I’ve already noted, time and time again, that the Left has convinced itself that there is no possible way that Trump wins in November. This was echoed in 2016, when they were really wrong, and I don’t expect it to be different this year.
 
The Left relies far too heavily on polls that they can manipulate and rig (and often do exactly that) and determine the likely results of the election from that alone. They look at national and state polls, particularly battleground state polls, and convince themselves that Trump is toast and there is little, if anything, he can do to save himself.
 
I’ve already expressed why this is utter malarkey time and time again, whether you are talking about the 2016 election or the 2020 one, but one writer for Spectator USA (not to be confused with the American Spectator) is not at all convinced that Biden will defeat Trump.
 
The title of his piece is: “Get ready for Trump’s second term,” and the subhead reads: “Much depends on whose hands control each House of Congress.”
 
So this writer, named Leonard Toboroff, is convinced of the exact opposite of what the Left is convinced about: Trump is going to win re-election.
 
He begins by noting who exactly Trump’s opponent is: “President Trump’s adversaries are running Joe Biden, a fallback Beltway lifer who is credibly accused of selling his office, leaking false intel about Gen. Flynn to the Washington Post and handsiness with female political allies. Oh, and it appears that a prosecutor in Ukraine is digging into the potential criminal liability of the one or more persons who gorged on Burisma’s trove of US taxpayer funds. Joe’s son Hunter is named, and so Joe, in a context not yet fully disclosed.”
 
Now, the fake news media will never pay attention to the graveyard that is Biden’s closet, but informed voters will take note of the many illegal dealings of Joe Biden, as well as his questionable character and record of failure as Senator and Vice President.
 
However, the election will be about far more than Joe Biden’s past. Toboroff notes that if there is a criminal investigation in Ukraine, nothing much will come of it, pending a potential Joe Biden plea of cognitive impairment that will allow him to walk (though, if such a plea is made before the election, that would be rather devastating to his campaign because it’s one thing to note he is mentally impaired, but it’s another thing entirely for him to admit it to a court – not that I actually expect anything to come out of Biden’s dealings with Burisma).
 
But Toboroff eventually begins talking more specifically about Trump and brings some much-needed logic to illogical fake news polls. He writes: “How is it possible for Trump to have 54 percent approval on the economy and 70 percent disapproval on the virus – and in the same poll? Nor would 300,000 people have donated a total of $20 million in a single virtual fundraiser by Trump if they believed the near-unanimous propaganda that he’s certain to lose in November. Nor would the ‘peaceful’ (Joe’s word) burning down of a courthouse in Portland, Oregon, cheered on by its mayor, edge Trump into a two- or three-point snap lead over Joe in a solid blue bastion.”
 
And he’s right about this. It makes no sense for so many people to be willing to donate to Trump if everyone and their grandmother believes it’s a lost cause. You don’t donate to a candidate you think will lose just because you might be trying to make a point or because you believe in their agenda or whatever else. You donate because you expect them to win and believe they will win.
 
The Saudis didn’t donate to the Clinton Foundation as much as they did because they expected Hillary to lose. They believed she would win, and when she didn’t, the Foundation saw a sharp decline in donations. The Saudis (and others) were trying to buy access.
 
But with Trump, regular people are donating their money and it makes no sense if they expected him to lose, especially in economic times such as these, when many people’s jobs have either been furloughed or eliminated completely.
 
People do not believe the fake news polls that claim Trump is toast. These polls were claiming the same thing LAST SUMMER, back when even the people RUNNING the polls didn’t really believe the polls and wholeheartedly expected Trump to sweep through reelection. These polls were claiming the same thing in 2016 as well, even up to election day itself, when some people had Clinton’s chances of election to be over 98%!
 
The fake news polls can claim whatever they want – reality will show something far different.
 
At any rate, Toboroff continued, noting the sort of approval ratings he is getting from Rasmussen, which is at around 48% and “trending up.”
 
“Translated logically, this gives Trump a wide lead in all battleground states that would translate into a bit more than 300 Electoral College votes. Let’s take this as grounds for examining what a second Trump term would lead us to expect.”
 
Toboroff notes that a lot will depend on which party gets control of both chambers of Congress. Like Lincoln, he writes, Trump “faces a House divided.” But he expects Trump and Republicans to win back the House, while also keeping the Senate as well.
 
With this expectation, Toboroff says that one of the biggest, if not the biggest focal point for the next four years will be the situation with China, specifically, militarily. “Trump will believe that a military buildup will propel economic growth – and it might, because now ‘military’ encompasses most all of the strands of American energy, from innovation to distribution.”
 
He notes that Trump won’t trust his intel community’s report on the military strength of China and will test and verify for himself just how strong they are, be it through pushing back against the ChiComs at the South China Sea or by possibly protecting Taiwan from a potential invasion (especially since Hong Kong has fallen to the Chinese communists and Taiwan was never recognized by China as an independent nation).
 
Now, I do not exactly want a conflict with China that would escalate into a war, particularly as we are trying to get out of endless wars in the Middle East, which establishment members of both parties have prolonged for as long as possible. But with a militarily-aggressive China, Trump will have to do something, especially if we wish to keep China from growing its influence (which has been a bit shattered by the Chinese coronavirus).
 
On the Homefront, Toboroff writes that “rebalancing the judiciary” aka turning the lower courts away from the radical liberals and towards the Constitutional conservatives, focusing on an American education system that does not promote the failed and dangerous ideology of communism and focusing on punishing the people that tried to undermine Trump’s first term with the Russia hoax are things that Trump will have to keep an eye on.
 
These, I would argue, are some of the biggest issues in America today. The Left’s influence is far too massive and obstructive in the lower (and highest) courts and we need to change that. Regarding education, I have long written about how we need to reform education so that communism does not get promoted and taught (in a positive way) in schools, while also bringing back God into the classrooms (and the atheists who have a problem with that can lick my boot).
 
Toboroff suggests charter schools, which is definitely a good option. Charter schools are schools of choice (not dependent on districting) and are independently run, though publicly funded. The Left HATES charter schools almost as much as they hate homeschooling because they can’t get their filthy paws all over the students to corrupt their young minds and teacher’s unions don’t apply to these schools.
 
They don’t like charter schools because they work fairly capitalistically: if they are better, parents will choose to send their kids there, as opposed to the crappy ones. The Left doesn’t want parents to have a choice as to where to send their kids to school (at least, as long as the parents live in a particular district and don’t move out).
 
Transforming the education system will be crucial for the future of this country, which the Left has had far too much influence in constructing.
 
In any case, to begin wrapping up, Toboroff fully expects Trump to win a second term and expects that second term to be rather full for Trump, what with having to deal with a 21st century USSR, having to ideologically reform the judiciary, having to practically reform the education system so as to not indoctrinate generations into foolishly and dangerously believing communism is not absolute crap, and dealing with American traitors who tried to cheat in the 2016 election, failed, and then tried to undermine Trump’s first term and remove a duly-elected president through the Russia hoax.
 
I, like Toboroff, do not buy into the idea that Trump is finished (as I have demonstrated in numerous articles). The only thing I will add is that no one should buy into the idea that Trump can’t lose and get complacent as a result. The Left will do what it can to cheat in this election; they will pull out every dirty trick they have to in order to ensure Trump doesn’t win again. We cannot afford to get complacent and believe Trump is guaranteed to win. I believe he will, but will go out to vote (IN PERSON) to ensure his victory.
 
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.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Truth be told, there are far too many reasons I could list that would answer that question for me to fit into one single article. I have already brought up, in the past, how the polls were showing Clinton would win by a landslide in 2016, and even shown the specific poll numbers and electoral vote predictions from a number of people, so there is no need for me to bring that up again.
 
There exists another reason that is far more contemporary than the 2016 polls: 2019 and 2020 polls.
 
You see, Matt Mayer has an interesting piece on Spectator about how “Predictions of Trump’s demise may yet again be premature.”
 
Mayer begins by showing the following numbers coming out of battleground states: in Arizona, Biden is up by two points. In North Carolina, he is up by eight; 11 in Pennsylvania, 10 in Michigan, 9 in Florida and eight in Ohio.
 
Under normal circumstances, and in a world where the news media is honest and objective, such numbers would spell trouble for Trump. However, we know perfectly well that the latter is not true, as we are literally talking about fake news polls. But that is not the only reason those numbers are suspect, and in fact, are not exactly bad news for Trump at all.
 
You see, those numbers that spell doom for the Trump re-election campaign were from last summer, before the Chinese coronavirus (and subsequently, the administration’s response to it, which some would argue was botched or at least not as good as it could have been (not that I am such a person)) and the “racial” riots we are seeing across the country and subsequently, Trump’s response to that as well. Last summer, just about everyone, Left or Right, was just about convinced that Trump would steamroll through the election and easily get re-elected.
 
Now, the Left is convinced (to an extent) that Biden will beat Trump as a result of the last roughly half year. So, then, those numbers that already had Biden winning in those battleground states have to have gotten bigger for Biden, right?
 
No, actually. Aside from Arizona, where Biden is now “ahead” by six points (a four-point increase), Trump has “closed the gap” in the other battleground states, in some by roughly half or even more.
 
In North Carolina, where Biden was supposedly leading by eight last year, he now only leads by one. In Pennsylvania, where Biden used to lead by eleven points, he now only leads by five. In Michigan, his lead is now only 6 (four-point decrease); in Florida, his lead is seven (two-point decrease); Wisconsin, Biden’s lead is 6 (three-point decrease) and in Ohio, Biden supposedly leads by six (two-point decrease).
 
If Trump truly butchered the response to the Chinese coronavirus and has performed abysmally in terms of dealing with racial inequality in America, and subsequently, dealing with the rioting and the destruction and burning down of places of business, homes, etc., - if Trump is truly as big of a screw-up just in the last half year as the Left says he is, how is it that polls show him gaining ground as opposed to losing it?
 
Like I said, last year, just about everyone was fully expecting Trump to easily win reelection. Despite what the polls said, I don’t think even the fake news media carrying those polls were convinced that Trump would be defeated by any of the 666 Democrat presidential candidates. Despite Biden’s lead early on, he would tend to flounder and he inspired just about no confidence at all, or even any energy. NO ONE is excited to vote for Biden, even now. Bernie was the clear opposition candidate for the DNC establishment and they did whatever they could to ensure Bernie would not be their nominee. Bernie got cheated twice.
 
The rest were a random assortment of lunacy, idiocy and radical communism but little personal appeal or notoriety to get very far in the polls. Warren was a cultural appropriator (not that any on the Left would dare call her that), Harris was a cop and an AG who routinely and unjustly would send black people to jail. Bloomberg’s stint lasted all of a half a movie’s run time and was essentially shot out of the sky after his first debate was over; Buttigieg was just the “look at me, I’m gay but somehow also the only person on here who would dare invoke the name of God” candidate; Gabbard was the only one I could even slightly tolerate because of her seemingly actual desire to bring our troops back and her hilarious attacks on Hillary, and the rest were totally forgettable.
 
Seriously, look up the Democrats who ran for president in 2020 and I can guarantee you straight up have not heard of at least a few of them, or forgotten that some of them ran.
 
My point is, despite the large number of candidates the Democrats boasted, time and time again, they all demonstrated a variety of reasons as to why they would lose to Trump by either a little or a lot. And now, the Democrats are stuck with a rapist with Dementia who refuses to leave the basement or answer any questions to the media because any unscripted engagement is 100% likely to result in him saying something else that demonstrates just how mentally unfit he is to run for president, let alone actually be president.
 
And this is the guy they say Trump is guaranteed to lose to? Again, even in their own polls, Trump has only GAINED support in key battleground states, even amidst a period of time in which one could argue Trump wasn’t at his best.
 
And we are still months away from the election. I have said this many times, but a lot can happen in between now and November of 2020. I have said this before the changing of the calendar took place, back when everyone was super confident Trump would easily be reelected, and I say this now, after the last few months of relative struggle. The events that will determine the results of the election have yet to occur. While one would think that the last few months have destroyed Trump’s chances, such a belief is rather short-sighted.
 
Even my own predictions on certain things have not panned out. I expected the Tara Reade story to be one that would haunt the Biden campaign. And while other things have obviously overshadowed that story because they were more important (namely, the pandemic), the fact that Biden is a rapist and hasn’t suffered the consequences in terms of support from women shows I was wrong with my predictions. Even the “you ain’t black” comment didn’t do much to hurt him with black people and he will still likely pull a majority of black voters to him.
 
So for anyone to believe the polls today, let alone a year ago, to be any indication of the results of the election is simply an exercise in madness. And even still, while I did say I wouldn’t bring this up again, I feel the need to mention that polls in 2016, specifically the day of the election, showed Clinton winning big and that obviously did not happen.
 
Not to mention the Cato Institute survey which showed people to be more reluctant to express their beliefs to other people because of fear of persecution, which could be one reason the polls say what they say: it’s entirely possible Trump supporters are either saying they “don’t know” who they will support or will say they will vote for Biden when they don’t actually plan to do so, and are just saying that to not be judged or punished by the pollsters.
 
The polls are wrong. Simple as that.
 
Matthew 7:15
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It’s late June of an election year, so it’s no surprise at all to see multiple Left-wing polls claiming that Trump is toast; that he’s going to lose and lose badly; that he is headed for a crushing defeat; that the walls are closing in and the American people are tired of Donald Trump. It’s the exact same song and dance we heard throughout 2016. Remind me, what was the result of that election?
 
Perhaps the only difference between 2016 and 2020 is that the media has fooled some Trump supporters into believing he is on the path to defeat. However, I highly doubt that’s the case at all for a number of reasons.
 
First of all, we were hearing this same bullcrap from the same people four years ago. Eddie Zipperer has a great thread on Twitter with numerous articles from 2016 that showed Hillary Clinton with 85-99% chance at winning, multiple electoral map results that showed she would win at minimum 300 electoral votes, and just article after article from the fake news media saying that Donald Trump had no chance in hell of becoming President of the United States. Four years later, they’re trying to tell us that the guy whom they said had no chance of winning but still won once again has no chance of winning.
 
Reuters had Clinton’s chances of getting elected at 90%. The Monday before the election, CNN had Clinton’s chances of winning at over 90%. MSNBC had a “scientist” predict that Clinton had a 99% chance of being elected. Stanford University said the same.
 
The Huffington Post predicted that Clinton would win 323 electoral votes, with Princeton predicting the same. Joy Reid predicted Clinton winning 340. Moody’s Analytics predicted Clinton would win 332 electoral votes. FiveThirtyEight had Clinton winning as few as 375 electoral votes and as many as 471.
 
Day in and day out, for months on end until even election day itself, these “journalists” were all of the belief that Hillary Clinton was practically DESTINED to become President of the United States.
 
And what do we see today? Fox News having Biden winning Florida by 9 percentage points, Georgia by 2, North Carolina by 2 and TEXAS by 1. Redfield & Wilton saying Biden is winning in Pennsylvania by 10 points, Michigan by 11, North Carolina by 6, Florida by 4 and Arizona by 4. CNBC saying that Biden is 9 points ahead nationally. Reuters saying that Biden is ahead 10 points nationally. The Economist/YouGov saying Biden is winning by 8 points nationally. NYT/Sienna showing Biden winning 14% nationally. Fox News showing Biden winning 12% nationally. Quinnipiac showing Biden winning 8% nationally, etc., etc.
 
It’s the exact same song and dance and roughly the same numbers we were seeing back in 2016. And you’re telling me that this time it’s somehow different?
 
Let me tell you what is actually different this time around that will affect the election: Trump has a record now.
 
Back in 2016, he ran on policy but could hardly back it up with things from his past because he ran a real estate empire and was a reality tv star. People trusted him with the economy (still do in most polls, and that is always the biggest issue) because of his experience but had to just trust his word for the rest of the job as POTUS and he delivered. He delivered on the economy, that’s for sure. He delivered on being the most pro-life president. He delivered on his stance against illegal immigration (not that he got any help from the GOP) and despite the troubles we face today, I trust that he can still take care of it all (there are hundreds of DOJ investigations into the people tearing down statues, so don’t tell me he isn’t being a law and order president).
 
Like I said towards the beginning of the pandemic: the virus cannot be blamed on Trump, and neither can the actions of other people. The virus itself came from China because they are dirty liars opportunistically setting the world on fire. The lockdown orders came from the governors individually, and not even all the states decided to lock things down. The economy is not doing great right now, but it was for three years under Trump and he will do it again, provided we open back up in full (and we have to at one point or another).
 
As far as the cases go, that has more to do with increased testing than the virus being out of control. And considering the CDC chief said that Chinese coronavirus cases could be ten times higher than confirmed cases, that only means that the mortality rate is a tenth of what it is today: 0.26%, so if the chief is right, the mortality rate should actually be 0.026%, which is considerably lower than the flu.
 
In other words, we have absolutely no reason at all to be shutting things down or keeping things shut down. Once people begin realizing this, the economy will make a great comeback and that will definitely boost Trump’s chances at re-election.
 
While the last few months haven’t exactly been great for Trump (and 2020 has really been a huge mess for basically everyone), I’m not at all convinced that Trump is headed for an electoral defeat, especially considering who his opponent is.
 
Granted, Biden is really helped by the fact that he is being kept hidden in the basement for the most part, but at one point or another, he will have to debate Donald Trump and will actually have to make public appearances more often. That is something he nor the Democrats can allow to happen which is part of the reason they are so adamant about going back to the virus as a main talking point (and because covering wanton destruction of property and violence coming from Leftists won’t exactly help convince voters to vote for Leftist Democrats).
 
Of course, the biggest threat to Donald Trump right now isn’t Joe Biden but voter fraud in the form of mail-in ballots, which the Left is all too happy about implementing for this election considering how absurdly easy it would be for them to cheat through this system. But otherwise, I don’t see how Biden beats Trump (which isn’t to say that he couldn’t and this is no license for people not to vote for Trump).
 
Now, one last thing I want to talk about actually has something to do with what Zipperer said at the end of his Twitter thread regarding all of the fake polls about Clinton. Zipperer said: “These are all the same ‘experts’ now making all the same predictions because their predictions aren’t about being right; their predictions are about gaslighting you out of voting.”
 
And he definitely is right. These polls aren’t meant to be accurate. They are meant to make you feel demoralized, like you are headed for crushing defeat, and that there is no real point in going out to vote because defeat is assured. They are meant to keep you from voting by making you feel there would be no point in spending hours at the polling booth if your guy is just going to lose anyway. The ironic thing about this is that I believe this is a double-edged sword. It might get some people demoralized and believe there is no point in voting for Trump, but it also leaves some Democrats overconfident and believe victory is assured so there is no point in spending those same hours at the polling booth if their guy is going to win anyway.
 
We just have to make sure that our side does not get demoralized by what the fake news media is claiming is the reality at hand, when that’s not at all the case. What reason does any one of us have to believe the same fake news polls from the same fake news sources that have for the past four years tried to insist to us that Trump had no chance at getting nominated, elected, cheated to get elected, was planning on cheating to get re-elected through either Russia, Ukraine or China, and now has no chance at getting re-elected?
 
Why would anyone believe the words of known liars and biased, agenda-driven deceivers?
 
Proverbs 19:9
“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As we are less than half a year away from the elections, polls that we see today are hardly all that relevant. The things that will have a great effect on the outcome of the election haven’t happened yet and won’t happen until around October (which is why the Democrats always spring up an “October surprise” to try and destroy their opposition, such as the sexual assault allegations thrown at Trump back in 2016).
 
However, as things currently stand, barring any major changes, it appears that the majority of people believe Trump will be re-elected as President of the United States, regardless of whether they actually support him or not.
 
According to a new poll by Zogby of 1,007 likely voters (so not the biggest sample size, but likely voters are more valuable than registered voters and all adults), a majority of 51% give the edge to Donald Trump to win the 2020 election, while 43% say that Biden will win.
 
While most polls have Biden winning, often by double digits (gee, where have I seen this before?), Zogby has the race at a tie of 46% for both candidates. But that is a poll of who surveyors support. This one has people saying who they believe will win regardless of whom they actually support.
 
Jonathan Zogby wrote in his analysis that Trump still has great support from his base and even is winning with middle aged and older voters while also beating Biden among union workers (as I have said in the past, union workers have largely been abandoned by the Democrats in favor of illegal immigrants, so this is not a surprise).
 
Zogby writes: “The subgroups most likely to believe the president would win were his base: Born Again Christians (Trump 68%/Biden 28%), NASCAR fans (Trump 68%/Biden 29%), union voters (Trump 61%/Biden 35%), and voters who recently lost a job (Trump 58%/Biden 34%). Most other demographics agreed Trump would beat Biden in 2020, regardless of their political ideology or support. Here is a breakdown of other important subgroups who thought Trump would beat Biden regardless of their political leanings: both men (Trump 57%/Biden 39%) and women (Trump 47%/Biden 46%) said Trump would win, as did voters living in the East (Trump 49%/Biden 45%), South (Trump 53%/Biden 42%) and Central/Great Lakes (Trump 56%/Biden 38%). The West region (Biden 49%/Trump 42%) disagreed with voters, overall, and felt Biden had the best chance to win in 2020.”
 
Not particularly surprising to see the West region believing Biden would win, considering that is the Left-coast: Commiefornia, Oregon, Washington, etc.
 
But taking the West region aside, this tells us plenty about voter enthusiasm regarding the candidates. Most people believing Trump will win indicates there is more enthusiasm for Trump than there is Biden; definitely more confidence.
 
This is particularly noticeable considering that, according to the Washington Examiner, “the survey was the latest to show that while voters indicate they prefer Biden, they expect Trump to win.”
 
While many of them say they would prefer Biden (remember, they tend to oversample Democrats), the fact that a majority as big as that one still believes Trump will win is a sign of little voter enthusiasm for Biden.
 
The Zogby poll also asked surveyors: “Who do you think is a greater threat to economic recovery in the United States?” with the two options being the two major political parties. Funny enough, 51% said the Democrats were a bigger threat to economic recovery than the Republicans (49%).
 
Despite it being as close as it is, again, you have to remember they tend to oversample Democrats. The only reason we are even talking about an economic recovery is because many Democrat states have opted for adopting draconian measures that kill businesses and jobs (as we have talked about extensively) for the purposes of “fighting” the Chinese coronavirus (and as we know, this shutdown was entirely unnecessary and any perceived benefits from it are unproven, while the disadvantages are concrete and clear for all to see).
 
Now, again, the polls that we see today are not indicative of what is likely to happen come November. The Leftist polls all showed Hillary winning in November the entire time even up to the actual election, so they are not exactly the most reliable of things. But especially in June, they are not likely to be reflective of reality. Keep in mind as well that the fake news media is not interested in reflecting reality but rather, adjusting it to fit their desires. They make it seem like virtually the entire country hates Trump (they’ve been doing this for four years to this point) when that is not at all the case.
 
But it is interesting to note the levels of voter enthusiasm that we see for the candidates. And I am not exactly surprised to see low enthusiasm for Biden, who might have topped his “you ain’t black” comment by saying that “Even Dr. King’s assassination did not have the worldwide impact that George Floyd’s death did” in a recent press conference.

Frankly, despite his obviously stupid and ignorant remark, I give him points for at least being coherent for roughly a full sentence. Of course, that was the same press conference where he said: “You know the rapidly rising umm uh in with uh with I don’t know,” and while I give him props for admitting in the end that even HE didn’t know what he was talking about, that is yet another gaffe in an absolute library full of them (and that wasn’t the only gaffe in that conference either).
 
However, as I feel it is often necessary, I should remind people not to feel too comfortable with all of this. Like I have said time and time again, we can’t afford to get complacent and assume this election is in the bag. I also believe Trump will be re-elected but not if we don’t show up to vote. Not that I think you should be reminded of this over and over again – you guys are definitely smart enough to understand why complacency is our biggest enemy and the only thing that can actually beat Trump – but I do think it is important to express the importance of not assuming things will go your way.
 
Hillary expected to win for a variety of reasons (among which were her rigging the election) and that complacency cost her dearly. We cannot afford to fall for the same thing, lest we lose far more than just an election.
 
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.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As I have stated multiple times in the past, what is perhaps my biggest gripe with NeverTrumpers, aside from the fact that they are NeverTrumpers, is the fact that, for years leading up to Donald Trump’s nomination and eventual election, the people that would become NeverTrumpers were supposedly staunch conservatives. They always spoke against the damage Obama was causing to the country, noted that Leftism is generally a horrible thing and that socialism would be the death of our nation.
 
For years, they had been clamoring for a Republican who could beat just about any Democrat and run the country very much in a conservative manner, opting for conservative policies that would bolster the economy, pick the right battles internationally while making sure we both defend ourselves and our allies without going into needless wars, speak of his or her love and reverence for the Lord and the Constitution and not ever cave to the actually insane Leftist mob no matter what.
 
For years, these people were hoping for the second coming of Reagan, so to speak, and yet, when we basically got that in Donald Trump, they abhorred it and even worse, began siding with THE LEFT.
 
And I could relatively understand their doubts before Trump was POTUS. Sure, he would say the right things about conservatism and the country, but he was not proven just quite yet. I still argued back then, as I do now, that it was far better to take a chance on someone we don’t know if they will be conservative than to allow for someone we know will be a SOCIALIST in Hillary Clinton to run the country. We didn’t know what kind of president Trump would have been back then, but just about many knew roughly what kind of president Hillary would have been, which is why I was angry with the notion of being a NeverTrumper. Those people, I felt, were betraying not only the conservative movement but the country itself.
 
But still, I could understand the doubt. What I refused to try and understand, however, because there really was no understanding it, was the ferocity and viciousness these same people had regarding Trump even AFTER he has proven he is the real deal. Again, for years, these people were clamoring for another Ronald Reagan – a conservative who won’t bend the knee – and when one showed up, they rejected him in favor of either Hillary Clinton (practically a cardinal sin, in my opinion) or a candidate who never had any chance of becoming POTUS like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson.
 
I could understand the doubts before Trump was POTUS, but I simply could not understand the adamant denial of reality – the reality that Donald Trump is a conservative. Maybe he’s not the typical conservative, and definitely not the typical Republican (which is only a good thing), but he is a conservative nonetheless and his policies show that to be true. And yet, these NeverTrumpers have, for the past four years, insisted that he is a fascist and have begun to clamor instead for the approval of the fake news media which insulted, mocked and hated them just a few years before.
 
They abandoned their conservative principles in favor of appeasing the Left, showing themselves to have never truly been conservatives at all. Conservatives don’t bow to the mob; we don’t bend the knee; we don’t clamor for the approval of the Left. We either stand on our principles or we don’t stand at all, and these NeverTrumpers chose not to stand at all, allowing themselves to fall for the Leftist cult of insanity.
 
However, over some time, whether short or long, some NeverTrumpers have come around to actually being “MaybeTrumpers”, if you will. Meaning that, while they still have issues with Trump’s style (they call it his "character", which is different, but they use that word anyway to make him look worse than he is because he does not have major character flaws), they recognize that they have to take him for what he is if we are to actually be conservative and keep the Left from being in power at all. Trump has proven to be a conservative, and even if people have issues with his style and mannerisms, that shouldn’t stand in the way of at the very least voting for him, particularly knowing the extremely dangerous alternative of communism.
 
So when I read Daniel Pipes’ op-ed on Newsweek, I was rather happy to see this development. In his piece, “A Reluctant but Unhesitating Vote for Donald Trump”, Pipes explains that, ever since Trump ran for office on the Republican ticket, he has had issues with his style and mannerisms.
 
Pipes admits that he “watched in dismay as I helped the Ted Cruz presidential campaign, seeing Republican primary voters select Donald Trump out of a field of 16 viable candidates and make him president-elect. I signed an open letter committing to ‘working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted’ to the presidency and wrote many articles lambasting Trump. I left the Republican Party on his nomination and voted for Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson in the general election. After the election, I hoped for Trump’s impeachment and President Mike Pence.”
 
Suffice to say that he was staunchly a NeverTrumper at the time. He further explains that his reasons for it are the same as most NeverTrumpers’ back in 2016: Trump’s style and policies. Pipes had issues with what he called “unethical business practices” in Trump University (which is just a claim as Trump never had to pay any sort of punishment for such "unethical business practices", other than a settlement under questionable circumstances led by a Left-wing activist Judge after he became President), with his “egotism”, the legal troubles he has had in the past (namely the amount of them), his supposed bigotry and his vulgarity. When it came to policies, Pipes explains, he believed he was even worse, believing Trump to be impulsive and a potential neo-fascist. Trump’s 2004 statement saying he probably identifies “more as Democrat” also worried him, believing that to mean that Trump would basically be going back and forth between Republican and Democrat policies.
 
All things that I am not surprised a NeverTrumper of the time would be worried about. Again, for myself, I scarcely cared about his style because I was more interested in simply beating the Left no matter what.
 
But that’s just his style. What about his policies? The ones that Pipes believed to be either potentially neo-fascist or somewhere in between Democrat and Republican? Well, Pipes has come to the same realization any logical person ought to have after the last four years: Trump is a very good conservative president.
 
“[T]o my unending surprise, [Trump] has governed as a resolute conservative. His policies in the areas of education, taxes, deregulation and the environment have been bolder than Ronald Reagan’s. His judicial appointments are the best of the past century… His unprecedented assault on the administrative state proceeds apace, ignoring predictable howls from the Washington establishment. Even his foreign policy has been conservative: demanding that allies contribute their fair share, confronting China and Iran and singularly supporting Israel. Ironically, as David Harsanyi notes, a potential character flaw actually works to out advantage: ‘Trump’s obstinacy seems to have made him less susceptible to the pressures that traditionally induce GOP presidents to capitulate.’”
 
In other words, Trump’s stubbornness keeps him from caving to the insufferable Leftist mob that tries to rule by fear and pressure. Where other Republican presidents would bend the knee (as RINOs tend to do), Trump doubles, triples and quadruples-down, never apologizing to people who deserve no such grace.
 
While there are things that Pipes disagrees with Trump on policy-wise, such as Trump’s “hostility toward allies” (which they hardly can be considered allies when they make under-the-table deals with the Chinese and the Russians) and his “dangerous meetings with Kim Jong-un” (which I don’t consider to be dangerous really, since anyone sane still knows that North Korea is no friend to the U.S. and no conservative has ever even come close to forgiving the acts against God that he commits on a daily basis, but Trump is trying to weaken the power the Chinese have), he does ultimately “agree with 80 percent of Trump’s actions” which is “a higher percentage than any of his predecessors, going back to Lyndon Johnson.”
 
In sum, while he still finds Trump’s style to be repulsive (again, don’t really care what people think about his style and mannerisms) and while he still finds things to disagree with Trump on policy-wise, Pipes has come to understand that Trump has been solidly conservative for the most part in his presidency and that the alternative, that being Joe Biden, is the same dangerous socialist nonsense the Left has been screaming about for the past few years. Allowing Joe Biden to win would present a clear danger to this country and Trump, despite his perceived style short-comings, is a FAR better alternative to anything the Left props up as their nominee.
 
Pipes concludes that he “will do my small part to help Trump get re-elected by writing, giving and voting.” He also says that he will vote for Trump as “the politician who represents my conservative views” and even urges other reluctant conservatives to do the same.
 
The question is just how many are there? Many former NeverTrumpers had the same issues that Pipes had and came around to supporting, or at least tolerating, Trump because of his conservative policies, which are the same ones they had been wanting a president to enact for years and years before. The vast majority of NeverTrumpers today are faux-conservatives who have decided to abandon the movement in favor of appeasing the Left (not to mention they side with people who actually tried to rig an election and stage a silent coup against the duly-elected president – people who present a clear and present danger to liberty and justice itself).
 
That much was particularly evident when NeverTrumper and *chuckles* 2020 GOP Primary opponent to Donald Trump (I really can’t keep a straight face), Joe Walsh said that he’d “rather have a socialist in the White House than a dictator.” In other words, he supports socialism now, which goes to show he never was truly a conservative, since Trump is FAR from a dictator and SOCIALISM NATURALLY LEADS TO A DICTATORSHIP AS EVIDENCED BY LITERALLY THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD EVEN TO TODAY.
 
I do hope that people who would have once considered themselves to be NeverTrumpers realize the existential threat that the Left poses and that the idea of supporting any one of them should repel them to the core. I hope they come to reconsider their position of not supporting Trump, or at least not voting for the guy, simply due to the peril that socialism brings to this country; the type that the Left is entirely enamored by.
 
True conservatives, at this point, recognize the good things Trump has done policy-wise, even if they can hardly stand the guy on a personal basis. I don’t care if they wouldn’t want to have a beer with the guy, all that matters in the end is who they end up voting for.
 
To paraphrase a certain racist Democrat, if you are on the fence about whether you are for Trump or Biden, then you ain’t conservative.
 
Proverbs 18:15
“An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli

We all know perfectly well that the Left benefits when people are suffering. This is generally the case, but particularly so in this day and age when the Left is banking on a large portion of the country to remain locked down due to the Chinese coronavirus fears. They know that they could not possibly hope to beat Trump when the economy is doing well, particularly as well as it was before this entire scenario happened, so Plan A for them, seeing as impeachment and removal did not work, is to destroy the economy as much as they possibly could.
 
Given the option, Democrats would demand Democrat-run states to remain as locked down as possible, implementing as many draconian policies as possible and blaming the inevitable economic collapse under such a circumstance on Trump’s “poor leadership” or something akin to that nonsense. They truly view our economic suffering as the single BEST option for winning an election.
 
Which is why it’s not surprising to see the Democrats in absolute panic over being given perhaps some of the worst news from THEIR OWN SIDE with regard to the possibility of Trump being re-elected.
 
You see, Harvard professor Jason Furman, a top economist for the Obama administration, said last month that the U.S. is on track to witness the “best economic data” in its entire history.
 
Furman, speaking to a group of bipartisan leaders, said: “We are about to see the best economic data we’ve seen in the history of this country.”
 
Politico reported: “Instead of forecasting a prolonged depression-level economic catastrophe, Furman laid out a detailed case for why the months preceding the November election could offer Trump the chance to brag – truthfully – about the most explosive monthly employment numbers and GDP growth ever. Furman’s counterintuitive pitch has caused some Democrats, especially Obama alumni, around Washington to panic.”
 
The Left panics when there is the chance for the best economic prosperity, or at least raw data, that the country has ever seen. Doesn’t that tell you all you need to know about them? Instead of being happy over the prospect of a great economic recovery from the current situation unlike anything we had ever seen before, they are reportedly running around in sheer panic and worry. How anyone can say that they are the party of “The People” or how they are “compassionate and tolerant” is beyond reason.
 
According to Politico, one former top Obama administration official expressed that this scenario was their “big worry”, and when asked about the level of concern this sort of situation has amongst top Democrats, the Democrat replied: “It’s high – high, high, high, high.”
 
Furman had also explained that, once the economic data from the past few months began to come in, he realized that the data was indicative of an economic recovery mirroring the sort that economics see following major natural disasters or “industry-wide catastrophe[s] like the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.”
 
Furman further explained that consumption and hiring began to tick up “in gross terms, not in net terms,” describing the turnaround as a “partial rebound.” This bounce back “can be very very fast, because people go back to their original job, they get called back from furlough, you put the lights back on in your business. Given how many people were furloughed and how many businesses were closed you can get a big jump out of that. It will look like a V.”
 
Considering many of the economic policies that led to the economic prosperity pre-Chinese coronavirus are still in place, provided the vast majority of the country opens back up, I generally agree with the sentiment that it would bounce back big time. My biggest concern, as I have noted many times in the recent past, is that we might be too slow in reopening and businesses will soon find that they cannot afford to bring back their furloughed workers. Small businesses have definitely taken a massive hit over the last few months (and a piece from The Federalist indicates this shutdown did nothing to combat the virus, so this was an exercise in futility at best) and every day that they are disallowed from opening back up is another day in which they cannot make money and get back on track.
 
Bigger giants in the business world will fare better, I imagine, and will be able to hire back the people they had to furlough but things definitely got messed up. Thankfully, with states opening back up and people having the ability to go back to work basically unimpeded, I do agree with the sentiment that we should be seeing quite a bounce back in the economy over the second half of this fiscal year.
 
And I’m not the only one to agree, as Larry Kudlow, the head of the White House National Economic Council, told Politico that he “totally agree[s].” “Q3 may be the single best GDP quarter since regular data. 2nd half super big growth, transitioning to 4% or more in 2021.”
 
Other Trump officials, such as Kevin Hassett and Peter Navarro, also agreed with Furman.
 
Of course, while people on the Right are ecstatic over the prospect of an economic rebound (Furman further stressed to Politico, when asked about his “new fans” in the Trump administration, that “they get the rebound part, but they don’t get the partial part”, sort of trying to dampen the mood, but it also is fairly contradictory to the idea that the economy would rebound “like a V,” as he explained earlier), people on the Left are outright panicking, as I mentioned before, particularly since Trump has always been ahead of Biden in the polls when it came to handling the economy.
 
One Democrat told Politico: “Trump beats Biden on the economy even right now! This is going to be extremely difficult no matter what. It’s existential that we figure it out.”
 
Another former Obama White House official told Politico: “Even today when we are at over 20 million unemployed (remember, this was back in April), Trump gets high marks on the economy, so I can’t imagine what it looks like when things go in the other direction. I don’t think this is a challenge for the Biden campaign. This is THE challenge for the Biden campaign. If they can’t figure this out, they should all just go home.”
 
Political strategist Arthur Schwartz tweeted the Politico article, adding: “Dems are spooked because the economy is going to rebound quickly. Their strategy for November is to keep the country closed. Their interests are served by hurting as many Americans as possible.”
 
Exactly my thoughts. The Left seemingly can only hope to win elections when the American people are suffering greatly. I can only imagine the glee they felt back in 2007-08 when the financial crisis and Great Recession was hitting this country. I can also only imagine the glee they felt the last few months in seeing the number of unemployed cases rolling in. They probably fully expected the country to automatically blame Trump for the bad news just because “blame Trump” is basically the Left’s default response to anything.
 
China unleashed a deadly virus on the world and lied about it for months (and still continues to lie) and is trying to coerce other countries into not punishing them as they deserve? Nah, it’s Trump’s fault, particularly as he is “blaming” China. Which reminds me: Trump isn’t “blaming” China. To say that he is is to insinuate that China is blameless and without fault. Trump is holding China accountable for their deadly actions which have killed a hundred thousand Americans (and God knows how many Chinese citizens and residents) and hundreds of people around the globe (according to official estimates, of course, which have to take China’s numbers at face value even though China has been lying about their numbers).
 
But in any case, getting off of that slight tangent, I am not even a little bit surprised that the Left would be so perplexed at seeing Trump beating Biden even with the economic news that we are getting. The VAST majority of Americans aren’t going to blame Trump for this simply due to the fact that we KNOW why it’s happening.
 
The news that we are seeing aren’t the result of a fundamental problem in our economic system or in the policies we are espousing. They are the result of a virus that has gotten people so freaked out as to shut down everything (and, again, this was negligible at best when it came to dealing with the virus) and the actions of relatively independent governors deciding to shut down their states to one extent or another.
 
It is only the hardcore, borderline actually insane Leftists that are blaming Trump for this whole fiasco. It’s only the Left-wing political hacks in the fake news media, Washington and around the country that are blaming Trump for any of this.
 
I hope that Furman’s prediction regarding the economy is what really happens. Models are generally always going to be wrong because no one can account for absolutely everything that could occur, but they can sometimes be useful in understanding at least one possible outcome.
 
Provided the country opens back up almost in full (New York might take more time, but even Cuomo himself has begun to talk about reopening), we should be seeing better economic news as time goes on. Here’s hoping that this is what ends up happening.
 
Hebrews 11:1
“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Last Friday, presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden appeared on the Breakfast Club podcast being interviewed by co-host Charlamagne tha God to discuss Biden’s black voting base. The entire thing was not exactly great and Joe Biden delivered perhaps what is one of his most racist statements of his life, which is saying plenty.
 
At one point, Charlamagne told Biden: “It’s a long way until November, we’ve got more questions.” Joe Biden seemed insulted by the notion that he would have more questions and replied: “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”
 
And the mask falls off. Time and time again, I have alluded to the Democrat Party essentially being a slave plantation of thought and Joe Biden all but confirmed that idea. You aren’t black if you are thinking of voting for Trump or if you are on the fence about who to vote for.
 
Naturally, this spurned backlash online from both sides of the aisle.
 
Machine Gun Kele tweeted: “I don’t know what kind of level of comfort you have to attain to make a statement like Joe Biden did in this video clip. Qwhite something.” (Not a typo, I think she completely meant to write that and I found it funny).
 
“Whoever helped Biden with this particular interview flopped. ‘You ain’t black’ will never bang coming from a white man’s mouth. Soz. I know your forefathers decided on the racial categories buy you really have a nerve whether in jest or not,” she continued.
 
Andrew Surabian tweeted: “A white guy lecturing black Americans that they ‘ain’t black’ if they don’t vote for him is about as condescending and racist as it gets.”
 
If you’re wondering what Charlamagne said following Joe’s statement, he seemed to have briefly brushed it aside to say: “It don’t have nothing to do with Trump, it has to do with the fact – I want something for my community.”
 
Following the clip, the Breakfast Club’s twitter page tweeted: “#joebiden said ‘If you have a problem figuring out if you are for him or Trump… you ain’t black’ Do you agree??” followed by a poll, which at the time of me seeing it, was an overwhelming: “Wait what.. no,” with thousands of votes.
 
For those of you who have been tuned in to politics for some time, you know very well that Joe Biden often says seriously stupid things. I even highlighted some of them in an article a month ago, detailing gaffes from the misinformed to the outright racist. Let’s revisit some of the racist ones because Joe Biden has an explicitly RACIST history, both in terms of things he has said and in terms of his actions.
 
Let’s begin with one of his most infamous statements, which he made in 2007 with regard to then-Democrat candidate Barack Obama: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”
 
Obviously, this was abhorrently racist and insinuated that no other African-American has ever been articulate, bright, clean or a “nice-looking guy”, which is wrong on so many levels. The Washington Post tried to excuse that statement as saying Biden was just referring to presidential candidates but even that doesn’t work. For one, not that I think he is a smart person, in fact I believe he is a deeply racist idiot, but Jesse Jackson ran for president in 1984 and 1988 and was a relatively serious contender for both. So to say that Obama was the first African-American presidential candidate (which Biden didn’t specify, but let’s just assume that’s what he meant to go along with the WaPo for now) that was “ the first mainstream African-American who is articulate, bright, clean and an nice-looking guy” dismisses Jesse Jackson altogether.
 
Again, I think Jesse Jackson is a racist idiot, but the Left doesn’t, so it was a stupid and racist comment no matter how you slice it.
 
Moving on to another instance of Biden being racist, we have the infamous “7-11” comment: “In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.”
 
Ignoring the fact that Indians moving to America from India doesn’t automatically make them Indian Americans, so that statement makes little sense, there is no denying the blatant racism here. Despite the fact that he finished the statement as saying “I’m not joking”, it’s pretty obvious he was, indeed, joking. Or at least, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt here, otherwise he is an even bigger racist than even I thought. But even if that was a joke, and I think most people would agree that it was, it was an awfully racist joke.
 
I’m not sure what point he was trying to get across, but one can hardly look at something like this and not consider it to be insensitive and racist. It alludes to the idea that Indian people can’t communicate with others well if they do not have a similar accent to their own. At least, that’s what I think Joe meant here, given he was referring to the self as having a “slight Indian accent”. But regardless of what he meant, it was awful and something the fake news media would NEVER let Trump or a Republican get away with.
 
Of course, there is also the infamous “Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids”, alluding to the idea that ALL black people are poor and that all poor people are black, but we have had plenty of examples of things he has said that make Biden a blatant racist.
 
Now, let’s move on to things he has DONE that make Biden a blatant racist.
 
New York Magazine has a pretty good piece on Biden’s atrocious civil rights record that I think one should read (and it's surprising because the writer is clearly a Leftist himself). It’s titled: “Will Black Voters Still Love Biden When They Remember Who He Was?”
 
Of course, this was written back when the primaries were still going and Joe wasn’t the obvious winner, but it still holds up fairly well. Other than the title itself, I guess. Joe is still the same racist he always was in the past. He clearly hasn’t changed in that regard and fully expects all black people to fall in line and support him, otherwise they cannot be considered black. He is still the slave-driver that Democrats always have been, but let’s get down to the meat and potatoes of the article.
 
Right off the bat, the writer, Eric Levitz, lambasts Joe with things he has said in the past: “Joe Biden once called state-mandated school integration ‘the most racist concept you can come up with,’ and Barack Obama ‘the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean.’ He was a staunch opponent of ‘forced busing’ in the 1970s, and leading crusader for mass incarceration throughout the ‘80s and ‘90s. Uncle Joe has described African-American felons as ‘predators’ too sociopathic to rehabilitate – and white supremacist senators as his friends.”
 
Following that, he mentions that “Biden helped kill the most effective policy for improving black educational attainment that America has ever known.”
 
He talked about how, originally, Joe Biden was in favor of desegregating schools, until his constituents were against it. After some time, he argued that “forced busing was appropriate for the South (where segregation was the product of racist laws), but unnecessary for the North (where, Biden pretended, it merely reflected the preferences of the white and black communities.),” according to New York Mag.
 
“Once in the Senate, Biden continued to triangulate, voting for most, though not all, of the anti-busing amendments that came before him. But for his overwhelmingly white constituents, nothing less than massive resistance to busing would suffice. The New Castle County Neighborhood Schools Association booed Biden off the stage at one event in 1974. One year later, the Delaware senator broke ranks with northern liberals – and joined his virulently racist North Carolina colleague Jesse Helms in voting to kneecap all federal efforts to integrate schools, anywhere in the country.”
 
The Helms amendment, which aimed to give the federal government the ability to withhold funds from schools that refused to integrate, failed, but Biden implemented an amendment of his own, “stipulating that none of those federal funds (of a $36 billion education bill), could be used by school systems ‘to assign teachers or students to schools… for reasons of race.’ His amendment would prevent ‘some faceless bureaucrat’ from ‘deciding that any child, black or white, should fit in some predetermined ratio,’” according to historian Jason Sokol.
 
Sokol continued: “Like the Helms gambit, [Biden’s provision] would still gut Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. But this time, a number of liberal senators that had opposed Helms’ amendment now supported Biden… Watching his liberal colleagues defect, Republican Jacob Javits of New York mused, ‘They’re scared to death on busing.’ The Senate approved Biden’s amendment. Biden had managed to turn a 48-43 loss for the anti-busing forces into a 50-43 victory.”
 
NY Mag notes that “The NAACP called Biden’s proposal ‘an anti-black amendment.’ The Senate’s sole African-American member, Ed Brooke, called it ‘the greatest symbolic defeat for civil rights since 1964.’”
 
It’s worth mentioning, though the NY Mag completely ignores it, that Ed Brooke was the first African-American to be elected to the Senate and that he was a Republican.
 
The reason it’s worth mentioning this is that Joe Biden, following the passage of his amendment, employed a tactic that the Left often uses against the Right: calling them the real racists.
 
“The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with. What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!,” Joe Biden remarked in an interview in 1975.
 
That same year, he essentially repeated his thoughts in an interview with NPR: “I think the concept of busing… that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride… a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”
 
It is interesting to see what b.s. the Left would use to justify the unjustifiable. From denying the humanity of unborn babies to denying the benefits black people get when they attend desegregated schools over segregated ones (studies show that black kids who attended desegregated schools earned an average of 25% more than those who attended segregated ones), the Left will stop at nothing and come up with the most insane b.s. to deny humans their God-given rights.
 
Moving on, and trying to keep things a bit short now since this article is so long already, we have the most obvious contribution to black suffering that Biden has made: the 1994 crime bill and a facet of other tough-on-crime bills that disproportionately affect black people.
 
“During the 1980s, Biden helped pass laws reinstating the federal death penalty, abolishing federal parole, increasing penalties for marijuana possession, expanding the use of civil asset forfeiture, and establishing a 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for possession of crack cocaine and powder cocaine,” according to New York Mag.
 
And while I agree with some of these things, namely the reinstating of the federal death penalty and being tough on drugs, these are things the Left often decries as “racist” and Biden has helped in pushing them through and getting them passed in the Senate.
 
Not to mention the ’94 crime bill itself was created by him.
 
In 1989, when H.W. gave a national address about his war on drugs, Biden said that Bush wasn’t being “tough enough, bold enough, or imaginative enough to meet the crisis at hand.” Biden called for tougher measures of increasing police presence to “catch the violent thugs”, increasing the number of prosecutors to convict them, increasing the number of judges to sentence them and increasing the number of prison cells to “put them away for a long time.”
 
Again, I, myself, am an advocate for tough sentencing for drug operations, dealers and (slightly less) for drug possession. But the Left currently is all for letting people mess themselves up in whatever way possible and Joe is their CURRENT NOMINEEE and he has this kind of track record when it comes to putting black people in jail.
 
This is without mentioning his comments regarding black youth possibly becoming “predators 15 years from now.”

There is plenty more to discuss when it comes to Biden’s blatant racism, such as the fact that he openly BRAGGED about receiving an award from segregationist George Wallace in 1973 and saying “We (Delawareans) were on the South’s side in the Civil War”, thereby including himself among the people who SUPPORTED THE PRO-SLAVERY SOUTH, but I think you get the point and this article is long enough as it is.
 
Biden fully expecting black people to submit to his Democrat whip and be enchained to his Leftist collar is really par for the course for the despicable man.
 
Isaiah 48:22
“’There is no peace,’ says the Lord, ‘for the wicked.’”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

​I just love days like today when the Left gives me all the ammo that I could possibly want to utterly and completely humiliate and destroy them with everything that I have. Such an opportunity was given to me when, following the Reade accusations that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her (with her being the eighth woman to come forward to accuse Biden of sexual assault/harassment), the Left switched from their “believe all women” platform to “believe the women who accuse conservatives” platform pretty darn obviously.
 
And nowhere has this switch been more obvious than in a recent New York Times op-ed written by feminist Susan Faludi, who writes: “’Believe All Women’ Is a Right-Wing Trap.”
 
Yes, apparently, we all were just hallucinating the idea that the Left insisted we should believe each and every woman that would come forward with “her truth” with regards to sexual assault. Apparently, it was just conservatives using that phrase just to attack Joe Biden and whatever other Leftist who got caught in this same sort of trap that the Left tried to set on right-wingers like Kavanaugh and Trump.
 
Apparently, the actual phrase is “believe women”, which is somehow different from “believe all women”. Apparently, the phrase “believe women” is supposed to mean that we take sexual assault claims seriously without throwing away due process and without “reflexively doubting them”, as Jill Filipovic tweeted upon reading the article.
 
It’s worth mentioning the load of crap that this whole thing is.
 
Filipovic, in her tweet, claims that “feminists never said ‘believe all women’ – the right inserted the ‘all’. Feminists said ‘believe women’: that is, start with the assumption that women are telling the truth instead of reflexively doubting them.”
 
Again, that’s a load of crap, not to mention a hilarious attempt at gaslighting. LITERALLY ALL FEMINISTS, WHEN THE METOO MOVEMENT BECAME A THING, STARTED SAYING “BELIEVE ALL WOMEN.” Filipovic either doesn’t remember (how convenient) or is straight-up lying and gaslighting, which is the most likely possibility simply because of the fact that the accusation is being thrown at the Democrats’ last hope of beating Trump in November: Creepy Joe Biden.
 
Let me share with you just a few examples of the many, MANY times feminists and Leftists in general have used the phrase “believe all women.”
 
Let’s begin with a tweet from The View on December 8th, 2017:
 
“’Rapes and sexual harassment are the least-reported crimes in our country because women are afraid they will not be believed and that they will be shamed – and we need to change that!’ Sunny on why she believes it’s essential to believe all women coming forward with allegations.”
 
From Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) on September 26th, 2018, with regards to the Kavanaugh accusations: “We stand with Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez, & Julie Swetnik. #BelieveAllWomen.”
 
That one in particular is hilarious to me because not only does she use the hashtag that the gaslighting leftists insisted feminists never used, but she is also adding Julie Swetnik, the woman who accused Kavanaugh of being at ten parties where she herself had been “raped”, though she never accused Kavanaugh of doing the “raping”. The reason I find it hilarious is because listening to her story for five minutes is all it takes to recognize how utterly bogus and ridiculous it is, not to mention fairly irrelevant, since she never accused Kavanaugh of partaking in the acts she claims happened in such parties.
 
But regardless of that tangential point, we can clearly see that she is earnestly using the full phrase and unless she’s secretly a right-wing operative or something like that, I guess that’s a case of a LEFTIST, FEMINIST USING THE PHRASE THAT FILIPOVIC INSISTED THEY DIDN’T USE.
 
From NPR: “’Believe all women’ has been the rallying cry of the #MeToo movement – a mantra embraced by some but dismissed by others as naïve. The tension over the credibility of women is nothing new, especially in rape investigations.”
 
And here’s an image from one of the protests regarding the Kavanaugh hearings:

​All it takes to classify a woman as a “survivor” is simply her telling her story, and Tara Reade has told her story extensively to a number of news outlets. All of a sudden, however, we are not to believe ALL “survivors” and women.
 
From the University of Oregon’s Organization Against Sexual Assault: “We must educate young boys on the meaning of consent and instill the value of women’s safety in them from a young age. #BelieveAllWomen #consent #MeToo.”
 
From a Democrat candidate for the North Carolina Senate: “After taking cyberstalking plea deal, WNC’s Rep. Henson to resign. #AboutTime #BelieveAllWomen #endofcorruption #DrainTheSwamp.”
 
From a mental health counselor who could probably use one himself: “This a**hole assumes the allegations of rape and sexual assault against Trump are fake, but I would bet good money he believes Juanita Broaddrick. #BelieveAllWomen.” (Worth mentioning that, upon finding this tweet, I found a reply that read: "That hashtag is a winner. Thank you. I wish other men believed." which cracked me up when I saw it because this woman wrote it at the time the original tweet was made and she 100% meant what she said).
 
Time after time, ever since the phrase was brought up, it has been used by the Left sincerely to attack any political opponents they can use the tactic of accusations against. Whenever a woman came forward with a story of sexual assault, we were to believe she was telling the truth and disparage the man that she was accusing, without hearing his side of the story and without granting presumption of innocence.
 
But now that Joe Biden has been accused for THE EIGHT TIME of some sort of sexual misconduct, even though there is AMPLE evidence of such things from just the pictures I shared in the very FIRST article I wrote discussing the Reade allegations, the response from the Left has been nothing short of a betrayal of the standards they had been trying to set for the last couple of years.
 
When it’s one of THEIR OWN who is being credibly accused of sexual assault, they either bury the story (like they had been trying to do with the SEVEN other women who came forward to accuse him) or they attack and disparage the accuser, accusing her of lying for Trump’s political benefit or simply being an affront to “progress”.
 
And the most hilarious part of all of it is that the argument they are trying to use, that the phrase should be “believe women”, not “believe all women”, doesn’t work because both signify the same thing.
 
There is no significant difference between “believe women” and “believe all women.” The “all” is IMPLIED in the former! Tara Reade is still a woman. The phrase they apparently believe should be used is “believe women” WHICH STILL APPLIES TO HER!
 
These idiots can’t even gaslight us right! They are arguing for a distinction without a difference! Even if they were right about feminists never having used the latter term, which is 100% wrong, as I just demonstrated, their argument STILL wouldn’t suffice to discredit Reade. She is still a woman and they are still insisting that women be believed.
 
And the argument that we don’t “reflexively doubt” the woman making the allegations is still ridiculous because NO ONE reflexively doubts women making allegations. What we do is not rob the person being accused of their presumption of innocence while still taking the woman’s allegations with the seriousness it deserves, if it deserves it at all. Accusations like the one from Blasey Ford or any of the other Kavanaugh accusers barely deserved any seriousness because of the fact that NONE of them brought forth any evidence of such misconduct from Kavanaugh.
 
Ford accused him DECADES after the incident happened. And unlike Reade, who waited almost as long to come forward with her story, Ford never told anyone about what supposedly happened when it supposedly happened. Reade told her mother, brother and those close to her soon after she was allegedly assaulted by Biden. CNN tried to delete a video of a phone call Reade’s mother made to Larry King’s show to talk about it, showing that Reade indeed told her mother around the time that the incident occurred.
 
Ford came forward with her accusation only when Kavanaugh was about to be the newest Supreme Court Justice and she never told anyone about what happened until the time she made the accusation. And the witnesses she brought forth either did not corroborate her story or outright REFUTED her story.
 
And keep in mind, Ford was THE MOST CREDIBLE out of all of Kavanaugh’s accusers. Each of the accusers that came forth after Ford were less and less credible, up to Swetnik, who sounded like a loon because she repeatedly attended parties held by the same people she accused of raping girls in those parties.
 
We didn’t not believe Ford because we “reflexively” doubt women coming forward with sexual assault allegations. We didn’t believe Ford because HER STORY WAS FULL OF HOLES, SHE KEPT CHANGING IT, SHE NEVER TOLD ANYONE BEFORE COMING FORWARD, SHE HAD NO CORROBORATING WITNESSES AND WAS VISIBLY TRAINED BY ALYSSA MILANO ON HOW TO ACT LIKE AN INNOCENT GIRL IN FRONT OF A JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, HALF OF WHOM WERE DEMOCRATS WITH AN AGENDA LIKE SHE WAS.
 
And that last part was the most important one, because it’s easily provable. A video from September of last year showed Blasey Ford’s attorney “telling attendees at a feminist conference that her client’s testimony against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a politically motivated move to protect Roe v. Wade,” according to Newsweek. So it is painfully obvious that the ONLY reason Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault wasn’t because he did it but because he posed a threat to their paganistic and satanic desire to KILL THEIR OWN CHILDREN SHOULD THEY PLEASE.
 
Meanwhile, Reade has far more going for her story being true than Ford ever did and Reade is, herself, a Democrat who in all likelihood hates Trump’s guts, so she has far less of a reason to come forward with accusations because of politics.
 
In all of this, keep in mind the one and ONLY reason the Left is saying the things they are saying: the target of these accusations is Joe Biden. If Tara Reade had accused Trump of sexual assault, even if she didn’t bring with her any sort of evidence or witnesses, she would be celebrated and treated like a QUEEN, much like Ford was. But because she is accusing Joe Biden, the rules of engagement have to be changed.
 
All of a sudden, the phrase the Left adopted when attacking political opponents, “believe all women” became so problematic that some of their members believed they should gaslight everyone and claim no feminist ever actually used it, when they very clearly did.
 
All of a sudden, that phrase is a “right-wing trap”, not because the Left has never used it but because it can be used against them by the Right.
 
So, they ignore the standards they set for other people as soon as they are used against them. Not the first time it’s happened; won’t be the last. But it is always glorious to see karma biting them in the rear and people trying to get them to operate under the rules THEY set.
 
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.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

A little more than a week ago, I talked about how people trust Trump over Biden when it comes to both the economy and handling the coronavirus pandemic, according to Reuters, and I mentioned how it was interesting that Reuters, of all polling organizations, was reporting this. However, we have something today that is a little bit more unexpected:
 
President Trump beats Joe Biden in several key battleground states by a decent margin, and this is being reported by CNN, the same people who have run fake news story after fake news story, coupled with fake news poll after fake news poll, regarding Trump, Russia and whatever else they can falsely accuse him of doing. These very same people, who not too long ago I talked about how they went from accusing Trump of colluding with Russia to actually colluding with Russia themselves when it came to reporting the pandemic in the “former” Soviet Union, are now reporting that their boy, Joe Biden, isn’t doing all that well.
 
Now, in their national poll, and what they will likely wish to focus on, they have Joe Biden beating Trump 51 to 46 percent. However, as we all well and truly know, the election is never a national race, but a race for all 50 states, and as I just said, Trump has Joe beat in plenty of the most important ones.
 
As a whole, CNN’s poll of 15 battleground states (Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin) shows President Trump beating Joe Biden by seven points, 52 to 45 percent with a margin of error of 3.7 percent.
 
Funny enough, this was also coupled with the fact that earlier in the week, CNN was forced to publish another poll which showed President Trump’s approval rating at its highest in the poll: 45%. Despite all of their hackery and their political attacks that are very obviously biased (and they don’t even try to hide their bias anymore), despite everything they’ve tried throwing at him, he’s only come out of each and every attack stronger than before.
 
It also doesn’t help the Left that Joe Biden has been marred in controversy over the past couple of months given the Tara Reade situation that Democrats and the media are DESPERATELY trying to bury under the rug (I find it hilarious that Schumer is panicking and was also satisfied with just Biden’s denial).
 
Another aspect that might not exactly help the former Vice President is the fact that he was very clearly involved in the witch hunt of Gen. Michael Flynn, given released records that showed he both was in the meeting where Obama and his staff were discussing Flynn and that Joe Biden was among the MANY people who asked for Flynn’s “unmasking” in official documents (which were first reported by CBS News but the Biden camp has forced the news organization to get rid of the story, further showing Biden lied about not bullying the media).
 
But getting back to the polling, RealClearPolitics’ poll of polls, which is a poll taking the averages of various polls, shows Biden’s popularity slipping following the Tara Reade story. Just a couple of months ago, Biden had a 51 to 44 percent lead on Trump, but now, Biden has slipped to 47 percent and Trump sits at 43 percent.
 
Trump’s job approval has also gone up in that particular poll, sitting at 45%.
 
Getting back to the CNN poll itself, it finds that Trump beats Biden with Independents, 50 to 46 percent. Biden has the advantage with women (funny enough) at 55 to 41 percent. Minorities also overwhelmingly support Biden over Trump 69 to 26 percent, but that is actually not particularly awful for Trump, as Republicans tend not to be too favored by minorities and Trump sits at 26% with them in that poll, which is rather high, all things considered. If that number holds, Trump will win plenty of minorities in the election.
 
In any case, Trump beats Biden with men, 50 to 46 percent and with white voters, 55 to 43 percent. Strangely enough, Biden has an advantage over Trump when it comes to older voters, those aged 45 and up, holding a six-point advantage over Trump, which is a bigger advantage than what he has with young voters, which is a three-point lead over Trump.
 
CNN commented on this, saying: “Though other recent polling has shown some signs of concern for Biden among younger voters and strength among older ones, few have pegged the race as this close among younger voters. The results suggest that younger voters in the battleground states are tilted in favor of Trump, a stark change from the last CNN poll in which battleground voters were analyzed in March[.]”
 
Breitbart News chalks this up to being the Bernie effect, with many of those young voters having been Bernie supporters and being disenchanted and outright enraged that Bernie once again got screwed over by the DNC and was kept from being the nominee. But this is not the first time we have heard of Biden, or even Democrats in general, not getting the youth vote to turn out.
 
Just two months ago, I wrote an article about how young people largely don’t tend to vote. In it, I showed a graphic that displayed reported rates of voters by age, showing the youngest demographic – those 18 to 29 years of age – voting at far fewer rates than those who are older than them.
 
However, there is a noticeable difference between people who turn out to vote and people who voice support. Plenty of young people voiced their support for Bernie Sanders, but notably fewer actually turned out to vote for him. Biden doesn’t even have all that much SUPPORT from young voters, which definitely will come to hurt him with that demographic come November (again, if this holds up).
 
Of course, he does have a very strange and nonsensical lead with older voters, and those tend to vote more, but I sincerely doubt that would be anywhere close to near enough to secure an electoral victory.
 
Again, the CNN poll itself shows Trump soundly beating Biden in key battleground states. Joe could very well win the popular vote (maybe), but the electoral college is where the votes are most important and he isn’t doing too well, it seems.
 
What’s more, considering the economic recession that we are about to face because of Leftist governors’ decision to keep their states closed just to hurt Trump (which will undoubtedly come to bite those Leftists in the rear come November, if the previous special election was any sort of indication), people know we will need a president who can quickly and effectively rebuild the economy and Trump has Joe soundly beat on that area as well, with a margin of 54 to 42 percent on Joe.
 
So both Reuters and CNN show that voters trust Trump with the economy more than Joe Biden, and it seems they largely know just who is responsible for the economic downturn that we are about to face: the “Resistance” Democrat Party, particularly the Democrat governors, who are choosing to shoot themselves on the foot just to get a chance to hurt Trump.
 
But as with Reuters, it is extremely interesting that CNN would be the ones to report this. Usually, they have nothing but negative (fake) news to report on Trump, but every once in a while, they are forced to at least relatively face the reality that they abhor: Trump is nowhere near as unpopular and despised as they say that he is.
 
Now, there is still plenty of time before the election, but if these numbers hold, I don’t really see a way Joe beats Trump (and as I have said many times in the past, this confidence should not translate to complacency for us Trump supporters and voters, as that is the only thing that could definitely beat the President).
 
Romans 16:20
“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Two Fridays ago, Joe Biden appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” with Mika Brzezinski (who, as I said in the article talking about it, did a pretty decent job) to speak about the allegation made by Tara Reade that he sexually assaulted her. Just appearing and addressing the allegations, denying them outright, made the Women’s March, which had previously been calling for Joe to address it with seriousness, perfectly satisfied and content with his answer.
 
We already knew how much of a joke the Women’s March was, but this is pathetic, even for them, though not unexpected. The Women’s March is nothing short of a Leftist political hack group aimed at targeting and destroying conservatives through accusations of sexual assault. Whenever one of their own is accused, however, a simple denial of the allegations is enough, when the same denial is seen as insufficient or even as an outright lie when done by the Right.
 
To remind you, this is the same organization that gave birth to the phrase “believe all women,” so that’s why this is particularly pathetic. They should change it to “believe all women (who accuse conservatives, but not the ones who accuse our guys)”.
 
In any case, following Joe’s interview and denial of the accusations, the Women’s March tweeted: “We are glad to see Joe Biden take a step in addressing this issue head-on. This is what is necessary to create a culture where survivors can come forward without fear of reprisal. We’ve come a long way on this, but still have a long way to go. Only Joe Biden can speak to his past, and we are glad he has begun to do so with his statement. It’s not on survivors or women to answer for him.”
 
What a load of crap. First of all, it took him FIVE WEEKS to address the issue. He had hoped his buddies in the corrupt fake news media would do the dirty work for him and not cover the allegation, hoping it would go away on its own. Ultimately, he couldn’t do that and when he realized it (or was told it), he decided to talk about it five weeks after the fact when there was mounting pressure to talk about it.
 
Second, is that really helpful for a culture of survivors coming forward without fear of reprisal? Funny, because Joe Biden, in 1993, ultimately FIRED Reade after she had made a formal complaint about him (and I will talk about this in a moment). She faced reprisal. Joe’s actions do not speak of a man who is sorry for what he did. He has tried EVERYTHING to hide what he did, which is why the following from the Women’s March is so ironic:
 
In a separate statement, the group says that they take women’s “allegations seriously” and that Biden “modeled” what a proper response to this sort of accusation should be because he allowed “for a fair inquiry of the facts to be conducted by journalists or other investigative bodies without interference.”
 
Again I say: what a load of crap. He has denied access to his Senate papers which are in the hands of the University of Delaware. If you were to find the complaint by Tara Reade about his sexual assault, it would be there, and Biden knows it and is denying people access to it. The Women’s March is flat-out LYING to protect their guy because they know that he is indefensible but they need someone to go against Trump. Speaking of which, the idiots actually think this puts them in A BETTER POSITION to win in 2020:
 
“To those concerned about what this means for the election: By addressing these allegations, we are improving our chances of winning in 2020. As we saw in 2018, when women are respected and empowered, we turn out in force.”
 
Yeah, right. Biden looks EVEN MORE GUILTY in the way that he addressed the allegations, as I said in my article’s very title.
 
It’s extremely ironic, but not surprising, that the Women’s March would sidle up to Biden simply by him denying the allegations. They did not offer Kavanaugh the same grace by any stretch of the imagination, even though Blasey Ford had NOTHING to corroborate her story. Even the witnesses she brought up CHALLENGED her story, either not remembering the house party or outright refuting the allegations made by Ford, and still, these dishonest hacks decided to believe her.
 
Meanwhile, here I am offering SEVEN pieces that corroborate Tara Reade’s story of her being sexually assaulted by Joe Biden in 1993 (though this won’t do anything to convince anyone on the Left, that’s for certain).
 
First, we have Lynda LaCasse, who was a former neighbor of Reade’s in the mid-90s. In an interview with Business Insider’s Rich McHugh, who helped Ronan Farrow break the Harvey Weinstein story, LaCasse said: “This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it.” LaCasse explained that in 1995 or 96, Reade had told her of what had happened, saying: “I remember her saying, here was this person that she was working for and she idolized him. And he kind of put her up against a wall. And he put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside her. She felt like she was assaulted, and she really didn’t feel there was anything she could do.”
 
That aligns with Reade’s own story, which she told numerous sources, including Business Insider, that Joe Biden pushed her up against a wall and sexually assaulted her with his fingers.
 
LaCasse continued: “[Reade] was crying. She was upset. And the more she talked about it, the more she started crying. I remember saying that she needed to file a police report. I don’t remember all the details. I remember the skirt. I remember the fingers. I remember she was devastated.”
 
And if you think she’s just some “conservative operator” or something, she admits to McHugh that she’s not only a “very strong Democrat” but also that she’s “for Biden,” indicating an intention to vote for him regardless of this story (which honestly repulses me, but whatever).
 
This is a Biden supporter and even she is acknowledging that Reade’s story is true and that it needs to be more than fully addressed.
 
Second, there’s Lorraine Sanchez, who told Business Insider (in the same article where LaCasse's interview happened) that she “worked with Reade in the office of a California state senator in the mid-‘90s… that she recalls Reade complaining at the time that her former boss in Washington, D.C., had sexually harassed her, and that she had been fired after raising concerns.”
 
She said that “[Reade said] she had been sexually harassed by her former boss while she was in D.C. and as a result of her voicing her concerns to her supervisors, she was let go, fired.”
 
Third, Collin Moulton, who is Reade’s younger brother. McHugh also spoke to Moulton and in those conversations with him and another person (Sanchez), he says that “they struck me as extremely credible.”
 
McHugh states: “I drilled down with the details of the story, and they matched up with her story, with Tara’s story.”
 
Fourth, there is one anonymous corroborating witness, who confirmed Reade had told her about the sexual assault at the time and McHugh also found her to be “extremely credible.”
 
Fifth, another anonymous corroborating witness, who says she was a former intern under Reade in Biden’s Senate office at the time. She says she was not told of the incident, “but [the witness] said… in mid-April of 1993, Tara was abruptly no longer her supervisor. So the timing matches exactly with what Tara was saying.”
 
Sixth, there is the 1993 videotape of Reade’s mother calling CNN’s Larry King on his show to ask for advice. According to The Intercept, the same source that first covered Reade’s story, “In interviews with The Intercept, Reade also mentioned that her mother had made a phone call to ‘Larry King Live’ on CNN, during which she made reference to her daughter’s experience on Capitol Hill. Reade told The Intercept that her mother called in asking for advice after Reade, then in her 20s, left Biden’s office.”
 
Obviously, CNN would never try to let people know about the tape and actively tried to hide it, erasing the episode of Larry King’s show where the call took place from their archives, but you know what they say: “what’s on the Internet is forever,” and an everyday Joe (not that Joe) found it after listening to the Katie Halper podcast. Here is the transcript of that call:
 
King: “San Luis Obispo, California, hello.”
 
Caller: “Yes, hello. I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him.”
 
King: “In other words, she had a story to tell but, out of respect for the person she worked for, she didn’t tell it?”
 
Caller: “That’s true.”
 
Personally, I don’t think it was “out of respect” for Biden, but out of fear, that she didn’t go to the press over it. I don’t know Reade or what she was thinking at the time, but I do know that, if I were a woman and were sexually assaulted by a prominent Senator (or anyone, really), regardless of who that person is and regardless of whether or not I previously respected that person dearly and whether or not I agreed with his political views, I would not have a shred of respect for that person after the fact. But I would have fear, and that, I think, was the driving force behind Reade not telling her story at the time.
 
She was younger and she didn’t want to challenge a powerful figure, whom she admired and respected and agreed with. But Reade’s mother’s story, the little that she told with the few details she provided, aligns with the events that took place in Reade’s life, down to the timing of it all.
 
And finally, we have the seventh piece, which is the most convincing piece of corroborating evidence we have so far. Yeah, if you thought the others were decent enough, then take a look at court documents from 1996, filed by one Mr. Theodore Dronen, Reade’s ex-husband, in fighting a restraining order she filed during his and Reade’s divorce:
 
“I met [Reade] in the spring of 1993 while working in Washington D.C. At the early stages of our dating, [Reade] felt comfortable confiding in me as we both worked for members of Congress. On several occasions, [Reade] related a problem that she was having at work, in U.S. Senator Joe Biden’s office. It was obvious that this event had a very traumatic effect on [Reade], and that she is still sensitive and effected [sic] by it today.”
 
Dronen noted that her “traumatic” experiences while working for Biden had tainted her “perception and judgment.”
 
There could well be another piece of corroborating evidence in the form of her harassment complaint, but that would be found in Biden’s Senate papers, which as I have said, are in the hands of the University of Delaware and Biden has denied people access to them, except for members of his own team (who will likely “lose” the papers regarding Reade, or at least, the complaint specifically, and claim they never found any such complaint).
 
All of this only makes the Women’s March statement and tweet look all the worse because Reade had FAR MORE evidence against Biden than Blasey Ford ever could have hoped to have against Kavanaugh and yet they choose to believe Biden when he just DENIES the allegation, as though what he says is Gospel.
 
Here’s hoping that more evidence comes forward of what Joe Biden did to Reade (and the seven other women who have accused him of sexual harassment/assault) and that Biden eventually finds himself in the very jail he would ironically want other accused men to be in.
 
Joe Biden deserves to go to the big house, not the White House.
 
Romans 2:6-8
“He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.