Remember when Trump first won the election and everyone from the media to Obama to Hillary and everyone in between was crying out that Russia somehow hacked the election? And when that fell through, especially considering it was Obama himself who insisted months prior to the election that it was not possible for a foreign entity to mess with the voting ballots (something the Left likely regrets to this day), they turned towards Russian collusion, starting phony investigation after phony investigation, with liar Congressmen claiming to have evidence but refusing to turn such evidence over.
 
Well, now that the Russian collusion narrative is basically dead (though there are those who still refuse to accept the truth even found in Mueller’s report surrounding that subject), the Left is looking at alternatives to getting Trump out of office. That much is clear considering Rep. Al Green (D-Impeachmentland) said he’s “concerned if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected” and considering Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Californistan) said “we cannot accept a 2nd term for Donald Trump”.
 
They are absolutely desperate to get rid of the guy and have no hope whatsoever of beating him in 2020 (and side note: Democrats didn’t accept his first term either, Nancy).
 
So they have two options: look into possible obstruction (not gonna work) or somehow force Trump to release his tax returns (not sure what that would accomplish. If there was some sort of “payment” from Russia to Trump at some point or another, people in the IRS would’ve flagged it down far sooner than Mueller would have and neither party has done anything of the sort).
 
I have a feeling they will want to explore the first one more intensely, but if they can hit Trump about his taxes, they will. And that’s precisely what the New York Times tried to do recently. Key word here is “try”.
 
The New York Times released a story talking about Trump’s tax returns from the late 80’s and early 90’s, where Donald Trump actually was not doing quite so well financially.
 
“Mr. Trump was propelled to the presidency, in part, by a self-spun narrative of business success and of setbacks triumphantly overcome. He has attributed his first run of reversals and bankruptcies to the recession that took hold in 1990. But 10 years of tax information obtained by The New York Times paints a different, and far bleaker, picture of his deal-making abilities and financial condition,” read the Times.
 
Basically, their aim is to say “Trump is not as successful as he’d like you to believe! He actually lost money for a period of time!” However, there is one crucial point that they fail to make: EVERYONE IN NEW YORK CITY REAL ESTATE WAS LOSING MONEY AT THE TIME!
 
Overall apartment rental prices in the city fell by 15% beginning in 1988. Manhattan homes crashed by roughly 33% between ‘89 and ’96 and the area Trump invested heavily in, a railyard which he hoped to turn into a neighborhood, home prices crashed even worse at 40%. The real estate company Olympia & York, at one point the biggest landlord in the entire city, had to declare bankruptcy. Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan had to fire or stop doing business with real estate bankers in the early 90’s.
 
The New York real estate market was collapsing. Everyone involved in the craft was losing a lot of money. Naturally, so did Trump.
 
And that is something Trump himself admits. Here are a few paragraphs from Donald Trump’s 2007 book titled: “Think Big and Kick Ass”.
 
“My company owed billions and was much too heavily leveraged. I was in debt personally for $900 million. One day I was walking down the street and I said to my then wife Marla, ‘That beggar over there Is worth $900 million more than I am.’ She said, ‘What do you mean?’ I said, ‘Because I’m $900 million in debt, and at least he has money in his pocket.’”
 
“I used to say to myself, ‘Oh, my God, am I in trouble. I am going down.’ That was big league. I was not focused but I never blamed myself, because from the day I graduated from Wharton in 1968, I did well. For twenty-one years I was doing fantastic. I felt like I had the right to take it easy. I really felt that after twenty-one years I had the right not to focus.”
 
“Reality taught me an important lesson: I could not have it both ways. If I wanted to be the greatest, the amazing Donald Trump who makes everything he touches gold, then I needed to focus. I could not have one without the other. I decided that I still wanted to be the old Trump and started focusing like never before. In 1991, the world was collapsing. It was so bad in real estate that if a person walked into a building, just looking around, we considered it to be a sign that the market was changing.”
 
“I have been through a lot. I have had great success. I have also had some really tough times, like when the real estate market collapsed in the early 90s. I owed many billions of dollars, and the banks were after my ass. It was not exactly fun! I had every major bank after me. Everybody in my industry was in big trouble. I had some friends and some enemies in the business who I thought were really tough guys, but most of them could not handle the bad times like they handled the good times. Most of them went out of business. All my friends were going bankrupt. I was very close, but I never went bankrupt. Even though it was not much fun and I never want to go through it again, in some ways it wasn’t so bad. I slept very well, and I managed to keep my faculties. It is not that I trained for it; I didn’t train for it. But that awful experience taught me that I can handle pressure. Most people crawled into a corner, put their fingers in their mouths, and said, ‘Mommy, Mommy, take me home!’”
 
“I learned that I can handle pressure. I did not back down under pressure. I turned it back on the banks and let them accept some of the blame. I figured it was the bank’s problem, not mine. What the hell did I care?”
 
While that may be an awful lot to look into (and I certainly won’t be analyzing everything) the main point I wanted to make here is the fact that Donald Trump knows very well, more than anyone, especially some NYT reporter, how bad things were for him and his business.
 
Everyone around him was going bankrupt and/or losing tons of money. He himself was losing tons of money and ALMOST went bankrupt, as he himself admits. And yet, he did persist, unlike the Times wishes to insist.
 
Look at that quote from the Times once again: “Mr. Trump was propelled to the presidency, in part, by a self-spun narrative of business success and of setbacks triumphantly overcome… But 10 years of tax information obtained by The New York Times paints a different, and far bleaker, picture of his deal-making abilities and financial condition.”
 
It’s not his tax returns that paint a different and bleaker picture than what Trump was boasting about himself, it’s THE TIMES THEMSELVES PAINTING A DIFFERENT PICTURE! Donald Trump, unlike many in his industry, actually did not go bankrupt. He was losing money, yes, as was everyone else. But he persevered, worked harder than everyone else, and he became the city’s prime real estate figure.
 
It’s not a “self-spun narrative of business success and of setbacks triumphantly overcome”, it’s a retelling of actual events and life experiences that he underwent. He had major business success, otherwise HE WOULDN’T BE A BILLIONAIRE! He had setbacks that he triumphantly overcame because HE DIDN’T GO BELLY UP WHEN EVERYONE AROUND HIM WAS!
 
Not that they bother to mention any of the other information in their article. Their sole focus is to attack Trump in any way they can. They willfully ignore that he came out of the 90s a real estate winner, particularly in comparison to many of his friends and competitors in the business.
 
The late 80s and early 90s were tough on Trump, and yet, he never declared bankruptcy himself. How then can one consider him a failure for NOT crumbling alongside the markets? How can he be considered a failure for having a few really bad years but eventually overcoming them?
 
The answer is that you can’t, but the Left will try their hand at anything that can possibly hurt Trump. Just conveniently forget that everyone was doing poorly (quite an understatement) in New York real estate around the same time as Trump was and all of a sudden, it looks like Trump was a really bad business man. Although you also have to conveniently forget that he did become a billionaire again as time went on and his businesses thrived.
 
You have to do an awful lot of misremembering and convenient forgetting of the facts in order to think and say that Donald Trump was not a good business man.
 
While everyone else was going bankrupt around him, God blessed Trump throughout. He did not go without some bad periods and without his struggles, but the Lord was guiding his footsteps the entire way. I hope Trump thanks God as often has he can for what He did for him.
 
Psalm 138:7
“Though I walk in the midst of trouble, you preserve my life; you stretch out your hand against the wrath of my enemies, and your right hand delivers me.”
 
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 biggest story of the weekend was the fact that on Easter Sunday, the day when Christians around the world celebrate the rising of the Lord Jesus Christ from the grave, signifying His defeat over death, multiple bombs, most of which were suicide bombings, targeted churches and luxury hotels, killing around 300 people (and expected to increase) and wounding 500 others in Sri Lanka.
 
The attack is believed to have been perpetrated by a radical Islamist terrorist group called National Thowfeek Jamaath, which might have ties to ISIS.
 
Included in the death toll are over 30 foreigners and 2 Americans.
 
Obviously, this is a very big deal. The death toll is very high and the attacks were numerous, with reportedly 7 locations being targeted: three churches and four hotels. According to the Wall Street Journal, six of the attacks were suicide bombings and the other one was a failed car bombing outside the St. Anthony Shrine. Another bomb was also found near Sri Lanka’s airport, but was found and defused before it went off.
 
The Wall Street Journal also reports that 85 other detonators were found abandoned in a bus station, indicating that the attacks carried out on Easter were supposed to only be the beginning of more chaos, death and destruction.
 
Considering this is major news, influential people took notice and wished to share their thoughts. However, one must recognize the sort of language used by people like former President Barack Obama and failure Hillary Clinton.
 
Obama tweeted: “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.”
 
Clinton tweeted: “On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I’m praying for everyone affected by today’s horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.”
 
“Easter worshippers”?
 
And they’re not the only ones who used that odd term. Presidential candidate Julian Castro tweeted: “On a day of redemption and hope, the evil of these attacks on Easter worshippers and tourists in Sri Lanka is deeply saddening. My prayers today are with the dead and injured, and their families. May we find grace.”
 
Even ABC News tweeted: “Tourists, Easter worshippers lament the closure of Notre Dame.” Though that one was sent the day before the attacks, but still used that strange term.
 
Just what exactly is that supposed to mean? Because Christians are not “Easter worshippers”. I’ve seen many people tweeting at Obama, Hillary and others about how they can’t seemingly use the term “Christians” (maybe it burns them to mention Him) but they gloss over the fact that no Christian worships Easter. NO ONE worships Easter.
 
Do we celebrate Easter? You bet we do. But we do not worship it. We worship Jesus who rose again from the dead, which we celebrate on Easter Sunday.
 
It’s such a strange term to use in what is supposed to be a replacement for “Christians”.
 
But in any case, notice how they really can’t seem to be able to use that word. Why wouldn’t they note that Christians were targeted and killed on Sunday? Why would they use such a strange and erroneous term to replace the far-easier-to-type “Christians”?
 
These are really just rhetorical questions, of course. These people are themselves not Christians and absolutely hate Christians, so at any point where Christians are targeted, especially in such a grand and horrific way, they have to completely avoid mentioning it. To them, Christians are oppressors and vicious rulers, not victims and targets of persecution and execution.
 
Notice the sort of language they use to talk about multiple horrific acts of violence against Christians versus what they said about the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand.
 
Here’s what Obama said after the NZ shooting: “Michelle and I send our condolences to the people of New Zealand. We grieve with you and the Muslim community. All of us must stand against hatred in all its forms.”
 
And now Hillary: “My heart breaks for New Zealand & the global Muslim community. We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms. White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.”
 
Rightly, they were outraged over the New Zealand shooting that killed 50 Muslims in a mosque. But they have no problem pointing out that Muslims were targeted in that attack while they perform verbal gymnastics to avoid pointing out that Christians were targeted in Sri Lanka.
 
The Left has no problem pointing out hatred and violence against Muslims when it happens (unless it’s Shiites being killed by Sunnis, as both are Muslims) but makes it their mission to try and diminish the effect of a far more destructive and deadly event. Not to minimize the horror of the New Zealand shooting, any destruction of life is tragic, but this attack led to more deaths and injuries, not to mention it was supposedly only the beginning of more planned terrorist attacks, likely targeting Christians.
 
50 dead Muslims is a major deal to the Left (as it should be) but 300 dead Christians and they can hardly pretend to give a damn.
 
Not that I expected anything less from these people, but it is a reminder of the sort of vile that they are. Especially looking over Hillary’s tweets. She wanted the NZ shooter’s head on a platter, denouncing Islamophobia (how come no one talks about Christophobia? Is that even a term?) and “racism in all its forms”. She says that “white supremacists terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere,” and insists that that sort of “murderous hatred must be stopped”.
 
But when Christians are the targets: they don’t get mentioned and are even lost in the crowd. “On this holy weekend for many faiths…” while not exactly wrong, as it is also Passover for Jews, this is an attack that specifically happened on Easter, a strictly Christian holiday, with Christians being the targets of the attacks.
 
They insist that we must stand in solidarity with the Muslim community around the world when they are targeted (which is rare, again, unless it is Muslim-on-Muslim violence which is frequent) and condemn Islamophobia, while not calling for any solidarity with the Christian community around the world when we are targeted and there are no calls for condemnation of Christophobia or the targeting of Christians at all.
 
And while Christophobia is technically a term, it is never outright used at any point. When someone targets gay people, that’s homophobia. Fine. When someone targets someone for their skin color, that’s racism. Fine. When someone targets women, that’s misogyny. Fine. When someone targets transgender people, that’s transphobia. Fine. When someone targets Muslims, that’s Islamophobia. Fine. But when someone targets Christians, the Left does not even recognize that they are Christians and certainly does not recognize any sort of trend of hatred towards Christians. Not fine.
 
But what makes this even worse is the actual term they use instead of Christians. If it had been “Easter observers” or “Easter celebrators” or something like that, it might’ve been marginally better. But “Easter worshippers” just rubs me the wrong way. It insinuates that what we worship is not Jesus Christ Himself, but the holiday. That we worship and have reverence towards a simple day on the week and not the Lord who made this day special with the unique and unprecedented feat of COMING BACK FROM THE DEAD. That we worship something that is not God.
 
THAT is what ticks me off more than anything else. Again, I fully expected this sort of behavior from the Left. I’m not at all surprised that they gave every damn they had about Muslims being killed in New Zealand but couldn’t be bothered to pretend about Christians. That is expected, but that term is outright insulting.
 
What Christian worships Easter? Point one out to me and I will tell you that he or she is not a Christian.
 
This is the definition of passive aggressive behavior. Implicit disdain of Christians.
 
Again, not exactly surprising behavior coming from the Left, whose heart is filled with hatred and evil, but we are yet again reminded of the sort of hatred and evil that they harbor.
 
John 15:18
“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated 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.

While I 100% knew that the Russian collusion narrative was not going to die even after Mueller cleared Trump of that accusation in his report, I’ll admit I thought the Left would not be THIS desperate to keep the narrative alive so soon.
 
The New York Times (at least in their online article) had a headline that read: “Washington’s Most Popular Russian (and His Teammates) Honored at White House.”
 
Now, that headline on its own is a bit ambiguous. It’s not an outright lie, but it’s fairly misleading, though there are clues in it that should tell you (at least if you’re a sane person) that Trump was actually meeting with the Stanley Cup champions the Washington Capitals, led by Alex Ovechkin, the team’s star player and Russian native.
 
But there is more to this than just what the headline tells you. In the beginning paragraph, the NYT mentions the recently wrapped up Russian investigation: “A day after President Trump reveled in the apparent fizzling of a two-year effort to prosecute him for possible illicit coordination with Russia during the 2016 campaign, Washington’s most prominent Moscow native arrived at the White House on Monday to celebrate.”
 
Now, tell me, is it at all necessary to mention the Russian investigation in an article about the President meeting with a championship-winning sports team? What does it add to the story’s main point – that Trump met with the Washington Capitals in the White House, and meeting with the team’s star player who just so happens to be from Russia – to make mention of the fact that Trump was under investigation for two years for supposed collusion with Russia?
 
By the way, I also love the subtle hint that they don’t think this is over. Saying “apparent fizzling” tells me how they 100% do not plan on this being settled just because Mueller couldn’t find anything. Poor desperate demons.
 
And it’s not just that beginning paragraph. According to the Daily Wire (the NYT has a subscription wall and I have no intention of giving them any of my money), later down the NYT article, they talk about a “2017 Oval Office meeting between Trump, the Russian foreign minister Sergey V. Lavrov, and then-Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergey I. Kislyak. Naturally, the Times took the opportunity to claim the conversation between these men ‘reinforced the belief that Mr. Trump had fired Mr. Comey because of the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between Russian operatives and the campaign – a move that would have potentially implicated him in another crime, obstruction of justice.’”
 
Again, in an article talking about the President meeting with the Washington Capitals months after they won the Stanley Cup, the most coveted prize in the NHL, what does it add to the story to mention this random meeting from ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO!?
 
You see, I could take that headline and beginning paragraph as a little joke about how Trump is meeting with a Russian the day after the Mueller investigation wrapped up. I have a sense of humor, so I can see the fun little irony of meeting with a Russian-born man the day after the Russian collusion investigation wrapped up, clearing him of the charges. But the fact that the article also mentions the Oval Office meeting with those two Russian diplomats from 2017 tells me the writer of this article did not mean any of this as a joke.
 
It tells me this is still an effort to maintain the Russian collusion narrative and even try and bring along the obstruction of justice narrative (which is as b.s. as the collusion narrative, given Trump has the legal power to fire the head of the FBI for any given reason or no reason at all). It tells me that none of this is funny and Trump meeting with Ovechkin (and his teammates) is another piece of evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. That somehow, a hockey player who led his team to winning the Stanley Cup and happens to be Russian (though he’s also a fan of Putin, for some reason, but that hardly implicates him as being an operative) plays some small part of the overall conspiracy to steal the election away from Hillary (and by extension, the Democrats, given that they could not give a single damn about her now) and thus shows that Trump is guilty of everything he’s been accused of.
 
It’s sad, to be quite honest. The Mueller report just cleared Trump of the very charges it was supposed to prosecute him on, so the Left is grasping at straws. Like I mentioned in my previous article, the Left has turned on Mueller, with some thinking he might’ve been compromised by the Russians or something.
 
This narrative was the only explanation the Left had for Trump winning in 2016, with the obstruction of justice charge coming a bit later, but also leading nowhere.
 
This is downright derangement. And not just Trump Derangement Syndrome, but outright derangement. They refuse to believe Trump didn’t collude with Russia. These people do not rely on facts or logic at all, but entirely on feelings.
 
They want Trump in jail because he ticks them off to no end. He didn’t commit any crimes, was elected fairly and legally, but he is an affront to them just by existing and must be rid of. That’s why people like Rep. Al Green (D-TX) (seriously, Texas, what are you doing electing this doofus?) repeatedly tried to bring up articles of impeachment throughout Trump’s presidency. He had no grounds for impeachment, only claiming things like obstruction of justice and so forth, but nothing substantial. And yet, he tried multiple times to have it be brought up for a vote on the House floor and was repeatedly rejected. Matter of fact, even after the Mueller investigation wrapped up, he keeps saying that he will continue to seek impeachment of the President.
 
That’s because impeachment is not about justice, but politics. The grounds for it have to be justified, for the most part, but if there is enough support for it, justice doesn’t matter. If enough Democrats and Republicans wanted Trump out, they could do it with the most b.s. reasons imaginable.
 
The Russian collusion narrative should be dead, and some Democrats like James Clyburn are trying to get them to move on (particularly to the narrative that Republicans want to take away people’s healthcare), but I’m certain these people will not move on. They will keep going back to the well that has dried up. They don’t care if nothing comes from it, they are desperate enough and deranged enough to think it will hurt Trump.
 
It won’t. And the more desperate they get, the less appealing they will be to most voters.
 
Of course, I imagine a fair majority of the Democrat base also believed in the collusion story and will likewise not want to let it go because it does not compute that Mueller found no evidence. After all, if the average Democrat voter only receives information from the MSM, time and time again, people like Rep. Adam Schiff told them they themselves had evidence of collusion, so Mueller must also have evidence of collusion. Finding that Mueller did not, actually, have anything goes against the garbage the media was feeding them and these people might come to the conclusion that something was amiss regarding Mueller. That he must’ve somehow been compromised or something else that might explain this new reality.
 
But I don’t think the majority of people are that nutty. Being cleared by Mueller is a massive win for Trump that could very well help him out in the future.
 
But again, I doubt this will do anything to change any on the Left’s minds. Some might be more willing to cut their losses and move on, but most I imagine will go even more insane than they already were. Before, while they still accused Trump of all of these things without any evidence, they at least had the Mueller investigation going on to fall back on, hoping it will find something. Now, they will try to claim things without evidence and without even the support of the Mueller investigation. In fact, the report directly contradicts what they would have to say, so that puts them in an even worse position.
 
But this is just how desperate they are. Again, I could’ve taken that headline and opening paragraph as a little joke, but these people have no sense of humor and did not intend those things to be a joke. They think Trump meeting with any Russian at all is tantamount to him meeting with Putin and drinking vodka in celebration of getting away with something malicious.
 
The desperation is real and it’s just beginning.
 
 Jeremiah 17:9
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?”
 
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.

Recently, I’ve been one to opine that nothing Trump does today will singlehandedly win or lose him the 2020 election. And while that holds true for the most part, what he does with regards to the economy is, indeed, something that could win or lose him in 2020, at least that’s what economists predict.
 
In a story on Politico, written by people who 100% do not want Trump to win again and try and tell their audience “it’s okay, because even though he’s likely to win in 2020, a number of mess ups and his unpopularity (which are really only featured in MSM polls) could derail his chances,” a number of economic experts, some of whom do not like Trump themselves and others who predicted his victory in 2016 all agreed that the strong economy will likely lead Trump to a huge victory in 2020.
 
Donald Luskin, chief investment officer of TrendMacrolytics, a source that predicted Trump’s 2016 victory, said: “The economy is just so damn strong right now and by all historic precedent the incumbent should run away with it.” He also mentioned that the economy “would have to slow a lot to still be not pretty good.”
 
According to Politico: “Luskin’s current model – which looks at GDP growth, gas prices, inflation, disposable income, tax burden and payrolls – has Trump winning by a blowout margin of 294 electoral votes.”
 
Again, that’s a MARGIN. If Trump is going to win by a margin of 294, then that means he’ll receive 416 total electoral votes (538 total votes in the electoral college). The way this was calculated is taking T (for Trump) to be = D (Democrat) plus the estimated 294. D = 538 (total possible votes) – T. So calculating T = D + 294, you replace D with 538 – T so the formula reads T = 538 - T + 294. Moving the two variables to the same side gives us T + T = 538 + 294. So 2T (or T + T) = 832. Dividing both sides by 2 gives us T = 416. 538 – 416 gives us 122, which is what the Democrat will get. 416 -122 = 294, the margin Trump is predicted to win by.
 
Sorry for the (sort of) short math lesson, but I felt it was important to note just how exactly we arrived at that number. While the Politico article doesn’t specifically mention how many votes Trump is predicted to get, I felt it was necessary to try and calculate this to get a bit more of a clear picture around this.
 
Yale economist Ray Fair, who also predicted Trump’s 2016 victory, said something similar: “Even if you have a mediocre but not great economy – and that’s more or less consensus for between now and the election – that has a Trump victory and by a not-trivial margin.” Fair said that, if the economy remains to be this strong (and while economists predict it will slow down significantly, I don’t see much reason for it to do so), Trump will likely win 54% of the vote.
 
Another economist, Mark Zandi, used 12 different economic models to predict the 2020 election. Trump won in every single one of them, with him winning relatively closely in only “three or four” of them, according to Zandi.
 
Something else that might help Trump is the fact that the Fed announced last week that they would hold off on raising interest rates, something they promised they would do last year, which helps in keeping the economy growing at a good rate. Trump himself says that had they not done so at least as often in the past, we’d likely have around a 4% GDP per year right now, but even with those continual rate hikes, the economy still grew by 3.1% for last year, which Trump celebrated as being the best number in 14 years (and yet another reason I doubt the economy will come to the grinding halt so many “experts” predict).
 
Now, like I said, the writers of this Politico article definitely do not want Trump to succeed. They cite everything from what other economists are saying about the future of the economy (again, not much reason for it to stall like they predict) to citing MSM polls that say Trump’s approval numbers are not great, around the low 40%.
 
But regardless of what kind of message they may want to portray, economic models tell the story that Trump is on track to destroying any opposition he meets based on the state of the economy alone.
 
Of course, these are estimates that are most likely not going to be 100% accurate in everything they show, but the trend seems to be that Trump’s strong economy (which is so strong the Left tries to connect it with Obama but no one’s buying what they’re selling) will likely be enough to ensure him victory, barring any major scandal (which the Left will try to promulgate, but the Russian collusion narrative is dying and they’re doing their best to revive it now that Mueller found no collusion) or the economy absolutely tanking (again, no real reason it should).
 
These people could NOT have been happy to report these models. Kind of surprised they did in the first place. Not that it’s all that likely that other MSM sources will report on it, even a little. Any good news for Trump has to be buried as much as possible.
 
1 Corinthians 15:57
“But thanks be to God, who gives us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I always love sharing good and happy news, particularly the kind that really bring a smile to my face, and this article has such news.
 
In a recent Siena College poll asking New Yorkers a number of questions, such as whether they think New York is on the right track or headed in the wrong direction (43 and 46% respectively, interestingly enough), the poll asked how New Yorkers viewed a number of people ranging from Chuck Schumer (51% approval), to Kirsten Gillibrand (43% approval) to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bill de Blasio and President Donald Trump.
 
And this is where we find the best part of the entire thing. President Trump has a 36% approval rating in the state of New York. Now, that’s not exactly ground-breaking, although higher than I honestly expected, but not all that high either. It’s a reasonable amount, all things considered.
 
However, current New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is two points BEHIND Trump at 34% and freshman Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who was touted as being the future of the Democrat Party, is at an embarrassing 31% approval, with 44% disapproving.
 
This is downright HILARIOUS to see. But wait, there’s more. A plurality of New Yorkers (38%) view her as the villain responsible for 25,000 New Yorkers not getting new jobs after the Amazon deal fell through.
 
Now, this is not the first poll to signal AOC’s unpopularity. Last week, Gallup found Ocasio-Cortez’s popularity taking a tumble, even finding that the more people get to know her, the less she is liked.
 
At least that’s something that she has in common with Hillary.
 
But due to these numbers, AOC went on a tirade online, blaming everything from Fox News to racism and sexism and bigotry for her poor numbers.
 
“[P]eople know more [about me] bc Fox News has turned into ‘AOC TMZ’ (no offense to TMZ), so awareness is growing w/GOPers,” the unpopular lunatic tweeted on Friday.
 
To which I would say the following: GOPers already know about you, you dimwit. We abhor the things you stand for and know for a FACT that they don’t work and would bring about the destruction of the United States. It’s not like she has been a silent, out-of-nowhere Congresswoman or even a candidate. Her defeat of Crowley in the primaries was a big surprise and her notoriety, not to mention popularity, rose since then. She has been EXTREMELY loud about her insane rhetoric since even before she won her race, so it’s not like Republicans were not aware of her.
 
Not that this amount of logic exists within her mind. No, she instead chose to pull the “racist” and “sexist” cards:
 
“When ‘centrists’ care more about the GOP base than the Dem base, bigotry gets legitimized. This is *the* playbook. GOP does it w/ virtually every Dem figure who isn’t a white male: otherize, demonize + splinter. It’s vital that we adapt & dismantle this approach, not cow to it.”
 
Yeah, I don’t even know where to start with that considering how this is so incoherent you’d think a 2nd grader wrote this.
 
But let’s give it a shot. Perhaps it’s important to note this is a reply to a tweet that read: “It’s interesting to see centrists suddenly downplay or ignore the effects of racism, sexism and Fox News targeting when discussing AOC’s overall approval ratings.”
 
Yeah, that’s too great a leap in logic for me to follow. How is it that she was fairly popular in the past (not by that much, but she wasn’t in this much of a hole) but all of a sudden, because Fox News is reporting on her unpopularity, she’s unpopular and it’s because she’s a female minority? What exactly changed here?
 
Not to mention neither the original tweet nor the AOC lunatic and victim reply do anything to answer just why she’s LESS POPULAR THAN TRUMP IN HER OWN STATE!
 
Did the people that elected her (and she received less votes than someone typically does for winning nearly 80% of them at barely over 100,000) all of a sudden become racists and sexists? Is that what we ought to believe here? Because AOC is saying she’s only unpopular now because Fox News is talking about her more (don’t know how that would negatively affect her like this, but sure, let’s go with that excuse) and because people are racist and sexist. So does that make her constituents racists and sexists?
 
I would argue her killing 25,000 jobs for New Yorkers and costing the state billions of dollars in tax revenue are at least some of the reasons people are unhappy with her. Or maybe the fact that she essentially defended Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism by making HER the victim of Islamophobia, which is adamantly ridiculous.
 
Either way, I don’t imagine her little tirade will do much in the way of regaining some of her popularity. It certainly doesn’t help to try and blame Fox News. It wasn’t a Fox News poll that initially showed these results. It was Gallup, which has Trump’s approval rating at only 39%, which is ludicrous.
 
But to the Left, they would be happy to see such numbers for Trump, but all of a sudden, when it comes to AOC, the data is flawed or bigoted?
 
And it’s not like you can even make the same argument for me. Yes, I take Gallup’s approval rating of AOC more legitimate than of Trump’s but that’s because it’s backed by even a New York poll that shows similar numbers.
 
That’s not to say that Gallup is 100% trustworthy, but it does appear to come to agreement with EVEN ANOTHER LEFTIST POLL, which actually tried to casually bury those numbers. If you look at the datasheet of the poll, which has 36 questions total, the question about Trump’s approval rating, de Blasio’s approval rating and AOC’s approval rating are a bit further down in the poll.
 
And by the way, the poll says that the sample had 47% Democrat registered voters and 21% Republican, so even with that sort of disparity between parties, Trump is STILL MORE POPULAR THAN DE BLASIO AND AOC!
 
Granted, part of that may be the fact that you’re more likely to find Democrats than Republicans in that state, but that doesn’t take away the fact that Trump is still more popular.
 
If you divide things down party lines, it shows that Trump’s favorability with Democrats sits at 15%, but with Republicans it sits at 79%. De Blasio’s favorability with Dems sits at 48%, but only 14% with Reps and AOC’s favorability with Dems sits at 47% with only 6% of Reps favoring her.
 
But even with much of the Democrat Party favoring AOC and de Blasio, both still fall short of Trump by a few points. And again, this is with a 47% Democrat sample compared with only 21% of Republicans. Which means that Independents also disapprove of both.
 
The sample had 26% Independents, with 40% favoring Trump, 29% favoring de Blasio and 22% favoring AOC.
 
Overall, it is fantastic to see Republican President Donald Trump polling better (if slightly) than Bill de Blasio and even Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is essentially the face of the Democrat Party (sorry, Nancy).
 
This is the sort of thing that puts a smile on my face.
 
Proverbs 16:7
“When a man’s ways please the Lord, he makes even his enemies to be at peace with 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.

Earlier this past week, President Donald J. Trump and North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un had their second historic summit to discuss the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Unfortunately, the talks fell apart when Kim Jong-un made a proposition that Trump thought was simply not good enough, prompting the President to walk away from the deal.
 
In specific, what the North Koreans wanted was full removal of all U.S.-led sanctions in exchange of shutting down nuclear facilities in Yongbyon, but not outside of that area. President Trump in a presser later said he was not willing to make a deal without the Norks committing to giving up their other secretive nuclear facilities and their missile and warhead programs.
 
“I’ve been saying very much from the beginning that speed is not that important to me,” Trump said before the summit. “Speed is not important to me. What is important is that we do the right deal.”
 
After the talks fell through, he again noted the importance of making the right deal, saying: “It wasn’t a good thing to be signing anything. We had some options, and at this time we decided not to do any of the options, and we’ll see where that goes… Sometimes you have to walk, and this was just one of those times.”
 
However, many (though surprisingly not all) on the Left criticized Trump for this and began calling the summit a collapse in talks and a disaster. Some on the Right also expressed criticism, though it’s very asinine to criticize Trump for NOT caving to Kim Jong-un.
 
Still, the Left makes it a point to call this summit an absolute failure, Trump a complete buffoon for failing to make a deal with the Norks (which they would’ve criticized had he made a bad deal with them anyway, so he can’t possibly win with them), and overall, they are repeating history.
 
Let’s not forget that President Ronald Reagan also held talks with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1986, in which Gorbachev demanded Reagan give up his Strategic Defense Initiative, a plan proposed by Reagan in 1983 of a missile defense system in space to counter nuclear weapons launched by the Soviet Union targeting America.
 
Gorbachev knew full-well that the Soviet Union’s economy simply couldn’t compete with America’s economy, so the Soviet Union couldn’t compete with Reagan’s “Star Wars” program. However, Reagan knew this as well and decided to walk away from the table, for which he was soundly criticized by the Left and the fake news media (before they were called the fake news media, but the name still applied).
 
The fake news media said Reagan messed up, that he was an idiot, that he was a national security threat, that those talks were a massive failure, etc. They are doing the exact same thing with Trump.
 
Now, there are some major differences that need to be pointed out between the Reagan-Gorbachev talks and the Trump-Kim talks.
 
First, there basically was a third, non-present party at the Hanoi summit this past week: China and Russia.
 
On its own, North Korea’s economy would absolutely collapse. They barely have anything as it is, only managing to stay afloat thanks to trades with Iran, Russia, and particularly China, because North Korea is essentially China’s puppet state.
 
The Reagan-Gorbachev summit featured a Soviet Union that essentially stood alone and was 5 years removed from completely collapsing (and the SDI is actually accredited for having been what finally destroyed the Soviet Union. The Communists couldn’t match the SDI and sank trying to). I don’t think North Korea will collapse in the next 5 years, especially if they are essentially being subsidized by China and Russia.
 
Second, and really the only thing that I can even remotely excuse the fake news media for, we are under no threat from North Korea in these talks, unlike with the Soviet Union. I can realistically see the fake news media being afraid of the Soviets launching nukes at America if Reagan is seen making some sort of mistake. Of course, they thought his entire presidency was a mistake, but Reagan walking away from a bad deal with the Soviets could realistically be seen as a scary thing, particularly if Gorbachev was furious with Reagan afterwards, as the media was reporting.
 
While Reagan, like Trump, very much had the upper hand going into the summit, the Soviet Union still posed a nuclear threat to America. North Korea, on the other hand, barely does. They JUST figured out how to keep their rockets from exploding mere seconds after launching them and do not have the nuclear capability America has.
 
Notice how all the threats from Kim Jong-un stopped pretty soon after Trump pushed back against him? Notice how North Korea stopped testing their nukes less than a year into Trump’s presidency (or around that time. It’s been over 400 days since North Korea tested a missile according to multiple sources)?
 
And another thing to notice is the fact that China outright said that they would not support North Korea if they made the first move against America.
 
So North Korea does not present anywhere close to the same threat that the Soviet Union presented. As a result, while I can realistically see why the fake news media might’ve been afraid of a Gorbachev retaliation of sorts, there is no reason for the fake news media to think that this summit essentially puts us back in square one with the Norks or this “failure” by Trump could present any sort of threat to the country.
 
Not that I’m seeing much of that from the fake news media, but it should be noted that the stakes are lower in these talks than they were in the Reagan-Gorbachev talks.
 
Finally, there is the Otto Warmbier tragedy in place in this summit. I do not know if the Soviet Union ever had a case similar to Otto Warmbier in which an American student was arrested in the Soviet Union and horrendously mistreated to the point that he was in a coma and died as a result. But that’s what the North Koreans did and something that was discussed at least somewhat in the summit.
 
The one criticism I have of Trump in this summit is his defense of Kim Jong-un when the dictator said he was not aware that this happened. However, I can absolutely understand why Trump wouldn’t outright attack or accuse Kim Jong-un in this situation.
 
Trump is trying to get the Norks to denuclearize. And while I do not like Trump’s defense of Little Rocket Man, who very much reminds me of Obama when he said he did not know about Hillary’s e-mails until he learned from the newspapers, what exactly is Trump supposed to do here?
 
Kim Jong-un doesn’t trust America and Trump all that much because he’s been raised not to trust Americans. Trump wants to get Kim Jong-un to trust him so that they can get deals done that are mutually beneficial. In order to do that, he wouldn’t call Kim a liar to his face (or even to the media), risking derailing and setting these talks back significantly over this issue, bad as it is.
 
In order to get anything substantial done with North Korea, as he promised during the campaign trail, he has to do things even he himself might not like. I seriously doubt he takes pride and pleasure in saying that he believes Kim Jong-un when he says that he was not aware of the Otto Warmbier situation. No person in his right mind would believe Kim Jong-un here, but Trump has to play nice if he wants to get things done. It’s what he often has to do when dealing with foreign leaders like Putin or Xi Jinping, etc. It may not be a pretty sight to see the President of the United States cozying up to them, but the alternative is nothing positive gets done at best and things worsen at worst.
 
If you want to get things done, you don’t attack the one other person who can help get things done, much as they might deserve it.
 
And it’s not like Kim Jong-un is not willing to appease Trump either. In a rare interview with press that is not North Korea’s, Kim Jong-un, through a translator, of course, said that he wouldn’t be in that summit if he wasn’t willing to give up his nukes.
 
Both sides want to make progress, obviously, so it’s not like Kim Jong-un is yanking Trump’s chain on this.
 
Now, one final thing I want to mention is that Trump himself is an intelligent businessman. He knows how to negotiate and knows when to walk away from a bad deal. Reagan was smart to walk away from that SDI deal and Trump is smart to walk away from this sanctions deal.
 
Because let’s be honest, had Trump signed a bad deal, as was honestly expected from the Left, he would’ve been attacked just as much for that as he is for having walked away, or maybe even more so. He simply cannot win with these people.
 
If he cured cancer, the Left would attack him for putting millions of doctors out of a job. The Left will always find a way to make a good move by Trump appear to be catastrophically bad for him. He will never win them over no matter what he does and he knows that pretty well at this point.
 
Better to have walked away from a bad deal than sign a bad deal just to make “progress”.
 
Joshua 1:9
“Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

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

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

Truth be told, this does not really come as much of a surprise to me. However, what is at least somewhat surprising is the fact that this poll comes from an MSM source. Of course, there have been plenty of other polls from the MSM that do not really paint things all that favorably for Democrats, but whenever the Left talks about the special counsel, or impeachment, or the Russia investigation in general, they tend to pretend everyone and their grandmothers are on their side.
 
But in reality, the vast majority of people really are not on their side.
 
And don’t misunderstand my explanation that the MSM sometimes shows bad things for Democrats to be any sort of praise for them. The title for the article in which the poll is shown is: “Americans support investigating Trump, but many are skeptical that inquiries will be fair, new poll finds.”
 
That is an MSM title in a nutshell. Some of the biggest points of this poll are either minimized or ignored completely on the headline (it doesn’t even mention impeachment) and makes the claim that Americans support investigating Trump, which alludes to saying pretty much every single American supports that.
 
Now, let’s look at what the poll and article have to say.
 
“The American people have mixed feelings about investigating President Trump…” Hold on, I thought you just said that Americans support it. Now they have mixed feelings about it?
 
In any case, let’s move on: “… with clear majorities wanting newly empowered Democrats to dig into his personal finances and foreign ties but most believing that Congress should not begin impeachment proceedings…”
 
Now, regarding what the poll said about people trusting Mueller, it says that “half of Americans report they have ‘just some’ confidence or none at all that the Mueller report will be fair and evenhanded, and 43 percent say they have at least a good amount of confidence in its fairness.”
 
Keep in mind that this survey was conducted before Mueller made a spectacle of the Roger Stone arrest in which the FBI sent a bunch of heavily armed officers and agents to arrest the 66-year-old on charges of perjury (that didn’t even have anything to do with Russia) among other process crimes.

Moving on to investigating Trump, the poll says that “six in 10 adults support the party using its congressional authority to obtain and release Trump’s tax returns…”
 
First, I doubt that. Second, adults or likely voters? Because there exists a significant difference there. An adult constitutes anyone 18 or older, but not everyone is likely to vote in an election. Third, Democrats were promising to do that on Day 1 of being sworn in to the House. It’s been a little less than a month since then and they still haven’t done that.
 
Of course, you have to assign people to certain things, but if that was a promise from the Democrats, you’d think they would move to place someone in charge of that ASAP and retrieve every little thing they can from Trump. And yet, I haven’t really heard much except for just talks surrounding that topic.
 
The article continues: “Similar majorities support Democrats investigating suspected financial ties between Trump and foreign governments, the president’s relationship and communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as possibly collusion in the 2016 campaign.”
 
Again, I doubt that, considering both everything else this poll says about Mueller and his likelihood of being fair and the fact that the Russian collusion narrative has been in use for a couple of years now, has resulted in zero evidence but plenty of conspiracy theories, and has been run through the Mainstream Media so much that it’s worn people out and has been dying as of late.
 
If there was clear evidence of collusion, as the Left likes to pretend there is, Trump would’ve been kicked out of the White House ages ago.
 
And interestingly enough, despite the poll supposedly finding so many people wanting Trump investigated, 46% say that Democrats will likely “go too far” in their investigations of the President.
 
So they want investigations into Trump but largely think the investigators will “go too far” or otherwise be unfair to Trump?
 
I’m not saying it’s not possible. There certainly could be people out there who think there might be something to the Russian collusion story (despite all the lack of evidence to support it) while also wanting to be fair to Trump and not absolutely investigate everything including his own personal body.
 
What I am saying, however, is that such a finding by the poll is pretty bittersweet, mostly bitter, for Democrats. People want them to investigate Trump but also don’t trust them to be fair to him. Democrats definitely want to utterly destroy Trump with everything they have and will not hesitate to “go too far” in doing so. So unless they 100% uncover some incredibly well-hidden diabolical plan where Trump is in cahoots with Putin to rule the United States of America, I think most people will be pretty ticked off with the Democrats in any investigation of Trump.
 
Moving on to one of the biggest points in this poll that is largely diminished by the MSM headline, support of impeachment of Trump has dropped drastically since August of 2018, around the time that Michael Cohen plead guilty to several charges made against him by the counsel. Back then, the poll found that 49% “said Congress should begin impeachment proceedings that could lead to Trump being removed from office, while 46 percent said Congress should not.”
 
Once again, I highly doubt it was that high, particularly since his approval ratings were particularly great at that time. However, I can definitely understand if support for it definitely was fairly high around that time. While the charges against Cohen were not going to lead to Trump’s impeachment for various reasons, the narrative made by the Left certainly didn’t help him.
 
However, let’s assume the number was correct. Since then, the number of people who support impeachment has completely plummeted.
 
“In the new survey, a smaller 40 percent support impeachment proceedings, while a 55 percent majority oppose them.”
 
They went from +3% in favor of impeachment to -15% against impeachment, an 18 point drop since last summer.
 
And that is, at least in part, another reason I doubt it was ever that high. Trump hasn’t done all that much more since then that would have people almost completely drop the idea of impeaching him. Yeah, the fallout from the Cohen guilty pleas subsided, but this is a massive drop that does not tend to happen to someone who is considered an “unpopular” president.
 
But again, let’s assume they’re right. This is a massive drop that, you would think, would at least make some headlines for them. If they were fair and balanced and not their fake news selves, they would take notice of the massive drop from 49% in favor and 46% opposed to only 40% in favor and 55% opposed.
 
Now, there are other things in this poll, such as dividing party lines regarding investigating into Trump, which should not surprise anyone that Democrats largely support investigating Trump while Republicans largely oppose it, so there is not really any need to further look at those.
 
The larger points remain that, while people MIGHT (not very confident in the MSM’s findings regarding this) largely support investigating Trump, they still largely distrust Mueller’s and the Democrats’ fairness regarding this whole thing.
 
And perhaps most importantly, large numbers of people mostly oppose impeaching Trump at this time, in stark supposed contrast to last summer when Cohen was pleading guilty to any charges that went his way and showed himself to be a detestable snake.
 
Not that this is going to make the Democrats or the media reconsider a darn thing. The media will still report as though 99% of the country supports them and agrees with them, with the only exceptions being “uneducated” “hillbilly” “MAGA-hat-wearing racists” and whatever else they will say about us, but reality is far from that.
 
There is good reason Trump’s approval numbers didn’t shift at all during the government shutdown. There is good reason they had only been growing since he proved to be an effective, America-first president who keeps his promises (even if he doesn’t always articulate things very well). And there is a reason we won’t abandon Trump any time soon.
 
We largely support Trump, which is a nightmare for the Left. A bigger nightmare is that we continue to support him despite every attack thrown his way by a heavily biased “news” media and bloodthirsty Democrats.
 
I pray that God will continue to guide Trump’s steps and that we can continue to push back against the evil that is the Left.
 
Psalm 37:4-6
“Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will give you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the Lord; trust in Him, and He will act. He will bring forth your righteousness as the light, and your justice as the noonday.”
 
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 government shutdown lasted for about five weeks, with little appearing to have come out of it except for the media blaming Trump for it, as usual, and the Democrats actually being to blame for it (I’ll explain momentarily).
 
The Democrat Party, the fake news media and college students all come to the agreement that the President was responsible and the one to blame for the government shutdown.
 
However, that train of thought changes once people start to learn some information that is not shared by the fake news media.
 
CampusReform’s Cabot Phillips went to George Mason University to ask some of the students who they blame for the then-current government shutdown.
 
As I stated previously, and completely unsurprisingly, the students all unanimously agreed that Trump was to blame for the shutdown.
 
So Phillips followed up that question with a pretty interesting and important one.
 
After asking the students who they blamed for the shutdown, Phillips asked them whether or not Democrats should agree on a compromise if Trump were to offer added protection for Dreamers, $800 million in funding for humanitarian aid and a slew of new judges to get immigration cases moving along faster.
 
Every single student that said they blamed Trump for the shutdown said that Democrats should compromise if Trump were to make that offer. Of course, that doesn’t matter at this point, but the kids thought they should’ve taken such a compromise.
 
What they didn’t know is that Trump actually DID make that offer earlier last week.
 
Suffice to say that the students were pretty surprised at that revelation.
 
One of the girls Cabot interviewed even went as far as to say she was “pleasantly surprised” that Trump offered that deal.
 
When asked if the Democrats should’ve taken Trump’s offer, all of them agreed that they should have, with one of them saying it was “the wrong move” for Pelosi to turn it down.
 
Then, Phillips asked them what the students had to say to Pelosi regarding this. One of them told Pelosi: “Compromise, compromise, compromise.”
 
Another said: “Just get the Democrats to, you know, budge…”
 
One girl said that Pelosi should “have a more open mind”, which is outright hilarious to me, considering how often the Left touts themselves as being open-minded and tolerant of everyone who is different from them, which is a complete fallacy.
 
Again, this doesn’t really matter at this point, but it’s good to see these kids appearing far more reasonable than the Democrats… or maybe that’s a bad thing, actually. These kids are more reasonable than the people in Washington. May God help us all.
 
Joking aside, by the end of the video (below), one student summarized the reason for the shutdown pretty well: “It’s the Democrats not giving in to the Republicans. So they don’t want to fund the wall at all. That’s why the shutdown is currently happening.”
 
I don’t know if that kid knows this, but that’s actually a pretty great summary of the situation that really should open his and anyone else’s eyes.
 
The kid realized for that moment that the ONLY reason the government was shut down for this long is not because of Trump being some sort of crybaby asking for money for a racist wall, but because Democrats are so petty they will turn down a good deal just so Trump doesn’t get his wall.
 
This much is emphasized when the Senate decided not to vote on bills that would open the government and Senator Tim Kaine, who would’ve been Hillary’s Vice President had she won, was visibly celebrating the fact that the government would continue to be shutdown, at least until Trump and Congress reached a deal to reopen it for three weeks (and I fully expect it to close again and Trump will have to declare a national emergency because the Democrats don’t want to negotiate on border security, open government or not).
 
But the fact that Tim Kaine celebrated an effort to reopen the government being killed certainly is interesting. I thought the Democrats really wanted the government to reopen and help those poor federal workers to actually be paid.
 
But when it comes to putting your money where their mouth is (yes, I’m making a joke about them taking your tax money), they refused to vote or pass anything that would get the government opened again.
 
Aside from the Tim Kaine celebration, something else that won’t be on the news is the fact that last week, there were multiple votes regarding back-pay for the “suffering” federal workers in the House.
 
According to Rep. Lee Zeldin, one January 17th, only 6 Democrats joined every single House GOP member on a bill to pay federal workers. The bill failed 195-222. On January 23rd, there was another vote on a similar bill but only 10 Dems joined Republicans on it and the bill failed 200-215. And on the following day, yet another bill that would pay fed workers was voted on, with only 13 Democrats joining Republicans, leading the bill to fail 200-214.
 
Literally all Republicans wanted to help these “suffering” and furloughed federal workers to get payed and the Democrats killed every bill that would've helped them. And then, they had the audacity to turn towards a CNN camera (because they are apparently everywhere there is a major story, if Roger Stone is any indication) and say Republicans were keeping the government shut down and were causing 800,000 federal workers to suffer WHEN IT’S LITERALLY THE OPPOSITE CASE IN REALITY!?
 
But these college students answering Phillips’ first question, the one about who was to blame for the shutdown, in the manner that they did does not surprise me in the least bit. It is yet another case of the media being disingenuous about who was to blame for the shutdown.
 
Trump offered them a good deal (that is honestly better for them than for him) and they were so fixated (and still are) on not letting Trump have his wall that they refused his offer. Nothing short of a promise of resignation as part of the deal would make the Democrats happy and even then, I could very well be wrong.
 
And not simply because Democrats are incapable of feeling joy being the soulless machines that they are.
 
But the fact remains that, upon learning some things and being given some good information, people can find out the truth. That kid at the end, while he might’ve later gone on to continue blaming Trump, did come to the reasonable conclusion that the only reason the government was shut down, particularly for as long as it was, is because Democrats refused to compromise.
 
And if more people come to the same conclusion, that is bad for the Democrats. Like I said, pretty much every single student in that video urged the Democrats to take the deal and thought it was a mistake for Pelosi to not go through with it.
 
This is the necessity of informing the public. There are a lot of people who are either uninformed or misinformed about things. These kids were largely uninformed (can’t blame them since the media they consume won’t tell them what Trump is doing unless it involves Russia or trolling people on Twitter) before Phillips let them know that the reasonable hypothetical offer from Trump was an actual offer from him.
 
So there are two major things to take away from this article:

1) it is uniquely important to give people the information necessary for them to arrive to their own conclusions. Like I said, the student at the end actually summarized the reason for the shutdown pretty well. Phillips didn’t tell him that, but gave him the tools to let him come to that conclusion.

2) the Democrats and the media are disgusting liars. This much we’ve known for a very long time, but it’s always important to note particularly when Democrats shed crocodile tears regarding the unpaid workers and proceed to kill any bill that would actually get them paid just so they can continue their sorrowful narrative.
 
There is a meme out there on the internet of this guy shooting someone on a couch, turning around and asking “why would someone do this?” as though he was not the reason for it (pretty great example right below).

This tends to be the case with pretty much everything they do, to be honest. You could literally replace the guy with AOC, have the victim as New Yorkers living in poverty and have the text say: “why would billionaires do this?”
 
There are a number of situations that would perfectly describe what the Left does with this meme, but getting back on track, this meme also shows what they were doing regarding the shutdown/federal workers not being paid.
 
They killed bills that would reopen the government or at least allow for federal workers to be paid, turn around and blame Trump and Republicans for the shutdown and workers not being paid.
 
It is the epitome of hypocrisy and outright deception. And if the CampusReform video is any indication, it’s working for a lot of people.
 
Those kids had NO idea that Trump offered a compromise to the Democrats who went on to reject it. This lack of information, or the outright consumption of misinformation, is the only reason Democrats are even capable of winning any election or even being relevant.
 
If everyone knew the truth about them, they’d know the Democrats were the ones who fought to keep their supposed “right” to own slaves, were split on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, founded the KKK and did not allow for a black person to attend a Democratic National Convention until the mid-1920s, their first official Democrat President, Andrew Jackson, went on to slaughter the Native Americans that they go on to claim were killed by simply white people, and they inspired Hitler’s Nuremberg Laws with their own segregation laws.
 
There is a TON more that I can point to as to why the Democrat Party is the worst party in world history, tied with any country’s communist party, but that would make this article as long as an entire series of volumes of books.
 
But what should largely be taken away from this article is the fact that it is imperative that we share the right kind of information. Of course, that’s nothing new, but it is always important to remember to do this.
 
The only reason Democrats are even close to being as prominent and powerful as they are is because they are workers of deceit just like Satan.
 
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.