Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

OF COURSE! Ivy League School Accepts Gun-Grabbing Parkland Survivor David Hogg

Hogg was rejected from MULTIPLE schools, but somehow he gets into the most famous college in the world? Hmm…

John Salvatore

Published

on

When a kid is rejected from multiple universities out of high school it’s sad, but it also signifies that grades weren’t good enough for entry.

Pretty much self-explanatory.

So then, how does anti-Trump, anti-gun, Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg get rejected from multiple schools and somehow make his way into HARVARD!?

Trending: WATCH: Anti-Trump Fox News Host Throws Hissy Fit After Mueller Report Vindicates Trump

Lest we forget Hogg has been a bully to right-wingers for a while now.

Here’s the problem:

Reactions:

https://twitter.com/justanurse25/status/1076499738738847745?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1076499738738847745&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftherightscoop.com%2Fafter-being-rejected-by-other-colleges-gun-grabbing-nut-david-hogg-is-going-to-harvard%2F

On Valentine’s Day, 2018, Nikolas Cruz murdered 17 people at a Parkland, Florida high school.

On July 25, 2018, Cruz, inmate 18-1958, registered to vote.

The father of one of the slain students, Andrew Pollack, is outraged that “despicable Democrats” are trying to “steal this election” – likely referring to the craziness in the state at the moment (more on that below).

$5 million.

That’s how much Dick’s Sporting Goods is being sued for breach of contract.

Why exactly?

It all stems from the Parkland, Florida high school shooting when Dick’s decided to stop selling guns to people under the age of 21, virtually stripping them of their 2A rights.

Citing breach of contract and fraud, Nevada-based Battle Born Munitions filed suit in federal court against Dick’s Sporting Goods this week.

At the root of the filing is what BBM says was the failure by Dick’s to hold up their end of a contract for the ammo distributor to supply the retailer with Field & Stream-branded ammo for resale in their stores. The delay by the big box sporting goods outlet, argues the filing, resulted in BBM losing out on a multi-million dollar contract to supply helicopters to an overseas U.S. ally.

The 11-page lawsuit filed Tuesday in a Pennsylvania federal court details that the two companies entered into an agreement in January 2016 to supply ammo packaged with Dick’s trademarked Field & Stream packaging. Acting on the contract, BBM paid two ammo manufacturers — Bosnian-based Igman and Hungarian-based RUAG — a total of $4.5 million for the product and made the munitions available to Dick’s by November of the same year, a delivery timeline stipulated by the contract. However, BBM says Dick’s then left them holding the bag for almost a year, refusing to pay them or take delivery of the ammo.

The house-branded ammo, which could not be repacked and sold to another retailer due to the Field & Stream headstamp on the cartridges, was eventually accepted by Dick’s but the intervening storage, at BBM’s expense, cost the ammo distributor $200,000. Further, since BBM’s cash was tied up in the stalled deal, they could not fill a contract with Lebanon for a batch of Bell helicopters, losing out on an additional $5 million, which they are seeking to recoup from Dick’s.

Lobbying against gun ownership was not a great move for Dick’s.

The Chairman & CEO of the company, Edward W. Stack, noted in a press release on February 28, 2018: “Following all of the rules and laws, we sold a shotgun to the Parkland shooter in November of 2017. It was not the gun, nor type of gun, he used in the shooting. But it could have been.

Clearly this indicates on so many levels that the systems in place are not effective to protect our kids and our citizens.

We believe it’s time to do something about it.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Beto Seemingly Calls for WAR Over Mueller Report Secrecy

The left just had to find some way to make the idea of transparency seem sensational, didn’t they?

Published

on

Beto O'Rourke

As the nation patiently awaits the findings of the Special Counsel report, a debate is raging. On both sides of the aisle, we are hearing that transparency is key.  Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General and self-proclaimed “heat shield” for Robert Mueller, has expressed his concerns over tarnishing the reputations of those not accused of a crime. The rest of America seems fairly well convinced, and rightly so, that there should be unfettered access to the report. And while this is undoubtedly a widely felt sentiment, the radical left just had to find a way to make it seem sensational. Cue 2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke: “Republicans and Democrats should do whatever they can to make sure their constituents, the American people, can read that report, form their own judgement, make their own decisions, and that the truth comes out,” O’Rourke said at a campaign stop in South Carolina Friday. O’Rourke warned that America may not see another year if details of Russian interference in the 2016 election included in the Mueller report are not made public, saying, “This is an unprecedented attack on this country and on our democracy, and we are owed the facts. And if we do not receive them, 243 years in, there’s nothing that guarantees us a 244th.” O’Rourke is undoubtedly suggesting that a Civil War or revolution could take place over something that everyone already wants. Not only have a number of democrats parroted the “everyone should get to see everything” line, but they’ve done so in complete agreement with Trump-appointed Attorney General Bill Barr. For Beto to go nuclear in this statement is beyond bizarre, and sounds more like a coaxed soundbite than his true sentiment on the subject.

Continue Reading

News

Mueller Report Findings Expected by Congress Sunday

Monday morning’s water cooler chit chat has already been decided.

Published

on

russiagate

Is our long national nightmare actually over?  Well, that depends on who you ask today. For many, the completion of the Mueller report on Friday, without any additional indictments being suggest by the Special Counsel, was a huge win for President Trump.  It meant that there wasn’t evidence sufficient to bring charges against the President…perhaps. We should remember that the DOJ’s longstanding belief was that a sitting President could not be indicted. On the left side of the aisle, however, a tense wait has begun, with the Attorney General expected to hand off a summation of Mueller’s findings to Congress any minute. Attorney General William Barr was expected to release his first summary of Mueller’s findings on Sunday, people familiar with the process said, on what lawmakers anticipated could be a day of reckoning in the two-year probe into President Donald Trump and Russian efforts to elect him. Since receiving the report Friday, Barr has been deciding how much of it Congress and the public will see. Of course, for some democrats, this simply wouldn’t cut it. “I suspect that we’ll find those words of transparency to prove hollow, that in fact they will fight to make sure that Congress doesn’t get this underlying evidence,” Rep. Adam Schiff of California, chairman of the House intelligence committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.” His plan: Ask for information and if that’s denied, “subpoena. If subpoenas are denied, we will haul people before the Congress. And yes, we will prosecute in court as necessary to get this information.” For now, we will just wait and see. We do know one thing for certain:  Monday morning around the water coolor is going to be a happenin’ spot.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend