Sometimes the Supreme Court gets it right and in a rarity, leveling a historic 9-0 decision, SCOTUS just sidestepped two major cases concerning partisan gerrymandering. This allows controversial district maps to stand and be used in this fall’s midterm elections just the way they are. That’s great news for Republicans and Democrats are incensed over it. They had their hearts set on redistricting voting districts… i.e. partisan gerrymandering. They will literally do anything to steal an election which includes gerrymandering, having the dead vote and recruiting illegal aliens and refugees to vote. Those are just a few of their favorite tricks.
You have to ask yourself if Dems are willing to illegally and unethically unseat a sitting president simply because he is a Republican and they don’t like him, how far will they go to rig an election? As far as they can possibly get away with, sometimes with the help of government agencies. They bend the rules just as far as they can and had planned to do so in the midterms as well. Their blue wave is more of a drip and now this. Things are just not looking good for leftists in the upcoming elections.
This decision is a huge one from SCOTUS. CNN reported: “The Supreme Court on Monday sidestepped two major cases concerning partisan gerrymandering, allowing controversial district maps to stand and be used in this fall’s midterm elections. The 9-0 ruling authored by Chief Justice John Roberts in a Wisconsin case is a blow to Democrats who argued the Republican-drawn maps prevented fair and effective representation by diluting voters’ influence and penalizing voters based on their political beliefs.”
Democrats won a challenge in a lower court, but the Supreme Court’s decision on the Wisconsin case Monday would limit who can bring such cases in the future. A second case from Maryland involved the Republicans challenging a district map drawn by Democrats. The justices said that a lower court did not act improperly in leaving the map in place. In an unsigned opinion with no dissents, the justices said that the challengers failed to reach the high bar of showing “irreparable harm” that would be necessary for a preliminary injunction to block the map. “Even if we assume — contrary to the findings of the District Court — that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims, the balance of equities and the public interest tilted against their request for a preliminary injunction,” the court said.
The court’s opinion in the Maryland case means that for now, the justices will leave having to answer whether the court can set a standard for when politicians go too far in drawing lines to benefit one party over another for another day. But it also makes it harder to bring it before the high court. This issue is sure to come before the court again, however, and it is one of the reasons it is so important that President Trump select another constitutional originalist to sit on the court when the next vacancy comes up. For instance, Kennedy was seen as the swing vote on this case. Rumor has it he will retire sometime this summer and President Trump will fill his spot. This could solidly weigh the Supreme Court in favor of conservatives for the first time in many years.
On Monday, Justice Anthony Kennedy stayed relatively silent. The last time the Supreme Court heard a major partisan gerrymandering case, in 2004, four conservative justices said the issue should be decided by the political branches, not the courts. But Kennedy was unwilling to bar all future claims of injury from partisan gerrymanders. That stance may soon be moot.
It would seem a whole raft of rulings are going against Democrats and their manipulation of voting. Judges ruled this last week that you can wear clothing with political expressions to the voting booth. That’s a win for free speech, something the left abhors. Democrats are always whining about how unfair the elections are, all the while trying to corrupt the voting process itself. For instance, trying to kill off voter ID. Lately, it hasn’t been working for them, which makes me smile.
This is nothing new for the left. They’ve been doing this for decades where they try to gerrymander districts so Democrats can win more seats even though the majority don’t want them there. When Republicans decided they had had enough and decided to turn the tables and give the Dems a bit of their own medicine, liberals had a meltdown. Unfortunately for the Dems, not all judges are liberal and even the liberal justices on the Supreme Court elected to punt this one.
It appears that Americans are going to give the left an even bigger boot in 2018 than they did in 2016. Good times. The Trump wave is still building and it looks like it’s going to crush the Democrats flat. In the meantime, expect the shrill whining from the left to intensify as they know their time is short and they will fight every inch of the way — including cheating when it comes to elections.
Trending Now on Right Wing News
VIDEO: Rashida Tlaib: Dems Discussing Arresting Trump Officials
It’s crystal clear..that the left should never ever be allowed into our government. These are dangerous folks.
Maybe Rashida should be arrested for her connections to Islamic terrorists. The fact that this woman is in our government…is despicable!
Via The Daily Wire:
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) stated on Tuesday that House Democrats were discussing behind closed doors how to arrest the members of President Donald Trump’s administration who did not comply with congressional subpoenas.
“Let me tell you, this is pretty — and this is the last caucus conversation we had. Do you know this is really unprecedented? This is the worst time we’ve ever had a situation like this,” Tlaib said during a town hall meeting. “So they’re trying to figure out — no joke — they’re trying to figure out, ‘Well, is it the D.C. police that goes and gets them?’ No, no.”
“What are we hoping? I mean, I’m not in those kinds of conversations, but I’m asking, like, you know, what happens? And they’re like, ‘Well, Rashida, we’re trying to figure it out ourselves because this is uncharted territory,’” she continued. “No, I’m telling you that they’re trying to be like, ‘Well, where are we going to put them? Where are we going to hold them?’ No, I mean those are the kinds of things they’re trying to tread carefully.”
— America Rising (@AmericaRising) October 4, 2019
Accordingly, in an escalating effort to force White House officials comply with congressional subpoenas, House Democrats have reportedly been reexamining holding those members of the administration in inherent contempt — a power that the legislature has not used since 1935.
The Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) explains that inherent contempt is the oldest of three strategies that Congress can use to enforce subpoenas. According to the Washington, D.C.-based think tank:
“Since 1935, Congress has relied on the executive and judicial branches when people refuse to comply with congressional subpoenas. This practice makes sense: if Congress cannot get the information it needs on its own authority, then it can rely on the authority of the other branches of government. However, there is another option. Instead of turning to another branch, Congress can legally imprison or fine individuals who refuse to comply.”
Tlaib incorrectly suggested that the process could be enforced by the Washington, D.C. Police Department — the procedure actually only involves the chamber that is concerned. Following a contempt citation, the individual is arrested by the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms, and subsequently brought to the floor for punishment, which may include imprisonment.
DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:
Whistleblower Didn’t Follow Law: Went To Schiff’s House Intel Panel Before IG
This pretty much explains the Democrat party. When do any of them follow the law? None of them have ever been held accountable for the laws they continue to break.
It is important for the American people to fight back. These politicians believe they are above the law. Time to stop allowing that.
A CIA officer whistleblower failed to follow the law for protecting members of the intelligence community (IC) seeking to report government malfeasance by going to the Democrat head of the House Intelligence Community before the IC inspector general (IG).
On Wednesday, the New York Times (NYT) revealed:
The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistleblower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.
However, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 explicitly requires an official concerned about wrongdoing within the government to go to the IC inspector general before the congressional panels in charge of oversight of the intelligence community.
In fact, while the URL at the bottom of the document screenshat by @BradMossEsq has apparently been defunct since 2017, here's what it used to say. It quoted the statute saying IC whistleblowers had to go through the ICIG before going to Congress. pic.twitter.com/cqXCIOMoJU
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 2, 2019
Under a section titled, “Summary of Procedures for Reporting Urgent Concerns Pursuant to the ICWPA,” the official Director of National Intelligence (DNI) website states:
The employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee –
a. before making such a contact, furnishes to the DNI, through the IC IG, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and
b. obtains and follows from the DNI, through the IC IG, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with necessary and appropriate security procedures.
The CIA whistleblower in question went to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff’s office days before the intelligence community’s inspector general, the internal investigator, and watchdog.
Investigators from the office of the IC IG are expected to operate independently of political leadership in government.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) knew about the “whistleblower” complaint days before it was officially filed, it was reported on Wednesday.
Schiff – who performed a dramatized version of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky during last week’s hearing – was aware of the broad contents of the “whistleblower” complaint days before the partisan CIA official formally filed the complaint, the New York Times reported.
After the detailing his accusations to the “the agency’s top lawyer,” the “whistleblower” took his complaint to a House Intelligence Committee aide, who relayed the information to Schiff, who is largely leading the charge on the impeachment inquiry.
Per the New York Times:
Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his accusations to the agency’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that avenue for airing his allegations was unfolding, the officer then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.
The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff or anyone else, an official said.
As the Times detailed, the “whistleblower” eventually brought the complaint to Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, as Schiff’s aide suggested. That move “gave the whistle-blower added protections against reprisals and also allowed him to legally report on classified information,” the Times reports:
While House Intelligence Committee members are allowed to receive classified whistle-blower complaints, they are not allowed to make such complaints public, according to a former official. A complaint forwarded to the committee by the inspector general gives it more latitude over what it can publicize.
By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained.
The complaint – based entirely on second-hand information – ultimately led to the release of the transcript, detailing the contents of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. The transcripts do not show the president engaging in quid pro quo for dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden, as Schiff suggested during his fabricated reenactment at last week’s hearing.
DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW: