The NRCC, which previously asked GOP and conservative groups to attack Texas Dem congressional candidate @GinaOrtizJones for being a lesbian, is now running an ad against her that criticizes her for supporting "taxpayer-funded sex change operations."
About that. (1/x)
The ad cites an Aug. 3, 2017 story in the San Antonio Express-News.
In it, Jones criticizes then-opponent Rep. Will Hurd for voting for an amendment to ban $ for med treatment relating to gender transition for military personnel. It failed. mysanantonio.com/news/local/art… (2/x)
The ad also cites a Blade story that says the same thing.
The ad doesn't mention that Jones served in the military + under 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.'
"I know that if 1 person on that team is not 100%, that unit is not 100% & the mission is at risk." washingtonblade.com/2018/06/20/gin… (3/x)
It's an odd, years-old line of attack for the NRCC to take against Jones... until you consider the NRCC is STILL trying to smear her for being a lesbian on its website + now trying to tie her to trans issues. (4/x)
Here's the NRCC website DemocratFacts.org, which it uses to communicate its preferred messaging to GOP super PACs and conservative groups for going after key Dems.
Of the dozens of candidates on here, Jones still appears to be the only one pictured with a partner. (5/x)
The NRCC's website also used to have language singling out Jones’ sexual orientation, but after @Robillard
reported on it in August, they took that language down.
So what appears to be happening here, less than a week before the election, is the NRCC trying to smear Jones by tying her to another LGBTQ issue since they got called out for trying to smear her for being a lesbian.
This is gross.
Fin.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Well look who maxed out donations to vulnerable Republican senators just as Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing was in the works: the Federalist Society board chairman. huffpost.com/entry/federali…
FEC reports show Steven Calabresi, the co-founder and chairman of the Federalist Society, gave the maximum contribution allowed to six GOP senators in tight races between Oct. 9-19th.
Barrett’s confirmation hearing was Oct. 12- 15th. She was voted out of committee on Oct. 22.
Which six GOP senators got Calabresi's donations at a time when the Federalist Society really needed their votes?
Republican Sens. Martha McSally (Ariz.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), David Perdue (Ga.), Kelly Loeffler (Ga.), Thom Tillis (N.C.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.).
BREAKING: Senate Republicans have confirmed Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, tilting the balance of the court to a 6-3 conservative majority for years to come. huffpost.com/entry/amy-cone…
Updated White House schedule:
The President participates in a swearing-in ceremony of The Honorable Amy Coney Barrett as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States at 9:00PM.
In floor remarks just before Barrett's confirmation vote, Chuck Schumer warned Republicans they will "never, never get their credibility back" after this process and hints that Dems are ready to blow up more Senate rules when they're back in the majority.
Democratic Judiciary Committee members are outside on the Senate steps protesting Barrett's confirmation process.
"The U.S. Senate has never, never considered a Supreme Court justice this close to a national presidential election day," says Schumer, SHOUTING into a microphone.
Dianne Feinstein, ranking Dem on Judiciary, reminds everyone that Republicans blocked Obama's SCOTUS pick, Merrick Garland, for 10 months in 2016 because, they argued, it was a presidential election year.
"Now, however, Republicans are proceeding regardless."
"This hearing was anything but fair," says Sen. Leahy, who was the ranking Dem on Judiciary when the GOP blocked Merrick Garland's SCOTUS nomination in 2016.
"They broke their word to finish a confirmation process that has become a caricature of illegitimacy."
A moment that stood out in Amy Coney Barrett's hearing is when she wouldn't say if climate change is real.
In her responses to the Judiciary committee's follow-up Qs, released tonight, she said SCOTUS has said climate change is controversial so she can't discuss it. 🤔
Barrett also refused to answer any of these questions in her follow-up responses.
The first 2 have easy, fact-based answers.
She wouldn't even say what a "policy question" is.