Trump Threatens More Plagues Unless State Governors Let His People Go

WASHINGTON, D.C—As more state governors lock down and enslave their people, one hero has been called to save Americans from their masters.

President Donald Trump says he was commanded by a burning rose bush in the Rose Garden to confront Democratic state governors over their tyranny. He first said he wasn’t sure he could do it as he was too awesome and good at this kind of thing and it would go to his head, but the rose bush agreed to send Mike Pence along with him to balance his amazingness out.

“Let my people go!” Trump cried as he threw down a MAGA hat and miraculously transformed it into a Big Mac, which he then ate. “Greatest miracle, maybe ever.” But the governors had their own Satanic magicians who performed similar tricks, turning their pink women’s rights hats into vegan milkshakes.

“Sad! Not good!” Trump said. “If you will not let my people go, more plagues will be unleashed — the best plagues, maybe ever. We’re talking bigly plagues.” Sure enough, Lake Erie turned to blood, Pepe the Frogs spread across the land, and locusts descended on everything and ate everybody’s crops. The Democrats didn’t seem to mind the Angel of Death plague though, since most of them are already cool with abortion.

After the tenth plague, some of the governors finally relented, allowing Trump to lead his people to freedom across a miraculously parted Missouri River.

RELATED POLITICAL SATIRE:

Alarming Report Suggests Americans Can’t Go Much Longer Without Jobs And Haircuts Before Becoming Hippies

April Officially Named ‘Bring Your Children To Work Month’

AOC Drops By Unemployment Office To Tell People How Lucky They Are Not To Have Oppressive Jobs

Essential Oils Plummet To $2.7 Million A Barrel

Study: 84% Of Christians Show No Symptoms Of Following Jesus

‘Don’t Slip Away, Allie — Come Back To Noah!’ Cries Weeping Brian Stelter During Nightly Viewing Of ‘The Notebook’

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by The Babylon Bee is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Cheating Factor in the Elections

There’s an old joke that goes like this:

How does a lifelong conservative voter in Chicago switch to being a liberal voter? He dies.

If the left is so great and their ideas are so wonderful, then how come they often have to cheat to win elections?

During the coronavirus, with its extraordinary upending of our regular life, some want to use this crisis to permanently change how we vote in this country. This reminds me of the left’s slogan, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

On March 16, the A.P. reported on a new law in Chicago whereby prisoners can vote in prison (not just by absentee ballot):

“A state law enacted last summer requires that Illinois’ 20,000 pretrial detainees be given the opportunity to vote. That means absentee ballots must be distributed in every jail in the state. But the law also requires that any county with more than 3 million residents set up voting machines in the jail. Cook was the only county to qualify.”

On April 3, CNN observed,

“The coronavirus crisis has prompted new calls to expand access to voting ahead of November’s election and intensified the long-running partisan fight over voting rights…. And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she wants money dedicated to vote-by-mail to be part of the next coronavirus bill.”

It may sound good, but some of the left’s tactics have been designed to basically steal the vote.

The left has been pushing for illegal immigrants to be able to vote. And every time an illegitimate vote is cast it nullifies a legitimate vote that is cast.

If there is cheating by Republicans against Democrats, I’m not aware of it. If you answer, “Watergate,” please note that was about half a century ago.

As we face the critical election this year, 2020, we do well to stay on guard against any means from anybody to steal our vote. Veteran journalist Bob Knight wrote a book, Liberty on the Brink, on the left’s efforts to falsify elections.

In a TV interview, he told me, “One thing is to allow millions of illegal immigrants into the country, not keep track of them, and then weaken the voting laws….In the book, I go through a number of ways they do this. They fight voter ID laws, which are very common sense laws because everybody agrees on them.”

Scott Powell, a senior fellow with the Discovery Institute, told me: “In America you have to have an identification to fly, to buy alcohol, to drive a car. Voting in an election is one of the more important things an American citizen can do, and there should be unanimous support for voter identification. Without voter identification, we are more likely to have electoral fraud, and that can swing elections in key areas.”

One of the key strategies of the left to try and sway the outcome of upcoming elections is a movement to abolish the Electoral College. But that was a brilliant concept by the founders in the Constitution itself to allow for states across the nation to have their say in the outcome of the election for president. The left just wants the big cities (usually liberal) to decide.

As constitutional attorney Jenna Ellis points out, “The Electoral College is a process that was put in place to safeguard the safety of the voters and to make sure that every state has a voice and has representation.”

Bob Knight gives an example of a practice rife with the potential for voter fraud: “Ballot harvesting is one of the latest techniques that the left is using to, I believe, steal elections. Ballot harvesting is legal in some jurisdictions, and it means you can go out and collect ballots from people you’re not related to. Usually you cannot vote, you cannot turn in a ballot for someone you’re not related to, and that’s to prevent vote fraud.”

He points out that on election night 2018, in normally conservative Orange County, California, several Republicans were leading—one of them by 14%. And then, says Knight: “Thousands of ballots came in [later] that were harvested by volunteers, usually union leaders. And that swept the Democrats to power in all congressional districts in Orange County. Now I can’t believe that Orange County overnight became a Democratic county, other than the ballot harvesting that facilitated it.”

Yes, the coronavirus may alter some of how voting is done in this critical election year. But it ought not to be the means by which the left tries to steal our vote.

Knight notes how serious this threat of voter fraud is: “The left is trying to take over the country and impose a socialist state on America. If they win this time around, I’m not sure we’ll ever get the American freedom we’re used to back.”

© All rights reserved.

President Trump, Please Pardon Roger Stone Now!

“Equal and exact justice to all men…freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of the person under the protection of the habeas corpus; and trial by juries impartially selected—these principles form the bright constellation that has gone before us.” – Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural address, 1801

“Justice is indiscriminately due to all, without regard to numbers, wealth, or rank.” –  John Jay

“Natural liberty is a gift of the beneficent Creator to the whole human race; and that civil liberty is founded in that and cannot be wrested from any people, without the most manifest violation of justice.” – Alexander Hamilton


While all of us in this twilight zone of totalitarianism wonder if and when things will ever get back to normal, Roger Stone is facing 40 months in prison starting May 1st, 2020.  Literally, this would be a death sentence for the 67-year-old with respiratory problems.  Here is the nightmare of the entire prosecution up until his conviction by a leftist jury.

We need to help Stone by doing two things, supporting his legal defense fund and by using social media and tweeting President Trump to pardon him before he enters prison to save him from certain death.

Stone is a veteran Republican Strategist, New York Times Bestselling author, pundit and longtime consultant to the Trump Organization. Mr. Stone is the grandmaster of 10 Republican Presidential campaigns including his seminal role in Donald Trump’s political emergence. This is detailed in the recent PBS Documentary series on Donald Trump as well as in the award-winning Netflix Documentary “Get Me Roger Stone.” He also served as chairman of Donald Trump’s Presidential Exploratory Committee in 2000 and 2012.

Mueller’s Last Prosecution

In February of 2019, Roger’s home in Florida was raided by the FBI, or as Kitty Werthmann called it, the Gestapo.  Roger stated, “A pre-dawn raid stormed my house with greater force than was used to take down terrorists or drug lords and terrorized my wife and my dogs. It was unconscionable.”  All this for a bunch of process crimes that in the entire history of our country, are rarely charged.

An intensive two-year multi-million-dollar investigation into Stone by the Special Counsel began in 2017.  They turned up no evidence of Russian collusion, no collaboration with Wikileaks, and no evidence that Roger Stone had advance notice of the source or content of any of the Wikileaks disclosures, including the e-mails of John Podesta before their release.  Mueller indicted Roger Stone for lying to Congress.

Stone was ultimately charged with lying to Congress and one count of witness tampering. His contrived indictment was crafted by Mueller Deputy Andrew Weissman.

Robert Mueller was allowed to “Judge Shop” for an Obama judge…and he came up with Amy Berman Jackson who also presided over the case of former Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort. Jackson had Manafort incarcerated prior to and during his trial, even in solitary confinement for nine months, despite the fact that he hadn’t been convicted of any crime.  A motion for a change of judge was requested by Stone’s attorneys, but denied.

Mueller used legal trickery to ensure that Jackson got Stone’s case by falsely claiming that his case was tied to the unproven case against the alleged Russian hackers, but the trial revealed no such link!

Judge Amy Berman Jackson

Judge Jackson is a liberal activist Judge who dismissed the wrongful death lawsuit in Benghazi against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and the suit by the Catholic Church challenging Obamacare’s requirement that employers provide free coverage for contraception and abortion. Jackson’s decision on the Catholic Church was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judge Jackson immediately issued a gag order on Stone, knowing that his living was made by public speaking.  Although such orders infringe on the First Amendment rights of the persons gagged and (sometimes) of the media, the judges issuing and upholding them claim they are necessary to preserve parties’ rights to a fair trial.

The U.S. Supreme Court expressly approved gag orders on trial participants in the 1966 liberal Warren Court in Sheppard v. Maxwell.  (This is the same court who took prayer out of school in 1962, and destroyed states’ rights regarding slander and libel in the 1964 NYTs v Sullivan case.) In this case, the media wasn’t gagged, but Stone’s ability to defend himself in public and to earn a living certainly was.

Jackson not only gagged Roger from defending himself, she also repeatedly personally attacked him from the bench and then rejected a motion to recuse herself accusing his lawyers of a “publicity stunt.”

Like so many others who supported Donald Trump for President, Roger ended up railroaded via a false prosecution.

During the sham trial, Judge Jackson ruled for the prosecution and against Stone’s lawyers on every motion in the case save one. It was reported that the Judge would smirk and roll her eyes at the jury whenever Stone’s lawyers were speaking in court.

Roger was found guilty, his exculpatory evidence was disallowed, and he was sentenced to seven plus years in prison by an overzealous prosecution team.

Four career DOJ prosecutors, abruptly resigned from their posts on Tuesday, February 10th, 2020 in an apparent dramatic protest just hours after senior leaders at the DOJ said they would take the extraordinary step of effectively overruling the prosecutors’ judgment by seeking a lesser sentence for President Trump’s former adviser Roger Stone.

The Deep State Set Up

There are many in the Deep State who want Roger Stone eliminated, and for many reasons.  The mere fact that Roger is a decades long friend of Donald Trump is enough to want him destroyed.

But they’d also like payback for Stone’s magnificent research in two books, “The Clinton’s War on Women,” which was the definitive expose on Bill, Hillary and Chelsea.  It not only detailed Bill Clinton’s serial sexual assaults on multiple women, but Hillary’s role in intimidating, bullying and silencing them.

Stone was the first person to expose the Epstein-Clinton connection in his book documenting Bill Clinton’s 28 flights to the convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s private Island and Epstein’s role in the founding of the Clinton Foundation.

His other book, one I couldn’t put down, superbly unmasked the entire Bush dynasty, “Jeb, and the Bush Crime Family,” (original title).  Both books exposed the corruption of these two powerful families.  Remember the Bushes openly admitted they voted for Hillary.

And just who oversaw Stone’s case for the Office of Special Counsel?  It was Jeannie Rhee, who represented Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation in the e-mail case and who gave the maximum contribution to Hillary’s campaigns in 2008 and 2016 as well as Obama in 2008. Rhee has no experience as a prosecutor and came out of Mueller’s office and has since returned.

The Stacked Liberal DC Jury

The trial was held in Washington DC.  A venue change was denied despite DC being 99 percent Democrat. Not one republican, veteran or Trump supporter was on the jury.

Former Memphis City Schools Board President, Tomeka Hart revealed that she was the foreperson of the jury that convicted former Trump adviser Roger Stone on obstruction charges, and soon afterward, her history of Democratic activism and a string of her anti-Trump, left-wing social media posts came to light.

Hart even posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone’s dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racists and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone’s prosecution.

Meanwhile, it emerged that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was an Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone’s arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election records reviewed by Fox News show.

The revelations came as President Trump has called the handling of Stone’s prosecution “ridiculous” and a demonstrably unfair “insult to our country.”

How did a federal court judge ever allow a far-left wing activist to sit on a case where a close Trump associate faced trial?  Because there is no justice for anyone who supports Donald Trump.

Justice Denied

Judge Amy Berman Jackson denied a request for a new trial made by Roger Stone following his conviction on charges related to the Russia investigation.  The Stone prosecution is a disgrace, it’s lawless, and it was rigged from the beginning.

Judge Jackson called nearly all jurors back for a hearing, a highly unusual move, after Stone’s attorneys also alleged misconduct after some jurors spoke out publicly following the case.

In her 81-page memorandum, Judge Jackson said the lawyers had not proved the forewoman was biased or that any jurors acted inappropriately. She included details of their juror questionnaires in her explanation.

“The assumption underlying the motion – that one can infer from the juror’s opinions about the President that she could not fairly consider the evidence against the defendant – is not supported by any facts or data and it is contrary to controlling legal precedent,” she wrote in denying the new trial. “The motion is a tower of indignation, but at the end of the day, there is little of substance holding it up.”

The Double Standard

Hillary Clinton’s criminal email investigation was dropped by AG Bill Barr early on in his appointment. To most Americans this was a travesty of justice for a woman who allowed foreign nations to easily gain access to classified American information. Truly, her actions were treasonous.

The DOJ later revealed that it would be closing its investigation of Andrew McCabe, the FBI’s former deputy director, over his false statements to investigators probing an unauthorized leak that McCabe had orchestrated. McCabe was fired in March 2018, shortly after a blistering Justice Department inspector general report concluded that he repeatedly and blatantly lied, or as the Bureau lexicon puts it, “lacked candor” when questioned, including under oath.

And late last August, 2019, the U.S. Justice Department had decided not to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey despite an internal investigation that found he improperly leaked information to the news media.

How about Brennan, Clapper, Strzok, Page, Rosenstein, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, and even Robert Mueller himself…all of them lied to Congress…no prosecutions!

Because of this Chinese virus, Michael Avenatti has been temporarily freed from a federal jail in New York City to ride out the coronavirus at a friend’s house in Los Angeles. Avenatti is awaiting a June sentencing after he was convicted of trying to extort $25 million from sportswear giant Nike. He also faces criminal trials in New York of defrauding Stormy Daniels and in Los Angeles of cheating clients and others of millions of dollars.

The federal Bureau of Prisons has notified Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney, that he will be released early from prison due to the coronavirus pandemic.

And Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign manager, who is 71 years old, has requested to serve the rest of his federal prison sentence at home due to risks presented by the coronavirus outbreak.  But I highly doubt this man will be released, since he supported President Trump.

Thousands of criminals have been released by state governors and city mayors, and we’re not just talking drug crimes, we’re talking rapists and murderers…a 26 year old murdered again the very day he was released.  Another man, 77 years old, thought too old to murder again, did just that, he murdered a mother and her twin sons.

These criminals are released to protect them from contracting Covid-19, and they prey on our shuttered society, yet Roger Stone is bound for prison…where is justice???

Conclusion

If Roger Stone is forced into prison, he will most likely die there.  He needs a pardon prior to presenting himself for incarceration.  And please people, don’t write and tell me that Trump will pardon him after he’s re-elected or even after he loses the election.  That will be too late for Roger, he will die in prison.  The same goes for Paul Manafort.  Trump could have pardoned Manafort’s federal charges and helped him out.

A judge last December 2019, dismissed New York state criminal charges filed against Paul Manafort. The dismissal was a blow to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who had brought the case against Manafort right after he was sentenced to a federal prison term earlier in 2019.  Manafort was not in court for the hearing in Manhattan. He suffered a medical issue at the federal prison in Pennsylvania where he is serving his 7½-year term.

Get these men out of prison, don’t let them die behind bars. The DOJ attack on anyone who supported Trump is obvious while the most corrupt within the Deep State are walking free.

Please use social media to ask President Trump to pardon Roger Stone before he spends one minute in a prison.

P.S.  These times of totalitarian control restricting our civil rights has cost so many.  One of them is NewsWithViews.  Donations we used to count on are understandably not there.  This website brings more truth to America than most, and we need your help to stay alive.  So many of us are struggling today, but if you can even spare a few dollars, you will help keep us alive and bringing you daily updates that you won’t find on cable news.  Please help us…and donate here.  Thank you, and Lord bless you!

© All rights reserved.

Holocaust Devotion

I was asked to write this piece for the annual remembrance of the Holocaust, where more than six million people of the Jewish faith were murdered during World War Two by the Nazi Germany leadership and its military.

This presents a challenge for this chaplain for a couple of reasons. First, I am a Christian, and although I am quite fond of the Jewish roots of Christianity, I am not Jewish. I have friends and family that are Jewish, I have been to synagogue services a few times, and I have been acquainted with a few Rabbi’s over the years; but again, I am not Jewish. This means that the best I can do is to be academically honest and spiritually sound to the best of my abilities in this endeavor.

Second, prior to becoming a chaplain, I spent the majority of my adult life as a member of the military and law enforcement communities; having retired from each of those vocations. My traditional “baby boomer” upbringing, compounded by my career choices, mean that I have the strong belief in equal protection and equal responsibilities under the law.

The atrocities committed during the Holocaust are almost unfathomable to me. Almost, because I have seen what human beings are capable of doing to each other up close and personal; and I have studied my history, and I know these events happened as I have talked to survivors of that time. This is why it is so important that we remember such things. So they never happen again.

Having said all that, let me share some of the history of the remembrance’s origins.

“Establishment of the Holiday (1) – The full name of the day commemorating the victims of the Holocaust is “Yom HaShoah Ve-Hagevurah”— in Hebrew literally translated as the “Day of (remembrance of) the Holocaust and the Heroism.”

It is marked on the 27th day in the month of Nisan — a week after the end of the Passover holiday and a week before Yom Hazikaron (Memorial Day for Israel’s fallen soldiers). It marks the anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.

The date was selected in a resolution passed by Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, on April 12, 1951. Although the date was established by the Israeli government, it has become a day commemorated by Jewish communities and individuals worldwide.

The day’s official name – Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day – was made formal in a law enacted by the Knesset on August 19, 1953; on March 4, 1959, the Knesset passed another law which determined that tribute to victims of the Holocaust and ghetto uprisings be paid in public observances.” – courtesy of the Jewish Virtual Library.

The encyclopedias Brittanica and Wikipedia also go into some depth about the related observances (one is called Purim – which remembers a similar situation of the Jewish people from the 5th Century B.C.).

What observances should we be doing on this day?

According to the Jewish Virtual Library article cited above, each congregation essentially creates their own remembrance service. Some gather and sing music, others light candles, some read the names of family or congregation members lost; and in years past, some services have read through the entire list of six million plus names.

For 2020, and with a worldwide health challenge at hand, remembrance services in Israel have become creative. According to the English speaking news outlets HAARETZ (4) and the Jerusalem Post (5), public gatherings are still not allowed in Israel because of the COVID-19 situation; so, the people of Israel have created a movement to go out on their porches one evening and light a candle and sing all at the same time, as well as joining together for a virtual “March of the Living”.

So, what does this mean going forward twenty years into the 21st century, and more than seventy-five years since the end of the second world war?

With some insight from another person of faith, this caused me to re-examine Isaiah chapters 55 and 60; which in short state that God’s got this, get back up and to quit feeling sorry for ourselves.

It means that we should not forget our history, less we repeat it; and no, I am not the first person to have said something to that effect. As best as I can research, that citation can best be attributed to one of two people. Either back to Sir Edmund Burke (8), an Irish statesmen and philosopher, who is also credited with the phrase “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”; or to Spanish philosopher George Santayana.

However, from a faith perspective, it means we should not lose hope. Even when it appears that the ghosts of the past are lurking in the shadows of the present. In the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible (what Christians refer to as the Old Testament), there is peace to be found in Psalm 23, and there are blessings in both Psalm 91, and in Numbers 6:22-27.

Please do not fret too much. Should we as a society pay attention to current events?

Absolutely. Should we panic? No! Remember that in the Tanakh alone, the phrase “fear not” appears at least forty times. If God put something in there that many times, maybe we should pay attention to it.

Remember, there is also the promise of hope and the promise God’s love in the following of His plan for our lives found in Ecclesiastes 4, Isaiah 40, and Jeremiah 29. Never forget that.

In closing, this is my prayer for each of you reading:

Almighty God, may You bring healing, peace and comfort to all of those reading this and to their loved ones as well, and all those affected by this worldwide health crisis. May
You watch out over those that are deemed essential and placing themselves in harms way to facilitate our response and recovery. Bring them safely back to their families. Please
watch out over our public officials, both elected and appointed. Give them the courage, wisdom, patience and love to complete their assignments both honorably and according
to Your will. We thank You for our blessings, and we ask that You forgive all of our mistakes; in Your precious name we pray. Amen.

Remember, God loves you. All you have to do, is love Him back.

© All rights reserved.

Trump Announces He Has Hidden 5 Golden Tickets Among Stimulus Checks

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Trump has built up a lot of buzz over the coming stimulus payments, saying he has hidden five golden tickets among the checks heading to Americans this week.

Anyone who gets a golden ticket will win a free tour of Mar-a-Lago. Rumor has it that Trump will be watching them closely to see which of the winners has the qualities he looks for in a manager, with the best candidate getting hired as Mar-a-Lago’s onsite McDonald’s manager.

“Who will win? Nobody knows!” Trump said gleefully as he carefully signed each of the golden tickets before hiding them among the stimulus checks. “I, Donald Trump, have decided to allow five Americans — just five, mind you, and no more — to visit my resort this year. These lucky five will be shown around personally by me, and they will be allowed to see all the secrets and the magic of my hotel and golf resort — the best golf, maybe ever. Then, at the end of the tour, as a special present, all of them will be given Season 1 of The Apprentice on DVD!”

“So watch out for the Golden Tickets! Five Golden Tickets have been printed on golden paper, and these five Golden Tickets have been hidden in your stimulus checks. These five may be anywhere — in any mailbox in the country. And the five lucky finders of these five Golden Tickets are the only ones who will be allowed to visit my Mar-a-Lago during the lockdown. Good luck to you all!”

Unfortunately, he put all five golden tickets in a stimulus envelope addressed to Jim Acosta.

RELATED POLITICAL SATIRE:

Stimulus Delayed As Trump Insists On Personally Delivering Giant Check To Every American

Portland Filled With Unemployed, Masked People Just Like Always

America Prepares For Plagues 2 Through 10

Arkham Asylum Releases All Inmates Amid Coronavirus Fears

American Sports Fans Would Even Watch Soccer At This Point

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire by The Babylon Bee is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Tedros Accused of ‘Covering Up Epidemics’ Before WHO Job

World Health Organization (WHO) chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, under fire for defending China’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, has a similar history of covering for a government that repeatedly denied cholera outbreaks.

“A leading candidate to head the World Health Organization was accused this week of covering up three cholera epidemics in his home country, Ethiopia, when he was health minister…” the New York Times reported.

The Times reported that Tedros led Ethiopia’s public health at a time when it declared itself free of cholera for a decade by diagnosing patients with the disease as having “acute watery diarrhea” instead.

“In an interview, Dr. Tedros, who was Ethiopia’s health minister from 2005 to 2012 and remains highly regarded for his accomplishments then, denied covering up cholera,” the New York Times reported. “Outbreaks occurring in 2006, 2009 and 2011, he said, were only ‘acute watery diarrhea’ in remote areas where laboratory testing ‘is difficult.’ That is what the Ethiopian government said then and is saying now about an outbreak that began in January.”

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus

6 Known Connections

In 2017, Tedros ran for the post of Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), a specialized agency of the United Nations. But at that same time, a report appeared in the Ethiopian News & Views bulletin stating that he stood accused of complicity in the commission of “crimes against humanity.” That charge was related not only to the three aforementioned cholera coverups, but also to allegations  surrounding Tedros’s longstanding political affiliation with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), an organization that: (a) grew out of the Marxist-Leninist League of Tigray (MLLT); (b) was responsible for horrific atrocities in Ethiopia — particularly targeting the Amhara ethnic group in the country’s northwest region; and (c) had become Ethiopia’s principal ruling party. In the 1990s, the U.S. government listed TPLF as a terrorist group. The Global Terror Database continues to list it as such, given the organization’s ongoing commission of armed attacks in rural areas. Meanwhile, the aforementioned Amhara Professionals Union has issued many accusations of systematic discrimination and human-rights abuses perpetrated by TPLF.

To learn more about Tedros, click here.

© All rights reserved.

Defending Trump’s “Opening Up America Again”

Perhaps I am a bit edgy due to corona virus house arrest. Just kidding. However, this guy’s email really annoyed me.

We’re in lock down and people are hurting wondering how they will pay their bills. All this was not happening 4 years ago. Over the last 4 years we have continued to see our freedoms erode. Yet, some keep hoping Trump will be our savior. What has he done over the last 4 years? All I’ve seen was more decay.”

Here is my response:

Where do you think we would be had Hillary won? Trump has fought for our freedoms like no Republican since Reagan. He has Republicans, Democrats, never Trump conservatives and 99% of the media fighting against his America first agenda. I give the guy credit.”

Folks, I refuse to dump on the only guy with the guts to fight for us. Trump has accomplished an extraordinary long list of unprecedented achievements for We the People.

Corona virus placed Trump between a rock and a hard place. Upon learning about the corona virus, Trump immediately implemented a travel ban from China. Democrats and fake news media accused Trump of overreacting and racism.

Democrat and conservative media began reporting corona virus as the worst to hit the planet and we’re all gonna die. I stopped watching Tucker Carlson on Fox News because every evening his reporting about the virus became scarier and scarier. Media scared the crap out of Americans on both sides of the political aisle.

Some folks say Trump should not have gone along with Dr Anthony Fauci and other experts’ proven-false prediction of 2 million deaths. Trump could not challenge the “experts”. With nationwide fear so high, members of his base would have joined fake news media and Democrats in crucifying him. Therefore, I do not think Trump screwed up by appearing to listen to Dr Fauci. Trump did what he had to do. He did not willingly risk collapsing the remarkable economy he built via deregulation.

With the exception of Rush Limbaugh, pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle were afraid to oppose the shutdown. Everyone surrendered to the narrative, “We can not sacrifice lives for money.” Was Trump suppose to stand out there all alone, appearing to endanger lives by refusing to support the shutdown? Fake news media would have eaten him alive with many of his supporters joining them.

Trump is a master deal maker with excellent instincts. He had to go along with the program until more Americans realized that the predictions of catastrophic high deaths was fake news. People realize that the so-called corona virus crisis is Democrats’ dream weapon to unconstitutionally control every aspect of our lives.

I am hearing tons of heartbreaking horror stories about the shutdown destroying lives. Cruelly, Democrats and fake news media are lovin’ it. They plan to blame Trump for the economic suffering to stop his reelection. In realty, their insidious fear-mongering pushed America into this self-induced mess.

A 106 year old woman recovered from corona. Ninety-eight percent of people who catch corona virus recover. Rush Limbaugh pointed out that in 2018, the normal flu season caused 810,000 to be hospitalized and 30 to 60,000 died. Hospitals were not overrun and we did not shutdown the country. We are nowhere near such numbers with corona virus.

Still, a lot of Americans remain petrified of corona and oppose Trump reopening America. At the same time, many Americans are fed up with governors’ draconian edicts.

The swiftly growing nationwide rebellion against the shutdown gave Trump ammo to be the adult in the room. Despite the fears of many, Trump announced “Opening Up America Again” beginning May 1st. Trump said some states will reopen before May 1st. Governors are empowered to tailor the reopening of their state. It is up to residents of each state to aggressively protest to rein in their power-obsessed governor.

Speaking of wacko power-obsessed governors, California Gov Gavin Newsom implemented an extreme lock-down for residents while tent city vagrants and illegals roam free. Newsom’s boot on the neck of residents contributed to creating mile long lines of cars to get to Second Harvest Food Bank. Meanwhile, Newsom proudly announced he will give $125 million in corona relief checks to illegal aliens.

Thomas Jefferson said, “The government you elect is the government you deserve.” How on earth did Gavin Newsom get elected? Californians should start saying no to Newsom’s insanity.

After Trump announced his plan to reopen America, CNN immediately began cranking up more corona virus fear to undermine reopening America. We all know that upon the first death after the reopen, Democrats and fake news media will call Trump a murderer, guilty of crimes against humanity. They’ll say ego-driven Trump selfishly sacrificed lives to save his economy. They will even find a way to absurdly throw racism into the mix.

Who in the political universe would be able to withstand such attacks other than our Superman president, Donald J. Trump? Trump’s leadership, guts and commitment to the American people will make him victorious over their evil smears.

I’m on the Trump Train, folks, riding it all the way through November 2020 and beyond.

© All rights reserved.

SILENT — I Will Not Be Silent Any Longer!

I have been silent.

I have been silent long enough.

I have been silent for too long.

Covid-19 has forced me into silence, so I tell myself.  But that is not the whole truth. The whole truth is I was tired.  I was mentally drained. I was shut down by social media. I almost gave up.

Almost.

You see, there is only so much a human can take.  Even someone who is as experienced in the world body politic as I am.  There comes a point when you think “what’s the point”?

You see people willingly give up their freedom out of fear in order to be safe.  The problem is, they know in their own little minds, they are not safe. But they give up that freedom and real security because everyone else is doing so.

I felt like I was shouting in the face of a category 6 hurricane.  Nobody could or would hear me. I was not alone. A few months out there were shouting the same warning.  But it seemed as if we were not, could not be heard.

But then, events in the states of Michigan and Montana changed everything.  Yes, two small events, as the media would have you believe, could indeed change everything.

Some of my fans would tell me to not give up.  Don’t give in. Your words are being heard. It just takes some time for the majority to process them.  It takes some time for the majority to actually live out what they believe at first to be the “new normal”.

Most folks don’t like this new normal.  By the way, where have we heard that before?  New normal?

Normal is not new.  It is as it has always been.

But, I hear that Social Distancing is the new normal.  This is nothing more than a Millennial construct that means nothing in reality.  Let’s face it, it does not and cannot work. Frankly, the truth is if one violates this “rule” just once, then it is a moot point.

Let me ask you, have you always maintained a safe Social Distance of at least 6 feet ALL the time when you are in public?  Of course not. As soon as you pass by someone in the grocery isle, you have negated this stupid rule.

I love it (not really) when I do my grocery shopping and I freely interact in less than 6 feet with other shoppers in the isles only to end up in the check out line where there are marks on the floor imploring me to stand here and not there.

Then I get to the checkout register and of course, the clerk is not 6 feet away from me.  But they do have a plexiglass partition. As if Covid or any other virus could not find its way around and over that hastily applied barrier.

Oh, and the store emplores shoppers to use their credit or debit card.  I comply with that request only to find that the terminal is covered in plastic wrap.  The problem is, I have to enter a lot of information into that terminal. And so do countless other shoppers before and after me.

Does the store change that plastic barrier after every shopper?  Nope.

My logical brain cannot compute the idiocy in which it is currently living.  I can walk within inches of another customer, but I must stand in line 6 feet from that same customer.  I have to use a terminal touched by that other customer. But, that customer was wearing a mask so I must be safe.

Don’t get me started on those stupid mask.  Every medical professional I have spoken to, (and it has been more than a few) have told me the masks that most are wearing are almost totally useless.

But folks “feel” safe wearing them.  Folks “feel” safe with Social Distancing.  But then if you have ever listened to my program or read any of my articles or blog posts you would know, your feelings don’t count’

Covid-19 and every other virus out there, does not care if you FEEL safe.  Terrorist don’t care if you FEEL safe. (I have often said the people on those jets during 9-11 FELT safe, but were they?  Obviously, they cannot answer you because they are all dead.)

What we have going on now is a vast experiment on how to take away people’s rights and freedoms without a war.  It’s as simple as that. And the majority of us have fallen into line without question.

This is not about Covid-19 and it never has been about Covid-19.  It is about destroying economies that were booming without government intervention.  It was about destroying President Trump in the USA and any leader elected around the world who was like Trump.

It was about the Globalist grasping at their waining power to instill their will upon the people of the free world.  Nothing more and nothing less. And much of the world fell in line out of fear. Not logic.

I was screaming into the wind about this.  And I got tired. But the actions of people in a few states here in the USA has given me a glimmer of hope that all is not lost.

I may be tired, but I am not out of energy.

I will not be silent any longer.

ISRAEL: Imbecilic, Iniquitous, Inimical . . .

By its unflagging support of the establishment of a homophobic, misogynistic Muslim-majority tyranny (a.k.a. a Palestinian state), America’s allegedly “progressive” Jewry reveals that it is, in fact, profoundly regressive

Benjamin Netanyahu is a failed leader. He has led the State of Israel, once a proud example of a tenacious and highly developed democracy, to the threshold of third-world status. He has failed in his domestic policy and his foreign policy. And a substantial percentage of Israel’s citizens refuse to believe a single word that he says—Eric Yoffie, former president of the Union for Reform Judaism, in Netanyahu is a colossal failure. But against the coronavirus, he is all Israel has, Haaretz, April 2, 2020.

In the midst of this unprecedented health and financial crisis for Israel, we respectfully urge you not to use the need for unity in the face of emergency to create a different crisis for Israel by moving forward on unilateral annexation—From a letter initiated by the Israel Policy Forum (IPF) to Blue & White leaders, Benny Gantz and Gabi Ashkenazi, signed by over 130 left leaning US Jewish leaders, April 6, 2020.

Such a move would make a two-state solution harder — if not impossible to achieve — and would likely have far-reaching negative consequences for the US-Israel alliance…We cannot overstate the long-term damage such a move would have on the US-Israel alliance…The repercussions would be extremely serious and long-lasting. Most Americans will only support that so long as they believe Israel is committed to pursuing peaceA letter from Mark Mellman and Anne Lewis, president and co-chairwoman of the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) to Benjamin Netanyahu, Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, warning against unilateral annexation in Judea-Samaria, circa April 13, 2020.


April was a bad month for common sense—at least as far as declarations from representatives of allegedly “progressive” US Jewry and purportedly pro-Israel organizations associated with the Democratic Party are concerned.

Appalling, asinine & absurd

Arguably, one of the most appallingly asinine instances of the torrent of pompous and pretentiously pious pontification directed at Israel and Israelis was a recent opinion piece in Haaretz by Eric Yoffie (see introductory excerpt), berating Netanyahu as a “colossal failure”. Indeed, virtually every sentence in the article “elevates” the absurd to heights rarely attained in he past.

Yoffie begins his venomous brew of self-contradictions, non-sequiturs and flights of fancy with a toxic tirade against Benjamin Netanyahu and indirectly against Israeli society as a whole.

According to Yoffie: “Benjamin Netanyahu is a failed leader [who] has led the State of Israel, [from being] a proud example of a tenacious and highly developed democracy, to the threshold of third-world status.

Yoffie rails on: “He has failed in his domestic policy and his foreign policy. And a substantial percentage of Israel’s citizens refuse to believe a single word that he says.

However, despite this, Yoffie concedes: “And yet, not only does he remain Israel’s prime minister, but at the moment he is widely seen as the only figure who can lead Israel through the coronavirus crisis… Bibi, after all, is the man who has governed Israel for the past 11 years, (Israel’s longest-serving premier, Bibi was also in office for three years in the 1990s).

Yet despite this, he depicts Netanyahu’s long incumbency as “a period of dramatic and disastrous decline in Israel’s economic and social well-being.”

Disdainful and derogatory

This, of course, is a grave indictment of Israel and Israelis and by unavoidable implication, displays utter disdain for the Israeli electorate—and for the Israeli population in general.

After all, if Yoffie was right in his assessment (i.e. that “Israel’s citizens refuse to believe a single word that he says” and Netanyahu has been responsible for “a period of dramatic and disastrous decline in Israel’s economic and social well-being”), then surely the Israeli voters must be both masochistic and moronic. For what other reason could there be for them to keep reelecting a leader so “unequivocally” mendacious and incompetent.

Curiously, it was well into Netanyahu’s second incumbency that Israel acceded to the prestigious organization of the world’s most developed countries, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and, despite stiff, opposition the country became a significant energy exporter.

Under his stewardship, Israel has become one of the best performing economies in the world — with GDP per capita breaching the $40,000 mark for the first time ever in 2017, up sharply by over 45% since 2009, when he was first re-elected after losing power in 1999. Indeed, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), today Israel has overtaken France, Britain and Japan in terms of GDP per capita—something unimaginable not many  years ago

This is a “dramatic and disastrous decline in Israel’s economic …well-being”?  Really?

The pot calling the kettle black?

In stark contrast to Yoffie’s glum assessment of Israel’s socio-economic progress after almost a decade under the allegedly “inept” Netanyahu-led governments, the OECD itself describes Israel’s development, in glowing terms: “Israel’s economy continues to register remarkable macroeconomic and fiscal performance. Growth is strong and unemployment low and falling. With low interest rates and price stability, financial policy is prudent, and public debt is comparatively low and declining.”

According to the OECD’s report: “[Israel’s] external position is solid, thanks to a dynamic high-tech sector. The average standard of living is improving, mainly due to higher employment rates. Continued accommodative macro policies and planned investments in the offshore gas fields in the coming years will spur further growth.”

Of course, the dimwitted Israelis, who, by Yoffie’s account are teetering on the brink of a third-world tyranny, are far too dumb to realize in what a perilous situation they are in. Thus, the OECD report concluded: “Against this backdrop, Israelis remain on average more satisfied with their lives than residents of most other OECD countries.”

Significantly, in this regard, Israel was slated number eleven in the 2018 Happiness Survey, released every year by the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, coming in just below the top ten, which included (in descending order): Finland Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada, New Zealand, Sweden and Australia—none of which are facing the harrowing existential challenges faced by Israel.

Thus, Israel easily outpaced Yoffie’s own country, the United States, which was in 18th place. Likewise, he berates Israel’s health services as being “near collapse”. However, if one assumes the life expectancy is largely determined by the level of medical services and social support, it is interesting to note the 2019 UN Development Report ranked Israel 9th out of over 200 countries, well above a host of Western European countries and almost thirty (!) places above the United States, in the 38th place.

Could the pot be calling the kettle black??

A truly transformative leader?

Of course, Netanyahu—like every mortal on the planet—is not irreplaceable or unblemished, but his record indicates that he is by far the most capable candidate to lead Israel in these challenging times—as even Yoffie is compelled to concede.

Indeed, in many ways, he has been a truly transformative leader.

This is clearly the case not only in the economic sphere, but in security and diplomacy as well.

He has drastically reduced Palestinian terror from the horrific levels he “inherited” from the Rabin-Peres era — and, despite occasional flare-ups, he has largely managed to contain it to hardly perceptible proportions — certainly nowhere near the grisly scale that prevailed under his predecessors.

In terms of foreign policy, he has produced remarkable success. He managed to wait out the inclement incumbency of Barack Obama, emerging largely unscathed — despite the undisguised antipathy between the two men.

His views on Iran and its perilous nuclear ambitions have been embraced by the Trump administration. He has managed to initiate far-reaching changes in Middle East politics, with increasingly amicable — albeit, as yet, only semi-overt — relations with important Arab states, inconceivable several years ago, while sidelining — or at least, significantly reducing — the centrality of the intractable “Palestinian problem”.

He has overseen Israel’s “pivot” eastwards, and burgeoning relationships with the ascendant economies of India and China, increasingly offsetting Israel’s commercial dependence on the oft less-than-benign EU. He also has scored remarkable diplomatic successes in Africa and South America.

Moreover, notwithstanding difficulties with western European countries, he has fostered increasingly warm relations and understanding with those in central and eastern Europe, driving a wedge into the otherwise widespread European animus towards Israel.

Small minded endeavor to diminish achievements

Yet despite Netanyahu’s impressive record of achievement, Yoffie embarks on a smallminded and meanspirited endeavor to dismiss them. Belittling his warm relations with world leaders, his success in getting the US to adopt his perspective on the Iran nuclear issue, his success in reducing the once horrific levels of terror and his developing contacts with the Arab-Sunni worlds, Yoffie sneers: “Bibi has produced a record that is, by any measure, a miserable one.

Significantly, Yoffie is at a loss to explain why a country, that is on the cutting edge of almost all fields of human endeavor, repeatedly “shoots itself in the foot” by time and again voting into power a leader, whose record is “by any measure, a miserable one”.

He produces a motley mélange of unpersuasive excuses for a lack of realistic competitors from both Right ([Bibi] has destroyed potential rivals on the right by his ruthless control of… the right-wing bloc)  and Left (Barak was “…politically inept”, Herzog “…insufficiently tough ; Gantz… weak and indecisive…)

Of course, the real reason for Yoffie’s chronic Bibiphobia is only thinly disguised, something he gives away about halfway through the article: The “Palestinians”.

He laments: “Deal of the Century’ practically forgotten, Bibi has shown no interest in any alternative arrangement—if not peace, then at least separation that would offer the Palestinians a degree of stability and dignity.

This leaves us to puzzle over just how much “stability and dignity” separation has provided the “Palestinians” in Gaza—with many awash in a untreated sewage, with polluted water supplies, with perennial power outages and under the yoke of the oppressive, dysfunctional Islamist tyranny of Hamas.

As to why separation is likely to produce anything more “stable and dignified” in Judea-Samaria, Yoffie offers nary a clue.

Pursing a pipedream

Significantly, the Trump Plan and the Palestinians constitute the link that brings us to the other “progressive” caveats directed at the Israeli leadership.

The first is a letter (April 6, 2020) initiated by the Israel Policy Forum (IPF), an organization that aims to shape the discourse and mobilize support among American Jewish leaders and U.S. policymakers for the realization of a viable two-state solution.

Addressed to Blue & White leaders, Benny Gantz and Gabi Ashkenazi, and signed by over 130 left leaning US Jewish leaders, it proclaims: “We have strongly objected to Israel unilaterally annexing West Bank territory and applying sovereignty to Jewish settlements, whether according to the parameters of the Trump plan or any other similar proposal, at any point in time.”

The IPF letter warns “To unilaterally move forward with such a plan now would be particularly damaging. It will call into question the Israeli government’s priorities during a global and national emergency, shine a spotlight on controversial Israeli policies… and could create a rupture inside of Congress and in the upcoming presidential campaign….”

According to the IPF signatories, such a unilateral initiative “will be viewed as political opportunism by proponents of annexation during the worst possible moment and will make it more challenging for American Jewish leaders as they seek to maintain strong support for Israel and pro-Israel policies at this time.

The second is a letter (circa April 13, 2020) from the president and co-chairwoman of the Democratic Majority for Israel, whose goal is to “Promote a Two-State Solution and Arab-Israeli Peace through Diplomacy and Partnership.

Addressed to Benjamin Netanyahu, Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, it warns against unilateral annexation in Judea-Samaria: “Such a move would make a two-state solution harder — if not impossible to achieve — and would likely have far-reaching negative consequences for the US-Israel alliance… We cannot overstate the long-term damage such a move would have on the US-Israel alliance…The repercussions would be extremely serious and long-lasting. Most Americans will only support that so long as they believe Israel is committed to pursuing peace .”

When “progressive” means “regressive”

It is of course, a long-standing conundrum why so called “progressives”, who purportedly cherish liberal values of societal pluralism and individual freedoms would cling to support for a Palestinian state. After all, such a state, if it were to emerge, would almost certainly be yet another homophobic misogynistic Muslim-majority tyranny and the utter antithesis of all to which they claim to subscribe. Yet impervious to factual precedents and future probabilities they adhere doggedly to their flawed dogma.

This was aptly described by Jonathan Tobin in a recent opinion piece, A disingenuous debate about annexation. He ends it with these words: Living in the past and clinging to the false hopes of the 1990s won’t build support for Israel or nurture the alliance between the two democracies. It’s long past time for liberal American Jews, even the old Oslo-cheering squad, to accept the reality of Palestinian rejectionism and the permanence of the West Bank settlements, whether or not they believed that they were a good idea in the first place.

He points out: Trying to undermine the new Israeli government or setting the stage for a conflict with the Democrats should Trump lose in the fall isn’t consistent with their claim of being ardent supporters of the Jewish state. Nostalgia for the illusions of the past should never be confused with activism that actually helps Israel.

He is of course, quite right. By its unflagging support of the establishment of a homophobic, misogynistic tyrannical political entity (a.k.a.  a Palestinian state), America’s allegedly “progressive” Jewry reveals that it is, in fact, profoundly regressive.

That is the real paradox that Eric Yoffie should set about resolving.

© All rights reserved.

Cricket In CNN Newsroom Gives Detailed Report On Biden Allegations

ATLANTA, GA—CNN finally gave a detailed report on Biden’s sexual assault allegations on its evening broadcast Thursday.

“Well, looks like something has happened with Biden,” said a CNN anchor. “For more details on this possible scandal, we go now to our revered correspondent, Mr. Cricket. Cricket, your thoughts?”

The cricket chirped for a full three minutes, representing the full extent of the coverage that viewers would receive over Biden’s sexual assault accusations. When he had finished chirping, they moved the cricket back into his cage for the next time they needed a detailed report on a Democratic scandal. The cricket was very busy during the Obama years.

“There you have it — all the coverage you’re going to get out of us on the Biden thing.”

RELATED POLITICAL SATIRE:

Skydiving Accident Ruled Death By Coronavirus

Most Millennials Completely Unaffected By Orders To Stay In Parents’ Home, Not Work

Uh-Oh: Wuhan Lab Changes Sign To ‘0 Days Since Accidentally Releasing A Virus’

The Future of Humanity: Terraforming Mars, Interstellar Travel, Immortality, and Our Destiny Beyond Earth

Time Traveler Desperately Explains To Noah Why He Can’t Let Those Bats Get On The Ark

Joel Osteen Ordered To Wear Soundproof Mask To Stop Spread Of False Gospel

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire by The Babylon Bee is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Blue Bloods Gone Oprah

Among the TV shows I gravitate to with my husband Steve, a former athlete, include live baseball, basketball and football games, historical documentaries, and both true crime shows and crime dramas like Law & Order, Forensic Files, Chicago PD, and Blue Bloods––all studies in the greatest mystery of all time, human behavior.

When Blue Bloods debuted in September 2010, we thought it was excellent, featuring in-depth and provocative episodes, and at last embodying the conservative values we embraced, including a distinct lack of the three-legged stool on which Progressives base their so-called values: moral relativism, political correctness, and multiculturalism.

The show is about the Reagan dynasty in NY City, where the following characters are presented every week with daunting challenges, moral dilemmas, high-action chases and arrests, and touching family dramas:

  • Frank Reagan, a widower and the New York Police Department (NYPD) Commissioner, played by Tom Selleck.
  • His father Henry Reagan, also a widower and a former NYPD Commissioner, played by Len Cariou.
  • Frank’s son Danny, played by Donnie Wahlberg, a tough, street-smart detective, and his partner Maria Baez (played by Marisa Ramirez). Danny was happily married to R.N.  Linda (played by Amy Carlson) before her death, and they were the parents of two sons played by real-life brothers Andrew and Tony Terraciano.
  • Frank’s daughter Erin, played by Bridget Moynihan, a letter-of-the-law Bureau Chief in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and divorced mother of daughter Nicky (played by Sami Gayle). Erin works closely with Anthony Abetemarco, a detective in the D.A.’s office (played by Steve Schirripa).
  • Frank’s son Jamie, played by Will Estes, a Harvard Law School graduate who chose to become a street cop, promoted to sergeant, and then married to his NYPD partner––a beautiful blonde from a decidedly dysfunctional background––“Eddie” Janko, played by Vanessa Ray.
  • Frank’s Chief of Staff, Garrett Moore, who is also the NYPD Deputy Commissioner of Public Information, played by Gregory Jbara.
  • I cannot omit the very gorgeous and fabulous actress Abigail Baker who plays Commissioner Reagan’s chief aide as Detective Abigail Hawk.

Suffusing the drama is the Commissioner’s late son Joe, an NYPD detective who was murdered by a corrupt gang of police officers and whose memory continues to haunt the Reagan family.

THE OLD FORMAT

Every week for the past many years, all these characters presented compelling and original drama with episodes addressing themes such as the unreliability of eyewitnesses, the difficulty of identifying sociopaths, the nefarious inner workings of the New York mafia, the dangers of nepotism within the ranks, the reluctance of sexual assault victims to come forward, the complexity of solving murder cases, on and on and on.

In every episode, it was clear that the protagonists––members of the NYPD from the top on down––knew the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, legal and illegal.

Right was the teenage kid from the projects who resisted following his thug friends into a life of crime; wrong were the thugs who chose a life of crime, including robbery, rape and murder.

Good were the people who yearned for a safe neighborhood coming forward to identify the bad guys, in spite of great risk to themselves and their families; bad were the drug dealers and corrupt politicians who covered for the bad guys.
Legal were the follow-the-rules cops who crossed every “t” and dotted every “I”; bad were the on-the-take judges who ruled against them.

Riveting. Illuminating. Thought-provoking. Influential. Worthy of our time.

THE OLD VALUES

Among the most refreshing qualities of the show was––not is––the great respect the children and grandchildren exhibited toward their father, the Commissioner, and their grandfather, the former Commissioner.

Every week, viewers were treated to the Reagan clan gathering around a huge dining-room table for a sumptuous dinner consisting of platters of roast turkey and roast beef, mountains of salad and vegetables, and heaping portions of baked and mashed potatoes, where one or another member of the family would say Grace before the meal, thank their Lord Jesus Christ for their bounty, make the sign of the Cross, and in unison say Amen.

While serious discussions and good-humored kidding took place around the table, philosophical disagreements also abounded. Yes, quizzical looks and raised eyebrows and even scowls were evinced, but there was always a refreshing absence of the dismissive, rude, hostile and insulting behavior and the repulsively foul language we’ve become accustomed to in shows ranging from newscasts to award shows to daytime talk shows to “Housewives” dramas. And there was never any sign or sight of an iPhone!

RATINGS DON’T LIE

According to Wikipedia, the pilot episode 10 years ago garnered 15,246 million viewers, and the ratings remained sky-high for about seven seasons. But from season eight on, the ratings began to plunge, with season nine seeing the lowest in the show’s history.

No mystery to me, as the Blue Bloods audience witnessed this once-terrific show go Oprah––turning into both a social service and finger-wagging forum designed to set Commissioner Frank Reagan and his unenlightened family straight, to teach them the Progressive values that the leftist writers they hired wanted them to learn: how to be a moral relativist, a multiculturalist, a politically correct jerk.

CLUELESS WRITERS

It is abundantly clear that the current writers had never watched the show, had no idea about the rock-ribbed simpatico dynamics of the Reagan family, had contempt for the police, and had a deep loathing of the Christian religion and prayer and even the mention of Jesus.

Why else would they have the always respectful sons of Frank Reagan and their grandfather Henry speak to them with such antagonistic, disrespectful language? Why would they feature rookie and even senior policemen speak to the Commissioner in such brazenly inappropriate terms? Why would they completely eliminate the prayer before eating dinner and any reference to Jesus?

Why? I know nothing about corporate media or who calls the shots and ultimately determines content. But this is an all-important election year and we already see the Murdoch boys pushing their properties––The Wall St. Journal and Fox News, among others––in a distinctly leftward direction, so it’s not a far stretch to theorize that anti-Trump CBS-TV is also pushing their popular shows along the same route.

After all, why would they drag a veteran leftist, the seemingly dotty 90-year-old Ed Asner, out of his comfortable California home to star in a preposterous episode where the writers wasted our time watching Asner and his old friend Commissioner Reagan show off their knowledge of ancient movies?

Why? Clearly the writers want to make the Commissioner look like a regular guy, to reduce his gravitas, to make him less important.

Why would they feature the toughest guy in town, Commissioner Reagan, visiting the new Mayor of NYC––who told him the City needed a tougher P.R. person than Reagan’s longtime Chief of Staff Garrett Moore––and then portray the Commissioner as an emotional, conflicted, hand-wringing wuss over a simple executive decision?

Why? Again, an attempt by the writers to make the Commissioner look incapable of taking charge and getting something done––sort of like Congressmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Adam Schiff (D-CA).

Of course, the goal of the real wusses who are writing this junk is to convince the viewing public that they’ve been wrong all along about Blue Bloods, that what we should really believe is that the police are the problem, prayer is the problem, Jesus is the problem, and we should vote for all the leftwing candidates who believe this tripe.

As for me and Steve, we’ve dropped this leftist travesty forever, and are now enjoying both reruns and new episodes of the quite fabulous and compelling Chicago PD!

© All rights reserved.

COVID-19 Damage Control: At What Cost?

This is not to say that the virus does not exist, nor that pockets of America do not suffer disproportionately from the health consequences of COVID-19. As the hysteria-driven lockdowns of coronavirus persist, constitutional conservatives are slowly emerging from under their beds.

Spear carriers for social isolation and economic constriction in America have reacted to critics with the same derision accorded wearers of red MAGA hats.

In less than thirty days, Americans have been persuaded to swap Constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties in exchange for the illusion of protection from a virus that has touched a relative few.

However, neither the vast majority of Americans, nor family, friends, or neighbors, have been infected by the virus. Yet, the American public is expected – no, required – to support a one-size-fits-all national response that, to this writer, is akin to killing a flea with an elephant gun.

As international travel is acknowledged as the world’s COVID-19 courier, I’m led to an inescapable conclusion:

COVID-19 is, first and foremost, an unintended consequence of three factors, in order of significance: Open Borders movement, business globalization, and international tourism.

Presently, the nation of Sweden has the most relaxed posture in western Europe regarding COVID-19; she has no lockdown whatsoever. Many media pundits are nearly gleeful in reports of higher infection rates in Sweden compared to the rest of Europe. However, in its daily briefings on the virus, the Sweden Department of Public Health insists that its infection rate would be much lower, had the government enacted screening measures early on, for Swedish vacationers returning from Italy.

According to the state department of health here in Minnesota, our rate of infection as a percentage of the population is the lowest of any state in the nation.

The mean age for deaths attributed to COVID-19 here is 86. Pre-existing health problems accompany nearly all the fatalities, and the majority have been residents of nursing homes.

This past week, several meatpacking companies throughout the Midwest – names like Smithfield, Cargill, Tyson, and Brazilian conglomerate JBS – reported closures of plants in which anywhere from 20 to 80 employees tested positive for corona virus. What do nursing homes and meatpacking plants share in common? The majority of workers in both industries – industries hard-hit by labor shortages- are recent arrivals from third-world nations; populations for whom international travel is commonplace.

New York City – the epicenter of COVID-19 in the United States – is also America’s symbol for the “nation of immigrants.” Additionally, she is a preeminent international business center. Business travelers from across the globe travel in and out of New York City by the hundreds every single day.

Finally, New York City may be the most popular tourist destination in America for foreign travelers. Walk down Fifth Avenue on any given weekend in Autumn if there is any doubt.

Is it any wonder, then, that COVID-19 fatalities in the New York Tri-state area make up as much as half of the nation’s COVID-related deaths?

What we are witnessing is the unintended consequence of unbridled, open borders migration, be it for business, escaping third world poverty, or tourism.

Globalists are hard at work on damage control. Their messengers of doomsday scenarios will claim victory regardless of the outcome. If the death count is high, they’ll say “we told you so”. If the death rate is low, they’ll take credit for convincing the world to heed their warnings.

And let’s not forget the icing on the cake.

Leftists the world over are not about to pass up an opportunity to exploit a crisis that could hurt the President’s re-election campaign. If turning a blind eye to civil liberties sends President Trump packing and derails the conservative/national sovereignty contingent, well, you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette. Collateral damaged be damned.

And the collateral damage? There are many versions of death. Nearly all agree that economic recovery will be long and drawn out, at best. The fallout will certainly be the death knell for many rural towns throughout the Midwest that have been hanging on by fingernails for years as it is. Hospitals will go broke. Record numbers face unemployment. Children are kept from schooling. Small retail businesses and the hospitality industry are crushed, many for good. Socializing is verboten. All in the name of containing a virus for which attributable deaths in New York’s Tri-state area (a population of nearly 20 million) make up roughly FIVE ONE HUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT of its population.

My late mother, a nurse, had a one-liner of dark humor she picked up on the hospital floor: “the operation was a complete success, and the patient died.”

NOTE: This is a guest column by my friend Bob Enos of Willmar, Minnesota.  Regular readers of Refugee Resettlement Watch may remember Bob who compiled a great deal of information on the economic cost of migrant and refugee labor and wrote several articles for RRW in the past.

Watch Mr. Enos give a presentation to a county board meeting in 2015 about his economic analysis of the cost to the county and state of the immigrant labor that benefits large global corporations at taxpayers’ expense.

Go here to read previous posts at RRW either written by him or about his work.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Evidence Is Coming In: Virus Experts May Have Been Badly Wrong

It’s looking more like the experts got the handling of COVID-19 wrong. Maybe really wrong.

In analyzing the data from countries who took dramatically different measures in response to COVID-19, from the most severe restrictions to very few restrictions (countries that keep and share good data, not China or Iran) it appears they are all showing essentially the same spread, spikes, flattening and decline. This includes Sweden and others that did not shutdown.

The same phenomenon is playing out among individual states in the U.S. Some went into Stalinist lockdowns (Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer) while others never locked down at all and only encouraged social distancing (South Dakota Gov. Krist Noem.) Florida technically did a lockdown, very “late” as Gov. Ron DeSantis is constantly lectured, but even then DeSantis exempted so much it was really not much different than the voluntary social distancing. And Florida’s numbers, which were supposed to be the next hotspot after New York, are tracking ballpark with those that took the most draconian measures.

So again, as with nations, the states are at different timeframes on the graphs, but all looking very similar in a timeframe to timeframe comparison — similar to each other and, this is critical, similar to previous coronavirus outbreaks. That’s a head-scratcher.

Another data set is adding to the suspicions.

Denmark, Scotland and Germany have done thorough antibody testing in specific locals and found infection rates between 12 and 27 times higher than they thought and models had projected. And a majority of the people were either asymptomatic or had very mild symptoms. This means that the death rate might be wildly lower than is currently suggested, as low as 0.2 percent — which would be very near to the normal flu. It could be close to 1 percent, but that is seeming less likely now, and still way below the 3.4 percent the World Health Organization put out that was used in the Imperial College projections of death totals.

“Many magnitudes more people have been infected with it than we realized,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at Stanford university, said on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show. “That means the death rate is lower than we thought, by orders of magnitude.”

It’s important to remember that because it is so contagious, the overall numbers may be higher, but then they may not be because of how quickly the peak is reached and the downside starts — much faster than anticipated even with the full lockdowns. Again, that is according to the models.

None of this was jibing with what the experts had said.

And then journalist John Solomon interviewed Dr. Knut Wittkowski, a biomedical researcher, statistician and modeler at Rockefeller University in New York, on his Just The News podcast. And a lot of bewilderment came into clarity. The numbers began making sense if, IF, Wittkowski is right.

First off, he is obviously an expert, but he also is a major outlier among the expert class. However, he mentions in the interview that more and more of his colleagues are agreeing with him and his bottom line, to wit: We not only did not need to shut down economies, we should not have. We may have made it worse by creating a second wave — which coronaviruses in the past did not have.

Wittkkowski said the first big mistake was closing the schools. If they had been left open, it would have gone through the children, who are least affected by the virus, and their parents, who also have low impacts from it. That’s a big way towards herd immunity of 60-70 percent. And the people who are vulnerable to it should stay away from children for the duration, which is a few months.

He said the threat continues to be for the elderly and those with underlying health conditions — something we’ve known almost from the beginning. In that way, he said it is just like all of the previous respiratory viruses such as MERS and SARS. They all differ some in both contagiousness and fatality rate, but the similarities are strong.

Here’s the key: Wittkowski said the shut down probably did not slow the spread because herd immunity would have started kicking in now, or soon, as has been the case in the previous coronavirus outbreaks. However, by truncating the opportunity for herd immunity, we have set ourselves up for the feared “second wave” — something that did not happen in previous coronaviruses because we did not prevent herd immunity with the shutdown.

If Wittkowski is right, at least to some degree, these shutdowns may well have destroyed the strongest economy in history and ultimately made the virus impact worse. That would be a failing of the expert class in truly epic fashion.

Now I do not blame politicians from either party without more information. They relied on experts and did what they were told they should do. DeSantis and some other governors pushed back, but the pressure was great. However, I do blame the experts and the media’s near idolatry of the expert class. Just do what they say!

In reality, we will know by probably mid fall if the expert class made a colossal mistake. And if so, a lot of heads should roll, because mistakes of this magnitude cannot be tolerated.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Watch Live: Trump’s Press Briefing on COVID-19

What Would the Reopening of the Economy Look Like?

California Mayor to Resign After Comparing Trump Supporters to KKK

How COVID-19 Exacerbates Lebanon’s Mounting Economic, Political Woes

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

It’s Time to Privatize the United States Postal Service

The country would be wise to let the market take a shot at cleaning up government waste.


Last week, the Trump administration unveiled a proposal to privatize the United States Postal Service (USPS). The plan comes as part of a broader initiative to trim and reorganize the federal government. And given its track record of waste and inefficiency, the USPS is a great place to start cutting the fat.

“USPS’s current model is unsustainable. Major changes are needed in how the Postal Service is financed and the level of service Americans should expect from their universal service operator,” the White House’s new proposal reads. The plan goes on to say that the administration plans to “fix” the post office before beginning the process of privatization. “USPS privatization through an initial public offering (IPO) or sale to another entity would require the implementation of significant reforms prior to sale to show a possible path to profitability.”

In terms of “fixing” the post office before taking it out of the hands of the government, the Trump administration has proposed reassessing the USPS’s ties with labor unions. This would give the new owners of the post office more freedom to set wages and provide benefits that are economically realistic.

The document reads:

“Freeing USPS to more fully negotiate pay and benefits rather than prescribing participation in costly federal personnel benefit programs, and allowing it to follow private sector practices in compensation and labor relations, could further reduce costs.”

As it stands today, much of the financial mess the USPS has found itself in is because of the exorbitant benefits programs that come with collective bargaining. In fact, as it stands today, the USPS still owes over $100 billion to its retiree health benefits fund.

It should come as no surprise that the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) have joined the likes of Bernie Sanders in opposing privatization. Commenting on the matter the NALC President Fredric Rolando said:

“NALC has long been committed to working with all of the stakeholders and not one has floated the idea of privatization except private shippers, who would love nothing more than to see the Postal Service dismantled. Now that we know that this administration and its Task Force will make recommendations on reforms to achieve OMB’s privatization goals, NALC will work tirelessly with other stakeholders and Congress to oppose this faulty privatization plan every step of the way to preserve this public institution, which is based in the Constitution.”

To be sure, when Rolando speaks of other “stakeholders” he is speaking about the other labor unions who have a vested interest in seeing this perpetual cycle of inefficiency continue, so long as they continue cashing checks. In fact, Mark Dimondstein, the president of the American Postal Workers Union echoed this sentiment, calling the privatization proposal “draconian” and predicting that it “would end regular mail and package services at an affordable cost.”

But as it stands currently, costs are hardly affordable. In addition to the billions of taxpayer dollars used to fund the post office, “consumers” also have to pay to use the USPS services, which essentially means that post office patrons are actually paying twice.

But all this just speaks to the larger point that the post office has been an incompetent disaster for far too long. It is about time some sort of action was taken.

No one looks to the post office as a beacon of government competence. Actually, no one looks to the post office for any sense of efficiency at all. And while the United States Postal Service has frequently found itself at the butt of many jokes, the truth of the matter is that its incompetence is costing the American taxpayers billions of dollars each year.

For the last 11 years in a row, the post office has experienced financial losses. In 2012, it was revealed that the USPS had experienced a net loss of $15.9 billion dollars. In 2013, this number decreased to a still enormous $4.8 billion, followed by $5.3 billion in 2014. As far as fiscal year 2018 is concerned, the Postal Service has already reported a $1.3 billion dollar loss. If any private company had experienced net losses to the tune of several billions of dollars, they would quickly find themselves out of business. But the post office is a beast of a different color.

As the USPS is a government protected monopoly, it does not have to respond to market demand. And since the taxpayers are on the hook for funding the USPS regardless of its performance, there are almost no consequences for its ineptitude. In fact, in many cases, it has been rewarded for its incompetence by having more money thrown in its direction.

It might be easier for Americans to look the other way and ignore all the wasteful spending if the post office actually held some sort of relevance in our daily lives. But in the digital age, there is really no justification for extorting money from taxpayers in order to pay for an outdated service that most people do not need. All correspondence can now be done through email and online shopping has completely replaced the need to send off for physical retail catalogs. Most bills are also already sent through email, with many companies even offering discounts for going “paperless.”

While congressional approval is needed before any manner of privatization can occur, it has been met with opposition by both members of Congress and labor unions. Unfortunately, the term “privatize” scares many, who fear what might happen if the post office is put in the hands of “greedy capitalists.”

Luckily for the critics, the post office serves almost no purpose in our digital age, making these concerns virtually unfounded. Not to mention, considering the USPS’s reputation for inefficiency and waste, it would take a great deal of effort for the private sector to do a worse job than the government has done.

Bernie Sanders recently expressed his concerns over Trump’s plans for the post office, saying:

“If the goal of the Postal Service is to make as much money as possible, tens of millions of people, particularly low-income people and people in rural areas, will see a decline in or doing away with basic mail services.”

But those who, like Sanders, are wary of putting the post office in the hands of the private sector might be surprised to learn that many European countries began privatizing their postal systems years ago. And it didn’t end in a disaster. For example, when Germany privatized the Deutsche Post in 1995, it helped saved the country’s mail system.

In the wake of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall, Germany was ready for change. Much like the USPS, prior to privatization, the Deutsche Post was slow and costly. Eager to get this wasteful agency out of the state budget, Germany decided to experiment with privatization. While the process was rather long, privatizing the German post and giving it control over its own operations allowed it to function like an actual business.

Now able to make decisions without the input of state authorities, Deutsche Post was able to implement policies that saved vast amounts of money. Instead of hiring new couriers to replace those who had retired, the German post opted to leave the positions vacant. They also centralized routes to save money where they could. Coincidentally, this plan to centralize routes is also part of the proposal by the Trump administration.

The only law that the German government placed on the Deutsche Post was to mandate that letters were to be delivered to all areas of the country, meaning no one could be excluded.

Sure, this one stipulation did give the government a little control over the post, but it was far preferable to the previous situation. Since it was now privately controlled, Deutsche Post was still able to make the important budget decisions that ultimately led to its eventual success. In fact, the German privatization model was so successful, it now runs the DHL shipping company. And while the German model provides a beacon to look to abroad, even the United States has had its own experiment in privatizing the mail.

In 1844, Lysander Spooner was frustrated by the increasing costs of the USPS. Recognizing that as a government monopoly, the post office was exempt from having to actually care about its consumers’ needs, Spooner founded The American Letter Mail Company. Charging less and providing better services than the USPS, Spooner’s venture became a direct competitor to the almighty state.

However, while the American Letter Mail Company did end up having several locations in cities like Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York, the USPS was not impressed. Angered by Spooner’s success, the government made threats to railroad companies who preferred Spooner’s services. When the state fought back, the Circuit Court actually began to doubt that the government had any authority to monopolize the mail. While the Constitution does give the government the power to run the Postal Service, it does not explicitly bar other companies from competing with state-run services. However, the state sought legislative action against Spooner, reinforcing its monopoly.

Commenting on the advantage private enterprise has over government-run  services, Spooner wrote:

“Universal experience attests that government establishments cannot keep pace with private enterprise in matters of business — (and the transmission of letters is a mere matter of business.) Private enterprise has always the most active physical powers, and the most ingenious mental ones. It is constantly increasing its speed, and simplifying and cheapening its operations. But government functionaries, secure in the enjoyment of warm nests, large salaries, official honors and power, and presidential smiles — all of which they are sure of so long as they are the partisans of the President — feel few quickening impulses to labor, and are altogether too independent and dignified personages to move at the speed that commercial interests require. They take office to enjoy its honors and emoluments, not to get their living by the sweat of their brows.”

Governments love to think inside the box. In fact, they are almost incapable of operating in any other fashion. But this has led to major inefficiencies, which, in the case of the USPS, have become too expensive to ignore. While Congress would need to approve this plan before any measure of privatization can occur, our elected officials would be wise to look at the options the private sector has to offer. If we are truly seeking prosperity, rather than financial insolvency, then the country would be wise to let the market take a shot at cleaning up government waste.

COLUMN BY

Brittany Hunter

Brittany was a senior writer for the Foundation for Economic Education. Additionally, she is a co-host of Beltway Banthas, a podcast that combines Star Wars and politics. Brittany believes that the most effective way to promote individual liberty and free-market economics is by telling timely stories that highlight timeless principles.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

How Can We Have Two Systems of Justice in This Country?

There should not be two standards of justice in this nation—a slap on the wrist for the politically correct who do wrong, while Gen. Michael Flynn’s whole life has been upended for allegedly lying to the FBI.

Flynn has lost his house, livelihood, and reputation. Meanwhile, in contrast, there is a high ranking FBI attorney who allegedly doctored an email to obtain a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrant for raw political sabotage, who has yet to be punished.

Last week, Senator Charles Grassley (R) Iowa declassified some footnotes to a Justice Department inspector general report on the whole Russian-Trump collusion allegation.

Of course, this whole mess began with a dossier written by former British spy Christopher Steele. He alleged that the Trump campaign secretly received help from Russia, so that Trump might become president. All of this has been investigated ad nauseam and found to be false.

Writing over the weekend an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal (April 11-12, 2020), Sen. Ron Johnson, (R) Wisconsin, noted: “The Steele dossier already ranks as one of the dirtiest political tricks of all time.” The falsified Steele dossier became the pretext by which some FBI officials appear to have obtained FISA warrants.

How can this nation continue to have two standards of law and order? Two standards of judgment? Punishment of conservatives for alleged wrong-doing versus wrist-slapping of liberals for woeful violations of the law.

Consider the morality of this and then the legality.

High-ranking FBI officials allegedly lied to try to prevent a political opponent from winning the presidency. Then when he did win, they lied to derail his presidency.

Dr. Frank Wright, the president of D. James Kennedy Ministries, points out, “Lying has become so endemic in our time that many times when some politicians speak, it’s a given that some of what they say is not necessarily the truth—but rather it’s so-called spin. However, we’ve learned recently that there is serious deception among key government leaders—even in the FBI.”

Veteran journalist and author Robert Knight said to me in an interview for Christian television: “When I was growing up the FBI were the heroes….and now the FBI has grown into this enormous organization whose powers are far reaching, and whose powers could be abused if political partisans get a hold of it, which apparently is exactly what has happened.”

The Department of Justice is slowly examining some of the alleged crimes of bad actors, particularly in the FBI, but as of this writing, no concrete charges have been filed. The wheels of justice seem to be grinding awfully slow—and at least so far, in an unfair way—tilted to the ruling class.

Knight added, “I don’t recall anytime in American history where the FBI was used as a blunt political instrument. There’s a pattern of corruption here that’s far and deep. And Americans are wondering if anybody’s ever going to be punished for it.” Bob said these words in the summer of 2018. To my knowledge, no one involved on the left has yet been punished.

Jarrett Stepman of the Heritage Foundation comments: “It’s the idea that some men put themselves above the laws, and I think that’s what a lot of people see. Especially what happened with the FBI. Some agents thinking they had a right to try to overturn, essentially, the election by the American people.”

It’s against the Bible to have two separate standards of justice. And it’s against the Constitution.

In an interview for Christian television on the Judeo-Christian roots of America, Dr. Daniel Dreisbach of American University, outlined some of the ways the Bible influenced the U. S. Constitution. He told me, “Take, for example, something as simple as Article One, Section Eight, which authorizes Congress to ‘fix the standard of weights and measures.’”

Dreisbach continued, “Perhaps the greatest of the English Common Law Jurisprudence was a man by the name of Sir Edward Coke. He wrote a commentary on the Magna Charta. There’s a paragraph in Magna Charta, speaking to the necessity to fix standard weights and measures, and in his commentary, Sir Edward Coke, writing in the seventeenth century said, ‘This is an idea rooted in the Word of God.’”  Indeed, we can read about this in the book of Proverbs

The idea of standard weights and measures implies that you would do the honest thing for all your customers. God is a God of justice, and He hates dishonest dealings—one standard for one person, but a different standard for someone else.

This country cannot have two standards of justice—one for the politically correct ruling class and another for the rest of us “deplorables.” It’s unconstitutional. And more importantly, it’s unbiblical.

© All rights reserved.