Still trying to find some topics that have little or nothing to do with the Chinese coronavirus, but it is getting harder and harder to do so as time goes by. However, I feel it is at least somewhat necessary to talk about the topic of Trump’s approval ratings here, largely because his rise in mainstream media polls is due to what he has done with responding to the virus.
 
A number of MSM polls had the President rising in approval, and Pew Research Center has him at a three-year high. For those counting at home, that means the highest approval of his presidency.
 
According to Pew: “Opinions about how President Donald Trump is handling the crisis are less positive, and more divided by partisanship. Nearly half of adults (48%) say Trump is doing an excellent or good job responding to the outbreak; an overwhelming majority of Republicans (83%) express positive views, compared with just 18% of Democrats.”
 
“However, Trump’s overall job rating is higher than it has been since the first few months of his presidency. Currently, 45% approve of the way he is handling his job as president, while 52% disapprove. In January, 40% approved of Trump’s job performance.”
 
“Since then, Trump’s job approval has increased significantly among a number of groups, including members of both parties, women (from 37% in January to 44% today), black adults (from 8% to 18%) and Hispanic adults (from 27% to 37%).”
 
The biggest reason for these upticks in his approval seems to stem from what the Democrats and many in the media claimed was a “xenophobic overreaction”: restricting travel to and from the U.S., specifically restricting travel from China and, once Italy and much of Europe showed to be in the uptrend in terms of infections, expanding the restrictions to Europe.
 
If you remember, former Vice President Joe Biden said of the travel restrictions on China, that it’s “hysteria and xenophobia – hysterical xenophobia”. Chuck Schumer had also said in a now-deleted tweet (because of course he would delete it) that the restrictions were just Trump being a “xenophobe” and overreacting.
 
Meanwhile, let’s take a look at the Pew Research poll, shall we? According to Pew, 96% of Republicans approve of restricting international travel to the U.S. 94% of DEMOCRATS also approve, so a total of 95% of people in the survey say that travel restrictions are good.
 
95% of Democrats said canceling major sports and entertainment events was a good idea, with 87% of Republicans agreeing. 94% of Democrats approved of closing K-12 schools with 85% of Republicans agreeing which is actually pretty surprising to me.
 
We all know that government (public) schools are centers of indoctrination, not education, so to see FAR more Democrats agreeing to canceling school than Republicans is rather astounding to me.
 
But moving on, 92% of Democrats agreed with asking people to avoid gathering in groups of more than 10, with 82% of Republicans agreeing. 91% of Democrats agreed with limiting restaurants to carry-out only, with 78% of Republicans agreeing. 81% of Democrats agreed with requiring most businesses other than grocery stores and pharmacies to close, with 61% of Republicans agreeing, which is not particularly surprising to me. The well-being of businesses and the economy tends to be more of a Republican issue and many of us would argue that it is not outright necessary to close pretty much everything for everyone (as I’ve already explained in previous articles).
 
Finally, when it comes to postponing state primary elections, 73% of Democrats agreed with doing so, while only 66% of Republicans agreed.
 
Of course, the most important and noteworthy portion of that poll was that incredible consensus regarding imposing travel restrictions. Again, Democrats and people in the media lambasted Trump for imposing those restrictions, first to China and then to Europe when the necessity arose, and just about everyone in that survey, be they Republican or Democrat, agreed with Trump’s plan to restrict travel.
 
It wasn’t a “xenophobic overreaction” to restrict travel during a global virus pandemic (or what could turn into one, as that was the sentiment at the time). The reason for restricting travel to and from China was due to their woeful attempt at limiting the spread, lying to everyone about it and keeping outside help from coming in. China set the world on fire with the virus and Trump knew he needed to do something.
 
Keep in mind that the travel restrictions were imposed in January. While the Democrats were running a sham impeachment and removal trial that was entirely partisan and based on nothing, President Trump established the Coronavirus Task Force and kept an eye out on both Iran (back when Soleimani was the big story) and Wuhan. While the Democrats were twiddling their thumbs, Trump took early, precautionary action. Action that no one can honestly say was “downplaying” the virus (again, the Democrats and the media were the ones downplaying it by that point).
 
As I’ve said time and time again, Trump was the first one in Washington taking the virus seriously. And this early action, coupled with the actions he is currently taking, are painting him in a better light in the minds of the people the MSM chooses to survey.
 
It’s important to keep all of this in mind, especially considering what Joe Biden said at the time of Trump applying the travel restrictions. When the Democrats were busy trying to impeach and remove the duly-elected president, and while they were crying “racist” at the travel restrictions, Trump was busy making sure that the country did not suffer greatly from the virus. And while we are currently in the situation we are in anyway, there’s no doubt in my mind that if Hillary had been president right now (as many on the Left had been fantasizing particularly for the past couple of months), she would not have put in place the travel restrictions and wouldn’t have taken the same early steps in fighting the virus (also, the economy would be in total shambles).
 
This will be important come November and it will be something the Left cannot take away from Trump, as there is clear evidence of them siding against Trump’s travel restrictions.
 
2 Chronicles 15:7
“But you, take courage! Do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.”

Amidst a sea of stories surrounding the Chinese coronavirus, it can be difficult to find anything that has little or nothing to do with it. I should know, as I have been trying to do that for a few days over the last week or so, choosing to write about it whenever I felt it was necessary to convey just how terrible the fake news media is and how they earn the title of “enemy of the people” (and are currently polling awfully, according to Gallup, which is 100% deserved).
 
But there are stories out there of that kind and one of them is the story of Tara Reade, who is accusing former Vice President and likely Democrat nominee Joe Biden of sexual assault in 1993.
 
From The Intercept: “Last April, Tara Reade watched as a familiar conversation around her former boss, Joe Biden, and his relationship with personal space unfolded on the national stage. Nevada politician Lucy Flores alleged that Biden had inappropriately sniffed her hair and kissed the back of her head as she waited to go on stage at a rally in 2014. Biden, in a statement in response, said that ‘not once’ in his career did he believe that he had acted inappropriately. But Flores’ allegation sounded accurate to Reade, she said, because Reade had experienced something very similar as a staffer in Biden’s Senate office years earlier.”
 
After watching the witches at ABC’s “The View” attack Flores and siding with Joe Biden, Reade decided to support Flores and share her story. Reade “gave an interview to a local reporter, describing several instances in which Biden had behaved similarly toward her, inappropriately touching her during her early-‘90s tenure in his Senate office.”
 
“In that first interview, she decided to tell a piece of the story, she said, that matched what had happened to Flores – plus, she had filed a contemporaneous complaint, and there were witnesses, so she considered the allegation bulletproof. The short article brought a wave of attention on her, along with accusations that she was doing the bidding of Russian President Vladimir Putin. So Reade went quiet,” according to The Intercept.
 
Now, let’s discuss a few things here. First of all, to those on the Left reading this (and I seriously doubt there are any, but I’ll say this regardless) who might be asking “why are you not giving Biden the benefit of the doubt and presuming his innocence?”, a few points:
 
One, I thought we were supposed to “believe all women”. Apparently, that is not the case if the accused is someone the Left likes. I mean, the same witches on “The View” who would 100% believe any ridiculous story about anyone on the Right (like they did with Kavanaugh) also chose to not believe Flores, believing her to be acting purely because of politics (even though she’s a Democrat). There is a very unserious double standard going on here that is plain to see for anyone with eyes.
 
Two, there is DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE of Biden doing exactly what both Flores and Reade have described Joe of doing. I mean, he even does this crap to GIRLS! Here are but a few pictures:

​These are six prominent pictures of Joe Biden inappropriately doing things to women or girls and Google searches show far more as well. The accounts of both Lucy Flores and Tara Reade, while not as well-documented as these pictures, demonstrate that the sort of behavior he is accused of is something HE REGULARLY DOES AND FINDS NO TROUBLE WITH!
 
The next thing I would like to discuss has something to do with the accusation thrown Reade’s way, regarding her doing the “bidding of Putin”.
 
That is something many Leftists tend to throw at people who disagree with them, when it’s not accusations of bigotry or being a Nazi. However, it’s not as idiotic or random as one might originally think.
 
Now, I’m not saying she is doing Putin’s bidding (that is still ridiculous), but she has demonstrated love and admiration towards Putin and Russia in the past.
 
In a now-deleted post on Medium, Reade wrote back in 2018: “What if I told you that everything you learned about Russia was wrong? President Putin scares the power elite in America because he is a compassionate, caring, visionary leader… to President Putin, I say keep your eyes to the beautiful future and maybe, just maybe America will come to see Russia as I do, with eyes of love. To all my Russian friends, happy holiday and Happy New Year.”
 
Reade explained that she wrote the post in a spirit of solidarity to a Russian friend of hers she had met in a creative-writing group. The Intercept also explains: “Reade’s leftist mother had raised her to oppose American imperialism and be skeptical of American exceptionalism.” So, basically, Reade was raised an America-hating communist, being lied to with the same dribble about America being an “empire” trying to “extend its control and borders and power” and that American exceptionalism was a bad thing.
 
Keep in mind, this is what Leftists still think to this day and before 2016, they all LOVED Russia and the Soviet Union, wishing they could have the power the Soviet leaders once had (and current Russian leaders still have, because let’s not pretend they aren’t still communists). A bit strange for someone to write so favorably of Putin and Russia after 2016, but still.
 
Again, I’m not saying that she is doing Putin’s bidding or that she is a “Russian agent”. But she does see Russia favorably.
 
Now, let’s get back to Joe and exactly why it is that he is being treated like he’s above the law.
 
I’ve already pointed out how the witches at “The View” took his side purely for political reasons (if he weren’t a political opponent to Trump, they would’ve disparaged him) but there is an even bigger scandal here.
 
Remember the “#MeToo” movement? How it originated due to Harvey Weinstein and a plethora of women coming forward to accuse not only him but many others in Hollywood of sexual assault? Remember how, out of this movement, another, relatively smaller movement arose?
 
That smaller movement was called “Time’s Up”, an organization formed in the wake of the MeToo movement to help women come forward with their stories (which would be treated as 100% true regardless of evidence or lack thereof). Tara Reade, knowing of this organization and its purpose, as well as its success in helping women’s cases, decided to seek their help.
 
However, due to their status as a non-profit organization, while they listened to her story, they ultimately decided not to help her because of who she was accusing: Joe Biden.
 
Their excuse was that Joe is running for office and pursuing him in a legal manner could jeopardize their non-profit status (which says a lot more about the Left and their vindictiveness if they actually fear legal retribution as a result of DOING THE RIGHT THING).
 
It’s worth mentioning that the managing director of the public relations firm that works on behalf of Time’s Up, Anita Dunn, is also Joe Biden’s top adviser for his presidential campaign. I wonder if there is any correlation to the organization not being able to help Reade and one of the organization’s top directors is also working for Reade’s accuser.
 
But you see, this is why I say Biden is treated like he’s above the law. The witches from “The View” sided with him purely because he is running against Trump, even though Flores’ account was very similar to what we have SEEN Joe do to other women and even to girls. And now, the organization that was CREATED to help women in the very situation Reade finds herself in is refusing to help supposedly because Joe is running for office and his potential victory could jeopardize their status as a non-profit organization.
 
For a moment, let’s run a hypothetical. Say a woman were to come forward to Time’s Up, shared her story, and the person she is accusing is President Trump. What do you think Time’s Up would do? Would they simply fear retribution because he’s the sitting president and running for re-election? Or would they go at him full-force despite his current position?
 
It’s far easier to imagine they would go after Trump than not, but for a moment, let’s say that their fears of jeopardizing their non-profit status were real and would not go after Trump as a result. Do you think that would be good for them in terms of PR? The media would LAMBAST them, calling them cowards for not standing up to Trump and they would almost immediately, if not outright immediately, buckle and go after Trump as hard as they could.
 
And yet, the media is largely siding with BIDEN, instead of the woman who is “simply telling her truth”; instead of a person we have been relentlessly told we should “always believe”.
 
Joe Biden gets treated like he’s above the law because he pretty much is. Remember what Trump’s impeachment was about? It was about asking Ukraine about Joe Biden BLACKMAILING THEM TO NOT PROSECUTE HIS SON WHO IS INCREDIBLY UNQUALIFIED TO HOLD A POSITION IN THE UKRAINIAN COMPANY “BURISMA”. There is video evidence of Joe BRAGGING about the same sort of Quid Pro Quo the Left and the media were saying Trump committed.
 
Trump was impeached because he ASKED the Ukrainian president about the awful thing Joe did to them in a short conversation that was mostly about the Ukrainian president and the relationship between our two countries.
 
And now, the media will, once again, side with Joe Biden despite him being on the receiving end of an accusation that, if it were thrown at Trump, would be the subject of countless stories and media panels lambasting Trump for “doing such a horrible, disgusting thing.” But since it’s Joe, a political opponent to Trump, they side with him.
 
The people on the Left are truly disgusting and vile.
 
Habakkuk 1:4
“So the law is paralyzed, and justice never goes forth. For the wicked surround the righteous; so justice goes forth perverted.”

3.28 million Americans filed for unemployment last week. 3.28 MILLION. Let’s not even begin talking about how this is a record-high, easily destroying the previous record set decades ago. Let’s not even begin talking about how the economic “experts” predicted roughly half that number before it was published. Over THREE MILLION Americans have lost their jobs in the past week. Where is the relief package? Being voted on today by the witch called Nancy Pelosi. Not yesterday, when the news came out. Not yesterday, when people could’ve been helped. Not DAYS AGO when the Senate had a bill prepared that was approved BIPARTISANLY before Chuck Schumer decided to screw the American people (with help from Nasty Nancy) and back out of the deal, only to vote on a VERY SIMILAR package days later that included more communist wish-list items.
 
The Democrats decided to SCREW the American people and let them SUFFER just so the economy could take a massive hit, just so they can attack President Trump (some in the media were all too quick to pull the trigger on that one) and just so they can attempt to keep their permanent political underclass chained up to their bony wrists.
 
If I sound angry right now, you can bet your sweet behind it’s because I DEFINITELY AM. Now, allow me to put some things into context, because, while I definitely am angry as hell at the Democrats trying to screw over the American people (while giving all the money to their rich, elitist friends in academia), there is cause for calm despite the troubling present times.
 
Perhaps the single biggest reason is simply that this is a far more temporary situation than any other economic crisis.
 
You see, the economic crises of the past have all been caused due to an inside issue. The 2007/08 financial crisis was the result of the credit crisis, an issue that would take a long time to solve almost regardless of who is president (though it would’ve helped if Obama didn’t put a strangle-hold on businesses and the economy for his entire tenure). There were other financial crises at the time, such as the housing market bubble popping, companies like GM getting bailed out (a big reason as to why I oppose Boeing or any other big business being bailed out), etc.
 
People couldn’t get credit, couldn’t get a new house, tons of people were unemployed and the country went into recession. It wasn’t anywhere near as bad as the Great Depression in the late 1920s, but it was bad nonetheless.
 
The news of over three million Americans being laid off in a single week is absolutely awful (and expect fairly similar numbers to come in the future if something isn’t done about it, which I will cover momentarily) and Congress was twiddling its thumbs about how much money to give to Howard University, how much money to give to useless crap like wind and solar energy, how LITTLE money it would give back to the American people (and basing it off of tax returns from two years ago, which is mind-numbingly idiotic as the situations are much different for many people between then and now, so someone who made $100k in 2018 but is now unemployed does not get any money, but someone who made $70k in 2018 and is still employed will get the money), how much money to give to illegal immigrant programs like DACA while detracting money for the wall and the biggest joke of all, how much money these Congresspeople will pay THEMSELVES, as if they needed the pay raise they are giving themselves.
 
But regardless of what selfish idiocy Congress was debating and negotiating at a time when people are SUFFERING because they can’t go to work precisely because the GOVERNMENT told them they can’t go to work, this is a financial crisis (that is only beginning) that can easily be mitigated and halted fairly quickly.
 
How? Open the economy back up for most people. Now, hear me out people who disagree and tell me that we need to keep it shut down because of the Chinese coronavirus. I’m not saying that the virus is no longer important neither am I trying to downplay it.
 
However, let’s take note of a few things. First of all, remember all the doomsayer “experts” who predicted hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of deaths in most countries? Well, they’ve basically said “woops” and revised their predictions to a few tens of thousands. Right now, we have barely just crossed the 1,000-death line in the country, with at least TEN times as many people having died from the flu in the same time period (despite the same self-isolation and social distancing measures taking place in that time span, really pointing to a higher death rate for the flu).
 
I’m not saying that the Wuhan virus is “just the flu”. What I am saying is that the two are comparable because they are ROUGHLY the same type of disease, both being the cold virus, both being contagious and neither having a cure.
 
Second, you can both have procedures in place so that the most at-risk individuals, meaning those in their late 50s and 60s, are self-isolating and self-quarantining, being taken care of, while having the vast majority of the work force go out to work with little to no chance for death.
 
Now, I know what some may say: “But the point of not going out to work is to not catch it and risk passing it along to older people, particularly those we love in our own home.”
 
I understand that, but here’s the thing: you can still isolate yourself from your loved one AND WORK TO GIVE THEM FOOD, SHELTER, ETC.! Because you know what’s worse than catching the virus? Catching the virus while out of work, out of supplies, and risking living on the streets, maybe even being driven to suicide.
 
Most people cannot afford to have the economy shut down like this. They either do not earn enough to be able to save a bunch of money, or are altogether not practical at saving money. And this is without even taking into consideration small businesses which are basically gutted under this situation.

As an example, take what Zachery Ty Bryan, a Hollywood actor from the 1990s sitcom "Home Improvement" (he played Brad Taylor, the eldest son), wrote in an op-ed for Fox News: "[D]uring a recent conversation with a longtime friend who works in the entertainment industry, she expressed concern that if the coronavirus shutdown goes on too long, they won't be able to make their monthly housing payment." Zach is talking about the working class in Hollywood, the people who make the shows and movies run in the first place, not really being able to work and therefore not being able to make payments for things they need to live.
 
When Trump said that we can’t let the cure be worse than the disease, this is what he was talking about: letting the economy shut down out of fear of a disease THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE will survive.
 
Those in the workforce tend to be those who would survive getting this disease. They don’t need to be quarantined or self-isolated. They can go to work. They might worry about an older loved one getting the disease as a result, but if they can barely feed themselves, they HAVE to go to work.
 
What’s more, who knows exactly how many people have the disease and will survive it anyway? The Chinese government did whatever it could to basically weaponize this, shutting down any whistleblowers, keeping outside help from coming in, lying to everyone about how well they are containing the virus and allowing for people in the VERY REGION to travel outside of China.
 
This disease has been in the U.S. for months now, and we just barely got to 1,000 deaths. Now, that’s not nothing, and I feel sorry for the loved ones of those who passed as a result, but you can have those least likely to get the disease (or, rather, least likely to die from it) working largely uninhibited.
 
I’m not calling for the economy to be opened up for Trump’s sake or for the sake of his re-election chances. I doubt the vast majority of people unemployed would blame Trump for it (though the media and the Democrats will do what they can to blame him) because it can be pretty obvious on whom the fault actually lies: the Chinese Communist Party (primarily, and they should be forced to pay all reparations for the damage they have caused) and the Democrats stalling out the relief package that was ALREADY AGREED TO by Democrats, waiting to pass it and hurting Americans in the process. I have no doubt in my mind that Trump will CRUSH either Joe or Bernie come November.
 
So I’m not calling for the economy to be opened for the benefit of Trump; I’m calling for the economy to be opened back up because people NEED to be able to work. They can’t afford this shut down any longer. No economy can operate with people not working. This isn’t prioritizing the economy over people’s health. It’s prioritizing their ability to work, earn a living, afford their medical care (for those who still can. Thanks, Obama) and making sure that the very temporary virus crisis does not evolve into a long-term financial crisis.
 
Once people have the ability to work, there will be mass hiring sprees with people getting their jobs back, which is why I am relatively calm about this. It’s bad right now, and it might get worse before it gets better, but it’s very temporary. Once the virus stops being such a massive deal, once people are allowed to go back to work, there will be plenty of job openings. But not if this problem is extended, businesses lose tons of income and are incapable of hiring people back, which is why the economy needs to be opened back up over the next few days or weeks (hopefully, by Easter, like Trump suggested). It cannot wait much, if any, longer than that.
 
I hope and pray that the Democrats turn to God and stop screwing people over, but if they do not, I pray that they will face the direst of consequences electorally come November. These communists cannot be allowed to win because it is clear where their priorities lie: themselves. They will do whatever they can to ensure they have their slaves; their permanent underclass.
 
Philippians 2:3
“Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.”

Trying to get back to stories that have little or nothing to do with the Chinese coronavirus, we find a report from Human Rights Watch regarding supposedly systemic human rights abuses from Egypt when it comes to children.
 
According to Human Rights Watch, “torture crimes against detainees in Egypt are systematic, widespread and likely constitute crimes against humanity.”
 
In a rather lengthy report, they detail numerous instances from people who were supposedly detained by Egyptian authorities without due process and subject to torture and mistreatment, with some being sentenced to death for damaging property.
 
“International law and Egypt’s Child Law prohibit the use of the death penalty for children. But Egyptian judicial authorities provisionally sentenced Karim (a child) to death in April 2019 for crimes allegedly committed when he was 17 years old, during a protest that damaged the façade of a hotel but caused no injuries or deaths.”
 
Egyptian officials supposedly tortured the kid until he confessed, but when there was public outcry over the death sentence of a child, the judge in the case cancelled the boy’s death sentence and gave him a sentence of 10 years in prison (which is still ridiculous, but a better alternative).
 
Now, I will take what Human Rights Watch says with a grain of salt. After all, one of their articles on their site lambasts Ohio and Texas for “cancelling” abortions amid the Wuhan virus crisis, apparently because these people do not believe in human rights for the unborn, so I have little reason to trust anything they say about any subject matter.
 
However, I will choose to trust them to a certain extent on this subject because I know how backwards Egypt (and much of the Middle East) is in terms of human rights and would 100% believe these savages to be capable of such things.
 
But regardless, let’s get back to the report.
 
According to HRW: “Fourteen of the children whose cases are documented in this report said they were tortured in pre-trial detention, usually during interrogation. In two additional cases, one child was verbally threatened into confessing to crimes, and another was badly beaten by prison guards.”
 
“One boy said his interrogators tied him to a chair for three days. Seven children said security officers electrocuted them during interrogation, including two children who said officers subjected them to shocks in the face with Taser-type stun guns, and two who said officers electrocuted them on their genitals.”
 
“Two other children, ages 14 and 17, detained in separate cases, said after authorities forcibly disappeared them security officials suspended them from their arms and dislocated their shoulders. The 14-year-old said that another prisoner who happened to be a doctor was able to re-set his joints in their prison cell. The 17-year-old said that during one interrogation, an officer forced his mouth open and spat in it. After a week of being tortured in detention, he confessed to destroying public property.”


The report notes of plenty of other cases in which children were tortured, humiliated and abused, but I think you get the picture. Assuming HRW isn’t lying here, we are learning here about a systemic procedure of human rights abuses, despite international and Egyptian law in the books, largely because of the totalitarian despot that forced out the former leader of Egypt (who was a Muslim Brotherhood member, so he wasn’t exactly a benevolent ruler either, not that the HRW will bother to mention that or the fact that the current leader is also a Muslim).
 
The report also notes how unjust any semblance of due process is in the backwards country, with children being tried in military courts and being detained with hardly any due process. Much of the torture of children happens in detention and interrogation before any “trial” actually happens, and a trial is hardly fair either, with a court having sentenced a THREE-YEAR-OLD to LIFE IMPRISONMENT, alongside 116 other defendants in a mass trial over alleged PROTESTS. So yeah, Egypt is utterly corrupt in terms of morality and justice.
 
Now, as previously mentioned, Egypt has laws that are meant to protect children from the very things they are being subjected to. But words on paper hardly mean anything if they are not enforced. The laws on the books, in any country, are irrelevant if they are not enforced. For example, according to USA Today, it’s illegal to “profanely curse and swear or use obscene language upon or near any street, sidewalk or highway within the hearing of persons passing by, upon or along such street, sidewalk or highway” in Rockville, Maryland.
 
That is among one of the strangest, dumbest and most random laws in the books in the country. But do you think that any member of the Rockville police department is listening out for people with a potty mouth, soap in holster? Do you think such a law is enforced? Of course not. The letter of the law is irrelevant if it is not enforced.
 
Now, while I know there is PLENTY of difference between that random, silly law and law meant to protect children from TORTURE, the point remains: the law is just a piece of paper unless it is enforced.
 
Law enforcement in Egypt, likely at the behest of Egyptian leaders, do not care one wit about enforcing such a law. That’s how despotic leaders work. They either have the law on their side, writing whatever law they want, or they ignore existing law to benefit themselves.
 
That’s what’s happening in Egypt and why I am willing to trust, to an extent, what Human Rights Watch is reporting here.
 
Bill Van Esveld, HRW associate children’s rights director, said: “Children are described being waterboarded and electrocuted on their tongues and genitals, and yet Egypt’s security forces are facing no consequences.”
 
Again, can’t really be surprised because this is simply what authoritarians do. They don’t care about the life of anyone, including children. They only care about themselves and their own power.
 
I believe I’ve shared this story somewhere else before (can’t quite remember in what article), but Joseph Stalin allowed his own SON to be captured and kept by the Nazis, despite the fact that he could’ve saved him with a prisoner exchange, and chose not to do so because he held no love for him. These people don’t care about THEIR OWN FAMILY, much less about the families of others.
 
Assuming that Human Rights Watch isn’t stretching the truth at any point in their report, I pray that there is a major change in Egypt, not only in terms of leadership, but in terms of their souls.
 
Proverbs 29:2
“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”

For the past few articles, I have largely tried to steer clear of any conversation or topic that had to do with the Chinese coronavirus, or Wuhan virus as I usually call it, because the media is flooded by such stories and I wanted to give people some respite from the constant bombardment of doom and gloom that we saw in the media (not to say the situation isn’t serious, but shutting down the economy for months is not a viable solution).
 
However, this article will largely cover how the fake news media has handled a particular portion of this crisis. Namely, a story surrounding an Arizona couple who ingested fish tank cleaner because one of its ingredients was chloroquine, a substance similar to the drug the President and NY Governor Andrew Cuomo have touted as a potential option in treating and curing the Wuhan virus, and the fake news media is choosing to blame Trump for the couple’s sheer lack of common sense.
 
From Axios: “A man has died after ingesting chloroquine phosphate – one of the anti-malaria drugs that Trump has mentioned in recent days.” That is very obviously fake news, as the couple did not ingest chloroquine phosphate, the prescription drug, but fish tank cleaner, which is not a drug but contains chloroquine – not chloroquine phosphate.
 
Heidi Przybyla from NBC News ran with the story anyway, fully blaming Trump and supposedly quoting the woman: “Her husband is dead & she’s in the ICU after ingesting chloroquine: ‘We saw Trump on TV – every channel - & all of his buddies and that this was safe,’ she said. ‘Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure.’”
 
There are a number of problems with this. First of all, THE COUPLE DIDN’T EVEN HAVE THE WUHAN VIRUS! Heidi pretty much admitted that in a follow-up tweet (which unsurprisingly garnered far less likes and retweets), saying that the couple “feared contracting coronavirus.”
 
Later on, Heidi “quotes” the woman: “Oh my God. Don’t take anything. Don’t believe anything. Don’t believe anything that the President says and his people because they don’t know what they’re talking about. And don’t take anything – be so careful and call your doctor. This is a heart ache I’ll never get over.”
 
Not sure where she got the quote from, but it’s awfully opportunistic for a fake news media who hates the President and would be satisfied with people dying if they are scared of taking the drug Trump (and Cuomo, but they forget about him) touted as a possible cure to the virus. Again, the couple didn’t have the Wuhan virus and THEY TOOK FISH TANK CLEANER!
 
And yet, these idiots went along with the story because it made Trump look bad. It took eight tweets for Heidi to bury the lead, writing: “The toxic ingredient they consumed was not the medication form of chloroquine, used to treat malaria in humans. Instead, it was an ingredient listed on a parasite treatment for fish.”
 
Not that that stopped Leftist hacks from piling on and blaming Trump as well, as though it’s his fault that a couple of ignoramuses who did not have the virus ingested fish tank cleaner without consulting with a doctor.
 
Seriously, that they would choose to run with this just goes to show the level of Trump Derangement Syndrome these fools have.
 
Here are the facts:

1. The couple did not have the virus, or at least were asymptomatic.

 
     2.  They did not ingest the prescription medication, hydroxychloroquine, usually taken in combination with azithromycin, the other drug Trump touted. They ingested chloroquine and whatever else is in the substance used to clean fish tanks. That is FAR different from the prescription drug. 

    3.  The couple “self-medicated” meaning they did not go to a doctor… because they would’ve been called idiots for thinking they should ingest fish tank cleaner. 

  4.  NY Governor Andrew Cuomo also touted hydroxychloroquine apart from the POTUS. And yet, Trump is the only one blamed here. Not to say that Cuomo should be blamed as he neither suggested people self-medicate (neither did Trump), nor told people to just ingest anything that has chloroquine in it. But Cuomo and Trump both touted the exact same drug, and yet, the story only focuses on Trump. Even the quote, which I doubt is real as it sounds too good for the Left to be real, only talks about how Trump and his people touted chloroquine (which they didn’t), conveniently leaving out Cuomo who did the same thing as Trump. 
 
Eventually, Axios was forced to correct their story (obviously without an apology for outright blaming Trump for the death of an American), writing: “We have deleted this tweet and corrected our story because it did not reflect the full nature of the self-medication done with an additive commonly used to clean fish tanks.”
 
We know for certain that, if people, namely Trump supporters, hadn’t raised the glaring problems in the story, no correction would’ve been issued and the fake news media would’ve sat comfortably blaming Trump for the death of the guy and the hospitalization of his wife.
 
It’s obscene what the fake news media would be willing to do to attempt to damage Trump. This, among MANY other reasons, is why they are the enemy of the people.
 
Hydroxychloroquine has the potential to help Americans with the virus. But the media has been trying to nuke that since Trump brought it up. Not too long ago, the fake news media said that ingesting 3 grams of it would be fatal. OF COURSE IT WOULD BE FATAL, THAT’S FAR MORE THAN THE RECOMMENDED AMOUNT!
 
Drinking too much water can be fatal too. Eating too much food can be fatal. You have to ingest the RECOMMENDED AMOUNT of a drug, not THREE FULL GRAMS OF IT!
 
And now, we have a story that is very sketchily put together about a man who died because of his own foolishness and a woman who might be trying to blame Trump for her own foolishness as well.
 
We don’t even know if the actual drug will be successful but the media wants doom and gloom. Last week, a reporter from NBC News (funny how that works out) said that Trump was giving Americans “false hope” by touting the drug, when he said it was POTENTIALLY a solution, not a promised one, and it’s not “false hope”, but real hope that may or may not work out depending on how things go.
 
The fake news media wants FAR more people to die so that they can blame Trump. If the drug is useful in fighting the virus, that is only TERRIBLE news for a bloodthirsty mainstream media who see the virus and its crisis as an opportunity to destroy the man whom they have failed time and time again to destroy. And if it is useful, they want to say that it could kill people so that low-information Americans will be too scared to take it and subsequently potentially die as a result, which, of course, is what these devils want.
 
As these bastards get more and more desperate, they show more of their true colors. They WANT people to die if that’s what it takes to defeat Trump. They WANT people to be uninformed, so they are discussing no longer covering the press conferences that help inform people because they also help Trump’s ratings. A majority of people approve of his handling of the virus. The media can’t have that, so they are discussing not covering the press conferences.
 
Defeating Donald Trump is their one and only goal. If it takes people being uninformed, or misinformed, and DIE, then so be it. If it takes people going BANKRUPT due to Democrats backing out of an already bipartisan deal so they can jam in GND garbage (what happened to “country over party”? Or does that only apply to Republicans seeking to betray the nation?), then so be it.
 
These people have absolutely no shame, no integrity and no heart. They will exploit the death and suffering of a couple who took missteps in fear of the virus (which has been propped up plenty by the fake news media) if it helps them hurt Trump.
 
This is some of the most scum-of-the-earth “reporting” I’ve seen since the Kavanaugh hearings.
 
These devils truly are the enemy of the people.
 
2 Corinthians 11:14
“And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.”

Amidst a constant news cycle trying to spread fear and terror to hurt the economy and Donald Trump, I wish I could write something that takes your mind off of notable current events and talk about something positive. Unfortunately, I found few, if any, stories that are positive that I could write about and, instead, I will write about something that makes my blood boil: the imprisonment of an innocent man as a result of deranged and immoral laws.
 
Now, before I begin, I would like to mention that Argentina has more decent laws regarding protection of human life than the United States does (I say this both happy that my country of origin is this way and ashamed and appalled that this country dehumanizes the unborn). In Argentina, abortion is largely illegal unless a pregnancy presents a health concern for the mother and/or the pregnancy was the result of rape. Still not great, but better than what we have in the States, with selective abortion and public officials destroying economic relief regarding the Chinese coronavirus so that the biggest genocidal group in the world, Planned Parenthood, can get some tax payer money. However, considering this story, those two exceptions in Argentine abortion law (particularly the second) should be eliminated and abortion made entirely illegal in the Latin American country.
 
Here’s why.
 
According to BioEdge: “An Argentine court has upheld the criminal conviction of a gynaecologist [sic.] who refused to abort the child of a rape victim in 2017. Dr. Leandro Rodriguez Lastra was sentenced to a 14-month suspended jail term, plus 28 months of disqualification from holding public office. Dr. Rodriguez Lastra will appeal.”
 
“The victim was a 19-year-old in her fifth month of pregnancy, the result of sexual abuse by a relative. At first she used an abortion drug provided by an NGO. That failed and she was referred to the hospital where Rodriguez Lastra was head of gynecology.”
 
“The doctor said that abortion posed a risk to both the unborn child and the mother. However, the judges said that the only thing necessary for a legal termination of pregnancy was a formal request from the rape victim. The child was later given up for adoption.”
 
So some good news, as the child is alive, but it is still ridiculous that the doctor would face criminal penalties for NOT taking another person’s life at the request of another.
 
If you want to be further outraged, read this:
 
“Faced with the intersection of so many vulnerabilities, the accused ignored the autonomy of the young woman, giving priority to the reproductive function that she symbolized as a woman, over her dignity, over her right to health and to be informed, accompanied, contained and respected in the process of interrupting the pregnancy, an interruption to which she had a right over any other right or interest… ignoring a woman’s voice, ignoring her vital needs, subjugating reproductive rights, devastating the psyche and enslaving the body in order to force pregnancy after a rape, means denying the victim’s status as a subject of rights and is the incarnation of gender violence in its most painful form.”
 
Wanna know where this came from? If you thought this was from a feminazi journalist in Argentina lambasting the doctor, I wouldn’t blame you for thinking that. This is a quote from the court’s ruling, from one of the justices presiding over the case.
 
Yep, the court’s ruling regarding the sentencing of Dr. Lastra sounds exactly like what some SJW, feminazi writer for Vox would put together, but it’s part of an actual legal ruling.
 
Take note of the language used here. Of course, the original is in Spanish, but the rough translation says it all. They accuse the doctor of ignoring “the autonomy” of the young woman and “giving priority to the reproductive function that she symbolized as a woman.” If the doctor’s intention was to save both the baby and the young woman, which BioEdge said it was, that’s outright SLANDER from the COURT.
 
First of all, no one has autonomy. We have free will, but that’s different from autonomy. Autonomy means that we are bound by nothing other than ourselves and our own belief systems. That we have the right to choose whatever we want without consequence. That nothing and no one can control us. But if we are autonomous, that means that God is not omnipotent, as He has no control over us, and therefore, is no God at all. The young woman does not have autonomy. She has free will, but not autonomy.
 
Second, the doctor wasn’t prioritizing the woman as a sex object. That’s actually ridiculous! He was prioritizing the lives of the baby and the mother. He’s not the stereotypical depiction of a man that feminazis have, where he sees women as nothing more than sex objects. He’s not Hollywood and he’s not Bill Clinton; he’s a decent person from what little we know about him.
 
Third, while I know this was a translation, take a look at the word “interrupt”. The Spanish word for interrupt is “interrumpir”, so they mean the same thing. To “interrumpir” or interrupt, implies a temporary pause and a continuation later down the line. Abortion isn’t an “interruption” of a pregnancy; it’s TERMINATION. It’s MURDER.
 
The court, especially with that last bit after the ellipsis, makes the doctor out to sound exactly like he was the one who RAPED the young woman. The rapist, not the doctor, ignored the woman’s voice. The rapist, not the doctor, ignored her vital needs. The rapist, not the doctor, subjugated her reproductive rights. The rapist, not the doctor, devastated her psyche and enslaved her body. And yet, they say all these things ABOUT THE DOCTOR WHO REFUSED TO END A KID’S LIFE!
 
Now, I know what some Leftists might try and yell at me. “Does that mean you don’t care about a woman who was RAPED?!” For which I say: “shut up, you know that’s not the case and you don’t care about the life of a human being, so you have no right to judge me at any capacity.”
 
Of course I care about the woman who was raped. I feel sorry for her. She’s a victim of a horrendous injustice here. However, abortion is not a solution by any stretch of the imagination. Do you know what abortion in this circumstance does? Validates the rapist’s actions. The young woman was raped by a relative. Said relative could rape her again or someone else entirely. Eliminating the life of the child not only is actual murder, as it is scientifically undeniable that the child is alive in the womb, but allows for evidence of the rape to be eliminated as well, leaving the relative free to rape once again.
 
A DNA test would prove the child is the relative’s, thus proving the rape, and would throw the guy in jail. Eliminating the child means eliminating the evidence and that means allowing the rapist to walk free. How exactly is that a better alternative? If the young mother doesn’t want the child, give it up for adoption, as she ultimately did, thankfully.
 
But don’t seek out an abortion. A doctor who refuses to eliminate proven life in the womb should not be punished for DOING THE RIGHT THING. Abortion is never the answer because abortion will never not be murder.
 
It is despicable that a doctor who only thought of doing the right thing, certainly in the eyes of God, would be considered as doing evil in the eyes of the government. It is despicable that he should face any sort of punishment for NOT ending someone’s life.
 
I hope and pray that the doctor’s appeal is successful and he does not have to suffer any more than he has for doing the right thing.
 
Galatians 6:9
“And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap; if we do not give up.”

The fake news media will always do its best to attack any dissenters and run cover for their own side, even when it is blatantly obvious what they are trying to do. This was the case with the Washington Post recently, as they tried to persuade people that Joe Biden didn’t say what he said in the last Democrat debate.
 
I briefly covered a bit of that debate, having largely focused on how both Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders confused the Wuhan virus for the swine flu (Joe), called the swine flu “N1H1” (Joe), confused the virus for SARS (Joe) and confused the virus for Ebola (Sanders). However, there was one part of the debate that I also covered even more briefly and that’s the fact that, when discussing oil drilling and fracking, Joe Biden adopted a far-Left stance on it, saying there’d be “no new fracking” and “no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. Ends.”
 
Despite this being a clearly definitive statement demonstrating Joe Biden’s sincere desire to ban all fracking and eliminate any and all ability for the oil industry to work in this country, leaving us to be 100% reliant on foreign oil, a complete reversal of the Trump policy, Joe’s aides quickly got to work trying to walk back those statements because maintaining that stance would essentially gift Trump with a 49-state landslide victory.
 
Specifically, the aides tried saving some sort of face, saying that Joe’s stance remains unchanged, but that he simply opposed new fracking and drilling on public lands, not outright banning all American oil industry’s ability to drill in the country, which is practically what he said during the debate. So, questions regarding whether or not Biden lied about his stance during the debate began to flood the campaign.
 
Enter the Washington Post with their “Pinocchios” fact-checking system.
 
According to the Washington Free Beacon: “A Washington Post fact-checker ruled Thursday that Joe Biden hadn’t lied when he said he supported a fracking ban during Sunday’s Democratic presidential debate. Rather, Biden had simply ‘described his fracking stance inaccurately.’”
 
The WaPo gave Biden “Zero Pinocchios” for saying that he intended to ban fracking and oil drilling, instead, providing the excuse that Biden simply had “misspoken” and “his position was the same as ever”, merely opposing fracking on public land.
 
The WaPo cited “clarifications” from the Biden staff post-debate and cited coverage in the Wall Street Journal saying that Joe’s position was the same as the one listed on his campaign website, dismissing any and all who cited Joe during the debate verbatim. Ultimately, the WaPo said that Biden “described his fracking stance inaccurately,” like I said, which is, of course, a load of crap.
 
Joe Biden is someone we KNOW has mental problems at this point in his life (and always has been a bit dull and bad with words). He has been documented routinely misremembering what state he is in, has confused his wife with his sister and vice versa, often misspeaks (having called the Wuhan virus both the swine flu and SARS, while also calling the swine flu “N1H1”) and is very, very obviously not mentally fit to RUN for president, let alone actually hold the position.
 
So the argument that he misspoke COULD be plausible… if he hadn’t had been so definitive with his answer. Again, he said: “no new fracking” and “no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. Ends.”
 
So either Joe was lying during the debate about his position or his campaign staff, and subsequently the fake news media, are lying about his position now. That was a clear and definite answer and he didn’t even slur his speech when he said it. The mistake he made was saying the quiet part out loud, leading his campaign staff to run damage control as a result.
 
Let me tell you something: if Trump had said something so definitive that the Left could pick apart and attack him over, the media would not give a hoot about what his campaign staff was trying to say or do. They would 100% attack Trump over his statement, and if it was definitive as that, it would make sense for them to do so. But when it’s a Democrat saying the quiet part out loud like that, it doesn’t matter what they said during the debate or the definitive words used to convey his true feelings and desires surrounding the topic. No, what matters is what his campaign website says and what his campaign staff says, even though the media would never give such a benefit of the doubt to a Republican candidate.
 
Joe Biden, somehow, is considered the “moderate” candidate for many in the media. Saying things like that that are very obviously not moderate takes can be disastrous for his campaign (at least in the general, because the lunatic Leftist base loves it when America is groveling at the feet of foreign powers), so people have to run damage control. But Biden is very clearly not a moderate by any stretch of the imagination. If being a “moderate” simply means not kissing Castro’s butt, that’s terrifying.
 
Biden is no moderate. The ONLY thing I could possibly give him kudos for is his attack on Medicare-for-All and pointing out how that sort of system is not working at all for Italy, but he still supports government Medicare and keeping the disastrous Obamacare system in place, so one could hardly consider him a “moderate” (either that or “moderate” has moved far enough Left that government-run healthcare is a “moderate” stance, which is also terrifying).
 
As a result of Biden’s clear Left-wing principles, I cannot be surprised at all that he would sincerely want a ban on fracking and destroying our oil industry. He doesn’t care how much of a complete disaster such a ban would be for the U.S., and is very clear in that. But his campaign knew that saying that in such unambiguous terms makes him even more likely to get stomped by Trump come November, so they run cover for the guy, with the help of the Washington Post, who deserve 5 Pinocchios for saying Biden simply “misspoke” or phrased his stance “inaccurately” when that clearly was not the case.
 
John 3:20
“For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.”

Some good news for a change, still sticking with stories that have little or nothing to do with the Wuhan Virus, the Idaho Senate has approved of HB 500a, the Fairness in Women’s Sports act, banning biological males who “identify” as females from competing in girls’ and women’s sports.
 
According to Breitbart: “The bill passed the State Senate, 24-11, after being approved by the House in February, 52-17. The House must approve a Senate amendment to the bill prior to sending it to the desk of Gov. Brad Little (R) for his signature.”
 
If approved by the House and signed into law by the governor (which is to be expected), Idaho would become the first state in the country to protect girls’ and women’s sports from biological males seeking to cheat by competing against women.
 
Utterly unsurprisingly, Leftists were outraged at this, with some trying to outright shame and intimidate members of the State Senate on Twitter.
 
GLSEN, an LGBT organization, tweeted: “This is downright shameful: In the face of a global pandemic, the Idaho Senate spent yesterday passing a dangerous bill that singles out transgender students for discrimination.”
 
I just love it when Leftist hacks jam all of their preferred adjectives into their tweets. In that one, we find “dangerous” and “discrimination”, despite the fact that this bill protects girls from CHEATING MALE ATHLETES competing against them in an unfair manner. It does not “discriminate” against anyone. It protects girls’ and women’s sports from being destroyed by shameless cheaters who have a natural advantage in physical competition and therefore have a much higher chance to win (and just because they don’t always win, that doesn’t take away their natural advantages that should not be present in this category of sports).
 
Idaho Sen. Mary Souza (R), a sponsor of this bill, told the Idaho Press: “We are not trying to do anything except save women’s sports for girls and women.” Apparently, trying to protect women’s sports is not “progressive”.
 
Leftists also call one of the provisions of the bill “retrogressive” because it demands that athletes prove their gender via some sort of DNA testing. This is a problem for Leftists because their entire narrative centers around gender being a “social construct” and being entirely “fluid” and up to an individual’s interpretation for their own gender, when biology teaches us otherwise.
 
Men have XY chromosomes whereas women have XX chromosomes. This isn’t up to interpretation, neither is it up for debate. Biology, science, tells us what men are and what women are. You would think that “the party of science” would believe science, but no, they just believe the “science” that benefits them.
 
“The glaciers aren’t actually melting and there is no threat of major cities being flooded? Bah! That’s not REAL science!”
 
“Logic demands that there be an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God, and the theory of evolution is so full of holes it may as well pass off as Swiss cheese? Then I deny logic itself!”
 
“Biology has proven that there is a very discernible difference between men and women, even though such a difference should already be plain as day with just a simple glance? Bah humbug! I reject such an obvious result!”
 
This is why I have written articles that PROVE the Left hates actual science. It’s because it’s true. The idea that men and women are different is, somehow, retrogressive even though it’s a natural fact.
 
But these people simply can’t help themselves and their side must always win, even when their side would be catastrophic for everyone at every level, and so, they attempt to shame the Idaho legislature for having COMMON SENSE.
 
And while I know that Leftists and transgender activists (but I repeat myself) will claim that there is no scientific evidence to suggest biological males “identifying” as females have an advantage over biological females, that’s simply not the case.
 
According to Breitbart News, “a recent study conducted by the Karolinska Institute and Linkoping University in Sweden found biological males – who claim to be transgender women – who were administered a full year of hormone therapy, still maintained muscle mass and strength advantages over biological women.”
 
“Despite the robust increases in muscle mass and strength in TM (Transgender Men, or women “identifying” as men), the TW (Transgender Women) were still stronger and had more muscle mass following 12 months of treatment. These findings add new knowledge that could be relevant when evaluating transwomen’s eligibility to compete in the women’s category of athletic competitions,” the researchers noted.
 
They concluded: “Our results indicate that after 12 months of hormonal therapy, a transwoman will still likely have performance benefits over a cis-woman [biological woman].”
 
Another study released in July of last year concluded that “male athletes who claim to be female hold an ‘intolerable’ advantage over biological female athletes,” according to Breitbart.
 
This study was conducted following the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announcing that it would allow transgender athletes to compete in the Olympics if the “transgender women” have testosterone levels below 10 nmol/L, which is still significantly higher than testosterone levels of biological females.
 
The researchers noted that “indirect effects of testosterone will not be altered by hormone therapy. For example, hormone therapy will not alter bone structure, lung volume or heart size of the transwoman athlete, especially if she transitions post-puberty, so natural advantages including joint articulation, stroke volume and maximal oxygen uptake will be maintained.”
 
And for those who might try and argue that the researchers are “transphobic” or “anti-trans”, note that they said “she” when referring to a transgender woman, when the ACTUAL pronoun for such a person is still masculine because such a person is STILL A MAN NO MATTER WHAT! They adhered to the politically correct pronoun for such a situation, so these people are not “transphobic” or some such nonsense (not that they would’ve been had they used the actual pronoun).
 
Men, as has been the case for literally all of human existence, have physical advantages over women. We are stronger than women, have higher muscle mass, denser bone structure, higher lung capacity and a bigger heart. All of these things give us an advantage over women in sports and any sort of physical competition. To deny these things is to deny the women competing any semblance of fairness in their sports.
 
Could you imagine a girl’s football team competing against boys? Or a girl wrestling against a boy? Well, you don’t have to think too hard to imagine this because the Left is trying to push for it and the second example has already happened (as you can see from the picture above). It doesn’t matter what one’s “preferred pronouns” may be, or even how low their testosterone levels are. Men have a physical advantage over women and it is unfair for all women if a man competes against them. That’s not transphobic, it’s reality.
 
So kudos to the Idaho legislature for doing the right thing and protecting girls and women in their sports competitions from shameless cheaters.
 
Proverbs 10:9
“Whoever walks in integrity walks securely, but he who makes his ways crooked will be found out.”

While plenty of other things have been on the news as of late (including a certain virus from China that I will do my best not to mention because it’s being talked about in every other media to an obscene extent), something that has flown under the radar is a slight correction made by the 1619 Project, the New York Times’ attempt at rewriting history for the benefit of an ideological war against this country.
 
Earlier in the month, a historian named Leslie M. Harris wrote an essay for Politico. According to National Review: “Harris claimed that Times fact-checkers reached out to her prior to the publication of the 1619 Project’s seminal essays to solicit her expertise on the relevant history involved. Harris wrote back to the fact-checkers, insisting that she ‘vigorously disputed’ the factual basis of one of the project’s central claims.”
 
What claim was she heavily contesting? The following passage from the Project: “Conveniently left out of our Founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.”
 
This, Harris contends, is not factually accurate (unsurprisingly). The entire reason behind the Project’s absurd claim is because of the Dunmore Proclamation, a proclamation made by the British governor of Virginia, Lord Dunmore, that was meant to preserve his rule as a representative of the monarchy by “drawing the slaves of rebellious colonists into his militia in exchange for their freedom,” according to Phillip Magness of the American Institute for Economic Research.
 
Magness continued: “The Dunmore Proclamation revealed one of the many ways in which slavery cut across the other dividing lines of the revolutionary period, but it did not portend a coming general emancipation from the Crown. Indeed, most slave-owning colonists perceived the measure as an attempt to incite a slave revolt against opponents of the British rule, rather than a sign of slavery’s weakening position. The proclamation conveniently exempted the slaves of loyalist plantation owners, and Dunmore himself left a sordid record as supporter and beneficiary of slavery in the British colonial system. Meanwhile, as the long fight to abolish the institution made all too clear, supporters of slavery maintained a firm majority in the British Parliament at the time – and would continue in power for several decades to come.”
 
So it is not even remotely true that preserving slavery was a reason for the Revolutionary War. The Dunmore Proclamation, as Magness noted, was nothing but an attempt at crushing the rebellion by getting rid of revolutionary colonists’ slaves, promising them freedom if they fought for the Crown, while exempting loyalist colonists from that proclamation. Slaves were nothing but a tool, as they largely were considered back then, at furthering a goal.
 
But even then, the 1619 Project remains arrogant about its claim. While they offered a correction, it’s minimal. Instead of eliminating that factually-ignorant claim from its essays, the Project said that preserving slavery was the purpose of SOME colonists rather than all of them. But that claim IS STILL WRONG!
 
That, combined with the fact that the Project ignored or dismissed historians and fact-checkers who disagreed with their erroneous claims and dismissed the 1776 Project, a counter-project run by conservative African-Americans to maintain the fact that our founding was in 1776 and not when the first slaves arrived in 1619, shows that the point of the 1619 Project was never about simply revising and uncovering hidden histories of this country, but rather, destroying the very founding principles and concepts of this country, declaring everything from its governmental system to its economic system as stained and discredited as a result of its history of slavery (completely ignoring the fact that slavery was found in many other places around the world and still can be found in places like the Middle East and China).
 
The reason I make this assertion is because at the end of the aforementioned National Review article, we find: “[Magness’] piece… is worth reading in its entirety for its portrait of a project that succumbed to ideological ambition and, in so doing, lost a bit in the way of historical accuracy.”
 
The 1619 Project didn’t “succumb” to ideological ambition. Ideological ambition WAS ITS ENTIRE PURPOSE! It was never meant to be a recounting of our nation’s history, it was meant to be a REWRITING of our nation’s history, seeking to delegitimize our nation’s institutions. One of the sociologists brought in by the Project basically admits as much, having essentially argued that the country’s plantation economy stained and discredited modern American capitalism.
 
The entire point of this project wasn’t to offer a plausible alternative to the typical founding story we are taught in school. It wasn’t supposed to be about uncovering a secret truth behind our nation’s founding that has been buried for centuries. It was always supposed to be an ideological piece to fuel a war on American institutions and its very legitimacy. So for the writer at National Review to suggest it succumbed to ideological ambition, losing “a bit in the way of historical accuracy” is not putting it the right way.
 
This is the New York Times we’re talking about; some of the same people that right now (and I am about to break my promise about not taking about the Wuhan virus) are deflecting the blame from China for the damage it has caused the entire world as a result of the Chinese coronavirus that originated in China and has spread because of the CCP’s negligence (at best). The same people that lionized Chinese Communist dictator Mao Zedong in remembering his death back in September and absolved radical Islamic terrorists from any blame for the 9/11 attacks on the WTC during the 18-year anniversary.
 
Do you really think anyone at the New York Times would do honest research and fact-checking for a revising of history like the 1619 Project, leaving any semblance of ideological ambition or politics out of it? They do not care about history, as those two examples with Mao and the 9/11 remembrance tweets show. They care about setting a narrative and nothing more.
 
They cared about one of the most evil people in the history of the world seeming like an innocent son of a peasant farmer rising to the challenge of leading a nation and its people (conveniently leaving out his death toll standing in the tens of millions on the low end). They cared about the radical followers of a deadly religion by absolving them of any guilt on 9/11. They are not going to care about making this country look good or honest or legitimate. Whatever they can do to strip it of its legitimacy, they will do it, as evidenced by the fact that they dismissed any and all dissidents, including fact-checkers, numerous historians and a counter-project run by African-Americans who know the history of this country.
 
Their purpose, from the Project’s very conception, was bashing America and everything it stood for as being illegitimate because of its history of slavery, again, dismissing the fact that slavery has been used by practically every other country and is still widely used in Middle Eastern countries and in China (largely through concentration camps). History and facts were damned by these people and still continue to be. The ONLY reason they issued any sort of correction is because a fact-checker, whom they previously contacted and voiced her disagreement with a particular wild claim, wrote an essay for Politico that drew attention to the Project’s erroneous claim.
 
Their correction was barely even a correction, still implying that protecting slavery was the purpose of some of the colonists involved in the revolution, when there is no evidence to be found of that and the evidence USED by the Project does not show it. Again, the Dunmore Proclamation was just a method of snuffing out the rebellion, not a measure by the Crown and British Parliament to attempt to abolish slavery in the colonies, particularly because slavery wouldn’t be abolished in Great Britain until 1833, nearly 60 years after the revolution.
 
The reason for this Project in the first place is because the Left hates this country and thinks it illegitimate, arguing with whatever load of crap they can to deceive as many people as possible.
 
2 Thessalonians 2:3
“Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.”

If you want some respite from every other news story having to do with the Wuhan Virus, whether it be Bill de Blasio’s idiotic trip to the gym or Bloomberg’s (the site, not the individual) running cover for the Chinese government who are responsible for this virus, then you’ve come to the right article because I will do my absolute best not to talk about anything to do with the Wuhan Virus here.
 
On March 12th, 2020, BBC ran with this story: “Greenland and Antarctica ice loss accelerating”.
 
“Earth’s great ice sheets, Greenland and Antarctica, are now losing mass six times faster than they were in the 1990s thanks to warming conditions. A comprehensive review of satellite data acquired at both poles is unequivocal in its assessment of accelerating trends, say scientists. Between them, Greenland and Antarctica lost 6.4 trillion tonnes of ice in the period from 1992 to 2017. This was sufficient to push up global sea-levels by 17.8mm. Of that combined 17.8mm contribution to sea-level rise, 10.6mm (60%) was due to Greenland ice losses and 7.2mm (40%) was due to Antarctica.”
 
“The combined rate of ice loss for the pair was running at about 81 billion tonnes per year in the 1990s. By the 2010s, it had climbed to 475 billion tonnes per year. According to the IPCC, its mid-range simulations (RCP4.5) suggested global sea-levels might rise by 53cm by 2100. But the Imbie team’s studies show that ice losses from Antarctica and Greenland are actually heading to much more pessimistic outcomes, and will likely add another 17cm to those end-of-century forecasts.”
 
Notice how it’s never good news when it comes to climate change with these people. It’s always “THE ICE CAPS ARE MELTING! MAJOR CITIES WILL BE FLOODED! THE END IS NIGH IN LIKE 10 TO 12 YEARS DEPENDING ON WHO YOU ASK! VOTE DEMOCRAT!” It’s actually insane.
 
Speaking of that 10 to 12 year timetable, if we are going to die in that time span, what sense does it make to say that sea levels will be at a particular level in the year 2100? Is it because the decade doomsday clock is illogical, based on nothing but fearmongering and there have been an awful lot of doomsday clocks in the past? Nah, that can’t be it.
 
Seriously, though, the claims made by the BBC here are either completely wrong or, at best, half-truths that are greatly exaggerated. What do I mean? Well, according to the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), melting of Greenland’s ice caps contributed to just 0.6mm/year to global sea level rise from 2003 to 2017. Most of this ice loss is due to receding glacier fronts, but in November of 2018, DMI confirmed that glaciers have largely maintained their area since 2012.
 
Meaning that, while ice losses have been found, they aren’t close to the level that the BBC talked about and over the past 8 years, ice levels have remained about the same. As a result, no one can realistically claim that there has been accelerated ice loss since 2003. It’s just not the case.
 
The half-truth from the BBC is that Greenland was losing ice rather quickly since the 1990s, but that’s largely a red herring argument. It has no bearing on future rates of loss and is therefore a fallacy of reason, believing that just because something was like this in the past, that it will definitely continue to be this way without deviation when in fact that’s not how the real world works. Matter of fact, in 2003, according to Climate Depot, “scientists reported that Greenland had cooled significantly between 1958 and 2001.”
 
As a result, ice loss slowed down significantly in that time period, as is to be expected, and since 2001, temperatures have returned to 1930s and 1940s levels.
 
As you can see in this graph, there have been plenty of other periods of high temperature in the past:

​What’s more, according to Climate Depot, “Far from ice loss increasing in the Antarctic, scientists cannot even agree whether the ice cap is even shrinking at all.” This is because a recent NASA study showed ice sheets GROWING, with snowfall in East Antarctica exceeding ice loss in West Antarctica. That same study also showed that “Antarctica gained 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.”
 
Regarding sea levels, they have been rising at a rate of 2mm a year since the late 1800s, with a slowdown between the 60s and 90s. Climate Depot also says: “Sea levels provide no evidence that the poles are losing ice at a faster rate than in the first half of the 20th [century]. They certainly do not support the theory that ice loss will significantly accelerate in the rest of the 21st [century].”
 
So there is really no need to fear anything that the BBC insinuates that we should fear. We are not going to see major cities flooding and we are not going to see major sea levels rising over the next 80 years. Why? Well, apart from the established facts and science, every other major prediction made by these climate freaks has been WRONG as I have said in the past.
 
Nothing we do or could possibly do (outside of using nukes) would have an effect on our climate to the point where we would see the kind of stuff these liars are telling us we are “seeing”. And, by the way, I am always amused when they try to argue this with man-made climate models, which are not based on reality, but rather on the junk science and math that they run to try and scare people into believing future generations are doomed. It’s kind of like the bogus calculations made by people who say that the Wuhan Virus (and I’m sort of breaking my earlier promise here, so forgive me, but it’s relevant and I’ll keep it brief) could cause up to hundreds of thousands of deaths if we don’t go straight up communist and impose quarantines, when in reality, death rates go down and the math that these people use to calculate such ridiculous numbers only works in a static world of hypotheticals. In Italy, where we are told is the “worst case scenario” deaths are nowhere near the hundreds of thousands.
 
Arguing using man-made climate models is arguing using people’s worst assumptions as though they are the definite and most likely future, an issue many climate scientists have raised in the past about using climate models in this manner.
 
Matthew 7:15
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”