College professor and MSNBC contributor Jason Johnson warned that President-Elect Donald Trump’s new pick to lead Justice Department is far more alarming than Matt Gaetz because she could actually carry out Trump’s agenda.
What is the left afraid of – the citizens finding out how corrupt the lefties were?
Nothing new with Schift’s words. His mind continues to work like a thousand-word puzzle which is always geared for trouble by establishing fake news to keep the left happy.
****
Trump Team Rejects Schiff’s Military Allegation as Fearmongering
California Senator-elect Adam Schiff recently claimed that former President Donald Trump intends to use the military against his political opponents if he returns to the White House. The allegation, made during an interview with Jake Tapper, has been dismissed by Trump’s team as baseless and a political ploy to stoke fear.
Schiff’s concerns were sparked by Trump’s recent remarks about dealing with “radical left lunatics” who, he said, are causing chaos in the country. “We have some very bad people,” Trump said. “It should be very easily handled by, if necessary, the National Guard or, if really necessary, the military.”
The former president’s team insists that his comments were about ensuring public safety, not targeting political adversaries. “President Trump has always been clear: his priority is law and order,” a campaign spokesperson said. “He’s talking about addressing violence and unrest, not engaging in political retribution.”
Schiff, however, sees a dangerous precedent in Trump’s rhetoric. “This kind of language is alarming and should concern every American,” Schiff told Tapper. “It’s a clear sign of authoritarian tendencies.”
Trump’s allies argue that Schiff’s interpretation is a deliberate distortion. “Adam Schiff is once again fabricating scenarios to smear President Trump,” said Rep. Elise Stefanik. “There’s no evidence to suggest Trump would misuse the military.”
During his presidency, Trump often called for strong measures to handle unrest, particularly during the 2020 protests. His supporters view these actions as part of his commitment to maintaining order, not as political weaponry.
Legal experts are weighing in, with some suggesting Schiff’s claims lack merit. “There’s no legal basis to assume Trump would use the military unlawfully,” said Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. “His remarks reflect standard government protocol for dealing with riots or emergencies.”
Schiff remains unconvinced, warning that even the suggestion of military involvement in political disputes could erode public trust. “The mere hint of such actions could embolden extremists,” he said. “This isn’t about what Trump may do—it’s about the dangerous environment he’s fostering.”
Trump’s supporters point out that similar accusations were made during his first term, none of which materialized. “This is just another attempt to paint Trump as a threat to democracy,” said former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. “It’s fearmongering, plain and simple.”
The controversy highlights the growing tensions as the 2024 election approaches. Trump remains a leading figure in the Republican Party, and his campaign has focused on issues like border security, economic revival, and national defense.
In response to Schiff’s claims, Trump recently reaffirmed his commitment to protecting Americans’ freedoms. “We will uphold law and order, but we will never weaponize the government against our own people,” he told a crowd in Iowa.
Schiff, however, insists that vigilance is necessary. “We must ensure that no president, current or future, misuses the tools of government to silence opposition,” he said.
Despite the back-and-forth, political analysts say the claims could resonate with some voters. “In a polarized climate, even unsubstantiated accusations can have a significant impact,” said political strategist David Axelrod.
For Trump’s team, the focus remains on reassuring the public. “President Trump is running to restore American strength and freedom,” his campaign said in a statement. “He will always act in the best interests of the nation.”
****
Senator Thune has his hands full by keeping him corralled.
It was a sad day when he was elected to the Senate; but, a thinker he is not. His thinking is always on the “do evil” track for the Democrats and never ends well in the end for him. His track record proves it.
A Minnesota election judge has been hit with two felony charges for allegedly disregarding voter registration protocols and allowing unregistered individuals to cast ballots in the 2024 election. Timothy Michael Scouton, the head election judge for the Badoura Township Precinct in Hubbard County, is now facing serious legal consequences, underscoring the critical role election officials play in maintaining the integrity of the democratic process.
Scouton has been charged with two felonies: accepting a vote from an unregistered voter and neglect of duty by an election official. These charges highlight the gravity of the allegations against him. According to Fox 9 Minneapolis, Scouton was expected to ensure all voters followed legal procedures, but officials claim he failed to enforce essential registration rules.
Scouton, who had completed both basic and advanced election judge training earlier in the year, allegedly did not follow the standard protocols for voter registration. A criminal complaint outlines that the issue surfaced when an election auditor noted inconsistencies involving 11 voters who had not filled out the required registration forms.
On November 7, the auditor reportedly contacted Scouton to inquire about the missing forms, to which he allegedly responded that he couldn’t find them. Upon further investigation, the auditor located the forms and learned that Scouton had instructed other election judges not to use them on election day. Instead, it’s alleged that Scouton’s son, who also served as an election judge, and other staff had only asked new voters to sign the back of a logbook without completing the legally required registration forms.
According to another election judge who worked alongside Scouton, they were unaware that the forms were necessary. This election judge claimed Scouton only directed them to collect signatures, skipping the formal registration process that verifies voter identities. This reported negligence has cast a shadow over the election integrity efforts in Hubbard County.
The Minnesota Secretary of State’s Office responded to the allegations, labeling them “extremely serious.” The office stressed that election judges take an oath to uphold election laws, and failing to do so compromises the public’s faith in the democratic process.
“Election judges take an oath to administer elections in accordance with the law,” the Secretary of State’s Office stated. “A deliberate failure to do so is unlawful and a betrayal of the public trust. Minnesota’s elections rely on the dedication and public service of 30,000 people, and they are required to conduct their work fairly, impartially, and within the letter of the law.”
Scouton now faces potentially severe penalties, including up to 10 years in prison and fines reaching $20,000. This case marks one of the rare instances where an election official faces criminal charges for alleged misconduct, drawing significant public and media attention.
The Hubbard County Auditor’s swift response has been widely commended. After noting the discrepancies, the auditor took quick action, ensuring that the allegations were thoroughly investigated by local authorities. The Secretary of State’s Office praised the auditor’s dedication to upholding Minnesota’s election standards and taking decisive steps to address potential wrongdoing.
This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in elections. With public trust in election processes under intense scrutiny, cases like these highlight the possible consequences of neglecting established protocols and underscore the need for strict adherence to legal procedures.
Election integrity has remained a divisive issue in recent years, with both political sides emphasizing the importance of secure voting processes. This case adds to ongoing debates about voter registration procedures, the role of election judges, and the protocols needed to protect the credibility of elections.
While most election officials across the country work diligently to ensure fair and lawful elections, even a single instance of alleged misconduct can shake public confidence. With the country more focused than ever on secure election procedures, Scouton’s case may set a precedent for how similar allegations of election misconduct are handled in the future.
As the investigation continues, election officials and the public await further developments. This case not only sheds light on the significance of proper election training and oversight but also acts as a reminder of the crucial responsibility entrusted to election judges. They are not only tasked with overseeing the voting process but also with safeguarding the very principles upon which the democratic system is based.
The outcome of Scouton’s case may lead to further discussions about strengthening election judge training and implementing additional measures to monitor compliance with election laws. Minnesota’s efforts to address the allegations decisively may help restore confidence in the state’s election processes and serve as a warning to others about the serious consequences of failing to uphold election protocols.
As election-related concerns continue to capture national attention, this case underscores the need for continued vigilance, transparency, and accountability at every level of the election process. The stakes remain high, as public trust in democracy hinges on the assurance that every vote cast is legal, and every vote counted is secure.
We go through this yakking during every election cycle. These people have to realize – the voters don’t care what they think since they know they are in the movies and in every movie they play a different type of character and live and act for that part. Therefore, we know it is hard for them to be serious when they have to adjust for different types of characters.
Just let the voters make their own decisions – we don’t need their advice since when they make a statement about voting – we just assume they are PLAYING A PART in a move about voting and aren’t serious – just mixed up movie stars. These people are playing the part as Democrats in the voting process- but – since they are also playing the part as a Capitalist when they work for a living and enjoy the profits – that is why we don’t take them seriously. Because, Liberals can’t have it both ways.
Time for movie stars to either bite the dust or shut up. Again, we don’t need their advice.
Celebrities Who Promised to Leave America If Trump Won – And Yet, Here They Are
Follow America’s fastest-growing news aggregator, Spreely News, and stay informed. You can find all of our articles plus information from your favorite Conservative voices.
It seems like clockwork: every election cycle, a parade of Hollywood celebrities loudly proclaims that they’ll pack their bags and leave America if their political candidate of choice loses. In 2016, and now again with President-elect Donald Trump’s return in 2024, numerous stars made bold promises to flee the country if Trump secured victory. Fast forward to today, and guess what? They’re all still here. Whether it’s the lure of lavish lifestyles in Los Angeles or their penchant for empty grandstanding, these liberal elites have one thing in common: they never follow through on their dramatic pledges. Let’s take a look at the celebrities who talked big but stayed put.
1. Cher
One of the most vocal anti-Trump celebrities, pop icon Cher once vowed to move to Jupiter if Trump won the presidency. While interplanetary travel may not have been realistic, her over-the-top proclamation captured headlines. Yet here she remains, still active on social media, tweeting relentlessly about her disdain for conservatives from the comfort of her California mansion.
2. Barbra Streisand
Legendary singer and actress Barbra Streisand threatened to relocate to Australia or Canada if Trump triumphed in the election. After years of anti-Trump rhetoric, Streisand is still belting out tunes stateside. Apparently, the allure of American fame and fortune outweighs her disdain for conservative policies.
3. Miley Cyrus
The pop star declared in 2016 that she would leave the country if Trump won. While Cyrus shed tears online over Trump’s victory, she was quick to move on, releasing albums and enjoying her celebrity status right here in the U.S. It seems the idea of actually leaving was nothing more than performative outrage.
4. Amy Schumer
Comedian Amy Schumer boldly announced she would move to Spain if Trump was elected. When questioned about her empty promise, Schumer shrugged it off as a “joke,” proving once again that for many Hollywood elites, political statements are just for show.
5. Samuel L. Jackson
The iconic actor vowed to move to South Africa if Trump won the presidency. Years later, he’s still here, cashing Hollywood paychecks and criticizing conservatives from his plush Los Angeles digs. Jackson’s threat to leave was as hollow as it was dramatic.
6. Whoopi Goldberg
The co-host of “The View” is known for her fiery anti-Trump rhetoric. She once mused about leaving the United States, but apparently the comforts of daytime television and a cushy lifestyle were too much to give up. Goldberg remains firmly rooted in American soil.
7. George Lopez
Comedian George Lopez said he’d leave the U.S. if Trump became president. But like so many others, he decided to stay put, preferring to complain about conservative politics while continuing to perform comedy routines for American audiences.
8. Lena Dunham
The creator of “Girls” declared that she would move to Canada if Trump won. Yet years later, she’s still here, living the Hollywood high life while virtue signaling to her liberal fanbase. Apparently, leaving the country was just too inconvenient.
9. Bryan Cranston
The “Breaking Bad” star said he would move if Trump won. Surprise, surprise—he didn’t. Instead, Cranston continues to work in Hollywood, criticizing Trump and his supporters from the safety of his multimillion-dollar home.
10. Jon Stewart
The former “Daily Show” host talked about leaving America if Trump became president. But he’s still here, hosting shows and taking swipes at conservatives whenever he can.
It’s a question worth asking: Why are all these celebrities, who so passionately oppose Trump and everything he stands for, still living in the country they promised to abandon? The answer is simple—virtue signaling and publicity stunts are easy; actually standing by your word is hard. These Hollywood elites are all too happy to reap the benefits of American capitalism, bask in the limelight, and cash in on their fame while berating conservatives and middle America
Mockery, Hypocrisy, and Hollywood Elitism
For many of these celebrities, threatening to leave America was never about actually moving; it was about attention and virtue signaling. In reality, they enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that come with living in this great nation—a nation that allows them to speak their minds and profit handsomely from it.
So, the next time a celebrity threatens to leave if their political candidate loses, don’t hold your breath. It’s just another empty promise from Hollywood’s elite—a transparent ploy to seem “woke” while keeping one foot firmly planted in American luxury.
Bottom Line: Actions Speak Louder Than Words
While these celebrities continue to rage against Trump and conservatives, they remain rooted in the very country they claim to loathe under conservative leadership. Their hypocrisy is evident, and their empty threats serve as a reminder of how disconnected Hollywood truly is from everyday Americans. Here’s a simple message for the next wave of celebrity dramatics: If you don’t like it here, there’s the door. But we won’t be holding our breath.
kommonsentsjane 