therightscoop--2020-01-17--Trump has a new theory on why Nancy Pelosi delayed the impeachment articles…

Trump appears to have a new theory on why Nancy Pelosi delayed the impeachment articles until now and it has everything to do with the election : I don ’ t know how much of this theory Trump really believes or if he ’ s just trolling Bernie and his supporter to try and get into their heads .
One thing is for sure .
Bernie says he would rather be in Iowa than in DC for the impeachment trial : ‘ I would rather be in Iowa today .
There ’ s a caucus there in two and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in New Hampshire , and Nevada , and so forth .
But I swore a constitutional oath as a United States senator to do my job , and I ’ m here to do my job , ’ Sanders said to reporters Thursday .
I ’ m sure Warren feels the same with the race so close .
But Sanders appears to have more at stake , with the latest Iowa poll averages showing Biden and Sanders neck and neck with Buttigieg not far behind and Warren right behind him .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in Iowa .

Trump appears to have a new theory on why Nancy Pelosi delayed the impeachment articles until now and it has everything to do with the election:
They are rigging the election again against Bernie Sanders, just like last time, only even more obviously. They are bringing him out of so important Iowa in order that, as a Senator, he sit through the Impeachment Hoax Trial. Crazy Nancy thereby gives the strong edge to Sleepy… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020
….Joe Biden, and Bernie is shut out again. Very unfair, but that’s the way the Democrats play the game. Anyway, it’s a lot of fun to watch! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020
I don’t know how much of this theory Trump really believes or if he’s just trolling Bernie and his supporter to try and get into their heads.
One thing is for sure. Bernie says he would rather be in Iowa than in DC for the impeachment trial:
‘I would rather be in Iowa today. There’s a caucus there in two and a half weeks. I’d rather be in New Hampshire, and Nevada, and so forth. But I swore a constitutional oath as a United States senator to do my job, and I’m here to do my job,’ Sanders said to reporters Thursday.
I’m sure Warren feels the same with the race so close. But Sanders appears to have more at stake, with the latest Iowa poll averages showing Biden and Sanders neck and neck with Buttigieg not far behind and Warren right behind him. You can understand why Biden really wants to be in Iowa.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--BREAKING: Trump’s impeachment legal defense team LEAKED

The legal defense team Trump will have for the impeachment trial has been leaked to the Associated Press , who says it will include none other than Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz .
And Pam Bondi… AP – President Donald Trump ’ s legal team will include former Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr , the former independent counsel who led the Whitewater investigation into President Bill Clinton , according to a person familiar with the matter .
The team will also include Pam Bondi , the former Florida attorney general .
The person spoke to The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the person wasn ’ t authorized to speak on the record .
My initial thoughts is that Ken Starr has been through this before with the Clinton impeachment and having that experience and legal expertise on Team White House will be a great asset .
Alan Dershowitz is a great legal mind and has been in Trump ’ s corner on this throughout , and I ’ ve no doubt he ’ d do a great job .
However a part of me wonders if this is in part a way for Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wonder the same about Pam Bondi .
I know she was the AG in Florida , but beyond that I don ’ t know much about her legal expertise .
What do you think ?

The legal defense team Trump will have for the impeachment trial has been leaked to the Associated Press, who says it will include none other than Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz. And Pam Bondi…
AP – President Donald Trump’s legal team will include former Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr, the former independent counsel who led the Whitewater investigation into President Bill Clinton, according to a person familiar with the matter. The team will also include Pam Bondi, the former Florida attorney general. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the person wasn’t authorized to speak on the record.
My initial thoughts is that Ken Starr has been through this before with the Clinton impeachment and having that experience and legal expertise on Team White House will be a great asset.
Alan Dershowitz is a great legal mind and has been in Trump’s corner on this throughout, and I’ve no doubt he’d do a great job. However a part of me wonders if this is in part a way for Trump to reward Dershowitz for loyalty.
I wonder the same about Pam Bondi. I know she was the AG in Florida, but beyond that I don’t know much about her legal expertise. What do you think?


therightscoop--2020-01-17--Ted Cruz: If House managers want John Bolton to testify, White House should be able to call Hunter B

Ted Cruz: If House managers want John Bolton to testify, White House should be able to call Hunter Biden…

Ted Cruz is calling for fairness and reciprocity when it comes to potentially calling for witnesses , saying that if the Democrat House managers want to call witnesses , the White House should be able to do the same : DC EXAMINER – Republicans could compel Hunter Biden to testify if Democrats succeed in calling former national security adviser John Bolton to be a witness in the Senate impeachment trial .
So said Sen. Ted Cruz in an interview Thursday with the Washington Examiner , shortly after he was sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts for the Ukraine impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Texas Republican made it clear that , while no decision has been reached on whether new witnesses would be called , he believed the Republican Senate majority would support Trump ’ s legal team getting to call at least an equal number of its own witnesses , potentially including 2020 Democratic front-runner Joe Biden ’ s son , if Democratic House managers for the trial are allowed to call in further people to testify .
“ If additional witnesses are called , at a minimum we should respect the principle of reciprocity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if the prosecution is allowed one witness , the White House ought to be allowed at least one witness .
If the prosecution is allowed two witnesses , the White House ought to be allowed two witnesses.
” The Republican said : “ That would mean , as a practical matter , if the House managers called , for example , John Bolton , that the White House defense team could call as a witness , say , Hunter Biden.
” Cruz says he doesn ’ t know how a vote on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t sure the required 51 senators would want to hear additional witnesses after each side made its case .
“ I don ’ t know which way that vote will go , ” Cruz said .
“ If the Senate goes down the road of additional witnesses , it needs to be fair and even-handed and respect due process.
” But he said exactly who gets selected shouldn ’ t be up to the senators .
“ That ’ s a determination for the House managers on the prosecution side and a determination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the defense side , ” Cruz said .
To this point , Susan Collins issued a statement late yesterday clarifying her position on calling witnesses , noting that she supported it in the Clinton impeachment trial and that she would likely support it now as well : “ At the conclusion of that phase of the 1999 trial , the Senate voted on a motion to subpoena witnesses and admit additional materials after the case had been heard and the questions had been posed , ” Collins continued .
“ I voted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ While I need to hear the case argued and the questions answered , I tend to believe having additional information would be helpful , ” the statement read .
“ It is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just as I did in 1999.
” If I had to guess , it seems likely that Democrats will have the votes to call witnesses .
And of course the media and Democrats will try and turn this trial into a fiasco .

Ted Cruz is calling for fairness and reciprocity when it comes to potentially calling for witnesses, saying that if the Democrat House managers want to call witnesses, the White House should be able to do the same:
DC EXAMINER – Republicans could compel Hunter Biden to testify if Democrats succeed in calling former national security adviser John Bolton to be a witness in the Senate impeachment trial. So said Sen. Ted Cruz in an interview Thursday with the Washington Examiner, shortly after he was sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts for the Ukraine impeachment trial set to begin next week. The Texas Republican made it clear that, while no decision has been reached on whether new witnesses would be called, he believed the Republican Senate majority would support Trump’s legal team getting to call at least an equal number of its own witnesses, potentially including 2020 Democratic front-runner Joe Biden’s son, if Democratic House managers for the trial are allowed to call in further people to testify. “If additional witnesses are called, at a minimum we should respect the principle of reciprocity,” said Cruz. “So, if the prosecution is allowed one witness, the White House ought to be allowed at least one witness. If the prosecution is allowed two witnesses, the White House ought to be allowed two witnesses.” The Republican said: “That would mean, as a practical matter, if the House managers called, for example, John Bolton, that the White House defense team could call as a witness, say, Hunter Biden.”
Cruz says he doesn’t know how a vote on witnesses will turn out…
Cruz wasn’t sure the required 51 senators would want to hear additional witnesses after each side made its case. “I don’t know which way that vote will go,” Cruz said. “If the Senate goes down the road of additional witnesses, it needs to be fair and even-handed and respect due process.” But he said exactly who gets selected shouldn’t be up to the senators. “That’s a determination for the House managers on the prosecution side and a determination for the White House defense team on the defense side,” Cruz said.
To this point, Susan Collins issued a statement late yesterday clarifying her position on calling witnesses, noting that she supported it in the Clinton impeachment trial and that she would likely support it now as well:
“At the conclusion of that phase of the 1999 trial, the Senate voted on a motion to subpoena witnesses and admit additional materials after the case had been heard and the questions had been posed,” Collins continued. “I voted in favor of that motion subpoenaing witnesses.” “While I need to hear the case argued and the questions answered, I tend to believe having additional information would be helpful,” the statement read. “It is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just as I did in 1999.”
If I had to guess, it seems likely that Democrats will have the votes to call witnesses. And of course the media and Democrats will try and turn this trial into a fiasco.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--WATCH: Crowd erupts with huge standing ovation when NC sheriff deputy tells board of commissioners “

WATCH: Crowd erupts with huge standing ovation when NC sheriff deputy tells board of commissioners “I will not enforce ANY unconstitutional law!”

A North Carolina sheriff deputy got crazy applause earlier this week at a Davidson County Board of Commissioners meeting where they were seeking to make Davidson County a Second Amendment protection county .
The applause came Tripp Kester , the sheriff deputy in uniform , made clear that he would not enforce any unconstitutional law in his jurisdiction : Here ’ s more from Journal Now : Davidson County gun owners can claim a victory as the Board of Commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday night to make the county a Second Amendment protection county .
The board , which is made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20 members of a standing-room-only crowd of more than 150 during a 30-minute public-comment period .
Every person who spoke did so in favor of the proposed Second Amendment protection resolution .
Perhaps the biggest cheers of the night came for Davidson County Sheriff ’ s Deputy Tripp Kester , who spoke while wearing his sheriff ’ s office uniform .
Kester called the Second Amendment “ God given , ” and called on the board to publicly demonstrate its willingness to protect those rights .
Speaking with a hardened look on his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement officer he would not enforce any law infringing on his right to keep and bear arms .
“ I ’ m going to protect the people of the county regardless of what ’ s done here , ” Kester said .
“ Let ’ s get on board and let ’ s do the right thing .
We ’ re not going to allocate any personnel , finances , resources or anything to infringe on their liberties.
” Kester ’ s short speech was fantastic and it ’ s great to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up for the second amendment .
Now you may have noticed this meeting is being said to have happened in Virginia .
As you can clearly see it is not , so feel free to share this to get the word out .

A North Carolina sheriff deputy got crazy applause earlier this week at a Davidson County Board of Commissioners meeting where they were seeking to make Davidson County a Second Amendment protection county. The applause came Tripp Kester, the sheriff deputy in uniform, made clear that he would not enforce any unconstitutional law in his jurisdiction:
Like A Boss! Sheriff: “I don’t mean to be disrespectful however,… “I WILL NOT ENFORCE ANY UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW” Crowd Erupts With Cheers 🙌#Virginia pic.twitter.com/OMkhPrkD9C — Rose (@rosedixontx) January 16, 2020
Here’s more from Journal Now:
Davidson County gun owners can claim a victory as the Board of Commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday night to make the county a Second Amendment protection county. The board, which is made up of seven Republicans, heard from 20 members of a standing-room-only crowd of more than 150 during a 30-minute public-comment period. Every person who spoke did so in favor of the proposed Second Amendment protection resolution.
Perhaps the biggest cheers of the night came for Davidson County Sheriff’s Deputy Tripp Kester, who spoke while wearing his sheriff’s office uniform. Kester called the Second Amendment “God given,” and called on the board to publicly demonstrate its willingness to protect those rights. Speaking with a hardened look on his face, Kester said as a law enforcement officer he would not enforce any law infringing on his right to keep and bear arms. “I’m going to protect the people of the county regardless of what’s done here,” Kester said. “Let’s get on board and let’s do the right thing. We’re not going to allocate any personnel, finances, resources or anything to infringe on their liberties.”
Kester’s short speech was fantastic and it’s great to see North Carolina sheriff deputies willing to stand up for the second amendment.
Now you may have noticed this meeting is being said to have happened in Virginia. As you can clearly see it is not, so feel free to share this to get the word out.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--REVERSAL: 11 US service members were injured in Iran’s attack on Iraqi air base last week

It was initially reported that there were no casualties or injuries on the Iraqi air base last week when Iran fired missiles in retaliation for the killing of Soleimani .
But now CNN is reporting that 11 people were actually injured and have been treated at a hospital in Germany : CNN – Several US service members were injured during last week ’ s Iranian missile attack on Al-Asad airbase in Iraq despite the Pentagon initially saying that no casualties had taken place .
“ While no U.S. service members were killed in the Jan. 8 Iranian attack on Al @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for concussion symptoms from the blast and are still being assessed , ” the US-led military coalition fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria said in a statement Thursday .
“ Out of an abundance of caution , service members were transported from Al Asad Air Base , Iraq to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany for follow-on screening .
When deemed fit for duty , the service members are expected to return to Iraq following screening , ” the statement added .
A US military official told CNN that 11 service members had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was launched in retaliation for the US airstrikes that had killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani the previous week .
Defense One was first to report on the injured service members .
Following the attack the Pentagon said that no casualties had resulted from the 16 missiles fired by Iran .
What about the initial reporting of zero casualties ?
Asked about the apparent discrepancy , a Defense official told CNN , “ That was the commander ’ s assessment at the time .
Symptoms emerged days after the fact , and they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ We corrected the record today , ” Jonathan Hoffman , the chief Pentagon spokesman , told CNN .
The Office of the Secretary of Defense “ learned about these injuries today and directed a statement go out immediately.
” CNN points out that the Pentagon defines a casualty as both an injury or fatality of a service member .
Thankfully these service members were only close enough to get a concussion and not worse .
From the initial reporting I would have thought the US would have vacated the base .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Iran some 80 minutes before and they in turn warned the US .
But I guess some were still on the base when the missiles hit .

It was initially reported that there were no casualties or injuries on the Iraqi air base last week when Iran fired missiles in retaliation for the killing of Soleimani. But now CNN is reporting that 11 people were actually injured and have been treated at a hospital in Germany:
CNN – Several US service members were injured during last week’s Iranian missile attack on Al-Asad airbase in Iraq despite the Pentagon initially saying that no casualties had taken place. “While no U.S. service members were killed in the Jan. 8 Iranian attack on Al Asad Air base, several were treated for concussion symptoms from the blast and are still being assessed,” the US-led military coalition fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria said in a statement Thursday. “Out of an abundance of caution, service members were transported from Al Asad Air Base, Iraq to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany for follow-on screening. When deemed fit for duty, the service members are expected to return to Iraq following screening,” the statement added. A US military official told CNN that 11 service members had been injured in the attack, which was launched in retaliation for the US airstrikes that had killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani the previous week. Defense One was first to report on the injured service members. Following the attack the Pentagon said that no casualties had resulted from the 16 missiles fired by Iran.
What about the initial reporting of zero casualties?
Asked about the apparent discrepancy, a Defense official told CNN, “That was the commander’s assessment at the time. Symptoms emerged days after the fact, and they were treated out of an abundance of caution.” “We corrected the record today,” Jonathan Hoffman, the chief Pentagon spokesman, told CNN. The Office of the Secretary of Defense “learned about these injuries today and directed a statement go out immediately.”
CNN points out that the Pentagon defines a casualty as both an injury or fatality of a service member. Thankfully these service members were only close enough to get a concussion and not worse. From the initial reporting I would have thought the US would have vacated the base. Iraq was said to have been warned by Iran some 80 minutes before and they in turn warned the US. But I guess some were still on the base when the missiles hit.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--Justice Department criminally investigating James Comey…

The Justice Department has opened another investigation into James Comey , this time over a classified Russian intelligence document leak that happened back in 2017 : THE HILL – The probe is the second time federal officials have a looked into Comey regarding leaked information .
The former FBI head has been frequently labeled a “ leaker ” by President Trump .
What makes this investigation abnormal , though , is that federal prosecutors usually investigate leaks when classified information is reported by the press , not years after the fact , the Times reports .
Sources familiar with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in particular , are looking into two articles that were written by the Times and The Washington Post in 2017 that mentioned the classified Russian government document .
The document that was mentioned reportedly played a large role in Comey announcing in July 2016 the FBI ’ s decision to not recommend charges for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding her use of a private email server to conduct government business .
According to the Times ’ s sources , the investigation began in the last couple of months , but why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s at remains unclear .
I know , ya ’ ll are completely stunned by this news .
LOL !
Seriously though , this seems like small potatoes when you consider the bigger and more important investigation that ’ s going on via John Durham .
That ’ s the one I ’ m really looking forward too and I suspect Comey will be caught up into that one as well .
But hey , we ’ ll take what we can get .
If he ’ s guilty of leaking , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cameras there when ya do .

The Justice Department has opened another investigation into James Comey, this time over a classified Russian intelligence document leak that happened back in 2017:
THE HILL – The probe is the second time federal officials have a looked into Comey regarding leaked information. The former FBI head has been frequently labeled a “leaker” by President Trump. What makes this investigation abnormal, though, is that federal prosecutors usually investigate leaks when classified information is reported by the press, not years after the fact, the Times reports. Sources familiar with the situation told the paper that prosecutors, in particular, are looking into two articles that were written by the Times and The Washington Post in 2017 that mentioned the classified Russian government document. The document that was mentioned reportedly played a large role in Comey announcing in July 2016 the FBI’s decision to not recommend charges for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding her use of a private email server to conduct government business. According to the Times’s sources, the investigation began in the last couple of months, but why it was initiated and what stage it’s at remains unclear.
I know, ya’ll are completely stunned by this news. LOL!
Seriously though, this seems like small potatoes when you consider the bigger and more important investigation that’s going on via John Durham. That’s the one I’m really looking forward too and I suspect Comey will be caught up into that one as well.
But hey, we’ll take what we can get. If he’s guilty of leaking, arrest him and make sure there are cameras there when ya do.


therightscoop--2020-01-16--Lev Parnas now DENIES speaking with Trump despite CNN reporting otherwise

Last year CNN reported that Lev Parnas had said he spoke directly with Trump about the Ukraine aid and investigating the Bidens : DC EXAMINER – Last November , CNN reported that Parnas told close associates he had spoken to Trump .
“ At one point during the party that night , Parnas and Fruman slipped out of a large reception room packed with hundreds of Trump donors to have a private meeting with the President and Giuliani , according to two acquaintances in whom Parnas confided right after the meeting , ” CNN wrote .
“ Eventually , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the topic turned to Ukraine that night , ” the article continued .
“ According to those two confidants , Parnas said that ‘ the big guy , ’ as he sometimes referred to the President in conversation , talked about tasking him and Fruman with what Parnas described as ‘ a secret mission ’ to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
” But now , according to the New York Times , Parnas is saying he did NOT talk to Trump about these things… In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that although he did not speak with Mr. Trump directly about the efforts , he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Mr. Giuliani that Mr. Trump was kept in the loop .
If he never spoke with Trump directly about Ukraine , then he has no first-hand knowledge of what Trump said or did .
Giuliani said in his interview with Fox News last November that Parnas basically took a photo with Trump and that ’ s all his ‘ meeting ’ with Trump amounted to .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ about him trying to work out a deal to his benefit here , it ’ s even less reason now to trust anything he has to say about this .

Last year CNN reported that Lev Parnas had said he spoke directly with Trump about the Ukraine aid and investigating the Bidens:
DC EXAMINER – Last November, CNN reported that Parnas told close associates he had spoken to Trump. “At one point during the party that night, Parnas and Fruman slipped out of a large reception room packed with hundreds of Trump donors to have a private meeting with the President and Giuliani, according to two acquaintances in whom Parnas confided right after the meeting,” CNN wrote. “Eventually, according to what Parnas told his confidants, the topic turned to Ukraine that night,” the article continued. “According to those two confidants, Parnas said that ‘the big guy,’ as he sometimes referred to the President in conversation, talked about tasking him and Fruman with what Parnas described as ‘a secret mission’ to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.”
But now, according to the New York Times, Parnas is saying he did NOT talk to Trump about these things…
In the interview with The Times, Mr. Parnas said that although he did not speak with Mr. Trump directly about the efforts, he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Mr. Giuliani that Mr. Trump was kept in the loop.
If he never spoke with Trump directly about Ukraine, then he has no first-hand knowledge of what Trump said or did. Giuliani said in his interview with Fox News last November that Parnas basically took a photo with Trump and that’s all his ‘meeting’ with Trump amounted to. And with all of the other stuff about him trying to work out a deal to his benefit here, it’s even less reason now to trust anything he has to say about this.


therightscoop--2020-01-16--The GAO conclusion that Trump ‘broke the law’ is a big nothingburger…

The GAO made a splash today when it concluded that Trump ‘ broke the law ’ in withholding aid to Ukraine last year .
Of course Democrats are running with this , calling it a BOMBSHELL and suggesting it ’ s more reason why Trump should be impeached .
Here ’ s the gist of the GAO report : In the summer of 2019 , the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB ) withheld from obligation funds appropriated to the Department of Defense ( DOD ) for security assistance to Ukraine .
In order to withhold the funds , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schedules with footnotes that made all unobligated balances unavailable for obligation .
Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law .
OMB withheld funds for a policy reason , which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act ( ICA ) .
The withholding was not a programmatic delay .
Therefore , we conclude that OMB violated the ICA .
Ed Morrisey once again helps us understand why this conclusion misses the mark : Read the whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the glaring issue with this conclusion , which is that the administration didn ’ t have an obligation to release the funds on any specific date in the fiscal year .
All they needed to do was to make sure the money got spent by the last day of the budget cycle .
That last day of the budget cycle was September 30th .
The money was released on September 11th , well before the end of the budget cycle .
Morrissey says because of this there ’ s no violation : In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spent within the budget year .
The aid may not have gone out as quickly as Congress intended or as the administration first planned , but as long as it got spent , there ’ s no violation .
And contra the GAO ’ s take , delays for non-programmatic reasons don ’ t violate the ICA as long as it doesn ’ t go past the same fiscal year as the appropriation .
But even if there were a violation here , he points out that it would only amount to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Rather , Morrissey notes , the solution to an actual violation is written in the law itself and would only amount to a lawsuit to force the administration to release the funds : Even if it did , though , Congress proposed the remedy for such failures within the ICA itself , as I noted last month when the issue first got raised .
The remedy is to sue the administration to force it to spend the funds , not to criminally prosecute the president over it… So there you have it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only being hyped by Democrats who hate the president and are looking for anything , no matter how small , to make him look bad .
More Trump Derangement Syndrome .

The GAO made a splash today when it concluded that Trump ‘broke the law’ in withholding aid to Ukraine last year. Of course Democrats are running with this, calling it a BOMBSHELL and suggesting it’s more reason why Trump should be impeached. Here’s the gist of the GAO report:
In the summer of 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld from obligation funds appropriated to the Department of Defense (DOD) for security assistance to Ukraine. In order to withhold the funds, OMB issued a series of nine apportionment schedules with footnotes that made all unobligated balances unavailable for obligation. Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.
Ed Morrisey once again helps us understand why this conclusion misses the mark:
Read the whole report, however, and one finds the glaring issue with this conclusion, which is that the administration didn’t have an obligation to release the funds on any specific date in the fiscal year. All they needed to do was to make sure the money got spent by the last day of the budget cycle.
That last day of the budget cycle was September 30th. The money was released on September 11th, well before the end of the budget cycle. Morrissey says because of this there’s no violation:
In this case, the money did get spent within the budget year. The aid may not have gone out as quickly as Congress intended or as the administration first planned, but as long as it got spent, there’s no violation. And contra the GAO’s take, delays for non-programmatic reasons don’t violate the ICA as long as it doesn’t go past the same fiscal year as the appropriation.
But even if there were a violation here, he points out that it would only amount to a civil offense and not an impeachable offense:
Under the agreement of both the executive and legislative branches in 1974, this is a civil matter, not a “high crime or misdemeanor.” It’s an absurdly picayune basis for removing an elected president, the head of a co-equal branch of government.
Rather, Morrissey notes, the solution to an actual violation is written in the law itself and would only amount to a lawsuit to force the administration to release the funds:
Even if it did, though, Congress proposed the remedy for such failures within the ICA itself, as I noted last month when the issue first got raised. The remedy is to sue the administration to force it to spend the funds, not to criminally prosecute the president over it…
So there you have it. A big fat nothingburger that is only being hyped by Democrats who hate the president and are looking for anything, no matter how small, to make him look bad. More Trump Derangement Syndrome.


therightscoop--2020-01-16--UH OH REPORT: Three federal agencies considering criminal allegations against Rep. Ilhan Omar…

It appears , according to David Steinberg , that three federal agencies are now investigating criminal allegations against Rep. Ilhan Omar that could lead to her being arrested for committing a number of felonies including student loan fraud and immigration fraud , which we ’ ve written about here before : Here ’ s what Steinberg wrote over at the Blaze in more detail regarding these allegations : This is related to evidence suggesting that Rep. Omar ’ s 2009 marriage to a UK citizen may have been an attempt to facilitate federal student loan fraud , or other fraud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Omar ’ s 2009 marriage , the new couple moved to Fargo , North Dakota .
Omar enrolled at North Dakota State University in August 2009 .
Her husband enrolled the following year .
Omar received a degree in June 2011 .
According to Omar herself , she and her husband then permanently separated in June 2011 .
The marriage ’ s start and end coincide with the start and end dates of Omar ’ s NDSU enrollment .
Incredibly — according to address records , and a statement from Omar herself — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first husband , and their two kids , throughout this second marriage .
● In 2017 , Omar finally filed for divorce .
Under penalty of perjury , she submitted a nine-question form to the court attesting to having lost all contact with her NDSU husband in June 2011 .
Dozens of verified social media posts , photos , and even a 2016 interview with the NDSU husband indicate otherwise .
It appears Omar perjured herself eight times answering those nine questions .
● This is related to evidence suggesting a breathtaking number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stated in an introductory passage within my July 18 article : The [ following ] answers to those questions about [ Rep. Omar ’ s 2009 marriage ] appear to give probable cause to investigate Omar for eight instances of perjury , immigration fraud , marriage fraud , up to eight years of state and federal tax fraud , two years of federal student loan fraud , and even bigamy .
To be clear : The facts describe perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a possible criminal investigation could hardly be of greater political import to Omar .
For several years , Omar has vigorously supported the abolishment of ICE .
Her 2020 re-election platform — featured on her campaign site , and pictured below — targets ICE agents with vicious rhetoric that simply must be read by interested parties .
States Omar ’ s site : “ Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) is an unreformable organization that has become increasingly militarized , brutal , and unaccountable.
” If she ’ s truly guilty , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then I hope these federal agencies follow through and prosecute .
But given all the politics involved I won ’ t hold my breath .
You can read more about this at The Blaze .

It appears, according to David Steinberg, that three federal agencies are now investigating criminal allegations against Rep. Ilhan Omar that could lead to her being arrested for committing a number of felonies including student loan fraud and immigration fraud, which we’ve written about here before:
BIG Ilhan Omar update: Federal investigators finally seem to be reviewing the overwhelming evidence against @IlhanMN. And at least THREE agencies are considering her case: 1. The @FBI,
2. The DofEd. Inspector General,
3. … And @ICEgov. (1/x) — David Steinberg (@realDSteinberg) January 16, 2020
In Oct ’19, the @FBI held a formal meeting to discuss a file of evidence against Ilhan Omar. (I was invited, but did not attend. I did submit new info to the FBI via an attorney.) The @FBI has since found the evidence compelling enough to share with these 2 agencies. (2/x) — David Steinberg (@realDSteinberg) January 16, 2020
Student Loan Fraud…
The DofEd. IG is considering evidence that Ilhan married a UK citizen in ’09 perhaps to commit student loan fraud, or other education fraud. She attended @NDSU from ’09-Jun ’11. The marriage only lasted from ’09-Jun ’11. She still lived w/ her 1st husband throughout. (3/x) — David Steinberg (@realDSteinberg) January 16, 2020
Immigration Fraud…
.@ICEgov is considering evidence that Ilhan Omar married a UK citizen in ‘09 perhaps to commit immigration fraud. Govt agencies rarely acknowledge an investigation. For now, I can confirm that the @FBI chose to share evidence w/ at least these 2 agencies. (4/x) — David Steinberg (@realDSteinberg) January 16, 2020
Here’s what Steinberg wrote over at the Blaze in more detail regarding these allegations:
1. Department of Education Inspector General This is related to evidence suggesting that Rep. Omar’s 2009 marriage to a UK citizen may have been an attempt to facilitate federal student loan fraud, or other fraud involving higher education. ● Shortly after Omar’s 2009 marriage, the new couple moved to Fargo, North Dakota. Omar enrolled at North Dakota State University in August 2009. Her husband enrolled the following year. Omar received a degree in June 2011. According to Omar herself, she and her husband then permanently separated in June 2011. The marriage’s start and end coincide with the start and end dates of Omar’s NDSU enrollment. Incredibly — according to address records, and a statement from Omar herself — she was also still living with her first husband, and their two kids, throughout this second marriage. ● In 2017, Omar finally filed for divorce. Under penalty of perjury, she submitted a nine-question form to the court attesting to having lost all contact with her NDSU husband in June 2011. Dozens of verified social media posts, photos, and even a 2016 interview with the NDSU husband indicate otherwise. It appears Omar perjured herself eight times answering those nine questions. (Click here for analysis of an additional court document Omar submitted, which suggests the likely motive for Omar taking such a risk. Each instance of perjury in Minnesota can receive a sentence of five years.) 2. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ● This is related to evidence suggesting a breathtaking number of possible immigration-related felonies. As I stated in an introductory passage within my July 18 article: The [following] answers to those questions about [Rep. Omar’s 2009 marriage] appear to give probable cause to investigate Omar for eight instances of perjury, immigration fraud, marriage fraud, up to eight years of state and federal tax fraud, two years of federal student loan fraud, and even bigamy. To be clear: The facts describe perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history. The involvement of ICE with a possible criminal investigation could hardly be of greater political import to Omar. For several years, Omar has vigorously supported the abolishment of ICE. Her 2020 re-election platform — featured on her campaign site, and pictured below — targets ICE agents with vicious rhetoric that simply must be read by interested parties. States Omar’s site: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is an unreformable organization that has become increasingly militarized, brutal, and unaccountable.”
If she’s truly guilty, which looks like a strong possibility, then I hope these federal agencies follow through and prosecute. But given all the politics involved I won’t hold my breath. You can read more about this at The Blaze.


therightscoop--2020-01-16--Lev Parnas told Rachel Maddow that Trump fired Yovanovitch over wanting Biden investigated by Ukrain

Lev Parnas told Rachel Maddow that Trump fired Yovanovitch over wanting Biden investigated by Ukraine, but here’s why he shouldn’t be trusted

There ’ s a lot of reporting today over an interview that Lev Parnas did with Rachel Maddow last night where he claimed that Trump got rid of former Ambassador Yovanovitch over his desire for Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate the Bidens .
First of all , remember that Lev Parnas was arrested in October of last year for trying to influence a Congressman via a straw donations in order to oust the US Ambassador to Ukraine : Chuck Ross from the Daily Caller posted this clip from the interview with Maddow .
Parnas is claiming that Trump fired Yovanovitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of getting Zelensky to investigate the Bidens .
But Chuck Ross notes this is very unlikely : To further make this point , Ed Morrissey this morning posted a screenshot from the indictment against Parnas , which shows that he was actively trying to oust Yovanovitch in 2018 , well before the Biden thing ever happened : Lev Parnas himself put his attempts to get Yovanovitch fired in April of 2018 : As Ed Morrissey points out , the indictment against Parnas is crystal clear that this straw donor scheme was solely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The question is why didn ’ t Maddow bring any of this up in the interview ?
When Parnas as arrested in October it was HUGE news in the media .
Surely Maddow covered it and you ’ d think she ’ d bring this point up with Parnas .
Furthermore , as Andrew McCArthy pointed out yesterday , Parnas wants to testify in the impeachment trial so that the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York will give him immunity .
McCarthy notes that if Parnas testifies without immunity he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immunity before he testifies .
So in effect Parnas is trying to leverage the impeachment to save his own butt , which gives him even more reason to lie to Maddow about the Biden fiasco .
Finally , I ’ ll note that last November Giuliani told Fox News that what Lev Parnas said and did for him was completely appropriate and normal .
However he adds that what Lev Parnas has been saying recently , especially in regards to meeting with Trump in December of 2018 where Trump told him to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and provably untrue .
He says five witnesses who were there will testify that this meeting never occurred .
In short , Giuliani says it ’ s clear that Parnas is trying to make a deal with his prosecutors .
The other big thing Lev Parnas said in his interview with Maddow is also provably false as well , which was that Trump threatened to withhold all aid from Ukraine if it did not publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens .
Not a single witness in the phony House impeachment Schiff Show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all said the opposite , that Trump didn ’ t make this threat and that the Ukrainians didn ’ t even know the aid was being held in the first place .
It sounds like Lev Parnas is very untrustworthy at this point and is just making stuff up to get himself immunity and save his own butt .
Democrats , both in the media and on Capitol Hill , don ’ t really care as long as they can use it to hurt Trump ’ s reelection efforts .

There’s a lot of reporting today over an interview that Lev Parnas did with Rachel Maddow last night where he claimed that Trump got rid of former Ambassador Yovanovitch over his desire for Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
First of all, remember that Lev Parnas was arrested in October of last year for trying to influence a Congressman via a straw donations in order to oust the US Ambassador to Ukraine:
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman: Two men with ties to Giuliani "sought political influence not only to advance their own financial interests, but to advance the political interest of…a Ukrainian government official ho sought the dismissal of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine." pic.twitter.com/yKIb6vaZw8 — Evan McMurry (@evanmcmurry) October 10, 2019
Chuck Ross from the Daily Caller posted this clip from the interview with Maddow. Parnas is claiming that Trump fired Yovanovitch solely because she was in the way of getting Zelensky to investigate the Bidens. But Chuck Ross notes this is very unlikely:
Lev Parnas claims the effort to get rid of Yovanovitch was solely to get her out of the way so investigations of Biden could be opened. Except Parnas was pushing for Yovanovitch's removal way back in May 2018, and his indictment says he did it at direction of Ukrainian official pic.twitter.com/3RHlLrwCnk — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) January 16, 2020
To further make this point, Ed Morrissey this morning posted a screenshot from the indictment against Parnas, which shows that he was actively trying to oust Yovanovitch in 2018, well before the Biden thing ever happened:
Lev Parnas himself put his attempts to get Yovanovitch fired in April of 2018:
WaPo has reported that Lev Parnas has claimed that in April 2018, he told Trump that Marie Yovanovitch was bad-mouthing him and should be fired. Doesn't square with Parnas' new claim that he did everything at Trump/Giuliani's behest. https://t.co/QtW6Nv3S9g pic.twitter.com/nMLk8t9rqz — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) January 16, 2020
As Ed Morrissey points out, the indictment against Parnas is crystal clear that this straw donor scheme was solely to buy influence to get Yovanovitch ousted. The question is why didn’t Maddow bring any of this up in the interview? When Parnas as arrested in October it was HUGE news in the media. Surely Maddow covered it and you’d think she’d bring this point up with Parnas.
Furthermore, as Andrew McCArthy pointed out yesterday, Parnas wants to testify in the impeachment trial so that the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York will give him immunity. McCarthy notes that if Parnas testifies without immunity he will convict himself, so he must have immunity before he testifies. So in effect Parnas is trying to leverage the impeachment to save his own butt, which gives him even more reason to lie to Maddow about the Biden fiasco.
Finally, I’ll note that last November Giuliani told Fox News that what Lev Parnas said and did for him was completely appropriate and normal. However he adds that what Lev Parnas has been saying recently, especially in regards to meeting with Trump in December of 2018 where Trump told him to do a bunch of stuff, is completely and provably untrue. He says five witnesses who were there will testify that this meeting never occurred. In short, Giuliani says it’s clear that Parnas is trying to make a deal with his prosecutors.
The other big thing Lev Parnas said in his interview with Maddow is also provably false as well, which was that Trump threatened to withhold all aid from Ukraine if it did not publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens. Not a single witness in the phony House impeachment Schiff Show testified to this. In fact they all said the opposite, that Trump didn’t make this threat and that the Ukrainians didn’t even know the aid was being held in the first place.
It sounds like Lev Parnas is very untrustworthy at this point and is just making stuff up to get himself immunity and save his own butt. Democrats, both in the media and on Capitol Hill, don’t really care as long as they can use it to hurt Trump’s reelection efforts.


therightscoop--2020-01-18--Arnold Schwarzenegger bashes AOC’s Green New Deal as “bogus” and a “marketing tool

The Terminator is unimpressed with Ocasio-Cortez and her little Green New Deal , and he ’ s calling it out in a new interview .
From the Hill : Former California Gov .
Arnold Schwarzenegger ( R ) in a new interview likens the Green New Deal proposed by House progressives to “ a slogan ” and a type of “ marketing tool.
” “ Something that is very well intentioned , but , I think , bogus , ” he said in an interview with The Atlantic published Friday .
The former governor acknowledged that the legislation may generate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but added , “ [ t ] o me , the only thing that really matters is : How do we move forward with our goals ?
And this means that we stop increasing the amount of greenhouse gases and pollution that we put out there.
” He went on to say that any real plan to lower emissions should copy the state of California , which has already cut emissions : “ We in California have shown that it can be done , and we have shown how to do it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wants to be serious in reducing greenhouse gases by 25 percent like we did , all they have to do is copy us .
That ’ s what states are supposed to do , to be the laboratory for the federal government , and just have the federal government copy very good ideas done by various states , ” he added .
I think the problem is that morons like AOC really believe that we need to cut out emissions completely , which will only happen if you completely and utterly dismantle the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found out when I was looking up this story , this isn ’ t the first time he ’ s crapped on the Green New Deal , it ’ s just that nobody noticed it before : However , as we all know , they ’ re not really serious about emissions , this is just a scheme for communists to take over the economy .
That used to be a kooky conspiracy theory , until the leftists themselves admitted it .

The Terminator is unimpressed with Ocasio-Cortez and her little Green New Deal, and he’s calling it out in a new interview. From the Hill:
Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) in a new interview likens the Green New Deal proposed by House progressives to “a slogan” and a type of “marketing tool.” “Something that is very well intentioned, but, I think, bogus,” he said in an interview with The Atlantic published Friday. The former governor acknowledged that the legislation may generate new buzz for combatting climate change, but added, “[t]o me, the only thing that really matters is: How do we move forward with our goals? And this means that we stop increasing the amount of greenhouse gases and pollution that we put out there.”
He went on to say that any real plan to lower emissions should copy the state of California, which has already cut emissions:
“We in California have shown that it can be done, and we have shown how to do it. And therefore, if the nation really wants to be serious in reducing greenhouse gases by 25 percent like we did, all they have to do is copy us. That’s what states are supposed to do, to be the laboratory for the federal government, and just have the federal government copy very good ideas done by various states,” he added.
I think the problem is that morons like AOC really believe that we need to cut out emissions completely, which will only happen if you completely and utterly dismantle the entire economy.
BUT, as I found out when I was looking up this story, this isn’t the first time he’s crapped on the Green New Deal, it’s just that nobody noticed it before:
.@Schwarzenegger celebrates CA’s 1 millionth solar roof.
He signed a bill as governor to make this day possible.
“We should show the world they don’t have to come up with green *new* deal or anything new. They should just copy California...this is where the action is!” @FOXLA pic.twitter.com/4KFvViVlYI — Elex Michaelson (@Elex_Michaelson) December 13, 2019
However, as we all know, they’re not really serious about emissions, this is just a scheme for communists to take over the economy. That used to be a kooky conspiracy theory, until the leftists themselves admitted it.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--Trump hammers Virginia Democrats and Iran’s Supreme Leader in back to back tweets!

Trump just tweeted about Virginia Democrats trying to take guns away since they were elected : “ That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ for Democrats , they will take your guns away.
” Yup !
I hope he @ @ @ @ @ taking back the state in 2020 , but I ’ m not holding my breath @ @ @ @ @ at Iran ’ s Supreme Leader for comments he made last night calling Trump a @ @ @ @ @ that the Iranian people “ push a poisonous dagger ” in his back or something @ @ @ @ @ read “ who has not been so Supreme lately ” .
Trump will be Trump @ @ @ @ @ this an open thread , so here ’ s a great Dodo video…

Trump just tweeted about Virginia Democrats trying to take guns away since they were elected:
Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. That’s what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020
“That’s what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away.” Yup! I hope he’s right about Republicans taking back the state in 2020, but I’m not holding my breath.
Trump also hit back at Iran’s Supreme Leader for comments he made last night calling Trump a “clown” and saying that the Iranian people “push a poisonous dagger” in his back or something:
The so-called “Supreme Leader” of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe. Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020
I snickered when I read “who has not been so Supreme lately”. Trump will be Trump.
Let’s make this an open thread, so here’s a great Dodo video…


therightscoop--2020-01-17--JUST IN: Supreme Court agrees to hear case on “faithless electors”, which could impact the 2020 pres

JUST IN: Supreme Court agrees to hear case on “faithless electors”, which could impact the 2020 presidential election…

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases about “ faithless electors ” and whether or not these electors must vote the same way their state voted in a presidential election : WSJ – The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to take a rare look at rules for electing U.S. presidents , saying it will decide whether a state ’ s appointed presidential electors can vote in the Electoral College for a candidate who didn ’ t win the state ’ s popular vote .
The court ’ s eventual decision could have ramifications for razor-thin presidential elections if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to break rank and cast ballots that depart from the will of the voters .
The first of two cases the Supreme Court will weigh in on is from Colorado , where a federal appeals court ruled that an elector can vote how they choose , regardless of how the state voted : In the 2016 election , one Colorado elector was replaced when he cast a vote for Ohio Republican John Kasich instead of Hillary Clinton , the Democratic presidential nominee who carried the state .
A divided federal appeals court sided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruling Colorado violated the Constitution by nullifying his vote .
That court said that while a state has the power to pick its electors , those electors have the discretion to vote for whom they wish .
The other is from Washington state , where its high court ruled that electors must vote in accordance with the state ’ s popular vote : The Supreme Court must be hearing these cases because these rulings are at odds and there needs to be a resolution .
Or they simply can ’ t let the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stand .
The good news is there ’ s plenty of time for them to hear the case before the election .
Or maybe that ’ s the bad news… The U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the cases in April , with a decision expected by June , a timeline that allows the justices to resolve the issue before the 2020 election .
The Electoral College was established by the Constitution to choose a president .
The political parties generally are in control of selecting a slate of potential electors in each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electors to vote according to the state ’ s popular vote for president .
Let ’ s hope the Supreme Court doesn ’ t issue a crazy ruling that would allow electors to vote contrary to their state .
After all , if electors can vote however they chose to vote , no matter the will of the people , then what would be the reason to even go out and vote ?

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases about “faithless electors” and whether or not these electors must vote the same way their state voted in a presidential election:
WSJ – The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to take a rare look at rules for electing U.S. presidents, saying it will decide whether a state’s appointed presidential electors can vote in the Electoral College for a candidate who didn’t win the state’s popular vote. The court’s eventual decision could have ramifications for razor-thin presidential elections if enough members of the Electoral College seek to break rank and cast ballots that depart from the will of the voters.
The first of two cases the Supreme Court will weigh in on is from Colorado, where a federal appeals court ruled that an elector can vote how they choose, regardless of how the state voted:
In the 2016 election, one Colorado elector was replaced when he cast a vote for Ohio Republican John Kasich instead of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee who carried the state. A divided federal appeals court sided with the faithless elector last year, ruling Colorado violated the Constitution by nullifying his vote. That court said that while a state has the power to pick its electors, those electors have the discretion to vote for whom they wish.
The other is from Washington state, where its high court ruled that electors must vote in accordance with the state’s popular vote:
The ruling conflicts with a decision in the Washington case, where its state Supreme Court last year ruled that faithless electors in 2016 could be fined for voting for Colin Powell instead of Mrs. Clinton, the winner of the state’s popular vote.
The Supreme Court must be hearing these cases because these rulings are at odds and there needs to be a resolution. Or they simply can’t let the federal appeals ruling in the Colorado case stand. The good news is there’s plenty of time for them to hear the case before the election. Or maybe that’s the bad news…
The U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the cases in April, with a decision expected by June, a timeline that allows the justices to resolve the issue before the 2020 election. The Electoral College was established by the Constitution to choose a president. The political parties generally are in control of selecting a slate of potential electors in each state. Roughly 30 states require its electors to vote according to the state’s popular vote for president.
Let’s hope the Supreme Court doesn’t issue a crazy ruling that would allow electors to vote contrary to their state. After all, if electors can vote however they chose to vote, no matter the will of the people, then what would be the reason to even go out and vote?


therightscoop--2020-01-17--Ted Cruz wrecks Chris Cuomo for “clutching his pearls” over McSally liberal hack remark

Ted Cruz wrecked CNN ’ s Chris Cuomo this morning for “ clutching his pearls ” over Martha McSally ’ @ @ @ @ @ Manu Raju a liberal hack .
First , here ’ s Cuomo ’ s commentary @ @ @ @ @ watch it , where he literally says “ I can ’ t believe people would @ @ @ @ @ McCain ’ s seat.
” If you want , you can read the transcript of @ @ @ @ @ Ted Cruz responded to the video this morning… A few minutes later hie followed up @ @ @ @ @ ’ s absolutely right .
And the best example of this is recently when Manu @ @ @ @ @ reporters , continually carried the water of House Democrats as they leaked information out of @ @ @ @ @ to find dirt to impeach Trump .
They never would ask Democrats the hard questions @ @ @ @ @ and Jordan pointed out on many occasions .

Ted Cruz wrecked CNN’s Chris Cuomo this morning for “clutching his pearls” over Martha McSally’s comment calling CNN reporter Manu Raju a liberal hack.
First, here’s Cuomo’s commentary if you can bear to watch it, where he literally says “I can’t believe people would vote for her to fill McCain’s seat.” If you want, you can read the transcript of it over at RCP:
Ted Cruz responded to the video this morning…
NY Dem royalty Chris Cuomo declares “I can’t believe people would vote for” McSally, or McConnell, or any GOP candidate. Clutching his pearls, in the very same breath, he says he can’t understand why anyone might think CNN are liberal hacks…. 🤔 https://t.co/CwMGYrT0Nc — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 17, 2020
A few minutes later hie followed up with this barb:
Pro tip: real “journalists” don’t (1) kiss up to every Dem, (2) refuse to ask them hard Qs, (3) relentlessly attack every Republican, (4) lie when doing so & (5) always, always push the prevailing Dem narrative of the moment. You know this, as does Manu. You just choose not to. — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 17, 2020
He’s absolutely right. And the best example of this is recently when Manu Raju, among many other reporters, continually carried the water of House Democrats as they leaked information out of their star chamber interrogations trying to find dirt to impeach Trump. They never would ask Democrats the hard questions, which Republicans like Zeldin and Jordan pointed out on many occasions.


therightscoop--2020-01-17--Another Muslim woman is challenging Ilhan Omar and she’s AMAZING! Watch her campaign video…

Dalia Al-Aqidi is a Muslim woman from Iraq who loves American and Trump and has just begun challenging Ilhan Omar .
She ’ s just released her first ad introducing herself to everyone and it ’ s off the charts .
WOW !
Ilhan Omar is going to have her hands full trying to defend her seat from Al-Aqidi and , to quote Rush Limbaugh , I hope she fails !
Seriously , Dalia sounds fantastic .
She loves America , loves freedom and understands how a government which says it will provide really leads to oppression , and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She ’ s seen this with her own two eyes .
I love the photo of her holding a rifle next to Saddam Hussein ’ s large marble portrait .
But then she goes on the attack , hammering Ilhan Omar for her outrage opposing the killing of Soleimani , who she correctly says was a vicious terrorist who killed American soldiers and countless innocent civilians .
Dilia notes that Omar claims to be speak for all Muslims , but emphatically says “ she does not speak for me.
” mic drop Rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes it personal for her and that she was so proud when Trump killed Soleimani , removing such an evil from the world .
It ’ s a great campaign introduction and one that I hope sends her soaring in the polls over Omar .
Check out her website here .
UPDATE : Here ’ s her interview on Fox and Friends this morning :

Dalia Al-Aqidi is a Muslim woman from Iraq who loves American and Trump and has just begun challenging Ilhan Omar. She’s just released her first ad introducing herself to everyone and it’s off the charts.
Watch:
WOW! Ilhan Omar is going to have her hands full trying to defend her seat from Al-Aqidi and, to quote Rush Limbaugh, I hope she fails!
Seriously, Dalia sounds fantastic. She loves America, loves freedom and understands how a government which says it will provide really leads to oppression, and in many cases war and mass murder. She’s seen this with her own two eyes.
I love the photo of her holding a rifle next to Saddam Hussein’s large marble portrait.
But then she goes on the attack, hammering Ilhan Omar for her outrage opposing the killing of Soleimani, who she correctly says was a vicious terrorist who killed American soldiers and countless innocent civilians. Dilia notes that Omar claims to be speak for all Muslims, but emphatically says “she does not speak for me.” mic drop
Rather, Dalia says that being from Iraq makes it personal for her and that she was so proud when Trump killed Soleimani, removing such an evil from the world. It’s a great campaign introduction and one that I hope sends her soaring in the polls over Omar. Check out her website here.
UPDATE: Here’s her interview on Fox and Friends this morning:


therightscoop--2020-01-17--EPIC: Mark Levin destroys Democrats over their hypocritical attacks on Trump

Mark Levin was in fine form on Hannity last night where he destroyed Nancy Pelosi and Democrats on Capitol Hill over their hypocritical attacks on Trump : Mark Levin slammed anti-Republican forces within the federal bureaucracy for going after President Trump after ignoring much sturdier allegations of malfeasance , telling “ Hannity ” host Sean Hannity that the last thing Democrats have been concerned about over the years is foreign interference in U.S. elections .
Levin recalled the 1996 Democratic campaign finance controversy involving Chinese-American businessmen , some of whom were shown to have made repeated visits to the Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denied that any lobbying by such persons included campaign contributions — which can only legally be made by U.S. citizens and some other permanent residents .
Levin said Clinton was impeached , but not for anything related to the alleged scandal .
“ The media didn ’ t care about the scandal that broke — the [ Los Angeles ] Times and a few others did , ” Levin said , quoting a contemporary article in that paper which reported that former Democratic fundraiser Johnny Chung told federal investigators that China ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Beijing to help reelect President Clinton.
” Chung , Levin said , was able to garner “ repeated access ” to the White House .
“ This is Chinese military money , ” Levin said .
The Times reported Chung met with Chinese Gen. Ji Shengde , who had $ 300,000 deposited into Chung ’ s account in order to subsidize Clinton campaign donations .
Chung ’ s White House access afforded him the ability to have guests be entertained in the company of the president and then-First Lady Hillary Clinton , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve been Trump ’ s opponent , you might remember , from 2016 , ” Levin remarked .
He also pointed to the fact that Clinton ’ s legal defense fund returned $ 600,000 in donations from Charlie Trie , a former Little Rock restaurateur and friend of President Clinton ’ s , because of “ significant concerns ” about the source of the money .
“ [ Trie ] visited the White House 22 times , ” Levin said .
“ There is your Democrat Party !
” Levin said that then-Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raise concerns about the scandal , yet continues to beat the drum of impeachment against President Trump .
“ What did Nancy Pelosi say when the Red Chinese military was spreading millions of dollars around to the Clinton campaign , to the DNC , and all the rest ?
— She didn ’ t say a damn thing.
” Levin noted there was no call from Democrats for a special counsel like Robert Mueller , and the media did not express major interest .

Mark Levin was in fine form on Hannity last night where he destroyed Nancy Pelosi and Democrats on Capitol Hill over their hypocritical attacks on Trump:
Watch the latest video at foxnews.com
Here’s more from Fox News:
Mark Levin slammed anti-Republican forces within the federal bureaucracy for going after President Trump after ignoring much sturdier allegations of malfeasance, telling “Hannity” host Sean Hannity that the last thing Democrats have been concerned about over the years is foreign interference in U.S. elections.
Levin recalled the 1996 Democratic campaign finance controversy involving Chinese-American businessmen, some of whom were shown to have made repeated visits to the Clinton White House. China at the time denied that any lobbying by such persons included campaign contributions — which can only legally be made by U.S. citizens and some other permanent residents.
Levin said Clinton was impeached, but not for anything related to the alleged scandal.
“The media didn’t care about the scandal that broke — the [Los Angeles] Times and a few others did,” Levin said, quoting a contemporary article in that paper which reported that former Democratic fundraiser Johnny Chung told federal investigators that China’s military intelligence chief “secretly directed funds from Beijing to help reelect President Clinton.”
Chung, Levin said, was able to garner “repeated access” to the White House.
“This is Chinese military money,” Levin said. The Times reported Chung met with Chinese Gen. Ji Shengde, who had $300,000 deposited into Chung’s account in order to subsidize Clinton campaign donations. Chung’s White House access afforded him the ability to have guests be entertained in the company of the president and then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, Levin said.
“That would’ve been Trump’s opponent, you might remember, from 2016,” Levin remarked.
He also pointed to the fact that Clinton’s legal defense fund returned $600,000 in donations from Charlie Trie, a former Little Rock restaurateur and friend of President Clinton’s, because of “significant concerns” about the source of the money.
“[Trie] visited the White House 22 times,” Levin said. “There is your Democrat Party!”
Levin said that then-Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., did not raise concerns about the scandal, yet continues to beat the drum of impeachment against President Trump.
“What did Nancy Pelosi say when the Red Chinese military was spreading millions of dollars around to the Clinton campaign, to the DNC, and all the rest? — She didn’t say a damn thing.”
Levin noted there was no call from Democrats for a special counsel like Robert Mueller, and the media did not express major interest.


therightscoop--2020-01-18--Ninth Circuit “reluctantly” slaps down children’s lawsuit on climate change

The ninth circuit is very sad tonight because it had to “ reluctantly ” slap down a kiddy lawsuit over climate change .
From Reuters : In a 2-1 decision , the 9th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals said the plaintiffs , who were between the ages of 8 and 19 when the lawsuit began in 2015 , lacked legal standing to sue the United States .
Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz said the majority reached its conclusion “ reluctantly , ” given “ compelling ” evidence the government had long promoted fossil fuels despite knowing they could cause catastrophic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change policies could hasten an “ environmental apocalypse.
” Our Children ’ s Trust , an Oregon-based non-profit behind the lawsuit , said in a statement that it would seek an 11-judge panel of the court to review the decision .
The ruling had “ catastrophic implications , ” said Julia Olson , the group ’ s executive director .
A Department of Justice spokesman said the government was pleased with the outcome .
The 21 children and young adults had accused federal officials and oil industry executives of violating their due process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sustaining human life , ” by knowing for decades that carbon pollution poisons the environment but doing nothing about it .
That is insane .
Thank goodness they didn ’ t fall on the side of insanity , which the ninth circuit usually does .
And… Hurwitz said the case left “ little basis for denying that climate change is occurring at an increasingly rapid pace , ” but that addressing it required “ complex policy decisions entrusted , for better or worse , to the wisdom and discretion ” of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other branches may have abdicated their responsibility to remediate the problem does not confer on Article III courts , no matter how well-intentioned , the ability to step into their shoes , ” he wrote .
There you go .
If your case is so good , take it to the public and have it litigated in the court of the 2020 election .
If you win , you get to destroy our economy for the sake of some computer models of the future… .

The ninth circuit is very sad tonight because it had to “reluctantly” slap down a kiddy lawsuit over climate change. From Reuters:
In a 2-1 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the plaintiffs, who were between the ages of 8 and 19 when the lawsuit began in 2015, lacked legal standing to sue the United States.
Good Lord, that was close.
More:
Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz said the majority reached its conclusion “reluctantly,” given “compelling” evidence the government had long promoted fossil fuels despite knowing they could cause catastrophic climate change, and that failing to change policies could hasten an “environmental apocalypse.” Our Children’s Trust, an Oregon-based non-profit behind the lawsuit, said in a statement that it would seek an 11-judge panel of the court to review the decision. The ruling had “catastrophic implications,” said Julia Olson, the group’s executive director. A Department of Justice spokesman said the government was pleased with the outcome. The 21 children and young adults had accused federal officials and oil industry executives of violating their due process right to a “climate system capable of sustaining human life,” by knowing for decades that carbon pollution poisons the environment but doing nothing about it.
That is insane. Thank goodness they didn’t fall on the side of insanity, which the ninth circuit usually does. And…
Hurwitz said the case left “little basis for denying that climate change is occurring at an increasingly rapid pace,” but that addressing it required “complex policy decisions entrusted, for better or worse, to the wisdom and discretion” of the White House and Congress. “That the other branches may have abdicated their responsibility to remediate the problem does not confer on Article III courts, no matter how well-intentioned, the ability to step into their shoes,” he wrote.
There you go. If your case is so good, take it to the public and have it litigated in the court of the 2020 election. If you win, you get to destroy our economy for the sake of some computer models of the future….


therightscoop--2020-01-18--John Solomon files lawsuit to obtain records of Ukrainian corruption from the State Dept.

John Solomon , the journalist who has uncovered so much about Biden ’ s corruption in Ukraine , is at it again and he ’ s got a new lawsuit to help him .
In light of new evidence made public by the US DOJ Inspector General Horowitz and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ( FISC ) , Southeastern Legal Foundation today filed a supplemental Motion with the FISC to seek publication of disciplinary actions taken by the FISC citing attorney wrongdoing with the FBI and DOJ – documents sought in SLF ’ s initial Motion in May this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Solomon .
He also explained more in an interview with Glenn Beck : “ It ’ s been a one-sided story so far , just like the beginning of the Russia collusion story , right ?
Everybody was certain on Jan. 9 of 2017 that the Christopher Steele dossier was gospel .
And our president was an agent of Russia .
Three years later , we learned that all of that turned out to be bunk , ” Solomon said .
“ The most important thing about politics , and about investigations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a story .
There are two pieces of evidence .
And right now , we ’ ve only seen one side of it , ” he continued .
“ I think we ’ ll learn a lot about what the intelligence community , what the economic and Treasury Department community was telling the president .
And I bet the story was way more complicated than the narrative that [ House Intelligence Committee Chairman ] Adam Schiff [ D-Calif. ] has woven so far.
” Very interesting .
Solomon has been under attack because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House in order to damage former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch .
They claim she was herself corrupt , she says that she was fired because she was close to exposing their corruption !
Frankly , I ’ m kinda sick of the accusations .
Someone somewhere present some conclusive evidence , and send someone to jail .
Otherwise it kinda seems like a big scam on both sides .

John Solomon, the journalist who has uncovered so much about Biden’s corruption in Ukraine, is at it again and he’s got a new lawsuit to help him.
Today with the help of @slf_liberty I filed an open records lawsuit seeking to compel the State Department to release documents showing contacts between US embassy in Kiev and Ukraine prosecutors during the 2016 election. https://t.co/7EopeYykUc — John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) January 17, 2020
From the press release:
In light of new evidence made public by the US DOJ Inspector General Horowitz and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), Southeastern Legal Foundation today filed a supplemental Motion with the FISC to seek publication of disciplinary actions taken by the FISC citing attorney wrongdoing with the FBI and DOJ – documents sought in SLF’s initial Motion in May this year on behalf of award-winning investigative journalist John Solomon.
He also explained more in an interview with Glenn Beck:
“It’s been a one-sided story so far, just like the beginning of the Russia collusion story, right? Everybody was certain on Jan. 9 of 2017 that the Christopher Steele dossier was gospel. And our president was an agent of Russia. Three years later, we learned that all of that turned out to be bunk, ” Solomon said. “The most important thing about politics, and about investigations, is that there are two sides to a story. There are two pieces of evidence. And right now, we’ve only seen one side of it,” he continued. “I think we’ll learn a lot about what the intelligence community, what the economic and Treasury Department community was telling the president. And I bet the story was way more complicated than the narrative that [House Intelligence Committee Chairman] Adam Schiff [D-Calif.] has woven so far.”
Very interesting. Solomon has been under attack because some believe he has been colluding with the White House in order to damage former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch. They claim she was herself corrupt, she says that she was fired because she was close to exposing their corruption!
Frankly, I’m kinda sick of the accusations. Someone somewhere present some conclusive evidence, and send someone to jail. Otherwise it kinda seems like a big scam on both sides.


therightscoop--2020-01-18--Arnold Schwarzenegger bashes AOC’s Green New Deal as “bogus” and a “marketing tool”


therightscoop--2020-01-18--Bernie bros are attacking MSNBC’s Joy Reid for having ‘body language expert’ call Bernie a liar

Yes , the proggie war between the Bernie commie bros and gals and the Big Chief Liz Warren scalpers is heating up and I ’ m all about it !
!
Today ’ s battle has to do with MSNBC ’ s Joy Reid bringing on a body language expert , who also happens to be a vaxxer , to call Bernie a liar !
!
Yess… MSNBC is a fucking disgrace .
What it allows on its air - this segment of bullshit charlatan body language analysis to prove Bernie is lying mixed with Joy Reid 's anti-semitic stereotypes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when speaking - is appalling but typical .
The hacker did it .
https : //t.co/BHPyg6cPSG — Glenn Greenwald ( @ ggreenwald ) January 18 , 2020 “ He turtles !
” LOL !
What a dope .
But don ’ t worry there are plenty of dopes on the other side too !
There are accusations of anti-semitism : just to be clear “ body language experts ” aren ’ t actually a thing and MSNBC should stop having them on all the time in general , whether it ’ s to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kim Jong un or to call Bernie Sanders a shifty-eyed Jew — Adam H. Johnson ( @ adamjohnsonNYC ) January 18 , 2020 lmao joy reid has a `` body language expert '' on her show to discuss what happened with warren and sanders after the debate and she completely distorts Bernie 's reaching out for a handshake as he was `` giving her the cold shoulder '' — Matt Binder ( @ MattBinder ) January 18 , 2020 Yes , feel the hatred course through your veins.. LMFAO Mark today as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are having a segment on how sexist Bernie is and wait for it ...
They just brought on a body language `` expert '' to guarantee Bernie 's body language showed he was 100 % lying .
JFC .
MSNBC & CNN are centrists superpac .
— citizen uprising ( @ cit_uprising ) January 18 , 2020 When you bring in body language `` experts '' it 's clear you have nothing of substance that will justify your hatred of # Bernie2020 , the candidate who can defeat Trump .
It 's so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though .
The longer this goes on , the more it helps Bernie .
@ amjoyshow # AMJoy — psileste ( @ Christarchist ) January 18 , 2020 They ’ re so angry , they ’ re actually figuring out the media is biased !
Welcome to the party !
We have booze , but no paper straws , sorry…

Yes, the proggie war between the Bernie commie bros and gals and the Big Chief Liz Warren scalpers is heating up and I’m all about it!! Today’s battle has to do with MSNBC’s Joy Reid bringing on a body language expert, who also happens to be a vaxxer, to call Bernie a liar!! Yess…
MSNBC is a fucking disgrace. What it allows on its air - this segment of bullshit charlatan body language analysis to prove Bernie is lying mixed with Joy Reid's anti-semitic stereotypes about his pushy use of his hands when speaking - is appalling but typical. The hacker did it. https://t.co/BHPyg6cPSG — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 18, 2020
“He turtles!” LOL! What a dope. But don’t worry there are plenty of dopes on the other side too!
The batshit huckster @JoyAnnReid brought on to do science on Bernie Sanders. The liberals are not handling his strong polling well https://t.co/EjgosOMnFc — Meagan Day (@meaganmday) January 18, 2020
And Vaccines!
Joy Reid's "body language" expert - who she called to decree that Bernie is lying because he hunches like a "turtle" - just deleted her anti-vaccine tweet. https://t.co/PNaAKwLtNo — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 18, 2020
There are accusations of anti-semitism:
just to be clear “body language experts” aren’t actually a thing and MSNBC should stop having them on all the time in general, whether it’s to interpret a hand shake between Trump and Kim Jong un or to call Bernie Sanders a shifty-eyed Jew — Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) January 18, 2020
joy reid invited a phrenologist onto msnbc to explain that the semite has a special gland in his brain that makes him devious https://t.co/LzAPondY3i — Goth Ms. Frizzle (@spookperson) January 18, 2020
And just general absurdity:
lmao joy reid has a "body language expert" on her show to discuss what happened with warren and sanders after the debate and she completely distorts Bernie's reaching out for a handshake as he was "giving her the cold shoulder" — Matt Binder (@MattBinder) January 18, 2020
Next week on #AMJoy, tune in as Bigfoot explains to @JoyAnnReid why Bernie Sanders is the worst candidate for environmentalist voters. Don’t miss it. pic.twitter.com/3ZmMLAodKz — Clark (@Clarknt67) January 18, 2020
On the next #AMJoy , a mind reader tells us that while Bernie was extending a hand shake to Warren he was really thinking about selling her a sub-prime mortgage. — Jimmy Dore (@jimmy_dore) January 18, 2020
On the next #AMJoy, a psychic joins the panel to tell America that spirits are giving her signs that Bernie Sanders is the Zodiac Killer. — Emma Vigeland (@EmmaVigeland) January 18, 2020
Yes, feel the hatred course through your veins..
LMFAO
Mark today as the most ridiculous day on #AMJOY
They are having a segment on how sexist Bernie is and wait for it... They just brought on a body language "expert" to guarantee Bernie's body language showed he was 100% lying.
JFC. MSNBC & CNN are centrists superpac. — citizen uprising (@cit_uprising) January 18, 2020
When you bring in body language "experts" it's clear you have nothing of substance that will justify your hatred of #Bernie2020, the candidate who can defeat Trump. It's so Fox News. Keep it up, though. The longer this goes on, the more it helps Bernie. @amjoyshow #AMJoy — psileste (@Christarchist) January 18, 2020
They’re so angry, they’re actually figuring out the media is biased!
One of the biggest mistakes from the Sanders campaign during this election cycle was not treating CNN and MSNBC the way he treated Fox News during his town hall. That should have been Bernie this ENTIRE primary
That shit resonates because Americans hate the media#AMjoy — Revolutionary Blackout Network🥋 (@SocialistMMA) January 18, 2020
Welcome to the party! We have booze, but no paper straws, sorry…


therightscoop--2020-01-18--VIDEO: Climate change protesters interrupt Pete Buttigieg campaign rally

YES !
More progressive-on-democrat fighting !
I love it !
This time it ’ s little mayor Pete under fire from far leftwing environmentalists !
Degenerates .
But wow , impressive organization to get your signs right out in front of the cameras .
I would almost think that lil pete planned this in order to get more attention , but no , it was way too awkward to have been planned by the campaign .
Environmental activists interrupted Pete Buttigieg at a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Friday questioning the finances for the Democratic candidate ’ s White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ singing protesters in Concord , N.H. , who were holding signs claiming that he “ Takes Money From Fossil Fuel Billionaires.
” “ We are fighting for our future , something , something strong , ” the protesters sang .
“ Thanks for coming , ” Buttigieg responded , pausing his remarks to address the protesters .
“ I can ’ t make out your song , but we definitely want the same things.
” “ See some inaccurate information going on up here , so let ’ s just dispatch with that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he read the signs .
“ I ’ ve taken the fossil fuel pledge , and I am determined to bring about solutions on climate change.
” Aren ’ t these people now homophobic ?
!
Isn ’ t that how this works ?
LOL !

YES! More progressive-on-democrat fighting! I love it! This time it’s little mayor Pete under fire from far leftwing environmentalists!
Degenerates. But wow, impressive organization to get your signs right out in front of the cameras. I would almost think that lil pete planned this in order to get more attention, but no, it was way too awkward to have been planned by the campaign.
From the Hill:
Environmental activists interrupted Pete Buttigieg at a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Friday questioning the finances for the Democratic candidate’s White House bid. Buttigieg was interrupted by singing protesters in Concord, N.H., who were holding signs claiming that he “Takes Money From Fossil Fuel Billionaires.” “We are fighting for our future, something, something strong,” the protesters sang. “Thanks for coming,” Buttigieg responded, pausing his remarks to address the protesters. “I can’t make out your song, but we definitely want the same things.” “See some inaccurate information going on up here, so let’s just dispatch with that real quick,” Buttigieg added as he read the signs. “I’ve taken the fossil fuel pledge, and I am determined to bring about solutions on climate change.”
Aren’t these people now homophobic?! Isn’t that how this works? LOL!


therightscoop--2020-01-18--Seattle officer fired over instagram posts about Obama and illegal aliens

OK listen .
I can already tell , this is gon na be a tough one .
We ’ re gon na disagree .
You ’ re gon na call me a raging RINO liberal in the comments .
But it ’ s OK. We ’ ll get through this .
Together .
Take a deep breath .
Here we go .
If you don ’ t like videos , here ’ s some text for you to read : A Seattle police officer has been fired following an internal investigation that found he violated the department ’ s social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charged comments on Instagram .
The investigation was launched after an anonymous complainant contacted Seattle ’ s Office of Police Accountability and alleged that police Officer Duane Goodman had made numerous offensive social media posts that violated police department policy .
Seattle police Chief Carmen Best suggested in a written statement released Friday night that the officer ’ s conduct was inappropriate .
“ For a police officer to encourage violence against public figures with whom they disagree is a betrayal of the values of our profession , ” Best said in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Secret Service concluded that the social media posts were “ far outside the acceptable bounds for a police officer , and potentially constituted criminal behavior.
” OK , so we should be suspicious .
Often these things are exaggerated in order to screw over the police .
But in this case… .
Gahhh , no .
Game over .
Sorry .
That ’ s no bueno .
This one is OK though : Yeah , I mean , not the best choice .
I agree with the sentiment , but I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standards .
Anyway , that other one though .
Yeah that ’ s not good .
I know you ’ re gon na hate me for adhering to a sliver of a standard of civility , but at least acknowledge that the cop himself admitted he made a mistake : The officer was terminated after admitting that his statements on Instagram “ negatively impacted the Department ’ s ability to serve the public , as well as that the postings were unprofessional , ” according to a case summary posted this week on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OK , go tear me apart , I can take it .
We ’ ll hug it out afterward .

OK listen. I can already tell, this is gonna be a tough one. We’re gonna disagree. You’re gonna call me a raging RINO liberal in the comments. But it’s OK. We’ll get through this. Together. Take a deep breath. Here we go.
If you don’t like videos, here’s some text for you to read:
A Seattle police officer has been fired following an internal investigation that found he violated the department’s social media policy by posting profane and politically charged comments on Instagram. The investigation was launched after an anonymous complainant contacted Seattle’s Office of Police Accountability and alleged that police Officer Duane Goodman had made numerous offensive social media posts that violated police department policy. Seattle police Chief Carmen Best suggested in a written statement released Friday night that the officer’s conduct was inappropriate. “For a police officer to encourage violence against public figures with whom they disagree is a betrayal of the values of our profession,” Best said in the statement. According to Best, the U.S. Secret Service concluded that the social media posts were “far outside the acceptable bounds for a police officer, and potentially constituted criminal behavior.”
OK, so we should be suspicious. Often these things are exaggerated in order to screw over the police. But in this case….
One post displayed a picture of a package mail bomb and text that “appeared to endorse violence” against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama, investigators said.
Gahhh, no. Game over. Sorry. That’s no bueno. This one is OK though:
A second post showed the officer displaying a middle finger and text that said, “If you support illegal immigrants coming into our country so much then make a difference and bring them into your home and YOU support them you (expletive)!”
Yeah, I mean, not the best choice. I agree with the sentiment, but I think police officers should hold themselves to higher standards. Anyway, that other one though. Yeah that’s not good.
I know you’re gonna hate me for adhering to a sliver of a standard of civility, but at least acknowledge that the cop himself admitted he made a mistake:
The officer was terminated after admitting that his statements on Instagram “negatively impacted the Department’s ability to serve the public, as well as that the postings were unprofessional,” according to a posted this week on the Office of Police Accountability website.
OK, go tear me apart, I can take it. We’ll hug it out afterward.


therightscoop--2020-01-19--Trump nukes Michelle Obama’s school lunch program… on her birthday

The Trump administration appeared to have targeted Michelle Obama ’ s school lunch program for obliteration on the very day of her birthday .
The Trump administration announced a rollback of Michelle Obama ’ s signature initiative for healthy school lunches on Friday , coinciding with the former first lady ’ s birthday .
Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced a proposed new regulation that would make it easier for school cafeterias to offer a la carte entrees to students and allow more varieties of vegetables to be used to meet nutrition requirements .
Perdue said the proposed rule will offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal to student ’ s preferences , reduce food waste and cut administrative burdens on administrators .
“ Schools and school districts continue to tell us that there is still too much food waste and that more common-sense flexibility is needed to provide students nutritious and appetizing meals , ” Perdue said .
“ We listened and now we ’ re getting to work.
” So a couple of things .
You aren ’ t gon na get our fat diabetes-ridden children to be healthy by forcing veggies down their throats at school @ @ @ @ @ @ @ options , but trust me on this , you need discipline and good parenting to force kids to eat well .
On the other hand , the reason we even have to argue about this stupid issue is because the government has tasked itself with feeding kids .
And they ’ ve made up ridiculous standards to make it easier for more and more kids to be dependent on government as early as possible .
I don ’ t really care about this either way .
But I will say that it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freaking out over this just because it ’ s an insult to princess Michelle Obama , when they didn ’ t really give a damn when Obama spat on the foothold that the military had in Iraq , just to crap on George Dubya Bush ’ s legacy .
That actually mattered , that led to ISIS , and that led to even more instability in the Middle East , and more torturous murders .
But hey , let ’ s get all worked up about Michelle Obama being insulted instead .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do hope you ’ re having a good weekend .
Have an open thread , give me some predictions to guide my NFL championship betting tomorrow .
And also check this out : Look at this scoundrel :

The Trump administration appeared to have targeted Michelle Obama’s school lunch program for obliteration on the very day of her birthday.
From Bloomberg:
The Trump administration announced a rollback of Michelle Obama’s signature initiative for healthy school lunches on Friday, coinciding with the former first lady’s birthday. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced a proposed new regulation that would make it easier for school cafeterias to offer a la carte entrees to students and allow more varieties of vegetables to be used to meet nutrition requirements. Perdue said the proposed rule will offer schools more flexibility to serve meals that appeal to student’s preferences, reduce food waste and cut administrative burdens on administrators. “Schools and school districts continue to tell us that there is still too much food waste and that more common-sense flexibility is needed to provide students nutritious and appetizing meals,” Perdue said. “We listened and now we’re getting to work.”
So a couple of things. You aren’t gonna get our fat diabetes-ridden children to be healthy by forcing veggies down their throats at school. Yes, there should be better options, but trust me on this, you need discipline and good parenting to force kids to eat well.
On the other hand, the reason we even have to argue about this stupid issue is because the government has tasked itself with feeding kids. And they’ve made up ridiculous standards to make it easier for more and more kids to be dependent on government as early as possible.
I don’t really care about this either way. But I will say that it’s pretty horrible that the media is freaking out over this just because it’s an insult to princess Michelle Obama, when they didn’t really give a damn when Obama spat on the foothold that the military had in Iraq, just to crap on George Dubya Bush’s legacy. That actually mattered, that led to ISIS, and that led to even more instability in the Middle East, and more torturous murders. But hey, let’s get all worked up about Michelle Obama being insulted instead.
~ ~ ~
That’s it for Saturday. I do hope you’re having a good weekend. Have an open thread, give me some predictions to guide my NFL championship betting tomorrow.
And also check this out:
Tomorrow is the world sign spinning championships in Las Vegas https://t.co/pHRxs14QXv pic.twitter.com/OgQKvKzyPe — KSNV News 3 Las Vegas (@News3LV) January 18, 2020
This Biden interview is illuminating pic.twitter.com/DBvd52lKyv — Jules (@Julian_Epp) January 17, 2020
NBC, your employer, has a great story on this, too. https://t.co/HYIDUuwymm https://t.co/a9QxaeplmI — Leigh Ann Caldwell (@LACaldwellDC) January 18, 2020
Look at this scoundrel:
all day. every day. all day. every day. pic.twitter.com/WiGepVxAUQ — Caleb Howe (@CalebHowe) January 18, 2020
Shameful!!! See you tomorrow!!


therightscoop--2020-01-19--Liberals rage at Kanye West for appearing alongside Christian leaders with traditional beliefs

Kanye West is acting outrageously by appearing alongside Christian leaders with traditional Christian beliefs .
Ever since Kanye West formed the gospel choir Sunday Service Collective in 2019 , they haven ’ t missed a Sunday at church .
This weekend , they ’ ll be sharing the pulpit at a prayer rally with several Evangelical celebrities who preach against the LGBTQ+ community .
The free 10-hour event , called “ Awaken 2020 , ” will be held at Sun Devil Stadium in Phoenix on Jan. 18 .
The rapper and producer was officially announced as a headliner on Jan. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lineup that includes anti-LGBTQ+ crusaders Cindy Jacobs , Lou Engle and Guillermo Maldonado .
Cindy Jacobs , co-founder of prayer-based organization Generals International , which is listed as a collaborator for the event , is an opponent of the Equality Act — which protects against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation — saying “ we would even come to a civil war if this continues.
” Another collaborator , Lou Engle , co-founder of prayer movement The Call , also has a history of opposing LGBTQ+ rights around the world , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community .
And Guillermo Maldonado , co-founder of Miami church El Rey Jesus , is known for spreading his anti-LGBTQ+ views both through his sermons and writings .

Kanye West is acting outrageously by appearing alongside Christian leaders with traditional Christian beliefs.
From the Hill:
Ever since Kanye West formed the gospel choir Sunday Service Collective in 2019, they haven’t missed a Sunday at church. This weekend, they’ll be sharing the pulpit at a prayer rally with several Evangelical celebrities who preach against the LGBTQ+ community.
The free 10-hour event, called “Awaken 2020,” will be held at Sun Devil Stadium in Phoenix on Jan. 18. The rapper and producer was officially announced as a headliner on Jan. 8, the last to join a lineup that includes anti-LGBTQ+ crusaders Cindy Jacobs, Lou Engle and Guillermo Maldonado.
Cindy Jacobs, co-founder of prayer-based organization Generals International, which is listed as a collaborator for the event, is an opponent of the Equality Act — which protects against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation — saying “we would even come to a civil war if this continues.” Another collaborator, Lou Engle, co-founder of prayer movement The Call, also has a history of opposing LGBTQ+ rights around the world, even calling for violence against the LGBTQ+ community. And Guillermo Maldonado, co-founder of Miami church El Rey Jesus, is known for spreading his anti-LGBTQ+ views both through his sermons and writings.