What's in it for Warren?

**Want FOX News Halftime Report in your inbox every day? Sign up here.**

On the roster: What’s in it for Warren? - Big pro-life defeat at high court - Koch network opens fire in swing Senate races - Audible: May want to rephrase that - Cat call

It’s pretty clear that Hillary Clinton has a lot to gain today from her first campaign appearance with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

But what’s in it for Warren?

Certainly it’s partly the same as it is for every Democrat: helping to beat Donald Trump and keep the White House in Democratic hands for another four years.

Beyond that though, Warren’s upside looks more limited – certainly more limited than Clinton’s advantages in their nascent alliance. While Clinton has to be concerned about being tarred with some of Warren’s more aggressive liberal positions, policy-based candidate contamination generally works from the top of the ticket down.

In Warren’s enthusiastic support, Clinton gets a meaningful bulwark against the Bernie Bros, the angry insurgents of the Democratic Party disappointed that their own Trump-style revolution did not succeed.

Though their numbers are not large, their narrative that Clinton is a phony and a hustler could convince more Democrats to reject her and either stay home or vote for Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

Warren’s liberalism is as pristine as a Nalgene bottle full of glacier runoff. And that is something Clinton needs. Just look at what happens in the new WSJ/NBC News poll when Stein and libertarian nominee Gary Johnson are added into the mix. A 5-point lead for Clinton turns into statistical dead heat.

For Warren, this represents brand damage rather than enhancement. Vouching for Clinton who is, regardless of her primary rhetoric, a big-business Democrat with big connections to Wall Street, diminishes Warren.

Warren could have done to Clinton what conservatives are doing to Trump on the Republican side and have cockamamie conversations about the differences between “support” and “endorse” in a bid to preserve some distance with a widely disliked party nominee.

Certainly Warren was careful to keep her distance from Clinton in the nominating process even well after it was clear that Bernie Sanders was just raking up his frequent flyer miles.

She found more ways to say “we’ll see” than a parent in the month before Christmas.

So why now? And why with an enthusiastic swing-state campaign appearance in which Warren lavishly praised Clinton as a woman with “brains, guts, and steady hands but most of all…a good heart?”

Certainly, Trump is a factor. Given the way the overwhelming majority of Democrats see Trump -- evil -- much greater latitude in regard to liberal orthodoxy will be allowed in the name of preventing his victory.

But one also assumes that Warren is keeping up her end of a bargain, a bargain that is presumably a pretty good one from her point of view.

Clinton and Warren met at the former secretary of state’s Washington, D.C. home on June 10, three days after the California primary. But that was not the bank-busting senator’s first visit to Clinton’s tony Observatory Circle address.

Clinton received Warren at home at the end of 2014 when speculation was running high that Warren might launch a presidential bid of her own. Having watched how Clinton struggled with the general election possibility which is Sanders, Warren must’ve had some pangs of regret about her decision not to run. After all, she might’ve won.

We can assume, however, given the froth and fervor with which Warren is now endorsing, her Twitter trolling of Trump, as well as her decision not to run, that Clinton’s offer must’ve been pretty good.

Could it be the Treasury Department? The cold-chills down the spine of every banker should tell you how formidable that post would seem to Warren. Vice president? Despite the “Thelma and Louise” digs from Republicans, it’s not a completely catastrophic idea…only mostly catastrophic. A suite of policy provisions like boosting the federal minimum wage and beating down bankers? Yewbetcha.

We can’t know exactly but we do know whatever it is, it was good enough to get Warren to start trading on her own reputation for doctrinal purity. So it must be a doozy.

The Atlantic takes a look at what technologies are on the horizon for the homes of the future: “The home of the future will be freckled with sensors that soak up data about all the activity that goes on inside. Systems in the house will then use that trove of information to understand your needs. Already, certain washing machines can assess the size of each load—and how dirty the clothes are—to determine how much water and detergent to use. A company called June makes an ‘intelligent oven’ (hitting the market later this year) that will use sensors and cameras to figure out what kind of food you’re preparing, then adjust the temperature and cooking method accordingly… Down the road, smart surfaces all over the house will respond to whatever’s placed on them: A countertop could help keep a mug of coffee warm, or make sure a beer stays ice-cold.”

Flag on the play? - Email us at HALFTIMEREPORT@FOXNEWS.COM with your tips, comments or questions

Average of national presidential polls: 
Clinton vs. Trump: Clinton +6.8 points
Generic congressional vote: Democrats +2.2

Fox News: “The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Texas law regulating abortion clinics, delivering a 5-3 decision that was the high court’s first major foray into the abortion issue in nine years. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion for the court, with Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joining him. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. ‘We agree with the District Court that the surgical center requirement, like the admitting-privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions, and constitutes an ‘undue burden’ on their constitutional right to do so,’ Breyer wrote. Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in a series of Tweets hailed the decision as ‘a victory for women,’ but said there’s more work to be done.”

Now they tell him! Supremes slam McDonnell prosecution - Virginian-Pilot: “The U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion Monday vacating former Gov. Bob McDonnell’s corruption convictions and sent it back to the lower appeals court. ‘In addition to being inconsistent with both text and precedent, the Government’s expansive interpretation of ‘official act’ would raise significant constitutional concerns,’ according to the unanimous opinion. ‘Because the jury was not correctly instructed on the meaning of ‘official act,’ it may have convicted Governor McDonnell for conduct that is not unlawful.’ SCOTUSblog’s Amy Howe posted in a live chat on the opinion: ‘Very favorable to the governor but not over.’”

Trump says he may forbid Kasich, Cruz from speaking slots at convention - The Hill

But do they really want to? - Politico

Report: Thousands of Republican donors avoiding Trump - USA Today

Palin takes credit for Trump’s rise - Daily Beast

Clinton makes surprise appearance at N.Y. gay pride parade - Bloomberg

Bernie’s press secretary exits campaign - CNN

Two new ads from the conservative group Freedom Partners Action Fund focus on two Senate races in the key battleground states of Ohio and Nevada. The Buckeye State ad aims at Democratic candidate Ted Strickland who the group claims drained the state’s rainy day fund then hiked taxes and fees. In the Silver State, the conservative group’s ad fires at Democratic candidate Catherine Cortez Masto who they claim protected special interests and drove Uber out of the state.

“The good thing is, we have a candidate who doesn’t need to figure out what’s going on in order to say what he wants to do.” – Trump campaign Chairman Paul Manafort to NBC News.

“I am still humiliated and embarrassed by the [Democratic sit in over gun control]. These are the very people that are elected to create and write the laws of our nation. These people are supposed to be held to the highest standards of our land yet there they were splattered across media screens around the world acting like out of control teenagers throwing hissy fits because they didn't get their allowances.” – Ginnie Redd, Durham, N.C.

“The election this year will not be about the candidates - we have no clear choices.  We just have two people trying to outdo each other with caustic comments.  Instead, my vote will be based on one very important issue, an issue that carries with it the possible future direction of this country.  That issue is the Supreme Court.  One vacancy now and possibly several more in the near future will be critical to our future.” – Bill Norwood, Ozark, Mo.

“Now, if David Cameron resigns this fall and Boris Johnson becomes Prime Minister at the same time Donald Trump becomes President…could we call it a ‘good hair day?!!’” – Dennis Paine, Lake Monticello, Va.

[Share your color commentary -- email us at halftimereport@foxnews.com -- please make sure to include your name and home town.]

UPI: “A couple in Wisconsin called upon local police after their cat’s wild behavior left them feeling like hostages in their own home. Police responded to the home in Greenfield when a woman called to report that her pet cat had attacked her husband and sought help in having the animal removed. ‘This is gonna sound like a strange question but we have a cat and it’s going crazy and it attacked my husband and we're kind of hostage in our house and we’re just wondering who we should call to do something, get rid of the cat or help us,’ the woman said in the 911 call shared by WWDJT. Neither the woman nor her husband were seriously injured by the cat, which was ultimately captured and placed in custody of the Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control Commission.”

Chris Stirewalt is digital politics editor for Fox News. Sally Persons contributed to this report. Want FOX News Halftime Report in your inbox every day? Sign up here.