therightscoop--2020-12-30--BREAKING: Republican congressman-elect from Louisiana dies of coronavirus days before being sworn in

A 41-year-old Republican who had just won a congressional seat in Louisiana ’ s 5th district has died tonight from coronavirus , just days before he was to be sworn in .
Below is the statement from his campaign manager , Andrew Bautsch : “ Congressman-elect Luke Letlow , 41 , passed away this evening at Ochsner-LSU Health Shreveport due to complications from COVID-19 .
“ Letlow was admitted into a Monroe Hospital on December 19 after testing positive for the coronavirus and was transferred to Ochsner-LSU Health on Tuesday , December 22 , and placed in intensive care .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Julia Barnhill Letlow , Phd.
, and two young children .
“ The family appreciates the numerous prayers and support over the past days but asks for privacy during this difficult and unexpected time .
“ A statement from the family along with funeral arrangements will be announced at a later time.
” He was only 41-years-old , which is too young to die from anything , no less from the coronavirus .
This is terribly tragic .
Politico has more on the reaction from members of Congress : Letlow , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Ralph Abraham ( R-La . )
before being elected to fill that seat , was supposed to be sworn into Congress on Sunday .
He is the first member or member-elect to die from the coronavirus , though dozens of lawmakers have tested positive for Covid-19 over the past year .
Lawmakers and aides on Capitol Hill said they were devastated to learn of Letlow ’ s passing .
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy ( R-Calif. ) said in a brief statement that “ our hearts break tonight as we process the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led by House Minority Whip Steve Scalise ( R-La . )
, issued a joint statement offering their condolences .
“ Luke had such a positive spirit , and a tremendously bright future ahead of him .
He was looking forward to serving the people of Louisiana in Congress , and we were excited to welcome him to our delegation where he was ready to make an even greater impact on our state and our Nation , ” the statement said .
“ More than anything , Luke was a loving husband , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his family — like so many others who have been affected by this evil disease — needs our prayers.
” Gov .
John Bel Edwards offered condolences via Twitter : “ It is with heavy hearts that @ FirstLadyOfLA and I offer our condolences to Congressman-elect Luke Letlow ’ s family on his passing after a battle with COVID-19 .
# lagov.
” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi paid him tribute as well : “ Congressman-elect Letlow was a ninth-generation Louisianan who fought passionately for his point of view and dedicated his life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grieves Congressman-elect Letlow ’ s passing , our sorrow is compounded by the grief of so many other families who have also suffered lives cut short by this terrible virus .
May it be a comfort to Luke ’ s wife Julia and their children Jeremiah and Jacqueline that so many mourn their loss and are praying for them at this sad time.
” And Rep. Liz Cheney , the GOP conference chair in Congress , also mourned Letlow ’ s passing : “ Such devastating news about Congressman-elect Letlow .
A tremendous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Luke and his family.
’ Louisiana ’ s Fifth District covers the northeast part of the state .
Letlow had won a runoff Dec. 5 over another Republican , state Rep. Lance Harris , to settle one of the last undetermined races of the 2020 election cycle .
Please say a prayer for Luke Letlow , his wife and two kids .
May he rest in peace .

A 41-year-old Republican who had just won a congressional seat in Louisiana’s 5th district has died tonight from coronavirus, just days before he was to be sworn in. Below is the statement from his campaign manager, Andrew Bautsch:
“Congressman-elect Luke Letlow, 41, passed away this evening at Ochsner-LSU Health Shreveport due to complications from COVID-19. “Letlow was admitted into a Monroe Hospital on December 19 after testing positive for the coronavirus and was transferred to Ochsner-LSU Health on Tuesday, December 22, and placed in intensive care. “Letlow is survived by his wife, Julia Barnhill Letlow, Phd., and two young children. “The family appreciates the numerous prayers and support over the past days but asks for privacy during this difficult and unexpected time. “A statement from the family along with funeral arrangements will be announced at a later time.”
He was only 41-years-old, which is too young to die from anything, no less from the coronavirus. This is terribly tragic.
Politico has more on the reaction from members of Congress:
Letlow, who served as chief of staff to former Rep. Ralph Abraham (R-La.) before being elected to fill that seat, was supposed to be sworn into Congress on Sunday. He is the first member or member-elect to die from the coronavirus, though dozens of lawmakers have tested positive for Covid-19 over the past year. Lawmakers and aides on Capitol Hill said they were devastated to learn of Letlow’s passing. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a brief statement that “our hearts break tonight as we process the news.” The entire Louisiana delegation, led by House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), issued a joint statement offering their condolences. “Luke had such a positive spirit, and a tremendously bright future ahead of him. He was looking forward to serving the people of Louisiana in Congress, and we were excited to welcome him to our delegation where he was ready to make an even greater impact on our state and our Nation,” the statement said. “More than anything, Luke was a loving husband, father, brother, and son, and his family — like so many others who have been affected by this evil disease — needs our prayers.” Gov. John Bel Edwards offered condolences via Twitter: “It is with heavy hearts that @FirstLadyOfLA and I offer our condolences to Congressman-elect Luke Letlow’s family on his passing after a battle with COVID-19. #lagov.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi paid him tribute as well: “Congressman-elect Letlow was a ninth-generation Louisianan who fought passionately for his point of view and dedicated his life to public service. As the House grieves Congressman-elect Letlow’s passing, our sorrow is compounded by the grief of so many other families who have also suffered lives cut short by this terrible virus. May it be a comfort to Luke’s wife Julia and their children Jeremiah and Jacqueline that so many mourn their loss and are praying for them at this sad time.” And Rep. Liz Cheney, the GOP conference chair in Congress, also mourned Letlow’s passing: “Such devastating news about Congressman-elect Letlow. A tremendous loss – we will be praying for Luke and his family.’ Louisiana’s Fifth District covers the northeast part of the state. Letlow had won a runoff Dec. 5 over another Republican, state Rep. Lance Harris, to settle one of the last undetermined races of the 2020 election cycle.
Please say a prayer for Luke Letlow, his wife and two kids. May he rest in peace.


therightscoop--2020-12-31--Mark Levin explains WHY Republicans must defend the constitution and challenge electoral votes from

Mark Levin explains WHY Republicans must defend the constitution and challenge electoral votes from certain states on Jan 6th

Mark Levin has written a hell of a piece describing how the integrity of our election process is what ’ s really at stake on January 6th when Congress votes to selects the president and vice president , and why Republicans must stand firm and defend the constitution by challenging the electoral votes from certain states .
I know Levin ’ s editorial is a bit long , but it is well worth reading to the end .
And if you can , read it twice : January 6 is the day we learn whether our Constitution will hold and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election was , in several targeted battleground states , an unconstitutional electoral exercise .
Even putting aside evidence of significant fraud , virtually none of which received a hearing by our courts , events leading up to and including the November national election constituted a radical and grave departure from the federal electoral system adopted by the framers of the Constitution and the state ratification conventions .
Now , let ’ s be clear : None of this matters to the Democrat Party , since it and its surrogates perpetrated these unconstitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nor does it matter to the media , which is utterly illiterate on the subject and unequivocally supports the supposed outcome in any event .
But it should be of great moment and concern to the people of this country and especially to congressional Republicans in both Houses , for if the latter do not at least confront and challenge this lawlessness on January 6 , when Congress meets to count the electors , it will be the GOP ’ s undoing and , simultaneously , the undoing of our presidential electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people of the United States who love our republic who will be the losers .
Win , lose , or draw , on January 6 , the Republicans must not act as if “ the people have spoken ” and be cowered into passivity or worse , such as joining the Democrat Party and media hecklers , by insisting that they are part of a lawless party seeking to “ reverse the results of the election.
” Too many Republicans have already buckled , including the Senate Republican leader , Mitch McConnell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Adam Kinzinger .
No doubt others who are unreliable and cowardly when facing the organized mob will follow .
But let us not be judged by those who have intentionally and strategically manipulated our politics and the law to undermine our constitutional order .
It is they who must be condemned .
Specifically , Article II , Section 1 , Clause 2 of the federal Constitution could not be more explicit .
It states , in pertinent part : “ Each State shall appoint , in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress … ” This language was purposeful .
During the Constitutional Convention , there were various proposals suggested for electing a president .
Should the president be directly elected by the people ?
That proposal was rejected out of concern that such a purely democratic process could be hijacked by a temporary majority .
Should the president be chosen in the first instance from within the national legislature ?
That proposal was also rejected on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the judiciary play a role in the selection of the president ?
That idea was dispensed with as being the most objectionable , as judges were to be the least political of all public officials .
The framers deliberatively and with much thought created the Electoral College process , in which the people and their elected legislatures — both state and national — would play important roles .
But the electoral process rested first and foremost on the state legislatures directing how the electors would be chosen .
The reason : While rejecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the framers concluded that the state legislatures were closest to the people in their respective states and would be the best representatives of their interests .
At no time did the framers even raise the possibility that governors , attorneys general , secretaries of state , election boards , administrators , etc.
, would play any significant role in the electoral process .
Indeed , certain of those offices did not even exist .
Moreover , as I said , the courts were rejected out of hand .
Thus , such an important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state legislatures .
After the 2016 election , the Democrat Party , its various surrogate groups , and eventually the Biden campaign unleashed hundreds of lawsuits and an unrelenting lobbying campaign in key states that had previously been won by President Trump , taking unconstitutional measures intended to stop President Trump from winning these states in the 2020 election , thereby literally undoing this critical constitutional provision .
What had been carefully crafted at the Constitutional Convention and clearly spelled out in the Constitution was the main obstacle to defeating President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The problem for the Democrats was that in several of these battleground states , the Republicans controlled the legislatures , while the Democrats controlled state executive offices .
The Constitution was not on their side .
Therefore , they used the two branches of government that were to have no role in directing the appointment of electors to eviscerate the role of the Republican legislatures .
In Pennsylvania , considered the battleground of the battleground states , the Democrat governor , attorney general , and secretary of state made and enforced multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ procedures , all of which were intended to assist the Democrats and Biden .
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court , whose seven justices are elected , has a 5-2 Democrat majority .
( In 2018 , there was a big push by the Democrat Party to fill three of the seats with Democrats , and it succeeded . )
Just months before the general election , that court rewrote the state election laws to eliminate signature requirements or signature matching , eliminate postal markings that were intended to ensure votes were timely , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday at 5:00 p.m. ( state law had a hard date and time — election day on Tuesday , which ended at 8:00 p.m .
ET ) , thereby fundamentally altering Pennsylvania ’ s election laws and nullifying the federal constitutional role of the Republican legislature .
In Michigan , among other things , the Democrat secretary of state unilaterally changed the state ’ s election laws with respect to absentee ballot applications and signature verification .
Indeed , she sent unsolicited absentee ballot applications by mail prior to the primary and general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to request such ballots .
She intentionally circumvented the Republican state legislature and violated the federal Constitution by issuing over 7 million unsolicited ballots .
Furthermore , a court of claims judge , appointed by a Democrat , ordered clerks to accept ballots postmarked by Nov. 2 and received within 14 days of the election , the deadline for results to be certified .
The ballots would be counted as provisional ballots .
The state legislature had no role in these changes .
In Wisconsin , the Elections Commission and local Democrat officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including Milwaukee and Madison , changed the state ’ s election laws .
Among other things , they placed hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in strategic locations in direct violation of state law .
Not surprisingly , the locations were intended to be most convenient to Democrat voters .
In addition , they told would-be voters how to avoid security measures like signature verification and photo ID requirements .
These bureaucrats and local officials bypassed the Republican legislature in altering state election procedures .
In Georgia , the secretary of state is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Texas lawsuit brought against Georgia and the three other states mentioned above , “ on March 6 , 2020 , in Democratic Party of Georgia v. Raffensperger , Georgia ’ s Secretary of State entered a Compromise Settlement Agreement and Release with the Democratic Party of Georgia to materially change the statutory requirements for reviewing signatures on absentee ballot envelopes to confirm the voter ’ s identity by making it far more difficult to challenge defective signatures beyond the 22 express mandatory procedures set forth at GA. CODE § 21-2-386 ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
71 .
Among other things , before a ballot could be rejected , the Settlement required a registrar who found a defective signature to now seek a review by two other registrars , and only if a majority of the registrars agreed that the signature was defective could the ballot be rejected but not before all three registrars ’ names were written on the ballot envelope along with the reason for the rejection .
These cumbersome procedures are in direct conflict with Georgia ’ s statutory requirements , as is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provided by telephone ( i.e.
, not in writing ) if a telephone number is available .
Finally , the Settlement purports to require State election officials to consider issuing guidance and training materials drafted by an expert retained by the Democratic Party of Georgia.
” Georgia ’ s Republican legislature had no role in these electoral changes resulting from consent decree .
Consequently , in each of these four battleground states — and there were others — whether through executive fiats or litigation , key , if not core , aspects of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contravention of the explicit power granted to the state legislatures and , therefore , in violation of the federal Constitution and the process set forth for directing the selection of electors .
And this is before we even get to the issue of voter fraud .
That said , in many instances , ballots that would have been rejected or , if counted , evidence of fraud , were now said to be legal — not by state legislatures but by those who unilaterally changed the election laws .
The United States Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and in this general election cycle , to make clear to the states that they must comply with the plain language of Article II , Section 1 , Clause 2 of the Constitution .
Indeed , when a federal district judge in Michigan altered that state ’ s election laws , a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court overturned his order .
Justice Gorsuch pointed out that the state legislature writes election laws .
However , when a case was brought to the Court involving the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ’ s interference in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court was paralyzed .
Chief Justice Roberts attempted to distinguish between federal and state courts , which is irrelevant ; in another instance , Justice Alito ordered the Pennsylvania secretary of state , not once but twice , to segregate certain mail-in ballots , but nothing came of it .
A court divided against itself can not stand , to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln .
Its failure to enforce the Constitution ( and by that I don ’ t mean make law or intervene in legitimate state election decisions ) has contributed mightily to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been reported and repeated , the president is not actually or officially chosen on Election Day .
The president is not chosen upon the certification of electors by the states .
The process ends in Congress .
And on Jan. 6 , Congress — following both the Constitution and its own procedural law — makes the final decision on who is to be president and vice president of the United States .
Of course , in every election in my lifetime , up to now , while there have been some controversies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But this time is different , as it must be .
The Democrat Party , its surrogates , and eventually the Biden campaign instituted an unprecedented legal and lobbying campaign , mostly under the radar , as it was not well covered by the usual media outlets , to undermine our Constitution , the Republican state legislatures , and the Trump re-election campaign , in favor of Biden .
In other words , the Constitution ’ s electoral process for choosing electors and ultimately the president and vice president was systematically and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Congress , or at least the Republicans in Congress , to confront this .
The Democrat Party has done severe damage to the nation ’ s electoral system , to the point where the state legislatures are now in the position of having the least input on the manner in which elections are held and federal electors are chosen — the complete opposite of what the Constitution compels and the framers unequivocally intended .
And the legislatures in Pennsylvania , Michigan , Wisconsin , and Georgia have , in a variety of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occurred , underscoring the seriousness of the problem .
If this outcome is allowed to stand without a fight on Jan. 6 , it is difficult to see how this can be fixed .
The Democrats will view this as a sure sign that they are free to do more and even worse .
It will become extremely difficult for Republicans to win nationwide elections ( something the ten or so GOP senators who wish to run for president should keep in mind ) .
It will also become increasingly difficult to win @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the 2020 constitutional violations will be used as a baseline for even more unconstitutional manipulations of the electoral system .
The Democrat Party ’ s goal is to turn the nation ’ s electoral system into the one-party rule that exists in virtually all blue states , especially California with its supermajorities .
As I said earlier , win , lose , or draw , the congressional Republicans must act .
It is the Democrats and their media who seek to undo election results by undoing the election system .
Look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I remind everyone of the relentless assault against candidate and then President Trump ? )
and now 2020 .
And they have every intention , as they have boldly proclaimed , to further undermine our constitutional system should they win the Senate majority in a few days — by eliminating the filibuster and any ability to slow their radical legislative agenda ; packing the Supreme Court with left-wing ideologues ; and packing the Senate with four more Democrats from Puerto Rico and D.C. And that ’ s just for starters .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it had no hope of removing President Trump in the Senate , but impeached him anyway — on the most specious of grounds .
They are playing for keeps and destroying our constitutional system , for which they have little regard .
I am well aware that it takes a majority of both Houses to send the election of the president to the House of Representatives , where each delegation gets one vote , an extremely difficult hurdle .
Nonetheless , it is not asking too much for the Republicans to uphold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all took an oath to do — and to fight to preserve and protect the plain words set forth in Article II .
They must make the case to and on behalf of the American people .
And they must make it clear to the Democrats that we , the people , who believe in this Republic , will not roll over !
Now , let ’ s see how many statesmen there are among Republican members of Congress .

Mark Levin has written a hell of a piece describing how the integrity of our election process is what’s really at stake on January 6th when Congress votes to selects the president and vice president, and why Republicans must stand firm and defend the constitution by challenging the electoral votes from certain states.
I know Levin’s editorial is a bit long, but it is well worth reading to the end. And if you can, read it twice:
January 6 is the day we learn whether our Constitution will hold and whether congressional Republicans care.
The 2020 presidential election was, in several targeted battleground states, an unconstitutional electoral exercise. Even putting aside evidence of significant fraud, virtually none of which received a hearing by our courts, events leading up to and including the November national election constituted a radical and grave departure from the federal electoral system adopted by the framers of the Constitution and the state ratification conventions. Now, let’s be clear: None of this matters to the Democrat Party, since it and its surrogates perpetrated these unconstitutional acts, as I shall soon explain. Nor does it matter to the media, which is utterly illiterate on the subject and unequivocally supports the supposed outcome in any event. But it should be of great moment and concern to the people of this country and especially to congressional Republicans in both Houses, for if the latter do not at least confront and challenge this lawlessness on January 6, when Congress meets to count the electors, it will be the GOP’s undoing and, simultaneously, the undoing of our presidential electoral system. Ultimately, it will be the people of the United States who love our republic who will be the losers.
Win, lose, or draw, on January 6, the Republicans must not act as if “the people have spoken” and be cowered into passivity or worse, such as joining the Democrat Party and media hecklers, by insisting that they are part of a lawless party seeking to “reverse the results of the election.” Too many Republicans have already buckled, including the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, Sen. John Thune, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger. No doubt others who are unreliable and cowardly when facing the organized mob will follow. But let us not be judged by those who have intentionally and strategically manipulated our politics and the law to undermine our constitutional order. It is they who must be condemned.
Specifically, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the federal Constitution could not be more explicit. It states, in pertinent part: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress …” This language was purposeful. During the Constitutional Convention, there were various proposals suggested for electing a president. Should the president be directly elected by the people? That proposal was rejected out of concern that such a purely democratic process could be hijacked by a temporary majority. Should the president be chosen in the first instance from within the national legislature? That proposal was also rejected on grounds of separation of powers. Should the judiciary play a role in the selection of the president? That idea was dispensed with as being the most objectionable, as judges were to be the least political of all public officials. The framers deliberatively and with much thought created the Electoral College process, in which the people and their elected legislatures — both state and national — would play important roles. But the electoral process rested first and foremost on the state legislatures directing how the electors would be chosen. The reason: While rejecting the direct election of a president, the framers concluded that the state legislatures were closest to the people in their respective states and would be the best representatives of their interests. At no time did the framers even raise the possibility that governors, attorneys general, secretaries of state, election boards, administrators, etc., would play any significant role in the electoral process. Indeed, certain of those offices did not even exist. Moreover, as I said, the courts were rejected out of hand. Thus, such an important power was to be exercised exclusively by the state legislatures.
After the 2016 election, the Democrat Party, its various surrogate groups, and eventually the Biden campaign unleashed hundreds of lawsuits and an unrelenting lobbying campaign in key states that had previously been won by President Trump, taking unconstitutional measures intended to stop President Trump from winning these states in the 2020 election, thereby literally undoing this critical constitutional provision. What had been carefully crafted at the Constitutional Convention and clearly spelled out in the Constitution was the main obstacle to defeating President Trump and winning virtually all future presidential elections. The problem for the Democrats was that in several of these battleground states, the Republicans controlled the legislatures, while the Democrats controlled state executive offices. The Constitution was not on their side. Therefore, they used the two branches of government that were to have no role in directing the appointment of electors to eviscerate the role of the Republican legislatures.
In Pennsylvania, considered the battleground of the battleground states, the Democrat governor, attorney general, and secretary of state made and enforced multiple changes to the state’s voting procedures, all of which were intended to assist the Democrats and Biden. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, whose seven justices are elected, has a 5-2 Democrat majority. (In 2018, there was a big push by the Democrat Party to fill three of the seats with Democrats, and it succeeded.) Just months before the general election, that court rewrote the state election laws to eliminate signature requirements or signature matching, eliminate postal markings that were intended to ensure votes were timely, and extended the counting of mail-in ballots to Friday at 5:00 p.m. (state law had a hard date and time — election day on Tuesday, which ended at 8:00 p.m. ET), thereby fundamentally altering Pennsylvania’s election laws and nullifying the federal constitutional role of the Republican legislature.
In Michigan, among other things, the Democrat secretary of state unilaterally changed the state’s election laws with respect to absentee ballot applications and signature verification. Indeed, she sent unsolicited absentee ballot applications by mail prior to the primary and general elections. State law required would-be voters to request such ballots. She intentionally circumvented the Republican state legislature and violated the federal Constitution by issuing over 7 million unsolicited ballots. Furthermore, a court of claims judge, appointed by a Democrat, ordered clerks to accept ballots postmarked by Nov. 2 and received within 14 days of the election, the deadline for results to be certified. The ballots would be counted as provisional ballots. The state legislature had no role in these changes.
In Wisconsin, the Elections Commission and local Democrat officials in the state’s largest cities, including Milwaukee and Madison, changed the state’s election laws. Among other things, they placed hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in strategic locations in direct violation of state law. Not surprisingly, the locations were intended to be most convenient to Democrat voters. In addition, they told would-be voters how to avoid security measures like signature verification and photo ID requirements. These bureaucrats and local officials bypassed the Republican legislature in altering state election procedures.
In Georgia, the secretary of state is a Republican. Regardless, as explained in the Texas lawsuit brought against Georgia and the three other states mentioned above, “on March 6, 2020, in Democratic Party of Georgia v. Raffensperger, Georgia’s Secretary of State entered a Compromise Settlement Agreement and Release with the Democratic Party of Georgia to materially change the statutory requirements for reviewing signatures on absentee ballot envelopes to confirm the voter’s identity by making it far more difficult to challenge defective signatures beyond the 22 express mandatory procedures set forth at GA. CODE § 21-2-386(a)(1)(B). 71. Among other things, before a ballot could be rejected, the Settlement required a registrar who found a defective signature to now seek a review by two other registrars, and only if a majority of the registrars agreed that the signature was defective could the ballot be rejected but not before all three registrars’ names were written on the ballot envelope along with the reason for the rejection. These cumbersome procedures are in direct conflict with Georgia’s statutory requirements, as is the Settlement’s requirement that notice be provided by telephone (i.e., not in writing) if a telephone number is available. Finally, the Settlement purports to require State election officials to consider issuing guidance and training materials drafted by an expert retained by the Democratic Party of Georgia.” Georgia’s Republican legislature had no role in these electoral changes resulting from consent decree.
Consequently, in each of these four battleground states — and there were others — whether through executive fiats or litigation, key, if not core, aspects of state election laws were fundamentally altered in contravention of the explicit power granted to the state legislatures and, therefore, in violation of the federal Constitution and the process set forth for directing the selection of electors. And this is before we even get to the issue of voter fraud. That said, in many instances, ballots that would have been rejected or, if counted, evidence of fraud, were now said to be legal — not by state legislatures but by those who unilaterally changed the election laws.
The United States Supreme Court had an opportunity before the election, and in this general election cycle, to make clear to the states that they must comply with the plain language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution. Indeed, when a federal district judge in Michigan altered that state’s election laws, a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court overturned his order. Justice Gorsuch pointed out that the state legislature writes election laws. However, when a case was brought to the Court involving the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s interference in state election laws, the U.S. Supreme Court was paralyzed. Chief Justice Roberts attempted to distinguish between federal and state courts, which is irrelevant; in another instance, Justice Alito ordered the Pennsylvania secretary of state, not once but twice, to segregate certain mail-in ballots, but nothing came of it. A court divided against itself cannot stand, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln. Its failure to enforce the Constitution (and by that I don’t mean make law or intervene in legitimate state election decisions) has contributed mightily to our current plight.
Despite what has been reported and repeated, the president is not actually or officially chosen on Election Day. The president is not chosen upon the certification of electors by the states. The process ends in Congress. And on Jan. 6, Congress — following both the Constitution and its own procedural law — makes the final decision on who is to be president and vice president of the United States. Of course, in every election in my lifetime, up to now, while there have been some controversies, the process has proceeded without much attention. But this time is different, as it must be. The Democrat Party, its surrogates, and eventually the Biden campaign instituted an unprecedented legal and lobbying campaign, mostly under the radar, as it was not well covered by the usual media outlets, to undermine our Constitution, the Republican state legislatures, and the Trump re-election campaign, in favor of Biden. In other words, the Constitution’s electoral process for choosing electors and ultimately the president and vice president was systematically and strategically attacked. It is now left to Congress, or at least the Republicans in Congress, to confront this. The Democrat Party has done severe damage to the nation’s electoral system, to the point where the state legislatures are now in the position of having the least input on the manner in which elections are held and federal electors are chosen — the complete opposite of what the Constitution compels and the framers unequivocally intended. And the legislatures in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia have, in a variety of ways, objected to what’s occurred, underscoring the seriousness of the problem.
If this outcome is allowed to stand without a fight on Jan. 6, it is difficult to see how this can be fixed. The Democrats will view this as a sure sign that they are free to do more and even worse. It will become extremely difficult for Republicans to win nationwide elections (something the ten or so GOP senators who wish to run for president should keep in mind). It will also become increasingly difficult to win a Republican majority in the Senate. And the 2020 constitutional violations will be used as a baseline for even more unconstitutional manipulations of the electoral system. The Democrat Party’s goal is to turn the nation’s electoral system into the one-party rule that exists in virtually all blue states, especially California with its supermajorities.
As I said earlier, win, lose, or draw, the congressional Republicans must act. It is the Democrats and their media who seek to undo election results by undoing the election system. Look at what they did in 2016 (need I remind everyone of the relentless assault against candidate and then President Trump?) and now 2020. And they have every intention, as they have boldly proclaimed, to further undermine our constitutional system should they win the Senate majority in a few days — by eliminating the filibuster and any ability to slow their radical legislative agenda; packing the Supreme Court with left-wing ideologues; and packing the Senate with four more Democrats from Puerto Rico and D.C. And that’s just for starters. This is the same party that did not care that it had no hope of removing President Trump in the Senate, but impeached him anyway — on the most specious of grounds. They are playing for keeps and destroying our constitutional system, for which they have little regard. I am well aware that it takes a majority of both Houses to send the election of the president to the House of Representatives, where each delegation gets one vote, an extremely difficult hurdle.
Nonetheless, it is not asking too much for the Republicans to uphold the United States Constitution — which they all took an oath to do — and to fight to preserve and protect the plain words set forth in Article II. They must make the case to and on behalf of the American people. And they must make it clear to the Democrats that we, the people, who believe in this Republic, will not roll over! Now, let’s see how many statesmen there are among Republican members of Congress.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--WATCH: Georgia election supervisor shows how easy it is to CHEAT during ballot adjudication process

A Georgia election supervisor demonstrated to members at a Georgia Senate Judiciary hearing this morning how easy it is to cheat during the adjudication process for ballots using the Dominion software : This is insane .
Ballots should be in a read-only mode after they are scanned and election supervisors should not have the ability to change anything .
If someone screwed up and voted for both Biden and Trump , that part of the ballot should be discarded by the computer .
But the election supervisor shouldn ’ t have the ability to alter anything .
Adding to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involved in the recount pointed out how they rescanned 15k ballots five different times and they could never get the same count each time they scanned .
She said the variance was around 50 each time they scanned the ballots , and their scans never matched the manual recount nor the initial count on election night : If you are scanning ballots , getting an accurate count should not be this hard .
States need to be forced to dump Dominion software and let ’ s just all go back to paper ballots @

A Georgia election supervisor demonstrated to members at a Georgia Senate Judiciary hearing this morning how easy it is to cheat during the adjudication process for ballots using the Dominion software:
GEORGIA.🚨 "I think I want to vote for Biden…" Explosive video at the Georgia State Senate Judiary Subcte. hearing election shows an *ELECTION SUPERVISER* demonstrating Dominion's "adjudication" process has a 'permission to cheat mode' as experts have warned. WATCH:🔻 pic.twitter.com/vVBxju3Pgj — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) December 30, 2020
This is insane. Ballots should be in a read-only mode after they are scanned and election supervisors should not have the ability to change anything. If someone screwed up and voted for both Biden and Trump, that part of the ballot should be discarded by the computer. But the election supervisor shouldn’t have the ability to alter anything.
Adding to the madness, a caucus chair who was involved in the recount pointed out how they rescanned 15k ballots five different times and they could never get the same count each time they scanned. She said the variance was around 50 each time they scanned the ballots, and their scans never matched the manual recount nor the initial count on election night:
"The problem was that they could never *reduplicate* what happened on Election Night & every time they ran the numbers, they got a DIFFERENT NUMBER…" "How many times did that happen?" "FIVE TIMES. They ran 15K ballots FIVE TIMES." Whistleblower's *shocking* revelations.🔻 pic.twitter.com/8vclaLNNbW — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) December 30, 2020
If you are scanning ballots, getting an accurate count should not be this hard. States need to be forced to dump Dominion software and let’s just all go back to paper ballots.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--Team Trump to present ‘specific evidence’ during electoral debate on January 6th

Jason Miller told Newsmax yesterday that they plan to present ‘ specific evidence ’ on January 6th when debate is held on the electoral votes after the objections of Senator Hawley and 30 other House members : Hawley didn ’ t announce until this morning that he would be objecting , so this was only a ‘ hope ’ as of yesterday .
Today it appears to be a reality .
Specific examples of voter fraud will be presented Jan. 6 if debate is held on the 2020 election results , according to Trump campaign senior adviser Jason Miller on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheduled to be certified during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6 .
Miller said evidence presented there would be different than that in the legal battles President Donald Trump ’ s campaign has fought in the courts .
“ Any of the [ court ] dismissals have been on process , ” Miller told Carl Higbie on Tuesday ’ s “ Greg Kelly Reports.
” “ So , let ’ s talk about Wisconsin where Mayor [ Rudy ] Giuliani is leading the legal team , actually filed a Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve identified over 50,000 ballots in the state of Wisconsin that were cast unconstitutionally.
” The Trump campaign ’ s fight in Wisconsin has centered on ballots that were cast by people who should not have been allowed to vote .
“ Article II of the Constitution makes it very clear , the state legislatures , and state legislatures alone , set up the voting systems for each state , the codes and the way they are conducted , ” Miler said .
“ And what we have here is over 20,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a application on file , the mail ballots .
Wisconsin ’ s very clear , very specific you got to have an application on file.
” Miller said Wisconsin also allowed ballot harvesting and “ 6,000 or so of these ballots that we believe were just completely null and void from people who never should have been able to cast them.
” He then cited “ suitcases of ballots ” found in Georgia , the campaign ’ s inability to “ inspect the machines ” in Arizona , and Michigan where “ they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ These are the specific types of evidence we want to present to the American people on the national stage and not allow local politicians to sweep it under the rug , ” Miller said .

Jason Miller told Newsmax yesterday that they plan to present ‘specific evidence’ on January 6th when debate is held on the electoral votes after the objections of Senator Hawley and 30 other House members:
Hawley didn’t announce until this morning that he would be objecting, so this was only a ‘hope’ as of yesterday. Today it appears to be a reality.
Here’s more from Newsmax:
Specific examples of voter fraud will be presented Jan. 6 if debate is held on the 2020 election results, according to Trump campaign senior adviser Jason Miller on Newsmax TV.
Electoral College ballots are scheduled to be certified during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6. Miller said evidence presented there would be different than that in the legal battles President Donald Trump’s campaign has fought in the courts.
“Any of the [court] dismissals have been on process,” Miller told Carl Higbie on Tuesday’s “Greg Kelly Reports.”
“So, let’s talk about Wisconsin where Mayor [Rudy] Giuliani is leading the legal team, actually filed a Supreme Court case this afternoon that said that we’ve identified over 50,000 ballots in the state of Wisconsin that were cast unconstitutionally.”
The Trump campaign’s fight in Wisconsin has centered on ballots that were cast by people who should not have been allowed to vote.
“Article II of the Constitution makes it very clear, the state legislatures, and state legislatures alone, set up the voting systems for each state, the codes and the way they are conducted,” Miler said. “And what we have here is over 20,000 ballots that were cast without actually having a application on file, the mail ballots. Wisconsin’s very clear, very specific you got to have an application on file.”
Miller said Wisconsin also allowed ballot harvesting and “6,000 or so of these ballots that we believe were just completely null and void from people who never should have been able to cast them.”
He then cited “suitcases of ballots” found in Georgia, the campaign’s inability to “inspect the machines” in Arizona, and Michigan where “they’re running through ballots multiple times.”
“These are the specific types of evidence we want to present to the American people on the national stage and not allow local politicians to sweep it under the rug,” Miller said.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--Walmart MOCKS Sen. Josh Hawley after he announced he would be objecting on January 6 and he hits bac

Walmart MOCKS Sen. Josh Hawley after he announced he would be objecting on January 6 and he hits back with FIRE

Someone at Walmart openly mocked Senator Josh Hawley today after he announced that he would be objecting to electoral votes @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a screenshot from Hawley , which shows Walmart saying “ Go ahead .
@ @ @ @ @ ” and calling him a “ sore loser ” : As yous see , Hawley @ @ @ @ @ Walmart for your insulting condescension .
Now that you ’ ve insulted 75 million Americans @ @ @ @ @ apologize for using slave labor ?
” Ouch !
But he didn ’ t stop @ @ @ @ @ maybe you ’ d like to apologize for the pathetic wages you pay your workers @ @ @ @ @ pop stores out of business.
” Walmart appears to have deleted the tweet from their @ @ @ @ @ far there is no tweet explaining it or apologizing for it in their timeline .

Someone at Walmart openly mocked Senator Josh Hawley today after he announced that he would be objecting to electoral votes from certain states. Here’s a screenshot from Hawley, which shows Walmart saying “Go ahead. Get your two hour debate.” and calling him a “sore loser”:
Thanks @Walmart for your insulting condescension. Now that you’ve insulted 75 million Americans, will you at least apologize for using slave labor? pic.twitter.com/oYJP4Cv2qE — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) December 30, 2020
As yous see, Hawley hit back saying “Thanks Walmart for your insulting condescension. Now that you’ve insulted 75 million Americans, will you at least apologize for using slave labor?” Ouch!
But he didn’t stop there, adding “Or maybe you’d like to apologize for the pathetic wages you pay your workers as you drive mom and pop stores out of business.”
Or maybe you’d like to apologize for the pathetic wages you pay your workers as you drive mom and pop stores out of business — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) December 30, 2020
Walmart appears to have deleted the tweet from their Twitter account, but thus far there is no tweet explaining it or apologizing for it in their timeline.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--REPORT: Congressman-elect Letlow died after suffering a heart-attack

Yesterday we reported that Congressman-elect Luke Letlow died yesterday after contracting coronavirus and being put in intensive care last week .
Now we learn that his death came after he suffered a heart attack following surgery : NY POST – Louisiana Rep.-elect Luke Letlow , who died while battling COVID-19 , suffered a heart attack following a procedure , a hospital official said .
The 41-year-old was receiving treatment in the intensive care unit at Ochsner LSU Health in Shreveport when he died Tuesday , the Monroe News-Star reported .
LSU Health Shreveport Chancellor G.E .
Ghali confirmed Letlow underwent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later went into cardiac arrest .
“ It ’ s devastating to our entire team , ” Ghali told the paper , adding that he “ had no underlying conditions.
” The Republican had first announced that he tested positive for the virus Dec. 18 and said he was quarantining at his Richland Parish home .
But his health began to deteriorate and on Dec. 19 , he was admitted to St. Francis Medical Center , and eventually transferred to Ochsner LSU Health .
Letlow is survived by his wife , Julia Barnhill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 3-year-old Jeremiah and 11-month-old Jacqueline , the paper reported .
Letlow didn ’ t die from COVID , he died from a heart attack while battling COVID .
It ’ s still tragic and I hope at some point we learn more about his case .
Last night several obnoxious leftists on Twitter where trying to make political hay after we learned that Letlow died , pushing their lockdown agenda and claiming his death was ‘ preventable ’ : Such a lowlife .
But he wasn ’ t the only one : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post these a-holes but this is the state of the left these days , always ready to politicize someone ’ s death without even knowing all the facts .

Yesterday we reported that Congressman-elect Luke Letlow died yesterday after contracting coronavirus and being put in intensive care last week. Now we learn that his death came after he suffered a heart attack following surgery:
NY POST – Louisiana Rep.-elect Luke Letlow, who died while battling COVID-19, suffered a heart attack following a procedure, a hospital official said. The 41-year-old was receiving treatment in the intensive care unit at Ochsner LSU Health in Shreveport when he died Tuesday, the Monroe News-Star reported. LSU Health Shreveport Chancellor G.E. Ghali confirmed Letlow underwent an operation related to the virus and later went into cardiac arrest. “It’s devastating to our entire team,” Ghali told the paper, adding that he “had no underlying conditions.” The Republican had first announced that he tested positive for the virus Dec. 18 and said he was quarantining at his Richland Parish home. But his health began to deteriorate and on Dec. 19, he was admitted to St. Francis Medical Center, and eventually transferred to Ochsner LSU Health. Letlow is survived by his wife, Julia Barnhill Letlow, in addition to his children, 3-year-old Jeremiah and 11-month-old Jacqueline, the paper reported.
Letlow didn’t die from COVID, he died from a heart attack while battling COVID. It’s still tragic and I hope at some point we learn more about his case.
Last night several obnoxious leftists on Twitter where trying to make political hay after we learned that Letlow died, pushing their lockdown agenda and claiming his death was ‘preventable’:
I mean it sincerely — Letlow's death is tragic. It was also avoidable. It shouldn't take tragedies for policymakers to treat the coronavirus pandemic with the seriousness it deserves. — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 30, 2020
Such a lowlife. But he wasn’t the only one:
It's a shame. He had a long career ahead of him of attacking women's access to healthcare while making it impossible to control gun violence. Alas, he threw it all away to selfishly benefit from anti-scientific political pandering. — Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) December 30, 2020
I honestly didn’t want to post these a-holes but this is the state of the left these days, always ready to politicize someone’s death without even knowing all the facts.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--City of Boston REMOVES statue of Abraham Lincoln freeing a slave

The ridiculousness never stops in this country .
It ’ s being reported today that , after all the idiocy over the summer regarding this statue , the city of Boston has just removed the statue of Abraham Lincoln standing over a freed slave : DC EXAMINER – A statue of Abraham Lincoln freeing a slave has been removed in downtown Boston .
“ The decision for removal acknowledged the statue ’ s role in perpetuating harmful prejudices and obscuring the role of Black Americans in shaping the nation ’ s freedoms , ” the Boston Art Commission said in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Known as the Emancipation Group statue or the Freedman ’ s Memorial , the statue has been in place near Boston Common since 1879 and depicts Lincoln standing over a newly freed slave , Archer Alexander .
An inscription on the statue reads , “ A race set free/and the country at peace/Lincoln/Rests from his labors.
” The city will eventually relocate the statue to a place where it can be better explained : “ The Mayor ’ s Office of Arts and Culture and the Boston Art Commission began a public engagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the decision to remove and relocate the Emancipation Group statue … As expressed by so many during the public process this year , we fully agree that the statue should be relocated to a new publicly accessible location where its history and context can be better explained .
The statue is being stored in a controlled storage facility in South Boston until a new location is determined , ” a spokesperson for the mayor ’ s office said .
The Boston Art Commission heard nearly two hours of debate on whether to remove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unanimously to remove it .
The debate came as riots and protests spread across the country following the death of George Floyd on Memorial Day .
“ After engaging in a public process , it ’ s clear that residents and visitors to Boston have been uncomfortable with this statue , and its reductive representation of the Black man ’ s role in the abolitionist movement , ” Boston Mayor Martin Walsh said in a statement over the summer .
“ I fully support the Boston Art Commission ’ s decision for removal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The statue is a copy of a statue in Washington , according to the Boston Herald , which also garnered attention from protesters this summer calling for its removal .
The National Guard was called in to protect it .
This is such a shame , especially with the amount of information at everyone ’ s fingertips .
One quick search on the internet will undoubtedly uncover the fact that the original version of the statue was paid for by freed slaves and is a testament to what Lincoln did to free them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the least , except to people who want to be victims even when they are not and who refuse to look up and understand history .
It ’ s disgusting .

The ridiculousness never stops in this country. It’s being reported today that, after all the idiocy over the summer regarding this statue, the city of Boston has just removed the statue of Abraham Lincoln standing over a freed slave:
DC EXAMINER – A statue of Abraham Lincoln freeing a slave has been removed in downtown Boston. “The decision for removal acknowledged the statue’s role in perpetuating harmful prejudices and obscuring the role of Black Americans in shaping the nation’s freedoms,” the Boston Art Commission said in a statement posted on its website. Known as the Emancipation Group statue or the Freedman’s Memorial, the statue has been in place near Boston Common since 1879 and depicts Lincoln standing over a newly freed slave, Archer Alexander. An inscription on the statue reads, “A race set free/and the country at peace/Lincoln/Rests from his labors.”
The city will eventually relocate the statue to a place where it can be better explained:
“The Mayor’s Office of Arts and Culture and the Boston Art Commission began a public engagement process over the summer that led to the decision to remove and relocate the Emancipation Group statue … As expressed by so many during the public process this year, we fully agree that the statue should be relocated to a new publicly accessible location where its history and context can be better explained. The statue is being stored in a controlled storage facility in South Boston until a new location is determined,” a spokesperson for the mayor’s office said. The Boston Art Commission heard nearly two hours of debate on whether to remove the statue over the summer and voted unanimously to remove it. The debate came as riots and protests spread across the country following the death of George Floyd on Memorial Day. “After engaging in a public process, it’s clear that residents and visitors to Boston have been uncomfortable with this statue, and its reductive representation of the Black man’s role in the abolitionist movement,” Boston Mayor Martin Walsh said in a statement over the summer. “I fully support the Boston Art Commission’s decision for removal and thank them for their work.” The statue is a copy of a statue in Washington, according to the Boston Herald, which also garnered attention from protesters this summer calling for its removal. The National Guard was called in to protect it.
This is such a shame, especially with the amount of information at everyone’s fingertips. One quick search on the internet will undoubtedly uncover the fact that the original version of the statue was paid for by freed slaves and is a testament to what Lincoln did to free them. It’s not offensive in the least, except to people who want to be victims even when they are not and who refuse to look up and understand history. It’s disgusting.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--BREAKING: Josh Hawley announces he will ‘object’ to electoral votes on Jan 6th

Senator Josh Hawley has just announced that he will ‘ object ’ to electoral votes form certain states on January 6th , when Congress holds a special session to certify the electoral votes : In case you can ’ t see the tweet , here ’ s his statement : So what exactly happens when a House member and a Senator object ?
“ Objections to individual state returns must be made in writing by at least one Member each of the Senate and House of Representatives .
If an objection meets these requirements , the joint session recesses and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question in their respective chambers for a maximum of two hours , ” the CRS said .
“ The two houses then vote separately to accept or reject the objection .
They then reassemble in joint session , and announce the results of their respective votes .
An objection to a state ’ s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded.
” Essentially it will just force a vote on the objections in both the House and Senate on whether to accept or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a pretty big uphill battle to get both the House and the Senate to accept the objections , but it will at the very least force a vote so that we know where every House member and Senator stands on the issue .

Senator Josh Hawley has just announced that he will ‘object’ to electoral votes form certain states on January 6th, when Congress holds a special session to certify the electoral votes:
Millions of voters concerned about election integrity deserve to be heard. I will object on January 6 on their behalf pic.twitter.com/kTaaPPJGHE — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) December 30, 2020
In case you can’t see the tweet, here’s his statement:
So what exactly happens when a House member and a Senator object?
“Objections to individual state returns must be made in writing by at least one Member each of the Senate and House of Representatives. If an objection meets these requirements, the joint session recesses and the two houses separate and debate the question in their respective chambers for a maximum of two hours,” the CRS said. “The two houses then vote separately to accept or reject the objection. They then reassemble in joint session, and announce the results of their respective votes. An objection to a state’s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded.”
Essentially it will just force a vote on the objections in both the House and Senate on whether to accept or reject the objection. It still seems like a pretty big uphill battle to get both the House and the Senate to accept the objections, but it will at the very least force a vote so that we know where every House member and Senator stands on the issue.


therightscoop--2020-12-30--HORRIBLE: Argentina just legalized the murder of unborn babies

Argentina , the homeland of Pope Francis , just effectively legalized the murder of unborn babies in the womb up to 14 weeks of gestation , with exceptions : AP – Argentina ’ s Senate passed a law legalizing elective abortion in Pope Francis ’ homeland early Wednesday after a marathon 12-hour session , a victory for the women ’ s movement that has been fighting for the right for decades .
The vote means that abortion will be legalized up to the 14th week of pregnancy , and also will be legal after that time in cases of rape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life .
It will have repercussions across a continent where the procedure is largely illegal .
The measure , which passed 38-29 with one abstention , was already approved by Argentina ’ s Chamber of Deputies and has the support of President Alberto Fernández , meaning the Senate vote was its final hurdle .
“ Safe , legal and free abortion is now the law , ” Fernández tweeted after the vote , noting that it had been an election pledge .
“ Today , we are a better society that expands women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he added .
Argentina is the largest Latin American country to legalize abortion and the vote was being closely watched .
With the exceptions of Uruguay , Cuba , Mexico City , Mexico ’ s Oaxaca state , the Antilles and French Guiana , abortion remains largely illegal across the region .
Just two years ago we wrote about the Argentinian Senate refusing to approve abortion , which we called a ‘ glimmer of hope ’ .
Now , sadly , that glimmer has been snuffed out .
Here ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the street that occurred after the vote : To see so many celebrating the right to murder babies in the womb is a horrible scene .
But if Argentina is anything like America , many of these people have been deceived by their liberal elites telling them it isn ’ t really a baby , but just a wad of tissue that needs removing .
I ’ m sure this breaks the heart of the Pope .
The fact that this occurred in a country where 70 to 90 percent of the population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as I suggested two years ago , indicative of the great falling away from the church that Paul speaks about in Thessalonians .
UPDATE : For those of you who are blaming the pope for this , you should know that he tried to stop the country from going down this path : Before the vote , the Roman Catholic bishop ’ s conference had denounced what it called a “ feverish obsession to install abortion.
” Just hours before the Senate session began Tuesday , the pope weighed in , tweeting : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an outcast , in order to tell us that every outcast is a child of God .
He came into the world as each child comes into the world , weak and vulnerable , so that we can learn to accept our weaknesses with tender love.
” Following the vote , the bishops issued a statement saying the measure “ will deepen even further the divisions in our country ” and said it lamented that the country ’ s leadership was distant from the dominant pro-life sentiment across the nation .
The pope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s absolutely right on this and does not stand with it in any way .

Argentina, the homeland of Pope Francis, just effectively legalized the murder of unborn babies in the womb up to 14 weeks of gestation, with exceptions:
AP – Argentina’s Senate passed a law legalizing elective abortion in Pope Francis’ homeland early Wednesday after a marathon 12-hour session, a victory for the women’s movement that has been fighting for the right for decades. The vote means that abortion will be legalized up to the 14th week of pregnancy, and also will be legal after that time in cases of rape or danger to the mother’s life. It will have repercussions across a continent where the procedure is largely illegal. The measure, which passed 38-29 with one abstention, was already approved by Argentina’s Chamber of Deputies and has the support of President Alberto Fernández, meaning the Senate vote was its final hurdle. “Safe, legal and free abortion is now the law,” Fernández tweeted after the vote, noting that it had been an election pledge. “Today, we are a better society that expands women’s rights and guarantees public health,” he added. Argentina is the largest Latin American country to legalize abortion and the vote was being closely watched. With the exceptions of Uruguay, Cuba, Mexico City, Mexico’s Oaxaca state, the Antilles and French Guiana, abortion remains largely illegal across the region.
Just two years ago we wrote about the Argentinian Senate refusing to approve abortion, which we called a ‘glimmer of hope’. Now, sadly, that glimmer has been snuffed out.
Here’s video of the ‘celebrations’ in the street that occurred after the vote:
NEW – Argentina becomes the first country in Latin America to legalize abortion after a landmark vote.pic.twitter.com/obFbMJrLiv — Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) December 30, 2020
#BREAKING: Celebrations in the streets as #Argentina’s Senate approved a bill to legalize #abortion by 38-29 vote. In November, Argentine native @Pontifex wrote “Is it fair to eliminate a human life to solve a problem? Is it fair to hire a hit man to solve a problem?” pic.twitter.com/AF5SnFliHz — Bree A Dail (@breeadail) December 30, 2020
To see so many celebrating the right to murder babies in the womb is a horrible scene. But if Argentina is anything like America, many of these people have been deceived by their liberal elites telling them it isn’t really a baby, but just a wad of tissue that needs removing.
I’m sure this breaks the heart of the Pope. The fact that this occurred in a country where 70 to 90 percent of the population are said to be Catholic is, as I suggested two years ago, indicative of the great falling away from the church that Paul speaks about in Thessalonians.
UPDATE: For those of you who are blaming the pope for this, you should know that he tried to stop the country from going down this path:
Before the vote, the Roman Catholic bishop’s conference had denounced what it called a “feverish obsession to install abortion.” Just hours before the Senate session began Tuesday, the pope weighed in, tweeting: “The Son of God was born an outcast, in order to tell us that every outcast is a child of God. He came into the world as each child comes into the world, weak and vulnerable, so that we can learn to accept our weaknesses with tender love.” Following the vote, the bishops issued a statement saying the measure “will deepen even further the divisions in our country” and said it lamented that the country’s leadership was distant from the dominant pro-life sentiment across the nation.
The pope has certainly made mistakes, but he’s absolutely right on this and does not stand with it in any way.


therightscoop--2020-12-31--GEORGIA: Ossoff blatantly LIES in a TWEET about the ELECTION and Twitter doesn’t give a FLYING…

The double standards in media and tech are so obvious and in our face lately .
They do not care that you know .
They will tell you that their unfairness IS fairness .
War is peace .
Freedom is slavery .
Elites are your friends .
They ’ ll say anything and do anything .
Just one example ?
Jon Ossoff in Georgia .
The so-called press and the tech giants are doing everything they can to make him and Warner the winners and turn the senate over to democrats .
That ’ s why they ’ re stealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces , and it ’ s why blatant propaganda doesn ’ t just go unpunished , but is actively coordinated with all parties .
Look at this outright lie .
“ Kelly had no idea who that was , and if she had she would have kicked him out immediately because we condemn in the most vociferous terms everything that he stands for , ” Loeffler ’ s campaign spokesman Stephen Lawson previously told the AJC regarding the photograph .
“ It ’ s not surprising coming from a pathological liar like Jon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Lawson said .
Do you see that she wasn ’ t campaigning with this guy ?
He was just a rando in a picture at an event .
That means OSSOFF IS LYING .
But the Daily Caller asked Twitter what they were doing to do about it , and Twitter said “ not a thang.
” Kennedy said he did not even have Twitter teams review the Ossoff tweet due to the busyness of the holiday season .
He explained to the DCNF that though the civic integrity category deals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about someone happens in political speech all the time.
” “ Making a claim about someone and their character wouldn ’ t fall under any of those policies , ” Kennedy said .
IT ’ S A LIE ABOUT A CAMPAIGN NOT A COMMENTARY ABOUT HOW UGLY SOMEONE IS .
And they KICKED THE NEW YORK POST OFF TWITTER OVER THE HUNTER BIDEN STORY .
Now they claim they aren ’ t the “ arbiter of truth ?
” This is a SCAM .
Trenton Kennedy knows that you know .
That comment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Caller and YOU .
Twitter is giving you the middle finger .
You may be all the way to Parler now , but that doesn ’ t mean they don ’ t deserve a middle finger in return .
UPDATE : Even CNN says Ossoff is a big fat liar .

The double standards in media and tech are so obvious and in our face lately. They do not care that you know. They will tell you that their unfairness IS fairness. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Elites are your friends.
They’ll say anything and do anything. Just one example? Jon Ossoff in Georgia. The so-called press and the tech giants are doing everything they can to make him and Warner the winners and turn the senate over to democrats. That’s why they’re stealing the vote right in front of our faces, and it’s why blatant propaganda doesn’t just go unpunished, but is actively coordinated with all parties.
Look at this outright lie.
The Daily Caller reports:
“Kelly had no idea who that was, and if she had she would have kicked him out immediately because we condemn in the most vociferous terms everything that he stands for,” Loeffler’s campaign spokesman Stephen Lawson previously told the AJC regarding the photograph.
“It’s not surprising coming from a pathological liar like Jon Ossoff whose parents still pay his rent,” Lawson said.
Do you see that she wasn’t campaigning with this guy? He was just a rando in a picture at an event. That means OSSOFF IS LYING.
But the Daily Caller asked Twitter what they were doing to do about it, and Twitter said “not a thang.”
Twitter spokesman Trenton Kennedy told the DCNF that the tweet does not fit under any of Twitter’s three policies for misleading information: “synthetic and manipulated media, COVID-19, and Civic Integrity.”
SERIOUSLY?
Kennedy said he did not even have Twitter teams review the Ossoff tweet due to the busyness of the holiday season. He explained to the DCNF that though the civic integrity category deals with elections, “making a claim about someone happens in political speech all the time.” “Making a claim about someone and their character wouldn’t fall under any of those policies,” Kennedy said.
IT’S A LIE ABOUT A CAMPAIGN NOT A COMMENTARY ABOUT HOW UGLY SOMEONE IS. And they KICKED THE NEW YORK POST OFF TWITTER OVER THE HUNTER BIDEN STORY. Now they claim they aren’t the “arbiter of truth?” This is a SCAM.
Trenton Kennedy knows that you know. That comment was MEANT to piss off the Daily Caller and YOU. Twitter is giving you the middle finger.
You may be all the way to Parler now, but that doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a middle finger in return.
UPDATE: Even CNN says Ossoff is a big fat liar.


therightscoop--2020-12-31--Federal judge, sister of Stacey Abrams, REVERSES decision blocking two Georgia counties from removin

Federal judge, sister of Stacey Abrams, REVERSES decision blocking two Georgia counties from removing 4,000 voters who moved…

In surprise ruling , Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner just reversed a decision from earlier this week that prevented two Georgia counties from removing over 4,000 voters from their rolls who moved away .
Her new decision allows the counties to mandate the use provisional ballots for these voters if they are indeed voting : POLITICO – A federal judge has agreed to allow a Georgia county to require that certain voters cast provisional ballots , just days before two runoff elections in the state that will decide control of the U.S. Senate .
More than 4,000 voters faced eligibility challenges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on unverified postal change-of-address records .
The new injunction from U.S. District Court Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner , issued just before midnight on Wednesday , replaces an earlier restraining order she had issued that prevented Muscogee County from forcing those voters to cast provisional ballots at all .
The latest order represents a significant move in the direction the county board urged during a court hearing earlier Wednesday .
Although the county may now require provisional ballots from those voters , Gardner ’ s order directs that no challenges to their eligibility be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Change of Address Registry , a U.S .
Postal Service database that Democrats have worried is an unreliable and unverified indicator of whether individuals have changed their legal residence .
Her order also requires Muscogee County to notify any voters for whom it finds such evidence of ineligibility and give them a chance to present evidence to count their ballot by Jan. 8 .
After a two hour hearing yesterday , Gardner decided that the Democrat group who filed the lawsuit wasn ’ t likely to succeed in challenging the ineligibility of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest order on the matter represented a significant rollback of her initial restriction on Muscogee , which prevented the county from requiring the challenged voters to cast provisional ballots at all .
The original restraining order prompted condemnation from Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and drew the attention of figures such as Donald Trump Jr. , who called out her connection to Abrams to fan allegations of bias .
Gardner ’ s order followed a two-hour hearing Wednesday on a lawsuit filed last week by Majority Forward over an attempt to challenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another 150 in Ben Hill County right before Tuesday ’ s election .
Gardner determined that Majority Forward did not demonstrate it was likely to succeed on its challenge to Ben Hill ’ s decision and focused her final order only on Muscogee .
Well I must say I ’ m shocked she reversed her original decision , but it ’ s the right decision .
Although I doubt Attorney Marac Elias thinks so .
He had said her original ruling was a “ victory over voter suppression .
”

In surprise ruling, Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner just reversed a decision from earlier this week that prevented two Georgia counties from removing over 4,000 voters from their rolls who moved away. Her new decision allows the counties to mandate the use provisional ballots for these voters if they are indeed voting:
POLITICO – A federal judge has agreed to allow a Georgia county to require that certain voters cast provisional ballots, just days before two runoff elections in the state that will decide control of the U.S. Senate. More than 4,000 voters faced eligibility challenges ahead of the Jan. 5 runoffs based on unverified postal change-of-address records. The new injunction from U.S. District Court Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner, issued just before midnight on Wednesday, replaces an earlier restraining order she had issued that prevented Muscogee County from forcing those voters to cast provisional ballots at all. The latest order represents a significant move in the direction the county board urged during a court hearing earlier Wednesday. Although the county may now require provisional ballots from those voters, Gardner’s order directs that no challenges to their eligibility be upheld based exclusively on data in the National Change of Address Registry, a U.S. Postal Service database that Democrats have worried is an unreliable and unverified indicator of whether individuals have changed their legal residence. Her order also requires Muscogee County to notify any voters for whom it finds such evidence of ineligibility and give them a chance to present evidence to count their ballot by Jan. 8.
After a two hour hearing yesterday, Gardner decided that the Democrat group who filed the lawsuit wasn’t likely to succeed in challenging the ineligibility of these voters:
The judge’s latest order on the matter represented a significant rollback of her initial restriction on Muscogee, which prevented the county from requiring the challenged voters to cast provisional ballots at all. The original restraining order prompted condemnation from Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and drew the attention of figures such as Donald Trump Jr., who called out her connection to Abrams to fan allegations of bias. Gardner’s order followed a two-hour hearing Wednesday on a lawsuit filed last week by Majority Forward over an attempt to challenge more than 4,000 voters in Muscogee and another 150 in Ben Hill County right before Tuesday’s election. Gardner determined that Majority Forward did not demonstrate it was likely to succeed on its challenge to Ben Hill’s decision and focused her final order only on Muscogee.
Well I must say I’m shocked she reversed her original decision, but it’s the right decision. Although I doubt Attorney Marac Elias thinks so. He had said her original ruling was a “victory over voter suppression.”


therightscoop--2020-12-31--“Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government” – Ben Sasse attacks Rep

“Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government” – Ben Sasse attacks Republicans who plan to object on Jan 6th

Ben Sasse wrote a lengthy Facebook post explaining why he won ’ t be ojecting on January 6th and attacking those Republicans who have already announced they will be objecting .
Instead of pasting the whole article in here , I ’ ll just give you the lowlights : 1 .
IS THERE A CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR CONGRESS TO DISMISS ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES ?
Yes .
A member of the House and the Senate can object and , in order for the vote ( s ) in question to be dismissed , both chambers must vote to reject those votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there any real basis for it here ?
Absolutely not .
Since the Electoral College Act of 1887 was passed into law in the aftermath of the Civil War , not a single electoral vote has ever been thrown out by the Congress .
( One goofy senator attempted this maneuver after George W. Bush won reelection in 2004 , but her anti-democratic play was struck down by her Senate colleagues in a shaming vote of 74-1 . )
… 2 .
IS THERE EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD SO WIDESPREAD THAT IT COULD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ELECTION ?
For President-Elect Biden ’ s 306-232 Electoral College victory to be overturned , President Trump would need to flip multiple states .
But not a single state is in legal doubt .
… …WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE ?
The president and his allies are playing with fire .
They have been asking – first the courts , then state legislatures , now the Congress – to overturn the results of a presidential election .
They have unsuccessfully called on judges and are now calling on federal officeholders to invalidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you make big claims , you had better have the evidence .
But the president doesn ’ t and neither do the institutional arsonist members of Congress who will object to the Electoral College vote .
Let ’ s be clear what is happening here : We have a bunch of ambitious politicians who think there ’ s a quick way to tap into the president ’ s populist base without doing any real , long-term damage .
But they ’ re wrong – and this issue is bigger than anyone ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government .
We have a deep cancer in American politics right now : Both Republicans and Democrats are growing more distrustful of the basic processes and procedures that we follow .
Some people will respond to these arguments by saying : “ The courts are just in the tank for Democrats !
” And indeed the President has been tweeting that “ the courts are bad ” ( and the Justice Department , and more ) .
That ’ s an example of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been worried about .
Democrats spent four years pretending Trump didn ’ t win the election , and now ( shocker ) a good section of Republicans are going to spend the next four years pretending Biden didn ’ t win the election .
All the clever arguments and rhetorical gymnastics in the world won ’ t change the fact that this January 6th effort is designed to disenfranchise millions of Americans simply because they voted for someone in a different party .
We ought to be better than that .
If we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to turn American politics into a Hatfields and McCoys endless blood feud – a house hopelessly divided .
America has always been fertile soil for groupthink , conspiracy theories , and showmanship .
But Americans have common sense .
We know up from down , and if it sounds too good to be true , it probably is .
We need that common sense if we ’ re going to rebuild trust .
It won ’ t be easy , but it ’ s hardly beyond our reach .
And it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of how , to recall Benjamin Franklin , we struggle to do right by the next generation and “ keep a republic.
” In reading Sasse ’ s entire post I notice that he never mentioned the bigger issue that Mark Levin laid out so well yesterday , which was how lawless Democrat state officials went around their state legislatures just like Obama taught them , by fiat and by the courts , to enact new rules for the election which in many cases contradicted laws passed by the legislatures .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter fraud , and yet Sasse ignores it just like John Roberts and crew .
I ’ m still hoping more Senators than just Hawley object on the 6th , but so far none of them have said anything .
And one thing is for sure , Sasse won ’ t be among them .

Ben Sasse wrote a lengthy Facebook post explaining why he won’t be ojecting on January 6th and attacking those Republicans who have already announced they will be objecting.
Instead of pasting the whole article in here, I’ll just give you the lowlights:
1. IS THERE A CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR CONGRESS TO DISMISS ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES? Yes. A member of the House and the Senate can object and, in order for the vote(s) in question to be dismissed, both chambers must vote to reject those votes. But is it wise? Is there any real basis for it here? Absolutely not. Since the Electoral College Act of 1887 was passed into law in the aftermath of the Civil War, not a single electoral vote has ever been thrown out by the Congress. (One goofy senator attempted this maneuver after George W. Bush won reelection in 2004, but her anti-democratic play was struck down by her Senate colleagues in a shaming vote of 74-1.) …
2. IS THERE EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD SO WIDESPREAD THAT IT COULD HAVE CHANGED THE OUTCOME OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION? No. For President-Elect Biden’s 306-232 Electoral College victory to be overturned, President Trump would need to flip multiple states. But not a single state is in legal doubt. …
…WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? The president and his allies are playing with fire. They have been asking – first the courts, then state legislatures, now the Congress – to overturn the results of a presidential election. They have unsuccessfully called on judges and are now calling on federal officeholders to invalidate millions and millions of votes. If you make big claims, you had better have the evidence. But the president doesn’t and neither do the institutional arsonist members of Congress who will object to the Electoral College vote. Let’s be clear what is happening here: We have a bunch of ambitious politicians who think there’s a quick way to tap into the president’s populist base without doing any real, long-term damage. But they’re wrong – and this issue is bigger than anyone’s personal ambitions. Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government. We have a deep cancer in American politics right now: Both Republicans and Democrats are growing more distrustful of the basic processes and procedures that we follow. Some people will respond to these arguments by saying: “The courts are just in the tank for Democrats!” And indeed the President has been tweeting that “the courts are bad” (and the Justice Department, and more). That’s an example of the legitimacy crisis so many of us have been worried about. Democrats spent four years pretending Trump didn’t win the election, and now (shocker) a good section of Republicans are going to spend the next four years pretending Biden didn’t win the election. All the clever arguments and rhetorical gymnastics in the world won’t change the fact that this January 6th effort is designed to disenfranchise millions of Americans simply because they voted for someone in a different party. We ought to be better than that. If we normalize this, we’re going to turn American politics into a Hatfields and McCoys endless blood feud – a house hopelessly divided. America has always been fertile soil for groupthink, conspiracy theories, and showmanship. But Americans have common sense. We know up from down, and if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. We need that common sense if we’re going to rebuild trust. It won’t be easy, but it’s hardly beyond our reach. And it’s what self-government requires. It’s part of how, to recall Benjamin Franklin, we struggle to do right by the next generation and “keep a republic.”
In reading Sasse’s entire post I notice that he never mentioned the bigger issue that Mark Levin laid out so well yesterday, which was how lawless Democrat state officials went around their state legislatures just like Obama taught them, by fiat and by the courts, to enact new rules for the election which in many cases contradicted laws passed by the legislatures. That is as big of an issue as voter fraud, and yet Sasse ignores it just like John Roberts and crew.
I’m still hoping more Senators than just Hawley object on the 6th, but so far none of them have said anything. And one thing is for sure, Sasse won’t be among them.


therightscoop--2020-12-31--Girlfriend told police that Nashville bomber was making bombs in 2019

The FBI reportedly said that Anthony Warner , the Nashville bomber , was not on law enforcement ’ s radar before the Christmas day bomb explosion .
However it turns out that police in Nashville were notified that Warner was making bombs back in 2019 by his girlfriend and attorney : If you can ’ t make that out , here ’ s what it says : On Aug 21 police responded to a call for service at 3816 Syfert Ln and spoke with OP 1 .
During the incident , OP 1 made statements that her boyfriend ( suspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trailer at his residence .
While on the scene of 3816 Syfert Ln police also spoke with OP 2 .
OP 2 stated that he is an attorney who represents OP 1 and the suspect and that the suspect frequently talks about the military and bomb making .
He stated that he believes that the suspect knows what he is doing and is capable of making a bomb .
It then details how police knocked on the door , but after several attempts never could get Warner to come to the door .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing in his RV because it was in the back of the house behind a fence .
That was August of 2019 .
After such a claim you ’ d think that law enforcement or the FBI would have followed up to investigate more , to find out if this was really true .
But they didn ’ t and we all know what happened .

The FBI reportedly said that Anthony Warner, the Nashville bomber, was not on law enforcement’s radar before the Christmas day bomb explosion. However it turns out that police in Nashville were notified that Warner was making bombs back in 2019 by his girlfriend and attorney:
BREAKING: we just received this report from @MNPDNashville showing Anthony Warner’s girlfriend reported he was making bombs in an RV one year ago. The FBI said earlier this week Warner was not on law enforcement’s radar prior to this incident. #nashvillebombing @WSMV pic.twitter.com/fYga92BIzP — Brittany Weiner (@brittweinerTV) December 30, 2020
If you can’t make that out, here’s what it says:
On Aug 21 police responded to a call for service at 3816 Syfert Ln and spoke with OP 1. During the incident, OP 1 made statements that her boyfriend (suspect) was building bombs in the RV trailer at his residence. While on the scene of 3816 Syfert Ln police also spoke with OP 2. OP 2 stated that he is an attorney who represents OP 1 and the suspect and that the suspect frequently talks about the military and bomb making. He stated that he believes that the suspect knows what he is doing and is capable of making a bomb.
It then details how police knocked on the door, but after several attempts never could get Warner to come to the door. Nor could they see what he was doing in his RV because it was in the back of the house behind a fence.
That was August of 2019. After such a claim you’d think that law enforcement or the FBI would have followed up to investigate more, to find out if this was really true. But they didn’t and we all know what happened.


therightscoop--2020-01-31--BREAKING: Lamar Alexander says he will NOT vote with Democrats tomorrow, which should DOOM the motio

BREAKING: Lamar Alexander says he will NOT vote with Democrats tomorrow, which should DOOM the motion for witnesses

Lamar Alexander has announced tonight that he will not be voting with Democrats tomorrow on the motion for witnesses : “ I worked with other senators to make sure that we have the right to ask for more documents and witnesses , but there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution ’ s high bar for an impeachable offense .
“ There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son , Hunter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ October 3 , 2019 , and during his July 25 , 2019 , telephone call with the president of Ukraine .
There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid , at least in part , to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens ; the House managers have proved this with what they call a ‘ mountain of overwhelming evidence.
’ There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation .
When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations , it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law .
But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year ’ s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate .
“ The question then is not whether the president did it , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American people should decide what to do about what he did .
I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday .
“ The Senate has spent nine long days considering this ‘ mountain ’ of evidence , the arguments of the House managers and the president ’ s lawyers , their answers to senators ’ questions and the House record .
Even if the House charges were true , they do not meet the Constitution ’ s ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crimes and misdemeanors ’ standard for an impeachable offense .
“ The framers believed that there should never , ever be a partisan impeachment .
That is why the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate for conviction .
Yet not one House Republican voted for these articles .
If this shallow , hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed , it would rip the country apart , pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist .
It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representatives is of a different political party .
“ Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘ the consent of the governed , ’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress .
Let the people decide .
”

Lamar Alexander has announced tonight that he will not be voting with Democrats tomorrow on the motion for witnesses:
Here is Alexander’s full statement:
“I worked with other senators to make sure that we have the right to ask for more documents and witnesses, but there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense.
“There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine. There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a ‘mountain of overwhelming evidence.’ There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers.
“It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.
“The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.
“The Senate has spent nine long days considering this ‘mountain’ of evidence, the arguments of the House managers and the president’s lawyers, their answers to senators’ questions and the House record. Even if the House charges were true, they do not meet the Constitution’s ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors’ standard for an impeachable offense.
“The framers believed that there should never, ever be a partisan impeachment. That is why the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate for conviction. Yet not one House Republican voted for these articles. If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist. It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party.
“Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘the consent of the governed,’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress. Let the people decide.”