No, I have not joined the dark side, I can assure you. The fact that Hillary Clinton might run for 2020 makes me happy not because I admire her or some literally insane nonsense like that. I don’t want her to win the White House, knowing full-well she would be terrible for the country. However, I will explain why I am happy to hear this momentarily.
First of all, while nothing’s exactly official yet in terms of the Hillary campaign, the reason this is even being talked about in the manner that it is is because of a Wall Street Journal article titled “Hillary Will Run Again”.
I don’t know about you, but when I first saw that, I honestly thought of the phrase “The South will rise again”. Funny, considering it’s Democrats who fought to keep black people as slaves. I even tweeted that that title sounded like it was Hillary’s “The South will rise again” moment.
In any case, let’s dive further into the article. The sub-headline reads: “Reinventing herself as a liberal firebrand, Mrs. Clinton will easily capture the 2020 nomination.”
Yet another statement that brings a smile to my face.
For further context, this piece was written by Mark Penn, a pollster and senior adviser to both Clintons from 1995-2008, and it was also written by Andrew Stein, who was the Democratic Manhattan borough president and New York City Council president.
Here is their lead paragraph: “Get ready for Hillary Clinton 4.0. More than 30 years in the making, this new version of Mrs. Clinton, when she runs for president in 2020, will come full circle – back to the universal-health-care-promoting progressive firebrand of 1994. True to her name, Mrs. Clinton will fight this out until the last dog dies. She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House.”
To be 100% honest with you, upon reading the subhead and the lead, I honestly thought the writers were trying to roast (make fun of) Hillary to some extent.
Let’s go over a few things from the subhead and lead. First, they mention she is “reinventing herself as a liberal firebrand…”, they mention this is Hillary Clinton “4.0” and that she is coming full circle, back to “the universal-health-care-promoting progressive firebrand of 1994”.
I’m sorry, I must’ve missed something important, because that’s exactly the same Hillary Clinton I voted against in 2016, will vote against in 2020 should she miraculously “win” the nomination again and the same Hillary Clinton I have seen for quite some time. How do you reinvent yourself into a lunatic liberal when that’s already what you are?
The other thing that made me think these two were roasting Hillary was when they mentioned: “She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way…”
Maybe I took it to mean something else, but that sounded a tad bit condescending, don’t you think? Not condescending to Obama and Trump, but to Hillary. It’s like saying “this boxer won’t let a little thing like getting his butt kicked for 11 rounds stop him from winning in the 12th”. It might sound like they’re trying to uplift Hillary, but it also comes off as giving a back-handed compliment. Like saying “she messed up majorly and screwed herself to a post twice before, but now, she’s ready to hopefully avoid screwing herself again.”
The article then says: “Hillary Clinton 2.0 was a moderate, building on the success of her communitarian ‘It Takes a Village’ appeals and pledging to bring home the bacon for New York. She emphasized her religious background, voiced strong support for Israel, voted for the Iraq war, and took a hard line against Iran.”
“As Hillary 3.0 catered to the coastal elites who had eluded her in 2008, Mr. Trump stole many of the white working-class voters who might have been amenable to the previous version. Finally she had the full support of the New York Times and the other groups that had shunned her for Mr. Obama – but only at the cost of an unforeseen collapse in support in the Midwest.”
Okay, I have a few things to say. First, I shall repeat an earlier question: how do you reinvent yourself into a lunatic liberal when that’s already what you were? The fact that they use “2.0” and “3.0” and now “4.0” indicates they believe Hillary is somehow different today than she was as a New York Senator, Secretary of State, or DNC candidate.
Second, I thought it was Trump colluding with Russia that cost Hillary the election. How would Trump “stealing” white working-class voters be a factor whatsoever if Trump and Putin were colluding behind closed doors, offering each other gay sexual acts (and that’s something the Left has been saying, ignoring their hypocritical homophobia) and ultimately stole the election from Hillary. We even have an investigation into the matter, don’t we? If that’s not what happened and it was the fact that Trump “stole” the white working-class and others who were legitimately left in the dust by a Democrat Party that is trying to become the Democratic Party of Mexico, then why do we have an investigation into something that didn’t happen and something that even they don’t actually believe happened?
(All of that was sarcasm, in case you couldn’t tell. I know precisely why this hoax of an investigation that some on the Left don’t even really believe is still ongoing.)
Finally, Trump didn’t “steal” the white working-class. The white working-class was altogether abandoned by the Democrat Party. Though they may have been the party of unions at one time, that’s not something they even care to keep anymore. They hope to ride on minorities’ backs to win them elections (yet another slavery reference?). And if they don’t win them, they can blame the white working-class and white women for their losses, which is the equivalent of touching a hot stove and being surprised that it burned them.
Turns out that abandoning an entire class of voters doesn’t exactly encourage those voters to vote for you.
In any case, the WSJ article is not done. They still offer hilarity and back-handed comments:
“[Hillary] will not allow this humiliating loss at the hands of an amateur to end the story of her career. You can expect her to run for president once again. Maybe not at first, when the legions of Senate Democrats make their announcements, but definitely by the time the primaries are in full swing.”
“Mrs. Clinton has a 75% approval rating among Democrats, an unfinished mission to be the first female president, and a personal grievance against Mr. Trump, whose supporters pilloried her with chants of ‘Lock her up!’ This must be avenged.”
“Expect Hillary 4.0 to come out swinging. She has decisively to win those Iowa caucus-goers who have never warmed up to her. They will see her now as strong, partisan, left-leaning and all-Democrat – the one with the guts, experience and steely-eyed determination to defeat Mr. Trump. She has had two years to go over what she did wrong and how to take him on again.”
That is an awful lot and I don’t think I can go over absolutely everything. This article is plenty long as is and I have yet to even state why this whole thing makes me happy.
So allow me to do just that. The reason I am happy Hillary is running again is because after her defeat, she has only gotten worse in my eyes, and likely in many people’s. After the election, she went on a long trip of mental breakdowns and even wrote a book titled “What Happened” to try and reason why she lost. Now, I didn’t read that book, but I take it it mentioned Putin, Russia, racism, sexism, bigotry, and all the excuses she could possibly get out of her hot sauce bag.
And this is ignoring the fact that there have been revelations that it was HER campaign that tried to steal the election and still managed to lose somehow. HER campaign hired foreign agents to write a fake dossier about Trump. HER campaign was the one that was helped by the Obama DOJ, FBI and FISA court.
She tried to steal an American presidential election. And this is ADDING to her rap sheet of crimes connected to the Clinton Foundation including selling 20% of our Uranium supply to, well, what do you know? VLADIMIR PUTIN! And let’s not forget that she also STOLE the Democrat nomination away from Bernie back in 2016 as well. Now, I’m personally glad she did that, considering the disaster that a possible Bernie Sanders presidency would’ve wrought (I still think Trump would’ve won, but just barely, kind of like in 2000). However, one cannot deny the dishonesty and overall wrongful act that was committed by the DNC to crown Hillary with the nomination.
If she runs again, and if she becomes the nominee again as these two writers say she will, then she will be utterly crushed even worse than last time.
What Trump didn’t have in 2016 was experience in the field and a record of successful policy, which is natural given he was an outsider at the time. Now that he’s had 2, and by the time 2020 comes around, 4 years of experience, he has only improved his chances of winning in 2020 to the point even Michael Moore legitimately believes he will be reelected if facing against anyone but Michelle Obama (and I think he could even beat her).
So I sincerely hope she wins and she becomes the nominee once again.
Now, regarding the last few paragraphs that I just shared with you, some of it returns to my earlier question of reinventing yourself into something you already were. They mention she is now left-leaning, partisan and all-Democrat as though she wasn’t in the past. Don’t make me laugh.
And one last thing. She didn’t get beat by an amateur. She got beat by TWO amateurs. Here, they were only thinking about Trump, who never held public office and was most definitely an amateur at the time. But we can’t forget that she lost in 2007 against an amateur who was US Senator for only TWO years, after serving in the Illinois State Legislature and was a “community organizer” before that.
But in any case, I look forward to the 2020 campaign on the Democrat side. Even if Hillary loses, her running will create some form of divide. If even Nancy Pelosi’s speakership is in peril because of young socialists like Ocasio-Cortez, then Hillary likely doesn’t stand a chance. Ironically, the writers also mention towards the end that Hillary would “trounce” all other candidates, including Joe Biden, but I really doubt the Democrats want to allow Hillary anywhere near their nomination once again… if they’re smart, that is.
“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. While Democrats like Hillary might promise everything for free, you can rest assured that this does not have hidden fees or taxes to be paid at a later date. If I say it’s free, that means it’s free. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
That is an incredibly obvious title and an undeniable fact of politics. The Left only tolerates you when you happen to agree with them, but the minute you dare think for yourself, you become the embodiment of Hitler. That is what Trump has had to deal with for 2 years now and what he will likely have to deal with for the rest of his life. And that extends to the rest of his family, too.
But why am I talking about this? Well, recently, pothead rapper Snoop Dogg (real name Calvin Broadus Jr.) released a video of himself outside the White House saying things like “F*** the President”.
This isn’t the first time the rapper who has more letters in his name than IQ points left has come out publicly against the President, with him releasing a new album called “Make America Crip Again” which featured a dead body covered by a flag with a toe tag that read “TRUMP”, and back in March of 2017, he released a music video that shows him shooting a fake gun at a clown-like Trump character with exaggerated orange paint on his face.
Not to mention that he’s not the only celebrity that has publicly come out against Trump, with the likes of Robert DeNiro, Merryl Streep, Samuel L. Jackson and just about anyone who has a big voice in Hollywood attacking the President.
While I don’t know if each of them personally knew Trump and liked him in the past, I imagine they at least tolerated him.
In the past, Trump used to be a bit more like a Democrat. That makes sense, since he sought to build buildings in New York City and you kind of have to be pretty friendly with those in the government to get things done quickly and efficiently, and Democrats have had control of NYC for a long time now.
Because he used to be more friendly towards Democrats, those who would vote for Democrats loved him.
Recently, I have been watching The Apprentice. As you may know, the show used to air on NBC. It was wildly popular and a lot of organizations, companies and people wanted to be a part of it.
Having watched an entire season of the show (Season 6, to be precise), I noticed some people in it who now say the sort of things Snoop Dogg recently said. Among which was Snoop Dogg.
Allow me to explain some things, in case you are unfamiliar with how the show runs. Trump selects a large number of people (usually 18 candidates) to participate in the show to be his next Apprentice, someone who will join Trump on a project he wants the Apprentice to lead. He divides the candidates into two teams who are given a project. Whatever team does better in that project wins and receives some form of reward for their good work.
In the season I watched, one of the rewards that were given to the winner of each particular project was visiting the Los Angeles Lakers’ practice facility (this season was shot in L.A. instead of the usual NYC) to play a pickup game of basketball and meet legends Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, James Worthy and then-Lakers coach Phil Jackson.
Another reward was visiting Snoop Dogg’s recording studio, getting to meet him, and just hang around (though not smoking pot).
So it was pretty clear that Snoop Dogg and the Los Angeles Lakers (who are not necessarily openly against Trump, but Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has been vocal) used to at least be fairly chummy with Trump if they were on his show.
Donald Trump, before running, used to be admired by both the Left and the Right. He was (is) the embodiment of the fullest potential of the American Dream. Not everyone will achieve it, but with time, hard work, dedication, passion and intelligence, it can definitely be achieved.
The Right loved him because he embodied the American Dream. The Left loved him because he was friendly towards them and he helped them out with financial contributions to their campaigns.
According to an article on US News dating back to January of 2016, before Trump was even the GOP nominee, “his political contributions over the last two and a half decades show that prior to the 2008 election cycle, Trump favored Democrats. He donated more than $10,000 to Hillary Clinton between 2002 and 2007, and Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is his top beneficiary, raking in $18,350 over the years.”
So he donated a good amount of money to Democrats over the years, among whom was his bitter rival Hillary Clinton. Of course, he also donated to Republicans, too. According to that same article, “On the Republican side, Arizona Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Rep. Mark Foley and former Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Spector also benefited from Trump’s generosity.”
So he donated money to yet another person in politics, though supposedly on the Right, who hated him upon his decision to run for POTUS in John McCain.
Trump also donated money, according to US News, to Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell (who is apparently cool with Trump now) and, perhaps most laughably of all, Kirsten Gillibrand. Although, I suppose that last one makes sense, since she has been a New York Senator since 2009.
So he used to be friendly with a lot of people in Washington on both sides of the aisle. Now, the article did mention that he donated more frequently to Democrats until 2008. Afterwards, he began donating more and more to Republicans. And who can blame him when the leader of the Democrat Party was the communist called Barack Hussein Obama?
But even still, I don’t quite remember the Left flat out hating Trump like they do now when he started donating more to Republicans. I suppose part of it was that he was still donating to Democrats (again, Gillibrand has been a senator since 2009), so things were kind of okay between them, but still. They only started to really hate him when he decided to run for office as a Republican.
Well, actually, that may not be entirely accurate. If you remember, the media used to mock him and thought he was a joke of a candidate who wouldn’t get far, but was good for ratings. So maybe they didn’t quite hate him at that point, but the fact that he decided to run as a Republican probably meant severing ties with Democrats from that point on, even if he had lost.
Once Trump became a serious threat to Hillary and the Democrat Party, not to mention his agenda was one that was 180 degrees backwards from the Left’s, meant that they harbored a deep-rooted hatred for him.
Now, I’m not saying they’re not allowed to not like someone who is now on the other side of their political ideologies. There are a lot of Never Trump conservatives whom I used to like but no longer do, namely people like Glenn Beck and Shepherd Smith among others. And if there is someone who used to be a conservative but now is a liberal, I’m not gonna like that person and think they are either idiotic or giving up to the pressure from the Left.
But I could not say I hate any one of them. The difference between someone who abandons the Left for the Right and someone who abandons the Right for the Left is that the Right won’t go bananas over someone leaving them to the point where they give speeches saying they “f*** person X” or “I want to beat up person X” and going to where they live, saying basically what Snoop Dogg is saying.
The fact that Leftists are the ones who do this means their hatred is at their core, to the point they go out of their own way to hurl insults. No right-winger will go out of their own way to insult someone on the Left.
Remember when Kanye West shared a picture of himself wearing a MAGA hat? Remember the slew of people hating on him for it? The people mocking him? This is what happens when you leave the Democrat slave plantation of thought. You get hunted down, attacked and harassed.
Until he altogether decided to stay away from politics (can’t blame him), he was hounded and harassed. Remember when two of Don Lemon’s guests made racist remarks towards him, saying that that’s what happens when an n-word doesn’t read?
They loved him when he said George Bush didn’t care about black people and hated him to the core when he showed himself wearing a MAGA hat, which to them, in their ridiculous world of insanity, is basically the equivalent of a swastika.
They “loved” Kanye until they realized he thought for himself. They “loved” Trump until the money stopped pouring in and ran against Hillary. They “love” anyone until that person disagrees with them or stops helping them. And when that person disagrees with them, all hell breaks loose.
NBC used to host The Apprentice. Snoop Dogg, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and likely other celebrities (again, I’ve only watched season 6) have been on the show as part of the rewards. And let's not forget that NBC used to air CELEBRITY APPRENTICE, where, as the title suggests, a bunch of celebrities try to get hired by Trump as his Apprentice (though Celebrity Apprentice basically replaced The Apprentice).
But once Trump dared to go against the Left, he became enemy number 1. Once anyone dares defy the Left, they become targets of hatred and ire.
One can hardly say the Left loves anyone. They don’t. They don’t even love themselves, how can they possibly love others? What they do is merely tolerate others as long as they agree with the Leftist agenda. That’s not love, and obviously, that’s not even tolerance.
Love is supposed to be unconditional. That’s not what the Left feels for anyone including themselves. So when someone like Trump comes along and defies them, it’s no surprise the kind of toxicity that oozes out of them henceforth.
Their hearts are filled with hatred. They are not tolerant; they are not loving; they are evil, plain and simple.
“The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to subscribe today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Since the November elections earlier this week resulted in nothing close to a blue wave for Democrats, two stories have since popped up regarding journalists, though with largely varying coverage of them.
First, and the story being covered the most, is Jim Acosta playing the victim after he put his hands on a female White House staffer whose job was to pass the microphone to other members of the White House press corps, but Jim refused to let her take away the mic because he wanted to continue badgering the President.
During the event, which was caught on camera, Jim Acosta was making comments, rather than asking questions, directed towards the President. When Trump wanted the mic to go to someone else, the female staffer had to perform her duties of passing the mic to whomever Trump had chosen to speak. However, Jim refused to hand over the microphone, and when the staffer tried to take it away from him, he put his hands in the crease of her elbow in a defensive manner to keep her from taking away the mic.
Now, I will give Jim the benefit of the doubt and say that he probably didn’t mean to do that and only did it in the heat of the moment, out of reaction over someone getting a bit too close to him. However, whatever sympathy I could feel for him goes away when he says he didn’t put his hand on her (video evidence proves otherwise) and goes as far as to say, when back on with CNN, that Trump had been targeting the media and he was trying to shut them down in response to Trump revoking his access to the press corps.
That’s an actual complaint he had in the aftermath of the incident. He didn’t apologize to the female staffer for touching her, even if it had been out of reaction, and even tries to make himself the victim of some injustice.
Due to this incident, the media chooses to side with Acosta and say that the President is attacking the media and trying to shut them down like the “fascist” he is, even though fascists control the media, not fight them (does that ring any bells of previous presidents?).
Now, let’s move on to the second story relating to a journalist, but one who actually has received threats: Tucker Carlson’s home was nearly broken into by an Antifa mob of about 20 people on Wednesday night.
While Carlson was prepping for his show, he received a text from his wife, who was at home at the time, detailing that she was in the kitchen about to make dinner when she heard loud noises and banging on her door. She didn’t know there was a mob outside, thought someone was trying to break in (they likely were), and hid in the pantry.
The reason we know this was an Antifa mob is because the hate group Smash Racism DC posted a video of the mob on Twitter (which has since been deleted by Twitter), which shows chants for Carlson that he was a racist, that he should leave town and were overall making threats towards him (even though he wasn’t there at the time). And in the video, a woman can be heard saying she wants to “bring a pipe bomb” to Carlson’s home.
Tucker Carlson detailed a bit of the event, saying: “Someone started throwing himself against the front door and actually cracked the front door.” Unless that person is a massive moron (they probably are anyway) and was simply expressing his anger by banging himself against the door, I see no reason to believe whoever was doing it was not trying to get inside.
What reason would someone have to throw themselves against someone’s front door, eventually cracking it? Either that person was trying to get inside in a really stupid way, or was simply incredibly moronic, hurting himself while expressing his anger (I’m assuming it was a man, but it could’ve been a woman).
Carlson has, as mentioned, a wife and four young children. Thankfully, he and his children were not inside at this time, but his wife was and she was terrified.
But is the media going to be talking about this, at least to the same extent that they are talking about Acosta? Are they going to say Carlson is the victim of threats like Acosta is? Of course not.
If they do talk about it, it will either be slightly mentioned and then be ignored, or the media will somehow try to justify the actions of the mob. People on Twitter certainly are trying to justify it.
But both of these situations highlight the incessant hypocrisy of the Left and the media. When Jim Acosta puts his hands on a female staffer to keep her from taking away a mic that doesn’t belong to him, and he’s temporarily banned from the White House as a result, the media rushes in to defend him and his actions, denying what he did and trying to characterize Trump as a fascist who is trying to shut down the media.
When Tucker Carlson is actually threatened by a hateful group of people surrounding his house, one of whom stated she wanted to bring a pipe bomb to the home of someone who has a wife and FOUR YOUNG CHILDREN, and with one of them likely trying to break in, all you’ll get is crickets at best and flat out sociopaths who couldn’t give a damn about the family that was just threatened due to Carlson’s beliefs.
And by the way, it’s not like this was a crowd protesting something Carlson said that maybe he shouldn’t have. It was a crowd protesting and threatening someone for holding a different view. It was a crowd that thoroughly believes Carlson is hurting people by exposing the truth about Antifa, the media and the Left in general. It was a crowd that, because they think Carlson is hurting people with words, wanted to hurt him physically and possibly even kill him and his family if that woman on the video was serious about a pipe bomb.
And it’s not like a pipe bomb is hard to make. It’s considered an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) precisely because it’s not hard to make. One of them could have actually made one, lit it, and thrown it inside Carlson’s home. A Molotov cocktail is also not hard to make, and could potentially do quite some damage as well.
So what you have in one corner is a fake news propagandist who calls himself a journalist complaining and crying over the fact that his inexcusable actions were punished (like a child throwing a tantrum), claiming Trump is out to get him and the media. In the other corner, you have a conservative journalist who was threatened at his own home (though he wasn’t there) by a deranged mob of Leftist lunatics who legitimately wish to cause him physical harm that could go as far as to kill him and his family.
Which one of the two will get more coverage? A snowflake “journalist” complaining that daddy took away his toy because he was being bad or a right-winger journalist having a mob of psychopaths at his literal doorstep threatening him and calling for him to leave the very town he grew up in just because he has different views from them?
And let’s not ignore the fact that these deranged lunatics believe the things they believe because they buy into the media narrative that Republicans and conservatives are racists, bigot, homophobes who want to harm people and even kill them by taking away their healthcare, which is up there in terms of massive lies in the history of the world, alongside “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”, “if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor” and “Nazis were not socialists”.
I know that it might be taboo to try to say that it’s because of the media that these people do what they do, but let me ask you this: if the media were covering Trump, and by extension Republicans, fairly and not saying they are racists and fascists, would such mobs show up, particularly as often as they do?
If the media were honest, would Antifa be around, or at least have as many people in their ranks as they do?
You might not want to believe that the media has much or anything to do with the actions of these deranged psychopaths, but their constant attacks on Trump and conservatives creates within their base at least a good number of people who thoroughly believe that crap and will want to take serious action apart from voting against them.
If the words and actions of the media lead others to justify acts of violence and/or harassment, then the media truly is the enemy of the people.
“Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who act faithfully are His delight.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
The November 6th elections have come and gone, with some very interesting changes and developments occurring throughout the night. Obviously, the biggest story of the night was the fact that Democrats have successfully reclaimed the House of Representatives by taking 26 or so seats, more than enough to give them a majority, slim as it may be.
And as it stands, the White House, obviously, is Republican, the Senate is Republican and now the House is Democrat. I have an awful lot of things to say about this, but I will do my best to keep it as short and concise as possible, while at least touching on the many things I want to discuss.
The first, and most important thing I want to mention is that, as predicted, there was no blue wave. Not even close to that. Yes, Democrats retook the House, which is unfortunate and will only serve to further divide this nation and hurt people in the individual districts, but no one can say that this is a blue wave. Furthermore, Republicans actually did a lot better than you might think.
The House is lost, and that is unfortunate, but one thing that needs to be mentioned is the great number of pickups we got in the Senate. Before the election, Democrats held 49 seats. Now, they only hold 44. Senators Heidi Heitkamp, Bill Nelson, Kyrsten Sinema, Joe Donnelly, Claire McCaskill and others all have been unseated. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) managed to get re-elected, but I find it rather ironic that he is the only Democrat that voted in favor of approving Brett Kavanaugh. The other Democrats who lost on Tuesday all voted against Kavanaugh, so that had some effect, I believe.
Not to mention that Ted Cruz managed to beat supposed Democrat superstar Beto O’Rourke in a race that shouldn’t have been anywhere near that close (though I suspect illegal votes are to blame, if the Project Veritas video covering illegal voting in the midterms is anything to go by). And in Florida, Rick Scott beat incumbent Bill Nelson, with another supposed Democrat superstar, Andrew Gillum, losing in another tight race.
The unfortunate thing is that Florida passed an amendment that will allow 1.4 million felons to vote, so I don’t have much hope for the state in the future. Of course, I don’t think all 1.4 million felons will vote, but felons tend to vote Democrat because Democrats also have a wanton disrespect for the rule of law and law enforcement. Not to mention that Cruz’s victory being about a 2 point margin is indicative of a blue trend in Texas (again, likely affected by illegal immigrants, but also likely affected by Leftists from California and New York moving there and voting for the policies and people that drove them out of those Leftist states in the first place).
Another bit of bad news is that, with Democrats in control of the House, there will definitely not be a wall getting built in the next two years and there definitely won’t be a repeal of Obamacare.
However, let’s move on to the better news. Apart from the pickups in the Senate, you also have to look at the fact that Democrats, at best, will simply be a lot of white noise over these next two years, as they have been over the past two years. Yes, they will launch investigation after investigation, and subpoena after subpoena, but what’s that going to amount to? They’ve been trying to prove Russian collusion for the past two years. Another two isn’t going to get them anything.
Not to mention that, while they might try to impeach Trump, they are not going to even come close to succeeding. Anything Democrats pass in the House will get stopped in the Senate. And an impeachment against Trump requires two-thirds of the SENATE, as well as approval from the VP, or enough votes to overturn the Vice President’s vote against impeachment.
So impeachment of the President would have to be a bipartisan effort, one that I don’t think will happen. Sure, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) might vote in favor of impeachment, but a lot of conservative, not to mention pro-Trump people, won in the Senate as well.
At most, the Democrats will be a major nuisance. Nothing will get passed, but not much was getting passed before anyway. Not to mention that Trump still has EO power, something that his predecessor set as a precedent for a tool for passing laws even when faced with an opposing party majority in the legislative branch.
And let’s not ignore the fact that Democrats winning in 2018 leaves Trump with a clear target for 2020. Trump has mastered the art of successfully putting the blame where it belongs: the Democrats. With nothing passing and Democrats being a massive force of obstruction, and little more, Trump can thoroughly expose the Democrats as little more than a pest that should not be in control of a doll house, much less of the House.
Now, these last two years should have logically led to Democrats suffering big losses in 2018. There was a lot of that in the Senate, but unfortunately, not so much in the House. But there is good news in Democrats taking some of these House seats. As Jake Tapper mentioned during his live coverage of the elections, many Never Trump Republicans were shown the door. Sure, some pro-Trump Republicans also lost, but it shows that going against the popular Republican President is not a solid campaign strategy.
Going forward, such losses should send a clear message that it’s best to support Trump and the MAGA agenda, instead of betraying your constituents. You would think that would be a common sense thing, but what can you do?
One other thing to mention that I want to at least talk about a little bit is that in Alabama and West Virginia, constitutional amendments were passed that protect the unborn. According to the Daily Wire: “In Alabama, voters approved an amendment to the state’s constitution affirming that the unborn have a right to life… In West Virginia, voters approved an amendment to their state constitution, which could end the practice of taxpayers funding elective abortions.” Not to mention that Alabama also passed an amendment that would allow for the Ten Commandments to be placed in public places. So these things are all great pro-life and pro-religious freedom news to take away from the elections.
Now, another thing I want to mention is the fact that, since Democrats won’t be able to pass laws in the Senate, any attempt at getting rid of the GOP tax cuts will be completely futile. We might not be able to pass anything, but neither will they. And these tax cuts are good for quite some time.
Yet another thing to mention is that, so far, Trump is doing far better than Obama did, electoral-wise. Let’s not forget that in 2010, Democrats lost 63 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate. THAT was a wave election.
So let’s look at some numbers over the years, according to Lawrence McDonald, who quotes data from the NY Times. In 2010, Obama lost 63 seats in the House. In 1994, Clinton lost 52. In 1958, Eisenhower lost 48. In 1974, Ford lost 48. In 1966, LBJ lost 47. In 1946, Truman lost 45. In 2006, Bush lost 30. In 1950, Truman lost 29. In 1982, Reagan lost 26.
Wanna know how many Trump lost? The same amount as Reagan, which is a pretty good sign, if you ask me, considering Reagan went on to be re-elected in the biggest landslide in U.S. political history.
Now, is this situation ideal? Definitely not. If I could have things my way, every Republican in every race, Senate, House, local, etc. would’ve won. But all things considered, we also stand to gain an awful lot in 2020, and I have no doubt Trump will be re-elected, with Republican control of Congress once again.
The last thing I want to mention, that ultimately has the biggest hand in putting a smile on my face after the elections, is that regardless of who controls the House, who controls the Senate, who controls the White House, it is Jesus Christ that is our ultimate Representative, Senator, and President. No matter who gains control of anything anywhere, Jesus is King. God is in control.
It’s no surprise to Him that Democrats retook the House. And He wouldn’t have allowed it if it weren’t part of His grander plan for us.
The good thing about losing sometimes is that losses can make you humble. After 2016, we were grateful to the Lord for the massive win. After 2018, we are still grateful to Him, and we come to Him in supplication and prayer, that He might heal our nation and that we might continue seeking His blessings.
I trust the Lord, and if He decides Democrats retake the House, then who in the world am I to argue? I merely implore to Him that this will be the definitively last time Democrats ever win anything again.
“The Lord brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; He frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the plans of His heart to all generations. Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom He has chosen as His heritage!”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. And while the Democrats promised free everything, this newsletter is actually free. So check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
With the elections happening tomorrow, let’s take a look at the latest figures released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) regarding our economic situation in terms of jobs created, unemployment rates, and rising wages.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: “Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 250,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.7 percent.”
That number is significantly higher compared to September’s surprisingly low number of 134,000 jobs created during the month, which was lower than anticipated. However, as I explained in the article covering the September report from the BLS, one explanation that the Bureau gives is that Hurricane Florence might have had some significant impact on the jobs numbers.
Now, at the end of the report, the Bureau informs us that they had made revisions for both September’s jobs report and August’s jobs report. In their revisions, September’s jobs report was revised down from that 134,000 to 118,000, which is not great, but indicates more jobs were created in the prior month. As the report explains, while September’s numbers were revised down, August’s numbers were revised up. August’s original number was 270,000 and was revised up to 286,000, which makes up the difference for September’s numbers.
Over the last 3 months, the average jobs gain has sat around 218,000. Over the last year, the average jobs gain has been 211,000, so seeing 250,000 in October is fantastic, as that shows higher-than-average job growth.
Moving on to unemployment rates, as I mentioned earlier, the overall rate remains unchanged at 3.7%.
For adult men, unemployment rose by 0.1 percentage points from last report’s numbers to 3.5%. For adult women, the number currently stands at 3.4%. For teenagers, the number went down significantly from 12.8% in the last report to 11.9%, so almost a complete percentage point. For whites, the number remains at 3.3%. For blacks, the number went up by 0.2 percentage points to 6.2%, which is not great. I would like to see that number go down, as we were seeing earlier this year. For Asians, the number dropped by 0.3 percentage points from 3.5% last report to 3.2%. Finally, Hispanic unemployment rate went down by 0.1 percentage points from 4.5% last report to 4.4%.
So overall, there was little to no change made to specific unemployment rates. Teenagers saw the biggest drop in unemployment, followed by small changes for Asians and Hispanics, with blacks unfortunately seeing a bit of a higher rate.
Employment in manufacturing increased by 32,000 jobs and has added 296,000 jobs throughout the year so far. Construction also rose by 30,000 in October, adding 330,000 throughout the year.
Moving on to wages, the report shows: “average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 5 cents to $27.30. Over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 83 cents, or 3.1 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $22.89 in October.”
The overall economy is currently booming, largely thanks to Trump’s economic policies.
Now, I’m old enough to remember Obama saying that a stagnating America was the “new normal” and that we better get used to it. How Obama could ever have been considered to be “Presidential” at any capacity, particularly more so than Trump, is entirely beyond me. Those words appeared to be words of surrender. That we would never see greatness in our country again.
Of course, knowing Obama did everything he could to fundamentally change and destroy our country, saying that America’s best days were behind us was simply part of the whole thing. Matter of fact, I would be willing to bet at least part of the reason Trump made his slogan: “Make America Great Again” was because of Obama’s attitude and words that America will only see stagnation from that point on.
And now, only a couple of years later, we’re seeing the realization of that very slogan. Sure, there is still an awful lot of work to do. We still don’t have a wall at the southern border, largely because of RINOs and Leftists who stand in the way of our border safety, but we are doing fantastic in many other areas.
And making America’s economy boom again is a big part of Making America Great Again. It would be hard to make it great again if we are not doing well economically. It’s hard to do much with next to no money. But that is not a problem we see today, now that Obama is out of the White House.
Part of the reason I seriously doubt there will not be anything close to a blue wave tomorrow is because I believe people see the difference Trump’s economy is making. During the Obama years, the president basically wrote off manufacturing and blue-collar jobs and literally said they were never coming back. Now, they’re back and they brought some friends, too.
The fact that the Democrat Party has essentially abandoned the manufacturing industry and just about every other blue-collar industry, while Trump and the GOP have done tremendous help with regard to those industries tells me those people will not vote Democrat again, if they have in the past.
The Democrats have abandoned blue-collar workers, white people, middle-America in favor of illegal immigrants. This will come back to bite them.
Regardless of what many polls say, I don’t see a blue wave happening. Now, does that mean the Democrats could take back the House (notice how the House is the only thing they talk about, not the Senate, which begs the question of “if there is a blue wave, why would Democrats not win Senate elections too?”) and do some real damage? Yeah. There is a chance, slim as I believe it to be, that Democrats could take back the House, albeit by a relatively small majority. But regardless of how small, a majority is a majority and Democrats have shown themselves to be very dangerous when they DON’T have power. I couldn’t imagine what they would do WITH power.
Democrats winning back the House by a slim majority may not be the coveted “blue wave”, but it still can be dangerous. All logic, all rationale, indicates Republicans winning tomorrow. These great economic numbers, as we have seen, can only be achieved when Republicans are in control.
And the good news is that I do believe Republicans will definitely retain and even gain seats in the Senate, and I have faith that they will also retain the House. I won’t go by early voting statistics one way or the other because some states do not have early voting. Often times, Democrats are ahead in early voting, even when Republicans end up winning. The fact that Republicans seem to be in the lead currently doesn’t mean much to me.
Now, it goes without saying that it is our civic duty as Americans to vote, regardless of what party you vote for. But it is imperative for Republicans to take this election as seriously as we did the last one. Tomorrow, we will see if we are a nation that worries more about creating jobs or creating mobs.
So please, go out to vote. And if I may make a recommendation, vote Republican. We have seen for the last two years how toxic and flat out mentally ill and evil the Left is. And that’s when they are outside of power. We can’t let them back in power, even if by a slim majority.
I’m not saying this jobs report will definitely boost Republicans, but it should. It gives us one final reminder of one of the things we are fighting for pre-election day.
But no matter what, I am glad to see such great jobs reports throughout this year. I just hope we can continue seeing them like this, unimpeded by the damage the Democrats could cause.
“Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. Unlike the Democrats who promise everything up to leprechaun hair to be free, this newsletter won’t cost you down the line in terms of taxes. It won’t cost you anything at all. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli
I hardly need a poll to tell me what I know to be true: the fake news media is far more divisive than Trump ever could be. However, that does not mean I do not smile at seeing many people agreeing with me on this issue.
Recently, a Morning Consult poll was released, asking 2,435 voters (so a large sample size) if Trump and the media have done more to divide the country than unite it. According to the poll, an overwhelming 64% of registered voters “said the press has done more to divide the country than unite it since Trump took office…”
56% said the same about Trump, but we’ll get to that momentarily.
The poll also shows percentages according to political party affiliation. According to the poll, 88% of Democrats said Trump was divisive, but a surprising 46% said the press was divisive.
With Independents, 67% said the media was divisive, compared to 54% who said that of Trump.
With Republicans, 80% said the press was divisive and 25% said Trump was.
Many of these numbers are pretty fascinating and good, in my opinion.
That 88% of Dems saying Trump is divisive does not surprise me. Frankly, what surprises me is that it’s not in the 90 percentile. However, that 46% of Dems saying the press was divisive is quite incredible and says an awful lot about the lack of credibility the fake news media has with their own target demographic, who should theoretically always support them.
It’s not exactly a majority, being less than 50%, but it’s incredibly close. As for Independents, who tend to go one way or the other, depending on the person (Sanders is technically an Independent, though he’s a far-Left Independent), they tend to be people who are dissatisfied with both parties, and given the Left’s recent behavior, I suspect there are more Independents today than even a few years ago, given the recent Walk Away movement.
67% of Independents saying the media is divisive is not a good thing for Democrats. And while 54% also say Trump is divisive, that’s still far less than those who point towards the media’s divisiveness.
As far as Republicans go, neither number really surprises me too much. I would think more than just 80% of Republicans would say the media is divisive, and I know very well that there are NeverTrump Republicans out there, so that 25% is actually fairly low and also a good sign for Trump.
Another Morning Consult/Politico poll back in July found that “28 percent of voters said they had ‘a lot’ of confidence in the presidency – more than twice the 13 percent who said the same of television news and double the 14 percent who said the same of newspapers.”
But these numbers generally point out what should really be crystal clear to anyone paying attention: the media is largely responsible for the divisiveness in our country.
Now, Trump being President, and being one who pushes back against the Left, naturally will also cause some divisiveness. The only reason Democrats and the media could say today that Bush was less divisive is because he was nowhere near as much of a fighter against the Left as Trump is. Let’s not forget that much of Bush’s early presidency was marred with Democrats being bitter about the Supreme Court deciding the election, thinking it was stolen from them. (ring any bells?)
The biggest reason Trump is characterized as divisive is because he actually fights back against the Democrats and the media, who have gotten used to Republicans quaking in their boots and apologizing for breathing.
But in this rhetoric of Trump’s divisiveness, and with pretty much every other rhetoric the media throws out there, it is the media that is largely to blame for the division in our country.
Who can blame people for thinking this way, when you have Don Lemon calling for people (aka Trump and Republicans) to stop demonizing people and in the same breath he demonizes white people and Republicans? When you have Julia Ioffe saying Trump has radicalized more people than ISIS has? When you have people calling Trump “Hitler” and Trump’s supporters “Nazis”? When you have people defending the vandalism and destruction that Antifa causes, calling them “angels”? When you have people defending acts of violence and/or harassment of Republican members of Congress or Trump’s staff?
Who can blame people for believing the media divides people when the media fought tooth and nail to spread lies and slander about a Supreme Court nominee with zero evidence? When the media pins the blame of any shooting anywhere on Trump and Republicans? When the media supports the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia, despite zero evidence ever having turned up? When the media defends one of the most crooked Presidents and presidential nominees we have ever seen in Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton respectively?
Who can blame people for believing this way when the media calls for others to tone down on the rhetoric, and in the same breath will tone up their OWN rhetoric? When over 90% of the coverage of Trump is negative?
And these are all just examples that come to immediate mind. I’m sure there are countless other examples of the media being divisive that I am forgetting. But it’s because of all of these examples, both the ones I listed and the ones I am certainly forgetting, that the people cannot come to trust what the media tells them.
Now, earlier, I mentioned that I would get to the 56% of people who said Trump was divisive. Again, he’s the President. The position tends to naturally divide people, at least to some extent. But the arguments made against him that he’s divisive ultimately come down to “he’s not apologizing like every other Republican ever”. Sure, that is never said outright, but that is ultimately the Left’s complaint with Trump. He doesn’t apologize for being who he is, for saying what he says and for doing what he’s doing. And it’s part of this defiance of the status quo of Republicans apologizing for daring to take a breath of air that makes Trump as successful and popular as he is.
Of course, that is only part of it, but it is a substantial part. And it’s this success that comes with his attitude that further drives the Left to insanity. Nothing they have tried has worked. No narrative, no rhetoric; no tried and true method of destroying Republicans has even made a dent. If anything, these attacks have had the opposite effect. The attacks were supposed to tear his approval numbers to shreds. He sits at the mid to high-40s, with some having him at 50% approval, which has him higher than Obama was at this point in his own presidency.
Granted, much of that is due to the fact that Trump is actually Making America Great Again, but the constant attacks against Trump are what drive his supporters closer to him.
I have often said that Trump’s election victory, and his subsequent success post-election, have driven the Left to near insanity, if they aren’t already there. They had a thermonuclear reaction to Trump’s victory, the effects of which we are still seeing and will continue to see for a very long time, most likely. This being the case, who can blame people for trying to distance themselves from what is highly radioactive and toxic?
64% of voters said the media is dividing the country. In all honesty, that number should be at 100% or somewhere close to that. Of course, that would be living in a perfect world where people don’t buy into the crap the Left sells and we do not live in such a world. But for this being an imperfect world, I will gladly take 64% of people believing and KNOWING the media is dividing the country.
I just hope that one day, that number will be very, very low, and we can have a news-media world that reports the truth rather than distorts it – that reflects narratives and beliefs, not create them.
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes entirely free of charge. Unlike the fake news media that will lie to you about pretty much everything, you can rest assured that it is not a lie when I tell you that this is completely free. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
If you know me, you know I do not tend to insult people. I always argue Leftists’ dumb arguments but never really call those people dumb. I call them out for what they are, but typically without insulting them. And if I insult them, it’s typically a part of a joke, to some extent.
As for Don Lemon, I will not insult him, since that’s beneath me. However, this needs to be made completely clear: he is, without a shadow of a doubt, a disgustingly hypocritical slimeball.
Recently, Don Lemon said some things that will leave anyone to cringe in utter disgust with the man.
First, on a CNN panel on Monday, he argued that he doesn’t see Democrats killing people because of political motivations. That the mail-bomber and the Tree of Life shooter were both right-wingers and that that is to blame for the violence.
When the issue of the shooter who tried to kill Republicans came up, he argued that there is no equivalency there. No comparison. Of course, that being bullcrap, Lemon does not explain why it’s different.
Second, talking with Chris Cuomo, Lemon said “we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right. And we have to start doing something about them… There is no white guy ban.”
In the same sentence, in the same breath, Lemon urges people not to demonize others, all-the-while demonizing white people and Republicans. It’s truly sickening what goes on in this guy’s mind and what comes out of his mouth. So allow me to slowly, but surely dismantle this guy’s arguments and properly call him out for exactly what he is.
Let’s begin with the argument that he doesn’t see Democrats killing people and that the socialist shooter is different from the synagogue shooter and mail-bomber.
First of all, even this hypocrite can’t tell me the socialist shooter wasn’t trying to kill people. The socialist shooter didn’t bring his AR-15 to the baseball field and start shooting Republicans because he wanted to have a civil conversation about healthcare. He went there because Bernie Sanders said prior to the shooting that Republicans were going to kill millions of people by getting rid of healthcare or changing it in the least.
The socialist shooter was reportedly shouting “this is for healthcare!” while he was shooting. Miraculously, that nut-job didn’t kill anyone. But he definitely tried to, given he was FIRING AT OTHER PEOPLE!
Second of all, the mail-bomber already had a history of violence, and even sending bombs in the mail in the past. Not to mention that the bombs were inoperable. They didn’t blow up and were not designed to. If Lemon can’t see Democrats killing people because the socialist shooter didn’t actually kill anyone, then by that logic, we can’t see the mail bomber killing anyone because he didn’t. Lemon’s argument here is largely based on the fortunate technicality that the socialist shooter didn’t manage to kill anyone. But let’s not forget that he was definitely trying to and sent Rep. Steve Scalise to the hospital.
Third of all, the Tree of Life shooter was not a right-winger. He was an ardent anti-Trumper who hated the fact that Trump was so pro-Jew and pro-Israel. That line of thinking falls more in line with anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan, Linda Sarsour, Al Sharpton, etc., who are all Leftists.
Beyond the socialist shooter, there are countless other stories of Leftists threatening the lives of anyone they disagree with and committing acts of violence. I’ve already written about that sort of thing TWICE, listing the rap sheet from Breitbart about the number of Leftist and media-incited/ignored/acceptable acts of violence against the Right.
I don’ trust that any of them wouldn’t go as far as to kill someone they disagree with should they have the chance to. That’s one of the reasons we have the second amendment and why we carry guns, just in case someone threatens and fully intends to take our lives.
If they are willing to actually terrorize people they disagree with, the next step is to actually kill them. The only political groups that have shown this tendency and attitude are Leftist political groups like Black Lives Matter, some of whom HAVE gone as far as to kill cops, and Antifa, who are one successful killing away from being labeled a terrorist organization the likes of ISIS, Hamas, etc.
Finally, let’s not forget that a Democrat HAS ACTUALLY KILLED a Republican in the past. Need I remind you that John Wilkes Booth successfully assassinated Republican President Abraham Lincoln? Booth was from the Democrat South, which hated that Lincoln was fighting them over their supposed “right” to own a human being.
So if Lemon can’t see a Democrat killing anyone for political reasons, he is completely ignorant of history. Not something that surprises me, but something that must be pointed out here.
Now, let’s move on to the racially-charged comment that honestly makes me, a Latino man, sick to my stomach.
The hypocrisy of that comment leaves me in utter shock. Not because I didn’t expect it – I certainly did - but because within the same breath, he calls on people to stop demonizing others and proceeds to demonize others.
What he means by that statement is that Trump and Republicans need to stop demonizing the media and the Left and just take that same demonization themselves. The media definitely doesn’t need to stop demonizing Republicans. Democrats definitely don’t need to stop demonizing Republicans. The Left doesn’t need to tone down on the inflammatory rhetoric, but Trump and Republicans do. Matter of fact, slimeballs like Lemon will flat out deny that their rhetoric is in any way inflammatory.
I don’t really know what else to say. Lemon’s comment speaks for itself. Aside from being hugely hypocritical, it is disgustingly racist. Saying that white people are a terror threat? How is this guy allowed on television? Trying to bring up the supposed “Muslim” ban (which doesn’t ban Muslims, just people from a list of Islamic-terror-related countries, and they know that, but they don’t care) and suggesting that maybe there should be a “white guy” ban?
Do you see now why I call him a hypocritical slimeball? His rhetoric is more inflammatory than he could claim Trump’s is, his arguments are illogical and flat out racist, and he, as well as the entirety of CNN, all believe what he is saying is acceptable and even right and correct.
And this comes in the same week that Far-Left writer Julia Ioffe said, on CNN, that Trump has “radicalized so many more people than ISIS ever did.”
She later “apologized” by saying she was “exaggerating”. But that, of course, leads us to believe she fully believes Trump has and is radicalizing people much in the same way ISIS does.
These two are not the only ones at CNN (or the broader Fake News media, for that matter) who have claimed Trump is to blame for the actions of the mail-bomber and synagogue shooter and is to blame for the current political climate.
But in doing all of this, apart from dodging the truth about those two nut-jobs (mail-bomber having a criminal history and the shooter being anti-Trump), they use the same inflammatory rhetoric they claim Trump is using, but even more so.
These people are unapologetic about their rhetoric. If they were, they wouldn’t be using it. For all their claims that Trump is dividing the nation, in reality, it is them who are doing that.
Trump, after the Tree of Life shooting, decided to go to Pittsburgh. The Left’s response? Attacking him, saying he shouldn’t be there. Trump, after the mail-bombing suspect was caught, gave a strong speech condemning his actions. The Left’s response? Trump is not being sincere.
While Trump’s use of “enemy of the people” to describe the FAKE news media (I capitalize the word fake because people tend to omit that part) might be inflammatory, it is nonetheless true. The fake news media constantly lies about everything, but that is the least of their sins that label them as the “enemy of the people”. Apart from straight up lying to people, they constantly label those they disagree with as racist, bigot, homophobe, etc. They label others as Nazis and fascists. They call Trump Hitler and a WaPo article even said he’s worse than Hitler.
In this labeling, they label everyone who supports Trump as a Nazi. Everyone who even slightly disagrees with them on anything as a Nazi. And Lemon, right here, is labeling those he disagrees with (and white people in general) as terror threats.
These people are filled to the brim with hatred. They hate Trump for everything he does and manages to do. They hate us for having ever defied their narcissistic behinds and choosing to support him. And in this hatred, they excuse actual threats and acts of violence against conservatives and right-wingers, all-the-while insisting it is us who are the real threat to democracy, to America, to people.
As human beings, I don’t consider the fake news media to be my enemy. As a Christian, I don’t do that. But as a political commentator, someone who wants what is best for the country, I consider them the enemy of the state.
Everything they want works towards the systemic dismantling of America as founded. That’s what the 8 years of Obama were all about. That’s what Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and every other Democrat is about. The fundamental destruction of the United States and the fundamental change towards a socialist nation in the likes of China, Venezuela, Soviet Russia, etc.
What they want is dangerous, and what they spew is dangerous. No, I would never harm any of them and anyone who wishes harm upon them, I disavow and no longer consider them conservatives because a true conservative would never want or do that.
But it truly must be understood that these people don’t care for America. THAT is what makes them the enemy of the people.
As for Lemon himself, I have nothing else to say. He’s a disgusting, hypocritical slimeball. I only have respect for him in that I respect his life and his right to his own opinion. Apart from that, he does not get nor deserve any sort of respect from anyone, let alone me.
I think he is someone in dire need of Christ. Looking into his eyes, I see someone who is dead inside. A typical trait for those who do not have faith in the Lord, and particularly for those on the Left. I sincerely hope he finds Christ. That is the best I can wish for him.
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. Unlike the fake news media, I won’t lie to you about something being free. When I say this newsletter is free, that is the truth. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Often times, whenever there is a tragic shooting that the entire nation talks about, such as the most recent one at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh that claimed the lives of 11 Jews, the Left will claim that the argument of a “good guy with a gun” is not real and does not happen - that it’s largely a hoax.
And to make sure they can continue saying that sort of thing, they will avoid stories like the one I am about to share with you. A story where a good guy with a gun potentially saved the lives of countless people at a McDonald’s in Birmingham, Alabama.
On Saturday night, the same day as the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting, a masked gunman opened fire in a McDonald’s in Birmingham. WBRC-TV covered the story, saying that the gunman entered the McDonald’s “when an employee opened the door for a father and his sons to leave.”
The shooter “then opened fire in the restaurant. At that point, the father began shooting at him.”
The father, the shooter, and one of the sons were all hit, but only the shooter died, with the father and the son sustaining “non-life threatening injuries.”
At this time, authorities do not know if the shooter was simply robbing the restaurant or targeting a specific employee.
Unfortunately, there does not appear to be CCTV footage of the incident, so I cannot exactly tell one way or the other. From the description given by WBRC-TV, the employee opened the door to allow for the family to leave, at which point the shooter entered and opened fire.
That appears to be, from the description, the chronological sequence of events in this story, so it appears that the shooter did not intend to rob the restaurant, but rather intended to shoot up the place and leave as many people dead as possible. If he were robbing the place, he would’ve let the family go, so there would be less people to worry about attacking him or calling the police.
And considering this was late at night, I don’t think there were that many people inside.
Now, from the apparent sequence of events, I find it miraculous that the father was quick enough to pull out his own gun and fire back at the shooter. Not knowing fully how the whole ordeal went down, and only picturing it from the description given by the local news source, I find it incredible that the father reacted quickly enough to see the gun (if the gun was even out before the shooter went in, which it must’ve been the case), pull out his own gun and start firing back, while he and one of his sons took at least one shot themselves.
I imagine there are a few details missing from this since that would simply have to be next to inhuman reactions to be as effective as he was while sustaining as little damage as he did.
Regardless, that’s for the people to know and for us to wonder (unless more details arise).
The father, as is to be expected, will not face any charges for his actions, according to local authorities.
In the aftermath, one of the employees told WBRC-TV that he was “feeling grateful”. “Wrapping my head around it all, I was just wishing someone would come wake me up from this nightmare.”
Another employee added: “He’s my hero. Because I can only imagine how it would’ve went if he wasn’t armed. We might not be here having this interview.”
As incredible and fascinating as this story is, it has next to no chance of being covered by the fake news media. And if it does, they will likely entirely ignore the father having saved the day, or at least mention him as though his contribution had been next to irrelevant.
The reason for this is that this largely helps support the notion and argument that conservatives use that a good guy with a gun can beat a bad guy with a gun. That the answer to gun crimes like these aren’t to restrict law-abiding citizens of their rights to bear arms but to help them protect themselves with less restrictive gun laws because there will always be bad people with guns. Just look at Chicago, the city with the strictest gun control laws in America.
But aside from this one story alone, there are countless other instances when a good guy with a gun saves the day, either by saving his/her own life, property or other people.
According to a study by The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, which was ordered by the anti-gun Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence.”
“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”
A different study suggests that there are over 1 million (1,029,615, to be exact) DGUs per year “for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere” but excluding “military service, police work, or work as a security guard.” According to Paul Hsieh, a conservative columnist on Forbes who wrote about this subject using both of those studies, says that the second study “[yields] an estimate of 162,000 cases per year where someone ‘almost certainly would have been killed’ if they ‘had not used a gun for protection.’”
In other words, people tend to protect themselves when faced with a deadly threat, particularly when they are armed. It’s very common, but it feels as though it isn’t given the amount of times the Left covers a shooting taking place in a school, an office, a church/synagogue, etc. which most of them are typically gun-free zones.
This story, alongside many that the media refuses to cover, serves to further support the notion that the best way to deal with a bad guy with a gun is through a good guy with a gun. It’s really not something even the Left should be able to argue.
When a shooting happens, who do people tend to call? Cops aka good guys with guns. Either they call the cops or security to deal with the threat. And both entities tend to have guns.
So the gun isn’t the problem here. It’s the sociopathic and evil individual perpetrating the evil deed.
In the UK, you may not see an awful lot of shootings (though they still happen), but you do see an awful lot of knife attacks, acid attacks, vehicular manslaughter, etc. That goes to show that the tool of use is largely irrelevant. Bad people will do bad things with whatever they have available to them.
The biggest difference between this story and any other story of a shooting is that there was a good guy with a gun right there to step up and eliminate the threat, even if it comes at a cost.
Thankfully, the father sustained injuries that are not life-threatening, but things could’ve turned far worse had he not had his weapon on him.
Gun control doesn’t keep bad people from owning or getting guns. It keeps good people from protecting themselves, having to hurdle through tons of bureaucratic bullcrap just to have the hope of being able to protect themselves should the need ever arise.
“He said to them, ‘But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free. No hidden fees and nothing to pay for down the line. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Over the weekend, an anti-Semitic (not to mention very anti-Trump, which we’ll get to later) nut-job shot up the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, reportedly shouting a phrase long-used by anti-Semites: “all Jews must die.”
The killer (who will not be named as to avoid inadvertently giving him any sort of fame or "glory") killed 11 people in the massacre.
But with this having been a mass shooting, the Left jumped at the chance to blame Trump for this. However, there exists one massive problem that the Left simply could not hope to overcome.
Actually, there are a couple of problems, but one of them ties into the other.
First, and perhaps least important of the two: the shooter was anti-Trump. He had even tweeted: “There is no #MAGA, as long as there is a kike infestation.” You can tell the second problem is quite important and a bit overwhelming for the Left if THIS problem is considered the less important one of the two.
The guy was anti-Trump largely because of the second problem the Left faces in their rhetoric and narrative to blame Trump: Trump has been the most pro-Jewish, pro-Israel President in American history.
Let’s begin with Trump’s statement following the shooting regarding anti-Semitism: “Anti-Semitism and the widespread persecution of Jews represents one of the ugliest and darkest features in human history. Anti-Semitism must be condemned and confronted everywhere and anywhere it appears.”
This is a strong statement totally disavowing any sort of anti-Semitism in America and pushing hard against it. But that’s not all. Recently, he even said that whomever seeks the destruction of the Jews, we (America) would seek THOSE PEOPLE’S destruction.
Plus, let’s not forget that Trump did what other Presidents before him only promised to do: he moved the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem.
Let’s not forget that Trump has, throughout the 2016 campaign and beyond, been a great friend of Jewish people and a great friend for Israel.
Let’s not forget that Trump cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority, which is hell-bent in taking over Jerusalem and exterminating the Jews via acts of terrorism.
Let’s not forget that Trump dismantled and completely tore apart the Iran nuclear deal, which is not only an action that greatly benefits the U.S., but also ensures Israel’s most notorious enemy does not get more and more money from America to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.
Let’s not forget that Trump deported a Nazi in hiding when both Bush and Obama could have, but failed or did not care to do.
Trump has been very friendly towards Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has overall been a great friend of Israel.
To label Donald Trump as an anti-Semite because of the actions by an anti-Semitic, anti-Trump nut-job is asinine and wrong.
That is particularly the case when the people who label Trump as an anti-Semite are some of the very same people who defend or ignore Louis Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic ramblings, and who have long stressed that Israel be contained and that it bow to its Palestinian enemies.
Barack Obama, in the aftermath of the terrorist attack, tweeted: “We grieve for the Americans murdered in Pittsburgh. All of us have to fight the rise of anti-Semitism and hateful rhetoric against those who look, love, or pray differently. And we have to stop making it so easy for those who want to harm the innocent to get their hands on a gun.”
Ignoring the obvious and pathetic call for stricter gun control laws (which never help anyone and only increase the likelihood of these things happening), this is the same guy who has been photographed smiling next to Louis Farrakhan, who recently said he was not anti-Semite, but “anti-termite”, basically dehumanizing Jews and labeling as nothing more than a pest to be rid of.
This is the same guy who worked towards making a deal with Iran to give them billions of dollars “to build roads and bridges”, which would be the most laughable pile of b.s. if that pile of b.s. hadn’t been so dangerous and hadn’t likely led Iran to accelerate their nuclear program.
In stark contrast with Donald Trump, Obama never was much of a friend to Israel. Quite the opposite could even be argued.
With what Donald Trump has done for Jewish people and for Israel, the Left cannot realistically and successfully label him as an anti-Semite.
While the desire to build a wall in the southern border could be misconstrued as being racist (it isn’t, even a little), they cannot misconstrue anything Trump says and/or does as being anti-Semitic.
What he has done as POTUS is greatly beneficial to Israel and the Jewish people, and that is not bound to end. The only Jewish people who are against Trump right now are simply Leftist partisan hacks who never liked him in the first place and barely even appear to be faithful Jews, considering one of them appeared to not have even liked Trump moving the embassy to Israel. (*ahem* Julia Ioffe saying she hopes the embassy move was “worth it” when attacking Jews who voted for Trump *ahem*).
And this is all without even focusing on the fact that the reason the shooter shot up the synagogue was because he was ticked off at Trump for being too Jew-friendly. So the media can’t even characterize the guy as having been right-winger or a Trump supporter because he was outspokenly anti-Trump due to the POTUS being so pro-Israel and pro-Jew.
At the end of the day, what the Left wants from this is not at all what is going to happen. This, alongside the mail bombings of the previous week, is supposed to characterize Trump as being culpable for the dangerous political climate we live in. This shooting, not having been political but rather religious, can’t do that.
Not to mention that since Trump is very pro-Israel, he cannot realistically be characterized as anti-Semitic. Sure, the Left could try and still blame him (they will certainly do that), but when the rhetoric that Trump is anti-Semitic falls flat on its face because of its absurdity and false nature, they will try to focus a little more on the gun and call for more gun control.
I, for one, hope they will continue to try and characterize Trump as anti-Semitic. It makes my job easier to flat out deny their claims and make counter-arguments with undeniable-on-all-sides facts.
Let’s see if the Left takes the bait on this one and continues with this asinine rhetoric.
“’I ask, then, has God rejected His people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.'”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. No hidden fees whatsoever. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I feel compelled to say this right now: What I will mostly be talking about is largely a conspiracy theory. As such, it should not be taken to be the absolute truth. However, the reason for me to write this is because the timing and the magnitude of this targeting of Democrats is highly suspicious to me and I have some theories to go along with these stories.
As you read this article, please keep in mind that these are merely unproven thoughts and theories that may never even be proven.
Over the last few days, a number of suspicious packages have been delivered to prominent members of the Democrat Party and to the news media, particularly CNN. Most of these packages appear to have been pipe bombs, with some having been suspicious powder.
Thankfully, no one is hurt. At least one of the bombs appears to have been a fake one, according to the New York Times, who cited experts who said that the bombs were “the kind more typically depicted on television and in movies, rather than devices capable of detonating.”
A site called Law and Crime released an x-ray picture of one of the pipe bombs, which shows wires sticking out of both ends of the bomb. We know this is not a functioning pipe bomb because pipe bombs do not have wires sticking out of both sides. They are more like dynamite, with the wire sticking out of only one side.
Now, let’s consider who these packages were sent to. They were sent to former President Barack Obama, failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (and thus, former POTUS Bill Clinton), Rep. Maxine Waters, former AG Eric Holder, a CNN studio in New York, former VP Joe Biden and George Soros.
None of these people, except for Maxine Waters have strong political power, not even Biden. George Soros’s power comes through his money in affecting politics, but he does not have direct political power, at least in the same way that Waters does. It’s important to understand this because the Left’s rhetoric is that it was a right-winger who sent those packages. If it really were a right-winger, what strategic advantage would Republicans have for someone sending bombs to anyone, let alone people who are under conservatives’ radar? It wouldn’t make any sense in the least, particularly done this way.
No right-winger in his right mind would send a bomb to Democrats 2 weeks before an election if they were hoping for Republicans to win. No right-winger in his right mind would send a bomb to anyone in the first place, but still.
Let’s also consider the timing of these packages. For one, they were sent within days, and in some cases, within hours of each other. They were also sent 2 weeks before one of the biggest elections of our lifetimes. AND they were also sent shortly after Trump, rightfully, capitalized on the migrant caravan heading towards our border, which as I have said in a previous article, could help Trump and Republicans in the midterms.
All of these packages were sent to well-known, but next to irrelevant people within the Democrat Party and the news media. While it would take a crazy person to send bombs to people through the mail, it would take an especially moronic crazy person to send bombs to high-profile figures on the Left and expect the packages not to be intercepted and kept away from the supposedly intended targets.
All of this, alongside the Left’s quick capitalization of placing the blame on Trump (which is frankly expected, but still significant) that makes me seriously question this entire thing.
Over the last couple of years, and particularly the last few months, we have seen an increase in violence coming from the Left directed towards the Right. This sort of thing tends to have an effect at the polling booths. I certainly know that I will vote Republican at least partly because of the Left’s behavior over the past couple of months and years. So I don’t think it’d be a far-fetched theory, though very much a conspiracy theory without proof, to believe that this is largely theatrics meant to garner momentum for Democrats.
Again, we have to consider the fact that the Left has been acting horrendously these last few months particularly, and we have to also consider the fact that the migrant caravan would garner momentum for Republicans.
Have you noticed how the caravan, which has reportedly swelled to over 14,000 illegals, has largely disappeared from the news-cycle apart from news of Trump sending troops to the border?
With all of this in mind, I would not be surprised if this all turned out to be theatrics and a hoax to drive people to vote against Trump’s “anti-media” and anti-Leftist rhetoric.
Again, you have to consider that the media has capitalized in blaming Trump for all of this. Some are directly blaming him for sending the bombs, while others are marginally more “sensible” and are blaming his rhetoric for “emboldening” a crazy right-winger now dubbed the “MAGA bomber”, with that hashtag trending on Twitter.
Given the nature of the Left to do this sort of thing to Republicans, and given that they often blame things on Trump and other conservatives without a shred of evidence (see how they treated Kavanaugh), and I can’t help but think that this was largely orchestrated to drive people to vote Democrat and to perhaps even justify the actual attacks happening against conservatives.
Let’s not forget that the Deep State told George W. Bush that there were WMDs in Iraq when there were none. Let’s not forget that the Left, with the help of the media, often fabricate stories to target conservatives.
The fact that the people targeted were all well-known Leftists, most whom do not have political power so there’d be no real point for a right-winger to target them, these packages have been delivered at a high frequency and that it all comes at an opportune time for the Left, 2 weeks before the election (remember the slew of women saying Trump sexually assaulted them 3 weeks before the 2016 election?) all leads me to be highly suspicious of this entire thing.
Once again, I really must insist that no one take this to be the reality of the situation. This is largely a conspiracy theory with no proof of being the absolute truth. I am merely expressing my suspicions regarding this entire thing. I am not ruling out the possibility of a crazed right-winger actually perpetrating these things. But I particularly must insist that this is not conservatives’ MO, and that this is pretty exclusively what Leftists tend to do, so that draws more suspicion.
As a rule of thumb, I do not trust what the MSM tells me about anything. I especially do not trust people who choose to capitalize on tragedy (or potential tragedy) for political gain as the Left often does and as many people including CNN President Jeff Zucker, lunatic actor Jim Carrey, 1/1024th conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin and others are doing.
So any sort of story that puts the blame on Trump, his rhetoric surrounding the fake news media (there’s a word for what the media is doing regarding all of this. I believe it is called “irony”), or anything that tries to, without proof, put the blame on Trump and/or conservatives I will simply not believe.
My belief is that this is largely theatrics meant to garner momentum for Democrats now that they are having actual doubts about their coveted “blue wave”. It could even be meant to serve as justification for the horrendous behavior they have shown towards conservatives.
By no means am I claiming that that’s the reality of the situation. I cannot prove that this is what is actually happening. I am merely suggesting that all of the circumstances surrounding these events are far too suspicious for me to take at face value.
But as I cannot prove anything regarding whether or not the Left is making all of this up for political gain (even if the circumstances point to that), all I will do for now is pray that this sort of thing does not happen to anyone else, Republican or Democrat, and that there will be a Christian revival that will lead to this sort of scare to no longer happen, particularly with such frequency.
“Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. No hidden fees and no future payments to be made. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...