therightscoop--2020-01-19--NBC reporter gets destroyed online for calling VA 2nd Amendment rally a ‘white nationalist’ rally

Ugh .
Here we go again .
The 2nd Amendment rally in Virginia is about to pop off and the @ @ @ @ @ to misrepresent it as much as possible .
So , call a gun rights rally @ @ @ @ @ and if anyone that looks like antifa attacks , call them white nationalists .
That @ @ @ @ @ works these days .
He deleted it after getting a lot of criticism online : @ @ @ @ @ hope and pray that everyone stays safe at the rally where there are sure to @ @ @ @ @ And we want responsible reporting , not just one-sided biased reports , which is kinda @ @ @ @ @ be calling for…

Ugh. Here we go again. The 2nd Amendment rally in Virginia is about to pop off and the media is going to try to misrepresent it as much as possible.
So, call a gun rights rally a white nationalist rally, and if anyone that looks like antifa attacks, call them white nationalists. That’s how the news works these days.
Tomorrow isn't a "white nationalist rally" but you're here to tell those of us who will actually be covering it to be careful about accuracy? Are you joking? — Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) January 19, 2020
He deleted it after getting a lot of criticism online:
I think we should all hope and pray that everyone stays safe at the rally where there are sure to be very tense interactions. And we want responsible reporting, not just one-sided biased reports, which is kinda what this guy appeared to be calling for…


therightscoop--2020-01-19--Mitch McConnell has a ‘kill switch’ on impeachment if Dems make it a ‘circus’

Well this is interesting .
There is a report that Mitch McConnell has arranged for a kill switch so that he can dismiss the impeachment trial if it becomes a “ circus.
” And guess who gets to define what a “ circus ” is ?
Cocaine Mitch .
From the Daily Wire : Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has reportedly created a “ kill switch ” for President Donald Trump ’ s upcoming Senate impeachment trial that would allow for the president ’ s legal team to either seek an immediate verdict or a dismissal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a circus spectacle .
“ I am familiar with the resolution as it stood a day or two ago , ” Sen. Josh Hawley ( R-MO ) told Axios .
“ My understanding is that the resolution will give the president ’ s team the option to either move to judgment or to move to dismiss at a meaningful time… ” “ Hawley added that in the most recent draft of the organizing resolution he saw there was an option for the president ’ s counsel to make a motion in multiple places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proceedings , ” Axios reported .
“ Hawley added that if the final resolution does not allow Trump ’ s lawyers the option to dismiss or move to judgment at a ‘ meaningful point ’ in the trial , he would be ‘ very , very surprised , ’ and might not vote for the organizing resolution.
” Wow .
I could see this almost being a bluff just to pressure Dems into staying in line .
On the other hand , McConnell is known as a master of legislative procedure , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the terms of the trial .
On the other other hand , I could also see this being politically difficult for Republicans to use unless they show conclusively that the Dems are acting inappropriately…

Well this is interesting. There is a report that Mitch McConnell has arranged for a kill switch so that he can dismiss the impeachment trial if it becomes a “circus.” And guess who gets to define what a “circus” is? Cocaine Mitch. From the Daily Wire:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has reportedly created a “kill switch” for President Donald Trump’s upcoming Senate impeachment trial that would allow for the president’s legal team to either seek an immediate verdict or a dismissal of the case if the trial descends into a circus spectacle. “I am familiar with the resolution as it stood a day or two ago,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) told Axios. “My understanding is that the resolution will give the president’s team the option to either move to judgment or to move to dismiss at a meaningful time…” “Hawley added that in the most recent draft of the organizing resolution he saw there was an option for the president’s counsel to make a motion in multiple places, including at the beginning of the proceedings,” Axios reported. “Hawley added that if the final resolution does not allow Trump’s lawyers the option to dismiss or move to judgment at a ‘meaningful point’ in the trial, he would be ‘very, very surprised,’ and might not vote for the organizing resolution.”
Wow. I could see this almost being a bluff just to pressure Dems into staying in line. On the other hand, McConnell is known as a master of legislative procedure, and Dems failed in their attempt to control the terms of the trial. On the other other hand, I could also see this being politically difficult for Republicans to use unless they show conclusively that the Dems are acting inappropriately…


therightscoop--2020-01-19--Chris Wallace confronts Dem on Nancy Pelosi happily celebrating the ‘somber’ impeachment

Chris Wallace forced Rep. Hakeem Jeffries to face up to the fact that Nancy Pelosi called impeachment somber but was @ @ @ @ @ out celebratory pens during the signing of the articles .
Jeffries down ’ t really @ @ @ @ @ say I ’ ve never been impressed with this guy because he always offers canned @ @ @ @ @ ’ t really seem to offer any original thought of his own .
And this @ @ @ @ @ just rambled on and on about the reasons for the impeachment and mostly ignored the @ @ @ @ @ question .
But even other Democrats cringed when they saw how happy those politicians were @ @ @ @ @ that is not gon na help their cause…

Chris Wallace forced Rep. Hakeem Jeffries to face up to the fact that Nancy Pelosi called impeachment somber but was all smiles when she passed out celebratory pens during the signing of the articles.
Jeffries down’t really answer. I have to say I’ve never been impressed with this guy because he always offers canned responses to questions and doesn’t really seem to offer any original thought of his own. And this was no different. He just rambled on and on about the reasons for the impeachment and mostly ignored the substance of Wallace’s question.
But even other Democrats cringed when they saw how happy those politicians were to impeach Trump. And that is not gonna help their cause…


therightscoop--2020-01-19--Rotherham police chief admits ignoring child sex assault out of fear of being called racist

A stunning and disgusting report from Rotherham in Britain confirms the worst fears about police looking the other way and ignoring massive child sex abuse for fear of appearing racist .
From The Times U.K. : A senior police officer admitted that his force ignored the sexual abuse of girls by Pakistani grooming gangs for decades because it was afraid of increasing “ racial tensions ” , a watchdog has ruled .
After a five-year investigation , the Independent Office for Police Conduct ( IOPC ) upheld a complaint that the Rotherham officer told a missing child ’ s distraught @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” if it was known that Asian men were routinely having sex with under-age white girls .
The chief inspector is said to have described the abuse as “ P*** shagging ” and to have said it had been “ going on ” for 30 years : “ With it being Asians , we can ’ t afford for this to be coming out.
” This has been suspected by many on the right for years , but even the suspicion was considered racist .
Now there is evidence it ’ s true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an anonymous official .
More from the Daily Mirror : IOPC director of major investigations , Steve Noonan , said : “ We are continuing to make significant progress with Operation Linden and we have completed more than 90 per cent of the enquiries we have identified so far .
“ A small number of investigation reports still need to be completed and our investigation into the actions of the former senior command team at South Yorkshire Police during the period of our investigation continues and is progressing well .
“ Our priority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be , the welfare of the many survivors of child sexual abuse we have been engaging with .
This is just evil .
And if it ’ s happening in Rotherham , it ’ s gon na be elsewhere too… Here ’ s posts where we covered reports that officials were ignoring Muslim pedophile attacks in Rotherham as back as 2014 , and also in 2015 , and in 2016…

A stunning and disgusting report from Rotherham in Britain confirms the worst fears about police looking the other way and ignoring massive child sex abuse for fear of appearing racist. From The Times U.K.:
A senior police officer admitted that his force ignored the sexual abuse of girls by Pakistani grooming gangs for decades because it was afraid of increasing “racial tensions”, a watchdog has ruled. After a five-year investigation, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) upheld a complaint that the Rotherham officer told a missing child’s distraught father that the town “would erupt” if it was known that Asian men were routinely having sex with under-age white girls. The chief inspector is said to have described the abuse as “P*** shagging” and to have said it had been “going on” for 30 years: “With it being Asians, we can’t afford for this to be coming out.”
This has been suspected by many on the right for years, but even the suspicion was considered racist. Now there is evidence it’s true, even if it is sourced from an anonymous official.
More from the Daily Mirror:
IOPC director of major investigations, Steve Noonan, said: “We are continuing to make significant progress with Operation Linden and we have completed more than 90 per cent of the enquiries we have identified so far. “A small number of investigation reports still need to be completed and our investigation into the actions of the former senior command team at South Yorkshire Police during the period of our investigation continues and is progressing well. “Our priority throughout the investigation has, and always will be, the welfare of the many survivors of child sexual abuse we have been engaging with.
This is just evil. And if it’s happening in Rotherham, it’s gonna be elsewhere too…
Here’s a report about the child sex gangs:
Here’s posts where we covered reports that officials were ignoring Muslim pedophile attacks in Rotherham as back as 2014, and also in 2015, and in 2016…


therightscoop--2020-01-20--Unbelievable: Bloomberg actually criticizes hero who gunned down church shooter in Texas

And now gun-grabbing moron Michael Bloomberg makes it clear just how extreme he is on guns .
He just criticized the hero who gunned down a scumbag church shooter in Texas .
From the Hill : “ It may be true that someone in the congregation had his own gun and killed the person who murdered two other people , but it ’ s the job of law enforcement to have guns and to decide when to shoot , ” the former mayor said earlier this month , adding , “ You just do not want the average citizen carrying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wow .
That guy saved lives because of his incredibly heroic act , and Bloomberg can ’ t accept it .
Amazing .
Trump wisely jumped on that ball after Bloomberg fumbled it : I mean what kind of maniac actually thinks it ’ s better to have a shooter run loose in a church than to have armed citizens being able to defend themselves ?
Now , if the tables had been turned you know that the media would have demanded the other candidates answer if they agree .
We ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But when it ’ s a Democrat they let it go .
I , for one , would love to see each and every Democrat admit they ’ d rather have churchgoers be shot than allow citizens to defend themselves… Here ’ s more about the hero that took down that church shooter in Texas .
Well that ’ s it for Sunday .
We hope if you ’ re Packers ’ fans that you have a lot of booze to comfort yourselves with right now .
It ’ s not lookin ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an open thread .
Here ’ s some comment fodder : Meanwhile , here ’ s what liberals are debating tonight :

And now gun-grabbing moron Michael Bloomberg makes it clear just how extreme he is on guns. He just criticized the hero who gunned down a scumbag church shooter in Texas. From the Hill:
“It may be true that someone in the congregation had his own gun and killed the person who murdered two other people, but it’s the job of law enforcement to have guns and to decide when to shoot,” the former mayor said earlier this month, adding, “You just do not want the average citizen carrying a gun in a crowded place.”
Wow. That guy saved lives because of his incredibly heroic act, and Bloomberg can’t accept it. Amazing.
Trump wisely jumped on that ball after Bloomberg fumbled it:
I mean what kind of maniac actually thinks it’s better to have a shooter run loose in a church than to have armed citizens being able to defend themselves?
Now, if the tables had been turned you know that the media would have demanded the other candidates answer if they agree. We’ve seen it over and over again. But when it’s a Democrat they let it go. I, for one, would love to see each and every Democrat admit they’d rather have churchgoers be shot than allow citizens to defend themselves…
Here’s more about the hero that took down that church shooter in Texas.
~ ~ ~
Well that’s it for Sunday. We hope if you’re Packers’ fans that you have a lot of booze to comfort yourselves with right now. It’s not lookin’ good in the fourth quarter.
Have an open thread. Here’s some comment fodder:
Rob Lowe is literally the only person who owns an NFL hat pic.twitter.com/NkZ0NtfAE9 — Andrew Joseph (@AndyJ0seph) January 20, 2020
Meanwhile, here’s what liberals are debating tonight:
Has bestiality always been historically so taboo? Why? It doesn't result in pregnancy; did it result in diseases? Why did humans evolve to get so repulsed from touching genitals with other species? — Aella (@Aella_Girl) January 19, 2020
A QAnon follower meetup in Virginia.
They're takin' down the cabal over some wine and appetizers. pic.twitter.com/ulJgG8OcYI — Travis View (@travis_view) January 19, 2020
Y’all have a good week.


therightscoop--2020-01-20--BREAKING: McConnell releases new impeachment trial rules and Dems, media NOT happy!

McConnell has released his new impeachment trial rules and the media isn ’ t happy with them : There ’ @ @ @ @ @ !
Oh my !
That ’ s not all they don ’ t like… Two @ @ @ @ @ ?
I was hoping it could all be done in a single day .
If @ @ @ @ @ ’ s proposed rules , which still need to be voted on tomorrow , you @ @ @ @ @ Or you can click this PDF link here…

McConnell has released his new impeachment trial rules and the media isn’t happy with them:
JUST IN: Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell proposes impeachment trial rules with no guarantee that witnesses will be called to testify pic.twitter.com/3j9wblV74K — Reuters (@Reuters) January 20, 2020
Witnesses and evidence are what are used to determine the outcome of a trial. The only way to not call witnesses is to have decided the outcome of the trial in advance, which Senate Republicans under the leadership of Mitch McConnell, proudly boasts they will accomplish. — Donna Brazile (@donnabrazile) January 20, 2020
Mitch McConnell proposes impeachment trial rules with NO guarantee that witnesses will be called to testify — Zaid Sabah (@ZaidSabah) January 20, 2020
There’s no guarantee for witnesses! Oh my!
That’s not all they don’t like…
In a 4-page resolution, Mitch McConnell said that the impeachment trial opening arguments would begin at 1 p.m. on Wednesday. Each side will be given 24 hours to present their case over just a two-day period. — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 20, 2020
NEW: Mitch McConnell will allot a total of 24 hours per side for opening statements in President Trump's impeachment trial. The time must be confined to two working days. — TheBeat w/Ari Melber (@TheBeatWithAri) January 20, 2020
Sen. Chuck Schumer slams Mitch McConnell’s organizing resolution, which compresses House arguments over 2 days as “a national disgrace.” — Alex Bolton (@alexanderbolton) January 20, 2020
Two whole days for opening statements? I was hoping it could all be done in a single day.
If you want to read McConnell’s proposed rules, which still need to be voted on tomorrow, you can do so below:
Loading...
Or you can click this PDF link here…


therightscoop--2020-01-20--WATCH: Ted Cruz stunned by a video exposing the media on impeachment…

Ted Cruz was stunned today by a video via the Media Research Center exposing the blatant hypocrisy of the media @ @ @ @ @ wrote on Twitter “ Wow .
WATCH this .
Stunning .
Wonder why the media @ @ @ @ @ While the video was indeed stunning , his question about why the media has changed @ @ @ @ @ course , not a serious one .
Because we all know the answer to that @ @ @ @ @ : • They hate Trump because he beat Hillary and they didn ’ t see @ @ @ @ @ are terribly worried he ’ ll win again .
So , the media must do @ @ @ @ @ , which means there must be witnesses and thus this impeachment must drag on as @ @ @ @ @ Democrats uncover as much dirt on Trump as possible .

Ted Cruz was stunned today by a video via the Media Research Center exposing the blatant hypocrisy of the media on impeachment.
Here’s the video:
FLASHBACK: The liberal media hated the idea of calling more witnesses during Bill Clinton's impeachment, saying it was a "distraction" and a "sham." pic.twitter.com/ibHWKLJjfk — MediaResearchCenter (@theMRC) January 20, 2020
Ted Cruz wrote on Twitter “Wow. WATCH this. Stunning. Wonder why the media changed their mind?”
While the video was indeed stunning, his question about why the media has changed their mind is, of course, not a serious one. Because we all know the answer to that question, which is threefold:
Trump is a Republican. Trump is Trump. They hate Trump because he beat Hillary and they didn’t see it coming, and they are terribly worried he’ll win again.
So, the media must do their part to destroy Trump, which means there must be witnesses and thus this impeachment must drag on as long as possible to help Democrats uncover as much dirt on Trump as possible.
Did I miss anything?


therightscoop--2020-01-20--WATCH: AOC smears Virginia 2nd amendment rally as protesters “flying confederate flags”, suggests co

WATCH: AOC smears Virginia 2nd amendment rally as protesters “flying confederate flags”, suggests cops should have been in riot gear…

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez just can ’ t understand why police are in riot gear when the left goes out and marches for the lives of Eric Garner and Freddie Gray , but there ’ s almost no police officers at a 2nd amendment rally where people are “ flying confederate flags ” and “ carrying semi-automatic weapons ” : Um , maybe police show up in riot gear to your ‘ marches ’ because most of the leftists who come to your ‘ marches ’ care more about rioting and burning down stuff than they do marching .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as we saw today .
There was no violence and it was quite peaceful .
Heck people were even picking up trash at the end of the rally .
Also , I don ’ t recall seeing any confederate flags in videos of the rally this morning .
I ’ m not going to rule out that maybe someone brought one somewhere , but as a rule this didn ’ t appear to be the case .
No , this is just AOC trying to keep up the false narrative that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rally .
Here ’ s a bonus clip for you that tells you everything you need to know ( and likely already knew ) about AOC :

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez just can’t understand why police are in riot gear when the left goes out and marches for the lives of Eric Garner and Freddie Gray, but there’s almost no police officers at a 2nd amendment rally where people are “flying confederate flags” and “carrying semi-automatic weapons”:
.@AOC contrasts today’s gun rights march in Richmond with protests against Eric Garner’s killing: "Why were there almost no police officers” despite protesters “flying confederate flags and [carrying] semiautamtic weapons”? pic.twitter.com/JRL9B76EQW — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 20, 2020
Um, maybe police show up in riot gear to your ‘marches’ because most of the leftists who come to your ‘marches’ care more about rioting and burning down stuff than they do marching.
This is not the case at second amendment rallies, as we saw today. There was no violence and it was quite peaceful. Heck people were even picking up trash at the end of the rally.
Also, I don’t recall seeing any confederate flags in videos of the rally this morning. I’m not going to rule out that maybe someone brought one somewhere, but as a rule this didn’t appear to be the case. No, this is just AOC trying to keep up the false narrative that the rally this morning was a white supremacist rally.
Here’s a bonus clip for you that tells you everything you need to know (and likely already knew) about AOC:
AOC: “The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center, or a center-conservative party” pic.twitter.com/6TNAC50nXi — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 20, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-20--CNN: The threats which caused Gov. Northam to declare a state of emergency “have simply not emerged”

CNN: The threats which caused Gov. Northam to declare a state of emergency “have simply not emerged” [VIDEO]

CNN is reporting that the threats over which Governor Northam freaked out about and declared a state of emergency never @ @ @ @ @ , CNN reports , “ the police very clear in saying they have not had @ @ @ @ @ rally and we have been standing here all morning since the beginning… ” How nice @ @ @ @ @ CNN went on to share an interview with a man from Virginia who is upset @ @ @ @ @ the Democrat legislature is trying to pass , so be sure and watch the rest @ @ @ @ @ same reporter interviewed a black gun support from Richmond who was there to protest the @ @ @ @ @ :

CNN is reporting that the threats over which Governor Northam freaked out about and declared a state of emergency never emerged this morning:
CNN: Threats which caused Gov. Northam to call for a State of Emergency "Have simply not emerged".. "The police very clear in saying they have not had a single arrest during this rally and we have been standing here all morning" pic.twitter.com/6p2JfebvFO — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 20, 2020
Rather, CNN reports, “the police very clear in saying they have not had a single arrest during this rally and we have been standing here all morning since the beginning…” How nice of them to report.
CNN went on to share an interview with a man from Virginia who is upset with the gun control laws the Democrat legislature is trying to pass, so be sure and watch the rest of the video.
The same reporter interviewed a black gun support from Richmond who was there to protest the gun control laws as well:


therightscoop--2020-01-20--WATCH: “Sir, are you a White Supremacist?”

A great video has emerged from the Second Amendment Rally this afternoon , where a guy with a camera asks @ @ @ @ @ rally if he ’ s a white supremacist .
His reaction was amazing .
“ @ @ @ @ @ his reply , as he held a sign of Ralph Northam and his friend dressed @ @ @ @ @ in blackface which said “ the man behind the sheet wants your guns.
” He @ @ @ @ @ They ’ re mad because there wasn ’ t any civil unrest .
Now they @ @ @ @ @ mad because there wasn ’ t any fight , ” pointing out just how peaceful @ @ @ @ @ .
The unnamed man said he was from St. Louis , noting that he didn @ @ @ @ @ and said none of them needed a weapon out there , “ but we got @ @ @ @

A great video has emerged from the Second Amendment Rally this afternoon, where a guy with a camera asks a black supporter at the rally if he’s a white supremacist. His reaction was amazing.
Watch:
“Sir, are you a White Supremacist?” pic.twitter.com/JFhxLRfgv1 — Zach Vorhies (@Perpetualmaniac) January 20, 2020
“United we stand” was his reply, as he held a sign of Ralph Northam and his friend dressed as a KKK member and in blackface which said “the man behind the sheet wants your guns.”
He went on to say “They’re mad because there wasn’t any civil unrest. Now they’re going to be mad because there wasn’t any fight,” pointing out just how peaceful the crowd had been today.
The unnamed man said he was from St. Louis, noting that he didn’t bring a weapon and said none of them needed a weapon out there, “but we got ’em.”
“White, Black, Hispanic, Latino, Mexican, whatever, United we stand.”
Watch the video for more…


therightscoop--2020-01-20--[UPDATE: READ FULL LEGAL BRIEF] – Trump legal team files legal brief ahead of impeachment trial, cal

[UPDATE: READ FULL LEGAL BRIEF] – Trump legal team files legal brief ahead of impeachment trial, calls for Senate to “swiftly” acquit Trump

Trump ’ s White House legal team has now filed a legal brief , which was due at noon today , calling for the Senate to “ swiftly ” acquit Trump in the impeachment trial because he did nothing wrong : NY TIMES – President Trump ’ s legal team will call on the Senate on Monday to “ swiftly reject ” the impeachment charges and acquit him , maintaining that he committed no impeachable offense and has been the victim of an illegitimate partisan effort to take him down .
In a lengthy brief to be submitted to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in earnest , the president ’ s lawyers plan to make the most sustained argument the White House has advanced since the House opened its impeachment inquiry last fall , contending that the two articles of impeachment approved largely along party lines were constitutionally flawed and set a dangerous precedent .
Mr. Trump ’ s lawyers plan to dismiss the largely party-line impeachment by the House as a “ brazenly political act ” following a “ rigged process ” that should be repudiated by the Senate , according to a person working with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ condition of anonymity ahead of the submission of the trial brief .
They will argue that neither of the articles of impeachment against Mr. Trump are valid because they do not state a violation of the law and they would in effect try to punish the president for foreign policy decisions and efforts to preserve executive prerogatives .
The AP has more details on the filing : President Donald Trump ’ s legal team asserted Monday that he did “ absolutely nothing wrong , ” calling the impeachment case against him “ flimsy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Constitution.
” The 110-page filing from the White House shifted the tone toward a more legal response .
Still , it hinged on Trump ’ s assertion he did nothing wrong and did not commit a crime — even though impeachment does not depend on a material violation of law but rather on the more vague definition of “ other high crimes and misdemeanors ” as established in the Constitution .
It says the two articles of impeachment brought against the president — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It asserts that the impeachment inquiry centered on Trump ’ s request that Ukraine ’ s president open an investigation into Democratic rival Joe Biden was never about finding the truth .
“ Instead , House Democrats were determined from the outset to find some way — any way — to corrupt the extraordinary power of impeachment for use as a political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election , ” Trump ’ s legal team wrote .
“ All of that is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.
” I ’ ve been looking for the actual brief to post here .
As soon as I find it I ’ ll add it for you to read .
UPDATE : Here ’ s the actual briefing for you to read…

Trump’s White House legal team has now filed a legal brief, which was due at noon today, calling for the Senate to “swiftly” acquit Trump in the impeachment trial because he did nothing wrong:
NY TIMES – President Trump’s legal team will call on the Senate on Monday to “swiftly reject” the impeachment charges and acquit him, maintaining that he committed no impeachable offense and has been the victim of an illegitimate partisan effort to take him down. In a lengthy brief to be submitted to the Senate the day before his trial begins in earnest, the president’s lawyers plan to make the most sustained argument the White House has advanced since the House opened its impeachment inquiry last fall, contending that the two articles of impeachment approved largely along party lines were constitutionally flawed and set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Trump’s lawyers plan to dismiss the largely party-line impeachment by the House as a “brazenly political act” following a “rigged process” that should be repudiated by the Senate, according to a person working with his legal team, who spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of the submission of the trial brief. They will argue that neither of the articles of impeachment against Mr. Trump are valid because they do not state a violation of the law and they would in effect try to punish the president for foreign policy decisions and efforts to preserve executive prerogatives.
The AP has more details on the filing:
President Donald Trump’s legal team asserted Monday that he did “absolutely nothing wrong,” calling the impeachment case against him “flimsy” and a “dangerous perversion of the Constitution.” The 110-page filing from the White House shifted the tone toward a more legal response. Still, it hinged on Trump’s assertion he did nothing wrong and did not commit a crime — even though impeachment does not depend on a material violation of law but rather on the more vague definition of “other high crimes and misdemeanors” as established in the Constitution. It says the two articles of impeachment brought against the president — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — don’t amount to impeachment offenses. It asserts that the impeachment inquiry centered on Trump’s request that Ukraine’s president open an investigation into Democratic rival Joe Biden was never about finding the truth. “Instead, House Democrats were determined from the outset to find some way — any way — to corrupt the extraordinary power of impeachment for use as a political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election,” Trump’s legal team wrote. “All of that is a dangerous perversion of the Constitution that the Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.”
I’ve been looking for the actual brief to post here. As soon as I find it I’ll add it for you to read.
UPDATE: Here’s the actual briefing for you to read…
Loading...


therightscoop--2020-01-20--Kellyanne Conway suggests Trump may exert Executive Privilege over Bolton testimony

A few minutes ago on Fox News , Kellyanne Conway was asked what will it mean for the White House if John Bolton testifies .
She responded “ Very little , though the president may exert executive privilege.
” When she was asked if ‘ executive privilege ’ was the strategy if Bolton testifies , Conway just said she ’ d let the lawyers file their brief today .
She went on to suggest that the House should have called Bolton to testify if Democrats were so anxious to hear from him .
Rather , she says , they put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and historically thin case of impeachment against Trump .
Trump would agree with this , as he just tweeted about the hypocrisy of wanting Bolton to testify now : Well they were in a rush until they weren ’ t , as we saw with Pelosi holding the impeachment articles for almost a month .
If Trump really feels that the calls for Bolton to testify is a travesty , he may very well invoke executive privilege .
I guess we ’ ll find out when we cross that bridge .
Trump also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ for demanding fairness when he never said a world about the House refusing to give Trump the fairness he deserved in their process :

A few minutes ago on Fox News, Kellyanne Conway was asked what will it mean for the White House if John Bolton testifies.
She responded “Very little, though the president may exert executive privilege.”
When she was asked if ‘executive privilege’ was the strategy if Bolton testifies, Conway just said she’d let the lawyers file their brief today.
She went on to suggest that the House should have called Bolton to testify if Democrats were so anxious to hear from him. Rather, she says, they put forward a very rushed, specious, and historically thin case of impeachment against Trump.
Trump would agree with this, as he just tweeted about the hypocrisy of wanting Bolton to testify now:
They didn’t want John Bolton and others in the House. They were in too much of a rush. Now they want them all in the Senate. Not supposed to be that way! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2020
Well they were in a rush until they weren’t, as we saw with Pelosi holding the impeachment articles for almost a month. If Trump really feels that the calls for Bolton to testify is a travesty, he may very well invoke executive privilege. I guess we’ll find out when we cross that bridge.
Trump also went after ‘Cryin’ Chuck Schumer’ for demanding fairness when he never said a world about the House refusing to give Trump the fairness he deserved in their process:
Cryin’ Chuck Schumer is now asking for “fairness”, when he and the Democrat House members worked together to make sure I got ZERO fairness in the House. So, what else is new? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-20--Virginia’s 2nd Amendment Rally is happening now and here’s a few live streams to watch…

The big 2nd Amendment Rally , that caused the governor to panic and declare a state of emergency where no @ @ @ @ @ the state capitol , is now underway .
Here are a few live streams I @ @ @ @ @ a few other videos and tweets from Benny Johnson who is on the ground there… @ @ @ @ @ one more to give a better idea of the crowd… UPDATE : Trump tweeted the @ @ @ @ @ :

The big 2nd Amendment Rally, that caused the governor to panic and declare a state of emergency where no one could carry guns around the state capitol, is now underway. Here are a few live streams I found:
Breitbart:
RT:
Agenda-Free TV:
Here’s a few other videos and tweets from Benny Johnson who is on the ground there…
Chants of “Northam Out” erupting in Virginia pic.twitter.com/XHhJtxMIzx — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 20, 2020
Leftist propaganda artists in the media are smearing the 2A protesters in Virginia as “White Supremacists” and “Neo Nazis”. That is a malicious lie. Don’t let them get away with it. The only racist in Richmond is the Democrat Governor. pic.twitter.com/b8IPJhwmSb — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 20, 2020
2A Protesters in Virginia: “USA, USA, USA.” “Hey Hey. Ho Ho. Racist Ralph has got to go.” pic.twitter.com/hDrloCGyow — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 20, 2020
2A Protesters in Virginia singing the Star Spangled Banner. pic.twitter.com/1Zlr3yJf52 — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 20, 2020
UPDATE: Here’s one more to give a better idea of the crowd…
Crowds in Richmond, Virginia are already massive and In the thousands These does not look like domestic terrorists @RalphNortham pic.twitter.com/l5eKs7IJEW — ELIJAH (@ElijahSchaffer) January 20, 2020
UPDATE: Trump tweeted the following about the rally today:
The Democrat Party in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia are working hard to take away your 2nd Amendment rights. This is just the beginning. Don’t let it happen, VOTE REPUBLICAN in 2020! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-20--Two people killed, 15 injured after shooter opens fire on crowd…

After the Kansas City Chiefs beat the Tennessee Titans and to head to the Superbowl , a shooting rang out in the parking lot of a nightclub that left 2 people dead and 15 injured .
Here ’ s what we know : FOX 4 KC – Two people were killed and 15 others were hurt in shooting at a Kansas City nightclub Sunday .
The shooting happened around 11:30 p.m. at 9ine Ultra Lounge , which is near 40 Hwy & Noland Road .
The shooter was trying to get into the bar and a fight broke out… Investigators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get into a the club , a fight broke out .
Kansas City police officers said the suspect started shooting .
Police said they believed a security guard shot and killed the suspect .
A woman was also shot and killed , but her relation to the suspect is unknown .
Only three people were hospitalized with critical injuries… Of the 15 people who were hurt , three people were hospitalized with critical injuries .
Investigators were not immediately able to verify if all of those victims were shot or hurt in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such a tragic end to such a wonderful day in Kansas City , ” Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Bakers said .
“ It is hard to stand here , beyond the cold , and talk about this kind of tragedy in really one of the best days Kansas City has had in a long time.
” Investigators said this is a very large crime scene , and that drivers should avoid that area through the morning .
Since only three were hospitalized , I ’ m guessing that some of the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broke out after the shooting began .
Hopefully the three with critical injuries will be ok .
If we learn anymore on the motive or the attack itself , we ’ ll bring that to you .
Here ’ s video of from Fox 4 Kansas City :

After the Kansas City Chiefs beat the Tennessee Titans and to head to the Superbowl, a shooting rang out in the parking lot of a nightclub that left 2 people dead and 15 injured. Here’s what we know:
FOX 4 KC – Two people were killed and 15 others were hurt in shooting at a Kansas City nightclub Sunday. The shooting happened around 11:30 p.m. at 9ine Ultra Lounge, which is near 40 Hwy & Noland Road.
The shooter was trying to get into the bar and a fight broke out…
Investigators said as the suspect was reportedly trying to get into a the club, a fight broke out. Kansas City police officers said the suspect started shooting. Police said they believed a security guard shot and killed the suspect. A woman was also shot and killed, but her relation to the suspect is unknown.
Only three people were hospitalized with critical injuries…
Of the 15 people who were hurt, three people were hospitalized with critical injuries. Investigators were not immediately able to verify if all of those victims were shot or hurt in other ways. “It just puts such a tragic end to such a wonderful day in Kansas City,” Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Bakers said. “It is hard to stand here, beyond the cold, and talk about this kind of tragedy in really one of the best days Kansas City has had in a long time.” Investigators said this is a very large crime scene, and that drivers should avoid that area through the morning.
Since only three were hospitalized, I’m guessing that some of the other injuries may have occurred when the panic broke out after the shooting began. Hopefully the three with critical injuries will be ok.
If we learn anymore on the motive or the attack itself, we’ll bring that to you. Here’s video of from Fox 4 Kansas City:


therightscoop--2020-01-21--Here’s what you can expect from tomorrow’s first day of the Senate impeachment trial…

As you know , tomorrow at 1:00 pm ET the Senate impeachment trial officially begins .
Fox News has done the hard work of explaining exactly what we can expect .
I ’ m going to condense it down to barebones .
At 1 pm there will be some preliminary business .
But shortly thereafter McConnell will offer his resolution dictating the parameters of the trial .
The Senate has two hours to debate it and they probably will , absent unanimous consent to forgo it .
At somewhere around 3:30 pm Schumer will then offer his counter-proposal .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well , but only impeachment managers and the president ’ s counsel will be debating it , not members of the Senate .
It ’ s because Schumer ’ s counter-proposal is just a branch on McConnell ’ s amendment ‘ tree ’ or something .
According to Fox News , that gets us to about 5:30 or 6 pm .
At this point , however , Fox News says a potential wild card could happen .
I ’ ll let them explain : Fox News is told to expect a closed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning lawmakers essentially would kick everyone out of the chamber : the public , the media , the president ’ s legal team and the impeachment managers .
The only people left : senators , Roberts and essential floor staff .
Fox News has no idea how long this could go , but it would happen in the Senate chamber itself , not the Old Senate Chamber .
In addition , this would be a deviation from what happened in 1999 .
Prior to then-President Clinton ’ s impeachment trial , all 100 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to forge an agreement on how to proceed in the trial .
Here , the trial already has begun .
Thus , in this circumstance , the Senate is debating how it will grapple with Schumer ’ s proposal or proposals – and , to some degree , McConnell ’ s .
Senators need to do this because they have a series of trial proposals on the floor .
The debate time would be allocated to the impeachment managers and Trump ’ s lawyers , so senators would have to sort this out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take an hour , or two or three .
Who knows ?
Whenever that closed session ends , the Senate will return to open session with or without an agreement .
Then they will begin voting on the agreements and/or proposals , starting with Schumer ’ s first and McConnell ’ s last .
According to Fox News , these votes will establish the framework for the trial .
Who knows what time it is now , but after the framework is established , the first day is over .
I ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going tomorrow for you to watch .

As you know, tomorrow at 1:00 pm ET the Senate impeachment trial officially begins. Fox News has done the hard work of explaining exactly what we can expect. I’m going to condense it down to barebones.
At 1 pm there will be some preliminary business. But shortly thereafter McConnell will offer his resolution dictating the parameters of the trial. The Senate has two hours to debate it and they probably will, absent unanimous consent to forgo it.
At somewhere around 3:30 pm Schumer will then offer his counter-proposal. The Senate gets two hours to debate that as well, but only impeachment managers and the president’s counsel will be debating it, not members of the Senate. It’s because Schumer’s counter-proposal is just a branch on McConnell’s amendment ‘tree’ or something.
According to Fox News, that gets us to about 5:30 or 6 pm. At this point, however, Fox News says a potential wild card could happen. I’ll let them explain:
However, a potential wild card is afoot. Fox News is told to expect a closed Senate session after these two debates, meaning lawmakers essentially would kick everyone out of the chamber: the public, the media, the president’s legal team and the impeachment managers. The only people left: senators, Roberts and essential floor staff. Fox News has no idea how long this could go, but it would happen in the Senate chamber itself, not the Old Senate Chamber. In addition, this would be a deviation from what happened in 1999. Prior to then-President Clinton’s impeachment trial, all 100 senators met in the Old Senate Chamber to forge an agreement on how to proceed in the trial. Here, the trial already has begun. Thus, in this circumstance, the Senate is debating how it will grapple with Schumer’s proposal or proposals – and, to some degree, McConnell’s. Senators need to do this because they have a series of trial proposals on the floor. The debate time would be allocated to the impeachment managers and Trump’s lawyers, so senators would have to sort this out on their own. Maybe this will take an hour, or two or three. Who knows?
Whenever that closed session ends, the Senate will return to open session with or without an agreement. Then they will begin voting on the agreements and/or proposals, starting with Schumer’s first and McConnell’s last. According to Fox News, these votes will establish the framework for the trial.
Who knows what time it is now, but after the framework is established, the first day is over. I’ll certainly have a livestream of it all going tomorrow for you to watch.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--White House announces eight House Republicans will be on impeachment defense team

The White House has just announced that eight House Republicans will be on his impeachment defense team as the trial gets underway in the Senate : THE HILL – The White House announced Monday that President Trump appointed several prominent Republican House members to advise his impeachment defense team ahead of the Senate trial set to begin this week .
GOP Reps. Jim Jordan ( Ohio ) , John Ratcliffe Texas ) , Mike Johnson ( La . )
, Mark Meadows ( N.C. ) , Debbie Lesko ( Ariz. ) , Lee Zeldin ( N.Y. ) , Elise Stefanik @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set to play leading roles .
A statement from the White House said the lawmakers “ have provided guidance to the White House team , which was prohibited from participating in the proceedings concocted by Democrats in the House of Representatives ” throughout the House proceedings and would continue to do so in the Senate .
The only name on that list I ’ m not terribly familiar with is Debbie Lesko from Arizona .
As far as the others , they don ’ t surprise me in the least as they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ side since the beginning of this .
Interestingly enough , there were some concerns about these House appointments from Senate Republicans : Johnson noted ahead of the announcement that there was some reluctance to have House members participate in the Senate trial , with GOP lawmakers in the upper chamber citing concerns the optics of adding House members could be detrimental to the seriousness of the trial .
“ There was some resistance or concern in the Senate that it would become more of a show than a trial and I tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been involved in the discussion on this are very serious about this , I mean I was a litigator for 20 years in federal court on constitutional law cases , so this is within my wheelhouse and something I have great interest in , ” Johnson said .
“ And the others that I have mentioned feel the same way , so it would be exactly the opposite of the concerns that ’ s been expressed on the other side.
” The Hill also notes that Lindsey Graham himself isn ’ t fond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Senate have also warned against such appointments , warning that the addition of Republican House members would cast the Senate trial in a partisan light .
“ I don ’ t think it ’ s wise .
I think we need to elevate the argument beyond body politics , beyond party politics and talk about the constitutional problems with these two articles , ” Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) told reporters earlier this month .
Honestly , I get their concerns , but I think McConnell will ensure that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible .
My biggest concern , of course , is more about getting through this trial and ending it .
I like that McConnell has not been generous thus far in allotting time for opening arguments and I hope he keeps the pedal to the metal so the country can be done with this shame and get back to normal business .

The White House has just announced that eight House Republicans will be on his impeachment defense team as the trial gets underway in the Senate:
THE HILL – The White House announced Monday that President Trump appointed several prominent Republican House members to advise his impeachment defense team ahead of the Senate trial set to begin this week. GOP Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio), John Ratcliffe Texas), Mike Johnson (La.), Mark Meadows (N.C.), Debbie Lesko (Ariz.), Lee Zeldin (N.Y.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Doug Collins are set to play leading roles. A statement from the White House said the lawmakers “have provided guidance to the White House team, which was prohibited from participating in the proceedings concocted by Democrats in the House of Representatives” throughout the House proceedings and would continue to do so in the Senate.
The only name on that list I’m not terribly familiar with is Debbie Lesko from Arizona. As far as the others, they don’t surprise me in the least as they’ve been hard on Trump’s side since the beginning of this.
Interestingly enough, there were some concerns about these House appointments from Senate Republicans:
Johnson noted ahead of the announcement that there was some reluctance to have House members participate in the Senate trial, with GOP lawmakers in the upper chamber citing concerns the optics of adding House members could be detrimental to the seriousness of the trial. “There was some resistance or concern in the Senate that it would become more of a show than a trial and I tried to make very, the people that have been involved in the discussion on this are very serious about this, I mean I was a litigator for 20 years in federal court on constitutional law cases, so this is within my wheelhouse and something I have great interest in,” Johnson said. “And the others that I have mentioned feel the same way, so it would be exactly the opposite of the concerns that’s been expressed on the other side.”
The Hill also notes that Lindsey Graham himself isn’t fond of the idea:
Key Republican allies in the Senate have also warned against such appointments, warning that the addition of Republican House members would cast the Senate trial in a partisan light. “I don’t think it’s wise. I think we need to elevate the argument beyond body politics, beyond party politics and talk about the constitutional problems with these two articles,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters earlier this month.
Honestly, I get their concerns, but I think McConnell will ensure that the Senate runs the trial as seriously as possible. My biggest concern, of course, is more about getting through this trial and ending it. I like that McConnell has not been generous thus far in allotting time for opening arguments and I hope he keeps the pedal to the metal so the country can be done with this shame and get back to normal business.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--Alan Dershowitz RETRACTS earlier statement about impeachment not needing a crime…

After appearing on ABC News on Sunday to argue that a president can not be impeached for abuse of power @ @ @ @ @ 1998 video on Monday from Dershowitz that seemed to contradict his argument .
The video @ @ @ @ @ : In the video Dershowitz says “ It certainly doesn ’ t have to be @ @ @ @ @ have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who @ @ @ @ @ liberty , you don ’ t need a technical crime.
” Dershowitz responded to the @ @ @ @ @ today , retracting his prior statement and pointing out that he was wrong then and @ @ @ @ @ that there didn ’ t need to be a crime .
He has since researched @ @ @ @ @ as it relates heavily to the charges against Trump , and says he is right @ @ @ @ @ to be a crime :

After appearing on ABC News on Sunday to argue that a president cannot be impeached for abuse of power, CNN dug up a 1998 video on Monday from Dershowitz that seemed to contradict his argument. The video is cued up at 5:22:
In the video Dershowitz says “It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don’t need a technical crime.”
Dershowitz responded to the revelation of the 1998 video today, retracting his prior statement and pointing out that he was wrong then and was relying on academic consensus that there didn’t need to be a crime. He has since researched the topic more in-depth, as it relates heavily to the charges against Trump, and says he is right today that there does need to be a crime:
(1 of 3)To the extent there are inconsistencies between my current position and what I said 22 years ago, I am correct today. During the Clinton impeachment, the issue was not whether a technical crime was required, because he was charged with perjury. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 21, 2020
(2of 3
Therefore, I didn’t research the issue; I relied on the academic consensus that a crime was not required. In Trump impeachment, on the other hand, that is the critical issue, because abuse of power and obstruction of congress are neither crimes nor criminal- like behavior. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 21, 2020
(3 of 3 cont) To the extent therefore that my 1998 off-the-cuff interview statement suggested the opposite, I retract it. Scholars learn to adapt and even change old views as they do more research. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 21, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-21--BOOM! San Antonio forced to spend a TON of cash defending decision to ban Chick-fil-A from city airp

BOOM! San Antonio forced to spend a TON of cash defending decision to ban Chick-fil-A from city airport — and it’s FAR from over

The city of San Antonio is having to spend a ton of money over the city council ’ s decision to ban Chick-fil-A from opening in the city airport : FOX 32 – The city of San Antonio has spent at least $ 315,000 in legal fees after the city council voted to bar Chick-fil-A from opening a location in the San Antonio airport in March , according to calculations by KENS 5 .
The legal fees encompass two lawsuits and a federal investigation , and other invoices are pending , according to KENS 5 .
These lawsuits are thanks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the legislature passed and Governor Greg Abbott signed last year , designed to protect the first amendment rights of companies like Chick-fil-A from discrimination .
Just over a week ago , one of the lawsuits filed by the San Antonio Family Association won a victory in court over the city who was trying to get the case dismissed : A lawsuit against the City of San Antonio for banning a popular fast food restaurant at the airport is moving forward .
District Judge David Canales ruled Friday against the city ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are disappointed with the outcome of the hearing and will evaluate our legal options going forward , ” said First Assistant City Attorney Liz Provencio .
“ We maintain that the City did nothing wrong and certainly did not violate any law , and we will continue to vigorously defend the City ’ s interests.
” “ Any vendor that attempts to occupy this space should be on notice , ” said plaintiff Patrick Von Dohlen .
“ The city ’ s efforts to replace Chick-fil-A violate state law and we are suing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vendor that tries to replace Chick-fil-A could soon be facing an injunction that prevents them from operating.
” As I suggested in the title , this is far from over and the city of San Antonio is going to have to spend a lot more before this is over and they lose .
If I lived in San Antonio , I ’ d be ticked that my taxpayer money was going to defend such discrimination by the wretches on the city council and I ’ d vote to replace the members who voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reverse the decision and get out from under this lawsuit as quickly as possible .

The city of San Antonio is having to spend a ton of money over the city council’s decision to ban Chick-fil-A from opening in the city airport:
FOX 32 – The city of San Antonio has spent at least $315,000 in legal fees after the city council voted to bar Chick-fil-A from opening a location in the San Antonio airport in March, according to calculations by KENS 5. The legal fees encompass two lawsuits and a federal investigation, and other invoices are pending, according to KENS 5.
These lawsuits are thanks to a ‘Save Chick-fil-A bill’ that the legislature passed and Governor Greg Abbott signed last year, designed to protect the first amendment rights of companies like Chick-fil-A from discrimination.
Just over a week ago, one of the lawsuits filed by the San Antonio Family Association won a victory in court over the city who was trying to get the case dismissed:
A lawsuit against the City of San Antonio for banning a popular fast food restaurant at the airport is moving forward. District Judge David Canales ruled Friday against the city’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit… “We are disappointed with the outcome of the hearing and will evaluate our legal options going forward,” said First Assistant City Attorney Liz Provencio. “We maintain that the City did nothing wrong and certainly did not violate any law, and we will continue to vigorously defend the City’s interests.” “Any vendor that attempts to occupy this space should be on notice,” said plaintiff Patrick Von Dohlen. “The city’s efforts to replace Chick-fil-A violate state law and we are suing to stop this from happening. Any vendor that tries to replace Chick-fil-A could soon be facing an injunction that prevents them from operating.”
As I suggested in the title, this is far from over and the city of San Antonio is going to have to spend a lot more before this is over and they lose. If I lived in San Antonio, I’d be ticked that my taxpayer money was going to defend such discrimination by the wretches on the city council and I’d vote to replace the members who voted for this to anyone who will vote to reverse the decision and get out from under this lawsuit as quickly as possible.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--Pro-Trump contributor says CNN fired him for exposing ‘the Charlottesville lie’

Steve Cortes said on Monday that he was fired from CNN because of a video he did with PragerU that exposed the big media lie about Trump ’ s comments on Charlottesville : DC EXAMINER – A pro-Trump CNN commentator claimed that he was forced out at the network for a video where he defended the president ’ s comments following the 2017 “ Unite the Right ” rally in Charlottesville , Virginia .
Steve Cortes , a former member of President Trump ’ s Hispanic advisory council , said that his tenure as a political commentator for the network @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show Monday .
He later reiterated that statement during an interview with Fox News ’ Laura Ingraham that night .
Cortes claimed that CNN took issue with a PragerU video from August in which he argued that Trump ’ s line about there being “ very fine people on both sides ” was not in reference to the neo-Nazis who were at the rally .
He said , “ The Charlottesville lie , the ‘ fine people ’ hoax , the president never called neo-Nazis fine people .
For committing what was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eyes of CNN , for declawing that deception that they continued to push , they put me on the bench .
They took me off the air after I did a PragerU video that got 6 million hits detailing exactly why the Charlottesville myth was a deception.
” Ingraham then asked if the network gave him an explanation for his departure .
He answered , “ Not in writing , no , but they did tell me it was directly because of the Charlottesville video .
The president retweeted it , the PragerU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retweeted it .
It got as I said , many millions of views , and I think we did strong work at improving the truth of the matter .
”

Steve Cortes said on Monday that he was fired from CNN because of a video he did with PragerU that exposed the big media lie about Trump’s comments on Charlottesville:
DC EXAMINER – A pro-Trump CNN commentator claimed that he was forced out at the network for a video where he defended the president’s comments following the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Steve Cortes, a former member of President Trump’s Hispanic advisory council, said that his tenure as a political commentator for the network “just ended” on his radio show Monday. He later reiterated that statement during an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham that night. Cortes claimed that CNN took issue with a PragerU video from August in which he argued that Trump’s line about there being “very fine people on both sides” was not in reference to the neo-Nazis who were at the rally.
He said, “The Charlottesville lie, the ‘fine people’ hoax, the president never called neo-Nazis fine people. For committing what was the unpardonable sin, at least in the eyes of CNN, for declawing that deception that they continued to push, they put me on the bench. They took me off the air after I did a PragerU video that got 6 million hits detailing exactly why the Charlottesville myth was a deception.”
Ingraham then asked if the network gave him an explanation for his departure.
He answered, “Not in writing, no, but they did tell me it was directly because of the Charlottesville video. The president retweeted it, the PragerU video that I did, the president retweeted it. It got as I said, many millions of views, and I think we did strong work at improving the truth of the matter.”


therightscoop--2020-01-21--“Nobody likes him” — Hillary Clinton blasts Bernie Sanders…

Bernie Sanders just got an elbow in the side from Hillary Clinton in her new documentary on Netflix , where she claims that ‘ nobody likes him ’ : PJ MEDIA – Hillary Clinton , who needed a rigged primary to defeat Bernie Sanders in 2016 , had some strong words about Bernie Sanders in a new Hulu documentary set to premiere at Sundance .
According to The Hollywood Reporter , the documentary , titled Hillary , is “ mostly ” flattering to the twice-failed presidential candidate .
“ I ’ d watched the 2016 election very closely , very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director Nanette Burstein .
The documentary was compiled from nearly 2,000 hours of footage from the 2016 campaign .
I doubt there ’ s much interesting to be seen in this documentary except for the part where Hillary says how she feels about her former primary opponent .
“ He was in Congress for years .
He had one senator support him .
Nobody likes him , nobody wants to work with him , he got nothing done , ” Hillary said of Sanders .
“ He was a career politician .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel so bad that people got sucked into it.
” When asked by The Hollywood Reporter in an interview about the forthcoming documentary if that sentiment she expressed then still applies today , she replied , “ Yes , it does.
” In fact , Hillary still holds enough ill will toward Sanders that she won ’ t even commit to endorsing him , should he win the 2020 Democratic primary .
“ I ’ m not going to go there yet .
We ’ re still in a very vigorous primary season @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it ’ s not only him , it ’ s the culture around him .
It ’ s his leadership team .
It ’ s his prominent supporters .
It ’ s his online Bernie Bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors , particularly the women .
”

Bernie Sanders just got an elbow in the side from Hillary Clinton in her new documentary on Netflix, where she claims that ‘nobody likes him’:
PJ MEDIA – Hillary Clinton, who needed a rigged primary to defeat Bernie Sanders in 2016, had some strong words about Bernie Sanders in a new Hulu documentary set to premiere at Sundance.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the documentary, titled Hillary, is “mostly” flattering to the twice-failed presidential candidate. “I’d watched the 2016 election very closely, very emotionally and very disappointedly,” says director Nanette Burstein.
The documentary was compiled from nearly 2,000 hours of footage from the 2016 campaign.
I doubt there’s much interesting to be seen in this documentary except for the part where Hillary says how she feels about her former primary opponent.
“He was in Congress for years. He had one senator support him. Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done,” Hillary said of Sanders. “He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.”
When asked by The Hollywood Reporter in an interview about the forthcoming documentary if that sentiment she expressed then still applies today, she replied, “Yes, it does.”
In fact, Hillary still holds enough ill will toward Sanders that she won’t even commit to endorsing him, should he win the 2020 Democratic primary. “I’m not going to go there yet. We’re still in a very vigorous primary season. I will say, however, that it’s not only him, it’s the culture around him. It’s his leadership team. It’s his prominent supporters. It’s his online Bernie Bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.”


therightscoop--2020-01-21--BREAKING: McConnell makes big change to organizing resolution for the impeachment trial

McConnell has made a big change to the organizing resolution for the impeachment trial , which is that they will @ @ @ @ @ two for opening arguments : This is a big deal because , as Jessi Turnure @ @ @ @ @ they each have 8-hour days instead of 12-hour days , which means America will be @ @ @ @ @ see it .
I personally didn ’ t mind it being two days , because @ @ @ @ @ get it over with as fast as possible .
I also think McConnell started with @ @ @ @ @ , knowing he might have to expand it in negotiations , which is how negotiations @ @ @ @ @ UPDATE : I ’ m hearing that it was several moderate Republican Senators that forced @ @ @ @ @ the changes above .
Probably Collins , Murkowski , Romney , and how knows which @ @ @ @ @ Senate trial live here .

McConnell has made a big change to the organizing resolution for the impeachment trial, which is that they will have three days instead of two for opening arguments:
NEW: The organizing resolution has been changed to allow both sides to have THREE day instead of just two to give their 24 hours of arguments. — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) January 21, 2020
Big change to McConnell's resolution: House impeachment managers and White House defense team will now have 24 hours over three days- not two- for opening arguments (8-hour days instead of 12). #NexstarDC — Jessi Turnure (@JessiTurnure) January 21, 2020
Two big changes to the McConnell resolution per Schumer spox: -They’re admitting the house record into evidence. (Before the Senate would have had to agree via vote) – And 24 hours now over three days (before it was over 2 days) — Leigh Ann Caldwell (@LACaldwellDC) January 21, 2020
This is a big deal because, as Jessi Turnure points out, it means they each have 8-hour days instead of 12-hour days, which means America will be able to tune in to see it. I personally didn’t mind it being two days, because I think McConnell wanted to get it over with as fast as possible. I also think McConnell started with more of a stingy number, knowing he might have to expand it in negotiations, which is how negotiations are supposed to work.
UPDATE: I’m hearing that it was several moderate Republican Senators that forced McConnell’s hand on the changes above. Probably Collins, Murkowski, Romney, and how knows which other moderate.
Watch the Senate trial live here.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--WATCH LIVE: Impeachment trial begins in Senate at 1 PM ET

The impeachment trial officially begins today in the Senate at 1pm ET .
You can watch it below on the @ @ @ @ @ .
I laid out yesterday what you can expect from the first day of the @ @ @ @ @ sure and check that out .
Here are a couple of tweets I just noticed @ @ @ @ @ find interesting…

The impeachment trial officially begins today in the Senate at 1pm ET. You can watch it below on the live stream of your choice.
FOX NEWS:
C-SPAN:
FOX BUSINESS:
I laid out yesterday what you can expect from the first day of the impeachment trial, so be sure and check that out.
Here are a couple of tweets I just noticed that I thought you might find interesting…
Mitt Romney told me that Dems are making a “mistake” in their reaction to McConnell resolution “If everything is an outrage, then nothing is an outrage.” He says McConnell changes from Clinton trial rules are “modest” and he won’t be voting today on motions to call for witnesses — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 21, 2020
Imagine being silly enough to compare an impeachment trial with a criminal trial https://t.co/G9PagKD5Qd — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) January 21, 2020
I mean, if this were a criminal trial, you'd actually have to you know, ALLEGE AN ACTUAL CRIME — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) January 21, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-21--BREAKING: Supreme Court denies liberal states’ request to fast track Obamacare case

The Supreme Court has just denied the request of nineteen liberal states to fast track their Obamacare case after a federal appeals court ruled last year that the individual mandate is unconstitutional : NBC NEWS – The U.S. Supreme Court declined Tuesday to put the legal challenge to Obamacare on a fast track , meaning the court — even if it later decides to take up the case — will not hear it during its current term that ends in June just as the presidential campaign heats up .
Nineteen blue states , led by California , asked the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision on whether to take the case .
They ’ re appealing a ruling late last year by a federal appeals court that said Obamacare ’ s individual mandate is unconstitutional .
The ruling said the rest of the law could not survive without it .
The states defending the law said the appeals court ruling created uncertainty about the future of the entire Affordable Care Act , which “ threatens adverse consequences for our nation ’ s health care system , including for patients , doctors , insurers , and state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take the case and hear it on April 26 , the last scheduled day for oral argument this term , or to add an extra argument day in May , something the court does only rarely .
Tuesday ’ s order rejected that request .
This means that Obamacare won ’ t be decided until after the presidential election .
It ’ s interesting to me that liberal states are the ones wanting this fast tracked .
I want it fast tracked to but for different reasons , so that Obamacare can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can go back to the way it was before Obamacare .
Prices have become so insane since 2014 that healthcare has become completely unaffordable for so many people , unless you are dirt poor and can get on the exchange .
If Congress can ’ t find a solution to undo Obamacare , then the courts need to simply dismantle it .

The Supreme Court has just denied the request of nineteen liberal states to fast track their Obamacare case after a federal appeals court ruled last year that the individual mandate is unconstitutional:
NBC NEWS – The U.S. Supreme Court declined Tuesday to put the legal challenge to Obamacare on a fast track, meaning the court — even if it later decides to take up the case — will not hear it during its current term that ends in June just as the presidential campaign heats up. Nineteen blue states, led by California, asked the Supreme Court earlier this month for a quick decision on whether to take the case. They’re appealing a ruling late last year by a federal appeals court that said Obamacare’s individual mandate is unconstitutional. The ruling said the rest of the law could not survive without it. The states defending the law said the appeals court ruling created uncertainty about the future of the entire Affordable Care Act, which “threatens adverse consequences for our nation’s health care system, including for patients, doctors, insurers, and state and local governments.” They asked the court to take the case and hear it on April 26, the last scheduled day for oral argument this term, or to add an extra argument day in May, something the court does only rarely. Tuesday’s order rejected that request.
This means that Obamacare won’t be decided until after the presidential election.
It’s interesting to me that liberal states are the ones wanting this fast tracked. I want it fast tracked to but for different reasons, so that Obamacare can be ended once and for all and we can go back to the way it was before Obamacare.
Prices have become so insane since 2014 that healthcare has become completely unaffordable for so many people, unless you are dirt poor and can get on the exchange. If Congress can’t find a solution to undo Obamacare, then the courts need to simply dismantle it.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--Iranian leader offers $3 million reward to ‘Whoever Kills Trump’

Looks like Iranian leadership is still reeling from Trump taking out Soleimani and now they are putting a bounty on Trump ’ s head… CBN NEWS – An Iranian lawmaker offered a $ 3 million reward to anyone who assassinates US President Donald Trump in retaliation for the killing of Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani , Iranian state media reported on Tuesday .
Tensions between Washington and Tehran have steadily increased since US forces killed Soleimani in an airstrike on Jan. 3 in Baghdad .
“ On behalf of the people of Kerman province , we will pay a $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kills Trump , ” MP Ahmad Hamzeh told the 290-seat parliament , ISNA reported .
The city of Kerman is Soleimani ’ s hometown and it is where his remains are buried .
It is unclear if the proposition has any official backing from Iranian clerics .
Maybe $ 3 million is a lot in Iran , but it ’ s not much here , especially given such a monumental task .
No , this is just Iran trying to sound fierce before their people when they really wanted to de-escalate tensions more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their pathetic missile strike .
Also they are probably trying to distract people with Soleimani again in the aftermath of the hundreds they murdered on that Ukrainian jet , which the Iranian people are most certainly angry about .

Looks like Iranian leadership is still reeling from Trump taking out Soleimani and now they are putting a bounty on Trump’s head…
CBN NEWS – An Iranian lawmaker offered a $3 million reward to anyone who assassinates US President Donald Trump in retaliation for the killing of Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani, Iranian state media reported on Tuesday. Tensions between Washington and Tehran have steadily increased since US forces killed Soleimani in an airstrike on Jan. 3 in Baghdad. “On behalf of the people of Kerman province, we will pay a $3 million reward in cash to whoever kills Trump,” MP Ahmad Hamzeh told the 290-seat parliament, ISNA reported. The city of Kerman is Soleimani’s hometown and it is where his remains are buried. It is unclear if the proposition has any official backing from Iranian clerics.
Maybe $3 million is a lot in Iran, but it’s not much here, especially given such a monumental task.
No, this is just Iran trying to sound fierce before their people when they really wanted to de-escalate tensions more than we did. That was obvious with their pathetic missile strike.
Also they are probably trying to distract people with Soleimani again in the aftermath of the hundreds they murdered on that Ukrainian jet, which the Iranian people are most certainly angry about.


therightscoop--2020-01-21--Mark Levin masterfully explains why Dem impeachment against Trump is so wrong, just like it was agai

Mark Levin masterfully explains why Dem impeachment against Trump is so wrong, just like it was against Andrew Johnson

Mark Levin had a great segment on his show last night where he explained why this Democrat impeachment against Trump is a horrible assault on the Constitution and the separation of powers , just as it was by radical Republicans against Andrew Johnson : Here ’ s the writeup from Levin ’ s show on the audio : The problem with those commenting on impeachment is that they don ’ t know much about the subject and keep comparing the Bill Clinton impeachment with the Donald Trump impeachment .
Those who ’ ve actually read or watched the Clinton impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that President Clinton was charged with .
Clinton was also held in contempt of court , he was disbarred by the state court and was going to be disbarred by the US Supreme Court , but he resigned instead .
The Trump impeachment is purely about separation of powers .
A sitting President must have the ability to have privileged conversations with his cabinet and advisors in order to execute the duties of his office .
The brief submitted by the Managers from the House of Representatives does not include a single violation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson was wronged , Trump is being wronged .
Now after you ’ ve listened to audio above , where Levin lays out just how serious the impeachment articles were against Bill Clinton , watch this stunning video again that we posted yesterday of how the media treated Clinton ’ s impeachment : It ’ s even more mind blowing when you watch this video knowing how legitimate the impeachment of Clinton was , and how the media treated it like it was absolutely nothing .
Yet they treat Trump ’ s impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Pathetic .

Mark Levin had a great segment on his show last night where he explained why this Democrat impeachment against Trump is a horrible assault on the Constitution and the separation of powers, just as it was by radical Republicans against Andrew Johnson:
Here’s the writeup from Levin’s show on the audio:
The problem with those commenting on impeachment is that they don’t know much about the subject and keep comparing the Bill Clinton impeachment with the Donald Trump impeachment. Those who’ve actually read or watched the Clinton impeachment trial know that there were 11 felonies that President Clinton was charged with. Clinton was also held in contempt of court, he was disbarred by the state court and was going to be disbarred by the US Supreme Court, but he resigned instead. The Trump impeachment is purely about separation of powers. A sitting President must have the ability to have privileged conversations with his cabinet and advisors in order to execute the duties of his office. The brief submitted by the Managers from the House of Representatives does not include a single violation of the Constitution. Just as Andrew Johnson was wronged, Trump is being wronged.
Now after you’ve listened to audio above, where Levin lays out just how serious the impeachment articles were against Bill Clinton, watch this stunning video again that we posted yesterday of how the media treated Clinton’s impeachment:
FLASHBACK: The liberal media hated the idea of calling more witnesses during Bill Clinton's impeachment, saying it was a "distraction" and a "sham." pic.twitter.com/ibHWKLJjfk — MediaResearchCenter (@theMRC) January 20, 2020
It’s even more mind blowing when you watch this video knowing how legitimate the impeachment of Clinton was, and how the media treated it like it was absolutely nothing. Yet they treat Trump’s impeachment like it’s the real deal. Pathetic.


therightscoop--2020-01-22--BREAKING: New report suggests Schiff LIED about Parnas evidence…

There ’ s a report out tonight that suggests that Nancy Pelosi ’ s favorite Intel Chief Adam Schiff lied about a text from Lev Parnas , suggesting he was trying to get a meeting with Zelensky for Giuliani : POLITICO – House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff appears to have mischaracterized a text message exchange between two players in the Ukraine saga , according to documents obtained by POLITICO — a possible error the GOP will likely criticize as another example of the Democrats ’ rushed effort to impeach President Donald Trump .
The issue arose when Schiff ( D-Calif. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chairman Jerry Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) last week summarizing a trove of evidence from Lev Parnas , an indicted former associate of Trump ’ s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani .
In one section of the letter , Schiff claims that Parnas “ continued to try to arrange a meeting with President Zelensky , ” citing a specific text message exchange where Parnas tells Giuliani : “ trying to get us mr Z.
” The remainder of the exchange — which was attached to Schiff ’ s letter — was redacted .
But an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several days later , Parnas sent Giuliani a word document that appears to show notes from an interview with Mykola Zlochevsky , the founder of Burisma , followed by a text message to Giuliani that states : “ mr Z answers my brother.
” That suggests Parnas was referring to Zlochevsky not Zelensky .
The word document contains a series of questions and answers , but doesn ’ t identify who is doing the asking or answering .
Yet the questions center on the hiring practices at Burisma , while the responses include @ @ @ @ @ @ @ build Burisma as [ an ] international company ” and “ we also thought it would help in Ukraine to have strong international board figures , ” which seems to point to Zlochevsky — not the Ukrainian president — as the respondent .

There’s a report out tonight that suggests that Nancy Pelosi’s favorite Intel Chief Adam Schiff lied about a text from Lev Parnas, suggesting he was trying to get a meeting with Zelensky for Giuliani:
POLITICO – House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff appears to have mischaracterized a text message exchange between two players in the Ukraine saga, according to documents obtained by POLITICO — a possible error the GOP will likely criticize as another example of the Democrats’ rushed effort to impeach President Donald Trump.
The issue arose when Schiff (D-Calif.) sent a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) last week summarizing a trove of evidence from Lev Parnas, an indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. In one section of the letter, Schiff claims that Parnas “continued to try to arrange a meeting with President Zelensky,” citing a specific text message exchange where Parnas tells Giuliani: “trying to get us mr Z.” The remainder of the exchange — which was attached to Schiff’s letter — was redacted.
But an unredacted version of the exchange shows that several days later, Parnas sent Giuliani a word document that appears to show notes from an interview with Mykola Zlochevsky, the founder of Burisma, followed by a text message to Giuliani that states: “mr Z answers my brother.” That suggests Parnas was referring to Zlochevsky not Zelensky.
The word document contains a series of questions and answers, but doesn’t identify who is doing the asking or answering. Yet the questions center on the hiring practices at Burisma, while the responses include statements such as “we wanted to build Burisma as [an] international company” and “we also thought it would help in Ukraine to have strong international board figures,” which seems to point to Zlochevsky — not the Ukrainian president — as the respondent.


therightscoop--2020-01-22--FREE: Watch tonight’s Levin TV episode where Mark delivers his own opening statement to the Senate…

Mark Levin has made tonight ’ s Levin TV show on impeachment free and you can watch it below : @ @ @ @ @ able to watch it yet , but here ’ s the promo language on it @ @ @ @ @ an opening statement to the Senate defending President Trump and responding to Adam Schiff during @ @ @ @ @ trial .
Let ’ s make this an open thread .
Here ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ puppy saved by some great people :

Mark Levin has made tonight’s Levin TV show on impeachment free and you can watch it below:
I haven’t been able to watch it yet, but here’s the promo language on it from Facebook:
Mark delivers an opening statement to the Senate defending President Trump and responding to Adam Schiff during the opening of the impeachment trial.
Let’s make this an open thread. Here’s a Dodo video of a little puppy saved by some great people:
You could only see his tiny little head 😱 pic.twitter.com/3gQiIXr4nI — The Dodo (@dodo) January 21, 2020


therightscoop--2020-01-22--NBC News attacks VP Mike Pence for speaking at black church with “homophobic” sermon

NBC News is attacking Vice President Mike Pence for attending a black church on Sunday where the sermon was ‘ homophobic ’ : Vice President Mike Pence spoke at a church service Sunday in which religious leaders said , among other things , that homosexuality is caused by “ the devil.
” The White House streamed the service live , and it ’ s still available on the official White House YouTube page .
Minutes after Pence promised congregants at the Holy City Church of God in Christ in Memphis , Tennessee , that he would “ stand strong for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Bishop Jerry Wayne Taylor launched into a diatribe about the “ demonic ” nature of homosexuality .
“ We have to encourage young men and women to get married , ” Taylor said from the pulpit .
“ It ’ s a demonic spirit that causes a woman to want to lie with another woman .
It ’ s a demonic spirit that causes a man to be attracted to another man.
” Later , Taylor called homosexuality “ unnatural , ” justifying his characterization by falsely claiming that same-sex attraction is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see two male animals coming together , ” he said .
“ We ’ ve got to expose what the devil is doing.
” I just want to stop here and point out that Pence attended this church in Memphis because of Martin Luther King Jr. Day , and that ’ s what his remarks were about from start to finish .
But that doesn ’ t get one mention in this article by NBC News .
Not one .
When Pence said he would “ stand strong for the values that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the context of his remarks about Martin Luther King Jr .
But NBC News connects those remarks to the anti-homosexual values of the pastor , which is incredibly dishonest .
“ He made a man to be a man , ” Taylor said .
“ If you want to know what God made you , when you go to the bathroom , just check your plumbing.
” Earlier in the service , Bishop Vincent Matthews Jr. dubbed Pence “ one of the most persecuted Christians in America ” and praised his faith .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ television and everywhere else is that he believes in the Bible , ” he said .
I got ta be honest .
I agree with much of what Bishop Jerry Wayne Taylor says here , at least in principle .
I don ’ t know how ‘ demonic ’ homosexuality is on an individual basis , but homosexuality is something that comes from the devil .
And we know how God responded to it in the book of Genesis .
It is a sin and something He detests , which is why S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1 Corinthians 6:9 ) of the “ unrighteous ” who “ will not inherit the kingdom of God ” .
I understand that the politically correct leftist media won ’ t like this , but you ’ d think they could at least acknowledge the reason why Pence attended this church in the first place .
But they don ’ t .
Here ’ s Pence ’ s speech if you want to listen to it .
I ’ ve got it cued up at the beginning of his speech :

NBC News is attacking Vice President Mike Pence for attending a black church on Sunday where the sermon was ‘homophobic’:
Vice President Mike Pence spoke at a church service Sunday in which religious leaders said, among other things, that homosexuality is caused by “the devil.” The White House streamed the service live, and it’s still available on the official White House YouTube page. Minutes after Pence promised congregants at the Holy City Church of God in Christ in Memphis, Tennessee, that he would “stand strong for the values that you hold dear,” Bishop Jerry Wayne Taylor launched into a diatribe about the “demonic” nature of homosexuality. “We have to encourage young men and women to get married,” Taylor said from the pulpit. “It’s a demonic spirit that causes a woman to want to lie with another woman. It’s a demonic spirit that causes a man to be attracted to another man.” Later, Taylor called homosexuality “unnatural,” justifying his characterization by falsely claiming that same-sex attraction is unique to humans. “You never see two male animals coming together,” he said. “We’ve got to expose what the devil is doing.”
I just want to stop here and point out that Pence attended this church in Memphis because of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and that’s what his remarks were about from start to finish. But that doesn’t get one mention in this article by NBC News. Not one.
When Pence said he would “stand strong for the values that you hold dear,” that was in the context of his remarks about Martin Luther King Jr. But NBC News connects those remarks to the anti-homosexual values of the pastor, which is incredibly dishonest.
The article continues…
Taylor also railed against transgender people. “He made a man to be a man,” Taylor said. “If you want to know what God made you, when you go to the bathroom, just check your plumbing.” Earlier in the service, Bishop Vincent Matthews Jr. dubbed Pence “one of the most persecuted Christians in America” and praised his faith. “The biggest criticism he gets on television and everywhere else is that he believes in the Bible,” he said.
I gotta be honest. I agree with much of what Bishop Jerry Wayne Taylor says here, at least in principle. I don’t know how ‘demonic’ homosexuality is on an individual basis, but homosexuality is something that comes from the devil. And we know how God responded to it in the book of Genesis. It is a sin and something He detests, which is why S. Paul included it in his list (in 1 Corinthians 6:9) of the “unrighteous” who “will not inherit the kingdom of God”.
I understand that the politically correct leftist media won’t like this, but you’d think they could at least acknowledge the reason why Pence attended this church in the first place. But they don’t.
Here’s Pence’s speech if you want to listen to it. I’ve got it cued up at the beginning of his speech:


therightscoop--2020-01-23--WATCH: Ted Cruz says House Managers made a “very strategic and serious error” on Hunter Biden yester

WATCH: Ted Cruz says House Managers made a “very strategic and serious error” on Hunter Biden yesterday…

Ted Cruz said last night that the House Democrat Managers made a “ very strategic and serious error ” yesterday @ @ @ @ @ making Hunter Biden ’ s testimony critical to the impeachment trial .
Cruz tells C-SPAN @ @ @ @ @ built their entire case on the proposition that any investigation into Burisma and corruption was @ @ @ @ @ was completely debunked.
” He then notes the problem with that argument is “ there @ @ @ @ @ evidence of corruption ” , and goes on to list out the evidence .
Cruz @ @ @ @ @ House Manager ’ s case is based on the allegations of corruption concerning Hunter Biden @ @ @ @ @ sham , then it is directly relevant .
And I got ta say the need @ @ @ @ @ the testimony of Hunter Biden and the need for the Senate to grant the White @ @ @ @ @ take that testimony has become all the more relevant .
”

Ted Cruz said last night that the House Democrat Managers made a “very strategic and serious error” yesterday in their opening arguments by making Hunter Biden’s testimony critical to the impeachment trial.
Watch:
Cruz tells C-SPAN that House Managers “have built their entire case on the proposition that any investigation into Burisma and corruption was a sham, that it was completely debunked.”
He then notes the problem with that argument is “there is very significant prima facie evidence of corruption”, and goes on to list out the evidence.
Cruz argues that “if the House Manager’s case is based on the allegations of corruption concerning Hunter Biden and Joe Biden being a sham, then it is directly relevant. And I gotta say the need for the Senate to hear the testimony of Hunter Biden and the need for the Senate to grant the White House lawyers the ability to take that testimony has become all the more relevant.”
Watch the video for more…


therightscoop--2020-01-23--REVERSAL: Trump putting entitlement cuts back on the table

As you all remember , back in 2016 Trump said he would not cut Social Security , Medicare or Medicaid .
But in a new interview with CNBC , Trump suggests he ’ s willing to look at them now , or at least at some point : JOE KERNEN : Do I dare– one last question .
JOE KERNEN : Entitlements ever be on your plate ?
PRESIDENT TRUMP : At some point they will be .
We have tremendous growth .
We ’ re going to have tremendous growth .
This next year I– it ’ ll be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The growth is going to be incredible .
And at the right time , we will take a look at that .
You know , that ’ s actually the easiest of all things , if you look , cause it ’ s such a– JOE KERNEN : –to do some of the things that you said you wouldn ’ t do in the past , though , in terms of Medicare– PRESIDENT TRUMP : Well , we ’ re going– we ’ re going look .
We also have– assets that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ve never had growth like this .
We never had a consumer that was taking in , through– different means , over $ 10,000 a family .
We never had the kind of– the kind of things that we have .
Look , our country is the hottest in the world .
We have the hottest economy in the world .
We have the best unemployment numbers we ’ ve ever had .
African American , Asian American .
Hispanics are doing so incredibly .
Best they ’ ve ever done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever done .
African American .
The numbers are incredible .
The poverty numbers .
The unemployment and the employment .
There ’ s– there is a difference , actually .
But the unemployment and employment numbers for African Americans are the best we ’ ve ever had .
You know , we just– came up with a chart , and it was a very important to number to me .
African American youth has the highest , by far , unemployment .
The best unemployment numbers that they ’ ve ever had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right now we have almost 160 million people working in the United States , and we ’ ve never even been close to that , Joe .
I ’ m glad Trump is willing to at least put them back on the table for his next four years , should he win .
That was a big criticism of his from the right back in 2016 .
Trump says it ’ s one of the easiest things to cut because it ’ s the biggest percentage .
I like that he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be easy to get the Congress to make any changes to entitlements .
Heck , a Republican House and Senate couldn ’ t get rid of Obamacare after they won with a mandate to do so in 2017 .
At this point I have low expectations that any entitlement cuts are coming in the future .
We ’ d have to win back both chambers and there would have to be a very strong majority in the Senate to even get past the filibuster issues and the RINOs in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll wait and see what 2020 brings…

As you all remember, back in 2016 Trump said he would not cut Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. But in a new interview with CNBC, Trump suggests he’s willing to look at them now, or at least at some point:
JOE KERNEN: Do I dare– one last question. PRESIDENT TRUMP: Go ahead. JOE KERNEN: Entitlements ever be on your plate? PRESIDENT TRUMP: At some point they will be. We have tremendous growth. We’re going to have tremendous growth. This next year I– it’ll be toward the end of the year. The growth is going to be incredible. And at the right time, we will take a look at that. You know, that’s actually the easiest of all things, if you look, cause it’s such a– JOE KERNEN: If you’re willing– PRESIDENT TRUMP: –big percentage. JOE KERNEN: –to do some of the things that you said you wouldn’t do in the past, though, in terms of Medicare– PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, we’re going– we’re going look. We also have– assets that we’ve never had. I mean we’ve never had growth like this. We never had a consumer that was taking in, through– different means, over $10,000 a family. We never had the kind of– the kind of things that we have. Look, our country is the hottest in the world. We have the hottest economy in the world. We have the best unemployment numbers we’ve ever had. African American, Asian American. Hispanics are doing so incredibly. Best they’ve ever done. Black. Best they’ve ever done. African American. The numbers are incredible. The poverty numbers. The unemployment and the employment. There’s– there is a difference, actually. But the unemployment and employment numbers for African Americans are the best we’ve ever had. You know, we just– came up with a chart, and it was a very important to number to me. African American youth has the highest, by far, unemployment. The best unemployment numbers that they’ve ever had. And the best employment numbers. Right now we have almost 160 million people working in the United States, and we’ve never even been close to that, Joe.
I’m glad Trump is willing to at least put them back on the table for his next four years, should he win. That was a big criticism of his from the right back in 2016.
Trump says it’s one of the easiest things to cut because it’s the biggest percentage. I like that he’s optimistic, but the truth is it won’t be easy to get the Congress to make any changes to entitlements. Heck, a Republican House and Senate couldn’t get rid of Obamacare after they won with a mandate to do so in 2017.
At this point I have low expectations that any entitlement cuts are coming in the future. We’d have to win back both chambers and there would have to be a very strong majority in the Senate to even get past the filibuster issues and the RINOs in our party. But I guess we’ll wait and see what 2020 brings…
Watch Trump’s full interview below:


therightscoop--2020-01-23--SooperPodcast #379! Uproyalously luna choke mega-doudou call of doody roorals

This WEEK !
!
We have a MATT and a JESS , and el SOoper goes back , way back , to tell them how he was RIGHT in previous podcasts and they were RONG !
WOW !
So , let me start at the beginning , so I suffer from acid reflux !
THEN Matt gives us some anti-vaxxer propaganda , then el Sooper explains everything and ties in Thomas Sowell ( yes , again ) , and then we all say the words that we can ’ t say .
ALSO el MATT spills the beans about his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
Then Matt bores everyone by droning on about poorly researched facts on diseases .
Wow , you have to listen now !
!
If the audio player doesn ’ t load up in your browser , click HERE to go directly to podomatic !
Logic is the my-microphone of Soop .
ALSO !
!
DON ’ T MISS the great great list of Podcast listener nuts !
!
They ’ re all here , mostly !
!
!
ALSO !
!
We now have a patreon – so you have to PAY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suckers !
!
HAHAHAHAH !
!
!
Go there and give us money .
We entertain you .
BUT Patreon members only get early access to the extras – you can go to the page right now and listen to extras from the prior podcasts !
!
WOW !
!
!
AND… the GREAT GRATE KATCHUP DEBATE !
!
This is a good one .

This WEEK!! We have a MATT and a JESS, and el SOoper goes back, way back, to tell them how he was RIGHT in previous podcasts and they were RONG! WOW! So, let me start at the beginning, so I suffer from acid reflux! THEN Matt gives us some anti-vaxxer propaganda, then el Sooper explains everything and ties in Thomas Sowell (yes, again), and then we all say the words that we can’t say. ALSO el MATT spills the beans about his secret DMs room with Jess! WOW! Then Matt bores everyone by droning on about poorly researched facts on diseases. Wow, you have to listen now!!
If the audio player doesn’t load up in your browser, click HERE to go directly to podomatic!
Logic is the my-microphone of Soop.
ALSO!! DON’T MISS the great great list of Podcast listener nuts!! They’re all here, mostly!!!
ALSO!! We now have a patreon – so you have to PAY to listen to the extra podcast, suckers!! HAHAHAHAH!!! Go there and give us money. We entertain you.
BUT Patreon members only get early access to the extras – you can go to the page right now and listen to extras from the prior podcasts!! WOW!!!
Like… the ORIGIN OF REBAR-FACE!!!!
AND… the GREAT GRATE KATCHUP DEBATE!! This is a good one.