therightscoop--2020-01-27--WOW: John Bolton’s own former Chief of Staff calls on him to withdraw book immediately…

Fred Fleitz , the former Chief of Staff to Bolton both in the mid 2000s and in 2018 , believes that Bolton made a big mistake writing a tell-all book to be published during Trump ’ s reelection campaign , and is calling on Bolton to withdraw the book immediately : FOX NEWS – It was crushing to read weekend press reports that my friend and former boss John Bolton plans to publish a tell-all book on his time as President Trump ’ s National Security Adviser .
The book reportedly will be published in March 2020 .
Given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confidential discussions with his senior advisers , I strongly disagree with Bolton ’ s decision to release the book before the November presidential election and call on him to withdraw it from the publisher immediately .
I have known John Bolton for 30 years and served as his chief of staff twice , at the State Department from 2001-2005 and at the White House National Security Council in 2018 .
He is an exceptional national security expert and a man of great integrity .
President Trump ’ s choice of Bolton was one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I very sorry when the courageous and visionary national security adviser left the White House after the relationship broke down .
Bolton played an important role in some of President Trump ’ s most successful foreign policy decisions , including withdrawing from the nuclear deal with Iran , moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem , and the 2018 Counterterrorism Strategy .
While there was some criticism of Bolton ’ s performance as National Security Adviser , most of it was unfair and reflected the difficulty of overseeing President Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holdovers in other government agencies , especially the State Department , were actively working to obstruct and defeat the president ’ s policies .
Presidents must be able to candidly consult with their advisers without worrying they will leak these discussions to the press or obtain high-dollar book contracts to publish them .
A book by a former national security adviser ahead of a president ’ s reelection bid may set a dangerous precedent since it could discourage future presidents from seeking advice from expert advisers on sensitive national security matters .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow the president and other senior officials to keep certain communications and internal deliberations private if disclosing them would disrupt the functions or decision-making processes of the executive branch .
Fleitz says that while Bolton may not have leaked the book , he ’ s still responsible for the leak : I haven ’ t seen Bolton ’ s book manuscript and I don ’ t know what ’ s in it .
I take Bolton and his staff at their word that they did not leak the manuscript to the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still responsible for this leak since Bolton ’ s explosive book was sent to the leak-prone National Security Council for a security review in December 2019 so the book could be published in the spring of 2020 .
It also is inexplicable how such a sensitive manuscript could be sent to the NSC in the middle of the impeachment process .
Under such circumstances , a leak of the manuscript was all but certain .
If a manuscript of this sensitivity was to be published at all , this should happen after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 .
I don ’ t understand the need for a former National Security Adviser to publish a tell-all book critical of a president he served , especially during a presidential reelection campaign that will determine the fate of the country .
There will be a time for Bolton to speak out without appearing to try to tip a presidential election .
As much as I ’ ve been a fan of Bolton over the years , I do think Fleitz is right here .
Even if the impeachment weren ’ t happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening and it ’ s just not the right time to release this kind of tell-all book , especially from someone so close to the president .
But it is curious , or ‘ inexplicable ’ as Fleitz points out , that Bolton would hand over such sensitive material to the leaky NSC during this impeachment saga .
It really makes me wonder if there ’ s some bad blood between Trump and Bolton and this is his way of getting back at Trump ?
Seriously , that doesn ’ t sound like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many years and I find it difficult to believe he would do such a thing .
I ’ ll wait until we know more before I render judgement…

Fred Fleitz, the former Chief of Staff to Bolton both in the mid 2000s and in 2018, believes that Bolton made a big mistake writing a tell-all book to be published during Trump’s reelection campaign, and is calling on Bolton to withdraw the book immediately:
FOX NEWS – It was crushing to read weekend press reports that my friend and former boss John Bolton plans to publish a tell-all book on his time as President Trump’s National Security Adviser. The book reportedly will be published in March 2020. Given the importance of protecting a president’s confidential discussions with his senior advisers, I strongly disagree with Bolton’s decision to release the book before the November presidential election and call on him to withdraw it from the publisher immediately. I have known John Bolton for 30 years and served as his chief of staff twice, at the State Department from 2001-2005 and at the White House National Security Council in 2018. He is an exceptional national security expert and a man of great integrity. President Trump’s choice of Bolton was one of his best personnel decisions and was I very sorry when the courageous and visionary national security adviser left the White House after the relationship broke down. Bolton played an important role in some of President Trump’s most successful foreign policy decisions, including withdrawing from the nuclear deal with Iran, moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and the 2018 Counterterrorism Strategy. While there was some criticism of Bolton’s performance as National Security Adviser, most of it was unfair and reflected the difficulty of overseeing President Trump’s national security policies when careerists and Obama holdovers in other government agencies, especially the State Department, were actively working to obstruct and defeat the president’s policies.
Fleitz believes Bolton’s book sets a “dangerous precedent”…
Presidents must be able to candidly consult with their advisers without worrying they will leak these discussions to the press or obtain high-dollar book contracts to publish them. A book by a former national security adviser ahead of a president’s reelection bid may set a dangerous precedent since it could discourage future presidents from seeking advice from expert advisers on sensitive national security matters. This is why executive privilege exists: to allow the president and other senior officials to keep certain communications and internal deliberations private if disclosing them would disrupt the functions or decision-making processes of the executive branch.
Fleitz says that while Bolton may not have leaked the book, he’s still responsible for the leak:
I haven’t seen Bolton’s book manuscript and I don’t know what’s in it. I take Bolton and his staff at their word that they did not leak the manuscript to the New York Times. But I believe they are still responsible for this leak since Bolton’s explosive book was sent to the leak-prone National Security Council for a security review in December 2019 so the book could be published in the spring of 2020. It also is inexplicable how such a sensitive manuscript could be sent to the NSC in the middle of the impeachment process. Under such circumstances, a leak of the manuscript was all but certain. If a manuscript of this sensitivity was to be published at all, this should happen after the election, not in the spring of 2020. I don’t understand the need for a former National Security Adviser to publish a tell-all book critical of a president he served, especially during a presidential reelection campaign that will determine the fate of the country. There will be a time for Bolton to speak out without appearing to try to tip a presidential election.
As much as I’ve been a fan of Bolton over the years, I do think Fleitz is right here. Even if the impeachment weren’t happening right now, the reelection campaign is happening and it’s just not the right time to release this kind of tell-all book, especially from someone so close to the president.
But it is curious, or ‘inexplicable’ as Fleitz points out, that Bolton would hand over such sensitive material to the leaky NSC during this impeachment saga. It really makes me wonder if there’s some bad blood between Trump and Bolton and this is his way of getting back at Trump? Seriously, that doesn’t sound like the Bolton I’ve respected over many years and I find it difficult to believe he would do such a thing. I’ll wait until we know more before I render judgement…


therightscoop--2020-01-27--Buttigieg challenged on abortion by pro-life Democrat [VIDEO]

Pete Buttigieg was challenged last night on abortion by a pro-life Democrat , who wanted to know if he even wanted the votes of pro-life Democratic voters and if he ’ d be willing to support changing the language in the Democratic platform to make it more inclusive for these same pro-life voters : In a nutshell , Buttigieg wouldn ’ t budge an inch on the issue .
Not on his own language/position nor on changing the language of the party platform excluding pro-life Democrats .
CHRIS WALLACE , FOX NEWS : We have a question now from Kristin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DAY , AUDIENCE : I am a proud pro-life Democrat .
So do you want the support of pro-life Democrats , pro-life Democratic voters ?
There are about 21 million of us .
And if so , would you support more moderate platform language in the Democratic Party to ensure that the party of diversity , of inclusion really does include everybody ?
BUTTIGIEG : Well , I respect where you ’ re coming from , and I hope to earn your vote .
But I ’ m not going to try to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am pro-choice .
And I believe that a woman ought to be able to make that decision .
Here ’ s what I… But I know that the difference of opinion that you and I have is one that we have come by honestly .
And the best that I can offer — and it may win your vote and , if not , I understand — the best I can offer is that if we can ’ t agree on where to draw the line , the next best thing we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ draw the line .
And in my view , it ’ s the woman who ’ s faced with that decision in her own life .
WALLACE : This is an interesting moment , because President Trump spoke at the March to Life movement .
He was the first president ever to actually appear at the March to Life movement .
And I ’ m curious , Kristin , were you satisfied with the answer you got from the mayor ?
DAY : No , I was not , because he did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And the second part was , the Democratic platform contains language that basically says that we don ’ t belong , we have no part in the party , because it says abortion should be legal up to nine months , the government should pay for it , and there ’ s nothing that says that people have a diversity of views on this issue should be included in the party .
In 1996 , and I guess several years after that , there was language in the Democratic platform that said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differing views on this issue , but we are a big tent party that includes everybody .
And so , therefore , we welcome you , people like me , into the party so we can work on issues that we agree on .
So my question was , would you be open to language like that in the Democratic platform , that really did say that our party is diverse and inclusive and we want everybody ?
BUTTIGIEG : Well , I support the position of my party that this kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone .
And I support the Roe vs. Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy there are very few restrictions and late in pregnancy there are very few exceptions .
And again , the best I can offer is that we may disagree on that very important issue , and hopefully we will be able to partner on other issues .
DAY : So that would be a no ?
WALLACE : So what do you — what do you say to Democrats who are pro-life — and there are obviously millions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do you say , then , to them on an issue of such deep conscience , that they should overlook this particular issue and look at the whole sum of views , or go find another party ?
BUTTIGIEG : Look , I ’ ve never encountered a politician or , frankly , another person that I agreed with 100 percent of the time , and even on very important things .
We may sometimes disagree .
But at the end of the day , this is what I believe .
And people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differently .
But this is something I believe is so important , especially because I ’ m never going to have to make that decision .
And so I may have my views , but I can not imagine that a decision that a woman confronts is going to ever be better medically or morally because it ’ s being dictated by any government official .
And that ’ s just where I am on the issue .
WALLACE : I think it ’ s fair to say Kristin is not clapping , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process .

Pete Buttigieg was challenged last night on abortion by a pro-life Democrat, who wanted to know if he even wanted the votes of pro-life Democratic voters and if he’d be willing to support changing the language in the Democratic platform to make it more inclusive for these same pro-life voters:
In a nutshell, Buttigieg wouldn’t budge an inch on the issue. Not on his own language/position nor on changing the language of the party platform excluding pro-life Democrats.
Here’s the transcript by RCP:
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS: We have a question now from Kristin Day about abortion. Kristin?
MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG: Hi.
KRISTIN DAY, AUDIENCE: I am a proud pro-life Democrat. So do you want the support of pro-life Democrats, pro-life Democratic voters? There are about 21 million of us. And if so, would you support more moderate platform language in the Democratic Party to ensure that the party of diversity, of inclusion really does include everybody?
BUTTIGIEG: Well, I respect where you’re coming from, and I hope to earn your vote. But I’m not going to try to earn your vote by tricking you. I am pro-choice. And I believe that a woman ought to be able to make that decision. Here’s what I…
(APPLAUSE)
But I know that the difference of opinion that you and I have is one that we have come by honestly. And the best that I can offer — and it may win your vote and, if not, I understand — the best I can offer is that if we can’t agree on where to draw the line, the next best thing we can do is agree on who should draw the line. And in my view, it’s the woman who’s faced with that decision in her own life.
WALLACE: This is an interesting moment, because President Trump spoke at the March to Life movement. He was the first president ever to actually appear at the March to Life movement. And I’m curious, Kristin, were you satisfied with the answer you got from the mayor?
DAY: No, I was not, because he did not answer the second part of my question. And the second part was, the Democratic platform contains language that basically says that we don’t belong, we have no part in the party, because it says abortion should be legal up to nine months, the government should pay for it, and there’s nothing that says that people have a diversity of views on this issue should be included in the party.
In 1996, and I guess several years after that, there was language in the Democratic platform that said that we understand that people have very differing views on this issue, but we are a big tent party that includes everybody. And so, therefore, we welcome you, people like me, into the party so we can work on issues that we agree on.
So my question was, would you be open to language like that in the Democratic platform, that really did say that our party is diverse and inclusive and we want everybody?
BUTTIGIEG: Well, I support the position of my party that this kind of medical care needs to be available to everyone. And I support the Roe vs. Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy there are very few restrictions and late in pregnancy there are very few exceptions.
And again, the best I can offer is that we may disagree on that very important issue, and hopefully we will be able to partner on other issues.
DAY: So that would be a no?
WALLACE: So what do you — what do you say to Democrats who are pro-life — and there are obviously millions of them, as well — what do you say, then, to them on an issue of such deep conscience, that they should overlook this particular issue and look at the whole sum of views, or go find another party?
BUTTIGIEG: Look, I’ve never encountered a politician or, frankly, another person that I agreed with 100 percent of the time, and even on very important things. We may sometimes disagree.
But at the end of the day, this is what I believe. And people I care about and respect view it differently. But this is something I believe is so important, especially because I’m never going to have to make that decision. And so I may have my views, but I cannot imagine that a decision that a woman confronts is going to ever be better medically or morally because it’s being dictated by any government official. And that’s just where I am on the issue.
(APPLAUSE)
WALLACE: I think it’s fair to say Kristin is not clapping, but that’s part of the process.
BUTTIGIEG: I understand.


therightscoop--2020-01-28--Senate Republicans met to discuss witnesses and here’s what we know…

Senate Republicans met today to discuss witnesses and such after the closing arguments were over .
The meeting is completed @ @ @ @ @ we know : I like how this sounds .
I want to be over and @ @ @ @ @ .
But here ’ s a couple more tweets that don ’ t sound aaaassss @ @ @ @ @ Collins are going to side with Democrats on witnesses .
If Alexander and Murkowski vote @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 51 .
However Politico seems more optimistic…

Senate Republicans met today to discuss witnesses and such after the closing arguments were over. The meeting is completed and here’s what we know:
“The overwhelming consensus is we’ve heard enough – and it’s time to move to a final judgment,” said Sen. John Barrasso, a member of the Senate GOP leadership, says after conference meeting — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 28, 2020
Bolton claims may be a bust. Senate Republicans hint after a closed-door meeting Tuesday afternoon that the GOP consensus is mostly against witnesses. The whip (vote counter), Sen. John Thune, tells us the Senate trial "shouldn't" go beyond Friday. "We are kind of on schedule" — Susan Ferrechio (@susanferrechio) January 28, 2020
I like how this sounds. I want to be over and done with this on Friday.
But here’s a couple more tweets that don’t sound aaaassss good….
Cornyn after GOP conference meeting on Senate trial: “Obviously there was a lot of different views about what people heard and mainly the discussion was how to think about it since it’s such a unique process.” — Katherine Faulders (@KFaulders) January 28, 2020
There is clearly no united position on witnesses coming out of the Senate GOP meeting. Senators are telling reporters to talk to individual senators for their positions. The Senate vote on whether to call more witnesses is in three days. — Laura Litvan (@LauraLitvan) January 28, 2020
GOP senate meeting breaking up. @SenAlexander said he’s waiting until after the two days of Q&A to make up his mind on whether to vote for witnesses. — Eli Stokols (@EliStokols) January 28, 2020
From colleague Jason Donner. Murkowski on Senate GOP Conference mtg on rounds of questions/where GOPers stand with witnesses: "I’m not going to comment on what may have been discussed in the meeting." — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) January 28, 2020
Obviously Romney and Collins are going to side with Democrats on witnesses. If Alexander and Murkowski vote for witnesses, then that’s 51.
However Politico seems more optimistic…
NEW: Senate Republicans feel like they can beat witness vote after private meeting Tuesday. Per attendees, "strong" presentation against hearing new evidence. "I feel good," says third attendee https://t.co/1CkuSYKj2V@BresPolitico @heatherscope @marianne_levine — Burgess Everett (@burgessev) January 28, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-28--DOJ accuses John Bolton of ‘grossly’ mischaracterizing Trump’s remarks

The DOJ is accusing Bolton , via his book , of grossly mischaracterizing a discussion he had with AG Barr , suggesting it ’ s not even remotely correct : NY POST – The Justice Department is denying a New York Times report based on John Bolton ’ s new book — specifically on a meeting the former national security adviser had with Attorney General William Barr about President Trump ’ s relationship with world leaders .
According to the Times ’ reporting on the manuscript , Bolton raised concerns in a meeting with Barr that Trump was “ effectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Turkey and China.
” Barr allegedly responded by voicing his own fears regarding Trump possibly creating the appearance that he had undue influence over active DOJ investigations of companies in the two countries .
In a statement , Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec accused Bolton of “ grossly ” mischaracterizing the exchange .
“ While the Department of Justice has not reviewed Mr. Bolton ’ s manuscript , the New York Times ’ account of this conversation grossly mischaracterizes what Attorney General Barr and Mr. Bolton discussed , ” Kupec said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal favors ’ or ‘ undue influence ’ on investigations , nor did Attorney General Barr say that the President ’ s conversations with foreign leaders was improper .
“ If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written , then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views — views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree .
”

The DOJ is accusing Bolton, via his book, of grossly mischaracterizing a discussion he had with AG Barr, suggesting it’s not even remotely correct:
NY POST – The Justice Department is denying a New York Times report based on John Bolton’s new book — specifically on a meeting the former national security adviser had with Attorney General William Barr about President Trump’s relationship with world leaders.
According to the Times’ reporting on the manuscript, Bolton raised concerns in a meeting with Barr that Trump was “effectively granting personal favors to the autocratic leaders of Turkey and China.”
Barr allegedly responded by voicing his own fears regarding Trump possibly creating the appearance that he had undue influence over active DOJ investigations of companies in the two countries.
In a statement, Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec accused Bolton of “grossly” mischaracterizing the exchange.
“While the Department of Justice has not reviewed Mr. Bolton’s manuscript, the New York Times’ account of this conversation grossly mischaracterizes what Attorney General Barr and Mr. Bolton discussed,” Kupec said.
“There was no discussion of ‘personal favors’ or ‘undue influence’ on investigations, nor did Attorney General Barr say that the President’s conversations with foreign leaders was improper.
“If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written, then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views — views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree.”


therightscoop--2020-01-28--Lindsey Graham predicts 51 votes to call Bidens, whistleblower, etc…

Lindsey Graham spoke with the press today and predicted that he ’ ll have 51 votes to call both Joe @ @ @ @ @ well as the whistleblower as witnesses .
Graham doesn ’ t agree with the reported @ @ @ @ @ that some Senators are trying to strike , saying “ if people want witnesses , @ @ @ @ @ get a lot of witnesses.
” Graham has said before that he doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ But if they insist on opening this up to witnesses , Graham says they are @ @ @ @ @ whether or not it was legitimate for Trump to believe there was something corrupt that @ @ @ @ @ means calling both Joe and Hunter Biden , the whistleblower , and a DNC staffer @ @ @ @ @ about the 2016 election .

Lindsey Graham spoke with the press today and predicted that he’ll have 51 votes to call both Joe and Hunter Biden, as well as the whistleblower as witnesses.
Watch:
Graham doesn’t agree with the reported 1 to 1 witness deal that some Senators are trying to strike, saying “if people want witnesses, we’re going to get a lot of witnesses.”
Graham has said before that he doesn’t want to call witnesses. But if they insist on opening this up to witnesses, Graham says they are going down the road of whether or not it was legitimate for Trump to believe there was something corrupt that needed investigating.
And that means calling both Joe and Hunter Biden, the whistleblower, and a DNC staffer who reportedly met with Ukrainians about the 2016 election.
Watch the video for more…


therightscoop--2020-01-28--WATCH LIVE: White House continues opening arguments in Senate impeachment trial at 1pm

The White House will continue their opening arguments in defense of President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial .
You @ @ @ @ @ live stream of your choice :

The White House will continue their opening arguments in defense of President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial. You can watch below on the live stream of your choice:
C-SPAN:
FOX NEWS:
FOX BUSINESS:


therightscoop--2020-01-29--Mark Levin has a few questions for Republican Senators who might vote to call witnesses…

Mark Levin has posted a few questions for Senators Romney , Collins , Murkowski and others regarding their desire to @ @ @ @ @ Senate impeachment trial .
First , he makes a couple of points about the ‘ @ @ @ @ @ one of his latest tweets , Levin points out that up to 7 Republicans are @ @ @ @ @ and that the questions below apply to them as well : These are Levin ’ @ @ @ @ @ good ones too… And the very last point he made tonight is about media bias @ @ @ @ @ red state Democrats :

Mark Levin has posted a few questions for Senators Romney, Collins, Murkowski and others regarding their desire to call for witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial.
First, he makes a couple of points about the ‘Bolton bombshell’:
1. There is nothing in the New York Times article or anywhere else that states John Bolton has first-hand knowledge or information of a quid pro quo, treason, bribery, other high crimes or misdemeanors. Nothing. — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 28, 2020
2. And the reason is, there was no quid pro quo and there is no impeachable offense. It doesn't matter what's in Bolton's manuscript. Therefore, the only thing Bolton's testimony could do is give a forum — an impeachment trial — for him to voice his disgruntlement. — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 28, 2020
In one of his latest tweets, Levin points out that up to 7 Republicans are considering a vote for witnesses and that the questions below apply to them as well:
I'm hearing that in addition to Romney, Collins and Murkowski, others considering supporting witnesses include Portman, Cassidy, Alexander, and Toomey. The questions I posted earlier obviously apply to them as well. — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020
These are Levin’s questions and they are good ones too…
ONE:
1. Question to Romney, Collins, & Murkowski: if John Bolton had evidence of an actual quid pro quo or impeachable offense, why didn’t he immediately report it to Congress or criminal authorities or ethics officials; or why didn’t go public immediately with a press conference? — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020
2. Answer: he had no evidence and had no evidence. — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020
TWO:
Question for Romney, Collins & Murkowski: if House Democrats didn’t have time to seek the testimony of Bolton and others because of potential litigation, why does the same litigation prospect not effect the decision to call Bolton, et al, as Senate witnesses? — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020
THREE:
Question for Romney, Collins & Murkowski? While you indicate an interest in Bolton as a witness, why don’t you indicate any interest in Adam Schiff, the so-called whistleblower, and Hunter Biden? — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020
And the very last point he made tonight is about media bias when it comes to the red state Democrats:
Notice most of the media do not confront or press 3 Democrats from Trump-supporting states — Manchin, Jones, and Sinema — about witnesses and removal. They dare not threaten the Democrats or even make them uncomfortable. — Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) January 29, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-30--REPORT: John Roberts is blocking Whistleblower’s name from being identified on Senate floor and Rand

REPORT: John Roberts is blocking Whistleblower’s name from being identified on Senate floor and Rand Paul doesn’t like it…

It ’ s being reported that Chief Justice John Roberts has made it clear that he will not allow the whistleblower ’ s name to be identified on the Senate floor and has even blocked a question by Rand Paul which mentioned it : POLITICO – Chief Justice John Roberts has communicated to senators that he will not read aloud the alleged Ukraine whistleblower ’ s name or otherwise publicly relay questions that might out the official , a move that ’ s effectively blocked Sen. Rand Paul from asking a question .
In a behind-the-scenes fight , Paul , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that violate Roberts ’ s edict , according to several Republicans familiar with the dynamics .
It ’ s a vintage Rand Paul effort that ’ s annoying fellow Republicans and could come to a head on Thursday .
Paul — who has strongly opposed the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump — has been floating the alleged whistleblower ’ s name in media interviews for months .
But Roberts signaled to GOP senators on Tuesday that he wouldn ’ t allow the whistleblower ’ s name to be mentioned during the question-and-answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sources .
Roberts was allowed to screen senators ’ questions before they were submitted for reading on the Senate floor , the sources noted .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) and other top Republicans are also discouraging disclosure of the whistleblower ’ s identity as well .
Paul has submitted at least one question with the name of a person believed to be the whistleblower , although it was rejected .
Sen. Mike Lee ( R-Utah ) composed and asked a question regarding the whistleblower earlier Wednesday that tiptoed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the House impeachment drive .
“ We ’ ve got members who , as you have already determined I think , have an interest in questions related to the whistleblower , ” Senate Majority Whip John Thune ( R-S.D . )
said .
“ But I suspect that won ’ t happen .
I don ’ t think that happens .
And I guess I would hope it doesn ’ t. ” Paul has complained that he is being preventing from asking a question about the origin of the Ukraine investigation , although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with reporters on Wednesday evening .
“ It ’ s still an ongoing process , it may happen tomorrow , ” Paul told reporters .
If the Senate votes to call witnesses , it will be unavoidable at that point in time .
But until then it looks like Roberts is going along with the ridiculous protection the partisan whistleblower is getting .

It’s being reported that Chief Justice John Roberts has made it clear that he will not allow the whistleblower’s name to be identified on the Senate floor and has even blocked a question by Rand Paul which mentioned it:
POLITICO – Chief Justice John Roberts has communicated to senators that he will not read aloud the alleged Ukraine whistleblower’s name or otherwise publicly relay questions that might out the official, a move that’s effectively blocked Sen. Rand Paul from asking a question. In a behind-the-scenes fight, Paul, a Kentucky Republican, has composed questions that violate Roberts’s edict, according to several Republicans familiar with the dynamics. It’s a vintage Rand Paul effort that’s annoying fellow Republicans and could come to a head on Thursday. Paul — who has strongly opposed the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump — has been floating the alleged whistleblower’s name in media interviews for months. But Roberts signaled to GOP senators on Tuesday that he wouldn’t allow the whistleblower’s name to be mentioned during the question-and-answer session that started the next day, the sources. Roberts was allowed to screen senators’ questions before they were submitted for reading on the Senate floor, the sources noted.
McConnell reportedly agrees…
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other top Republicans are also discouraging disclosure of the whistleblower’s identity as well. Paul has submitted at least one question with the name of a person believed to be the whistleblower, although it was rejected. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) composed and asked a question regarding the whistleblower earlier Wednesday that tiptoed around identifying the source who essentially sparked the House impeachment drive. “We’ve got members who, as you have already determined I think, have an interest in questions related to the whistleblower,” Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said. “But I suspect that won’t happen. I don’t think that happens. And I guess I would hope it doesn’t.” Paul has complained that he is being preventing from asking a question about the origin of the Ukraine investigation, although he didn’t get into specifics with reporters on Wednesday evening. “It’s still an ongoing process, it may happen tomorrow,” Paul told reporters.
If the Senate votes to call witnesses, it will be unavoidable at that point in time. But until then it looks like Roberts is going along with the ridiculous protection the partisan whistleblower is getting.


therightscoop--2020-01-30--WATCH the powerful pro-life Super Bowl ad that FOX won’t air…

According to Lyric Gillett , the founder of Faces of Choice , Fox won ’ t be airing her powerful pro-life ad during the Super Bowl , something she ’ s been trying to negotiate since July of last year .
FOX told the Washington Times that “ the network sold out its ad space early on ” for the Superbowl .
But if that ’ s the case , the how is Bloomberg getting time for his own campaign ads when he didn ’ t even start running until just before Thanksgiving .
If she ’ s been negotiating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sold her placement .
Gillet says that FOX just strung her along , saying “ over the past six months , we have struggled to have FOX clear a 30 second spot for Super Bowl Sunday.
” She said a few days ago she still hadn ’ t received an answer and even started a petition when she became aware that there were 5 more spots opening up , but apparently it didn ’ t help .
Personally I love the ad and how it frames the abortion ‘ choice ’ : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Choice has a face , and choice is a person.
” It ’ s truly powerful and would be a great Super Bowl ad if only FOX weren ’ t so cowardly and afraid of the Left .

According to Lyric Gillett, the founder of Faces of Choice, Fox won’t be airing her powerful pro-life ad during the Super Bowl, something she’s been trying to negotiate since July of last year.
Watch:
FOX told the Washington Times that “the network sold out its ad space early on” for the Superbowl.
But if that’s the case, the how is Bloomberg getting time for his own campaign ads when he didn’t even start running until just before Thanksgiving. If she’s been negotiating since July, surely FOX could have sold her placement.
Gillet says that FOX just strung her along, saying “over the past six months, we have struggled to have FOX clear a 30 second spot for Super Bowl Sunday.” She said a few days ago she still hadn’t received an answer and even started a petition when she became aware that there were 5 more spots opening up, but apparently it didn’t help.
Personally I love the ad and how it frames the abortion ‘choice’: “Choice is not merely a word. Choice has a face, and choice is a person.” It’s truly powerful and would be a great Super Bowl ad if only FOX weren’t so cowardly and afraid of the Left.


therightscoop--2020-02-05--BREAKING: Manchin will vote to impeach Trump

Joe Manchin from West Virginia has now come out and said he will vote to impeach Trump : So there @ @ @ @ @ like the only bipartisan vote will be for impeachment , thanks to Mitt Romney .
@ @ @ @ @ come through on this one .
I hope the people of West Virginia remember this @ @ @ @ @ up in four more years .

Joe Manchin from West Virginia has now come out and said he will vote to impeach Trump:
Voting whether or not to remove a sitting President has been a truly difficult decision, and after listening to the arguments presented by both sides, I have reached my conclusion reluctantly. My full statement: pic.twitter.com/yIgy6Qf5JZ — Senator Joe Manchin (@Sen_JoeManchin) February 5, 2020
MANCHIN will vote to convict the President.
SINEMA will vote to convict the president.
They join JONES and all other Democrats voting to convict. ROMNEY is the only senator to announce a vote against Party. — Libby Casey (@libcasey) February 5, 2020
So there you go. It looks like the only bipartisan vote will be for impeachment, thanks to Mitt Romney.
I really thought Manchin would come through on this one. I hope the people of West Virginia remember this when his term is finally up in four more years.


therightscoop--2020-02-05--BREAKING: Senate requests Hunter Biden’s official travel records… [UPDATED]

Senator Grassley and Senator Johnson have just announced that they have requested the official travel records of Hunter Biden from @ @ @ @ @ that was fast .
It looks like we ’ ve got a Senate investigation into @ @ @ @ @ as Senator Grassley chairs the Finance committee and Johnson chairs the Homeland Security and Government @ @ @ @ @ points out in her tweet , this request is about potential conflicts of interest .
@ @ @ @ @ with more when we get it…

Senator Grassley and Senator Johnson have just announced that they have requested the official travel records of Hunter Biden from the Secret Service:
Breaking: from their press office – “Good afternoon, Senators Grassley and Johnson today requested Hunter Biden’s official travel records from the U.S. Secret Service as a part of their ongoing probe into potential conflicts of interest. A full news release is forthcoming” — Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) February 5, 2020
Well that was fast. It looks like we’ve got a Senate investigation into Hunter Biden already underway, as Senator Grassley chairs the Finance committee and Johnson chairs the Homeland Security and Government Affairs committee.
As Herridge points out in her tweet, this request is about potential conflicts of interest.
We’ll update you with more when we get it…
UPDATE: Here’s more from Catherine Herridge:
Letter to Director Secret Service requesting records “whether Hunter Biden used government-sponsored travel to help conduct private business…related entities in China and Ukraine…reportedly flew aboard Air Force Two” @ChuckGrassley @SenRonJohnson https://t.co/jYJxAfFrHx pic.twitter.com/DXJuRR4Eid — Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) February 5, 2020


therightscoop--2020-02-09--Woman asks Biden if he’s losing, and he calls her a ‘liar’ and ‘dog-faced’

Reporters and campaign enthusiasts alike were shocked and confused when Biden called a woman “ dog-faced ” and a liar for asking a question about why he did so poorly in Iowa .
And there ’ s video : I ’ m gon na say right up front that I am not calling for outragey outrage on what Joe Biden just did to a woman who asked a simple question .
BUT , note the reaction here : The reaction is just surprise , like “ oh , that Joe , he ’ s so silly.
” Now imagine if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dog-faced ” in 2012 , or if Trump had… well OK , Trump has done similar things , so we ’ re kinda losing on that debate .
BUT the point is that they called Trump a misogynist and a sexist over similar comments , but with Joe they suddenly forget the outrage .
AND it ’ s not the first time !
But are you gon na see the media drudge up all the crazy bizarre times Biden has acted creepily towards women in order to make this look worse and inspire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That kind of irrational ire is reserved just for Republicans .
And every day , it seems , we see examples like this that proves it…

Reporters and campaign enthusiasts alike were shocked and confused when Biden called a woman “dog-faced” and a liar for asking a question about why he did so poorly in Iowa. And there’s video:
I’m gonna say right up front that I am not calling for outragey outrage on what Joe Biden just did to a woman who asked a simple question.
BUT, note the reaction here:
Biden initially asked the student if she had ever caucused before, and I guess she said yes (I didn’t see or hear what she said), and then I believe he replied, in a joking way: “you’re a lying dog faced pony soldier”???? Which is not a phrase I have ever heard????? ??? — Olivia Nuzzi (@Olivianuzzi) February 9, 2020
The reaction is just surprise, like “oh, that Joe, he’s so silly.” Now imagine if Mitt Romney had called a woman “dog-faced” in 2012, or if Trump had… well OK, Trump has done similar things, so we’re kinda losing on that debate. BUT the point is that they called Trump a misogynist and a sexist over similar comments, but with Joe they suddenly forget the outrage.
AND it’s not the first time!
Joe Biden has been insulting dogs and ponies and yes soldiers since 2016, at least. Attribute campaign-ending scoop to “ravishingly handsome blogger Soopermexican” cc:@Olivianuzzi https://t.co/xevvsKSSQV — ¡El SooperMexican! ن c137 🦬 (@SooperMexican) February 9, 2020
But are you gonna see the media drudge up all the crazy bizarre times Biden has acted creepily towards women in order to make this look worse and inspire outrage at his campaign? NOPE. That kind of irrational ire is reserved just for Republicans. And every day, it seems, we see examples like this that proves it…


therightscoop--2020-02-10--Oscars hit all-time low in ratings

Oscars hit all-time low in ratings

The Oscars had a rough night last night , and it wasn ’ t just about cow insemination : THR – ABC ’ s Oscar telecast reached all-time lows in the ratings , falling sharply from last year .
The three-hour-plus broadcast averaged about 23.6 million viewers and a 5.3 rating among adults 18-49 , well below the 29.56 million and 7.7 for last year ’ s awards — which aired two weeks later .
The Oscars were down 20 percent year to year in viewers and 31 percent in the key ad-sales demo of adults 18-49 .
Last year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slide , growing the audience for the first time since 2014 .
Sunday ’ s show also falls well short of previous ratings lows for the Oscars , set in 2018 .
That year the telecast averaged 26.54 million viewers and a 6.8 rating in the demo ; Sunday was down 11 percent in viewers and 22 percent in adults 18-49 from prior lows .
It ’ s always good news to me when these Hollywood award shows hit new lows , because they are filled with so much blather .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ honestly hadn ’ t looked up what any of them said on a political bent .
But there ’ s Brad Pitt lamenting how the Senate refused to call John Bolton in the impeachment trial .
This was after the odd cow insemination speech from Joaquin Phoenix .
This is why their ratings are at all-time lows , because people are just tired of Hollywood and their ’ causes ’ and their liberal politics .

The Oscars had a rough night last night, and it wasn’t just about cow insemination:
THR – ABC’s Oscar telecast reached all-time lows in the ratings, falling sharply from last year. The three-hour-plus broadcast averaged about 23.6 million viewers and a 5.3 rating among adults 18-49, well below the 29.56 million and 7.7 for last year’s awards — which aired two weeks later. The Oscars were down 20 percent year to year in viewers and 31 percent in the key ad-sales demo of adults 18-49. Last year’s Oscars stopped a four-year ratings slide, growing the audience for the first time since 2014. Sunday’s show also falls well short of previous ratings lows for the Oscars, set in 2018. That year the telecast averaged 26.54 million viewers and a 6.8 rating in the demo; Sunday was down 11 percent in viewers and 22 percent in adults 18-49 from prior lows.
It’s always good news to me when these Hollywood award shows hit new lows, because they are filled with so much blather. For example:
Before I saw this clip I honestly hadn’t looked up what any of them said on a political bent. But there’s Brad Pitt lamenting how the Senate refused to call John Bolton in the impeachment trial. This was after the odd cow insemination speech from Joaquin Phoenix.
This is why their ratings are at all-time lows, because people are just tired of Hollywood and their ’causes’ and their liberal politics.


therightscoop--2020-02-13--Trump, RNC rake in massive fundraising haul during impeachment

Impeachment wasn ’ t just good for Trump ’ s poll numbers , but it was also good for his re-election bank account : FOX NEWS – President Trump ’ s re-election campaign and the Republican Party brought in more than $ 60 million in January , amid the impeachment battle on Capitol Hill .
The Trump campaign , its authorized fundraising committees ( Trump Victory 2020 and Trump Make America Great Again Committee ) and the Republican National Committee reported Thursday that they raised $ 60.6 million combined in January , with more than $ 200 million cash on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment hoax and dumpster fire primary process have only contributed to this record-breaking financial support for President Trump ’ s re-election , ” Trump 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale said in a statement Thursday .
“ With President Trump ’ s accomplishments , our massive data and ground operations , and our strong fundraising numbers , this campaign is going to be unstoppable in 2020 , ” he added .
Since the beginning of 2019 , the Trump campaign , RNC and joint-fundraising committees have raked in a stunning $ 525 million .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the four entities gained over 1 million new digital and direct-mail donors .
“ The more Democrats smear President Trump , the more enthusiasm we see for him and his many accomplishments , ” RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a statement .
“ We already have 500,000 volunteers trained and activated , and this record-breaking support is helping us grow our grassroots army even more .
”

Impeachment wasn’t just good for Trump’s poll numbers, but it was also good for his re-election bank account:
FOX NEWS – President Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican Party brought in more than $60 million in January, amid the impeachment battle on Capitol Hill.
The Trump campaign, its authorized fundraising committees (Trump Victory 2020 and Trump Make America Great Again Committee) and the Republican National Committee reported Thursday that they raised $60.6 million combined in January, with more than $200 million cash on hand.
“The Democrats’ shameful impeachment hoax and dumpster fire primary process have only contributed to this record-breaking financial support for President Trump’s re-election,” Trump 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale said in a statement Thursday.
“With President Trump’s accomplishments, our massive data and ground operations, and our strong fundraising numbers, this campaign is going to be unstoppable in 2020,” he added.
Since the beginning of 2019, the Trump campaign, RNC and joint-fundraising committees have raked in a stunning $525 million. And since impeachment began in September, the four entities gained over 1 million new digital and direct-mail donors.
“The more Democrats smear President Trump, the more enthusiasm we see for him and his many accomplishments,” RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a statement. “We already have 500,000 volunteers trained and activated, and this record-breaking support is helping us grow our grassroots army even more.”


therightscoop--2020-02-21--WATCH LIVE: Trump rally in Las Vegas happening now!

President Trump is in Las Vegas today holding a rally ahead of tomorrow ’ s Nevada caucuses and it ’ @ @ @ @ @ can watch it below :

President Trump is in Las Vegas today holding a rally ahead of tomorrow’s Nevada caucuses and it’s underway now. You can watch it below:
FOX NEWS:
NBC NEWS:
FOX 10 PHOENIX:


therightscoop--2020-02-21--Beware of FOX’s Lego Masters show…

Beware of FOX’s Lego Masters show…

FOX ’ s show Lego Masters , where teams of lego builders compete against each other , is apparently carrying the LGBT agenda and , as this Christian parent points out , can be really traumatic for kids : I don ’ t like involving my family in what I write , but I feel forced to do so in this case .
We were sitting around as a family watching the “ LEGO Masters ” building battle TV show on Fox when it happened .
I guess it ’ s partly my fault for not vigilantly researching the show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It felt like a kids ’ show , but we soon discovered that some of these adult contestants are quite “ diverse ” , like a skirt-wearing bearded man .
The contestants were building their creations , hoping to win the contest and not get voted off by the judges .
Then , smack in the middle of the drama of LEGO-building , Fox threw in a well-placed little shot of physical affection followed by a soundbite with two of the male contestants talking about how they got married .
My youngest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My little girl looked confused .
It was a clear moment of innocence stolen from my children .
My son shot me a look as if to say , “ What in the world does that even mean ?
” I asked him later if I could talk to him .
He was actually so disturbed that he told me he didn ’ t want to talk about it .
As a parent , I still needed to give him as much of a brief , God-focused explanation as I could muster , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t grasp it .
The show is about legos , which kids love !
You ’ d think it ’ d be the perfect show for kids to watch .
But as we ’ ve seen so many times in recent years , that ’ s just not the case .
Hollywood just loves to shove the gay agenda down our throats and they are increasingly targeting kids .
I tried to find the clip of this “ shot of physical affection ” to see exactly what it entailed , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even so , I think we can all imagine what occurred and can understand how kids , especially young ones , could find that so disturbing .
I know I would have… And by the way , it ’ s not just TV shows .
I ’ m seeing more and more commercials doing the same thing .
I saw one the other day with two dudes kissing and was completely disgusted .
I can tolerate certain things , but that ’ s definitely not one of them .

FOX’s show Lego Masters, where teams of lego builders compete against each other, is apparently carrying the LGBT agenda and, as this Christian parent points out, can be really traumatic for kids:
I don’t like involving my family in what I write, but I feel forced to do so in this case. We were sitting around as a family watching the “LEGO Masters” building battle TV show on Fox when it happened. I guess it’s partly my fault for not vigilantly researching the show, but Fox caught me off guard. It felt like a kids’ show, but we soon discovered that some of these adult contestants are quite “diverse”, like a skirt-wearing bearded man. The contestants were building their creations, hoping to win the contest and not get voted off by the judges. Then, smack in the middle of the drama of LEGO-building, Fox threw in a well-placed little shot of physical affection followed by a soundbite with two of the male contestants talking about how they got married. My youngest son’s jaw literally dropped. My little girl looked confused. It was a clear moment of innocence stolen from my children. My son shot me a look as if to say, “What in the world does that even mean?” I asked him later if I could talk to him. He was actually so disturbed that he told me he didn’t want to talk about it. As a parent, I still needed to give him as much of a brief, God-focused explanation as I could muster, but I could see his mind still couldn’t grasp it.
The show is about legos, which kids love! You’d think it’d be the perfect show for kids to watch.
But as we’ve seen so many times in recent years, that’s just not the case. Hollywood just loves to shove the gay agenda down our throats and they are increasingly targeting kids.
I tried to find the clip of this “shot of physical affection” to see exactly what it entailed, but I was unable to find it. Even so, I think we can all imagine what occurred and can understand how kids, especially young ones, could find that so disturbing. I know I would have…
And by the way, it’s not just TV shows. I’m seeing more and more commercials doing the same thing. I saw one the other day with two dudes kissing and was completely disgusted. I can tolerate certain things, but that’s definitely not one of them.


therightscoop--2020-02-21--REPORT: Trump targeting Never Trumpers in his administration

Trump is putting Never Trumpers in his administration on notice via his new head for the U.S. Presidential Personnel Office : Johnny McEntee called in White House liaisons from cabinet agencies for an introductory meeting Thursday , in which he asked them to identify political appointees across the US government who are believed to be anti-Trump , per 3 sources familiar w meeting .
https : //t.co/l6Kj8wdT9F McEntee told staff that those identified as anti-Trump will no longer get promotions by shifting them around agencies .
But McEntee suggested the most dramatic changes may have to wait until after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House liaisons from cabinet agencies for an introductory meeting Thursday , in which he asked them to identify political appointees across the U.S. government who are believed to be anti-Trump , three sources familiar with the meeting tell Axios .
Behind the scenes : McEntee , a 29-year-old former body man to Trump who was fired in 2018 by then-Chief of Staff John Kelly but recently rehired — and promoted to head the presidential personnel office — foreshadowed sweeping personnel changes across government .
But McEntee suggested the most dramatic changes may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
Trump has empowered McEntee — whom he considers an absolute loyalist — to purge the “ bad people ” and “ Deep State.
” McEntee told staff that those identified as anti-Trump will no longer get promotions by shifting them around agencies .

Trump is putting Never Trumpers in his administration on notice via his new head for the U.S. Presidential Personnel Office:
Johnny McEntee called in White House liaisons from cabinet agencies for an introductory meeting Thursday, in which he asked them to identify political appointees across the US government who are believed to be anti-Trump, per 3 sources familiar w meeting. https://t.co/l6Kj8wdT9F
McEntee told staff that those identified as anti-Trump will no longer get promotions by shifting them around agencies.
But McEntee suggested the most dramatic changes may have to wait until after the November election.
Here’s more from Axios:
Johnny McEntee called in White House liaisons from cabinet agencies for an introductory meeting Thursday, in which he asked them to identify political appointees across the U.S. government who are believed to be anti-Trump, three sources familiar with the meeting tell Axios.
Behind the scenes: McEntee, a 29-year-old former body man to Trump who was fired in 2018 by then-Chief of Staff John Kelly but recently rehired — and promoted to head the presidential personnel office — foreshadowed sweeping personnel changes across government.
But McEntee suggested the most dramatic changes may have to wait until after the November election.
Trump has empowered McEntee — whom he considers an absolute loyalist — to purge the “bad people” and “Deep State.”
McEntee told staff that those identified as anti-Trump will no longer get promotions by shifting them around agencies.


therightscoop--2020-02-21--SooperPodcast #384! GO Plandslide horse-faced lesbian pony soldiers!

THIS WEEK we done got ourselves OsteoperoJess and RheuMattoid on the podcast and we talk some horse-faced lesbian debate , and still wonder what hurlbutt has to do with anything .
AND also why Jess hates Buttigieg , and the BloomBORG and also the socialism .
Also Snowpiercer , and verker and parasite .
Also McDonalds candles and Steve Kornacki and el sooper yells about San Francisco and New York some more and then he yells about how wonderful America is , and then he yells about vaping !
WOW !
Logic is the my-microphone of Soop .
If the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in your browser , click HERE to go directly to podomatic !
ALSO !
!
DON ’ T MISS the great great list of Podcast listener nuts !
!
They ’ re all here , mostly !
!
!
ALSO !
!
We now have a patreon – so you have to PAY to listen to the extra podcast , suckers !
!
HAHAHAHAH !
!
!
Go there and give us money .
We entertain you .
BUT Patreon members only get early access to the extras – you can go to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extras from the prior podcasts !
!
WOW !
!
!
AND… the GREAT GRATE KATCHUP DEBATE !
!
This is a good one .

THIS WEEK we done got ourselves OsteoperoJess and RheuMattoid on the podcast and we talk some horse-faced lesbian debate, and still wonder what hurlbutt has to do with anything. AND also why Jess hates Buttigieg, and the BloomBORG and also the socialism. Also Snowpiercer, and verker and parasite. Also McDonalds candles and Steve Kornacki and el sooper yells about San Francisco and New York some more and then he yells about how wonderful America is, and then he yells about vaping! WOW!
Logic is the my-microphone of Soop.
If the audio player doesn’t load up in your browser, click HERE to go directly to podomatic!
ALSO!! DON’T MISS the great great list of Podcast listener nuts!! They’re all here, mostly!!!
ALSO!! We now have a patreon – so you have to PAY to listen to the extra podcast, suckers!! HAHAHAHAH!!! Go there and give us money. We entertain you.
BUT Patreon members only get early access to the extras – you can go to the page right now and listen to extras from the prior podcasts!! WOW!!!
Like… the ORIGIN OF REBAR-FACE!!!!
AND… the GREAT GRATE KATCHUP DEBATE!! This is a good one.


therightscoop--2020-02-22--Breaking: Roger Stone files a motion to disqualify judge in his case

Here we go .
Roger Stone filed to remove the judge from his case because she said that the jurors @ @ @ @ @ interesting .
I think it ’ s pretty clear that at least one juror carried @ @ @ @ @ the Trump administration , and it looks like she lied on her juror questionnaire .
@ @ @ @ @ basis for disqualifying the judge .
On the other hand , although she admonished Barr @ @ @ @ @ trying to influence her sentencing , she ended up pretty much following their recommendation .
@ @ @ @ @ a lot of fuss over this when there ’ s not much substance to it @ @ @ @ @ looks like Trump will eventually pardon Stone .
I guess in that case , any @ @ @ @ @ try to undermine the authority of the court will provide cover for Trump if he @ @ @ @ @ his old swinger buddy…

Here we go. Roger Stone filed to remove the judge from his case because she said that the jurors served with integrity.
NEW: Roger Stone has filed a motion to disqualify the judge in his case.
His lawyers allege her remarks about jurors at his sentencing suggest she is not impartial in regard to whether a juror improperly served on his case. pic.twitter.com/LHy6fRPeiq — Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) February 22, 2020
Roger Stone asks to disqualify Judge Amy Berman Jackson from his case, taking issue with what she said at his sentencing yesterday. Stone claims her statement at his sentencing yesterday, that jurors "served with integrity" should force her to recuse from his case now. @kpolantz — Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) February 22, 2020
Very interesting. I think it’s pretty clear that at least one juror carried bias against Roger Stone and the Trump administration, and it looks like she lied on her juror questionnaire. So I could see the basis for disqualifying the judge.
On the other hand, although she admonished Barr and the Trump administration for trying to influence her sentencing, she ended up pretty much following their recommendation. So… there seems to be a lot of fuss over this when there’s not much substance to it. Especially since it definitely looks like Trump will eventually pardon Stone.
I guess in that case, any motion that Stone files to try to undermine the authority of the court will provide cover for Trump if he has any inclination to pardon his old swinger buddy…


therightscoop--2020-02-23--Liberals turn on “Never Trump” pundits as they begin to turn MAGA-curious!

Well here we go .
Now all the liberals and the far left commie Bernie comrades are attacking the “ Never Trump ” pundits because some of them are turning MAGA-curious !
Since “ Never Trump ” is a hot topic , I don ’ t recall making the deal where we would support any insane socialist against Trump .
I publicly urged people to vote for Hillary where it mattered ( & got killed for it ) , as horrendous as Trump is , I doubt I could do the same with Sanders .
— John Ziegler ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ca n't believe the `` Never Trump '' republicans , a group of conservative republicans who have voted republican for their entire republican lives , are considering voting republican again now that Bernie has a commanding lead .
— maple cocaine ( @ maplecocaine ) February 23 , 2020 But ultimately , I think it ’ s easier to come back to normalcy from a lawless , nationalist national leadership than it is a socialist one .
So if I ’ m forced— and hopefully I won ’ t be because Democrats will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I will choose Trump .
Don ’ t @ me .
— Liz Mair ( @ LizMair ) February 23 , 2020 It is remarkable that the Democrats are going to hand their nomination to a man who will cause a lot of my Never Trump friends who are still opposed to Trump to suddenly hold their noses and vote Trump .
— Erick Erickson ( @ EWErickson ) February 23 , 2020 '' Never Trump '' means “ NEVER ” Trump .
If you still vote for Trump just because you don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then you are either a liar , or you are too stupid to understand the word “ NEVER.
” — Ms. Krassenstein ( @ HKrassenstein ) February 23 , 2020 The truth is that no matter who the Democrats nominate , “ Never Trump ” Republicans will hem and haw over it .
They were never “ Never ” Trump at all .
Even if the nom went to Bloomberg , an actual Republican , they ’ d find something to go “ oh I don ’ t know if I can vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( @ ParkerMolloy ) February 23 , 2020 “ Never Trump , unless the alternative is social democracy ” got ta be one of the most revolting ethical postures of our time .
https : //t.co/geqNZkPDGG — Sam Adler-Bell ( @ SamAdlerBell ) February 23 , 2020 *Bernie does well* A bunch of never-Trump people : Look let 's be honest , Trump is not All bad , the stock market , you know , and unemployment and trade , certainly , and actually , he can be really quite funny and charming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cages when you think about it — maura quint ( @ behindyourback ) February 23 , 2020 Since 'Never Trump ' appears to be trending , here 's my two cents .
To my old friends and new , please do n't convince yourself in this most critical moment that a candidate who supports big government is somehow now worse than a president who opposes the rule of law .
— David Jolly ( @ DavidJollyFL ) February 23 , 2020 Enough w/ this nonsense that we should pick the candidate Never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t consult with us when choosing their nominee .
We win by energizing our base , younger voters , independents & nonvoters & that ’ s what Bernie is doing .
# BernieBeatsTrump — Ryan Knight 🌹🗽 ( @ ProudResister ) February 23 , 2020 Wild that Never Trump conservatives who made the first black president ’ s two terms a living hell now have the nerve to tell him what to do .
GTFOH .
https : //t.co/RUU5alVGNg — Adam Best ( @ adamcbest ) February 23 , 2020 Never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real world , yet mainstream media outlets have given them tons of airtime and deference during the Democratic primary .
https : //t.co/QOibf24On3 — Media Matters ( @ mmfa ) February 23 , 2020 I wonder if they will be tossed from CNN and MSNBC now that only hardcore socialists are approved for propaganda ?
Hmmm .
I see that `` Never Trump '' is trending .
It is ever-trending , so to speak .
On one hand , `` Never Trumpers '' are few and irrelevant -- barely a pimple on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other , they are a scourge , a menace .
Their antagonists can not stop talking about them .
Odd .
— Jay Nordlinger ( @ jaynordlinger ) February 23 , 2020 Yeah .
Kinda .
I mean , we were all told that Trump would be another Hitler and that he would tank the economy and that he would start a war with his tweets against China and Iran .
None of that happened .
If you ’ re still critical of Trump , like I am , if you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look at Bernie Sanders ’ socialist idiocy and think , I dunno , four more years of this isn ’ t that bad .

Well here we go. Now all the liberals and the far left commie Bernie comrades are attacking the “Never Trump” pundits because some of them are turning MAGA-curious!
Since “Never Trump” is a hot topic, I don’t recall making the deal where we would support any insane socialist against Trump. I publicly urged people to vote for Hillary where it mattered (& got killed for it), as horrendous as Trump is, I doubt I could do the same with Sanders. — John Ziegler (@Zigmanfreud) February 23, 2020
I can't believe the "Never Trump" republicans, a group of conservative republicans who have voted republican for their entire republican lives, are considering voting republican again now that Bernie has a commanding lead. — maple cocaine (@maplecocaine) February 23, 2020
But ultimately, I think it’s easier to come back to normalcy from a lawless, nationalist national leadership than it is a socialist one. So if I’m forced— and hopefully I won’t be because Democrats will stop Bernie before he locks this down— I will choose Trump. Don’t @ me. — Liz Mair (@LizMair) February 23, 2020
They’re angry:
"Never Trump" means “NEVER” Trump. If you still vote for Trump just because you don’t like the Democratic Nominee, then you are either a liar, or you are too stupid to understand the word “NEVER.” — Heidi Krassenstein (@HKrassenstein) February 23, 2020
“Never Trump, unless the alternative is social democracy” gotta be one of the most revolting ethical postures of our time. https://t.co/geqNZkPDGG — Sam Adler-Bell (@SamAdlerBell) February 23, 2020
*Bernie does well*
A bunch of never-Trump people: Look let's be honest, Trump is not All bad, the stock market, you know, and unemployment and trade, certainly, and actually, he can be really quite funny and charming and it's only a FEW kids in cages when you think about it — maura quint (@behindyourback) February 23, 2020
Since 'Never Trump' appears to be trending, here's my two cents.
To my old friends and new, please don't convince yourself in this most critical moment that a candidate who supports big government is somehow now worse than a president who opposes the rule of law. — David Jolly (@DavidJollyFL) February 23, 2020
Enough w/ this nonsense that we should pick the candidate Never Trump Republicans like the best. Republicans don’t consult with us when choosing their nominee. We win by energizing our base, younger voters, independents & nonvoters & that’s what Bernie is doing. #BernieBeatsTrump — Ryan Knight ☭ (@ProudSocialist) February 23, 2020
Wild that Never Trump conservatives who made the first black president’s two terms a living hell now have the nerve to tell him what to do. GTFOH. https://t.co/RUU5alVGNg — Adam Best (@adamcbest) February 23, 2020
Exactly. It's impossible to overstate how over-represented Never Trump Republicans are in the media. https://t.co/70iexm5vap — Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) February 23, 2020
Here’s Media Matters:
Never Trump Republicans are utterly irrelevant in the real world, yet mainstream media outlets have given them tons of airtime and deference during the Democratic primary.
https://t.co/QOibf24On3 — Media Matters (@mmfa) February 23, 2020
I wonder if they will be tossed from CNN and MSNBC now that only hardcore socialists are approved for propaganda? Hmmm.
Also:
I see that "Never Trump" is trending. It is ever-trending, so to speak. On one hand, "Never Trumpers" are few and irrelevant -- barely a pimple on the butt of the body politic. On the other, they are a scourge, a menace. Their antagonists cannot stop talking about them. Odd. — Jay Nordlinger (@jaynordlinger) February 23, 2020
Yeah. Kinda. I mean, we were all told that Trump would be another Hitler and that he would tank the economy and that he would start a war with his tweets against China and Iran. None of that happened. If you’re still critical of Trump, like I am, if you’re a principled conservative, you have to look at Bernie Sanders’ socialist idiocy and think, I dunno, four more years of this isn’t that bad.


therightscoop--2020-02-23--Scammers are cashing in on the ‘Greta Thunberg effect’ through fake carbon credits

A new report from The Telegraph says that scammers are cashing in on Greta Thunberg spreading global warming alarming : Consumers trying to offset their emissions are at risk of being ripped off in a “ wild west ” unregulated carbon market , an investigation by The Telegraph has found .
With the trading of carbon credits enjoying a boom , concerns have been raised about offsetting projects around the world .
Environmentalists have warned that offsetting could be doing more harm than good because it makes people wrongly believe they are not having an environmental impact .
So here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idiots send their money to “ carbon offset ” companies who do little or nothing to actually help save the planet , but it makes those gullible idiots feel better about not actually making their lives any less convenient .
AND Greta Thunberg is making it worse .
More : Despite the controversy surrounding offsetting , the industry is experiencing a boom from the “ Greta Thunberg effect ” , fuelled by big companies such as easyJet , British Airways and BP pledging to go carbon neutral and offering customers offsetting options .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimated to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars while the voluntary market , on which individuals can purchase carbon credits , was worth $ 295.7 million ( £229 million ) in 2018 – more than double the previous year , according to Ecosystem Marketplace , which tracks global trends .
Its December report said the market is “ at the tipping point we ’ ve been long waiting for ” as companies respond to consumer pressure to offer green options , but also noted that growing demand could lead to “ sub-par @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get involved .
But we all kinda knew this was a scam anyway , right ?
Heck I saw this a DECADE ago when Al Gore sold the same alarmism BS and then started CASHING IN on the “ carbon offset ” BS !
!
Here he is scamming Jake Tapper about it 3 years ago .
AND they admit they have no idea if their offsets work : Lou Munden , the founder of TMP Systems , a consultancy specialising in climate change which has analysed carbon markets since 2011 , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any good evidence one way or another to tell you whether this stuff works – we just don ’ t know .
”

A new report from The Telegraph says that scammers are cashing in on Greta Thunberg spreading global warming alarming:
Consumers trying to offset their emissions are at risk of being ripped off in a “wild west” unregulated carbon market, an investigation by The Telegraph has found. With the trading of carbon credits enjoying a boom, concerns have been raised about offsetting projects around the world. Environmentalists have warned that offsetting could be doing more harm than good because it makes people wrongly believe they are not having an environmental impact.
Amazing.
So here’s how it works – gullible idiots send their money to “carbon offset” companies who do little or nothing to actually help save the planet, but it makes those gullible idiots feel better about not actually making their lives any less convenient.
AND Greta Thunberg is making it worse. More:
Despite the controversy surrounding offsetting, the industry is experiencing a boom from the “Greta Thunberg effect”, fuelled by big companies such as easyJet, British Airways and BP pledging to go carbon neutral and offering customers offsetting options. The combined global carbon trading market is estimated to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars while the voluntary market, on which individuals can purchase carbon credits, was worth $295.7 million (£229 million) in 2018 – more than double the previous year, according to Ecosystem Marketplace, which tracks global trends. Its December report said the market is “at the tipping point we’ve been long waiting for” as companies respond to consumer pressure to offer green options, but also noted that growing demand could lead to “sub-par” offsets as “inexperienced buyers” get involved.
But we all kinda knew this was a scam anyway, right? Heck I saw this a DECADE ago when Al Gore sold the same alarmism BS and then started CASHING IN on the “carbon offset” BS!! Here he is scamming Jake Tapper about it 3 years ago.
AND they admit they have no idea if their offsets work:
Lou Munden, the founder of TMP Systems, a consultancy specialising in climate change which has analysed carbon markets since 2011, said: “We don’t have any good evidence one way or another to tell you whether this stuff works – we just don’t know.”
Incredible.


therightscoop--2020-02-24--Buttigieg has little boy come out of the closet as gay at campaign rally

A little 9-year-old boy came out of the closet as ‘ gay ’ at a Buttigieg campaign rally : NY POST – A 9-year-old Colorado boy got kudos from openly gay Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg when he asked him during a rally for help telling the world that he ’ s also gay .
“ Thank you for being so brave , ” Zachary Ro ’ s question read .
“ Would you help me tell the world I ’ m gay too ?
I want to be brave like you.
” Zachary ’ s question — which he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he entered the Aurora , Colorado , rally Saturday night — was met with cheers and chants of “ Love means love ” from the nearly 4,000 people in attendance .
“ I don ’ t think you need a lot of advice from me on bravery , you seem pretty strong , ” Buttigieg said as he began to answer the boy .
There are some suggesting this is a campaign stunt designed to endear Buttigieg to Democratic voters as he tries to recapture the momentum he had in Iowa .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t think that means it ’ s fake .
Sure , some 9-year-olds aren ’ t thinking about this stuff .
But in our highly sexualized culture where homosexuality is being pushed to children of all ages on TV and everywhere else , kids will be thinking about this stuff and trying to determine where they fit .
But I think more than anything it ’ s appalling to those of us who hate to see another kid being led down a path that is in such staunch opposition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @

A little 9-year-old boy came out of the closet as ‘gay’ at a Buttigieg campaign rally:
Here’s more:
NY POST – A 9-year-old Colorado boy got kudos from openly gay Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg when he asked him during a rally for help telling the world that he’s also gay. “Thank you for being so brave,” Zachary Ro’s question read. “Would you help me tell the world I’m gay too? I want to be brave like you.” Zachary’s question — which he wrote on a piece of paper as he entered the Aurora, Colorado, rally Saturday night — was met with cheers and chants of “Love means love” from the nearly 4,000 people in attendance. “I don’t think you need a lot of advice from me on bravery, you seem pretty strong,” Buttigieg said as he began to answer the boy.
There are some suggesting this is a campaign stunt designed to endear Buttigieg to Democratic voters as he tries to recapture the momentum he had in Iowa. And that’s probably true.
But I don’t think that means it’s fake. Sure, some 9-year-olds aren’t thinking about this stuff. But in our highly sexualized culture where homosexuality is being pushed to children of all ages on TV and everywhere else, kids will be thinking about this stuff and trying to determine where they fit.
But I think more than anything it’s appalling to those of us who hate to see another kid being led down a path that is in such staunch opposition to God. We should pray for Zachary…


therightscoop--2020-02-24--BREAKING: Weinstein found GUILTY of criminal sex act and rape….

The jury in the trial of disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein has finally come back with a verdict , finding @ @ @ @ @ criminal sex act and rape : But , as Aarti Pole points out , Weinstein @ @ @ @ @ serious charges : CNN – Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of committing a criminal sex @ @ @ @ @ involving one woman and rape in the third degree involving another woman .
A New @ @ @ @ @ movie mogul on the more serious charges of predatory sexual assault involving the two women @ @ @ @ @ Mann .
In doing so , jurors indicated that they did not find beyond a @ @ @ @ @ also raped Annabella Sciorra , another victim whose testimony prosecutors used in an attempt to @ @ @ @ @ behavior .
I ’ m seeing conflicting information on the sentencing guidelines .
It appears @ @ @ @ @ 25 years in prison , which is the maximum .
The minimum may be as @ @ @ @ @ Hopefully the judge won ’ t be too lenient on him…

The jury in the trial of disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein has finally come back with a verdict, finding him guilty of both a criminal sex act and rape:
#Breaking Harvey Weinstein verdict:
GUILTY OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT IN THE FIRST DEGREE
GUILTY OF RAPE IN THE THIRD DEGREE
NOT GUILTY OF PREDATORY SEXUAL ASSAULT (2 counts)#HarveyWeinstein #MeToo — Aarti Pole (@aartipole) February 24, 2020
But, as Aarti Pole points out, Weinstein was acquitted of the more serious charges:
JUST IN: Harvey Weinstein, 67, was just found guilty of criminal sex act and rape. BUT A New York jury acquitted the disgraced movie mogul on the more serious charges of predatory sexual assault involving the two women, Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann.https://t.co/kp2LMwjUXC — Aarti Pole (@aartipole) February 24, 2020
Here’s more:
CNN – Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of committing a criminal sex act in the first degree involving one woman and rape in the third degree involving another woman. A New York jury acquitted the disgraced movie mogul on the more serious charges of predatory sexual assault involving the two women, Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann. In doing so, jurors indicated that they did not find beyond a reasonable doubt that Weinstein had also raped Annabella Sciorra, another victim whose testimony prosecutors used in an attempt to establish Weinstein’s predatory behavior.
I’m seeing conflicting information on the sentencing guidelines. It appears Weinstein could face up to 25 years in prison, which is the maximum. The minimum may be as few as five years. Hopefully the judge won’t be too lenient on him…


therightscoop--2020-02-24--President Trump met by MASSIVE crowd in India – [FULL SPEECH]

President Trump held a rally in India with Prime Minister Modi in the wee hours of this morning our time , and was met by massive crowds there : The crowd was massive .
Just watch : Trump even had people lining the streets as his motorcade drove to the stadium : According to ABC News , the crowd that met both Trump and Modi was estimated at over 100,000 people : President Donald Trump on Monday , greeted by an enthusiastic crowd estimated at more than 100,000 at the world ’ s largest cricket stadium in India , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humanity .
“ Namaste !
Namaste , ” Trump told the cheering crowd at the “ Namaste Trump ” or “ Welcome Trump ” event in Ahmedabad .
“ And hello to India .
This is such a great honor , ” he said , as he began a two-day whirlwind visit .
“ The first lady and I have just traveled 8000 miles around the globe to deliver a message to every citizen across this station : America loves India , America respects , India , and America will always be faithful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said , claiming there were 125,000 there to greet him , although the stadium is said to hold only 110,000 .
Below is video of Trump ’ s speech .
I ’ ve got it cued up to 1:32:55 where Trump begins speaking : And lastly here ’ s a quick report from Fox News on the trip by Trump to India :

President Trump held a rally in India with Prime Minister Modi in the wee hours of this morning our time, and was met by massive crowds there:
During his speech at the #NamasteTrump programme, @POTUS @realDonaldTrump highlighted aspects of his vision for USA. He also spoke at length about India’s greatness as well as the greatness of our culture, ethos, people and more. I thank him for his kind words. pic.twitter.com/T2trutWPqY — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) February 24, 2020
The crowd was massive. Just watch:
Unparalleled vibrancy at the world’s largest stadium. Watch… pic.twitter.com/RupPFsOq2z — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) February 24, 2020
Trump even had people lining the streets as his motorcade drove to the stadium:
In motorcade en route to the stadium. I’ve never seen anything like this. Unbelievable!!!! #NamasteTrump pic.twitter.com/EwFm3hZjgc — Dan Scavino Jr.🇺🇸 (@Scavino45) February 24, 2020
According to ABC News, the crowd that met both Trump and Modi was estimated at over 100,000 people:
President Donald Trump on Monday, greeted by an enthusiastic crowd estimated at more than 100,000 at the world’s largest cricket stadium in India, said the country gives hope to all of humanity. “Namaste! Namaste,” Trump told the cheering crowd at the “Namaste Trump” or “Welcome Trump” event in Ahmedabad. “And hello to India. This is such a great honor,” he said, as he began a two-day whirlwind visit. “The first lady and I have just traveled 8000 miles around the globe to deliver a message to every citizen across this station: America loves India, America respects, India, and America will always be faithful and loyal friend to the Indian people,” he said, claiming there were 125,000 there to greet him, although the stadium is said to hold only 110,000.
Below is video of Trump’s speech. I’ve got it cued up to 1:32:55 where Trump begins speaking:
And lastly here’s a quick report from Fox News on the trip by Trump to India:


therightscoop--2020-02-28--Israeli scientists: ‘In a few weeks, we will have coronavirus vaccine’

It looks like Israel is going to beat everyone to the punch in creating a vaccine for the coronavirus : JPOST – Israeli scientists are on the cusp of developing the first vaccine against the novel coronavirus , according to Science and Technology Minister Ofir Akunis .
If all goes as planned , the vaccine could be ready within a few weeks and available in 90 days , according to a release .
“ Congratulations to MIGAL [ The Galilee Research Institute ] on this exciting breakthrough , ” Akunis said .
“ I am confident there will be further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a needed response to the grave global COVID-19 threat , ” Akunis said , referring to the disease caused by the novel coronavirus .
For the past four years , a team of MIGAL scientists has been developing a vaccine against infectious bronchitis virus ( IBV ) , which causes a bronchial disease affecting poultry .
The effectiveness of the vaccine has been proven in preclinical trials carried out at the Veterinary Institute .
“ Our basic concept was to develop the technology and not specifically a vaccine for this kind or that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chen Katz , MIGAL ’ s biotechnology group leader .
“ The scientific framework for the vaccine is based on a new protein expression vector , which forms and secretes a chimeric soluble protein that delivers the viral antigen into mucosal tissues by self-activated endocytosis , causing the body to form antibodies against the virus.
” Endocytosis is a cellular process in which substances are brought into a cell by surrounding the material with cell membrane , forming a vesicle containing the ingested material .
In preclinical trials , the team demonstrated that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific anti-IBV antibodies , Katz said .
“ Let ’ s call it pure luck , ” he said .
“ We decided to choose coronavirus as a model for our system just as a proof of concept for our technology.
” But after scientists sequenced the DNA of the novel coronavirus causing the current worldwide outbreak , the MIGAL researchers examined it and found that the poultry coronavirus has high genetic similarity to the human one , and that it uses the same infection mechanism , which increases the likelihood of achieving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short period of time , Katz said .
“ All we need to do is adjust the system to the new sequence , ” he said .
“ We are in the middle of this process , and hopefully in a few weeks we will have the vaccine in our hands .
Yes , in a few weeks , if it all works , we would have a vaccine to prevent coronavirus .
”

It looks like Israel is going to beat everyone to the punch in creating a vaccine for the coronavirus:
JPOST – Israeli scientists are on the cusp of developing the first vaccine against the novel coronavirus, according to Science and Technology Minister Ofir Akunis. If all goes as planned, the vaccine could be ready within a few weeks and available in 90 days, according to a release.
“Congratulations to MIGAL [The Galilee Research Institute] on this exciting breakthrough,” Akunis said. “I am confident there will be further rapid progress, enabling us to provide a needed response to the grave global COVID-19 threat,” Akunis said, referring to the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
For the past four years, a team of MIGAL scientists has been developing a vaccine against infectious bronchitis virus (IBV), which causes a bronchial disease affecting poultry. The effectiveness of the vaccine has been proven in preclinical trials carried out at the Veterinary Institute.
“Our basic concept was to develop the technology and not specifically a vaccine for this kind or that kind of virus,” said Dr. Chen Katz, MIGAL’s biotechnology group leader. “The scientific framework for the vaccine is based on a new protein expression vector, which forms and secretes a chimeric soluble protein that delivers the viral antigen into mucosal tissues by self-activated endocytosis, causing the body to form antibodies against the virus.”
Endocytosis is a cellular process in which substances are brought into a cell by surrounding the material with cell membrane, forming a vesicle containing the ingested material.
In preclinical trials, the team demonstrated that the oral vaccination induces high levels of specific anti-IBV antibodies, Katz said.
“Let’s call it pure luck,” he said. “We decided to choose coronavirus as a model for our system just as a proof of concept for our technology.”
But after scientists sequenced the DNA of the novel coronavirus causing the current worldwide outbreak, the MIGAL researchers examined it and found that the poultry coronavirus has high genetic similarity to the human one, and that it uses the same infection mechanism, which increases the likelihood of achieving an effective human vaccine in a very short period of time, Katz said.
“All we need to do is adjust the system to the new sequence,” he said. “We are in the middle of this process, and hopefully in a few weeks we will have the vaccine in our hands. Yes, in a few weeks, if it all works, we would have a vaccine to prevent coronavirus.”


therightscoop--2020-02-28--Turkey announces it will begin flooding Europe with Syrian refugees again

Turkey has just announced today that it will no longer stop refugees from flooding Europe via land and sea : JPOST – Turkey , faced with a possible new wave of Syrian migrants and dozens more dead Turkish soldiers in Idlib , will no longer stop Syrian refugees from reaching Europe , a senior Turkish official said as President Tayyip Erdogan chaired an emergency meeting .
An air strike by Syrian government forces in Syria ’ s northwest Idlib region killed 29 Turkish soldiers and seriously wounded others , the local governor in Turkey ’ s southeastern province of Hatay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a million civilians have been displaced in Idlib near the Turkish border since December as Russia-backed Syrian government forces seized territory from Turkey-backed Syrian rebels , marking the worst humanitarian crisis of the country ’ s nine-year war .
The threat to open the way for refugees to Europe would , if executed , reverse a pledge Turkey made to the European Union in 2016 and could quickly draw Western powers into the standoff over Idlib and stalled negotiations between Ankara and Moscow .
With regard to the recent attack , the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that it supports Turkey following the reported attack .
“ We stand by our NATO Ally Turkey and continue to call for an immediate end to this despicable offensive by the Assad regime , Russia , and Iranian-backed forces , ” a State Department representative said in a statement .
This whole thing is a mess and it pains me greatly that the US is on the side of Turkey .
Erdogan is the one who invaded and declared he was going to create a ‘ safe zone ’ for all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country .
Syria ’ s Assad said he didn ’ t agree and would go to war with Turkey , and that ’ s what ’ s happening .
Look , I don ’ t like being on the side of the Syrian Regime either , partnered with Russia and the Iranians .
I just wish the Trump administration hadn ’ t put out that statement fulling supporting Turkey .

Turkey has just announced today that it will no longer stop refugees from flooding Europe via land and sea:
JPOST – Turkey, faced with a possible new wave of Syrian migrants and dozens more dead Turkish soldiers in Idlib, will no longer stop Syrian refugees from reaching Europe, a senior Turkish official said as President Tayyip Erdogan chaired an emergency meeting. An air strike by Syrian government forces in Syria’s northwest Idlib region killed 29 Turkish soldiers and seriously wounded others, the local governor in Turkey’s southeastern province of Hatay said separately early on Friday. Nearly a million civilians have been displaced in Idlib near the Turkish border since December as Russia-backed Syrian government forces seized territory from Turkey-backed Syrian rebels, marking the worst humanitarian crisis of the country’s nine-year war. The threat to open the way for refugees to Europe would, if executed, reverse a pledge Turkey made to the European Union in 2016 and could quickly draw Western powers into the standoff over Idlib and stalled negotiations between Ankara and Moscow.
With regard to the recent attack, the US is fully supporting Turkey:
The US said that it supports Turkey following the reported attack. “We stand by our NATO Ally Turkey and continue to call for an immediate end to this despicable offensive by the Assad regime, Russia, and Iranian-backed forces,” a State Department representative said in a statement.
This whole thing is a mess and it pains me greatly that the US is on the side of Turkey. Erdogan is the one who invaded and declared he was going to create a ‘safe zone’ for all of these Syria refugees that are flooding his country. Syria’s Assad said he didn’t agree and would go to war with Turkey, and that’s what’s happening.
Look, I don’t like being on the side of the Syrian Regime either, partnered with Russia and the Iranians. I just wish the Trump administration hadn’t put out that statement fulling supporting Turkey.


therightscoop--2020-02-27--WATCH: Rep Matt Gaetz gives impassioned speech on corruption on DC, vowing to never take PAC money a

WATCH: Rep Matt Gaetz gives impassioned speech on corruption on DC, vowing to never take PAC money again!

Earlier today Florida Republican Matt Gaetz gave an impassioned speech at CPAC on the corruption of PACs and special interest money in Washington DC , exchanging money for favors , and vowed never to take PAC money again .
Gaetz began by saying that ‘ honest capitalism ’ is under attack , not just by the Bernie Bros , Antifa and the radical left , but by special interests and PAC money inside ‘ the swamp of Washington DC ’ .
He lamented that sometimes it seems it doesn ’ t even matter which political party wins the election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too often the special interests that shuttles around the most campaign donations.
” He noted that even committee assignments are given to those members of Congress who are most indebted to special interests .
Big business loves the PAC process because PACs allow big business to put their interests over Americans .
I know .
I ’ m here to confess .
I ’ ve catfished special interests out of hundreds of thousands of dollars .
While I never met their expectations , I always knew what they wanted .
He then vowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal PACs again : Our founding fathers did not commit treason against the crown of England just to watch our generation turn around and prostitute ourselves to multi-national globalist corporate interests .
I ’ ve never turned tricks for Washington PACs , but as of this very moment I will not pick up their money in the nightstand anymore .
I will never again accept a donation from a federal political action committee .
Not one red cent .
The American people are my one and only special interest .
You can watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about PACs and special interests begins a little before the 3:00 minute mark :

Earlier today Florida Republican Matt Gaetz gave an impassioned speech at CPAC on the corruption of PACs and special interest money in Washington DC, exchanging money for favors, and vowed never to take PAC money again.
Gaetz began by saying that ‘honest capitalism’ is under attack, not just by the Bernie Bros, Antifa and the radical left, but by special interests and PAC money inside ‘the swamp of Washington DC’.
He lamented that sometimes it seems it doesn’t even matter which political party wins the election, “because in Congress the winner is too often the special interests that shuttles around the most campaign donations.” He noted that even committee assignments are given to those members of Congress who are most indebted to special interests.
Gaetz then made a confession:
Big business loves the PAC process because PACs allow big business to put their interests over Americans. I know. I’m here to confess. I’ve catfished special interests out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. While I never met their expectations, I always knew what they wanted.
He then vowed to never take one red cent from federal PACs again:
Our founding fathers did not commit treason against the crown of England just to watch our generation turn around and prostitute ourselves to multi-national globalist corporate interests. I’ve never turned tricks for Washington PACs, but as of this very moment I will not pick up their money in the nightstand anymore. I will never again accept a donation from a federal political action committee. Not one red cent. The American people are my one and only special interest.
You can watch his full speech below. The part about PACs and special interests begins a little before the 3:00 minute mark:


therightscoop--2020-02-27--Ted Cruz challenges the Oracle of science, AOC!

After Trump appointed Mike Pence as the White House leader of their response to the Coronavirus , AOC claimed that @ @ @ @ @ horrible leader because he ’ s anti-science : Well ain ’ t that the pot @ @ @ @ @ Ted Cruz responded to AOC today , challenging her as the oracle of science : @ @ @ @ @ question had to do with gender since the Y chromosome determines if a child will @ @ @ @ @ this question .
Because to answer it properly is to admit the brutality of abortion @ @ @ @ @ the womb is not just a blob of tissue .
Yeah she wouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ about this one too .
It ’ s the United States , of course , @ @ @ @ @ the International Energy Agency .

After Trump appointed Mike Pence as the White House leader of their response to the Coronavirus, AOC claimed that Mike Pence would be a horrible leader because he’s anti-science:
Mike Pence literally does not believe in science. It is utterly irresponsible to put him in charge of US coronavirus response as the world sits on the cusp of a pandemic. This decision could cost people their lives. Pence’s past decisions already have. https://t.co/NhMPOusOWm — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 27, 2020
Well ain’t that the pot calling the kettle black.
Ted Cruz responded to AOC today, challenging her as the oracle of science:
As you are speaking as the oracle of science, tell us, what exactly is a Y chromosome? https://t.co/t4XVVzWr3A — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) February 27, 2020
I’m assuming this question had to do with gender since the Y chromosome determines if a child will be male.
He continues…
2/x And at what age of gestation does science tell us that an unborn child feels physical pain? — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) February 27, 2020
I like this question. Because to answer it properly is to admit the brutality of abortion and that the life in the womb is not just a blob of tissue.
And lastly…
3/x And, of the 195 countries on planet Earth, which country produced the greatest total reduction in CO2 emissions in 2019? — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) February 27, 2020
Yeah she wouldn’t want to admit the truth about this one too. It’s the United States, of course, as analyzed and reported by the International Energy Agency.