Breaking: White House Fires Back After Kellyanne Is Attacked on Trumped-Up, Outrageous Charges
While America would love to have 2019 and 2020 marked by legislative efforts at growth and security, the Democrats and corrupt agencies still populating the D.C. swamp are more interested in decade-old tax bills, re-investigating non-existent collusion, and now trumping up absurd charges against White House counselor Kellyanne Conway.
These are not just any charges. According to the Washington Examiner, the Office of Special Counsel is asking for Conway to be removed from her position because of “numerous” violations of the Hatch Act.
Henry Kerner, head of the Office of Special Counsel, sent an 18-page letter Thursday to President Donald Trump recommending Conway be kicked out of her government job.
The Hatch Act prohibits certain federal employees from engaging in certain political activity such as, but not limited to, using their authority to influence or interfere with an election.
Kerner’s letter calls Conway a “repeat offender” because she has dared criticize Democratic presidential candidates while speaking in her official capacity. But in Conway’s defense, Cory Booker is a blowhard, Bernie Sanders is a socialist lunatic, and Joe Biden is a lying, creepy wrecking ball of a candidate.
How could she not criticize them?
Kerner wrote, “Ms. Conway’s violations, if left unpunished, would send a message to all federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act’s restrictions. Her actions thus erode the principal foundation of our democratic system — the rule of law.”
As The Washington Times reported in May, Conway has been asked about her potential Hatch violations previously. “If you’re trying to silence me through the Hatch Act, it’s not going to work…Let me know when the jail sentence starts,” she responded.
Trump’s White House isn’t buying the letter at all — and fired back with a statement making that clear.
“The Office of Special Counsel’s unprecedented actions against Kellyanne Conway are deeply flawed and violate her constitutional rights to free speech and due process,” Steven Groves, a White House spokesman, said in a statement, according to the Examiner.
“Others, of all political views, have objected to the OSC’s unclear and unevenly applied rules which have a chilling effect on free speech for all federal employees. Its decisions seem to be influenced by media pressure and liberal organizations — and perhaps OSC should be mindful of its own mandate to act in a fair, impartial, non-political manner, and not misinterpret or weaponize the Hatch Act.”
The Office of Special Counsel’s examples of Conway’s alleged violations include calling Booker “sexist,” and a “tinny” speaker.
The alleged violations also include Conway claiming Elizabeth Warren lied about her ethnicity — which Warren did. Repeatedly. For decades.
The letter also complains that Conway called Biden and Sanders “two, old white straight men career politicians.” Fact check: True, true. true, true, true, true, aaaaaaand true.
Referring to Biden as “Creepy Uncle Joe” also earned Conway another ding in Kerner’s letter.
Per Kerner, Conway also committed these sins:
She claimed Biden lacked vision.
She called Biden’s campaign announcement video “dark and spooky.”
She called Sander’s ideas “terrible for America.”
She chastized Beto O’Rourke for “think[ing] the women running are good enough to be President.”
It seems clear to me that these charges are bogus. As in, embarrassingly bogus. Nothing about them seems like Conway is trying to interfere with political elections.
Last time I checked, being in government meant you should be a champion of free speech, not have it stripped from you.
The Deep State playbook continues to be ad hominem investigations and subpoenas. If the Democrats continue to offer nothing of value to the American people except to those who want to see blood from the Trump administration, they stand no chance in 2020.
And we can all applaud that.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
