National issues such as abortion and schools have taken center stage in the tight governor’s race in Virginia as the candidates spend millions on television advertising. 

The commonwealth’s competitive race for governor is viewed by many as a harbinger of what’s to come in the 2022 midterms, and the race is already proving to be a testing ground for some of the biggest national issues that could influence next year’s elections.

Former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe and Republican Glen Youngkin have spent a hefty total of $47 million on campaign ads that tout their candidacy or take jabs at the other for their stances on local and national issues. 

McAuliffe has been outspending his Republican opponent at $25 million to $22 million on TV, radio and online ads, according to data obtained from CNBC from AdImpact. These ads make up over half of McAuliffe’s $44.4 million and Youngkin’s $42.2 million in total campaign spending.

Their most expensive and most aired television ads are about two highly contentious issues sitting at the forefront of national politics, according to AdImpact. This includes abortion, which comes amid Texas’ new law that bans the procedure as early as six weeks into pregnancy, and schools amid national debates on curriculum and mask mandates. 

Abortion rights

While there is no law in place restricting abortion rights in Virginia, McAuliffe’s campaign has seized on Youngkin’s open opposition to abortion as a threat to a woman’s right to choose. 

Youngkin’s stance contrasts McAuliffe’s promise to be a “brick wall” against any legislation that would limit abortion access. 

Three of McAuliffe’s most expensive ads, which cost from $510,000 to $922,000 to produce and run, have attacked Youngkin for his abortion stance. They are among the former governor’s most aired ads on broadcast or cable television, with each airing over 1,100 times, according to AdImpact data. 

The most expensive out of the three is a minute-long ad that includes a hidden-camera video showing Youngkin’s response to a question about defunding planned parenthood and banning abortion. 

Youngkin said he can’t fully discuss his stance on abortion as it could risk losing “independent votes,” but pledged to go “on offense” to ban abortion if he becomes governor and Republicans win a majority in the House of Representatives. 

The video characterized Youngkin’s remarks as “admitting his far-right agenda.” 

Another ad includes a video from the first gubernatorial debate where Youngkin was asked if he supports including a right to abortion in Virginia’s constitution, to which he said, “No, I do not.” 

The ad also said the Supreme Court would likely overturn Roe v. Wade, which would return the issue of abortion to the jurisdiction of the states, as it was before the Roe decision. If Youngkin were elected, the ad argues, he would effectively ban all abortions in Virginia. 

A poll released Wednesday from Monmouth University shows that 17% of likely voters in Virginia see abortion as one of the most important issues in deciding their vote for governor. In terms of which candidate would handle abortion better, voters are evenly drawn. 

About 35% said McAuliffe would handle it better while 33% said Youngkin would. 

School controversies

Youngkin’s campaign has seen schools as a pathway to victory amid a crusade against mask mandates and critical race theory. 

The Republican candidate’s campaign has slammed McAuliffe for opposing parental control over public-school curriculum in particular. Three of Youngkin’s most expensive television ads attack McAuliffe for this stance, and have been aired up to 4,200 times. 

One of Youngkin’s most expensive ads, which cost approximately $1.5 million to produce and air, includes a clip from the first gubernatorial debate where McAuliffe expressed that he does not think parents should decide what schools should teach. 

“I’m not going to let parents come into schools and take books out and make their own decision,” McAuliffe said. His comment during the debate came after an argument between the two candidates over a veto McAuliffe signed as governor of legislation that allowed parents to opt out of allowing their children to study material deemed sexually explicit. 

The ad characterized McAuliffe as “putting politics over parents” and “failing our kids.” 

Another ad of Youngkin uses the same video of McAuliffe from the first gubernatorial debate, calling his stance on parental control “wrong.” It also touts Youngkin’s own efforts, which includes his plan to create 20 “innovation schools” to “empower parents with educational choice.”

“I’ll always stand up for Virginia’s parents,” Youngkin said in the ad. 

The Monmouth University poll shows that 41% of likely voters in Virginia see schools and education as one of the most important issues in deciding their vote for governor. 

In terms of which candidate would handle schools and education better, Youngkin has a narrow one percentage point lead. 

Approximately 39% said Youngkin would handle it better while 38% said McAuliffe would. 

Other fault lines 

Other national and local issues play central roles in both candidate’s television ads. 

For instance, many of Youngkin’s ads either attack McAuliffe for pushing for police reform or Virginia’s high crime rates when he served as governor. And several of McAuliffe’s ads attack Youngkin for opposing vaccine mandates. 

About 25% of McAuliffe’s television ads also link Youngkin to former President Donald Trump, who has endorsed the Republican candidate. The ads focus on their overlapping stances on Covid-19, election integrity and education. 

Overall, roughly 75% of McAuliffe’s television ads include attacks on his GOP opponent. 

Youngkin has a more of a mix of positive and negative ads, including biographical ads that underscore his business-approach to politics due to his 25 years of experience as a former CEO of the Carlyle Group

With Virginia’s Election Day just under two weeks away, both candidates are likely to ratchet up their campaign advertising to motivate their partisan bases.

The Monmouth University poll found the candidate’s neck and neck with support among likely voters identical at 46%. And the disparity in enthusiasm between supporters of Youngkin and McAuliffe has grown to a 23 percentage point gap in the poll, at 49% to 26%.

“The next two weeks will see a lot more mobilization, continual appeals for turnout and nonstop commercial ads from the two candidates,” said Karen Hult, a political science professor at Virginia Tech.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/22/virginia-governors-race-abortion-schools-take-center-stage-in-election-ad-wars-.html

Hours before actor Alec Baldwin fatally shot a cinematographer on the New Mexico set of “Rust” with a prop gun, a half-dozen camera crew workers walked off the set to protest working conditions.

The camera operators and their assistants were frustrated by the conditions surrounding the low-budget film, including complaints about long hours, long commutes and collecting their paychecks, according to three people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment.

Safety protocols standard in the industry, including gun inspections, were not strictly followed on the “Rust” set near Santa Fe, the sources said. They said at least one of the camera operators complained last weekend to a production manager about gun safety on the set.

Three crew members who were present at the Bonanza Creek Ranch set that day said they were particularly concerned about two accidental prop gun discharges on Saturday.

Baldwin’s stunt-double accidentally fired two rounds Saturday after being told that the gun was “cold” — lingo for a weapon that doesn’t have any ammunition, including blanks, two crew members who witnessed the episode told the Los Angeles Times.

“There should have been an investigation into what happened,” said the crew member. “There were no safety meetings. There was no assurance that it wouldn’t happen again. All they wanted to do was rush, rush, rush.”

A colleague was so alarmed by the prop gun misfires he sent a text message to the unit production manager. “We’ve now had 3 accidental discharges. This is super unsafe,” according to a copy of the message reviewed by the Times.

“The safety of our cast and crew is the top priority of Rust Productions and everyone associated with the company, ” Rust Movie Productions LLC said in a statement. “Though we were not made aware of any official complaints concerning weapon or prop safety on set, we will be conducting an internal review of our procedures while production is shut down. We will continue to cooperate with the Santa Fe authorities in their investigation and offer mental health services to the cast and crew during this tragic time.”

The tragedy occurred Thursday afternoon during filming of a gunfight that began in a church that is part of the old Western town at the ranch.
Baldwin’s character was supposed to back out of the church, according to production notes obtained by The Times. It was the 12th day of a 21-day shoot.

Hutchins was huddled around a monitor lining up her next camera shot when she was accidentally killed by Baldwin.

The actor was preparing to film a scene in which he pulls a gun out of a holster, according to a source close to the production. Crew members had already shouted “cold gun” on the New Mexico set. The filmmaking team was lining up its camera angles and had yet to retreat to the video village, an on-set area where crew gathers to watch filming from a distance via a monitor.

Instead, the B-camera operator was on a dolly with a monitor, checking out the potential shots. Hutchins was also looking at the monitor from over the operator’s shoulder, as was the movie’s director, Joel Souza, who was crouching just behind her.

Baldwin removed the gun from its holster once without incident, but the second time he repeated the action, ammunition flew toward the trio around the monitor. The projectile whizzed by the camera operator but penetrated Hutchins near her shoulder, then continued through to Souza. Hutchins immediately fell to the ground as crew members applied pressure to her wound in an attempt to stop the bleeding.

Earlier in the day, the camera crew showed up for work as expected at 6:30 a.m. and began gathering up their gear and personal belongings to leave, one knowledgeable crew member told The Times.

Labor trouble had been brewing for days on the dusty set at the Bonanza Creek Ranch near Santa Fe.

Shooting began on Oct. 6 and members of the low-budget film said they had been promised the production would pay for their hotel rooms in Santa Fe.

Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer killed on set of an Alec Baldwin movie, was going to be ‘very famous,’ a director who worked with her said.

But after filming began, the crews were told they instead would be required to make the 50-mile drive from Albuquerque each day, rather than stay overnight in nearby Santa Fe. That rankled crew members who worried that they might have an accident after spending 12 to 13 hours on the set.

The cinematographer who was accidentally killed, Halyna Hutchins, had been advocating for safer conditions for her team, said one crew member who was on the set and was tearful when the camera crew left.

“She said, ‘I feel like I’m losing my best friends,’” recalled one of the workers.

As the camera crew — members of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees — spent about an hour assembling their gear at the Bonanza Creek Ranch, several nonunion crew members showed up to replace them, two of the knowledgeable people said.

One of the producers ordered the union members to leave the set and threatened to call security to remove them if they didn’t leave voluntarily.

“Corners were being cut — and they brought in nonunion people so they could continue shooting,” the knowledgeable person said.

The shooting occurred about six hours after the union camera crew left.

Baldwin, the film’s star who also served as a producer on the film, was apparently rehearsing a scene outside the church of the Bonzana Creek Ranch set, according to two knowledgeable people.

Cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, one of American Cinematographer’s Rising Stars, was killed on the set of ‘Rust.’ Here’s everything we know so far.

The Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office said deputies were dispatched to the Bonanza Creek Ranch movie set, where filming was underway for the western “Rust,” after calls to 911 at 1:50 p.m. Baldwin was starring in the movie in addition to serving as one of the producers.

No charges have been filed, but the Sheriff’s Office said that “witnesses continue to be interviewed by detectives.”

Baldwin said Friday he’s “fully cooperating with the police investigation” into the incident.

“There are no words to convey my shock and sadness regarding the tragic accident that took the life of Halyna Hutchins, a wife, mother and deeply admired colleague of ours,” Baldwin wrote Friday in a series of tweets.

Production has been halted on the low-budget movie, which began filming this month.

In an email to its members, Local 44 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, a union that represents prop masters, said the shot that killed Hutchins and injured director Joel Souza on Thursday was “a live single round.”

‘Rust’ star and producer Alec Baldwin, who fired a weapon that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, addressed the incident Friday via Twitter.

“As many of us have already heard, there was an accidental weapons discharge on a production titled Rust being filmed in New Mexico,” said the North Hollywood-based local. “A live single round was accidentally fired on set by the principal actor, hitting both the Director of Photography, Local 600 member Halyna Hutchins, and Director Joel Souza. Both were rushed to the hospital,” the email said.

A source close to union said Local 44 does not know what projectile was in the gun and clarified that “live” is an industry term that refers to a gun being loaded with some material such as a blank ready for filming.

Bonanza Creek Ranch has been a popular filming location for more than 60 years. The first movie to film there was “The Man From Laramie,” starring Jimmy Stewart. It also was the set for the classic “Blazing Saddles,” “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” and the popular TV show “Longmire.”

One of the financiers for “Rust” is Santa Monica-based lender BondIt Media Capital, founded in 2013 by Matthew Helderman and Luke Taylor. According to its website, BondIt finances movies through instruments including gaps loans, bridge loans and tax credit financing.

The company has primarily financed low-budget movies including the Bruce Willis actioner “Hard Kill,” the Charlotte Kirk horror flick “The Reckoning” and the upcoming Robert De Niro film “Wash Me In the River,” directed by Randall Emmett.

BondIt was particularly active during the COVID-19 pandemic, stepping in to fill financing gaps as independent producers struggled to find backing for films during the public health crisis.

Staff writers Amy Kaufman, Wendy Lee, Anousha Sakoui and Richard Winton contributed to this report.

The term “prop gun” includes a variety of weapons, including nonfunctioning guns and cap guns, but also real guns firing blank cartridges, which can pack a punch — and result in death.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

Lev Parnas leaves federal court, in New York on Friday. A New York jury convicted Parnas, a former associate of Rudy Giuliani, of charges that he made illegal campaign contributions to influence U.S. politicians and advance his business interests.

Richard Drew/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Richard Drew/AP

Lev Parnas leaves federal court, in New York on Friday. A New York jury convicted Parnas, a former associate of Rudy Giuliani, of charges that he made illegal campaign contributions to influence U.S. politicians and advance his business interests.

Richard Drew/AP

NEW YORK — A New York jury convicted a former associate of Rudy Giuliani on Friday of charges that he made illegal campaign contributions to influence U.S. politicians and advance his business interests.

The verdict was returned in Manhattan federal court, where Lev Parnas was on trial for more than two weeks as prosecutors accused him of using other people’s money to pose as a powerful political broker and cozy up to some of the nation’s star Republican political figures.

One part of the case alleged that Parnas and an associate made illegal donations through a corporate entity to Republican political committees in 2018, including a $325,000 donation to America First Action, a super PAC supporting former President Donald Trump.

Another part said he used the wealth of a Russian financier, Andrey Muraviev, to make donations to U.S. politicians, ostensibly in support of an effort to launch a legal, recreational marijuana business.

Parnas, 49, was convicted on all counts after about five hours of jury deliberations.

The Soviet-born Florida businessman had insisted through his lawyer that he never used the Russian’s money for political donations. He briefly closed his eyes and shook his head as the verdict was read.

Outside the courtroom after the verdict, Parnas said, “I’ve never hid from nobody. I’ve always stood to tell the truth.”

A co-defendant, Ukraine-born investor Andrey Kukushkin, was convicted of being part of the effort to use Muraviev’s money for political contributions. He had also denied any wrongdoing.

The case had drawn interest because of the deep involvement of Parnas and a former co-defendant, Igor Fruman, in Giuliani’s efforts to get Ukrainian officials to investigate Joe Biden’s son during Biden’s campaign for president.

Giuliani’s company and attorney didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the verdict.

Giuliani remains under criminal investigation as authorities decide whether his interactions with Ukraine officials required him to register as a foreign agent, but he wasn’t alleged to have been involved in illegal campaign contributions and wasn’t part of the New York trial.

The case did, though, give an up-close look at how Parnas entered Republican circles in 2018 with a pattern of campaign donations big enough to get him meetings with the party’s stars.

“In order to gain influence with American politicians and candidates, they illegally funneled foreign money into the 2018 midterm elections with an eye toward making huge profits in the cannabis business,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement following the verdict. “Campaign finance laws are designed to protect the integrity of our free and fair elections – unencumbered by foreign interests or influence – and safeguarding those laws is essential to preserving the freedoms that Americans hold sacred.”

In addition to the $325,000 donation to America First Action, made through an energy company, prosecutors said Parnas and Fruman orchestrated donations to U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, of Texas, and to other committees supporting House Republicans.

Giuliani and Trump were sparsely mentioned during the trial, although a photograph featuring Parnas with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, was one of the first exhibits shown to jurors during closing arguments and a video of Giuliani with Parnas was among exhibits jurors could view during deliberations.

DeSantis was among those who received campaign contributions that prosecutors said were traced to $1 million that Parnas and Fruman received from Muraviev, who has been involved in several U.S. cannabis ventures.

About $100,000 of Muraviev’s money went toward campaign contributions in what Assistant U.S. Attorney Hagan Scotten called a conspiracy to secretly bring his “wealth and corruption into American politics” in violation of laws barring foreign donations to U.S. political candidates.

“The voters would never know whose money was pouring into our elections,” Scotten said.

Former Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt, now a candidate for U.S. Senate, testified during the trial that a blustering Parnas suggested he could raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for him in 2018. He eventually came through only with a $10,000 check that Laxalt’s lawyers told him to reject.

Joseph Bondy, a lawyer for Parnas, had called the allegations against his client “absurd.”

He insisted in his closing argument that Muraviev’s money went toward supporting legal marijuana businesses looking to expand.

Kukushkin’s lawyer, Gerald Lefcourt, sought to portray his client as an unknowing dupe in the scheme, who was mocked behind his back by other participants as mentally challenged.

Following the verdict, prosecutors asked for immediate incarceration of Parnas and Kukushkin, citing a risk of flight, but the judge allowed them to remain free on bail while awaiting sentencing.

The charges against Parnas collectively carry the potential for decades behind bars, but any prison sentence would likely be measured in years, rather than decades.

Fruman pleaded guilty earlier this year to a single count of solicitation of a contribution by a foreign national. He awaits sentencing.

Another co-defendant, David Correia, also pleaded guilty and has been sentenced to a year in prison for crimes including defrauding investors in an insurance company that had paid Giuliani a $500,000 consulting fee.

Parnas awaits a second trial in connection with that scheme.

Giuliani has insisted that he knew nothing about potentially illegal campaign contributions by either Parnas or Fruman. The former mayor says everything he did in Ukraine was done on Trump’s behalf and there is no reason he would have had to register as a foreign agent.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/10/22/1048523571/lev-parnas-rudy-giuliani-campaign-finance-convicted

Pamelina Williams, 22, a student at the Milwaukee Area Technical College in Wisconsin, said she would like to transfer to a four-year college, but is not sure she can afford to. Having her tuition waived for now would make her “more inclined” to continue her education, she said.

“It would make it a lot easier for me to do that,” said Ms. Williams, a fellow with Rise, an organization that advocates for free community college.

A recent estimate from the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center found that community colleges were the hardest hit among all higher-education institutions, with enrollment dropping by 9.5 percent this spring. More than 65 percent of the total undergraduate enrollment losses in the spring occurred at community colleges, according to the report.

Celeste K. Carruthers, an associate professor of economics at the University of Tennessee, said that research on community colleges had shown that waiving tuition would most likely increase enrollment, as well as wages for people who completed their degrees.

Dr. Carruthers and her colleagues tracked the performances of students who were eligible for Knox Achieves, a program that provided free community college to any high school graduate in Knox County, Tenn., and found that eligibility for the program led to higher completion rates at two-year community colleges. It also led to significantly higher wages for as long as seven years after high school, according to the study.

Riley Acton, an assistant professor of economics at Miami University in Ohio who has studied community colleges, said waiving tuition across the board would make it easier for students to decide to attend community college. Many face barriers in applying for financial aid, given the complexities of the process.

“It’s not always made immediately clear to students that yes, that’s the advertised tuition rate, but if you fill out these forms and apply for these programs, that rate could be reduced,” Dr. Acton said.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/us/politics/free-community-college-democrats.html

Over the past year, there was a significant jump in the number of migrants — mostly families — from Brazil, which has been in the grips of the worst Covid crisis in South America. More migrants also arrived from Venezuela, Nicaragua and India, among many others.

Southern border apprehensions previously reached such high levels in the late 1990s, peaking in 2000, when many migrants who entered the country unlawfully were drawn to jobs in construction, food processing and restaurants.

As in the past year, most of those who entered were single adults from Mexico. Many of them tried more than once to sneak into the country, usually until they succeeded, because they did not face significant legal consequences, said Jessica Bolter, an analyst with the Migration Policy Institute. She added that there were “lots of incentives for migrants to try to cross over and over.”

When the Trump administration first invoked the current public health rule, known as Title 42, officials said it was needed to avoid the spread of the coronavirus in the United States. But it has had the unintended consequence of encouraging hundreds of thousands of desperate people to make repeated attempts to enter the country. Many of those subjected to the rule are expeditiously returned to Mexico, often by bus, only to try again a few days later.

Before the public health rule was put in place at the beginning of the pandemic, migrants caught entering the country without authorization could be criminally prosecuted and detained for months.

In September, about 25 percent of the arrests were of repeat crossers.

The high rate of recidivism suggests the majority of border crossers in recent years have been caught, which was not the case during previous peaks. The number of Border Patrol agents has increased substantially in the last decade, and technology like heat sensors, cameras and drones makes it difficult to evade capture.

“There were not nearly as many agents, they had little technology, and there were a lot of easy places to cross,” said Jeff Passel, a demographer at the nonpartisan Pew Research Center who studies the population of those who enter without authorization. “Data shows the Border Patrol now catch almost everybody who tries to cross illegally.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/us/politics/border-crossings-immigration-record-high.html

More than a month before authorities found the decomposed remains of Florida fugitive Brian Laundrie in a swamp near his home, he allegedly slipped away from his parents’ house under the guise of a hike.

That was on Sept. 13, two days after Laundrie’s fiancée, Gabby Petito, was reported missing. His attorney, Steve Bertolino, told Fox News Digital Thursday that he immediately informed the FBI that his client had failed to come home.

However, local police in North Port, Florida, said they thought Laundrie was still inside the house until they knocked on the front door on Sept. 17.

BRIAN LAUNDRIE SEARCH: NO DISCREPANCY BETWEEN FBI AND PARENTS ON MISSING TIMELINE, SAYS FAMILY LAWYER

Brian Laundrie as seen in bodycam footage released by the Moab Police Department in Utah.
(Moab PD)

Bertolino said that after he told the FBI that Laundrie failed to return from the park, he had no further contact with the FBI until they told him Friday about a tip that Laundrie had been seen in Tampa.

But from Tuesday evening to Thursday, neither Laundrie’s parents nor his attorney followed up with the FBI or local authorities about their missing son’s whereabouts.

“There was never any communication between myself and law enforcement in the next three days,” Bertolino told Fox News Digital. “They never asked me, and I never informed them that Brian didn’t come home.”

They also waited until the Friday meeting regarding the Tampa tip to file a missing person report.

BRIAN LAUNDRIE FOUND DEAD, FBI CONFIRMS REMAINS

“North Port PD was under the assumption that Brian was home, and so was the FBI when they got a tip on Friday that Brian was in Tampa, and they wanted to meet with us on Friday,” Bertolino said. “I was shocked and said, ‘That’s good. You found him in Tampa,’ and they said, ‘What do you mean? I thought he’s at the house.’ I said, ‘No, I told you the other day he never came home.'”

(Taylor Bostwick via Storyful)

North Port Police Chief Todd Garrison had said in the middle of that week that he knew exactly where Brian Laundrie was – but he was wrong. 

Speaking to reporters during a news conference on Sept. 16, Garrison was asked if he knew where Laundrie was at that moment.

“Yes,” he replied.

BRIAN LAUNDRIE FAMILY LAWYER ADDRESSES RUMORS PARENTS PLANTED REMAINS

The family made no effort to correct him and showed no public urgency about their son’s whereabouts or well-being — even though Bertolino later told ABC News that Brian’s father, Chris Laundrie, believed his son was “grieving” and upset when he left for the Sept. 13 hike. The public didn’t know Petito was dead until authorities said they found her remains on Sept. 19.

Chris and Roberta Laundrie lead investigators to personal items belonging to their son in the Myakkahatchee Creek Environmental Park Wednesday, Oct. 20, 2021. Police separately found human remains that the FBI later concluded belonged to their fugitive son, Brian Laundrie.
(Michael Ruiz/Fox News Digital)

Bertolino did not immediately respond to a request for clarification about Brian Laundrie’s mental state when he left or what he was “grieving” about.

Laundrie and Petito set off on a cross-country road trip earlier this year in a white Ford Transit van, which they lived out of as they camped at public parks along the way.

BRIAN LAUNDRIE SEARCH: FBI CONFIRMS UNIDENTIFIED HUMAN REMAINS, FUGITIVE’S BACKPACK AND NOTEBOOK FOUND

An FBI-led search found Petito’s remains at a Bridger-Teton National Forest campsite on Sept. 18 north of Jackson, Wyoming. Teton County Coroner Dr. Brent Blue later ruled her death a homicide by manual strangulation – meaning she’d been killed by hand.

A travel-blogging couple known as Red, White and Bethune spotted Petito’s van at the campsite on Aug. 27 – hours after what may have been the last time she was seen alive in public.

That day, Nina Celie Angelo and Matthew England were eating at Merry Piglets in Jackson when they saw Brian Laundrie arguing with restaurant staff, they told Fox News Digital last month.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Laundrie exited and reentered about four times, and Petito apologized to the workers for his behavior, the couple said.

Two weeks before that, witnesses in Moab, Utah, told police they’d seen Brian Laundrie slapping and hitting Petito outside an organic grocery store. He also allegedly threatened to take her phone and drive off without her before police pulled the couple over north of town.

Despite a Utah law requiring arrests or citations to be made in all domestic violence cases, police deemed the matter a “mental health break” and told the couple to spend the night apart. Moab officials later announced an investigation into the officers’ handling of the matter.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/us/brian-laundrie-death-timeline-grieving-hike-vanished

The US supreme court allowed a Texas law that bans the vast majority of abortions to temporarily remain in effect, but will hear arguments on 1 November. The law, known as Senate Bill 8, bans the procedure after roughly six weeks gestation or before most women know they are pregnant.

The justices said they will decide whether the federal government has the right to sue over the law. The court’s action leaves in place, for the time being, a law Texas clinics say has led to an 80% reduction in abortions in the nation’s second-largest state.

The refusal by the court’s conservative majority to block the law while oral arguments are prepared was excoriated by the liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor, who called the decision “cold comfort” to Texas’s 6 million women of reproductive age.

“The court is right to calendar this application for argument … in recognition of the public importance of the issues these cases raise,” wrote Sotomayor. “The promise of future adjudication offers cold comfort, however, for Texas women seeking abortion care.”

In Texas, SB8 has been in effect since September, aside from a district court-ordered pause that lasted 48 hours. It bans abortions once cardiac activity is detected, usually about six weeks.

While courts have blocked other state laws effectively banning abortion before a fetus can survive outside the womb, the Texas law has so far avoided a similar fate because it leaves enforcement up to private citizens, a move that many critics have said effectively creates anti-abortion bounty hunters.

The law allows anyone, anywhere to bring a suit against anyone who helps a woman obtain an abortion, and provides a $10,000 penalty against defendants found to violate the law. Defendants cannot recoup anything if they prevail in court.

The Biden administration, in its final pitch to block Texas’s ban on most abortions, warned the supreme court that none of its decisions would be safe if it allows the Texas law to remain in force.

If the law stays in effect, “no decision of this court is safe. States need not comply with, or even challenge, precedents with which they disagree. They may simply outlaw the exercise of whatever rights they disfavor,” the administration wrote in a brief filed on Friday.

Other state-enforced bans on abortion before the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb have been blocked by courts because they conflict with supreme court precedents.

“Texas should not obtain a different result simply by pairing its unconstitutional law with an unprecedented enforcement scheme designed to evade the traditional mechanisms for judicial review,” the administration wrote.

A day earlier, the state urged the court to leave the law in place, saying the federal government lacked the authority to file its lawsuit challenging the Texas ban.

The justice department filed suit over the law after the supreme court rejected an earlier effort by abortion providers to put the measure on hold temporarily.

In early October, US district judge Robert Pitman ruled for the administration, putting the law on hold and allowing abortions to resume. Two days later, a three-judge panel of the fifth US circuit court of appeals put the law back into effect.

Texas said it opposed the early review by the supreme court, but that if the justices agree to the Biden administration’s request, they also should use this case to directly overrule the Roe and Casey decisions.

The supreme court is already slated to hear arguably the most consequential abortion rights case in decades, a case called Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which challenges Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban and will be heard on 1 December.

The Dobbs case is seen as a direct challenge to Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 case that legalized abortion nationally to the point a fetus can survive outside the womb, generally regarded at 24 weeks gestation. The decision has protected the right to terminate a pregnancy for nearly five decades, including in hostile states which have worked zealously to, once more, make the procedure illegal within their borders.

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/oct/22/supreme-court-texas-abortion-ban-arguments

The deletion of a clean electricity program from a massive budget bill now being negotiated on Capitol Hill weakened the hand of Mr. Biden, who is set to arrive in Glasgow on Nov. 1 for a pivotal U.N. summit where he had hoped to re-establish American leadership on the fight against climate change.

Speaking at a CNN Town Hall on Thursday night, Mr. Biden pledged that when he arrives in Scotland, “I’m presenting a commitment to the world that we will in fact get to net zero emissions on electric power by 2035 and net zero emissions across the board by 2050 or before, but we have to do so much, between now and 2030, to demonstrate what we’re going to do to get there.”

Accompanying the president to Scotland, in addition to a significant portion of his Cabinet, will be Mr. Biden’s top climate change advisers, John Kerry and Gina McCarthy, both veterans of the Obama administration. During that administration, Mr. Kerry and Ms. McCarthy traveled to multiple international climate negotiations, where Mr. Kerry promised that the United States would pass a tough climate law, which it never did, and Ms. McCarthy detailed tough pollution rules governing smokestacks and power plants, which were enacted but then rolled back by the Trump administration.

Mr. Biden is likely to present his Plan B to a skeptical audience in Glasgow.

“Biden has been forceful with what he says on climate change,” said Laurence Tubiana, France’s former climate change ambassador who is now the chief executive of the European Climate Foundation. “But credibility is a problem. There will still be a question mark — how can he deliver?”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/climate/biden-climate-plan.html

  • The Laundrie family’s lawyer pushed back on speculation about how Brian’s remains were found.
  • He said Brian’s parents had advised authorities where to look shortly before the remains were found.
  • The idea that his parents had known where the remains were is “not too bright,” the lawyer said.

The lawyer for Brian Laundrie’s family vehemently rebutted speculation about the circumstances in which the 23-year-old’s remains were found, saying that “the public doesn’t understand simplicity.”

Laundrie’s remains were found on Wednesday in Florida’s Carlton Reserve, the FBI said on Thursday, concluding a five-week search in the vast nature reserve.

He had been missing since mid-September, when he went for a hike in the reserve, his parents said. They initially said he went missing on September 14 but later said he vanished on September 13.

The FBI had named Laundrie a person of interest in the killing of his fiancée, Gabby Petito, whose remains were found near a Wyoming campsite on September 19. Her death was ruled a homicide, and a coroner said the cause of death was strangulation.

The couple had embarked on a joint cross-country “van life” road trip in the summer. Petito’s family reported her missing 10 days after Laundrie returned alone to their home in Florida on September 1.

Laundrie’s refusal to help authorities in the search for Petito fueled widespread outrage and speculation about her death. There’s also been speculation about how the search for Laundrie ended shortly after his parents got involved.

A lawyer for the Laundrie family, Steven Bertolino, told Insider’s Azmi Haroun and Natalie Musumeci that Laundrie’s parents, Chris and Roberta, had “advised” authorities where to look when they joined the search on Wednesday.

Bertolino was visibly frustrated while speaking to NewsNation’s Marni Hughes on Thursday night.

“It’s not about knowing specifically where to go,” he told Hughes, saying the logic was simply to “start at the beginning” of the trailhead.

Teams with police officers, FBI agents, and a cadaver-sniffing dog had already searched that area. The police in North Port had also used airboats and ATVs in the search, the local CBS affiliate WINK News reported.

Authorities in North Port posted a video of the search on YouTube:

But the area where Laundrie’s remains were found had been underwater in September, Michael McPherson, an FBI special agent, said at a press conference on Wednesday.

A tweet on September 24 from Josh Taylor, the North Port public-information officer, illustrated the flooding in the reserve:

Bertolino said on Thursday that after the flooding receded, Chris Laundrie was able to find a white bag belonging to his son, leading authorities to Brian’s remains nearby.

Kyle Heyen, a K-9 handler and former police officer, questioned this, telling NewsNation on Wednesday that it was “highly suspicious” that a dog would have missed the remains.

“If the body had been there, when they went by with cadaver dogs, and the body had been there for more than two or three minutes, the odor would have come through the water,” Heyen said.

Bertolino was visibly frustrated when Hughes pressed him on Thursday on the finding. “It just so happened that that’s where Brian was,” he said. “So my thought would be anybody who’s questioning that is not too bright.”

He added, “The public doesn’t understand simplicity.”

Addressing rumors on social media that the Laundries could have planted the remains, Bertolino said that the FBI, the police, and journalists had seen the find.

“When do you think these items were planted? And do you really think the Laundries had skeletal remains of their son in a plastic bag and brought them to the preserve?” he said.

He added, “If I’m the only one who has to say that this is hogwash, because I didn’t want to say the word ‘bullshit,’ then I’m going to say it: It’s bullshit.”

Source Article from https://www.insider.com/brian-laundrie-family-lawyer-addresses-speculation-over-his-remains-2021-10

The White House clarified a number of statements President Biden made during a live town hall Thursday night, walking back his vow to call in the National Guard to aid the congested supply chain and his suggestion that the United States would defend Taiwan from a potential attack from China.

The White House told Fox News on Friday that “requesting the use of the national guard at the state level is under the purview of Governors.” 

AFTER BIDEN SAYS US WOULD DEFEND TAIWAN FROM ATTACK, CHINA SAYS THERE’S ‘NO ROOM FOR COMPROMISE’

“We are not actively pursuing the use of the national guard on a federal level,” a White House official told Fox News. 

The clarification came after the president, during a CNN town hall hosted by Anderson Cooper Thursday night, was asked if he would consider having National Guardsmen drive trucks to make up for the lack of truck drivers amid the fallout from the coronavirus pandemic. 

President Biden participates in a CNN town hall at the Baltimore Center Stage Pearlstone Theater, Thursday, Oct. 21, 2021, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
(AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Biden said he would, and that he had a timetable to solve the crisis. 

“I had a timetable for, first of all, I want to get the ports up and running,” the president said, noting the commitments he had from Walmart and other companies, like UPS and FedEx, to run 24/7 operations to help quell the congested supply chain. 

When pressed further on whether he would want the National Guard to drive trucks, the president replied: “The answer is yes, if we can’t move to increase the number of truckers, which we’re in the process of doing.” 

Shifting to foreign policy, the president was asked by a member of the audience about China’s recent testing of a hypersonic missile and questioned him about whether the United States would defend Taiwan in the wake of an attack from Beijing. 

“China, Russia, and the rest of the world knows we have the most powerful military in the history of the world. Don’t worry about whether we’re going to – they’re going to be more powerful,” Biden said in the CNN town hall. “What you do have to worry about is whether or not they’re going to engage in activities that will put them in a position where they may make a serious mistake.”

Biden added that he does “not want a Cold War with China.” 

“I just want to make China understand that we are not going to step back, we are not going to change any of our views,” Biden said. 

Cooper chimed in, pressing again on whether the U.S. would defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack, to which Biden replied: “Yes, we have a commitment to do that.” 

By Friday morning, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson responded to the comment via the Chinese state-affiliated Global Times. 

“No one should underestimate the strong resolve, determination and capability of the Chinese people to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the spokesperson said, according to the mouthpiece for the brutal communist regime. “China has no room for compromise.”

WHITE HOUSE WALKS BACK BIDEN VOW TO USE NATIONAL GUARD TO UNTANGLE SUPPLY CHAIN

The Global Times added that China’s foreign ministry told the U.S. to “be cautious in words and deeds” and to “refrain from sending any wrong signal to secessionists.” 

But a White House spokesperson on Friday told Fox News that the president “was not announcing any change in our policy.” 

“There is no change in our policy,” the spokesperson told Fox News. “The U.S. defense relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act.” 

“We will uphold our commitment under the Act, we will continue to support Taiwan’s self-defense, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,” the spokesperson added. 

The Taiwan Relations Act to which the United States is a party does not guarantee the U.S. will engage militarily if China attacks Taiwan, which it has claimed for decades is sovereign Chinese territory, but states that the United States “will make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain self-sufficient defense capabilities.”

U.S. presidents have pursued a policy of “strategic ambiguity” so that China would not know exactly what the U.S. response would be to an attack.

Beijing views Taiwan as a breakaway province and claims that it is part of its own territory. The two countries split in 1949, and China has been increasing pressure on the self-ruled nation while opposing its involvement in international organizations such as the United Nations. The U.S. does not formally recognize Taiwan but maintains an unofficial relationship and is supportive of its democratic government. 

The Biden administration has aimed to compartmentalize its relationship with China – competing in some respects while seeking cooperation on other issues, like climate change. But it has made clear for months that the United States will defend Taiwan, which is a democratic island off the coast of China. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“We have an abiding interest in peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We consider this central to the security and stability of the broader Indo-Pacific region,” a senior administration official told Fox News in August as China aimed to seize on the Afghanistan withdrawal to intimidate Taiwan. 

“We will uphold our commitment under [Taiwan Relations Act], we will continue support Taiwan’s self-defense, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,” the official said. 

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-officials-clarify-biden-comments-live-town-hall

Speaker Nancy Pelosi seemed upbeat as she returned from the White House, telling reporters she believed a deal was within reach. Still, she declined to say whether the House could vote on either the social spending bill or the Senate-passed infrastructure bill next week, remarking only that “I’m very optimistic.”

“There are many decisions that have to be made, but more than 90 percent of everything is agreed to and written,” Pelosi told reporters after the House’s final votes of the week Friday.

“We are an exuberant party with many points of view, and we’ll build our consensus and we’ll get this done.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also dialed into the Pelosi-Biden breakfast from New York, according to a source familiar with the meeting. Though Manchin said the party still has work to do as he left the Capitol on Thursday — and has indicated to associates he is in no rush to finish a deal — talks between Sinema and key Democrats have been intensifying.

Those negotiations, between the White House, Manchin and Sinema, are largely the final hurdles to a deal, according to Democratic sources.

“The conversations continue,” said House Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal (D-Mass.), who has been negotiating at length with Sinema and the White House.

“We agree on the policy outcomes. Now we just have to find a path on the revenues side,” Neal said. “This is the ninth inning.”

Democrats are aiming to sell Manchin and Sinema on a roughly $2 trillion bill that tackles climate action, expanding paid family leave, education and child care, paid for as much as possible by increasing taxes on corporations and wealthy Americans. They are unlikely to raise income or corporate tax rates due to opposition from Sinema, but Democrats are proposing workarounds to establish a corporate minimum tax and levy billionaires’ assets.

Manchin has proposed a bill of $1.5 trillion but indicated some flexibility, and Democratic leaders in both chambers have welcomed Biden’s direct engagement in that negotiation.

“I’ve been hoping there was gonna be a deal for the last three months,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Friday, adding that Biden is “working it pretty hard, so I’m hopeful that we’ll get something done. Obviously, our objective was to get something done by [Friday].”

Hoyer announced on the floor later Friday that he plans to bring both of Biden’s bills — infrastructure and the social spending plan — to the floor next week “if they’re ready.”

The incremental movement comes as Democrats are feeling growing pressure to deliver, particularly ahead of the Virginia gubernatorial election early next month. There, Democrat Terry McAuliffe has been leaning on congressional leaders to send something to Biden’s next to show the Democratic Party can govern.

While the White House gets closer to a deal with Manchin and Sinema, one House centrist who has vocally criticized the social spending package sounded more upbeat.

“The fact that we’re now down to a number that’s in the trillion-plus range, that something has gotten my attention,” said Oregon Rep. Kurt Schrader, one of four House Democrats who voted against central planks of Biden’s social spending plan in committee earlier this year.

But Florida Rep. Stephanie Murphy, another of those four Democrats who’ve slowed down key portions of the package, said she has expected more outreach from party leaders.

“While there’s significant focus on Senate members, House members also have distinct perspectives on the bill,” Murphy said, referring to a handful of moderate House Democrats who have expressed concerns on the bill’s policy as well as process. “I think it would be really wise to engage and see why.”

“We need to make sure that everybody’s concerns are heard and addressed,” Murphy said.

Biden, for his part, has expressed confidence and predicted at a CNN town hall Thursday night that the party could break its lengthy logjam: “I do think we’ll get a deal.”

During the town hall, Biden also discussed some of the party’s disagreements with Sinema and Manchin, including Sinema’s opposition to raising the corporate tax rate. The president said Sinema “will not raise a single penny in taxes on the corporate side and/or on wealthy people, period,” though some of the proposals she’s working on would target corporations and the rich without rate hikes.

Shortly after a Thursday meeting with White House staff, a source close to Sinema said the Arizona Democrat had agreed to proposals in Biden’s four revenue categories: international, domestic corporate, high-net-worth individuals and tax enforcement. It’s not clear, however, whether other Democrats have all signed off on those Sinema-approved provisions.

Biden also offered additional policy specifics Thursday night, opening a window into where the negotiations stand on the party’s top priorities in the social spending plan. For example, Biden said that the party’s proposal for paid family leave would last four weeks, instead of the 12 weeks that proponents of the package originally sought. In addition, Biden revealed that both Sinema and Manchin oppose expanding Medicare to include dental, vision and hearing.

Manchin “doesn’t want to further burden Medicare so that — because it will run out of its ability to maintain itself in the next number of years,” Biden said. “There’s ways to fix that, but he’s not interested in that part, either.”

Nicholas Wu and Marianne LeVine contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/22/pelosi-huddles-with-biden-as-he-tries-to-strike-deal-with-sinema-manchin-516748

“As much as 10-15 inches of precipitation are possible over the next 7 days for higher elevations in Northern California, Southwestern Oregon, and Northwest Washington, with a significant portion of this precipitation expected during the second AR [atmospheric river],” wrote the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes based in La Jolla, Calif., in a briefing.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/10/22/california-atmospheric-river-bomb-cyclone/

A film crew member died and another was injured after actor Alec Baldwin discharged a prop firearm on the set of the movie “Rust” in New Mexico on Thursday, authorities said.

But how can a prop gun kill someone?

“Prop weapons do have a dangerous factor to them even though they’re a lot safer than using a live firearm on set,” says Joseph Fisher, a prop master who works on movie sets and has handled weapons in the military and with the NYPD. “Typical prop load will be about 25 to 50% of the gunpowder in an actual projectile load that would be used in a regular weapon.”

Fisher said those on set “take extreme caution with any kind of weapons, whether they be prop guns, blank guns, and anything in between. 

“Typically, we will do a safety brief with the cast and crew. We’ll introduce the weapon to the cast and crew, we’ll let them examine it, we’ll explain the safety precautions that go with each type of prop weapon,” he told CNN.

In a scene involving prop guns, “we do safety distances, we try to keep the actors slightly misaligned with the weapon, so that if the person firing the weapon is firing straight this way, the other actor in frame is just slightly off,” Fisher explained.

Read more about prop guns and how they can be deadly here.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/entertainment/live-news/alec-baldwin-movie-set-shooting-10-22-21/index.html

It is one of the Hill’s favorite Kabuki dances: bring up a bill that everyone knows will go down in flames.

The supporters and the opponents get to posture, the journalists provide analyses that could have been penned in advance, everyone moves on — and nothing changes.

That, in fact, could describe most of what’s happening in the swampy capital these days. A whole lot of sound and fury followed by perpetual paralysis.

The familiar script played out Wednesday when Senate Democrats tried for a second time to pass a voting rights bill, not a single Republican voted for it, and it was blocked from getting to the floor.

FROM NEIL CAVUTO TO JOHN KING TO COLIN POWELL, THE PERSONALIZING OF THE VACCINE DEBATE

The only difference this time was that this was a scaled-down measure, revised to meet Joe Manchin’s objections, with several far-reaching provisions tossed out. Manchin had asked for months to try to sell this incarnation to the GOP. But with Mitch McConnell’s troops solidly against it, the measure didn’t come close to the 60-vote margin needed to defeat a potential filibuster.

 Since Manchin refuses to carve out an exemption for the filibuster, this amounts to the final nail in the coffin.

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., speaks at a news conference outside his office on Capitol Hill, Oct. 6, 2021. Manchin spoke on the debt limit and the infrastructure bill.
(Getty Images)

Democrats decried an assault on democracy, Republicans decried political overreach by Biden’s party, the media decried Manchin, and the rest of us were left crying about Washington’s inability to get much of anything done.

Meaningless words

At the Martin Luther King Memorial on Thursday, President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris delivered impassioned speeches about the need for voting rights, with the president vowing to “keep the pressure up.” But didn’t the timing just underscore their political failure?

Biden segued into a pitch for the vaguely named Build Back Better bill. I have to laugh when I see the breathless reports on the endless negotiations over what was a $3.5 trillion measure and now will wind up closer to $1.5 trillion, if it passes at all. 

The Democrats are going to agree on a framework! The Democrats are going to hammer out a blueprint! When you see those words, they’re essentially meaningless. So are the artificial deadlines they keep setting and blowing through. Now Nancy Pelosi wants a House vote on Oct. 31, ensuring that Republicans will call it a nasty Halloween surprise.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks before signing a House continuing resolution to keep funding the government, Sept. 30, 2021, on Capitol Hill in Washington.
(Associated Press)

The long delay has fueled Biden’s slide in the polls and made it look like he doesn’t even have clout with his party’s warring progressive and moderate wings. Even many allies are dispirited.

CNN’s Don Lemon says Biden and his party are “not selling their agenda. … Democrats, get your butt in gear and get passionate about saving this damn country. You’re not doing it. You’re weak.”

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF OF THE DAY’S HOTTEST STORIES

The Washington Post reports that after months of negotiations, “Biden is doing something new: getting specific and plunging into details, telling lawmakers exactly what he thinks needs to go into the package that could define his presidency.”

What took him so long?

Which raises the question: What took him so long? Biden has been acting like the 101st senator, patiently hearing everyone out and letting them vent. There are times when a president has to knock heads.

President Joe Biden, with first lady Jill Biden, speaks during a visit at Brookland Middle School in northeast Washington, Sept. 10, 2021. (Associated Press)

I assume the Democrats will eventually pass some kind of bill, given that failure would amount to a mass suicide pact. But the marketing has been so bungled that this may not be viewed as a victory. As Biden indicates he’ll toss out free community college in favor of free prekindergarten, along with a clean electricity program opposed by Manchin, the media focus is on what’s not in the bill. 

Even if the Democrats spend an eye-popping $2 trillion on social and climate programs (and another trillion on infrastructure), that will be depicted as a retreat from the always unrealistic $3.5 trillion. And raising taxes on the wealthy, a Biden campaign pledge, may also go out the window.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Even when things eventually happen in Washington, they move in excruciatingly slow motion. The White House made a big deal this week about how it will roll out vaccines for kids 5 to 11, but the federal health agencies are weeks away from approval. And while the Food and Drug Administration has finally OK’d booster shots, the conflicting messaging has everyone confused about who will be eligible and when.

Quote of the day: the FDA’s Peter Marks telling the New York Times, “Although it is not simple, it’s not utterly hopelessly complex.”

Actually, it is — like most of what passes for government these days.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/gridlock-voting-rights-rejected-biden-spending-bill-media-buzz-kurtz

  • The Laundrie family’s lawyer pushed back on speculation about how Brian’s remains were found.
  • He said Brian’s parents had advised authorities where to look shortly before the remains were found.
  • The idea that his parents had known where the remains were is “not too bright,” the lawyer said.

The lawyer for Brian Laundrie’s family vehemently rebutted speculation about the circumstances in which the 23-year-old’s remains were found, saying that “the public doesn’t understand simplicity.”

Laundrie’s remains were found on Wednesday in Florida’s Carlton Reserve, the FBI said on Thursday, concluding a five-week search in the vast nature reserve.

He had been missing since mid-September, when he went for a hike in the reserve, his parents said. They initially said he went missing on September 14 but later said he vanished on September 13.

The FBI had named Laundrie a person of interest in the killing of his fiancée, Gabby Petito, whose remains were found near a Wyoming campsite on September 19. Her death was ruled a homicide, and a coroner said the cause of death was strangulation.

The couple had embarked on a joint cross-country “van life” road trip in the summer. Petito’s family reported her missing 10 days after Laundrie returned alone to their home in Florida on September 1.

Laundrie’s refusal to help authorities in the search for Petito fueled widespread outrage and speculation about her death. There’s also been speculation about how the search for Laundrie ended shortly after his parents got involved.

A lawyer for the Laundrie family, Steven Bertolino, told Insider’s Azmi Haroun and Natalie Musumeci that Laundrie’s parents, Chris and Roberta, had “advised” authorities where to look when they joined the search on Wednesday.

Bertolino was visibly frustrated while speaking to NewsNation’s Marni Hughes on Thursday night.

“It’s not about knowing specifically where to go,” he told Hughes, saying the logic was simply to “start at the beginning” of the trailhead.

Teams with police officers, FBI agents, and a cadaver-sniffing dog had already searched that area. The police in North Port had also used airboats and ATVs in the search, the local CBS affiliate WINK News reported.

Authorities in North Port posted a video of the search on YouTube:

But the area where Laundrie’s remains were found had been underwater in September, Michael McPherson, an FBI special agent, said at a press conference on Wednesday.

A tweet on September 24 from Josh Taylor, the North Port public-information officer, illustrated the flooding in the reserve:

Bertolino said on Thursday that after the flooding receded, Chris Laundrie was able to find a white bag belonging to his son, leading authorities to Brian’s remains nearby.

Kyle Heyen, a K-9 handler and former police officer, questioned this, telling NewsNation on Wednesday that it was “highly suspicious” that a dog would have missed the remains.

“If the body had been there, when they went by with cadaver dogs, and the body had been there for more than two or three minutes, the odor would have come through the water,” Heyen said.

Bertolino was visibly frustrated when Hughes pressed him on Thursday on the finding. “It just so happened that that’s where Brian was,” he said. “So my thought would be anybody who’s questioning that is not too bright.”

He added, “The public doesn’t understand simplicity.”

Addressing rumors on social media that the Laundries could have planted the remains, Bertolino said that the FBI, the police, and journalists had seen the find.

“When do you think these items were planted? And do you really think the Laundries had skeletal remains of their son in a plastic bag and brought them to the preserve?” he said.

He added, “If I’m the only one who has to say that this is hogwash, because I didn’t want to say the word ‘bullshit,’ then I’m going to say it: It’s bullshit.”

Source Article from https://www.insider.com/brian-laundrie-family-lawyer-addresses-speculation-over-his-remains-2021-10

Joe Biden has given the strongest indication yet that he is willing to end or whittle down the Senate filibuster as a means of overcoming Republican intransigence and moving ahead with reforms to voting rights, the debt ceiling and possibly more.

Speaking in Baltimore a day after Senate Republicans yet again blocked major legislation designed to secure access to the ballot box for all Americans, Biden expressed mounting frustration at the filibuster which effectively gives the conservative minority a stranglehold over large swathes of policy.

“We’re going to have to move to the point where we fundamentally alter the filibuster,” the president said.

At a CNN town hall in Baltimore on Thursday night, Biden hedged on how far any reform would go. “That remains to be seen,” he said, “in terms of fundamentally altering it or whether or not we just end the filibuster straight up.”

Asked by the moderator Anderson Cooper whether he would consider ending the filibuster on the issue of voting rights alone, Biden replied: “And maybe more.”

The filibuster has increasingly emerged as the rock upon which the ship of the Biden presidency could founder. The Senate mechanism locks in minority rule by allowing just 41 senators out of the 100 who sit in the chamber to block legislation.

The present Senate has a 50:50 split between Democrats and Republicans, though the Democrats hold the majority by dint of Kamala Harris, the vice president’s, casting vote. Yet the Democratic agenda is still stymied across important areas of public policy by the filibuster, which requires Democratic whips to find 60 votes to pass legislation.

On Wednesday the Republican group led by Mitch McConnell applied the filibuster once more to hold back the Freedom to Vote Act. The bill would be the most significant overhaul in US election procedures in a generation, countering the wave of voter suppression measures that have been championed by Republicans across the states this year.

Progressive Democrats have been increasingly pressuring Biden to be more aggressive on the filibuster in order to secure fundamental reforms. But the president is in a tight spot given the resistance to change from within his own ranks.

Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, and Kyrsten Sinema from Arizona, have both said they would oppose limiting the filibuster. Given universal Republican opposition to change, it would take a unanimous vote of all 50 Democrats to push this through.

Biden told the CNN town hall that entering into the hornet’s nest of the filibuster at this moment could make it harder for him to pass other pieces of signature legislation. “I lose at least three votes right now to get what I have to get done on the economic side of the equation, the foreign policy side of the equation.”

The president did not stipulate which three senators he had in mind.

Earlier this month the Democrats began focusing on the idea of scrapping the filibuster in the critical area of the debt ceiling. Republican opposition pushed the nation to the brink of defaulting on its debt, though McConnell backed down at the last minute.

Biden told the town hall that “the idea that, for example, my Republican friends say that we’re going to default on the national debt because they’re going to filibuster that and we need 10 Republicans to support us is the most bizarre thing I ever heard.”

He said that if a similar clash reoccurred, “you’ll see an awful lot of Democrats being ready to say, ‘not me. I’m not doing that again. We’re going to end the filibuster.’ But it still is difficult to end the filibuster beyond that.”

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/22/joe-biden-senate-filibuster-republicans-politics

Ms. Durst’s disappearance nearly 40 years ago marked the beginning of a long, strange, cross-country saga as the authorities sought to ensnare Mr. Durst, who was eventually tried for two other murders. But Mr. Durst proved a cunning, if odd, foe for investigators. Until this month, he had never been convicted despite decades of suspicion and occasionally incriminating behavior.

Mr. Becerra, who declined to comment, has been involved with the case for more than 20 years, and is one of the investigators who has been working on a case against Mr. Durst that is being pursued by Miriam E. Rocah, the Westchester district attorney. Her office is bringing about two dozen witnesses before a grand jury with the goal of charging Mr. Durst with murder.

Mr. Becerra’s single-page complaint is short on details. It says that the grounds for the allegations against Mr. Durst are contained in the files of the Westchester district attorney, the New York State Police and the Los Angeles district attorney, as well as “conversations with numerous witnesses and observations of defendants, recorded interviews and observations of Mr. Durst’s recorded interviews and court testimony in related proceedings.”

The charge offers the promise of a resolution to a case that has long been the focus of speculation, but has provided precious little real evidence; Ms. Durst’s body was never found, and there was no official crime scene. But whether the new charge, and an eventual indictment, will provide new details of Ms. Durst’s disappearance remains unknown.

Robert Abrams, the attorney for Kathie McCormack Durst’s family, expressed surprise. “My clients, Kathie’s siblings, and I were unaware of this development. Sometimes it takes 40 years for justice. We are grateful for the work, dedication and commitment of District Attorney Rocah and her staff.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/nyregion/robert-durst-wife-kathie.html