As I have stated in the past, the Ukraine story is nothing more than a revamped version of the Russian collusion narrative, filled with nothing but lies and smears against Trump, accusing him of things he didn’t do, like trying to get “dirt” on Biden, which is a current Democrat talking point regarding the situation. Everything about it, from the whistleblower’s strange report to his connections to Democrats like Adam Schiff and Joe Biden, reeks of a not-so-silent coup attempt by the Democrats.
 
But despite every negative thing under the sun that the Democrats can throw at Trump, regardless of the circumstance or the setting, the President enjoys pretty normal approval ratings.
 
Looking at Rasmussen’s Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, we find that Donald Trump’s approval rating sits at 50%, which is rather normal for his administration. Compare that to even just a week ago, when his approval rating stood at 47%, also despite the negative coverage and the constant attacks from the press and from Democrats.
 
The President had enjoyed a recent high of 53% approval, around the time the Ukraine call “scandal” was brought up by Democrats and shortly before Trump released the transcript to the call, showing that there was no actual quid pro quo, nor any other type of crime that can be pointed out, despite what Democrats and the media might try to convey (likely a part of the reason as to why Pelosi decided not to have a formal impeachment inquiry vote in the House).
 
Following that, his approval rating dipped down a bit, falling to a recent low of 46%, but far from terrible, or even his record-low in the Rasmussen poll of 39%.
 
Considering it is currently sitting at 50% and around that area, it’s pretty easy to tell that this latest attempt at destroying Donald Trump is yet another one of the Democrats’ many, many duds. Russian hacking didn’t work, Russian collusion didn’t work, Stormy Daniels didn’t work, campaign finance violations accusations didn’t work, calling him “Hitler” hasn’t worked, and now, the Ukraine call “scandal” isn’t working.
 
And with the strategies that Democrats are incorporating in their campaigns, that of trashing Trump and promising to get rid of him, likely won’t work either. Moody’s Analytics has Trump winning in a landslide in all three of their models if things maintain course (with one showing Trump narrowly losing only if Democrat turnout is high and the economy is in the toilet, as in, if it crashes by 12% shortly before Election Day).
 
There is still a little over a year before the 2020 election happens, and a lot can happen in that span of time. It’s still not entirely clear who the Democrat nominee will be, with Biden seemingly losing some ground to Elizabeth Warren. However, regardless of who the Democrat nominee will be, if things stay relatively as they are today, even if just a little bit worse (Moody’s predicts that even a 9% crash in the stock market would still give Trump the win, even if it’s a bit closer than the other models, which show Trump winning by a bigger landslide than he did in 2016), it’s more likely than not that Donald Trump will come out of the 2020 election having been re-elected as President of the United States, which will most definitely send the media into a frenzy.
 
And it’s pretty clear, at this point, that if all the Democrats have is nothing but lies and accusations, that will definitely not be enough to destroy Trump, no matter what the Left might want. There’s a reason why even some Leftists believe that impeaching Trump will lead to his re-election in 2020. It’s not what Americans want, regardless of what the heavily-skewed Fox News poll might show.
 
President Trump is popular, even more so than Obama at the same point in his own presidency, who only had 45% approval at the time. That is a fact that no Leftist wants to acknowledge, even if doing so is to their detriment.
 
Deuteronomy 28:7
“The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

​The ever-crazy woke Left has made many spicy claims about a number of things being racist, sexist, homophobic, violent or any combination of all of them. Among these strange takes are the claim that a fantasy football auction was racist, that libraries are racist, that outdoor sports clubs are racist, that honoring a white man who helped black people is racist, that wanting a healthy body makes you a Nazi and that Disney’s “The Lion King” is fascist.
 
Now, we find another equally-as-ridiculous claim by a socialist professor who clearly is lacking in the mental health department.
 
You see, according to a University of Washington professor, the aquatic lifeform that lives in a pineapple under the sea is racist, sexist, “violent” and perpetuates colonialist thought and cultural appropriation.
 
You cannot make this stuff up.
 
In an academic journal, the professor explains that the fictional setting of Bikini Bottom is problematic because it is based on the nonfictional Bikini Atoll, a coral reef in the Marshall Islands which were used by the U.S. military to test nuclear bombs during the Cold War. The U.S. government, in order to use the area, had to relocate the people indigenous to the region and those indigenous people could never return because of the copious amounts of radiation.
 
This, in the lunatic professor’s mind, means that SpongeBob SquarePants, even if not intending to, represents colonialism on the part of America because the indigenous people of the area had to be relocated.
 
Now, call me crazy, but I think relocating an indigenous people somewhere far away from the site of nuclear detonations is the better option between that and letting them remain there until the nukes kill them. The U.S. didn’t have much of a choice as to where to test its nuclear arsenal because a lot of people live in different places and it’s better to move relatively smaller populations than to commit a nuclear holocaust.
 
Professor Barker, the lunatic professor in question, further tried to argue that SpongeBob had the “privilege” of “not caring about the detonation of nuclear bombs,” because one of the show’s writers, in explaining SpongeBob’s character, said the sentient sponge was “a guy who could get super excited about a napkin but wouldn’t care if there was an explosion outside.”
 
Because of this, Barker argues that “the detonations do not cause concern for the characters, as they did for the Bikinians, nor do they compromise SpongeBob’s frequent activities, like visiting hamburger joints or the beach with friends.”
 
Now, someone has to REALLY hate fun in order to seriously make any of these arguments and the ones that I will further share.
 
In case it’s not apparent to this University professor, who probably teaches her students the wonders of Marxism and veganism and is responsible for the “education” of many young people (God help them), SpongeBob SquarePants is a FICTIONAL CARTOON CHARACTER!
 
I don’t know how much clearer it can be based on the fact that he is two-dimensional and a TALKING AND WALKING SEA SPONGE!
 
The character was written as being a complete dunce, and as seasons went on, got even dumber. It’s an outright meme how dumb he is, when in one episode, you can see SpongeBob and Patrick celebrating over “saving Bikini Bottom” while it’s literally on fire and explosions are happening, as shown below:

​But that scene is clearly played for a joke, which everyone gets and because it’s a fictional cartoon, so it doesn’t matter, at the end of the day, what happens to the city. By the end of the episode, the city will be just fine, no one ever really dies on the show, at least on-screen. It makes ZERO sense to accuse A FICTIONAL CARTOON SPONGE of having “privilege”.
 
But that’s not all she has to complain about. No, Leftists never run out of things to complain about.
 
She also tried to argue that, and bear with me here, SpongeBob and his friends continually perpetuate past injustices to the indigenous people through their “occupation and reclaiming” of the show’s nonfictional “Goo Lagoon”, what is essentially an underwater beach.
 
This, Barker argues, means that the setting of the show and the fact that “Goo Lagoon” is a place SpongeBob and his friends frequent is “symbolic violence” against indigenous people.
 
Furthermore, Barker insists that “although the U.S. government removed the people of Bikini from the atoll above the surface, this does not give license to SpongeBob or anyone else, fictitious or otherwise, to occupy Bikini.”
 
Basically, the place is off-limits to even cartoon characters because the U.S. military relocated the indigenous people so they could test nukes. That is the kind of illogical argument this woman is trying to make.
 
Barker added: “SpongeBob’s presence on Bikini Bottom continues the violent and racist expulsion of Indigenous peoples from their lands (and in this case their cosmos) that enables U.S. hegemonic powers to extend their military and colonial interests in the postwar era.”
 
Now, if you thought THAT was crazy, hold on because it gets worse. Not only is SpongeBob violent and racist for existing in Bikini Bottom, but the show is also guilty of “cultural appropriation of iconic Pacific Island representations” when they show that SpongeBob lives inside a pineapple and Squidward lives inside an Easter Island-like statue.
 
Barker also has problems with the theme song of the show because “the viewer becomes an unwitting participant in the co-opting of Bikini’s story and the exclusion of the Bikinian people.”
 
And while Barker does say that the creators of the show likely didn’t intend to be this “racist”, she does say that the area is “not theirs for the taking.”
 
I don’t know how much clearer it can be that this “argument” – and I give it a lot of undeserved credence by calling it that, even in quotation marks – doesn’t work because it’s A) a fictional town filled with sentient fish, and B) underneath the actual coral reef of the area where Indigenous people were, so there were never any Indigenous people in the FICTIONAL TOWN FILLED WITH SENTIENT FISH!
 
But moving on from this, the show is also largely sexist because Sandy Cheeks is the only female character in the main cast and Barker claims that the only reason Sandy exists in the first place is to boost gender diversity in the show.
 
Even the fact that SpongeBob is called “Bob” is problematic in her eyes because the name “Bob” “represents the everyday man, a common American male, muck like a ‘Joe’”. So any person named “Bob” or “Joe” represents the common American male, and that is apparently a bad thing.
 
Anyone want to mention to her that the current frontrunner for the Democrat nomination is named “Joe”? And he definitely does not represent the common American male. His policies and his mannerisms attempt to completely trash and abandon the common American male because that’s what his lunatic, extremist Party demands.
 
Now, I just have to ask: how does anyone possibly come up with nonsense like this without taking an insane amount of drugs? Because this is not what a normal, reasonable and at least average-intelligence human being theorizes.
 
Fans of the show, interestingly enough, theorized that the lore behind SpongeBob and the origin of Bikini Bottom is a result of those nuclear detonations and that the residents of Bikini Bottom sprung up as a result of the radiation from those nukes.
 
But one must really hate any and all kinds of fun and entertainment to try and claim that SpongeBob SquarePants is racist, sexist and a representation of American “colonialism” and injustice against Indigenous people simply because of the setting the show is BASED on.
 
Love or hate the cartoon, no one even reasonably sane would try and seriously levy these arguments on social media, let alone IN AN ACADEMIC JOURNAL!
 
If anyone made these arguments on social media, or even on mainstream media, they’d be laughed at and ridiculed to high heaven, so for a university professor to write this is particularly sad and troubling when you think about it.
 
Like I said before, this woman is a university professor, meaning that she has students whom she teaches. If this is what she has to say about A NICKELODEON CARTOON, I can’t imagine what she might say about things like capitalism, social justice, Karl Marx, Trump, etc. (though I doubt they stray too far from things like “orange man bad” or “communism is better than capitalism”).
 
If you remember, I mocked the Washington Post columnist who argued that “The Lion King” was fascistic. But the difference between someone like that barnacle-head and this one is that this one influences younger generations and molds their minds to what she wants.
 
Obviously, not everyone she teaches likely will be molded into her very own Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth), but considering how radical-Leftist many college students are, I can see that people like her are a major reason for it.
 
I’ve long maintained that colleges aren’t places of education but rather indoctrination, as dissent and opposing thought is largely shut down and utterly maligned in most college campuses. When arguments and opposing thought are banned, this is the kind of nonsense that springs up: calling things that have literally nothing to do with racism racist.
 
If you want to know why half of Millennials are socialists, there is your answer. They are being TAUGHT by professors who find everything racist, including their own skin tone if they are white (and most of them are). They are being molded into communists by these people, not because it makes sense, but because the alternative is not only not taught, but basically banned from colleges and publicly demonized.
 
Violence against conservatives in college campuses are rather routine and any conservative’s attempt at letting their opinions be heard is more-often-than-not shut down by either other students or even campus faculty and police.
 
This is the danger of an unchecked and unopposed Left. They dictate what the rules are and what they aren’t. Even progressives aren’t exactly safe, because what used to be considered progressive in the past is not considered “progressive enough” today. You are branded a homophobe, racist Nazi if you oppose transgenderism or pedophilia, even if you support gay marriage.
 
Even Ellen DeGeneres caught some major heat from radical Leftists for hanging out with former President George W. Bush during a football game. While Bush is hardly a conservative, he is considered a war criminal by the radical Left, so DeGeneres, one of the Left’s biggest stars because she is simultaneously a woman and gay (yes, that’s basically all it takes), is maligned for even trying to be friendly to Bush.
 
The Left is the epitome of hatred and evil, if these two things don’t make that case enough. To claim a fictional sea sponge is racist just because he lives in a fictional town UNDERNEATH the site of a nuclear test that forced Indigenous people to move because the military didn’t want to nuke them is utterly ridiculous at the least.
 
It’s crazy that in a website about politics and religion, I am forced to defend SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS from uber-Left lunatics trying their hardest to be “woke”.
 
May God help the students that this crazy woman teaches and may God help the woman herself, as she clearly is in serious need of the Love of God.
 
1 Peter 3:9
“Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

With the Russian collusion narrative all but six feet under, and with every other “scandal” pushed out by the fake news media flopping more than a fish out of water, the Left’s latest “scandal” has ironically focused on Russia’s rival: Ukraine.
 
Like with the Russian collusion narrative, Trump was alleged to have tried to collude with Ukraine to interfere with the 2020 Presidential elections via the investigation of Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, thereby hurting Biden’s own candidacy. It is also being alleged that Trump threatened Ukraine with withholding foreign aid to the country if they didn’t investigate Hunter and the company he worked for.
 
However, like with everything else these people spew, that was nothing more than fake news.
 
With the way the media was talking about it, they made it look like investigating Biden was all that was in Trump’s mind and that he was out to influence in the elections. But the facts point in the other direction completely.
 
You see, President Donald Trump recently released the full, unclassified transcript of his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
 
What we find in the transcript of the phone call are a couple of things:
 
First, Trump congratulating Zelensky on his party’s success in a recent Parliamentary election in which they gained quite a bit of power. They talked quite a bit about what they hope to do in the future as far as U.S.-Ukraine relations go, with Zelensky crediting Trump as being an inspiration for Zelensky’s own election victory back in May of this year. Zelensky mentioned his desire to “drain the swamp” present in Ukrainian politics, and the two discussed the relationship Ukraine has with the European Union, which doesn’t seem to be a particularly good one.
 
The transcript is five pages long and Trump doesn’t begin discussing other matters until the third page.
 
In that page, he mentions the cybersecurity company Crowdstrike, which is connected to the DOJ’s investigation into election interference.
 
President Trump said the following during the call: “I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.”
 
So what is being said here? Trump is asking Ukraine to look into the whole ordeal surrounding Crowdstrike, which is under investigation by the DOJ as part of Barr's investigation into the origination of the Russian collusion hoax.

As far as Biden goes, to give you some context as to why he is being talked about at all, back in 2016, a top Ukrainian prosecutor was investigating Burisma Holdings, a company which employed the former VP’s son as a board member, as well as a firm called Rosemont Seneca, which received monthly transfers of upwards of $166,000 from Burisma between 2014 and 2015.
 
And Joe Biden himself had bragged about withholding $1 billion in U.S. loans to Ukraine if they didn’t fire the prosecutor investigating Hunter.
 
Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations that he told then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko: “I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”
 
It’s truly ironic because one of the allegations the Left had been making about this call that Trump had with Zelensky was that he had a quid pro quo, or a favor granted in exchange for something in return, and that Trump had threatened to withhold money unless they investigate Biden, but in reality, we find that BIDEN himself had committed this type of quid pro quo threat.
 
All Trump had asked Zelensky to do is to look into the entire ordeal surrounding Crowdstrike, if at all possible. Within the phone call, Trump wasn’t pressuring Zelensky to look into anything. He didn’t threaten Ukraine with withholding funds if they didn’t do something. It was BIDEN who did that back when he was Vice President (and Obama was likely in on it too).
 
All that was in the phone call was Trump congratulating Zelensky on more election victories, discussing them meeting up in Poland, the U.S. or Ukraine, discussing the economic potential of Ukraine moving forward as an energy independent nation, and looking into Crowdstrike. It wasn't until later on that Trump mentioned the prosecutor who had been fired: "I just want to let you know that's the other thing... There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me," said the President to Zelensky.
 
The main thing that Trump seemed to have sought was looking into Crowdstrike, with the Biden stuff appearing to be a complete afterthought.

And, by the way, he didn’t have to threaten Ukraine like Biden did. That’s because Trump isn’t a corrupt crook like Joe Biden is or Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn) is. Why Sen. Chris Murphy? Because he did something relatively similar to Joe Biden.
 
The Hill reports that earlier in September, Sen. Chris Murphy told Zelensky not to cooperate with Rudy Giuliani. To Murphy’s own words: “I told Zelensky that he should not insert himself or his government into American politics. I cautioned him that complying with the demands of the President’s campaign representatives to investigate a political rival of the President would gravely damage the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. There are few things that Republicans and Democrats agree on in Washington these days, and support for Ukraine is one of them.”
 
Basically, he gave a thinly-veiled threat to President Zelensky not to investigate Hunter Biden in a rather similar manner as Joe did. He was essentially threatening that relations with the two countries could be jeopardized once a Democrat wins the White House if they investigate Hunter Biden and cooperate with Giuliani.
 
Again, these two Democrats (and others like them) are extremely corrupt.
 
If you would like to read the transcript yourself, here is the link: https://www.scribd.com/document/427411245/Trump-Zelensky-trancript#from_embed.
 
Read it for yourself and see what a nothingburger this “scandal” which was used to launch an impeachment inquiry into the President is. Read it and discover just how utterly desperate the Left is to get rid of Trump. There is nothing in it that even points to criminal activity. 

And for this, the Democrats wish to impeach him (not that they need much. His very existence triggers them to wish to impeach him). For this absolute fake news nothingburger.
 
The Democrats thought this would be what ended Trump. Like with everything else they tried, it utterly blew up in their faces.
 
Let’s see just how crazier these people can get. I have the feeling we’ve just scratched the surface.
 
Romans 16:18
“For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naïve.”
 
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.

Looking over topics for me to cover, I came across a Daily Caller article with the following title: “Over 90,000 Sign Petition To Rename Street Outside Trump Tower After Obama.”
 
The article is short, considering there isn’t much to say about this. It covers the fact that over 90,000 people signed the aforementioned petition “in order to spite President Donald Trump,” according to The Daily Caller.
 
The article says that “[T]he woman behind the petition told Newsweek that she wants to honor Obama because Osama bin Laden was killed by American forces during the Obama administration.” Elizabeth Rowin, the woman behind the petition, went on to say: “I honestly started it as a joke. I saw a comedian joke about how it would make Trump so mad if it was named after former President Obama and thought why not.”
 
Rowin went on to tell Newsweek that the New York City Council told her they would pursue the project and she intends to write a letter to Mayor Bill de Blasio about it.
 
While there isn’t an awful lot of detail about this story, considering just how unimportant it is in the grand scheme of things, I do have a bit to say about this.
 
First, I love the fact that Rowin lists bin Laden’s death as the reason for this. It’s almost literally Obama’s only good accomplishment as POTUS. If you asked people to name Obama accomplishments, first and foremost (and quite possibly on its own) would be killing Osama bin Laden. But they would struggle to name other accomplishments. Obamacare is garbage, the economy was horrible when he was in charge, foreign relations were terrible and whatever damage he caused, Trump has been working to fix them.
 
Even if one were to consider the Iran nuke deal as an Obama accomplishment, that’s been thrown out the window long ago. President Donald Trump is shredding Barack Obama’s legacy and his accomplishments far outweigh and outnumber Obama’s.
 
And that’s really the irony behind this entire story. Leftists will cheer at the renaming of the street Trump Tower is on after Barack Obama, thinking Trump will fume about it. If he’s half the internet troll (in a good way) that I think he is, he will be delighted about the change.
 
Why? Because of the symbolism of Trump Tower literally towering over Obama.
 
Trump can tweet something along the lines of: “So glad New York City changed the name of the street Trump Tower is on to President Barack H. Obama Avenue. A great symbol of my accomplishments (Trump Tower) towering over President Obama’s.”
 
It would turn the Left’s spiteful intent to rename that street completely against them. There literally would be a massive symbol of Trump’s accomplishments, that being the Trump Tower, being far more important and impressive than Obama’s. At least, that’s what I would say if I were on Trump’s shoes regarding this.
 
To repeat myself, just about everything Obama did as President of the United States has been eliminated. Obama’s legacy is down to only a few things.
 
Obamacare is still around, unfortunately, due to either spineless or traitorous Republicans.
 
The economic stagnation that Obama insisted was “the new normal” for America is far behind us, with record low unemployment across the board, millions of jobs created with Trump’s “magic wand”, the economy growing at 3% annually, paychecks going up, consumer confidence skyrocketing, the cutting of taxes, etc.
 
The disastrous Iran nuke deal is also gone, at least when it comes to the U.S. funding the world’s lead sponsor of terror.
 
Relations with North Korea are… peculiar, but not at levels of U.S. bending over backwards to appease them.
 
ISIS is pretty much destroyed and the last major Islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil happened in late 2017, with the latest Islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil happening in January of this year (no fatalities, but one injured in a “lone wolf” ISIS loyalist knife attack against a police officer), according to thereligionofpeace.com, a site that tracks Islamic terrorism among other things.
 
The U.S. is no longer a part of the Paris Climate Accord, so we are no longer wasting hundreds of millions of dollars fighting a boogey man.
 
The number of people on food stamps is getting lower and lower as more and more people can afford to pay for their own meals.
 
The U.S. embassy in Israel is now in Jerusalem, something many of Trump’s predecessors promised they would do but never got around to doing it for various reasons.
 
And most of these accomplishments are just off the top of my head. I could continue with that, adding smaller accomplishments as well, but these are the ones I wanted to cover. The point of this is to highlight the fact that Donald Trump’s presidency has been the total polar opposite of Obama’s: actually good for the country.
 
In reality, whether the Left will care to admit it or not, Trump has far more accomplishments than Obama, particularly since Trump’s accomplishments include OVERTURNING OBAMA’S LEGACY. The fact they want to rename the street Trump Tower is on to President Barack H. Obama Avenue shows you how petty these people are, but it could really backfire on them spectacularly.
 
It wouldn’t be a major story by any means, just one of the many episodes relating to Trump’s Twitter wars with others, but in trying to tick the guy off, they could very well end up just symbolizing Trump towering over Obama. And that’s something I would absolutely love to see, even if it’s mentioned for only a moment.
 
You just have to love it when the Left dunks on itself.
 
Proverbs 18:2
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
 
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.

Following the two shootings that occurred over the weekend, President Donald Trump issued a televised statement from the White House condemning white supremacy, racism and hatred that likely fueled the shootings to take place, something the Left had been demanding Trump do following the tragedies. However, having done so, the Left is ticked off that he did, insists he is insincere and continues to spread the lie that Donald Trump is a racist white supremacist who enables people like the shooters (who both held Leftist beliefs) to commit those kinds of heinous acts.
 
But for a brief period of time, the New York Times actually acted like a news organization and planned to deliver a story surrounding the event in a relatively unbiased manner. Their original headline was: “Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism.”
 
I will share a few of the statements the President made shortly, but I would have to say that that is an apt summation of what was said. President Trump fully condemned the shooters, as well as the white supremacy ideology that likely fueled at least one of them. However, this unbiased headline was too “far-right” and too unbiased for the ever-so tolerant and not-at-all full of crap Leftists who are still subscribed to the paper.
 
Nate Silver from FiveThirtyEight, a notable far-Left source, tweeted: “Tomorrow’s NYT print edition. Not sure ‘TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM’ is how I would have framed the story.”
 
Him being a Leftist, that doesn’t surprise me. Neither does it surprise me that 2020 Dem hopefuls also announced their frustrations over the truthful headline.
 
Cory Booker tweeted: “Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do.”
 
Kirsten Gillibrand tweeted: “That’s not what happened.”
 
Allow me to briefly address the two failures. First, let’s start with what Not So Smarticus said, “Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do.”
 
Am I the only one getting 1984 vibes here? Cause to me, it sounds like a politician is shaming the publication for reporting the truth and insists that people’s lives are in danger as a result of it. Because, you see, the truth is dangerous. When people find the truth, they stop believing the lies. The lies that Donald Trump is a racist and a white supremacist. The lies that Donald Trump colluded with Russia. The lies that Republicans have blood on their hands when tragedies like these happen. And to me, it looks like Cory Booker is attempting to channel his inner Joseph Goebbels: “Let me control the media and I will turn any nation into a herd of pigs.”
 
He doesn’t want the media to report on the truth because that has consequences dire to his agenda – to the Leftist agenda. Lives are not put into danger because the New York Times’ original headline featured objectivity and truth. Lives are not put into danger because the headline, for once, featured a Trump who offers unity (which he had been for years, but the MSM never reported on it, likely because of crap like this). But in the mind of a Leftist, Trump is Hitler (who was also an extreme Leftist, but no one will care to admit that on the Left) and as a result, to give him any sort of objectivity is the same as allowing him to start a Holocaust.
 
This is why they say ICE detention centers are “concentration camps”. Having lived their lives in the constant toxic bullcrap they spew, they started to believe it. They truly believe that Donald Trump is in any way comparable to Hitler, so to portray him objectively in any way would be the equivalent of giving Hitler a pass, in their minds.
 
This is how utterly corrupt these people are, and the reason I say that there is truly no longer freedom of the press. Constitutionally, and officially, there is freedom of the press as it is detailed in the First Amendment. But when news organizations are hit with so much blowback not only from other “journalists” but also politicians and people threatening to unsubscribe, the organizations under fire for reporting the truth no longer have the right to report freely.
 
So, they changed the headline to: “Assailing Hate But Not Guns.” Because of course the focus has to be on the guns. The two shooters held Left-wing ideologies. That can’t be mentioned whatsoever. The Left is lucky one of them was a white supremacist, because otherwise, they would have to avoid talking about motive, for the most part. They certainly avoid the Dayton shooter, who had very openly-Leftist social media activity before the shooting.
 
Now, let’s discuss what Kirsten Gillibrand thought of the original headline. To repeat, she tweeted: “That’s not what happened.”
 
Oh, isn’t it? I understand Leftists tend to live in their own world, but please at least try to provide evidence to back up your claims. You claim that Trump didn’t call for unity against racism? Well, what’s this then?:
 
“Together, we lock arms to shoulder the grief. We ask God in Heaven to ease the anguish of those who suffer. And we vow to act with urgent resolve… The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online, consumed by racist hate. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America. Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart and devours the soul… In the two decades since Columbine, our nation has watched with rising horror and dread as one mass shooting has followed another, over and over again, decade after decade. We cannot allow ourselves to feel powerless. We can and will stop this evil contagion. In that task, we must honor the sacred memory of those we have lost, by acting as one people. Open wounds cannot heal if we are divided. We must seek real bipartisan solutions – we have to do that, in a bipartisan manner – that will truly make America safer and better for all.”
 
This is only a portion of what the President said recently, followed by similar remarks on social media. Exactly which part of this is him not trying to unite our country against racism? The part where we “lock arms to shoulder the grief”? The part where we “vow to act with urgent resolve”? The part where “our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy”? The part where we must act “as one people”? The part where our “wounds cannot heal if we are divided”? Or the part where “we must seek real bipartisan solutions… in a bipartisan manner… that will truly make America safer and better for all”?
 
Exactly how is the headline: “Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism” not a factual and accurate summation of what the President said? No, the President didn’t assail against guns because, as I said in my previous article covering these tragedies, that wouldn’t solve anything because guns are not the root cause of shootings. But in what way is the original headline in any way dangerous or fictitious? In the Left’s mind, any story that does not portray Trump as the literal devil is dangerous to their narratives and rhetoric and their opportunity to defeat him at any capacity. That’s the Left’s current goal: defeat Donald Trump at any cost.
 
Evidently, that comes even at the cost of a free press, but we already knew journalism was long dead. This just further proves that to be true.
 
John 8:44
“You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”
 
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.

Despite the bogus calls of racism surrounding the addition of a citizenship question to the U.S. Census, a very solid majority of Americans support such an addition, including Latinos and African Americans, according to a recent Harvard/Harris poll.
 
The poll shows that 5 in 9 Hispanics, or 55%, support adding a citizenship question to the Census, and nearly 6 in 10 African Americans, or 59%, also say the same.
 
Overall, 67% of American voters support adding the question to the Census, with 72% of white Americans, almost 90% of Republicans, 63% of swing voters and between 64 and 69% of working class Americans making up that overall number.
 
Despite the Supreme Court foolishly voting to kick the can down the road on this issue, President Trump is reportedly looking to add the question to next year’s Census anyway, with the help of Attorney General William Barr. So it is very likely that the President will sign an executive order to add the question to the Census.
 
But of course, this is all bad news for the Left. To them, adding a citizenship question is “racist” and nothing but an effort to “make America white again” even though nothing about adding a question would really affect how “white” America is. The only REAL reason the Left is opposed to the citizenship question is because of districting.
 
U.S. Senate candidate in Kansas, Kris Kobach, explained: “Right now, congressional districts are drawn up simply based on the number of warm bodies in each district. Not only are legal aliens counted, but illegal aliens are counted too. As a result, citizens in a district with lots of illegal aliens have more voting power than citizens in districts with few illegal aliens.”
 
In other words, this completely jeopardizes our American electoral system because districts all of a sudden have more people to count and receive more voting power. Places like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Antonio, etc., if they take more and more illegal aliens who people don’t know are illegal aliens, they receive more power, but it is ill-gotten and illegitimate power.
 
How else do you think California is so irretrievably blue? I often say that the biggest mistake President Reagan ever made is sign the amnesty bill late in his administration. While the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 made it illegal for businesses to knowingly hire illegal immigrants (like that stopped them), it also legalized illegals who came into the country before January 1st, 1982. Even Wikipedia says that “despite the passage of the act, the number of illegal immigrants in the United States rose from 5 million in 1986 to 11.1 in 2013.”
 
Yeah, it’s not “despite” the passage of the act, but precisely BECAUSE of the passage of the act. This signified that even one of the most conservative Presidents would be willing to sign an amnesty bill. And while it may have been “promised” to Reagan that it would be the only bill of its kind, you absolutely cannot trust the Washington establishment. Paul Ryan often promised Trump that they would be building the wall eventually and they never got around to doing that, hoping to God that Democrats would take control of the House (which they did, as we know).
 
Illegals being able to vote in elections means the electoral system is being rigged and affected by foreign influences. Adding a citizenship question makes it clear who is a citizen and who is not and takes away the ill-gotten power that districts with a lot of non-citizens have received.
 
Simply put: only American citizens ought to be represented in this country. Non-citizens don’t have the right to vote in federal elections in this country for good reason. And even though they have the right to vote in local elections in some states, I think they shouldn’t be able to. They aren’t citizens of this country, so they shouldn’t be represented.
 
Now, I know what some people might say: “But Freddie, aren’t you a foreigner yourself? Aren’t you being hypocritical right now?” To which I say: no, as I never held the belief that non-citizens ought to have the right to vote in a country where they were not citizens of. The representatives of the United States ought to represent AMERICANS, not foreigners, legal or illegal.
 
What’s more, only legal immigrants ought to have a path to citizenship. The ones that become citizens, such as myself, have henceforth the inherent right to be represented in government BECAUSE WE ARE CITIZENS! It makes absolutely no sense to me that any state would allow for non-citizens to be part of the group represented by the government.
 
At the risk of sounding like a right-wing cliché, America is for Americans. That doesn’t mean foreigners aren’t allowed. That doesn’t mean America is strictly for white people. That means the American government ought to represent Americans and ONLY Americans. Those who are either born here or have taken the steps necessary to become U.S. citizens are considered Americans. Other countries like Mexico explicitly prohibit foreigners from participating in the electoral system. Matter of fact, the Mexican Constitution explicitly states (translated, of course) that “foreigners shall not in any way involve themselves in the political matters of the country.” This means that foreigners don’t have the right to vote, run for office or participate in any political event like rallies or demonstrations.
 
Do you know why that is? Well, for one, Mexico doesn’t want to be turned into another country and has the common sense not to allow for foreign interference in their elections. Yeah, they have a slew of other problems, but at least they aren’t dumb enough to allow for non-citizens to be represented politically in that country.
 
Second, Mexico isn’t filled with people who feel guilty about being white (for obvious reasons) or who feel guilty for things they did but fixed or things they flat out didn’t do. Democrats in America, specifically white Democrats, hate the fact they are white and will apologize whenever they can or feel they should; they feel guilty about slavery, even though it was resolved WELL before anyone currently living in this country was born (and even though it was the Democrats who fought for slavery, something they adamantly deny); feel guilty about segregation, even though it has also been resolved; and feel guilty about “making other countries poorer because of our capitalism” which is such a nonsense statement you might as well have spoken Russian to a chihuahua.
 
Thirdly, the Mexican government doesn’t have to worry too much about b.s.-ing people about what they want to do to gain power. Mexico isn’t exactly a very capitalistic country, part of the reason it’s so crappy. But the Left in this country has to work overtime to b.s. people about their intentions. It’s why they cry “racism” at the addition of a citizenship question. It’s not about racism and they know it. It’s about districting and voting power.
 
By adding a citizenship question, districts with more illegal immigrants lose power, while districts with less gain more through the reduction of the other district’s lost power. In other words, uber-Leftist, open-borders cities like Los Angeles lose power, while rural America gains power as a result.
 
The Left HATES rural America, think we are nothing but gun-toting, God-fearing, racist, dumb, inbred hillbillies who ought to be cut down a size. In reality, we are pro-2nd amendment, yes, and God-fearing Americans, but far from racist, dumb or inbred. Matter of fact, I assure you rural Americans are 10 times smarter than Leftists from Los Angeles, etc.
 
Want to know what makes me think that? Rural Americans aren’t spending all their time dreaming about a socialist “utopia” that is entirely unrealistic. We don’t spend our time hating the color of our own skin or the color of another person’s skin (which is what racism is by definition, but the Left wants to change that definition really badly). We don’t spend our time foolishly believing giving away everything for free is at all a realistic and achievable objective. We don’t spend our time worshipping equally-as-flawed humans who make movies. We don’t spend our time watching the fake news media and parrot everything they say online. We don’t spend our time worrying about an issue that is not caused by us and cannot be solved by us. We don’t spend our time foolishly (at best) thinking that human life inside the womb is akin to Jell-O. We don’t spend our time thinking people can realistically change their genders on a mere whim or think there are an infinite number of possible genders.
 
In the final analysis of American cultures, you will find that the only people who are racist, sexist or in any way moronic are the Left, who constantly harp about people’s skin color, judge people who are white, judge people who are male, judge people who are straight and judge people who disagree with them in any way. It’s those who attack white people for being white that are racist, not those who defend white people. It’s those who attack men for being men that are sexist, not those who defend them. It’s those who believe gender is a social construct and will call that “science” who are truly moronic at best and outright demented at worst.
 
And these are the people who DEMAND we hand over our electoral power for them to do with as they please, legislating things that get closer and closer to resembling the Soviet Union? ABSOLUTELY NOT! The American people should not fall for their idiotic words regarding the citizenship question, and if that poll is any indication, it looks like most are not.
 
Americans ought to be represented in America. If a foreigner wishes to be represented, then they better go to whatever country they hail from because that is where they will be represented. Otherwise, they better hope they are here legally and wait to become American citizens like the rest of the legal immigrants here do, because they should not and likely will not be represented in this country otherwise.
 
And no, to demand American-exclusive representation in America isn’t racist. IT’S COMMON SENSE THAT LITERALLY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY EMPLOYS!
 
And before anyone says that the Bible dictates we allow foreigners and sojourners into our land, take a look at Exodus 12:48-49: “If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”
 
Sojourners, foreigners, are supposed to follow our LAWS and will be punished if they do not follow our laws. Our laws dictate that illegal immigrants are, well, ILLEGAL. The Bible doesn’t speak in favor of illegal immigration whatsoever, unlike some fake, Leftist preachers and Christians would have you believe.

We are to treat foreigners fairly, but on the condition they follow THE LAW WE HAVE SET IN PLACE. Should they fail to do so, they ought to be punished accordingly. THAT is equality.
 
Leviticus 18:26
“But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you.”
 
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.

Ahead of the 4th of July, Gallup released a poll indicating that the number of people who said they were proud, or “extremely” proud, to be Americans is considerably lower today than in previous polls, with trends showing this sort of thing for the past couple of years.
 
However, it is important to note just who exactly it is that is dragging these numbers down: people who identify as Democrats aka people who hate Trump and would love to see this country turn into a socialist country (though as I have explained in the past, most people don’t actually know what socialism is).
 
Gallup said that while, overall, 70% of U.S. adults said they were proud to be Americans, only 45% said they were “extremely” proud of their country, a rather low number not seen in quite some time and the second time in only two years that that number was below 50%.
 
According to the poll, only 22% of Democrats said they were “extremely” proud of this country and that “subgroups that typically identify as Democrats – women, liberals and younger adults,” also showed lower levels of pride in their country. That 22% is the lowest in Gallup’s polling history for Democrats, who have historically never been quite so proud of this country, regardless of who was President.
 
Even while Obama was President, the lowest number for Republicans was 68%.
 
But again, the Democrats are really the ones who drive down these numbers, because 76% of Republicans and 41% of Independents were “extremely” proud of this country. And this really shouldn’t come as much of a surprise at all.
 
Matter of fact, this is quite some wonderful news, when you think about it. The Democrats, a party that has spent over a decade openly bashing this country and going on “apology tours” to other countries and who wish for nothing more than to see this country be turned on its head, are very much not proud to be Americans. Why? Because Donald Trump is President and is Making America Great Again, a slogan that literally causes Leftists to go nuts every time they hear it because they want precisely the opposite.
 
While Republicans, Independents, and the few sane Democrats that are extremely proud of this country spend their time in joy over what is happening around them, embittered and hateful Leftists spend their time making bogus claim after bogus claim about many aspects of America, be it “running concentration camps” at the southern border, or “Trump’s military parade was literally never done before”, or “white people’s very existence is a threat to brown people” or “Border Patrol is biased against minorities” (even though 51% of CBP agents are Latino), they have just about everything negative to say about this country, from its founding to today.
 
Just look at Nike’s Betsy Ross flag scandal. One socialist, third-rate former quarterback complained to them about a flag (that literally was on the side of the Union when fighting the Confederates) that was supposedly racist because it was made when there was slavery and Nike folded like a wet piece of paper. People like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers are marred because they lived when slavery was allowed, or owned slaves themselves, and created a nation supposedly with the idea that only “white men” would be free.
 
All a massive load of b.s. Slavery was in place in this country WELL before this country’s founding, and it’s not like no other country had slaves. I don’t see people lambasting Egypt or many other African or Middle Eastern countries despite the fact that they have all allowed slavery to exist (and there are still some countries that allow for slavery to exist). England also had slavery, and they didn’t just enslave Africans, but also enslaved Irish people too, sending them to the New World to be sold to English settlers in the West Indies.
 
But the Left completely abhors America because slavery was a thing that happened when it was founded. Despite the fact that we took care of that problem LESS THAN A CENTURY LATER, the fact that it was even a problem at one point in the first place is cause for scorn towards this country.
 
Despite the fact that most of the racial problems that existed in America were A) largely due to Leftists and B) were resolved eventually, the fact that these problems existed and caused people ire is seen as a justifiable enough reason to hate this country and turn to a system that LITERALLY ENSLAVES ITS OWN POPULATION in socialism.
 
Ignorant fools will complain about how minorities and homosexuals are treated in this country while wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt (in case you are unaware, Che Guevara was a massive racist and homophobe who opened Cuba’s first ACTUAL concentration camp and among many considered to be “counter-revolutionaries” were gay people, who were seen as bourgeois).
 
They will decry the Constitution as being rigged against black people and completely ignore the fact that Frederick Douglass, a former slave himself, said of the Constitution: “The Constitution is a glorious liberty document. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? Or is it in the temple? It is neither,” and “Now, take the Constitution according to its plain reading, and I defy the presentation of a single pro-slavery clause in it. On the other hand it will be found to contain principles and purposes, entirely hostile to the existence of slavery.”
 
The plain truth is that this country is the greatest nation on Earth. It is not perfect, of course (the fact that abortion and homosexual marriage are legal is a testament to that). No country founded and ruled by men can ever be perfect due to our very nature of imperfection. But I dare any Leftist who hates this country, someone like Colin Kaepernick, to live somewhere like Venezuela or Cuba, and not among the bourgeois like he does today, but among the proletariat, among the masses, where he would be treated like any other person and still say that that is better than America at any capacity.
 
People FLEE other nations to COME INTO THIS COUNTRY for a very good reason. Whether that reason be for economic opportunity (like my family did), for religious or another kind of freedom, or to take advantage of the welfare system in place in this country like so many illegals (and, truth be told, a fair amount of legal immigrants) do, they all come into this country because the one they chose to leave behind was utter garbage.
 
If this country were anywhere near as bad as the Left said it was, no amount of George Soros’ money would convince people to form caravans and march into America like an invading army.
 
If this country were anywhere near as bad as the Left said it was, people would be LEAVING this country in droves rather than coming into it.
 
The truth of the matter is that America is the best country in the history of the planet because it was founded with the greatest economic system (capitalism) under the greatest form of government (a Constitutional Republic) and blessed by the almighty Lord. The Left absolutely abhors all three of these things, so it comes as no surprise that so few Democrats are proud, or extremely proud of this country.
 
If the people who view abortion as liberation, homosexuality as a must-have for any society 24/7 to the point children are forced to learn it and forced to love it, view age as “just a number”, view Christian religious freedom as a violation of another person’s rights but view Muslim religious freedom as perfectly acceptable (even if they actually violate another person’s rights), view guns as sentient killing machines, view gun owners and the NRA as terrorists but view Islamic terrorists as “misunderstood”, view fascist protesters who claim to be against fascism and commit violence on a regular basis as “angels”, view this country as not something to be proud of, then Hallelujah because we are doing something right.
 
These people are the incarnation of what Isaiah was talking about in the 20th verse of the 5th chapter, when he talked about those who substitute evil for good and good for evil.
 
If they were to meet God, they would consider Him the devil. So if these people hate this country that much, then Trump is doing something marvelously right.
 
Still, apart from that, there are some things that are positive in the Gallup poll. Gallup put in a question asking people what they were proud of about American society. 91% said they were proud of scientific advancements in this country, 89% said they were proud of the military, 85% said they were proud of American culture and arts, 75% were proud of the economic achievements, 73% proud of achievements in sports and 72% proud of the country’s diversity in race, ethnic background, and religion.
 
So despite how much the Left hates America, even they have to recognize the areas in which we are doing particularly well, even if they disagree about other aspects.
 
Still, this doesn’t take away the fact that they are not very proud at all of this country, even if just for the fact that it elected Donald Trump, whom they view as the embodiment of Hitler (despite how far he actually is from such a Satanic historical figure).
 
Of course, they are certainly entitled to their own opinion. And they are certainly entitled to be wrong. They may wallow in misery over the “bad” things this country is doing. Meanwhile, I will delight in the great things this country has done and continues to do, thanking the Lord for blessing this country and begging for Him to continue to do so.
 
Psalm 33:12
“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. 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.

Back in March, I wrote an article talking about Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Al-Shabaab)’s anti-Semitic comments and how the Democrat Party initially planned to pass a resolution condemning all anti-Semitism (without singling out Omar) but then simply chose to pass a resolution condemning all forms of hatred, pretending as if no anti-Semitism actually was spewed.
 
Recently, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Hamas) tried her hand at a common tactic among anti-Semites: revisionist history of the Holocaust and Israel.
 
On a Yahoo podcast named, “Skullduggery”, Tlaib said the following words: “There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors, Palestinians, who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports… I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post- the Holocaust, post- the tragedy and horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time.”
 
Now, there are a number of things that are very, very wrong about this.
 
First, that initial portion is quite horrific. She gets a “calming feeling” when she thinks about the Holocaust and the tragedy of it? That is honestly some of the most vile, anti-Semitic rhetoric I have heard in my life. And before anyone tells me I’m taking it out of context, as pretty much all Democrats will claim here, in what context exactly is the phrase “calming feeling” when thinking of the Holocaust in any way not anti-Semitic?
 
Had she tried to say she got a “calming” or “pleasant” feeling of “knowing” her ancestors did nice things for the Jews (a complete lie, but we’ll get to that in a moment), then that would’ve been different. But she prefaced that with the actual Holocaust and its tragedy.
 
She could’ve said: “There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of what my ancestors did for the persecuted Jews post- the Holocaust, about how they did their best to try to help them, even if it came at the cost of their very own lives and livelihoods.” THAT would’ve still been utterly wrong and Jewish revisionist history, but it at least would’ve been taken a little bit better, in my opinion. It at least would’ve hidden her hatred for Jews and appreciation for the Holocaust. But the Left is convinced they can get away with pretty much everything, so she can make clear her hatred of Jews and appreciation for the Holocaust and the Democrats + the media will come to her defense… exactly as they did.
 
The second, and perhaps most important thing that is wrong about what she said is the actual revisionist history. The Palestinians living in the area at the time were anything BUT welcoming of the Jewish people post- the Holocaust. Violence was often used against Jews returning to the Holy Land, which was occupied by Muslims at the time.
 
And matter of fact, it was the Palestinian Grand Mufti, Muhammad Amin al-Husayni, who was a big ally of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, even being a big fan of Hitler’s “final solution” of the elimination of lesser races and people.
 
Now, a commonplace lie that is peddled by anti-Semites is that Israel only exists today because of the Holocaust. That is patently untrue.
 
Even ignoring the fact that Israel existed as a nation THOUSANDS of years before the Holocaust took place, what with Abraham essentially being considered every Jew’s ancestor (and every Christian, really), as well as Moses delivering the Jewish people out of bondage through God’s power, and God choosing Saul to anoint him as king of Israel, followed by David and Solomon, the Jewish people began to resettle in the land WELL before the Holocaust.
 
According to the New York Post: “Last Wednesday was Israel’s Memorial Day for fallen soldiers and victims of terror. Israeli television broadcast all the names – 23,741. The litany begins with Avraham Shlomo Zalman Tzoref, who was murdered by Arabs opposing his work for the Jewish community in Jerusalem. That was in 1851. The Holocaust took place nearly a century later.”
 
What’s more, Jewish people began to return to Jerusalem, or Zion, around the 1880s. “In 1917, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour declared that his government ‘view[s] with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.’ The League of Nations, a precursor to the United Nations, gave the British a temporary mandate to govern Palestine, and under the mandate, the Jewish community formed its own self-governing body in 1922.”
 
So there was already quite the Jewish presence in the area well before Hitler came along. And returning to the Grand Mufti, according to a German transcript of a meeting between him and Hitler, when visiting German troops, the Mufti said: “An appeal by the Mufti to the Arab countries… would produce a great number of volunteers eager to fight.”
 
Hitler then made a promise to the Mufti that, after conquering the Southern Caucasus, “Germany’s objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere.”
 
The Arabs even pressured the British into limiting the number of Jews who would be granted access to the mandate established in 1917 in seek of refuge, leading many ships to be forced to turn around and many Jews to be sent to almost certain death in Europe.
 
What’s more, in 1947 when the U.N. voted to “partition mandatory Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state, five Arab armies invaded in an attempt to make it all Arab.”
 
So not only was there considerable Jewish presence in the region well before the Holocaust, enough to petition the British to allow for a sovereign Jewish state, and not only were the Arabs in cahoots with the Nazis, but once World War II had ended and the newly-formed U.N. voted to allow for a Jewish state to exist in the region, the Arabs (or Palestinians) outright invaded the region to keep it from becoming Israel’s.
 
The REAL history lesson here is the fact that Tlaib’s ancestors SOUGHT THE DESTRUCTION OF THE JEWS, EVEN SIDING WITH HITLER TO DO SO! And yet, she implies that the real victims here are the “Palestinians” post- the Holocaust. She implies that the Jews were greedy land-grabbers and thieves who took advantage of poor, little Palestinians who only wanted them to be safe and comfy.
 
What a load of crap! The Islamic Arabs have been mortal enemies to the Jews for centuries, ever since the “prophet” Mohammed’s first bloody crusade against infidels. They worked hand-in-hand with the NAZIS to eliminate the Jews. That is a FACT. What Tlaib is claiming here is entirely ahistorical crap.
 
But lo and behold, the self-righteous Democrat Party comes to Tlaib’s defense after getting called out for her horrific choice of words and her thinly-veiled attempt at rewriting history to make the Jews look like the bad guys.
 
Everyone from President Trump to Congressional Republicans to SANE PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEIR HISTORY AND CAN TELL TLAIB IS A HORRIBLE ANTI-SEMITE called Tlaib out on her bigotry and her hatred.
 
“Democrat Rep. Tlaib is being slammed for her horrible and highly insensitive statement on the Holocaust. She obviously has tremendous hatred of Israel and the Jewish people,” wrote the President.
 
This, in particular, has gotten the Democrats to, once again, defend anti-Semitism and show themselves to be far closer to the Nazi Party than they could ever claim Trump and Republicans to be.
 
Dem. Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) tweeted: “If you read Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s comments, it is clear that President Trump and Congressional Republicans are taking them out of context. They must stop, and they owe her an apology.”
 
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Californistan) tweeted: “Republicans’ desperate attempts to smear Rep. Rashida Tlaib & misrepresent her comments are outrageous. President Donald Trump & House GOP should apologize to Rep. Tlaib & the American people for their gross misrepresentations.”
 
Yeah, Trump and Republicans should totally apologize to the horrible bigot for making her horrific comments that do not even attempt to hide her hatred for Jews and hardly attempt to hide that she is trying to rewrite history to make Jews look like the bad guys DURING THE WORST TRAGEDY TO EVER BEFALL THE JEWS!
 
Yeah, Tlaib was only making poorly-thought-out at best comments saying she got a calming feeling when thinking about the Holocaust and the tragedy and was only trying to insinuate the common anti-Semitic lie that Arabs in the region were welcoming of the Jews who totally were never there before.
 
Even Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-USSR) weighed in on this in defense of Tlaib. May I remind you he himself is Jewish?
 
Well, he’s a socialist, so I don’t know how one can be Jewish (or Christian) and socialist at the same time. If one were to say he is a socialist, he is not a Jew or a Christian. One cannot serve two masters (God and the government) for he will love one and hate the other and vice versa.
 
But in any case, we continue seeing the Left-ward trend from the modern Democrat Party to get closer and closer to the Nazi Party of Germany without actually calling themselves Nazis (and even having the nerve to call other people “Nazis”).
 
One does not have to think very hard about where we will go from here.
 
Psalm 109:2-5
“For wicked and deceitful mouths are opened against me, speaking against me with lying tongues. They encircle me with words of hate, and attack me without cause. In return for my love they accuse me, but I give myself to prayer. So they reward me evil for good, and hatred for my love.”
 
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.

Over the weekend, Hamas terrorists at the Gaza Strip fired around 700 rockets towards Israel, killing four Israelis and wounding dozens others, according to the Jerusalem Post.
 
“Terror groups Hamas and Islamic jihad in Gaza have fired over 700 rockets at Israel since Friday, killing four Israelis and wounding dozens. Defiant Hamas and Islamic Jihad officials said on Sunday that they don’t rule out the possibility that the current round of fighting in the Gaza Strip could lead to an all-out war with Israel,” reported the Jerusalem Post.
 
Reuters reported: “The latest round of violence began [Thursday] when an Islamic Jihad sniper fired at Israeli troops, wounding two soldiers.” This is important to keep in mind and you’ll find out why in a moment.
 
Both Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib responded to this attack, but taking the side of the Islamic terrorists attacking Israel, unsurprisingly.
 
Tlaib tweeted in response to a tweet (which I will share in a moment) the following: “When will the world stop dehumanizing our Palestinian people who just want to be free? Headlines like this & framing it in this way just feeds into the continued lack of responsibility on Israel who unjustly oppress & target Palestinian children and families. #FreePalestine.”
 
Now, I have a number of things to say about this alone, but let’s first see what this headline is and what tweet she is responding to. The headline comes from the New York Times, ironically enough, considering their disgusting Anti-Semitic picture from about a week ago, and it reads: “Gaza Militants Fire 250 Rockets, and Israel Responds With Airstrikes.”
 
Really nothing wrong here, as it states some facts. However, Tlaib and the person she responded to have a problem with this headline and the framing of it, making it seem like it’s the terrorists’ fault… which it is. And yet, they have a problem with this. Why am I not surprised?
 
But that’s just the headline. What tweet was Tlaib responding to? This one: “This is a stunningly irresponsible and misleading headline. Israel shot dozens of unarmed Palestinian protestors in Gaza on Friday and killed 4 Palestinians, including two protesters, in Gaza before any projectiles were launched.”
 
This comes from a Twitter verified account (again, not surprised) that goes by the name of Yousef Munayyer. Obviously, a Muslim and one that sides against Israel (as most tend to do).
 
But that is where that Reuters report becomes important. Israel may have shot “unarmed Palestinian protesters” (doubt they were unarmed and they are not protesters but occupiers of a land that belongs to Israel, but I’ll get to that later), but if they did, it is out of retaliation against a Jihadi sniper shooting and wounding soldiers. Is Israel not allowed to retaliate against attacks? Are they supposed to kowtow to Muslim invaders?
 
In Tlaib’s, Omar’s and Yousef’s minds: yes, Israel should surrender to them.
 
Now, before I get to Omar’s tweet, I would like to dismantle Tlaib’s. First, the headline is a rather accurate one and places the blame on those who are to blame: the radical Islamic terrorists. The NYT won’t admit it themselves, neither would they dare say the words “radical Islamic terrorists”, but they at least have some basic understanding of who the aggressor here is and it’s not Israel (and this will likely be one of very few and far between times when I will actually compliment the New York Times). So the headline she is talking about does not dehumanize anyone, does not represent a sort of “lack of responsibility” on the part of Israel and does nothing except report the truth (again, a rarity for the NYT).
 
And second, notice the actual dual loyalty Tlaib demonstrates to have here. “Our Palestinian people”? Who is “our” in this situation, because it’s definitely not the United States. The U.S. supports Israel, not Muslim invaders. Tlaib is massively hypocritical in accusing Jewish American politicians of having dual loyalties to Israel and then proceeding to call Palestinians “our” people. They are not America’s people. They shouldn’t even be Tlaib’s people, but that is why I say she is the one with dual loyalties here.
 
Now, let’s look into Omar’s tweet:
 
“How many more protesters must be shot, rockets must be fired, and little kids must be killed until the endless cycle of violence ends? The status quo of occupation and humanitarian crisis in Gaza is unsustainable. Only real justice can bring about security and lasting peace.”
 
As some people on Twitter point out, this reads much like Hamas propaganda. She accuses Israel of occupying the Gaza Strip when in reality, it belongs to Israel.
 
Also, what is “real justice” in this scenario? Considering the side she is taking, of attacking Israel and their right to defend themselves against foreign invaders who wish to destroy them completely, I’m assuming “real justice” means the wiping out of Israel off the face of the Earth.
 
Again, she considers Israel to be occupying the Gaza Strip when it’s radical Muslims who are occupying the area. To her, “justice” is simply vengeance.
 
But here’s the thing, and I’m repeating myself: IT BELONGS TO ISRAEL! Muslims in the area are the ones making threats (and sometimes act on said threats) of attacking Jerusalem and completely destroying Israel, forcing them to either submit to Islam or be killed. But the Holy Land does NOT belong to Muslims. God did not promise Mohammed that land. He promised Abraham and his descendants that land.
 
And by descendants, He did not mean Abraham’s illegitimate child Ishmael, whom Muslims consider to be Abraham’s true first-born son and to whom they believe land belongs as his inheritance. According to Muslim exegesis, Sarah asked Abraham to marry Hagar so that they may have a child together, as Sarah was barren. But Abraham never married Hagar and Ishmael was not the son God promised to Abraham. Abraham was impatient with God as he waited decades for the promise to be fulfilled, getting older and older and his hopes diminishing with each passing year. He got impatient, as did Sarah, and they thought God would bring them a son through someone that is not Sarah.
 
They were mistaken, as years later, they would bear Isaac. Despite the fact that Sarah was barren and despite the fact that she was well beyond the age of child-rearing, God delivered to them the son that He promised them.
 
Genesis 21:9-13 shows us exactly what was intended out of both Isaac and Ishmael. After Isaac had been born and circumcised, “Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing. So she said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.’ And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. But God said to Abraham, ‘Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.’”
 
God considers Isaac to be Abraham’s heir, as we just read from the Scripture. Ishmael still had his place in history and God blessed him with a nation because he was also Abraham’s offspring, but to Isaac belongs the promise of the Lord made to Abraham. To Isaac belongs the inheritance of his father. To the Israelites, who come from the line of Isaac, belongs the Holy Land.
 
It is Ishmael’s offspring, the radical Muslims in Hamas, etc. who wish to see Israel destroyed and see themselves occupying the Holy Land. But it does not belong to them.
 
Do you see why I call the Muslims in Gaza “occupiers”? Because that is what they are. That is not to say they are not allowed to live there, but the land does not belong to them, which is what they claim. The land belongs squarely to Israel.
 
You can try and argue with me all day long about the issue, but ultimately, it is not me with whom you are arguing, but with the very word and promise of the Lord.
 
And between Omar, Tlaib and other Muslims who claim the land to be theirs and the Lord God Almighty, I’m not a big fan of the Muslims’ chances.
 
Genesis 12:7
“Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, ‘To your offspring I will give this land.’ So he built there an altar to the Lord, who appeared to him.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As was to be expected, the fallout from Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic comments and the Democrat Party refusing to admit that she is anti-Semitic has not yet subsided, but one particularly idiotic Leftist has the worst take I’ve seen so far about this whole thing: that Christians are the real anti-Semites.
 
Of course, the moron I’m talking about is Young Turks host Cenk Uygur, who tweeted: “You know what’s REAL anti-semitism? Right-wing Evangelical Christians supporting Israel because they think it will bring about the End Times where all of the Jews die. Worst anti-Semitism in the world!”
 
You know how I often read something someone says or tweets and I say how I am so ready to have my fun with them? Well, none of those instances compare with how much havoc I am about to rain down on this idiot.
 
But before I begin, allow me to show you some of the things other Twitter users have written in response to this guy:
 
“And there ya go… I was waiting to see who the first hateful moron was gonna be to make this argument,” wrote one Mr. Larry O’Connor.
 
“You named your show after the people that were responsible for the Armenian genocide. Shut your mouth, jackass,” said Arthur Schwartz (and a bit of a spoiler for later down this article: I will get back to that topic of the Armenian genocide momentarily).
 
“Many Christians are of Jewish ethnicity and ancestry. Jesus and ALL the apostles were Jewish. Nearly all of the early Christians were Jewish. Why would Christians wish death on brethren? This couldn’t be a more moronic tweet but I’m sure he will surprise me,” wrote Chris Loesch, husband of NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch.
 
“As a Jew, I am grateful every day for my Evangelical Christian friends who support our shared history and *defend* the Jewish people and our right to our homeland. Without their support there would be no one else on Earth standing by us as genocidal masses relentlessly attack,” wrote Chad Felix Greene.
 
“Buffoonery. He’s going to tell us what the ‘worst anti-Semitism in the world’ is? I’ll tell you what the worst anti-Semitism is: the one that used anti-Semitic tropes to systematically murder six million Jews. THAT, Cenk Uygur is the WORST. Don’t dare speak again for Jews!” said a Mr. Dov Hikind.
 
Now, I promised you earlier just what exactly my take was regarding this whole thing and I promised you a scathing analysis and dissection of this idiotic rhetoric, so here it is.
 
Do you want to know what real anti-Semitism is? The kind that Dov just mentioned: the one where an aggressively anti-Semitic socialist captured, imprisoned and killed 6 million Jews.
 
Do you want to know what real anti-Semitism is? Iran constantly declaring and swearing they will wipe Israel off the map. It’s Hamas committing jihad against the Jews on a daily basis at Israel’s border in the Gaza strip.
 
It’s Syria and other nations constantly launching missiles at Israel in the hopes of killing as many Jews as possible and weaken the nation’s resolve. It’s Ilhan Omar accusing politicians of dual loyalties to Israel and only supporting Israel for the money. It’s people claiming, without proof or reason, that Israel is “occupying” the land on which they reside – the land that was PROMISED TO THEM BY GOD!
 
Not that I expect this idiot to recognize what anti-Semitism is when his entire show is named after a revolutionary group in the early 20th century that led to the slaughter of 1.5 million Christian Armenians.
 
In case you do not know what the Armenian genocide is because the education system is so corrupt that any historical event that victimizes Christians must not be covered so as to maintain the narrative that Christians are oppressors, allow me to give you a relatively short history lesson about the entire thing.
 
Armenia was an independent nation for a decent amount of time, even becoming the first nation in the world to make Christianity its official religion in the 4th century A.D. However, the Armenian people often were ruled by an entirely different nation, or empire, as was more commonly considered at the time. During the 15th century, Armenia became part of the Ottoman Empire.
 
To no one’s surprise, the Ottoman Empire was largely led by Muslims who would often treat the typically-Christian Armenians like less than second-class citizens. Christians had to pay higher taxes and were subjected to very restrictive and minimal political and overall legal rights.
 
Interestingly enough, despite their hardships, Armenians actually thrived anyway. They were typically better educated and were wealthier than the rest of the Empire, particularly their Turkish neighbors, who grew resentment of them because of their success.
 
So when the Ottoman Empire crumbled by the end of the 19th century when Turkish Sultan Abdul Hamid II was dethroned, a revolutionary group called the Young Turks sought to reform Turkey into a more modern constitutional monarchy. The Armenians saw this as a sign of better things to come, but in fact, the opposite occurred.
 
The Young Turks sought to “Turkify” the once mighty Empire, which meant that any non-Turks, including and especially counting Christian non-Turks, were seen as a threat to their vision.
 
The beginning of World War I didn’t help the Armenians at all either. Turkey entered the Great War on the side of the Germans and Austro-Hungarians (you know, the baddies?). Turkish military leaders, according to History.com, argued that “the Armenians were traitors: If they thought they could win independence if the Allies were victorious, this argument went, the Armenians would be eager to fight for the enemy.”
 
Which wasn’t inaccurate. The Armenians organized battalions that would help the Russians fighting the Turks. But then again, can you blame them for wanting to fight for Turkey’s enemies when Turkey and the Ottoman Empire both subjected the Armenians to horrible social justice laws (and the actual social justice, not the actual insanity of the Left today) and made the Armenians out to be scum of the earth and literal infidels?
 
But in any case, we move on to the day the genocide is widely known to have begun: April 24th, 1915. On that day, the Turkish government “arrested and executed several hundred Armenian intellectuals,” according to History.
 
“After that, ordinary Armenians were turned out of their homes and sent on death marches through the Mesopotamian desert without food or water. Frequently, the marchers were stripped naked and forced to walk under the scorching sun until they dropped dead. People who stopped to rest were shot. At the same time, the Young Turks created a ‘Special Organization,’ which in turn organized ‘killing squads’ or ‘butcher battalions’ to carry out, as one officer put it, ‘the liquidation of the Christian elements.’”
 
“These killing squads were often made up of murderers and other ex-convicts. They drowned people in rivers, threw them off cliffs, crucified them and burned them alive. In short order, the Turkish countryside was littered with Armenian corpses. Records show that during this ‘Turkification’ campaign, government squads also kidnapped children, converted them to Islam and gave them to Turkish families. In some places, they raped women and forced them to join Turkish ‘harems’ or serve as slaves. Muslim families moved into the homes of deported Armenians and seized their property.”
 
Reports say that there were about 2 million Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire at the time of the massacre, and in 1922, when the genocide was over, around 388,000 Armenians remained. That’s roughly north of 1.5 million Christian Armenians massacred by the Young Turks.
 
And what does Cenk name his show after? The very entity that was responsible for that genocide.
 
Imagine someone creating a show named after Nazi Germany. It’s about as bad as that.
 
So why am I not surprised at the sort of animosity Cenk shows with regard to Evangelical Christians? After all, he named his show after the group responsible for the massacre of over a million of us.
 
Do you want to know what is real bigotry? That. Precisely that. Trying to say that Christians are the real anti-Semites because our support of Israel is as strong as it is because of the prophecy of the End Times as detailed in the book of Revelations.
 
Yes, we Christians believe that Israel must solely belong to the Jewish people for the End Times prophecy to be fulfilled. But let me remind you of something about God: HE GETS TO DECIDE WHO GETS INTO HIS KINGDOM!
 
It’s not rare for a Jewish person to convert to Christianity. Those that do will be saved while those who do not will, unfortunately, perish. That’s applicable to LITERALLY EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER LIVED, CURRENTLY LIVES, AND WILL EVER LIVE IN THE FUTURE.
 
By saying that the “only” reason Christians support Israel is because of the End Times prophecy that will not include anyone who has not been saved by Christ, he is not only attacking Christians but GOD HIMSELF.
 
It’s no different from someone on Facebook whining at you that “if God really was as merciful or loving as you say He is, He would just let anyone into Heaven no matter what” which is a gross insult to the character of God and an incredibly asinine argument made by someone who truly has no idea what they are talking about (and I speak from experience having actually encountered someone like this on Facebook long ago).
 
The Jewish people are God’s chosen people. The land of Israel belongs squarely to them. But those who have converted and will convert to Christianity, recognizing the deity of Jesus Christ, who is Lord, to them belongs the Kingdom of God.
 
That, by no means, does it mean we Christians are in any shape manner or form at odds with Judaism. Matter of fact Jesus Himself was Jewish as He also worshipped the same exact God as the Jews. God the Son worshipped, in the flesh, God the Father, who is also the God of Abraham, of Isaac, of David and of all of Israel. And the twelve apostles were ALL Jewish themselves, including Paul, who did not become an apostle until after Christ’s death at the cross, when he would persecute and execute Christians.
 
There is a reason we call ours a “Judeo-Christian” culture because the two share similar tenets. Christians believe everything the Jews do up to the point where Christ is involved. We worship the same exact God, albeit under typically (but not always) different laws and rituals. Christians find their roots in Judaism. As such, we are allies for as long as the world is here. Jews gave us the law.
 
It’s absolutely ridiculous to insist that someone SUPPORTING Israel is anti-Semitic because of End Times prophecies where GOD GETS TO DECIDE WHAT’S WHAT!
 
REAL anti-Semitism, as I covered earlier, is what Hitler did, what Ilhan Omar continually does, what Iran continually does, what the Democrat Party is slowly coming to accept and everything that has to do with the systemic destruction or oppression of the Jewish people.
 
And a REAL bigot is someone who names their show after the radical Islamic group that was solely responsible for one of the worst genocides in world history.
 
Again, I’m not surprised at all at Cenk’s hatred of Christians. He essentially supports an act that sought to eradicate them from a nation entirely.
 
But let me tell you something else: God is not one to delight in His children’s suffering. To those whom He’ll have mercy, He’ll have mercy. To those whom He’ll execute justice, He will execute justice.
 
Genesis 12:3
“I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you; and all the families of the earth will be blessed through you.”
 
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.