• A CNN report released on Monday alleges that Bernie Sanders told Elizabeth Warren in 2018 that he did not believe a woman could win the presidency, according to four anonymous sources.
• Sanders has denied the claim, calling it “ludicrous.” 
• The Washington Post later reported a source as saying that Sanders did not say he did not believe a woman could be president, but rather said Trump would use “nefarious tactics” against the Democratic nominee. 
• Warren stood by the original allegation, saying that Sanders disagreed with her that a woman could win the White House but added she didn’t want to discuss the matter any further, calling him an ally and a friend.

Allegations

A CNN report released on Monday detailed a December 2018 meeting between presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders in which Sanders allegedly said that he did not believe a woman could win the election. 

The report said that its details of that encounter were based on accounts from four anonymous people, two that Warren spoke with soon afterward, and two “familiar with the meeting.” 

Sanders’ campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, called the assertion a “lie,” and the Vermont senator denied the claim himself in a statement. 

“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win,” Sanders told CNN. 

According to The Washington Post, two people with knowledge of the 2018 meeting told the news outlet that Warren asked Sanders if he thought a woman could win the White House. One of these sources said that Sanders did not say he believed a woman couldn’t win, but rather that Trump would use “nefarious tactics” against the Democratic candidate.  

“What I did say that night was that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could,” Sanders said in his statement. “Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”

But later on Monday night, Warren stood by the initial allegation in a statement tweeted by her communications director.

“Among the topics that came up was what would happen if Democrats nominated a female candidate,” Warren said. “I thought a woman could win; [Sanders] disagreed.” 

“I have no interest in discussing this private meeting any further because Bernie and I have far more in common than our differences on punditry,” she added.

Online Reactions

Regardless of who said what, both Warren and Sanders supporters were quick to jump online with their opinions. 

Many Twitter users expressed anger at the Massachusetts senator, accusing her of lying about Sanders’ comments in order to get ahead in the race. #RefundWarren began trending on Monday night, encouraging people to request refunds for donations to her campaign.

Meanwhile, Sanders supporters fell back on instances in the past where he has been explicit about his belief in equal gender opportunities.

On the flip side, others expressed their belief in Warren’s claims, arguing that she had nothing to gain from being untruthful. Many pledged their unwavering support despite the events unfolding.

Also, the idea that Warren trotted this out to damage Sanders seems very unlikely – she knows that women who complain about sexism are seen as whiners, not winners. I mean look *gestures to the internet right now* around!

— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) January 14, 2020

Others took to Twitter to neutralize the situation, suggesting that pitting two Democratic candidates against each other does nothing productive for the party.

Warren-Sanders Relationship

While Warren called her and Sanders long-time “friends and allies in this fight,” their unspoken civil pact has faced obstacles recently. 

On Sunday, Politico reported that Sanders volunteers were issued a script that criticized Warren. 

In a campaign appearance on Sunday, Warren said she was “disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me,” and verbalized her hopes that he redirects his campaign for the sake of not dividing their mutual political party. 

Sanders denied ever personally attacking Warren and said that each campaign has hundreds of employees who “sometimes say things that they shouldn’t.” 

Both the script and he-said-she-said drama unfolded right before the seventh Democratic debate, in which six candidates will be participating—including both Warren and Sanders. The debate will be held in Iowa, which is also where the first-in-the-nation caucuses will take place in about three weeks.  

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (BBC) (Axios)

• At a Democratic presidential debate on Thursday, Joe Biden noted that he personally keeps in touch with children who have speech impediments, speaking with a stutter as he referenced one.
• Former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted in response, mocking his delivery.
• Sanders faced a wave of backlash in response to her tweet.
• She apologized after Biden himself, who has personally struggled with a stutter for most of his life, condemned her directly.

Controversial Tweet

Former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders apologized on Thursday after posting a tweet that seemed to mock people with speech impediments. 

Sanders’ post, which has since been deleted, was in response to comments Joe Biden made on Thursday at the sixth Democratic presidential debate, held on the campus of Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. 

At one point, Biden was speaking to the efforts he makes to be accessible to the public. He referenced the “call list” he and his wife have of people with whom they regularly stay in touch. Among these, he said, is a “little kid who says ‘I can’t talk, what do I do?’” Biden stuttered over the “I” and the “what” for emphasis.

“I have scores of these young women and men who I keep in contact with,” he added. 

Biden has been open in the past about the stutter he has struggled with for most of his life, most prominently in an interview published last month in The Atlantic. In that piece, he opened up about the ways in which his speech impediment has brought him strife, from being bullied as a child to tripping him up during political speeches. 

Shortly after Biden’s comments at the debate, Sanders took to Twitter to address them.

“I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I hhhave absolutely no idea what Biden is talking about,” she wrote, adding the hashtag #Demdebate.

Sanders Slammed

Sanders’ remark was met with a wave of backlash from people across the Internet.

How dare you. And you call yourself a “Christian”? Can you imagine how you would feel if one of your children were a stutterer? But that would require being an empathetic person, of which, clearly, you are not. Not to mention cruel. #SarahSanders

— Kathy (@kcday21) December 20, 2019

Sanders attempted to recover from her initial comment in a follow-up tweet that has also been deleted.

“To be clear was not trying to make fun of anyone with a speech impediment,” she wrote. “Simply pointing out I can’t follow much of anything Biden is talking about.” 

It wasn’t until Biden responded to her directly in a tweet of his own, pointing to his own struggles, that Sanders apologized.

“I’ve worked my whole life to overcome a stutter,” he wrote. “And it’s my great honor to mentor kids who have experienced the same. It’s called empathy. Look it up.”

“I actually didn’t know that about you and that is commendable,” Sanders replied. “I apologize and should have made my point respectfully.”

Biden used the exchange with Sanders to encourage donations to his presidential campaign.

“If you believe we need to bring empathy back to the White House chip in $5,” he wrote, adding a link to a donation page.

See what others are saying: (Washington Post) (Vox) (New York Times)

• The House of Representatives impeached President Donald Trump on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
• While most Democrats voted in favor of both charges, 2020 presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) voted present.
• In a lengthy statement, Gabbard said that “could not in good conscience vote either yes or no” because of the partisan nature of the process, and added that her vote was “a vote for much-needed reconciliation.”
• The articles will now be sent to the Senate for trial. Speaker of the House Pelosi has said she will delay sending the articles until she can be assured that the Senate will conduct a fair trial.

House Votes to Impeach

The House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald Trump Wednesday night, officially making him the third president in U.S. history to be impeached.

After a day’s worth of debate, the House held two separate votes on the two articles of impeachment levied against Trump. 

The first article is for abuse of power and claims that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rival Joe Biden by withholding nearly $400 million in military aid, as well as a meeting at the White House.

The second article alleges that Trump obstructed Congress by refusing to cooperate with their impeachment inquiry.

The abuse of power article was passed with 230 yeas to 197 nays, with one member voting present. The obstruction of Congress article was passed along similar margins, with 229 yeas to 198 nays, and one present vote.

House members voted almost entirely along party lines. No Republicans voted in favor of either article, while nearly all of the Democrats voted in favor of both.

Two Democrats voted against the abuse of power article and three voted against the obstruction of Congress article.

However, one of the Democrats who voted against both articles was Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, who recently announced that he plans to switch his party affiliation to Republican.

Tulsi Gabbard Votes Present

Notably, the single Democrat who voted present for both articles of impeachment was 2020 presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI).

Gabbard explained her decision in a lengthy video posted on Twitter.

“After doing my due diligence in reviewing the 658-page impeachment report, I came to the conclusion that I could not in good conscience vote either yes or no,” she said. “I am standing in the center and have decided to vote Present.”

“I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing,” she continued.

“I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country.”

Gabbard also said that she had introduced a censure resolution, which is basically a strong rebuke of the president.

She claimed that the resolution would send a message to Trump and future presidents while still leaving the question of removal to voters in 2020. 

“My vote today is a vote for much-needed reconciliation and hope that together we can heal our country,” she concluded.

Gabbard’s decision still drew a lot of criticism from Democrats, and the topic trended on Twitter with hashtags that included #TulsiCoward and #TulsiIsARussianAsset.

Questions of Fairness in Senate Trial

With the Houses’ decision to impeach Trump, the process will now be passed off to the Senate, where a trial will be held.

Even before the House voted to pass the articles, the Senate was already gearing up to hold the impeachment trial.

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) rejected Democrat’s demands to call four White House officials as witnesses.

He argued there were no reasons for the Senate to agree to hear testimony from officials who could help the Democrats’ case. The move was condemned by many Democrats. 

McConnell also was criticized Tuesday for telling reporters that he would not be impartial in the impeachment trial.

“I’m not an impartial juror,” he said. “This is a political process. I’m not impartial about this at all.”

McConnell’s actions have raised more questions about whether or not Senate Republicans will hold a fair trial. 

Pelosi Delays Sending Impeachment Articles to Senate

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi also appeared to share that concern. 

After the House approved the articles, Pelosi said Wednesday night that she would delay sending them to the Senate until it is clear that the upper chamber would conduct a fair trial.

The move appears to be an effort to slow down the impeachment process and force Senate Republicans to set procedures that Democrats find more favorable. 

“So far, we have not seen anything that looks fair to us, so hopefully, it will be fairer, and when we see what that is, we will send it over that matter,” she said.

Many Republicans reacted angrily to Pelosi’s decision, including Trump.

“Pelosi feels her phony impeachment HOAX is so pathetic she is afraid to present it to the Senate, which can set a date and put this whole SCAM into default if they refuse to show up!” the president wrote on Twitter. 

McConnell also attacked the move in a speech on the Senate floor Thursday.

“It was made even made clear last night when Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid, too afraid to even transmit their shoddy work product to the Senate,” he said.

“Mr. President, looks like the prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country, and second-guessing whether they want to do to trial.” 

But Pelosi doubled-down on her stance while speaking at a press conference Thursday, where she also responded to McConnell’s accusations.

“It reminded me that our founders, when they wrote the Constitution, they suspected there could be a rogue president,” she said, referring to McConnell’s speech. “I don’t think they suspected that we could have a rogue president and a rogue leader in the Senate at the same time.”

McConnell and other Republican Senate leaders had initially said they wanted to hold the trial in January and make it as fast as possible.

Now, Pelosi’s plan to hold the articles until the Senate outlines a procedure the Democrats support could complicate that timeline.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (Politico) (Fox News)