confirm Amy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the ballot .
“ You don ’ t know her view of Roe v. Wade .
You don ’ t know her view , ” Trump said .
Trump ’ s about-face is the latest example of what happens when the GOP ’ s promises to its social-conservative base collide with the political risks of those promises becoming a reality .
Earlier this week , Sen. Joni Ernst ( R-IA ) , who is in a tough re-election , said at her debate that the “ likelihood of Roe v. Wade being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d play down such a possibility rather than cheer it on is remarkable , given that only nine months ago , she signed on to a Supreme Court brief explicitly asking that the justices reconsider the landmark ruling .
After years of implicitly — or , in Trump ’ s case , explicitly — calling for Supreme Court justices that would gut abortion rights in the United States , Republicans are now accusing Democrats of fear-mongering by pointing out that Trump ’ s replacement for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg gets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack of confidence in how aggressively Barrett would act on the bench to dismantle abortion rights is at odds with the enthusiastic support anti-abortion groups have given to her nomination .
There doesn ’ t seem to be any ambiguity either for Sen. Josh Hawley ( R-MO ) , who this summer announced that he would only support Supreme Court nominees “ who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.
” Even absent an explicit acknowledgement from Barrett , Hawley has since said she meets this test .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says “ indicates that she understands Roe was really an act of judicial imperialism and wrongly decided.
” Hawley ’ s assessment aside , other influential members in the conservative legal movement are predicting that a Roe reversal isn ’ t actually on the table , contradicting years of assurances from Republicans to the religious right that electing them would put it there .
Michael McConnell , a former federal appellate judge and an extremely influential thinker in right-wing legal circles , published a Washington Post op-ed Tuesday afternoon arguing that even with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court , the chances of Roe being overturned were still extremely low .
The argument came with a political analysis that could be read as a warning directed at justices who themselves might be considering reversing the precedent of Roe : The former judge ’ s op-ed also addressed the likelihood that a Justice Coney Barrett would cast the deciding vote to kill Obamacare , which is being targeted with a GOP lawsuit that has the support of the Trump administration .
McConnell said a scenario where Barrett ’ s appointment led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even “ more far-fetched ” than one where she helped the Supreme Court nix Roe .
Vulnerable GOP senators who previously voted in favor of repealing the Affordable Care Act too are deploying that argument when asked to respond to the threat that the lawsuit — and their vote in favor of her confirmation — poses to the Affordable Care Act .
“ The experts are saying it ’ s highly unlikely they ’ ll overturn the ACA , ” Sen. Steve Daines ( R-MT ) said at a debate Monday .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal experts.
” It also being embraced by the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell himself , who in 2018 defended the Trump administration ’ s support of the lawsuit .
On Tuesday , McConnell mocked Democrats for raising the possibility that Trump ’ s nominee would agree with his DOJ ’ s arguments in the case .
“ This mother of seven , including multiple children who were born or adopted facing pre-existing condition medical challenges , is just itching to block families like hers from accessing medical care , ” McConnell said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

As a candidate in 2016, President Trump vowed that if he got the chance to fill seats on the Supreme Court, a reversal of the monumental abortion rights decision Roe v. Wade would “happen, automatically.”
But as his third Supreme Court nominee appears headed for the bench, he’s now trying to backpedal on the promise that his justices will overturn Roe.
“There’s nothing happening there,” Trump said at Tuesday’s debate, when former Vice President Joe Biden said that the rush to confirm Amy Coney Barrett had put Roe v. Wade on the ballot.
“You don’t know her view of Roe v. Wade. You don’t know her view,” Trump said.
Trump’s about-face is the latest example of what happens when the GOP’s promises to its social-conservative base collide with the political risks of those promises becoming a reality.
Earlier this week, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), who is in a tough re-election, said at her debate that the “likelihood of Roe v. Wade being overturned is very minimal.”
That she’d play down such a possibility rather than cheer it on is remarkable, given that only nine months ago, she signed on to a Supreme Court brief explicitly asking that the justices reconsider the landmark ruling.
After years of implicitly — or, in Trump’s case, explicitly — calling for Supreme Court justices that would gut abortion rights in the United States, Republicans are now accusing Democrats of fear-mongering by pointing out that Trump’s replacement for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg gets them closer to that goal.
Their lack of confidence in how aggressively Barrett would act on the bench to dismantle abortion rights is at odds with the enthusiastic support anti-abortion groups have given to her nomination. There doesn’t seem to be any ambiguity either for Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), who this summer announced that he would only support Supreme Court nominees “who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.”
Even absent an explicit acknowledgement from Barrett, Hawley has since said she meets this test. He’s pointed to a record that Hawley says “indicates that she understands Roe was really an act of judicial imperialism and wrongly decided.”
Hawley’s assessment aside, other influential members in the conservative legal movement are predicting that a Roe reversal isn’t actually on the table, contradicting years of assurances from Republicans to the religious right that electing them would put it there.
Michael McConnell, a former federal appellate judge and an extremely influential thinker in right-wing legal circles, published a Washington Post op-ed Tuesday afternoon arguing that even with Coney Barrett’s addition to the court, the chances of Roe being overturned were still extremely low.
The argument came with a political analysis that could be read as a warning directed at justices who themselves might be considering reversing the precedent of Roe:
The politics would not be kind to pro-lifers. Right now, abortion-related disputes concern marginal cases (such as late-term abortions, parental consent, sex-selective abortion and disposal of fetal remains) where public opinion is divided and the majority might even support increased restrictions. If Roe were overruled, the debate would shift to out-and-out prohibitions, where public opinion is squarely on the side of abortion rights. Republican Party primaries would feature fights to the death between purists and compromisers, and a united pro-choice Democratic Party would gain the advantage.
The former judge’s op-ed also addressed the likelihood that a Justice Coney Barrett would cast the deciding vote to kill Obamacare, which is being targeted with a GOP lawsuit that has the support of the Trump administration. McConnell said a scenario where Barrett’s appointment led to the health-care law’s dismantling was even “more far-fetched” than one where she helped the Supreme Court nix Roe.
Vulnerable GOP senators who previously voted in favor of repealing the Affordable Care Act too are deploying that argument when asked to respond to the threat that the lawsuit — and their vote in favor of her confirmation — poses to the Affordable Care Act.
“The experts are saying it’s highly unlikely they’ll overturn the ACA,” Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) said at a debate Monday. “That’s the consensus of many legal experts.”
It also being embraced by the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell himself, who in 2018 defended the Trump administration’s support of the lawsuit.
On Tuesday, McConnell mocked Democrats for raising the possibility that Trump’s nominee would agree with his DOJ’s arguments in the case.
“This mother of seven, including multiple children who were born or adopted facing pre-existing condition medical challenges, is just itching to block families like hers from accessing medical care,” McConnell said sarcastically. “What a joke.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--Santorum Makes Wild Comparison Between Proud Boys And Protesters

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum ( R ) on Wednesday said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden ’ s apparent failure to “ go after his own ” amid spats of violence during recent protests was just as bad as President Trump ’ s refusal during Tuesday night ’ s debate to condemn white supremacy .
Santorum prefaced the wild comparison by saying that Trump ’ s refusal to denounce white supremacy was a “ bad error , ” adding that the President has “ condemned these groups before.
” The President ’ s spotty record on the issue has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President ’ s remarks Tuesday , which Santorum called a “ huge gaffe.
” But that “ gaffe ” has elicited celebration from the Proud Boys , a far-right hate group that the President told to “ stand by.
” The group lauded Trump ’ s remarks as a kind of “ historic ” validation that even brought in a wave of new recruits , according to posts on the group ’ s social media channels .
After lightly appearing to slap the President on the wrist , a move that was largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often stood by Trump amid past missteps , Santorum then equated Trump ’ s refusal to condemn white supremacy with what he called Biden ’ s failure to condemn “ his own.
” “ I think the President was right in pointing out that the left is out there , you know , in Portland and lots of other places , causing violence , ” Santorum said , adding : “ The fact that Biden didn ’ t go after his own was equally as reprehensible .
“ The comment was the kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spin .
Not only did Santorum align Biden with violence that the former vice president has spoke out against , but he also suggested that angry demonstrators with no apparent unifying affiliation are pretty much the same as an organized hate group that openly endorses violence and has demonstrated support for a white supremacist movement .
Earlier this month , FBI Director Christopher Wray in testimony to Congress said that antifa represented an ideology and was not an organized terror group or even a formal group .
“ New Day ” anchor Alisyn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clarify Santorum ’ s comparison , asked if the former senator had intended to compare Biden ’ s reference to Wray ’ s assessment to Trump ’ s remark about the Proud Boys .
“ I don ’ t know that much about them , ” Santorum quickly said , adding : “ I just don ’ t think that the president is out there encouraging people to violence , because the president is for law and order , period .
”

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (R) on Wednesday said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s apparent failure to “go after his own” amid spats of violence during recent protests was just as bad as President Trump’s refusal during Tuesday night’s debate to condemn white supremacy.
Santorum prefaced the wild comparison by saying that Trump’s refusal to denounce white supremacy was a “bad error,” adding that the President has “condemned these groups before.”
The President’s spotty record on the issue has been repeatedly referred to by Republicans following the President’s remarks Tuesday, which Santorum called a “huge gaffe.”
But that “gaffe” has elicited celebration from the Proud Boys, a far-right hate group that the President told to “stand by.” The group lauded Trump’s remarks as a kind of “historic” validation that even brought in a wave of new recruits, according to posts on the group’s social media channels.
After lightly appearing to slap the President on the wrist, a move that was largely unprecedented for the former senator who has often stood by Trump amid past missteps, Santorum then equated Trump’s refusal to condemn white supremacy with what he called Biden’s failure to condemn “his own.”
“I think the President was right in pointing out that the left is out there, you know, in Portland and lots of other places, causing violence,” Santorum said, adding: “The fact that Biden didn’t go after his own was equally as reprehensible. “
The comment was the kind of false equivalency that makes your head spin.
Not only did Santorum align Biden with violence that the former vice president has spoke out against, but he also suggested that angry demonstrators with no apparent unifying affiliation are pretty much the same as an organized hate group that openly endorses violence and has demonstrated support for a white supremacist movement.
Earlier this month, FBI Director Christopher Wray in testimony to Congress said that antifa represented an ideology and was not an organized terror group or even a formal group.
“New Day” anchor Alisyn Camerota, in an apparent attempt to clarify Santorum’s comparison, asked if the former senator had intended to compare Biden’s reference to Wray’s assessment to Trump’s remark about the Proud Boys.
“I don’t know that much about them,” Santorum quickly said, adding: “I just don’t think that the president is out there encouraging people to violence, because the president is for law and order, period.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--Commission On Presidential Debates Is ‘Considering Changes’ After Trump Debacle

The Commission on Presidential Debates said on Wednesday that it ’ s considering changes to the structure of the remaining two presidential debates .
The commission ’ s announcement comes after President Trump went off the rails during the first debate Tuesday , constantly interrupting and interjecting while moderator Chris Wallace struggled to keep things on track .
The first debate “ made clear that the additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates to ensure a more orderly discussion of the issues , ” the commission said .
In a statement issued Wednesday , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considering the changes that it will adopt and will announce those measures shortly.
” The CPD added that it ’ s “ grateful ” for Wallace ’ s “ professionalism and skill ” he brought to the debate and it “ intends to ensure that additional tools to maintain order are in place for the remaining debates.
” Shortly after the CPD released its statement , Trump rehashed his ire toward Wallace and Biden in a tweet .
The Trump campaign also hit back at the CPD ’ s consideration of changes for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communications director Tim Murtaugh on Wednesday afternoon .
Murtaugh accused the CPD ’ s discussion of instituting changes to debates going forward “ because their guy got pummeled last night.
” “ President Trump was the dominant force and now Joe Biden is trying to work the refs , ” Murtaugh wrote .
“ They shouldn ’ t be moving the goalposts and changing the rules in the middle of the game.
” Earlier Wednesday , Biden said that he hopes the CPD can “ control the ability of us to answer the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any changes should be made to the format of upcoming debates against Trump .
“ I ’ m not going to speculate on what happens in the second or third debate , ” Biden said .
“ My hope is that they ’ re able to literally say : the question gets asked of trump .
He has a microphone two minutes to answer the question , and no one else has a microphone , and then I don ’ t know what the actual rules are going to be , literally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me to make sense.
” Biden added that he ’ s “ looking forward to it , ” before being pressed on whether he has anything to say to persuadable voters who were turned off by politics after Tuesday night ’ s debate debacle .
The former VP replied that he can “ understand ” the sentiment and proceeded to jab Trump for being a “ national embarrassment ” in light of his chaotic debate performance .
“ I kind of thought at one point — maybe I shouldn ’ t say this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States conducted himself the way he did — I think it was just a national embarrassment , ” Biden said .
“ But , look , I just hope that the American people and those undecided voters try to determine what each of us has as an answer for their concerns and allows us to actually speak .
”

The Commission on Presidential Debates said on Wednesday that it’s considering changes to the structure of the remaining two presidential debates.
The commission’s announcement comes after President Trump went off the rails during the first debate Tuesday, constantly interrupting and interjecting while moderator Chris Wallace struggled to keep things on track.
The first debate “made clear that the additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates to ensure a more orderly discussion of the issues,” the commission said.
In a statement issued Wednesday, the CPD said it will be “carefully considering the changes that it will adopt and will announce those measures shortly.”
The CPD added that it’s “grateful” for Wallace’s “professionalism and skill” he brought to the debate and it “intends to ensure that additional tools to maintain order are in place for the remaining debates.”
Shortly after the CPD released its statement, Trump rehashed his ire toward Wallace and Biden in a tweet.
Try getting a new Anchor and a smarter Democrat candidate! https://t.co/B9heSVV1OJ — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 30, 2020
The Trump campaign also hit back at the CPD’s consideration of changes for upcoming debates in a statement issued by communications director Tim Murtaugh on Wednesday afternoon. Murtaugh accused the CPD’s discussion of instituting changes to debates going forward “because their guy got pummeled last night.”
“President Trump was the dominant force and now Joe Biden is trying to work the refs,” Murtaugh wrote. “They shouldn’t be moving the goalposts and changing the rules in the middle of the game.”
Earlier Wednesday, Biden said that he hopes the CPD can “control the ability of us to answer the question without interruption” when asked whether any changes should be made to the format of upcoming debates against Trump.
“I’m not going to speculate on what happens in the second or third debate,” Biden said. “My hope is that they’re able to literally say: the question gets asked of trump. He has a microphone two minutes to answer the question, and no one else has a microphone, and then I don’t know what the actual rules are going to be, literally, but that’s what seems to me to make sense.”
Biden added that he’s “looking forward to it,” before being pressed on whether he has anything to say to persuadable voters who were turned off by politics after Tuesday night’s debate debacle.
The former VP replied that he can “understand” the sentiment and proceeded to jab Trump for being a “national embarrassment” in light of his chaotic debate performance.
“I kind of thought at one point — maybe I shouldn’t say this, but the President of the United States conducted himself the way he did — I think it was just a national embarrassment,” Biden said. “But, look, I just hope that the American people and those undecided voters try to determine what each of us has as an answer for their concerns and allows us to actually speak.”
Watch Biden’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--Scott Gives Trump Benefit Of The Doubt: He Should ‘Correct’ Proud Boys Shout Out

Sen. Tim Scott ( R-SC ) said Wednesday that President Donald Trump should make an effort to amend remarks he made during the first presidential debate on Tuesday where he told a far-right hate group to “ stand by.
” “ I think he misspoke , ” Scott , who is the only Black Republican in the Senate , told reporters .
“ I think he should correct it .
If he doesn ’ t correct it , I guess he didn ’ t misspeak.
” The comments come after Trump ’ s call for members of the Proud Boys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to The New York Times , were posting in private social media channels , lauding Trump ’ s words as “ historic.
” Vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris further suggested that Trump ’ s rhetoric on race during Tuesday ’ s debate served as a “ dog whistle through a bullhorn ” to white supremacist groups .
National Press Secretary for the Trump campaign attempted to clean up the remarks in a separate CNN interview on Wednesday saying that the President was really telling the Proud Boys to “ get out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many times President Trump needed to condemn white supremacy — which the campaign official claimed Trump has done “ multiple times in the past.
” “ I don ’ t know how many ways you want him to say it , and how many times you want him to say it , ” Gidley said .
“ New Day ” anchor John Berman pushed back , asserting that there was “ no limit on the amount of times you can condemn white supremacists.
” “ They ’ re just that bad .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do it , ” Berman said , adding : “ for some reason he wasn ’ t willing to .
”

Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) said Wednesday that President Donald Trump should make an effort to amend remarks he made during the first presidential debate on Tuesday where he told a far-right hate group to “stand by.”
“I think he misspoke,” Scott, who is the only Black Republican in the Senate, told reporters. “I think he should correct it. If he doesn’t correct it, I guess he didn’t misspeak.”
Reporter: “Do you find that concerning, the president's refusal last night during the debate to condemn white supremacist groups?" Sen. Tim Scott: “I think he misspoke. I think he should correct it. If he doesn't correct it, I guess he didn't misspeak." pic.twitter.com/qxDTrg7ulT — NBC News (@NBCNews) September 30, 2020
The comments come after Trump’s call for members of the Proud Boys elicited cheers from group members, who, according to The New York Times, were posting in private social media channels, lauding Trump’s words as “historic.”
Vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris further suggested that Trump’s rhetoric on race during Tuesday’s debate served as a “dog whistle through a bullhorn” to white supremacist groups.
National Press Secretary for the Trump campaign attempted to clean up the remarks in a separate CNN interview on Wednesday saying that the President was really telling the Proud Boys to “get out of the way.” Gidley then asked how many times President Trump needed to condemn white supremacy — which the campaign official claimed Trump has done “multiple times in the past.”
“I don’t know how many ways you want him to say it, and how many times you want him to say it,” Gidley said.
“New Day” anchor John Berman pushed back, asserting that there was “no limit on the amount of times you can condemn white supremacists.”
“They’re just that bad. It’s just that worth it to do it,” Berman said, adding: “for some reason he wasn’t willing to.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--Trump’s ‘Stand By’ Order To Proud Boys Heightens Fears Of Election Day Intimidation

When President Donald Trump told the Proud Boys , the right-wing street gang , to “ stand by ” during Tuesday night ’ s presidential debate , the damage was immediate : Short of calling for violence itself , Trump ’ s comment raised the specter of it , threatening the integrity of the upcoming elections .
On Parler , an alternative to Twitter , the group promoted a new t-shirt with Trump ’ s comment on it .
A prominent organizer for the Proud Boys , Joe Biggs , asserted that Trump said what he did “ because someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bigs shared a meme showing a fake tweet from Trump , ordering the Proud Boys to “ fuck them up.
” There ’ s a reason most conservative politicians try to keep the Proud Boys at arms length : For one thing , they ’ re “ bigoted morons , ” as Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-TX ) said this summer , despite being pictured last year with the group ’ s leader .
The Proud Boys also relish violence and confronting anti-fascists and left-wing protesters , a hobby that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for racial justice have swept the country .
“ We will kill you , ” the group ’ s founder , Gavin McInnes , once said .
“ That ’ s the Proud Boys in a nutshell.
” At a recent rally in Portland , some Proud Boys carried signs with the phrase “ Free Kyle Now ” — a reference to Kyle Rittenhouse , who is currently facing charges for killing two protesters in Kenosha , Wisconsin .
Lindsay Cohn , a professor at the Naval War College who focuses on civil-military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t need to know Trump ’ s intent with the comment to know its likely effect .
“ What ’ s likely to happen because of it is that there will be problems with the election , ” she said .
“ I personally think that there is a significantly better than 50 % chance that we will see violence.
” Michael Miller , a professor at George Washington University who focuses on autocracies , told TPM last week that “ there does seem to be a strategy here of preparing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary.
” Miller runs the “ Authoritarian Warning Survey , ” a regular poll of scholars of democratic decline that in recent days has shown an spike in concern .
“ People , I think , are underestimating the likelihood of just a full-on democratic breakdown , ” he said .
And given that Trump has for months asserted the election will be fraudulent , his comment Tuesday night will only further motivate groups like the Proud Boys and other armed right-wingers to “ stand watch over the polls , ” Cohn said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any violence on Election Day , Cohn said , Trump ’ s words have also made it possible that some voters will be scared away .
Combined with the recent delays at the Postal Service and Trump ’ s attacks on mail-in voting , she said , “ the vote is being squeezed from both sides.
” “ People are going to hear that neither mail-in balloting nor voting in person is safe or secure or legitimate or appropriate , ” she added .
“ This seems to me like a pretty blatant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign spokesperson , Hogan Gidley , tried to clean up Trump ’ s mess Wednesday morning , pointing to other times Trump has condemned white supremacists and saying that Trump meant to tell the Proud Boys to “ get out of the way.
” If the group ’ s own social media channel was any indication , that ’ s not the message they took from Trump ’ s words .

When President Donald Trump told the Proud Boys, the right-wing street gang, to “stand by” during Tuesday night’s presidential debate, the damage was immediate: Short of calling for violence itself, Trump’s comment raised the specter of it, threatening the integrity of the upcoming elections.
On Parler, an alternative to Twitter, the group promoted a new t-shirt with Trump’s comment on it. A prominent organizer for the Proud Boys, Joe Biggs, asserted that Trump said what he did “because someone needs to deal with ANTIFA.” Later, Bigs shared a meme showing a fake tweet from Trump, ordering the Proud Boys to “fuck them up.”
There’s a reason most conservative politicians try to keep the Proud Boys at arms length: For one thing, they’re “bigoted morons,” as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said this summer, despite being pictured last year with the group’s leader.
The Proud Boys also relish violence and confronting anti-fascists and left-wing protesters, a hobby that’s kept them busy this summer as protests for racial justice have swept the country. “We will kill you,” the group’s founder, Gavin McInnes, once said. “That’s the Proud Boys in a nutshell.”
At a recent rally in Portland, some Proud Boys carried signs with the phrase “Free Kyle Now” — a reference to Kyle Rittenhouse, who is currently facing charges for killing two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Lindsay Cohn, a professor at the Naval War College who focuses on civil-military relations, told TPM Wednesday that she didn’t need to know Trump’s intent with the comment to know its likely effect.
“What’s likely to happen because of it is that there will be problems with the election,” she said. “I personally think that there is a significantly better than 50% chance that we will see violence.”
Michael Miller, a professor at George Washington University who focuses on autocracies, told TPM last week that “there does seem to be a strategy here of preparing his side to potentially be violent if necessary.”
Miller runs the “Authoritarian Warning Survey,” a regular poll of scholars of democratic decline that in recent days has shown an spike in concern. “People, I think, are underestimating the likelihood of just a full-on democratic breakdown,” he said.
And given that Trump has for months asserted the election will be fraudulent, his comment Tuesday night will only further motivate groups like the Proud Boys and other armed right-wingers to “stand watch over the polls,” Cohn said.
Even if there isn’t any violence on Election Day, Cohn said, Trump’s words have also made it possible that some voters will be scared away. Combined with the recent delays at the Postal Service and Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting, she said, “the vote is being squeezed from both sides.”
“People are going to hear that neither mail-in balloting nor voting in person is safe or secure or legitimate or appropriate,” she added. “This seems to me like a pretty blatant attempt at voter suppression.”
A Trump campaign spokesperson, Hogan Gidley, tried to clean up Trump’s mess Wednesday morning, pointing to other times Trump has condemned white supremacists and saying that Trump meant to tell the Proud Boys to “get out of the way.”
If the group’s own social media channel was any indication, that’s not the message they took from Trump’s words.
“YES SIR,” a post from the account read. “PROUD BOYS STANDING BY.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-09-30--To No One’s Surprise, Only Trump And His WH Believe He Won Chaotic Debate

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Wednesday was quick to join President Trump in claiming victory during his first presidential debate against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , despite his off-the-rails performance that was widely and swiftly panned by the media .
Asked whether Trump believes he won the chaotic debate against Biden during an interview on Fox Business on Wednesday morning , McEnany replied “ yes ” and that the President was in “ very good spirits ” as he walked off the stage the night before .
McEnany touted that Trump — who repeatedly cut into Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moderator and Fox News anchor Chris Wallace — “ brought the fight that the American people wanted to see ” by taking on the role of a reporter .
“ The American people wanted to see the president question Joe Biden in a way that the media never does .
He gets a pass , ” McEnany said .
“ You ’ ve seen those softball questions .
President Trump took on the role of both the media — what they should be doing — and a candidate sharing his record with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s unwieldy performance and whether his approach will change during upcoming debates against Biden , McEnany noted that the next debate set for Oct. 15 in Miami , Florida will be in a “ much different format ” because it ’ s a town hall where the President will be talking to voters .
“ So by nature it will be a different format , a different tactic , ” McEnany said , before going to defend Trump ’ s “ offense style ” by ripping Biden for not condemning antifa — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ an idea ” rather than an organization during the debate — and questioning whether he will pack the Supreme Court , which the former VP has demurred on when asked .
“ Because the President was on offense , the American voter left that debate with a distinct answer and look at this former vice presidential candidate that they had not had previously , ” McEnany said .

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Wednesday was quick to join President Trump in claiming victory during his first presidential debate against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, despite his off-the-rails performance that was widely and swiftly panned by the media.
Asked whether Trump believes he won the chaotic debate against Biden during an interview on Fox Business on Wednesday morning, McEnany replied “yes” and that the President was in “very good spirits” as he walked off the stage the night before.
McEnany touted that Trump — who repeatedly cut into Biden’s answers and constantly talked over moderator and Fox News anchor Chris Wallace — “brought the fight that the American people wanted to see” by taking on the role of a reporter.
“The American people wanted to see the president question Joe Biden in a way that the media never does. He gets a pass,” McEnany said. “You’ve seen those softball questions. President Trump took on the role of both the media — what they should be doing — and a candidate sharing his record with the American people.”
When pressed on Trump’s unwieldy performance and whether his approach will change during upcoming debates against Biden, McEnany noted that the next debate set for Oct. 15 in Miami, Florida will be in a “much different format” because it’s a town hall where the President will be talking to voters.
“So by nature it will be a different format, a different tactic,” McEnany said, before going to defend Trump’s “offense style” by ripping Biden for not condemning antifa — which the former VP pointed out is “an idea” rather than an organization during the debate — and questioning whether he will pack the Supreme Court, which the former VP has demurred on when asked.
“Because the President was on offense, the American voter left that debate with a distinct answer and look at this former vice presidential candidate that they had not had previously,” McEnany said.
Watch McEnany’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--MSNBC Anchor Pulls Plug On Trump Camp Adviser After Stoking Biden Earpiece Conspiracy

MSNBC anchor Ayman Mohyeldin and Trump campaign adviser Steve Cortes butted heads on Thursday over the campaign ’ s baseless claims that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden ’ s team backed out of an agreement for each candidate to be inspected for an earpiece prior to Tuesday night ’ s disastrous debate .
With just hours to go before the chaotic debate between Trump and Biden kicked off on Tuesday night , the Trump campaign baselessly accused the Biden campaign of previously agreeing to an inspection for earpieces prior to the debate , but supposedly reversed their decision to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said that “ it seems pretty obvious that the Biden team is looking for any safety net they can find.
” Biden deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield fired back at the claim by characterizing it as “ completely absurd ” and “ pathetic , ” and slamming the Trump campaign for “ lying.
” During Cortes ’ interview on MSNBC on Thursday , Mohyeldin brought up that the Trump campaign spent tens of thousands of dollars on Facebook ads featuring doctored photos of Biden wearing an earpiece during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s team said “ this is entirely made up.
” Mohyeldin then pressed Cortes on his remark insisting that the Biden campaign agreed to an inspection and then backed out , before asking if he ’ d like to issue an apology for his misleading statement .
“ No , I didn ’ t mislead anybody , ” Cortes said .
“ Give me your proof that it ’ s false.
” After Mohyeldin fired back “ that ’ s not how it works , ” he asked Cortes to specify who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earpiece inspection , which the Trump campaign spokesperson replied : “ I don ’ t know where the agreement is.
” Mohyeldin continued grilling Cortes on providing a specific name , which prompted Cortes to become more aggrieved as he believed that the MSNBC anchor was accusing him of being a liar amid pressing him on the Facebook ads that he claimed to be unaware of .
“ Frankly , I ’ m not going to take your word for it Ayman and I ’ m not going to take MSNBC ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I ’ m not willing to take your word for it , quite frankly.
” While Cortes continued shouting , Mohyeldin told him that he ’ ll give him a “ chance to go back and prepare for this interview next time for with what your campaign is doing.
” “ Bring the names of those involved — you don ’ t even know the names of the people involved — you don ’ t know the names of the people in your campaign who made the agreement , ” Mohyeldin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on accusing Cortes of misinforming the public , the Trump campaign talking head had an explosive reaction .
“ I ’ m not going to allow you to call me a liar on TV and not allow me to respond !
” Cortes shouted , while Mohyeldin effectively ended the interview by cutting off his feed .
The fiery exchange between Mohyeldin and Cortes comes a day after CNN anchor Jake Tapper booted Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh following a testy exchange regarding the President ’ s refusal to condemn white supremacists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to steamroll Tapper by using the Trumpworld ’ s tactic of deflection , the CNN anchor had enough .
Tapper appeared to hit a breaking point from there by invoking debate moderator and Fox News anchor Chris Wallace , who struggled to keep things in line as Trump constantly interrupted and interjected throughout the debate .
“ OK , you know what , I ’ m not Chris Wallace , ” Tapper sarcastically told Murtaugh .
“ Thank you , Tim !
Appreciate it .
Thank you so much .
”

MSNBC anchor Ayman Mohyeldin and Trump campaign adviser Steve Cortes butted heads on Thursday over the campaign’s baseless claims that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s team backed out of an agreement for each candidate to be inspected for an earpiece prior to Tuesday night’s disastrous debate.
With just hours to go before the chaotic debate between Trump and Biden kicked off on Tuesday night, the Trump campaign baselessly accused the Biden campaign of previously agreeing to an inspection for earpieces prior to the debate, but supposedly reversed their decision to do so the day of the debate. Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said that “it seems pretty obvious that the Biden team is looking for any safety net they can find.”
Biden deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield fired back at the claim by characterizing it as “completely absurd” and “pathetic,” and slamming the Trump campaign for “lying.”
During Cortes’ interview on MSNBC on Thursday, Mohyeldin brought up that the Trump campaign spent tens of thousands of dollars on Facebook ads featuring doctored photos of Biden wearing an earpiece during the debate, and noted that Biden’s team said “this is entirely made up.”
Mohyeldin then pressed Cortes on his remark insisting that the Biden campaign agreed to an inspection and then backed out, before asking if he’d like to issue an apology for his misleading statement.
“No, I didn’t mislead anybody,” Cortes said. “Give me your proof that it’s false.”
After Mohyeldin fired back “that’s not how it works,” he asked Cortes to specify who made the supposed agreement for a pre-debate earpiece inspection, which the Trump campaign spokesperson replied: “I don’t know where the agreement is.”
Mohyeldin continued grilling Cortes on providing a specific name, which prompted Cortes to become more aggrieved as he believed that the MSNBC anchor was accusing him of being a liar amid pressing him on the Facebook ads that he claimed to be unaware of.
“Frankly, I’m not going to take your word for it Ayman and I’m not going to take MSNBC’s word for it,” Cortes said. “I’m not willing to take your word for it, quite frankly.”
Crosstalk between Mohyeldin and Cortes ensued.
While Cortes continued shouting, Mohyeldin told him that he’ll give him a “chance to go back and prepare for this interview next time for with what your campaign is doing.”
“Bring the names of those involved — you don’t even know the names of the people involved — you don’t know the names of the people in your campaign who made the agreement,” Mohyeldin told Cortes.
After Mohyeldin doubled down on accusing Cortes of misinforming the public, the Trump campaign talking head had an explosive reaction.
“I’m not going to allow you to call me a liar on TV and not allow me to respond!” Cortes shouted, while Mohyeldin effectively ended the interview by cutting off his feed.
The fiery exchange between Mohyeldin and Cortes comes a day after CNN anchor Jake Tapper booted Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh following a testy exchange regarding the President’s refusal to condemn white supremacists during the debate.
After Murtaugh attempted to steamroll Tapper by using the Trumpworld’s tactic of deflection, the CNN anchor had enough.
Tapper appeared to hit a breaking point from there by invoking debate moderator and Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, who struggled to keep things in line as Trump constantly interrupted and interjected throughout the debate.
“OK, you know what, I’m not Chris Wallace,” Tapper sarcastically told Murtaugh. “Thank you, Tim! Appreciate it. Thank you so much.”
Watch the exchange below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--MI AG Charges Far-Right Hoaxsters For Robocalls With False Vote-By-Mail Claims

Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl — a President Trump-loving duo who were behind a series of notoriously outlandish schemes to smear Trump ’ s opponents — face felony charges for their alleged involvement in robocalls that spread false claims about voting by mail .
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel unveiled the charges Thursday .
Among them are charges of voter intimidation and conspiracy to commit an election law violation .
“ Any effort to interfere with , intimidate or intentionally mislead Michigan voters will be met with swift and severe consequences , ” Nessel said .
“ This effort specifically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deter them from voting in the November election.
” “ We ’ re all well aware of the frustrations caused by the millions of nuisance robocalls flooding our cell phones and landlines each day , but this particular message poses grave consequences for our democracy and the principles upon which it was built , ” she continued .
“ Michigan voters are entitled to a full , free and fair election in November and my office will not hesitate to pursue those who jeopardize that.
” Nessel and Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which were first picked up in Detroit , in August .
The calls told the recipients falsely that voting by mail would put their information in databases used for arrest warrants , debt collection and “ mandatory vaccines.
” The robocalls fashioned themselves as coming from a group led by Wohl and Burkman .
In denying his involvement to TPM in August , Burkman claimed that “ no one in their right mind would put their cell in robo call.
” According to Thursday ’ s announcement , the robocalls went out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Attorneys general offices in New York , Pennsylvania , Ohio and Illinois also told Nessel that there were similar calls in their states , Nessel ’ s announcement said .
Additionally she received assistance in the investigation from California Attorney General Xavier Becerra .
The announcement said that charges had been filed Thursday in the 36th District Court in Detroit .
Arraignment is pending for the defendants .
“ The Attorney General ’ s office will be working – with local law enforcement if necessary – to secure the appearance of each defendant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It ’ s too early to say if formal extradition will be necessary or if they will present themselves here voluntarily in the very near future .
”

Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl — a President Trump-loving duo who were behind a series of notoriously outlandish schemes to smear Trump’s opponents — face felony charges for their alleged involvement in robocalls that spread false claims about voting by mail.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel unveiled the charges Thursday. Among them are charges of voter intimidation and conspiracy to commit an election law violation.
“Any effort to interfere with, intimidate or intentionally mislead Michigan voters will be met with swift and severe consequences,” Nessel said. “This effort specifically targeted minority voters in an attempt to deter them from voting in the November election.”
“We’re all well aware of the frustrations caused by the millions of nuisance robocalls flooding our cell phones and landlines each day, but this particular message poses grave consequences for our democracy and the principles upon which it was built,” she continued. “Michigan voters are entitled to a full, free and fair election in November and my office will not hesitate to pursue those who jeopardize that.”
Nessel and Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson announced their inquiries into the calls, which were first picked up in Detroit, in August. The calls told the recipients falsely that voting by mail would put their information in databases used for arrest warrants, debt collection and “mandatory vaccines.” The robocalls fashioned themselves as coming from a group led by Wohl and Burkman.
In denying his involvement to TPM in August, Burkman claimed that “no one in their right mind would put their cell in robo call.”
According to Thursday’s announcement, the robocalls went out to nearly 12,000 residents in Detroit. Attorneys general offices in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois also told Nessel that there were similar calls in their states, Nessel’s announcement said.
Additionally she received assistance in the investigation from California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
The announcement said that charges had been filed Thursday in the 36th District Court in Detroit. Arraignment is pending for the defendants.
“The Attorney General’s office will be working – with local law enforcement if necessary – to secure the appearance of each defendant in Michigan,” the announcement said. “It’s too early to say if formal extradition will be necessary or if they will present themselves here voluntarily in the very near future.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--Chris Wallace Goes There: Trump To Blame For Debate Mess

Fox News anchor Chris Wallace reiterated his regrets about the debate that President Trump hijacked with constant interruptions and interjections during an interview on his own network Thursday .
After saying that he initially thought “ a real debate ” was happening when Trump began engaging with Democratic rival Joe Biden during the debate , Wallace conceded that “ it became clearer and clearer over time that this was something different ” as the President attempted to steamroll the former VP 145 times throughout the night , citing a Fox News analysis .
Wallace then argued that Trump “ bears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday ” — a shift from his interview with the New York Times the day before when he was bluntly asked whether the President was responsible for the debate going off the rails .
Wallace told the Times “ well , he certainly didn ’ t help , ” but declined to elaborate further .
Fellow Fox News colleague Bill Hemmer went on to ask Wallace if he thought the debate was a mess in the moment or if he thought he had a chance of getting it back on track .
Wallace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was that the President was interrupting too often .
He pointed to his experience in having difficulty hearing two people talking simultaneously while hosting “ Fox News Sunday.
” “ So I kept trying to get the President to stop and let Biden finish his answer and let them go back and forth , ” Wallace said .
“ And then it kept escalating.
” Wallace then hit back at Trump ’ s assertion that the debate moderator didn ’ t go after Biden enough for interruptions .
“ The President said well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , and I said because you ’ re doing a lot more of the interrupting , Mr. President , ” Wallace said .
“ Biden was doing some , no question about it , but less than half as many times as the President.
” Asked if he believes that Trump had more volume , which caused him to hear less of Biden ’ s remarks , Wallace acknowledged that the President “ talked louder , but he also talked more often.
” Wallace aired his frustration about how he and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and woman-hours ” trying to “ prepare a serious substantive debate ” on a wide range of issues , only for their “ delicious cake ” to come out half-baked .
“ I was really hoping for the debate that I think America wanted to see , which was a serious exchange of views , ” Wallace said .
“ I felt like I had gotten together all of the ingredients .
I had baked this beautiful , delicious cake , and then frankly the President put his foot in it .
”

Fox News anchor Chris Wallace reiterated his regrets about the debate that President Trump hijacked with constant interruptions and interjections during an interview on his own network Thursday.
After saying that he initially thought “a real debate” was happening when Trump began engaging with Democratic rival Joe Biden during the debate, Wallace conceded that “it became clearer and clearer over time that this was something different” as the President attempted to steamroll the former VP 145 times throughout the night, citing a Fox News analysis.
Wallace then argued that Trump “bears the primary responsibility for what happened on Tuesday” — a shift from his interview with the New York Times the day before when he was bluntly asked whether the President was responsible for the debate going off the rails. Wallace told the Times “well, he certainly didn’t help,” but declined to elaborate further.
Fellow Fox News colleague Bill Hemmer went on to ask Wallace if he thought the debate was a mess in the moment or if he thought he had a chance of getting it back on track.
Wallace replied that his initial thought as moderator was that the President was interrupting too often. He pointed to his experience in having difficulty hearing two people talking simultaneously while hosting “Fox News Sunday.”
“So I kept trying to get the President to stop and let Biden finish his answer and let them go back and forth,” Wallace said. “And then it kept escalating.”
Wallace then hit back at Trump’s assertion that the debate moderator didn’t go after Biden enough for interruptions.
“The President said well, why don’t you admonish him, and I said because you’re doing a lot more of the interrupting, Mr. President,” Wallace said. “Biden was doing some, no question about it, but less than half as many times as the President.”
Asked if he believes that Trump had more volume, which caused him to hear less of Biden’s remarks, Wallace acknowledged that the President “talked louder, but he also talked more often.”
Wallace aired his frustration about how he and his researcher spent “literally hundreds of man-hours and woman-hours” trying to “prepare a serious substantive debate” on a wide range of issues, only for their “delicious cake” to come out half-baked.
“I was really hoping for the debate that I think America wanted to see, which was a serious exchange of views,” Wallace said. “I felt like I had gotten together all of the ingredients. I had baked this beautiful, delicious cake, and then frankly the President put his foot in it.”
Watch Wallace’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--Rogue, Unsanctioned ‘Poll Watchers’ Create Feedback Loop With Bogus Voter Fraud Claims

In the final minute of Tuesday night ’ s presidential debate , President Donald Trump laid out something of an order for supporters of his : “ I ’ m urging my supporters to go in to the polls and watch very carefully.
” Why ?
The President hasn ’ t left Americans to wonder : He wants that sweet , elusive “ evidence ” of widespread voter fraud he ’ s always talking about .
“ If I see tens of thousands of ballots being manipulated , I can ’ t go along with that , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there will not be tens of thousands of manipulated ballots this election season .
Though often invoked by the right , GOP operatives have repeatedly come up empty handed when asked to point to present-day examples of widespread fraud .
And yet Trump for months has laid the groundwork for claiming as much .
He ’ s baselessly asserted dozens of times that mail-in voting is prone to tampering .
And as he said in August , “ the only way we ’ re going to lose this election is if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watchers typically play the tedious role of ensuring that voters ’ rights are protected and voting laws are followed , this year Trump supporters following the President ’ s directive are stumbling into the spotlight .
One woman claiming to be a Trump campaign poll watcher was refused entry at a Philadelphia elections office prior to Tuesday ’ s debate , the Philadelphia Inquirer reported , and for good reason : She wasn ’ t actually a sanctioned poll watcher .
No poll watching is permitted at elections offices , only at polling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania occurs only on Election Day .
“ The propaganda that ’ s being generated by the other side is just that , chaos is the objective , ” Pennsylvania Lt. Gov .
John Fetterman ( D ) said on CNN Sunday , noting that the state didn ’ t experience any voter fraud or other significant issues during its primary elections this year .
“ People in Pennsylvania need to understand that that ’ s all it is : Noise and distraction , propagated by an organization whose lone objective during this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to create diversions away from an outcome they very well may not like , ” Fetterman added .
Nonetheless , Trump tweeted about the woman and used her as an example of the ongoing supposed fraudulence of the election .
“ As you know , today there was a big problem ” in Philadelphia , he intoned at Tuesday ’ s debate .
“ They weren ’ t allowed to watch .
You know why ?
Because bad things happen in Philadelphia.
” The Trump campaign didn ’ t respond to TPM ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is really another example of partisan folks creating/taking advantage of minor incidents to shake our confidence in the elections , ” Suzanne Almeida , interim executive director of Common Cause Pennsylvania , told TPM .
There could be more rogue poll watchers on the way : The Philadelphia chapter of the Proud Boys , the right-wing street gang that Trump told to “ stand by ” during Tuesday ’ s debate , referred to Trump ’ s tweet about the rejected “ poll watcher ” in a post online Tuesday .
“ There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Reached by email , the group declined to elaborate .
Megan Squire , a professor of computer science at Elon University who tracks the far-right online , told TPM that unsanctioned poll watching efforts could play a major role in the public perception of November ’ s elections .
In addition to the potential that the Proud Boys will try to intimidate voters with their efforts , she said , “ another very real problem — maybe even a bigger problem — is these guys and other bad actors amplifying harmful memes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on social media.
” Michael Miller , a professor at George Washington University who focuses on autocracies , told TPM Wednesday that Trump may use the dirt these rogue poll watchers dig up to launch an attack on the election results themselves .
“ There is a possibility he tries to massively disrupt polling places , but there ’ s maybe another piece of strategy , which is that he wants these poll watchers just to gather a bunch of anecdotes to claim fraud , ” Miller said .
“ If you just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s a national story : ‘ This happened in Philadelphia , this happened in Peoria , ’ and it allows him to claim a national-level scandal , ” he added .
Trump ’ s examples so far have been pretty weak : During the debate Tuesday , he claimed mailmen in West Virginia were “ selling ” ballots ( wrong ) , that ballots had been found “ in creeks ” and “ dumped in rivers ” ( nope ) , and that ballots had been “ thrown out.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nine military ballots in Pennsylvania that were discarded mistakenly , despite a peculiar statement from the local U.S. Attorney office that implied the opposite .
At a press conference Thursday , White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Trump ’ s comment about ballots being “ dumped in rivers ” was really a reference to three trays of mail , including some absentee ballots , that were found in a roadside ditch last week in Wisconsin , though authorities have not said how many ballots there were nor if they had been filled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her answer on Trump ’ s “ rivers ” comment — she refused to acknowledge he was lying — criticizing the press for a “ lack of journalistic curiosity ” about the purported vulnerabilities of widespread mail-in voting .

In the final minute of Tuesday night’s presidential debate, President Donald Trump laid out something of an order for supporters of his: “I’m urging my supporters to go in to the polls and watch very carefully.”
Why? The President hasn’t left Americans to wonder: He wants that sweet, elusive “evidence” of widespread voter fraud he’s always talking about.
“If I see tens of thousands of ballots being manipulated, I can’t go along with that,” he said Tuesday.
“What does that mean?” moderator Chris Wallace pressed.
“It means you have a fraudulent election,” Trump responded.
If history is any indication, there will not be tens of thousands of manipulated ballots this election season. Though often invoked by the right, GOP operatives have repeatedly come up empty handed when asked to point to present-day examples of widespread fraud.
And yet Trump for months has laid the groundwork for claiming as much. He’s baselessly asserted dozens of times that mail-in voting is prone to tampering. And as he said in August, “the only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged.”
While legally-sanctioned poll watchers typically play the tedious role of ensuring that voters’ rights are protected and voting laws are followed, this year Trump supporters following the President’s directive are stumbling into the spotlight.
One woman claiming to be a Trump campaign poll watcher was refused entry at a Philadelphia elections office prior to Tuesday’s debate, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, and for good reason: She wasn’t actually a sanctioned poll watcher. No poll watching is permitted at elections offices, only at polling places. And legitimate poll watching in Pennsylvania occurs only on Election Day.
“The propaganda that’s being generated by the other side is just that, chaos is the objective,” Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman (D) said on CNN Sunday, noting that the state didn’t experience any voter fraud or other significant issues during its primary elections this year.
“People in Pennsylvania need to understand that that’s all it is: Noise and distraction, propagated by an organization whose lone objective during this campaign season is to sow chaos, to create diversions away from an outcome they very well may not like,” Fetterman added.
Nonetheless, Trump tweeted about the woman and used her as an example of the ongoing supposed fraudulence of the election.
“As you know, today there was a big problem” in Philadelphia, he intoned at Tuesday’s debate. “They weren’t allowed to watch. You know why? Because bad things happen in Philadelphia.”
The Trump campaign didn’t respond to TPM’s request for comment.
“This is really another example of partisan folks creating/taking advantage of minor incidents to shake our confidence in the elections,” Suzanne Almeida, interim executive director of Common Cause Pennsylvania, told TPM.
There could be more rogue poll watchers on the way: The Philadelphia chapter of the Proud Boys, the right-wing street gang that Trump told to “stand by” during Tuesday’s debate, referred to Trump’s tweet about the rejected “poll watcher” in a post online Tuesday.
“There goes our plans!” they wrote. Reached by email, the group declined to elaborate.
Megan Squire, a professor of computer science at Elon University who tracks the far-right online, told TPM that unsanctioned poll watching efforts could play a major role in the public perception of November’s elections.
In addition to the potential that the Proud Boys will try to intimidate voters with their efforts, she said, “another very real problem — maybe even a bigger problem — is these guys and other bad actors amplifying harmful memes and fake news about the election process on social media.”
Michael Miller, a professor at George Washington University who focuses on autocracies, told TPM Wednesday that Trump may use the dirt these rogue poll watchers dig up to launch an attack on the election results themselves.
“There is a possibility he tries to massively disrupt polling places, but there’s maybe another piece of strategy, which is that he wants these poll watchers just to gather a bunch of anecdotes to claim fraud,” Miller said.
“If you just find three cases of examples, suddenly that’s a national story: ‘This happened in Philadelphia, this happened in Peoria,’ and it allows him to claim a national-level scandal,” he added.
Trump’s examples so far have been pretty weak: During the debate Tuesday, he claimed mailmen in West Virginia were “selling” ballots (wrong), that ballots had been found “in creeks” and “dumped in rivers” (nope), and that ballots had been “thrown out.”
The latter case was apparently a reference to nine military ballots in Pennsylvania that were discarded mistakenly, despite a peculiar statement from the local U.S. Attorney office that implied the opposite.
At a press conference Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Trump’s comment about ballots being “dumped in rivers” was really a reference to three trays of mail, including some absentee ballots, that were found in a roadside ditch last week in Wisconsin, though authorities have not said how many ballots there were nor if they had been filled out or not.
McEnany spent most of her answer on Trump’s “rivers” comment — she refused to acknowledge he was lying — criticizing the press for a “lack of journalistic curiosity” about the purported vulnerabilities of widespread mail-in voting.
“I’m very curious!” Fox News Radio’s Jon Decker responded. “Where’s the river?!”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--Rightwing Trolls And Tricksters Try To Conjure Up Fake Proof Of Trump’s Voter Fraud Claims

When Bob Phillips heard that a wealthy New York City gym owner was prepared to donate $ 1,000 to his good government organization , Common Cause North Carolina , he was elated .
When the mystery man calling himself James Fortune upped that offer to $ 10,000 , the elation turned to doubt .
“ $ 1,000 is a lot for us , so $ 10,000 — we don ’ t get people who write those kinds of checks , ” he told TPM .
Over the course of two whiplash-inducing weeks , Phillips came to suspect that he , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wisconsin , was the subject of an attempted infiltration and sting .
These attempts , which range from schemes by groups like Project Veritas — with their heavily-edited “ gotcha ” videos — to doubt sowing by right-wing trolls , pundits and gadflies , have been replicated across the country , particularly in battleground states likely to decide the election .
Though differing in style and levels of commitment , they seem to share a common goal : to whip up “ proof ” of the voter fraud President Donald Trump has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right-wing actors have been creative in their targeting of different steps of the voter process .
Many have focused on fabricating voter registration fraud : planting the suspicion that groups are registering non-citizens or felons .
Some allege illegal ballot harvesting ( collection by a third party , which is legal in some states ) , or funhouse-mirror versions or ballot harvesting where shady people stuff bags with ballots bound for mysterious locations .
In North Carolina , Phillips had his guard down because Fortune had already “ ingratiated ” himself , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations — by cutting them checks .
Fortune first made contact with Democracy North Carolina , a close partner of the Common Cause chapter , as well as Latinx advocacy group Fortaleza .
He made donations to both .
These groups have been expending their resources heavily on voter education and engagement , especially given the changes COVID-19 has wrought .
Common Cause specifically has been focusing on informing people about laws newly passed by the state government which , among other things , expand access to absentee ballots .
Phillips told TPM @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fortune himself until the supposed businessman ’ s third call with Common Cause .
He said that Fortune made passing , opinionated comments — once about Trump “ hurting small businesses ” — but nothing that roused Phillip ’ s suspicions .
“ It ’ s not like I haven ’ t heard that before , ” he said .
“ People are emotional right now.
” It wasn ’ t until Fortune floated upping his $ 1,000 donation so substantially that he started to have misgivings .
“ The first thing out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was : ‘ If we increased that donation five- or tenfold , what would you do with it ?
’ ” Phillips said .
“ I was beginning to think , who is this guy ?
He parachutes in , we don ’ t know him , finds out about what we do and within a week is talking about giving $ 10,000.
” Fortune also offered Phillips a volunteer to join the organization : a friend of Fortune ’ s who , he said , recently moved to the area and was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman , Phillips recalled , contacted him immediately , claiming a background in protest movements in Brooklyn and wanting to know if she could start as soon as tomorrow .
Around that time , Phillips ’ friend from Democracy North Carolina called .
His first question : “ Have you been doing any business with James Fortune ?
” Phillips was told that Democracy North Carolina had found out that Fortune asked a person involved in voter education and advocacy if the groups could be persuaded to delve into the illegal and register @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s proffered rationale was allegedly : “ Trump is gon na cheat so we might as well also.
” That was enough to raise the alarm .
The groups looked into Fortune ’ s donations .
They came from a company called Blue Sky Med Labs LLC , which did not exist until June , shortly before Fortune came to town .
A local Atlanta TV station , nearby where Blue Sky is incorporated , was told by the LLC founder ’ s business partner that the lawyer for Blue Sky is Stefan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counsel for the Trump campaign .
Passantino did not respond to TPM ’ s questions .
Phillips reported the situation to the Wake County District Attorney , and Fortune and his enthusiastic volunteer disappeared .
DA Lorin Freeman is reviewing the situation , but told TPM the situation does “ not yet ” warrant a criminal inquiry .
“ You have to wonder if this is not all part of activity to fit the narrative the President is putting out there that we can ’ t trust elections due to rampant fraud , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ six voter advocacy groups fell victim to similar infiltration attempts by two men who they believe to be agents of Project Veritas .
The men had been involved with some of the groups for months .
None of the groups , which include Our Wisconsin Revolution , Voces De La Frontera and Souls to the Polls , would talk to TPM .
“ They ’ re scared for their personal safety , ” said David Di Martino , a PR representative for three of the organizations .
But the groups did send a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the infiltration and claiming they had identified one of the men as Christian Hartsock , right-hand man to Project Veritas ’ James O ’ Keefe .
The groups said that both men raised the idea of illegally registering noncitizens and felons to vote .
The two men “ repeatedly touted the idea of knowingly registering noncitizens and felons to vote — even though it is against the law — in order to bring about a lawsuit and win their voting rights afterwards , ” the groups wrote , describing the alleged infiltration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ secretly recorded video and in-person meetings from June to early September of this year .
“ Our collective organizations believe that we have become a target for Project Veritas ’ s fraudulent actions , ” they wrote in the letter .
“ We believe that their latest efforts to misrepresent our civic engagement work may violate multiple laws.
” They are now waiting on tenterhooks to see if they ’ ll become the next subject of a Project Veritas video drop .
Right-wing trolls of all stripes are getting in on the action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting .
Earlier this week , Republican state leadership in Wisconsin tried to get a Madison city clerk-sponsored event , called Democracy in the Park , shut down with claims of illegality .
The events serve as a place where poll workers can answer questions about voting , serve as witnesses for absentee ballots and safely collect and deposit ballots at the clerk ’ s office .
The lawmakers called the events “ unlawful , ” though , as the city attorney pointed out , failed to cite any actual law being broken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their opposition by Michelle Malkin , a once-CPAC , Fox News-brand conservative who has since gone completely off the rails and embraced white supremacists and Holocaust deniers .
“ Imagine sheaves of ballots carelessly stuffed into cheap , canvas , pizza delivery-style totes , ” she conjectured on creators.com , one of the only platforms that ’ ll still host her bonkers columns .
“ Then imagine them being carted away by unknown drivers to unknown locations for unknown reasons .
Observers captured photos of several stuffed red bags being loaded into an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s municipal government building.
” In one evidence-free paragraph , Malkin turned a nonpartisan attempt to make voting easier into a suspicious ( and later , George Soros-backed ) attempt to hijack the election .
Baked Alaska , a prolific far-right internet troll who lives to accuse veterans of stolen valor or scream that the 19th Amendment should be repealed , harassed a voter registration volunteer to a similar tune in a livestream in Tempe , Arizona last week .
Amid a toxic sludge of vile accusations and constant harassment , the YouTuber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ on your payroll , ” which he later corrected to “ no , I mean he ’ s paying you.
” “ That guy finances all sorts of shit to destroy our country , ” he added .
Meanwhile , a stream of gleeful commentators shouted about ballot harvesting in all caps in the live chat .

When Bob Phillips heard that a wealthy New York City gym owner was prepared to donate $1,000 to his good government organization, Common Cause North Carolina, he was elated.
When the mystery man calling himself James Fortune upped that offer to $10,000, the elation turned to doubt.
“$1,000 is a lot for us, so $10,000 — we don’t get people who write those kinds of checks,” he told TPM.
Over the course of two whiplash-inducing weeks, Phillips came to suspect that he, like three other voter advocacy groups in Wisconsin, was the subject of an attempted infiltration and sting.
These attempts, which range from schemes by groups like Project Veritas — with their heavily-edited “gotcha” videos — to doubt sowing by right-wing trolls, pundits and gadflies, have been replicated across the country, particularly in battleground states likely to decide the election. Though differing in style and levels of commitment, they seem to share a common goal: to whip up “proof” of the voter fraud President Donald Trump has been shouting about all campaign long.
The right-wing actors have been creative in their targeting of different steps of the voter process. Many have focused on fabricating voter registration fraud: planting the suspicion that groups are registering non-citizens or felons. Some allege illegal ballot harvesting (collection by a third party, which is legal in some states), or funhouse-mirror versions or ballot harvesting where shady people stuff bags with ballots bound for mysterious locations.
In North Carolina, Phillips had his guard down because Fortune had already “ingratiated” himself, in Phillips’ words, with other local organizations — by cutting them checks. Fortune first made contact with Democracy North Carolina, a close partner of the Common Cause chapter, as well as Latinx advocacy group Fortaleza. He made donations to both.
These groups have been expending their resources heavily on voter education and engagement, especially given the changes COVID-19 has wrought. Common Cause specifically has been focusing on informing people about laws newly passed by the state government which, among other things, expand access to absentee ballots.
Phillips told TPM that he didn’t connect with Fortune himself until the supposed businessman’s third call with Common Cause. He said that Fortune made passing, opinionated comments — once about Trump “hurting small businesses” — but nothing that roused Phillip’s suspicions.
“It’s not like I haven’t heard that before,” he said. “People are emotional right now.”
It wasn’t until Fortune floated upping his $1,000 donation so substantially that he started to have misgivings.
“The first thing out of his mouth in that next call was: ‘If we increased that donation five- or tenfold, what would you do with it?’” Phillips said. “I was beginning to think, who is this guy? He parachutes in, we don’t know him, finds out about what we do and within a week is talking about giving $10,000.”
Fortune also offered Phillips a volunteer to join the organization: a friend of Fortune’s who, he said, recently moved to the area and was very interested in helping out. The woman, Phillips recalled, contacted him immediately, claiming a background in protest movements in Brooklyn and wanting to know if she could start as soon as tomorrow.
Around that time, Phillips’ friend from Democracy North Carolina called. His first question: “Have you been doing any business with James Fortune?” Phillips was told that Democracy North Carolina had found out that Fortune asked a person involved in voter education and advocacy if the groups could be persuaded to delve into the illegal and register undocumented immigrants to vote. Fortune’s proffered rationale was allegedly: “Trump is gonna cheat so we might as well also.”
That was enough to raise the alarm. The groups looked into Fortune’s donations. They came from a company called Blue Sky Med Labs LLC, which did not exist until June, shortly before Fortune came to town. A local Atlanta TV station, nearby where Blue Sky is incorporated, was told by the LLC founder’s business partner that the lawyer for Blue Sky is Stefan Passantino — a former deputy White House counsel for the Trump campaign. Passantino did not respond to TPM’s questions.
Phillips reported the situation to the Wake County District Attorney, and Fortune and his enthusiastic volunteer disappeared. DA Lorin Freeman is reviewing the situation, but told TPM the situation does “not yet” warrant a criminal inquiry.
“You have to wonder if this is not all part of activity to fit the narrative the President is putting out there that we can’t trust elections due to rampant fraud,” said Phillips.
Wisconsin Infiltration
In Wisconsin, six voter advocacy groups fell victim to similar infiltration attempts by two men who they believe to be agents of Project Veritas. The men had been involved with some of the groups for months.
None of the groups, which include Our Wisconsin Revolution, Voces De La Frontera and Souls to the Polls, would talk to TPM. “They’re scared for their personal safety,” said David Di Martino, a PR representative for three of the organizations.
But the groups did send a letter to the state Attorney General alleging the infiltration and claiming they had identified one of the men as Christian Hartsock, right-hand man to Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe. The groups said that both men raised the idea of illegally registering noncitizens and felons to vote.
The two men “repeatedly touted the idea of knowingly registering noncitizens and felons to vote — even though it is against the law — in order to bring about a lawsuit and win their voting rights afterwards,” the groups wrote, describing the alleged infiltration. They said they believe the two men secretly recorded video and in-person meetings from June to early September of this year.
“Our collective organizations believe that we have become a target for Project Veritas’s fraudulent actions,” they wrote in the letter. “We believe that their latest efforts to misrepresent our civic engagement work may violate multiple laws.” They are now waiting on tenterhooks to see if they’ll become the next subject of a Project Veritas video drop.
Trolls Too
Right-wing trolls of all stripes are getting in on the action, seeking to manufacture claims of illegal voting.
Earlier this week, Republican state leadership in Wisconsin tried to get a Madison city clerk-sponsored event, called Democracy in the Park, shut down with claims of illegality. The events serve as a place where poll workers can answer questions about voting, serve as witnesses for absentee ballots and safely collect and deposit ballots at the clerk’s office. The lawmakers called the events “unlawful,” though, as the city attorney pointed out, failed to cite any actual law being broken.
The GOP lawmakers were buoyed in their opposition by Michelle Malkin, a once-CPAC, Fox News-brand conservative who has since gone completely off the rails and embraced white supremacists and Holocaust deniers.
“Imagine sheaves of ballots carelessly stuffed into cheap, canvas, pizza delivery-style totes,” she conjectured on creators.com, one of the only platforms that’ll still host her bonkers columns. “Then imagine them being carted away by unknown drivers to unknown locations for unknown reasons. Observers captured photos of several stuffed red bags being loaded into an unmarked white van parked outside Madison’s municipal government building.”
In one evidence-free paragraph, Malkin turned a nonpartisan attempt to make voting easier into a suspicious (and later, George Soros-backed) attempt to hijack the election.
Baked Alaska, a prolific far-right internet troll who lives to accuse veterans of stolen valor or scream that the 19th Amendment should be repealed, harassed a voter registration volunteer to a similar tune in a livestream in Tempe, Arizona last week.
Amid a toxic sludge of vile accusations and constant harassment, the YouTuber accuses the volunteer of having George Soros “on your payroll,” which he later corrected to “no, I mean he’s paying you.”
“That guy finances all sorts of shit to destroy our country,” he added. Meanwhile, a stream of gleeful commentators shouted about ballot harvesting in all caps in the live chat.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--Trump Resists Debate Changes That Would Stop Him From Interrupting Biden

President Donald Trump on Thursday complained of potential changes proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates that would prevent him from repeatedly interrupting his Democratic opponent Joe Biden , as the President did constantly during the first debate .
The comments come after the Commission on Presidential Debates signaled in a statement on Wednesday that it would be carefully considering “ tools to maintain order ” in an effort to “ ensure more orderly discussion of the issues.
” Responding to the initial announcement Wednesday , Trump tweeted insults at his Democratic opponent and took aim at the debate ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting a new Anchor and a smarter Democrat candidate !
” he wrote .
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany stood by the President ’ s blunders on Wednesday , asserting during a Fox Business Network interview that Trump “ brought the fight that the American people wanted to see.
” Trump campaign director of communications Tim Murtaugh on Wednesday suggested that the commission — which is nonpartisan — was only making adjustments because “ their guy got pummeled.
” RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel similarly suggested on Thursday that she hoped the CPD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once again protect Joe Biden from answering to the American people.
” The RNC chair suggested during a Fox Business Network interview that changes from the commission were intended to assist Biden , who she says “ got away ” without answering tough questions at the first debate .
If by “ got away ” she meant wasn ’ t given room to answer the questions directed at him due to Trump ’ s repeated interruptions , you wouldn ’ t know it .
When pressed , McDaniel repeatedly refused to acknowledge the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President had gone too far during Tuesday ’ s presidential debate .
Several of Trump ’ s top aides and allies have said that Trump weakened his own reelection bid by relentlessly interrupting his Democratic opponent .
McDaniel maintained that she does not support a potential change that would cut the microphone of either candidate if they break the rules .
“ I don ’ t think you should be changing the rules that they have agreed to , ” McDaniel said , suggesting that the proposed changes were being made “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manager for Biden , said the Democratic nominee is ready for the next debate in Miami on Oct. 15 .
“ He ’ ll be focused on answering questions from the voters there , under whatever set of rules the Commission develops to try to contain Donald Trump ’ s behavior , ” she said in a statement Wednesday .
“ The president will have to choose between responding to voters about questions for which he has offered no answers in this campaign — or repeating last night ’ s unhinged meltdown .
@

President Donald Trump on Thursday complained of potential changes proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates that would prevent him from repeatedly interrupting his Democratic opponent Joe Biden, as the President did constantly during the first debate.
Why would I allow the Debate Commission to change the rules for the second and third Debates when I easily won last time? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2020
The comments come after the Commission on Presidential Debates signaled in a statement on Wednesday that it would be carefully considering “tools to maintain order” in an effort to “ensure more orderly discussion of the issues.”
Responding to the initial announcement Wednesday, Trump tweeted insults at his Democratic opponent and took aim at the debate’s moderator Chris Wallace: “Try getting a new Anchor and a smarter Democrat candidate!” he wrote.
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany stood by the President’s blunders on Wednesday, asserting during a Fox Business Network interview that Trump “brought the fight that the American people wanted to see.”
Trump campaign director of communications Tim Murtaugh on Wednesday suggested that the commission — which is nonpartisan — was only making adjustments because “their guy got pummeled.”
RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel similarly suggested on Thursday that she hoped the CPD “does not change the rules to once again protect Joe Biden from answering to the American people.”
The RNC chair suggested during a Fox Business Network interview that changes from the commission were intended to assist Biden, who she says “got away” without answering tough questions at the first debate.
If by “got away” she meant wasn’t given room to answer the questions directed at him due to Trump’s repeated interruptions, you wouldn’t know it.
When pressed, McDaniel repeatedly refused to acknowledge the assessment made by some Trump allies that the President had gone too far during Tuesday’s presidential debate. Several of Trump’s top aides and allies have said that Trump weakened his own reelection bid by relentlessly interrupting his Democratic opponent.
McDaniel maintained that she does not support a potential change that would cut the microphone of either candidate if they break the rules.
“I don’t think you should be changing the rules that they have agreed to,” McDaniel said, suggesting that the proposed changes were being made “arbitrarily.”
Kate Bedingfield, deputy campaign manager for Biden, said the Democratic nominee is ready for the next debate in Miami on Oct. 15.
“He’ll be focused on answering questions from the voters there, under whatever set of rules the Commission develops to try to contain Donald Trump’s behavior,” she said in a statement Wednesday. “The president will have to choose between responding to voters about questions for which he has offered no answers in this campaign — or repeating last night’s unhinged meltdown.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-10-01--Pfizer, Last Hope For Pre-Election COVID Vaccine, Hits Out At ‘Politicization’ During Debate

Pfizer ’ s CEO warned against a COVID-19 vaccine being politicized in a letter to employees obtained by CNBC , after a Tuesday Presidential debate in which President Trump repeated his promise of a pre-election vaccine .
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that he was “ disappointed that the prevention for a deadly disease was discussed in political terms rather than scientific facts.
” Out of the three COVID-19 vaccine candidates farthest along in testing , Pfizer ’ s is the only one with a chance at pre-election approval .
The Food and Drug Administration has put trials of AstraZeneca @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigates a bad reaction , while Moderna ’ s CEO said on Wednesday that the earliest the company would submit for emergency approval is late November .
Pfizer has stood apart from its competitors in its willingness to declare and repeat that its COVID-19 vaccine would gather enough trial data by late October for the company to ask the FDA for emergency approval .
President Trump has spent months pressuring the FDA to approve an early vaccine — in time for Election Day — as other parts of the government have made plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine by November 1 .
Despite that , Bourla suggested in his Thursday letter that both sides were to blame for politicizing the vaccine .
“ In this hyper-partisan year , there are some who would like us to move more quickly and others who argue for delay , ” the Pfizer CEO wrote .
“ Neither of those options are acceptable to me.
” Any COVID-19 vaccine , once approved , would likely go first to limited groups of people , including ER doctors , first responders , and those at high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , experts say , likely won ’ t come until deep into 2021 .
Bourla added in the letter that “ we are moving at the speed of science ” and added that “ we would never succumb to political pressure.
” “ The amplified political rhetoric around vaccine development , timing and political credit is undercutting public confidence , ” he wrote .
“ I can ’ t predict exactly when , or even if our vaccine will be approved by the FDA for distribution to the public.
” Like the Moderna @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two doses in order to be effective .
Pfizer ’ s candidate requires a 21 day wait time between the two shots , as opposed to Moderna ’ s 28-day interval .
Phase III trials of the Pfizer shot began in late July .
A protocol released by the company shows that 32 participants in the trial ’ s placebo group falling sick with COVID-19 triggers a review of the data that could serve as the basis for requesting emergency approval , compared to 53 cases for the Moderna trial .
Bourla emphasized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the company ’ s timeline and that it was seeking a “ safe and effective ” vaccine to prevent COVID-19 .
The letter comes after a group of 60 prominent vaccinologists and epidemiologists wrote an open letter last week to Bourla , urging him to abide by rigorous safety standards and wait to submit for emergency FDA approval until all trial participants had received both doses .
“ Given that many trial participants have not yet received their second dose , monitoring should occur through at least late November before an application for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the FDA , ” that letter reads .
Bourla wrote in his message that “ the world will be safer if we stop talking about the vaccines ’ delivery in political terms and focus instead on a rigorous independent scientific evaluation and a robust independent approval process .
”

Pfizer’s CEO warned against a COVID-19 vaccine being politicized in a letter to employees obtained by CNBC, after a Tuesday Presidential debate in which President Trump repeated his promise of a pre-election vaccine.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that he was “disappointed that the prevention for a deadly disease was discussed in political terms rather than scientific facts.”
Out of the three COVID-19 vaccine candidates farthest along in testing, Pfizer’s is the only one with a chance at pre-election approval. The Food and Drug Administration has put trials of AstraZeneca’s shot on hold as it investigates a bad reaction, while Moderna’s CEO said on Wednesday that the earliest the company would submit for emergency approval is late November.
Pfizer has stood apart from its competitors in its willingness to declare and repeat that its COVID-19 vaccine would gather enough trial data by late October for the company to ask the FDA for emergency approval.
President Trump has spent months pressuring the FDA to approve an early vaccine — in time for Election Day — as other parts of the government have made plans to begin initial distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine by November 1.
Despite that, Bourla suggested in his Thursday letter that both sides were to blame for politicizing the vaccine.
“In this hyper-partisan year, there are some who would like us to move more quickly and others who argue for delay,” the Pfizer CEO wrote. “Neither of those options are acceptable to me.”
Any COVID-19 vaccine, once approved, would likely go first to limited groups of people, including ER doctors, first responders, and those at high risk of serious complications. Widespread availability, experts say, likely won’t come until deep into 2021.
Bourla added in the letter that “we are moving at the speed of science” and added that “we would never succumb to political pressure.”
“The amplified political rhetoric around vaccine development, timing and political credit is undercutting public confidence,” he wrote. “I can’t predict exactly when, or even if our vaccine will be approved by the FDA for distribution to the public.”
Like the Moderna candidate, Pfizer’s vaccine requires two doses in order to be effective. Pfizer’s candidate requires a 21 day wait time between the two shots, as opposed to Moderna’s 28-day interval.
Phase III trials of the Pfizer shot began in late July. A protocol released by the company shows that 32 participants in the trial’s placebo group falling sick with COVID-19 triggers a review of the data that could serve as the basis for requesting emergency approval, compared to 53 cases for the Moderna trial.
Bourla emphasized in his letter that science was driving the company’s timeline and that it was seeking a “safe and effective” vaccine to prevent COVID-19.
The letter comes after a group of 60 prominent vaccinologists and epidemiologists wrote an open letter last week to Bourla, urging him to abide by rigorous safety standards and wait to submit for emergency FDA approval until all trial participants had received both doses.
“Given that many trial participants have not yet received their second dose, monitoring should occur through at least late November before an application for an Emergency Use Authorization should be considered by the FDA,” that letter reads.
Bourla wrote in his message that “the world will be safer if we stop talking about the vaccines’ delivery in political terms and focus instead on a rigorous independent scientific evaluation and a robust independent approval process.”