Kari Lake's opponent who dumped his pregnant wife may soon have his dirty laundry exposed
Rep. Ruben Gallego (D) is competing with Kari Lake for a U.S. Senate seat in Arizona. While recent polls show Gallego leading Lake by upward of 13 points, forthcoming revelations about the Democrat's murky past might help close the gap and deny him a future in the Senate.
The Washington Free Beacon filed a motion in January to unseal Gallego's 2017 divorce records, which were hidden from the public since he dumped his wife, Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, when she was nine months pregnant.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday — days after Lake wrote, "Arizona deserves to know what he's hiding" — that the Democrat and his ex-wife can no longer keep their divorce records under wraps, which are now expected to come out before week's end.
The Free Beacon noted at the outset that something was unusual about the relatively heightened secrecy around the dissolution of Gallego's marriage:
Though both Ruben and Kate Gallego are public figures, public records and basic information on the internet about the circumstances of the divorce are scant, likely because the Gallegos or their allies have buried them. In Arizona, as in most states, court records—including those related to divorces—are generally accessible to the public. But in the Gallegos’ case, the entire docket is under seal, something incredibly unusual in a state where the sealing of information, if it happens at all, is typically limited to specific sensitive information.
The Free Beacon suggested further that the records were publicly relevant because both Gallegos held public office and Rep. Gallego had incorporated the divorce into his political backstory.
There was also the matter of where the couple filed for divorce.
While Arizona law requires that citizens file for divorce in that county where they presently live, the Free Beacon noted that the Gallegos lived in Maricopa County when they filed for divorce in Yavapai County.
The Gallegos resisted the push for transparency and fought to keep the records sealed.
'Congressman Gallego is not entitled to special privileges to secrecy in court records.'
The Yavapai County Superior Court agreed that the records should be unsealed but permitted the congressman an opportunity to propose redactions.
Superior Court Judge John Napper later rejected a number of Gallego's proposed redactions on July 3 and ordered that a version of the record be filed publicly.
Gallego, who told a fellow lawmaker "F*** your prayers" in 2022, appealed, claiming he and his ex-wife were seeking to protect their minor child. They secured a stay on July 30 from the state Court of Appeals. However, on Tuesday, the appellate court subsequently ordered that this stay be lifted on Oct. 17, prompting Gallego to seek the intervention of Arizona's Supreme Court.
The couple's lawyers suggested in their Tuesday motion to stay the appellate court's decision that the unsealing of the records would irreparably harm their privacy and safety rights.
According to the Tucson Star, the Free Beacon countered with a response stressing the Gallegos failed to meet the legal requirements to block the release of the file.
"That process will mean the media and the electorate get nothing from these presumptively public records until after all votes are cast," wrote Michael Edney, attorney for the Free Beacon. "That harm to the media and voters is time-sensitive and irreparable, starting a week ago with the commencement of early voting, a problem that will deepen each day until Nov. 5."
Edney added, "Congressman Gallego is not entitled to special privileges to secrecy in court records not afforded to other Arizona Citizens. If anything, the press and public have a heightened First Amendment interest in court records regarding public officials."
The Arizona Supreme Court unanimously rejected the couple's bid late Wednesday.
"The court concludes that the Gallegos have not established a strong likelihood of success on the merit," wrote Justice Clint Bolick. "Nor have they established irreparable harm with any degree of specificity if the stay is not granted."
Ahead of the unsealing, Rep. Gallego has been urging voters to turn in early ballots.
Early voting began in Arizona on Oct. 9.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Virginia punches back after Biden-Harris DOJ sues to halt purge of noncitizens from voter rolls
The Biden-Harris Department of Justice is working frantically to challenge state efforts to remove noncitizens from voter rolls in two states ahead of the election.
Just weeks after the DOJ sued Alabama and its top election official over the state's efforts to ensure that only American citizens would get to determine the fate of the state and country, the DOJ filed a lawsuit on Oct. 11 against the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Virginia State Board of Elections, and Virginia Commissioner of Elections, claiming the noncitizen voter purge was too close to Election Day.
Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin characterized the lawsuit as "politically motivated" election interference, and his lawyer, former Virginia Attorney General Richard Cullen, maintains that Virginia's efforts are entirely lawful.
Of apparent concern to the Biden-Harris DOJ is Section 8(c)(2) of the National Voter Registration Act — the Quiet Period Provision — which requires states to complete programs intended to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from registration lists by no later than 90 days prior to a primary election or general election for federal office. It does not, however, preclude correction of a registrant's information.
The DOJ's contention is that the removal of likely noncitizens from voter rolls before the election not only violates this provision but is problematic because the removals "may be error-ridden, cause voter confusion and remove eligible voters days or weeks before Election Day who may be unable to correct the State's errors in time to vote or may be dissuaded from voting at all."
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) issued an executive order on Aug. 7, exactly 90 days before the general election, requiring both that the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections regularly update voter lists to remove individuals identified as noncitizens and that the state Department of Motor Vehicles expedite the interagency data sharing with the DOE with regards to noncitizen transactions.
Youngkin further indicated that 6,303 noncitizens who had "accidentally or maliciously attempted to register" to vote had been scrubbed from the voter rolls between January 2022 and July 2024.
"Call me crazy, but I think American elections should be decided by American citizens and Virginia elections should be decided by Virginians," Youngkin said in an interview. "That's why this executive order is so important because it does make sure that we have clean voter rolls."
Trump lauded the initiative, noting in a Truth Social post that the Virginia governor is "TAKING A STRONG LEAD IN SECURING THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER — PROTECTING EVERY LEGAL VOTE AND KEEPING ILLEGAL ALIENS THAT HAVE BEEN LET INTO OUR COUNTRY FROM VOTING."
"EVERY STATE SHOULD FOLLOW VIRGINIA'S LEAD," added Trump.
Youngkin's EO tasked elections officials with checking the list of individuals flagged as noncitizens by the DMV with the list of existing registered voters. Voters identified as noncitizens are those who chose "No" in response to questions about their American citizenship on forms submitted to the DMV.
Local registrars were, in turn, tasked with notifying those whose names overlapped the two lists that they had two weeks to affirm their citizenship or face cancellation.
The DOJ alleges that this process was carried out into the quiet period, in violation of the NVRA — citing Commissioner Susan Beals' Sept. 19 confirmation that removals were ongoing — and has also resulted in American citizens having their voter registrations canceled.
'Virginians — and Americans — will see this for exactly what it is: a desperate attempt to attack the legitimacy of the elections in the Commonwealth.'
The DOJ is demanding not only the restoration of the "ability of impacted eligible voters to vote unimpeded on Election Day" but that Virginia halt its program removing noncitizens from voter rolls.
Virginia is not taking the DOJ's intervention lying down.
"With less than 30 days until the election, the Biden-Harris Department of Justice is filing an unprecedented lawsuit against me and the Commonwealth of Virginia, for appropriately enforcing a 2006 law signed by Democrat Tim Kaine that requires Virginia to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls — a process that starts with someone declaring themselves a non-citizen and then registering to vote," Youngkin said in an Oct. 11 statement.
"Virginians — and Americans — will see this for exactly what it is: a desperate attempt to attack the legitimacy of the elections in the Commonwealth, the very crucible of American Democracy," continued Youngkin. "With the support of our Attorney General, we will defend these commonsense steps, that we are legally required to take, with every resource available to us. Virginia's election will be secure and fair, and I will not stand idly by as this politically motivated action tries to interfere in our elections, period."
Youngkin's lawyer, Richard Cullen, outlined the state's likely defense in a memo obtained by WRIC-TV, stressing that Virginia's program does not violate federal law because it is not a systematic program but rather an individualized process that begins with "individuals themselves indicating that they are a noncitizen during a DMV transaction."
University of Richmond Law Professor Henry Chambers told WRIC, "You can have narrowly tailored specified reasons for knocking folks off the list, that essentially the argument that is being made in the memo."
Cullen's memo noted further that the state affords impacted voters ample notice and time to demonstrate their eligibility and citizenship prior to cancellation.
The Virginia Mercury reported that state Sen. Bill Stanley (R) has indicated the Biden-Harris DOJ is trying to make something out of nothing.
"There are failsafe measures to this," said Stanley. "Even if they are subsequently removed from the rolls, let's say, in error, those persons can still register to vote on Election Day under our 'same day' registration law. So I fail to see why the federal government is doing this but for no other reason but to try to upset our otherwise sound voter registration process here in Virginia for political purposes."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
WATCH: Caitlyn Jenner’s take on controversial Olympic boxer pummeling women in the ring
The Algerian boxer Imane Khelif has sparked an online firestorm, as people viciously spar over whether or not the athlete is biologically male or female. According to what the mainstream media and the IOC are saying, Khelif is not transgender but was born female with a condition called DSD that causes the development of XY chromosomes. Others say that it is impossible to have XY chromosomes and be anything other than a biological male.
Caitlyn Jenner, who largely pioneered the transgender movement, spoke about the controversy during a recent Fox interview.
Dave Rubin plays the clip.
Caitlyn Jenner Makes Fox Host Go Quiet with Unexpected Take on Controversial Olympic Boxerwww.youtube.com
“First of all, if you’re dealing with being intersex, we’re talking about 0.001% of the population. It’s a very, very small portion of the population,” Jenner said, adding that the “media is so hypersensitive about this.”
“I think the Olympic Committee did absolutely the wrong thing by letting her compete. ... The IOC just didn't do their job at the beginning and then the media got a hold of this and blew the whole thing up. But shame on the IOC for not protecting the integrity of women's sports and shame on the IOC for not protecting the safety of women's sports, obviously,” Jenner continued, noting that “this is a safety issue.”
Want more from Dave Rubin?
To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
'Patriot Act 2.0' — Lindsey Graham's DANGEROUS plan after Trump shooting
FBI whistleblower Steve Friend has a warning in the aftermath of the assassination attempt on Trump — and it’s not for former President Trump.
“There was an exchange between deputy director Paul Abbate and Ron Johnson from Wisconsin, where to the layperson it seems reasonable the FBI wants to open up all avenues, remove the blindfold, have no blinders on, consider the fact that this could be assassination, this could be domestic terrorism,” Friend tells Jill Savage of “Blaze News Tonight.”
However, to the non-layperson — this could mean something more sinister.
“When you designate something as a domestic terrorist investigation, that enables you to make it classified, and when you have a classification code on there, you have to have a need to know in a security clearance,” Friend explains.
Because of that, the FBI can withhold information.
“The American people are not going to have the transparency that we ultimately need for this investigation,” he says.
While the FBI’s actions are concerning, that’s not Savage’s only concern.
“Lindsey Graham had a very concerning solution for the issues with the investigation,” Savage tells Friend.
“We have encrypted apps of an assassin, a murderer, and we can’t get into them all these days after,” Graham said. “That needs to be fixed folks. I’m all for privacy, but to a point.”
“What if, in the future, somebody’s using these apps to communicate with a foreign power. I think we need to know these things. We need to know them in real time,” he added.
Friend says that Graham’s suggestion would effectively render the Fourth Amendment a “dead letter, at that point.”
Graham’s use of the phrase “real time” is also concerning.
“Real time, which means continually monitoring it,” Friend explains.
“This is the government assuming that a tool will be used for ill, when it is just a tool. Because we don’t trust the government in this country. The job of law enforcement is not supposed to be easy. You’re supposed to have reasonable suspicion, probable cause, the burden is supposed to be there,” he adds.
Want more from Blaze News Tonight?
To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com