Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Faked news Links from other news sources. MSM White Progressive Supremacy

CBS News: No Evidence Trump Shared Nuclear Secrets With Australian billionaire.

Visits: 19

CBS News: No Evidence Trump Shared Nuclear Secrets With Australian billionaire. Fake news and obscure websites were spreading false stories that Trump was running around passing top secret information. CBS News is reporting that this is false.

“Sources tell CBS News there is no indication former President Trump shared sensitive records with an Australian billionaire + no charges have been filed by the Special Counsel through their alleged discussion about US Nuclear subs was investigated,” CBS’s Catherine Herridge posted on X, formerly Twitter, Saturday.



America's Heartland Commentary Corruption Crime Faked news Links from other news sources. Media Woke MSM Progressive Racism Reprints from others. White Progressive Supremacy WOKE

NYT Pushes the White Oppressor Myth.

Visits: 16

NYT Pushes the White Oppressor Myth.

The propaganda is endless!

Here’s an odd sentence in today’s New York Times:

“Mr. Erwin was born in 1942 in Tyler, Texas, where the Black community lived on the north side of town, the whites lived on the south side and Black people did not cross Front Street after sundown.”

“And Black people did not cross Front Street after sundown”??? But whites felt free to stroll around the black part of town any time of day?

It’s the incessant myth of WHITE PEOPLE PREYING ON BLACKS!

In case you’re wondering, even in the 1940s, the black murder rate was many, many times higher than the white murder rate:


Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. The Courts

Justice Alito responds to Pro Publica personal attacks.

Visits: 20

Editor’s note: Justin Elliott and Josh Kaplan of ProPublica, which styles itself “an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism with moral force,” emailed Justice Alito Friday with a series of questions and asked him to respond by noon EDT Tuesday. They informed the justice that “we do serious, fair, accurate reporting in the public interest and have won six Pulitzer Prizes.” Here is Justice Alito’s response:

ProPublica has leveled two charges against me: first, that I should have recused in matters in which an entity connected with Paul Singer was a party and, second, that I was obligated to list certain items as gifts on my 2008 Financial Disclose Report. Neither charge is valid.

• Recusal. I had no obligation to recuse in any of the cases that ProPublica cites. First, even if I had been aware of Mr. Singer’s connection to the entities involved in those cases, recusal would not have been required or appropriate. ProPublica suggests that my failure to recuse in these cases created an appearance of impropriety, but that is incorrect. “There is an appearance of impropriety when an unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant facts would doubt that the Justice could fairly discharge his or her duties” (Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices appended to letter from the Chief Justice to Senator Durbin, April 25, 2023). No such person would think that my relationship with Mr. Singer meets that standard. My recollection is that I have spoken to Mr. Singer on no more than a handful of occasions, all of which (with the exception of small talk during a fishing trip 15 years ago) consisted of brief and casual comments at events attended by large groups. On no occasion have we discussed the activities of his businesses, and we have never talked about any case or issue before the Court. On two occasions, he introduced me before I gave a speech—as have dozens of other people. And as I will discuss, he allowed me to occupy what would have otherwise been an unoccupied seat on a private flight to Alaska. It was and is my judgment that these facts would not cause a reasonable and unbiased person to doubt my ability to decide the matters in question impartially.

Second, when I reviewed the cases in question to determine whether I was required to recuse, I was not aware and had no good reason to be aware that Mr. Singer had an interest in any party. During my time on the Court, I have voted on approximately 100,000 certiorari petitions. The vast majority receive little personal attention from the justices because even a cursory examination reveals that they do not meet our requirements for review. See Sup. Ct. R. 10. To ensure that I am not required to recuse, multiple members of my staff carefully check the names of the parties in each case and any other entities listed in the corporate disclosure statement required by our rules. See Supreme Court Rule 29.6. Mr. Singer was not listed as a party in any of the cases listed by ProPublica. Nor did his name appear in any of the corporate disclosure statements or the certiorari petitions or briefs in opposition to certiorari. In the one case in which review was granted, Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd., No. 12-842, Mr. Singer’s name did not appear in either the certiorari petition, the brief in opposition, or the merits briefs. Because his name did not appear in these filings, I was unaware of his connection with any of the listed entities, and I had no good reason to be aware of that. The entities that ProPublica claims are connected to Mr. Singer all appear to be either limited liability corporations or limited liability partnerships. It would be utterly impossible for my staff or any other Supreme Court employees to search filings with the SEC or other government bodies to find the names of all individuals with a financial interest in every such entity named as a party in the thousands of cases that are brought to us each year.

• Reporting. Until a few months ago, the instructions for completing a Financial Disclosure Report told judges that “[p]ersonal hospitality need not be reported,” and “hospitality” was defined to include “hospitality extended for a non-business purpose by one, not a corporation or organization, . . . on property or facilities owned by [a] person . . .” Section 109(14). The term “facilities” was not defined, but both in ordinary and legal usage, the term encompasses means of transportation. See, e.g., Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language 690 (2001) (defining a “facility” as “something designed, built, installed, etc., to serve a specific function affording a convenience or service: transportation facilities” and “something that permits the easier performance of an action”). Legal usage is similar. Black’s Law Dictionary has explained that the term “facilities” may mean “everything necessary for the convenience of passengers.” Federal statutory law is similar. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C §1958(b) (“ ‘facility of interstate commerce’ includes means of transportation”); 18 U.S.C §2251(a) (referring to an item that has been “transported using any means or facility of interstate commerce”); Kevin F. O’Malley, Jay E. Grenig, Hon. William C. Lee, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions §54.04 (February 2023) (“the term ‘uses any facility in interstate commerce’ means employing or utilizing any method of . . . transportation between one state and another”).

This understanding of the requirement to report gifts reflected the expert judgment of the body that the Ethics in Government Act entrusts with the responsibility to administer compliance with the Act, see 5 U.S.C. App. §111(3). When I joined the Court and until the recent amendment of the filing instructions, justices commonly interpreted this discussion of “hospitality” to mean that accommodations and transportation for social events were not reportable gifts. The flight to Alaska was the only occasion when I have accepted transportation for a purely social event, and in doing so I followed what I understood to be standard practice.

For these reasons, I did not include on my Financial Disclosure Report for 2008 either the accommodations provided by the owner of the King Salmon Lodge, who, to my knowledge, has never been involved in any matter before the Court, or the seat on the flight to Alaska.

In brief, the relevant facts relating to the fishing trip 15 years ago are as follows. I stayed for three nights in a modest one-room unit at the King Salmon Lodge, which was a comfortable but rustic facility. As I recall, the meals were homestyle fare. I cannot recall whether the group at the lodge, about 20 people, was served wine, but if there was wine it was certainly not wine that costs $1,000. Since my visit 15 years ago, the lodge has been sold and, I believe, renovated, but an examination of the photos and information on the lodge’s website shows that ProPublica’s portrayal is misleading.

As for the flight, Mr. Singer and others had already made arrangements to fly to Alaska when I was invited shortly before the event, and I was asked whether I would like to fly there in a seat that, as far as I am aware, would have otherwise been vacant. It was my understanding that this would not impose any extra cost on Mr. Singer. Had I taken commercial flights, that would have imposed a substantial cost and inconvenience on the deputy U.S. Marshals who would have been required for security reasons to assist me.

Justice Alito is an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.


Links from other news sources. Media Woke Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

The Feds Come For Fox News! When is a lawsuit really a shakedown coordinated by the Biden regime?

Visits: 30

This article is a reprint from Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way.

The #1 conservative site on Substack — The Right Way is recommended by over 180 fellow Substack authors

The corporate media has been buzzing the last few months about a defamation lawsuit filed against Fox News by an electronic voting machine company. In fact, the left-wing corporate press is positively salivating at the monetary damages that might be inflicted on Fox News if the case is lost. Apparently, those purple-haired kids don’t understand that $1.6 billion is hardly a fine for Rupert Murdoch — he probably pays that much semi-annually for those routine divorces he’s always getting.

Why would the American corporate media cheer on a lawsuit that has broken all the rules for discovery, and threatens the First Amendment protections of journalists? And since when do vendors operating as third-party proxies for state governments in national elections get to sue the Fourth Estate for defamation?

That’s just the start of the trouble. Consider the plaintiff. How can you defame a company that Americans didn’t know existed until the 2020 election — in an industry that Democrats like Kamala Harris regularly defamed as corrupt in HBO specials like “Kill Chain” among others?

That’s a tough question — legally speaking. Of course, it’s an easy question in terms of politics. What can you tell Democrats that they won’t believe? For example: that boys are girls and girls are boys? There’s no basic fact of biology that Democrats won’t deny — if necessary. There’s no scientific law they won’t denounce in a pinch — gravity! chemistry! the third law of thermodynamics! — to remain in the good graces of their shameless mob.

After all, the memory of the average Democrat voter is about the same as a fruit fly dipped in Fentanyl.

That’s why the corporate media can publicize the private text messages of Fox journalists, and expect that dangerous precedent to be viewed as normal too.

That’s the only explanation for CNN covering the jury selection and calling it “historic.” Or Mediate celebrating the fact that the Delaware judge assigned to the case is clearly not neutral. Here’s a slice from that craptastic outlet’s coverage:

That was not the only time Judge Davis spoke out in colorful terms about Fox’s coverage in the aftermath of the election, which he has described in scathing terms throughout this case. “I could have a lot of fun with this case,” Davis said at one point, during a discussion of Dominion’s opportunity to cross examine Fox witnesses.

Nothing like the judge openly admitting that he views Fox News as guilty before the trial. Do you remember a time when judges tried to hide their liberal bias? I sure do. That’s the old America. In the new Amerika (thank you Kafka!) the communist judges advertise their lack of impartiality to the communist press. And why not? Maybe there’s a Soros retirement bonus waiting for any robed idiot who turns our judicial system into a modern Stalinist replica that’s suitable for the Banana Republic of Biden.

Though it’s hard to believe, MSNBC’s trashy commentary was even more toxic and absurd than Mediate’s garbage:

“There could be a lot of implications depending on how it plays out,” said Imraan Farukhi, an assistant professor at Syracuse University’s S.I. Newhouse School of Public CommunicationsBesides the financial impact, Farukhi added, “The other question is what will they do with their talent if they lose? The majority of the stars at Fox are implicated. Any other news organization would have probably seen their hosts losing their jobs for improper reporting.”

Who’s going to tell Imraan Farukhi that if getting fired for “improper reporting” was actually a thing in American corporate media, there would no longer be American corporate media?

For that matter, who’s going to tell Imraan Farukhi that good entertainment lawyers don’t leave to become assistant professors at third-tier colleges? (I peeked at his bio.) How much does Farukhi even know about media? Or America for that matter? Did he just cross the southern border or something? I ask because he seems to be — well, you know — new here.

Of course, Assistant Professor Farukhi is not the only lunatic who’s out howling in the moonlight about the Fox lawsuit.

Everywhere you look, you find manifest absurdities on display in this lawsuit.

1st: The judge involved the case has already ruled that Fox’s claims about the electronic voting machine company are false.

In this case, it’s obvious that Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis is writing checks with his mouth that he simply can’t cash. The Constitution mandates that individual states conduct our elections. It is illegal for individual states to outsource our elections to foreign companies owned by foreigner individuals using private software that cannot be reviewed or audited.

This is basic law 101.

Why would such an absurd scenario be tolerated by our national security state (just think of all the cybersecurity spooks at the FBI, CIA, NSA and DHS) for even a moment? The answer, of course, is that it would not be tolerated — unless the national security state was the ultimate power behind it all.

That’s why you see 2020 election votes being counted in Spain by a DoD “contractor” called Scytl. That’s why you have a FBI agent posing as Arizona’s Director of Elections for the 2022 midterm disaster in Maricopa County.

And that’s why you have Delaware judges pretending to be cybersecurity experts who want you to believe that flaws in our election systems (that are published by CISA on its official website no less!) are really just “conspiracy theories.”

2nd: The plaintiff was allowed to seize the data from any journalist or producer or anchor at Fox News that it wanted. When has that ever happened in America?

A private company has never been allowed to hoover up the data from a legacy media network and embark on a fishing expedition. Never. Until now.

How was that data used?

On Monday March 6th, Tucker Carlson released the first footage of the January 6th insurrection showing police ushering protestors inside the Capitol.

On Tuesday March 7th, Tucker Carlson’s private text messages were widely published by the corporate media — as part of the “coverage” of the Fox lawsuit.

Notice the perfect timing. The data from discovery was used as leverage.

That same day, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer publicly warned Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch against running more footage: “Rupert Murdoch has a special obligation to stop Tucker Carlson from going on tonight […] our democracy depends on it.”

These are not subtle threats.

3rd: Chuck Schumer’s public threat to Rupert Murdoch gave the game away — it’s the federal government behind it all.

Why did the leader of the U.S. Senate claim that the owner of a news network had “a special obligation” to stop a TV anchor from investigating January 6th? That’s just the sort of thing that violates our democratic norms isn’t it? What was he talking about? The “special obligation” is no doubt Fox’s role in trying to sell the American people on the phony results of the stolen 2020 election — and the early Arizona call for Biden/Harris in particular.

There’s a word for this sort of threat and the word is: kompromat.

America’s national security state (FBI, DHS, CIA, NSA) is none too thrilled to be unmasked as the instigator of a phony insurrection on January 6th that stopped our duly elected senators from challenging the 2020 election certification due to fraud.

After all, subverting America is a delicate business.

Our spy agencies understand that they’ve lost their legitimacy with the American people — which is why they’re trying to seize power through the TikTok bill this week after getting caught trying to infiltrate Catholic churches last week in between investigating angry parents at school board meetings as “domestic terrorists” and stealing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s cellphone in a parking lot for no good reason.

It’s hard work rigging America’s elections at taxpayer expense — especially once its citizens start to notice.


Faked news Corruption Elections Leftist Virtue(!) Politics The Courts

Pretext of “Nuclear Documents” to Attack Trump Is Quickly Blown Up

Visits: 42

From Multiple sources:

According to the Washington Post (albeit a discredited newspaper but a reliable shill for the Washington political elite), the FBI was looking for nuclear documents in the Presidential collection Donald Trump stored at his Palm Beach estate. This speaks to the frantic desperation of the anti-Trump crowd, especially the corrupt officials that infest the leadership of the FBI and the Department of Justice. They used this ludicrous pretext to obtain a search warrant with the help of a credulous, cretinous Judge, Bruce Reinhart.

The nuclear secrets at Mar-a-Lago tale was more desperate than usual.
It lasted less than 12 hours.

U.S. federal agents were looking for documents relating to nuclear weapons when they searched former President Donald Trump’s home in Florida this week, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.

Having failed to produce any evidence that Trump was working with good old Vladimir Putin to destroy America’s democracy with Russiagate 1.0, the anti-Trump crowd apparently has decided to trot out another Russia-tainted meme, the ultimate red herring, to portray Donald Trump as a 21st Century Dr. Strangelove. We now know the truth.

Donald Trump was trying to build a nuclear weapon in his wine cellar at Mar A Lago.

Seriously, the theory was that Trump was building a bomb for Putin, because — you know — Russia is a technologically backward country and needs outside help. Really???

And if you believe that, I have some oceanfront property located just outside Winslow, Arizona for sale. Cash only and small bills.

Maybe we now know why the FBI was pawing through Melania Trump’s lingerie. Did they intercept a text from Trump telling his wife that she looked like a nuclear tipped cruise missile in her red Teddy. Of course, the FBI had to assume that was code word for something far more nefarious. I had to wonder why the FBI spent so much time handling and sniffing Melania’s panties and negligees.

(Maybe they are members of a “J. Edgar Hoover Cross Dressing Club,” and were looking to upgrade their outfits before their next Monkey Pox rave.)

The Deep State-Fake News cabal needs to work harder on their conspiracies.

Scott Adams, the cartoonist and author behind the Dilbert comic strip, posted a list of the most prominent deep state-fake news lies and conspiracies attacking President Donald Trump.

Here is a list of 11 previous fake news conspiracies that fell flat.

If only there were 51 principled former intelligence officials who could verify the authenticity of the latest claim.

Here is the common thread in all of the fake news hoaxes.

What this whole episode shows us is that Kamala Harris is no longer the dumbest member of the Biden team. Nope. That honor goes to Merrick Garland. He apparently believed that this scheme would discredit Trump and elevate Garland as the Clausewitz of the Biden Presidency. Warner Brothers may file a copyright infringement lawsuit against the mad Attorney General for adopting a Wile E Coyote plot. Garland strapped himself to the tip of the missile before activating the fuze that ignited the rocket. He failed to recognize that he would be riding a political nuclear bomb to his own political demise. Maybe he is just a secret admirer of Slim Pickens and wanted to recreate Pickens’ iconic moment in Dr. Strangelove.

Alright, back to serious. Trump may be right that someone may have planted a document related to nuclear weapons or nuclear technology in the boxes he had locked up. That does not incriminate Trump and is no crime. The prosecutors would have to show that Trump instructed someone on his staff to put such a document in one of the boxes. Trump may be a lot of things, but stupid and reckless are not how he became a billionaire and beat the dickens out of Hillary in 2016. Is there another Alexander Vindman lurking in the shadows keen on helping create a pretext to discredit Trump?

Trump may be a lot of things, but stupid and reckless are not how he became a billionaire and beat the dickens out of Hillary in 2016.

If Trump really was trying to hide such information why would he have instructed his attorneys to negotiate with the National Archives on getting an agreement to return the records to the Feds? In fact, if he had mens rea*, do you really think Trump would keep something so figuratively radioactive on his estate?

[*mens rea Latin, literally ‘guilty mind’; in the law “criminal intent”.]

Merrick Garland, despite his Harvard education, is not a smart man. He signed off on a warrant rather than ask Trump and his lawyers if he had such documents in his possession. Are they going for the old – he lied to me tactic that they used on General Michael Flynn? Lying to Federal Agents is a crime unless you are former FBI Chief Andrew McCabe.

Instead of doing the reasonable, lawyerly thing, Garland chose the nuclear option. It will come back to haunt him.

Trump lawyer Christina Bobb said in interviews Thursday night (8-11) that President Trump and his family in New York watched the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago Monday via closed circuit TV security cameras. Bobb said the FBI had ordered staff at Mar-a-Lago to turn the cameras off but that Trump lawyers had the cameras turned back on. [Now we know why the FBI wanted them turned off. — TPR]

CBS News reported Thursday night the Trump legal team is considering releasing video and photos of the search (excerpt):

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team is weighing whether to release the search warrant and inventory of material seized at Mar-a-Lago before a federal judge rules on the matter, according to a Florida-based attorney for Trump, Lindsey Halligan.

Earlier Thursday, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Justice Department had filed a motion to unseal the warrant and related documents, “absent objection from the former president.” Trump has until 3 p.m. Friday to respond.

His legal team is also discussing whether to release video and photos of the search, Halligan said. Two sources familiar with Trump’s legal strategy said that before FBI agents executed the warrant, they asked that Mar-a-Lago’s private security cameras be turned off. Trump’s team refused to comply.

The U.S. Secret Service, which maintains a permanent presence at the former president’s home, was not a party to the dispute over the cameras because the private club owns and controls the cameras, not the government.

It isn’t clear what any video that may have been captured by Mar-a-Lago’s cameras would show. According to Halligan, there were security cameras in Trump’s office, but not in all of the areas that were searched. She also said that there are photos of FBI personnel on the grounds.

Why does the fake news insist on lying to the American public?

Why does anyone listen to them anymore?




Uncategorized Education Opinion Reprints from others.

Actual Historian Dr. Mary Grabar Exposes Radicalization of ‘1619 Project’ Creator Nikole Hannah-Jones: She ‘Blames All White People and Her Country’ for Personal Issues

Visits: 34


A Breitbart News Reprint.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of the debunked New York Times ‘1619 Project,’ “blames America for her family’s problems,” according to Mary Grabar, Ph.D., resident fellow at the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization and author of Debunking The 1619 Project: Exposing the Plan to Divide America and Debunking Howard Zinn: Exposing the Fake History That Turned a Generation Against America.

Grabar joined Breitbart News Saturday with host Matthew Boyle to discuss the power of false historical narratives on American society and the danger in the proliferation of Hannah-Jones’s work and Critical Race Theory.

“She is not a historian,” Grabar said, explaining Hannah-Jones’s background is in journalism whose “beat is race,” and came to national prominence because in 2019, she proposed “upon remembering a high school black studies class … devoting a special issue to the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first Africans at Jamestown” to the New York Times Magazine.


The magazine published a “completely distorted view … of what 1619 meant,” Grabar explained, continuing that Hannah-Jones’s view on this part of history “came almost exclusively from Lerone Bennett, who was this polemicist … and he’s also the one who coined the phrase ‘black power’ … and, of course, Stokely Carmichael took it up as a rallying cry, inspiring riots and mayhem.”

In the middle of the violent riots across the country in the summer of 2020, Hannah-Jones remarked in a tweet that “it would be an honor” to have the riots called “The 1619 Riots.” She later deleted the tweet.

Speaking about Hannah-Jones’s upbringing, Grabar remarked that “she has a black father and a white mother. The mother hardly ever gets any mention — she only focuses on the black side of her family.”

Hannah-Jones’s father was “discharged under murky circumstances” from the military and “had to take menial jobs for his entire life,” leading to the perception that “he’d been cheated,” Grabar said.

She also explained that Hannah-Jones was subject to the notorious busing policy of the 1960s and 1970s, where children were “taken away from their communities, from, you know, where their friends are from and where their churches are, into a sort of an alien place, and they have difficulties.”

The new book by journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, “The 1619 Project: A New Origin Story” is displayed at a New York City bookstore on November 17, 2021 in New York City. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

She “was bused to a majority-white school in a nicer neighborhood,” Grabar said of Hannah-Jones. “So, from second grade, she was bused one hour each way to this nice school and she recently recounted how she observed the changes, as she was riding along, how the houses got nicer, you know, the streets were kept up, and she was going into this ‘white world,’ and there she claimed she was not taught black history.”

“From a historical perspective, we can see [how] the bad policies of the 1960s and 1970s, which produced busing, and produced these radical activists who are writing these false histories — these were being taught in the schools to people like Nikole Hannah-Jones, who has risen to the top by producing this false narrative of American history, and weaving it in with her own personal story,” Grabar said.

“So, someone who probably could have benefitted from psychotherapy is now being exalted and placed on a platform as a historian whose, you know, are worthy of being taught in schools K through 12, and at the college level,” she concluded.


Grabar explained that Hannah-Jones’s first experience with “black history” came when she was introduced to “this fraud of a historian” Lerone Bennett, “and that radicalized her.”

“And she says that she became incorrigible,” Grabar continued. “She would not say the Pledge of Allegiance, she began to hate America, and so she blames America for her family’s problems. … You’ve got a woman who seems very embittered, blames all white people and her country for problems that she had.”

Grabar explained that Hannah-Jones took on a “Marxist” worldview that she “uses to explain current events, through that historical lens, and the end game is a Marxist socialist revolution and also reparations.”

Mary Grabar is also the founder of the Dissident Prof. Education Project. Debunking Howard Zinn: Exposing the Fake History That Turned a Generation Against America and Debunking the 1619 Project: Exposing the Plan to Divide America can be found on her website, as well as Amazon and Barnes and Noble.


The Courts Corruption Opinion Politics

Couric admits coverup. Left hiding the truth from their leftist cult followers.

Visits: 16

Being one who has exposed lies from the left and got a White Plantationist ( white liberal ) banned on four different Liberal news venues, I actually understand why Couric did what she did. I personally know of a obscure left wing blog that on a daily basis takes actual facts and turns them sideways. I guess that’s done to keep the 15-20 followers of that blog to stay loyal.

For those who don’t know, Couric left out comments that RGB made that would surprise those on the left. What were they?

The athletes, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, showed contempt for those who “made it possible for their parents and grandparents.”

In the interview — which was published by Yahoo News, where Couric was global news anchor at the time — she asked Ginsburg about then-San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick and others who refused to stand during the playing of the national anthem before NFL games. Replied Ginsburg: “I think it’s really dumb of them.”

In this 2016 photo, Katie Couric (left), shown while serving as global news anchor for Yahoo news, interviews Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Photo: Screenshot/Yahoo News)
In this 2016 photo, Katie Couric (left), shown while serving as global news anchor for Yahoo news, interviews Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Photo: Screenshot/Yahoo News)

“Would I arrest them for doing it? No,” Ginsburg elaborated. “I think it’s dumb and disrespectful. I would have the same answer if you asked me about flag burning. I think it’s a terrible thing to do, but I wouldn’t lock a person up for doing it. I would point out how ridiculous it seems to me to do such an act.”

Couric then asked, “But when it comes to these football players, you may find their actions offensive, but what you’re saying is, it’s within their rights to exercise those actions?”

“Yes,” said Ginsburg. “If they want to be stupid, there’s no law that should be preventive. If they want to be arrogant, there’s no law that prevents them from that. What I would do is strongly take issue with the point of view that they are expressing when they do that.”

One of the reasons Couric edited the comments? Couric claims that Ginsburg, who was 83 at the time, was ‘elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question’ 

Couric said she was conflicted because, as a Supreme Court Justice, Ginsburg’s thoughts were important for people to hear, but as a fan, she allowed her personal politics to influence her editing decision. In closing, According to a new report in The Daily Mail, Couric writes in her memoir that she edited out the comments because they were “unworthy of a crusader for equality” like Ginsburg.



The man was on Fire. Trump knocks it out of the Ballpark.

Visits: 19

The man was on Fire. Trump knocks it out of the Ballpark. I watched only about an hour but I ACTUALLY THOUGHT HE WAS STILL PRESIDENT.

President Trump: If we had an honest media, which we don’t, they would say it loud and clear. By the time I left that magnificent house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, almost 20 million Americans had already been vaccinated. 1.5 million were administered just on my final day alone… Biden said there was no vaccine. Say it again, Joe. I actually don’t believe he said that in a malicious way. I think he said it because he didn’t know what the hell was happening. (laughter) … We took care of a lot of people including on December 21st we took care of Joe Biden. He got his shot. He got his vaccine. He forgot.

Driving the loons at MSNBC CRAZY.


Politics Opinion

Why you can’t trust the MSM and Progressive politicians. Democrat Impeachment Managers Withdraw Statements Falsely Attributed to Sen. Mike Lee After Schumer Intervention.

Visits: 22

Why you can’t trust the MSM and Progressive politicians. Democrat Impeachment Managers Withdraw Statements Falsely Attributed to Sen. Mike Lee After Schumer Intervention. So the impeachment managers tried to pull a fast one. Using fake news they tried to use what they called evidence. Why did they do what they did?

This led to a remarkable moment where Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT), the president pro tempore of the U.S. Senate who is also presiding over the impeachment trial of Trump since Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts declined to preside, given that Trump is no longer in office, made an unclear ruling apparently rejecting Lee’s motion. Lee then appealed his ruling and sought a vote in the Senate to override Leahy, and after several confusing moments the Senate began voting on Lee’s objection to Leahy’s unclear ruling. After a couple senators’ names were called when the clerk began calling the roll of Senators to vote on Lee’s objection, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke up and intervened to stop the vote. Schumer used a tactic called noting the absence of a quorum–essentially pausing the Senate’s formal business as televised for the nation while senators and staff handle a dispute or negotiation off camera–to “work this out.”

Moments later, they came back into action and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD)–the House Democrats’ lead impeachment manager–admitted that Cicilline’s characterization of Lee as it related to the Trump-Tuberville phone call, while based on news reports, was inaccurate, and then he withdrew the matter from the record himself without a Senate vote.



Governor DeSantis shows how you are to treat a fake news trashy reporter.

Visits: 29

Governor DeSantis shows how you are to treat a fake news trashy reporter. CNN’s Rosa Flores and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) got into a heated exchange over the coronavirus vaccine rollout across the state that has left many assisted living facilities waiting for vaccines after the Governor said he would prioritize senior citizens.

CNN reporters have a habit of asking a question that turns into questions and turns into no one else getting a chance to speak. Well the Governor of Florida wasn’t going to allow the low level info babe her day in the sun. She tried to blame the blue counties in Florida in action on the Governor.

Florida got the vaccine to the hospitals and nursing homes. It’s up to them to get the vaccines to the citizens in a timely manner.



Verified by MonsterInsights