Trump says NY Judge Merchan ‘thinks he is above the Supreme Court’ after barring him from immunity arguments

New York Judge Juan Merchan has prohibited Trump from attending presidential immunity arguments at the US Supreme Court

By Brooke Singman

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Trump said New York Judge Juan Merchan “thinks he is above the Supreme Court,” after “prohibiting” him from attending arguments Thursday on presidential immunity, telling Fox News Digital it is “the most important case in many years” before the high court. 

The former president and presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee spoke exclusively to Fox News Digital on Wednesday after spending the last two days in a Manhattan courtroom for opening arguments and witness testimony in his unprecedented criminal trial. 

Trump had requested to attend arguments at the Supreme Court when it holds oral arguments about the former president’s immunity on Thursday, but Judge Merchan, who is presiding over the trial, rejected that request. (Continue Reading)

Full Article & Source:
Trump says NY Judge Merchan ‘thinks he is above the Supreme Court’ after barring him from immunity arguments

Mom gets standing ovation after calling for ‘mass exodus’ from public schools

By Sam Dorman

Florida mom Quisha King called for a “mass exodus” from the public school system, arguing that school systems left parents with no other choice for fighting left-wing ideas.

Her comments came during the annual Family Research Council’s Pray Vote Stand Summit during a Thursday panel on Fighting Indoctrination on a National Scale.”

“I really think at this point the only thing to do is have a mass exodus from the public school system – that’s it,” King said. In response, she received prolonged applause, and many in the audience stood to their feet at the Leesburg, Virginia, event.

King previously drew national attention for her speech opposing critical race theory (CRT) in June. She works with the group Moms for Liberty, which is one of many battling CRT and other ideas across the nation.

“With this FBI thing, it just made me realize – what else are we supposed to do?” King asked. “Standing up to these people doesn’t seem to matter. I mean, we have – all of us – we’ve been at these school board meetings, we’ve been voicing our opinions, we’re writing articles, we’re emailing teachers – we’re doing all that stuff. And they don’t care. I’m like the only thing left to do is to just peace out.”

She added that “it has to be us doing it together” in order to “really send the message that you do not have the right to indoctrinate our children.”

Her comments came amid an uproar over the Department of Justice’s announcement that the FBI would investigate potential violence at school board meetings. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s memo on the issue raised concerns as it appeared to be in response to a National School Boards Association (NSBA) letter suggesting that officials were encountering a form of “domestic terrorism.”

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views,” Garland’s memo states.

Still, critics like Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., have raised concerns about DOJ restricting free speech – pointing to language in NSBA’s letter that disparaged anti-CRT efforts.

Full Article & Source:
Mom gets standing ovation after calling for ‘mass exodus’ from public schools

The Concept: In the Midst of Orwellian Madness

I never thought I would see it, but here we are.  The concept is no longer merely works of fiction.  We are living a present day version of George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm combined.  Who would have thought so many “modern” people could be so very indoctrinated as to fall for the elite’s and elite wannabee’s spiel of lies? 

We’re watching riots.  There is no misunderstanding of what they are.  Buildings and cars are being destroyed and burned.  Citizens and police officers alike are being viciously attacked.  Yet, a multitude of Democrats call it peaceful protesting and suggest the Republicans, Bill Barr and whomever else is trying to prevent people’s right to protest.

Are these Democrats that delusional or do they think we are that stupid and they will be able to convince the rest of us that the lie is the truth and the truth is the lie?

Watching and listening to a portion of the Judicial Committee hearing hosting Attorney General Bill Barr on Tuesday, July 28, 2020, I not only wanted to scream at the power seekers – I did scream at them.  I screamed at them for slinging false allegations and then refusing to give the attorney general an opportunity to respond.  Their behavior was childish, hateful, deceitful and worse – a conspiracy in motion.

I’d say there is no excuse for the behavior of the Democrats on that committee, but there is a reason.  They are trying to grab power not rightfully theirs.  They are attempting to lie their way into that power not earned nor freely given them.  And… obviously… they will try to destroy anyone and anything in the way of that power grab.  That, or they are simply mentally ill and so delusional that they cannot ascertain the difference between their fictional concept floating around in their defective brains & the reality actually transpiring before them.  Either way – they are in the wrong.

Someone in the right need not lie nor deceive to prove their allegation or position is true.  They present facts and give reason why their position should be the accepted one.

These Democrats and Republicans of ill-intent, on the other hand, tend to deceive and deceive some more!

It’s pathetic!

It’s definitely unbelievable that so many regular people are falling for the radical lib lies.  How can that be? Simply use the brain without bias and one should be able to see what has been transpiring.  It’s right there in plain sight.  Unless one is only watching hate-Trump networks and like print material, where only half-truths (full lies) are told and the spin leaves out important information, while at the minimum offering spin, spin, spin.

Friendly reminder:  Protests do not involve looting, destruction and attacks on police and others.  That is RIOTING and criminal behavior.

Back to the liberal narrative…

A journalist I had admired, and liked as a person as well, surprised me a few months ago.  She suggested that President Trump had mocked Serge Kovaleski disability, something that had been debunked years ago.  Being good at her job – she should have known that – or did she and said it anyway to put down Trump?  I don’t know.  I’ll probably never know.  However, I did tweet her about it and sent along a video as a reminder.

To this day, there are people who don’t like Trump because they believe he mocked the reporter’s disability.  As a result, these people despise the president and see (judge) everything he says as does based on the person they believe him to be – not the person he is.  In short, they are against anything he says or does prior to him saying or doing it.

If anyone needs a reminder…

Serge’s disability does not involve flailing.  He has arthrogryposis.

The flailing that Trump did is what he has done for years in reference to people being flustered or frustrated.  He did it in reference to Ted Cruz, too.  Did anyone accuse the president of mocking his disability?  Oh!  That’s right.  Senator Cruz doesn’t have a disability.

What about the lie that President Trump didn’t disavow David Duke, though he has repeatedly done so over the years.  It’s a lie, but it was repeatedly said and to this day, even with video proof out there that it is a lie – there are people who still believe that Trump is pals with Duke.

What about the lie that President Trump said there were good people on both sides and that he was referring to the KKK and White Nationalist?  No!  He was talking about the people that came to protest for and against keeping the statue.  That should have been obvious to anyone actually listening to what he was saying – yet… many are repeating the lie (some on purpose & some unknowingly) and other people are hating Trump and calling him a racist because of the lie – not because he is.

What I do love is when people state for fact that Trump is a liar and lies all the time, yet, when asked, to name the lies – they can’t do it.  Why?  Because most of the people I’ve run into that are making the claim have no idea what the alleged lies are.  They are merely parroting what they have heard or been told to say.

Turns out that one of our fine outlets (sarcasm) was allegedly counting what they considered a lie, as a separate lie every time the president stated it.  In other words, if an economist stated a five dollar bill was worth $5 and Trump repeated it, but their expert said it was worth 5 cents – then, rather than considering two experts were disagreeing – they claimed Trump lied.  And, if he repeated that expert’s claim 100 times, then it was claimed he lied 100 times.

Difference of opinion is another area. 

If Trump has a different opinion than the fine outlet (sarcasm) – he lied.  He’s not allowed not to agree, it would seem.

And then there are the exaggerations merely to make a point.  They are called hyperbole.  You know, statements not meant to be taken literally.  Like when I say, “As I’ve said a millions times” – it’s understood that I really didn’t say whatever a million times, but I’ve said it lots – maybe half a million?    Yet, when President Trump does likewise – it’s called a lie by the fine outlet (sarcasm).

You may wonder what all this has to do with the riots, indoctrination, Animal Farm, 1984, and the Judicial Committee hearing with Bill Barr.

Everything.

Lies mold perceptions.

Perceptions define reception.

Reception defines reaction.

In short, if you believe one man is truthful and the other is a liar, you will most likely believe the one you consider truthful over the one you consider a liar, right?  But what if your truthful man is mistakenly wrong or actually lying?  What if you are blowing off the man who is actually telling you the truth, because you believe him to be a liar?

That’s the point. 

When one let’s perceptions rule the roost, so to speak, rather than consider anything contrary to what they have been told and encouraged to believe – they have allowed bias to destroy their ability to come to an informed conclusion about anything.  Instead, they become indoctrinated puppets to be used at will – not the smart people they think they are.

Normally, people ask questions they would like the answer to.  So why would anyone, except for the people that create, present and believe all the propaganda suffocating our very existence just now, be so excited that Barr was treated with such disrespect and not allowed to answer the questions posed to him? 

Wasn’t that the whole point after all – to ask and get answers?

Then, though we viewed and heard what transpired, Democrats actually came out and portrayed a scenario that suggested Barr was the rude one and Barr talked over everyone.  Oh, hear me laugh rudely at their audacity to attempt a gaslight moment as I “take my time back.”

I think of the riots and wonder how anyone can actually justify allowing them to happen.  It’s good because why?

It’s justified because of built up anger and oppression?

Does that mean I can go smack Nancy Pelosi around, steal her ice cream and set fire to her expensive refrigerators, because she has so upset me because her decisions affected me badly?

Well, of course not.

Neither is there an excuse for all the riots that are occurring or the people in authority that are allowing the harm to businesses, their cities and their citizens.

What’s wrong with these people?

Why are so many listening to them?  Will they continue to listen once it is their home that is being destroyed and family hurt or killed?

I’ve read Animal Farm & 1984.  It should be required reading for those indoctrinated puppets that have fallen victim to the propaganda of the pigs (not cops) that start out being the heroes only to lose their fairness in the pursuit of power.

Furthermore, no one should want recorded history changed from what it actually was, except for those who feel guilty for what they or their predecessors have done.

Who is trying to remove history?

It certainly isn’t the Republicans or pro-Trump people.

Shouldn’t that give pause?

Shouldn’t it give reason to take a look at what is actually transpiring, rather than what one is being told is the reality they should accept as theirs, though it really isn’t a “reality” at all?

Riots are occurring.

Governors – not Trump – are allowing those riots!

Citizens are being attacked because of the Democrats – not Trump.

Do you really think it is okay for people to be attacked because they happen to be on the street or in their business or homes, while rioters decide to do their wrongful deeds?

Some seem to be all in for the riots, so they can blame Trump, but it isn’t his fault.  Nothing that can be said or done will make it his blame to claim.

Before I close, which I intend to do…

My approach is to prove myself wrong in any situation.  If I can’t – then I am most likely right.

Someone tells me a video proves something?  I watch it with that in mind as a possibility.

Someone tells me someone said something?  I listen with that in mind as a possibility.

I have no problem being wrong, if I am wrong.

I’m like – okay.

What I do have a problem with are people who are indoctrinated puppets, who seem to have a toddler IQ, gaslighter intent, or simply the willingness to follow the pack and spew whatever is the talking point (truth or false) against the other side for the day.

Again…

Riots are occurring, which are illegal & officers should be allowed (required) to step in and stop them.

Governors, who stop officers from acting within the law, should be charged with all crimes committed as a result.  In other words, if I am slugged because a governor forbade the officers to enforce the law – that governor should be accountable for the assault on me.

If you don’t agree, I guess someone can come slug you, your kids, mom or dad and that is okay – cause, in your mind, riots are good and anything that happens as a result of the riot is good.

What a stupid thought.

It’s time to take a step back and consider all things based on truth – rather than political illusion and the puppet feed thrown out by the hate vultures to be consumed by the ill-informed.

Riots are wrong.

Kicking people in the head is wrong.

Ganging up on a person is wrong.

Burning down or otherwise destroying someone’s property is wrong.

Lying about someone is wrong.

Lying about what someone said is wrong.

Trying to take over power by deceit and for wrongful purpose is wrong.

What was once wrong, and works of fiction, has become our daily lives because…?

It’s time to take back our sanity and control of our lives!

It’s time to tell the radicals of both parties that we are done with them!

It’s time to seek and focus on the truth!

Trump isn’t the one that has being lying!

It’s time to admit it!

 
Copyright © 2020 Carrie K. Hutchens

Thank you for Supporting Carrie’s Take!








 

Open Letter to the Democrats in Congress

Dear Impeachment Obsessed:

The facts are simple!

Ukraine received the approved aid.

Ukraine received the approved aid by the deadline.

End of story.

You have no case.

You have no legit grounds to impeach President Trump.

You only have lies & spin.

It’s time to stop the Alinsky tactics.

It’s time to act with integrity.

It’s time to vote “NO” on impeachment.

Sincerely,

An Informed & Angry Voter

Let’s Say a Reporter (Real One) was Subpoenaed by Left-Leaning Committee

I was reading, “Barr spars with Nadler, threatens to skip testimony after dispute over hearing format” and became both agitated and amused.  This is some crazy stuff we are witnessing and I felt an overwhelming need to share the analogy that immediately came to mind.

Let’s say a reporter (real one) read the police report of a robbery & reported on it.  Reported strictly on what the report itself said.  No opinion.  No assumption.  Simply reported what was reported to law enforcement.

A suspect was arrested.

The reporter (real one) simply reported a suspect was arrested.

The suspect appeared at a hearing.

The D.A. stepped forward & asked that the suspect be released and all charges dismissed.  D.A. stated evidence had been found that this person was not guilty of the robbery after all.  The judge agreed & charges were dismissed.

The reporter (real one) reports:

“The D.A. stepped forward & asked that the suspect be released and all charges dismissed.  D.A. stated evidence had been found that this person was not guilty of the robbery after all.  The judge agreed & charges were dismissed.”

The left-leaning Committee becomes outraged. 

How dare the D.A. state there was evidence the suspect was not guilty?

How dare the D.A. ask for a dismissal of charges?

How dare the judge agree?

How dare the reporter (real one) report what transpired?

The Committee, after all, knows the suspect must be guilty.  It’s declared that the evidence is in plain-sight.  Some say they have seen it.  Many declare the suspect and reporter must be removed from their jobs.  There must be transparency – they will have a hearing and call the reporter (real one).  Yes, they are sure, they claim, they will expose the reporter’s (real one’s) attempted cover-up, find a way to make the suspect guilty and thereby over-ride the D.A. and judge.

The reporter (real one) was subpoenaed to the hearing.

It was obvious the Committee was hostile and determined to challenge the reporter’s (real one’s) integrity and right to continue in their position.

The reporter (real one) states upfront that they have no idea why they were asked to appear before the committee.  They weren’t involved in the crime, the reporting of it to the police, the investigation, the outcome of that investigation, the D.A. deciding to request a dismissal or what evidence he was talking about, nor the judge’s decision.  All they – the reporter (real one) – had done was to report what had transpired with nothing added or deleted, including personal commentary, especially regarding the evidence, individuals involved, or results thereof.

A robbery happened.

It was investigated.

A suspect was arrested.

A suspect went to court.

The D.A. stated further evidence proved they had the wrong person.

The D.A. asked for dismissal.

The judge agreed to the dismissal.

What part of that was the reporter (real one) responsible for? 

What part did the reporter (real one) influence in some way?

How is the reporter (real one) lacking in integrity?

How is the reporter (real one) being dishonest?

All of that being irrelevant to the Committee, they demanded the reporter (real one) present everything involved in the incident, investigation & conclusions to them.  The reporter (real one) reminded them that they already had access to all that information, excluding anything by law the officers & D.A. were not allowed to share.

Committee members, as often seen, postured during the hearing and afterwards rushed to appear in front of the cameras.  The reporter (real one), they claim with such righteous indignation, hadn’t been forthcoming with them and denied them the reports they needed to fully investigate the case and provide the public with the facts.

Okay.

The reporter (real one) – whose only part in this entire situation was to report on the actions and findings of others – is suddenly not forthcoming and hiding information from the Committee?  Information that they already have or can readily obtain?

Insanity comes to mind.

Attorney General Barr, did not hire the team to investigate the Russian interference, nor did he prepare the investigation summary and conclusion.  That was Mueller & Team.

(The reporter (real one) reporting the actions and conclusion of those handling the case.)

Attorney General Barr, did not alter anything.  He presented the report “AS IS” with only redaction of information not allowed to be readily shared.

(The reporter (real one) reporting the actions and conclusion of those handling the case.)

Attorney General Barr, was left to conclude one aspect.  Did anything the President do appear to actually be obstruction?  No.  It didn’t.  (A conclusion based on the information the Mueller Team presented.)

(The judge agreeing with the D.A.’s findings.)

The left-leaning Committees apparently don’t like Mueller & Team’s conclusions that President Trump neither engaged in collusion nor obstruction, so they are going to proceed with further investigation, until they can find something… anything… to blame him for?  And, part of their plan is to take down Barr for daring to report what transpired and what Mueller concluded as a result thereof?

Yes, insanity, or perhaps corruption and lack of actual integrity on the part of those participating in the dishonesty, crazy behavior and out-in-left field allegations are possibilities we should wonder about, shouldn’t we?  It matters not which.  What is transpiring is not what we should expect from rational adults, especially ones in control of the lives of others and our country.

A.G. Barr is guilty of nothing.

The left-leaning Committees, on the other hand, have much to answer for.

Copyright © 2019 Carrie K. Hutchens

‘Who Appointed You to the Supreme Court?’: Senator Grills Yates For Defying Trump Travel Ban

Source:
‘Who Appointed You to the Supreme Court?’: Senator Grills Yates For Defying Trump Travel Ban