Stevens calls it sexist to suggest her fiancé's vote swayed her, six days after he announced that vote.

…(cont) Here's what's in the folder, in the order it happened. Wednesday the 28th, The Hill reports that Jason Turkish — Congresswoman Haley Stevens's fiancé — says he's voting for Mike Rogers over Abdul El-Sayed, and accuses El-Sayed of language he calls antisemitic. The next day, the 29th, the Washington Examiner runs what reads like the same interview — same Wednesday, Turkish saying El-Sayed makes the Jewish community less safe — a second paper picking up what the first one already had. I mention that only because I almost read it as two separate days, and it isn't; it's one remark, in two papers.

Two days later, the 30th, the Examiner has Congresswoman Stevens committing to campaign with El-Sayed for the final stretch — her former primary rival. The 31st, Common Dreams has El-Sayed answering a demand from Stevens that he apologize over his Israel comments, and saying he's staying focused on beating Rogers. So as of Halloween, by what's in my folder, the congresswoman was on the trail with El-Sayed, two days after her fiancé's statement ran in print.

Monday — and I'll go fast here, since another edition already walked through it — Rogers puts out a video promising no federal abortion action, Stevens endorses him anyway, and by that night the House Democratic caucus has moved her out. I'm not retracing that part. What's new is today.

Today the Examiner has Congresswoman Stevens calling it sexist — her word — that anyone would suggest her fiancé's vote had anything to do with her endorsement. Today's folder also has Michigan's Democratic Party chair, on CBS, saying she lied to her own constituents, and the vice president, on Fox, saying her endorsement will "certainly" help and give certain voters "permission." Three descriptions of the same Monday, filed the same Tuesday.

Here's a small demonstration. When I write a check at the bank down the street, it clears, and it's on the ledger whether I bring it up at dinner or not. The teller doesn't ask me if the check counted toward the balance — it counted the moment it cleared, same as Turkish's answer counted the moment the paper printed it, on the 28th.

So here's as far as I got before the branch finally picked up: her fiancé's vote was in print six days before she called the suggestion sexist. Was there a day between the 28th and the 2nd when her household was on the record for two different candidates in the same Senate race — and, hold on, don't put me back on hold yet — is that the same six days she's calling sexist?