You know the Left is egregiously tyrannical when even Vladimir Putin thinks it proper to compare the woke “progress” they are attempting to do with what the Soviets did during the 1917 revolution and after.
 
For context, on Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin (whom I’ll remind all of you used to be in THE USSR’S KGB!) gave a speech during a plenary session of the 18th annual meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club in Sochi, where the topic of discussion was “Global Shake-up in the 21st Century.”
 
In this speech, Putin said the following (keep in mind this was translated from Russian, so it might sound grammatically off at times): “We see with bemusement the paralysis unfolding in countries that have grown accustomed to viewing themselves as the flagships of progress. Of course, it’s none of our business or what is happening, the social and cultural shocks that are happening in some countries in the Western countries, some believe that aggressive blotting out of whole pages of your own history, the affirmative action in the interest of minorities, and the requirement to renounce the traditional interpretation of such basic values as mother, father, family, and the distinction between sexes are a milestone… a renewal of society.”
 
He alluded to the fact that while Western nations have a right to do whatever they wanted to do, “the overwhelming majority of Russian society” rejected this wokeness altogether.
 
“The preparedness of the so called social progress believe that the bringing a new conscience, a new consciousness to humanity, something that is more correct. But there is one thing I would like to say: The recipes they come up with are nothing new. Paradoxical as it may seem, but this is something we saw in Russia. It happened in our country before after the 1917 revolution, the Bolsheviks followed the dogmas of Marx and Engels. And they also declared that they would go in to change the traditional lifestyle, the political, the economic lifestyle, as well as the very notion of morality, the basic principles for a healthy society. They were trying to destroy age and century long values, revisiting the relationship between the people, they were encouraging informing on one’s own beloved and families. It was hailed as the march of progress. And it was very popular across the world and it was supported by many, as we see, it is happening right now.”

“Incidentally,” he continued, “the Bolsheviks were absolutely intolerant of other opinions, different from their own. I think this should remind you of something that is happening. And we see what is happening in the Western countries, it is with puzzlement that we see the practices Russia used to have and that we left behind in distant path, the fight for equality and against discrimination turns into an aggressive dogmatism on the brink of absurdity, when great authors of the past as Shakespeare are no longer taught in schools and universities because they announced as backwards classics that did not understand the importance of gender or race.”
 
“In Hollywood there are leaflets reminding what you should do in the cinema, in the films, how many personalities and actors you’ve got, what kind of color, what sex, and sometimes it’s even tighter and stricter than what the Department of Propaganda of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee did,” continued the surprisingly based Russian president. “And the fight against racism, which is a lofty goal, turns into a new culture, cancel culture, and into reverse discrimination, racism on the obverse. And it brings people apart, whereas the true fighters for civic rights, they were trying to eliminate those differences. I asked my colleagues to find this quote from Martin Luther King, and he said, ‘I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.’ That is a true value.”
 
“You know, the Bolsheviks were speaking about nationalizing not just the property, but also women. The proponents of new approaches go so far as they want to eliminate the whole notions of men and women, and those who dare say that men and women exist and this is a biological fact, they are all but banished. Parent number one, parent number two, or the parent that has given birth, or instead of breastmilk, you say human milk. And you say all of that, so the people who are not sure of their sexual agenda are not unhappy.”
 
“And I would like to say that this is not something new, and the 20s and the 1920s, the Soviet couture Tagore came up with the so called ‘Newspeak,’ and they thought that thereby they were building a new consciousness and coming up with new values, and they went so far that we feel the consequences up until now,” concluded Putin. “There are some monstrous things when from a very young age, you teach to children that the boy can easily become a girl and you impose on them this selection, this choice. You push the parents aside and make the child take this decisions that can destroy their lives. And if we call the spade a spade this is nigh to crime against humanity and all of that under the banner of progress, while some people just want to do that.”
 
I will remind you once again that this man used to WORK for the Soviet Union’s KGB, and in many ways runs Russia as though it was still the USSR. And yet, he understands just what the American Left is bringing to the table by trying to be “woke” and “progressive.”
 
Now, I’m not so naïve as to think he was saying all this to warn the West that what is happening is extremely reminiscent of the Soviet Revolutionary tactics of the early 20th century. He even started that speech by noting the bemusement they had in seeing what is happening. He made this speech not to warn the West, but to warn Russia against following the West’s woke direction of regressive “progress.”
 
The Russian people reject, as well they should, this idiotic “woke” thinking which is nothing new whatsoever, but Putin understands that positive sentiment for it is popular in the West and it could infect the Russian Federation. While, again, Putin runs Russia as it was the Soviet Union, both he and the Russian people at large have at least SOME amount of basic and traditional human values. They reject the militant gay agenda, the idea that the white race is naturally oppressive (probably because over 90% of the Russian population is white), and the idea that a man can be a woman or vice versa.
 
These are all tropes of the modern day Left in the Western world (even the Chinese communists aren’t fond of homosexuality, given that the CCP banned “sissy” men from being seen on television) but whose Godless values could spread to other countries with relative ease.
 
Putin wants to protect Russia from such heinous values because, as he said, such values destroy society. But despite the fact that he was clearly just trying to warn Russia, it does inadvertently serve as a warning to the West, which is currently undergoing such an asinine cultural revolution.
 
What the Left is doing and is trying to do is destroy not only the United States, but also the Western world in general. The foot-soldiers have a misguided idea that the West is responsible for the world’s woes such as slavery (as though this wasn’t a thing in Egypt thousands of years ago), racism (again, as though it wasn’t a thing elsewhere), genocide and imperialism (redundant to say it again), etc. Those at the top, to one extent or another, know it’s all bullcrap but gain tremendously from Western culture being battered and divided in such a way.
 
Take, for example, the Black Lives Matter (not the organization, but the belief/slogan) vs. All Lives Matter debate. This is a debate which, for the most part, I do not care to take part in any longer because I’ve come to the realization that most people, certainly the reasonable ones, are arguing over something that they agree on.
 
This is what I mean: Those who chant “Black Lives Matter”, at least the reasonable ones, don’t generally exclude other lives. While the slogan and chant seem exclusionary, no reasonable person who says that chant will also go on to say “I mean ONLY Black Lives Matter.” They believe that other people’s lives matter apart from black people’s, again, at least the reasonable ones. There are unreasonable people who say “no lives matter until Black Lives Matter”, which is preposterous and outright evil, and THAT is most certainly exclusionary and emphasizes that only black lives matter. But for the most part, I think that the foot-soldiers who side with “Black Lives Matter” don’t exclude other races.
 
As a result, they inadvertently admit that all lives matter. On the flipside, those who say “All Lives Matter” believe that, naturally, black lives are included. No reasonable person who says “All Lives Matter” will say “but not the black ones.” Frankly, I haven’t heard anyone on that side of the debate make such an assertion.
 
So what you have is one side, Black Lives Matter, believing that black lives matter and so do other people’s, and you have another side, All Lives Matter, believing that black lives matter and so do other people’s. THEY ARE ARGUING OVER SOMETHING THEY AGREE ON!
 
And this is what the elites and the establishment are gunning for: the division of the people so that we focus our efforts on each other as opposed to them. Somehow, the elite class has managed to make people argue over something that both “sides” agree on. Sure, like I said, there are those who are lunatics and exclusionary, but those are few and far between; the exception. Most people believe that all lives matter, even if they chant “Black Lives Matter.” So all we’re doing by engaging in this debate is wasting time and energy going at each other’s throats, when it’s the elite class which is pulling the strings in all this and causing such division and chaos.
 
This is what they do with pretty much everything. They do it with climate change, they do it with sexuality and the sexes in general, they do it with shootings, with terrorist attacks, and do it with homosexuality, all in the name of “progress”. They sow discord and chaos and division. This is what the Soviets did in the early 20th century, as Putin full-well understands, ironically.
 
The reason I say all this isn’t to try and back away from a debate, but to try and redirect it. It’s because I try to differentiate between the weak (those who say “BLM” but believe ALM) and the wicked (those who either say “no lives matter until BLM” or who attempt to further sow discord), knowing that at least the weak can be convinced to join our side. It’s hard to convince the weak that they are wrong when we treat them as wicked and just as culpable of the division and chaos as the elite ruling class.
 
The modern Left, the establishment elites, must not only be defeated but utterly DESTROYED AND CRUSHED everywhere, in basically every manner. Else, only the dissolution of society, Western and Eastern, will await us. Take heart, then, that God is with us and not with them.
 
Isaiah 54:17
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall confute 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.”

For anyone who doesn’t pay attention to the fake news media, or at least doesn’t think they are in any way truthful, objective journalists, it was immediately clear that the allegation that President Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election was a load of crap, fabricated by an embittered loser Hillary Clinton and her Leftist associates in and outside the media.
 
However, if you’re like Russell Brand and you watch the fake news media because you think they are at least somewhat truthful in their “reporting”, you’re bound to believe the crap that they spew until, surprise, surprise, you begin to question certain things and discover the lies they have been telling.
 
This is precisely what Brand has apparently been going through recently, as in a recent video which he posted to Rumble (something I will talk about in a moment, as it’s relevant to my overall argument), he expressed his epiphany that Trump was actually correct about Russian collusion being a hoax and that the Clintons and Democrats in general are corrupt and liars.
 
Brand said: “Well, now there’s serious evidence that it was the Clinton campaign and Hillary Clinton acolytes that were directly involved in the generation of what has proven to be conspiracy – untrue! Think about how much media you watched. Me, a person who I think, broadly speaking, is from the left – a liberal, certainly not a Trump-supporting Republican, with respect to those of you who are – I find myself in awe, gobsmacked, flabbergasted and startled by these revelations.”
 
This might be the first time I’ve heard a Leftist say “with respect to those of you who are” Trump supporters.
 
He continued: “What my concern is becoming is that these are totemic issues pushed to the forefront to mask ordinary, regular corruption like the Russiagate thing, the Hunter Biden laptop, all of that stuff. And it was like, being sort of in a way discussed as if it was just an absolute fact. To discover that this was propaganda, a construct, a confection by the Democratic Party – who, of course, are now in government – is kind of beyond disappointing, because you begin to question and query what other things may not be true. Once you recognize that people create certain truths in order to meet certain ends and aims, the idea you might be able to trust their integrity obviously dissolves.”
 
That is kind of major, all things considered, but perhaps not quite as much as one might originally think. You see, at least ever since the Chinese coronavirus pandemic began, Russell Brand has been surprisingly based and not following the narrative other Leftists follow. It seems his Rumble account (which it’s telling that he has one as well, as that indicates his separation from mainstream outlets, to an extent) is relatively new, with his first video having been published only on September 15th. However, I have seen at least snippets of him on some sort of podcast in which he stands against the COVID tyranny that we have been seeing.
 
Not to mention he is also rather based on other matters as well. For example, that aforementioned first video was titled: “Did Liberals Use Feminism to Justify Afghan Cluster F*ck?”, basically pointing at liberals and feminism and saying that it was they who messed things up in Afghanistan.
 
Other video titles include: “Are You DISGUSTED By This?! Marine’s Viral Video Gets Him Sacked,” obviously referring to Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, who posted a video critical of the military leadership messing up Afghanistan and being basically imprisoned for it; “Facebook Are MANIPULATING Our Stupid Governments & LYING TO US”, which is pretty self-explanatory, and could frankly include all of big tech; “How Everyday People Were SCREWED By Liberal Politics,” which is also pretty self-explanatory and rather telling, seeing as he tends to hold liberal beliefs; “The Mainstream Media Are Trying To Start A CIVIL WAR!!,” “Vaccine Mandates: An ASSAULT On Your Bodily Freedom?”, “SHOCKING Wuhan Evidence. Did Fauci LIE?”, “Is This HYPOCRISY?!,” referring to, among other things, AOC wearing a very expensive dress which had the words “Tax the rich” on it to the highly-exclusive Met Gala, which to answer the question: Yes, it’s very hypocritical; “Thought Biden Couldn’t Sink Any Lower?? THINK AGAIN!!”, and others relating to not trusting Big Pharma, and bashing the establishment.
 
To summarize, Brand, as liberal as he was and in some ways still is, has been rather critical and questioning of the crap that those he considered/s to be on his side have been pushing for, at least as of late.
 
Which is certainly a rather hopeful sight to see, regardless of context. The guy who has been a raging liberal all this time and he would still classify himself as such has begun to see things in a more clear light, as they are, rather than as the Left claims they are. Inundating yourself in fake news means you can’t see reality as well as those who wisely avoid it, which is why it’s taken Brand only until NOW to come to the realization that Trump DIDN’T collude with Russia and that Hillary and Democrats in general are massively corrupt and evil, which has been general knowledge to most of us since this whole nonsense began.
 
Brand even said that he wanted to believe that the Democrat Party is the party of “inclusivity, and diversity and truth and social justice and all great, positive ideas,” but he is seemingly not too sure about that anymore, and with good reason. The only inclusivity the Democrat Party approves of is of Leftists and Leftist thinking. If you’re a conservative, you are less than human and don’t belong even in the job you might hold. The only diversity the Democrat Party approves of is diversity of outward appearance, but only as far as those people are Leftists, as conservative blacks, Hispanics, Asians, women, etc. are considered traitors to their race and gender, as though the Left still owns people.
 
The only “truth” the Democrat Party approves of is the relative truth crap that they pass off, while any evidence which contradicts them must be eliminated, as well as those who bring up such evidence. The only social justice the Democrat Party approves of is of disabling police officers from being able to take care of criminals, while people are being illegally held in prison for January 6th, just for being in the Capitol building doing nothing in particular because the FBI agents did their job in setting them up.
 
And anyone who doesn't inject fake news poison into their streams on the regular recognizes that the Democrat Party has no great, positive ideas, certainly none which are of any benefit to anyone other than themselves (this includes Republicans in the establishment, by the way, not just Democrats).
 
In any case, that Russell Brand has been discovering all these things about the side he once supported, or to some extent still supports, is hopeful in that if he, of all people, is figuring this stuff out, so can anyone who does even a bit of research which doesn’t include going back to the fake news well. It certainly means that the Left is nowhere near as popular, particularly with their most recent actions, as they believe themselves to be or even claim to be, even with some of their most recognized celebrities like Brand and, surprisingly, Nikki Minaj, who has done more to fight for freedom in a couple of weeks than the GOP has in decades.
 
Their downfall is a matter of when, not if.
 
Ephesians 6:12
“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.”

It is unfortunate, but many times, it is necessary to learn the hard way what works and what does not. Vladimir Lenin, who initially sought and succeeded to implement communist Marxism into Russian government and way of life, rather quickly saw what happens when you go full-communist: starvation, suffering, torment, and miserable death, not just for citizens but for the country that implements it as well.
 
March of 1921 was a rather important time in the history of the Soviet Union. Following an unsuccessful invasion of Poland in 1920, the Soviet Union was teetering on the precipice of total economic collapse. The farmers were unproductive and starving, as was the general population. To make matters worse, hungry Soviet sailors were getting irritated with the Bolsheviks and their authoritarian ways, mounting the Kronstadt Rebellion and demanding, among other things, freedom of speech and assembly (ironically, considering these guys were self-admittedly faithful to Marxist communism).
 
That rebellion was quickly put down, but Lenin wasn’t unaware of what was happening. The Soviet Union, which was only a few years old by that point, was dying under its putrid system of government which killed all economic incentive. Without economic incentive, a nation cannot survive.
 
So, Lenin, on March 21st, 1921, began to implement the “New Economic Policy” (NEP), which began to undo the effects and causes of the misery of the previous four years, at least to an extent. The New Economic Policy, simply, is the very system which Lenin was previously staunchly against and launched a revolution to defeat: capitalism. Even Lenin was aware of what this was, proclaiming a partial restoration of “a free market and capitalism”, in his own words.
 
Of course, he wasn’t completely reversing course on the communist and Marxist ideology. Lenin was still a communist at heart and wanted as much communism as he could realistically implement in the Soviet Union. It’s just that he at least had enough rationality to recognize that the amount of communism he was implementing was literally killing his very country.
 
It’s possible that he learned, rather quickly, that it was impossible to implement communism in full without seeing extremely negative side-effects such as your country going broke. That may just be because communism only leads to such negative side-effects and it is an absolute pipe dream for it to even remotely work.
 
The idea that everyone is equal and gets equal results might be appealing to some, but that is simply not how the world works. We might try and treat each other equally as much as we can, but there will always be some amount of hierarchy which is impossible to overcome, no matter the economic system in place.
 
In a (usually) capitalist America, you have hierarchies in government, at work, on the streets, etc. There is the President of the United States (a position currently vacant, both legitimately and intellectually), with the VP underneath, and the executive branch which serves under the POTUS. There is Congress which has Senate Majority and Minority Leaders, as well as a Speaker of the House and a Minority Speaker. In companies, there is the CEO/president (not always the same person or position, though), other executives, middle-managers, etc. On the streets, there are the police, who have the authority to arrest people, etc.
 
What I just described as a usual occurrence in a capitalist country also happens in a completely communist country. There is the head of state and whoever is underneath him, there is the police on the streets, and there are bosses in companies (government-owned, but still) who have higher rank than those below.
 
It is quite literally impossible for there to be complete equality in terms of how one treats another, because some will have higher positions than others. It is even more impossible to attain equal results. Not all farmers will produce the exact same amount of produce to (be forced to) share with “the people” (i.e., the government).
 
Ultimately, what communism results in is authoritarianism from those who are in charge and misery for those living under it.
 
Ludwig von Mises put the distinction between capitalism and socialism most eloquently:
 
“A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system which men can live as human beings.”
 
Those who claim “real communism/socialism has never been tried” fail to understand that, yes, it has been tried multiple times by multiple people in multiple countries, and the results are always similar: misery, to different extents. The only difference between a communist country like the Soviet Union and a communist country like China is the amount of capitalism they chose/choose to implement. China is a bit more capitalistic than the Soviet Union ever was, but even China tried full-on Communism decades ago and it failed too.
 
They are still communists, don’t misunderstand, as they are ruled by authoritarians in the CCP and there is very little social freedom to speak of. But economic freedom is at least a bit more prevalent than what it was in the Soviet Union, and it has allowed China to be at least somewhat economically decent. They still artificially inflate their GDP by constructing ghost cities no one will ever live in (something which will eventually come to bite them in the rear), but they have more relative economic freedom that the USSR did.
 
And those who claim “real communism/socialism has never been tried” also fail to understand that what they desire is nothing but a pipe dream that, when tried, leads to the destruction of a nation in a fairly quick manner. In about a decade, Venezuela went from being highly prosperous to destitute, where their currency is literally more valuable if used to create fashion accessories than for their intended use.
 
All countries which turn towards socialistic policies inevitably see the results of such socialism, and can only stay afloat due to the capitalism that still remains untouched by them.
 
The Foundation for Economic Education gives us just a few examples of societies which turned towards communism (or something akin to it), to one extent or another, and which failed as a result:
 
“Ancient Rome’s Republic began its deadly experiment in democratic socialism in the 2nd Century B.C. It began as a welfare state, degenerated into a regulatory nightmare and finally collapsed into an imperial autocracy. Legislative assemblies voted into office by the Roman electorate constructed the socialist edifice brick by brick. Rome was not built in a day, but concentrated state power had no trouble tearing it down completely.”
 
“The Pilgrims of Plymouth, Massachusetts famously tried another version of democratic socialism seventeen centuries later. It was the communal variety, in which they placed the fruits of their labors into a common storehouse and then distributed it to each other equally… Starvation forced them to scrap it rather quickly in favor of private property.”
 
That story in particular we have shared with you time and time again, particularly around Thanksgiving.
 
The FEE also notes how the Germans elected Adolf Hitler and his National Socialists, Great Britain and Scandinavia adopted welfare state socialist policies following World War II and all had suffered as a result, and New Zealand was bogged in socialistic regulatory madness but largely got rid of such policies which have since freed its economy.
 
To different extents, socialism and communism have been tried, and even the ones that got just a taste of it ended up suffering as a result. Even then, they were still far better off than those which dove headfirst into communism like the Soviets and Chinese, who quickly saw how dangerous it was and needed to reign it in at least a bit.
 
“Real” communism has been tried by many, and they have seen their newly formed nations dying just as quickly as they were created. All forms of socialism stifle the economy and bring about suffering.
 
The antidote, as Lenin seemingly came to learn 100 years ago, is capitalism. Ironically, had he not died just a few years later and Stalin not taken power and gotten rid of NEP by re-socializing the economy, it’s possible that the Soviet Union might have been better off throughout its entirety. It wouldn’t have been great by any means, of course, as they still would have had some amount of communism, but they likely would have been more akin to modern-day Russia and China – still communist (not that Russia calls itself that, and are more oligarchical, but they pretty much are still that with the little capitalism they implement), but not so much that they are on the brink of death.
 
Surely, if even one of history’s most notorious communists learned that full communism brings economic death, then so can others in a far easier manner. I would hope that Americans who are misinformed about what socialism is and does don’t have to drag us through the lethal dangers of full communism before they learn that it doesn’t work.
 
Proverbs 18:15
“An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.”

For about three and a half years, CNN peddled the false and debunked idea that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election away from Hillary Clinton, bringing in tons of “experts”, including Pencil Neck Adam Schiff, to insinuate that there is “evidence” of Trump doing such a thing but not providing any at any point in time (and yet, some people are surprised that, yes, Adam Schiff also had absolutely no evidence).
 
For three and a half years, CNN and other Left-wing hacks in the mainstream media (but I repeat myself) accused Trump of colluding with Russia, without evidence, and tried to delegitimize a perfectly legitimate election that didn’t go the way they had hoped (and if you’ve been here long enough, you know that the colluding and cheating was done by Hillary and the Obama administration, colluding with Ukraine, Russia and other deep state agents throughout the globe… and still failed). For three and a half years, CNN pushed the fake news story that Trump colluded with Russia.
 
But now that the Chinese coronavirus pandemic has struck the world, CNN is colluding with Russia and pretending they are not lying about how many virus cases they have.
 
From Mary Ilyushina (a Russian, so of course) at CNN back in March of 2020: “Why does Russia, population 146 million, have fewer coronavirus cases than Luxembourg?”
 
While the title was bad enough, taking at face value what a murderous dictator says about the number of cases, it gets worse (and yes, I know this was a couple of months ago but I’ll get to that).
 
“Russian President Vladimir Putin said this week his country managed to stop the mass spread of coronavirus – and that the situation was ‘under control,’ thanks to early and aggressive measures to keep more people from getting the disease,” read the beginning of her piece.
 
Again, she is taking at face value what Putin is saying, when he has no credibility whatsoever, being a murderous dictator like Xi Jinping and all that. She even concedes that “Putin’s strategy seems to have worked,” again, giving credit and credibility to a murderous regime that deserves and has none.
 
Then, Ilyushina cited THE WHO in their praise of Russia: “’The director-general of WHO said ‘test, test, test,’’ Dr. Melita Vujnovic, the World Health Organization’s representative in Russia, told CNN Thursday. ‘Well, Russia started that literally at the end of January.’”
 
“Vujnovic said Russia also took a broader set of measures in addition to testing.”
 
As if citing the WHO, which has been in bed with China the entire time and has an abysmal record in terms of objective reporting and truth-telling, wasn’t bad enough, Ilyushina goes on to cite Rospotrebnadzor, “Russia’s state consumer watchdog” as Ilyushina calls them, or in other words, Russia’s censorship unit.
 
From the censorship unit, Ilyushina cited that “Rospotrebnadzor had run more than 156,000 coronavirus tests in total.” She also then went on to contrast Russia and the U.S., saying: “By comparison, according to CDC figures, the United States only picked up the pace in testing at the beginning of March, while Russia says it has been testing en masse since early February, including in airports, focusing on travelers from Iran, China, and South Korea.”
 
Again, she is citing Russian “intelligence” here, in particular, the CENSORSHIP UNIT. You have to be willfully ignorant (or in collusion with them) to take their “information” at face value and attempt to make a comparison to the U.S.
 
Ilyushina then went on to talk about the distrust the Russian people have of their government figures, which she says is simply “a legacy of [Russia’s] Soviet past.” Yeah, well, when your own government has been lying to you for longer than you have been alive, you’re going to be distrustful. The Russian people KNOW DAMN WELL that their government is lying (they are the ones suffering with the virus, after all) and that it has a reason to lie (it’s in their very DNA to lie). They, like China, want to appear as power players during this pandemic and appear to have the situation under control (as Ilyurhina said) when they do not and their people are dying.
 
The Russian people aren’t distrustful of the government simply because of its Soviet past. They are distrustful because Russia STILL ACTS LIKE THEY’RE IN THE SOVIET PAST! Putin is president for life, basically. Any time they have an election, Putin gets to run and win every single time, using tactics not too dissimilar from what Venezuela’s Maduro did a couple of years ago.
 
Ilyushina goes on to write: “On social media, Russians have raised questions referring to their country’s poor track record of transparency, such as the coverup around the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe in 1986 and the country’s botched response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s.”
 
“Authorities have moved swiftly to counter what they see as misinformation (awfully rich, considering this is Russia we are talking about. Disinformation campaigns are their MO). In early March, Russia’s Federal Security Service and internet watchdog (aka a censorship unit) moved to take down a viral post claiming the real number of coronavirus cases was 20,000 and that the Russian government was covering it up. Facebook and Instagram users in Russia then started to see coronavirus awareness alerts linking to Rospotrebnadzor’s official website.”
 
So the censorship unit in Russia was sending FB and IG users in the country alerts about the virus that linked to their site? Yep, nothing suspicious about that.
 
She also talked about the “skepticism” of Russians about “News reports of shortages in protective equipment… And some experts have raised doubts about the reliability of Russia’s testing system, which depends on a single laboratory. A report by PCR.News, a media outlet for medics and healthcare professionals, pointed out that the only approved coronavirus testing system, produced by Vector in Novosibirsk, has a lower sensitivity than other virus tests, raising concerns about false negatives.”
 
Yeah, the tests could be faulty and there could be shortages in protective equipment and the government is most likely lying about the total number of cases, precisely because of those faulty tests, but that’s just skepticism!
 
Yeah, right.
 
By the way, earlier in her piece, Ilyushina said that Russia has “just 253 people infected”. That may have been the case back when the piece came out on March 22 of 2020 (and again, you would have to take at face value the figures the Russian government is giving here), but according to BBC News on May 3rd, “Russia’s cases rise by 10,000 in one-day record.”
 
So Ilyushina was FAR too early to declare victory and try to say that Putin’s “early measures” were successful in beating the virus or that things were “under control.”
 
In any case, Ilyushina then went on to talk about “cover-up allegations rebutted by Kremlin and the WHO”.
 
Anastasia Vasilyeva, a Russian doctor and leader of the Alliance of Doctors union, made the same claims that rational people would in that she believes the Russian government to be covering up the actual number of cases by using pneumonia and other respiratory infections as the cause of death, ironically doing the opposite of the way we count corona deaths in the U.S.
 
“You see, they said the first coronavirus patient that died, that the cause of death was thrombosis. That’s obvious, nobody dies from coronavirus itself, they die from the complications, so it’s very easy to manipulate this,” Vasilyeva told CNN. Of course, both Russian authorities and the WHO rebuked her, denying the accusation forthright.
 
Now, you could tell me “but Freddie, don’t you have complaints about counting deaths with the virus as deaths from the virus in the U.S. itself? Wouldn’t you be siding with the Russians and the WHO in this instance?” To which I say, not exactly.
 
When Dr. Birx said that people who died “with” the virus counted as deaths “from” the virus, that’s a problem because ANY death, no matter how it happened, can be attributed to the virus. Died in a car crash and had the virus? Coronavirus death. Got shot 16 times in the head and had the virus? Coronavirus death. Had tuberculosis and the virus and died? Coronavirus death. In fact, TB testing and wards stand to be replaced by coronavirus testing and wards, since hospitals need the workforce to test people during the pandemic. This, obviously, means less testing for tuberculosis, which is an even worse killer for people with compromised immune systems, as it kills 4,000 people a day and 1.5 million a year, according to Madhukar Pai, a healthcare contributor to Forbes.
 
In other words, some people really COULD BE DYING from tuberculosis but they aren’t getting the testing they need and if they have the virus, they could be counted as a death to the virus if they die as opposed to a death from tuberculosis when, if they didn’t have the virus and still died, they would normally be counted as a TB statistic.
 
The U.S. counts people who die WITH the virus as having died BECAUSE of the virus. I get that the virus itself doesn’t kill and that people die from the complications. It’s like HIV/AIDS in that way. However, there is an honest way of counting Chinese coronavirus deaths and a dishonest way. Both the U.S. and Russia are doing the latter, with one inflating the number of virus deaths and the other deflating them, covering them up.
 
Russia is essentially doing the opposite of what doctors in the U.S. are doing: counting a coronavirus death as anything but.
 
But getting back to the actual article, as I said earlier, Ilyushina was far too quick to declare victory for Russia, as CNN itself reported: “Three Russian doctors fall from hospital windows, raising questions amid coronavirus pandemic” just a couple of months after that original article. The person who wrote this new article, you ask? MARY ILYUSHINA!
 
So Ilyushina, back in March of this year, was SPREADING RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA in saying that they had less Chinese coronavirus cases than Luxembourg (they have over 177,000 cases now, with more than 11,000 new cases each day, according to Worldometers, and even then, I am still highly skeptical) and that Putin’s efforts at the beginning of the pandemic were “successful” in ensuring that Russia wasn’t hit too hard.
 
There is no denying here the efforts by the mainstream media in colluding with China to absolve it of any wrongdoing and to pretend like it did nothing wrong, and that they even were prudent and practical about dealing with the virus, while the Bad Orange Man is doing everything wrong, but to see CNN colluding with Russia to spread Russian disinformation is actually a twist I did not see coming amidst this pandemic (though, in all honesty, I probably should have). For all the years that CNN was trying to make Russia look like they hacked or colluded with Trump to get him into office, I didn’t expect CNN to do this, but I really should have.
 
Old habits die hard and the Left will always love Russia and the communist disinformation that it tries to spread.
 
Psalm 69:4
“More in number than the hairs of my head are those who hate me without cause; mighty are those who would destroy me, those who attack me with lies. What I did not steal must I now restore?”

After two years, 200 interviews and millions of dollars wasted on a witch hunt of an investigation into a fictional theory by salty Leftists who refused to accept the result of the 2016 presidential elections, the Senate Intelligence Committee is set to finally conclude its investigation into the 2016 election, Russian collusion and Donald Trump, having “uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee,” reports NBC News.
 
In an interview with CBS News last week, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) said: “If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don’t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia.”
 
“We know we’re getting to the bottom of the barrel because there’re not new questions that we’re searching for answers to. What I’m telling you is that I’m going to present, as best we can, the facts to you and to the American people. And you’ll have to draw your own conclusions as to whether you think that, by whatever definition, that’s collusion,” Burr added.
 
Most likely, what they will present as being the facts is that Trump Jr. met with that Russian lawyer in the hopes of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton but wound up with nothing because there was never any intention by the Russian lawyer to give Jr. anything and the fact that Trump “urged” Russia to retrieve Hillary’s 30k+ deleted e-mails during a rally (and the Left still can’t take a joke).
 
NBC reports that Democrats on the committee believe that Trump associates were “willing to accept help from a foreign adversary” during the election, again referencing the Trump Jr. meeting with the Russian lawyer.
 
So being willing to accept help from a foreign adversary is tantamount to a crime or at least seen as a bad thing to do? Good! Then, we really should be slapping some handcuffs on the people who worked on the Clinton campaign and the DNC, right?
 
Back in April of 2018, the House Intel Committee released a report that said pretty much the same thing the Senate is saying: there is no Trump-Russia collusion.
 
While Trump Jr. sought to gain dirt on Hillary with Natalia Veselnitskaya (the Russian lawyer), the Clinton campaign “paid for opposition research on Trump obtained from Russian sources, including a litany of claims by high-ranking current and former Russian government officials. Some of this opposition research was used to produce sixteen memos, which comprise what has become known as the Steele dossier.”
 
That was an excerpt from the House Intel Committee’s report.
 
So, NBC, if it’s simply bad enough that Trump sought opposition research on Hillary from a “foreign adversary” that he should face some sort of consequence, I presume Hillary Clinton and anyone involved with the DNC should also face dire consequences because not only did they try to get research, but actually had some (even if it’s fake) and actually used it as a basis for the Mueller investigation, right?
 
When is Hillary’s court date? Or Donna Brazille’s? Or Debby Wasserman-Schultz’s? Or Barack Obama’s? Or James Comey’s? Or James Clapper’s? Or John Brennan’s? I won’t ask about John McCain because he’s probably already serving his time.
 
Now, one Democrat aide, who chose to remain anonymous, told NBC News regarding this: “We were never going to find a contract signed in blood saying, ‘Hey Vlad, we’re going to collude.’” Clearly, this anonymous aide was less-than-thrilled about this outcome.
 
Well, considering the Democrats want to look into every business affair Trump’s ever had, and want to look into his tax returns, convinced they will see money somehow wired to or from the Kremlin during the 2016 election, I actually think they were expecting something like that to be somewhere around.
 
I mean, if they’re convinced there’s mountains of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, surely it should be as simple as Donny leaving Vladdy-boy a sticky-note on his desk in Moscow that they are going to collude to steal the election, right? Because Trump’s just that dumb and obvious, right?
 
The reason I say at the beginning of the title that they are telling me something I already knew (fun fact, that was also what I had to say when the House Intel Committee released their report back in April) is because I KNEW FULL WELL THERE WAS NO COLLUSION!
 
You don’t even have to be a lawyer or an investigator to figure this out. You just need to read the atmosphere within the Left and the media – that they want to get Trump if it’s the last thing they do – and understand the nature of how leaks work, particularly considering how the Steele dossier and Comey telling Trump about the dossier was leaked so easily by/to the media (because Comey gave it to them). If any investigation into Trump actually found anything relating to Trump and Russia, they would talk about it. How else do you think we got to learn about Veselnitskaya? Or just about anything else? Whatever can be found about Trump and Russia is sent out into the media as fast as it is learned (which is also why there are so many gaffes, like dates on e-mails being wrong). So if there was any conclusive evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, we would’ve heard about it immediately.
 
But after two years of looking into nothing, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation is finally wrapping up, with Mueller’s investigation also perhaps coming to a close in the near future, at least according to NBC News.
 
Personally, I don’t think Mueller will close it any time soon. The Left has/had high hopes for it and if it finds nothing of substance, Mueller could be getting the Seth Rich treatment. And I’m only half-joking about that.
 
In any case, despite the two-year-long witch hunt into Trump that will not likely fully end any time soon because Democrats are vindictive s.o.b.’s, Trump’s approval rating currently sits at a near all-time high of 52%, according to Rasmussen, with 55% being his all-time high, back just a little after Trump’s inauguration.
 
So even after two years of lies and deceit and hateful rhetoric from the media, his approval rating is only holding strong and growing.
 
If things keep going like this, Democrats will have the fight of their lives in 2020, especially if they continue down the road of the idiotic Green New Deal.
 
Proverbs 28:5
“Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely.”
 
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!

There is a very good reason I have ceased calling people who work in the media, at least mainstream media, “journalists”. A journalist is someone who digs into issues, asks tough but fair questions, and looks for the objective truth. They can be wrong, but they were looking for truth. People who work in the mainstream media, in this day and age, don’t look for the truth. They look to fabricate it.
                                                                    
So, when anyone from an MSM source writes an opinion piece about Trump that is neither overly critical of him nor overly supportive of him (I admit to doing the latter pretty much all of the time), it is seen as a breath of fresh air.
 
Grady Means wrote such an article on the San Francisco Chronicle. Now, while it’s not CNN, the NYT and other major MSM sources, given this is coming from the city where the phrase “full of crap” is taken literally, it makes sense to make certain presumptions about this California-based news source.
 
His article, titled “In defense of Trump’s foreign policy” notes the interesting way the POTUS goes about dealing with other nations in comparison to his predecessors (particularly Obama) and what results such dealings bring about to the security of not just the United States, but perhaps even the rest of the world.
 
In his second paragraph, he makes it known that he is not an apologist for Trump; that he did not vote for Trump nor Hillary. He notes: “I didn’t and still don’t think he has a firm grasp of history and global issues, and so I have no dog in this fight…”
 
So it is clear that Grady is not exactly a Trump supporter, but he is not a Leftist whacko either and can recognize good work when he sees it, even if it derives from questionably confusing tactics.
 
Grady writes: “As opposed to his immediate predecessors, he has not gotten us into a huge catastrophe in Iraq (in fact, he has not gotten us into any big shooting war). He has not gone on an embarrassing global apology tour to autocratic Muslim countries who treat women like dirt. He has not telegraphed our moves in Afghanistan and Iraq, emboldening our enemy and leading to loss of American lives. And, for the moment, he has stopped nuclear and missile expansion in North Korea as opposed to Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, who all claimed to have stopped North Korea’s nuclear program. Not to ‘conflate’, but he is way ahead of his more articulate predecessors on many counts – the ones that actually count.”
 
Clearly, we can see Grady had some issues with the way Obama particularly dealt with foreign policy. That paragraph leads me to believe he is not a Leftist, seeing as pretty much all Leftists saw Obama’s apology tour not as embarrassing or degrading but as justice for decades of “stealing” and “cheating” from other countries.
 
Then, Grady makes the point that he is not entirely certain what Trump is thinking most of the time. “So what is Trump’s foreign policy? It appears to have something to do with positioning and making deals, although we would need to use IBM’s Watson computer running a million variations of game theory to fully understand his logic and approach. But that does not make it wrong. It just makes it confusing.”
 
He then details the way Trump treats Putin and Xi Jinping, the leaders of America’s two most notable enemies. He, in person, flatters them to no end and strokes their egos, calling them “good guys” and saying he trusts them in front of cameras.
 
Part of the reason the Left believes Trump is a traitor or a Russian spy is due to how he treats Putin and Xi Jinping in person. But they always leave out what Trump does in his policy, which is actually against the interests of Russia and China.
 
Grady notes that Trump’s actions seemingly contradict his personal words of flattery for the rival nations. One moment, Trump is stroking their egos, and the next, “he dramatically expands the defense budget (aimed at China and Russia), takes the advice of the command leadership to streamline military response and effectiveness, moves a good portion of the Pacific fleet to the coast of China and North Korea, and directly challenges China over the islands in the South China Sea. He TWICE draws a red line on chemical weapons in Syria and enforces it (as opposed to his feckless predecessor) with cruise missile attacks, and then attacks and kills Syrian and Russian forces committing genocide. He provides lethal weapons to Ukraine to fight Russians, creates a better balance between the Shiite and Sunni forces in the Middle East, re-strengthens our alliance with Israel, starts a mini trade skirmish with China to force a needed discussion on intellectual property theft that his predecessors were afraid to have, refocuses foreign policy on Asia and firms up the alliance with Japan.”
 
Grady goes on and on, listing off Trump’s foreign policy achievements such as expanding our energy resources by dealing with Saudi Arabia, “kicking NATO and EU leadership (which led his predecessors around by the nose) in the rear for their historically cynical and mercantilist policies, expands NATO funding and strengthens it significantly,” strengthening our cyberwarfare systems and strengthening the U.S. economy, which is a crucial factor in any dealings, with the strengthening of the value of the dollar.
 
Then, Grady openly admits: “I have no idea what the guy is thinking.”
 
That’s fine, but I would like to try my hand at explaining the Don’s logic. I think Trump, above other things, wants to remain unpredictable. Creating confusion is a part of remaining unpredictable. What I believe he intends to do is to make a deal every single time he meets with someone. He’s not going to meet with world leaders just to get a photo-op. His mission is to make a deal with them. Granted, that’s what world leaders tend to do anyway, but given that he wrote the book on making deals, he sees it as his number one priority above all else for the duration of the meeting.
 
And in these meetings, as I have said in his defense of the Helsinki meeting, he does not want to antagonize the opposing party. He would do the same with the Democrats if they were not so stuck up as to deny to give him anything he wants and then whine when he does things they don’t like. When he meets actual world leaders, he looks to make a deal because he feels that he really can. Frankly, we’ve seen everyone from Emmanuel Macron to Vladimir Putin to even Kim Jong-un be friendlier with Trump than the Democrats have.
 
The way Trump thinks is this: “I can be your best friend or your worst enemy”. In personal meetings, he does his best to be friendly unless he is attacked for no reason. He meets with our supposed “allies” in NATO and the EU and treats them the same way they have been treating us for ages: poorly. Then, he goes to our enemies and treats them nicely. He is sending our “allies” a message that he can find other allies apart from them. That he can befriend others and treat them well. That they have not been fair with the U.S. and he’s not taking crap from them.
 
He could easily be Europe’s greatest ally if they were making fair deals with us.
 
And at the end of the day, Trump, knowing that Russia and China are still our greatest rivals, enacts policy and actions that go against their best interests. That still stand up for American interests and for world interests.
 
It may be confusing, considering we likely have not seen any other President before him deal with foreign powers, enemies and allies alike, in the way that he does (I say likely because I can only realistically compare Trump to Obama and don’t know how the previous Presidents after our period of isolationism dealt with foreign powers).
 
However confusing it may be, it’s working like a charm. Iran, despite their threats and being “unimpressed” with Trump’s all-caps tweet against them, is crumbling with their currency imploding on them and their people visibly ticked off at the leadership. North Korea has recently been dismantling key launching facilities because of the June 12 summit. ISIS has been almost entirely wiped out, with no large terrorist attacks having occurred in America since Halloween of last year (there have been some smaller ones, but nothing ISIS can claim responsibility for).
 
So with all of these major threats to our nation either being destroyed (ISIS), denuclearized or defunded and on the brink of collapse, even Grady has to admit: “… I feel a lot safer today than I did under his past predecessors.”
 
In the span of less than two years, Donald Trump has destroyed the “JV” team, reached a deal to get North Korea to denuclearize and stopped funding the terror-sponsor that is Iran’s nuclear capabilities (though I fear Obama has done too much damage here).
 
Our biggest foreign threats, at this point, are horrendous tariffs from other nations imposed on American products, but that is being taken care of with a trade war that we are in prime position of winning, given our strong and improving economy.
 
Grady’s article overall is a breath of fresh air regarding coverage of Trump. Usually, people are either overly critical of him (on both sides, for some reason) or overly supportive of him (I do this largely because he does a lot of great things for this country that heavily outweigh any “character flaws” he may have and sins of the past such as Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal).
 
It is hard to find honest coverage of a sitting President, especially in today’s world of rhetoric and narrative over objective truth.
 
Proverbs 2:9
“Then you will understand righteousness and justice and equity, every good path;”

Recently, it seems as though a firestorm has been occurring in the country and seems as though most of America thought Trump did a poor or horrendous job in Helsinki some days ago in a meeting with Putin.
 
However, as usual, that seeming outrage across the country is anything but.
 
A new Axios/Survey Monkey poll (not necessarily an MSM source, but they are Millennials) shows that, of 2,100 total adults surveyed, 58% disapproved of “the way Trump handled his press conference with Putin”, with 40% approving.
 
Yes, that is a massive gap, but here’s the thing: 79% of Republicans say they APPROVED of Trump’s handling of Putin while 91% of Democrats and 68% of Independents disapproved. When it comes to Democrats, if it involves Trump unless he’s not specifically mentioned, they disapprove of his job. The Independent number is the only one that is remotely concerning, but not for the long-term, as this will easily blow over in a week or so and the country will get back to focusing on great jobs numbers, the booming economy, and all the other things that make the touted Blue Wave evaporate into mist.
 
The poll then goes on to talk about Russia in general, as well as Russian interference.
 
“Americans are split on whether the allegations of Russian interference are a serious issue (50%) or a distraction (47%). This breaks cleanly along party lines, with 85 percent of Republicans seeing it as a distraction and 85 percent of Democrats seeing it as a serious issue. Among Independents, 56 percent see it as a serious issue.”
 
As I sometimes do, I myself shall answer this poll question. I align myself with the 85% of Republicans who see this is as a distraction. Why? Because that’s precisely what it is. That’s precisely what the Mueller investigation is: a distraction. A distraction from the collusion that happened between the Clinton campaign and Obama DOJ. A distraction from the fact that there WAS collusion in the elections between a major political party and what was supposed to be an unbiased branch of government to rig an election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
 
A distraction from the fact that there was more illegal immigrant interference in the election than Russian interference. That there were more votes for Hillary than were counted in Michigan. That there was voter fraud taking place wherever the Left saw fit to do it without getting caught.
 
Regardless, Axios continues: “More than half of Americans (55%) don’t trust the Trump administration to take steps to prevent foreign interference in November’s midterms.”
 
Of course, I would say that I do trust the Trump administration to ensure this. What I don’t trust is the Democrats taking steps from preventing illegal immigrant foreign interference in November’s midterms, particularly in San Francisco.
 
Now, the interesting thing is that Gallup also had a poll recently (granted, taken before the July 16 press conference) which shows statistically no one cares about the “Situation with Russia”.
 
In the poll, when asked “what do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?”, people responded with illegal immigration, dissatisfaction with the government, racism, unifying the country and lack of respect for others as the top 5. The topic “Situation with Russia” received an asterisk next to it, signifying that not enough poll-takers chose that answer to statistically determine its importance.
 
Now, again, this was before the press conference, but considering everything else going on right now, as well as the fact that it’s mostly the media, the deep state and a slew of Never Trumpers who are against Trump on this, I would say that perhaps there would be a shift of 2 or 3% of people caring. The media, as I’ve shared before, is largely untrusted and the deep state and Never Trumpers have always had it out for Trump, so it’s not surprising.
 
With all of this said, I don’t blame anyone for believing Trump is not strong with Putin. Without the evidence to show us that he is, anyone can believe that Trump is dealing with Putin in the same way that Obama and George W. Bush did.
 
However, it is always important to know the facts.
 
Breitbart News provides a list of 7 ways Trump has been tough on Russia since his presidency began.
 
First, they mention the sanctions made against Russia.
 
“The Trump administration imposed several rounds of tough sanctions against Russian individuals and entities over the past two years. The sanctions announced in March and June of 2018 were explicitly in response to Russian cyberwarfare, which somewhat perplexed media organizations comfortable with the storyline that Trump does not care about hackers and had to be restrained by Congress from lifting every sanction against Russia.”
 
“Quite a few of the persons and operations targeted by Trump administration sanctions were directly linked to the 2016 ‘election meddling’ case. Others were sanctioned over Russia’s actions in Ukraine and Crimea, and for helping Iran and North Korea evade sanctions against them.”
 
Then, the article notes Russian diplomats and intelligence officers being expelled from the country.
 
“Another action Trump voiced reservations about but proceeded with anyway was the shuttering of the Russian consulate in Seattle in March, along with the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomatic personnel and intelligence officers.”
 
The article also mentions cybersecurity, with the Trump administration banning the use of software from Kaspersky Labs, a Russian cybersecurity giant back in December of 2017; enforcing arms control violations, meaning the Trump administration punishing Russian companies for helping the Kremlin create a cruise missile that violates Cold War arms control treaties; selling weapons to Ukraine to help them combat Russian aggression; enforcing the “red line” in Syria with his strike against Bashar Assad as punishment for his use of chemical weapons against his own people; and finally, Trump approving pre-summit indictments of the 12 Russians charged against meddling in the 2016 election.
 
Yes, the President was made aware of the charges before the summit, which isn’t really surprising, considering it’s his DOJ that is announcing the charges. Trust me, Trump doesn’t get to learn about this from “reading the newspaper” like a certain lying former commander-in-chief.
 
The Breitbart article goes into more detail, but it’s clear that, regardless of what Trump actually says about some of these things, or even about Putin and Russia themselves, Trump is actually pretty tough on Russia in his deeds.
 
At the end of the day, that is what ultimately matters. Results over rhetoric. And as I said before, I understand why Trump wants to appear like he’s buddy-buddy with Putin. He’s a deal-maker. He flatters people when he feels it’s necessary and is tough on people when actually necessary.
 
So at the end of the day, I completely understand why Republicans largely approve of Trump’s handling of the press conference while Democrats and Independents largely disapproved. I’m not saying that all of the Republicans were well-informed on Trump’s actions against Russia, but that serves as one explanation for a good number of them.
 
Not to mention that Trump is innumerably better than anything the Democrats or GOP Establishment offer in a presidential candidate.
 
Proverbs 11:14
“Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in abundance of counselors there is safety.”

Earlier this week, President Trump held a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in which members of the media and Democrat Party, for some reason, expected him to address the Russian meddling into U.S. elections following the indictment of 13 Russian entities by the Mueller investigation. (Now I understand the reason for bringing up these charges again: to cause the firestorm we’re seeing).
 
And because he did not address the issue, even going so far as to say he trusts Putin more than U.S. intelligence, he is being attacked and berated by people on both sides of the aisle.
 
The media is calling his meeting “disgraceful”, John Brennan is calling it “treason” and more than “high crimes and misdemeanors”, RINOs are joining the Left once again in attacking Trump and even conservative figures such as Ben Shapiro, Newt Gingrich, and others have said it was a disgraceful meeting.
 
However, I see it entirely differently. Trump did what was best for his presidency in the long-term, even if it draws criticism and ire in the short-term. To even admit or give credence to the Mueller investigation means to give an inch to the opposition. That’s something you never do.
 
If you give an inch to the Left, they will take a mile. If Trump mentions, at least on camera, to Putin that they meddled in the elections and will be punished for it, not only does that tick off Putin, which is not the aim of Trump, but it gives legitimacy to the insane witch-hunt.
 
But there’s one thing that really needs to be said, regardless of your political leanings: while there was Russian ENTITIES meddling in the election, we have not seen any sort of Trump-Russia collusion, we have not seen Russia actually hacking anything (in regards to the DNC servers, it was Podesta’s fault for being stupid enough to fall for one of the most obvious scams on the internet), and we have not seen any vote, popular or electoral, be affected by this meddling.
 
The outcome of the election was not affected by this case, as even Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein has said TWICE now.
 
But Trump has absolutely no reason to back the same intelligence agencies that have worked and conspired to keep him out of office since his nomination, perhaps even longer. He has no reason to support traitors in the Deep State who literally make up dossiers of urinating hookers to destroy him.

In my mind, the only thing he did wrong was saying he trusts Putin more than U.S. Intelligence. While the Intelligence community is not to be trusted, Putin is a dictatorial gangster who has literally killed his opposition. He runs sham elections and strongly intends to take back the now-sovereign nations who were once part of the Soviet Union.
 
Putin would love nothing more than to see a destabilized America. The Deep State and the Left are in the same boat. The difference is that Putin goes as far as to kill and imprison his opposition on the regular. I’m not defending the Deep State by any means, but I would be naïve to say that Putin is any better.
 
That being said, I understand why Trump said what he said. Trump is a negotiator. A deal-maker. You don’t make mutually-beneficial deals by antagonizing the other party. Trump was not going to publicly berate and try to embarrass Putin by calling out meddling that had nothing to do with the Kremlin, as far as we know, and that ultimately did nothing to change the outcome of the election.
 
Trump is a man who tends to treat people the way he wants to be treated. Unless you publicly attack and berate him, Trump can be your absolute best and most loyal friend. Putin, so far, has treated Trump far, FAR better than people within OUR OWN GOVERNMENT have.
 
As for the people that attack Trump for this, and I mean people who call themselves conservatives, I cannot honestly understand their rhetoric here. Take, for example, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro. Even Ben has called this meeting “disgraceful”.
 
What he calls disgraceful was Trump calling out U.S. Intelligence’s hand in the deterioration of U.S.-Russia relations and saying he supported Putin’s claim that he did not meddle in the elections, saying: “I have confidence in both parties.”
 
Ben Shapiro responded by saying: “Both parties. One party being a murderous dictator, and the other the intelligence community that works for him.”
 
He is only half right in this instance. Yes, Putin is a murderous dictator, as I have said earlier, but the intelligence community does not work for Trump. It’s SUPPOSED to work for him, but it doesn’t. If it did, it would not be working 24/7 to try to undermine and destroy him. And let’s not forget that it’s not just his own intelligence community that he’s talking about here.
 
Do you know what Trump’s intelligence community is? Obama’s intelligence community. The same one that tried to keep Trump from becoming President. Again, why would he support a treasonous community like that?
 
But do you really want to know what is interesting about all of this. Aside from people like Ben Shapiro and other conservatives, it seems that the Democrat and Republican Parties, as well as the media seem to care more about what Trump did or did not say instead of what PETER STRZOK, LISA PAGE, AND THE FBI TRIED TO DO IN THE ELECTIONS!
 
People like Paul Ryan, Jeff Flake, John McCain, and other establishment RINOs are more outraged at this subjectively “bad” meeting than they were at Peter Strzok’s narcissistic cockiness in his House hearing. The guy threatened to “stop Trump”, refused to turn over crucial evidence for HIS OWN HEARING, worked in the Clinton email case and the Mueller investigation. But what did we hear from the GOP Establishment? Crickets.
 
And now they say Trump was the disgraceful one? Thanks for reminding me how strongly I heavily dislike these people.
 
Then again, it’s not really surprising. What was surprising was conservatives turning on Trump for this. No, I don’t like Putin either and no, I don’t consider him an ally to the U.S., but the U.S. Intelligence community has done EVERYTHING to make me dislike and distrust them. And Trump must think the same.
 
Supporting the Intelligence community over another country does not make you a patriot if that intelligence community is as rotten and corrupt as it is. Heck, supporting the government altogether, regardless of who is in power, does not make you a patriot. Supporting your country does. Supporting your troops does. Supporting your fellow Americans does.
 
This attack against Trump, at least from fellow conservatives, is simply asinine. Trump did what he thought was the best thing to do. Now, he has also backtracked on some things, particularly in regards to the intelligence agencies saying he has "full faith and support" in them and accepts their conclusions on Russian meddling in the election.

However, the point remains that no one can honestly blame him for being distrustful of the intelligence communities. Like I said, trusting Putin over them is questionable, but the intelligence community has lost many people's trust in the past few years. You can't trust either.

And let's not forget that the biggest part of all this comes from the DNC servers, which we do not know if Russians actually hacked them since the Democrat Party refused to turn the servers over to the FBI and the FBI was just fine with it.
 
But with what Trump did, all that would really come of this is people being ticked off at him, as we've seen. The Left is always ticked off at him, so who cares about that? But even the conservatives who are ticked off at him will eventually let go of that anger because they are not emotionally-disturbed liberal crybabies.
 
They know Trump has been a fantastic President so far and won’t push for impeachment if he ticks them off on occasion. But as for the Deep State and the media, they will always want to impeach Trump. The important thing to consider is that Republicans have to at least have some quasi-legitimate reason for it, which they so far do not have, even with today's backtracking of Trump's words.

Like I said, we have not seen evidence suggesting a single vote was affected in the election and that's all the meddling we have actually seen. Otherwise, the DNC server hack is merely speculation from the Left, as is collusion and everything else.
 
Overall, while his meeting with Putin was not something that I could say is groundbreaking or helps our relations with Russia all too much, I will say that it was not the apocalyptic and treasonous meeting people might say it is. Actually, I would say it was quite the opposite. I think it was a pretty good meeting. What with Putin and Trump both mocking the collusion narrative and Trump pointing back at the DNC’s servers, I would say it was not a bad meeting at all.
 
But even if the meeting was just fine, I would not be willing to throw Trump under the bus for it. And I do not think he has a darn thing to apologize for, even if he is backtracking on certain things.

The overall point is that the Intelligence community is not to be trusted in certain matters (not necessarily for absolutely everything). I don't blame Trump for wanting to backtrack on his trust of them. He should try to refocus the attention on the DNC server.. But the fact remains that the Intelligence community is rotten and corrupt and only marginally better than Putin when it comes to trustworthiness.
 
1 John 4:1
“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

When did the news media become a complete circus? When did they start publishing and writing stories that are so incredible only people who are equally insane can believe them? Because this is what is happening in today’s media. They’ve long ceased to be journalists. They’ve become not only propagandists, but even conspiracy theorists to rival Jesse Ventura.
 
Eric Garland, a writer for The Atlantic, sent out a series of tweets that showcase how far off the deep end he has gone.
 
Replying to a tweet by someone else about Kanye West appearing on Alex Jones’ InfoWars show, Garland said: “Both are witting (or, implausibly, unwitting) at least assets of Russian intelligence, be it through Roger Stone (likely Jones’ case) or other corrupt elements.”
 
No evidence necessary in the Left’s world of lunacy. Just come up with a claim that other Leftists would run with and your job is done. Of course, that is not the only insane tweet he sent out.
 
Further replying to that tweet, he continued: “Kanye’s recent coordinations with Trump, along with his use of inflammatory rhetoric and symbols (Confederate Flag) reek of ‘provokatsiya’.”
 
For those who are not fixated enough about Russia to have learned some Russian terms just to “make” a point, provokatsiya means “taking control of your enemies in secret and encouraging them to do things that discredit them and help you.”
 
In other words, Trump’s essentially brainwashing West into supporting him. Which is ridiculous, as it’s been 2 years since the election and 3 or so years since Trump decided to run for President and became a big deal in politics. If Trump had the magic power to do that, why West? And why now? Why not “brainwash” the news media as well? Why not “brainwash” every delegate so he would win all states? Why not “brainwash” every American into supporting him? If he could do that to West, why wouldn’t he do that to some of his biggest enemies in Hollywood such as Jim Carrey, Robert DeNiro, Kathy Griffin and the rest?
 
And if he wanted to “brainwash” black celebrities so more black people would support him (which, according to a Reuters poll, his support among black men has doubled since West’s enlightenment), why start or stop at Kanye? Why not Jay-Z, who is another celebrity enemy of Trump? Why not Beyonce, who is widely loved and, usually, less controversial than West?
 
But Garland is not done. This is, by far, my favorite tweet: “Call this conspiracy theory if you dare: you ain’t got a better explanation than this, and my sources tell me this is going to come out. So see you in a year. We’ll circle back.” And to top it off, he ends that tweet with an emoji, just to further prove his “credibility”.
 
Ok, I shall dare to call it a conspiracy theory. Ready? Here it goes. Ahem. It’s a conspiracy theory. I know, that’s crazy, right? This Leftist is providing no evidence and I dare call his brilliant hypothesis a conspiracy theory?
 
Ok, seriously, this guy’s a moron. It’s a conspiracy theory as the only “evidence” he provides is that West met with Trump after the election (shocking, right? A celebrity of high standing meeting with the newly-elected President?) and that he went to Russia a week later.
 
His theory is that West met with Putin and either was abducted, a chip was implanted into his brain that would trigger support for Trump at some random day in April in a couple of years (because logic), or he was put though a Call of Duty: Black Ops-type brainwashing method and he sees numbers on occasion. (Props to you if you understood that reference).
 
What was West actually doing in Russia? Meeting with a Russian fashion designer to get inspiration for a new line of Yeezy (West’s clothing brand) apparel.
 
So West met with Trump after the election (a lot of people did), and went to Russia to meet with a Russian fashion designer and the Left shouts collusion. Makes sense if you happen to live in the psychiatric hospital from One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest.
 
But I love that he dares people to call it a conspiracy theory as though it is surrounded in facts. And yes, I do have a better explanation than his. It’s called LEARNING THE TRUTH!
 
For ages, the Left has kept a hold on black people. Either through physical or mental chains, the Left has always OWNED black people to one extent or the other. West decided to unshackle himself from his slave master’s chains and decided to become free in thought. He has been thinking about the way black people have been treated by the Democrats, something that he was previously not allowed to do, and has learned the truth.
 
Maxine Waters’ comments about him speaking out of turn are evidence enough of the mental chokehold Democrats have on African-Americans.
 
Kanye West has been learning the truth. That explanation is a million times more logical and truthful than the malarkey Garland is spewing.
 
By the way, I just love that Russia is the Left’s scapegoat to explain things. What I mean is that, if something isn’t to their liking, such as West learning the truth about the Democrat Party, the Left can simply shout “Russia” to make themselves feel better. Russia has become their safety blanket in dealing with the fact that the Left was utterly rejected in 2016 and continues to be largely rejected today, particularly seeing the great things Trump has managed to accomplish despite the Democrats’ obstruction and distraction efforts.
 
They can’t deal with the fact that Kanye West is now free from their chains, so they blame Russia. To quote Harriet Tubman, “Now I’ve been free, I know what a dreadful condition slavery is. I have seen hundreds of escaped slaves, but I never saw one who was willing to go back and be a slave.”
 
West is now free and there is no chance he will return to the Left’s slave plantation of thought willingly. And the Left simply can’t deal with that because they are highly-emotional and volatile children.
 
John 8:32
“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

If you’ve been paying attention to the news, whether they’re real or fake news, you know very well that there is no evidence to support the claim that Trump colluded with Russia to cheat in the 2016 election. Despite the fact that the fake news media keeps saying: “there’s mountains of evidence” against Trump regarding collusion, there is, in fact, no evidence of collusion. Even a little bit of evidence.
 
Else, don’t you think Mueller would’ve already issued charges against Trump directly? Don’t you think Congress would’ve already voted to impeach Trump?
 
There is no evidence of collusion because THERE WAS NO COLLUSION! This much, anyone with some skill in rational thinking can conclude. Still, the House Intel Committee had to also look into these accusations, and on Friday, released a report declaring the panel had not found any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
 
Officially, the 253-page report says that the committee “found no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded, coordinated, or conspired with the Russian government.”
 
The report also said that both campaigns demonstrated “poor judgment and ill-considered actions”.
 
About Trump, the committee cited a meeting that took place in June of 2016 between officials in the Trump campaign and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who “falsely purported to have damaging information on the Clinton campaign.”
 
About Clinton, the committee found “that the Clinton campaign and the DNC, using a series of cutouts and intermediaries to obscure their roles, paid for opposition research on Trump obtained from Russian sources, including a litany of claims by high-ranking current and former Russian government officials. Some of this opposition research was used to produce sixteen memos, which comprise what has become known as the Steele dossier.”
 
Now, these are all things that you and I have known for quite some time. Regardless, it’s still important to point out (crucial, in fact), particularly since the information we know we didn't get thanks to the MSM. The MSM has been trying to bury these facts and information, since they show far more evidence of Clinton-Russia collusion than Trump-Russia collusion. So chances are that most of their viewers don’t know about the malarkey that is the Steele dossier and the payment from the Hillary campaign to put that dossier together.
 
Chances are that we know far more about what Fusion GPS is than a regular CNN or MSNBC viewer. The fake news media hardly, if ever, talks about Fusion GPS. When talking about the Russian collusion, they will talk about nearly anything else aside from that. And when they talk about the Steele dossier, they focus on the ridiculous little story of Trump hiring prostitutes to urinate on the Obamas’ bed in a hotel in Russia.
 
Despite how stupid and unbelievable that story is, they still prefer to run it, despite the fact that the Steele dossier has been all but publicly confirmed to be false… even then, conservative media tries its best to publicly confirm it.
 
And this report is even more substantial because of Trump’s reaction to it. On Twitter, the President tweeted: “Just Out: House Intelligence Committee Report released. ‘No evidence’ that the Trump Campaign ‘colluded, coordinated, or conspired with Russia.’ Clinton Campaign paid for Opposition Research obtained from Russia – Wow! A total Witch Hunt! MUST END NOW!”
 
The reason it’s more substantial is because this also is brought to the attention of other typical viewers of the MSM. Liberals, as well as conservatives, follow Trump on Twitter. I’ve seen liberals reply to Trump’s tweets time and time again. Regardless of what they are saying (which is usually untrue and misinformed, or a simple joke), the President does have these liberals’ attention.
 
Now, I don’t doubt that liberals will deny or not believe what he is saying, but the information is being brought to the table. That thought is now in every person that has read that tweet’s heads.
 
I can’t imagine the MSM bringing this sort of discussion to light for all too long. Heck, even a simple search in the New York Times’ website for “Fusion GPS” takes us to a story, at the near top of the page, about discrediting the attack against Fusion GPS, titled “The Republicans’ Fake Investigations”. Do you want to know who wrote the story? Glenn R. Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS – the opposition research firm that hired Steele to write up the dossier.
 
All I hear from that article is “I am not a crook!” Does the very founder of Fusion GPS, someone who worked alongside the Clinton campaign to create the Steel dossier, really expect me to believe anything he says to defend the Russia investigation and his own firm? His article’s literal subtitle reads: “The attack on our firm, Fusion GPS, is a diversionary tactic by Republicans who don’t want to investigate Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.”
 
Really? So the fact that the Clinton campaign used you guys to create that dossier is a diversion and entirely irrelevant? Aha, yeah, ok.
 
Let me remind you what a dossier is: “a collection of documents about a particular person, event, or subject.” That is literally the definition you would get if you were to Google: “dossier definition”. It doesn’t get any more bare-bones than that.
 
Now, do you know what that definition means? “A collection of documents…” In other words, a collection of EVIDENCE OR FACTS about someone or something!
 
The dossier was presented to the FISA courts to issue the warrants to spy on American citizen Carter Page. Beyond that, the dossier is the entire basis for Mueller’s Special Counsel Investigation into Russian collusion, which at this point has devolved into literally any sin Trump has ever committed since he was born.
 
Like I said, the dossier has all but been publicly proven to be false, but all of this information already points to that conclusion. It’s all actual evidence of it.
 
Again, there is more evidence of Clinton-Russia collusion than there is Trump-Russia collusion. I don’t know how many people still believe the dossier to be true, but there are bound to be some low-information people who do. This report, alongside Trump’s reaction on Twitter, will at least bring this discussion to people’s minds, regardless of whether they believe it or not.
 
But even having the thought of it in their minds is a good first step. All that is necessary is to provide them with the facts and information necessary to prove what we already know for a fact.
 
Trump did not collude with Russia to win the election. Hillary did, and she still lost.
 
Proverbs 2:10
“For wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul.”