It is no secret to anyone at this point that the Democrat Party has effectively become the Party of infanticide. This is something they’ve been for a long time, don’t misunderstand, but I think more and more people are beginning to feel uncomfortable with the Party’s policies regarding abortion.

This has been especially true since the passing of the New York legislation legalizing late-term abortion, with Governor Coonman in Virginia essentially endorsing infanticide, and other states going farther towards accepting the execution of babies born alive after a botched abortion, which is especially noted in Congress, with all but three Democrat Senators voting against a bill that would protect such babies.
 
I’ve often said that the Democrats and the Left in general have let the mask slip off their face ever since Trump became President. Their opposition to Sen. Ben Sasse’s (R-NE) Born-Alive bill is a testament to their fervent opposition for anything Trump would happily support.
 
However, their radical extremism on this issue has seemingly turned off even a good portion of Democrat voters who would previously have identified as pro-choice.
 
But that’s getting a bit ahead of myself. Let’s take a step back and discuss the incredible new Marist poll’s showing from a survey taken in mid-February.
 
The recent poll found that 47% of respondents identified as pro-life and 47% identified as pro-choice. This is the first time in a decade that the poll finds as many people identify as pro-life as they do pro-choice.
 
But the results of this poll are made even more impressive by the simple fact that just a month prior, only 38% identified as pro-life and 55% identified as pro-choice. That’s a difference of 17 whole points in the span of a single month!
 
This, I think, is the biggest thing to look at. Of course, I’ll also be looking at other numbers which are also pretty great, but this number and contrast with the January poll is something that I will focus on for the most part later on.
 
In any case, what is seen as the biggest boost in numbers for pro-life people seems to come, surprisingly, from Democrats and respondents who were under the age of 45.
 
Previously, only 20% of Democrats identified as pro-life, which was still surprisingly high, all things considered. The Democrat Party certainly has no room for pro-life people, so it is surprising to see so many registered Democrats saying they are pro-life. In any case, that number was before the most recent poll. According to the Marist poll, that number has surged 14 points to 34%. Still not as many as one would hope, but a significant gain altogether, let alone in the span of a single month.
 
And as far as young Americans go, with those under the age of 45, back in January, the gap between pro-choice and pro-life was massive, with 65% saying they were pro-choice and 28% identifying as pro-life. Now, only 48% identify as pro-choice and 47% identify as pro-life, a single point deficit.
 
Dividing down party lines, as previously mentioned, 34% of Democrats now identify as pro-life, 46% of Independents identify as pro-life (with 48% being pro-choice) and 67% of Republicans identify as pro-life, which honestly comes as a pretty big surprise to me. Most conservatives tend to be pro-life, so 67% is a worryingly low number, all things considered.
 
The poll also noted that 71% of Americans disapprove of third-trimester abortions, with that number including 60% of Democrats, 72% of Independents and 85% of Republicans. So the Democrat Party’s push for supporting late-term abortions are not popular even among their own supposed constituents.
 
71% also disapprove of abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, or roughly 4 months.
 
Almost all of these numbers, especially in such a short amount of time, is music to my ears.
 
Over the past couple of months, the Democrat Party has deluded themselves into thinking that socialism is widely popular in America and that most people do not think of a baby in the womb, or having recently been born, as a human being. They think the majority of Americans agree with them wholeheartedly that a fetus is really nothing more than a disease or a virus, equating it to a cancerous tumor that must be rid of.
 
They think they do themselves a massive favor by supporting late-term abortion bills, endorsing infanticide (even if they don’t want to call it that) and overall believing that the vast majority of the population agrees with them.
 
We the People do not agree. This much is plainly seen not just in this poll but in other polls taken around the same time as well. Even those who vote for Democrats and have previously identified as pro-choice, or at least not been entirely sure about the whole issue and remained neutral have come to oppose the Democrat Party on this.
 
So much so that in the span of a single month, people have gone from pro-choice to pro-life so much that the numbers are tied for the first time since 2009.
 
And you know the Democrat Party isn’t going to learn a darn thing from this. They are dead-set in believing the lie that just about everyone agrees with them and loves them and hates Trump with a passion. They are dead-set in believing an ultra-radical approach to abortion is a winning ticket for them.
 
America has not yet completely sold its soul to the devil. And America is, I think, beginning to realize that the Democrat Party is the party of Satan.
 
I mean, to outright reject a bill that allows for the protection of BABIES BORN ALIVE after a failed abortion is outright satanic. It’s denying that that baby is a human being. How is that any different from Hitler denying Jews their humanity, or Southern Democrats denying black people their humanity?
 
It becomes painfully obvious just how satanic the Democrat Party and the Left altogether are. They offer babies as a sacrifice to their gods of money and power. I am running out of adjectives to call these people. I know that I tend to throw the word “evil” out there an awful lot to describe the Left, but that’s because that is precisely what they are.
 
No one can make the argument that denying a BABY BORN ALIVE their humanity and right to life is not evil in the least bit. No one can make the argument that a baby inside the womb is not a human and terminating it is not an act of sheer evil akin to murdering anyone already born.
 
The Left can dress things up however they want, using whatever deceitful words they want. Abortion is not healthcare, not for the mother and especially not for the child. To call this a healthcare issue is to equate pregnancy to a disease. Yes, it’s something the Left often does, but that doesn’t make it any less evil.
 
It’s not a woman’s liberation effort because no one is liberated by being slave to sin and to the flesh.
 
You can take a piece of crap, put colorful sprinkles on it, spray it with a nice perfume to make it smell better, wrap a bow on it and call it chocolate ice cream, but at the end of the day, it’s still just a piece of crap. That’s what the abortion issue is.
 
It’s death made to look like a healthcare service that strengthens a woman’s power and serves to free her from a fictitious patriarchy, but at the end of the day, it’s the advocacy of death for the most innocent among us.
 
Abortion is not a healthcare service. It’s not a tool for liberation. It’s not a right. It’s bloody murder.
 
It’s what sycophants like Jack the Ripper, Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer could only dream of doing. It’s what genocidal maniacs like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong would smile about.
 
It’s what the very embodiment of evil, Lucifer, finds delight in every day of the week.
 
It’s what the Democrat Party fights tooth and nail for. And I think people have had enough.
 
Thank you God that there are people out there with enough reason to see what evil the Democrat Party has been advocating for recently.
 
Isaiah 58:8
“Then shall your light break forth like the dawn, and your healing shall spring up speedily; your righteousness shall go before you; the glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Earlier this week, Univision’s anchor Jorge Ramos, who is famous for repeatedly calling Trump a racist (though that’s the rest of the Left as well, but he particularly tries to call him a racist as often as he can), held an interview with Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro.
 
However, Jorge Ramos made the mistake of pointing out the horrors of Maduro’s regime, specifically a video of a group of children looking for food inside trash trucks.
 
Due to this, Maduro ended the interview, and had Ramos and his crew detained in the presidential palace for two hours. All of their equipment, including their own cell phones, were confiscated and never returned.
 
And recently, Jorge Ramos recalled in detail what it was like to experience that.
 
“So it is Monday night,” Ramos began explaining in a Facebook video. “We are already in the hotel in Caracas, Venezuela. And what happened is that I conducted an interview with Nicolas Maduro. I asked him if I can call him either a ‘president’ or a ‘dictator’ because, you know, millions of Venezuelans don’t consider him a president.”
 
“Then we discussed the fraud [election] that happened here in May 2018, also the reports of torture and human rights abuses and political prisoners. And at the end, I showed him a video that I personally took last Sunday of three kids behind a trash truck – looking for food. And he just couldn’t stand it. He didn’t want to continue the interview, he wanted to close my iPad – where I showed him the video – and then he said the interview was over.”
 
“It was about 17 minutes of interview. After that, their minister of communications, Jorge Rodriguez, told us that they didn’t authorize the interview. And they confiscated all of our cameras, all our video, all of our cell phones, and we were thrown out of the presidential palace.”
 
“But before I left the palace, they took me into a security room with producer Maria Guzman, and they asked for our cell phones. I didn’t want to give them my cell phone, so they turned off the lights in the room, and a group of agents came in. They took, forcefully, my backpack, my cell phone. They did the same thing with Maria’s. And they forced us to give them our pass codes for the cell phones.”
 
“We didn’t know what was going to happen to us back then, nor what was happening to the rest of the group, who were about seven journalists. And after about two hours of being detained – because we couldn’t leave the palace – two hours of being detained, they allowed us to leave the presidential palace.”
 
“They didn’t give us our equipment, nor our material, and still at this point we do not have a cell phone or the interview. I think we will never have that interview – they don’t want the world to see what we did [see].”
 
Ramos also noted that the incident was “a violation of freedom of expression and a violation of human rights, a violation of all the principles of journalism.”
 
He’s right, but here’s the thing: there’s no such thing as freedom of expression, freedom of the press, or even human rights in a socialist country.
 
The only things you are allowed to express are what the government approves of. If the government doesn’t like what you are saying, and considers you a threat as a result (and can make up any excuse to consider you a threat, as they made up that the interview was not authorized, giving themselves permission to steal Univision’s equipment and their cell phones), they will shut you down in any way they feel is necessary.
 
Truth be told, Ramos is lucky to be from America. I doubt a Venezuelan journalist would’ve gotten off that easy.
 
But in any case, the point I’m trying to convey here is that these people, particularly Ramos, could not hope to even try and call Trump a dictator now (though they most likely still will). For as much as Trump may dislike the fake news media (for good reason), he won’t do anything to restrict their freedoms. He won’t shut them down, won’t violate their constitutional or human rights. Why? BECAUSE HE’S NOT A DICTATOR!
 
But you can plainly see how a dictator truly acts. If he feels the least bit offended, insulted, or simply doesn’t like the direction a conversation is going, every right the person supposedly offending the dictator has goes out the window. They are no longer “authorized” to interview the dictator; they are no longer allowed to record anything; they are not even considered a fellow human being.
 
Again, Ramos got off easy. A Venezuelan journalist would’ve been subjected to whatever punishment Maduro wanted, whether that’s imprisonment or execution. Because that’s just how dictators operate. The only reason Ramos is in America now is because this is his home (much as he might dislike that). Had Maduro punished Ramos with prison or worse, that would’ve created an international incident. And despite what Trump may think of Ramos, as the President of the United States and a decent human being, he wouldn’t have accepted such treatment of an American citizen at the hands of a foreign dictator.
 
Now, I don’t think anyone on the Left will look at this situation and reconsider calling Trump a dictator. They know very well that it’s not true, but the narrative that he’s a dictator has to remain, facts be damned. But at the very least I hope that Ramos and whoever else was involved in this nightmarish situation where they were at the mercy of a socialist dictatorship come to reconsider the definition of a dictator in their own minds.
 
They just experienced what it was like to be subjected to a dictator. They were detained for just two hours and could see the sort of evil Maduro is. He doesn’t care about the starving children, doesn’t acknowledge political prisoners, doesn’t care about human rights abuses and violations. He’s burning humanitarian aid trucks trying to enter his country for crying out loud!
 
The entire world can clearly see what a dictator looks like. And this is what socialism brings about.
 
Do you think Kim Jong Un is any better? Or Raul Castro? Or that Stalin was any better? Or Mao Zedong? Or Adolf Hitler? Or Benito Mussolini? Or Raul’s brother Fidel? What all of these people have in common, apart from the fact that they all are or were dictators, is that they are/were dictators of socialist/communist nations.
 
Matter of fact, they were dictators precisely BECAUSE they led socialist/communist nations. That’s just what those systems of government bring about: centralized government with one person at the helm ruling however they want (and because man is naturally evil, they tend to rule with an iron fist).
 
Not that I think Ramos will make the connection between Maduro being a dictator and socialism being the cause of it, but it’s plain and clear to see for anyone who has eyes.
 
Maduro is a dictator because that’s what socialism brings. There has never been a country in the history of the world that has succeeded because of socialism/communism. But there are plenty of examples of socialism destroying countries.
 
And in the process of that destruction, there is one individual who lives like a king, like the 1%. The one responsible for the death and despair of an entire country lives in riches and fancies himself a great and wise leader.
 
This is what happens every single time socialism is tried anywhere in the world. Trump literally advocates AGAINST socialism as often as he can now, and like I said, he won’t deny the media their 1st Amendment rights, much less their human rights.
 
It’s an insult to call Trump a dictator, while seeing the horrors of socialism in Venezuela and wanting to bring that here. That’s not just stupid, not just tone-deaf, but outright detestable and evil.
 
Mark 7:21-23
“For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I can’t really say that I am surprised that a socialist member of our government has a complex that makes her think she is people’s boss because she is in the government, but I do find it dangerous nonetheless that anyone in the government would so readily and quickly come to admit that they think they are the boss of the American people and not the other way around.
 
Both on Twitter and during an event called “Girls Who Code” in New York City, socialist nut Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez showed people her superiority complex.
 
Let’s begin with her tweet, in which she replied to someone about how she is the only one who has actually come up with a proposal to combat climate change (the GND is not a proposal at all, but a socialist wish-list. It talks about what it wants to do but not how to actually do it, because it’s impossible to do those things).
 
Here’s what she tweeted:
 
“Yup. If you don’t like the Green New Deal, then come up with your own ambitious, on-scale proposal to address the global climate crisis. Until then, we’re in charge – and you’re just shouting from the cheap seats.”
 
And during the “Girls Who Code” event, AOC said, in a very unprofessional and “hip” manner of speaking: “Like, I just introduced the Green New Deal two weeks ago, and it’s creating all of this conversation. Why? Because no one else has even tried. Because no one else has even tried. So people are like, ‘Oh it’s unrealistic. Oh it’s vague. Oh it doesn’t address this little minute thing.’ And I’m like, ‘You try. You do it. Cuz you’re not. Cuz you’re not. So, until you do it, I’m the boss’. How bout that?”
 
Okay, I have an awful lot of things to say about these things.
 
First, like I said, the GND is not a proposal. It’s not a plan of action at all. She’s just throwing a wish-list of what she would want done with no actual way of doing it. If she worked in the private sector and showed this sort of “plan” that is actually impossible to accomplish to her boss, she’d be fired for incompetence.
 
Second, she’s been in office for only two months and she already thinks herself more important than anyone else. She’s already tasted SOME power and she’s drunk off of it.
 
Need I remind her that just three months ago, she herself was “shouting from the cheap seats” about what she wants? This is her first government position after working as a bartender in New York. How insulting is that to people who do not get elected to power? And this is the mentality I’m talking about. The mentality that the American people are worthless scum of the earth and the people in the government are gods in comparison.
 
Third, yeah, we’re saying it’s unrealistic, vague and doesn’t address “this little minute thing” (which, in this case, is the insignificant little matter of how exactly we’re going to pay for all of this without bankrupting the country, obliterating our economy and having the nation and its people descend into destitution. You know, the “minute” details).
 
The Green New Deal, as I thoroughly explained in my article covering it, is flat out impossible in a world that is not perfect. And in a world that is perfect, the Green New Deal is unnecessary. Socialism only works in two places: Hell, where they already have it and Heaven, where they don’t need it.
 
So of course we’re saying those things about the GND. Because THEY’RE TRUE!
 
Finally, as James Woods made known to her on Twitter: We the People are HER bosses, not the other way around.
 
In case you missed it, James Woods replied to her narcissistic tweet by saying: “So, you may have missed this, but the way it works in America is YOU work for US. The last time somebody told Americans to sit down and shut up was 1776. If you ever learn to read, look it up. You are not only an idiot, you’re an arrogant idiot, and there is nothing more dangerous.”
 
And it’s that last part of his tweet that leads me to the overall point of my article: power corrupts people, particularly people like AOC.
 
Like Woods said, she’s not just an idiot, but an arrogant one at that. This much was made known to everyone when she ran on the socialist policies she ran with and even tried to challenge Nancy Pelosi. Regardless of what you may think about socialism (which is not only stupid, but it’s the worst, most evil idea any human has ever come up with), one can’t help but recognize how stupid it is for an incoming DEMOCRAT FRESHMAN to try and challenge Nancy Pelosi in any way. Not to glorify Pelosi too much, but she’s a veteran politician here who knows how to survive D.C. AOC challenging her would be like me challenging George Foreman (in his prime) to a boxing match. It’d be very stupid.
 
So having an arrogant idiot in government is very dangerous. Again, she’s only had this position for two months and she already thinks herself a superior being to the worthless maggots that dare challenge her authority and intellect.
 
Could you imagine if she were POTUS? She’d be far worse than Obama. Obama at least wasn’t an idiot. He knew what to push and what not to push. He knew who to challenge and who not to challenge. And whatever he may have thought of himself, and I fully believe he thought himself king of America with the way he ran the country, he at least had the common sense not to broadcast it to everyone.
 
AOC, on the other hand, thinks herself so glorious and superior that anyone challenging her in any way is a moron or an inferior race of human and is not shy about showing people what she thinks. Two months in Congress and she’s already this corrupt. The good news is she’s not exactly all that popular with some people in the Democrat leadership so she may be out of a job in 2020, particularly after costing New York, and more importantly, the Democrat Party nearly $30 billion from Amazon.
 
Still, whatever may happen with her in the eyes of the Democrat Party, she is proving to everyone that she is an ignorant little child who is boasting about daddy buying her a new toy (getting elected into Congress being the toy in this situation).
 
But like I said in the beginning of the article, I am not surprised that she thinks this way about herself and the American people. I’m just surprised that she’d be so open about this and at how quickly she’s come to think this way.
 
But this is what happens when you’re a socialist. What happens when you replace God with the government. If the government can essentially replace God, then it stands to reason that those within the government think themselves a superior being to the plebeians that are not in the government.
 
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. AOC has nowhere near absolute power and she’s already this corrupt.
 
This is the mark of the devil in her heart. Satan lives well in hers.
 
Too bad for both AOC and Satan that God is the one with absolute power, authority, etc. They both want to replace God and certainly have the mentality that they believe they can, but both fall painfully short of Him.
 
Colossians 1:16
“For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – all things were created through him and for him.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It is not often that I even care to write about anything with relations to animals. For the most part, I care more about matters of God, or matters of humans than I do about matters of animals. Usually, the lowest creation I will consider talking about is the actual planet whenever I discuss climate change. But I suppose this article sort of connects to climate change as well in some ways, at least with the fictitious notion that we are killing our planet.
 
Recently, two previously-thought extinct creatures were discovered. On the Galapagos Island of Fernandina, a giant tortoise, which was last seen more than 100 years ago (1906, more specifically) was discovered.
 
This tortoise was found to be a female tortoise, is believed to be more than 100 years old (roughly the life expectancy of a giant tortoise) and other tracks and scents were also found near her, which might belong to other members of her species, indicating she may not be alone.
 
The other creature that was recently found is perhaps the only creature I would be willing to advocate for its extinction. The Wallace’s Giant Bee (the nightmarish creature is seen right below), named after Alfred Russel Wallace, who discovered the species in 1958 and was last seen in 1981 also was found in Indonesia.
 
The Wallace’s Giant Bee, according to CBS News, is around 1.5 inches long and has a 2.5 inch wingspan. Unsurprisingly, LiveScience dubbed this bee a “nightmare bee”.

​The giant tortoise was discovered by an expedition by the Giant Tortoise Restoration Initiative (GTRI) and Satan’s bee (as I shall call it henceforth) was discovered, oddly enough, by a conservation photographer who had been trying to find this bee for 20 years.
 
I don’t know about you, but the only way I’d be willing to spend 20 years looking for a nightmare bee is if my mission were to, upon finding it alive, kill it with fire. Just bring a flamethrower with me and burn the nightmare fuel of a creature along with the nest it was found in, collateral damage be damned.
 
Of course, since it is a bee, it might not necessarily be immediately hostile like wasps are, but still. One look at this thing and I can’t help but want to kill it off.
 
In any case, let’s get down to the reason I am even talking about this at all. As the title suggests, I am adamant in explaining the simple fact that nature always finds a way.
 
Beyond the fact-less narratives of the Left when it comes to climate change, it is simply a ludicrous thought that humanity could cause harm to the climate this much, even when it “tries” to do the opposite (I put that word in quotation marks because it’s clear to me countries still participating in the Paris Climate Accord don’t actually care about the environment if their CO2 emissions are still as bad as they are).
 
Man has the power to do a lot of evil and a lot of damage, but not this much, not without nuclear weapons.
 
In a previous article, I talked about how if you tasked me with destroying the planet without nuclear weapons, I would not be able to. Despite however much gas we may be emitting, the polar ice caps aren’t melting like Al Gore and the other idiots are telling us. You need only think of the time when TWO ships were stranded in the South Pole back in 2014 to see how bogus of an argument that is. Those ships were stranded because the assumption was that there was less ice in the area than there actually was.
 
Not to mention that if you look at an image of the planet in a time lapse, you can see the ice caps GROWING not receding.
 
So whatever damage the Left says we are doing to the planet is simply not true. Which is why I would not be able to destroy the planet without nukes. What is thought to be destroying the planet now is certainly not doing it, so how else would I be able to?
 
But even if you do want to continue with the notion that we are destroying the planet, or at least not doing our best to help it, the fact is that nature still finds a way to survive.
 
Look at Chernobyl as an example. The Chernobyl disaster occurred on April 26th, 1986, with subsequent evacuations happening over the next few days (not immediately because communism).
 
I won’t go into detail about the level of radiation that was released by the accident because it’s a lot of technical words that might confuse some people, but there was a lot of radiation that was released.
 
All that we really need to know about this is that Live Science says that the region surrounding the nuclear power plant won’t be habitable for humans for at least 20,000 years. Which, I honestly find odd because they also say that “thriving populations of wolves, deer, lynx, beaver, eagles, boar, elk, bears and other animals have been documented in the dense woodlands that now surround the silent plant.”
 
Of course, this isn’t to say that people literally can’t go there, since my 8th grade science professor actually went there but literally had to burn the clothes he wore on his trip. Still, I don’t suggest anyone try and live in the area any time soon.
 
In any case, my point is that Chernobyl currently has “thriving populations” of different kinds of animals with minimal signs of radiation effects apart from a few stunted trees. Aside from that, if you look at pictures of Chernobyl, you will find a lot of areas where nature is growing even inside some buildings.
 
So despite the terrible radioactive accident of Chernobyl, nature found a way to survive the radioactive area. Despite our CO2 emissions, nature finds a way to get HEALTHIER. And despite whatever else we may be doing to nature, long-thought-extinct creatures can pop up again.
 
Now, I doubt we’ll ever see a dodo bird again, much as I would love to see one, but nature always finds a way to survive because nature’s God is the one in control. He gets to decide what animal survives, what animal thrives and what animal dies.
 
He gets to decide what happens to the polar ice caps. He gets to decide what happens in the event of nuclear accidents (or even nuclear war).
 
The thought that man can destroy the planet stems from unbelief in God, who controls the planet and the universe. This particularly is among the reasons I seriously doubt Pope Francis’ faith. He supposedly believes in God, who created the universe, but does not believe God is currently in control of the climate of the planet? He believes man can do anything to override whatever God does or wants?
 
What sort of faith is that?
 
God is the one who decides that the giant tortoise is still around. He is the one that decides that Wallace’s Giant Bee is still around (for a reason that currently escapes me, but I won’t question Him).
 
So nature always finds a way solely because God is the one who dictates what happens in nature and the way it works. It is asinine to claim we are killing the planet when A) there’s no actual evidence to support that and B) we don’t have the power to override God’s work.
 
Again, the only way I can see to destroy the planet (and even then, the planet would still be around, but most humans and animals likely wouldn’t be) is through the use of nuclear weapons. And like I said, God still dictates what would happen even if humanity foolishly were to destroy itself.
 
1 Chronicles 29:11
“Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is yours. Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and you are exalted as head above all.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It’s no secret at this point that the State of New York has become one of the least child-friendly states in the entire country with their recent legislation that allows for late-term abortions to be legal (among other things).
 
As a response to this, a pro-life group called Focus on the Family has decided to show a 4D ultrasound image (like a 3D ultrasound but with moving images showing the baby three-dimensionally in real-time) of an unborn child in Times Square.
 
Focus on the Family president Jim Daly told LifeSiteNews: “Over 40 years ago, our founder, Dr. James Dobson, recognized that the family was in trouble. Prompted by the Lord, he left a very comfortable position in academia to start Focus on the Family. Our mission then – and now – is to help families thrive in Christ. We do this by providing help and resources for couples to build healthy marriages that reflect God’s design, and for parents to raise spiritually and emotionally healthy kids.”
 
All of that is fantastic. Quite fascinating that Dr. Dobson had the foresight to understand the Left’s war against the family. Of course, 40 years ago was just 1979, so Roe v. Wade had been the law of the land for some years at that point, but it is quite interesting to see someone back then be able to at least somewhat foretell what lied ahead in the road the country was taking.
 
And the message of focusing the family around the image of God, His plan for us and what He commands out of a marriage and family is also fantastic. It is rare to see that sort of message, in large part because the Left owns the news media which is adamant about taking away an unborn, or even newborn child’s very humanity.
 
In any case, Daly continued: “Times Square is known as ‘The Crossroads of the World’ and we’re at a crossroad as a nation regarding life. Do we really want to be part of the Abortion Axis of Evil – like China, North Korea and Vietnam that allows abortion for any reason after 20 weeks? We’re hearing from people all over the country who are disgusted by the blatant disregard for life. Enough is enough!”
 
I really like that name: “Abortion Axis of Evil”. It really encapsulates precisely what these countries are. They are akin to the Axis of World War II with Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and imperialist Japan. But beyond even that, it is absolutely, unequivocally evil. So that name fits the shoe just right.
 
Daly also noted that “most people have never seen a 4-D ultrasound. It’s our hope that after seeing these videos in Times Square, people will have no doubt that every life is made in the image of God. It’s our prayer that ALIVE FROM NEW YORK will be an event used to help change hearts and minds regarding life. We hope you’ll join us!”
 
Before writing this article, I did not know that 4D ultrasounds were even a thing. I knew very well about the standard 2D ultrasound, where there is a flat, 2D image of a baby living inside the womb. I also knew about 3D ultrasounds, where the image is three-dimensional but completely still. However, I did not know about 4D ultrasounds before this (in large part because I am not about to become a parent any time soon).
 
But this 4D ultrasound I think can be a very effective tool both for expecting parents to see their baby and for pro-life advocates who insist that the being growing inside a woman’s womb is a live human virtually no different from a baby that has already been born (as the image above suggests).
 
Daly went on to talk about what Focus on the Family has already managed to achieve, saying that over 15 years, they have saved “an estimated 425,000 babies by placing ultrasound machines in high-abortion areas… When abortion-minded women see an image of their baby on a screen, research suggests that 54% of them will choose not to abort. Just last month at the March for Life, we announced a goal of saving a million lives by 2025. In the aftermath of the egregious NY legislation legalizing late-term abortion and the Virginia governor endorsing infanticide, we’re prayerfully hoping this will call greater attention to the plight of the preborn.”
 
Everything about this is fantastic, though I am concerned with what the pro-abortion crowd will do regarding this. The 4D ultrasound showing is set to take place sometime in May. Given that this is New York, especially New York City, I don’t doubt that pro-abortion people will look to somehow prevent this event from happening, either petitioning Bill de Blasio to not allow this showing of an ultrasound to occur or something else entirely, including even sabotaging the event somehow.
 
Pro-abortion people know very well that an ultrasound shows a baby’s humanity. It shows that what the woman is seeing right then and there is the growing of her very own child, who is very much alive. A 4D ultrasound, basically taking the more realistic images of a 3D ultrasound and combining that with 2D’s ability to show a live-feed of a baby further shows the humanity of an unborn child. It shatters the idea that what is growing inside a uterus is not a baby, a human or alive. It shatters the idea that what is being shown on screen can be equated to a cancerous tumor ready to be removed. It shatters the idea that it’s just a clump of cells randomly thrown together.
 
4D ultrasound shows a real baby, an alive baby, in real time. Anyone who sees an ultrasound, particularly a 4D ultrasound and still denies the viability or humanity of the baby on their screen is either evil or outright demented (or both). I would say moronic but I think even stupid people would recognize a human when they see one. This is not a matter of intelligence, but a matter of morality.
 
To deny that a human baby is alive inside the womb is evil, regardless of what someone might try and argue. It’s virtually no different from denying Jews their humanity during the Holocaust (and I tend to be careful about comparing things with the Holocaust, but with the fact that there have been over 60 million abortions since 1973 in the U.S. ALONE, I don’t think it’s too far-fetched to compare the issue of abortion with a sort of modern-day Holocaust that is actually worse than the original Holocaust).
 
That’s over 60 million lives ended by the evil belief that a human baby inside the womb is not a baby at all.
 
God willing, this showing of a 4D ultrasound will go off without a hitch and will actually get a lot of people in Manhattan thinking about what it is they are even discussing. It’s not an issue of women’s rights or women’s healthcare or women’s liberation from the “patriarchy”.
 
It’s no woman’s (or man’s) right to kill their own child at any stage of his or her life. It’s definitely not healthcare when you’re talking about the literal ending of a life. That’s the antithesis of healthcare. And it’s not women’s liberation from the “patriarchy” because this allows women to have as much sex as possible, leaving them with a feeling of emptiness and allowing themselves to essentially be used by men as much as possible.
 
What part of a woman feeling sad and sorry for herself after her 100th round of sex with some random guy is women’s liberation?
 
Let me tell you: that’s not liberation from anything. It’s the very opposite. It’s bondage to sin.
 
It’s bondage to the flesh. No human ever is liberated by something that ensnares them and puts them in bondage.
 
Hopefully, that idea runs through many people’s minds upon seeing a 4D ultrasound of what can only be described as a living human being.
 
Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

This is the second time in a week that I write about something like this, but it is always important to make note when it happens.
 
Recently, former tennis player and openly gay activist Martina Navratilova wrote an op-ed for the Sunday Times of London where she voiced her concern regarding transgender women (men who turn female) playing against biological women and having a natural advantage as a result.
 
“To put the argument at its most basic: a man can decide to be female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organization is concerned, win everything in sight and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to making babies if he so desires… It’s insane and it’s cheating. I am happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her. It would not be fair.”
 
Seems fairly reasonable, wouldn’t you think? She’s not outright dropping any support for transgenders, but she is voicing her concern regarding physically superior transwomen competing against biological women and having a natural advantage every time out.
 
But instead of being willing to have a conversation with her, who very much is still adamant about supporting LGBT “rights”, the LGBT-friendly sports group Athlete Ally completely dropped her as an ambassador and from the group altogether.
 
Athlete Ally released a statement regarding Navralitova’s piece:
 
“Athlete Ally unequivocally stands on the side of trans athletes and their right to access and compete in sport free from discrimination. Martina Navratilova’s recent comments on trans athletes are transphobic, based on a false understanding of science and data, and perpetuate dangerous myths that lead to the ongoing targeting of trans people through discriminatory laws, hateful stereotypes and disproportionate violence… As an organization dedicated to addressing root causes of homophobia and transphobia in and through sport, we will only affiliate with those committed to the same goal, and not those who further misinformation or discrimination in any way.”
 
Boy, can I have a lot of fun with this one.

First of all, I find it hilarious that they try and call Navralitova “transphobic” for voicing her opinion regarding this issue. It’s a darn cliché at this point. Everyone who disagrees with me in this day and age can only be a Nazi, or a fascist, or a racist, or a homophobe or a transphobe or a veganphobe (just watch, that will be a thing soon enough) or whatever negative accusation one can come up with.
 
Anyone who disagrees with me is literally Hitler and there’s no room for discussion, so such opinion existing must be eliminated and all affiliations with that person must be ended and that person be made to suffer as a consequence of their reasonable actions or thoughts.
 
Second, don’t b.s. me about what science and data says. Grab any 5th grade biology book, look into DNA and chromosomes and you will see what science has to say about gender “stereotypes”. The fact of the matter is, as I stated in my previous article surrounding a similar topic, men are physically superior to women on average.
 
On an individual case, yes, sometimes a woman beats a man in a contest of physicality. Which is why, whenever anyone says “well, if trans people playing against women is cheating, why aren’t they winning all the time?” I will say just that: sometimes, a woman can best a man in a physical event.
 
For example, I myself used to sort of play tennis when I was younger. The very first somewhat legitimate game I ever had (in which I was neither playing against my parents or against my coach) was against a girl that was maybe a couple of years younger than me. I was maybe ten while she was likely no older than 9 herself, around 7 or 8.
 
I lost… badly. That doesn’t mean she was physically superior to me in any way. While I was a young kid, I undoubtedly was still physically stronger than her. However, multiple factors can contribute to such a loss.
 
Primarily, that was my first “real” game against someone while she herself had been playing for longer (at least that’s what my coach told me after I lost and I legit started to cry because I was 10 and just lost to a younger girl, which hurt my pride). The girl was more experienced than me and that helped her out.
 
So there most certainly can be cases of women beating men in a physical competition. But the fact remains that men are physically superior to women on average.
 
Going back to my NBA/WNBA comparison, most halfway decent players in the NBA would likely dominate in the WNBA, while not one WNBA player would likely do that well against NBA players.
 
One of the biggest challenges for college players joining the NBA is getting their bodies “NBA ready”. There’s a major difference between college basketball and NBA basketball that goes beyond the distance of the three-point line. NBA players are older, bigger, stronger and more physically dominant than college players. Look at pictures of a rookie LeBron James, Kevin Durant or Giannis Antetokounmpo compared to today and you will see they did not have NBA ready bodies back then, but most certainly do now.
 
So that’s a problem MEN face. How much more likely would a female athlete be able to compete against NBA players in anything regarding physicality?
 
Whatever “science” and “data” these people are using are anything but scientific. It’s propaganda made to fit their erroneous narrative that totally betrays science while pretending to be science. Like the media claiming to be objective, no one with a brain buys that men are not physically superior to women on average.
 
The third and final thing I want to talk about regarding these idiots’ decision to drop one of their best allies in the world of sports for the heinous crime of disagreeing about something is that I want to highlight the sort of self-destructive behavior that must accompany their self-destructive ideology.
 
It’s no secret that I think the Leftist ideology, socialist ideology, is self-destructive. Not only does it not work anywhere it’s tried, but it fails miserably, creating tons of human suffering, and for the literally idiotic belief from Karl Marx that you can go from 100% government control of pretty much everything to zero need for any government at all and a people fully capable of ruling themselves without a government and laws to protect them as Marx believed the last phase of communist evolution would be.
 
It’s ludicrous and self-destructive. But not only is the ideology self-destructive, so are the people that push for it.
 
Martina Navratilova has been an advocate for LGBT rights for ages, particularly in the age of Reagan and AIDS when people thought the disease was a gay-only disease. In many ways, she was a pioneer for gay people, both within and without the world of sports. And all it takes to eliminate her work for these people is one differing opinion regarding transgenderism and sports.
 
All it took was not being “woke” enough for this group to drop her completely. Anything to the right of Marx, even within lifelong Democrats and Leftist allies, simply cannot be allowed to remain and they cannot allow themselves to associate with such people.
 
Today, being a feminist can cause ire on the Left if you don’t count transwomen as actual women.
 
They eliminate their own in an effort to keep moving farther and farther to the left if their own aren’t “woke” enough.
 
I imagine Martina must feel pretty jaded for the current treatment she’s receiving. I doubt she ever thought the same people she helped throughout her life and career would betray her like this.
 
But this further goes to show the kind of mentality of the Left: agree with us all the time or be made to suffer.
 
No room for independent thought whatsoever. And definitely no room for independent thought that is backed up by reason, logic and outright facts.
 
Here’s hoping Martina Navratilova opens her eyes to the sort of monster that the Left is and opens her eyes to Christ as well that she might believe in Him and be saved.
 
John 8:31-32
“So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, ‘If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.’”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I have often said, just about anytime I talk about the fake news media that they, at the end of the day, are a bunch of propagandists for the Democrat Party. The fact that 92% of the media coverage of Donald Trump is negative is a testament to that fact.
 
But it’s one thing for me, a conservative kid who has never worked in the media, to tell you, and it’s an entirely different thing for someone who actually used to work in the media to tell you the same thing.
 
Enter Lara Logan, former CBS journalist, in an interview with retired Navy SEAL Mike Ritland on his show “Mike Drop”.
 
In what she later admits is “professional suicide” for her, she rails against the media not simply for being left-wing biased, but for dropping all pretense of objectivity.
 
“The media everywhere is mostly liberal, not just in the U.S. But in this country, 85% of journalists are registered Democrats – that’s just a fact. No one is registering Democrat when they’re really a Republican. So, the facts are on the side that you just stated: most journalists are Left, or liberal, or Democrat, or whatever word you wanna give it,” said Logan.
 
That statistic, alongside the 92% negative coverage of Trump, further goes to show the bias that exists in the media, that has been there long before Trump even arrived in the political scene. The fake news media has been fake news long before Trump branded them as such.
 
She continues: “How do you know you’re being lied to? How do you know you’re being manipulated? How do you know there’s something not right with the coverage? When they simplify it all and there’s no gray. There’s no gray. It’s all one way. Well, life isn’t like that. If it doesn’t match real life, it’s probably not – there’s something wrong.”
 
Indeed, there are a lot of things that can be said about the Trump administration, both positive and negative. The media chooses to stick with the negatives (I admit I also tend to stick with the positives, but then again, I’m not 24/7 news coverage so there’s only so much I can talk about and I try to push back against that constant negativity against him when I talk about him at all. I tend to be objective).
 
While the media chooses to stick with hoax stories of Russian election interference, or Stormy Daniels, or campaign finance issues, etc., they ignore the millions of jobs created, the booming economy, the attempts at peace with North Korea, the near complete defeat of ISIS, etc.
 
I’ve often said that the media does not report on reality but attempts to alter it for those who watch or read what they have to say. Glad to see a former CBS journalist (don’t quite know if she herself is a Republican or a conservative, but she definitely is smarter than most people in the media) acknowledging the fact that the media is so left-wing biased that they are basically propagandists.
 
In any case, she continued: “So, for example, all the coverage on Trump all the time is negative… That’s distortion of the way things go in real life, because although the media has historically always been left-leaning, we’ve abandoned our pretense, or at least the effort, to be objective today.”
 
“We’ve become political activists, and some could argue propagandists, and there’s some merit to that.”
 
She also mentioned that it is pretty much impossible to get the Right’s side of the story unless you yourself search Breitbart to find the other side of the story.
 
All in all, I am glad to see Ms. Lara Logan saying all of these things. And I do certainly think this is professional suicide for her. Being a journalist, she just exposed the media for what they are. When someone exposes you for what you truly are, if what you are is a bad thing, chances are you are not going to like that person, and definitely wouldn’t consider hiring them for anything.
 
Truth be told, she has more bravery for this than Dr. Christine Blasey Ford did for lying about Brett Kavanaugh. Ford got something out of her deceit: tons of money and fame. Logan will probably find it hard to land a job anywhere in the mainstream media now.
 
Of course, her chances of landing a gig with a conservative news network went up, but there’s almost no chance of landing a job with CNN or NBC, etc. if she were to look for employment there.
 
But I am glad she had the bravery to say this. It’s 100% true, everything she said.
 
The media are a bunch of political activists. She didn’t want to go as far as to call them propagandists, simply saying that the argument could be made for that, but I have no qualms about calling them out for it: they ARE propagandists.
 
Consider the way they covered Obama. They thought everything that came out of his mouth was gold and everything he did was perfect. They were so enamored with him that they didn’t mind, or notice, when he fooled them regarding the Iran nuclear deal. He could lie to them all day and the media would pass it all off as the inarguable and absolute truth.
 
Regarding Hillary, it was much the same (for the time that she was relevant, at least). They adored everything she did, even when she was blatantly racist (“I don’t feel no ways tired” or Hillary “always” keeping hot sauce in her purse because that apparently will draw in black people).
 
Contrast that with everything they have to say about Trump: that he’s a racist, sexist, bigot, etc. That he’s a national security threat, that he’s unfit for office, that he’s a lunatic, blah blah blah.
 
So Ms. Logan is completely right when it comes to the media coverage of Trump and when it comes to what the mainstream media is. They are propagandists who don’t even care to pretend to be objective, just claiming that they are every now and then.
 
What Ms. Logan did here is important. She is exposing the evil of the Left, at least the Left-wing media. This, at the cost of her own career, is unique.
 
Like I said earlier, I do not know if she herself is a conservative or a Republican at any capacity. However, with this knowledge in her mind, I hope she will continue down the right path towards conservatism (if she’s not already there) and will come to find Christ as well (again, if she’s not already there).
 
Here’s hoping she will be able to find Christ and that we’ll be able to fight back against a news media that is hell-bent on distorting reality and making lies into truths.
 
John 16:13
“When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

​Last week, President Trump signed an omnibus spending bill that will include $1.375 billion for the border wall, and he also declared a national emergency under the National Emergencies Act of 1976 in order to get $8 billion (so far) for border wall funding.
 
And this has caused many people to have some negative reactions. Of course, while the omnibus bill signing might make some Democrats happy (and I will momentarily explain why this was actually bad for them), they see the national emergency declaration as a bad thing and will try to challenge it in the courts (until it reaches the Supreme Court where it will be seen as perfectly constitutional and legal because of the aforementioned Act).
 
On the Right, many see the signing of the omnibus bill as Trump “caving” in some manner and see Trump giving far more to the Democrats than he got. Once again, I will explain in a brief moment why it’s nowhere near as bad as they might think.
 
So let’s get down to it and see just why it is that I am defending this move by Trump, even if it’s not even close to perfect.
 
First things first, I perfectly understand that this bill is pretty bad. Putting aside border wall funding (and it’s not even all that much, but I will explain why it’s better than you might think), the bill includes a lot of things Democrats want, such as weakening ICE and border patrol, making it harder to deport some illegals, and a bevy of other things they really want.
 
By no means is this a fantastic deal – not even close. However, there are a number of points I would like to make. First, this deal makes it so that the Democrats, who previously condescendingly would say that maybe they’d give $1 for the wall, actually give Trump well over a billion dollars more for it.
 
Of course, they will try and say that it’s not border wall funding, just fencing, etc. but I think people, even in the Democrat party, can see that this is the Democrats compromising to Trump more than Trump compromising to the Democrats. The Democrats promised, time and time again, that not one cent would go towards funding Trump’s wall. Even the condescending joke from Pelosi about maybe giving him a dollar was just that: a joke. That is, until recently.
 
Now, the Democrats are giving Trump at least some money for something he wants. How is that going to make the Democrats look in the eyes of their own constituents? They can throw out whatever excuse or misleading explanation they want, but let’s be honest here: they promised no money for a wall. And Trump’s getting a wall.
 
Second, had this deal not come about, many of the things the Democrats wanted in it that they got they would’ve gotten eventually. Trump won’t be in office forever. And there’s no guarantee that the next Republican president will be as conservative as him or as willing to fight the Left as him. The things the Democrats got here they were slowly but surely going to get eventually. The difference between this deal and no deal is that we actually get a little bit of funding for the wall, courtesy of the Democrat Party, and the national emergency declaration.
 
Third, I’ve seen comparisons of this omnibus bill to last year’s atrocious omnibus bill. And truly there is no comparison. Yeah, the Dems get a lot of things they wanted, but so do we this time around. There was nowhere near this kind of money for a wall in the previous omnibus bill, which was subsequently promised by the snake that is Paul Ryan. The only reason Trump signed the previous omnibus bill is because RINOs promised him he’d get his wall. He didn’t. But he does with this one.

Finally, and perhaps the most important point of all: this deal is a budget deal. Meaning that this deal is only good until the end of September. What the Democrats get out of it is temporary. What we get out of it is considerably more permanent.
 
So while the deal is far from perfect, it’s nowhere near as bad as some people might think. We get some money for a wall, ammo against the Left in terms of rhetoric, and something more permanent than what the Left gets.
 
Now, had the deal been signed without a national emergency declaration, I would’ve been considerably less happy about this. The national emergency declaration gives Trump around $8 billion (again, so far) to build more walls. This is considerable progress from where we were last year (even though Republicans owned Congress last year, many NeverTrump rats made sure to betray the country).
 
Switching gears, many on the Right will say that using this power sets a bad precedent for future presidencies, particularly for Democrats.
 
One particularly juicy suggestion of this came from Pelosi of all people (yes, I know I was talking about people on the Right, but you’ll want to hear this one). She said that Trump’s emergency declaration for this opens the door for Democrats to use that power once they have the White House again to declare a national emergency on gun violence.
 
Yeah, no. It would be unconstitutional to do that for that sort of “emergency” because of the 2nd Amendment. However, the constitution makes it so that the President’s very DUTY is protecting the nation, and that’s what this declaration is aimed to do.
 
And as far as people on the Right claiming this sets a bad precedent for Democrats to use this power, let me just say I’d rather a Democrat use this power, a constitutional power, to declare a national emergency on something that may not even really be an emergency than have something like what Obama did with DACA, an act that was enforced unconstitutionally.
 
And that’s far from the only unconstitutional act Obama did. But no one talked about Obama setting a bad precedent for Republican presidents (not that they’d willingly do anything unconstitutional but still).
 
Obama tried his best at ruling the country like a king. No one dared try and stop him. So how is exercising constitutional powers setting a bad precedent for future presidents? If anything, it sets a good precedent, particularly in the way Trump did this. A national emergency wasn’t the first thing he tried. Otherwise, we probably would have more walls at the border. In any case, the national emergency declaration is a sort of last-ditch effort to do this. It’s perfectly constitutional and legal. It’s a power that’s there for this precise reason.
 
And no, it’s not going to get struck down in the courts. Yes, the Democrats will challenge it as best they can, considering it presents a very serious threat to their present and future voting base. But like I said, it’s legal. The matter will be taken up to the Supreme Court, where it will almost certainly be upheld (unless they decide to be stupid traitors).
 
Why would it be upheld? Because the point of this declaration isn’t to fulfill some nonexistent racist dogma that supposedly runs through Trump’s mind. It’s to mitigate ILLEGAL border crossing, gun, drug, human and sex smuggling and trafficking, prevent future American deaths at the hands of people who HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE as best as it can and overall truly make the country safer from what can only be considered a subtle invasion of our homeland.
 
For as much as the Democrats want to close their eyes, cover their ears and shout that there’s no emergency at the border, nothing could be further from the truth. That is what we are faced with and it’s the reason we elected Trump.
 
This declaration is 100% legitimate. And this declaration, as well as the money given to us by a reluctant Democrat Party, will make it so that we can finally make progress in our efforts to secure the border.
 
Regardless of what people will say about this whole ordeal: that the deal was terrible and Trump shouldn’t have signed it because it gives so much more to the Democrats, that the declaration of a national emergency sets a bad precedent (somehow) or that it will be struck down by the courts (challenged? Yes. Struck down? Highly unlikely), this deal (at least the part about border wall funding) and declaration will be a good thing for the country and for Trump in the long term.
 
If people are worried that Trump’s base is going to abandon him, let me remind you of some things. Despite everything that happened, even all the times when some people thought Trump caved in any manner, despite him signing that horrible omnibus deal last year, despite him reopening the government and seemingly getting nothing out of shutting it down in the first place, despite every negative attack against Trump from both sides for the past 2 years, his latest approval rating from Rasmussen is 52%. In many polls, his approval ratings either did not move or went up since the shutdown.
 
And his approval ratings were, on average, improving even after all the attacks and conspiracies waged against him. So even if his approval does take a hit with this, it’s not like he just lost 2020. We are still a little less than two years away from that election. An awful lot of things can happen from here to then.
 
And even if people think he messed up on something, his base is not going to abandon him, at least the ones that know what’s at stake.
 
Just look at the people the Democrats have to offer. Each one of them, likely without reading it, signed on to the laughable Green New Deal. Each one of them is in a battle to show who is the most devout socialist. Who is going to grow the government faster and bigger. Who is going to fundamentally alter America to be something it was never meant to be.
 
Those who truly love this country as it was founded (no, that doesn’t include slavery. We Republicans ended it, remember?) know perfectly well the gift from God that Trump is. I’ve already written an article about how big of a bullet we dodged in 2016 thanks to the Grace and goodness of God. Every day that passes, I become more and more convinced that things would’ve gone horrible awry, to the point of no return, under a President Hillary Clinton.
 
How much worse would things be with a President Kamala Harris or a President Bernie Sanders or a President Joe Biden or a President Cory Booker?
 
We know perfectly well what’s at stake. Those who love this country aren’t about to abandon Trump just because he gave a little too much away for this deal. Because, as I said before, they were going to get that with a future Democrat President anyway. We at least got money for a border wall and a subsequent national emergency declaration to help out in that manner.
 
We knew perfectly well Trump’s presidency wouldn’t be easy and that he’d likely have to make some compromises. But let me tell you, this is considerably more than a President Jeb Bush or President John Kasich would’ve gotten, if they even would’ve been able to beat Hillary in the first place.
 
They would’ve bowed down to the Deep State as if it was their god, and in many ways, it is.
 
It cannot and should not be understated how significant and good it would be to get a wall built along the southern border. That, in itself, does a whole lot for our country.
 
Thank you Lord that you are with us always and gave us a President like Trump.
 
Deuteronomy 20:4
“For the Lord your God is he who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies, to give you the victory.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

On CBS’s “60 Minutes”, while trying to promote his new book regarding Trump and the FBI (which is 100% likely to have b.s. all over it), former FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who was fired by President Trump on the eve of his retirement, claimed that “he and other Justice Department officials discussed recruiting Cabinet members to oust President Donald Trump using the 25th Amendment after Trump fired then-FBI director James Comey,” according to the Daily Wire.
 
The New York Times also reports that McCabe makes the claim that “top Justice Department officials were so alarmed by President Trump’s decision in May 2017 to fire James B. Comey, the bureau’s director,” that they contacted various Cabinet members to see how they would respond to the desire to apply the 25th Amendment, an amendment in the U.S. Constitution that allows for the Cabinet to “vote out” the president if he or she is incapacitated or otherwise is incapable of fulfilling his or her duties.
 
In other words, the FBI, at least McCabe, and the DOJ looked to test the water in Trump’s own Cabinet to see if they would be willing to remove the president using the 25th Amendment. Given that this attempt at a very obvious silent coup resulted in nothing the Deep State wanted, it is safe to assume the Cabinet did not wish to remove Trump from office.
 
Of course, that didn’t stop the Deep State from continuing trying to remove the duly-elected President from office just because they don’t like him one bit.
 
McCabe also made the claim that Comey’s firing “prompted Mr. McCabe to order the bureau’s team investigating Russia’s election interference to expand their scope to also investigate whether Mr. Trump had obstructed justice.”
 
Again, it’s clear this amounted to nothing because Trump fired Comey in May of 2017. It’s been nearly two years and there has only been suggestions that it was obstruction of justice from the media, but no concrete case could be made against Trump because the FBI operates under the Executive branch, which Trump is the boss of, so he can fire whomever he wants for whatever reason he wants.
 
This includes terrible FBI directors who are incompetent at best and outright treasonous at worst (and sometimes both, considering they failed to complete their objective of destroying Trump).
 
Now, the man who interviewed McCabe is CBS’s Scott Pelley. Pelley discussed his interview with McCabe on “CBS This Morning” on Thursday.
 
Pelley said: “The most illuminating and surprising thing in the interview to me were these eight days in May when all of these things were happening behind the scenes that the American people really didn’t know about.”
 
To me, it’s very illuminating of the kind of corruption there is in the Deep State, but it comes as no surprise to me. We’ve known that there has been a silent coup against Trump for about two years now. It’s just very illuminating seeing the details of something we knew very well about already.
 
In any case, Pelley continued: “There were meetings at the Justice Department at which it was discussed whether the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet could be brought together to remove the president of the United States under the 25th Amendment. These were the eight days from Comey’s firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel. And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president.”
 
Again, none of this comes as any surprise to me. Still, it is always good and fascinating to learn of the procedures that were undertaken to try and remove Trump from office that very clearly failed.
 
And the funny thing is that McCabe also confirmed that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein discussed having agents wearing a wire when speaking with Trump was discussed seriously, not as a joke, which Rosenstein tried to affirm.
 
Now, let me tell you a little something about what it takes to become an American citizen. Trust me, what I will tell you has more to do with this than you might think.
 
While seeking to become a citizen of the United States, people need to take certain oaths as part of becoming a citizen. Apart from taking tests and being able to speak basic English (although that might’ve been removed from the requirements for seriously dumb reasons), you have to swear allegiance to the United States of America.
 
And as part of this oath-swearing, you are required to swear and affirm that you will never attempt to overthrow the American government.
 
Obviously, everyone says that they won’t do that as part of trying to become a citizen, but people that try to overthrow the government very clearly receive some sort of punishment if they do try it. Now there exists in the penal code title 18 of the U.S. penal code § (Section) 2385 – Advocating overthrow of Government.
 
There is also title 18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason. However, I do not really think there is a case against McCabe (or anyone else involved in this silent coup) using these two code sections.
 
The Advocating overthrow of Government section talks about people who violently or forcefully seek to overthrow the government. Talking with Cabinet members to use the 25th Amendment does not even get close to that requirement. As far as Treason goes, that largely talks about levying war against the U.S. or adhering to our enemies, “giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere”.
 
So I do not think there is a case against McCabe using either of these two clauses.
 
However, that does not mean that McCabe and others involved with this silent coup, such as Rod Rosenstein, Comey, etc., should simply get away with it. Of course, I’m not saying we ought to break the law to punish them. That would make us no better than these scums of the earth.
 
However, what I am saying is that it’s become crystal clear just what we are dealing with. The Deep State is a den of snakes. Corrupt people at various levels and areas of the government that routinely poison the well.
 
It is not enough to simply defeat Democrats in elections, we have to completely defeat the Left socially and spiritually. You’ve seen, for the past two years (and just about any time there is a Republican in office) the sort of visceral and vile reactions the Left shows.
 
When Trump beat Hillary, everyone on the Left was crying foul while they themselves were guilty of foul play, being covered up by the Mueller investigation into Trump. Every day, the media suggested Russia either hacked the election, and when that was shown to be an asinine argument, began to insist Trump and Russia colluded to steal the election.
 
When Bush beat Gore, the Left went haywire on the Supreme Court and on Florida, crying foul play. Now, I don’t know if they were themselves guilty of similar foul play back then, but I wouldn’t put it past them to have at least tried something. I’m too young to remember the Bush presidency (I’m also not from here, as I moved to the U.S. when Obama was in office), much less remember the 2000 election, apart from the cries from the Left against Florida and the Supreme Court (and I only learned about all this long after Bush left office), so maybe those who were here for it can remember some shady things, but since I do not have anything even close to evidence, I won’t allude to much. All I’ll say is I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to destroy Bush in a similar manner to Trump.
 
When Lincoln beat Southern Democrat John C. Breckinridge and Democrat Stephen A. Douglas in the 1860 presidential election, seven states in the Democrat South decided to secede before Lincoln was even inaugurated.
 
The Left has historically HATED it when a Republican would beat a Democrat in a presidential election, going all the way back to the very first Republican president.
 
Instead of accepting the results of the elections like civilized and rational people, they often throw hissy-fits that last throughout that president’s entire tenure, be it one or two terms.
 
If it’s not outright secession from the Union, it’s attacking the Supreme Court and the State of Florida. If it’s not attacking the highest court in the land or the Sunshine State (Florida’s nickname), it’s insisting that the Republican victor of the election was in cahoots with foreign agents (a crime which the Clinton campaign and the DNC are very obviously guilty of themselves).
 
And now, we see some more details regarding the silent coup the Deep State has been attempting for the past two years. Again, it’s not surprising at all, but very illuminating.
 
And it’s fitting, to be quite honest. The Bible tells us an awful lot about works being made in the darkness coming to light.
 
Verses such as Luke 8:17: “For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light,” and Luke 12:3: “Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops,” are only some verses that come to mind (and a quick Google search).
 
Whatever the enemy, be it Satan or the Deep State, is plotting in the dark will eventually come out into the light. Be it soon after it is plotted or years and years later. Be it immediately or takes a lifetime, these things are made known to us eventually. Not to compare this silent coup to the Holocaust because any comparisons to it tend to cheapen the horrors of it, but the Holocaust was something that was discovered to have happened only after WWII had already ended. All-the-while people were looking at Hitler as this bad guy looking to rule the world, many were made unaware of the true horrors that evil socialist was carrying out in the dark.
 
Again, not to compare what Hitler did to what the Deep State is trying here because there really is no comparison in terms of their horrifying natures, but they both do share in common that they are works by evil people, people completely devoid of Christ in their hearts, working in the darkness against people they hate/hated.
 
And both have come out into the light for the whole world to see. Of course, the extent of the silent coup is not quite yet known so far, but it will be made known eventually, whether it be in a few months, years, decades, or in the afterlife, it will be shown.
 
Certainly no part of it is any secret to God. The Deep State can hide whatever they want from the public for however long they feel is necessary, but nothing they do is a surprise to God. He knows precisely what they are doing and what the intentions of their hearts are.
 
We will see what kind of excuses these people come up with to justify their entrance into the Kingdom of God. I bet none of them have the correct answer.
 
1 Corinthians 4:5
“Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I often say that the Left is self-destructive. That the Left, at its core, is a way for society to self-destruct. You need only look at the Green New Deal to see the cyanide pill the Left wants to force down our throats (and their own, too).
 
I also often say that the ideologies they hold tend to lock horns with itself. For example, the Left supports both LGBT people and Muslims. Islam abhors homosexuality to the point where it is encouraged to eliminate anyone who is even suspected of being gay. The biggest shooting in American history, the Orlando gay night club shooting, really speaks more about Islam’s hatred of homosexuality than it does about gun laws in America (the terrorist shouldn’t have had a gun in the first place).
 
But we’re not even talking about that sort of infighting, though that will only continue in the future anyway.
 
No, today, I’m talking about a lesbian woman being kicked off of an LGBTQ Commission for following the biological and factual reasoning that a transwoman, regardless of what they identify as, is still a male and a transman, regardless of what they say, is still female. Science says as much.
 
Julia Beck is the lesbian woman we’re talking about here. She was kicked off the commission last October after “identifying a transgender rapist as male, his correct biological sex, though he ‘identifies’ as a woman,” according to The Daily Wire.
 
Beck recently was interviewed by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson about this. “I believe in truth”, she told Carson. “I believe that people should have these conversations and say things that matter without fear of punishment.”
 
Well, the unfortunate thing about this is that the Left largely does not want to have these conversations, because conversations about this alludes to people disagreeing with them and opposing them to any extent, and that cannot be allowed to occur.
 
Carlson replied to Beck by saying: “I couldn’t agree with you more, and I’m grateful that you have that attitude. But why do you think it was important to say this, specifically?”
 
Beck answered: “Well, when we get down to it, women and girls all share a biological reality. We are all female. But if any man, if any male person can call himself a woman, or be legally identified as female, then predatory men will do so in order to gain access to women’s single-sex spaces, and this puts every woman and girl at risk.”
 
THANK YOU! This is precisely the argument everyone on the Right was making regarding transgender bathroom laws (which the cowards in North Carolina caved on a long time ago). This sort of permission for biological males to use women’s restrooms just because they can make the claim that they identify as a woman and no one will bat an eye at that puts women and girls inside those restrooms in unnecessary peril.
 
Already, rape and other sexual assault acts are being called out as often as possible (see the entire #MeToo movement), so why would the Left be willing to put more women and girls in danger?
 
Actually, dumb question. These evil s.o.b.’s think the best option to dealing with gun crimes is taking away guns from those who obey the laws, further putting them in danger and in the lines of sight of those who do not care for any laws, much less gun laws.
 
If anything, both their desire to take away guns from law-abiding citizens and desire to allow men to enter women’s restrooms further shows the sort of self-destructive ideology I talked about in the beginning of the article. They claim to want to solve problems, but the only problems that arise come from the “solutions” the Left brings up.
 
But returning to Beck, she actually happens to be of sound and intelligent mind here. She recognizes the unnecessary dangers brought about by men in single-sex and typically female-only areas.
 
Carlson made sure to note in his show that it has always been his “instinct” that the transgender activists’ agenda “is not going to be good for girls in the long run.”
 
Beck replied by saying: “I absolutely agree. In many states, men can legally identify themselves as female and gain access to women’s single-sex spaces, and sports is just one institution where men are taking titles, scholarships, and this is a problem.”
 
Of course. Men are biologically stronger, on average, than women. Of course, there are some individual exceptions, but men tend to be stronger than women.
 
I remember watching Trump’s show “The Apprentice” some time ago and remember that, in the season opener, the very first task Trump gave to the teams, which were men vs. women, was running in one of his golf courses to his private helicopter in a race.
 
While these people were not necessarily athletes, and even though they were all wearing business suits that were definitely not made for running, unsurprisingly, the men won the race.
 
Why? Because men tend to be more physically fit, stronger, faster and athletic than women.
 
Watch an NBA game in comparison with a WNBA game and you’ll clearly see the differences between men and women, even among athletic men and women. Most men in the NBA can dunk, even if it’s not necessarily a flashy dunk, while most women in the WNBA can hardly reach the rim, if even that.
 
Biologically speaking, men tend to be physically superior to women. If anyone has a problem with that, don’t take it up with me, take it up to the One who made it this way. See if you can find some way of calling God a misogynist to His Face.
 
Returning to Beck, she then went on to say that women who even dare to speak out regarding the negatives and outright dangerous repercussions of radical transgender activism are pretty much “silenced”.
 
Carlson then asked if Beck “found it hard to advocate for biological truth and the protections of women and girls when she, an open lesbian, belongs to the LGBT acronym, which notably includes T for transgender,” according to The Daily Wire.
 
She answered: “The letters in the acronym share, um, not much. The L, G, and B, are based on sexuality, sex, biological reality, but the T is based on gender identity, which is not based in biological reality. In fact, I would argue it is opposed to biological reality. The LGB is very different from the T, and I don’t think it is fair to lump us all into the same acronym.”
 
Okay, a few things here. First, I completely agree with her on this. In fact, the B in LGBT stands for BISEXUAL. And bisexual insinuates a maximum of only two genders. Someone that is bisexual is someone who is attracted to both males and females, both men and women. Not transgender men or transgender women. Not Apache helicopter men and M1 Abrams tanks women. Not any of the 666 flavors of artificial gender. Just men and women. The only two options.
 
So the T in LGBT, at the end of the day, is in some ways an affront to the B in LGBT. Or, the other way around. In any case, it naturally creates infighting, much like we see in Beck’s case, though she is a lesbian woman trying to stand up for all women who are legitimately being left in the dust and led to the gallows by a self-righteous Left that further moves the needle towards Satan.
 
Second, her argument about transgenderism being opposed to biological reality is spot on and something we often say as well. No matter what you say, how you identify, you are what God made you to be. If you were born with the XX chromosomes, you are female. A biological female and that cannot be changed as your DNA is what dictates your gender among many other things.
 
If you have the XY chromosomes, you are male. And only a male. Nothing else will ever change that.
 
To make the claim that someone can be a female, even if they are a biological male, is to spit in the face of science (and God, really). It defies logic and facts.
 
And funny enough, this defiance of logic and facts also does what I talked about in the beginning: self-destruct society.
 
Logic and facts are necessary in a civilized society. When logic is ignored and facts are challenged (not in a scientific effort to advance the craft, but in a political effort to distort reality), you don’t make progress in humanity, you do the opposite of that. Regression is the only thing that results in ignoring and distorting reality.
 
Just take a look at the world around us, where you can be punched in the face or berated and verbally attacked for holding a differing opinion from someone else. And it doesn’t even have to relate to politics. Differences in opinion in terms of philosophy, art, even video games can result in such brutish violence.

This lack of self-control of emotions is almost no different from barbarians killing each other off or attacking each other for next to no reason. And this is the direction society is heading towards if the Left gets their way. There is no room for civilized discussion. Everyone needs their own safe spaces and if that cannot be accomplished, emotions flare and human life, which has lost all meaning after decades of abortion advocacy, is brutally ended.
 
And I’m not just talking about being unable to physically get to some sort of “safe space”. I’m talking about being so triggered by the mere existence of a differing opinion that severe action is taken. An extreme and rare scenario, yes, but a possible one nonetheless.
 
Even Julia Beck explains in an article about lesbianism and transgenderism how her views leave people to actively ostracize her, to the point where she explains that “people I trusted told me to die in a fire for naming male people men.”
 
A figure of speech, of course, but when does it stop being mere linguistics and begin being actual threats, or even actual attempts?
 
Granted, most people that wish that upon someone (as evil as they may be) won’t actually do it. But it only takes one madman or woman (notice that there’s only two options here) to actually attempt it.
 
In any case, despite our political and religious differences, Beck and I can at least agree to hold on to what is real, logical and factual. I’m not saying Beck is a conservative because of this (though I imagine many people will call her that, meant as an insult). But I am saying that she at least has common sense.
 
And common sense is a rare trait in Leftist advocacy groups.
 
1 Corinthians 15:33
“Do not be deceived: ‘Bad company ruins good morals.’”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.