Overall, last week was a quieter week in the unfolding impeachment saga.
Earlier last week, Trump administration officials continued the ongoing habit of defying House Democrats’ impeachment-related subpoenas. As Fox News <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W66Yc9M66hdk3W3XxYpT2NH8vQ0/5/f18dQhb0SfHn9c-h9gW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Vj1Qt2G2VLDpF18CSvhfW8CZrMG8m7vgGW8B-9dc8yVPQ_N3HtdkMVbDp_W3Htl0P3N0TRKW67jVlh5wL6c-VTH5T364Qd0yW8zvHql5_Vt-mF8m81QV25l2W55fLnq8WmgDpW5n6V1k8VCv8JW2MznrN5nbq6BVGXpVf3ZQWFgW5nyN8z2z95WfW2yscgj7nlhG4W5ZpycS57-ZBTW83C5JP6rY-3sW2KQ2YY1Gk5dXN2Hj7tS8JHM_W8c3wwh3X0g0yN6bp1cMbq5fxW4TKc2l5vJbBHN7fdQ4vP_8XWW5kNW6S8LkXJBW9jJxZh8d9s4gW50XBc38Sh4LLW4F2q0N7lCx_cW1pgv5Z8L1RcHW7YGRT28rg-P2W51m0wR3ghHDsW4Vyr8l8qCrzkW9jBRnz3zJsY2W7d0nLw5bW-L4W1bBvW33_5XgcW6hz0s82bzNQYW5ZS0xn6yzFt5W4cyCw230Pjz7W1CV8c97G7bpYN4QDgwJWW9M5W5RRkPs6zX_YLW5_5dnz7SJ7wCW4zBVJp2-BmhdVTr0CC1yf53YvVL6QTbLkf68sTPS02" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W66Yc9M66hdk3W3XxYpT2NH8vQ0/5/f18dQhb0SfHn9c-h9gW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Vj1Qt2G2VLDpF18CSvhfW8CZrMG8m7vgGW8B-9dc8yVPQ_N3HtdkMVbDp_W3Htl0P3N0TRKW67jVlh5wL6c-VTH5T364Qd0yW8zvHql5_Vt-mF8m81QV25l2W55fLnq8WmgDpW5n6V1k8VCv8JW2MznrN5nbq6BVGXpVf3ZQWFgW5nyN8z2z95WfW2yscgj7nlhG4W5ZpycS57-ZBTW83C5JP6rY-3sW2KQ2YY1Gk5dXN2Hj7tS8JHM_W8c3wwh3X0g0yN6bp1cMbq5fxW4TKc2l5vJbBHN7fdQ4vP_8XWW5kNW6S8LkXJBW9jJxZh8d9s4gW50XBc38Sh4LLW4F2q0N7lCx_cW1pgv5Z8L1RcHW7YGRT28rg-P2W51m0wR3ghHDsW4Vyr8l8qCrzkW9jBRnz3zJsY2W7d0nLw5bW-L4W1bBvW33_5XgcW6hz0s82bzNQYW5ZS0xn6yzFt5W4cyCw230Pjz7W1CV8c97G7bpYN4QDgwJWW9M5W5RRkPs6zX_YLW5_5dnz7SJ7wCW4zBVJp2-BmhdVTr0CC1yf53YvVL6QTbLkf68sTPS02&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322538000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHfzSxml8H1uB5yNuwuigeuqaTJEQ">reported</a>, a lead National Security Council attorney, a top aide to Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, and an additional Office of Management and Budget aide all failed to show up for their scheduled depositions on Capitol Hill. Otherwise, U.S. ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W4tGyMg8VHFFjW65NlCc5Kwsbs0/5/f18dQhb0Sq5G8Y9-RWW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Tq1Vq7GqVLDpF18CSvhfW8DrSws3J4F4KW8B-9dc8yX6RjW3knCMv8yXl2gW5x625k8mFVfxW3GCvtS3Q020dW1pgMhv65jGWdN5v6x90SbM5KW8mFFZS5wL96LW1sL3M03MybvyW6RNDcs5xKvMBW69GbGF3NpJSjW4KQJk12N33B5W3_t0gL32Gf2QW4dnWJc69NG1wW6PqSg98mQMWvW5Vb2cd5w8WykMMNBCZMMQxXW80gSRf97rB1bW8xqZLV24H1v5W2756LD93S-6cW8tdfY73N8_sZW3PgfgR4p3W3cW653Nh163tMgzW2xrxt664Ls7qW66YDzg6SLQd9W6Rbygg6QhWvKN3lll5mVxnMPN5J1scwhMG-KW23y2NH5C2CLWVSRWT_27s9J8W7wV0lj1xfQR4W3ygvH88c3fNTVJ5v6n7v4WNLW49vfHg6sFhDKMN-wDG42c_8W3nh5k98qNPfnW3FXFhk4BKzChW6QJtpH81-l8QW11PGlS1BzGN8W5YZ_DT73yKD2W70RWLy5bkc53111" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W4tGyMg8VHFFjW65NlCc5Kwsbs0/5/f18dQhb0Sq5G8Y9-RWW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Tq1Vq7GqVLDpF18CSvhfW8DrSws3J4F4KW8B-9dc8yX6RjW3knCMv8yXl2gW5x625k8mFVfxW3GCvtS3Q020dW1pgMhv65jGWdN5v6x90SbM5KW8mFFZS5wL96LW1sL3M03MybvyW6RNDcs5xKvMBW69GbGF3NpJSjW4KQJk12N33B5W3_t0gL32Gf2QW4dnWJc69NG1wW6PqSg98mQMWvW5Vb2cd5w8WykMMNBCZMMQxXW80gSRf97rB1bW8xqZLV24H1v5W2756LD93S-6cW8tdfY73N8_sZW3PgfgR4p3W3cW653Nh163tMgzW2xrxt664Ls7qW66YDzg6SLQd9W6Rbygg6QhWvKN3lll5mVxnMPN5J1scwhMG-KW23y2NH5C2CLWVSRWT_27s9J8W7wV0lj1xfQR4W3ygvH88c3fNTVJ5v6n7v4WNLW49vfHg6sFhDKMN-wDG42c_8W3nh5k98qNPfnW3FXFhk4BKzChW6QJtpH81-l8QW11PGlS1BzGN8W5YZ_DT73yKD2W70RWLy5bkc53111&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322538000&amp;usg=AFQjCNG2N_u7lof0SETcF-Mvxtr0JqxbtQ">updated</a> his recent testimony in a way that could further hurt the Trump team’s efforts to rebut Democrats’ charge that Trump engaged in a nefarious “quid pro quo” in last summer’s now-infamous phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Trump has been <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W3qSM5D31MlCFW4FjM1117Mbmx0/5/f18dQhb0Sq5z8Y9YsWW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5R21Nvw7TVLDpF18CSv07W5w5R8T8x14cSW8yVJcM8rdDcDN1nPcdCMDj_jW8tYz--5w5BNDV_tKSx5C3LsHN5F294hXy7VSVY0M9Y5y5jh-W1rfXlz1kRpb7W7ZClNK1q7NGsW8t4BPX4Sf1kGW6dqF0Z8W2c9WW32CQ2l8jxMNSW1Vx27W6Pkt_VN62_rT82FpQ3W9dH8_66V4mcJW86KnNH7P1-wWN33FK-yqPkxDVnjZC81Hfvb0W59lgPN1y_PrlW1gtmV585y-CwW9djGw_77c_9bVKJRZ98ksL8qW9d6gxl5n3MwtW2Rw5ft82_d7wW6xcPLZ7ws4HJVJC88f6zyWGlVp-_rh7x3yGJW9g4bml77nXYRW52Ym4r14HD_cW2p8_TT7-cq2QW3d0zvx4p7yDTW2zz89m3M1RxqW8r4Pxt5_BMMVW3fKSXy5Zl4SZVd8y6q1QNZ5kW2gzfh33MP03dW2B62ny6lgqdyW95ccVC5_6SwhW1KSCLB36sLG2w1NsfDKpw5f2Hnn1w02" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W3qSM5D31MlCFW4FjM1117Mbmx0/5/f18dQhb0Sq5z8Y9YsWW80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5R21Nvw7TVLDpF18CSv07W5w5R8T8x14cSW8yVJcM8rdDcDN1nPcdCMDj_jW8tYz--5w5BNDV_tKSx5C3LsHN5F294hXy7VSVY0M9Y5y5jh-W1rfXlz1kRpb7W7ZClNK1q7NGsW8t4BPX4Sf1kGW6dqF0Z8W2c9WW32CQ2l8jxMNSW1Vx27W6Pkt_VN62_rT82FpQ3W9dH8_66V4mcJW86KnNH7P1-wWN33FK-yqPkxDVnjZC81Hfvb0W59lgPN1y_PrlW1gtmV585y-CwW9djGw_77c_9bVKJRZ98ksL8qW9d6gxl5n3MwtW2Rw5ft82_d7wW6xcPLZ7ws4HJVJC88f6zyWGlVp-_rh7x3yGJW9g4bml77nXYRW52Ym4r14HD_cW2p8_TT7-cq2QW3d0zvx4p7yDTW2zz89m3M1RxqW8r4Pxt5_BMMVW3fKSXy5Zl4SZVd8y6q1QNZ5kW2gzfh33MP03dW2B62ny6lgqdyW95ccVC5_6SwhW1KSCLB36sLG2w1NsfDKpw5f2Hnn1w02&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322538000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFOMhLg0w9RtoEqGXB9qMbywrUpsQ">tweeting</a> a lot recently to encourage Americans to actually read the underlying transcript of the Zelensky phone call, which potentially bodes well in terms of the Trump team realizing that it needs to advance a substantive — instead of merely a procedural — argument that expressly argues that the totality of what substantively transpired between Trump and Zelensky does not even come close to meeting the “high crimes and misdemeanors” criterion that the Constitution prescribes as its impeachment standard. As I have explained in previous Election Wires, Alexander Hamilton <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W6jrZP49glTwtVQXTVh83DLRD0/5/f18dQhb0SbTP8YHrXgN8HWm5lHyjJqW8q-jQ-4XyTvPW3hHh8X2P7_nXVcnTGj98kNPXW26n-yd25xxTKW5t2x5c4v13hrN98jppGZbhHpW4r1N_c5tXDYXW1wJ6H251RS_HW61SSZm7mG7sDW51vX4y6HrZgDW7lVtgt4s2-MqW8f6L0f3VpzgTW9dSlS635rgClW94-4T07sLptqW41TlcR3TwTqCW4KbJZx2kGg8MW6sCkcN4YFc44W57-WqM3H_PtyW2DzCtR1yBNY7W1kBBQz2Gm3GzVqYwFH8FCZrbW7nGzDf8Gd1wNVkDZvr7FhCnlW5SSSCD6qSd4CW82-KL08jhTv1W4b5wR-2r7NVtW2G-ftt4nmPn4V7r66n4GtrHrN8gGSMWBnDH8W1sl9sW9kFWZfW32k78t6Pc2NRN7PwBwrVzQv-VVn7DD12G_sLW1RP_SX32Sff8N4JWF2MhL_4cW24Zwh22nRzM3W5701m62WqWb0W3gtYvZ2_yD7XW8DnzGX2hj86VW1vhHFD54NZMCMNDyx-rTzpYV10v2z2KMnWW103" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W6jrZP49glTwtVQXTVh83DLRD0/5/f18dQhb0SbTP8YHrXgN8HWm5lHyjJqW8q-jQ-4XyTvPW3hHh8X2P7_nXVcnTGj98kNPXW26n-yd25xxTKW5t2x5c4v13hrN98jppGZbhHpW4r1N_c5tXDYXW1wJ6H251RS_HW61SSZm7mG7sDW51vX4y6HrZgDW7lVtgt4s2-MqW8f6L0f3VpzgTW9dSlS635rgClW94-4T07sLptqW41TlcR3TwTqCW4KbJZx2kGg8MW6sCkcN4YFc44W57-WqM3H_PtyW2DzCtR1yBNY7W1kBBQz2Gm3GzVqYwFH8FCZrbW7nGzDf8Gd1wNVkDZvr7FhCnlW5SSSCD6qSd4CW82-KL08jhTv1W4b5wR-2r7NVtW2G-ftt4nmPn4V7r66n4GtrHrN8gGSMWBnDH8W1sl9sW9kFWZfW32k78t6Pc2NRN7PwBwrVzQv-VVn7DD12G_sLW1RP_SX32Sff8N4JWF2MhL_4cW24Zwh22nRzM3W5701m62WqWb0W3gtYvZ2_yD7XW8DnzGX2hj86VW1vhHFD54NZMCMNDyx-rTzpYV10v2z2KMnWW103&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322538000&amp;usg=AFQjCNE1AffeFK5cSCOpT2MgXlzcjpLYCw">explained</a> in The Federalist No. 65 that the impeachment of a president may be properly considered for all “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”
Accordingly, Trump’s impeachment defense must be centered around substantively arguing that the Zelensky phone call did not “abuse or violat[e] … some public trust.” This should not be particularly difficult, and the White House should consider hiring a <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W4Fc5RG6l41mxW3_0SfX5CPqKQ0/5/f18dQhb0S2C728_sBBVMvn3M1b7DcSN2xHp4pDHJ4kW1q92vL54Rt0YW2wjy_W47QqJ6W4lbFp33MvbCdW2CYkfh1KTHDsW4VJy_Z19zfMlW1gMDxd1v2NSTW1qM8X183Y1KQW22rH4F9g6_SwW5zQJWQ3JR16lW52zsJc51CmnTW6PNRz95jffL2W6gP_kl1p6wj_Mr6nn9-nDwzW8s13Dv6HDfN2W2KFwBv4vJQwPW8c8qlR826XdzVVCy5B155FnWVs5ySm8_nzKFW4Xs1Gv2YvvGqW8-pqRl4P47H0W6CPTrn2zBQTHVFWlfK4W7pFVV622bD93_c68N40ZDz6tT08JW435ZY65jY-YHW68BbGd4qRRHvW3DqYXW1fPFpGVXY-vN3-tmwkW2Vwy9x86TCbgW8n-ZzZ2RDT7pW40B3Pk3gsnxDW1mDSY91J8w2jW6xyVCF3M7Y9BW8m6g-k2HHttGW6MQQqS3gcvNJW3Kr-Fn7b8kx3W7rn_rY5GJ7sgW33-3gL7HTkg0Vr85Hc5D0l0gW4LCWXN3FmmKJW6HCFvV7cjdDFW5F2PS24F1QhjW6WGKZx6mBz8LW7rD5qB7hvX58W1SC1Xh4Fzzd3W761s0r23_rQTf5N2-BB11" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W4Fc5RG6l41mxW3_0SfX5CPqKQ0/5/f18dQhb0S2C728_sBBVMvn3M1b7DcSN2xHp4pDHJ4kW1q92vL54Rt0YW2wjy_W47QqJ6W4lbFp33MvbCdW2CYkfh1KTHDsW4VJy_Z19zfMlW1gMDxd1v2NSTW1qM8X183Y1KQW22rH4F9g6_SwW5zQJWQ3JR16lW52zsJc51CmnTW6PNRz95jffL2W6gP_kl1p6wj_Mr6nn9-nDwzW8s13Dv6HDfN2W2KFwBv4vJQwPW8c8qlR826XdzVVCy5B155FnWVs5ySm8_nzKFW4Xs1Gv2YvvGqW8-pqRl4P47H0W6CPTrn2zBQTHVFWlfK4W7pFVV622bD93_c68N40ZDz6tT08JW435ZY65jY-YHW68BbGd4qRRHvW3DqYXW1fPFpGVXY-vN3-tmwkW2Vwy9x86TCbgW8n-ZzZ2RDT7pW40B3Pk3gsnxDW1mDSY91J8w2jW6xyVCF3M7Y9BW8m6g-k2HHttGW6MQQqS3gcvNJW3Kr-Fn7b8kx3W7rn_rY5GJ7sgW33-3gL7HTkg0Vr85Hc5D0l0gW4LCWXN3FmmKJW6HCFvV7cjdDFW5F2PS24F1QhjW6WGKZx6mBz8LW7rD5qB7hvX58W1SC1Xh4Fzzd3W761s0r23_rQTf5N2-BB11&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322539000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFaoX3W5izx0HAP-yge7DG7VQV-sA">chief strategist</a> to lead the effort — one possible name that comes to mind is <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W25ysKm8yt6j7N2N7qC0QXDx30/5/f18dQhb0Sjvm6BHC8SW62tQd64T_wDdW5w02yj5w05lbVscWqS1VbPj2W53DQ4N33FVCTW1W0s6730rr3SW8_gQtC8ZCH4KN7X_pnlRbnvcW1lQNDF5w5C_HW5y5jh-1rfXlzW1kRpb77ZClNKW1q7NGs8t4BPXW4Sf1kG6dqF0ZW8W2c9W32CQ2lW8jxMNS1VwV0kW3HbhT65tNvm-W52mV-88tzC3FW8q-1tC6H4mrRW55T8N87w3wPSW1NC3Kc1F6KTtW8Y0h_b2T-f0qW2GttMf7v5xChVzZmCx2266yKW92pY_C4dZGZtW1KT2mr7MctF-Vy90MB1wgXPmN7Tzp61wZk9_W92rRtX1Xv_n0W7nZfGg58677kW20S-qb7CkfkRW2MVMJp2VPGKHW8XRjSq7ZjRCNW1BxxJm819pLQW73R1h2224kXkW1WYmHy20ZdMCW1c8vq-7ps3S_N8Yztwfb2_nMW6PxM7x7vs64-W7fTjHB97sBJnW4jfDlp6KRQscW25yrLf397kxjW2vSzV74Q-5SVW4HzlZ64mb2rj111" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*W25ysKm8yt6j7N2N7qC0QXDx30/5/f18dQhb0Sjvm6BHC8SW62tQd64T_wDdW5w02yj5w05lbVscWqS1VbPj2W53DQ4N33FVCTW1W0s6730rr3SW8_gQtC8ZCH4KN7X_pnlRbnvcW1lQNDF5w5C_HW5y5jh-1rfXlzW1kRpb77ZClNKW1q7NGs8t4BPXW4Sf1kG6dqF0ZW8W2c9W32CQ2lW8jxMNS1VwV0kW3HbhT65tNvm-W52mV-88tzC3FW8q-1tC6H4mrRW55T8N87w3wPSW1NC3Kc1F6KTtW8Y0h_b2T-f0qW2GttMf7v5xChVzZmCx2266yKW92pY_C4dZGZtW1KT2mr7MctF-Vy90MB1wgXPmN7Tzp61wZk9_W92rRtX1Xv_n0W7nZfGg58677kW20S-qb7CkfkRW2MVMJp2VPGKHW8XRjSq7ZjRCNW1BxxJm819pLQW73R1h2224kXkW1WYmHy20ZdMCW1c8vq-7ps3S_N8Yztwfb2_nMW6PxM7x7vs64-W7fTjHB97sBJnW4jfDlp6KRQscW25yrLf397kxjW2vSzV74Q-5SVW4HzlZ64mb2rj111&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322539000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEkHYtQGNJnUgVekOAXvHBD3KQ8eQ">Mark Paoletta</a>. The Trump team should stop focusing on loudly denying that a “quid pro quo” transpired and instead defend the notion that quid pro quos and the process of attaching strings to foreign aid recipients is <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*N3c1jhC4ZhWgN6rBZ-4YF-cd0/5/f18dQhb0S1Xm7w2QxfSmM12K3Q-HW68S6q64L28KfW3cdmVv2Jn1FXW18qSz31J8h02W8LnY5s7x1q7mW6STH7-1bp9m9W8wpfBS8XtdxFN8wq4xmF1bLxW9lTT6l9cDS-QW6pNSgD4mFYXjW2HSGbL7mGP1-W3zVgJT3yL6j-N8NwdnyHWJZyMB7fMXJGYFfN75Nwr-zsQ-BW7j1dg516K1vjW5gV2yf5gQxCcW1_hG_C5nXjzNTh4fP4zR4TSN7PJ6y79bxwLW77nMT856H4GwW95ZhXW17lqjXW1FbWlF75SM7MW5BQQDK3RcXGVW6CsNd55bs4Y6W7XYbBK8ynYp2VXqQhY47C4vDW5y8VSl6NMk7NW6FV12Y41T4sqW6l0q6b1nKfB7W7JZPgs15Cc9xN5Qcq2T-_c4XW1nd44N4M0l8FW4czpW7330DHvW5GrLjj3VjQcCW6tctB76kzZLxW4Y74pp1thsyMW1LjKTn4rGl2xVp_zGp8lhY4-W3Xkt3827BFppVYJm-q1qgt-rW77Tm9c5ym3_xW9bpbdl6-lsLTW4syWxg7bgtSJN8DC3d8j8RbyW27Yv1r2G8ZN-111" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*N3c1jhC4ZhWgN6rBZ-4YF-cd0/5/f18dQhb0S1Xm7w2QxfSmM12K3Q-HW68S6q64L28KfW3cdmVv2Jn1FXW18qSz31J8h02W8LnY5s7x1q7mW6STH7-1bp9m9W8wpfBS8XtdxFN8wq4xmF1bLxW9lTT6l9cDS-QW6pNSgD4mFYXjW2HSGbL7mGP1-W3zVgJT3yL6j-N8NwdnyHWJZyMB7fMXJGYFfN75Nwr-zsQ-BW7j1dg516K1vjW5gV2yf5gQxCcW1_hG_C5nXjzNTh4fP4zR4TSN7PJ6y79bxwLW77nMT856H4GwW95ZhXW17lqjXW1FbWlF75SM7MW5BQQDK3RcXGVW6CsNd55bs4Y6W7XYbBK8ynYp2VXqQhY47C4vDW5y8VSl6NMk7NW6FV12Y41T4sqW6l0q6b1nKfB7W7JZPgs15Cc9xN5Qcq2T-_c4XW1nd44N4M0l8FW4czpW7330DHvW5GrLjj3VjQcCW6tctB76kzZLxW4Y74pp1thsyMW1LjKTn4rGl2xVp_zGp8lhY4-W3Xkt3827BFppVYJm-q1qgt-rW77Tm9c5ym3_xW9bpbdl6-lsLTW4syWxg7bgtSJN8DC3d8j8RbyW27Yv1r2G8ZN-111&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322539000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHEw9E7rY4Yf2KZyP460NghspYTSg">inherent in the very foreign aid enterprise</a> itself. Think about it logically: Why shouldn’t Americans want more conditions imposed on foreign countries in order to receive the beneficence of our U.S. taxpayer dollars? There is ample room here for Trump to tap into widespread, populist-infused opposition to mass foreign aid itself.
National polling remains narrowly in favor of impeachment. As of November 7, 2019, <a href="https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*N9g4SqVFBFCcW95frjl3yBbvc0/5/f18dQhb0SbTX8Y9Wm6W80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Rq5Cgxh0VnQ9Qq8ZvGN0W6yR8-3549KcjW7r98KK1SLhGnW328XxL2LWcZ_N4dPVJtql99tW1Vws8c2KWLmnW4cPwbS8HbRxPN8k1dMQpSBF3W8WhTQ14JftKGW8W5ZBz759s5xW7PNfvy96zRPSW6bT6L38RRjRDW5CktzD83KHrFN7J39rl1g4hYW4Dk-X22PGBDHW7lRZ4W8gjY6LW8WBKbV56sy_8W2NhXFJ6Y23ZhW5njKYK5lqJMTW6zzJtZ774x7FW59BDvc2dDPmkW5MhB-77ryzGvN4gl57p6Qr93W2L52jd4jqztHW4Pz5934zXcZfVwm8sc6wjgmDW1k0MNr7wyGhBW4cntCV310tMKW33KGSm6XvYPyN4lBZ6Fnpt4xW6GTq088Ph58-W594SN87x2btgW7w46LW2F435_W6wrhgQ5h-8njW61lQ4C23WHzLN4gFC2zPT2nMV9-MvN86_DdBN7LCVy2GCyWsW24nf__4L1MmrN4JXQH_1nvT7f5zJXvM03" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://email.dailywire.com/e2t/c/*W4n-ptk20ymJxW8JtsBr1WvdDc0/*N9g4SqVFBFCcW95frjl3yBbvc0/5/f18dQhb0SbTX8Y9Wm6W80JfVF1k63-nN7sTcfmt_T69W6Dk5Rq5Cgxh0VnQ9Qq8ZvGN0W6yR8-3549KcjW7r98KK1SLhGnW328XxL2LWcZ_N4dPVJtql99tW1Vws8c2KWLmnW4cPwbS8HbRxPN8k1dMQpSBF3W8WhTQ14JftKGW8W5ZBz759s5xW7PNfvy96zRPSW6bT6L38RRjRDW5CktzD83KHrFN7J39rl1g4hYW4Dk-X22PGBDHW7lRZ4W8gjY6LW8WBKbV56sy_8W2NhXFJ6Y23ZhW5njKYK5lqJMTW6zzJtZ774x7FW59BDvc2dDPmkW5MhB-77ryzGvN4gl57p6Qr93W2L52jd4jqztHW4Pz5934zXcZfVwm8sc6wjgmDW1k0MNr7wyGhBW4cntCV310tMKW33KGSm6XvYPyN4lBZ6Fnpt4xW6GTq088Ph58-W594SN87x2btgW7w46LW2F435_W6wrhgQ5h-8njW61lQ4C23WHzLN4gFC2zPT2nMV9-MvN86_DdBN7LCVy2GCyWsW24nf__4L1MmrN4JXQH_1nvT7f5zJXvM03&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1573279322539000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHjohA6iENayXNCIer4Ab-w5ydxzA">FiveThirtyEight</a> indicates that Americans now support impeachment by a 3.6% margin. This margin has been generally narrowing of late, however, which could indicate that congressional Democrats are over-playing their current hand.
Moving forward, it will be interesting to see if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) actually holds a formal House-wide vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry. As readers will recall from previous Impeachment Wire updates, the much-ballyhooed vote that Pelosi led two weeks ago seems to only lay out the procedural rules for impeachment — as opposed to authorizing impeachment itself. The big impeachment-related news this week will come on Wednesday, when Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has stated he will finally open up the initial impeachment hearings to the public.
This piece will be frequently updated.

House Democrats Hold Meeting To Discuss Impeachment Inquiry

Impeachment Wire: The Latest On The Effort To Impeach President Trump

2020 Election

Democratic Party

Donald Trump

Impeachment

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Eleven sitting United States senators wrote an open letter on Friday expressing their support for former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who announced only a day earlier that he was officially throwing his hat into the ring and running to regain the U.S. Senate seat in Alabama that he previously occupied.
&#8220;Each of us has served in the United States Senate with Jeff Sessions,&#8221; the letter read. &#8220;We have seen him work diligently in the public eye and behind closed doors, when things were both good and bad, under stress and in success.&#8221;
&#8220;We know Jeff&#8217;s character and his temperament. We know his commitment to his principles. We know he is a man of his word. And we know he is devoted to serving the people of Alabama,&#8221; it continued. &#8220;We believe Jeff Sessions has more to offer his country, and we believe the United States Senate will be better with his experience and leadership.&#8221;
The endorsement letter was signed by Sens. John Barrasso (R-WY), Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Deb Fischer (R-NE), James Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Pat Roberts (R-KS), and Richard Shelby (R-AL), who represented Alabama with Sessions for two decades.
&#8220;Jeff Sessions is a good friend and a respected former colleague,&#8221; Shelby said. &#8220;I believe he is well-suited to return to his role as United States Senator for the state of Alabama, where I served with him for more than 20 years. He has my full support and endorsement.&#8221;
Sessions revealed on Thursday evening that he would be joining the crowded Alabama Republican primary field. Sessions held Alabama&#8217;s junior Senate seat for four terms before he was appointed to the role of attorney general under President Donald Trump. Trump and Sessions&#8217; relationship soured after the former AG recused himself from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Trump ultimately forced Sessions&#8217; resignation from the Department of Justice.
Democrats won control of the Senate seat in 2017 after the state held a special election to replace Sessions, who vacated the seat when he was tapped to head the Justice Department. Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) defeated his Republican challenger Roy Moore, who faced massive blowback after allegations arose that Moore had molested a teenager in the 1970s.
Despite the controversy, Jones won the special election by less than 2% of the vote and is now considered to be one of the most vulnerable incumbent senators in the 2020 election cycle. The typically red state voted for Trump by nearly 30 points.
While announcing his candidacy, Sessions reiterated his support for the president and will largely be running on his agenda. However, Trump told reporters on Friday that he is still unsure whether or not he will be endorsing Sessions.
&#8220;Well I haven&#8217;t gotten involved. I saw he said very nice things about me last night. But we&#8217;ll have to see,&#8221; he said before departing the White House for events in Georgia. &#8220;I haven&#8217;t made a determination.&#8221;

US-politics-media-police

11 Senators Pen Letter In Support Of Jeff Sessions For Alabama Senate

Alabama

Jeff Sessions

Last evening, on the verge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke&#8217;s confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, the much-vaunted American Bar Association (ABA) released a shockingly ad hominem, scathing <a href="http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/10/30/2019.10.29_chair_rating_letter_to_graham_and_feinstein_re_nomination_of_lawrence_j.c._vandyke.pdf">letter</a> that concluded that VanDyke is &#8220;Not Qualified&#8221; for his proffered perch. The most shocking paragraph in the ABA&#8217;s letter accuses VanDyke, a religious Christian, of harboring animus against the LGBT community:
<blockquote>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Some interviewees raised concerns about whether Mr. VanDyke would be fair to persons who are gay, lesbian, or otherwise part of the LGBTQ community. Mr. VanDyke would not say affirmatively that he would be fair to any litigant before him, notably members of the LGBTQ community.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
This is a vicious and malicious <a href="https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1189369387263954950">smear</a> made against a good and decent man. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/30/politics/american-bar-association-nominees-vandyke/index.html">Moved to tears</a> at his confirmation hearing earlier today while questioned by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), VanDyke protested the ABA&#8217;s grotesque libel with an affirmation of the teachings of his Christian faith: &#8220;It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of God. &#8230; [litigants in court] should all be treated with dignity and respect.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Lawrence VanDyke brought to tears because of the shameful and false accusation by the <a href="https://twitter.com/ABAesq?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABAesq</a> that he holds animus toward the LGBT community. Thank you to <a href="https://twitter.com/SenHawleyPress?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenHawleyPress</a> for highlighting this injustice. The ABA has lost all credibility for trying to destroy this good man’s life. <a href="https://t.co/4ARyHvw3Zu">pic.twitter.com/4ARyHvw3Zu</a>
&mdash; Gregory T. Angelo (@gregorytangelo) <a href="https://twitter.com/gregorytangelo/status/1189579775414808576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fellow Judiciary Committee member Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) captured the essence of the whole sordid affair: &#8220;The ABA has lost its credibility as a neutral arbiter; it should be treated no differently than any other special interest group, which it is.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In judiciary hearing <a href="https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenMikeLee</a> rips <a href="https://twitter.com/ABAesq?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABAesq</a> over controversial &quot;not qualified&quot; rating for Trump judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke :
&quot;The ABA has lost its credibility as a neutral arbiter; it should be treated no differently than any other special interest group, which it is.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/8DHwVOGq0E">pic.twitter.com/8DHwVOGq0E</a>
&mdash; Nate Madden (@NateOnTheHill) <a href="https://twitter.com/NateOnTheHill/status/1189637851257982976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
To conservatives, it should be obvious that Sen. Lee is emphatically correct. The ABA, which has also <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/the-confirmation-process-that-was-then-this-is-trump/">attempted</a> to claim other Trump judicial nominee <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/seventeen_judicial_nominees_advance_to_the_senate_including_two_rated_not_q">scalps</a>, is institutionally controlled by leftist trial lawyers and bigwig Democratic Party donors. As Thomas Jipping <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/another-self-inflicted-wound-for-the-aba/">noted</a> this morning for National Review&#8217;s &#8220;Bench Memos&#8221; blog, &#8220;since the 1970s, the ABA House of Delegates has passed hundreds of resolutions on all the hot political topics, all of them taking a liberal position.&#8221; In fact, the lead ABA reviewer of VanDyke, Marcia Davenport, is a partisan Democrat who once <a href="https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1189362031561990145">donated</a> to VanDyke&#8217;s opponent in his 2014 Montana Supreme Court election. VanDyke, additionally, is qualified by any objective metric: He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, served as an editor of the Harvard Law Review, clerked for the highly prestigious former Judge Janice Rogers Brown on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and has entertained a supremely successful career as an appellate litigator. Accordingly, the Judicial Crisis Network&#8217;s Carrie Severino <a href="https://judicialnetwork.com/in-the-news/aba-has-outdone-itself-lvd/">opined</a>: &#8220;The ABA has amassed quite the history of bias against conservatives over the last few decades, but with VanDyke, it has really outdone itself.&#8221;
Indeed.
Over the years, I have heard gripes from no shortage of conservative friends working in the judicial nominations arena that the ABA is a biased, left-wing organization that merely masquerades as politically neutral in the self-interested pursuit of its own institutional clout. This is undoubtedly true — and the obvious solution is to stop treating the ABA&#8217;s ratings with any respect. For both Judiciary Committee Republicans and GOP presidents alike, that requires a systemic disclaiming of any legitimacy for the ABA&#8217;s judicial nominee qualifications. Republicans must resist the urge to tout the ABA&#8217;s more customary &#8220;Well Qualified&#8221; ratings for even the GOP&#8217;s own judicial nominees. Only by refusing to play the ABA&#8217;s game, across the board, will the GOP ever make headway in pushing back against this partisan organization. Much like the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">judicial supremacist game</a>, the ABA qualifications game is not something that conservatives can ever win.
There is no reason whatsoever to care about how the trial lawyer-dominated ABA vets judicial nominees. But for conservatives, that means that we literally cannot ever care — whether the ABA&#8217;s ratings are helpful or harmful to our cause. Only by demonstrating such consistency will we ever help discredit an organization that deserves nothing but discrediting.
</div>
</div>
</div>

ABA logo

HAMMER: Who Cares About The ABA’s Judicial Nominee Ratings?

Christianity

Homosexuality

Josh Hawley

Judicial Branch

Judiciary

LGBT

Mike Lee

Religion

Transgender

Impeachment of the president is a two-step process. First, the House votes to impeach, which, in a criminal court, would be analogous to handing down an indictment. Then the Senate holds what amounts to a trial. If convicted, the president is removed from office and the vice president takes over. If acquitted, he would return to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as if nothing had ever happened.
To hear the mainstream media tell it, President Trump is on the verge of being impeached and removed from office. But while Democrats control the House — which will almost certainly vote to impeach — Republicans control the Senate, which almost certainly will not vote to convict.
There have been reports in MSM outlets that a dozen or more Republicans could vote to convict. &#8220;The Senate is likelier to remove Trump after impeachment than you think,&#8221; read a Washington Post headline this month. But even that report said &#8220;getting 20 out of 53 Republican senators to agree to boot him from office won’t be easy under any circumstances.&#8221;
Therein lies the rub. In the Senate, a chamber-wide vote to convict requires a two-third majority — or 67 of the 100 members. The current makeup of the chamber is 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, and two independents who almost always vote with the Democrats. That means Democrats need 20 Republicans to cross the aisle.
But, problem. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says not only do the Democrats not have 20, they don&#8217;t have a single vote.
“You have to accept that President Trump is president,” Graham said Tuesday on Fox News’ “Hannity” show.
“That’s the problem. They don’t accept that President Trump won the election, and America hates a sore loser as much as any country on the planet. This is an unfair process being driven by sore losers and there is not one vote in the United States Senate to impeach President Trump based on this phone call because he did nothing wrong,” the South Carolina Republican said.
The senator quickly corrected himself, saying there is not one vote “among Republicans” in the Senate.
Hannity asked Graham if the Senate could call former Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or even Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) to testify.
“The president’s denied right to counsel and Republicans can’t call witnesses without Schiff agreeing, so this whole thing is a sham,” Graham said.
House Democrats on Tuesday unveiled legislation to authorize the next phase of the impeachment inquiry against Trump. The eight-page resolution calls for public hearings and requires the House Intelligence Committee, which Schiff heads as chairman, to file a report detailing its findings and recommendations. The report would also come with a final recommendation on impeachment to be left to the House Judiciary Committee.
On the other side, Republicans would be authorized to request subpoenas, but every request would require a full committee vote. Because Democrats control the House, they&#8217;ll be able to deny any subpoena they choose.
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said the resolution simply “confirms that House Democrats’ impeachment has been an illegitimate sham from the start as it lacked any proper authorization by a House vote.”
The resolution “does nothing to change the fundamental fact that House Democrats refuse to provide basic due process rights to the administration,” she said.
<iframe title="Lindsey Graham: &#039;Not One Vote&#039; Among Senate Republicans To Remove Trump" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DgnHEnOg7No?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford And Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Testify To Senate Judiciary Committee

Lindsey Graham: ‘Not One Vote’ Among Senate Republicans To Oust Trump

Lindsey Graham

Reports are surfacing that former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, 72, who served as a senator from Alabama for 20 years, is thinking of running for his Alabama Senate seat in 2020. Sessions must decide by November 8 if he will attempt to run. Sessions was elected Attorney General of Alabama in 1994 and subsequently was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996, then reelected in 2002, 2008, and 2014.
<a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/oct/28/jeff-sessions-weighs-run-old-alabama-senate-seat-r/">The Washington Times</a> reported that YellowHammer News stated that Sessions “has been taking meetings and making calls regarding a run for his old Senate seat. He is now strongly considering mounting a candidacy.” After Sessions became Attorney General, a special election was held in Alabama to determine his successor; Democratic Sen. Doug Jones won after his GOP opponent, Judge Roy Moore, was accused of sexual harassment in the past.
<a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jeff-sessions-possible-alabama-senate-run_n_5db78bc4e4b0bd61024feaca">Huffington Post</a> reported, “Three Republicans with knowledge of the situation say Sessions has made telephone calls exploring the possibility of running for his old Senate seat. The Republicans spoke on condition of anonymity so they could speak more freely about closely held conversations.”
Alabama is a strong conservative state; Jones is widely deemed vulnerable, so five Republicans have already declared their candidacy, as <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/28/sessions-considering-running-senate-alabama-060720">Politico</a> noted: Rep. Bradley Byrne, former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville, Secretary of State John Merrill, state Rep. Arnold Mooney and Moore.
David McIntosh, the president of the conservative Club for Growth, told Politico, “We are hearing that Sessions is seriously considering running for Senate again and that polling indicates he would be in very good shape. The Club for Growth has in the past and would once again encourage him to run for that Senate seat … We were enthusiastic way back early on that Sessions, when he retired from the attorney general spot, might go back to the Senate. At that point he didn&#8217;t want to think about that because he was just finishing up one job. I&#8217;m very encouraged he&#8217;s now seriously considering it … I think he&#8217;d see his role in the Senate as pushing Senate Republicans to actually enact the Trump agenda.”
Politico noted that Sessions has $2.5 million in his campaign account, which would place him second among GOP candidates behind Byrne, who has over $2.5 million in cash.
An Oct. 10-12 poll from Cygnal found Tuberville at 32%, with Byrne at 18%,
Sessions is a staunch conservative who takes a hard line on abortion and immigration. He voted against a $192 billion additional anti-recession stimulus spending in 2009. In 2006 he said that banning the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional. In 2011 he voted for barring the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases; in 2009 he voted for protecting middle-income taxpayers from a national energy tax. Sessions voted against banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets in 2013; he voted for prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers in 2005.
In 2003 Sessions received an A+ rating from the National Rifle Association; he opposed the United Nations&#8217; Arms Trade Treaty in 2013.
<a href="https://www.al.com/news/2019/10/report-jeff-sessions-strongly-considering-run-to-reclaim-old-senate-seat.html">AL.com</a> reported on Monday, “During an appearance at a Republican fundraiser in Huntsville earlier this month, Sessions said Trump has upheld his promises to the American people. ‘That’s why I still do support him,’ Sessions said.”
&nbsp;

Jeff Sessions May Run For Alabama Senate Seat

Senate Republicans are once again taking pro-lifers for a ride and expecting to get away with it.
Just months after swearing up and down that the trillion-dollar budget deal agreed to in July was the only way to protect pro-life priorities in the year-end spending fight, Senate Republicans have done nothing to stop that very assault by their Democratic counterparts.
The Senate spending bill on the Department of State and foreign operations, recently <a href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY2020%20SFOPS%20Appropriations%20Act,%20S.2583.pdf">reported</a> out of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, both Republicans and Democrats supported the inclusion of language that directly violates the progress President Trump has made on the <a href="https://khn.org/morning-breakout/trump-administration-expands-mexico-city-policy-to-include-groups-that-dont-perform-abortions-but-support-ones-that-do/">Mexico City Policy</a>, which prevents U.S. taxpayer dollars from going to foreign organizations that fund or promote abortion overseas.
The language, <a href="https://www.shaheen.senate.gov/news/press/in-committee-approved-funding-bill-shaheen-boosts-funding-for-anti-opioid-grants-pfas-research-and-federal-support-to-improve-mental-health-services-for-law-enforcement">added by</a> Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), is designed to do an end-run around the Trump administration’s ban sending taxpayer money to foreign abortion providers by adding a nearly $60 million increase to U.S.-based groups that fund abortion overseas.
Groups that are eligible to receive these taxpayer dollars include <a href="https://www.pathfinder.org/focus-areas/safe-abortion-care/">Pathfinder International</a>, <a href="https://www.popcouncil.org/research/safe-abortion-and-postabortion-care">Population Council</a>, <a href="http://fpconference.org/2016/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/EngenderHealth-FactSheets.pdf">Engender Health</a>, and <a href="https://path.org/resources/womens-right-to-choose-partnerships-for-safe-abortion-in-nepal/">PATH</a>. All of them list abortion services as key missions.
That Senate Republicans would allow this on a voice vote — the type of vote that is not recorded, and usually reserved for non-controversial amendments — is bad enough. But worse, it is a <a href="https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/can-white-house-and-gop-senators-protect-pro-life-policy/">blatant violation</a> of the “handshake agreement” in the <a href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Bipartisan%20Budget%20Agreement%20July%2022%202019.pdf">budget deal</a> which barred the inclusion of so-called “poison pill” amendments.
While the term “poison pill” was left undefined, it was largely considered to include amendments that were deemed explicitly partisan by one side. Specifically, the deal <a href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Bipartisan%20Budget%20Agreement%20July%2022%202019.pdf">prohibited</a> higher spending levels for accounts unless “agreed to on a bipartisan basis by the four leaders with the approval of the president.”
Lest there be any doubt, this Shaheen-style increase to abortion funding has already been clearly shown to be partisan. In June, the Democrat-controlled House voted on an <a href="https://lesko.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2207">amendment</a> by Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) that would have barred the increases in the Shaheen amendment. Every single House Republican, as well as two House Democrats, <a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll324.xml">voted</a> to restrict the money.
But now, Senate Republicans want to allow it.
And not to stop there, Senate Republicans are apparently also fine with language in the <a href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY2020%20SFOPS%20Appropriations%20Act,%20Report%20116-126.pdf">bill’s report</a> prioritizing funding toward “family planning/reproductive health” — phrases long deemed by the pro-life community to be synonymous with abortion.
Both of these provisions are obviously in violation of the budget deal. And any attempt by Senate Republicans to shush the pro-life movement, to tell them “we’ll deal with it in conference” (when the House and Senate reconcile their different versions of the same bill), should be treated as suspect.
Pro-lifers have seen this move before. Indeed, the blatantly bad faith with which Senate Republicans are treating the pro-life movement is egregious, but hardly surprising.
As I <a href="https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/15/requiem-for-the-pro-life-movement/">wrote a year ago</a>, using the pro-life cause as an excuse to pass bad bills — while not intending to actually address any of their priorities — has become de rigueur for Republicans in power.
And this budget deal is turning out to be no different. Senate leadership pressed pro-lifers that this “handshake agreement” <a href="https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/can-white-house-and-gop-senators-protect-pro-life-policy/">was the only thing</a> standing between them and a total abolition of the abortion protections in law. Keeping abortion restrictions in place, pro-life groups were told, was contingent upon <a href="https://www.sba-list.org/newsroom/press-releases/sba-list-celebrates-house-passage-budget-agreement">pro-life support</a> of the bill.
Except, once again, it was merely a manipulation for Senate Republicans to get support from the conservative base in the short term, in order to sell them out a few months later.
Pro-lifers have to stop taking these assurances at face value. This is the same set of Republicans that had majorities in the House and Senate for two years, with a Republican in the White House, and managed to accomplish (or even to try to accomplish) approximately nothing on behalf of the pro-life cause. Worse still, they <a href="https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/01/do-nothing-republican-senate-goes-home/">shouted down</a> anyone in their conference who attempted to try.
Love him or hate him, President Trump has done more for the pro-life cause than any other Republican president <a href="https://www.sba-list.org/trump-pro-life-wins">in history</a>. And rather than supporting him in those efforts, Senate Republicans seem intent to undermine him — and, in a twisted bit of cynicism, to use the pro-life movement as cover to do so.
If the pro-life movement in Washington is to have any lasting impact, it has to start with a hard-earned distrust of the leaders who seem intent on manipulating them, time and time again.
&nbsp;
Rachel Bovard spent a decade working for Republicans on Capitol Hill, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) She was also director of policy services at the Heritage Foundation. She currently serves as the senior director of policy at the <a href="https://www.conservativepartnership.org">Conservative Partnership Institute</a>.

unborn child

BOVARD: Senate Republicans Are Betraying Pro-Lifers

Abortion

Republican Party

Hillary Clinton 2016

Senate Judiciary Letter To DOJ: Ukraine Helped Clinton Campaign, DNC

Charles Grassley

Democratic National Committee

Hillary Clinton

Ukraine

Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) honored the legacy of his fellow Georgia colleague Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) on Tuesday in preparation for his forthcoming retirement.
&#8220;I rise today with mixed emotions. I rise to recognize an incredible Georgian, a true statesman, a titan of the United States Senate, and maybe most importantly, a friend to me and many people here and back home in Georgia,&#8221; Perdue said while speaking on the Senate floor.
&#8220;It will be hard to see him go, but the realty is, he won&#8217;t go. He&#8217;ll still be involved here. I&#8217;m sure I&#8217;ll get the phone calls about when we might have disagreed on a vote, or why didn&#8217;t I think about this. He&#8217;s been a tremendous partner for me these last four years,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Johnny has left a profound legacy that’s worth celebrating, one that we should all strive to follow here in this body.&#8221;
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_fQdIDTmd1A" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Perdue&#8217;s remarks come less than a month after Isakson announced that he would be stepping down from his U.S. Senate seat at the end of the year due to ongoing health issues.
The beloved senator revealed in 2015 that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson&#8217;s disease. In July, Isakson was hospitalized after he fell in his Washington, D.C., apartment and fractured four of his ribs and tore a rotator cuff, for which he is still undergoing physical therapy. Only days before he announced his retirement, the Georgia senator underwent surgery to remove a two-centimeter renal cell carcinoma from one of his kidneys.
&#8220;He epitomizes the best for the United States Senate. His legacy can be summed up in one word: service,&#8221; Perdue said. &#8220;No matter what he does, Johnny puts other people before himself.&#8221;
&#8220;Johnny puts other people first before himself. He doesn&#8217;t do it for recognition or fame. Many times, he does it when people don’t notice or know he did it,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;He does it because it&#8217;s the right thing to do.&#8221;
Perdue further commended Isakson for his long and accomplished career serving the people of Georgia. While Isakson notably was the first Republican senator in Georgia to win a third term, he also is the only elected official to serve in Georgia&#8217;s State House, Georgia&#8217;s State Senate, the United States House, and the United States Senate.
Perdue noted that Isakson&#8217;s career also included his time in the private sector, in the Georgia Air National Guard, and even as a local Sunday school teacher for more than three decades.
&#8220;His dedication to service is even more impressive because it has produced incredible results for our country. This town has a lot of activity, but it&#8217;s short on results. Johnny knows the difference,&#8221; Perdue said before touting Isakson&#8217;s work as the chairman of the Senate Veterans Administration Committee, as well as his successful legislation impacting agriculture, energy, infrastructure, and criminal justice.
&#8220;When he speaks, people listen. He gets the job done. He understands what priority means,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Yet, Johnny isn&#8217;t the kind of leader who gives orders and makes demands. He&#8217;s someone who leads from place of respect, compromise, and understanding with both sides of the aisle.&#8221;
&#8220;With Johnny, it doesn&#8217;t matter who you are, or what party you’re in, or where you&#8217;re from,&#8221; Perdue added. &#8220;He&#8217;s always there to talk and always ready to listen.&#8221;
Isakson&#8217;s Senate seat does not expire until 2022, so there will be three years remaining in his term when he steps down on December 31, 2019. Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp will appoint someone to fill the vacant seat through the end of 2020, at which time the seat will be subject to a special election.
&#8220;Of course the road has not always been easy for Johnny. Not every battle has been won, not all news has been good,&#8221; Perdue said. &#8220;What I&#8217;ve always admired about him though is his stalwart resilience — whenever circumstances have tried to knock him down, he always gets back up with a smile and he keeps serving others.&#8221;
&#8220;You feel guilty when you&#8217;re around Johnny Isakson when you&#8217;re having a bad day,&#8221; he added. &#8220;If Johnny asks how you&#8217;re doing, you better say &#8216;great&#8217; because he&#8217;s going to give you that same answer.&#8221;

davidperdue

WATCH: Georgia Senator Gives Heartfelt Speech About Retiring Colleague Diagnosed With Parkinson&#8217;s

Georgia

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) responded on Thursday after the chief executives of more than 100 companies wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate urging Congress to pass various anti-gun measures.
&#8220;Now look, here&#8217;s my starting point: I want to see facts. I believe love is the answer, but I also own a handgun just in case, and that’s my right as an American citizen,&#8221; Kennedy told Fox Business host Stuart Varney. &#8220;The Bill of Rights is not an a la carte menu — the Second [Amendment] is just as important as the First or the Fourth.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">I believe love is the answer, but I also own a handgun just in case; that’s my right as an American citizen. I’m interested in having a discussion about gun legislation, but we shouldn’t make decisions to curtail Constitutional rights based on emotions. I want to see facts. <a href="https://t.co/uF6BISsGa7">pic.twitter.com/uF6BISsGa7</a>
— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenJohnKennedy/status/1172162139206901760?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
&#8220;Some of my colleagues say &#8216;OK, we&#8217;re going to curtail the Second Amendment constitutional right in the interest of public safety and it will reduce mass shootings.&#8217; My response is, &#8216;OK, prove it,'&#8221; he continued. &#8220;I&#8217;m interested in facts, I&#8217;m not interested in speculation. I don&#8217;t want to see people pulling stuff out of their orifices. Show me the causal scientific evidence because you&#8217;re dealing with a constitutional right.&#8221;
The Senate has faced growing calls to address a recent slew of deadly mass shootings, with the Democratic Party urging for a host of anti-gun measures including universal background checks and so-called &#8220;red flag&#8221; laws, which allow for temporary gun confiscation for individuals deemed a danger to oneself or others.
Many of the Democratic presidential candidates have gone further, advocating for a government-run gun confiscation program and ban, increasing the gun purchase age to 21, and even implementing a national gun registry and licensing system.
However, chief executives of more than 145 American companies <a href="https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/1699-gun-control-letter-to-the-sena/3258ed616a016f80dfa3/optimized/full.pdf#page=1">penned a letter</a> to the Senate on Thursday specifically demanding that the upper chamber take up legislation that the Democrat-led House previously passed requiring universal background checks and enacting &#8220;red flag&#8221; laws.
&#8220;These proposals are common-sense, bipartisan and widely supported by the American public,&#8221; the letter stated. &#8220;It&#8217;s time for the Senate to take action.&#8221;
&#8220;I find it curious that when a radical jihadist blows up a school and kills kids, we’re told not to judge all Muslims by the act of one Muslim — and I agree with that, by the way,&#8221; Kennedy said. &#8220;But I just don&#8217;t understand why the same rule does not apply to the 100 million law-abiding gun owners in this country.&#8221;
&#8220;And in terms of what these CEOs say, I respect their right to have an opinion, but I don&#8217;t pay any attention to them,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;A lot of these guys, they&#8217;re the ones that tanked the economy in [2008].&#8221;
The Louisiana senator argued that while corporations have the right to be involved in political issues, they have yet to make a persuasive argument for why American&#8217;s should have certain rights taken away.
&#8220;Most of these CEOs — not all of them, but most of them — they think they are the smartest guy in the room or gal in the room and they&#8217;ve got their eye on the bottom line and, you know, I treat it like any other letter,&#8221; Kennedy said. &#8220;And about that poll, first, I have got to see the poll that say what folks say they say. I know how to write a poll question. I can make a poll walk, talk, and whistle the Battle Hymn of the Republic.&#8221;
&#8220;Number two, let&#8217;s suppose that the polls are right — we have a Bill of Rights not to protect the majority, but to protect the minority,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;The Bill of Rights doesn&#8217;t protect the high school quarterback or the prom queen, it protects people who aren’t as popular.&#8221;

Senator John Kennedy

WATCH: GOP Senator Hits Back After CEOs Demand Gun Reform: ‘Love Is The Answer, But I Own A Handgun Just In Case’

Gun Control

Failed Georgia congressional candidate Jon Ossoff announced on Monday evening that he was officially launching a bid to unseat Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) in the state of Georgia.
&#8220;Georgia, I&#8217;m running for Senate,&#8221; Ossoff wrote on Twitter. &#8220;Political corruption threatens our republic and the future of the planet. The battle we began in Georgia in 2017 will be won in Georgia in 2020 when we win the White House and the Senate.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Georgia, I&#8217;m running for Senate.
Political corruption threatens our republic and the future of the planet.
The battle we *began* in Georgia in 2017 will be *won* in Georgia in 2020 when we win the White House and the Senate.
Chip in right now ️ <a href="https://t.co/LtaUi1qNNc">https://t.co/LtaUi1qNNc</a> <a href="https://t.co/4BeC5f9jh2">pic.twitter.com/4BeC5f9jh2</a>
— Jon Ossoff (@ossoff) <a href="https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/1171377892137361408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Ossoff notably lost his race for Georgia&#8217;s 6th Congressional District in 2017 to former Rep. Karen Handel (R-GA) in the special election to replace Tom Price. Price vacated the seat after he was nominated to the role of Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Donald Trump. The special election set the record for the most expensive House race of all time, with more than $50 million spent, largely by outside groups.
&#8220;I believe that we are all called to fight the abuse of power, even when the odds are against us. So, from the darkness in a district where the last Democrat lost by 23 points, I ran for Congress,&#8221; Ossoff says in his first campaign ad. &#8220;It was one of the toughest races in history, and a heartbreaking loss, but we were just getting started.&#8221;
&#8220;We didn&#8217;t give up … Georgians who poured their hearts and souls into a campaign the first time – they didn&#8217;t give up,&#8221; he continues. &#8220;They went on to flip 14 state house districts, they joined the army that Stacey Abrams built to change our state forever, and they helped Democrats across this country win back the House.&#8221;
The nationally watched election greatly boosted Ossoff’s profile, and he is now considered to be the most high-profile candidate running for the Democratic nomination to challenge Perdue when his term expires in 2020.
&#8220;We have squandered trillions on endless wars. We have squandered trillions on bailouts for failed banks. We have squandered trillions on tax cuts for wealthy donors. Then we&#8217;re told there&#8217;s noting left over for the people,&#8221; Ossoff told the <a href="https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/breaking-ossoff-run-for-senate-georgia/S7S3FWCEDm7UY6J4gN6fSL/#">Atlanta Journal Constitution</a> on Monday. &#8220;The corruption must be rooted out. And Senator David Perdue is a caricature of Washington corruption.&#8221;
He also explained to the AJC that his plan is to &#8220;raise a grassroots army unlike any this state has ever seen&#8221; by expanding his network of supporters.
Ossoff first revealed in December that he was mulling over a second run for political office and was considering a challenge to Perdue. Interestingly, the investigative journalist-turned-aspiring-politician also called on failed Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams to run for the Senate seat as well. Abrams announced in April that she would not run for Senate in 2020.
Ossoff used his political infrastructure and fundraising lists to help Abrams, and other down-ticket Democratic candidates, during her unsuccessful run for governor during the 2018 midterm election cycle. In Ossoff&#8217;s nearly four-minute campaign advertisement, he mentions Abrams multiple times, in what may signal a strong partnership between the two failed candidates as they seek to flip the consistently red state blue.

John Ossoff

WATCH: Most Expensive House Loser Announces Bid For Senate

Jon Ossoff

Sen. Johnny Isakson announced on Wednesday that he will be stepping down from his United States Senate seat at the end of the year due to ongoing health issues.
&#8220;After much prayer and consultation with my family and my doctors, I have made the very tough decision to leave the U.S. Senate at the end of this year,&#8221; Isakson said in a statement. &#8220;I have informed Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp that I will resign my Senate seat effective December 31, 2019. I am leaving a job I love because my health challenges are taking their toll on me, my family, and my staff.&#8221;
Isakson revealed in 2015 that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson&#8217;s disease. In July, the Georgia senator was hospitalized after he fell in his Washington, D.C. apartment and fractured four of his ribs and tore a rotator cuff, for which he is still undergoing physical therapy. And on Monday, he underwent surgery to remove a two-centimeter renal cell carcinoma from one of his kidneys. Isakson cited the aforementioned health issues as a reason for his retirement.
&#8220;In my 40 years in elected office, I have always put my constituents and my state of Georgia first,&#8221; Isakson said. &#8220;With the mounting health challenges I am facing, I have to conclude that I will not be able to do the job over the long term in the manner the citizens of Georgia deserve.&#8221;
&#8220;It goes against every fiber of my being to leave in the middle of my Senate term,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;But I know it&#8217;s the right thing to do on behalf of my state.&#8221;
Isakson won reelection to his Georgia seat for a third term in 2016, making him the first GOP senator in the state to do so. He is also the only elected official to serve in Georgia&#8217;s State House, Georgia&#8217;s State Senate, the United States House, and the United States Senate.
Isakson&#8217;s Senate seat does not expire until 2022, so there will be three years remaining in his term when he steps down. Consequently, Kemp will appoint someone to fill the vacant seat through the end of 2020, at which time the seat will be subject to a special election. A regular election will commence in 2022 for a full six-year term.
Isakson is the chairman of both the Senate Committee on Veterans&#8217; Affairs and the Select Committee on Ethics. He also sits on the Committee on Finance and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, of which he is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety.
&#8220;I look forward to returning to Washington on September 9 when the Senate goes back into session,&#8221; Isakson said. &#8220;And after December 31, I look forward to continuing to help the people of Georgia in any way I can and also help those who are working toward a cure for Parkinson&#8217;s.&#8221;
“Senator Johnny Isakson has epitomized public service for most of my lifetime,&#8221; Georgia GOP Chairman David Shafer told The Daily Wire. &#8220;He is a pioneering Republican, a wonderful family man and a great Georgian. I wish him the best in his retirement as an era in Georgia politics ends.”

Johnny Isakson

GOP Senator Johnny Isakson Announces His Retirement

On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell trolled Senate Democrats who are eager to get rid of the filibuster, tweeting, “The last time Democrats changed longstanding Senate rules for short-term partisan benefit, here is what it got them: Justice Neil Gorsuch. Justice Brett Kavanaugh. And 43 new lifetime circuit judges, the most ever at this point in a presidency.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The last time Democrats changed longstanding Senate rules for short-term partisan benefit, here is what it got them: Justice Neil Gorsuch. Justice Brett Kavanaugh. And 43 new lifetime circuit judges, the most ever at this point in a presidency <a href="https://t.co/lwhqan9gRG">pic.twitter.com/lwhqan9gRG</a>
— Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) <a href="https://twitter.com/senatemajldr/status/1164580580555743232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
McConnell also <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/opinion/mitch-mcconnell-senate-filibuster.html">published an op-ed</a> in The New York Times warning the Democrats not to go down the path they are currently espousing. He started by quoting his prophetic statement from 2013, when the Democrats, led by Harry Reid, changed the procedure so that debate on most judicial nominations would require only a simple majority 60-vote supermajority vote required heretofore. McConnell noted at the time, “You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think.”
McConnell recalled, “I tried a practical argument. The political winds shift often, I reminded my Democratic friends. And I doubted they’d like their new rules when the shoe was on the other foot.” He wrote that many Democrats regret their 2013 decision, then added, “Nevertheless, the far left now wants Democrats to touch the hot stove yet again. This time, they want to erase the Senate’s 60-vote threshold to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/10/us/politics/climate-change-filibuster.html?module=inline">end debate on legislation</a>.”
McConnell pointed out that when the GOP retaliated, the Democrats couldn’t handle it, and now, “The Senate has taken a step back toward its centuries-old norms on nominations: limited debate and a simple majority threshold.”
He warned, “On legislation, however, the Senate’s treasured tradition is not efficiency but deliberation. One of the body’s central purposes is making new laws earn broader support than what is required for a bare majority in the House.”
McConnell said bluntly, “Our country doesn’t need a second House of Representatives with fewer members and longer terms. America needs the Senate to be the Senate. I recognize it may seem odd that a Senate majority leader opposes a proposal to increase his own power. Certainly it is curious that liberals are choosing this moment, when Americans have elected Republican majorities three consecutive times and counting, to attack the minority’s powers. But my Republican colleagues and I have not and will not vandalize this core tradition for short-term gain. We recognize what everyone should recognize — there are no permanent victories in politics.”
McConnell cautioned, “No Republican has any trouble imagining the laundry list of socialist policies that 51 Senate Democrats would happily inflict on Middle America in a filibuster-free Senate … the Democratic Party is racing leftward, with presidential debates that make the 2008 exchanges between Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards look downright conservative by comparison …”
He concluded, “I hope the saner voices among Democrats can help their compatriots see reason. Unless and until that happens, Americans must never let this radical movement gain enough power to vandalize the Senate. If future Democrats shortsightedly decide to reduce the Senate to majority rule, we’ll have lost a key safeguard of American government. And — stop me if you’ve heard this one — they’d regret it a lot sooner than they think.”

Mitch McConnell

McConnell Trolls Dems: The Last Time You Changed Senate Rules, You Got THIS

Filibuster

Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper declared Wednesday night that he is running for U.S. Senate against Cory Gardner (R-CO), who has long been seen as the most vulnerable Republican Senator in the 2020 election.
&#8220;I don&#8217;t think Cory Gardner understands that the games he&#8217;s playing with Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell are hurting the people of Colorado,&#8221; says Hickenlooper in a campaign <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=81&amp;v=-63689Ahyuk">announcement video</a> that features the former governor playing billiards.
&#8220;Look, I&#8217;m a straight shooter. I&#8217;ve always said Washington was a lousy place for a guy like me who wants to get things done,&#8221; continues Hickenlooper. &#8220;I know changing Washington is hard, but I want to give it a shot.&#8221;
Hickenlooper, a former businessman and geologist, joined the Democratic 2020 primary back in March and was the first person to emphasize a record of bipartisan cooperation, according to the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-hickenlooper-democratic-ex-governor-of-colorado-enters-2020-race-11551699000">Wall Street Journal</a>. He ultimately failed to garner any wide support, never receiving more than 2% in any national poll and only receiving 7% support in his home state of Colorado, according to <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/john-hickenloopers-presidential-campaign-is-over-can-he-flip-a-senate-seat-instead/">FiveThirtyEight</a>.
But as a candidate for U.S. Senate, Hickenlooper&#8217;s prospects seem much brighter. A poll conducted in late July by the Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group has him ahead of all other Democratic candidates by 51 points, according to the <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2019/08/12/john-hickenlooper-2020-senate-cory-gardner/">Denver Post</a>. A more recent poll has Hickenlooper beating Gardner in a head-to-head matchup by 13 points, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/us/politics/john-hickenlooper-senate-2020.html">The New York Times</a>.
Cory Gardner, who has served in the Senate since 2015, remains optimistic about his chances for re-election. The senator&#8217;s campaign manager, Casey Contres, has dismissed Hickenlooper as &#8220;just another liberal in the clown car,&#8221; the Times reports. &#8220;Whoever their party nominates will be wildly out of step with Colorado and we look forward to facing them in the general election,&#8221; said Contres.
The Senate currently has 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats (including two independent senators who typically vote with Democrats). Many left-wing <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/08/politics/kris-kobach-roy-moore-senate-2020/index.html">political commentators</a> see the election as an opportunity for Democrats to gain control in the chamber.
Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley made a trip to Colorado on Monday to campaign for Gardner and assured his supporters that he will be re-elected in 2020. &#8220;All of the media and everyone else is going to tell you, &#8216;It&#8217;s a scary race, we don&#8217;t know.&#8217; But we&#8217;ve been here before,&#8221; said Haley, in comments reported by <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2019/08/19/cory-gardner-2020-nikki-haley/">The Denver Post</a>. &#8220;We&#8217;ve won here before. We know how to do it and we&#8217;ll do it again.&#8221;

John Hickenlooper

Former Presidential Candidate Launches Campaign Against GOP Senator Cory Gardner

Nikki Haley

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has been repeatedly asking Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to consider running for the soon-to-be vacated Senate seat currently held by long-time Senator Pat Roberts (R-KA), according to the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/fbc55a6d6e6f40eba760c8d58a720b35">Associated Press</a>.
Pompeo, who briefly served as CIA director before assuming his current position, has publicly denied that he has any interest in running for Senate. According to the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/kansas-gop-weighs-senate-hopefuls-while-pining-for-pompeo-11565721022">Wall Street Journal</a>, in late July he told the Economic Club of Washington that the idea is &#8220;off the table.&#8221;
But the Associated Press notes that if Pompeo does not decide to run, it could lead to the party nominating Kris Kobach, the former Kansas secretary of state who lost his race for governor last year.
&#8220;Some in the party are afraid [Kobach] will again tap a conservative base, emerge from a crowded primary, alienate moderate voters and lose an otherwise safe seat that Republicans likely need to maintain their narrow Senate majority,&#8221; says the news agency.&#8221;
Republican adviser David Kensinger says &#8220;Pompeo getting into the race solves the problem,&#8221; reports the Associated Press.
At his inaugural campaign speech last month, Kobach spoke strongly in favor of President Trump&#8217;s agenda. Kobach also declared to his supporters that &#8220;this is not the time for a quiet senator,&#8221; as reported by the <a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article232407992.html">Kansas City Star</a>
&#8220;It&#8217;s not a time for a senator who wants to make everybody happy and doesn&#8217;t want to take a stand. It&#8217;s not a time for a senator who is Republican-lite,&#8221; said Kobach.
The Kansas City Star notes that &#8220;Democrats view Kobach&#8217;s entry into the race as an opportunity to win a Senate seat in the GOP-leaning state for the first time since 1932.&#8221; Democrats plan to direct &#8220;major&#8221; money to the race if Kobach ultimately wins the nomination, the outlet reports.
As noted by The Wall Street Journal, Kobach is also one of the few declared candidates who has not agreed to leave the race should Mike Pompeo declare his candidacy. &#8220;I would have to assess the situation,&#8221; he said about the prospect of bowing out.
While sources have told the Journal that Pompeo is McConnell&#8217;s preferred candidate, Pompeo has also signaled that he may have future presidential aspirations after President Trump leaves office.
&#8220;America has given me an awful lot,&#8221; said Pompeo, as reported by the <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/mike-pompeo-confirms-hes-interested-in-presidential-run">Washington Examiner</a> last month. &#8220;And if I thought I could do a good turn, there&#8217;s nothing I wouldn&#8217;t consider doing for America.&#8221;
The filing deadline to run for the open seat is June 1, 2020.

Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Briefs Senators On Situation In Iran

McConnell Nudging Trump Administration Official Toward Senate Run

Mike Pompeo

Trump Administration

Maine House Speaker Sara Gideon, a Democrat who is challenging Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) for her seat in 2020, reportedly violated election laws numerous times in 2015 and 2016 and is now casting blame on &#8220;incorrect guidance&#8221; for the violations.
<a href="https://freebeacon.com/politics/collins-challenger-used-pac-to-reimburse-own-contributions/">The Washington Free Beacon</a>&#8216;s Brent Scher reported that Gideon broke the law by &#8220;getting reimbursed for personal political contributions to federal campaigns through a corporate-funded Maine political action committee.&#8221;
&#8220;​Federal election law explicitly prohibits individuals from making contributions in the name of another person or entity,&#8221; the Free Beacon added, noting that Gideon&#8217;s own website even warns donors against doing what she reportedly did.
&#8220;In 2015, Gideon contributed $1,000 to Emily Cain, who was the Democratic candidate running for the seat in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District. Nearly a month later, Gideon’s state political action committee paid her $1,000, calling it a &#8216;reimbursement for federal contribution,'&#8221; the <a href="https://bangordailynews.com/2019/08/01/politics/sara-gideon-ran-afoul-of-federal-election-law-with-political-donations-in-2015-and-2016/">Bangor Daily News</a> reported. &#8220;That committee, Gideon Leadership PAC, which has largely been used to bolster Democratic legislative campaigns, reimbursed Gideon three more times through 2016 for $1,750 more in contributions to Cain and the federal campaign arm of the Maine Democratic Party.&#8221;
Cleta Mitchell, an expert campaign finance attorney, told the Free Beacon: &#8220;Contributions in the name of another is probably the number one worst campaign finance violation under federal law.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;ve seen laypeople who periodically need reminders that it&#8217;s illegal to reimburse someone for a campaign contribution, but I&#8217;ve never seen anyone in the political arena, especially an officeholder, who doesn’t understand that this is a serious thing you just do not do,&#8221; Mitchell continued. &#8220;Your donors are your donors, and they better not be getting reimbursed by any third party.&#8221;
Erin Chlopak, a former head of the Federal Election Commission’s policy division, told the Bangor Daily News: &#8220;Typically, when people try to break the law, they try to be more discreet about it.&#8221;
Gideon is backed by Senate Democrats in her bid to unseat Collins.

Susan Collins’ Senate Challenger Accused Of ‘Worst Campaign Finance Violation’

Maine

Susan Collins

The Senate confirmed more than a dozen of President Donald Trump&#8217;s lifetime judicial nominees during the two days that the country was captivated by the latest 2020 Democratic Party presidential debates.
&#8220;For too long, fairly uncontroversial judicial nominees just like these have been held up and delayed by our Democratic colleagues even when the vacancy qualifies as a judicial emergency,&#8221; Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. &#8220;Uncontroversial district judges used to be confirmed promptly in big groups by voice vote.&#8221;
Four federal district court judges were successfully confirmed on Tuesday and another nine were confirmed the following day. Of the 13 total confirmations, three judges — Karin Immergut in the District of Oregon, John Milton Younge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and Mary Rowland in the Northern District of Illinois — were passed by voice votes.
The latest round of confirmations solely focused on U.S. district court judges — thereby representing a pivot from McConnell&#8217;s prior focus on filling circuit court vacancies. Republicans had initially hoped to push through 19 of Trump&#8217;s judicial picks before senators went back to their home states for the month-long August recess.
The Senate has confirmed more than 130 of Trump’s judicial nominees since the president was sworn into office, including U.S. Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Trump has often touted the record number of conservative judges that he has been able to successfully confirm to the bench, however he has also expressed frustration with the slow-moving confirmation process, accusing Democrats of stonewalling his executive and judicial nominees alike.
&#8220;Hundreds of good people, including very important Ambassadors and Judges, are being blocked and/or slow walked by the Democrats in the Senate,&#8221; Trump tweeted in March. &#8220;Many important positions in Government are unfilled because of this obstruction. Worst in U.S. history!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Hundreds of good people, including very important Ambassadors and Judges, are being blocked and/or slow walked by the Democrats in the Senate. Many important positions in Government are unfilled because of this obstruction. Worst in U.S. history!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/973907142649397251?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
While the Senate advanced 13 lifetime judges, the Democratic Party was holding the second debate series for its 2020 presidential primary candidates. Consequently, seven Democratic senators skipped the judicial votes in order to appear on the debate stage.
Prior to the debate, a coalition of four progressive advocacy groups <a href="https://www.acslaw.org/inbrief/acs-sign-onto-letter-urging-cnn-to-ask-democratic-presidential-candidates-about-the-supreme-court/">sent a letter to CNN</a> urging the network to question the primary candidates on the Republicans&#8217; plan to move America &#8220;right of center&#8221; with judicial confirmations.
&#8220;Confronting this generational shift in our courts will be one of the most pressing issues for the next president — in fact, the viability of his or her entire agenda depends on it,&#8221; the letter read. &#8220;At this week’s Democratic presidential primary debate, we urge you to ask presidential candidates how they will respond to the crisis in our courts.&#8221;
&#8220;This is a critical issue that somehow escaped the meaningful discussion in the first Democratic debates in June,&#8221; the letter continued. &#8220;The failures of the debate moderators to ask a single question about the Supreme Court was particularly confounding since the Court issued its highly controversial, 5-4 ruling to allow partisan gerrymandering on literally the same day as the second debate, and yet the candidates were not asked to respond at all.&#8221;
CNN, however, declined to question candidates about the judiciary during the second debate.

Senate Confirms A Slew Of Trump’s Lifetime Judicial Nominees While Democrats Are Busy Debating

Supreme Court

The vote on the largely bi-partisan bill to replenish the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund has been stalled by Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY) for budgetary reasons.
&#8220;Sen. Mike Lee of Utah placed a procedural hold on an <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/07/12/house-passes-bill-to-extend-9-11-victim-compensation-fund/">extension of the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund</a>, a Senate aide confirmed to The Post, effectively blocking the bill from coming up for a vote despite overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle,&#8221; reports the <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/07/17/activists-blame-senator-mike-lee-for-holding-up-the-9-11-victims-fund/">New York Post</a>. &#8220;Shortly after Lee kicked the can down the road, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) requested a unanimous consent agreement on the Senate floor, only to have the motion swatted down by Sen. Rand Paul.&#8221;
Sen. Paul cited the $22 trillion debt as part of his rationale to hold the bill up, arguing that spending should be cut elsewhere before committing to something for another 70 years.
“I reserve the right to object,” said Paul. &#8220;It has long been my feeling that we need to address our massive debt in this country — we have a $22 trillion debt, [and] we’re adding debt at about a trillion dollars a year — and therefore any new spending that we are approaching, any new program that’s going to have longevity of 70, 80 years, should be offset by cutting spending that’s less valuable.&#8221;
According to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/453519-rand-paul-blocks-senate-vote-on-9-11-victim-compensation-fund">The Hill</a>, Paul said that if the bill were brought up for a vote in the U.S. Senate, he would be offering up an amendment, &#8220;but until then I will object.&#8221; A spokesperson for the Kentucky senator that he is &#8220;not blocking anything&#8221; and that he is &#8220;simply seeking to pay for it.&#8221;
&#8220;As with any bill, Senator Paul always believes it needs to be paid for. Senator Paul is simply offering an amendment, which other senators support, to pay for this legislation,” the spokesperson told The Hill.
A spokesperson for Sen. Mike Lee said he wants to give the legislation one more look to &#8220;prevent fraud and abuse.&#8221;
&#8220;Sen. Lee is seeking a vote to ensure the fund has the proper oversight in place to prevent fraud and abuse,&#8221; said the spokesperson.
The 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund was created to aid the first responders who led the rescue effort on Ground Zero for several months after the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11 — a tragedy that caused many permanent illnesses. Last Friday, the U.S. House passed the replenishments for the funds by an overwhelming majority — 402 to 12. Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-passes-9-11-victims-fund-bill">reports</a> that it &#8220;comes as the $7 billion 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund is being depleted and has cut benefit payments by up to 70 percent.&#8221; The bill would ensure the fund can pay benefits for 70 years.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has expressed support for the bill and praised the 9/11 first responders as &#8220;American heroes and patriots.&#8221;
&#8220;The first responders who rushed into danger on September 11th, 2001 are the very definition of American heroes and patriots,&#8221; McConnell said. &#8220;The Senate has never forgotten the Victim Compensation Fund and we aren’t about to start now. Nothing about our shared goal to provide for these heroes is remotely partisan. We will consider this important legislation soon.&#8221;

Rand Paul, Mike Lee Block 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund Vote

Rand Paul

As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/48687/sen-hawley-unveils-anti-censorship-bill-taking-aim-amanda-prestigiacomo">reported</a> last month, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) — who I have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47899/hammer-senator-josh-hawley-most-important-freshman-josh-hammer">called</a> the most important freshman conservative since Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) — <a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/s1914/text">filed a bill</a>, titled the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, in direct response to the systemic anti-conservative censorship imposed by the modern industrial titans of Big Tech. Specifically, Hawley&#8217;s bill seeks to end the legal liability safe harbor that Congress included in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996. By its own terms, the bill would only apply to large companies with &#8220;more than 30 million active monthly users in the U.S., more than 300 million active monthly users worldwide, or who have more than $500 million in global annual revenue.&#8221;
&#8220;With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: Complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,&#8221; Hawley <a href="https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduces-legislation-amend-section-230-immunity-big-tech-companies">said</a> at the time.
Hawley&#8217;s bill did not emerge out of nowhere. In April, Cruz, in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Judiciary&#8217;s <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/subcommittees/subcommittee-on-the-constitution">Subcommittee on the Constitution</a>, convened a hearing on the topic of CDA Section 230 immunity. During the hearing, constitutional law expert Eugene Kontorovich <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Kontorovich%20Testimony.pdf">offered testimony</a> that seemed to preview the eventual filing of Hawley&#8217;s bill:
<blockquote>[Section 230] shields companies from liability for much of the content on their sites, on the theory that they are not acting analogously to newspaper editors — making substantive decisions about what appears and what does not — but simply providing a forum or platform. &#8230;
Section 230’s blanket presumption is not mandatory, and certainly open to revision in a different environment more than two decades after its passage. In enacting the immunity provisions, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230">Congress assumed</a> that protected internet services provide &#8220;a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.&#8221; To the extent that assumption is weakened by online companies filtering out viewpoints that they deem ideologically impermissible, the assumptions behind Section 230 may need to be revisited.</blockquote>
Suffice it to say the bill has been <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/6/26/18691528/section-230-josh-hawley-conservatism-twitter-facebook">controversial within right-of-center circles</a> — to say nothing of its controversial nature within the broader Washington, D.C. <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/after-years-big-spending-tech-s-political-machine-turns-high-n1025096">lobbyist community</a>.
I am very sympathetic to what Hawley is seeking to accomplish. As I <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/6/26/18691528/section-230-josh-hawley-conservatism-twitter-facebook">told</a> Vox&#8217;s Jane Coaston last month, &#8220;Conservatives could theoretically merely voice support to a market-based solution wherein lower barriers to entry encourage competing platforms to emerge, [but] the reality is that such a &#8216;solution,&#8217; in the context of tech behemoths like Google and Facebook, is fanciful and completely unrealistic.&#8221; So if one accepts the premise that Big Tech censorship and de-platforming of conservatives is an increasingly acute and drastic problem, then the proposed remedy of removing CDA Section 230&#8217;s absolute immunity — in effect, flipping the burden to a tech platform to demonstrate that the platform is not engaging in politically motivated censorship, in order to maintain a legal status of absolute immunity — seems to me like a very mild remedy. Teddy Roosevelt-era trust-busting this is not.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">It is not government overreach to demand that Silicon Valley tech giants disclose their censorship algorithms in exchange for continuing to receive CDA Sec. 230 immunity.
— Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1136697398481379331?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Now, it looks like Hawley&#8217;s bill is gaining momentum within Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Cruz, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1182585158591195">interviewed yesterday</a> by Nate Madden of Blaze Media, was <a href="https://twitter.com/NateOnTheHill/status/1148945463229517824">quite clearly supportive</a> of the measure. More generally, cracking down on Big Tech for its anti-conservative censorship proclivities seems to be an <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/technology/452286-cruz-to-hold-google-focused-hearing-on-alleged-anti-conservative-bias-next">issue of increasing importance</a> for Cruz&#8217;s political profile. Even more promising for Hawley, however, was <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-09/top-senate-republican-wants-to-rein-in-tech-s-liability-shield">Bloomberg&#8217;s report</a> yesterday that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is keen on reining in CDA Section 230&#8217;s safe harbor provision. &#8220;Things would change tomorrow if you could get sued,&#8221; Graham said during a Committee hearing earlier this week, reported Bloomberg.
Hawley&#8217;s bill is an important opening legislative salvo in the broader intramural debate on the Right as to how best to address ubiquitous institutional leftist bias from the titans of Big Tech. Others, such as those affiliated with the Claremont Institute, are also helping to <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/05/31/banding_together_against_big_tech_140453.html">lead and offer possible paths forward</a>. Ultimately, Hawley&#8217;s bill is a very mild legislative tweak in direct response to corporate malfeasance from institutional actors that have benefited from a superfluous congressional hand-out dating back to the early days of the mass-consumer Internet era. With both the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman (Graham) and an iconic Committee conservative (Cruz) now offering increased momentum for Hawley&#8217;s measure, it will be fascinating to see who else within the Senate Republican caucus hops on board.

HAMMER: Josh Hawley’s Bill Taking On Big Tech Censorship Gains GOP Momentum. Good.

Technology

Ted Cruz

On Wednesday, the Senate passed a bipartisan border supplemental plan sending $4.6 billion in additional aid to the southern border; the bill was approved last week by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The Senate has has now approved its bipartisan border supplemental plan. The measure needed 60 yeas.
The vote was 84-8.
&#8212; Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1143964974055854080?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
As <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/19/us/politics/senate-border-aid-package.html">The New York Times</a> reported last week, &#8220;The bipartisan agreement, which the committee advanced 30 to 1, allocates about $2.9 billion for the care of migrant children and $1.3 billion to improve facilities at the border. It does not allow the Department of Homeland Security to add beds at detention centers or migrant processing facilities &#8230; the compromise was reached without input from House Democrats, who have been working on their own version, and it is unclear how the two measures align in addressing the administration&#8217;s urgent push for additional money at the border.&#8221;
According to <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-passes-border-security-funding-bill-after-rejecting-house-version/">CBS News</a>, the bill includes &#8220;$2.88 billion for Health and Human Services to provide safe shelter and care for children in custody; $1.1 billion for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to establish migrant care and processing facilities; $220 million for the Justice Department to help process immigration cases and provide resources to U.S. Marshals Service for care and detention of federal detainees; $145 million for branches of U.S. military for missions along the border.&#8221;
The bill stipulates overtime pay for agents and officials at the border along with funding for 30 new immigration judge teams.
Mark Morgan, acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said earlier in June, &#8220;I&#8217;m here as ICE begging for this. We need that to get the families out of the Border Patrol detention facilities and into better facilities.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/senate-passes-border-aid-bill-as-trump-defends-treatment-of-migrants.html">CNBC</a> reported, &#8220;On Tuesday night, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/25/house-passes-emergency-border-bill-amid-concerns-about-migrant-children.html">the Democratic-held House passed its own plan to appropriate $4.5 billion</a> &#8212; including standards for caring for children at U.S. migrant detention facilities. Now, the two chambers will try to reconcile their plans. Earlier Wednesday, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of the bill by a 55-37 margin.&#8221; <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/pelosi-under-pressure-after-senate-passes-bipartisan-border-funding-bill">The Washington Examiner</a> noted, &#8220;Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Wednesday she won&#8217;t take up the Senate version, even though it is bipartisan and passed with an overwhelming majority.&#8221; 
<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/26/immigration-border-fight-congress-1383717">Politico</a> reported that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Wednesday, &#8220;The House passed its version last night. It&#8217;s a much better bill than the Senate version. We should take up the House bill here in the Senate and send something to the president as soon as possible and then make sure the administration uses funds to improve the conditions at the border immediately.&#8221;
But Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said, &#8220;They should take ours. The House one is not adequate.&#8221;

US Capitol Building, Washington DC

Senate Passes Bipartisan $4.6 Billion Bill For Aid To Southern Border

Southern Border

Failed Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore announced on Thursday that he is running for the same Senate seat in 2020 after accusations of child molestation derailed his campaign in 2017.
Moore&#8217;s last run was so disastrously scandal-plagued that &#8220;Senate Republicans made clear they would rather have a Democrat with them in the Senate than Roy Moore, who was accused by more than half a dozen women of predatory behavior when they were teenagers and he was in his 30s,&#8221; The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/20/roy-moore-might-launch-another-senate-run-theres-nothing-washington-republicans-can-do-about-it/">reported</a>.
&#8220;Why is there such a fear, such an anger, why such a hatred, such an opposition to somebody running?&#8221; Moore asked at his press conference. &#8220;Is it because I believe in God and marriage &#8230; and the right of a baby in the womb to have a life? Are these things embarrassing to you?&#8221;
&#8220;Everyone in Alabama knows that last election in 2017 was fraudulent,&#8221; Moore said &#8212; apparently referencing the reportedly shady disinformation tactics employed by Democrats during the election, and which were previously <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/alabama-senate-roy-jones-russia.html">reported</a> on by The New York Times.
Republican strategist Chris Barron slammed Moore over his comments, tweeting: &#8220;Stacy Abrams and Roy Moore. Opposite sides of the same brain dead coin.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Stacy Abrams and Roy Moore. Opposite sides of the same brain dead coin. <a href="https://t.co/8Jce1gZyQy">https://t.co/8Jce1gZyQy</a>
&#8212; Chris Barron (@ChrisRBarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChrisRBarron/status/1141793496841555968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Moore reportedly said that he was &#8220;not going against President Trump&#8221; by entering the race.
Donald Trump Jr. quickly punched back, tweeting: &#8220;This is pure fake news. I can assure everyone that by running, Roy Moore is going against my father and he&#8217;s doing a disservice to all conservatives across the country in the process.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
This is pure fake news. I can assure everyone that by running, Roy Moore is going against my father and he&#8217;s doing a disservice to all conservatives across the country in the process. <a href="https://t.co/pjfDKfoIO0">https://t.co/pjfDKfoIO0</a>
&#8212; Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) <a href="https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1141793386170638337?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) responded to Moore&#8217;s announcement by saying: &#8220;Give me a break. This place has enough creepy old men.&#8221;
Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) said: &#8220;The people of Alabama are smarter than that.&#8221;
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) said: &#8220;I would oppose Roy Moore. &#8230; I will not be by myself, I hope. I think Alabama can do better than that.&#8221;
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump warned against Moore entering the race: &#8220;Republicans cannot allow themselves to again lose the Senate seat in the Great State of Alabama. This time it will be for Six Years, not just Two. I have NOTHING against Roy Moore, and unlike many other Republican leaders, wanted him to win. But he didn&#8217;t, and probably won&#8217;t. If Alabama does not elect a Republican to the Senate in 2020, many of the incredible gains that we have made during my Presidency may be lost, including our Pro-Life victories. Roy Moore cannot win, and the consequences will be devastating&#8230;.Judges and Supreme Court Justices!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
&#8230;If Alabama does not elect a Republican to the Senate in 2020, many of the incredible gains that we have made during my Presidency may be lost, including our Pro-Life victories. Roy Moore cannot win, and the consequences will be devastating&#8230;.Judges and Supreme Court Justices!
&#8212; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1133699637678870528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
This is a breaking news story, refresh the page for updates.

Menu