Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., is set to attend a ‘very intimate’ fundraiser hosted by a left-wing politician who supports the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, critical race theory (CRT), has a history of anti-police rhetoric and believes ‘white supremacy’ has a ‘stranglehold’ on society.

Baldwin, who is up for re-election in 2024 in the battleground state of Wisconsin, will be celebrated at a San Francisco reception on Sunday among hosts with a long record of left-wing activism, according to a flyer for the fundraiser. The event seeks to collect individual contributions between $250 and $3,300 to support the Democratic senator. 

Bay Area city council member Carolyn Wysinger, who is co-hosting the fundraiser, backs several controversial groups. She recently slammed the Los Angeles Dodgers for uninviting the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, an anti-Catholic group of ‘queer and trans nuns,’ to their June Pride night.

‘3-0 is what LA fans get for sitting back as the Dodgers banned the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence from their Pride Night to please religious zealots,’ Wysinger wrote in a Facebook post. ‘Black Lesbian Jesus is not pleased and until y’all do right by the gays a broom will be comin yalls way….’

The Dodgers have since reinvited the group, despite concerns from religious organizations over their protests that include pole dancing on crosses and using the phrase ‘go and sin some more.’ 

Wysinger also spoke at a ‘Drag Up! Fight Back!’ event that sought to ‘protect trans kids’ and claimed ‘Right-wing GOP Christian Nationalists’ are calling for the ‘imprisonment and even death of LGBTQ people,’ according to a flyer for the gathering on Do The Bay.

The protest, where children were photographed in attendance, featured adult drag performances and members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

Wysinger is directly involved with CRT efforts, which Democrats have long maintained are not being implemented in K-12 educational institutions.

The left-wing politician was a fellow, and later participant, at the African American Policy Forum’s Critical Race Theory Summer School, which pushes the teaching of CRT in K-12 schools.

‘I’m SO excited to join [African American Policy Forum’s] CRT Summer School!’ Wysinger wrote last July on Twitter. ‘As a 2020 inaugural fellow, I’m glad to be back with Dr. Kimberle Crenshaw & 160 CRT profs. As attacks on CRT advance, now more than ever we must have the tools necessary to fight for a multiracial democracy.’

The 2022 CRT Summer School sessions were designed to address why CRT ‘has been deployed as an entering wedge into dismantling the commons, public institutions, and racial and social progress since the mid 20th century,’ its website states.

The sessions also analyzed ‘why the particular assaults on CRT and racial justice education land differently to even those whom we count as our allies.’ The sessions aimed to ‘educate constituents about what CRT is and what it was before right-wing operatives distorted and defamed it.’

Wysinger’s controversial viewpoints extend even further. She has a record of anti-police rhetoric and suggested that ‘racist police violence’ is a ‘public health emergency.’ 

‘The public-health emergency that is racist police violence requires me to speak out more than ever, because Pride is a defense of Black bodies and always has been,’ she wrote in a 48Hills opinion piece in 2020.

Wysinger later added that ‘white supremacy’ has a ‘stranglehold’ on society.

‘Folks that know that racist police violence is an issue, but can’t do the one thing it takes to break the system, the one thing it takes to break the stranglehold of white supremacy on society, the one thing it takes to stop anti-Blackness from being taught worldwide: Stop centering whiteness,’ she wrote.

While serving as board president of San Francisco Pride, Wysinger and her colleagues banned the San Francisco Police Officers Pride Alliance from wearing their uniforms while marching in an LGBTQ parade.

Also expected to be in attendance at Baldwin’s fundraiser is Gretchen Sisson, the lead investigator for the University of California, San Francisco’s Abortion Onscreen program who in 2022 sought to normalize abortion through implementing more ‘abortion plot lines’ in television.

‘We hope these shows and others continue to build on these depictions by giving main characters abortion plotlines instead of only guest actors and working to reflect the reality of abortion patients in the U.S,’ Abortion Onscreen’s 2022 report read.

Sisson, who has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to candidates, has also said her money gets her ‘access’ to politicians. 

‘The traditional idea is that donors give money because they want to be in proximity to power. I would never deny that being a major donor is a major power and gives me access,’ Sisson told San Francisco Magazine in 2019. ‘But that’s not why I do it. I don’t care about being close to power. I care about changing what power looks like.’

Baldwin’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the fundraiser.

A federal lawsuit filed Friday directly challenges an Arkansas law banning librarians and booksellers from exposing minors to explicit or otherwise ‘harmful’ media. The law, slated to take effect Aug. 1, has drawn the ire of librarians’ associations, publishers, and writers’ groups.‘Act 372 forces bookstores and libraries to self-censor in a way antithetical to their core purposes,’ the lawsuit, filed by a coalition that includes Little Rock’s Central Arkansas Library System, alleged.

A federal lawsuit filed Friday challenges an Arkansas law that would subject librarians and booksellers to criminal charges if they provide ‘harmful’ materials to minors.

A coalition that includes the Central Arkansas Library System in Little Rock filed the challenge to the law, which takes effect Aug. 1. The law also creates a new process to challenge library materials and request that they be relocated to areas not accessible by kids.

The lawsuit comes as lawmakers in an increasing number of conservative states are pushing for measures making it easier to ban or restrict access to books. The number of attempts to ban or restrict books across the U.S. last year was the highest in the 20 years the American Library Association has been tracking such efforts.

The lawsuit said the fear of prosecution under Arkansas’ law, which Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed in March, could prompt libraries and booksellers to no longer carry titles that could be challenged.

‘Act 372 forces bookstores and libraries to self-censor in way antithetical to their core purposes,’ the lawsuit said.

EveryLibrary, a national political action committee, has said it’s tracking at least 121 proposals introduced in state legislatures this year targeting libraries, librarians, educators and access to materials. The group said 39 of those proposals would allow for criminal prosecution.

‘This vaguely written and sweepingly broad directive leaves librarians and booksellers in Arkansas without a clear understanding of what they are legally obligated to do,’ said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, one of the groups representing the coalition in the lawsuit. The American Civil Liberties Union is also representing the coalition.

The lawsuit names the state’s 28 local prosecutors as defendants, along with Crawford County in west Arkansas. A separate lawsuit filed last month challenged the Crawford County library’s decision to move children’s books that included LGBTQ+ themes to a separate portion of the library.

‘I am representing the 28 prosecutors named in this lawsuit, and I look forward to defending the constitutionality of Act 372,’ Republican Attorney General Tim Griffin said in a statement.

Writers’ group PEN America and publisher Penguin Random House sued a Florida school district Wednesday over its removal of books about race and LGBTQ+ identities.

The plaintiffs challenging Arkansas’ restrictions also include the Fayetteville and Eureka Springs Carnegie public libraries, the American Booksellers Association and the Association of American Publishers.

<!–>

–>

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to answer a question Friday related to Hunter Biden’s previous drug use and reported plans to use the Second Amendment as a defense should he be charged with a gun crime.

When asked during the White House press briefing whether someone who is a drug user should be able to possess a firearm, Jean-Pierre simply said, ‘I’m not going to get into a tit-for-tat on this. I’m just not going to.’

Hunter, a known past drug user who battled drug abuse and addiction, has been under investigation by the Justice Department, a portion of which involves a 2018 gun purchase. During that time, Hunter said he was a regular cocaine user.

Federal law prohibits drug users from owning guns, but a Supreme Court ruling last year that essentially broadened Second Amendment protections puts that prohibition into question – and Hunter’s lawyers could use the argument as part of his defense.

President Biden, Hunter’s father, however, previously criticized the SCOTUS decision his son’s legal team is preparing to use in his defense should he be charged, saying at the time that he was ‘deeply disappointed.’

‘Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license,’ Biden said in an official statement. ‘More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York’s long-established authority to protect its citizens.’ 

‘This ruling contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all,’ he added.

First reported in Politico, Biden’s lawyers have already told DOJ officials that, if their client is charged with the gun crime, they will challenge the law under the Second Amendment, a person familiar told the publication. 

When he bought the gun in 2018, Biden filled out a federal form on which he allegedly claimed that he was not ‘an unlawful user of, or addicted to’ any ‘controlled substance,’ Politico reported in 2021. However, according to Biden’s 2021 memoir, he frequently used crack cocaine at the time.

The scenario could put Hunter and conservative Republicans on the same side of trying to bolster pro-Second Amendment legal precedent.

Fox News’ Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.

The Newtown, Connecticut Board of Education has voted to keep ‘Blankets’ and ‘Flamer’ — two books on sexuality that garnered formal complaints for their explicit nature — on its shelves.Debate over the books’ prospective banishment caused a local political crisis, with two Republican board members, Janet Kuzma and Jennifer Larkin, resigning over it.‘This process has monopolized our time and attention for two months,’ Democratic board member Allison Plante said of the debate.

A Connecticut board of education has voted two keep two books on its town’s high school shelves after weeks of acrimonious debate over book-banning that culminated in the resignation of two Republican board members.

The remaining members of the Newtown Board of Education unanimously agreed Thursday night on a compromise motion that rejected banning the books ‘Blankets’ by Craig Thompson and ‘Flamer’ by Mike Curato, with the caveat that school administrators create a process ‘to support choices of individual parents and guardians’ on whether their children will have access to the books.

As with similar debates across the country, some parents had called for banning the books because of their sexual content. School officials in March said they received nine official complaints against ‘Flamer’ and one against ‘Blankets.’

‘Blankets’ is an autobiographical story that deals in part with sexual abuse. ‘Flamer,’ around which much of the debate was centered, is a semi-autobiographical graphic novel about a young man coming to terms with his homosexuality.

Republican board members Janet Kuzma and Jennifer Larkin resigned amid the controversy on Wednesday. Larkin cited the need for a better work-life balance, while Kuzman addressed the controversy, citing in her resignation letter ‘abhorrent’ behavior by people attending public meetings.

‘I am resigning due to the complete lack of condemnation of this behavior by leadership at all levels,’ wrote Kuzman, who had proposed a compromise that would have required all students 16 and younger to receive written parental permission before reading the books.

‘I pray for our community to regain a sense of civility in the face of differing opinions,’ she added.

Both sides of the issue reported being harassed by those with opposing opinions.

The Newtown Republican Town Committee issued a statement Thursday saying, ‘There is something horribly wrong in our community when town volunteers and even private citizens who send an email, speak at a meeting or write a letter to the editor are subject to harassment.’

Librarian Suzanne Hurley said at a May 2 meeting that she and her colleagues had been accused of negligence and incompetence by ‘keyboard warriors.’

The number of attempts to ban or restrict books across the U.S. last year was the highest in the 20 years the American Library Association has been tracking such efforts.

EveryLibrary, a national political action committee, said it’s tracking at least 121 different proposals introduced in state legislatures this year targeting libraries, librarians, educators and access to materials.

During the debate in Connecticut, school officials noted that ‘Flamer’ has been in the school library since last year and has never been checked out. ‘Blankets’ has been at the library since 2013 and was checked out once, they said.

Before Thursday’s vote, Newtown board member Allison Plante, a Democrat, acknowledged fatigue over the issue.

‘This process has monopolized our time and attention for two months,’ said Plante, who proposed the compromise that was approved. ‘Please, please support this motion.’

<!–>

–>

A New Hampshire man has been charged with threatening to kill a U.S. senator, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

Brian Landry, 66, of Franklin, is accused of calling and leaving a threatening voicemail at a district field office of a senator on May 17, stating that he was a veteran sniper and was coming for the senator if the senator didn’t change.

Landry admitted to federal investigators that he had called the senator’s office but did not recall exactly what he said, the U.S. attorney’s office said. It was not immediately known if he is being represented by an attorney. Prosecutors did not reveal the senator’s identity.

If convicted, Landry faces a sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

<!–>

–>

Connecticut lawmakers voted Friday to tighten the state’s marriage laws, prohibiting anyone under age 18 from being issued a marriage license under any circumstance.

The legislation cleared the Senate unanimously, following a 98-45 bipartisan vote last month in the House of Representatives. It updates a 2017 anti-child marriage law that advocates contend created a dangerous loophole, leaving young people at risk of coercion and sexual abuse.

Currently in Connecticut, a 16- or 17-year-old may get a marriage license if their local probate court judge approves a petition filed on the minor’s behalf by their parent or guardian. Current state law also allows emancipated minors to marry at 16 or 17, something that will end under this new legislation as well.

The bill moves to Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont’s desk. A spokesperson said Friday the governor plans to sign the legislation into law.

Despite Friday’s unanimous Senate vote, there was criticism of the legislation in the House — including whether it’s needed given the small number of teen marriages in Connecticut, and the fact a probate judge can deny a license if they believe a young person is being coerced into marrying.

But Democratic Sen. Herron Gaston of Bridgeport spoke from personal experience about the importance of the legislation during Friday’s Senate debate. He described about how his sister was married to a 50-year-old man when she was 17 years old and living on the island of St. Lucia.

‘I’ve seen the devastating impact it has had on her physically, how it deprived her of her innocence and of her childhood,’ he said. ‘She bore five children from this marriage and eventually had to flee from the island of Saint Lucia and down to Florida in order to get away from her abuser.’

Some advocates for the legislation, dressed in wedding gowns with chains around their wrists, watched Friday’s proceedings from the Senate gallery. They noted all week how neighboring states, including Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, have already adopted the 18-year-old marriage requirement.

Connecticut is one of several states across the country this year that moved to raise the minimum age to legally marry to 18, including Vermont. Bids to raise the minimum marriage age in West Virginia and Washington stalled.

<!–>

–>

President Biden addressed the nation Friday evening, just one day after Congress passed a bill to raise the government’s borrowing limit in bipartisan fashion after weeks of tense negotiations between himself and Republican House leaders.

‘My fellow Americans, when I ran for president, I was told the days of bipartisanship were over and that Democrats and Republicans could no longer work together. But I refused to believe that, because America can never give in that way of thinking,’ Biden said. 

‘That’s why I’m speaking to you tonight, to report on the crisis averted and what we’re doing to protect America’s future. Passing this budget agreement was critical. The stakes could not have been higher,’ he said.

‘If we had failed to reach an agreement on the budget, there were extreme voices threatening to take America, for the first time in our two hundred forty-seven year history, into default on our national debt. Nothing, nothing would have been more irresponsible,’ he added. 

Biden went on to detail what effects a default in the debt the nation could have incurred, and described the bill’s passage as very good news for American people. ‘No one got everything they wanted, but the American people got what they need,’ he said.

The bipartisan deal will suspend the debt limit with no cap until Jan. 1, 2025, slashes non-defense spending to near fiscal year 2022 levels, pulls back on new funding set to go towards the IRS in addition to clawing back some unspent COVID-19 pandemic-era funds. The bill also caps spending increases at 1% for the following year.

With the bill’s passage and Biden’s expected signature, Washington will avoid a default on government debt, which the Treasury Department was predicting could happen on June 5.

Fox News’ Elizabeth Elkind and the Associated Press contributed to this report.