therightscoop--2020-06-16--NBC News ‘reporter’ is turning in conservative sites to Google for them to ban from their ad network

NBC News has just written a story explaining how Google banned two conservative websites from their ad revenue network after NBC News Verification Unit reported them to Google .
The two sites are The Federalist and Zerohedge : Google ’ s ban of the websites comes after the company was notified of research conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate , a British nonprofit that combats online hate and misinformation .
They found that 10 U.S-based websites have published what they say are racist articles about the protests , and projected that the websites would make millions of dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Federalist from its advertising platform after the NBC News Verification Unit brought the project to its attention .
ZeroHedge had already been demonetized prior to NBC News ’ enquiry , Google said .
ZeroHedge and The Federalist did not respond to requests for comment .
So a British organization says The Federalist and Zerohedge are writing racist articles , and NBC News Verification Unit takes that information to Google to get both Zerohedge and The Federalist banned .
As Dana Loesch tweeted , “ This isn ’ t journalism .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalist ’ who wrote the article and apparently collaborated with these groups to get Google to shut them down : As I was writing this post , Adele-Momoko Fraser suddenly locked her Twitter account , no doubt because of all the complaints and reaction she ’ s getting from people who believe NBC News shouldn ’ t be in the business of trying to get other websites shut down .
It should be noted that according to Scott Nover at Adweek , Fraser got it partially wrong : This really doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her position at NBC News to get other outlet she disagrees with shut down .
Just look at some of her previous tweets , posted by Kyle Smith , who notes that she ’ s a British Labour Party activist : Smith also believes this is the article from the Federalist that Fraser and her labor party hate groups turned in to Google : Megyn Kelly retweeted this saying “ This is insane .
Thought police out in full force.
” Josh Hawley has taken notice of all this as well : IMPORTANT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this piece , I see that Google has indicated that they have not banned The Federalist and have worked with them to address their issues : Google writes “ Our policies do not allow ads to run against dangerous or derogatory content , which includes comments on sites , and we offer guidance and best practices to publishers on how to comply.
” Hawley writes “ So NBC News was lying about this or was misinformed about the deal you had with them … or what ?
” There ’ s a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but I believe it ’ s long enough .
The short version is that this NBC News reporter isn ’ t a reporter at all and that she ’ s working with far left groups to try and get them banned from Google ’ s ad revenue network , which you can bet they surely depend on greatly and might have to shut down if they didn ’ t have it .

NBC News has just written a story explaining how Google banned two conservative websites from their ad revenue network after NBC News Verification Unit reported them to Google. The two sites are The Federalist and Zerohedge:
Google’s ban of the websites comes after the company was notified of research conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a British nonprofit that combats online hate and misinformation. They found that 10 U.S-based websites have published what they say are racist articles about the protests, and projected that the websites would make millions of dollars through Google Ads. Google blocked The Federalist from its advertising platform after the NBC News Verification Unit brought the project to its attention. ZeroHedge had already been demonetized prior to NBC News’ enquiry, Google said. ZeroHedge and The Federalist did not respond to requests for comment.
So a British organization says The Federalist and Zerohedge are writing racist articles, and NBC News Verification Unit takes that information to Google to get both Zerohedge and The Federalist banned. As Dana Loesch tweeted, “This isn’t journalism. It’s cancel-culture activism.”
This is the ‘journalist’ who wrote the article and apparently collaborated with these groups to get Google to shut them down:
NBC “reporter” actively supporting speech suppression and tech tyranny. 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 pic.twitter.com/nqytYcECEC — Dan Bongino (@dbongino) June 16, 2020
As I was writing this post, Adele-Momoko Fraser suddenly locked her Twitter account, no doubt because of all the complaints and reaction she’s getting from people who believe NBC News shouldn’t be in the business of trying to get other websites shut down.
Hi Adele, Google says you all are liars. Why did you run with a completely false report then? https://t.co/LlUq0Alig4 — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) June 16, 2020
It should be noted that according to Scott Nover at Adweek, Fraser got it partially wrong:
A Google spokesperson tells me that @NBCNews gets it wrong. Google says The Federalist was notified they *could* be demonetized but hasn't yet been. They can still remedy. Google also says the sites' comments section not any articles were in violation.https://t.co/Nl9SmJBnEX — Scott Nover (@ScottNover) June 16, 2020
Google says the comments sections of these sites violate their "dangerous and derogatory" policies. https://t.co/37ukcbO89q — Scott Nover (@ScottNover) June 16, 2020
Comment sections???
To clarify, Google says The Federalist will be de-monetized, but there's a short window between judgement and action, so it's not currently de-monetized. During that window, The Federalist can remedy the actions. — Scott Nover (@ScottNover) June 16, 2020
This really doesn’t change anything. Adele-Momoko Fraser is using her position at NBC News to get other outlet she disagrees with shut down. Just look at some of her previous tweets, posted by Kyle Smith, who notes that she’s a British Labour Party activist:
Smith also believes this is the article from the Federalist that Fraser and her labor party hate groups turned in to Google:
This seems to be the piece that led to demonetizing The Federalist – a piece of media criticism that calls out many false and misleading statements. Huh?https://t.co/zABdhvlnl0 — Kyle Smith (@rkylesmith) June 16, 2020
Megyn Kelly retweeted this saying “This is insane. Thought police out in full force.”
Josh Hawley has taken notice of all this as well:
Translation: @NBCNews goes to a monopolist to ask for action against two competitor outlets and the monopolist agrees to ban them. This is the free market? https://t.co/5YEW3ton9x — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) June 16, 2020
IMPORTANT: As I’m finishing up this piece, I see that Google has indicated that they have not banned The Federalist and have worked with them to address their issues:
The Federalist was never demonetized. — Google Communications (@Google_Comms) June 16, 2020
We worked with them to address issues on their site related to the comments section. — Google Communications (@Google_Comms) June 16, 2020
Google writes “Our policies do not allow ads to run against dangerous or derogatory content, which includes comments on sites, and we offer guidance and best practices to publishers on how to comply.”
Hawley writes “So NBC News was lying about this or was misinformed about the deal you had with them … or what?”
So @NBCNews was lying about this or was misinformed about the deal you had with them … or what? https://t.co/6EpGq90JcG — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) June 16, 2020
There’s a lot more I could add to this post, but I believe it’s long enough. The short version is that this NBC News reporter isn’t a reporter at all and that she’s working with far left groups to try and get them banned from Google’s ad revenue network, which you can bet they surely depend on greatly and might have to shut down if they didn’t have it.


therightscoop--2020-06-16--MSNBC reporter gets SHAMED by CHAZ protester after he calls it a ‘street festival’ – [VIDEO]

An MSNBC reporter made the mistake of calling the CHOP takeover of a portion of downtown Seattle a “ street festival ” , and that did not go over with the protesters there at all : Vaughn Hilliard , the MSNBC reporter , is trying to explain how ‘ peaceful ’ it is there after a week of clashes with the police .
So he says it ’ s like a ‘ street festival ’ .
But a protester came up and shamed him for even suggesting such a thing , saying “ It is not a street festival…do not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying that .
Learn right now that it is not a street festival !
” Another chick standing their claimed their voices are strained because of police tear gas , telling Hilliard “ you have to understand some traumatizing things happened here ; all of us standing here are suffering from PTSD from our own country.
” I ’ m surprised they didn ’ t make Hilliard get on his knees and beg for forgiveness .
Seriously , that would have been epic .
As to that PTSD comment , puh lease .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ military nor have I been to war , but I can imagine the horrors that those men and women who fight for us must see there .
For this woman to claim she ’ s got PTSD because she had to deal with tear gas is laughable at best .
If anything they need more tear gas to run them back home to their mommies .

An MSNBC reporter made the mistake of calling the CHAZ CHOP takeover of a portion of downtown Seattle a “street festival”, and that did not go over with the protesters there at all:
Vaughn Hilliard, the MSNBC reporter, is trying to explain how ‘peaceful’ it is there after a week of clashes with the police. So he says it’s like a ‘street festival’.
But a protester came up and shamed him for even suggesting such a thing, saying “It is not a street festival…do not say that! Shame on you for saying that. Learn right now that it is not a street festival!”
Another chick standing their claimed their voices are strained because of police tear gas, telling Hilliard “you have to understand some traumatizing things happened here; all of us standing here are suffering from PTSD from our own country.”
I’m surprised they didn’t make Hilliard get on his knees and beg for forgiveness. Seriously, that would have been epic.
As to that PTSD comment, puh lease. I’ve never been in the military nor have I been to war, but I can imagine the horrors that those men and women who fight for us must see there. For this woman to claim she’s got PTSD because she had to deal with tear gas is laughable at best. If anything they need more tear gas to run them back home to their mommies.


therightscoop--2020-06-16--Domino’s Pizza BURNS Rick Wilson over stupid angry tweet

Way back in dark ages known as 2012 , Kayleigh McEnany complimented Domino ’ s Pizza and they responded with @ @ @ @ @ to yesterday .
For some strange reason Rick Wilson ( probably doing anti-Trump research , @ @ @ @ @ , or both ) decided to retweet the above 2012 response from Dominos and accuse @ @ @ @ @ : Dominos responded diplomatically , but made a subtle point about just how bizarre the @ @ @ @ @ More than a few people were quick to tweet their praise of Domino ’ s @ @

Way back in dark ages known as 2012, Kayleigh McEnany complimented Domino’s Pizza and they responded with gleeful thanks:
@kayleighmcenany That's one heck of a compliment! Thanks for the love! #WEAPPRECIATEIT! — Domino's Pizza (@dominos) November 9, 2012
Fast forward to yesterday. For some strange reason Rick Wilson (probably doing anti-Trump research, or maybe he was drunk, or both) decided to retweet the above 2012 response from Dominos and accuse them of ruining their brand:
Dominos responded diplomatically, but made a subtle point about just how bizarre the tweet was from Wilson:
Welp. It's unfortunate that thanking a customer for a compliment back in 2012 would be viewed as political. Guess that's 2020 for ya. — Domino's Pizza (@dominos) June 16, 2020
Nice!
More than a few people were quick to tweet their praise of Domino’s response:
DOMINOS GIVE YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA DIRECTOR A RAISE! Incredible. — Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) June 16, 2020
FATALITY. — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) June 16, 2020
I don’t really care for your pizza, but will happily order Domino’s next time for this response! — LibertyNow🇺🇸 (@LibertyNow11) June 16, 2020
Excellent! We haven’t had dominoes in a long time but we will be ordering this week. Thanks for standing up to the bullies!! — Sam (@4_maimas) June 16, 2020


therightscoop--2020-06-16--Dan Bongino: If Atlanta police officer had used a neck restraint, Rayshard Brooks would likely still

Dan Bongino: If Atlanta police officer had used a neck restraint, Rayshard Brooks would likely still be alive

Dan Bongino was on Fox News responding to the president ’ s executive order a few minutes ago , and he said something interesting about the use of neck restraints versus chokeholds : Bongino noted that he was glad that the president didn ’ t ban neck restraints , which he says are unfortunately known as chokeholds .
Bongino explained that a chokehold specifically cuts off someone ’ s windpipe and is indeed very dangerous and could kill someone .
But he says that neck restraints and carotid restraints are very different .
Bongino then explains that if you watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the two police officers carefully , you ’ ll see one of the officers begin to attempt a neck restraint on Brooks but ultimately doesn ’ t do it .
Bongino notes that he can ’ t get into the officer ’ s head as to why he didn ’ t go through with it , but said if he had gotten a successful carotid neck restraint on Brooks , he probably would have passed out in seconds and woken up alive .
Bongino adds that people have to be careful when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lump carotid neck restraints with chokeholds and ban them altogether , you ’ re leaving the officer with no choice but to use a firearm , which in many cases leads to death .

Dan Bongino was on Fox News responding to the president’s executive order a few minutes ago, and he said something interesting about the use of neck restraints versus chokeholds:
Bongino noted that he was glad that the president didn’t ban neck restraints, which he says are unfortunately known as chokeholds. Bongino explained that a chokehold specifically cuts off someone’s windpipe and is indeed very dangerous and could kill someone. But he says that neck restraints and carotid restraints are very different.
Bongino then explains that if you watch the Atlanta video of Rayshard Brooks fighting with the two police officers carefully, you’ll see one of the officers begin to attempt a neck restraint on Brooks but ultimately doesn’t do it. Bongino notes that he can’t get into the officer’s head as to why he didn’t go through with it, but said if he had gotten a successful carotid neck restraint on Brooks, he probably would have passed out in seconds and woken up alive.
Bongino adds that people have to be careful when discussing police tactics, because if you lump carotid neck restraints with chokeholds and ban them altogether, you’re leaving the officer with no choice but to use a firearm, which in many cases leads to death.
Watch the video for more…


therightscoop--2020-06-16--WATCH LIVE: President Trump delivers remarks and signs executive order on police reform

At 12 noon President Trump is scheduled to both deliver remarks and sign an executive order on police reform .
@ @ @ @ @

At 12 noon President Trump is scheduled to both deliver remarks and sign an executive order on police reform. You can watch below:
WHITE HOUSE:
FOX NEWS:
NBC NEWS:
WHILE YOU WAIT:


therightscoop--2020-06-16--MULTIPLE VIDEOS: Man shot as Albuquerque protesters clash in tense exchange over tearing down local

MULTIPLE VIDEOS: Man shot as Albuquerque protesters clash in tense exchange over tearing down local statue

A tense exchange erupted in gunfire last night in New Mexico during attempts by protesters to tear down a statue of Spanish conquistador Juan de Oñate in front of the Albuquerque Museum .
I ’ ve been looking for videos of the incident to try and get the real story .
It appears a man in a blue shirt , who was trying to protect a statue and was physical with protesters in the process , was eventually pushed away from the statue by angry protesters and ganged up on , even tackled on the street at one point .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defend himself and ended up shooting one of his attackers .
Just to give you an idea of what was going on , here are the protesters trying to pull down the statue as the shooting takes place in the background .
The sounds of gunfire happen at the very end : Earlier the man in the blue shirt appears next to the statue , along with the New Mexico Civil Guard , getting physical with protesters as he appeared to be trying to protect the statue : Here ’ s another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shirt being physically blocked by one woman as he tried to get to the statue .
He just jerked her to the ground : With that as what little background I could find , here you see the angry protesters driving the man in the blue shirt away from the statue .
He reportedly used pepper spray to keep them away .
You then see a couple protesters tackling him to the ground after he appeared to be leaving .
That ’ s when he pulled out a gun and shot one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slowed the video down by 75 % so you can see much better what the man and the blue shirt was dealing with as he was tackled : In the immediate aftermath of the shooting , it appears that New Mexico Civil Guard members tried to restore order and kicked the man ’ s gun away from him as he sat on the pavement : Here ’ s video of the man who was shot getting attention from an onsite medic .
Ignore the caption as I don ’ t think it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ambulance taking the wounded man away : There are a few tweets alleging that these protesters may have been Antifa , but I don ’ t know that for sure .
What I do know is that the police are investigating and the city has already removed the statue this morning :

A tense exchange erupted in gunfire last night in New Mexico during attempts by protesters to tear down a statue of Spanish conquistador Juan de Oñate in front of the Albuquerque Museum.
I’ve been looking for videos of the incident to try and get the real story. It appears a man in a blue shirt, who was trying to protect a statue and was physical with protesters in the process, was eventually pushed away from the statue by angry protesters and ganged up on, even tackled on the street at one point. He appeared to pull out a gun to defend himself and ended up shooting one of his attackers.
Just to give you an idea of what was going on, here are the protesters trying to pull down the statue as the shooting takes place in the background. The sounds of gunfire happen at the very end:
Communists in Albuquerque try to pull down a statue before gun fire erupts during what appears to be an attempted murder. pic.twitter.com/kvzDkflZcm — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) June 16, 2020
Earlier the man in the blue shirt appears next to the statue, along with the New Mexico Civil Guard, getting physical with protesters as he appeared to be trying to protect the statue:
More of 5⃣1⃣8⃣ in Albuquerque NM, showing the shooter (blue shirt + scarf) assaulting several protestors [@meganrabundis]
pic.twitter.com/aOPUKaPeXn — T. Greg Doucette (@greg_doucette) June 16, 2020
Here’s another video of the man in the blue shirt being physically blocked by one woman as he tried to get to the statue. He just jerked her to the ground:
He clearly started this by throwing a girl to the ground and pepper spraying the crowd. #Albuquerque #NewMexico #NewMexicoCivilGuard pic.twitter.com/C6WgToxL1Q — jeremiah scott (@codecookride) June 16, 2020
With that as what little background I could find, here you see the angry protesters driving the man in the blue shirt away from the statue. He reportedly used pepper spray to keep them away. You then see a couple protesters tackling him to the ground after he appeared to be leaving. That’s when he pulled out a gun and shot one of them to stop his attackers:
Here’s another angle:
Wow! If this is #Albuquerque shooting what do you think?? Albuquerque wild AF. It appears to be the scene. No confirmation on this video 🤯🤯🤯🦉🌪🌪 pic.twitter.com/1QhQUBrhOO — roberto pedone (@zerosum24) June 16, 2020
Someone slowed the video down by 75% so you can see much better what the man and the blue shirt was dealing with as he was tackled:
In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, it appears that New Mexico Civil Guard members tried to restore order and kicked the man’s gun away from him as he sat on the pavement:
More on 5⃣1⃣8⃣ after the shooting in Albuquerque NM Keep in mind: ABQ police has been coordinating with the New Mexico Civil Guard militia in earlier protests [@nick_w_estes]
pic.twitter.com/anUwlPhdck — T. Greg Doucette (@greg_doucette) June 16, 2020
Here’s video of the man who was shot getting attention from an onsite medic. Ignore the caption as I don’t think it’s accurate:
Militia Supremacy group the "New Mexico Civil Guard" shot a protestor trying to remove a racist statue in Albuquerque.
Pro-"Fa" groups are much more prevalent & dangerous than "Antifa" groups. #2A does NOT give u right to shoot protestors.pic.twitter.com/TskC5L1q0y — Covfefe "Shecky" Jones- King Of Shade👑 FBR 🌊🌊 (@King_Of_Shade) June 16, 2020
And here’s the ambulance taking the wounded man away:
Someone shot at an #Albuquerque protest. Media is saying militia menbee take into custody pic.twitter.com/aOBuHFfB26 — roberto pedone (@zerosum24) June 16, 2020
There are a few tweets alleging that these protesters may have been Antifa, but I don’t know that for sure. What I do know is that the police are investigating and the city has already removed the statue this morning:
A statue of a Spanish conquistador was removed Monday in Albuquerque, New Mexico after after a man was shot during protests pic.twitter.com/JUjdQayJlX — Bloomberg QuickTake (@QuickTake) June 16, 2020


therightscoop--2020-06-17--AG Barr’s former prep school under attack to remove him from distinguished alumni list over Lafayett

AG Barr’s former prep school under attack to remove him from distinguished alumni list over Lafayette Square

The left isn ’ t just trying to remove confederate statues and any other statue that reminds them of a confederate statue .
Now they are trying to get AG Barr removed from the distinguished alumni list at his former prep school : NY POST – The alumni committee of the prestigious Bronx prep school Horace Mann is facing furious calls to remove Attorney General Bill Barr from their distinguished-alumni list following reports that law enforcement followed his orders to aggressively clear protesters in DC for a Donald Trump photo op .
“ It ’ s a big debate with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to remove him , ” says a source .
“ They had to have an emergency meeting about it , but no decision has been made.
” Almost 8,000 people have signed a Change.org petition to have the politico , who was given the alumni association ’ s Award for Distinguished Achievement in 2011 , removed .
“ Barr directly ordered the violent removal of protesters for the president ’ s political gain , and this was a callous and despicable act demonstrating a clear disregard for our democratic values of free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the petition , started by class of 2020 students Kiara Royer and Jessica Rosberger .
“ Barr violated our school ’ s Core Values of Mutual Respect and Mature Behavior as well as our Mission Statement by infringing on the common good.
” Alums decrying Barr is nothing new .
Since 1991 , a Horace Mann peer of his , Jimmy Lohman , now an attorney , has been publicly accusing the AG of being a racist who bullied him at school because he supported civil rights .
The school ’ s Alumni @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school ’ s Alumni Council said in a statement , “ We have heard concerns expressed by current students , alumni and school employees … We are convening our council to canvass the views of our alumni constituencies and to review in a deliberate manner the range of perspectives that are being communicated to us in connection with the award .
We intend to consider the issues thoroughly and sensitively.
” If the media bothered to report the truth about what really happened at Lafayette Square , people would know that the clearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in advance of Trump ’ s to walk to St. John ’ s Church and had nothing to do with it .
They ’ d know that the US Park Service made the decision to clear Lafayette Park because of the violence over the weekend and that AG Barr signed off on it on Monday morning and gave the order .
They ’ d know that the reason it didn ’ t get cleared until later in the day , shortly before Trump walked to the Church , was because Barr couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen earlier due to the injuries and exhaustion of these same men from the weekend that had literally just ended .
But instead , the media smeared AG Barr and now the left is out for blood .
And now it looks like this Alumni Council is going to cave to the harassment of the liberal mob .
I sure hope I ’ m wrong , but this just shows you how much influence the fake news media still has in this country and how many useless idiots still believe their every word @

The left isn’t just trying to remove confederate statues and any other statue that reminds them of a confederate statue. Now they are trying to get AG Barr removed from the distinguished alumni list at his former prep school:
NY POST – The alumni committee of the prestigious Bronx prep school Horace Mann is facing furious calls to remove Attorney General Bill Barr from their distinguished-alumni list following reports that law enforcement followed his orders to aggressively clear protesters in DC for a Donald Trump photo op. “It’s a big debate with the alumni committee as to whether or not to remove him,” says a source. “They had to have an emergency meeting about it, but no decision has been made.” Almost 8,000 people have signed a Change.org petition to have the politico, who was given the alumni association’s Award for Distinguished Achievement in 2011, removed. “Barr directly ordered the violent removal of protesters for the president’s political gain, and this was a callous and despicable act demonstrating a clear disregard for our democratic values of free speech and racial justice,” says the petition, started by class of 2020 students Kiara Royer and Jessica Rosberger. “Barr violated our school’s Core Values of Mutual Respect and Mature Behavior as well as our Mission Statement by infringing on the common good.” Alums decrying Barr is nothing new. Since 1991, a Horace Mann peer of his, Jimmy Lohman, now an attorney, has been publicly accusing the AG of being a racist who bullied him at school because he supported civil rights.
The school’s Alumni Council is actually considering it:
The school’s Alumni Council said in a statement, “We have heard concerns expressed by current students, alumni and school employees … We are convening our council to canvass the views of our alumni constituencies and to review in a deliberate manner the range of perspectives that are being communicated to us in connection with the award. We intend to consider the issues thoroughly and sensitively.”
If the media bothered to report the truth about what really happened at Lafayette Square, people would know that the clearing of Lafayette Park was actually decided well in advance of Trump’s to walk to St. John’s Church and had nothing to do with it. They’d know that the US Park Service made the decision to clear Lafayette Park because of the violence over the weekend and that AG Barr signed off on it on Monday morning and gave the order. They’d know that the reason it didn’t get cleared until later in the day, shortly before Trump walked to the Church, was because Barr couldn’t get enough manpower to make it happen earlier due to the injuries and exhaustion of these same men from the weekend that had literally just ended.
But instead, the media smeared AG Barr and now the left is out for blood. And now it looks like this Alumni Council is going to cave to the harassment of the liberal mob. I sure hope I’m wrong, but this just shows you how much influence the fake news media still has in this country and how many useless idiots still believe their every word.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--“Absolutely untrue!” – US Trade Rep Robert Lighthizer denies Bolton’s claim about Trump and China

With Bolton ’ s book due out soon excerpts are already being printed in the media , with one claiming that Trump begged China ’ s President Xi to help him win election by purchasing more soybeans and wheat from US farmers .
But US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer says the claim is “ absolutely untrue ” : THE HILL – U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Wednesday denied a claim by former national security adviser John Bolton that President Trump asked Chinese President Xi Jinping for help winning the 2020 election .
“ Absolutely untrue .
Never happened .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ recollection of that ever happening .
I don ’ t believe it ’ s true .
I don ’ t believe it ever happened , ” Lighthizer said at a Senate Finance Committee hearing .
Less than an hour earlier , The Washington Post ran an excerpt from Bolton ’ s upcoming book , in which the former Trump administration official claims that Trump made the request for electoral help from Xi during a one-on-one meeting at the Group of 20 summit in Japan in June 2019 .
Trump , Bolton wrote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s economic capability to affect the ongoing campaigns , pleading with Xi to ensure he ’ d win.
” “ He stressed the importance of farmers , and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome .
I would print Trump ’ s exact words but the government ’ s prepublication review process has decided otherwise , ” the excerpt in the Post read .
Lighthizer said he was at the meeting in question and disputed Bolton ’ s account .
The funny thing is that Bolton is getting hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this book .
Republicans are upset that he would be this disloyal after being given a top job in the White House , and so soon after his tenure in the White House : Multiple Republicans largely shrugged off Bolton ’ s claims , reasoning that the former national security adviser had an ax to grind with his former boss .
“ $ 2 million .
Apparently that ’ s all it took for John Bolton to sell off what little credibility he had left , ” Rep Doug Collins ( R-Ga. ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton ’ s book deal .
Democrats , on the other hand , are pissed that Bolton refused to testify during Trump ’ s impeachment and kept quiet only so he could sell a tell-all book .
Democrats fumed over the new information Wednesday , pointing to Bolton ’ s prior refusal to testify before the House during impeachment hearings unless a judge ordered him to do so .
“ When Bolton was asked , he refused , and said he ’ d sue if subpoenaed .
Instead , he saved it for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schiff ( D-Calif. ) , who oversaw most of the impeachment hearings as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee .
“ Bolton may be an author , but he ’ s no patriot , ” Schiff added .
Despite how upset these Democrats are , I assure you they ’ ll gladly use whatever Bolton gives them now in order to keep Trump from winning the election .
They ’ ll sing about every controversy from the rooftops and the media will gladly help them do it .

With Bolton’s book due out soon excerpts are already being printed in the media, with one claiming that Trump begged China’s President Xi to help him win election by purchasing more soybeans and wheat from US farmers. But US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer says the claim is “absolutely untrue”:
THE HILL – U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Wednesday denied a claim by former national security adviser John Bolton that President Trump asked Chinese President Xi Jinping for help winning the 2020 election. “Absolutely untrue. Never happened. I was there. I have no recollection of that ever happening. I don’t believe it’s true. I don’t believe it ever happened,” Lighthizer said at a Senate Finance Committee hearing. Less than an hour earlier, The Washington Post ran an excerpt from Bolton’s upcoming book, in which the former Trump administration official claims that Trump made the request for electoral help from Xi during a one-on-one meeting at the Group of 20 summit in Japan in June 2019. Trump, Bolton wrote, turned the conversation to “China’s economic capability to affect the ongoing campaigns, pleading with Xi to ensure he’d win.” “He stressed the importance of farmers, and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome. I would print Trump’s exact words but the government’s prepublication review process has decided otherwise,” the excerpt in the Post read. Lighthizer said he was at the meeting in question and disputed Bolton’s account.
The funny thing is that Bolton is getting hit from all sides on the release of this book.
Republicans are upset that he would be this disloyal after being given a top job in the White House, and so soon after his tenure in the White House:
Multiple Republicans largely shrugged off Bolton’s claims, reasoning that the former national security adviser had an ax to grind with his former boss. “$2 million. Apparently that’s all it took for John Bolton to sell off what little credibility he had left,” Rep Doug Collins (R-Ga.) tweeted, referencing the reported worth of Bolton’s book deal.
Democrats, on the other hand, are pissed that Bolton refused to testify during Trump’s impeachment and kept quiet only so he could sell a tell-all book.
Democrats fumed over the new information Wednesday, pointing to Bolton’s prior refusal to testify before the House during impeachment hearings unless a judge ordered him to do so. “When Bolton was asked, he refused, and said he’d sue if subpoenaed. Instead, he saved it for a book,” tweeted Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who oversaw most of the impeachment hearings as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. “Bolton may be an author, but he’s no patriot,” Schiff added.
Despite how upset these Democrats are, I assure you they’ll gladly use whatever Bolton gives them now in order to keep Trump from winning the election. They’ll sing about every controversy from the rooftops and the media will gladly help them do it.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--DOJ releases reforms for Section 230 to crack down on social media companies who arbitrarily censor

DOJ releases reforms for Section 230 to crack down on social media companies who arbitrarily censor speech

The DOJ today put out it ’ s report on Section 230 , offering up recommendations to crack down on social media companies and keep them from arbitrarily removing comments they don ’ t agree with : DC EXAMINER – The Justice Department issued a report proposing that the laws governing internet companies should be reformed and some immunities should be rolled back to help incentivize internet businesses to be “ responsible actors.
” Attorney General William Barr said Wednesday that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 must be updated after nearly two decades .
“ When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the government is the one who must act on behalf of society at large .
Law enforcement can not delegate our obligations to protect the safety of the American people purely to the judgment of profit-seeking private firms .
We must shape the incentives for companies to create a safer environment , which is what Section 230 was originally intended to do , ” Barr said .
“ Taken together , these reforms will ensure that Section 230 immunity incentivizes online platforms to be responsible actors .
These reforms are targeted at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ addressing illegal and exploitive content while continuing to preserve a vibrant , open , and competitive internet.
” Barr added , “ These twin objectives of giving online platforms the freedom to grow and innovate while encouraging them to moderate content responsibly were the core objectives of Section 230 at the outset.
” To this end , the DOJ suggests discarding the language “ otherwise objectionable ” in Section 230 and to make it more specific , replacing it with “ unlawful ” and “ promotes terrorism ” : The Justice Department ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — Nurturing Innovation or Fostering Unaccountability ?
, was the culmination of a 10-month review .
It comes shortly after President Trump ’ s late May executive order , which claimed that Twitter , Facebook , Instagram , and YouTube “ wield immense , if not unprecedented , power to shape the interpretation of public events ” and that “ online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse.
” The DOJ report said it aimed to “ update the outdated immunity for online platforms ” under Section 230 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reform proposals to provide stronger incentives for online platforms to address illicit material on their services while continuing to foster innovation and free speech.
” The Justice Department report said some of its proposed reforms are “ intended to clarify the text and original purpose of the statute in order to promote free and open discourse online and encourage greater transparency between platforms and users.
” The Justice Department suggested replacing the “ vague catch-all ” phrase “ otherwise objectionable ” in Section 230 by replacing it with “ unlawful ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ This reform would focus the broad blanket immunity for content moderation decisions on the core objective of Section 230 — to reduce online content harmful to children — while limiting a platform ’ s ability to remove content arbitrarily or in ways inconsistent with its terms or service simply by deeming it objectionable.
” The Justice Department explained its reasoning in a press release , emphasizing that it was simultaneously looking to encourage the free flow of ideas while discouraging illegal activities .
“ Section 230 was originally enacted to protect developing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not liable for the third-party content on their services or for their removal of such content in certain circumstances .
This immunity was meant to nurture emerging internet businesses and to overrule a judicial precedent that rendered online platforms liable for all third-party content on their services if they restricted some harmful content , ” the agency said .
“ However , the combination of 25 years of drastic technological changes and an expansive statutory interpretation left online platforms unaccountable for a variety of harms flowing from content on their platforms and with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with little transparency or accountability.
” Other reforms proposed by the Justice Department on Wednesday included “ denying Section 230 immunity to truly bad actors ” such as child abusers , terrorists , and cyberstalkers , and the reforms would “ enable victims to seek civil redress.
” The Justice Department said that it “ supports reforms to make clear that Section 230 immunity does not apply in a specific case where a platform had actual knowledge or notice that the third party content at issue violated federal criminal law.
” The report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ the immunity provided by Section 230 does not apply to civil enforcement by the federal government.
” The Justice Department also proposed clarifying that federal antitrust claims “ are not covered by Section 230 immunity ” because “ it makes little sense to enable large online platforms ( particularly dominant ones ) to invoke Section 230 immunity in antitrust cases.
” Obviously this would take Congress to get on board and make this happen , so who knows if it will actually get done .
You can read the full report @ @

The DOJ today put out it’s report on Section 230, offering up recommendations to crack down on social media companies and keep them from arbitrarily removing comments they don’t agree with:
DC EXAMINER – The Justice Department issued a report proposing that the laws governing internet companies should be reformed and some immunities should be rolled back to help incentivize internet businesses to be “responsible actors.” Attorney General William Barr said Wednesday that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 must be updated after nearly two decades. “When it comes to issues of public safety, the government is the one who must act on behalf of society at large. Law enforcement cannot delegate our obligations to protect the safety of the American people purely to the judgment of profit-seeking private firms. We must shape the incentives for companies to create a safer environment, which is what Section 230 was originally intended to do,” Barr said. “Taken together, these reforms will ensure that Section 230 immunity incentivizes online platforms to be responsible actors. These reforms are targeted at platforms to make certain they are appropriately addressing illegal and exploitive content while continuing to preserve a vibrant, open, and competitive internet.” Barr added, “These twin objectives of giving online platforms the freedom to grow and innovate while encouraging them to moderate content responsibly were the core objectives of Section 230 at the outset.”
“Responsible actors” is something desperately needed.
To this end, the DOJ suggests discarding the language “otherwise objectionable” in Section 230 and to make it more specific, replacing it with “unlawful” and “promotes terrorism”:
The Justice Department’s 28-page report, titled Section 230 — Nurturing Innovation or Fostering Unaccountability?, was the culmination of a 10-month review. It comes shortly after President Trump’s late May executive order, which claimed that Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube “wield immense, if not unprecedented, power to shape the interpretation of public events” and that “online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse.” The DOJ report said it aimed to “update the outdated immunity for online platforms” under Section 230 and “identified a set of concrete reform proposals to provide stronger incentives for online platforms to address illicit material on their services while continuing to foster innovation and free speech.” The Justice Department report said some of its proposed reforms are “intended to clarify the text and original purpose of the statute in order to promote free and open discourse online and encourage greater transparency between platforms and users.” The Justice Department suggested replacing the “vague catch-all” phrase “otherwise objectionable” in Section 230 by replacing it with “unlawful” and “promotes terrorism.” The agency said, “This reform would focus the broad blanket immunity for content moderation decisions on the core objective of Section 230 — to reduce online content harmful to children — while limiting a platform’s ability to remove content arbitrarily or in ways inconsistent with its terms or service simply by deeming it objectionable.” The Justice Department explained its reasoning in a press release, emphasizing that it was simultaneously looking to encourage the free flow of ideas while discouraging illegal activities. “Section 230 was originally enacted to protect developing technology by providing that online platforms were not liable for the third-party content on their services or for their removal of such content in certain circumstances. This immunity was meant to nurture emerging internet businesses and to overrule a judicial precedent that rendered online platforms liable for all third-party content on their services if they restricted some harmful content,” the agency said. “However, the combination of 25 years of drastic technological changes and an expansive statutory interpretation left online platforms unaccountable for a variety of harms flowing from content on their platforms and with virtually unfettered discretion to censor third-party content with little transparency or accountability.” Other reforms proposed by the Justice Department on Wednesday included “denying Section 230 immunity to truly bad actors” such as child abusers, terrorists, and cyberstalkers, and the reforms would “enable victims to seek civil redress.” The Justice Department said that it “supports reforms to make clear that Section 230 immunity does not apply in a specific case where a platform had actual knowledge or notice that the third party content at issue violated federal criminal law.” The report said that the law should make clear that “the immunity provided by Section 230 does not apply to civil enforcement by the federal government.” The Justice Department also proposed clarifying that federal antitrust claims “are not covered by Section 230 immunity” because “it makes little sense to enable large online platforms (particularly dominant ones) to invoke Section 230 immunity in antitrust cases.”
Obviously this would take Congress to get on board and make this happen, so who knows if it will actually get done. You can read the full report below:


therightscoop--2020-06-17--BREAKING: Fulton County DA charging Atlanta officer who shot Rayshard Brooks with MURDER

The Fulton County DA Paul Howard has just announced that he ’ s charging the now-fired police officer in Atlanta @ @ @ @ @ shot Rayshard Brooks in self-defense with felony murder : The DA is pulling out all @ @ @ @ @ order to justify this ridiculous murder charge : He ’ s also claiming that the @ @ @ @ @ in trying to arrest Brooks has become a states witness and will be releasing a @ @ @ @ @ Howard accuses Rolfe of kicking Brooks while he was on the ground fighting for his @ @ @ @ @ to prove his claim : Is it possible Rolfe and Brosnan made some mistakes while @ @ @ @ @ Sure .
If he actually kicked him while laying on the ground dying , as @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be a good thing .
But I suspect there ’ s probably @ @ @ @ @ And remember , things were happening at a super fast pace .
From what I @ @ @ @ @ and responsibly given the threat against him and this murder charge is despicable .

The Fulton County DA Paul Howard has just announced that he’s charging the now-fired police officer in Atlanta, Garrett Rolfe, who shot Rayshard Brooks in self-defense with felony murder:
BREAKING: Officer Garrett Rolfe faces 11 charges including felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in the death of #RayshardBrooks, according to Fulton County DA Paul Howard pic.twitter.com/KKcE7ZzInN — Courtney Bryant (@CourtneyDBryant) June 17, 2020
LATEST: Fulton County's district attorney announces felony murder and aggravated assault charges against Garrett Rolfe, the former officer who shot 27-year-old Rayshard Brooks pic.twitter.com/Iz1FXKGmMa — Bloomberg QuickTake (@QuickTake) June 17, 2020
The DA is pulling out all the technicalities he can in order to justify this ridiculous murder charge:
DA Paul Howard also points out that firing a taser OR a gun is not allowed when a suspect is running away, according to #Atlanta police guidelines — Courtney Bryant (@CourtneyDBryant) June 17, 2020
He’s also claiming that the other officer who was involved in trying to arrest Brooks has become a states witness and will be releasing a statement against his partner:
Fulton County DA says Officer Brosnan has become a state's witness and will testify against Officer Rolfe in the death of Rayshard Brooks. — Ken Yeung (@thekenyeung) June 17, 2020
Fulton County DA: Arrest warrants for Officers Rolfe and Brosnan have been issued and have been asked to surrender themselves by tomorrow. $50,000 bond is being asked for Brosnan as he's going to become a state's witness against Rolfe. — Ken Yeung (@thekenyeung) June 17, 2020
Howard accuses Rolfe of kicking Brooks while he was on the ground fighting for his life, showing a picture to prove his claim:
BREAKING: Fulton County DA on actions of officers after Rayshard Brooks was shot: "Officer Rolfe actually kicked Mr. Brooks while he laid on the ground, while he was there fighting for his life." A second officer stood on Brooks' shoulders, the DA says. https://t.co/pZgZ377kZV pic.twitter.com/67O9Gcz7lL — Evan McMurry (@evanmcmurry) June 17, 2020
Is it possible Rolfe and Brosnan made some mistakes while trying to restrain Brooks? Sure. If he actually kicked him while laying on the ground dying, as the DA suggests, that won’t be a good thing. But I suspect there’s probably more to this story. And remember, things were happening at a super fast pace. From what I could see Rolfe acted appropriately and responsibly given the threat against him and this murder charge is despicable.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--Despicable Dick Durbin called Senator Tim Scott’s bill on police reform a TOKEN approach; Tim Scott

Despicable Dick Durbin called Senator Tim Scott’s bill on police reform a TOKEN approach; Tim Scott unloads with EPIC response!

The utterly despicable Dick Durbin showed his true colors today on the Senate Floor , suggesting Democrats can ’ t support Senator Tim Scott ’ s bill on police reform because it ’ s a “ token ” approach : Now there ’ s a racist dog whistle for ya .
Durbin knew exactly what he was saying and he knows he can get away with it because the media won ’ t care that he said it .
He also knows that Tim Scott has been attacked as a ‘ token ’ black Republican ever since McConnell tapped him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s joining in .
What a puke .
Upon hearing this Senator Tim Scott came to the floor and issued an epic rebuke of Durbin in response to his ‘ token ’ insult .
It was one of the most amazing responses I ’ ve ever seen on the Senate floor : If anyone in the MSM has a shred of objectivity , they ’ ll have Tim Scott on to respond more publicly to this and they ’ ll grill Durbin over his racist dog whistle .
But alas , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The utterly despicable Dick Durbin showed his true colors today on the Senate Floor, suggesting Democrats can’t support Senator Tim Scott’s bill on police reform because it’s a “token” approach:
Now there’s a racist dog whistle for ya. Durbin knew exactly what he was saying and he knows he can get away with it because the media won’t care that he said it. He also knows that Tim Scott has been attacked as a ‘token’ black Republican ever since McConnell tapped him to write this bill, and now he’s joining in. What a puke.
Upon hearing this Senator Tim Scott came to the floor and issued an epic rebuke of Durbin in response to his ‘token’ insult. It was one of the most amazing responses I’ve ever seen on the Senate floor:
If anyone in the MSM has a shred of objectivity, they’ll have Tim Scott on to respond more publicly to this and they’ll grill Durbin over his racist dog whistle. But alas, we know it won’t happen.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--WATCH: ABC News anchor treats Andrew Cuomo like a STAR in softballiest interview you’ve ever seen

Andrew Cuomo just got the star treatment by ABC News and Good Morning America anchor Amy Robach , who sat down with him to specifically discuss his coronavirus response .
By the end of the interview you ’ d think she was his biggest fan ( via Free Beacon ) : Good grief !
It appears only thing Robach grilled Cuomo about was why he wasn ’ t running for president with his super-duper high approval rating .
The video above , by the way , doesn ’ t show all the questions she asked Cuomo , just the gutless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robach asked Cuomo if he had any regrets in hindsight about closing down New York later than he did , explaining that he ’ s been criticized for that .
When he said no , she then followed up asking if felt responsible for the lives that were lost in his state due to Covid-19 .
Cuomo essentially said no again , and yet Robach NEVER once asked him about all the old people who died in nursing homes because of his policy to send coronavirus patients back to their original nursing home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questions is just sickening and it proves once again what we have been saying for years , that the MSM is the Democrat controlled media .
There ’ s no question about it .
Not one Republican on the planet , especially President Trump , would have received this kind of star treatment with anyone in the MSM .
It ’ s just so blatant these days that it ’ s clear they don ’ t care anymore if anyone sees how biased they truly are…they don ’ t even try to hide @ @

Andrew Cuomo just got the star treatment by ABC News and Good Morning America anchor Amy Robach, who sat down with him to specifically discuss his coronavirus response. By the end of the interview you’d think she was his biggest fan (via Free Beacon):
Good grief! It appears only thing Robach grilled Cuomo about was why he wasn’t running for president with his super-duper high approval rating.
The video above, by the way, doesn’t show all the questions she asked Cuomo, just the gutless ones. For example at one point Robach asked Cuomo if he had any regrets in hindsight about closing down New York later than he did, explaining that he’s been criticized for that. When he said no, she then followed up asking if felt responsible for the lives that were lost in his state due to Covid-19. Cuomo essentially said no again, and yet Robach NEVER once asked him about all the old people who died in nursing homes because of his policy to send coronavirus patients back to their original nursing home.
To hear all of these softball questions is just sickening and it proves once again what we have been saying for years, that the MSM is the Democrat controlled media. There’s no question about it. Not one Republican on the planet, especially President Trump, would have received this kind of star treatment with anyone in the MSM. It’s just so blatant these days that it’s clear they don’t care anymore if anyone sees how biased they truly are…they don’t even try to hide it.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--Here’s your MUST-SEE videos of the day and they are fantastic!

There are several viral videos floating around today , so instead of making a post for each one I decided @ @ @ @ @ .
I ’ ve watched them all and they are fantastic .
We ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ calls one of the best pro-life video they ’ ve ever seen : Next up @ @ @ @ @ by Damani Felder on Democrat leaders : Third , we have a sweet video from @ @ @ @ @ Biden for his ‘ you ain ’ t black ’ comment , which Trump retweeted @ @ @ @ @ this video several times now and honestly , I can ’ t stop watching it @ @ @ @ @ loving this video .
It ’ s a black woman on the street speaking truth @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t know her name , but she ’ s excellent : Go ahead @ @ @ @ @ an open thread :

There are several viral videos floating around today, so instead of making a post for each one I decided to put them all together. I’ve watched them all and they are fantastic.
We’ll start with what Live News calls one of the best pro-life video they’ve ever seen:
One of the best pro-life videos ever.pic.twitter.com/xeq7wqmigK — LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) June 17, 2020
Next up is this truth bomb dropped by Damani Felder on Democrat leaders:
Speechless. Two minutes that are worth EVERY SECOND of your time as @TheDamaniFelder drops a nuclear bomb on @TheDemocrats Flawless victory.pic.twitter.com/fN3ackrVF9 — Rob Smith 🇺🇸 (@robsmithonline) June 17, 2020
Third, we have a sweet video from The Marine Rapper nailing Joe Biden for his ‘you ain’t black’ comment, which Trump retweeted. I’ve watched this video several times now and honestly, I can’t stop watching it:
Lastly, people are loving this video. It’s a black woman on the street speaking truth to some protesters. I don’t know her name, but she’s excellent:
This woman is more well informed than almost anyone I see posting on social media pic.twitter.com/0exEomA7bs — Ryan James Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) June 15, 2020
Go ahead and use this post as an open thread:


therightscoop--2020-06-17--Quaker to rebrand 130-yr-old Aunt Jemima syrup over racial stereotype…

The syrup that many of us grew up with is about to disappear from shelves , as Quaker is going to rebrand its Aunt Jemima syrup over what it admits is a racial stereotype : NBC NEWS – The Aunt Jemima brand of syrup and pancake mix will get a new name and image , Quaker Oats announced Wednesday , saying the company recognizes that “ Aunt Jemima ’ s origins are based on a racial stereotype.
” The 130-year-old brand features a Black woman named Aunt Jemima , who was originally dressed as a minstrel character .
The picture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent years Quaker removed the “ mammy ” kerchief from the character to blunt growing criticism that the brand perpetuated a racist stereotype that dated to the days of slavery .
But Quaker , a subsidiary of PepsiCo , said removing the image and name is part of an effort by the company “ to make progress toward racial equality.
” “ We recognize Aunt Jemima ’ s origins are based on a racial stereotype , ” Kristin Kroepfl , vice president and chief marketing officer of Quaker Foods North America , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives , we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers ’ expectations.
” Kroepfl said the company has worked to “ update ” the brand to be “ appropriate and respectful ” but it realized the changes were insufficient .

The syrup that many of us grew up with is about to disappear from shelves, as Quaker is going to rebrand its Aunt Jemima syrup over what it admits is a racial stereotype:
NBC NEWS – The Aunt Jemima brand of syrup and pancake mix will get a new name and image, Quaker Oats announced Wednesday, saying the company recognizes that “Aunt Jemima’s origins are based on a racial stereotype.”
The 130-year-old brand features a Black woman named Aunt Jemima, who was originally dressed as a minstrel character.
The picture has changed over time, and in recent years Quaker removed the “mammy” kerchief from the character to blunt growing criticism that the brand perpetuated a racist stereotype that dated to the days of slavery. But Quaker, a subsidiary of PepsiCo, said removing the image and name is part of an effort by the company “to make progress toward racial equality.”
“We recognize Aunt Jemima’s origins are based on a racial stereotype,” Kristin Kroepfl, vice president and chief marketing officer of Quaker Foods North America, said in a press release. “As we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives, we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers’ expectations.”
Kroepfl said the company has worked to “update” the brand to be “appropriate and respectful” but it realized the changes were insufficient.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--North Korea sending troops to southern border in escalation with South Korea

North Korea is escalating tensions with South Korea by sending troops to areas of their southern border that had been vacated by agreement in 2018 .
They will also be conducting military exercises on the border as well : NY POST – North Korea said Wednesday that it will send soldiers to now-shuttered inter-Korean cooperation sites in its territory and reinstall guard posts and resume military exercises at front-line areas , nullifying tension-reducing deals reached with South Korea just two years ago .
The announcement is the latest in a series provocations North Korea has taken in what experts believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seoul and Washington amid stalled nuclear negotiations .
On Tuesday , the North destroyed an empty inter-Korean liaison office in its territory .
The North ’ s General Staff said military units will be deployed to the Diamond Mountain resort and the Kaesong industrial complex , both just north of the heavily fortified border .
The two sites , built with South Korean financing , have been closed for years due to inter-Korean disputes and U.S.-led sanctions .
The North also said it will resume military exercises , reestablish guard posts and boost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as open front-line sites for flying propaganda balloons toward South Korea .
Those steps would reverse agreements reached between the Koreas in September 2018 aimed at lowering military tensions along the border .
South Korea ’ s military expressed regret over the North Korean announcement and warned that the North will face unspecified consequences if it violates the 2018 deals .
Just yesterday Kim Jong Un ’ s sister gave the order to destroy “ de facto embassy with South Korea ” because she ’ d determined that the North-South joint liaison office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jong Un is tired of not being in the spotlight as he was two years ago and is being intentionally provocative to get the world ’ s attention again .
But we see how that turned out last time , with Trump trying to get Un to agree to denuclearization and Un ultimately rejecting the proposal .
Let ’ s not make that mistake again .
Rather , it ’ s time to get tough with North Korea .

North Korea is escalating tensions with South Korea by sending troops to areas of their southern border that had been vacated by agreement in 2018. They will also be conducting military exercises on the border as well:
NY POST – North Korea said Wednesday that it will send soldiers to now-shuttered inter-Korean cooperation sites in its territory and reinstall guard posts and resume military exercises at front-line areas, nullifying tension-reducing deals reached with South Korea just two years ago. The announcement is the latest in a series provocations North Korea has taken in what experts believe are calculated moves to apply pressure on Seoul and Washington amid stalled nuclear negotiations. On Tuesday, the North destroyed an empty inter-Korean liaison office in its territory.
The North’s General Staff said military units will be deployed to the Diamond Mountain resort and the Kaesong industrial complex, both just north of the heavily fortified border. The two sites, built with South Korean financing, have been closed for years due to inter-Korean disputes and U.S.-led sanctions. The North also said it will resume military exercises, reestablish guard posts and boost military readiness in border areas as well as open front-line sites for flying propaganda balloons toward South Korea. Those steps would reverse agreements reached between the Koreas in September 2018 aimed at lowering military tensions along the border. South Korea’s military expressed regret over the North Korean announcement and warned that the North will face unspecified consequences if it violates the 2018 deals.
Just yesterday Kim Jong Un’s sister gave the order to destroy “de facto embassy with South Korea” because she’d determined that the North-South joint liaison office was useless.
It looks like Kim Jong Un is tired of not being in the spotlight as he was two years ago and is being intentionally provocative to get the world’s attention again. But we see how that turned out last time, with Trump trying to get Un to agree to denuclearization and Un ultimately rejecting the proposal. Let’s not make that mistake again. Rather, it’s time to get tough with North Korea.


therightscoop--2020-06-17--POLITICO: Trump has a point about the polls being wrong…

Politico is out with an article this morning arguing that Trump has a point about pollsters overestimating support for Biden in many of these polls : As President Donald Trump tumbles in the polls and falls further behind Joe Biden , his campaign has returned to a familiar refrain : The polls are underestimating Trump ’ s appeal again .
Pollsters aren ’ t deliberately skewing their surveys against the president and his party , as Trump ’ s orbit alleges .
The national polls showing Trump trailing Biden by an increasing margin aren ’ t “ phony ” or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the relatively few who conduct surveys in battleground states , are still grappling with the same problems that plagued those polls four years ago .
In fact , most pollsters believe that , on balance , state polls are overstating the scale of Biden ’ s advantage .
That was precisely the problem in 2016 : The national polls were largely accurate , to within the margin of error .
But there were too few state polls , and many of those that were conducted failed to collect accurate data , especially from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swing states .
And those issues haven ’ t been fixed .
Pollsters are looking for answers… Pollsters are looking for answers .
One of the major takeaways of the American Association for Public Opinion Research ’ s post-2016 autopsy was that state polls that didn ’ t weight , or adjust , their samples to include more white voters who hadn ’ t graduated college missed a key element of Trump ’ s coalition .
In previous elections , the differences in white voters ’ preferences along educational lines were smaller , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accelerated with Trump on the ballot in 2016 .
“ Before 2014 , it wasn ’ t that big of a deal because the reality is non-college white voters and college-educated white voters — the distinction between the two wasn ’ t as dramatic , ” said Democratic pollster Jefrey Pollock .
“ But starting with 2014 , that began to cleave a lot and is now obviously humongous.
” GOP pollster Glen Bolger said he believes a combination of pollsters ’ inability to get the right educational mix and to convince potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to phone polls is pointing their surveys in a slight Democratic direction .
“ I don ’ t know how big the effect is .
I also don ’ t know what the ratio is between it being ‘ shy Trump ’ voters and interviewing too many college graduates and not enough non-college grads , ” Bolger said .
“ But I do think those are factors in some of the polls that show a particularly wide lead for Biden at this point in time .
And I do think that things will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls indicate right now.
” Politico isn ’ t saying that Trump is really winning in these polls that suggest he ’ s losing , but rather that his situation may not be as dire as it looks in some of these polls .
Whatever the case , we still have over five months until the election and a lot can and will change before then .
As we get closer to November we ’ ll also see pollsters switching from populations of registered voters to likely voters , which will hopefully yield @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these pollsters can ’ t figure out the Trump appeal dynamic in their populations then we might be looking at another election shocker , just like we saw in 2016 .

Politico is out with an article this morning arguing that Trump has a point about pollsters overestimating support for Biden in many of these polls:
As President Donald Trump tumbles in the polls and falls further behind Joe Biden, his campaign has returned to a familiar refrain: The polls are underestimating Trump’s appeal again. They have a point. Pollsters aren’t deliberately skewing their surveys against the president and his party, as Trump’s orbit alleges. The national polls showing Trump trailing Biden by an increasing margin aren’t “phony” or rigged. But some pollsters, especially the relatively few who conduct surveys in battleground states, are still grappling with the same problems that plagued those polls four years ago. In fact, most pollsters believe that, on balance, state polls are overstating the scale of Biden’s advantage. That was precisely the problem in 2016: The national polls were largely accurate, to within the margin of error. But there were too few state polls, and many of those that were conducted failed to collect accurate data, especially from white voters without college degrees in key swing states. And those issues haven’t been fixed.
Pollsters are looking for answers…
Pollsters are looking for answers. One of the major takeaways of the American Association for Public Opinion Research’s post-2016 autopsy was that state polls that didn’t weight, or adjust, their samples to include more white voters who hadn’t graduated college missed a key element of Trump’s coalition. In previous elections, the differences in white voters’ preferences along educational lines were smaller, but began to grow last decade and accelerated with Trump on the ballot in 2016. “Before 2014, it wasn’t that big of a deal because the reality is non-college white voters and college-educated white voters — the distinction between the two wasn’t as dramatic,” said Democratic pollster Jefrey Pollock. “But starting with 2014, that began to cleave a lot and is now obviously humongous.” GOP pollster Glen Bolger said he believes a combination of pollsters’ inability to get the right educational mix and to convince potential Trump voters to respond and answer truthfully to phone polls is pointing their surveys in a slight Democratic direction. “I don’t know how big the effect is. I also don’t know what the ratio is between it being ‘shy Trump’ voters and interviewing too many college graduates and not enough non-college grads,” Bolger said. “But I do think those are factors in some of the polls that show a particularly wide lead for Biden at this point in time. And I do think that things will be closer in the states that the polls indicate right now.”
Politico isn’t saying that Trump is really winning in these polls that suggest he’s losing, but rather that his situation may not be as dire as it looks in some of these polls.
Whatever the case, we still have over five months until the election and a lot can and will change before then. As we get closer to November we’ll also see pollsters switching from populations of registered voters to likely voters, which will hopefully yield a more accurate result. But if these pollsters can’t figure out the Trump appeal dynamic in their populations then we might be looking at another election shocker, just like we saw in 2016.


therightscoop--2020-06-18--“Who in the hell do you think you are?!?” – Matt Gaetz explodes at smug Democrat during hearing on p

“Who in the hell do you think you are?!?” – Matt Gaetz explodes at smug Democrat during hearing on police reform [VIDEO]

In a House hearing on police reform , Matt Gaetz exploded at a pompous Democratic Congressman who said that he cared more about the children of Republicans than they do .
The video isn ’ t terribly long , so if you can watch the whole thing then please do .
But if you ’ d rather skip ahead , 1:57 would be good time at which to start watching .
Or 3:22 if you are in a real hurry .
Earlier in his speech Democrat Cedric Richmond emphasized , among other things , that he has a black son @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son will be treated by police in the future .
The whole video is about Richmond telling Republicans that they aren ’ t interested in real reform .
At 3:22 , Matt Gaetz asks Richmond if he is suggesting that no one on the Republican side of the aisle has non-white children .
Richmond really didn ’ t want to go there , but after Gaetz persisted he did say that he knows of Republicans who have black grandchildren .
He then argued that it wasn ’ t about the color of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , black people in the streets that are getting killed.
” The line that infuriated Gaetz came next , when Richmond added “ And if one of them happens to be your kid I ’ m concerned about him too .
And clearly I ’ m more concerned about him than you are.
” Gaetz was having none of that , and responded emphatically “ You ’ re claiming that you have more concern for my family that I do ?
Who in the hell do you think you are ?
!
?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t know how much we care about our families !
” Gaetz continued undeterred , exclaiming “ This is outrageous !
You should take those words down .
I know you care about and love your family .
So do we dammit !
” That was where it ended .
As Richmond made clear at the beginning of his speech , he is not a friend of Republicans .
That was quite clear .

In a House hearing on police reform, Matt Gaetz exploded at a pompous Democratic Congressman who said that he cared more about the children of Republicans than they do.
The video isn’t terribly long, so if you can watch the whole thing then please do. But if you’d rather skip ahead, 1:57 would be good time at which to start watching. Or 3:22 if you are in a real hurry.
Earlier in his speech Democrat Cedric Richmond emphasized, among other things, that he has a black son and he has worries about how his son will be treated by police in the future. The whole video is about Richmond telling Republicans that they aren’t interested in real reform.
At 3:22, Matt Gaetz asks Richmond if he is suggesting that no one on the Republican side of the aisle has non-white children. Richmond really didn’t want to go there, but after Gaetz persisted he did say that he knows of Republicans who have black grandchildren. He then argued that it wasn’t about the color of their children, but “about black males, black people in the streets that are getting killed.”
The line that infuriated Gaetz came next, when Richmond added “And if one of them happens to be your kid I’m concerned about him too. And clearly I’m more concerned about him than you are.”
Gaetz was having none of that, and responded emphatically “You’re claiming that you have more concern for my family that I do? Who in the hell do you think you are?!?”
Richmond smugly interjected “If the shoe fits…”
Gaetz continued, shouting “You don’t know how much we care about our families!”
Richmond smugly interjected again, “A kicked dog hollers!”
Gaetz continued undeterred, exclaiming “This is outrageous! You should take those words down. I know you care about and love your family. So do we dammit!”
That was where it ended. As Richmond made clear at the beginning of his speech, he is not a friend of Republicans. That was quite clear.


therightscoop--2020-06-18--This video shows just how HORRIBLE a police officer’s job truly is…

A video is going around today of a couple of state troopers who were trying to arrest a man on the side of the interstate and it went horribly wrong : This video isn ’ t from this year or even last year .
It ’ s from 2017 .
But given the times we live in where people hate cops more than ever , it seems , this video is a good reminder of what police officers have to deal with on a daily basis .
According to the video description , one officer was shot four times but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have released dramatic dashcam video of the shootout on Route 33 that seriously injured Pennsylvania State Trooper Seth Kelly in 2017 .
The suspect Daniel Clary was convicted of attempted murder in May .
In November 2017 , State Trooper Ryan Seiple made what was supposed to be a routine traffic stop on Route 33 in Plainfield Township , Northampton County .
Dashcam video shows Clary getting a ticket for speeding , but as the trooper begins to pull away , Clary flags him down again .
Trooper Sieple called for backup and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kelly putting Clary through a sobriety test .
The video shows Clary unstable on his feet during several tests .
When the troopers try to arrest Clary , he resists and they wrestle him to the ground .
Clary attempts to fight back .
At one point , the fight spills out onto the road with traffic driving by .
Police tried to use a taser on Clary but he gets up and reaches into the driver ’ s side window of his car .
The video shows Clary firing the gun multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kelly .
Both officers return fire and Clary drives away .
Trooper Kelly was shot four times during the exchange of gunfire Nov 7 , 2017 , on the side of Route 33 in Plainfiield Township .
He arrived at a local hospital clinically dead .
He spent 12 days in a medically-induced coma and 25 days in the hospital .
He doesn ’ t remember the shootout .
Houck showed jurors the 45-mintue video of the traffic stop , the struggle and its aftermath .
Houck believes he could have suppressed its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe it ’ s important that the public should view the video to see just how dangerous police work can be and to see the restraint employed by the troopers before they were forced to open fire .
“ We think the community should see it , ” Houck said .
Clary , 22 , of Effort , Pa. , was convicted June 29 of multiple felonies , including attempting to kill Seiple and Kelly .
His attorney argued at trial he was scared and shot at the troopers because he feared for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Aug. 31 .
It ’ s horrible what these officers have to deal with .
A routine traffic stop turns into a nightmare scenario where one office nearly lost his own life .
In an unrelated video , and this one is from today , a police officer who was getting off work on a recent morning stopped by McDonalds for breakfast .
She never got her breakfast after waiting for a long time , and it left her in tears over the way she was treated , just for being a cop @

A video is going around today of a couple of state troopers who were trying to arrest a man on the side of the interstate and it went horribly wrong:
This video isn’t from this year or even last year. It’s from 2017. But given the times we live in where people hate cops more than ever, it seems, this video is a good reminder of what police officers have to deal with on a daily basis.
According to the video description, one officer was shot four times but somehow managed to survive:
State Police have released dramatic dashcam video of the shootout on Route 33 that seriously injured Pennsylvania State Trooper Seth Kelly in 2017. The suspect Daniel Clary was convicted of attempted murder in May. In November 2017, State Trooper Ryan Seiple made what was supposed to be a routine traffic stop on Route 33 in Plainfield Township, Northampton County. Dashcam video shows Clary getting a ticket for speeding, but as the trooper begins to pull away, Clary flags him down again. Trooper Sieple called for backup and the video shows Sieple and Trooper Seth Kelly putting Clary through a sobriety test. The video shows Clary unstable on his feet during several tests. When the troopers try to arrest Clary, he resists and they wrestle him to the ground. Clary attempts to fight back. At one point, the fight spills out onto the road with traffic driving by. Police tried to use a taser on Clary but he gets up and reaches into the driver’s side window of his car. The video shows Clary firing the gun multiple times at both Trooper Sieple and Trooper Kelly. Both officers return fire and Clary drives away. Trooper Kelly was shot four times during the exchange of gunfire Nov 7, 2017, on the side of Route 33 in Plainfiield Township. He arrived at a local hospital clinically dead. He spent 12 days in a medically-induced coma and 25 days in the hospital. He doesn’t remember the shootout. Houck showed jurors the 45-mintue video of the traffic stop, the struggle and its aftermath. Houck believes he could have suppressed its release. But he and the troopers believe it’s important that the public should view the video to see just how dangerous police work can be and to see the restraint employed by the troopers before they were forced to open fire. “We think the community should see it,” Houck said. Clary, 22, of Effort, Pa., was convicted June 29 of multiple felonies, including attempting to kill Seiple and Kelly. His attorney argued at trial he was scared and shot at the troopers because he feared for his life. Clary will be sentenced Aug. 31.
It’s horrible what these officers have to deal with. A routine traffic stop turns into a nightmare scenario where one office nearly lost his own life.
In an unrelated video, and this one is from today, a police officer who was getting off work on a recent morning stopped by McDonalds for breakfast. She never got her breakfast after waiting for a long time, and it left her in tears over the way she was treated, just for being a cop:


therightscoop--2020-06-19--WATCH: Trump posts hilarious video mocking CNN for fake news and the left goes nuts!

Trump posted a hilarious video by Carpedonktum mocking CNN for being a purveyor of fake news : I got ta @ @ @ @ @ to me !
The responses to this from Twitter have also been hilarious , with @ @ @ @ @ : I love how they appeal to Ivanka , as if she can stop Trump @ @ @ @ @ of not being able to do so .
Obviously !
The chyron looks nothing like @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s not fake news , it ’ s a very short mockumentary !
@ @ @ @ @ Caleb Hull is wondering… Hahaha you know it won ’ t be long .
It @ @ @ @ @ media asks if this is doctored !
LOL !

Trump posted a hilarious video by Carpedonktum mocking CNN for being a purveyor of fake news:
I gotta say, seems pretty accurate to me!
The responses to this from Twitter have also been hilarious, with liberals feigning outrage and disbelief:
This is the social media account of the president? Of the United States? Until recently, a G20 country? https://t.co/R1amdsusQk — David Frum (@davidfrum) June 19, 2020
This is absolutely pathetic and disgraceful and yet another low point for a presidency that finds a new one every single day. For all our sakes, VOTE. https://t.co/lI0nK3kCDG — Gary Whitta (@garywhitta) June 19, 2020
I love how they appeal to Ivanka, as if she can stop Trump from tweeting after 3.5 years of not being able to do so.
Obviously CNN did not run this clip with this chyron. This is actual fake news, unlike what the president sometimes thinks is fake news. https://t.co/PSSHpcxch9 — Kathryn Watson (@kathrynw5) June 19, 2020
Obviously! The chyron looks nothing like a CNN chyron. Also it’s not fake news, it’s a very short mockumentary!
On the flip side, Caleb Hull is wondering…
How long until Twitter adds the "manipulated media" disclaimer to this? https://t.co/n6hFreFrKd — Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) June 19, 2020
Hahaha you know it won’t be long. It’ll be after the media asks if this is doctored! LOL!


therightscoop--2020-06-19--“CBS wants a race war!” – CBS News posts incredibly irresponsible headline of story

CBS News posted this irresponsible headline on a story today that caught many by surprise : It sounds really bad , eh ?
But this headline is very misleading : DC EXAMINER – CBS News drew criticism Wednesday for a headline on a story involving police shooting and killing a black man without mentioning the man allegedly opened fire first .
“ Deputies kill half-brother of black man found hanged in park , ” a CBS headline posted on Twitter Wednesday read , referring to the death of Terron Jammal Boone .
Boone was the half-brother of Robert Fuller , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ park on June 10 in what was first believed to be a suicide before the coroner walked back that conclusion .
The tweet doesn ’ t include the police report that states officers attempted to stop Boone , who was wanted for kidnapping , spousal assault , and assault with a deadly weapon , at which point he jumped out of his vehicle and opened fire on officers before they shot and killed him .
The headline was surely meant to get BLM clicks .
But given all the cop-hate out there right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more accurate headline .
Jason Howerton at The Blaze was infuriated when he saw the tweet from CBS News : Both Howerton and Hull highlighted a portion of the article that said “ Detectives with the sheriff ’ s Major Crimes Unit were tracking a man who was wanted for kidnapping , spousal assault and assault with a deadly weapon but when they tried to stop his car , he opened the door and began shooting , authorities said.
” It should also be noted that the man started firing with both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the car .
The woman was shot in the chest and taken to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries .
The little girl was unharmed .

CBS News posted this irresponsible headline on a story today that caught many by surprise:
Deputies kill half-brother of black man found hanged in park https://t.co/yoLJNU6bPF — CBS News (@CBSNews) June 18, 2020
It sounds really bad, eh? But this headline is very misleading:
DC EXAMINER – CBS News drew criticism Wednesday for a headline on a story involving police shooting and killing a black man without mentioning the man allegedly opened fire first. “Deputies kill half-brother of black man found hanged in park,” a CBS headline posted on Twitter Wednesday read, referring to the death of Terron Jammal Boone. Boone was the half-brother of Robert Fuller, a black man found hanging in a park on June 10 in what was first believed to be a suicide before the coroner walked back that conclusion. The tweet doesn’t include the police report that states officers attempted to stop Boone, who was wanted for kidnapping, spousal assault, and assault with a deadly weapon, at which point he jumped out of his vehicle and opened fire on officers before they shot and killed him.
The headline was surely meant to get BLM clicks. But given all the cop-hate out there right now, CBS News should have used a more accurate headline.
Jason Howerton at The Blaze was infuriated when he saw the tweet from CBS News:
I want you to look me in the freaking eye and tell me this isn't pure evil from the media??? Are the clicks that worth it? You're willing to pour gasoline on this out of control fire for CLICKS?! pic.twitter.com/lt2eP3H0Lw — Jason Howerton (@jason_howerton) June 18, 2020
Caleb Hull suggested that CBS News wants a race war:
Headline vs. what actually happened. CBS wants a race war. pic.twitter.com/R3d2hnQ0Wq — Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) June 18, 2020
Both Howerton and Hull highlighted a portion of the article that said “Detectives with the sheriff’s Major Crimes Unit were tracking a man who was wanted for kidnapping, spousal assault and assault with a deadly weapon but when they tried to stop his car, he opened the door and began shooting, authorities said.”
It should also be noted that the man started firing with both a woman and a 7-year-old girl in the car. The woman was shot in the chest and taken to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries. The little girl was unharmed.


therightscoop--2020-06-18--LISTEN: Fauci says Americans ‘don’t believe science’ or ‘authority’, Tapper and Gupta agree and blam

LISTEN: Fauci says Americans ‘don’t believe science’ or ‘authority’, Tapper and Gupta agree and blame Trump

Dr. Anthony Fauci was on the official HHS podcast “ Learning Curve ” today and bashed the American public as basically reactionary , anti-science jerks who hate authority .
Authority being him , you see .
“ One of the problems we face in the United States is that unfortunately , there is a combination of an anti-science bias that people are — for reasons that sometimes are , you know , inconceivable and not understandable — they just don ’ t believe science and they don ’ t believe authority , ” he said .
“ That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is truth , ” he said .
“ It ’ s amazing , sometimes , the denial there is.
” He compared people who have lost faith in the task force ’ s predictions and advisories about things like social distancing with people who are antivax .
Then explained why he ’ s an authority of truth .
“ I think the people who believe are people who understand and who have trust in someone who has a very , very long track record of always speaking the truth based on evidence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve done that through six administrations.
” CNN ’ s Jake Tapper must have been disappointed that Fauci didn ’ t blame Trump for it , so he had the network ’ s Sanjay Gupta on this afternoon to make sure that part was tacked on .
We are all backward hicks who think the moon landing was fake and eat racist syrup while refusing to be vaccinated .
And also Trump .
But if we would just Respect His Authoritah it ’ d all work out .
Great messaging .
From @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier this year when they said masks won ’ t help .

Dr. Anthony Fauci was on the official HHS podcast “Learning Curve” today and bashed the American public as basically reactionary, anti-science jerks who hate authority. Authority being him, you see.
“One of the problems we face in the United States is that unfortunately, there is a combination of an anti-science bias that people are — for reasons that sometimes are, you know, inconceivable and not understandable — they just don’t believe science and they don’t believe authority,” he said.
“That’s unfortunate because, you know, science is truth,” he said. “It’s amazing, sometimes, the denial there is.”
He compared people who have lost faith in the task force’s predictions and advisories about things like social distancing with people who are antivax. Then explained why he’s an authority of truth.
“I think the people who believe are people who understand and who have trust in someone who has a very, very long track record of always speaking the truth based on evidence,” he said, “and I’ve done that through six administrations.”
LISTEN:
https://therightscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Fauci-Americans-Hate-Science.mp3
CNN’s Jake Tapper must have been disappointed that Fauci didn’t blame Trump for it, so he had the network’s Sanjay Gupta on this afternoon to make sure that part was tacked on.
WATCH:
We are all backward hicks who think the moon landing was fake and eat racist syrup while refusing to be vaccinated. And also Trump. But if we would just Respect His Authoritah it’d all work out.
Great messaging. From the guy who just admitted they lied earlier this year when they said masks won’t help.


therightscoop--2020-06-18--California Gov. Newsom MANDATES masks for everyone not protesting, and social distancing too.

Gov .
Gavin Newsom issued a new mandate on Thursday .
Mask up everywhere , wash your hands , stand six feet apart .
Will that apply to BLM protests ?
we ask knowing the answer is “ probably not.
” The order on Thursday says that California has “ limited the spread of COVID-19 and associated hospitalizations and deaths ” through “ collective actions ” but that it ’ s not over .
“ Simply put , we are seeing too many people with faces uncovered , ” said Newsom , “ putting at risk the real progress we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This document updates existing CDPH guidance for the use of cloth face coverings by the general public when outside the home .
It mandates that face coverings be worn state-wide in the circumstances and with the exceptions outlined below .
It does not substitute for existing guidance about social distancing and handwashing .
Here is the specific guidance .
You ’ ll note it affect people doing normal things like shopping or riding in cabs but not protesting by the thousands .
People in California must wear face coverings when they are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Inside of , or in line to enter , any indoor public space ; • Obtaining services from the healthcare sector in settings including , but not limited to , a hospital , pharmacy , medical clinic , laboratory , physician or dental office , veterinary clinic , or blood bank ; 2 • Waiting for or riding on public transportation or paratransit or while in a taxi , private car service , or ride-sharing vehicle ; • Engaged in work , whether at the workplace or performing work off-site , when : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public ; • Working in any space visited by members of the public , regardless of whether anyone from the public is present at the time ; • Working in any space where food is prepared or packaged for sale or distribution to others ; • Working in or walking through common areas , such as hallways , stairways , elevators , and parking facilities ; • In any room or enclosed area where other people ( except for members of the person ’ s own household or residence ) are present @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Driving or operating any public transportation or paratransit vehicle , taxi , or private car service or ride-sharing vehicle when passengers are present .
When no passengers are present , face coverings are strongly recommended .
• While outdoors in public spaces when maintaining a physical distance of 6 feet from persons who are not members of the same household or residence is not feasible .
The order also generously offers some exceptions , like kids younger than 2 years .
Y ’ all remember how people were like “ it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polite , nobody is trying to control you ” ?
Anyway we ’ ll see how the protests go .

Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a new mandate on Thursday. Mask up everywhere, wash your hands, stand six feet apart.
Will that apply to BLM protests? we ask knowing the answer is “probably not.”
The order on Thursday says that California has “limited the spread of COVID-19 and associated hospitalizations and deaths” through “collective actions” but that it’s not over.
“Simply put, we are seeing too many people with faces uncovered,” said Newsom, “putting at risk the real progress we have made in fighting the disease.”
The order states the requirement plainly:
This document updates existing CDPH guidance for the use of cloth face coverings by the general public when outside the home. It mandates that face coverings be worn state-wide in the circumstances and with the exceptions outlined below. It does not substitute for existing guidance about social distancing and handwashing.
Here is the specific guidance. You’ll note it affect people doing normal things like shopping or riding in cabs but not protesting by the thousands.
People in California must wear face coverings when they are in the high-risk situations listed below:
Inside of, or in line to enter, any indoor public space;
Obtaining services from the healthcare sector in settings including, but not limited to, a hospital, pharmacy, medical clinic, laboratory, physician or dental office, veterinary clinic, or blood bank;2
Waiting for or riding on public transportation or paratransit or while in a taxi, private car service, or ride-sharing vehicle;
Engaged in work, whether at the workplace or performing work off-site, when: Interacting in-person with any member of the public; Working in any space visited by members of the public, regardless of whether anyone from the public is present at the time; Working in any space where food is prepared or packaged for sale or distribution to others; Working in or walking through common areas, such as hallways, stairways, elevators, and parking facilities; In any room or enclosed area where other people (except for members of the person’s own household or residence) are present when unable to physically distance.
Driving or operating any public transportation or paratransit vehicle, taxi, or private car service or ride-sharing vehicle when passengers are present. When no passengers are present, face coverings are strongly recommended.
While outdoors in public spaces when maintaining a physical distance of 6 feet from persons who are not members of the same household or residence is not feasible.
The order also generously offers some exceptions, like kids younger than 2 years.
Y’all remember how people were like “it’s not a law it’s just polite, nobody is trying to control you”?
Anyway we’ll see how the protests go.


therightscoop--2020-06-18--Trump responds to Supreme Court DACA decision…

Trump has responded to the Supreme Court decision today upholding DACA in quite a few tweets today , starting with @ @ @ @ @ he should have kept to himself , as the Supreme Court has ruled on his @ @ @ @ @ first term as President .
Certainly not every ruling has gone his way , but @ @ @ @ @ argued that decisions like the one today are proof that we need new justices on @ @ @ @ @ says the decision by the Supreme Court today was a political one : Trump does @ @ @ @ @ be starting over… Lastly , Trump is creating a new list of conservative judicial nominees @ @ @ @ @ from if he gets reelected :

Trump has responded to the Supreme Court decision today upholding DACA in quite a few tweets today, starting with this one:
These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd. Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
This one he should have kept to himself, as the Supreme Court has ruled on his side several times over his first term as President. Certainly not every ruling has gone his way, but some definitely have:
Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn’t like me? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
Trump argued that decisions like the one today are proof that we need new justices on the Supreme Court:
The recent Supreme Court decisions, not only on DACA, Sanctuary Cities, Census, and others, tell you only one thing, we need NEW JUSTICES of the Supreme Court. If the Radical Left Democrats assume power, your Second Amendment, Right to Life, Secure Borders, and… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
…Religious Liberty, among many other things, are OVER and GONE! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
Trump says the decision by the Supreme Court today was a political one:
The DACA decision, while a highly political one, and seemingly not based on the law, gives the President of the United States far more power than EVER anticipated. Nevertheless, I will only act in the best interests of the United States of America! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
Trump does indicate that his administration will be starting over…
As President of the United States, I am asking for a legal solution on DACA, not a political one, consistent with the rule of law. The Supreme Court is not willing to give us one, so now we have to start this process all over again. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
Lastly, Trump is creating a new list of conservative judicial nominees who he promises to pick from if he gets reelected:
I will be releasing a new list of Conservative Supreme Court Justice nominees, which may include some, or many of those already on the list, by September 1, 2020. If given the opportunity, I will only choose from this list, as in the past, a Conservative Supreme Court Justice… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
…Based on decisions being rendered now, this list is more important than ever before (Second Amendment, Right to Life, Religous Liberty, etc.) – VOTE 2020! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020