Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett faced another day of Senate questioning on Wednesday, during which Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked some questions about how the court balances out the president. In particular, Leahy wondered how Barrett would feel about a president pardoning themself, given that President Trump has claimed he has that power.

"Does a president have an absolute right to pardon himself for a crime?" Leahy asked Wednesday. Much like she has for other questions, and as she did when Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) asked about self-pardoning on Tuesday, Barrett declined to give an answer. "So far as I know, that question has never been litigated," Barrett said, preventing her from answering because she could have to decide on it later.

Barrett's lack of an answer came just after she affirmed that "no one is above the law," but said that even the Supreme Court cannot "control whether or not a president obeys" a court's ruling. That could come into play if the Supreme Court has to litigate in next month's presidential election. Kathryn Krawczyk

This year's election is looking familiar.

Polls have long given Democratic nominee Joe Biden a big advantage in this year's presidential race. And with more forecasting Democratic gains in the Senate as well, pollsters and analysts have started to compare 2020 to 1980. That's when former President Ronald Reagan swept the U.S. in a landslide, and Republicans ousted 12 Democrats in the Senate.

One of those pollsters estimating a blue wave is Charlie Cook, who runs The Cook Political Report. Cook noted in a Wednesday tweet that a big presidential win doesn't necessarily mean a complete wave — it didn't in 1972 and 1984. But he thinks this year's likely big win for Biden will be different, recalling how the losses trickled in for Democrats in 1980 and saying this year's Senate losses for Republicans "won't hit 12 but could get to be a pretty big number."

The idea's most ardent defender is Joe Trippi, who has been working on Democratic campaigns since 1980. He has repeated over and over that this year's election looks much more like 1980 than 2016, crediting the fatigue voters already feel after just four years of Trump.

Cook's insistence that just one Democratic-held Senate seat is in play this year versus nine Republican seats has only added to Trippi's evidence. Kathryn Krawczyk

It looks like Sacha Baron Cohen's attempt to prank Rudy Giuliani for his new Borat film was a great success.

The comedian's sequel, in which Borat travels to America in hopes of gifting his daughter to someone close to the Trump administration, drops on Amazon this Friday. But spoiler-filled details emerged on Wednesday about a shocking scene in which Baron Cohen dupes President Trump's personal lawyer.

In the movie, The Guardian reveals, Giuliani speaks with the actress who portrays Borat's daughter for what he thinks is a conservative news show, after which "the pair retreat at her suggestion for a drink to the bedroom of a hotel suite, which is rigged with concealed cameras." From there, Giuliani "can be seen lying back on the bed, fiddling with his untucked shirt" and then "reaching into his trousers and apparently touching his genitals," The Guardian writes.

At that point, Borat reportedly interrupts the two, bursting in to say, "She's 15. She's too old for you."

In reviews for the film published on Wednesday, critics were naturally gobsmacked by the Giuliani moment, with the Los Angeles Times speaking of a "what-the-hell-am-I-seeing" sequence that will likely lead to "indignant lawsuits," while Deadline said that the "big Giuliani finale is a stunner" and Vanity Fair wrote that "you cannot help wondering exactly what Giuliani may have done next" had he not been interrupted.

Giuliani actually revealed earlier this year that he called the police on Baron Cohen over a prank interview, at the time telling Page Six, in a statement that didn't exactly age well, "I felt good about myself because he didn't get me." Perhaps he meant to conclude that sentence with a Borat-style "not!" Brendan Morrow

Mel Brooks is ripping President Trump for his COVID-19 response and backing Democratic nominee Joe Biden for president in what is evidently his first political video ever.

The icon of comedy in a video shared Wednesday by his son Max endorsed the Democratic nominee for president, doing so while his son and grandson stood outside behind him.

"They can't be with me," Brooks explained. "Why? Because of this coronavirus, and Donald Trump's not doing a damn thing about it. So many people have died, and when you're dead, you can't do much!"

Brooks went on to endorse Biden, saying he's voting for the former vice president because "Joe likes facts, because Joe likes science" and because he "will keep us going."

Max Brooks previously shared a hilarious social distancing PSA in March featuring the Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles director in isolation, but he noted on Wednesday that at 94, his father "has never made a political video. Until now." Brendan Morrow

Michael Bloomberg isn't just outspending President Trump in Florida. He's dragging the president into a "money pit," a former a former Florida Democratic Party spokesman tells Politico.

After his brief and pricey failed presidential run, the former New York City mayor threw his support and his billions behind Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Bloomberg has specifically focused on the critical swing state of Florida, pledging to spend at least $100 million there, mostly on TV ads, to boost Biden's candidacy. Both Republicans and Democrats aren't quite sure why Bloomberg is spending so much on TV versus social media and voter outreach. But Max Steele, a former Florida Democratic Party spokesman, tells Politico the point is rather to "keep [Trump] mired down" because "Florida is a money pit."

Steve Schale, who leads the pro-Biden Unite the Country super PAC, agreed. Because of Bloomberg and other PACs' overhwleming spending, "Trump has now been committed to the equivalent of land war in Asia by having to spend so much of his money in Florida," Schale told Politico. In turn, Trump hasn't had the money he needs to compete in the north and midwest, namely Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. And with Florida covered by Bloomberg, other Democratic PACs have been able to head for the northern battlegrounds where Trump is falling behind.

The idea that Trump is hemorrhaging money to keep up with Biden is boosted by the fact that his campaign reported having just $63 million in the bank at the end of September, even after raising $1.5 billion since the 2016 election. Read more at Politico. Kathryn Krawczyk

The Department of Justice and Purdue Pharma have reached an $8.3 billion settlement regarding the OxyContin maker's role in the opioid crisis, the DOJ announced during a Wednesday press conference. In addition, Purdue will plead guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and violating federal anti-kickback laws, The Associated Press reports.

Purdue will plead guilty to offering doctors kickback payments if they wrote more prescriptions for Purdue's painkillers, as well as using health record software to push for those prescriptions. The company will also have to admit it held up Drug Enforcement Administration investigations into the company as part of the settlement. It will forfeit at least $2 billion to the federal government, pay at least a $3.54 billion criminal fine, and fork over $2.8 billion in damages, among other charges. Purdue filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last year, preventing it from paying the criminal fine right away.

The settlement doesn't absolve Purdue's owners and executives from criminal liability, as a criminal investigation into them and the company is still ongoing. It will turn Purdue into a public benefit company managed by a trust and remove its owners, the Sackler family, of any involvement. The company also still has to deal with thousands of claims from local and state officials over the opioid epidemic as they dealt with more than 450,000 overdose deaths in the past 20 years. Purdue has suggested paying $10 billion to settle them all. Kathryn Krawczyk

Pope Francis has reportedly backed civil unions for same-sex couples in a "major step" for the Catholic Church.

The pope in a documentary that premiered on Wednesday at the Rome Film Festival expressed support for creating "a civil union law" for same-sex couples so that "they are legally covered," Catholic News Agency reported.

"Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family," Francis reportedly says in the film Francesco. "They're children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it."

The pope also reportedly says in the documentary, "What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered."

This, Catholic News Agency noted, was a significant departure from the Vatican's stance on the issue and from the position of Francis' predecessors. The remarks were confirmed by The Associated Press, which noted that Francis had supported civil unions for same-sex couples as archbishop of Buenos Aires but had never done so as pope.

Jesuit priest and America Magazine editor James Martin praised the pope's remarks, describing them as "a major step forward in the church's support for LGBTQ people."

David Gibson, director of Fordham University's Center on Religion and Culture, also told The Washington Post, "This is huge. Looking behind all this, he's basically saying, again, we're not out here to be culture warriors. We're not out here to pick fights. We are out here to build up the family." Brendan Morrow