Control of the US Senate remains unknown



So far, Republicans have underperformed in many races across the country, and now which party will control the United States Senate for the next two years remains unclear.

Senators serve six-year terms, and a third of the Senate — approximately 33 senators — is up for reelection during every election cycle. Since January 2021, the Senate has been evenly split with 50 Republicans, 48 Democrats, and 2 independents who caucus with Democrats, leaving Vice President Kamala Harris (D) to cast more than two dozen deciding votes in less than two years.

No major outlet has yet projected which party will control the U.S. Senate. However, the following races will likely play a key role in the outcome.

Pennsylvania

This race is particularly important for Democrats, as Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Dr. Mehmet Oz were competing for a seat vacated by retiring Republican incumbent Pat Toomey. A Fetterman win will increase the chances that Democrats maintain or perhaps increase their Senate majority.
Unfortunately, Fetterman suffered a debilitating stroke back in May, which severely affected his ability to give speeches, dialogue with voters, and participate in debates. Because of his impaired physical and mental fitness, Oz attempted to offer a stable, reliable alternative to Fetterman, who did not make many appearances without closed-captioning and has a very liberal track record as the lieutenant governor of the state.

So far though, Pennsylvania voters do not seem as concerned about Fetterman's health. As of early Wednesday morning, he holds a narrow lead of just under one point with 88% of votes reported.


\u201cFETTERMAN: \u201cI run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade.\u201d \n\n\u201d
— Benny Johnson (@Benny Johnson) 1667693805

Arizona

In Arizona, Sen. Mark Kelly, a Democrat incumbent, has faced a strong challenge from venture capitalist Blake Masters. Masters hammered Kelly's record of voting to approve President Joe Biden's liberal agenda, and in particular, his seemingly indifferent attitude toward illegal immigration.
"If this is the result of Senator Kelly being 'focused on the border,' my gosh, he's the most ineffective and worst senator of all time," Masters quipped during their debate in early October.
\u201c.@bgmasters: "If this is the result of Senator Kelly being 'focused on the border,' my gosh, he's the most ineffective and worst senator of all time."\u201d
— RNC Research (@RNC Research) 1665106366

Voting irregularities in Maricopa County, the most populous county in the state, will make this race difficult to call.

Georgia

Political junkies and college football fans across the country paid close attention to this race between Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat, who won a special election against Republican incumbent Kelly Loeffler in 2020, and former Heisman Trophy winner and University of Georgia legend Herschel Walker.
Running as a Republican, Walker was able to capitalize on his folksy mannerisms and southern drawl to convince many voters to trust him, despite allegations that he had paid for a former girlfriend to abort his child in 2009. In his debate against Warnock, Walker leaned in on his pro-life stance and his friendship with former President Donald Trump, both topics which he was then able to turn into attacks against Warnock.
"[I]f black lives matter," Walker rhetorically asked Warnock, who is also a Christian minister, "why are you not protecting those babies? And instead of aborting those babies, why are you not baptizing those babies?"
\u201cHerschel Walker (R): \u201cIf Black Lives Matter, why are you not protecting those babies, and instead of aborting those babies, why are you not baptizing those babies?\u201d\n\nSen. Raphael Warnock (D): \u201cI think the women of Georgia have a clear choice.\u201d\u201d
— The Recount (@The Recount) 1665790058

Warnock and Walker remain neck and neck, at 49.1% and 48.8%, respectively. If neither candidate reaches the 50% threshold once all ballots have been counted, the race will head for a runoff.

Nevada

Democrat incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto has looked vulnerable for months against Republican challenger Adam Laxalt. Since mid-September, Laxalt has shown a steady lead in the polls, and Cortez Masto has struggled to demonstrate solidarity with her party while also distancing herself from Biden, who is deeply unpopular with many Nevadans. On Oct. 25, the New York Times dubbed her "the Senate's most at-risk Democrat."
The two did not have a debate this election season.

\u201c\u201cNot once has @cortezmasto said no and put her foot down on behalf of the people of Nevada. She has stood side by side, almost 100% of the time, with Joe Biden.\u201d\n\nSenator @TomCottonAR is right. Masto has been nothing but a rubber stamp for Biden.\n\nNevada is ready for change.\u201d
— Adam Paul Laxalt (@Adam Paul Laxalt) 1667678084
Clark and Washoe Counties, the two most populous counties in the state, may not announce vote tallies until Thursday, according to Jon Ralston of the Nevada Independent and Ben Margiott of KRNV. So, we have very little data about this race.

New Hampshire

This state was not supposed to be in play for Republicans, and it turns out, it never really was. Sen. Maggie Hassan (D) won by just 0.6% of the vote in 2016, New Hampshire then trended leftward in the next two election cycles. Biden won the state handily in 2020, 52.7% to Trump's 45.4%.
During the primary this year, Democrats then threw considerable money at Republican Don Bolduc because they thought he would be easiest candidate to defeat in the November election. A PAC affiliated with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) obviously agreed, since it pulled money out of the race in mid-October.
Though Bolduc took a slight lead in some polls in the final days, Hassan held a comfortable lead all night. She has been projected to win reelection safely.

\u201cDON BOLDUC: Under Joe Biden and Maggie Hassan, \u201cyou can\u2019t even buy a house, you can\u2019t even rent property, you can\u2019t even feed your children, you can\u2019t even heat your home. That is the ultimate tax.\u201d #NHSen\u201d
— RNC Research (@RNC Research) 1667437347

Transportation Sec. Pete Buttigieg has been 'MIA' during supply chain crisis — because he has been on paternity leave for two months



The United States has been facing a supply chain crisis for months, and things are reaching a head as companies are warning Americans that Christmas could be tough this year.

The issue is part of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg's portfolio, yet, as Politico reported Thursday, the secretary "has been MIA" as the crisis has grown.

Turns out, Buttigieg has been out of the office on paternity leave since mid-August.

What's that now?

Supply shortages and rising prices are threatening the U.S. economy, and analysts are warning that the Christmas season could be significantly hampered.

President Joe Biden this week announced a deal with officials and union leaders and workers in Los Angeles to try to ease supply chain disruptions by addressing the bottleneck of container ships off the coast of California that is plaguing operations. The deal will keep L.A. ports open 24/7, but experts told Reuters this week that the deal is too little, too late to fix the issue by Christmas.

The person who is supposed to be dealing with the situation — Secretary Buttigieg — has been missing in action. And Politico took note:

While U.S. ports faced anchor-to-anchor traffic and Congress nearly melted down over the president's infrastructure bill in recent weeks, the usually omnipresent Transportation secretary was lying low.

One of the White House's go-to communicators didn't appear on TV. He was absent on Capitol Hill during the negotiations over the bill he had been previously helping sell to different members of Congress. Conservative critics tried (unsuccessfully) to get #WheresPete to trend and Fox News ran a story on October 4 with the headline: “Buttigieg quiet on growing port congestion as shipping concerns build ahead of holidays."

Where has he been? Turns out that he has been on paid paternity leave since the middle of August "to spend time with his husband, Chasten, and their two newborn babies," Politico reported, and the White House didn't previously announce it.

"For the first four weeks, he was mostly offline except for major agency decisions and matters that could not be delegated," a Transportation Department spokesman told the outlet. “He has been ramping up activities since then."

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey pointed out that this was a strange move for someone in a Cabinet post.

"Since when have Cabinet secretaries taken months off at a time for parental leave?" Morrissey asked. "Since now, apparently, even when crises brew within their portfolio. After all, Cabinet officials do not formally fall under the federal family leave system, and for good reason. Those positions are considered too critical for the operation of government to mandate such lengthy absences."

Politico noted that historically Cabinet secretaries have worked to come back sooner. For example, the outlet noted, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro was off for about a week after his child was born.

The reason Buttigieg's leave stands out as unusual is because, as Morrissey noted, Cabinet secretaries are not eligible for federal paid family leave benefits.

According to the Office of Personnel Management, “Individuals in the executive branch who are appointed by the President to positions in the Executive Schedule are not covered by the leave system. They do not earn leave and serve at the pleasure of the President," Politico said. But, OPM told the outlet, "the President can choose to allow him to take time off."

Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton has been on Buttigieg's case during the crisis and ripped the secretary on Twitter this week, writing, "Pete Buttigieg was completely unqualified to serve as Secretary of Transportation. But Biden still picked him. Now, Pete is absent during a transportation crisis that is hurting working-class Americans."

Pete Buttigieg was completely unqualified to serve as Secretary of Transportation. But Biden still picked him.Now… https://t.co/wjwyScuiFy

— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) 1633969320.0

Cotton went on Fox News on Thursday night to continue his attack on Buttigieg and the administration's handling of the crisis.

"Who's going to save Christmas for Americans? Pete Buttigieg?" the senator asked. "I mean, please. Pete Buttigieg couldn't organize a one-car funeral. He's not going to organize our nation's ports and roads and highways and airports."

Tom Cotton: Pete Buttigieg couldn't organize a one car funeral www.youtube.com

Obama's ethics chief eviscerates White House for reportedly devising art scheme to sell Hunter Biden paintings to secret buyers for as much as $500K



Art is a big business. Worldwide sales of art and antiques reached an estimated $64.1 billion in 2019, according to the Art Basel and UBS Global Art Market Report. One of the more curious artists to begin selling their artwork is Hunter Biden. The son of President Joe Biden is selling his artwork for potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars presents a potential headache for the White House.

The Biden administration reportedly stepped in and helped broker a deal that would allow a purchaser of Hunter's artwork to remain anonymous, which has concerned many over the possibility of bribery and money being exchanged for influence. One of the critics who slammed this alleged secret selling situation is Walter Shaub, former President Barack Obama's onetime ethics chief.

Hunter's art dealer is Georges Berges, who "plans to host a private viewing for Biden in Los Angeles this fall, followed by an exhibition in New York," according to Artnet. "Prices range from $75,000 for works on paper to $500,000 for large-scale paintings."

Shaub told Fox News that Hunter's art deal is "the opposite of government ethics." In effect, the Biden administration got the "art dealer to promise not to give us the means to monitor whether the buyers are getting preferential access to government" by keeping buyers anonymous, according to Shaub.

"Nobody ever said secrecy was the best disinfectant, but that's what we have now. And White House officials getting involved in any way other than to request transparency amounts to effectively putting an official stamp of approval on the president's son trading on his father's public service," Shaub said. "Instead, the president should be begging his son not to go through with this sale, even if that means threatening to banish him from the family's Thanksgiving table this fall and publicly condemning his actions."

"The idea's that even Hunter won't know, but the WH has outsourced government ethics to a private art dealer," Shaub wrote on Twitter. "We're supposed to trust a merchant in an industry that's fertile ground for money laundering, as well as unknown buyers who could tell Hunter or WH officials? No thanks. Is this amateur hour for government ethics?"

The former Office of Government Ethics director emphasized, "The WH has put its stamp of approval on the president's son profiting off his father's public service again."

"Yeah yeah, I know some folks aren't going to like this thread because we're not supposed to criticize the president who's way better than the ethical disaster named Trump," Shaub explained. "But, you know what? With democracy on the ropes, ethics has never been more important. And this ain't it."

Richard Painter, who was a top ethics official in the George W. Bush administration, told the Washington Post, "The whole thing is a really bad idea."

"The initial reaction a lot of people are going to have is that he's capitalizing on being the son of a president and wants people to give him a lot of money," Painter said. "I mean, those are awfully high prices."

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) pointed out some potential issues with Hunter selling expensive art to unknown entities, "Some very tough ethical questions about whether the president's son, who is still investing in CCP-linked firms, should take $500,000 in payment (bribes) for his 'artwork.' Better consult the experts on this one!"

Some very tough ethical questions about whether the president's son, who is still investing in CCP-linked firms, sh… https://t.co/EbBOxYytgJ

— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) 1625757199.0

White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates said Hunter had done nothing wrong with his new business endeavor.

"The president has established the highest ethical standards of any administration in American history, and his family's commitment to rigorous processes like this is a prime example," Bates responded to the criticism.

A bipartisan Senate investigation released last July alleges that the art industry is "largely unregulated," and "uncovered a complex set of facts involving shell companies with hidden owners, intermediaries who mask purchasers and sellers, and lax money laundering safeguards in the U.S. art industry."

"There is a lack of transparency in private art sales," the 150-page congressional report states. "As such, Congress should add high-value art to the list of industries that must comply with BSA requirements. Given the intrinsic secrecy of the art industry, it is clear that change is needed in this multi-billion-dollar industry."

The report alleges that "certain Russian oligarchs appear to have used transactions involving high-value art to evade sanctions imposed on them by the United States on March 20, 2014, in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea."

Last month, Shaub blasted President Biden for allowing children and relatives of powerful administration officials to be hired for key government positions.

"[T]his royally sucks. I'm disgusted," Shaub said in June. "A lot of us worked hard to tee him up to restore ethics to government and believed the promises. This is a real 'f*** you' to us—and government ethics."

Georges Berges describes Hunter Biden's jump into art:

Biden has been a lifelong artist that has devoted his artistic career to both the written word and the visual arts. A lawyer by trade who now devotes his life to the creative arts - he brings a myriad of experiences creating powerful and impactful pieces of art. Biden's paintings range from photographic mix-media to abstract works on canvas, yupo paper, wood and metal. He incorporates oil, acrylic, ink and the written word within his work to create a distinctively unique experience that have become signature Biden.

Artnet notes that some of Biden's artwork are "geometric abstractions, filled with patterns and somewhat hallucinogenic."

Hunter admitted in February 2020, "For years I wouldn't call myself an artist," but, "Now I feel comfortable saying it."

"I don't paint from emotion or feeling, which I think are both very ephemeral," Biden said. "For me, painting is much more about kind of trying to bring forth what is, I think, the universal truth."

When asked what President Joe Biden thinks of his art, Hunter responded, "My dad loves everything that I do, and so, I'll leave it at that."

Joe Biden's nominee to head ATF suggests 'assault weapons' ban would cover much more than AR-15s



President Joe Biden's radically pro-gun control nominee to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and Explosives confirmed Wednesday, when pressed by Republican senators, that he supports a ban on a wide range of so-called "assault-style weapons," which include more rifles than just an AR-15.

David Chipman, a longtime gun control lobbyist with more than two decades experience working for ATF, faced questions from several Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans on his views on guns, admitting to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) that he supports a ban on AR-15 rifles and would enforce such a ban if Congress were to legislate one.

"Mr. Chipman, a minute ago Sen. Whitehouse asked you if any of your views on guns are out of step with a majority of the American people. The AR-15 is one of, if not the most popular rifle in America. It's not a machine gun, it's a rifle. Your public position is that you want to ban AR-15s, is that correct?" Cruz asked.

"With respect to the AR-15, I support a ban," Chipman answered. "The AR-15 is a gun I was issued on ATF's S.W.A.T team and it's a particularly lethal weapon and regulating it as other particularly lethal weapons, I have advocated for."

WATCH: Sen. Ted Cruz gets Joe Biden’s ATF Director nominee David Chipman to admit that he wants to BAN the AR-15, t… https://t.co/uJEXYyAe4P

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) 1622045403.0

Chipman works as a senior policy adviser at Giffords, a gun control advocacy group let by former Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords, who was severely injured in a shooting attack in 2011. In that capacity, he has advocated for limits on high-capacity magazines and a federal assault weapons ban.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and others pressed Chipman to define the term "assault weapons," which some gun control proponents with limited knowledge of firearms have come to use as a catch-all phrase to describe guns they don't like.

Cotton wanted specifics, asking, "What is an assault weapon?"

"Senator, an assault weapon would be — in the context of the question you asked — what Congress defines it as," Chipman answered in an attempt to dodge the question.

"So you're asking us to ban assault weapons, we have to write legislation, can you tell me what is an assault weapon? How would you define it if you were the head of the ATF?" Cotton pressed.

Senator @TomCottonAR asks Biden's ATF nominee David Chipman to define an "assault weapon":"Any semi-automatic rif… https://t.co/LeXDkUYrAQ

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) 1622047832.0

Chipman eventually cited the ATF to define an assault rifle as "any semi-automatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine above the caliber of .22."

"I"m amazed that might be the definition of an assault weapon," Cotton said. "That would basically cover every single modern sporting rifle in America today."