Featured

Five times America received and reacted to electronic discrimination from the Cyber-Left


In an effort to further snuff out the conservative message on online, Facebook takes action

  1. Facebook announces hate speech advertisement ban

One America News Network reports that Facebook has decided to ban advertisements it deems as hate speech.

Mark_ZuckerbergMark Zuckerberg recently announced Facebook will prohibit hate speech from now on. On Friday, the CEO announced the platform will prohibit any advertisements that claim society is threatened by members of a particular race, ethnicity, gender or other protected category.

This came after several major companies threatened to pull Facebook advertisements for the month of July. Zuckerberg specifically noted posts from politicians will be removed if they “incite violence or suppress voting.”

According to the CEO, other posts may be flagged if they do not adhere to the company’s rules.

“We’re going to start labeling content that we find newsworthy that might otherwise violate our policies,” he said. “…If we determine the content may lead to violence or deprive people of their right to vote, we’re going to take that content down, no matter who says it.”

Facebook will also notify users if they try to share a post that has been flagged.

This comes as many social media users on both sides of the aisle have pointed out censorship abuses by big tech.

Attorney General William Barr has addressed how the Department of Justice might handle big tech censorship. In an interview with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Barr claimed the department is investigating several tech companies on the grounds of antitrust laws.

According to reports, he will be announcing specific measures in the next few weeks.

The attorney general is reportedly considering revisions to Section 230, which protects companies from content on their sites and ensures equal speech representation.

“They built up this powerful network, very strong market power, based on the representation that they were sort of open to all as sort of a bulletin board,” explained Barr. “When they got that market power, now they’re censoring views.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

Considering the American government developed the resource they now use to deliver their product, these Internet companies might deliver a balanced product

Considering that the Internet came from ARPANET (a network between universities and the military) and that the overall network within the borders of the U.S. cannot be disputed to as a U.S. asset, the American government might exercise the same rights as it does over the airwaves. That is, just as it requires television stations and radio stations to prove that they are broadcasting in the public interest.

Moreover, considering that all of these social networking companies say that they are platform where ideas are shared freely; however, in practice, they act as publishers (by editing the messages that are allowed out and choosing winners and losers among the field of message bearers). Therefore, if they are going to act like publishers, they should be open to lawsuits like publishers.

Another instance that reminds us that the speech everybody likes does not need protecting

  1. Reddit bans r/The_Donald and r/ChapoTrapHouse as part of a major expansion of its rules

As seen on The Verge, Reddit has banned subreddits “The_Donald” and “ChapoTrapHouse” as part of an expansion of its rules.

redditReddit will ban r/The_Donald, r/ChapoTrapHouse, and about 2,000 other communities today after updating its content policy to more explicitly ban hate speech. The policy update comes three weeks after Black Lives Matter protests led several popular Reddit forums to go dark temporarily in protest of what they called the company’s lax policies around hosting and promoting racist content. It marks a major reversal for a company whose commitment to free expression has historically been so strong that it once allowed users to distribute stolen nude photos freely on the site.

“I have to admit that I’ve struggled with balancing my values as an American, and around free speech and free expression, with my values and the company’s values around common human decency,” Reddit CEO Steve Huffman said in a call with reporters.

In a blog post that cites the company’s new rules, Huffman said users of the r/The_Donald subreddit had violated the site’s policies for years. (The site has no official connection to President Donald Trump, although he did do an Ask Me Anything there as a candidate in 2016.) “The community has consistently hosted and upvoted more rule-breaking content than average (Rule 1), antagonized us and other communities (Rules 2 and 8), and its mods have refused to meet our most basic expectations,” Huffman said.

Similarly, r/ChapoTrapHouse had also hosted content that violates the site’s rules, Huffman said. The subreddit is a spinoff of the popular left-wing podcast.

Reddit’s new policy begins with a first rule that requires users to “consider the human.” It reads:

Remember the human. Reddit is a place for creating community and belonging, not for attacking marginalized or vulnerable groups of people. Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence. Communities and people that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.

That formed the basis of a policy framework that bans hate speech.

“Reddit’s mission is to bring community and belonging to everybody in the world, and there is speech in the world and on Reddit that prevents other people from doing so,” Huffman told reporters. “Harassing speech or hateful speech prevents people from coming to Reddit and feeling safe and sharing their vulnerabilities … So if we have speech on Reddit that’s preventing people from using Reddit the way that we intend it to be used, or that prevents us from achieving our mission, then it’s actually a very easy decision.”

The introduction of the new policies has resulted in the removal of about 2,000 subreddits so far, and the company says “the vast majority” were inactive. Only about 200 of them had more than 10 daily users, the company said. They include:

  • r/DarkHumorAndMemes
  • r/ConsumeProduct
  • r/DarkJokeCentral
  • r/GenderCritical
  • r/Cumtown
  • r/imgoingtohellforthis2
  • r/Wojak
  • r/soyboys

Last year, Reddit “quarantined” r/The_Donald, placing it behind a warning screen after it was found to host content that incited violence. The company had previously prevented posts on the forum from reaching Reddit’s front page. Former users of the forum began moving to a new site off Reddit last year.

While Monday’s removals hit some high-profile political communities, Huffman said the company would continue to support a broad range of political speech.

(Read more at The Verge)

It sounds like these restrictions would have stopped A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift

Although I do not support the transfer of nude pictures, this clampdown on the conservative segment of the Reddit audience does not match up to the standards that they claim to hold. As with the previous article, this seems like a case of a company that claims to be an online billboard acting more like an online publisher that edits the works on it.

Censorship of Conservatives by Liberal Twitter creates a response

  1. Parler hits 500K as an alternative to liberal Twitter

One America News Network reported in a 27 June 2020 article that Parler has gained 500K users due (in most part) to the censorship from liberals at Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

ParlerAmid rising censorship of conservative voices on Twitter and other social media platforms, the new app Parler has seen a large influx of users. According to reports, more than 500,000 new people created accounts on the site after Twitter recently banned two conservative accounts.

Parler’s user base skyrocketed by 50% this week alone, bringing the total number of users to 1.5 million.

Conservatives like Rep. Matt Gaetz and Sen. Ted Cruz announced they joined site after experiencing what they called “unfair banning of right-wing accounts.”

“They use that power to silence conservatives and to promote their radical left-wing agenda,” stated Cruz. “Big tech has shown the ability to shadow ban what you say or post without anyone ever knowing about it.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

I have been on Parler as @Mark1one since 4 June 2019

Feel free to follow me at @Mark1one, since I have been there for some time.

Of course, since I am not a heavy hitter (and even if I were), all I can say is: the more the merrier.

Potential Democrat leaders encourage discrimination by the Left on social media

  1. Democrat Congressional candidate urges Twitter followers to ‘report’ Trump supporters

Breitbart shares the rantings of McMurray, the ]Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District.

Nate McMurrayNate McMurray, the Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District, urged Twitter followers Wednesday to “report” Trump supporters.

“When you see fake videos, when you see racism, when you hear support for Trump, do not roll your eyes, do not play nice, do not worry about hurting someone’s feelings, CALL IT OUT — REPORT IT — FIGHT IT,” he wrote:

Thursday, immigration lawyer Matthew Kolken shared a screenshot of McMurray’s tweet and said, “This is a dangerous chill of 1st Amendment freedoms”:

However, McMurray appeared to have amended the “REPORT IT – FIGHT IT” command with “TALK TO THEM – DO NOT GO WITH THE FLOW” in another tweet on Friday:

(Read more at Breitbart)

This “Fight it” stance seems to go with someone who thinks their supporters have made their mind(s) up and cannot be confused with the facts

Much like the times I have noted the Cancel culture, this “Cancel campaigning” seems to ignore the opposition and encourages the followers of the campaign to do the same. It looks like this guy has thoroughly gotten lost in his own confirmation bias.

Facebook doubles down on eliminating the First Amendment

  1. Facebook blacklists Laura Loomer’s campaign ads

Breitbart reports on what might seem to be violation of Laura Loomer’s First Amendment rights.

Laura LoomerFacebook has reportedly banned all ads on behalf of Laura Loomer, the frontrunner in the GOP primary race for House candidate in Florida’s 21st district.

Loomer’s personal account is banned on Facebook, as well as on Facebook-owned Instagram, and her campaign was prevented from creating a page to reach voters on Facebook last November. Now the campaign is being banned from running ads on the platform as well.

Loomer’s most recent ad can be viewed on YouTube:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has previously said it’s not right for “private companies to censor politicians.”

“The Laura Loomer for Congress Inc. Campaign represents more than just Laura Loomer, the candidate,” said Karen Giorno, chief strategist for the Loomer campaign and formerly the campaign manager for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign in Florida.

The Loomer campaign, said Giorno,  “embodies a national movement, that radiates from within President Donald J. Trump’s home district, FL-21 and is made up of millions of voices from across the country. Many have become volunteers, donors and have pledged to vote for Laura Loomer in the August 18th primary and again in November to retire the radical, elitist, entrenched Democrat incumbent, Lois Frankel. ”

“This community of citizens that are Republican, Democrat and Independent are choosing to support Laura Loomer for Congress to represent them in Washington, because she embodies their values, their mores, their beliefs and their norms.  By Facebook banning Laura Loomer for Congress Campaign ads from running, they are essentially going against their own policy, and canceling millions of voices as well.”

“This is a perfect example of how Big Tech is committing blatant election interference in the form of illegal in-kind contributions to the Democrat party and their candidates in a race that is taking place in the President’s backyard.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

The Left is out to destroy America. Sadly, Loomer is getting in the way of that.

While Zuckerberg claims he wants free speech, his actions show that he only wants free liberal speech or free Marxist speech. If you step over the boundaries and start to become in the least conservative (as with the first article in this post), he will shut you down.

Issues for Christians


Christians hunted, marked for death, meet secretly

OneNewsNow reports in a 6 December 2019 article how Christians suffer in Muslim-dominated lands.

syriachild.jpgFor those living in a Muslim island nation and various parts of West Africa, being a Christian means one is marked for death – and those who translate the Bible will likely never return to their homes again … alive.

Wycliffe Associates, one of the world’s leading Bible translation organizations, says workshops and strategies for Bible translation often spring forth from clandestine meetings between its team members and mother-tongue Bible translators.

Undercover Christians

Such workshops, reports Wycliffe Associates, “are springing out of the seeds sown in these secret meetings” – meetings that may take place on an isolated mountain top, or among church leaders disguised as tourists, or during a walk through a crowded market where translators’ prayers and conversations are drowned out by the noise and bartering.

Persecution for following Christ and translating Scripture into native languages in these volatile regions include being hunted, receiving death threats and working in secret to avoid imminent death.

Wycliffe Associates president and CEO Bruce Smith commends native Bible translators for secretly meeting with his ministry team, as the risk of being caught with foreigners could mean death.

“Despite the persecution and risks they face, Christians are reaching out to us, asking for the tools, technology, and training they need to launch Bible translation projects,” Smith states. “I am humbled and overwhelmed to see the tenacity of Christians in the most extreme anti-Christian environments on earth.

“In spite of the hostility of religious and governmental authorities, in spite of the risk of violence, of arrest, of torture, even death, Christians ardently press on,” he adds.

MAST (Mobilized Assistance Supporting Translation) – a collaborative translation method employed by the international nonprofit organization – equips native Christians to share the written Word where it is strictly forbidden. MAST projects currently under way across the globe number more than 1,200. The ministry also equips mother-tongue translators with technology that complements MAST, including computer tablets, Print-On-Demand equipment, and Bible translation recording kits.

In fact, in a number of areas that crack down on Christianity, believers must abandon their home country if they want to translate the Bible and stay alive.

“In some countries, we’ve helped move national Bible translators out of their own countries because their lives are literally at risk if they attempt to translate the Scriptures in their homeland,” Smith shares. “Some translators are at such risk that they will never be able to go home again. The translated Scriptures will have to be smuggled back across the border.”

Tragic stories of Christians giving up their lives and safety are not uncommon in this part of the world.

According to Wycliffe Associates, a translator in West Africa recently was murdered and his wife was mutilated; and one pastor – a hunted man – was forced to flee his country and now lives under a “virtual death sentence.” Regardless, says the ministry, that pastor remains firmly committed to the work of Bible translation for his language group.

(Read more at OneNewsNow)

Pray for an Islamic reformation where it moves from a cult of death

Pray for a change in the heart of Islam so that the focus moves from killing the enemies of Islam, from killing those who leave Islam, from visiting some form of “revenge” on those who have been deemed to insult Islam, from executing the deviants within the community, from falling on members of certain other named religious communities, and from otherwise focusing on death.

But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. (Matthew 5:44‭-‬45 NASB)

Speaking Truth not Tolerated at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

It seems that a pro-LGBTQ agenda has crept into the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, as reported by the American Family Association.

SWBTS_Lopez.pngRobert Oscar Lopez is an outspoken witness to the power of God to transform a life.  He was raised by “two moms” and identified as bisexual for years before surrendering his life to Christ.

He has spent his life fighting. First, it was for his own life – for freedom from the clutches of homosexuality. Then it was (and is) against the attacks from the homosexual activist community. Read AFA Journal story “Breaking Free from a Culture of Shame” here.

This man’s resiliency is astounding.

And now he’s fighting one of the most powerful religious organizations in existence – the Southern Baptist Convention.

Prior to being hired in 2016 by Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS), Lopez was a tenured professor at California State University. In today’s culture, it is no surprise that a former homosexual now speaking from a biblical perspective would be persecuted.

After repeated subjection to senselessly demeaning investigations at the public university, the sense of relief Lopez experienced when “rescued” into a Christian seminary must have been palpable. The pressure to shut up about his testimony and matters of biblical sexual morality was a thing of the past. Or so he thought.

Last week, the morning after Thanksgiving Day, Lopez received an email notifying him that his position at SWBTS had been eliminated. He told AFA this wasn’t really a surprise to him. He had been asked to resign two months earlier by the provost, Randy Stinson.

“I was called into seven secret meetings,” he explained. “They would never put anything in writing. I was called in alone all the time. I didn’t know who was going to be in the meetings. And I had no forewarning about what was going to be brought up. It was very much like mental intimidation. … They told me people were watching me.”

As part of the series of meetings, Lopez was told he was held in low esteem by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Initially, he was subjected to an onerous process, requiring him to submit requests before writing or speaking on sexual matters. But eventually, Dean Michael Wilkinson made clear that Lopez was to stop talking about all matters of sexuality, including his testimony, homosexuality, and sex abuse.

Lopez had been active in writing and speaking about the dangers of the Equality Act and abuse in the gay community. And he had drafted and submitted a resolution to the SBC supporting counseling to help lead people out of homosexuality.  These were all apparently giant no-nos for the SBC, which according to Lopez has embraced the “Revoice” ideology.  Revoice is a radical movement to promote normalization and acceptance of LGBTQ terms within the church – creating a slippery slope which many believe will lead to full-blown acceptance of homosexuality.

(Read more at the American Family Association)

Nothing good comes from capitulation

As we know by the capitulation of Chick-Fil-A to the LGBTQ crowd or by any of any number of reports by Janet Mefferd on “Revoice,” giving in to the demands of the the LGBTQ crowd will only result in a new set of demands to be met. Therefore, the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary must not bend as it seems to be doing.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, (1 Corinthians 6:9 NASB)

Stand firm therefore, having girded your loins with truth , and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, (Ephesians 6:14 NASB)

Hundreds of Pakistani Christians Sold as Brides to China

Breitbart reports in a 7 December 2019 article on the selling of

pakistan-christiansPage after page, the names stack up: 629 girls and women from across Pakistan who were sold as brides to Chinese men and taken to China. The list, obtained by The Associated Press, was compiled by Pakistani investigators determined to break up trafficking networks exploiting the country´s poor and vulnerable.

The list gives the most concrete figure yet for the number of women caught up in the trafficking schemes since 2018.

But since the time it was put together in June, investigators´ aggressive drive against the networks has largely ground to a halt. Officials with knowledge of the investigations say that is because of pressure from government officials fearful of hurting Pakistan´s lucrative ties to Beijing.

The biggest case against traffickers has fallen apart. In October, a court in Faisalabad acquitted 31 Chinese nationals charged in connection with trafficking. Several of the women who had initially been interviewed by police refused to testify because they were either threatened or bribed into silence, according to a court official and a police investigator familiar with the case. The two spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared retribution for speaking out.

At the same time, the government has sought to curtail investigations, putting “immense pressure” on officials from the Federal Investigation Agency pursuing trafficking networks, said Saleem Iqbal, a Christian activist who has helped parents rescue several young girls from China and prevented others from being sent there.

“Some (FIA officials) were even transferred,” Iqbal said in an interview. “When we talk to Pakistani rulers, they don´t pay any attention. ”

(Read more at Breitbart)

Why does this happen?

It happens because the Christian community of Pakistan has been isolated economically. It happens because China has limited its families to having one child per family. It happens because, with a preference for boys in Eastern cultures, generations of female babies have been aborted due to the one-child mandate.

It happens when a cowardly political class cannot find itself within its black heart to do the right thing. It also happens when a complacent media will not speak up for the underdog (especially when that media stands arrayed against a group like Christians).

Finally, it happens for reasons, both holy and evil, that fly out of our control. Nonetheless, we must prefer our brothers and sisters in Christ when moved by the Spirit.

Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor; (Romans 12:10 NASB)

Seek the Lord while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. (Isaiah 55:6 NASB)

Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. (Matthew 7:7 NASB)

Liberals shoot themselves in the impeachment foot


‘Coup has started’: Whistleblower’s attorney vowed to ‘get rid of Trump’ in 2017

ZeroHedge revealed that the lawyer for the “whistleblower” tweeted that “coup has started” in 2017. Now, that lawyer has been attempting to convince us that the tweet was prophetic and not proof of a conspiracy in its infancy.

The Democratic operative attorney representing the anti-Trump whistleblower vowed to “get rid of Trump”, and said that the “#coup has started” in 2017 tweets.

zaid 1

Mark Zaid, the John Podesta, Clinton and Schumer-linked attorney who founded the anti-Trump nonprofit ‘Whistleblower Aid’ in 2017, tweeted “It’s very scary. We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters. We have to.

He also tweeted “#coup has started” after former AG Sally Yates was fired for “refusing to enforce a legal order” from Trump.




(Read more at ZeroHedge)

If the Democrats want an action (like removal of a President), they need to bring the witness to the open court

In America, we have the right to face our accusers (even when we are a maligned President). Therefore, if the Democrats want to do anything more than grandstand — if Democrats want to bring charges in Congress, then they need to follow the laws that protect the accused bring this “whistleblower” into the public hearing at Congress.

Alleged Whistleblower’s Name Appears In Transcript Released By Schiff

The Daily Wire pointed out that Schiff-for-brains was the one who accidentally exposed the name of the whistleblower.

schiff-for-brainsControversy over whether or not to reveal the name of the man widely believed to be the whistleblower whose complaint prompted the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry ratcheted up even further on Wednesday after Donald Trump Jr. tweeted out an article and quote including the whistleblower’s alleged name. While Democrats and the left-leaning media expressed outrage about Trump’s social media post, an impeachment inquiry transcript released by the office of Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff includes the very name Trump tweeted out.

As reported by RedState, Schiff, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee who is heading up the Democrats’ impeachment efforts, appears to have accidentally allowed the name widely identified as the whistleblower to appear in the transcript of the committee’s interview with top U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor.

In the transcript, the interviewer asks Taylor if the name of the man who has been widely reported as the whistleblower “ring[s] a bell?” Taylor responds, “It doesn’t.”

“So, to your knowledge, you never had any communications with somebody by that name?” Taylor is asked, to which he replies, “Correct.”

The failure to redact the name means one of two things, suggests Turning Point USA’s Benny Johnson, either he’s not the whistleblower or the Democrats made a massive error.

The alleged identity of the whistleblower was first reported by RealClearInvestigations’ Paul Sperry, who describes his identity as “an open secret inside the Beltway.”

Sperry reported last week that the whistleblower is allegedly a 33-year-old “registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia ‘collusion’ investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.” The whistleblower reportedly “left his National Security Council posting in the White House’s West Wing in mid-2017 amid concerns about negative leaks to the media” and “has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia,” Sperry reports, citing federal documents.

(Read more at the Daily Wire)

Since this numb nuck Schiff has exposed the identity of the “whistleblower” as Eric Ciaramella, let’s just go with open hearings

Since we know that Schiff met with and coached the “whistleblower” prior to his emergence and we now know the name of the “whistleblower” when Adam Schiff published it in his transcripts, why don’t we just get Mr. Ciaramella sworn in before Congress and get all of the other associated material witnesses under oath?

Before Schiff’s blunder, the whistleblower’s lawyers cite the ‘deep throat’ model for keeping their client’s identity secret

Breitbart reports in a 7 November 2019 article how the lawyers for the “whistleblower” were citing the Nixon-era “deep throat” for keeping this now-exposed Democrat’s name from being exposed.

whistleblower-silouette-anonymousThe lawyers representing the so-called “whistleblower” who sparked the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump reportedly argued this week that their client’s identity could remain secret for decades, citing the years-long “Deep Throat” mystery as a model.

On Wednesday, the Washington Examiner explained:

The secret of “Deep Throat” was kept from the early ’70s until 2005, when former FBI Associate Director Mark Felt came forward at 91 years old. He died two years later.

Whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid, an aficionado of Watergate history, said leaving his client’s identity unresolved indefinitely would encourage future whistleblowers.

Felt was a prime suspect from the beginning. … Without firsthand sources, the accusation didn’t stick. … It later became known to a prosecutor, but news outlets were left to speculate.

Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, who received information from Felt, his colleague Carl Bernstein, and their editor Ben Bradlee, knew the “whistleblower’s” name. Allegedly, some left-wing mainstream news outlets also know the impeachment “whistleblower’s” name, but refuse to report it.

{Read more at Breitbart)

If everything was sunshine and rainbows, then we wouldn’t be having this conflict.

As much as the Democrats would like to have their cake and eat it, too — they have to live in the real world. They have to open up and be fair to both sides. If they don’t, there will be a reckoning.

Impeachment twists


The fact that Brit Hume could ask this proves that we trust too much in “experts”

Vindman claimed to be ‘deeply troubled’ by Trump’s effort to ‘subvert’ US foreign policy; however, then Brit Hume pointed out this ‘huge fallacy’

Brit Hume of Fox points out how the American public has become conditioned to unquestioningly accept the arguments of “experts” that the left-leaning press trots out — like the supposed “whistleblower” (as detailed in a 2 November 2019 Daily Caller article).

alexander-vindmanLt. Col. Alexander Vindman was reportedly “deeply troubled” by what he saw as President Donald Trump’s efforts to “subvert U.S. foreign policy,” but Fox News commentator Brit Hume pointed out a “huge fallacy” in that line of thinking.

“[Vindman] told lawmakers that he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy and an improper attempt to coerce a foreign government into investigating a U.S. citizen,” The Washington Post reported Friday, referring to the NSC official’s Tuesday impeachment inquiry testimony.

Hume, however, used Twitter to point out the fact that there is a “huge fallacy” in Vindman’s reasoning.

“Anyone know what it is?” Hume asked in the Saturday tweet.


The answer, as nearly every respondent to Hume’s tweet pointed out, is that it is the president himself who is tasked to set United States foreign policy.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Just because someone with scrambled eggs on his cap and ribbons on his chest voices opposition to a President, it doesn’t mean we don’t have to examine the situation

trump-allies-charge-VindmanVindman may have served honorably in the armed force. However, if he is trying to tamper with evidence (revise the transcripts to something that none of the transcriptionists heard), then we do not have to accept his word.

In the case of Vindman, in contradiction to what all transcriptionists heard, Vindman argued unsuccessfully to have the transcripts changed.

Three crippling facts about the lies promoted by the Democrats focused on impeachment

The Western Journal outlines how the call for impeachment came from one National Security staff employee and, based on that fact, exposes three crippling issues with the testimony.

On Tuesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff’s super-secret committee heard testimony from the Democrats’ latest star witness — Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

But if Vindman’s opening statement is any indication, the impeachment narrative pushed by Schiff, the Democratic Party and the establishment media took another brutal shellacking.

Vindman, a career Army officer, Purple Heart recipient, and the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, appeared before Schiff’s kangaroo court — which included lawmakers on the House Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform Committees as well — to discuss his “concerns” regarding President Donald Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

NYTwitsWithout a hint of irony, The New York Times reported Monday, ahead of his testimony, that Vindman “will be the first White House official to testify who listened in on the July 25 telephone call.”

It should strike anyone as bizarre that it has taken over a month since the entire Trump-Ukraine “scandal” began for Schiff and company to finally get someone in the room who was actually on the call.

The intelligence community whistleblower who sparked the entire controversy wasn’t on the call. He just heard grousing from people who were.

Also, what the whistleblower reported was incorrect — and he or she submitted it around the time that the intelligence community whistleblower form was reportedly updated to — wait for it — allow submissions like theirs.

The whistleblower’s earliest memo regarding the call also relayed at least seven lies or pieces of misinformation (We compared that memo to the call transcript and counted ourselves) that did not at all correspond with the call transcript Trump shrewdly released.

Then, there were assorted other witnesses, including former, and now acting, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor.

Taylor imploded on the stand in Schiff’s super-secret SCIF by confirming he could only offer hearsay and that Zelensky’s people didn’t even know of the much-ballyhooed suspension of U.S. military aid to Ukraine until after the much-ballyhooed July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky.

Now we come to Vindman, whose testimony anti-Trumpers everywhere were certain would prove Trump tried to execute a quid pro quo scenario with Zelensky.

Vindman, however, not only bombed in terms of helpfulness to the Democrats, but he also revealed four pieces of information — one of them extremely important — and effectively pulled a Tonya Harding on the quid pro quo narrative’s knees.

First, Vindman appears to have at least attempted to mislead the committee, claiming on page five of his pre-written opening statement that he “did not think it was proper [for Trump] to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen.”

The only problem with that comment is that it’s predicated on a complete lie.

Trump didn’t demand anything during the call. Remember, it was Zelensky who urged Trump to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, and it was Zelensky who offered to investigate.

“We are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine,” Zelensky said during the call, adding, “I guarantee as the president of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly.”

Whether Vindman was actually trying to mislead (which seems foolish given the transcript) or genuinely doesn’t recall the conversation he heard (which obviously presents other credibility problems), the net effect was not good for Democrats.

Second, Vindman took note of an earlier Trump-Zelensky call he sat on that took place on April 21, 2019.

During that call, Vindman claimed that “Trump expressed his desire to work with President Zelenskyy and extended an invitation to visit the White House.”

That testimony undermines the idea that Zelensky’s invitation to the White House was predicated on him launching investigations into the Bidens, Burisma Holdings (where Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, sat on the board) and Crowdstrike.

Taylor helped undermine that Democratic chestnut when he confirmed the Ukrainians — and the general public — didn’t know about the aid freeze until August, after the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky.

Now, Vindman’s testimony makes the quid pro quo premise that much more unlikely by moving the date that the White House invitation was extended back to April 21.

If Trump invited Zelensky to the White House back in April with no strings attached, how could the White House visit been part of the alleged quid pro quo?

Third, …

(Read more at the Western Journal)

To restate the third point, we need to elevate US national security above Democrat partisanship

To restate the third point made by the Western Journal commentator Josh Manning, we need to put national security above protecting politicians who take bribes on the side. National security needs to be ranked over the current liberal pet project of the day.

However, on the same note, the NSC should not be involved in an apparent attempt to frame the President in a set-up conversation.

Fishing: House Democrats impeachment lawyer suggests probe May Extend Beyond Ukraine

Breitbart reports in an 18 October 2019 article that House Democrats seem to be fishing for reasons to impeach the President.

Fishing_Hook_Illustration_featHouse Democrats may extend the impeachment inquiry beyond U.S. President Donald Trump’s Ukraine-related activities, the general counsel behind the investigation recently indicated.

Democrats can impeach Trump even if his Ukraine-related actions are not criminal, Douglas Letter, the lawyer, argued before a federal judge last week.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) handpicked Letter in January to serve as the general counsel for the Democrat-led House of Representatives.

Since then, he has been at the center of strategizing the House Democrats’ impeachment fight against the president, CNN reported Thursday.

Letter does not talk to the press. CNN, however, quoted him as telling a federal judge last week that the impeachment probe may extend beyond Ukraine.

“I can’t emphasize enough: It’s not just Ukraine. If it’s criminal, but even if it’s not — President Trump can clearly be impeached if he was obstructing justice,” the lawyer reportedly said.

CNN added:

Letter also said that even simply lying to the American public could prompt impeachment. In the court proceeding, Letter was fighting on behalf of House Democrats to obtain the FBI memos from interviews with key White House witnesses that Robert Mueller conducted as part of his two-year probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and whether anyone from President Donald Trump’s campaign was involved.

The lawyer, who reportedly spent four decades at the U.S. Department of Justice, is reportedly working on behalf of House Democrats with a team of nine attorneys.

The impeachment probe is supposed to focus on determining whether Trump abused his power as president by withholding aid to Ukraine in a bid to get dirt on Joe Biden.

A “whistleblower’s” allegation that Trump made a quid pro quo offer to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a call on July 25 triggered the impeachment probe. The “whistleblower” claimed Trump demanded Zelensky’s cooperation in investigating Biden and his son Hunter in exchange for aid.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the leader of the probe, has also said, however, that there does not need to be a Ukraine-linked quid pro quo to impeach Trump.

House Democrats have accused President Trump of obstruction of justice for refusing to cooperate with their impeachment probe, particularly for not relinquishing documents.

Former President Barack Obama refused to cooperate with congressional investigators seeking information on his administration’s fatal gun-running operation known as Fast and Furious. Nevertheless, neither Republicans nor Democrats sought to impeach him for it.

Under Fast and Furious, the Obama administration allowed criminals in Mexico to buy hundreds of guns. Some of the weapons were used to kill U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. They were also used to kill or wound an estimated 300 Mexicans.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Just as this blog has pointed out, certain Democrat members of Congress want to use any measure possible to remove their opposition

Maxine Waters has trumpeted her desire to impeach the President from November 2016. Al Green famously said as recently as May 2019:

I’m concerned if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected. If we don’t impeach him, he will say he’s been vindicated. He will say the Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the House and didn’t take up impeachment. He will say we had a constitutional duty to do and we didn’t. He will say he’s been vindicated.

I think we should do everything we can to make certain that every point Al Green made comes true. Otherwise, they might see it as an endorsement of their socialistic, baby-killing agenda.

The “whistleblower” is identified as a Democrat who worked with John Brennan and Joe Biden

Lifezette reported in a 31 October 2019 article on the previously-unknown “whistleblower” in the Democrat’s impeachment scheme.

The identity of the whistleblower behind the Ukraine hoax has reportedly been revealed as CIA officer Eric Ciaramella, a registered Democrat who worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.

Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations identified the man suspected of initiating allegations against the president — allegations that resulted in today’s impeachment proceedings.

Attorneys for the whistleblower have, naturally, declined to confirm their client’s name.

“But,” Sperry wrote on Wednesday, “the name of a government official fitting that description — Eric Ciaramella — has been raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings.”

He indicated that Ciaramella’s identity was raised as well “in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry.”

Democrats all along have been very clearly shielding the whistleblower’s identity, claiming they were doing so because of concerns about his or her safety.

The media, who have no obligation to keep the name under wraps, have been obediently following the Democrat Party’s lead, in our view — to nobody’s surprise.

That very identity, however, seems to indicate the individual was being protected for more nefarious reasons.

Who he is and what he stands for undermines the resistance party’s efforts to portray the impeachment proceedings as anything other than a charade.

Ciaramella isn’t just a politically neutral and concerned citizen.

“Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan,” Sperry reported on Wednesday.

He added that the ardent Democrat is “a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia ‘collusion’ investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.”

In other words — the man bears a striking resemblance to every single Democrat lawmaker pushing for impeachment right now.

Ciaramella is their golden boy and everything they are — as determined to undo the results of a presidential election as they were.

And that is why they tried hiding him from the public, as we see it.

As Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) pointed out, the outing of Eric Ciaramella as the whistleblower calls into question the entire genesis of the drive to impeach President Donald Trump.

His motivations are well known to the intelligence community, if not the public.

“He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump,” a former NSC official told RealClearInvestigations.

Ciaramella reportedly huddled for “guidance” with the staff of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff.

“Guidance” is a suspect word — the true description should be “coaching.”


(Read more at Lifezette)

Odd that all of these socialists and their supporting cast have such close ties to Biden

Additionally, it is certainly odd how communists like Comey, Brennan, and Ciaramella all got together to work against Donald Trump.

Just like the Democrat’s Nuclear Option, House approves Democrat’s impeachment rules

The left-leaning Associated Press reports in a 21 October 2019 article how the Democrats again slit their own throats. Just as Democrats previously approved and then condemned the use of the “nuclear option,” the Democrats need to regret this subversion of due process.

Nonetheless, the Associated Press reported it as follows:

Democrats swept a rules package for their impeachment probe of President Donald Trump through a divided House, as the chamber’s first vote on the investigation highlighted the partisan breach the issue has only deepened.

By 232-196, lawmakers on Thursday approved the procedures they’ll follow as weeks of closed-door interviews with witnesses evolve into public committee hearings and — almost certainly — votes on whether the House should recommend Trump’s removal.

All voting Republicans opposed the package. Every voting Democrat but two supported it.

Underscoring the pressure Trump has heaped on his party’s lawmakers, he tweeted, “Now is the time for Republicans to stand together and defend the leader of their party against these smears.”

Yet the roll call also accentuated how Democrats have rallied behind the impeachment inquiry after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent months urging caution until evidence and public support had grown.

She and other Democratic leaders had feared a premature vote would wound the reelection prospects of dozens of their members, including freshmen and lawmakers from Trump-won districts or seats held previously by Republicans. But recent polls have shown voters’ growing receptivity to the investigation and, to a lesser degree, ousting Trump.

That and evidence that House investigators have amassed have helped unify Democrats, including those from GOP areas. Rep. Cindy Axne, D-Iowa, said she was supporting a pathway to giving “the American people the facts they deserve,” while Rep. Andy Kim, D-N.J., said voters warrant “the uninhibited truth.”

Yet Republicans were also buoyed by polling, which has shown that GOP voters stand unflinchingly behind Trump.

“The impeachment-obsessed Democrats just flushed their majority down the toilet,” said Michael McAdams, a spokesman for House Republicans’ campaign arm.

Elsewhere at the Capitol on Thursday, three House panels led by the Intelligence Committee questioned their latest witness into the allegations that led to the impeachment inquiry: that Trump pressured Ukraine to produce dirt on his Democratic political rivals by withholding military aid and an Oval Office meeting craved by the country’s new president.

Tim Morrison, who stepped down from the National Security Council the day before his appearance, testified — still behind closed doors — that he saw nothing illegal in Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president that is at the center of the Democrat-led investigation.

(Read more at the Associated Press)

Add to these rules, Adam Schiff blocks Republicans from being legally exposed

As reported at The Last Refuge and as shown in the below table. Alexander Vindman was available to attend and listen in to the conversation between the Presidents of the United States and the Ukraine.

alexander-vindman-2-faraSimilarly, as reported by Sundance of The Last Refuge, it seems that Vindman did not exclusively wear his military uniform while executing his (Democrat, conniving) duties at the White House. (Yes, that is Vindman in the red oval below.)

alexander-vindman-3-energy-v1

I guess that the lawyers in Schiff’s office figure that a military uniform provides a certain level of respect that a gapping suit doesn’t.

Trump impeachment hearings must include Obama, Bidens

Tom Del Beccaro from Fox News argues that Republicans should start doing their jobs by calling witnesses close to the issue central to the impeachment narrative. Therefore, Republicans must call Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and other witnesses before Congress.

It’s official now. Democrats are careening toward the impeachment of a president and dragging the American people along with them. In today’s mass media age, it will consume this nation like few other events ever have.

I outlined a broader strategy for the GOP in my recent article for Fox News Opinion: “Republicans must win the impeachment trial – and they can by following these five steps.”

At this point, the formal House vote deprives the Republicans the right to subpoena witnesses without the permission of Adam Schiff – the man who has repeatedly lied to the American people. That is a stark departure from the procedure that was afforded the minority party under Nixon and Clinton.

If the Republicans are serious about winning this truly political fight, here are three witnesses they should demand be subpoenaed:

  • Hunter Biden
  • Joe Biden
  • Barack Obama

Before we talk about them, you might ask the question: What is an impeachable offense?

The Constitution explicitly states: “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”  That is the easy part when it comes to presidents.  Treason and bribery are easily defined but “other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” are not.

Did those words refer to a president challenging a suspect law passed by a Congress seeking to determine who could serve in a president’s cabinet? In 1868, a Republican-dominated House of Representatives impeached Democratic President Andrew Johnson, with an overwhelming vote of 126 to 47, for just that. The Senate, however, never convicted Johnson.

Johnson’s acts related to his exercise of official presidential powers.  The Nixon impeachment proceedings started based on the ill-famed Watergate break-in and a subsequent cover-up.  Nixon’s acts were a combination of private acts and executive power.

Bill Clinton you ask?  Well, that was based on his perjurous statement to a federal grand jury and obstruction of justice in a private lawsuit against him – largely private actions thought far too unfit for a president by the Republican House. The Senate did not convict Clinton either.

(Read more at Fox News)

Hat tip to the Chris Salcedo Show

Joe Biden on the stand would be a Republican advertisement writer’s dream

Considering Joe’s propensity for gaffing, having him on the stand would be heaven on Earth for Trump’s advertisement team.

Republican PACs are already attacking vulnerable Democrats who voted for impeachment resolution

It seems that Fox News has observed some Republicans growing a spine as certain Republican political action committees have started attacking vulnerable Democrats who voted for impeachment.

House Democrats in red districts who voted for the House resolution setting rules for the Trump impeachment inquiry are already under attack after a political action committee dedicated to boosting Republicans launched a digital ad campaign Thursday.

The Congressional Leadership Fund said in a statement that it had targeted 29 vulnerable Democrats with ads that will appear when constituents search for impeachment-related terms online. Those ads will redirect to a website with a petition titled: “Tell your member of Congress: Stop Impeachment Now!”

“The Democrats are so blinded by their personal hatred of President Trump that they’re willing to sacrifice all work on the issues voters care about, just to have one last shot at removing him from office to avenge their 2016 loss,” said CLF President Dan Conston. “Now that they’ve cast their votes in favor of marching headfirst into impeachment, vulnerable Democrats have shown voters there is zero difference whatsoever between them and the radical leftists fighting tooth and nail to impeach this president.”

The House of Representatives passed a resolution Thursday setting rules for the public phase of the impeachment inquiry Democrats have been pursuing into President Trump. A complaint from an anonymous whistleblower and testimony from other administration officials has indicated that Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to open investigations that would be politically beneficial to his 2020 reelection campaign — notably into Joe Biden and his son, Hunter — while withholding nearly $400 billion in military aid.

Democrats and others have accused Trump of trying to use the aid as leverage to get Ukraine to deliver the investigations. Trump and his defenders have said there was no quid-pro-quo — aid for investigations — with Trump describing a July 25 phone call in which he discussed the investigations, but not the aid, with Ukrainian President Voldomyr Zelensky as “perfect.”

Conor Lamb, D-Pa., who won his seat in a competitive 2018 special election, is one of the higher-profile Democrats targeted by the campaign. On Thursday, he said his vote for the impeachment rules resolution was simply to establish rules for the investigation and that he had not yet made up his mind if he would vote to impeach Trump.

“This resolution sets the rules for the upcoming hearings. I believe everyone benefits from clear rules, so I voted yes.  I have not made any decision about impeachment, nor will I until all the evidence is in,” he said in a statement. “I do believe that Russia is a major threat to the United States in Ukraine and around the world, and our oath requires us to put our country first, always.”

The CLF provided an example of what one of the ads would look like with a screenshot of one ad aimed at Anthony Brindisi, D-N.Y. It appears as a search result with a hyperlink that reads, “Anthony Brindisi | Just Voted For Impeachment | He’s with Radical Dems Not Us.”

(Read more at Fox News)

There are many more new and old Democrats who need to be voted out

In the Houston area, there is lying Lizzie Fletcher, who promised she would work for the business community and said that she would not be Nancy Pelosi’s rubber stamp (even though her campaign was financed by Pelosi). Lizzie needs to answer for her inaction and for her lies.

Clinton-Obama emails sought by Sen. Ron Johnson amid Democrats’ impeachment inquiry

Now we find that Fox News has observed that Ron Johnson has begun seeking certain certain Clinton-Obama emails amid the impeachment inquisition.

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson on Thursday formally sought “all email communications” between Hillary Clinton and former President Obama, saying the Justice Department was blocking their release — even though they could shed light on whether the former secretary of state discussed sensitive matters on her unsecured personal email system while she was overseas.

Johnson’s letter came as House Democrats approved procedures for their impeachment inquiry against President Trump, warning he may have endangered U.S. national security by allegedly withholding aid to Ukraine for political reasons. Earlier this month, a State Department report into Clinton’s use of a private email server for government business found dozens of people at fault and hundreds of security violations.

In a letter to the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Johnson, R-Wis., said summer 2016 communications from FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok to FBI Director James Comey’s Chief of Staff James Rybicki hinted at the existence of the Clinton-Obama messages that were relevant to the issues raised by her private server.

Johnson noted that on June 28, 2016, a week before Comey’s public statement declaring that “no reasonable prosecutor” would charge Clinton, Strzok wrote, “Jim – I have the POTUS – HRC emails [Director Comey] requested at end of briefing yesterday. I hesitate to leave them, please let me know a convenient time to drop them off.”

“I write to request email communications between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama,” Johnson wrote, setting a deadline of Nov. 14, 2019. “In January 2018, I requested the Department of Justice (DOJ) produce emails Secretary Clinton sent to President Obama while she was located in the ‘territory of a sophisticated adversary.'”

He added: “Given that DOJ acknowledged that they ‘are not in a position’ to produce emails to the committee that contain ‘equities of other executive branch entities,’ I ask that, pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, you please provide all email communications between Secretary Clinton and President Obama.”

May 2016 email from Strzok, obtained by Fox News last year, said “we know foreign actors obtained access” to some Clinton emails, including at least one “secret” message “via compromises of the private email accounts” of Clinton staffers. However, last year, the DOJ watchdog slammed Comey for speculating publicly that Clinton’s emails had been hacked by foreign actors.

Interviews with intelligence community officials released this past August indicated that senior FBI leaders “seemed indifferent to evidence of a possible intrusion by a foreign adversary” into Clinton’s non-government email server, and that State Department officials allegedly sought to “downgrade classified material found on the server,” according to Senate investigators probing the matter.

(Read more at Fox News)

The more about Democrat corruption that comes out, the better

We can only hope that this drags out until the months before the election.

Bolton will not voluntarily testify, says his lawyer

The Hill reports in a 31 October 2019 article that former Obama-era ambassador John Bolton will not testify unless he receives a subpoena.

Former national security adviser John Bolton will not appear voluntarily to testify in connection with the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

Bolton’s attorney Chuck Cooper told The Hill in an email late Wednesday that Bolton would not appear voluntarily and would need to be subpoenaed.

House Democrats have issued subpoenas to several witnesses in order to compel their testimony amid efforts by the White House to prevent their appearance. The White House has refused to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry, describing it as illegitimate and an attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election.

House investigators on Wednesday invited Bolton, who was dramatically ousted as Trump’s third national security adviser in September, to testify at a deposition on Nov. 7, next week.

It is not clear whether a subpoena will be enough to compel his appearance. Charles Kupperman, former deputy national security adviser, filed a lawsuit on Friday asking a federal court to weigh in on whether he should obey a subpoena to testify or instructions from the White House against cooperating, describing himself as caught between two competing branches of government.

 

I’m not sure whether Bolton is playing Brier Rabbit or he has done something

Either which way, we should give this guy the treatment that those who would undermine our government would deserve.

The Biden problem


 

Vanity Fair calls the Biden nepotism as a 2020 scandal

Vanity Fair recognizes the political-dynasty-wrecking potential of the Biden problem.

hunter-biden-at-daddys-podium
Hunter Biden at V.P. Joe Biden’s lectern

In a move sure to trigger 2016 P.T.S.D., The New York Times has published a nearly 3,000-word tale of intrigue involving the Biden family’s various entanglements in Ukraine. In short, the story is this: in the final year of the Obama presidency, Vice President Joe Biden “threatened to withhold $1 billion in United States loan guarantees if Ukraine’s leaders did not dismiss the country’s top prosecutor”—Viktor Shokin—“who had been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption in his own office and among the political elite.” The pressure campaign also just so happened to benefit Biden’s younger son, Hunter, who was then getting paid as much as $50,000 to sit on the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company that was in Shokin’s sights. The question the Times raises, but does not answer, is: were Joe’s and Hunter’s overlapping interests in Ukraine coincidental, or corrupt?

The Bidens say Joe acted “without any regard” for the impact on his son, and that Hunter never discussed private business with his father. But of course, that seems unlikely to put this story to rest. The current Ukrainian prosecutor general recently decided to reopen the investigation into Burisma, which could unearth new details about Hunter’s work. No surprise, the story is also being heavily promoted by Donald Trump and his allies, including lawyer Rudy Giuliani. According to the Times, Giuliani has met repeatedly with both the ousted Ukrainian prosecutor and the new prosecutor, and has discussed his findings with Trump—who then suggested he would like Attorney General William Barr to look into the matter. (Perhaps that is why Barr was at a loss for words on Wednesday, when Senator Kamala Harris asked whether “the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone.”)

Times reporter Ken Vogel, presumably seeking to pre-empt accusations of water-carrying, explained on Twitter that the paper’s interest in the subject predates Trump. “TO BE CLEAR: Independent of @RudyGiuliani’s efforts, the intersection of @JoeBiden & HUNTER BIDEN in Ukraine warrants scrutiny,” he said, noting that the Times had begun reporting on the Burisma story in 2015. Some within the Obama State Department, too, were concerned with the appearance of impropriety, or the possibility that Hunter’s business could complicate his father’s diplomatic efforts. (“I have had no role whatsoever in relation to any investigation of Burisma, or any of its officers,” Hunter Biden told the Times in a statement. “I explicitly limited my role to focus on corporate governance best practices to facilitate Burisma’s desire to expand globally.”)

Nevertheless, the Times report dovetails with Trumpworld efforts to get the Biden-Ukraine story in the news. The Hill reported in April on Joe Biden’s 2020 Ukrainian nightmare. More recently, the right-wing American Greatness and conservative-leaning Fox News both highlighted stories about the Biden family’s entanglements in Ukraine. MAGA-friendly outlets Breitbart and The Daily Wire made hay of the story on Thursday, leveraging the journalistic credibility of the Times.

The Burisma affair—whether coincidence or scandal—may be just the first volley in what is likely to become a broader war over Joe Biden’s conduct and record. Past speculation about Biden family drama has centered on Hunter’s documented struggle with drug use and his recently ended relationship with his late brother’s widow. But the bigger threat might actually be Hunter’s past business enterprises. Already, there’s another attack line looming on the horizon: in his latest book, Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends, Breitbart editor-at-large Peter Schweizer describes how a private-equity firm managed by Hunter Biden, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, negotiated a $1.5 billion investment deal with the state-owned Bank of China at the same time that his father, then the vice president, was conducting high-level diplomacy with Beijing. (On one of his trips, Hunter allegedly made use of Air Force Two.) Whether or not the Chinese hoped to curry favor with Hunter’s father, Trump allies are sure to make note of the issue, especially given Joe Biden’s controversial remark this week downplaying China as an economic competitor. (A spokesman for Hunter Biden disputed Schweizer’s claims to the Journal.)

(Watch the normally-liberal media rip Biden a new one at Vanity Fair)

The central part of the Biden problem is Joe Biden

Much as Joe Biden did much to deep-six race relations by fighting for segregation in the 1970’s and by stumbling verbally around his 2008 running mate (when he called Obama “the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy“), Joe Biden has worked as his own worst enemy. Whether we consider the corruption centering on Crowdstrike (the Democrats’ private online investigators) or just his stumbling comments on the campaign trail, Joe Biden continually does more to destroy his campaign than his opponents could ever hope to do.

Giuliani Promises To Release Incriminating Evidence On Biden

A 23 September 2019 article in the Daily Caller describes some of the steps former Mayor Giuliani has promised to take in dealing with the Biden problem.

NYMayorGuilliani
Former NYC Mayor Giuliani

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Monday that he has “a lot more evidence” on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s dealings with Ukraine, adding in that Biden’s son Hunter is “drug challenged.”

After telling CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Thursday that he asked Ukraine to look into Biden, Trump’s personal lawyer went after Biden for multiple alleged offenses related to Ukraine. He tweeted Monday that Ukraine paid Hunter $3 million in laundered money while his father and Obama looked the other way.

Giuliani told Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo on Monday that he would continue to unearth evidence against the Bidens.

“There’s a lot more evidence I’m going to put out,” Giuliani said on “Mornings with Maria.” “I put one out today — money-laundering. I’ve got a bigger one for tomorrow, a bigger one for the day after.”

Trump’s personal attorney added that the situation is a positive for Trump because it puts the spotlight on Biden.

“It’s the only way you can get this out,” Giuliani said. “The only way that they [the media] would cover this story is by punching the president in the face, and then the president deflects the punch — which he’s done — the story’s come way down from where it was, and then he hits ’em with a right hand that’s more powerful.”

During the conversation about Biden’s alleged conversations with Ukraine, Giuliani took a hit at Hunter, saying he is “drug challenged,” adding in that Joe Biden “fails at everything.” Hunter has struggled with drug and alcohol addiction throughout his life, according to an interview published in The New Yorker in July.

As the criminals who beleaguered New York would know, Giuliani does not make idle threats

Although I cannot tell you what the surprise might be, if Giuliani tells us that Biden has a surprise coming, then you can make book on that surprise appearing.

Biden’s Nepotism and Hypocrisy in Ukraine

Canada Free Press provided an op-ed comment by James A. Lyons, Jr. Admiral, USN (ret.) on the problem of nepotism created by Joe Biden.

joe-biden-hunter-biden-ukrainian-oil
With no oilfield experience, Hunter Biden got a job at a Ukrainian oil company paying $50K/month for years

U.S. relations with Ukraine have dramatically flourished under President Trump, in contrast to the poor state of the Washington-Kiev strategic alliance under former President Obama. While the Trump national security team approved the sale of Javelin anti-tank missile systems and sniper rifles to Ukraine, the Obama administration vetoed similar sales of lethal weapons, leaving Ukraine to face Russia alone. An equally important aspect of U.S. support for Ukraine has been in reforms and the fight against corruption, which the Obama administration also undermined by nepotism and hypocrisy.

Former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Robert Gates famously wrote in his memoir that Joe Biden “has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.” Now that the former vice president is considering yet another presidential run, voters should always remember some of Amtrak Joe’s golden oldies, including: dismissing North Korea as a “paper tiger”, stating that the Taliban is not America’s enemy, and embracing China’s one-child policy. But, it would be hard to name another sitting vice president whose reckless nepotism impacted another country, as Biden did with Ukraine.

Vice President Biden routinely complained about “backsliding” over Ukraine’s fight against corruption, while at the same time, his son, Hunter, with no background in the gas industry, earned a huge salary as a consultant to gas mogul Mykola Zlochevsky’s Burisma Holdings, which is mired in allegations of corruption. This example of nepotism is, as reported in The Washington Post, a problem for U.S. soft power as Hunter Biden’s appointment “looks nepotistic at best, nefarious at worst.” Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer said the lack of due diligence in the Vice President’s office was surprising as Hunter Biden’s employment by Burisma “undercut that message of anti-corruption.”

Prior to Burisma, Hunter Biden teamed up with his Yale roommate, Devon Archer to create Rosemont Capital and Rosemont Seneca*. Their first forays were in China, including in a nuclear company under FBI investigation. But the good times did not last, as Archer was charged in May 2016 with “conspiracy to commit securities fraud” against Native Americans.

(Read more about he mafia-like Burisma at the Canada Free Press)

Everybody knows that governments do not hire drugged-out, inexperienced sons for no reason

If it looks like nepotism and smells like nepotism and tastes like nepotism and feels like nepotism, it is probably nepotism.

Joe Biden bragged about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor who investigated his son fired

The Hill reported in a 1 April 2019 article that Joe Biden really stuck his foot in his mouth by bragging on the way he got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired. To magnify the situation, he did it in front of the world’s power players (all surrounded by cameras and recorders).

Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.

In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling Poroshenko.

BidenAdmits“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event, insisting that President Obama was in on the threat.

Interviews with a half-dozen senior Ukrainian officials confirm Biden’s account, though they claim the pressure was applied over several months in late 2015 and early 2016, not just six hours of one dramatic day. Whatever the case, Poroshenko and Ukraine’s parliament obliged by ending Shokin’s tenure as prosecutor. Shokin was facing steep criticism in Ukraine, and among some U.S. officials, for not bringing enough corruption prosecutions when he was fired.

But Ukrainian officials tell me there was one crucial piece of information that Biden must have known but didn’t mention to his audience: The prosecutor he got fired was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings that employed Biden’s younger son, Hunter, as a board member.

(Read more at The Hill)

When you hear the Vice President say this, what else needs be heard?

With this bragging on tape, what other proof do we need?

Trump to release whistleblower complaint to Congress: report

According to a 24 September 2019 article at The Hill detailed how President Trump planned to release the whistleblower report to Congress.

The White House is expected to give Congress the whistleblower complaint at the heart of a brewing scandal that has led to a formal House impeachment inquiry against President Trump, a source confirmed to The Hill on Tuesday.

reportPolitico first reported that both the whistleblower complaint and Inspector General report will be released to Congress by the end of the week. The decision marks a reversal for the White House, which had previously declined to provide the documents to lawmakers, even as Trump decried the impeachment inquiry sparked by the controversy as a “witch hunt.”

The official emphasized to Politico that the decision and timing could change, but that the president has agreed to the move.

The White House declined to comment on the record about the matter.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday announced the House would launch an official impeachment inquiry amid concerns that the president sought to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a July talk to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter by threatening to withhold military aid.

Trump admitted this week that he mentioned Biden during the call and that he cut off aid to Ukraine days before the conversation. However, he has maintained that there was no quid pro quo discussed during their conversation.

Trump and Republican allies have claimed Biden abused his power during his time as vice president when he pressed Kiev to dismiss a prosecutor who was investigating a natural gas company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch, whose board members included Biden’s son. No evidence has emerged that Biden was acting to protect his son.

The president has already promised to release the official transcript of his phone call with Zelensky, saying it will reveal a “very friendly and totally appropriate call.” However, congressional Democrats say the transcript is insufficient and that the whistleblower complaint, which first expressed alarm over the phone call, is needed to fully flesh out the details of the discussion.

(Read more at The Hill)

Another Democrat scheme bites the dust

The President has placed the information out where it can be seen, has been open to answering questions, and has gone to the public with the President of Ukraine. How will the Democrats deny this in light of the many things they have done (via Biden, as mentioned above, and via a set of senators, mentioned below).

Democrats Wrote to Ukraine in May 2018, Demanding It Investigate Trump

Breitbart points out in a 24 September 2019 article how three Democrats demanded that the Ukrainian government investigate Trump. (Hat tip to the Chris Salcedo Show)

Democrats wrote to the Ukrainian government in May 2018 urging it to continue investigations into President Donald Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign — collusion later found not to exist.

Durbin-Leahy-MenendezThe demand, which came from U.S. Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), resurfaced Wednesday in an opinion piece written by conservative Marc Thiessen in the Washington Post.

Ironically, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) declared Tuesday that the mere possibility that President Trump had asked Ukraine to continue an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden — even without a quid pro quo — was enough to trigger an impeachment inquiry. (Biden boasted in 2018 that he had forced Ukraine to remove its prosecutor by threatening to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid; he did not tell his audience at the Council on Foreign Relations that the prosecutor was looking into a firm on whose board his son, Hunter Biden, was serving.)

Thiessen observed (original links):

It got almost no attention, but in May [2018], CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

The Democrats’ letter is available online here. In it, Menendez, Durbin, and Leahy demanded that the Ukrainian government answer their questions about the Mueller probe, and issued an implied threat: “This reported refusal to cooperate with the Mueller probe also sends a worrying signal — to the Ukrainian people as well as the international community — about your government’s commitment more broadly to support justice and the rule of law.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

If demanding investigation from Ukraine of political opposition is impeachable, these senators must be impeached

Senators Leahy, Durbin, and Menendez must be impeached if, as the accusers of President Trump are correct. If using the United States governmental power to compel a foreign government to investigate a political opponent is impeachable — then impeach them.

If it is not an impeachable offense, please bug off.

Things that should give us pause regarding China, Hong Kong, gun control, and the Second Amendment


Chinese “paramilitary” at Hong Kong border

Reuters reports in a 14 August 2019 article that “paramilitary” forces have moved to the border of Hong Kong (in stark violation of the agreement made with Britain when Hong Kong was surrendered as a British colony).

Hong Kong braced for more mass protests over the weekend, even as China warned it could use its power to quell demonstrations and U.S. President Donald Trump urged his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to meet with the protesters to defuse weeks of tensions.

Hundreds of China’s People’s Armed Police (PAP) on Thursday conducted exercises at a sports stadium in Shenzhen that borders Hong Kong a day after the U.S. State Department said it was “deeply concerned” about the movements, which have prompted worries that the troops could be used to break up protests.

ShenzhenSportsCenterParamilitaryParking

Trump told reporters on Thursday he did not want to see a resort to violence to quell the protests in Hong Kong and reiterated that he wanted to see China “humanely solve the problem.”

“I am concerned. I wouldn’t want to see a violent crackdown,” Trump said, speaking in Morristown, New Jersey. “If he (Xi) sat down with the protesters – a group of representative protesters – I’d bet he’d work it out in 15 minutes. … I know it’s not the kind of thing he does, but I think it wouldn’t be a bad idea.”

(Read more at Reuters)

Patriots, think about these things regarding the mainstream media and how they frame this conflict

In the United States of America, “paramilitary” brings up images of overweight guys in worn-out fatigues bought at the Army Surplus store. These guys likely spend some part of their weekends shooting holes in cans or putting meat on the table by hunting small game.

Truthfully, although I have never belonged to any paramilitary group, I support the overall goals of such groups. I support the freedom afforded by the Second Amendment. I support those who put in the time needed to be prepared to defend against threats against their families. Additionally, I support the patriotism and other elements of preparedness often associated with these groups.

However, the “paramilitary” that the American “news” agencies refers to seems to come equipped with hundreds of vehicles with turrets and what seem to be guns.

ShenzhenSportsCenterVehiclesWithTurrets

This should be a reason for pause.

Even though this might just be a threat against the Hong Kong protesters, these “paramilitary” forces might be deployed against people who have no guns and no body armor. These Hong Kong citizens definitely do not have military-grade rifles or side arms.

Therefore, with the power of words, the American press has equated six-wheeled tanks and armored personnel carriers with non-professional weekend warriors. Reuters wants the headline readers to believe that little threat is offered against the brave people standing up for what little rights they have left.

Think about this the next time a Democrat calls for the American people to be disarmed and the press paints a sad picture in support of the Democrat.

Trump ties China trade deal to Hong Kong protest

In a 15 August 2019 article by Fortune, Trump’s tweet brings the Hong Kong protests into the China trade deal.

HongKongMillions.png

President Donald Trump late Wednesday seemed to conflate the protests in Hong Kong with the U.S.’s trade war with China. “Of course China wants to make a deal. Let them work humanely with Hong Kong first!” he tweeted. If Trump thought wielding the Hong Kong protests as leverage in the ongoing U.S.-China trade war would prompt concessions from Beijing, he seemed to have miscalculated—by a large margin.

Trump turned his Twitter attention to the growing unrest in Hong Kong on Wednesday, when he urged those involved to “be calm and safe” amid reports that the Chinese government was amassing troops on the border with Hong Kong. He later picked up the thread, looping the ongoing trade war into the matter.

“I know President Xi of China very well,” Trump tweeted. “He is a great leader who very much has the respect of his people. He is also a good man in a ‘tough business.’ I have ZERO doubt that if President Xi wants to quickly and humanely solve the Hong Kong problem, he can do it. Personal meeting?”

Trump’s decision to link the protests in Hong Kong with the trade war negotiations may have been a misstep, as it plays into China’s narrative of what the demonstrations are all about. Over the past two months, Beijing has repeatedly accused the U.S. of stirring up unrest in Hong Kong in order to serve the White House’s trade agenda. State media now runs news stories alleging that white foreigners attending the Hong Kong protests are actually CIA operatives instigating turmoil. The protesters themselves, meanwhile, cite demands for greater democratic freedoms as the reason for taking to the streets.

(Read more at Fortune)

Think about how President Trump introduced this narrative

Although the press seems to want to downplay this narrative, President Trump bypassed them by putting the information out in a tweet (below).

However, had the President gone to CNN or CBS to spread his message, he would have been nearly silenced.

China Is Waging a Disinformation War Against Hong Kong Protesters

Even the New York Times recognizes in a 15 August 2019 article the measures taken by China against the Hong Kong protesters.

china-propaganda

When a projectile struck a Hong Kong woman in the eye this week as protesters clashed with the police, China responded quickly: Its state television network reported that the woman had been injured not by one of the police’s bean bag rounds, but by a protester.

The network’s website went further: It posted what it said was a photo of the woman counting out cash on a Hong Kong sidewalk — insinuating, as Chinese reports have claimed before, that the protesters are merely paid provocateurs.

The assertion was more than just spin or fake news. The Communist Party exerts overwhelming control over media content inside China’s so-called Great Firewall, and it is now using it as a cudgel in an information war over the protests that have convulsed Hong Kong for months.

In recent days, China has more aggressively stirred up nationalist and anti-Western sentiment using state and social media, and it has manipulated the context of images and videos to undermine the protesters. Chinese officials have begun branding the demonstrations as a prelude to terrorism.

(Read more at New York Times)

Only a few observations regarding the review of the expected at the New York Times

First, for the most part, the violent images of the Hong Kong protests have been excised from our media because they don’t want to reflect badly on another socialist society (remember, Venezuela shot and killed its own unarmed citizens).

Second, this comes from the outfit (the NYTwits) that still accuses the Trump administration of treasonous acts performed in conjunction with the Russians despite the findings in the Mueller report.

Just as China has made westernization a boogeyman here, many of the New York Times articles depend on demonizing a person or groups. One prime example might be summarized as “Orange man bad.” Another might be the habit at the New York Times of associating Christians with Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph.

Fourth, Google has worked with the Chinese government to suppress Internet searches within China, has blocked their Google Maps application to searches in China, and works with the Chinese military. Considering the left-leaning tendencies of Google, how might they use their findings to change elections across the globe (including in the US)?

Philadelphia shooting: Mayor calls for gun control

In a 15 August 2019 article by the BBC, several of the most common Democrat talking points on gun confiscation came out.

MayorKenney
Mayor Kenney calls for gun laws when multiple gun laws were already violated.

The mayor of Philadelphia has joined growing calls for gun control after a shootout in his city left six officers injured as they served a drug warrant.

“Our officers need help,” said Mayor Jim Kenney. “They need help with keeping these weapons out of these people’s hands.”

A gun battle broke out between police and a gunman on Wednesday, leading to a seven-hour stand-off.

The suspect reportedly carried a semi-automatic rifle and several handguns.

Mr Kenney called out politicians for their failure to address the gun crisis and confront the National Rifle Association’s powerful gun rights lobby.

“It’s aggravating, it’s saddening,” Mr Kenney said. “If the state and federal government don’t want to stand up to the NRA and some other folks, then let us police ourselves.”

He added: “Our officers deserve to be protected and they don’t deserve to be shot at by a guy for hours with an unlimited supply of weapons and an unlimited supply of bullets.”

US President Donald Trump also weighed in on the shooting, tweeting Thursday morning that the Philadelphia shooting suspect “should never have been allowed on the streets”.

“Long sentence – must get much tougher on street crime!” he wrote.

(Read more at the BBC)

Pointing out the lies and fallacies

This article focuses on the following:

  1. Our sympathy and respect for the Philadelphia police who were fired upon
  2. Our assumed respect for those who are in positions of power (such as this mayor)
  3. The desire of many to be within a perceived majority (that is, we would also like to be with those who “joined growing calls”)
  4. Our assumed fear of scary-sounding weapons (“semi-automatic rifle and several handguns”)

Additionally, it gives primacy to the Democrat talking points by mentioning them first and more fully. The first six paragraphs (160 words) support the Democrat line of “reasoning.” Only after that is there any discussion of President Trump’s suggestion of more jail time for this repeat offender (two paragraphs encompassing 37 words).

Nonetheless, the BBC does not consider the following issues with their line of reasoning:

  1. The shooter was a drug dealer with previous drug and gun-related convictions. It was already illegal for him to own the guns. Adding more gun laws would not have stopped this criminal from committing this crime.
  2. It is illegal to try to kill or attempt to kill an officer of the law. This criminal had already determined to disobey this law when he pulled together his arsenal and began firing on the police.
  3. Both murder and attempted murder is illegal.
  4. Pennsylvania and Philadelphia have gun laws that were violated by this criminal. Adding another gun law would not prevent anything.
  5. Gun laws have little effect on murder rates. Look at Chicago, New York, and London.
  6. As jihadists have taught us, planes, bombs, cars, trucks, and knives can be used when guns are not available.

Hong Kong Protesters sing the American national anthem and “Sing Hallelujah to the Lord”


Hong Kong Protesters Embrace American Flag in Fight for Freedom

Breitbart reported in a 29 July 2019 article how the US flag and national anthem have become central to the Hong Kong protests.

HongKongUS_Flag

The American flag has become a symbol of resistance against China in the ongoing protests in Hong Kong, prominently waved throughout the city this past weekend as police fired tear gas and rubber bullets into the peaceful crowds.

Millions of Hong Kong residents have participated in rallies since early June against a bill proposed in the city’s legislature that would have allowed China to extradite anyone present in Hong Kong by accusing him or her of breaking Chinese law. Under the “One Country, Two Systems” policy China agreed to when the U.K. handed Hong Kong over in 1997, Hong Kong must abandon any claims to sovereignty in exchange for China not imposing communist laws on the city. The protesters objected that the extradition law would violate that policy.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam claimed the bill was “dead” this month, but protesters astutely noted that lawmakers had tabled the bill, allowing them to revive it any time. Protesters are demanding that the Legislative Council withdraw the bill entirely.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Our response to the Chinese

TiananmenTanks

With the protests being peaceful so far, the Hong Kong security forces have still daily cleaned blood from the streets. Therefore, I have to ask whether this will be like the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989? If it turns that direction, what can America do? What will we do?

Our response to American politicians

To put a more introspective turn on this story, what must we do to prevent this from happening in America?

For one, we must not give up our First Amendment free speech rights to a left-leaning corporation such as Google or Twitter.

Second, we must not lay down our Second Amendment rights to the feel-goodism of a red flag law.

Hong Kong Protesters Wish They Had The Second Amendment

The Daily Caller points out the obvious regarding those who stand defenseless before a Communist government.

HongKong2nd

While Americans are a major exception, most people throughout the world don’t have a built-in, government-protected right to own guns.

The Second Amendment is uniquely American, and something many protesting for basic human rights would love to have. Those protesters include residents of Hong Kong, who say they are fighting the oppression of China’s communist party and its new extradition law.

Some protesters have even been flying American flags to signify their desire for freedom.

(Read more and see the video at the Daily Caller)

Look at these images and listen to these sounds. Think of looking down the barrels of rifles of the Communist army. Then tell me you still want to surrender your right to own a gun.

Hong Kong protesters embrace unexpected Christian anthem: ‘Sing Hallelujah to the Lord’

An 18 June 2019 Fox News article explains how a Christian hymn became a rallying cry in Hong Kong (where only 10$ of the population is Christian).

HongKongSingHallelujah

A hymn sung by Christian groups participating in the anti-extradition Hong Kong protests has caught on and become an unlikely anthem for the movement of millions in the streets.

For the past week, “Sing Hallelujah to the Lord” has been heard almost non-stop at the main protest site in front of the city’s Legislative Council, and at marches and tense stand-offs with police, Reuters reported.

Although only 10 percent of the population is Christian, church groups quickly rallied after being alarmed by reports of police brutality to make a safe haven for protesters as the government said it had to crack down on “organized riots.”


And that’s how the hymn caught on.

“As religious assemblies were exempt, it could protect the protesters. It also shows that it is a peaceful protest,” Edwin Chow, 19, acting president of the Hong Kong Federation of Catholic Students, told Reuters. “This was the one people picked up, as it is easy for people to follow, with a simple message and easy melody.”

(Read more at Fox News)

When I first heard of this anthem being used, I did not know how a Christian anthem could come into wise use in a land where 90% of the population does not profess Christianity.

It seems that it occurred because Christians in Hong Kong were following the Bible by protecting the powerless.

While the Christian community of Hong Kong finds itself dwarfed within the community, it has been able to show love and provide protection. May God bless them.

Trump’s Address to Israel


President Trump’s Address to Israel

President Trump spoke to the Israeli government:

Thank you, Prime Minister Netanyahu. I want to thank you and Sara for hosting us for what has been an unforgettable visit to this very special land. I also want to thank Chairman Itzik Molko, Acting Director Ayellet Shilloh-Tamir, and Chief Operating Officer Dalia Lazar, for hosting us today in this incredible museum. And thank you, Ambassador and Mrs. Friedman for joining us, along with a number of very good friends who have come from our country to yours as we reaffirm the unshakeable bond between the United States and Israel.

I want to begin my remarks today by sending the thoughts and prayers of the entire American People to the victims of the terrorist attack in Manchester, in the United Kingdom, and our condolences to the many families who lost their loved ones. Dozens of innocent people and beautiful young children were savagely murdered in this heinous attack upon humanity. I repeat again that we must drive out the terrorists and the extremists from our midst, obliterate this evil ideology, and protect and defend our citizens. All civilized nations must be united in this effort. This trip is focused on that goal: bringing nations together around the goal of defeating the terrorism that threatens the world and crushing the hateful ideology that drives it so hard, and seems to be driving it so fast.

It is a privilege to stand here in this national museum, in the ancient city of Jerusalem, to address the Israeli people – and all people in the Middle East who yearn for security, prosperity, and peace.

Jerusalem is a sacred city. Its beauty, splendor, and heritage are like no other place on earth. What a heritage. The ties of the Jewish people to this Holy Land are ancient and eternal. They date back thousands of years, including the reign of King David whose star now flies proudly on Israel’s white and blue flag.

Yesterday, I visited the Western Wall, and marveled at the monument to God’s presence and man’s perseverance – I was humbled to place my hand upon the wall and to pray in that holy space for wisdom from God.

I also visited and prayed at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a site revered by Christians throughout the world. I laid a wreath at Yad Vashem, honoring, remembering, and mourning the 6 million Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust. I pledged there what I pledge again to those here today: NEVER AGAIN.

Israel is a testament to the unbreakable spirit of the Jewish people. From all parts of this great country, one message resounds: and that is the message of hope.

Down through the ages, the Jewish people have suffered persecution, oppression and even those who have sought their destruction. But, through it all, they have endured – and they have thrived.

I stand in awe of the accomplishments of the Jewish People, and I make this promise to you: My Administration will always stand with Israel. Through your hardships, you have created one of the most abundant lands in the world. A land that is rich not only in history, culture, and opportunity, but especially in spirit.

This museum where we are gathered today tells the story of that spirit – from the two Holy Temples, to the glorious heights of Masada, we see an incredible story of faith and perseverance. That faith is what inspired Jews to believe in their destiny, to overcome their despair, and to build here a future that others dared not to dream.

In Israel, not only are Jews free to till the soil, teach their children, and pray to God in the ancient land of their forefathers. But Muslims, Christians, and people of all faiths, are free to live and worship according to their conscience and to follow their dreams.

Today, gathered with friends, I call upon all people – Jews, Christians, Muslims, and every faith, tribe, and creed – to draw inspiration from this ancient city, to set aside our sectarian differences, to overcome oppression and hatred, and to give all children the freedom and hope and dignity written into our souls.

Earlier this week, I spoke at a historic summit in Saudi Arabia. There, I urged our friends in the Muslim world to join us in creating stability, safety and security. I was deeply encouraged by the desire of many leaders to join us in cooperation toward these shared and vital goals. Conflict cannot continue forever – the only question is when nations will decide that they have had enough.

That historic summit represents a new opportunity for people throughout the Middle East to overcome sectarian and religious divisions to extinguish the fires of extremism, and find common ground and shared responsibility in making the future of this region. Change must come from within.

No mother or father wants their children to grow up in a world where terrorists roam free, schoolchildren are murdered, and their loved ones are taken. No child is born with prejudice in their heart. No one should teach young boys and girls to hate and kill.

And no civilized nation can tolerate the massacre of innocents with chemical weapons.

My message to that summit was the same message I have for you: We must build a coalition of partners who share the aim of stamping out extremism and violence – and providing our children a peaceful and hopeful future.

But a hopeful future for children in the Middle East requires the world to fully recognize the vital role of the state of Israel.

And, on behalf of the United States, we pledge to stand by you and defend our shared values so that together we can defeat terrorism and create safety for all of God’s children.

Israelis have experienced firsthand the hatred and terror of radical violence. Israelis are murdered by terrorists wielding knives and bombs. Hamas and Hezbollah launch rockets into Israeli communities where schoolchildren have to be trained to hear the sirens and run to bomb shelters. ISIS targets Jewish neighborhoods, synagogues, and storefronts. And Iran’s leaders routinely call for Israel’s destruction. Not with Donald J. Trump.

Despite these challenges, Israel is thriving as a sovereign nation – and no international body should question the contributions Israel makes to the region.

Today, let us pray for that peace – and for a more hopeful future across the Middle East.

There are those who present a false choice. They say that we must choose between supporting Israel and supporting Arab and Muslim nations in the region. That is completely wrong. All decent people want to live in peace, and all humanity is threatened by the evils of terrorism. Diverse nations can unite around the goal of protecting innocent life, upholding human dignity, and promoting peace and stability in the region. My Administration is committed to pursuing such a coalition, and we have already made substantial progress during this trip.

We know, for instance, that both Israelis and Palestinians seek lives of hope for their children. And we know that peace is possible if we put aside the pain and disagreements of the past and commit together to finally resolving this crisis which has dragged on for nearly half a century.

As I have repeatedly said, I am personally committed to helping Israelis and Palestinians achieve a peace agreement, and I had a meeting this morning with President Mahmoud Abbas and I can tell you that the Palestinians are ready to reach for peace – and, from my meeting with my friend Benjamin Netanyahu, I can tell you Israelis are ready to reach for peace as well.

Making peace will not be easy. We all know that. Both sides will face tough decisions. But with determination, compromise, and the belief that peace is possible, Israelis and Palestinians can make a deal. But even as we work toward peace, we will build strength to defend our nations.

The United States is firmly committed to keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and halting their support of terrorists and militias that are causing so much suffering and chaos throughout the Middle East.

America’s security partnership with Israel is stronger than ever – including the Iron Dome missile defense program, which has been keeping the Israeli people safe from short-range rockets launched by Hezbollah and Hamas. And David’s sling which guards against long-range missiles. It is my hope that someday very soon Israeli children will never need to rush towards shelter, as sirens ring out.

Finally, the United States is proud that Israeli Air Force pilots are flying new American F-35 planes to defend their nation, and it was wonderful to see these mighty aircraft in the skies over Israel recently as you celebrated the 69th anniversary of Israel’s independence.

But even as we strengthen our partnership in practice, let us always remember our highest ideals – let us never forget that the bond between our two nations is woven together in the hearts of our people – and their love of freedom, hope, and dignity for every man and every woman.

Let us dream of a future where Jewish, Muslim and Christian children can grow up together and live together in trust, harmony, tolerance and respect.

The values practiced in Israel have inspired millions all across the world.

The conviction of Theodor Herzl rings true today: ‘whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind.’

As we stand in Jerusalem, we see pilgrims of all faiths coming to this land to walk on this hallowed ground.

Jews place the prayers from their hearts in the stone blocks of the Western Wall.

Christians pray in the pews of an ancient church.

Muslims answer the call to prayer at their holy sites.

This city, like no other place in the world, reveals the longing of the human heart – to know and worship God.

Jerusalem stands as a reminder that life can flourish against any odds.

When we look around this city, and we see people of all faiths engaged in reverent worship, and school children learning side-by-side, and men and women lifting up the needy and forgotten, we see that God’s promise of healing has brought goodness to so many lives. We see that the people of this land had the courage to overcome the oppression and injustice of the past – and to live in the freedom God intends for every person on this earth.

Today, in Jerusalem, we pray and we hope that children around the world will soon be able to live without fear, to dream without limits, and to prosper without violence. I ask this land of promise to join with me to fight our common enemies, to pursue our shared values, and to protect the dignity of every child of God.

Thank you. God bless you. God bless the State of Israel. And God bless the United States.