Remember when you were a kid and would be in trouble for something and you just lied and lied about it? Remember how you would feel about being caught in your own lies? Well, that’s exactly how Nancy Pelosi felt during an interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo.
The House voted to release a four-page memo outlining Obama’s DOJ and FBI minions abusing a surveillance program so that they could spy on Donald Trump during his transition to becoming President.
This memo presents a MASSIVE threat to the Democrats and Obama himself, so I’m not surprised to see Nancy Pelosi being nervous and stuttering at every sentence while talking with Chris Cuomo about it. Now, if she was this nervous when talking with Democrat-friendly Chris Cuomo, imagine how she would’ve felt talking with someone who might actually put some pressure on her.
To Chris’ credit, he did ask some proper questions about the memo when he needed to (and ignored the lying and b.s. Pelosi would spew, but that’s to be expected of him). But even with questions that make sense, Pelosi still felt nervous merely discussing it.
She would often say that releasing this memo would be a matter of national security even though Obama himself declassified top secret info about Bush’s fight with terrorism. When he did that, the New York Times reported that “exhaustive details about interrogation methods used by the Central Intelligence Agency could lead to a flood of new disclosures about secret Bush administration operations against Al Qaeda.”
THAT actually put U.S. officials at risk and THAT was a matter of national security that the Democrats simply didn’t care about. THIS release of the memo is not a matter of national security, it’s a matter of Democrat security. This memo will largely serve to further destroy Obama’s legacy and standing (with independents, perhaps, but it likely won’t do much with brainwashed liberals). This could lead to a lot of arrests in the future, perhaps including Obama himself.
So you can see why the Democrats don’t want the American people to see this memo. Pelosi claims it’s a matter of national security, even though it’s not. She also claims that people simply won’t understand what the memo means and says. That’s how little she thinks of regular citizens.
No, it’s likely that most people won’t understand all the legalistic aspects of the memo, but we’re smart enough to recognize a general theme: abuse of power and illegal espionage on an American citizen and President-elect.
Besides, it’s only four pages long. Even if it’s filled with all sorts of lawyer talk, I will still likely figure out what the memo is saying.
Back when Paul Manafort was indicted, I read the charges that Robert Mueller presented. I’ll be the first to admit I didn’t understand absolutely everything. I’m not a lawyer, after all. But I could understand what the charges were and that they had nothing to do with Russian collusion.
Once I read the memo, I might not understand absolutely everything it says, but I’ll be able to recognize what it’s talking about and what illegal deeds Obama and his Justice Department did during Trump’s transition to the White House.
And once I read it, myself, alongside a lot of other conservative news outlets, will be able to simplify things if needed. Though, I don’t think the people who will read the memo will be dumb enough to not see what it’s talking about (again, perhaps except brainwashed liberals who will keep their minds closed when reading it and believe it all to be lies).
Regardless, returning to Pelosi, it’s clear as day that she’s very nervous about this memo being released to the public. Just as Ephesians 5:13 says: “But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, for everything that is illuminated becomes a light itself.”
What happens in the dark will come to the light. The secrets of the Obama DOJ will be revealed for all who have eyes to see; for all who have ears to hear.
Now, I should clarify something. It’s not the fact that the American people will see the memo that might lead to consequences for Obama and those involved in the illegal activities detailed in the memo. Punishment would likely occur despite the American people knowing about it.
That’s not what Pelosi is nervous about here. It’s not the fact that Obama and his Justice Department broke the law that worries her. She’s a career politician with a $30 million net worth. Like President Truman once said: “You can’t get rich in politics unless you’re a crook.”
So it’s not the illegality of Obama’s actions that worries her. It’s the fact that people will KNOW that he did it that worries her. It’s the fact that it will be exposed to the general public.
It’s the fact that this memo will severely hurt the Democrats’ chances at retaking Congress in 2018. If it becomes general knowledge that Obama broke the law to spy on a political opponent, it will reflect badly upon Democrats in the future.
This memo can easily become a weapon for Republican candidates to expose the corruption of the Democrats (granted, they have a lot of other examples of this, but this becomes yet another one, and a big one, at that).
The reason Pelosi is so nervous about it is because this will only further destroy the Democrat Party. If used right, no Democrat should even retain a seat in 2018 (except in loony California, perhaps), let alone gain any.
Public opinion about them will likely diminish, even within their own base (Bernie supporters already thought Hillary was crooked, so this certainly doesn’t help anyone in the Establishment).
This memo will largely serve to further rip the Democrat Party to shreds.
“But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, for everything that is illuminated becomes a light itself.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I’ll begin this article by saying that I could understand NeverTrumpers a year or so ago. I could understand their worries. I could understand their skepticism. I could understand why they were against Trump back then.
Trump was largely unproven. He never held elected office (which is one of the many reasons we like him), he had never really enacted conservative policy. He was an insanely successful entrepreneur. But he was a New Yorker too. What I mean is that he spent a lot of time with liberal friends and making friends with elected liberals in New York. This is one of the reasons NeverTrumpers didn’t like him.
Plenty of politicians before Trump came along and said the right things at the right time. Back in 2012, Romney would sound super conservative when he needed to, but then turn around and be the cowardly establishment rat that he is. Trump kicked off his campaign with a very strong and conservative message. And while he wasn’t taken very seriously back then, he still faced opposition from NeverTrumpers such as Glenn Beck.
He spoke nice but he had yet to prove he was a true conservative. And even Trump himself said that he considers himself to be more of a “common sense conservative”, as opposed to some of his opponents who were more “constitutional conservative”; meaning, his opponents were more focused on the legality of situations. That’s not to say that being a constitutional conservative is a bad thing. On contraire, I would hope to see more of them in Congress. But Trump wasn’t a lawyer. He wasn’t focused more on the constitutional side of things.
Obviously, he cares deeply about our Constitution, but he’s never made it the focus of things. So I understand why NeverTrumpers were skeptical about him. They theorized that the only reason he ran is so that he could hand over the election to Hillary (I’m actually paraphrasing something I heard Glenn Beck say one day when I actually listened to him). They expected him to either go soft against Hillary just as Romney did against Obama, or if he won, that he would betray his supporters and side with the Democrats that he once befriended and donated to.
But over this past year, he’s left little doubt that he intends to keep his promises. That he intends to Make America Great Again. And I’m not the only one who’s noticed.
The Heritage Foundation, a well-respected conservative think tank, ranked Donald Trump’s first year in office ahead of Ronald Reagan’s first year in terms of enacting conservative policies.
How do they rank the two presidents? Well, according to Breitbart: “In 2016, Heritage came up with 334 conservative policies, a wish-list of sorts, for a new Republican administration. Trump has enacted 64 percent of those items. In 1981, his first year in office, Reagan scratched off only 49 percent of the items on that year’s Heritage list.”
Now, there are some notable differences that have to be acknowledged. In 2016, Republicans retained control of Congress. Back in 1980, Republicans managed to take back the Senate, but the Democrats still held a pretty decent majority in the House. No doubt, things were expected to be very difficult to be passed.
Now, I also acknowledge that Republicans in Congress have been jerks, to put it lightly, and have not passed much MAGA agenda policy. So while Republicans control Congress, there are those who are hidden Democrats that refuse to help Make America Great Again. There’s not that many, but enough to obstruct the agenda. And since Republicans now only hold a 1 vote lead, it’s even easier for Congressional NeverTrumpers to obstruct things.
Another difference worth mentioning is that Reagan and Trump have worked in entirely different eras. Reagan didn’t have social media and conservative media to help expose the b.s. coming from the Left. Had Trump also not had social media and conservative media to help him out, I don’t think he would’ve become the Republican candidate. He still might’ve, but it’s doubtful. And the likelihood of him winning the general election would’ve been slim.
If all people had to go on to learn about Trump was what the MSM said about him during the campaign, I’m not certain he would’ve even come close to winning. Reagan managed to utterly crush his opponents despite the lack of social media and conservative media.
That being said, I also have to mention that Reagan had a very different character than Trump does. Reagan was more “constitutional conservative”. He was what conservatives today aspire to be. For as much as I love Trump, he isn’t as articulate as Reagan was.
And one final difference would likely be how they were both treated by the media. Yes, both Reagan and Trump were treated as a joke. But even though I wasn’t alive to see Reagan campaign, I doubt the media was as bloodthirsty back then as they are today.
I imagine they had some semblance of manners and respect. At the very least some decency. I can’t say that the media has any of these qualities anymore.
Again, I don’t know exactly how the media treated Reagan back then, but I can’t imagine they were as beastly as they are towards Trump. Biased, sure. But not beastly.
Now, let’s return to the issue of the NeverTrumpers. While I could understand their skepticism a year ago, I can’t say I can understand any of their arguments anymore. They said he wasn’t a real conservative, yet a well-respected conservative think tank acknowledges that Trump has been more conservative than even REAGAN in enacting conservative policy. As an example, take deregulation.
Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA, informed us that “President Trump has cancelled and killed more than 1,500 regulations in the last 11 months. The most of any President in history in first year of a Presidency.”
Deregulation goes a long way to helping the country, and a long way to establish yourself as a true conservative. While Democrats and liberals enact and call for more regulations to absolutely everything they possibly can, conservatives tend to deregulate things that don’t need to be regulated.
A large reason the economy is doing as well as it is is because of these deregulations on businesses. It’s amazing what the economy can do when you take off the shackles placed by Democrats (who have a rich history of shackling things).
Aside from a booming economy, Trump has been doing wonders to fight for the rights of unborn children and destroying our radical Islamic enemies.
Trump has proven to be extremely conservative in deed. He may not be an ideological conservative, but he has very conservative instincts. He may not have seen Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats as his enemy, but I believe he will start seeing them that way. He expected the country to rally behind him once he was elected but that didn’t happen. That wasn’t ever going to happen. But he’s learned that these people will hate him no matter what he does… or doesn’t do, as in the case of merely CONSIDERING firing Mueller (which he has every right to do) but deciding against it.
I believe he’s beginning to understand and see things more conservatively. Thus, his actions and growth as a President should leave no one on the Right to still be against him.
He’s proven to be conservative in the actions he’s partaken. Anyone on the Right who is still against him is merely being stubborn at this point. Thankfully, there are some NeverTrumpers who have realized their mistakes, such as Mollie Hemingway from The Federalist and radio talk show host Dennis Prager.
Both have realized that he’s more conservative than they believed he was. No doubt, it’s his policies and actions as POTUS that led them to realize their mistake in opposing him.
Unfortunately, there are still some who choose to remain stubborn, choose to side with the Left, if anything, and continue opposing him. People like Jonah Goldberg of the National Review and Bill Kristol. Perhaps even Glenn Beck, though I’ve ceased to listen to him and follow him on Twitter. A shame, really, since he was pretty funny at times.
Regardless, it’s this stubbornness that will ultimately alienate them from the rest of the country, both conservatives and liberals. Much like with yet another NeverTrumper, Megyn Kelly, these NeverTrumpers will never be liked by the Left as long as they don’t disavow their supposedly “conservative” values. And with their stubborn opposition to Trump, conservatives won’t like them either.
Why would they? Again, I could understand their skepticism a year ago. But not anymore. They have no actual reason to still dislike him or what he’s doing. Their continuing hatred towards him proves them to be just as stubborn as anyone on the Left. Despite clear evidence, they stick to their beliefs.
It takes more faith to be an atheist and believe in climate change than it does to believe in God. Likewise, it takes more faith to believe Trump isn’t conservative than to believe he is.
And that’s where the biggest comparison is made between the NeverTrumpers and the Left at this point in time. Both groups are insanely stubborn and refuse to believe in the evidence presented to them.
“He who is often reproved, yet stiffens his neck, will suddenly be broken beyond healing.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Look, I’ll be the first to tell you that I didn’t want any sort of amnesty for even a single illegal immigrant. But sadly, there are Republicans in Congress who refuse to help pass much of anything to do with Making America Great Again. I’ll give them credit for passing the tax cuts, but tax cuts are things Republicans tend to vote for anyway.
But the sad reality is that there are RINOs in Congress such as Lindsey Grahamnesty. So in order to fulfill some campaign promises such as building the Wall, ending the visa lottery program and ending the chain migration program, deals have to be made. And sometimes, that means giving up some things in order to get what you want.
Even though Trump’s amnesty plan will help 1.8 million illegals to a path to citizenship (which will undoubtedly go towards voting for Democrats), his plan will also help the country far more than you may think.
First, I want to clear some things up. This is not amnesty in the way Democrats would want it. Democrats would hope for immediate legalization of illegals and an immediate and quick path to citizenship. This plan doesn’t do that at all.
According to Breitbart: “The path to citizenship would require a 10-12 year period where recipients would be required to demonstrate good behavior, work and education requirements, and good moral character.”
In other words, the illegals helped in this amnesty plan won’t get to help the Democrat Party any time soon. Not to mention that this plan means that any illegal that doesn’t meet the requirements will then not be eligible to become a citizen thereafter. So no evil jerks like Kate Steinle’s killer or that monster who killed two cops and wishes he could’ve killed more would be able to become citizens under this plan.
Not to mention that this plan also helps keep the promise made to Chuck Schumer after he agreed to reopen the government. Schumer was promised that a vote on immigration must occur on the Senate floor by February 8th. This is likely the plan that will be put to vote by then. (Everyone and their grandmother expects the Democrats to reject this bill and there’s always a chance that some Republicans will vote against it).
But if the biggest purpose of having this plan is so that the Democrats won’t shut down the government again in February, then this plan helps.
This plan, according to Breitbart, also includes: “A $25 billion lump sum ‘trust fund’ for a border security ‘wall system’ for not only the Southern border but major security investments on the Northern border as well. It also includes sweeping limitations for chain migration – limiting family immigration sponsorships to only spouses and minor children – not for parents or extended family members… The proposal would also end the visa lottery program and reallocate them towards fulfilling the skilled-based visa backlog.”
So we can see why this plan is not the “betrayal” you might think it is. I wish it didn’t have to come to this, but RINOs in Congress such as Grahamnesty will constantly side with the Democrats on this issue. In a perfect world, all Republican members of Congress would get behind the MAGA agenda in full and not challenge things every step of the way. If there’s one thing they should learn from Democrats it’s how to be united with each other.
This plan is most certainly not something Democrats would want, even though they claim to fight for “DREAMers”. If anything, this plan will also expose Democrats in their efforts. By voting against it, they are essentially stabbing the “DREAMers” in the back by telling them that they have to continue struggling until they can get rid of Trump. Frankly, the Democrats should know that they’re not going to get a much better deal than this. They should know Trump isn’t going to give them amnesty without funding for the Wall, an end to the visa lottery program and an improvement (or utter abolishment) of the chain migration program.
This plan, though it doesn’t sound good on the outset, is actually a pretty good plan. I’m talking about more than just what the plan is itself. I’m also talking about the fact that this backs the Democrats into a corner. Either they stick to their promise to help the illegals even if this is not a great deal or they abandon the illegals and leave them in the dust for as long as Democrats aren’t in control.
It could be that Democrats are hoping they will be able to take Congress, but frankly, they’d need a super-majority in order to get what they want. They know, or at least should know, that Trump will veto any bad bill that the Democrats pass in Congress. The Democrats would have to gather enough votes to overrule his veto and I don’t see that happening.
First, I don’t see them even gaining any sort of majority, since, and I’ve said this in other articles, all Republicans would have to do is point to the booming economy and say that the Democrats didn’t vote for that. If done right, Republicans could win more seats. Maybe not 60, but certainly gain more of a lead on the Democrats.
Second, even if the Democrats end up retaking Congress, I don’t see them getting a super-majority. Even if some Republican candidates are idiots and don’t utilize the booming economy well (I know there’s more to it than that, but that’s at least one thing all Republican candidates should use), I don’t think enough will lose their elections to get the Democrats a super-majority. I’m also aware that there will be RINOs like Graham in Congress, but I don’t think there will be enough to help out the Democrats. Particularly so since Jeff Snowflake won’t seek reelection (which he would lose anyway) in 2018.
Considering everything, the Democrats should know that this will likely be the best deal they’re going to get from Donald Trump. If they vote against it, we conservatives can use it as ammunition, saying things like “See? The Democrats don’t care about the people, they only care about their votes. This bill would help nearly 2 million of these illegals but still, the Democrats voted against it.”
Even Rush Limbaugh has said, multiple times, that he’d support an amnesty bill for as many illegals as the Democrats wanted if it means that the illegals don’t get to vote for at least 15 years.
So, overall, this bill isn’t anywhere near as bad as you might believe. Is it perfect? No. In a perfect world, no such deal would have to be made, Republicans in Congress would’ve voted to fund the Wall months into Trump’s first year in office, voted to end chain migration immediately and ditto for the visa lottery program.
But this is not a perfect world. And in order to make deals, sometimes you have to make sacrifices. This plan helps the country more than it hurts it. It’s not what a lot of Trump supporters wanted, but it’s something we should be able to realize isn’t as bad as initially thought.
Not to mention that I’m pretty much ok with whatever the outcome is. If it passes, then we get funding for the Wall, an end to the visa lottery program and a chain migration program that isn’t b.s. If it doesn’t pass, then these illegals will remain illegal and the Democrats might even take a hit on their popularity (I say “might” because I don’t see a large likelihood of that happening. But I know that I’d bring it up as much as possible when talking about the subject).
Either way, I believe the country wins to a certain extent. Frankly, I’d prefer if this bill passes even at the cost of legalization and future citizenship of these “DREAMers” if it means the Wall will start getting built, chain migration is improved to something that makes sense and the visa lottery program is done away with.
Not to mention that funding the Wall will likely result in another drop in illegal crossings. I’ve seen multiple Breitbart articles talking about illegal border crossings getting higher beginning with talks of immigration. Compare that to articles from earlier in 2017 when Trump was freshly inaugurated and Breitbart wrote multiple articles talking about illegal crossing numbers getting lower out of fear for the Wall.
Well, eventually, that fear goes away if the Wall is no closer to being funded than it was last year. Upon the mere passing of this bill, crossings are likely to decrease since the fear of the Wall will soon become a reality.
Now, one could say that these numbers could also skyrocket if people figure that it’d be better to try to cross now, before the Wall is finished building, than later. I would say there’s a possibility of that if I didn’t expect more funding to likely go to border agencies. If I’m thinking about this possibility, I have no doubt that Trump has thought about it as well and would likely do what he can to keep a surge in those numbers from happening as a result of this bill passing.
But I’m getting a bit ahead of myself here. Frankly, I don’t actually expect this bill to pass Congress. But if it does, I’m sure Trump is thinking about repercussions and possibilities about the mere news getting out that it will and/or has passed. And if it does pass, I don’t want you to think that Trump has betrayed you or abandoned his campaign promises. In fact, he’s fulfilling a big one with this plan as it is.
Either way, I think things will be fine. And you know me. I’m more of a realist than an optimist.
“Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
There are things in this world that you simply can’t explain. Black holes are an example of something you can’t explain, as they defy the laws of physics. Leftists are another example of something you can’t explain because they defy the laws of logic.
Soul Singer Erykah Badu is one such Leftist who defies the laws of logic. In an interview with Vulture, she was asked about a trip she took to Israel in 2008, in which she expressed support for Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam who’s been accused of anti-Semitism (which is as surprising as the Patriots making the Superbowl).
According to Breitbart: “Badu told Marchese (the interviewer for Vulture) that Farrakhan has ‘flaws,’ like any man, but that she will ‘follow anyone who has positive aspects.’”
And this is where logic ultimately dies. Literally everyone has at least one positive aspect about themselves. But given what she says about Hitler, that last quote doesn’t really surprise me.
She goes further to explain her way of thinking by saying: “I mean, I’m not Muslim, I’m not Christian (no kidding), I’m not anything; I’m an observer who can see good things and bad things. If you say something good about someone, people think it means that you’ve chosen a side. But I don’t choose sides. I see all sides simultaneously.”
At this point, logic is being further beaten much like a dead horse. People always will choose a side. No one can “not choose a side” about something. Not choosing, in itself, is choosing something. It’s choosing indifference or abstinence. She says that she’s “an observer who can see good things and bad things” and that she doesn’t choose sides. That’s the equivalent of a sports spectator watching a game and not caring about who wins or loses. The thing is that you can’t have that sort of outlook on life all the time.
Much in the same sense that you can’t believe in relativism all the time. I believe I’ve made this point before with this same analogy, but it’s a good one so I’ll use it here.
If you’re driving on the road and are crossing an intersection and see a semi-truck going at the same time and you’re in a collision course with it, you can’t say that it’s all relative. You can’t say that the truck is only there because you perceive it to be there. You have to do something about it otherwise you’ll crash and quite possibly die. That semi is, in absolute truth, going to hit you if you don’t do something quick to avoid it. You can’t avoid it by closing your eyes and therefore losing your perception of the truck. That truck isn’t there because you see it’s there. That truck is there because it is.
So even if you believe in relativism, you can’t perpetually live with that belief. Likewise, you can’t possibly observe all sides and perpetually abstain from making a choice. Like I said, not choosing is, in itself, choosing.
So she can’t say that she doesn’t choose sides. It’s logically impossible to do that. If you don’t choose sides, it’s either because you don’t exist or because your brain is incapable of making choices. You would have to be in a vegetative state to not be able to choose anything.
Regardless, we’ve spent a bit too long on this topic, so let’s move on.
Due to her expressed support for Farrakhan (which ironically means she chose him over Israel), she had been accused of being anti-Semitic. She went on to defend herself in perhaps one of the most confusing and worst ways to defend yourself from such accusations.
She said: “I don’t even know what anti-Semitic was before I was called it. I’m a humanist. I see good in everybody. I saw something good in Hitler.”
And people wonder why conservatives believe the Left is crazy, or at least full of crazy people.
That comment drew surprise from her interviewer, who asked her “come again?”
Possibly realizing her mistake, she had to explain just why she thought this way by mentioning his artwork. “Yeah, I did. Hitler was a wonderful painter.” Then she immediately backtracked by saying: “Okay, he was a terrible painter. Poor thing. He had a terrible childhood.”
Yeah, the time to backtrack was when you said you saw something good in Hitler, not when you said he was a good painter.
She goes on to say: “That means that when I’m looking at my daughter, Mars, I could imagine her being in someone else’s home and being treated so poorly, and what that could spawn. I see things like that. I guess it’s just the Pisces in me.”
Ignoring the ridiculous “Pisces” portion of her quote, this is precisely why I say the Left is crazy.
Plenty of people have or had terrible childhoods. But you have to be truly evil to do what Hitler did. Having a bad childhood doesn’t excuse anyone for doing the evils Hitler did. Not to mention that Hitler didn’t exactly have the absolute worst of childhoods anyway.
He lost his younger brother Edmund in 1900 due to Measles, but that’s where the tragedy ends. Otherwise, the only things that were tough for Hitler were his conflicts with his father and plenty of teens have that happen to them. Hitler wanted to go to art school, but his father forced him to attend a technical school in Linz. Hitler rebelled against his father and said in Mein Kampf that he intentionally performed poorly in school.
Aside from his brother’s death, this just sounds like the life of any regular teenager (of course, this is ignoring the fact that they were in Germany at the turn of the 1900s, so it’s difficult to compare that to today’s youth, not to mention he also fought in the First World War, but PLENTY of other kids who didn't turn into Hitler also fought in wars).
Speaking strictly about his relationship with his father, it sounds like plenty of people’s childhoods. Frankly, Obama had somewhat of a worse childhood since his father left him and his mother when he was only 3-years-old. And even basketball star Jimmy Butler had a worse childhood, with his father abandoning his family and him being kicked out of the house at the age of 13 by his mother. So Hitler “having a poor childhood” is an even worse excuse for what he did later in life.
And her philosophy of “following people who have good aspects” is not only ridiculous, but it could also be dangerous.
The Bible tells us that Lucifer was beautiful, charming and highly intelligent. But that’s not a good enough reason to follow him. Not to mention that “the good aspect” that Hitler has is anything but good. How is having a bad childhood a good aspect of someone? She already admitted that he was a terrible painter, so that’s also not a good aspect of him. Hitler was the embodiment of evil on this Earth. If he had good aspects to himself, they must’ve been with his missing testicle.
So what good aspect did Hitler have? Because she’s not even sure about it herself.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
It’s expected to find a good amount of Trump supporters in the United States. After all, over 60 million people voted for him in 2016. What isn’t expected, however, is to find support for Trump outside of the U.S. Even less expected is to find support for Trump in the leader of an African country.
In fact, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni sounded like any other Trump supporter you’d meet here in the States. Speaking to lawmakers at the East African Legislative Assembly, Museveni said: “America has got one of the best presidents ever. Mr. Trump. I love Trump. I love Trump because he talks to Africans frankly. I don’t know if he’s misquoted or whatever, but when he speaks, I like him because he speaks frankly.”
How is it that in a couple of sentences, the president of Uganda has spoken far better of Trump than AMERICAN MEDIA?!
Regardless, we return to President Museveni. He continues with: “The Africans need to solve their problems. They need to be strong.” And that’s not the only instance of him showing support for the POTUS.
Museveni has even written an article titled: “The Confusion, Ingratitude as well as danger of Western Liberals & the Trump Therapy.”
He writes: “I have been closely following… World and African political events for the last 56 years. In those 56 years, I have noticed many happenings, behaviours, etc. One of the groups that I have observed with interest are the Western “Liberals”, “Leftists”, etc. In particular, I have noticed the confusion, ingratitude and, therefore, danger of these groups.” Starting off strong, I see.
“Liberals are supposed to be people who are not conservative and hardliners in economic, political and social issues. Leftists are supposed to be progressive as far as the same issues are concerned… Suffice it to say that the freedom fighters from Africa, who have been fighting colonialism, neo-colonialism, slave trade and marginalization for the last 500 years, would have counted the Western Liberals and Leftists among our automatic allies because these should be people that should be fighting for freedom and justice for all peoples, including the formerly Colonized Peoples.”
“Instead, we notice confusion, ingratitude and, therefore, danger from these liberals and leftists… During the US campaign, I noticed President Trump using the words: ‘convergence rather than divergence,’ while handling international affairs. That is exactly what the Western Liberals and Leftists should have been looking for. Instead, we would spend endless hours arguing with the Western Liberals on matters on which we cannot have convergence bearing in mind that our societies were still pre-capitalist and traditional while theirs have been industrial for centuries now.”
“These are issues to do with family, forms of democracy, homosexuals, central planning versus economic liberalization, etc. One had to control irritation to politely get through these meetings. Yet matters of convergence were there and uncontested: fighting extremism and terrorism… modern education in natural sciences and social sciences; the emancipation of women; trade; democracy; etc. This is what, in brief, I regard as the confusion of the Western Liberals and Leftists… By the Western Liberals trying to impose all their views and values on everybody in the World, they generate not convergence but divergence and even conflict.”
It’s a rather lengthy article, but the best part comes in the final paragraph. When talking about powerful nations coming together to solve the world’s problems, Museveni writes: “This is where Mr. Trump comes in. He says: ‘Why do we not examine the possibility of working with Russia against common threats, such as terrorism?’ The liberals then shout that Mr. Trump must be having a secret agenda with Mr. Putin etc.”
Museveni has also praised President Trump multiple times on Twitter and, according to the Daily Wire: “A further review of Museveni’s Twitter account reveals no such praise or adoration for former President Barack Obama.”
Overall, I think it’s incredible to find such an ardent Trump supporter leading an African nation. Clearly, he’s not at all offended over the reported remarks made about countries such as Haiti and African nations. On contraire, he supports these remarks. He thinks that Africans should be stronger and look to solve their own problems. THAT is the mark of a leader. While accepting and even asking for help is ok, looking to make your nation stronger and your people stronger and solve your own problems is even better.
A strong leader wants to make his nation and people strong and does whatever he can to do that. That’s what Trump wants to do and is working very hard to do. That’s what Museveni wants to do and seemingly is working to do as well.
I’m also glad to see Museveni calling out the Left in this manner. While the Left claims that Trump is a divider, Museveni can see that Trump is trying to unite people and the world. He’s already helped out Russia with a potentially serious terrorist threat in St. Petersburg, which Russian President Vladimir Putin thanked the POTUS for his help. And last weekend, while the Women’s March was happening, Trump tweeted: “Beautiful weather all over our great country, a perfect day for all Women to March. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success and wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years!”
Of course, if you read my previous article, the Women’s March was nothing more than a massive hate-fest centered around attacks on Trump. Funny enough, this is where the ingratitude part of Museveni’s article comes in. Trump is doing wonders for the country, and these people were marching to reverse all of that.
So regardless of Trump’s call to support the women marching that day, the Left still spewed nothing but hatred and insults at him. Regardless of Trump’s effort to unite people in this march, the Left made sure to keep people divided.
It’s so obvious that even the president of an African nation was able to call out the Left’s b.s.
Regardless, I appreciate President Museveni’s words about our president.
1 Peter 3:8
“Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Over this past weekend, two separate and very different marches occurred. One was the March for Life and the other was the Women’s March. And these two events highlight the characters of the opposing sides.
According to the Daily Wire, at the March for Life event: “Families proudly pushed their babies with Down syndrome – an abnormality we, as a society, are urgently told to dispose of – in their strollers with smiles on their faces; former abortion clinic workers held signs proclaiming that life matters; teens chanted about their love for babies and held clever and playful signs; single mothers boasted of their children they chose to keep thanks to pro-life pregnancy centers and religious organizations; a Congresswoman told the masses of the miracle birth of her daughter who was supposed to die upon delivery; and the faithful said prayers aloud in unison and sang church hymns.”
Overall, love was the main message of the March for Life.
In stark contrast, we see the hatred of the “Women’s March”, which in all reality is the “Hatred March”. Because that’s exactly what that march showcased.
Info Wars released a video of one of their team members attending the event. The video is over 20 minutes long, so I won’t talk about absolutely everything in it, but that’s fine. Most of the video is simply the same thing: angry, hateful protesters calling for the impeachment of our duly elected president, calling for supposed “women’s rights” that they already have or that they shouldn’t have - aka the “right” to kill their own children as though they were some sort of disease - and lots and lots of swearing.
Throughout the video, you would see those captured by the camera either flipping off the camera or the reporter himself (or both), you would see the protesters calling Info Wars fake news (which is hilarious), you would see the protesters voicing the same liberal talking points that Trump is a racist and a sexist despite having no proof of those claims and even going so far as to deny the fact that Trump has appointed more women to significant positions than any previous President.
They would often call Trump a rapist but ignore the fact that Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein and multiple other Democrats are rapists themselves. One of them even berated the Info Wars guys and twice spat on them.
Many of them were constantly cursing despite the fact that children were present. One of them even called the Info Wars guys “a**holes” right in front of his son who looked to be no older than 13. I saw a lot of children marching with their insane parents and some even holding signs such as “Justice = Equality”, despite the fact that that’s entirely untruthful given that Bill and Hillary Clinton are just two of many Democrats who should be in jail at the moment.
But the overall message was clear: these people hate everyone and everything that isn't like them. I saw far more hateful signs attacking Trump than loving signs calling for unity and peace. In fact, I don’t remember having seen a single sign that didn’t either bash Trump or recite a liberal talking point such as “we’re all immigrants”, which funny enough, has nothing to do with women and thus proves the point that this was not a “women’s march” but a “hatred march”.
On the other hand, all I saw from the March for Life signs was love. That unborn children should be protected no matter what. One in particular makes the great point that “True feminists protect human life”. And that’s true. A true feminist would protect unborn girls. Someone who’s truly against racism would protect unborn minorities. Someone who’s for gay rights would protect the right of a potential future gay person.
And yet, all these people support abortion. They support the idea of euthanasia for minorities. Oh, did that come out of nowhere? Yeah, that’s what Margaret Sanger’s mission was. She founded Planned Parenthood for the benefit of eugenics. In other words, she founded Planned Parenthood so that “undesirables” wouldn’t get a chance at life.
In a 1934 article titled: “America Needs a Code for Babies”, Sanger said that the government should establish a code “for the better distribution of babies… to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit… No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for fatherhood… No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.”
I recall a liberal talking point being that the government should “stay out of women’s vaginas”. Well, the very founder of Planned Parenthood suggested that the government should control women’s vaginas through the same means they control someone’s right to drive. And funny enough, this is very similar to China’s “one child” policy, yet we don’t see these Leftists calling out China’s oppressive regime.
And this might even be a tough pill to swallow for liberals, but Sanger even accepted an invitation to speak to the women’s chapter of one of the biggest racist organizations in history: the Ku Klux Klan. In a letter to one of her associates, Clarence Gamble, she wrote: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” This was a letter explaining why she hired black ministers to be her ambassadors to the black community.
And that’s not all. In 1938, she urged Americans to follow Nazi Germany’s path of eugenics. “In animal industry, the poor stock is not allowed to breed,” she wrote. “In gardens, the weeds are kept down.”
And that’s not her only affiliation with Nazis. Ernst Rudin, chief architect of the Nazi sterilization program, wrote an article on Sanger’s magazine “Birth Control Review” titled: “Eugenic Sterilization, an Urgent Need.”
Knowing this, I’m not really surprised that the protesters at the “Women’s March” were so hateful and angry. The very founder of Planned Parenthood was a hateful, angry Nazi-sympathizer who sought to eradicate the African-American population and allow the government to have control of people’s reproductive endeavors.
The evidence is clear: the Left is full of hateful bigots and the Right is full of loving and compassionate people who love life.
“Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
You might be wondering what exactly it is that I mean by “less than nothing.” After all, you can’t have less than nothing. Zero is nothing and there’s nothing less than that… well, except negative numbers. And that’s precisely what the Democrat Party has earned with this shutdown.
After roughly 3 days, the Democrat Party caved in their efforts to force a DACA deal with no border wall. The Democrats and Mitch McConnell came to an agreement to sign basically the exact same bill that was up for debate before the shutdown began. And that’s where I say that Democrats gained nothing. But how did they gain less than nothing? Well, this shutdown has the potential to be a liability for Democrats in the mid-term elections.
Last week, I mentioned how all Republicans need to do to win in 2018 would be to bring up the booming economy and how the Democrats voted AGAINST it. Now, they have another arrow in their quiver: the Democrats’ horrible priorities.
During this shutdown, Democrats sided with illegals over American citizens who need the government to survive. Those who rely on welfare and social security checks were in danger of not getting the money they need to simply SURVIVE and those in the military, who are already paid dreadfully little, were in danger of not getting paid as well. That’s why Trump mentioned the military when talking about the shutdown.
The Democrats prioritized illegals over American citizens who need the government funded. I even personally tweeted at Sen. Chuck Schumer that this would guarantee Republicans win in 2018. While that may be a bit far-fetched since we’re roughly 10 months away from November, my message is clear: this shutdown will only serve to HURT Democrats in the future.
Like I said, this adds another arrow to the Republicans’ quiver. All they have to do is remind local voters that Democrats prioritized illegal immigrants over American citizens. That Democrats would rather fight for those who shouldn’t even be here over those who are in need of government assistance. If the Democrat Party wants to be the blue-collar party, this is a horrible way to achieve that.
It’s not just that people were affected by this shutdown for as long as it lasted (which wasn’t much). It’s also that Democrats can easily be called out as hypocrites over this.
While Obama was President and Republicans threatened shutdowns, the Democrats would always scream out that people would DIE if the government shuts down.
Back during the 2013 shutdown, Chuck Schumer said this to Jake Tapper: “It was not a hard line on the substantive issues. It was a hard line saying, unless I get my way I’m going to shut the government down, I’m going to risk default for the nation. Now anyone can do that… I believe in immigration reform. What if I persuaded my caucus to say I’m going to shut the government down, I’m going to not pay our bills unless I get my way? It’s a politics of idiocy, of confrontation, of paralysis.”
Well, look who’s wearing the dunce hat now. By his own definition, what he was doing was simply idiotic, confrontational and paralyzing. But the funny thing is that the Left, rather poorly, tried to blame this shutdown on Trump by using the hashtag “#TrumpShutdown” on Twitter. While there are those who are of low information who believed it (I follow some of those people on Twitter and have a fun time engaging them on these things), most people were quick to see the b.s.
Even the New York Times wrote an article titled: “Senate Democrats Block Bill to Keep Government Open Past Midnight; Shutdown Looms.” Of course, I went to look in the Times’ website and couldn’t find it, but rather found another article published on the same day titled: “Government Shuts Down as Bill to Extend Funding is Blocked; Senate Adjourns for the Night.”
Granted, this was a story being updated, so it makes sense that they would change their headline from “shutdown looms” to “government shuts down.” But before the update, they actually managed to say something truthful: this shutdown was the sole fault of the Democrats.
This goes to show just how unorganized the Left was on this if even the MSM blamed the shutdown (temporarily) on Democrats.
And according to the Daily Wire: “The Democrats’ plan was, apparently, to force Republicans to extend benefits for DACA recipients as part of a long-term funding bill. But when President Trump refused the ‘compromise immigration plan’ drafted by Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer and his colleagues – largely over a provision that granted temporary amnesty to DACA parents – the plan seemed to break down. Even typically left-leaning media chastised the Democrats for their misstep, and suggested that only Democrats would suffer from negative public opinion surrounding the government shutdown.”
Thankfully, we now have a president that won’t simply cave to the Democrats and this eventually forced Schumer to cave, realizing that this was a mistake (not that he will ever admit that, but he’s gotta be thinking this shutdown served no good purpose for them).
So in reality, this shutdown and its resolution shows us three things about Democrats: 1) They will prioritize millions of people who shouldn’t even be here over American citizens 2) the Democrats are hilariously hypocritical and 3) the Democrats appear to be very weak at the moment.
Even House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was against Schumer on this, as were progressive activists.
When you gain absolutely nothing and stand to lose future elections due to your mistakes, you appear to be rather weak. Schumer and the Democrats caved. That’s a sentence I’m joyfully happy to write and incredulous over the fact that I’m actually writing it.
It’s clear that Democrats will prefer to fight for those who shouldn’t be here over those who are rightfully here. It’s clear that Democrats are hypocrites about everything they talk about (not something new, but important to point out nonetheless). And it’s clear that Democrats are rather weak at the moment. That was clear the day Hillary lost the election, but now, it’s also clear to those within the Democrat base as well.
This is a bad defeat for the Left and this could spell trouble for them in the coming elections should Republican candidates use this to their advantage.
“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
There’s no denying that a big part of the reason Donald Trump won was because he managed to get a lot of Democrat votes in 2016. Given his message of Making America Great Again, there was little reason for people to not vote for him. That is not a Republican message. It’s not a Democrat message. It’s an American message. And red-blooded Americans want just that.
So, we go to Youngstown, Ohio, where CNN asked a group of five former Democrat voters who voted for Trump about how they feel with the state of the country and how well a job Trump is doing.
And the answer visibly astounds CNN’s Martin Savage, the man asking the questions.
The interview begins with an iron worker by the name of Rick Green saying: “I realized that the core foundation for the country is slipping away.” Another person in the panel, a mother of four children by the name of Anna Para, said: “It got to a point where I did not like the direction that my country was going.”
The narrator, Savage himself, then informs us that in 2016, according to the Mahoning County Board of Elections: “approximately 7000 registered Democrats switched parties to become Republicans.”
Now, just from reading that text, all we get is the number of Democrats who switched to Republican. But if you watch the video down below, you can actually hear the disdain in the narrator’s voice when he says “Republicans.” He actually sounds disgusted to even have to say something like that. And that just made me laugh the first time I watched the video.
Regardless, returning to the panel of interviewees, another Democrat, this time a pastor by the name of Derrick Anderson, said: “[Trump] said he’s gonna make America first and he’s gonna bring jobs back.” Then, another interviewee, this time a machine shop worker by the name of Geno DiFabio, said: “Donald Trump says ‘you’re in lousy trade deals’. We fixed that, the jobs can come back.”
And the final interviewee, a minority student by the name of Justis Harrison, said: “Something that [Trump] said that really sticks with me is that he wants to give the power back to the American people and that’s something that I can certainly get behind.”
When Martin Savage asked how Trump is doing, they responded with “fantastic” and “phenomenal”, with Anna saying: “Better that I ever would have dreamt”. To which Savage, somewhat shocked, asks “Really?” And they all answer with a resounding “yes”, with Derrick adding: “He’s doing wonderful. He’s staying on task.”
Savage then asks: “How big an issue, to all of you, is immigration?” Notice how he asks about immigration, not ILLEGAL immigration. As though there was no real difference. Regardless, the panel answers: “Huge.”
Now, THAT, really shocks Savage, who asked: “Really? In Youngstown, Ohio?” As though the issue of ILLEGAL immigration should really only matter to those living in border states. Yes, Mr. Savage, this is an issue that matters to Trump supporters from California to Maine. From Arizona to Washington. From Florida to Alaska. From Texas to North Dakota.
Illegal immigration is something that mostly affects border states, but it’s something that matters to all Trump supporters.
Which is something that the panel makes sure to inform Savage about with them all saying “absolutely”. Rick went further, saying: “And as far as I’m concerned, they’re stealing jobs of rightful citizens.” And Justis added: “I feel like when people come here illegally that’s just very disrespectful. You don’t respect our laws you shouldn’t be able to come here freewheeling like that.”
Which is a very good point that the Left misses. When the Left talks about Trump and illegal immigration, they always play the race card and claim he’s racist for wanting to kick these people out and make sure they stay out. In truth, it’s not about race.
If it were about race, as a Hispanic, I’d be quaking in my boots about the thought of getting deported. If it were about race, I wouldn’t have supported Trump in 2016 and wouldn’t ardently continue supporting him throughout the coming elections. But it’s not about race. It’s about rule of law. Those who break the law are punished. Race has nothing to do with that.
Which is precisely why whenever idiots like Colin Kaepernick claim cops are racist, I can’t help but to cringe. To paraphrase a line from the movie Liar, Liar, STOP BREAKING THE LAW, A**HOLES! People who obey the law tend to not be threatened by the police. That’s something that applies to everyone, regardless of race.
Likewise, those who break the law by coming here illegally deserve the punishment dictated by the statutes. Illegals coming here should be punished. I don’t care if they’re from Mexico, Haiti, or Norway. You come here illegally, you have to be punished.
And thankfully, this is a point that these Youngstown, Ohio citizens understand perfectly well.
Returning to the video, Savage then talks about Trump’s tweets which used to cause Geno to cringe, but they don’t anymore.
“So you don’t cringe anymore because you’ve grown numb to it, or…?”, asked Savage. Geno answered with: “Not at all. I know what he’s done and I’m starting to get an inkling why he uses Twitter in the way he does. Because if all he had to rely on is what people say about him, oh my God, I might not like the guy. I love the job he’s doing.”
In a perfect world, this would help Savage understand why Trump supporters like it when Trump uses Twitter in the manner that he does. But this is not a perfect world, and he’ll probably still think Trump is a crazy man with a Twitter account and his supporters are all mindless sheep reading what the crazy guy is saying and believing every word of it.
The Left claims to not understand why Trump uses Twitter, but even they know why. Because if it was left up to the MSM alone, his support wouldn’t be as much as it is today. That’s why they say that he should stop tweeting so much.
Moving on, Savage talks about the claims made against Trump that he’s a racist. Justis, the minority student, said that she had met Trump at a rally, that he’s not a racist and that he “was just the nicest person and if he was a racist as everyone paints him out to be, he could have just walked right past me and not even said a word.”
Aside from the anecdote about the rally, she basically says what all Trump supporters, regardless of their race, say about him. “He’s not a racist.” “He’s a nice guy”. I don’t know Trump personally, unfortunately, but he seems to be a far nicer and kinder guy than Obama. To Obama’s credit, he was charming, which is why he was as popular as he was. But Trump has a lot of charm as well. The difference is that much of that charm comes DESPITE what the media says about him.
Truth be told, had the media been as tough on Obama as they are on Trump, I doubt he would’ve been even a quarter as charming or popular as he was.
Regardless, we move on with the following topic Savage brings up: the lies. Savage asks: “Do you think he’s a liar?”
Geno answers with: “No. I think he’s falling short on some of his goals. We all do.”
Which is a valid point. At this point in time, we had hoped and expected that tax reform and Obamacare would be things that were taken care of a few months into his presidency and we’d be farther along in Making America Great Again than we are. But we put too much trust in the Republican Establishment and so far, we’ve only managed to bring about tax reform.
Not to take anything away from that achievement in itself, but many of us hoped we’d be farther along by this point in time. Then again, that’s not really something Trump had that much control over. The President, thankfully, doesn’t control Congress. The branches have to work together to get things done. That’s a system that I wouldn’t dream of changing. What I do dream of changing is the jerks in Capitol Hill obstructing the MAGA agenda every chance they get.
But this is not something Trump directly controls. When it comes to things he can directly control, such as the military and influencing the economy, he’s doing fantastic. ISIS is in a worse state at this point than many of us even imagined they’d be. The economy is growing at rates Obama never accomplished. Overall, as the head of the Executive Branch, Trump is doing fantastic.
And even the panel recognizes that the economy is truly booming. While Savage points out that the Youngstown, Ohio economy isn’t booming (no wonder, since they have a Democrat mayor), other places in the country are flourishing. And Rick mentions that small businesses are starting to pick up in the area and that Trump’s tax reform will help the economy in the long-run.
When talking about how the media treats Trump, the panel agrees that the media doesn’t give the President a fair shake.
Wrapping this article up since it’s running a bit long, all I’ll say is that CNN clearly didn’t expect to see DEMOCRAT voters still supporting the Republican President. I can tell Savage was shocked by every answer these people gave him. And that’s something I’m very happy to see.
“Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Considering the amount of ridiculous articles the MSM has written over the past couple of years, it’s honestly surprising for an MSM source (The New York Times) to write something like this.
According to The New York Times: “support for the [tax] law has grown significantly over the past month, and more Americans believe that they will receive a tax cut. Forty-six percent of Americans strongly or somewhat approved of the law in early January, up from 37 percent when the bill was nearing passage in December. At the same time, falling unemployment, accelerating economic growth and a surging stock market have made Americans increasingly positive about both their own finances and the overall economy.”
Gotta say, I never expected a Mainstream Media source to actually write something truthful, or even acknowledge the surging economy under Trump.
Frankly, that’s merely one of the reasons people like the tax cut. Individually, of course people want to keep more of their hard-earned money. But in terms of overall prospects for the future of the economy, people are seeing unemployment numbers plummeting and more jobs being created.
Even Apple has announced that, due to the tax cuts, they “will bring hundreds of billions of overseas dollars back to the U.S., pay about $38 billion in taxes on the money and invest tens of billions on domestic jobs, manufacturing and data centers in the coming years,” according to Fortune.
Not to mention that, according to an article written on January 14th by the Washington Examiner: “A list of 40 firms offering millions of employees bonuses and customers fee cuts has surged to 164 in just 10 days as the likely financial benefit of President Trump’s tax reform.”
“Jet Blue… is offering a $1000 bonus to 21,000 employees,” said the article. “Some companies are offering bonuses up to $3000 increases in 401k contributions and wage hikes.”
And let’s not forget that Walmart (and other companies) are raising their minimum wage thanks to the tax cuts.
It’s really no surprise, then, that more and more Americans are more supportive of the tax bill, which House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed would be “the end of the world.”
It’s not the end of the world. It’s the end of the Democrat Party’s chances to retake Congress in 2018.
Honestly, all Republican candidates would have to do is remind people that the Democrats didn’t want them to keep more of their money. That the Democrats didn’t want jobs returning to the country. That nothing like this ever happened while Obama was President. That nothing like this would ever happen with Democrats at the helm.
Add that to the fact that Democrats really don’t have any actual agenda other than “we hate Trump”, then I really wouldn’t be too surprised if they lost MORE seats rather than gain more. Of course, that all depends on the Republicans and the candidates. But the 2018 midterms really is the Republicans’ to lose. If the economy is doing far better by November of this year, unless the Republican candidate absolutely sucks, I don’t see any Democrat candidate being too successful this coming election.
I mean, considering everything we’ve talked about and adding the fact that black and Hispanic unemployment rates are dropping like flies, along with the overall unemployment rate, why would anyone ever vote Democrat again?
Like I said, the Democrats don’t really have an agenda. All they will run on is “we hate Trump and we’ll work to impeach him”. Well, if Trump is fulfilling his promise to Make America Great Again at least economically (he’s also doing that in other aspects, but we’ll stick with economics), then why would people want to vote for people who don’t want Trump in office?
Not a single Democrat voted to pass the tax bill that is helping millions of employees get bonuses and helping Americans across the country to keep more of their money. Not one Democrat thought that companies would be more willing to invest more of their money in the U.S. economy. Not one Democrat wanted more jobs coming into the country. Not one.
So why would anyone want them back in power? Even from a liberal’s point of view, I would be able to see that the economy is doing far better than anyone expected. I would be able to see that Trump and the GOP have helped us keep more of the money we earn and helped people who are struggling to find a job to actually get a job.
That’s precisely why even The New York Times of all people have to acknowledge that more Americans are happier with the bill than before it passed. That’s something we conservatives saw coming.
While the Democrats can try all they want to say that this bill is actual “Armageddon”, people will notice a difference in their bank accounts and their paychecks. And they will realize just where this extra money is coming from. They will realize what has helped the unemployed to become employed. They will realize that lower taxes is a good thing for everyone, including the government in the long-term.
And they will realize that Democrats aren’t the ones who want to lower taxes. Quite the opposite, in fact, they want to increase your taxes by trying to sell you on the ridiculous idea that if the government gets more money, more good things will happen and it will be able to help more people. They try to sell you the idea that higher taxes are a good thing, when everything including economics and logic tells you differently.
If Republicans run on this economic point at least, I doubt many Democrats will be successful in 2018.
Regardless that’s a matter to be discussed in the future. For now, we’ll delight in the fact that the American economy is doing fantastic and the future looks bright.
“You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be blessed, and it shall be well with you."
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Earlier this week, President Trump went through a physical and mental fitness test performed by White House Doctor Dr. Ronny Jackson, who was also Obama’s and Bush’s doctor while they were presidents.
Reporting on the president’s health, Dr. Jackson praised Trump’s overall health, saying it was very good for someone his age. “It is called genetics,” said Dr. Jackson. “I don’t know. Some people have great genes… he has incredible genes and that’s the way God made him.”
The doctor suggested to Trump that he lose 10-15 pounds through diet and exercise, to which the President agreed. “He is more enthusiastic about the diet part than the exercise part, but we’re going to do both,” Dr. Jackson said.
Overall, Dr. Jackson thinks Trump is “fit for duty… I think he will remain fit for duty for the remainder of this term and even the remainder of another term if he is elected.”
No doubt this further cements the frown on the Left’s faces, but that’s just the physical. Even if Trump is physically fit for his age, they’re still hoping he bombed the mental test… which he didn’t.
In fact, he scored perfectly in the mental acuity test (30 for 30). Oh boy, it seems the Left has lost yet another card for them to use against Trump.
Remember how one of the biggest, if not the biggest, arguments made against Trump during the election was that he was “unfit for office”? How he was “mentally unstable” and showed signs that he had dementia and/or Alzheimer’s? Well, it seems the President has a perfectly sound mind.
Not that this will really matter to the Left. It’s not about facts, you see. It’s about narratives. About how they feel and what they think. They think and feel that he is mentally unstable and will wholeheartedly believe it to be true despite facts. If that in itself is not mental instability, I don’t know what is.
They will believe everything they report about him. If they honestly believe he did hire a couple of prostitutes to urinate on a bed the Obamas slept on, they will believe anything about him. If they could, they would even report that Trump is an alien from outer space who’s here to turn this country into a dictatorship.
Heck, even Jeff Snowflake might believe Trump to be the reincarnation of Stalin with his comparisons to the socialist serial murderer.
While they have been claiming and shouting at the top of their lungs that Trump is mentally unfit, they themselves have shown to be mentally unstable. We like to call it “Trump Derangement Syndrome”. This has been in effect ever since Trump defeated Hillary.
The entire Left suffers from this. They believe everything bad that happens is Trump’s fault (just look at Jamie Lee Curtis blaming Trump for the false alarm in Hawaii) and believe nothing good that happens is thanks to Trump. They insanely believe and give credit to Obama for the economy doing so well.
They believe Trump colluded with Russia despite a year-long investigation that has yielded not a single shred of evidence. They believe his attacks against the media are unnecessary and he’s only doing it because he’s a “bully”.
That’s like pushing back against a school-yard bully and he sits there astonished, believing you pushed back against him for no good reason. The media really can’t take any hits well whatsoever and believe any attacks against them to be attacks against the first amendment.
News flash, MSM, YOU DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFAME PEOPLE! You can say whatever you want about them, think whatever you want, but you can’t pass off what you believe about someone as being the truth.
But that won’t stop them. Nothing short of a straitjacket will stop them. They will continue to believe what they believe about Trump. Continue to report what they believe about him as being factual and continue to use untrustworthy sources to defame Trump at every chance they get.
What they’re doing is not journalism, it’s propaganda. Jeff Flake comparing Trump to Stalin highlights just how unhinged and out of his mind the weenie Senator is. And he even dares say that the media are the ones telling the truth? Now THAT is actual insanity.
The truth is that Trump is perfectly mentally sound and over the end of 2016, all of 2017, and this early part of 2018, the Left, the Mainstream Media and the Washington Establishment have been losing all of their marbles.
They go insane over how Trump is as popular as he is. They go insane over how Trump is as successful as he is. They go insane over the mere fact that Trump ISN’T insane.
And we haven’t even reached half of his first term. I’m kind of worried about what their collective mental health will be if and when he gets reelected. I don’t think there are enough mental asylums in the world to contain these lunatics.
They will wholeheartedly believe that Dr. Jackson is either lying under orders of Trump or is simply wrong. CNN already had Dr. Sanjay Gupta diagnose Trump with heart-disease despite having never examined him and going off of a single score from the medical report (coronary calcium score).
But Dr. Jackson, having actually examined the President, was convinced that despite that score, “his cardiac health is excellent… He doesn’t have, really, a family history of premature cardiac disease, he doesn’t smoke, he doesn’t have diabetes… I think those things, in combination with the excellent cardiac results that we got from the exercise stress test, I think, are very reassuring.”
And when asked directly about heart disease, the doctor said: “No, he does not have heart disease… technically, he has nonclinical atherosclerotic coronary – coronary atherosclerosis… He had a coronary calcium score done in 2009. It was 34. He had a coronary calcium score done in 2013 that was 98. And then we did get a calcium score from this one… it was 133. So I had a long conversation with the cardiologist (one from Walter Reed and another from the Cleveland Clinic) and everyone saw that as reassuring that he’s gone this period of time and he’s had that much – or that little of a change in his coronary calcium load. So that I think, overall, his coronary calcium score is very reassuring and goes along with the rest of his cardiac workup.”
In short, the doctor that actually examined the President informs us that Trump doesn’t have heart-disease. But that clearly didn’t stop Dr. Gupta from saying Trump does have heart-disease based off of the coronary calcium score. CNN was clearly looking for any confirmation that Trump was unfit for office in any way, be it physical or mental.
Clearly, he’s mentally fit for duty, so they had to go with physical health. They were searching for anything that could fit into their narrative and had to dig deep into the barrel of b.s. to get anything remotely close to solid… which they failed to do.
They were looking for evidence of mental or physical unfitness and they found nothing. They’ve been looking for evidence of collusion for over a year and have found nothing. They’ve been pushing for these narratives that have proven to be false or at least that haven’t been proven right.
Not that this will stop them. As long as they can convince even one person that he’s insane, they will run with that narrative.
Truly, it will only be insane people that believe he’s insane.
2 Timothy 1:7
“For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Freddie Marinelli and Danielle Cross will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...