Usually, when a large event such as a terrorist attack occurs, it grabs the attention of the country. Even botched terror attacks still manage to grab most people’s attention (remember the Christmas bomber of 2009?).
But CNN, despite the fact that a terror attack, botched as it was, took place, they still couldn’t talk about anything else other than the President. And it wasn’t even about anything major. They ignored the failed terrorist attack in favor of covering one of Trump’s supposed daily habits: how many Diet Cokes he drinks in a day.
I say supposedly because I don’t know the President personally, so I can’t confirm such mannerisms, but I don’t believe anything the fake news media says about him, no matter how mild it is.
But still, even though 27-year-old Muslim extremist Akayed Ullah planned to blow up a train station because of Christmas decorations, CNN decided that wasn’t worth talking about and instead favored the waste-of-time discussion of Trump’s dietary habits.
I do have to give CNN some points for at least mentioning it before focusing on the diet segment, but much akin to Whose Line Is It Anyway, those points don’t matter.
On CNN’s “New Day”, Alisyn Camerota mentions that: “We do have some breaking news we are following right now because there are emergency crews in New York City. They are responding to some type of possible explosion. We understand it’s near the Port Authority bus terminal.”
And that’s the extent of her coverage on the failed terrorist attack. Later on in the show, she begins focusing on Trump’s diet coke habit:
“This is about his Diet Coke habit. Let me read it to you. ‘Watching cable, he shares thoughts with anyone in the room, even the household staff he summons via a button for lunch or for one of the dozen Diet Cokes he consumes each day’ (A quote from the original story published by the NYT about Trump’s life in the White House)… Corey Lewandowski, his campaign manager, has a new book out about some of these very things. Corey’s book is called ‘Let Trump be Trump.’ Here’s what he writes. ‘On Trump Force One, there were four major food groups, McDonald’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken, pizza and Diet Coke.’ When I read this, I think, this is not what doctors would recommend…”
Why is that trash segment worth more airtime than reporting on a developing story about a failed terror attack? Clearly, if you want to know what’s going on in the world, CNN is not a source to do so. I’ve known this for some time, but this is beyond fake news. This is altogether IGNORING the news.
Now, I know that this was a botched terror attack. According to the U.K. Daily Mail, which at the moment seems to be a far superior news organization: “The taxi driver behind the failed terror attack in New York City told investigators he meant to detonate his homemade pipe bomb in the busy subway station after seeing the walls festooned with Christmas posters – in revenge for violence against Muslims all over the world. While initial reports suggested the crude pipe bomb… had detonated prematurely, suspect Akayed Ullah, 27, insisted he set off the bomb deliberately.”
If you didn’t know the details of the terror attack, that one paragraph served a far greater purpose for you than CNN did. If you have family in New York City and you hear about a potential terror attack and tune in to CNN, you’re likely going to be decently and justifiably annoyed by their reporting of the President’s dietary habits.
CNN, at this very moment, is not just the Most Distrusted Name In News. They’re also the Most Useless Name In News. I don’t know if it’s the fact that this was an Islamic terrorist attempting to kill people the reason CNN avoided the story or the fact that the terrorist was so incompetent that he didn’t do any significant damage to anyone but himself (which at the time of the segment, people didn’t even know about that), but ignoring a terror attack, regardless of the result or damage created is unprofessional.
No, no one died from it and only the evil lunatic suffered serious injuries, but it’s still something worth talking about. Even the President himself talked about the attack, saying that “’lax’ immigration policies were to blame for the attack…” And he “urged Congress to ‘enact legislative reforms to protect the American people.’”, according to UK Daily Mail.
But CNN still decided it wasn’t important enough to steer them away from the ever-so-important discussion of how much soda the President drinks in a day.
Now, I understand that this attack wasn’t as big as, say, the Orlando night club shooting or the San Bernardino shootings or other multiple attacks made against America in New York City because no one died and the only person to get hurt is the devil worshipper himself. But any semblance of a terrorist attack, particularly one that’s inspired by ISIS’ calls “for militants and lone wolves to attack holiday markets”, according to UK Daily Mail, should still be a decently big topic of conversation.
Now, I could probably forgive them if they had been talking about the Alabama Senate Election, or Trump’s sexual assault accusers or anything about the Russia story, but certainly not “how much Diet Coke does Trump drink a day?”
All the other things are big talking points that most people will pay attention to and discuss with others. But who exactly is going to make a big fuzz about how much Diet Coke Trump drinks? Why is that a more important story than A TERRORIST ATTACK THAT COULD’VE GONE FAR WORSE?!
If a reporter asks a Trump supporter about the Russia story or the women accusing him of sexual assault, they are all likely to say that they don’t believe the stories. But if they ask a Trump supporter what he thinks about the President’s soft-drink-consuming habits, they’ll likely tell them: “This is the kind of media opposition Trump faces? He’s got nothing to worry about, then.”
That’s how ridiculous that segment was. Not one Trump supporter cares about how much Diet Coke Trump drinks. Beyond that, since this is coming from CNN, not one Trump supporter even believes he drinks that much.
But even if their credibility wasn’t as tarnished as it is, people are still not likely to care all that much about it. If you’re going to talk about Trump, at least talk about something worth-while.
I mean, seriously. The one time they don’t talk about Trump-Russia collusion but instead focus on something so irrelevant and it’s when there was a potentially catastrophic terrorist attack?
And remember, this was a couple of days ago. The bomb detonated at around 7:20 A.M on December 11th, 2017. Alisyn Camerota made the mention on her show, according to NewsBusters, at around 7:58 A.M. Eastern Time, and at around 8:38 A.M, she began to talk about the Diet Coke story.
THIS WAS A DEVELOPING STORY AT THE TIME OF REPORTING! Literally all she says about the attack is that there was a possible explosion near the Port Authority bus terminal. Presumably, that’s everything she knew about the incident at the time, which is understandable. But it’s HER JOB TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT IF POSSIBLE!
She’s a “journalist”. Journalists are supposed to investigate these things and report them to the public. I doubt she knew how much or how little damage was caused by the explosion. People could’ve been lying dead on the ground while she was talking about Trump’s apparent obsession with Diet Coke.
Now we know that no one innocent was hurt, but we didn’t know that at the time. Alisyn certainly didn’t either.
I can’t decide whether CNN is insanely incompetent or deliberately negligent of real news. And I’m saying this literally one article after talking about how they were wrong about a Trump collusion story. After that story, I learned that David Frum is an idiot. After this story, I learned that Alisyn Camerota is grossly incompetent in her job as well.
And these are the people that are telling me Trump cheated in the election?
These ungodly people clearly don’t follow this bible verse:
2 Timothy 3:17
“That the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Just when I thought the Left had no sanity left within them, one of them comes out and makes one of the most idiotic claims we’ve seen this year… and that’s really saying something.
Less than a week after ABC News’ Brian Ross reported fake news about candidate Trump ordering Michael Flynn to contact the Russians (as a reminder, he made that order after he won the presidency), CNN reported fake news that Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., received an e-mail containing sensitive material about Hillary Clinton that was discovered by Wikileaks. CNN reported that he received that e-mail on September 4th, 2016, before some of the information in that e-mail was published by Wikileaks.
But it’s since been discovered that the e-mail was sent on the 14th of September, at a time when the information within that e-mail had already been shared to the public.
That report was an obvious attack on the President and a way to fuel the “collusion” story, much like Ross’s fake news story was. And one of the funny things about it is that Manu Raju will not be punished like Brian Ross was because according to Brian Stelter: “[Raju] followed the editorial standards process. Multiple sources provided him with incorrect info.”
How is not checking the validity of the source or info considered following standard editorial process? If he got the date wrong, he either didn’t read the e-mail or didn’t read it carefully and thoroughly. Is that CNN’s standard editorial process? What am I saying, OF COURSE IT IS!
This is the fake news media, after all. If any story against Trump or Republicans can be somewhat believable, then facts schmacts! They’ll run with that story.
Regardless, we return to the topic at hand. In a segment with Brian Stelter, David Frum, a CNN contributor, said: “…I would say, the mistakes are precisely the reason the people should trust the media. Look, astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth. Astrologers never make mistakes or at least they never own up to them, because what they are offering [is] a closed system of ideology and propaganda.”
By that logic, Weinstein raping women is precisely why they should trust and support him.
Does he not hear the stupidity that comes out of his mouth? And then there’s what he said after the ridiculous claim.
“Astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth”. Journalists (at least today) are as much scientists as Leonardo DiCaprio or Al Gore are. Their processes aren’t about discovering the truth. They are about HIDING IT. They are about ALTERING THE TRUTH TO FIT THEIR NARRATIVES.
Although, I’m glad he says what he said about Astrologers. They “never make mistakes… because they use a closed system of ideology and propaganda.” That’s precisely what the MSM is.
Since this latest blunder, CNN has yet to apologize for delivering fake news to their audience. CNN did correct the story, but they didn’t apologize for it. They didn’t apologize to their audience for reporting fake news and they didn’t apologize to Trump Jr. for spreading misinformation that could’ve damaged his image and reputation. Then again, I wouldn’t expect them to apologize for defamation.
Returning to Frum, he wasn’t finished making his plea for winning the “Dumbest Claims Made in 2017” award. Later, he said: “The worst mistakes that press organizations have made in the coverage of Trump has precisely occurred in their effort – their overzealous effort to be fair to the President.”
You mean to tell me everything they’ve reported about the Trump-Russia collusion, the sexual assault allegations, the ridiculous claims of bigotry and their narrative that Trump’s so insane he is guaranteed to start a nuclear war with North Korea has all been IN FAVOR OF THE PRESIDENT?!
What kind of upside-down land of the missing brains world do you live in that you think the media is trying to be FAIR to Trump? Seriously, this guy, who once claimed to be Republican, is in the company of the most public serial liars so much that he himself believes the b.s. these people share. And does so with PASSION.
So much passion, in fact, that he’s gone completely insane. You HAVE to be if you fundamentally believe that the reason people should trust the fake news media is precisely BECAUSE they lie and get things wrong all the time.
I’ll be honest, I’ve been trying to follow his kind of logic. But seeing as to how I’m not a massive imbecile, I can’t follow it. Earlier, I made the comparison that, following that logic, women should trust Weinstein precisely because he rapes women. You can also say that, if you cheat on your spouse, your spouse should trust you PRECISELY because you cheated.
How anyone could honestly believe what Frum just said is beyond me. How anyone can take him seriously is beyond me.
But I’m happy and glad to see a blabbering idiot in this situation. The fact that he said something so outrageously mindless when discussing a botched story by CNN shows you the reality of the fake news media. They’re scared to the point of mindless blabbering.
Scared that they truly have lost their monopoly on news-sharing. Scared that most people in the country don’t trust them anymore. Scared that, with these latest and highly talked-about blunders by the news media, some of the people they thought would trust them no matter what may begin to question them on occasion.
To point out the obvious: No Mr. Frum, people don’t trust the fake news media because they are fake. They certainly shouldn’t and certainly don't for that reason.
The fake news media has been lying to the public long before Trump was in the picture. They’ve been exposed in recent time and their credibility is long gone. Botching stories in the manner Ross and Raju did certainly doesn’t help them.
And the best part is that they’re not going to stop. The fact that they continue lying and occasionally getting caught in the act is what helps Trump and conservatives in the long-run. Since just about everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie, they’re easily countered with facts. With the truth. With logic.
I’ve said before that if the Republicans really wanted to defeat Democrats at nearly every turn, they could. All it takes is knowing your stuff. Learning the facts. Pointing out the lies the Left tells you. And sometimes, the Left makes it rather easy to counter what they have to say, as you could see from this article.
All Republicans need to do is tell the truth, back it up with facts and point out the lies of the Left and attack them for it.
Fox News could OBLITERATE CNN, ABC and every other news source out there if their entire cast was filled with conservative truth tellers and not the occasional Never Trumper *ahem* Shepherd Smith *ahem* Chris Wallace *ahem*.
Unlike what Frum believes, people trust news sources that don’t lie. That’s why the Left is in total shambles, or at least that’s one of the reasons.
Much like with the fake news media, people just don’t trust the Left anymore… well, the majority of the people, that is. The Left’s credibility has only suffered in the last few years, but especially so this last year.
Hollywood icons people thought to be godly are proving to be anything but. The Democrat Party has no one to be their next champion like Obama was or Hillary, to some extent. And the media has been called out for their constant altering of the truth.
The Left is in shambles and they have no one to blame for it other than themselves.
“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
We all knew something like this had to happen eventually. With the Alabama Senate election taking place tomorrow, the sexual assault allegations were going to regain focus. Especially the allegations by the only woman who offered any tangible “evidence” against Moore.
There were really three possible outcomes for this story: Beverly Young Nelson releasing her yearbook for independent handwriting analysis, Nelson deciding against talking about it further before the election (which was the least likely to happen), or Nelson admitting that it’s fake.
And lo and behold, the lattermost option is the case.
Beverly Young Nelson has admitted that she forged a portion of the yearbook, officially discrediting her and her so-called “evidence”. Now, a Leftist could ask: “It’s just a portion! Why does this discredit her evidence if the rest is not forged?”
That’s the thing: we don’t know if it’s all forged. But if only a little bit of it is forged, it severely weakens this piece of evidence and the accuser. If a part of it is forged, how do we know if the rest isn’t forged as well? Lying never helps in a court case such as this. If you’ve been assaulted, why would you lie about anything? That’s what discredits Nelson. There was no reason to lie if what happened is the truth.
But still, something as clear as water goes right over ABC News’ head. ABC News had the opportunity to interview Nelson about the yearbook.
In the interview, ABC News reporter Tom Llamas asks in a rather strange way about the yearbook. “Beverly, he signed your yearbook”, Llamas said, prompting Nelson to reply with: “He did sign it.” Llamas then says: “And you made some notes underneath”, with Nelson replying: “Yes.”
Does that sound like he’s essentially leading Nelson on what to say and admit? The MSM has a very specific way to phrase things to drive their narrative. And that interview definitely sounds like one of the ways the MSM drives their narrative.
And what’s most puzzling, at least to the regular viewer, is that the segment is rather short and they quickly move on from it as though it’s not a big deal.
Of course, it IS a big deal, so I understand why they want to basically bury it under the rug as fast as possible. It’s still news so they still have to talk about it but they definitely tried to downplay it and pretend it was nothing of interest before moving on to something that doesn’t almost completely destroy the narrative against Roy Moore.
Worse still, Breitbart tells us: “Early reports are that Nelson and Allred (Nelson’s attorney) will produce an expert to prove the rest of the yearbook is not a forgery. So a proven forger is bringing in her own expert.”
That’s the equivalent of Hillary Clinton hiring her own investigator to look into her e-mail scandal or the Uranium One deal. An insider investigator will hold as much credibility as Nelson herself.
And you have to ask: “Why hire your own investigator? Why not allow an independent handwriting analyst to analyze the yearbook? Why bring this up FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE ALABAMA SENATE ELECTION? And more importantly, WHY LIE?!”
You see, it’s the last question that will likely seal victory for Roy Moore. Plenty of Alabama voters, including yours truly, already didn’t believe Nelson or any of the other accusers in the first place. One of them presents tangible evidence but then, 4 days before the election, admits that it’s not entirely truthful (and very well could be entirely dishonest). That destroys her accusations and arguments completely.
The funny thing is that, earlier in the interview, she says that “God knows, and Roy knows and I know what happened.” Well, at least THAT is a rather honest statement. Of course God knows, He knows EVERYTHING. Of course Roy knows, IT INVOLVES HIM. And of course she knows, SHE’S THE ONE LYING TO THE PUBLIC.
So God, Roy and Nelson all know what happened and they all know she’s lying. She knew from the beginning that the yearbook was forged. I knew since she brought it up (and learned a good deal about it) that the yearbook was forged. If you remember, the yearbook is signed “Roy Moore D.A.”, but Roy Moore wasn’t the District Attorney at the time he allegedly sexually assaulted her.
Beyond that, Breitbart reminds us that Nelson has a reason to lie about Roy. That as circuit judge, Roy “ruled against her in a 1999 divorce case.”
Breitbart also reminds us that the other two accusers: Leigh Corfman and Tina Johnson have reasons to be discredited and not believed. Corfman claims that, after Moore allegedly molested her when she was 14-years-old, she began to live a troubled life of “drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt.” The reason she’s not believed is that contemporaneous court records (records that existed at the same time of the alleged molestation) contradict her statement, saying that she had discipline problems before the time of the alleged molestation and that her “disciplinary problem has improved greatly”, according to documents from 1980, a year after the alleged molestation took place.
So Corfman herself has a big hole in her story. What about Johnson? She claims that Moore once “groped her butt in his office in 1991.” According to Breitbart: “She was not in Moore’s office ‘on business’”, but rather she was in his office “due to a bitter custody battle where Moore represented Johnson’s mother, who was trying to gain custody of Johnson’s 12-year-old son based on the claim that Johnson was an ‘unfit, absent, and unstable mother.’”
So she has her own reasons, like Nelson, to lie about Roy Moore, thus discrediting her accusation as well, or at the very least creating a cloud of doubt about her own story. And she has to prove her accusations beyond reasonable doubt, which she can't.
Regardless, it just seems funny that, four days before the Senate election, Nelson admits she lied and her evidence is forged. It’s even funnier that ABC News made it seem like the revelation was no big deal.
It really makes you think, and even confirms some people’s suspicions, that this was all a sham and a political effort and strategy by the Democrats. None of the accusers have solid and TRUTHFUL evidence or accounts against Moore. Knowing that, and the fact that Moore’s opponent Doug Jones basically made himself known to be a racist with a strategy about “if Moore were a black pedophile, would we consider electing him?” as though race has anything to do with this just further cements my confidence that Roy Moore will handily win the election.
And what makes me happier is that yet another Democrat effort to destroy a conservative figure in politics will have failed. More so, since this has been a months-long effort to destroy the judge that will likely end in failure.
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall refute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord and their vindication from me, declares the Lord.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Much in the same way that everyone in Hollywood knew about Harvey Weinstein’s obsession with sexually assaulting the women he works with, it turns out that almost everyone in the media (and even some Hollywood people) knew about Matt Lauer’s behavior.
Back in 2008, Matt Lauer was “roasted” in a secret event. A roast is when a group of people make jokes about someone at that person’s expense, but it’s usually light-hearted and not meant to be mean-spirited. However, they can sometimes get out of hand and rather offensive. Such was the case with Matt Lauer’s 2008 roast.
According to Fox News: “The notorious event – now legendary in New York media circles – pushed the outer limits of sexist, racist, homophobic and obscene jokes – and left little doubt that Lauer’s colleagues knew NBC’s biggest star had a troubled marriage and a wandering eye.”
Now, I’ll quote some of the jokes, with censorship of course. But even with censorship, you’ll likely know what the foul word is, so I’ll give you a graphic content warning.
WARNING: THE FOLLOWING CONTENT WILL CONTAIN GRAPHIC LANGUAGE NOT SUITABLE FOR A YOUNGER AUDIENCE. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
One of the speakers, Martha Stewart, joked: “I hear NBC executives call Matt the ‘**** of the Rock’”.
Another speaker, CNN Worldwide President Jeff Zucker (who was chairman of NBC Universal at the time and denied he knew about Lauer’s sexual misconduct) said: “It’s good to see Matt up here and not under my desk. I don’t want to say Matt is a germophobe, but he’s the only guy I know who uses Purell both before and after he *******”.
According to Fox News: “Then ‘Today’ co-host Meredith Vieira was especially crude, making jokes about Lauer and [Al] Roker partaking in **** sex during the Turin Olympics, with Roker as the receiving partner. Former ‘Today’ star Katie Couric went next, reading a… Top 10 list of facts about Lauer. Among the digs, ‘No. 10 – According to his wife, he’s not really an early riser, if you know what I mean.’”
But one of these “facts” about Lauer served to not just roast Lauer, but also embarrass someone else. That someone else was Ann Curry, who was Dateline NBC anchor at the time.
According to Couric’s list: “No. 2 – He loves to eat Curry”. And according to Fox News: “Curry (sitting in the audience) went pale and the crowd roared with laughter.”
And perhaps what’s one of the more disturbing jokes comes from “comic” Bob Saget, who according to Fox News: “took the stage to offer Lauer some marriage advice: ‘Do what I’m doing, Matt. Come into the Dark Side. My next wife hasn’t even been born yet.’”
Now, there’s more, but I’d like to not continue to pervert your minds with the filth these sick people think is normal and socially acceptable.
The point is that these people, despite the fact that they claim they had no idea about Lauer’s sexual misconduct, really did know about it. Beyond that, THEY CELEBRATED IT! They didn’t just know about it, THEY MADE AN ENTIRE EVENT REVOLVING AROUND IT!
And remember, this was back in 2008. They’ve known this at the very least since then, no doubt for longer. So they’ve had over a DECADE to blow the whistle on this sick man, but none of them did it. No one from his former co-hosts to studio executives to colleagues in the New York media did anything about it. And now they claim it’s egregious? That they are shocked he did these things? That what he did is unacceptable?
WHY WAS IT MORE THAN ACCEPTABLE BACK THEN?! WHY WASN’T HE HELD ACCOUNTABLE BACK THEN?!
And then there’s Noah Oppenheim’s statement to NBC staff. Oppenheim is Andy Lack’s deputy who told NBC staff, according to Fox News, that: “following his ‘review’ (about the Lauer investigative case run within NBC), anyone still working at NBC found to have known about Lauer’s behavior and not done anything would be punished ‘in the most severe way possible.’”
In other words, just about everyone in NBC is at risk of losing his or her job. Again, they’ve widely known about this for YEARS and not a single mention came of it, at least in serious terms.
They all knew what Lauer was doing to women and they laughed about it. It’s one thing to know about it and not say anything. That’s bad enough, especially if you know your work or life likely won’t be too affected. But to know about it and LAUGH ABOUT IT?! That’s a new low.
Not that I expected anything better of these Leftists. Sexual perversion courses through their veins. Sin thrives within their hearts.
They made fun of his perversion rather than call it out. They laughed not at Lauer’s expense but rather at his VICTIMS’ expense. They didn’t just make fun of his sexual escapades. THEY CHAMPIONED HIM FOR THEM!
But now that he’s been called out, they pretend they didn’t know about it? That’s like the Nazis not knowing about the concentration camps. Or the terrorists not knowing about 9/11. THEY TOOK PART IN IT! Not in the escapades themselves, but they certainly were more than ok with them.
Those may be extreme examples, but they still make sense. They lived with the knowledge and worked with the rapist. They hung out with him and befriended him. They were more than ok with what he did. They APPLAUD him for what he did.
If anyone belongs in a basket of deplorables, it’s the whole of the American Left.
“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
As we enter the 2018 mid-term cycle, more and more talks about Democrats winning to impeach Trump will occur. They will certainly run on that. They’ve talked about impeaching him well before he even took office and will continue talking about it until he’s finished with his 2nd term as President.
But it seems as though at least one writer from one Mainstream Media source realizes the error in the Democrat Party’s ways. Jeet Heer (yes, that’s a real name), a Leftist writer for the website “New Republic”, wrote an article calling for Democrats to stop focusing on impeaching Trump and start focusing on just beating him at every chance they get.
The article is titled: “The Democrats’ Dangerous Obsession With Impeachment.”
Quite the powerful, Leftist-bashing title, especially coming from another Leftist.
The article begins with: “Amid a stream of revelations, arrests, and plea bargains from Robert Mueller’s investigation of Donald Trump campaign’s connections with Russia, liberals are becoming giddy at the prospect of impeaching the president.”
“Becoming”? They’ve been giddy at the prospect of impeaching him since before he took office! The Russia investigation is almost all they’ve talked about this past year. WHAT DO YOU THINK ITS INTENT IS?! It’s meant to lead to Trump’s impeachment. They want him locked up too, but they’d settle with impeachment, as long as they can also impeach Mike Pence.
But they aren’t just “beginning” to get giddy at the thought of succeeding. They’ve been dreaming about this almost since the election. I say almost because they’ve had to have time to grieve over the fact that their liar of a candidate, Crooked Hillary, was absolutely destroyed in the election.
The article then talks about how Vox’s founder, Ezra Klein, “argued last week that impeachment be normalized as a regular procedure in American democracy… [Ezra] wanted to redefine the rules for impeachment so they apply to Trump, a president who has demonstrated that he is manifestly unfit for office. ‘Impeachment is not a power we should take lightly,’ Klein wrote. ‘Nor is it one we should treat as too explosive to use. There will be presidents who are neither criminals nor mental incompetents but who are wrong for the role, who pose a danger to the country and the world… Being extremely bad at the job of president of the United States should be enough to get you fired.’”
After writing that he subjectively believes “it is true that Trump is ‘extremely bad at the job of president”, he recognizes that such a definition would be a bad idea because impeachment would then be used as a political weapon (or at least a more readily used one than it already is) and that the reasons for impeachment are entirely subjective (which defines every reason the Left currently has for impeaching him).
But let’s go with it for now. If being bad at being president should get you fired, why wasn’t Obama fired within his first 4 years? The Fast and Furious scandal, which even the National Review acknowledges as one of the Obama administration’s “earliest embarrassments”, put around 2000 weapons into the hands of criminals south of the border. One of which took the life of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
If allowing criminals outside the border to get weapons isn’t considered “being a bad president”, then what is? He willingly put border patrol agents’ lives in danger. And he’s not an idiot. He knew the consequences of such actions. He just didn’t care.
Like he didn’t care about the 4 Americans killed in Benghazi. That was as much Obama’s fault as it was Hillary’s. Reinforcements were requested but they were denied. There was no reason to deny reinforcements. They could’ve saved at least one if not all of the Americans in the embassy, but the victims were denied help. And then, an innocent man was arrested for allegedly putting up a video that supposedly insulted the Islamic barbarians enough to kill people. A video which never existed.
Long ago, I wrote an article titled “As Bad As Obama Was, Does He Deserve To Be Jailed?” In it, I delve further into the reasons he should go to jail. But really, you can easily say those were all reasons he should’ve been impeached. If we’re talking about impeaching a president because he’s bad, then why was Obama never even close to being impeached?
Regardless, we move on. The article then talks about how it’s virtually impossible for Trump to be impeached. “The practical problem is that for impeachment to be meaningful, Trump would not just have to be impeached by the House of Representatives (which requires a simple majority) but also removed by the Senate (requiring a two-thirds vote). It’s easy to imagine a scenario where the Democrats win the House of Representatives in 2018 and have the necessary votes for impeachment. But even in that best-case scenario, in which Democrats win every toss-up race for the Senate, they would still be well short of the votes they need in the Senate. Which means that kicking Trump out of the White House by necessity has to be a bipartisan effort with significant Republican buy-in.”
He fails to mention that the Vice President also would have to vote to impeach the POTUS.
Quoting Peter Beinart of The Atlantic, the article says: “the possibility of Republicans co-operating in removing Trump is dropping even as there’s more evidence [emerging] that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.”
Well, two things about this: First, I’d like to ask: “what evidence?” Believe me, if there was any sort of solid evidence that points to Russian collusion, we’d be hearing about it. We’d definitely know it. So far, the only thing that even remotely comes close to being evidence is the Russian dossier. But that’s all fake as well. It comes close simply because it’s the basis for the entire investigation.
Trust me, it doesn’t take a year for the FBI to find a single piece of evidence of a crime (they usually investigate crimes, not people, but still). It doesn’t take the MSM a year of investigation to come up with nothing if there’s clear criminal activity.
I’ve been saying this for months now and will likely have to continue saying this until Trump’s 2nd term is over, but if there was any solid piece of evidence of collusion, we’d know about it by now. The MSM has been quick to deliver fake news about this. Could you imagine how quick they’d be to deliver real news about this if it were true? They’d be the only thing in this known universe to exceed the speed of light upon delivering such news.
But they haven’t. There’s nothing real about the investigation and the news the MSM reports.
Second, the possibility of Republicans co-operating in removing Trump is dropping not because they will “tolerate just about anything from Trump”, as the article writes. That’s the thing, they DON’T tolerate anything from Trump.
Over and over again, you hear people like John McCain, Mitt Romney, Lindsay Graham and other RINOs blatantly being AGAINST anything Trump does. What this guy is saying is entirely wrong and false. He continues by saying that “[The GOP] continue to stand with him despite his demented tweeting, the political support he’s given to Roy Moore, his repeated expressions of contempt for the justice system, and his cavalier threats to launch a nuclear war.”
That sentence is so insanely wrong I could probably write another article on that sentence alone. We’ve heard multiple times, from the very people listed above, that he should slow down or altogether stop tweeting. They want to shut him down. They don’t want him to be telling the truth to people through social media.
They’ve been adamantly against Roy Moore and Trump’s support of him. They’ve been less vocal about it in recent time because other news have filled the media’s time, such as the tax plan. But they still despise the judge.
“Repeated expressions of contempt for the justice system”? Are you kidding me? Take the Kate Steinle case. Look at the facts and then tell me the verdict wasn’t utter b.s. Who wouldn’t have contempt for such an “injustice” system?
“Cavalier threats to launch a nuclear war”? Why is pushing back against a lunatic dictator considered a threat to launch nuclear war? If a man with a gun threatens to kill you and your family and you point a gun to him to protect yourself and your family, how are you the aggressor in that circumstance? How are you the only one threatening to commit homicide? Kim Jong-un THREATENED US FIRST, YOU MASSIVE IMBECILE! Declaring that there’d be justified retaliation for nuclear action is not threatening nuclear war. THE INITIAL LAUNCH IS!
Regardless, he ends his article by saying the Democrats should look to simply defeat Trump at the ballot boxes instead of chasing a pipe dream. Which tells you just how desperate the Democrat Party truly is. You see, THEY CAN’T HOPE TO DO THAT! Yes, they’ll be looking to win in 2018 and 2020. That’s obvious. But their hopes can’t rest on that alone. They’re desperate to regain power in America. They want him out now. They aren’t very hopeful for 2018. Certainly not after this past year of significant elections going to Republicans.
There have been a lot of special elections over this past year. Some have happened in California, but that’s not newsworthy because it was expected that the Democrat candidate would win. But in others such as Georgia and Montana, the election was a bit more contested. The winner wasn’t going to be very obvious from the outset. Those are elections the Democrats hoped they would win, had a chance of winning but ultimately lost in.
Loss after loss tends to take its toll on the losers. They first thought Hillary would crush Trump or at the very least win, even if it was rather close. That didn’t happen. They then thought they’d crush the GOP candidates in these special elections that were actually significant and that, too, didn’t happen.
If they continue to lose in significant elections, they are right to be worried about 2018. Despite all of their b.s. polls about Trump’s popularity, he’s stronger now than he was when he first ran or even won the presidency. I know that there are certain once “Never Trumpers” such as Mark Levin who have changed their tone about Trump since he took office. He’s proven that he’s a conservative man who is working hard every day to Make America Great Again.
And the more the Left attacks Trump, the more his supporters embrace him. More than that, more and more people JOIN him.
He’s grown stronger while the Democrats have grown weaker. That’s why they’re banking so much on impeachment. It’s their best chance of defeating Trump – which, given what the article of the New Republic tells us, is a rather pathetic chance in and of itself.
“For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
You know the interesting thing about lying? You can often get caught in your own web of lies.
Sure, often times the fake news media will get away (at least publicly) with lying to people, but occasionally, they are so clearly caught in a lie that even other fake news sources have to take some notice.
ABC News’ Brian Ross was suspended for 4 weeks without pay after he “was forced to correct a bombshell on-air report about Michael Flynn”, according to CNN.
In a statement apologizing for Ross’s mistake, ABC said: “We deeply regret and apologize for the serious error we made yesterday. The reporting conveyed by Brian Ross during the special report had not been fully vetted through our editorial standard process. As a result of our continued reporting over the next several hours ultimately we determined the information was wrong and we corrected the mistake on air and online.”, adding: “It is vital we get the story right and retain the trust we have built with our audience – these are our core principles. We fell far short of that yesterday.”
Yeah, when they say that “it’s vital we get the story right”, they really mean “it’s vital we TELL the story right.”
Just so you know, Brian Ross, on Friday, cited a single anonymous source about the Flynn investigation, saying: “Michael Flynn promised ‘full cooperation to the Mueller team’ and is prepared to testify that, as a candidate, Donald Trump ‘directed him to make contact with the Russians.’”
That, understandably, made Leftists everywhere soil themselves with excitement. Unfortunately, and very hilariously, Ross was lying and had to correct his story. Trump didn’t order Flynn to do anything as a candidate. The Trump transition team, however, did order him to speak with foreign leaders. An order that is not illegal. It’s not even unconventional for an incoming administration to do that.
But because of the way Ross reported it, Leftists cheered and called for Trump to be impeached and locked up, and the Dow Jones dropped over 350 points on Friday, before recovering a decent deal.
So Ross’s story was so groundbreaking that it made the Dow Jones dropped like a bag of bricks, costing a lot of people a decent deal of money. You see, liberals, your dumb actions have consequences.
But of course, the fake news media being the fake news media, ABC News “initially attempted to downplay the mistake, referring to its correction as a ‘clarification’ on ‘World News Tonight’ and then online. After a barrage of criticism, the network changed the language online from ‘clarification’ to ‘correction’”.
So even after getting caught in their own fake news, they still tried to pretend it was no big deal.
Saying Trump, as a candidate, ordered Flynn to contact the Russians is MASSIVELY DIFFERENT from saying Trump, as president-elect, ordered Flynn to contact the Russians.
One story gets closer to finding Russian collusion and the other is a story about what usually happens during a transition between one administration and another.
One is massive breaking news and the other is simply standard procedure.
Of course, on Friday, the Left thought they were one massive step closer to impeaching Trump and convicting him. One such example comes from The View’s Joy Behar, who read aloud the false report from Ross and was celebrating the fake news along with her colleagues on that terrible show and the ignorant audience who clearly had nothing better to do that day.
Behar, visibly getting excited as she read the report, clapped and cheered at the news. Her colleague, Ana Navarro said: “It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas and it’s beginning to look a lot like collusion.” With Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain, saying that the crowd reacted as though they were in Oprah, saying it was like “you get a car, and you get a car, and you get a car”, with Behar chiming in saying: “No, it’s ‘you go to jail, you go to jail, you go to jail.’”
So you can imagine the grin on my face when I saw the video of Behar apologizing to the audience for delivering the fake news herself.
Regardless, she explains to the audience that Brian Ross was wrong when he gave his report, believing it to have simply been a mistake and not intentional fake news. And you can see the disappointment on each of The View’s hostesses on seeing that their latest pathetic effort to unseat Trump has failed.
They say over and over again (with the slight exception of Meghan McCain) that this wasn’t fake news, just “wrong news” if you will. That they don’t believe Ross intended to mislead people into thinking they’ve found evidence of Russian collusion or that Trump, as a candidate, sought to collude with the Russians.
I, for one, believe he intended to mislead people. They’ve become so entrenched in their fake news stories about Russian collusion that they now believe it to be true. And Brian Ross, having also lied about the Aurora theater shooter’s affiliation with the Tea Party, clearly is eager to bust Trump for anything even remotely shady. And if he can’t find anything shady, he makes things look shady.
Like I said, there’s nothing illegal or unorthodox about an incoming administration looking to make contact with foreign leaders. That’s not shady. What would be shady is what Ross reported. A candidate making such contact with foreign leaders and governments is illegal and very shady. Which is why I’d be happy to point the Left in the direction of a little woman named Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If they’re looking for a story about a candidate colluding with foreign governments, they need not look any further than Clinton. With the Russian dossier, there’s clearly more Clinton-Russia collusion than Trump-Russia collusion. With the Uranium One deal, there’s clearly more Clinton-Russia collusion than Trump-Russia collusion.
And yet, they choose to ignore or flat out deny the truth. They are the ones who are corrupt, shady and criminals. They are the ones who constantly lie to the American people.
Take the Tax Reform bill that (thankfully) passed Senate last Friday as an example. The Left keeps saying that the bill will cost low and middle-income families a lot of money. That the bill is a scam. That it will take from the poor and regular people and give money to the rich. That’s a lie that they always tell about any Republican tax plan.
The Washington Post wrote about the tax plan, and they too say it will hurt low and middle-income families: “The JCT (Joint Committee on Taxation) found that the GOP bill would add nearly $1.5 trillion to the debt over the next decade and that, on average, families earning between $20,000 and $40,000 a year and between $200,000 to $500,000 would pay more in individual income taxes in 2023 and beyond. JCT does not explain why these families see an increase, but it is likely that it’s in part because some tax credits aimed at helping the middle class expire in 2023.”
In other words, the GOP tax plan only hurts families WHEN THE TAX CREDITS EXPIRE! JCT doesn’t need to explain why these families see an increase because IT’S PAINFULLY OBVIOUS WHY THEY WOULD SEE AN INCREASE! THEY WILL PAY MORE WHEN THE TAX CREDITS EXPIRE IN 2023!
But this is the kind of thing I’m talking about. Occasionally, the fake news media gets caught in their web of lies and is publicly mocked and called out for their lies. But there’s lies wherever you look in the media.
Trump, as a candidate, didn’t order Flynn to contact the Russians. Trump, as president-elect, did (indirectly, through his transition team, but you know what I mean).
The GOP tax plan will only hurt families when tax credits expire. There’s nothing in it that will hurt them once it passes and there’s nothing in it that indicates the rich will take money from the poor. The tax credits will expire with or without this bill.
But at least someone in the fake news media world is being punished (though given a rather small punishment) for blatantly lying to the public.
“The righteous hate what is false, but the wicked make themselves a stench and bring shame on themselves.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
I’m almost tempted to make a bingo card of Leftist men who have recently been exposed for sexually assaulting at least one woman. Seriously, firing after firing, allegation after allegation, ousting after ousting, the Left seems to be getting demolished as time goes on.
The most recent Leftist to have been exposed as a sexual assaulter is Matt Lauer, who has been fired from NBC for credible allegations of sexual assault made against him.
An article written on PageSix.com is titled: “Matt Lauer allegedly sexually assaulted staffer during Olympics.”
“Matt Lauer allegedly sexually assaulted a female NBC staffer during the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014.”
And one of the more interesting parts of this story is the fact that Matt Lauer’s victim complained to NBC’s Human Resources department about the assault. Usually, women call out their attackers very publicly. In this intriguing new environment of women exposing sexual assaulters, this is the first time I’m hearing that the victim either hasn’t come forward publicly or refuses to do so.
Of course, I can understand her decision not to publicly do that. There’s personal repercussions that come with informing the public that you’ve been assaulted. But it’s interesting that in this particular case, the woman chose to remain anonymous, at least for the time being.
Regardless, the article continues: “An NBC insider said Lauer’s alleged victim complained to HR on Monday: ‘This happened so quickly. She didn’t go to the media, she made a complaint to NBC’s human resources, and her evidence was so compelling that Matt was fired on Tuesday night. The victim says she has evidence that this has also happened to other women, but so far we don’t have evidence of that.’”
Perhaps another rather interesting part of the article is that they write: “Lauer’s firing comes amid rumors that several news outlets were working on stories about his alleged sexual misconduct. Reporters for the New York Times had been investigating Lauer for several weeks, according to sources who had been contacted by the paper, CNN reported.”
What exactly does that tell you? It tells me that the reason Lauer was fired in the first place isn’t simply because of the evidence presented to NBC’s HR department by the victim. Another reason, seemingly, is that other news outlets were investigating him on his sexual misconduct and “working on stories” about it.
Does that mean that NBC would’ve kept Lauer on their staff if other news outlets hadn’t been working on stories about him? That if the woman had been the only person to even bring up what he did that NBC wouldn’t have fired him?
Maybe, or maybe not. Regardless, we move on to NBC News Chairman Andy Lack’s statement on Lauer’s firing: “On Monday night, we received a detailed complaint from a colleague about inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace by Matt Lauer. It represented, after serious review, a clear violation of our company’s standards. As a result, we’ve decided to terminate his employment. While it is the first complaint about his behavior in the over twenty years he’s been at NBC News, we were also presented with reason to believe this may not have been an isolated incident…”
Wait, wait, wait. “We were also presented with reason to believe this may not have been an isolated incident?” But the aforementioned NBC insider said “the victim says she has evidence that this has also happened to other women, but so far we don’t have evidence of that.”
If Andy Lack has reason to believe more women were assaulted by Lauer, doesn’t that mean he has sufficient evidence for such reasoning? There’s a bit of a contradiction, don’t ya think? Either they have enough evidence to at least have reason to believe Lauer assaulted more than just that initial woman or they DON’T have enough evidence that he assaulted more than just one woman.
Which is the truth? I don’t know. But I’ll tell you, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more women that have been victimized by Lauer. In every high-profile sexual assault case we’ve seen in recent time, there’s always been more than just one woman. Even in the Roy Moore case.
Of course, we know the Roy Moore case is entirely b.s., but you get the point. There’s usually more than just one woman.
Now, why do I say I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more women in this case? Two reasons. First, because of a little bit of information that the Page Six article divulges: “His wife, Annette, famously filed for divorce in 2006, accusing him of ‘cruel and inhumane’ behavior, but withdrew the filing a month later after they reached a private agreement. They ostensibly live separate lives – she lives full time in the Hamptons with their children, while Matt resides in the city during the week.”
Now, back in 2006, I wasn’t paying much attention to the world around me, so forgive me for learning this only now. But the claim his wife made is rather troubling. “Cruel and inhumane” behavior? If that’s true, I feel sorry for Annette and her children.
The second reason I wouldn’t be surprised if more women are victims of Lauer is simply because of what Lauer is: a Leftist.
I’ve said this time and time again, but the Left is among the biggest threat to women in the world. The very fact that the Left has no morals or values is what endangers women the most. The Left respects no one and treats everyone equally poorly.
According to Hillsdale College, Winston Churchill said: “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.” in 1948. And in 1945, he said: “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
Under socialism, everyone is equally miserable. This misery extends past financial wealth. The Left is socialist. And they’re the ones doing these things to multiple women. They have no good values or morals. They see people not as people but as opportunities.
They saw Obama as an opportunity to elect the first black President. They see women as an opportunity to advance their feminist agenda, while simultaneously getting closer (a bit too close) to women who believe their b.s. They see gay people as an opportunity to further drive us to immorality and sin. They see transgenders as an opportunity to do very much the same thing now that gay marriage is the law of the land and the Left has to be angry about something.
They see black people as victims of a racist past they never lived through. As victims of a racist past that the Left themselves are responsible for yet claim no responsibility for it.
The Left is entirely devoid of morals. Of values. Their hearts are filled with sin. There’s a reason Lust is one of the 7 deadly sins. It’s one of the major ones that billions of people commit and too often don’t repent for.
I often say that evil fills the hearts of the Left. Lust is considered a part of said evil. That’s why I’m not surprised that all these Leftists have done horrible things to multiple women. What surprises me is the courage many of these women have to expose these Leftists.
I can tell you, I didn’t think something like this would happen. And certainly not at this magnitude. It’s truly incredible to see these Leftists be exposed. The Left usually protects their own people, but it seems that’s not entirely the case. While they still protect the likes of Al Franken, John Conyers, Bob Menendez and whoever else in Congress who’s a Democrat has been accused of sexual assault, they are seemingly leaving members of the media in the dust.
Just last week Charlie Rose was fired from his network for the very same thing. Kevin Spacey was fired from his Netflix show “House of Cards” and the original domino, Harvey Weinstein, was fired from the very company he co-founded.
I don’t know what the reason is for these Leftists’ careers being basically obliterated, but I will certainly thank God for these unrepentant sinners being punished for their sins.
America’s justice system may not be perfect, but God’s justice system certainly is.
“When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Do you want to know one of the reasons I like Trump so much? It’s because he deliberately goes out of his way to enrage the media and directs what they report on. His latest effort has been to poke fun at Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s fake Native American heritage.
During an Oval Office event honoring the work of Navajo code talkers during World War II (one of whom actually praised Trump and said the country was in good hands), President Trump went out of his way to call out Warren for her claim that she’s partly Native American.
“I just want to thank you because you’re very, very special people. You were here long before any of us were here. Although we have a representative in Congress who, they say, was here a long time ago. They call her ‘Pocahontas.’”
As you can expect, the media went bananas over this comment, even saying it’s a “racial slur”.
It’s not a racial slur, you ignoramuses. IT WAS A PERSON’S NAME! It’s like saying the name “LeBron” is a racial slur because LeBron James is black. But the media, being the ignorant buffoons they are, decided that this was another instance of the President being “racist”.
Why is it racist of Trump to point out and make fun of Warren for claiming to be Native American but it’s not racist of Warren to baselessly claim she’s Native American?
According to Fox News: “The truth is, Warren is probably not Native American but claimed she was to advance her academic career that eventually landed her a gig at the prestigious Harvard Law School. The university even promoted Warren as a Native American faculty member back in 1996 in a Harvard Crimson piece on diversity on campus.”
And to what does she base her claims? A Boston genealogist’s report that Warren is 1/32nd Cherokee, that her family has told her stories about their origins (though no documentation was ever given) and that her grandpa had “high cheekbones like all of the Indians do”, according to Warren herself.
So being 1/32nd Cherokee means she’s Native American? So if I were to find out I’m 1/32nd African American (or just African) does that mean that I can list myself as a black man? That I can become a member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)? That I can guilt trip a white man into apologizing for slavery? That my vote for Trump means that he received a slightly higher African American vote count?
Of course not! Being 1/32nd anything doesn’t mean a darn thing!
How about stories with no actual documentation? Does that mean that if my parents had told me when I was little that our family came from Mars that it makes me a Martian? Or if they told me we came from Mount Olympus that I’m part Greek god? OF COURSE NOT! Saying you’re part something doesn’t make it true. I could say I’m part cupcake but that wouldn’t mean it’s the truth!
Lastly, her grandpa’s cheekbones were high like all Indians’? My great grandpa was pretty tall. Does that mean he was Paul Bunyan or came from a family of literal giants? Of course not. A physical attribute doesn’t mean anything.
And yet, she still lives her life as though she’s a Native American with no basis for her claim. Why is that not outrageous for the Left? Why is Trump calling her out (briefly, at that) considered racist? And why is the word “Pocahontas” racist?
To answer those questions, the word “Pocahontas” is not racist. It’s a name. It never has been racist and it never will be racist. Trump calling her out shouldn’t be considered racist but the MSM can’t resist to attack him on anything they possibly can and report on the nickname as a “racial slur”. Lastly, it’s not outrageous for the Left because the Left has no values. They pretend to support things they really don’t.
They pretend to care about people when they really don’t. If they cared about African Americans, they wouldn’t victimize them at every turn, pass legislation that makes it harder for them to get out of poverty and blame police officers’ racism for the few African American deaths that occur at the hands of law enforcement. Seriously, when was the last time you heard of a police officer killing an African American? I honestly can’t remember it happening since Trump became President (not saying it’s due to him winning but that no black person has reportedly been killed by a cop since then).
If they cared about black people, they would try to stop or at least slow down black on black crime.
If they cared about gay people, they would call out the Muslim world for literally KILLING them just for being gay.
If they cared about women, they would unabashedly attack those who actually HAVE assaulted women, not defend them just because they’re Democrats. If they cared about women, they wouldn’t be among women’s biggest threats in society.
They truly don’t care about anyone other than themselves. Selfishness is the reason Warren claims to be Native American. She used that to get a job at Harvard Law School and, according to Warren herself, that she would “be invited to a luncheon.”
So a job and an event to get free food is why she falsely and baselessly claims she’s Native American? And let’s not forget that she’s a 2020 Democrat presidential candidate hopeful as well. She would likely run on being both the “first woman and Native American president” in U.S. History.
It’s disgustingly hypocritical for her to claim such a heritage while simultaneously calling other people racist.
She’s a white woman. Not a Native American woman. Not that she’ll ever admit to her lies. She’s way too deep in it to simply backtrack on that. Not to mention she’s too proud to do the right thing. The Left never does the right thing, anyway.
Regardless, I will enjoy the fact that Trump once again has caused the media to lose a little more of their remaining sanity. I’ll enjoy the fact that he’s essentially directing the media on what they report on.
“In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
One rather major theme this past year has been that the media wishes to portray Trump as a very unpopular and toxic president. That whoever he endorses in elections would be destined to lose, simply because of such an endorsement. However, this past weekend, an ABC network analyst, Cokie Roberts, admitted that “it will be hard to defeat [Moore] in the general election.”
Here’s specifically what she said: “[Trump] doesn’t have to go to Alabama. He’s done plenty for Roy Moore. Moore can put it in his ads, which he’s doing. He’s clearly got the endorsement of President Trump. Without the endorsement of President Trump, he won the primary. I think with the endorsement of President Trump, it will be hard to defeat him in the general election.”
Now THAT I did not see coming. A network analyst for a major fake news source admits that Trump’s endorsement of Moore makes it more difficult for the Democrat candidate to win? THEY NEVER DO THESE KINDS OF THINGS!
In the Left’s own little world, they assume every Democrat candidate everwhere is going to win either in a rather close race or a landslide victory. So for one of these people to admit that TRUMP’S endorsement of a Republican candidate makes things HARDER for Democrats is shocking.
Now, I do agree that Trump’s endorsement of Moore certainly helps. But even without it, I’m entirely confident Moore will defeat his opponent, Doug Jones.
Why? A couple of reasons, actually.
First, with the constant attacks against Moore, all the attention of the voters in Alabama has gone to him. Fake allegation after fake allegation, conservative voters in Alabama are doing with Moore what American voters have been doing with Trump: get even closer to him.
Trump proved himself to be a massive threat to the Left, resulting in the onslaught of attacks made against him before and after the elections. Every time they’ve attacked him, his base and supporters have only grown closer to him. We see the same with Moore.
Moore is proving himself to be a massive threat to the Left as well. In their desire to destroy him, they’ve only made him more powerful. Truth be told, before the allegations, I still would’ve voted for him simply because he’s a Christian and conservative. But now, I’m PASSIONATE about voting for him. And that’s simply because the Left made it known that they do not want him in Congress. And if the Left doesn’t want him in Congress this badly, I WANT HIM IN CONGRESS JUST AS BADLY!
But that’s only one of the reasons I think he’ll beat Doug Jones.
The second reason is that Alabama is a very Christian state. Christians tend to not be in favor of abortion or those who promote or accept abortion. Doug Jones believes that abortion should be an option until A BABY IS BORN!
Meaning that at any point in the 9 month pregnancy, Doug Jones believes it’s ok to kill the child. Even though a fetus can survive outside of its mother’s womb after 5 or 6 months, even then it doesn’t have a right to life according to Jones.
This very issue can boil any Christian’s blood. And as I’ve told you in the past, 86% of people in Alabama as of 2014 identify as Christian. It would be insanely difficult for anyone to run on “I think killing babies inside the womb at any point in time is ok” in Alabama and win a majority vote. Alabama is LIGHT YEARS away from California by that standard.
Now, I can see why Cokie Roberts believes it’s difficult to defeat Moore. Aside from Trump’s endorsement, Moore is basically the Senatorial candidate version of Trump. They both believe in many of the same things and hope to achieve many of the same things in their positions. They both want to Make America Great Again in every way they possibly can.
They both have been viciously attacked by the Left and the fake news media. They both have passionate supporters behind them due to those very attacks. They both wish to drain the swamp. They both want to Make America OURS Again.
They both have faced Establishment opposition who wish to maintain the status quo and keep America for themselves. They both seek to defeat said opposition at every turn they can.
Cokie Roberts is entirely right (something I thought I’d never say of someone from a fake news network). It will be very difficult for Democrats to win in Alabama. But that’s nothing new. Like I said in a previous article, Alabama has voted solidly Republican since Reagan. For the longest time, Democrats have had a difficult time winning in Alabama. It’s no different now.
Of course, I can’t see into the future. I can’t definitely tell you that Moore will win. But I personally have no doubt that he’s in prime position to win. Of course, the GOP will likely look to expel him and deny Alabama voters their preferred candidate, but that’s an issue to tackle after the election.
And I can assure you, I will be on top of that when and if it happens.
But for now, I shall enjoy the fact that even someone from a fake news source comes to the realization that the Democrats will likely experience yet another loss in a significant election.
1 John 5:4
“For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world – our faith.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Sticking with these past few weeks’ theme of sexual assault allegations, the Washington Post published a massive article about Charlie Rose’s inappropriate sexual misconduct. And I mean massive in more than one sense of the word.
The article, titled “Eight women say Charlie Rose sexually harassed them – with nudity, groping and lewd calls”, has well over 100 paragraphs and around 6000 words.
Obviously, I’m not going to talk about absolutely everything there. It’s a shame, really, because I’ll likely have to omit a lot of things I really want to include. Unfortunately, due to time and space constraints, I will have to dismiss a lot of the details and specifics the article contains. Regardless, I’ll do my best to stick with the most relevant points, as I always do.
The article begins with: “Eight women have told The Washington Post that longtime television host Charlie Rose made unwanted sexual advances toward them, including lewd phone calls, walking around naked in their presence, or groping their breasts, buttocks or genital areas.”
I find it simultaneously interesting and unsurprising at the Post’s choice of words. They claim here that Rose has made “unwanted sexual advances” towards those women, according to them, including “groping their breasts, buttocks or genital areas.”
Yeah, that’s not just unwanted sexual advancement at that point. That’s actual assault. He may not have gone as far as to have raped the women, but non-consensual groping is considered sexual assault. That’s why I would have to rope in Rose along with people such as Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, Kevin Spacey and such. He’s a sexual assaulter just as well.
We skip a bit towards another portion of the article. According to the WaPo: “Most of the women said Rose alternated between fury and flattery in his interactions with them. Five described Rose putting his hand on their legs, sometimes their upper thigh, in what they perceived as a test to gauge their reactions. Two said that while they were working for Rose at his residences or were traveling with him on business, he emerged from the shower and walked naked in front of them. One said he groped her buttocks at a staff party.”
Again, we’re crossing over to “sexual assault” territory, not just sexual advances.
But, unlike the Leftist Washington Post, Rose’s victims are less keen on simply calling his behavior “sexual misconduct”.
Reah Bravo, an intern and associate producer for Rose’s PBS show, told the Post: “It has taken 10 years and a fierce moment of cultural reckoning for me to understand these moments for what they were. He was a sexual predator, and I was his victim.”
Right to the jugular on that one, huh? She’s labeling him for exactly what he is: a sexual predator. No “he made unwanted sexual advances towards me” or “he sexually harassed me”. She is flat-out, unapologetically calling him out as a sexual predator.
Another woman, Kyle Godfrey-Ryan, recalled “at least a dozen instances where Rose walked nude in front of her while she worked in one of his New York City homes. He also repeatedly called the then-21-year-old late at night or early in the morning to describe his fantasies of her swimming naked in the Bellport pool as he watched from his bedroom”, according to the Post.
According to her, she even told Rose’s executive producer, Yvette Vega, about the calls. And, according to Godfrey-Ryan, “she would just shrug and just say, ‘That’s just Charlie being Charlie.’”
To her credit, Vega did later say that she “should’ve stood up for them.” Yeah, she should’ve. Why would saying “that’s just Charlie being Charlie” be an acceptable excuse? That’s essentially saying “Charlie is very powerful here, so there’s nothing you can do about it except just take it and deal with it.”
Worse, that’s essentially excusing anyone for any deed ever. “Hitler is killing millions of Jews!” “Oh, that’s just Hitler being Hitler.” “Islamic terrorists are killing hundreds of people every year!” “Oh, that’s just Muslims being Muslims” (Though, that’s almost the excuse they really give for attacks.)
Why would someone saying “That’s just Jerk #7 being Jerk #7” be an acceptable response to someone coming to you FOR HELP WITH A SEXUAL PREDATOR?!
Worse for Godfrey-Ryan (or better, in some ways), according to the Post: “Godfrey-Ryan said that when Rose learned she had confided to a mutual friend about his conduct, he fired her.”
I say “better in some ways” because she’s at least far away from that creep after having been fired.
Next, we move on to Megan Creydt, who worked as a coordinator on Rose’s show from 2005 to 2006.
According to her: “It was quite early in working there that he put his hand on my mid-thigh.” According to the Post, Rose was “driving his Mini Cooper in Manhattan while she was sitting in the passenger seat.”
According to Megan: “I don’t think I said anything. I tensed up. I didn’t move his hand off, but I pulled my legs to the other side of the car. I tried not to get in a car with him ever again. I think he was testing me out.”
As a guy, it’s not very likely I’ll ever get into a situation similar to that one. Therefore, I’m not too sure I would be able to give a credible, realistic response. It’s easy to say that she should’ve just “removed his hand away from her leg and scold him”, but that’s not very realistic. It’s easy to think outside of the moment, but not in it. Besides, that’s Charlie Rose. He’s powerful, at least from her standpoint. Removing his hand may lead to a bad response from Rose, including maybe even firing her. So I can see why she didn’t say or do much besides just moving her legs a bit further away from the disgusting perv.
Moving on, the Post writes: “A woman then in her 30s who was at [Rose’s] Bellport home in 2010 to discuss a job opportunity said Rose appeared before her in an untethered bathrobe, naked underneath. She said he subsequently attempted to put his hands down her pants. She said she pushed his hands away and wept throughout the encounter.”
“Untethered bathrobe”, you say? Now who does that remind me of? Oh, that’s right! The first domino in this sexual assault domino effect: Harvey Weinstein. Yet another reason to put Rose in with that other disgusting creep.
There’s quite a few other stories about Rose’s disgusting behavior, but I don’t have the space to fit everything in.
But I think we’ve seen quite enough already. Charlie Rose is yet another Leftist pervert being called out by multiple women.
Some time ago, I wrote an article explaining the reasons as to why women become conservative. This is one of those reasons. LEFTIST MEN ARE PIGS!
No, never mind. That’s a horrible insult to pigs. Pigs can actually be cute sometimes. They serve a good purpose, especially for food. It’s hard to see these Leftists serving any sort of good purpose for the world.
These Leftist men are worse than scum. The Left in general is the very representation of the scum of the Earth. The Left seeks to control people in more ways than one, clearly. Beyond their ruthless drive towards establishing a new world order in which they are the kings of the world with the power to control people’s actions, thoughts, desires and beliefs, they seek to make people their slaves.
Slaves who will be forced to do exactly as they say. If one of these Leftist men orders his slave to have sex with him, his slave must obey. If one of these Leftist men orders his slave to not believe in God, his slave must obey.
It’s disgusting beyond description. That’s the kind of world the Left envisions themselves living in.
A world where Charlie Rose can do far more than what he’s already done. A world where Kevin Spacey, Al Franken, Harvey Weinstein, George Takei and everyone who’s been credibly accused of sexual assault can do far more than the actions people claim they have done. I say credibly because no one in their right mind believes Trump and Moore have actually done anything Leftist women say they have done.
I’m glad all of these Leftists are being exposed as sexual predators. Evil should be exposed on a daily basis. I mean, hey. That’s what we do here at Angels of Truth!
But while these evil people are being exposed, you have to think to yourself, “why is this happening?”
The Left always makes sure to bury stories like this, yet the New York Times broke the story about Weinstein (after having killed the story over ten years ago), and here, we see a very detailed article about Charlie Rose’s assault and misconduct published by the Washington Post, who, I’ll remind you, began the wave of fake allegations against Judge Roy Moore.
So why are they defying the status quo and actually exposing their own people? Perhaps for the same reason they’ve also turned their backs on Bill Clinton: to target Trump and other conservatives in the future.
The Left might be sacrificing some of their pawns to attempt to be on the side of women accusers so that, when the time comes, they can reignite the allegations against Trump.
And I think it’s important to know this (or at least theorize this to be the case) because by the time the Left actually majorly pushes for the allegations against Trump, we’ll know immediately what they’ve been doing.
The Left might care about its people, but you have to remember, they care more about their results. If they have to destroy a good number of their people, they’ll do it if it means achieving their goals. Their goals to win back the White House and eventually establish a globalist government.
Regardless, that’s just theorizing (though it’s a rather solid theory, if I may say so myself). As it stands now, we’re seeing the Left almost literally crumble a year after Trump’s election.
The powerhouse they believed themselves to be is almost non-existent. And if we continue to elect MAGA people, the Left will continue to be torn to shreds.
Regardless of their goals, they still have some serious opposition. I’m not talking about Trump. I’m not talking about us conservatives or freedom lovers and fighters. I’m talking about God. He is their ultimate enemy. And He is the One they will never be able to defeat.
“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Drake will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...