The nude celebs warned citizens that failure to carefully follow the instructions on a postal vote can result in a 'naked ballot', which will not be deemed valid in the count for the November 3 presidential election. 

Liberal comedians and actors have gone nude in a video to warn voters against mailing in a 'naked ballot' for next month's presidential election.

Quite how the sight of Chris Rock, Mark Ruffalo or Josh Gad in the altogether would persuade anyone to do anything is questionable, but the stars urged fellow citizens to closely follow the instructions.

"Take your clothes off and vote!" demanded Comedienne Amy Schumer, the cousin of Democratic ​Party Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer - regardless of the legal implications.

"I gotta gets my ballot to the MotherF***ing post office. Let's Go!" says Tiffany Haddish from the seat of her car. 

School of Rock and Wreck-it Ralph star Sarah Silverman - supported by her buck-naked father 'Schleppy' - and Chelsea Handler warned that in states like Pennsylvania send out ballots with two return envelopes, one of which holds the completed ballot paper and must then be stuffed in the second. 

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/viral/202010071080700185-cannot-be-unseen-naked-celebs-tell-americans-how-to-vote-by-mail/

 

 

Democracy is a beast with many disguises, especially face masks, presently... 

Washington: President Donald Trump said he will not participate in next week's virtual debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden because "I'm not gonna waste my time".

"I’m not going to do a virtual debate" with Biden, Trump told Fox Business Network, moments after the Commission on Presidential Debates announced the changes due to Trump's diagnosis.

"That's not what debating is all about - you sit behind the computer and do a debate, ridiculous. And then they cut you off whenever they want.

"I don't think I'm contagious at all," Trump said.

 

Read more:

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/second-trump-biden-presidential-debate-going-virtual-amid-president-s-covid-19-diagnosis-20201008-p563g0.html

 

Read from top.

It was a truth bomb on Friday evening from former Kansas Senator Bob Dole on Twitter. 

Dole, a Republican, admitted in his Tweet on Friday that members on the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is made up of Republicans and Democrats, don’t support President Donald Trump. The controversial decision by the commission to conduct the next Presidential debate remotely...

“The Commission on Presidential Debates is supposedly bipartisan w/ an equal number of Rs and Ds,” said Dole. “I know all of the Republicans and most are friends of mine. I am concerned that none of them support @realDonaldTrump. A biased Debate Commission is unfair.” 

Dole is right. The rules being established by the commission certainly are targeting and ostracizing Trump, while ignoring the very real issues plaguing Democratic candidate former Vice President Joe Biden.

The co-chair of the commission Frank Fahrenkopf, said Trump’s campaign presented “no evidence whatsoever” that he has tested negative for the coronavirus, after being released from Walter Reed Military Medical Center after a three day stint at the facility. He was released by doctors and has remained symptom free of COVID-19. 

Trump has declined to do the virtual debate. 

In an interview with Brian Kilmeade on Fox News, Fahrenkopf said he wanted to have a debate next week saying a virtual debate is the “safest way to go.”

“We’re talking about something that will happen in less than a week, if it had originally gone forward. Less than a week,” he told Kilmeade. “At this point in time, there is no evidence whatsoever whether or not when the president tested negative.”

 

Read more:

https://saraacarter.com/truth-bomb-former-sen-bob-dole-says-members-on-the-commission-on-presidential-debates-dont-support-trump/

 

Read from top.

Kamala Harris grilling prompts doubtful claim from Amy Coney Barrett

Democratic senator and vice-presidential nominee condemns Republican push to overturn healthcare law and abortion rights

Kamala Harris delivered a blistering rebuke of Republican efforts to tear down healthcare and abortion access as she grilled Amy Coney Barrett, prompting the supreme court nominee to make the unbelievable claim that she was not aware of Donald Trump’s campaign promise to appoint justices who would dismantle Obamacare.

Speaking via teleconference during Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday, the Democratic senator and vice-presidential nominee began with a campaign speech about the importance of accessible healthcare amid the coronavirus – highlighting the number of Americans who would lose insurance if the 2010 Affordable Care Act were repealed in five states where Republican senators are struggling to win re-election.

 

She then addressed Barrett: “Prior to your nomination, were you aware of President Trump’s statement committing to nominate judges who will strike down the Affordable Care Act? And I’d appreciate a yes or no answer.”

 

Barrett maintained that before she was nominated to the supreme court, she was unaware of his public statements. “I don’t recall hearing about or seeing such statements,” Barrett said.

 

Harris asked how many months after Barrett wrote an article criticizing John Roberts’ decision upholding the Affordable Care Act she received her nomination for her appeals court position.

 

“The Affordable Care Act and all of its protections hinge on this seat,” Harris said.

 

“I would hope the committee would trust my integrity,” Barrett said, noting, as she has done throughout the hearings, that she has not made any commitments to rule a certain way on the healthcare law.

 

The assertion, and Barrett’s implication that she had somehow tuned out the president’s loud, public criterion for judges he’d appoint, is difficult to believe.

 

Harris, the former attorney general of California, is famous for her prosecutorial style of questioning. Her sharp interrogation of Donald Trump’s last Supreme Court nominee – now Justice Brett Kavanaugh – helped elevate her political profile.

 

Read more:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/13/kamala-harris-amy-coney-barrett-senate-hearing


————————————————

CLAIM: Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) said “the Affordable Care Act and its protections hinge on … the outcome of this hearing.”

VERDICT: MOSTLY FALSE. Barrett’s confirmation would likely not result in Obamacare being overturned, at least not now.

Sen. Harris, the Democratic Party nominee for Vice President, used the bulk of her time in Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing on Tuesday to accuse the judge of preparing to overturn Obamacare in upcoming litigation.

As Breitbart News explained in a recent fact check, it is unlikely Barrett could overturn Obamacare soon even if she wanted to:

The Supreme Court will hear the highly anticipated case on November 10, and Democrats claim that if Barrett is on the Court, she will end Obamacare — especially because she has criticized the manner in which Roberts upheld it (though not the act itself).
Democrats also point to President Donald Trump’s steadfast determination to overturn Obamacare (he also wants to replace it).
There are a number of possibilities in California v. Texas, but it is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will invalidate all of Obamacare.
One reason is that several of the current justices are very skittish when it comes to the issue of severability.
“The ACA, most likely, will not be struck down,” Jonathan Turley told Fox News on Monday, saying that Chief Justice Roberts, as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh, would be likely to argue that Obamacare could in fact survive without the individual mandate.
Moreover, as one letter submitted on behalf of Barrett argued, her confirmation would likely have no effect on the outcome.
…
If Barrett is not confirmed, and the remaining justices vote the same way they did in the 2012 case (or the way their predecessors did), then the Court would be deadlocked 4-4. That would simply leave the Fifth Circuit’s decision in place. The individual mandate would be unconstitutional, but the district court would have to start the severability analysis over.
That could mean Obamacare would be overturned in the future — but only after much more litigation.
The only way Barrett could make a substantive difference is if she voted to uphold Obamacare, joining the liberal justices.
If one of the conservatives defected — joining Chief Justice Roberts — on the issue of severability, then Barrett would be in the minority anyway.

It is theoretically possible that Barrett could vote to overturn Obamacare, but it would likely be in a new, different case entirely.

Harris also falsely claimed that Barrett wanted to overturn Obamacare. As Breitbart News explained in another fact check, Barrett has never expressed a view on the substance of the law, or the policy.

She merely criticized the judicial reasoning used by Chief Justice John Roberts in upholding the statute by effectively rewriting it to make the individual mandate a tax instead of a penalty:

Barrett has never stated an opinion on the law, and her judicial philosophy is that judges are not lawmakers.
What she has done is criticize Chief Justice John Roberts’s decision in NFIB v. Sebelius, in which he rewrote the statute to save it.

The Hill agreed with Breitbart News’ analysis: “The challenge Democrats face is that while they claim Barrett will overturn ObamaCare, the judge has never explicitly said she would do so, though she has dropped big hints about how she’s likely to rule.”

In addition, Harris made the false claim that 100 million Americans have pre-existing conditions and depend on Obamacare. As the Wall Street Journal explained last month, Harris overestimated that number absurdly:

Joe Biden claimed at Tuesday’s debate that “100 million people who have pre-existing conditions” will lose insurance if the Trump Administration wins an Affordable Care Act case at the Supreme Court. Democrats have terrified voters with this fiction for years …
The question is not how many Americans have a health condition, but how many Americans buying insurance in the individual insurance market have a condition that makes them difficult to insure at prices they can pay. Keep in mind that the Affordable Care Act set up a subsidized transitional plan for anyone with pre-existing conditions denied insurance in the individual market. Peak enrollment: about 115,000 in 2013.
The White House in an executive order last week noted that, by the Obama Administration’s own report, a mere 2.7% of an estimated roughly 130 million people with pre-existing conditions gained access to health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.

Harris’s entire presentation was scripted, and she read from notes as she sat in her Senate office. Barrett, notably, did not use notes at all in an entire day of testimony.


Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.


Read more:https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/13/fact-check-kamala-harris-repeats-false-claims-about-amy-coney-barrett-and-obamacare/



Read from top.

Washington: Barring any last minute surprises, Amy Coney Barrett will be appointed to the Supreme Court before the November 3 election after sailing through two days of marathon question-and-answer sessions in the US capital.

While Democrats remain furious about the chain of events that led to this moment, Donald Trump's nominee performed impressively at her confirmation hearings and will secure enough votes to take the seat left vacant by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Republicans are thrilled by the prospect of a judge they regard as a "female legal superstar", in the words of Senator Martha Blackburn, sitting on the nation's most powerful court for decades to come.

"This is history being made, folks," Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham said on Thursday (AEST).

 

Read more:

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/history-being-made-amy-coney-barrett-sails-towards-supreme-court-20201015-p565c9.html

 

 

Meanwhile:

...

Harrison said that while Graham hasn’t done a traditional, in-person town hall with voters in South Carolina in years, “You can find him on Sean Hannity every other night begging for money.”

Graham craved this week’s hearings on Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, because, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he’s getting oodles of free television exposure just when he needs it. He’s surely also betting that his role in elevating another conservative justice will please many South Carolina voters and shift their attention from his breathtaking inconstancy.

He once vowed that he’d never consider, let alone promote, a Supreme Court nominee put forward in the last year of a president’s term, telling journalists to mark his words and use them against him if the need ever arose. The need indeed did.

He once railed that the way to make America great again was to “tell Donald Trump to go to hell.” Now he’s Trump’s adoring golf buddy. Does that mean Graham is a fairway-weather friend? It certainly means that his convictions have all the weight of whipped cream.

 

Read more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/14/opinion/lindsey-graham-jaime-harrison.html

 

He could not be happier, even if he loses...

 

Read from top.