While I tend not to look at too many polls to gauge a candidate’s favorability or people’s views on a certain issue, one poll conducted by YouGov, a market research and data analytics firm, caught my eye with some of the results on the issue of illegal immigration.
 
The poll was conducted just a few days ago and it polled 1,500 U.S. adults. The poll found that only 19% of those polled favored “releasing the families and having them report back for an immigration hearing at a later date.”
 
In other words, only 19% of those polled favored the Obama-era policy of “catch and release”.
 
According to the Daily Wire: “Even among Democrats, only 30% liked the idea, while 33% of Hillary Clinton voters and 36% of self-described ‘liberals’ favored it. Among Independents, just 17% were in favor of catch and release, as were just 16% of moderates. Among Republicans, only 7% backed it, as did only 7% of conservatives and 4% of Trump supporters.”


This tells me something in particular: people didn’t actually like what Obama’s policies were, they just liked them because they were Obama’s. Similarly, I’ve noticed on occasion that when people are asked what they think of a policy enacted by Trump, but were not told it was Trump’s, people tended to favor said policy (of course, depending on what the policy was).
 
“Catch and Release” is entirely synonymous with Obama and is revered by the fake news media as the policy we should be using (that is until they start heavily demanding open borders, as they might in the coming days and weeks following the charade of “keeping families together”). But when you get down to it, most people, even Democrats, liberals and Clinton voters, do not like the idea of “catch and release”.
 
The poll provided four particular policies regarding illegal immigration: “catch and release”, “holding families together in detention centers until an immigration hearing at a later date” (which seems to be the one the Trump administration is leaning towards), “arresting the adults, sending them to jail to await a criminal trial and sending any minor children to shelters run by the Department of Health” (the administration’s previous approach), and “arresting both the adults and minor children, sending the adults to jail and the minor children to juvenile detention centers to await a criminal trial”.
 
I already mentioned “catch and release” and the results of that poll, but the other ones are quite interesting as well.
 
In regards to “holding families together in detention centers until an immigration hearing at a later date”, this method proved to be the most popular among polltakers, with a total of 44% backing the idea, 49% of Democrats, 39% of Independents, 47% of Republicans, as well as 53% of Clinton voters, 44% of Trump voters, 48% of liberals, 51% of moderates and 43% of conservatives.
 
Personally, I agree with this idea. The separation of families is a very bad thing, which is why I bash Obama, Bush and especially Clinton over this since this began in 1997 after the Flores case, as I mentioned in my previous article.
 
Of course, I can’t say I’m surprised at the amount of Democrat voters who support this idea. It’s a little more humane (though the media will certainly try to make it seem just as inhumane as separating families so they can push for open borders and amnesty) and Democrat voters tend to be fooled into thinking Democrats care about anyone other than themselves. But this idea overall seems better than the previous approach. Not to mention that Trump’s EO exposes the Left as frauds since they will say it’s not enough and will push for no prosecution and detainment at all, which exposes this as not being about the kids, but about open borders.
 
Stupidly enough, the Left believes they can win on the key issue that got Trump elected in the first place and it’s the reason I believe Trump’s EO is the best move to expose the fraudulent Left on this issue.
 
Regarding Trump’s previous approach of “arresting the adults, sending them to jail to await a criminal trial and sending any minor children to shelters run by the Department of Health”, that proved to be less popular than even “catch and release”. Of the people polled, only 12% supported the idea, with 5% of Democrats supporting it, 12% of Independents, 22% of Republicans, 3% of Clinton voters, 27% of Trump voters, 3% of liberals, 11% of moderates and 25% of conservatives.
 
Again, not very surprised at these results. It’s not a very popular policy, at least to me, because it was used and created by Democrats. Of course, the media and Democrats try to make it seem as though it’s strictly Trump policy, and many have bought into that b.s. In a perfect world, people would recognize that this policy was created and used by the Left (yes, I’m counting Bush as part of the Left) and bash those who created it and the ones who employed it but had the chance to end it.
 
Like I said, Obama had the best chance to do this in 2009 when the Democrats owned Congress and the White House. And don’t tell me that that is only 2 years of majority. That is not a good enough excuse. Trump has been in power for less than 2 years and look at what he’s accomplished so far. And that is with a Republican Party that has been UNCOOPERATIVE for much of it and a Democrat Party that has been OBSTRUCTING everything they possibly could. Obama, with total control of Congress, could’ve done far more damage than he actually did. We must thank the good Lord that he wasn’t as effective as Trump is.
 
Let’s finally move on to the final policy on the poll: “arresting both the adults and minor children, sending the adults to jail and the minor children to juvenile detention centers to await a criminal trial”. Unsurprisingly, only 8% supported this idea, with 2% of Democrats, 7% of Independents, 16% of Republicans, 2% of Clinton voters, 15% of Trump voters, 2% of liberals, 6% of moderates, and 15% of conservatives.
 
Personally, I also disagree with that idea. It simply seems like too much, particularly for minors. While there very well could be some minors who are close to 18 years old, most are younger children who are dragged to these places by their parents (for some reason) so sending them to juvie over something they really had no control over is a little harsh.
 
Now, I can also understand the reasoning behind some conservatives on issues like these. I agree with the idea that we should take care of our own children first, our own homeless people first, our own citizens first. That is part of the reason I voted for Trump, to put America, and thus, Americans, first. Any nation that prioritizes the citizens of another country over their own citizens is a nation that is doomed to be reshaped at best and utterly destroyed at worst.
 
But it makes sense that this last method is so unpopular.
 
Now, these were not the only things tracked by the poll. Among many other things such as Trump’s handling of North Korea, people’s view on certain countries as allies or enemies and their opinions on the FBI, the poll asked “Do you think the policy of separating parents arrested for crossing the border into the United States without proper documentation from their minor children will or will not discourage immigrants from crossing the border illegally?”
 
In other words, is family separation a deterrent of illegal border crossing? A total of 34% said that it is, with 38% saying no and 28% being unsure. Personally, I don’t think it’s a deterrent whatsoever. Think of it this way: families are attempting to illegally cross the border in at least 80 degree heat on a good day, risking capture and deportation, risking separating themselves in the trip alone, risking heatstroke and dehydration (and other things that threaten their lives). If they are willing to go through that, I can’t see how being separated by the government can seem like much of a deterrent.
 
The only effective deterrent of illegal immigration is a border wall and more security. We need to make it almost entirely impossible for anyone to cross the border illegally. People might be able to climb a fence, but unless they are Spider-Man, they can’t climb a 20 to 30 ft. wall.
 
Now, looking at these results overall, it tells me that people still tend to side with Trump on immigration issues. If even Hillary voters and registered Democrats heavily disapprove of “catch and release”, what honest-to-God hope do they have to winning in the midterms? Especially on the biggest issue that got Trump elected? Pushing for amnesty and open borders didn’t work in 2016, so what makes them think it will work now? The way they see Trump isn’t the way the majority of the country sees Trump.
 
Ephesians 5:13
“But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Yesterday, I shared with you a nice story about Chris Pratt giving a good, wholesome, pro-God acceptance speech at the MTV Movie awards. Unfortunately, the Left is loud enough in their asinine outrage that they warrant some form of attention.
 
Amidst the controversy of children being separated from their “families” (unsure how many of them are simply using children to enter the country), actor Peter Fonda, Jane Fonda’s younger but equally as disturbed brother, sent out a series of disgusting tweets attacking DHS secretary Kristjen Nielsen and Donald Trump’s youngest son, Barron.
 
Why do they continually attack an 11-year-old? Because they’re bullies, that’s why.
 
The tweets he sent out are vile, so I will censor the disgusting excuse for a human being’s language.
 
Let’s begin with his attack on Barron, which has since been deleted (it’s all in caps, because he is insane and loud, but it’s annoying so I will write it out like a normal human being who hasn’t lost all his marbles): “We should rip Barron Trump from his mother’s arms and put him in a cage with pedophiles and see if mother will stand up against the giant a**hole she is married to. 90 million people in the streets on the same weekend in the country. F***.”
 
Boy, can I have a lot of fun with this tweet alone, but I don’t want to make this too long. First, this is hundreds of times worse than what Border Patrol is doing. They aren’t ripping kids from their “parents’” arms. The parents willingly leave them when seeking asylum, otherwise they get deported. Second, no one is putting these kids with Polanski- I mean pedophiles. They are taken by government workers. Third, you can’t even get 90 million people to vote for the disaster candidate that was Hillary, how can you get 90 million people to march on the streets? That would take more than the entire population of the three biggest states: California, Texas and Florida.
 
Not everyone in California is a mind-numbed Leftist. Even less people are in Texas and Florida. Getting 90 million people to march on something would be taking nearly a third of the entire country’s population. You’re not gonna get that.
 
Regardless, let’s continue with the insane actor’s tweets.
 
This one is directed at Nielsen: “Kristjen Nielsen is a lying gash that should be put in a cage and poked at by passerby. The gash should be pilloried in Lafayette Square naked and whipped by passerby while being filmed for posterity.”
 
A couple of things regarding this. First, eww. Second, Democrats don’t get to whip people anymore. They lost that right when they lost the Civil War. Third, this, among the other vile things, goes to show how twisted and demented this p.o.c. is. Lastly, this jerk made me look up the term “gash” in a vulgar sense. I won’t share it with you because I do not wish to taint your minds to the levels of this demented dude.
 
This next tweet attacks ICE agents and their families (again, in all caps to show how insane he is): “We should hack this system, get the addresses of the ICE agents, CBP agents and surround their homes in protest. We should find out what schools their children go to and surround the schools in protest. These agents are doing this cuz they want to do it. They like doing this. F***.”
 
Does he have Tourette’s or something? Why does he have to end these tweets with that profanity? He already shows his literally insane outrage, why end it with that word? Also, again, this is far worse than what ICE and Border Patrol are doing. This is stalking and harassment. And that’s best case scenario.
 
Why does the Left feel as though violence is the only solution? Why do they feel they have to shout at people to “win” their arguments? Oh, right, because they can’t fight in the realm of ideas and their collective IQ barely reaches the double digit mark. And no, I’m not talking about ALL Left-leaning people here. I don’t refer to liberals as stupid. I refer to these Leftists with some semblance of power as stupid.
 
Now, I won’t share all of his vile, disgusting tweets because I think this is enough to show how insane these people are. I’m actually running out of adjectives to describe these people and their behavior. It’s vile, disgusting, volatile, asinine, insane, ridiculous… you get the idea.
 
But do you want to know what makes this entire hysteria laughable? It’s so obvious it’s just to score political points that it hurts.
 
First, this policy is not Trump’s. He didn’t enact anything, as I’ve honestly seen someone on Twitter complain about. This isn’t Trump’s doing. This is the result of a 1997 federal government agreement on the Flores v. Sessions case and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that accompanied children could not be held in custody under the terms of the settlement. This follows the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Who was the POTUS who signed this bill into law? Bill Clinton.

Second, Chuck Schumer and the Democrats rejected a bill proposed by the GOP to fix this issue. The reason? To “keep the focus on Trump”, according to Chuck Schumer in an interview with The Hill. When presented with a piece of legislation that would effectively end their cries and would mean a longer-term solution than an Executive Order (which Trump has signed), they reject it in order to continue this cockamamie fight.
 
The truth is that Democrats couldn’t care less about children. They are the ones who want to continue funding Planned Parenthood, the world’s biggest child-killing organization. They constantly separate children from their families, and that’s honestly the nicest thing that horrible organization does. Yet, we are to believe these evil people care about these children?
 
And let’s not forget, these are the “children” of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! Not the children of people who want to enter the country legally, but the children of people who want to enter the country so bad they would use children as anchors to seek asylum. It’s these parents that are WILLINGLY separating themselves from their children.
 
As an immigrant who came to this country as a child, I can assure you that there’s no way in Hell my mother would agree to being separated from me for more than 20 days just so she could enter the country. There’s no way in Hell any good parent would do that to their children. You’ve seen the pictures of Obama’s separation of children from their parents. You’ve seen them cry. What good parent would do that to their child? To enter the country? Sure, wherever they are coming from is most likely a “s**thole” country, but no good parent would willingly separate themselves from their children just for a shot at a better life. They would stay with their children and figure out another way.
 
Wanna know why this is such a big deal? A couple of reasons. More and more people are using this method of entering the country illegally. Why? Because Trump has taken away many other options for these people. Using a child to seek “asylum” is just a new, more popular way to have a decent shot at entering the country. Not to mention the hundreds of cases in which people have fraudulently used children to enter the country, according to the Washington Examiner. In fact, “301 children who arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border with an accompanying adult from October 2017 to April 2018 were found to have no relation to the adult who posed as their parent or guardian.”
 
So people are clearly using children as a scam to enter the country.
 
Another reason this is such a big deal is because the Left has absolutely no other arrows in their quiver. With the economy roaring, ISIS basically defeated and NK agreeing to denuclearize, among many other great things, the Democrats have had nothing to sell people on. This is purely an effort to revive the long-since-dead “Blue Wave”. Not to mention this is meant to take us to “Let’s not separate families and just open the borders”.
 
Elections and open borders are all the Democrats care about here. Not the children, nor their families. If they cared at all about the children, they wouldn’t have signed this into law back in 1996. They wouldn’t have enforced this law while Obama was still President. They wouldn’t have waited until they exhausted all other options to attack Trump for.
 
They would’ve taken care of this when they had ultimate power back in 2009, or even at any point during Obama’s presidency, given that the GOP wants to put an end to this policy as well.
 
The Democrats don’t want a fix to this, they want something to fight over. They can’t win anywhere else. They can’t win with Trump’s economy kicking butt. They can’t win with unemployment numbers hitting record-lows. They can’t win with Trump making the world a little bit safer. Ironically, they will try to win with arguably the biggest issue Trump won: immigration.
 
But with Trump’s decision to sign an EO and working with the GOP to make this a more long-term thing, the Democrats won’t have much to fight over by the time November rolls around. The majority of the country still wants Trump’s agenda dictating immigration reform.
 
Now, I fully expect Paul Ryan to use the momentum of this farce of a fight to push his amnesty bill, thus hurting Republicans in November, but we’ll see what happens. Trump won’t sign an amnesty bill, that’s for sure.
 
Returning to Peter Fonda, I don’t think I need to say anything more. His disgusting psyche speaks for itself.
 
Ephesians 6:11
“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It is rare to see Hollywood celebrities, particularly massive stars, showing their faith in God to the public, but Chris Pratt is not quite like other Hollywood celebrities.
 
Aside from the obvious fact that he’s not an Atheistic liberal, Chris Pratt is not afraid to be so outspoken about his faith in the Lord. We’ve seen him tweet prayers for close friends and being an overall good guy, but this speech might flat out make him my new favorite Hollywood actor.
 
At the MTV Movie awards earlier this week, Chris Pratt was honored with the “Generation Award”. In his acceptance speech (video below), he felt compelled to give a list of tips, or as he calls them, “9 Rules From Chris Pratt”.
 
Here’s some of the list, the ones I think are the best “rules”:
 
Number 1: “Breathe. If you don’t, you’ll suffocate.”
 
Number 2: “You have a soul. Be careful with it.”
 
Number 3: “Don’t be a turd. If you’re strong, be a protector and if you’re smart, be a humble influencer. Strength and intelligence can be weapons and do not wield them against the weak. That makes you a bully. Be bigger than that.”
 
Number 5: “Doesn’t matter what it is, earn it. A good deed, reach out to someone in pain, be of service, it feels good and it’s good for your soul.”
 
Number 6: “God is real. God loves you. God wants the best for you. Believe that. I do.”
 
Number 8: “Learn to pray. It’s easy and it’s so good for your soul.”
 
Number 9: “Nobody is perfect. People are going to tell you you’re perfect just the way you are; you’re not! You are imperfect. You always will be, but there’s a powerful force that designed you that way. And if you’re willing to accept that, you will have grace and grace is a gift. Like the freedom we enjoy in this country that grace was paid for with somebody else’s blood. Do not forget it. Don’t take it for granted.”
 
Finally, he ends his speech by saying: “God bless you. Please get home safely.”
 
Let me tell you, I far prefer Chris Pratt’s acceptance speech than I did Robert De Niro’s. Not only is Pratt’s not an unnecessary and dull tirade against Trump that shows signs of insanity, but it’s also a very good and positive message.
 
Frankly, I don’t know which rule is my favorite. I certainly appreciate number 6’s bold and truthful statement about God’s existence and His unconditional love for us. It’s basic, but it’s also very much appreciated. If this were a church sermon, this would be an unnecessary proclamation. Pretty much everyone in a church is already accepting of the fact that God is real. But since this is an award ceremony with other A- and B-list celebrities, such as Chadwick Boseman and Mila Kunis, I would say that Pratt’s bold statement is a welcome change of pace for what otherwise might’ve been yet another unnecessary and alienating tirade against Trump.
 
And before a Leftist reader (not certain that there even are any here) claims that God is “alienating”, I’ll say that it’s really not. First, his proclamation isn’t bashing the beliefs of half his audience; it’s boldly professing his own. Second, Pratt’s message is about the love God has for us. That is literally the opposite of alienating.
 
This proclamation is certainly a welcome change of pace from the usual Leftist insanity that they promulgate and shove down people’s throats.
 
The other two that are in contention would have to be 8 and 9. 8, much like 6, is simple but powerful. It’s also a fantastic tip to anyone who hears it. Prayer is a fundamental part of faith in God and will honestly help a lot of people.
 
For anyone who feels left out and as though they don’t matter, prayer can help them feel and believe that there is someone in this universe that is listening. And aside from feeling good, you can also build a good relationship with God in this manner. Though He already knows what is in your heart, He delights in your prayers.
 
But number 9 seems to be the best one out of all of them. Let’s read that one more time, shall we? “Nobody is perfect. People are going to tell you you’re perfect just the way you are; you’re not! You are imperfect. You always will be, but there’s a powerful force that designed you that way. And if you’re willing to accept that you will have grace and grace is a gift…”
 
This both takes the time to give fantastic advice for people who feel they should be perfect and continues sharing the greatness of God. You are not perfect. You never will be, neither should you try to be. You were not designed to be perfect. You were designed according to His purpose. According to His plan.
 
“… Like the freedom we enjoy in this country, that grace was paid for with somebody else’s blood. Do not forget it. Don’t take it for granted.”
 
That is perhaps the most powerful part of his entire speech. Not only does he show his patriotism for his country in acknowledging that this country enjoys freedoms next to no other country enjoys and those freedoms were fought for by brave men in the past who died for the vision of a free nation and a free people, he brings it back to God and the sacrifice Christ made at the cross.
 
He died so that we may be free from sin, forgiven for those sins and that we may be given grace to enter Heaven should we repent, ask for this forgiveness and accept Christ as our Lord and Savior.
 
And yes, I suppose you could say it’s a bit blasphemous to compare the sacrifice made by men to create this nation with the sacrifice made by the Son of God to give us salvation, but I think Pratt understands the unbelievable sacrifice Christ made at the cross and wanted to also add in a bit of patriotism with a parallel that works.
 
Of course, Christ’s sacrifice is incredibly more important to far many more people. This is something we can all agree on, including the superstar actor. But it’s worth taking note of the sacrifice other people made in making this a free nation. Let’s be honest, how many other actors winning awards will take the time to note the greatness of our nation and its fortuitous freedom which many take for granted?
 
Hollywood people usually either attack the POTUS, the policy he’s enacting or employing even if it’s good for the country or has been employed by previous Presidents or flat out attack our system of government and wish for some sort of communist revolution to occur (which would not happen in a capitalist country, as dictated by history).
 
But Pratt’s acknowledgment of the sacrifice made by our Founding Fathers and the revolutionaries, as well as the immense sacrifice made by Christ on the cross is noteworthy. Like the freedoms we enjoy in this country, we should not take for granted the sacrifice and the gift that Christ has given us.
 
If left entirely up to us, it is highly unlikely we would be able to reach the Kingdom of God. In fact, let me rephrase that. It’s IMPOSSIBLE to reach the Kingdom of God without Him. Verse after verse explains well how we cannot enter Heaven on our own. So taking Christ’s sacrifice for granted would lead us nowhere desirable.
 
When people in movies and t.v. talk about someone making the ultimate sacrifice aka laying down their lives to save their friends, no other being in the history of Earth ever made a sacrifice as powerful, successful and grand as the one Christ made on the cross. A character in a movie or show may be able to save his friend or group of friends, but Christ saved all who believeth in Him. I can’t possibly claim to know a precise number, but it should be around the BILLIONS range in the roughly 2000 years since His death.
 
But returning to Pratt’s speech, I find it endearing to see a Hollywood mega star such as himself being so outspoken about his faith in God and his appreciation for this country. I think this goes to show that Pratt is the Lot to Hollywood’s Sodom. A man of faith in a wicked environment. I pray that Pratt’s faith is strong enough to withstand the wicked environment he lives in. So far, he seems to be doing well.
 
Psalm 1:1-2
“Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

George Soros knows very well that, in order to OWN America, you have to OWN the DNC. And in order to OWN the DNC you must OWN the Clintons. Please don’t forget this premise as you read on…

The IG report that was made public last week reveals a huge number of interesting evidence about the swamp – it confirms Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were biased against Trump. It confirms that ‘we’ in the FBI ‘will stop Trump’ from becoming President – and ‘we’ has to be a group of people CONSPIRING at the FBI. It confirms that then FBI director James Comey broke protocol with one end in mind: to exonerate Hillary from any crime. In doing so, Comey himself may have broken the law by adding to the law something that it doesn’t require in the Hillary case: intent. I think we can all agree that Page, Strzok, Comey, Hillary and all the rest broke the law – and our trust. These were people in positions of power who used that power to benefit themselves and a particular presidential candidate. Hillary herself was way too senior in the Obama Administration not to know that she was breaking the law when she decided to keep an illegal, unprotected server for official business.

Let’s let lady Justice deal with these actors – I have a feeling that somebody will end up in jail over all of this.

But let’s focus on Obama for a moment. We know that Obama lied when he said he learnt about the illegal server when the media reported it and not before. We know it’s a lie because the IG report says that Obama himself was using an alias to write to Hillary when she was the Secretary of State on her numerous email addresses – he, too, was using unofficial Hillary email addresses to conduct official businesses and that’s a crime. So we know that a Hillary criminal investigation would have led to Obama himself and he could not afford it. 

Now, let’s talk about the premise of the headline: Was Obama trying to OWN Hillary?

We all know that NOBODY in the Obama Administration back in 2016 thought Trump was going to win. Obama never in a million years thought he could be the target of an investigation – it’s the reason he let Hillary keep that illegal server. Nobody in the Obama Administration thought any of this would come to light.

So, with this in mind, let’s go back to the Comey press conference in October 2016 when he announced the FBI had found 30,000 new emails on the ‘Hillary matter’ that they would investigate, only to announce a couple of days later that there was no intent on the part of Hillary and therefore no ‘reasonable prosecutor’ would indict. Why would he do this, knowing that in May of that year the FBI had decided not to pursue Hillary? They knew all along Hillary was not to be touched. Why would he open and close the investigation like this in October of 2016? And why wouldn’t he just do his job and present the evidence to the DOJ?  I’ve heard analysts say it was Comey’s ego that caused him to be on the spotlight, or Hillary may have threatened him and that’s why he closed the investigation and all sorts of reasons why he chose against prosecuting her, even when he didn’t have the power to do that as FBI director.

Well, I have another theory….let me explain.

Obama had already indicated in April 2016 that 'I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America's national security,' in an interview on 'Fox News Sunday.' He added 'What I've also said is that -- and she has acknowledged -- that there's a carelessness, in terms of managing emails, that she ... recognizes.' So Comey was just following orders: Hillary was just...'careless'.

Now, if you want to OWN America, you must OWN the DNC. And Obama doesn’t own the DNC…yet. He knows this perfectly well – if he’s going to put his own friends in office, he must NEUTRALIZE the Clintons sooner rather than later. Right now, the DNC is divided – and the Clintons have way too many friends for Obama’s liking. For a long time I thought Obama would throw Hillary under the bus on this email case just to get the Clintons out of the way and become the king of the DNC. But now I think he had a better plan…

I think Obama decided that neutralizing the Clintons doesn’t necessarily mean finishing them off politically – it means keeping their skeletons in the closet and owning them personally, like mobsters do. I think Comey was trying to convey the message that, once Hillary was inaugurated, she’d have to thank Obama for her freedom and presidency. And Obama holds the key to her future. She better continue with his legacy or else…

Let’s not forget that Obama is used to Chicago politics – these people are not like you and me. They’re mobsters. And speaking of mobsters, there’s one story in The Godfather Part II that explains what may have happened here (clip at the bottom).

You see, in The Godfather II, there’s this character, Senator Pat Geary, that opposes Michael Corleone, the head of the mobster family. The Senator knows Corleone is a criminal and he wants to find ways to bring him to justice. Corleone needs politicians, law enforcement agents and senior leaders on his payroll in order to conduct his illegal business freely. And this Senator is in his way. What was Corleone’s brilliant plan? To ambush the Senator: the Corleone gangsters find a prostitute for the Senator, who they then kill but making it look like the Senator did it. The Senator had been drugged somehow and he doesn’t even remember what happened to the girl – he thinks he must have killed her, given the evidence. But the Godfather’s saviors come to the rescue and protect the Senator from public shame and jail. The end objective was to OWN the Senator, which they managed to do by PROTECTING him from being INDICTED over a CRIME.

With Hillary it’s the same – except she did commit the crime. So Obama’s objective was to OWN the next President by sending Comey to close the email case to PROTECT Hillary from being INDICTED over a CRIME.

Perhaps that’s the reason the IG didn’t find documented evidence of political bias – Comey and Obama weren’t just rooting for Hillary out of love for her. This was about WHO was going to OWN the DNC…and the country.
 
Psalm 9:7-8
'But the LORD abides forever; He has established His throne for judgment, And He will judge the world in righteousness; He will execute judgment for the peoples with equity.'

​Author: Danielle Cross

Recently, the DOJ’s Office of Inspector General report on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton e-mails investigation revealed a text message conversation between two FBI employees the day after Trump won the 2016 election.
 
Here is the exchange:
 
FBI Employee: “I’m very upset.”
FBI Employee: “haha”.
FBI Attorney 2: “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently.”
FBI Employee: “Don’t stress. None of that mattered.”
FBI Employee: “The FBI’s influence.”
FBI Attorney 2: “I don’t know. We broke the momentum.”
FBI Employee: “That is not so.”
FBI Employee: “All the people who were initially voting for her would not, and were not, swayed by any decision the FBI put out. Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing. They probably didn’t watch the debates, aren’t fully educated on his policies, and are stupidly wrapped up in his unmerited enthusiasm.”
 
Love you too, bud.
 
But seriously, you might be thinking “this is just what the Left in general thinks of us, what’s the big deal? They’ve called us worse.” True, but those were all people on social media or in the MSM. These people are FBI AGENTS who are supposed to REMAIN UNBIASED!
 
Take a look back at these texts. I’ll also remind you that Peter Strzok also texted Lisa Page that “they” would stop Trump from becoming President. I don’t know who these two employees are, but clearly there was a larger conspiracy to rig the election.
 
Of course, this is nothing new to us. We knew that Hillary conspired to cheat and we also knew that Obama did as well, but this really puts things into perspective. This is evidence that the FBI was politically biased throughout the campaign. Meaning, there is reason to believe there was bias in the handling of the e-mail investigation as well.
 
The FBI attorney was wondering what they could have done differently. Regarding what? It’s unclear. The conversation seems to focus on the Hillary investigation. But the larger context is regarding the election. What could they, as FBI agents, have done to keep Trump from becoming President? Clearly, not very much. But what gives them license to believe they even could have done anything? Was their handling of the investigation meant to help out Hillary?
 
Of course, we know that it was. Comey usurped the authority of the Attorney General by exonerating Hillary and not seeking charges against her. He didn’t have the power to do that as FBI director. The FBI director can make recommendations to the AG, but he/she does not have the authority to decide the fate of the person being investigated.
 
But again, as we already knew all of this and the corruption within the FBI, this further puts things into perspective.
 
Now the conversation didn’t just end there. Of course, the attorney continued his or her upset tirade by saying: “I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone.”
 
And the employee made further known just what he thinks of us: “Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years…” And then he says something pretty interesting: “We have to fight this again.”
 
Who is “we”? Who is the “we” that Strzok talks about when saying they would stop Trump? Of course, I have no doubt that it’s the Deep State, the swamp, the Obama people who can’t stand to lose and must not allow people their right to vote for people they disagree with.
 
To this elitist jackhole, we are too stupid to know what is right. We are too uneducated and must be helped in choosing who to vote for. And if we vote for the wrong person, they will do whatever they can to destroy said person, undermine that person and rule his or her election null and void.
 
This is corruption at its finest. Thankfully, the American electorate system seems to have been solid enough that no matter what these holier-than-thou elitists tried to do, they wouldn’t get away with it.
 
And since it’s in my nature, I will obliterate this man’s claims here.
 
First, the only ones who are crazy here are the people who believe themselves big enough and bad enough that they could influence and alter the results of an election to benefit themselves every time out. The only ones crazy here are the ones who fight for a political side that would ultimately see the United States destroyed from within, that would see American citizens at the mercy of the government… or Sharia Law, honestly. The only ones who are crazy here are the ones who believe a fetus is nothing more than a random assortment of cells, Islamic terrorists can be appeased by giving them jobs, Antifa terrorists are peaceful angels sent from Heaven, a man can be a woman and vice versa, and that MS-13 are innocent souls.
 
Second, what gun violence? You mean the one that ravaged the nation during Obama’s 8 years when he did absolutely nothing about it, even with a Democrat majority in his first 2 years as POTUS? You mean the one where we saw record numbers of shootings perpetrated by Democrats or Muslims? I won’t deny there isn’t gun violence in Trump’s America, but Obama had the best opportunity to actually do something about it and did nothing. Not to mention that some of the most dangerous places in the country in terms of gun violence are places where Democrats have power, such as Chicago, Oakland and Detroit.
 
Third, I simply love how he blasts poor and middle class people. Aren’t the Democrats supposed to be the ones who cared about the low and middle class people? Aren’t they the ones who do great things for the downtrodden? How are Trump’s supporters the poor and middle class?
 
This is just another example of how the Left has utterly abandoned the low and middle class. Particularly, the white, blue collar class. They make fun of you, they attack you, and then, somehow expect you to vote for them? What a joke.
 
Finally, the FBI employee makes fun of Trump’s promise of bringing back jobs and of your expectations that jobs will “magically” come back. Well, abracadabra, jerk. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (from March 2018), Donald Trump has created nearly 2.5 million jobs since becoming President. This goes along with record-setting unemployment rates in the last few months as well.
 
Reading what these people think of us, I feel mixed emotions. For one, I feel indifferent, as this is something I would expect out of mind-numbed Leftists who believe Obama is God. The problem is that, as I mentioned earlier, these are FBI employees. They’re law enforcement. They’re SUPPOSED to remain unbiased in how they handle investigations and their overall work. THAT is what makes me angry. Although, it’s also something to be expected. This is the swamp, after all. The Deep State. These are corrupt, biased and evil people we are talking about.
 
People who have seemingly worked to alter the results of an election. People who have sought to undermine the people they are supposed to serve. People who have taken Democracy into their own hands and tried to taint it.
 
We really have to thank the Lord for Donald Trump’s election victory. It’s not just Hillary that he had to beat. It was also government corruption. And by some miracle, he managed to do it. All thanks to the Lord.
 
Because here’s the thing: it really doesn’t matter what these FBI employees tried to do or will try to do. It doesn’t matter the extent Hillary and Obama and his administration went to cheat. It doesn’t matter what they think they are capable of. Ultimately, it is God who decides what happens.
 
He gets to decide who wins an election. He gets to decide what policy an authority figure enacts. None of it is a surprise to Him. He gets to decide who goes where and what they end up doing. For as powerful as the FBI might think they are, or might actually be, they are absolutely nothing compared to the Lord.
 
Usually, I would use an analogy here to compare a situation, but no analogy could honestly be properly used. Because there is nothing that can compare to God’s power. Nothing that can compare to the power gap that exists between God and Man. Man, ultimately, has no power. We only have as much power as the Lord gives us.
 
These fools may think they can play God. Ultimately, they are nothing.
 
We must also be thankful that these things are coming to light. It might be scary to believe our government can be so corrupt as to try and steal an election away from the American people, but it’s worse to not be aware of the danger.
 
Make no mistake, this is war. A war that we cannot afford to lose and cannot afford to not participate in. This isn’t Democrat vs. Republican anymore. It’s not conservative vs. liberal. It’s the Left vs. We the People. It’s Evil vs. Good. It’s government corruption vs. the American people. The Deep State vs. the rest of us.
 
The swamp may be big, but it’s not unbeatable. As I said before, it is the Lord who gets to decide who wins and who loses. If He is with us, who in the world are they to be against us?
 
Proverbs 19:21
“Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

In today’s world, it seems that very many people who have some sort of popularity talk about Trump negatively, either attacking him personally, or his family, or what have you. So it is rare when someone with relative or massive popularity isn’t jumping in to bash the POTUS. Seemingly, comedian Kevin Hart has been making a point not to attack Trump, which “comedienne” Kathy Griffin saw as unacceptable.
 
In an interview with USA Today, Griffin called out Hart for not attacking Trump: “I do feel like this is such an anxiety-ridden time for everyone that there is a thirst for all kinds of comedy. And look, if you want to not hear about Trump at all, go see Kevin Hart. He doesn’t even mention Trump. I personally think that’s a p**** move because he’s a black man. But I guess he’s selling more tickets than I ever will.”
 
Boy, am I gonna have fun with this one.
 
Let’s go bit by bit, here. First, this is not an anxiety-ridden time for everyone. With record low unemployment across the board, rising wages and 18-year highs in consumer confidence, the only people who have anxiety over this are those who oppose Trump. Griffin is among the only people who have anxiety over Trump being President at this point. Much of America is already being made great again and people are living better off today than at any point during the Obama presidency.
 
Second, how dumb is this woman? Attacking someone else for not following the herd in attacking Trump won’t gain her any fans. Frankly, I’d be surprised if she even has any left, after that Trump-beheading stunt she pulled. If anything, she comes off as a bully, wanting to force Hart to attack the President, when he clearly has no intentions of doing so, given that he hasn’t up to this point.
 
Third, what does his race have to do with anything? It’s a “p**** move because he’s a black man.” What does that even mean? I understand what she is calling him, but THAT is the reason she’s doing so? Because he’s a black man that won’t attack Trump?
 
At this point, Griffin’s racism is entirely exposed. Just because Hart is black he’s supposed to align with Democrats’ way of thinking? Well, pardon the black people that choose not to be slaves of the Left. And pardon a celebrity who does not wish to alienate half his audience by attacking Trump.
 
Which brings me to my last point: of course he’s going to sell more than Griffin. He’s actually talented. Beyond that, he clearly does not wish to alienate half of his audience by attacking the POTUS. He wants his comedy to be something that everyone in the room can laugh about. He is precisely the kind of person many people want out of entertainers.
 
What do I mean by that? In the past year or so, ESPN has suffered massive hits in ratings. Why? Largely because of people like Jemele Hill and other ESPN hosts who constantly bring up the President and attack him. ESPN is about sports, not politics. People who watch ESPN tend to want to get away from the subject of politics altogether. They just want to focus on the world of sports, so when they see people like Jemele Hill attacking the President, people tune out and change the channel.
 
Similarly, when actors attack and berate Trump, those who voted for Trump decide to not watch their movies or t.v. shows anymore. Part of the reason Roseanne was so popular was because the lead character was a Trump supporter (albeit still a liberal).
 
The reality is that a lot of people, most likely the majority of the country, like Donald Trump. So seeing Robert De Niro shouting obscenities in front of high schoolers and at the Tony awards causes those who like Trump to not want to watch De Niro’s content.
 
And do you want to know what’s funny? I wouldn’t be surprised if Kevin Hart’s shows started selling more due to this callout by Griffin. I know that Griffin attacking Hart makes me want to watch Kevin Hart’s content. Now, whether I’ll like it or not depends on how funny Hart is. But if I know for certain that he’s not going to attack Trump, whether he agrees with Trump or not, whether he likes Trump or not, I’m more willing to watch him.
 
Because I don’t really care what an entertainer’s opinion is. While they are more than free to speak their own opinion, I would rather watch their content not knowing what their opinions are.
 
That’s why I defend Laura Ingraham when she told LeBron James to “shut up and dribble”. While he does have every right to speak his mind, I couldn’t care less what his opinion on Trump is. I just want to watch great basketball. I just want to watch one of the greatest players of all time drag his sorry team to the NBA Finals. The same goes for the equally “woke” Steve Kerr, Kevin Durant and Stephen Curry of the Golden State Warriors. I just want to watch a great team play great team-oriented basketball to dominate their opponents.
 
So when it comes to Kevin Hart, if and when I begin watching his shows, I can be happy knowing that it will only be about entertainment and not “being woke”.
 
And one last point about Griffin’s racism: why would Hart attack a President who has helped the black community more than the country’s first black President? Seriously, with how low unemployment rates are for African-Americans, and with tax cuts helping out about 90% of the country, what reason does Hart, or any African-American have to attack the POTUS? His supposed racism? He has never said anything actually racist, at least in the time that I have been paying attention to the things he’s been saying.
 
And no, calling down-trodden countries “s**tholes” is not racist. Calling illegal immigrants criminals is not racist. They ARE criminals. Even if they don’t rape or murder or hurt anyone, their very status as an illegal immigrant makes them criminals. Oh, and calling MS-13 animals is only insulting to animals.
 
So the Left has absolutely nothing to call Trump on, or at least, nothing real. They can spin whatever they want out of his words, but anyone who’s paying a little bit of attention can tell that he’s not the racist demon the Left makes him out to be.
 
In fact, Griffin has said more racist things from that one interview with USA Today alone than Trump has.
 
What does she think Hart is supposed to do now? Obey his “massa” Ms. Griffin? Do as he is told by his Leftist slave-owner?
 
This is the kind of racism that I expect out of the Left, to be honest. But the thing is that she says it so casually and as though it’s not hugely racist. He’s black so he’s supposed to attack Trump? He’s not her slave. He’s not the Left’s slave. Whether he is a liberal is irrelevant at this point. He doesn’t have to do anything the Left orders him to do.
 
21st Century to Kathy Griffin: you Democrats can’t own slaves anymore. You already lost that “right” after you lost the Civil War.
 
Isaiah 48:22
“’There is no peace,’ says the Lord, ‘for the wicked.’”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Recently, a myriad of pro-Trump candidates won their primary races against NeverTrump RINOs, and this has caused the Left and NeverTrumpers to go into absolute panic.
 
For one, I will mention that MSBC’s “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough is essentially calling the Republican Party a Trumpist cult in his little rant against the conservative candidates winning over the swamp-dwellers.
 
However, he is not the big focus for me today. In another MSNBC show hosted by Stephanie Ruhle, former George H.W. Bush aide Mark Leibovich, and speechwriter for George W. Bush, Peter Wehner, also attacked Trump, those who voted for him and those within the GOP who are smart and conservative enough to support the POTUS.
 
Ruhle began by asking where the “conscience" of the GOP was. Wehner made the claim that Republicans no longer had a conscience.
 
“Well, it doesn’t exist anymore. And the results of last night are going to make it even truer.” Wehner also claimed that many high-ranking Republicans were fellow NeverTrumpers but “they won’t speak publicly because they are afraid of losing.”
 
Yeah, I am very much aware of that fact. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have always been NeverTrumpers, although McConnell has been making some effort of crediting the President for being the most conservative President in his era. This crediting of Trump by McConnell, to Wehner, was baffling.
 
“That claim by McConnell is ridiculous, even on the grounds of policy, Trump has not achieved that much. The tax cut was the big thing. The reality is that if you look at what he’s achieved versus Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush or any other President, Republican or Democrat in the first year it’s pretty minimal.”
 
You really have to laugh at this moron. Let’s take a look back, shall we? In his first year, he immediately began attacking ISIS relentlessly, even driving them away from a lot of the territory they had captured thanks to Obama’s inaction in the region. In his first year, he immediately began deregulating businesses and corporations and employing a rule of “for every new regulation put in place, two others must be eliminated.” In his first year in office, he helped create 2 million jobs, and setting record-lows for unemployment across the board, as well as setting record-highs for the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
 
Fast forward to a year and a half later, and unemployment is sitting at all-time lows in recorded history, ISIS has been nearly eradicated entirely, consumer confidence it at an 18-year high, oh, and NORTH KOREA HAS AGREED TO DENUCLEARIZE!
 
And if you really want to stick with just Trump’s first year in office, the Heritage Foundation completely disagrees with this outrageous faux-Republican. I wrote an article about half a year ago detailing the Heritage Foundation’s ranking of Trump in terms of conservatism in his first year in office. They ranked him as more conservative than Reagan. And Charlie Kirk offered us some numbers, saying “President Trump has cancelled and killed more than 1,500 regulations in the last 11 months. The most of any President in history in first year of a Presidency.”
 
So, as you can see, Wehner, Trump is the most conservative President in terms of policy we have ever had.
 
And since he didn’t have the evidence to back up his bogus claim, he decided to personally attack the President over his “lack of morals.”
 
“This is a man who is a pathological liar, who is not only engaged on an assault on truth, he’s trying to annihilate truth. The Republican Party is his sword and shield. And they’re complicit in the lies and complicit in the deep immorality, and I don’t just mean morality in terms of his sexual ethics, I’m talking about a man who’s basically at his heart, a nihilist, a kind of Niesche and a person who believes that might makes right. And the Republican Party which was born in the era of the Civil War and Lincoln, who is the greatest moral leader that America’s ever produced is now aligned with this person who is a moral idiot.”
 
Ruhle also questioned how evangelical Christians could essentially align themselves with Trump.
 
Boy, do I have a lot to talk about here.
 
First, what lies? He doesn’t mention anything specific. He just parrots the b.s. that members of the fake news media and Democrat Party have said. The most notable pathological liars who have held the highest office in the land have been Mr. “You Can Keep Your Doctor” Obama and Mr. “I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Woman” Clinton. In case you haven’t noticed, they were both DEMOCRATS!
 
Second, what immorality? I will admit that he has made mistakes in the past (over a DECADE ago), but so have many people… in the Bible. In case this self-righteous heathen has forgotten, both Samson and King David were sexually immoral and both are regarded as great Judeo-Christian heroes. Why? Because both showed remorse and repentance to their sinful actions and were ultimately forgiven by the Lord.
 
Third, does this ignoramus not realize the kind of people he is aligning himself with? The kind of people who consider black infanticide en masse to be a healthcare issue. The kind of people who consider illegal immigrant rapist killers to have a “spark of divinity” in them. The kind of people who consider a severe mental illness to be gender liberation. These people are the very people Isaiah referred to in chapter 5 verse 20: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
 
Wehner is the very embodiment of that verse, as is the rest of the Left who consider themselves morally superior to CHRISTIANS!
 
But in reading these attacks against Trump, one can’t help but to think these people are getting more and more jumpy. They are beginning to panic more and more, and for good reason.
 
Every single attack they have laid out against Trump has massively backfired on them. The Russian collusion story is all but dead, Stormy Daniels is no longer in the spotlight, there’s nothing they can find that Trump has done that is an impeachable offense, and to make matters worse for them, he’s only GAINING popularity. His approval ratings are climbing, with more and more people being supportive of his dealings with North Korea, his withdrawal from the Iran nuke deal and just about everything he’s doing.
 
Nothing has worked thus far and now, they are searching the bottom of the barrel. And what do they find? Robert De Niro saying “f*** Trump” and this fake Republican calling Trump a “moral idiot”. This is what the Left has been reduced to. With the economy being the best we’ve seen in ages, getting a step closer in achieving world peace (though it will never happen) with North Korea, and America being made great again, all the Democrats can run on is “we don’t like this,” which is really a losing campaign, since all of these things are great for the world and the country.
 
Trust me, voters are noticing Democrats and the fake news media siding against Trump in his dealing with Kim Jong-un. They are rooting for North Korea to keep their nukes, and thus, remain a nuclear threat to the U.S. and its allies all for the satisfaction of knowing Trump would be humiliated.
 
They have always been anti-war and anti-nukes, but the minute Trump, as a Republican, takes a step towards making the world a little bit safer, they root for an enemy to keep their nuclear arsenal. At this point, they are essentially betraying core beliefs simply because Trump is doing something they would have praised Obama to the hills for had he done it.
 
Seriously, if Obama had done this, they would be demanding that his head would be placed on Mount Rushmore.
 
This NeverTrump strategy will ultimately backfire on these people. The very reason this panel was even put together was because NeverTrump candidates were destroyed in their primaries by pro-Trump candidates. That’s an indication that a good number of people are liking what Trump is doing and want to put in Congress people who will help pass the MAGA agenda. Further resistance coming from people who consider themselves Republicans will ultimately lead to their defeat.
 
But let these idiots blabber on about Trump not being conservative or moral. At least this way, we know who our friends are and who our enemies are.
 
Romans 12:21
“Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Late this past Monday, President Donald Trump met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un in a historic summit in Singapore. In this meeting, the North Korean dictator signed an agreement to begin working towards denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. While this is a good sign for the future, it’s not necessarily a guarantee.
 
Not to burst anyone’s bubble here, I am very happy with this summit, believe it to be a major achievement for Trump and the world – and I’ll explain why I think Trump did a lot of things right in his approach – and I am hopeful for the future for a number of reasons, but I simply must remain cautious regarding this deal.
 
Previous promises and deals have been made in the past (not quite like this one, however) in which the dictator of North Korea verbally promised to denuclearize. They have been promising that for ages but they never made good on that promise. Like with Republicans promising to end Obamacare, the North Korean dictators have promised to denuclearize in the past and failed to keep that promise.
 
However, part of the reason I can be hopeful about this being different is that Kim Jong-un might not be the same as his father and grandfather. Make no mistake, their whole family is horrible, but you occasionally have a generation of people who don’t want to follow the same guidelines set forth by their previous generation. I’ll still remain skeptical over this, since Kim Jong-un is still the leader of a nation that has enslaved its people and maintains an iron grip on their throats, but he could be different enough from his father and grandfather to actually seek peace and not start World War III.
 
Now, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro wrote an article about the summit either being a masterstroke by Trump or a bad debacle that may lead us nowhere. In this article, he wrote three reasons why we shouldn’t celebrate this whole thing just yet. The first thing is in regards to not getting any serious concessions from Kim. Like I mentioned above, there’s the possibility for this being different due to Kim’s new generation. But that isn’t everything I’m banking on for the success of this summit for the benefit of the future of the world.
 
I’m also banking on the fact that Kim got first-hand experience in dealing with Donald Trump before this summit.
 
One of Shapiro’s concerns with Trump’s attitude towards Kim Jong-un is that the leader of the free world is legitimizing a dictator and equating him with other world leaders. I don’t see it that way.
 
When it comes to Donald Trump, I have learned that he always thinks a few steps ahead. During this summit, President Trump said that it was a “great honor” to meet Kim, adding that Kim is “very talented” and “very smart”, as well as a “very good negotiator.” He gave credit to the dictator in making the Olympics a “tremendous success by agreeing to participate.” He ended by saying that “his country does love him. His people, you see the fervor.”
 
The only thing I did not like about what Trump said is that Kim’s people love him. They love him in the same way that a captured person with Stockholm’s syndrome loves their captors. He’s a brutal dictator that forces fake love out of his people, else they go to the gulags. However, while Ben Shapiro sees this as a pathetic show of diplomacy, I see it as something entirely different. I see it as “this is who I can be to you if you play ball.”
 
What do I mean? After Kim Jong-un started making threats against the U.S. and its allies, Donald Trump pushed back with equal or greater force. He showed Kim that he is not someone he wants as an enemy. He showed Kim that he is not spineless like Obama. That the POTUS was done bending over backwards to appease allies and enemies alike.
 
In this summit, Trump acted as though he and Kim Jong-un were best friends. I don’t see that as a bad thing whatsoever. The message Trump is sending, in my opinion, is that he can be Kim’s worst enemy (as evidenced by his behavior in the past) or Kim’s best friend. Treat him and the U.S. right, with respect and honesty, and Trump can be your biggest friend and supporter. But treat him and the U.S. wrong, with disrespect and lying about these promises, and Trump can be your worst nightmare.
 
This is the way he treats everyone. Canada, Europe, Mexico, Russia, whatever. If you remember, Trump met Kim shortly after leaving the G7 summit. He showed more respect and friendliness to Kim than to America’s allies. Again, I don’t see this as a bad thing.
 
During the G7 summit, he showed that if our friends aren’t fair with us, we won’t be fair with them. During the NK summit, he showed that if our enemies are friendly with us, we will be friendly with them.
 
This is demonstrated by the tariffs Trump has imposed on Canada and other countries. This is the kind of diplomacy that we like seeing from Trump.
 
Now, returning to the North Korean dictator, like I said in the title, I shall remain hopeful but cautious.
 
Kim Jong-un hasn’t shown much in regards to his trustworthiness. He did promise to cease nuclear ballistic missile tests until the summit, and he stayed true to that promise. However, Reagan puts it best in these sort of situations: “Trust, but verify.”
 
In reality, we have little to no reason to trust Kim, but we should. However, we should also ensure that he does stay true to this new deal. And that is something that I can be certain Trump will employ as well.
 
Matthew 7:12
“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets."
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

There is one particular characteristic about the Left that they would rather no one ever mention or call out that puts them in a worse light than they already are. Beyond actively trying to discredit the legitimacy of an election and trying to impeach a sitting U.S. President on the grounds that they simply don’t like him, the Left also has one characteristic that is patently obvious to those who look even a little: hypocrisy.
 
In an interview with the UK’s Metro magazine, former Hollywood actor and A-lister Rupert Everett, who’s most famous for his role in the late-90s romantic comedy “My Best Friend’s Wedding”, or, if you are young like me, Prince Charming from Shrek 2, Everett called out Hollywood’s hypocrisy regarding LGBT people.
 
“There’s tons of roles that I haven’t got for lots of different reasons, some of them probably for not being a good enough actor or doing a lousy audition – all that counts. But there were three or four big films, when I was successful, that the director and the other actors wanted me to be in and that I was absolutely blocked from by a studio, just for the fact of being gay.”
 
Now, I simply must point something out here. Everett does not exactly provide evidence to support that claim. Anyone can claim they didn’t get something, be it a role in a movie or a job, for the simple fact of being gay. Anyone can make that sort of claim. However, what he says here is relatively specific. It’s not simply that he didn’t get the part because he was gay - it’s that, while some people working on the films wanted him, the studio specifically were the ones to deny him that, for whatever reason. BLOCK, as he mentions.
 
Not to mention that whenever people claim they didn’t get something because of their race or religion or gender or sexuality, they tend to sound as though they are ranting. I understand that this is on print and not a video or audio of the interview, but even the printed word can showcase the tone of some people. I’m certain you can see the tone and pace of a heated attack or calling out of a Leftist argument when you read these articles. Reading what Everett said there, it didn’t sound as though he was ranting. It sounded as though he was revealing something that is relatively common place for him.
 
Everett continues: “That does absolutely happen. But at the same time, it has been the making of me as well. It has forced me always to try and be creative, to try and make something up. I think my career as a writer would not have happened if I had been heterosexual, active, working non-stop.”
 
While he does count his blessings, in a way, as having the time to be a writer, he does casually point out the fact that, if he were straight, studios would keep him busy with major roles in movies. That, because of his homosexuality, Hollywood studios have denied him some roles and unwittingly given him the time to do something else with his time to further his career.
 
But then, Everett lays on Hollywood quite strongly: “My position of working in this aggressively heterosexual milieu of showbusiness has definitely made me feel kind of parallel [to Oscar Wilde, the character he portrays in his new movie ‘The Happy Prince’.] Of course I haven’t been put in prison and subjected to hard labour and I haven’t died from it, but I have been constantly on the back foot, really, in my career as a gay actor…”
 
And that first part really should be a huge attack on Hollywood. To the Left, there is nothing worse than a straight, white male who is ok with being straight, white and male. To refer to them as an “aggressively heterosexual milieu (environment) of showbusiness” is a slap in the face to them. They live in a world of progressivism. To appear as anything less is a crime, in their eyes.
 
The funny thing is that, they are honestly not progressive.
 
What I mean by that is that, while they may say progressive things and issue progressive messages (such as “f*** Trump”, apparently), they live a life of hypocrisy. They may SOUND progressive but they AREN’T progressive.
 
Let’s take Leonardo DiCaprio, for example. He is a massive supporter of “green energy” and other nonsense that is meant to “fight climate change”. Meanwhile, he is a massive contributor to the very “cause” of climate change.
 
According to a Daily Mail article from 2017, “It can be estimated that DiCaprio has potentially emitted up to 418.4 tons of CO2 this year because of his globe-trotting. The average American emits 19 tons a year.”
 
DiCaprio’s gas emissions are 22 times WORSE than the average American, and yet, calls for you, the average American, to be more concerned with the environment and to take better care of it. That figure only talks about his CO2 emission due to his travels. I wonder how much he pollutes with his at least 7 different homes, according to Realtor.com.
 
If he were really a “progressive”, he would not be so willing to have such a massive carbon footprint on the world. Does he not know the damage he’s causing to the environment? What kind of friend is he to Mother Nature if he is abusing her like this, while turning around and DEMANDING all of us to be more environmentally-cautious?
 
Moving on from DiCaprio’s faux progressive lifestyle, let’s visit a very hot topic from late last year: sexual assault, abuse, harassment, etc.
 
Of course, I’m certain you know who I want to focus on. Pervy Harvey Weinstein, of course. How many times has he called for progressive and feminist ideals? How many times has he met with top feminist icons such as Meryl Streep and Hillary Clinton? How many times was he seen as a pro-woman Hollywood mogul? Well, maybe he was a little bit too pro-woman.
 
If Weinstein really believed in everything he and his friends were talking about to the cameras - about women being given better wages, women being given the “right” to choose - then he wouldn’t have forced some of them to have a better wage by sleeping with him. He wouldn’t have taken away a woman’s right to choose whether or not she had sexual contact with him.
 
Now, let’s move on to the “issue” of having a border wall (which perplexes me as to how defending and securing our national border can even be considered an issue of debate) and the refugee crisis.
 
The UK Daily Mail absolutely shreds both the Clooneys and Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.
 
According to their article, the two celebrity couples have 8 houses combined (Clooneys 5, Brangelina 3). All of which secure and none of which help these “poor Syrian refugees looking for a new home”.
 
You see, to these people, YOU should be the one taking care of the refugees. YOU should be the one willingly giving up your home to military-aged members of the cult of Islam. YOU should be the one to happily live with immigrants. Never mind the fact that the Clooneys moved out of their home in Italy precisely because of the influx of immigrants. They are still the jewels of society and you should worship the ground they walk on because they are always right.
 
Give me a break.
 
So, when I read that Everett interview calling out the hypocrisy of Hollywood regarding gay people, I was about as shocked as when I saw the Golden State Warriors win another championship. It’s very much expected because that is just who they are.
 
They say one thing, but you should never expect them to live by such words. To hold them accountable means to be a hater and you ought to be silenced for calling out such wonderful gods. That is the Left’s mentality, anyway.
 
Their MO is “do as I say, not as I do.” How anyone can respect and admire such blatant hypocrisy is beyond me.
 
Matthew 6:1
“Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

IMPORTANT MESSAGE: If you are feeling depressed and suicidal, please call the National Suicide Prevention Hotline at 1-800-273-8255.
 
Last week, CNN celebrity chef host Anthony Bourdain chose to end his life, reportedly after years of battling depression and drug abuse and feeling that he was “an unhappy soul, with a huge heroin and then crack problem,” as Bourdain revealed in an interview with The Guardian.
 
This comes just a week after another celebrity, Kate Spade, committed suicide.
 
Suicide is a big problem in the U.S. According to a study done by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention in 2014, the annual suicide rate in the U.S. is 13 per 100,000 individuals, their highest rate in thirty years, and has been increasing since 1999.
 
According to the study’s findings:

• Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in America

 

• Men die of suicide 3.5x more often than women.

 

• Women attempt suicide twice more often than men do.

 

• There are 121 suicides per day on average.

 

• White males accounted for 7 out of 10 suicides in 2015.

 

• A firearm is used in half of all suicides.

 

• And the rate of suicide is highest among middle age white men.

 
In 2016, the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) recorded specific data about the number of suicides by age group and sex. It reported that 436 people aged 10-14 committed suicide, 265 males and 171 females. Ages 15-24, we see a massive jump in numbers to 5723 total, 4575 males, 1148 females. Ages 25-34 saw 7366 total suicides, with 5887 males and 1479 females. 35-44 had 7030 total, 5294 males, 1736 females. 45-54 saw a total of 8437, the highest of any age group, with 6198 males ending their lives and 2239 females. 55-64 saw 7759 total suicides, the second highest, with 5745 males and 2014 females. 65-74 saw a dip in numbers with a total of 4403, 3463 males and 940 females. Finally, people older than 75 saw a total of 3801 suicides, with 3291 males and 510 females, the largest male to female ratio.
 
In total, 2016 saw 44,965 people end their lives – a terrible amount no matter how you look at it.
 
In the United States, the top 5 states in highest suicide rates (2016) were Montana, Alaska, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah, in that order. Montana’s suicide rate per 100,000 people stood at 25.9 and Utah’s stood at 21.8. Of course, there are a lot of variables to consider such as population, wealth, social standing, culture and religion.
 
In the military, it’s more likely for a soldier to end their own life than to die on the battlefield, at least according to a 2009 U.S. Army report, which also included military veterans.
 
And for LGBT people (specifically youth), their suicide rates are 1.5 to 3 times higher than heterosexual youth.
 
Suicide is an epidemic in the United States. It hurts family, friends and loved ones. It’s generally a non-partisan issue; both Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals discourage suicide. So despite the strong amount of support people have and the amount of discouraging that happens regarding suicide in general, why does it still happen? And why is it happening so often? And why so much more today than before?
 
Given the title of this article, you can already guess the answer to these questions.
 
I often speak about the lack of Christ in people’s hearts. But usually, I speak about how the lack of Christ in their hearts leads people to choose evil and side with evil; do evil things, say evil things, etc. I often talk about how there is a lack of Christ in the Left’s heart. But when I do, I often talk about the people in some level of power, within and without the government. People like Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Bill and Hillary Clinton, the MSM as a whole, among others. It’s easy to forget, in these attacks and callouts to these evil people, that there is also a lack of Christ in regular Americans’ lives.
 
While in 2015, 75% of all Americans identify as Christian, that number is lower than it was in 2012 (78%), 2001 (81.6%) and 1990 (85%). Still a sizeable majority, but a clearly declining figure (though there is hope for some rising figures in the nearby future).
 
It’s this decline in Christianity that I want to take a look at, because this largely coincides with suicide rates. Less people identify as Christians today than before and more people are committing suicide than before. Now, I won’t say that that’s the entire reason for it, but it I will say that has a major impact.
 
According to a study published by the American Journal of Psychiatry on depressed inpatients, “Religiously unaffiliated subjects had significantly more lifetime suicide attempts and more first-degree relatives who committed suicide than subjects who endorsed a religious affiliation… subjects with no religious affiliation perceived fewer reasons for living, particularly fewer moral objections to suicide.”
 
And they concluded that “Religious affiliation is associated with less suicidal behavior in depressed inpatients.”
 
Now, this does not mean that religiously affiliated people do not commit suicide. While this study showed these results, they do not specify any particular religion. They just say that religion tends to be a deterrent for suicidal people. Pretty much all religions view suicide negatively and something that should not be done, with Islam specifically forbidding suicide completely (except in regards to suicide bombing). So, I certainly am not suggesting that we should turn to Islam to prevent suicide. But the AJP notes that religion tends to keep more people from ending it all.
 
Regarding Christianity, I unfortunately could not find specific data pertaining to Christian suicides, but I know that they can happen. Some years back, a Christian friend of mine committed suicide. While I do not have specific data, I have known it to happen at least for one Christian. So it does happen.
 
Why? I unfortunately do not know. As a Christian, I understand that suicide, while it isn’t necessarily a sin, is not something God wants for us. He has laid out a plan for our lives and that plan ends in VICTORY - always.  While it is also never a surprise for Him when Christians commit suicide, He works all things for good in the end and He certainly has a purpose for us.
  
People can and often do things that are against God’s commandments. Sin is a prime example of people going against God. And it’s something that everyone does, including the most ardent followers of Christ.
 
Not to attack any Christian’s faith, but a Christian committing suicide, in my opinion, tends to not have very strong faith in Christ. Think of it this way: if you commit suicide, you are effectively choosing your own fate that goes against what God has chosen for you. And doing so sometimes could be because of a lack of faith or weak faith in Christ.
 
I understand that such a claim could be very upsetting. I cannot make this claim a general one. Each individual case is different and there are things going on that usually no one other than God knows about. With regard to my Christian friend, there were clearly things that I did not know were going on with her. Things that not one of her friends or family likely knew about. What drove her to suicide is entirely beyond me. I speculate that it might be from weak faith or shaken faith in Christ, but I cannot claim to know. The only being in existence that can know is the Lord. Only He knows what was in her heart.
 
The reason I speculate this is because of my understanding of the nature of Man. I’ve said this time and time again that Man is naturally evil. This includes Christians. The difference is that Christians understand that Christ is Lord and understand His constant fight with the evil one, which will end upon His return. It’s this understanding that gives us the knowledge of the difference between good and evil. It’s because we are naturally evil that we cannot enter Heaven on our own accord. We need Christ for that. And it’s because we are naturally evil that we sin.
 
It’s this evil in our hearts that drives us to commit evil acts. It’s our evil hearts that drive us further from God, giving us doubt and fears and insecurity. Again, I cannot claim to know what my Christian friend was going through, but it makes logical sense if her faith was shaken to a degree – if she had doubts, if she felt fears and insecurities that she felt God would not appease. That is the kind of logical sense I try to make of my friend’s case. And that is the kind of sense I try to make of many Christians’ cases.
 
I know that I have a very strong faith in Christ. And while I may not know every path ahead of me, I have no fears of the future, for I know God is with me. It’s this trust in God that keeps me joyous and away from a noose.
 
Because I’ll be honest with you, I have no idea where I’d be if I was not a Christian. I became a Christian in high school, but in middle school, I had spent some time living through a sort of existential crisis: I thought an awful lot about death, how short life is and how there might not be a Heaven. I thought about what the point of life was. While I never got close to actually considering suicide, even back then, I have little doubt that I could be clinically depressed today if I were not a Christian.
 
My faith in Christ has helped me live a joyous life that has only just begun. But I do wonder what has driven other Christians to suicide. I really am trying to avoid angering anyone or upsetting anyone by saying that they were weak of faith. My intention is not to anger people. My intention here is to make logical sense of it all, even if I’m missing crucial details, and encourage people to have a strong faith in Christ.
 
Part of the reason I say this is because I also know that anyone can claim to be a Christian and not actually be one. Let’s look at that Christianity number again. If 75% of Americans were solidly Christian, I can guarantee that no Democrat would ever get elected. I can guarantee that no Leftist policy would be integrated, same-sex marriage and abortion would not be legal, it would not even be a political issue, and this country would not be so fresh off the disaster of the Obama presidency.
 
Anyone can claim to be a Christian but lack Christ in their hearts. The Bible often mentions this sort of thing in the books of James, Isaiah, Matthew, 1 John, 2 Timothy, Luke, etc. It warns us of people who claim to be of faith but are far from it.
 
Again, my intention is not to attack anyone’s faith in Christ. My intention is to draw a logical conclusion from Christian suicide and from suicide in general.
 
Forgive me if you are upset by what I have said. But please take this as an affirmation to the importance of faith in Christ.
 
My faith has saved me from more than just the depths of Hell. It has saved me from living a life of worry and depression and panic over what comes after death. It has saved me from living such a life and from ever considering suicide an option. I hope that applies to you as well.
 
Isaiah 58:11
“And the Lord will guide you continually and satisfy your desire in scorched places and make your bones strong; and you shall be like a watered garden, like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.”