Trump Won, But We’re Not Done!

Between eating Turkey, passing out, and eating more turkey, plus pumpkin cheesecake (a dollop of whipped cream on top), I caught the news on TV. It seemed the lead story of every broadcast was Trump is an uncouth two-faced SOB. The incredulous mainstream media is going to bombard us for the next four years, spinning every news story to further the Left’s despicable lie that stupid racist whites elected America’s version of Hitler.

The Left has already begun doubling down on it’s efforts to demonize conservatism and block every attempt to reverse Obama’s illegal far-left radical transformation of our once great nation.

Heads up folks. Step one in the Left’s War Room playbook is to discourage us; convince us that Trump is a fraud who will betray his voters. This is why we are seeing so many Leftist talking heads, the NY Times and other democrat operatives disguised as media claiming Trump is backing away from his campaign promises. Don’t fall for it folks.

These people on the Left are relentless and evil. Yes, I said evil. Most of what they stand for and desire to do is consistently anti-God, anti-America and anti-traditional family and values. They always send the message that God’s original plan and purposes are stupid. They have a much better more sophisticated idea for the way things ought to be. But, I digress.

trump-hillary-twiceEven as I speak, Hillary’s camp is still insidiously scheming to steal the presidential election from We the People in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

In an unprecedented sleazy attack, Hillary’s thugs sent threatening letters to electors to bully them into breaking tradition and the law by voting against the will of voters in their states. Hillary’s thugs are trying to strong-arm electors to vote for Hillary on December 19th rather than Trump, the peoples’ choice. 

The Clintons are like Jason and Michael Myers in those Friday the 13th and Halloween movies. No matter what was done to kill Jason and Michael; hit them with a train or cutting them up into little pieces, somehow they came back to life. Thus, I am holding my breath until after December 19th. Then, I can rest assured that Hillary is truly politically dead and Trump can begin fixing Obama’s mess; making America great again.

Since 2012, I have served as chairman of The Conservative Campaign Committee (CCC). CCC was birthed out of Tea Party Express. CCC’s brilliant executive director, Joe Wierzbicki and president Ryan Gill saw the need for a PAC laser-focused on electing conservatives; mostly House and Senate races. They asked me to come on broad as chairman of CCC.

I like to think of us as the “Wild Bunch”, the title of an old movie. We produce TV and radio campaign ads and utilize social media. We go the unusual extra mile of providing boots on the ground initiatives; organizing phone-from-home, rallies and standing on street corners waving signs; not my wife Mary’s favorite thing because she hates cold weather. We pride ourselves on squeezing every ounce of juice out of our resources, talents and efforts. Win or lose, we know we gave it our all.

Mary and I are still on the road. Post election, our CCC team is working on the Louisiana Special Runoff Election through December 10th, and then on top of that the push-back by Democrats to try and steal the election in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, and then the 100 Day Plan, Supreme Court battles (go Ted Cruz!) and so much more… 

My bottom line is yes, Trump won, but we’re not done yet folks.

The Left is not going away, abandoning its evil mission to transform America. Think of them as villains Jason and Michael Myers, impossible to permanently annihilate. The Left will relentlessly seek to discourage us at every turn. Even before his inauguration, the Left has begun its shock-and-awe assault to destroy Trump’s presidency. It is vitally important that we remain unaffected by media spin. We must stay engaged, alert and prayed-up.

Like the Carpenters’ song, “We’ve Only Just Begun” the monumental politically bloody battle to reverse Obama’s evil transformation of our country. Crazy people are dangerous. Thus, be prepared for the crazy Left to come at Trump and normal thinking Americans with every evil scheme/attack their perverted brains can conceive.

Three Leftist black thugs beat up an elderly white man including kicks to his face for voting for Trump. A group of Leftist blacks beat up a black female Trump supporter and told spectators not to call an ambulance for her. Black Lives Matters have doubled down on assassinating police. Unprecedented, there have been 60 police officers fatally shot this year, 20 in ambushes. This is pure evil from the pits of hell folks.

We must be ready to legally push back. Quoting English military and political leader Oliver Cromwell, “Trust in God and keep your powder dry.”

My fellow patriots, yes, Trump won. But we have many more miles to go before we can sleep.

VIDEO: Nigel Farage speech in the United States about Brexit and Trump

Nigel Farage on 2016, the year of political revolution, stating, “Often there are decades where very little happens and occasionally there’s a year where decades happen.”

Watch this analysis of what happened in 2016.

Here’s Donald Trump’s statement regarding British referendum on E.U. membership posted June 24, 2016 on Facebook:

The people of the United Kingdom have exercised the sacred right of all free peoples. They have declared their independence from the European Union, and have voted to reassert control over their own politics, borders and economy. A Trump Administration pledges to strengthen our ties with a free and independent Britain, deepening our bonds in commerce, culture and mutual defense. The whole world is more peaceful and stable when our two countries – and our two peoples – are united together, as they will be under a Trump Administration.

Come November, the American people will have the chance to re-declare their independence. Americans will have a chance to vote for trade, immigration and foreign policies that put our citizens first. They will have the chance to reject today’s rule by the global elite, and to embrace real change that delivers a government of, by and for the people. I hope America is watching, it will soon be time to believe in America again.

Prophetic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nigel Farage: “I Fear For My Life”

FARAGE: If Le Pen Wins, The EU Is Over

Change Your Mind — Change Your Destiny — Here’s Great News!

bride-of-christWilliam James, the father of modern psychology said that the greatest discovery of our time is that we can alter our lives by altering our attitudes.

So what attitude do we need to alter most? Most likely it’s our attitude toward the Creator of the universe who seems like a vengeful tyrant that allows needless suffering and who, religionists say, will send us to hell–eternal torment for mistakes that we already made. Who wants to believe in a God like that?

That’s all a lie, and if we start life’s crossword puzzle with “God is love,” the blanks fill in much better. The Bible teaches that God loved mankind so much that, in spite of our going our own way and falling into many woes, God sent His Son (we are made in Their image or likeness and most of life’s lessons are applicable to destiny) to show us how to live well with a high destiny. This is the “gospel.”

Gospel means ‘good news,’ and there are lots of sincere people teaching what they believe is the gospel, but in most cases, it’s only part of the story that goes something like this:

Christ died for our sins and if we invite Him into our hearts, He will save us. That’s an important part of the picture, but it misses an important aspect…

There’s a changing aspect of the gospel. In Noah’s day, it meant being saved from destruction. In Moses’ time, it was deliverance from slavery. Christ offered eternal salvation.  This changing aspect of truth (Christ is the Truth) makes the truth for our time easy to miss. Human nature clings to the familiar and tends to reject Christ in present truth.

For us, the gospel is better than any of the above because it’s all of them and more if we meet the conditions implied in His wedding parables that are misunderstood by many Christians who have been taught that Christ will suddenly take us to heaven. They fail to understand the wedding from the Old Testament Scriptures that Christ was teaching—

The greatest event in the Old Testament was God’s deliverance of His people from slavery in Egypt—He took them to covenant relationship by which they became His kingdom (Exodus 19:5,6) and Bride Jeremiah 3:14. There’s a parallel experience for us if we can believe it and understand it better.

The disciples asked when Christ would restore the kingdom and He said it wasn’t for them to know the times and seasons (Acts 1:6,7) but Paul said we ‘know them perfectly, for the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night when they shall say peace and safety* sudden destruction comes on them as travail** on a woman with child.’ 1Thess 5:1-3.

*The Iran Nuclear Treaty was ‘peace and safety’ and five other “when-then” signs from 2015 suggest “kingdom” events are impending as a world crisis is building that fits the Bible’s description.

**The apostle Paul included the Exodus when sudden destruction fell on Egypt travailing with God’s ‘firstborn’ Exod 4:22. He said, “All those things happened to them for our examples…ends of the world.” 1Cor 10:1,11.

Summary:

God is going to afflict the U.S. for its godless culture of murdering infants (60 million abortions) as Egypt killed Israelite babies (not even a million) and the Supreme Court re-defining of biblical marriage contrary to what even dumb animals know.

Those who understand the Bible on this topic and are ready for what’s coming can be blessed with a higher destiny. Please give the conditions and clues that Christ specified your best consideration as explained here.

To the intent that “He will make [us] ruler over all that He has.”

EDITORS NOTE: Dr. Richard Ruhling is a retired physician who sees much meaning in the all-time best-seller, the Bible. His books like The Alpha & Omega Bible Code have mostly 5-star reviews on Amazon and most are free. Click here: http://amzn.to/1iXKH8n

Rise of the Alt-Media

Soon various news outlets will publish their Top 10 List of news stories from this year.

The biggest, and the #1  story, of 2016 is not about the alt-Right. Rather it is about the alt-Media.

For the first time in history it was the citizen journalist who overtook the Presidential primary and election by storm. Ordinary citizens, the forgotten men and women on Drudge Report, Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, YouTube, Instagram and the newest social media site Gab.ai changed the narrative and spoke truth to power.

Websites like WikiLeaks and citizen video journalists at Project Veritas exposed corruption, fraud and abuses of power. The dent became a major collision as those in power were disposed by the powerless.

Click here for one list of alt-Media sites.

The alt-Media became so powerful that Facebook and Twitter began aggressively censoring those who exposed their lies and manipulation of the facts. Some called out the false polling and narrative that Hillary Clinton had the election in the bag, until the early hours of November 9th, when the walls came crashing down.

Legacy media outlets are disgraced, licking their wounds and still trying to understand why they weren’t listened too by the unwashed masses. The legacy media or LAME for short, believed their propaganda would ring as true with those too weak minded to seek out the truth on WikiLeaks, Project Veritas and read the headlines on the Drudge Report and on Breitbart.

Even today the “woe is me” are still crying in their frappes.

The rise of the alt-Media is how one drains the swamp of those reptiles who would consume those who fought against them, namely now President-elect Donald J. Trump.

Social media has a new sheriff in town and their name is alt-Media.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Surprising Fact About Trump’s Transition the Media Won’t Tell You

The Forgotten Man — There is something fitting in the idea that the last shall be first

In the just-concluded election cycle, the term “The Forgotten Man” became fashionable in the final days of the campaign. Donald Trump began using it extensively as did his surrogates in media interviews because it so completely summed up the feelings of so many voters — the average guy working hard, paying his taxes and completely ignored by the Establishment.

TRANSCRIPT

In the just-concluded election cycle, the term “The Forgotten Man” became fashionable in the final days of the campaign. Donald Trump began using it extensively as did his surrogates in media interviews because it so completely summed up the feelings of so many voters — the average guy working hard, paying his taxes and completely ignored by the Establishment.

The term is from the title of a 2007 book examining the middle class during the depression of the 1930s. The upshot is that political and cultural elites completely dismissed the concerns of the common man, the middle class, the working stiff — what the media, cultural and political elites today refer to as “flyover country.”

The parallels between events in the culture and events in the Church continue to amaze. Just as it is an appropriate term in the social context, so too there is the Forgotten Man in the pews of Catholic parishes these days.

All over America, there are men and women, working hard to raise their children in a sea of filth, to try and impart the Faith to them. All over America, parents are struggling to fend off cultural icons that attract the attention of their children and drag them out of the Faith.

These men and women constitute the Forgotten Man of Catholicism — the Forgotten Catholic. Their fears are seldom addressed by the Church Establishment. In fact, in many cases there fears are actually bolstered by a hierarchy and clergy that sound very much like the very culture that parents are trying to fight off.

The Church should be — always — a countercultural institution, especially in this evil and perverted culture. And yet, when parents step into a Catholic church with their little souls in tow, they get blasted with warmed-over, secular preaching about acceptance and tolerance and not being judgmental.

They are almost guaranteed never to hear a word breathed about Hell or sin or damnation or salvation.

They are “treated” to careless liturgy, hostility toward anything remotely smacking of traditional Catholicism, and are, in a word, forgotten. How has this situation come about that the people who put their money in the collection baskets and actually believe the Faith are essentially ignored and forgotten?

Because they live in theological flyover country; they are the peasant Catholics whom bishops and various clergy hold in quiet disdain. Their concerns are not really that important because they aren’t writing huge checks to the archbishop’s annual fundraiser; they aren’t making enormous donations to various archdiocesan galas and dinners and benefits.

They are the Forgotten Man of the Church, and they are walked all over by too many of the clergy, dismissed as fanatics or overly zealous or, God forbid, too pre-Vatican II.

The people in the pews who embrace the garbage spewed out at them Sunday after Sunday are the very ones who are leaving the Church because they’ve been given no compelling reason to stay in. Soon, all that will be left is a small collection of the Deplorables, the Forgotten Man — those who will have remained faithful and longsuffering in the face of so much scorn and contempt.

The great irony is it is the contemptible clergy in the end who will be forgotten, while those who are currently the peasants who will change from being forgotten to forever remembered and embraced by Almighty God.

There is something entirely fitting in that — something like “The last shall be first.”

EDITORS NOTE: This video commentary first appeared on ChurchMilitant.com.

The Ideological Litmus Test for Immigrants

There has been considerable and legitimate debate over the rightness and efficacy of profiling criminals. Where is the proper balance between good, proactive policing and infringing on Americans’ civil liberties?

But can the same two-sided case be made for profiling visitors and potential immigrants to our country? Not at all. Certainly no case can be made with the same arguments, starting with the fact that they are not American citizens.

Here’s why an ideological test is legitimate and responsible for immigrants and visitors.

  1. It is well accepted that nations have the right and responsibility to control their borders and control who comes and who goes.
  2. Two reasons they have a responsibility to do so are to ensure that people do not enter who want to foment insurrection and topple the legitimate government, or who are known criminals and pose a threat to the population. No one argues that latter, few would argue with the former.
  3. In the case of insurrection, that means that an ideological component must be at work for a nation protecting itself and citizenry. If a person is known to want to create a rebellion against the United States of America, for instance, there will be some sort of ideology driving that desire. And the government has not only a right, but a duty, to keep that person out of the country.
  4. Any ideology that seeks to replace the United States Constitution and its enumerated rights for citizens is by definition an ideology seeking to wholly replace the government of the United States that is derived from that Constitution, and is therefore an ideology of insurrection and subversion.
  5. Sharia law, just as a for instance, is a religious form of government. The Arabic term sharīʿah means a body of religious law derived from prophecy — as opposed to human legislation derived through democracy. Sharia law is set through religion and is governed by religious leaders. As such, it is antithetical to nearly every portion and amendment in the United State’s Constitution — the structure on which the legitimate government of the United States is built. Sharia law is therefore ideologically incompatible with the country and believes in the eventual overthrow of the government by some means.
  6. Therefore anyone who believes in Sharia law for the United States should not be allowed entrance to the country as a visitor or an immigrant.

The same reasoning can be applied to other ideological positions, such as being an anarchist or Mexican “Reconquistas” who believe that the entire Southwest United States should be conquered in some fashion by Hispanics.

This does not mean that if you disagree with an amendment of the U.S. Constitution or oppose with laws and policies you cannot come in — unless your ideology would lead you to criminally oppose them. And it would not apply to heads of state. But if any known or stated ideological belief leads to the overthrow of the United States government, then the government actually has a mandate to keep out people who hold those ideologies.

It is not bigotry. It is not a question of freedom of religion. It is not an affront to freedom of speech. And such ideological profiling does not apply to American citizens. But it is totally defensible as a required filter for visitors and potential immigrants for the sake of American citizens and visitors.

EDITORS NOTE: Here is the Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America,

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”

This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

Santa Claus fired for opposing Muslim child marriages

The Bavarian town of Mühldorf has fired the man who has dressed up as Father Christmas for over 30 years because of the social media post he shared on his Facebook page. Peter Mück has been a staple of the annual Christkindlmarkt, or Christmas market, in the town for over a generation, handing out sweets to local children, The Telegraph reports.

The Santa Claus who sought to protect the well-being of children got sacked in the name of political correctness and fear, but the Mayor of Mühldorf and Socialist party member, Marianne Zollner, tried to spin it differently — and highly illogically. She said:

“I explained to him that this movement, in my view, does not respect the equality and dignity of all people, or our democratic values, and that this attitude was not compatible with the work of portraying Santa Claus.”

If Zollner respected democratic values, and the equality and dignity of all people, she would not have supported firing Peter Muck, who in fact was standing up for the rights, equality and dignity of young girls who are abused and humiliated under the banner of Islamic culture. Marianne Zollner is fearful of Muslim backlash, period.

Interesting that Zoller and the other Mühldorf authorities responsible for sacking Santa would be the first in line to proclaim that Islam is hijacked by a small group of jihadists, child rapists (despite Muhammad’s consummation of his marriage with nine-year-old Aisha) and the likes of the Islamic State. So does it follow, then, that their action in firing this veteran Santa is an essentially open declaration that they are fearful of offending jihadists, child rapists and the likes of the Islamic State? Hardly. Their actions (never their words) do show, however, that they actually deem Muslims overall to be in an dangerous class by themselves, and Westerners must never offend them, out of fear of backlash.

Those responsible for firing Santa Claus in Mühldorf – and all like-minded Westerners — need to confront their obvious fear (phobia) of Muslims and begin to take up the fight for our freedoms, human rights and the rule of law. They also need to recognize that no genuinely peace-loving, pluralistic Muslim will ever support human rights abuses or the victimology narrative of “Islamophobia.” Any caring, thinking individual will share the same concern for the rape of child brides as was shown by the sacked Santa of Mühldorf.

santa

Peter Mück (center)

“German Santa Sacked After Sharing Anti-Child Marriage Post Online”, by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, November 23, 2016:

A Christmas market Santa Claus was sacked in Germany after sharing a post from the hipster-right Identitarian movement which called for action against the increasing number of child marriages in the country.

The Bavarian town of Mühldorf has fired the man who has dressed up as Father Christmas for over 30 years because of the social media post he shared on his Facebook page. Peter Mück has been a staple of the annual Christkindlmarkt, or Christmas market, in the town for over a generation, handing out sweets to local children, The Telegraph reports.

Mr. Mück was fired because he supported the action of the anti-mass migration hipster-right Identitarian youth movement who were campaigning against the growing trend of child marriages among migrants in Germany. The post which he shared had the slogan, “Child marriage = child abuse” of which he commented, “the core message of which is correct and justifiable for me.”

Mayor of Mühldorf, and Socialist party member, Marianne Zollner explained the reasoning behind getting rid of Mr. Mück, saying: “I explained to him that this movement, in my view, does not respect the equality and dignity of all people, or our democratic values, and that this attitude was not compatible with the work of portraying Santa Claus.”

Since the sacking, the mayor has claimed to have received threats from Germans online who she says accuse her of protecting paedophiles.

Mück claimed for his defence that he had not known about the background of the group who many in the German media have accused of being “undemocratic” and even “neo-Nazi” despite their repeated claims that their peaceful protests are a part of the democratic process.

A prominent figure in the German-speaking Identitarian movement is Martin Sellner who leads the Austrian branch of the organisation. He expressed bafflement as to why the Socialist mayor would punish Mr. Mück for spreading a message the vast majority of Germans agree with including the Federal Justice Minister Heiko Maas.

Speaking exclusively to Breitbart London he said: “These are methods like in the Stalinist DDR (East Germany). The multiculturalist elite is in panic mode and flailing around wildly in a rage of censorship. They have learned nothing. With every citizen they hurt, we are getting new sympathisers.”….

RELATED ARTICLE: Providence, RI mayor establishes Muslim-American Advisory Board to protect Muslims

The ‘Hate-Crime’ Victims Of Trump Who Weren’t by Jamie Glazov

To gain power, totalitarian movements always portray themselves as victims. And while they are in the process of abusing, they cry in front of the world posing as the abused. They stage “hate-crime” attacks against themselves because hate crimes are their political and cultural capital. When those hate-crimes don’t exist, they must be invented.

We are witnessing precisely this phenomenon at this very moment in regards to the myriad hoax “hate-crimes” that anti-Trump forces are manufacturing out of thin air and blaming on Trump supporters. The media are bolstering the entire hallucination process, with CNN leading the way.

Central to the whole narrative is the supposed “Islamophobic” anti-Muslim crime-wave sweeping the nation. The rumors spread and the media regurgitates the lies without any evidence to back them up. And then, after the hoaxes are debunked one by one, the media is, by that time, bored and no longer interested.

The latest “Islamophobia” counterfeit involves a Muslim student at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL). The Muslima alleged that her hijab and wallet were stolen by two white Trump supporters who were shouting racial slurs. The woman’s accusation incensed leftists and Muslims across the nation and the world, prompting the ACLU of Louisiana to issue a statementdenouncing both the incident and, of course, Donald Trump. The investigation into the incident involved several law enforcement agencies, including the FBI. The Washington Post, New York Times and CNN, meanwhile, ate the story up.

But what happened to this Muslima’s story under tough police questioning? Well, the ULL student eventually broke down and admitted to police that she had fabricated the entire thing. By that time, of course, the media wasn’t too interested in such an innocuous little detail.

Recently, The Huffington Post reported on an incident of “Islamophobia” under the headline “Islamophobia Just Drove This Boy And His Family Out Of America.” It was all so heartbreaking and unjust. The one little problem with the story, however, was that it never happened.

Trump supporters, meanwhile, are supposedly involved in a lot of other evil than just attacking Muslim women on campuses and driving little Muslim boys out of America:

A gay Canadian filmmaker, Chris Ball, was alleged to have been beaten up by Trump supporters on election night in Santa Monica. It was upsetting, but it turned out the incident never really happened at all.

An image also recently went viral online that purported to show KKK members in North Carolina celebrating Donald Trump’s victory. It was really awful. And it was also confirmed to be a hoax. The proof of the hoax, however, didn’t go viral.

Many other hoaxes of Trump-induced terror are being debunked as we speak.

All of these “hate-crime” fabrications made up by the anti-Trump forces are nothing new. They are a completely natural ingredient of how totalitarians operate and, hence, how the Unholy Alliance of the Left and Islam operates. Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield explains this phenomenon in the context of the Left:

“The left is a victimhood cult. It feeds off pain and fetishizes suffering as a moral commodity to be sold and resold in exchange for political power.”

Greenfield calls this leftist charade “victimocracy” and labels its foot soldier the “cry-bully” who is, in reality, the “abuser-victim.” This monster, Greenfield writes, is

“the abuser who pretends to be a victim. His arguments are his feelings. He comes armored in identity politics entitlement and is always yelling about social justice or crying social justice tears. If you don’t fight back, the cry-bully bullies you. If you fight back, the cry-bully cries and demands a safe space because you made him feel unsafe.”

Thus, because now the Unholy Alliance maniacs feel “unsafe” because they didn’t get their way in the election, it becomes very clear why it’s crucial for them to play the victim – and, most importantly, to fabricate “hate-crimes” being perpetrated against themselves. Greenfield explains:

“If cry-bullies can’t safe-bait you, they will manufacture threats by faking hate crimes against themselves or phoning in bomb threats to validate their need for a safe space in which no one is allowed to disagree with them. Surviving their own fake crimes turns cry-bullies into social justice heroes.”

Islamic supremacists play a key part in this story. And since the Left controls our culture and boundaries of discourse, it makes complete sense that the media, instead of focusing on how the Muslim community should make Americans feel safe by repudiating Islamic texts that inspire and sanction violence against unbelievers, instead amplify the narrative that it is Muslims who are afraid and that it is non-Muslim Americans who need to make Muslims feel safe. Leading scholar of Islam Robert Spencer explains this charade, unveiling why Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the CAIR need there to be hate crimes against Muslims so badly:

“The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wants and needs hate crimes against Muslims, because they’re the currency they use to buy power and influence in our victimhood-oriented society, and to deflect attention away from jihad terror and onto Muslims as putative victims.”

This is why the Muslima at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette fabricated the “hate-crime” against herself. And it is also why her lie is only the latest example in a long list of so many other Muslim counterfeit stories.

Just to list a few of the typical and notorious incidents:

In February 2016, a Michigan Muslima, Said Chatti, was arraigned in Dearborn’s 18th District Court for making a false police report about an “Islamophobic” plot to bomb Dearborn FordsonHigh School, a majority-Muslim high school. She contacted the Dearborn Police Department and claimed that an “anonymous” friend of hers overheard a group of individuals plotting to blow up the school to retaliate against the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. When the police presented her with the evidence of the holes in her story, she admitted it was a false report.

In December 2015, a 37-year-old Muslim man, Gary Nathaniel Moore of Houston, was charged with first-degree arson for setting a Houston mosque on fire on Christmas day – a mosque where he himself was a regular, having attended it for five years, coming five times per day to pray seven days per week. Using surveillance video from multiple businesses nearby, investigators were able to identify Moore and a search warrant of his home recovered a backpack and clothing similar to that which was seen in surveillance footage, as well as half of a two-pack of charcoal lighter-fluid bottles that seemed to match another lighter fluid bottle found inside the mosque.

In March 2012, we beheld the murder of Muslima Shaima Alawadi. At first reported as a “hate-crime,” it then turned out to be an honor murder. The media and Unholy Alliance were extremely vocal and indignant while the murder was a hate-crime, even staging a campaign, “One Million Hijabs for Shaima Alawadi.” But once the murder turned out to be an Islamic crime, Shaima turned out not to matter to even one of the activists who had, at one point, made so much noise and howled so many cries of indignation.

The list goes on and on: a Muslim woman in England was proven to have lied to police about claiming to have been punched in the face for wearing a hijab; a Muslim woman in Dearborn dropped a lawsuit against police after video proved she was lying when claiming they forced her to remove her hijab; a supposed “hit-and-run” on a Muslim woman in Brussels blamed on “far right” anti-Islam demonstrators turned out to be perpetrated by a Muslim named “Mohamed.”

Many more of these Muslim victimization fantasies and lies have been documented by Robert Spencer in his special report, “The Top Anti-Muslim Hate Crime Hoaxes of 2014,” and in his recent video, Yet Another “Islamophobic Hate Crime” Hoax.

And so, we come to see that faking hate-crimes is a long and standard tradition of the cry-bully, and the Unholy Alliance is the premier cry-bully of our modern age. With Trump’s victory now a reality, the Left/Islam forces are foaming at the mouth and gnashing their teeth.

And while they set fires and break windows, brutally beat young girls for liking Trump, break the faces of those they think look like Trump and injure police officers, they cry and whine because they are the real victims of real hate-crimes. But, as the evidence reveals, these are the hate-crimes perpetrated by the Trump supporters who might have been — and inflicted on the victims who weren’t.

Reprinted from Daily Caller.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump’s CIA nominee Mike Pompeo promises to roll back Iran deal

Jamie Glazov Moment: Steve Bannon, Keith Ellison and the Left’s Ugly Record on Anti-Semitism

‘Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells. We have a cell here in Minneapolis!’

“Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells. We have a cell here in Minneapolis.” Davis said that “six to 10” jihad supporters had attended previous hearings and noted that “some defendants gave them signals.” Two defendants, Mohamed Farah and Abdirahman Daud, “flashed index fingers pointed upward as they faced the gallery on their way out, an apparent symbol of ‘tawhid’ that symbolizes an Islamic concept of ‘oneness of God’ but is also a popular symbol used by ISIL supporters.”

What was happening was clear to anyone who is informed, but so few people are. Kudos to Judge Davis for telling it like it is.

“Terrorist cell is alive in Minneapolis, U.S. judge in ISIL case says,” by Stephen Montemayor, Star Tribune, November 19, 2016:

In sentencing nine young Somali-Minnesotans on terror conspiracy charges this week, U.S. District Judge Michael Davis closed a chapter in the federal government’s long, extraordinary investigation of ISIL recruitment in Minnesota.

But the full story is far from over.

In nine hearings over three days before a courtroom packed with the families of the young men who sought to give their lives to ISIL, Davis repeatedly underlined a clear message: There is a terrorist cell in Minneapolis and it is still alive today.

Each day, Davis sought to extract acknowledgment from the young men that they were “terrorists,” and left no doubt as to his thoughts on whether they were simply misguided youths.

“Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells,” Davis said one day, then, raising his voice: “We have a cell here in Minneapolis.”

Saying the Minnesota public had “danced around” the issue, Davis described the cell’s size as being between nine to 20, including those sentenced last week and others killed abroad.

Later in the week, he raised eyebrows in the courtroom by telling one defendant that he noted “six to 10” supporters who attended previous hearings and insisted that “some defendants gave them signals.”

“I know they’re out there,” Davis said. “The community knows they’re out there.”

Federal prosecutors seemed to share Davis’ conviction. In an unusual development on Wednesday, they asked that two defendants, Mohamed Farah and Abdirahman Daud, be returned to the courtroom after their hearings were finished. Prosecutors said both men flashed index fingers pointed upward as they faced the gallery on their way out, an apparent symbol of “tawhid” that symbolizes an Islamic concept of “oneness of God” but is also a popular symbol used by ISIL supporters.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Priebus on Islam: “Clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic”

Trump’s CIA nominee Mike Pompeo promises to roll back Iran deal

Donald Trump, Honor Your Words, Make Them your Deeds by Thomas Pastore, USMC

The recent statement (11/22/16), that you will not pursue any further investigation and criminal pursuits of Hillary Clinton has already lost you a large percentage of voters who have put you in the Executive office, an Executive office whose threshold you have yet to cross. The year 2019 is not that far away, and Americans longing for a corruption-cleansed Washington are beginning to see that vision fade. Why would you risk that second term before you begin the first? Your declaration of “deeds to pursue”, is what invigorated an “imprisoned” citizenry to vote for you.

The alleged criminality of one Hillary Clinton has embedded itself so deeply into the tributaries that leak out of the “Swamp” (that you promised to clean) that anything else other then seeking her indictment, (as part of a “cleaning” process) is already viewed as redundant. I don’t need to break out the laundry list of alleged crimes which should have already been prosecuted by the exiting “Hope and Change” crowd.

Do not take away this chance to have a legitimate investigation and prosecution that we all know is more than just speculation. America is owed that much! Revealed emails that allegedly speak of defiance of the law, collusion to violate the law, conspiracy to destroy evidence, endangering the lives of over 300 million people due to unsecured equipment, the transference of classified and higher material through unsecured equipment, and said equipment also determined to have been “hacked” by many foreign interests, etc. are just some of the reasons America deserves and seeks a fair and just review and prosecution should the truth demand such a pursuit. It is our Right! What is and what will be the difference between you and this present administration should you do as they have done?

Donald Trump, this goes higher and further than even your position in our government. The people of America have an undeniable and indisputable right to seek justice. The scars of denial and disdain remain all across America’s back and will remain, regardless of how history rewrites these past eight insufferable years. Too many politicians have felt that America is their playground, when in fact it is the people’s country, though now scorched with the careless disrespect and disregard by those interested in only greedy pursuits.

The country is now so dirtied and tainted that only an aggressive and determined investigation and prosecution could provide the proper detergent for the “cleaning” that you claim to desire. Do the right thing and remove these “boot-prints” of forced crime, distorted “diversity,” and demanded “tolerance” from our backs. Allow the scars to heal.

Should you continue these “politics-as-usual” pursuits, thinking it is for “the greater good,” then you will be tossing around the same lies that have been coming out of Washington for the past eight years. Maybe even unbeknownst to you, your “changeling” process will have begun, and you may not even recognize yourself before the first 100 days. It will be certain that We the People will see you as we see others who have bedded themselves in the satin sheets of “Let’s Make a Deal,” a.k.a. Washington, D.C.

We the People will be forced to recognize that you cannot keep the one (#1), promise that inspired many to get you elected. The disillusion will once again fester and the hope will fade away. We will be compelled to seek another Candidate, four years hence, as Uncle Sam begins to turn “blue” from the betrayal injected into his system.

What benefit would any other investigations and/or indictments mean when the only true pursuit is being ignored because you feel they are “good people?” America’s prisons are filled with “good people” because the need for truth and justice had to prevail so as to preserve the integrity and sincerity of a struggling people working towards a civilized society. Who will respect you and the justice system should you turn your back on the very essence and heartbeat of why we have such a justice system?

These past eight years have force-fed the people a dictator-style justice that served no one but the Monster of Dissension.

Undoubtedly, the Democrat Party would not have been so kind, as history has reflected in our past pursuits of justice with Watergate, when Hillary herself was determined to seek a “body” to prosecute at any cost.

We should not have to walk a path of treachery to bring back some dignity and respect to America, as both globally and at home, people are waiting, watching, and yes, hoping. Don’t let your words become syllables of meaningless rhyme when you have the grandest of opportunities to rebuild America with deeds…Deeds take Courage, and few leaders have that ingredient!

Let people respect you for what you do, not for what you say. We have had too many words of miscarriage and far too few deeds with honor in an America desperate to restore its identity as well as its intended path.

Making America Great Again is more then just Pontificating at the Podium. One must be ready to honor the will of the people, for the People are also “GOOD” and deserve more from one who chooses to lead.

Let’s not allow history to say, “They lost the election but Won the War”.

Thomas Pastore
Vietnam Veteran/USMC
“Where the smell of the swamp is beginning to intoxicate America’s opportunity to become Great.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Caddell: Trump’s Clinton Pass a ‘Mistake,’ Raises ‘Questions About Commitments’ That Got Him Elected

eter Schweizer: Letting Hillary off the Hook Is ‘Definition of a Rigged System’

‘Not Over’: 4 Legal Probes Hillary Clinton Still Faces

Mitt Romney — You are not welcome in the White House

Dear Mr. Trump,

(Via)  Ms. Hicks – at the Trump press office and the Trump transition team leadership,

This nation does not and will not be able to tolerate the likes of Mr. Mitt Romney in the White House or in  any part of your “Make America Great Again” team.

He is part of the reason this nation fell into the hot soup of Marxism and Socialism and Communism and Progressive debauchery.

Mr. Romney is the father of the misnamed Obamacare.  Credit given to President Obama for Mr. Romney’s unconstitutional assault on the people of Massachusetts with his forced mandated health care plan.

The citizens of Massachusetts who fail to comply with his forced engagement in commerce still face fines and persecution at their  place of employment and are forced to pay deductions from their retirement checks for insurance.

All unconstitutional.

Romneycare –  the blue print of Obamacare devised and created and designed by Romney’s team of people like Dr. Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economics professor and personal friend of Mitt Romney, who wrote the blue print for the destruction of America’s free market healthcare system.

Mitt Romney – the Socialist  who buried his state of Massachusetts in carbon taxes driving up the price of fuel like coal and gas in an attempt to enforce the George Soros backed and Al Gore inspired Obama and Hillary Clinton supported United Nations fraud of global warming.

Mitt Romney the Socialist who hides behind the GOP brand name while working for the New World Order globalists.

Mr. Trump – stay far away from the Socialist Romney – he is a festering sore on capitalism and will bring you back down  into the septic tank of the Hillary Clinton mindset of global governance vice constitutional sovereignty and free markets.

Nationalism is scorned and sneered at by these Republican In Name Only establishment Marxists.   They hide in the pockets of George Soros and pop out like confetti and opportune moments.

See you in Washington, D.C. –  God Bless America!

Kind regards,

Senior Chief Geoff Ross
Surface Warfare Air Warfare
US Navy retired
Trump – Senior Enlisted Military Retired Team

UPDATE: Kellyanne Conway: Party Unity, Sure, But Romney as Head of State? No

President-elect Donald Trump’s top adviser Sunday questioned the loyalty of Mitt Romney should he be selected secretary of state.

In an interview with CNN’s “State of the Union,” Kellyanne Conway – who has voiced previous criticism of Romney as a candidate for the nation’s top diplomat – declared, “We don’t even know if Mitt Romney voted for Donald Trump.” “I’m all for party unity, but I’m not sure we have to pay for that with the secretary of state position,” she said.

“What Donald Trump decides, Kellyanne Conway and everybody else will respect,” she added. “It’s just the backlash from the grassroots. I’m hearing from people saying ‘my parents died penniless, but I gave $216 to Donald Trump’s campaign, and I would feel betrayed.’

She also took a swipe at Romney’s qualifications for the post. “Gov. Romney, in the last four years, has he been around the globe doing something on behalf of the United States of which we’re unaware?” she asked. “Did he go and intervene in Syria where they are having a massive humanitarian crisis? Has he been helpful to [Israel Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu?”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Huckabee: Choosing Romney As Secretary Of State An Insult To All Trump Voters

What You Need to Know About Gov. Nikki Haley, Trump’s Pick for UN Ambassador

Meet Betsy DeVos, Trump’s Pick for Education Secretary

I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam

Isn’t “Phobia” a type of mental disorder, an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something? Isn’t the “Islamophobia” motion which was ‘unanimously’ passed by the Canadian Government which calls for limiting the rights of Canadians to criticize Islam, contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

The definition of Islamophobia from a Google search is dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.

What exactly has the Parliament of Canada petitioned against? Criticism of Islam? Criticism of Muhammad? Criticism and condemning the Islamic State and all Islamic terrorist groups affiliated with radical Islamic ideology? Petitioning against those Canadians who Condemn Sharia law? If Canadians criticize Islam or convert from Islam, will they now be considered an “Islamophobe” by Canada?

Is Canada Planning to Make Criticizing Islam Illegal?

What’s next? Sending Iran and Hamas type morality police to the doorsteps of Canadians critical of Islam, while radical imams continue to spew openly radical Ideas in schools and mosques? What about Canadians who are suspicious of others plotting possible terrorist activities – will they be afraid to report it to authorities in case they are wrong?

The petition your government recently passed a motion for was initiated on June 8, 2016 by Samer Majzoub, President of the Canadian Muslim Forum condemning Islamophobia in “all” forms.

The details in the petition which was sponsored by the Liberal MP are extremely sketchy to say the least- e-411 for the parliamentary petition:

“We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

Again I say, please keep in mind Islamophobia’s definition.

Is Canada Planning to Make Criticizing Islam Illegal?

It seems that many Western politicians, the “Mainstream Media”, and our political elites use the term “Islamophobia” without even knowing what is in Islam. There might be lot to rationally be “phobic”, or simply fearful, about.

Since Trudeau Liberals came to power, Canadians have been constantly reminded that to speak negatively about Islam is supposedly acting as a fear-mongering, racist, xenophobic, “Islamophobe”.

It is far more probable that they are none of those things; rather that it is the accusers who are racist (Quran: 2;65; 2.89 (Allah transforms Jews into apes); 3:110-112; 4;160, and on and on); Xenophobic really does not apply to Jews, Christians, Yazidis, Hindus, Kurds, Baha’is , Zoroastrians, and a few different sects of Islam; it is truly the other way around.

These people are rightfully afraid of harm coming to them from Sharia law and radical Islam. I am a living example of one who has experienced harm from radical Islamic Sharia law. I was imprisoned at age 16 by the Iranian Regime for simply expressing my disagreement with their policies. They held me prisoner for 18 months in their notorious Evin Prison; I miraculously escaped the murder and rape I heard every day in that dark place.

The memories of that season still haunt me today. And, their threats still follow me today, to this great land of Canada. Therefore, I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam. To call my fear a phobia, an irrational fear, lacks compassion and fails to recognize the true reality of the same present danger living close to me once again. I am on their hit list. It was reported that the highest commander of the IRGC very recently said they would soon kill all dissidents living abroad.

People who are jittery about radical Islam and Sharia law are this way for many a reason: They look at how Sharia law is practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, by Islamic State and Nigeria’s Boko Haram, and are concerned quite justifiably.

The Islamic Cairo Declaration of 1990, written as a direct refutation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states that all human rights are predicated on Islamic Sharia Law. Therefore, according to this view, beheading, stoning, flogging, slavery, child marriage, wife-beating, amputations, and a woman’s worth considered half of a man’s are all human rights. Is that what we want for Canada, or in Canada? Or, in and for any country?

All that these purported critics are doing is pointing out what is in Islam’s Sharia law if anyone cared to look. And, when it comes to concern with quality of life, people should care to look. What is it that these extremists are so eager to cover up?

To those of us who have experienced Islamic sharia law first-hand, protecting Western values – free speech, common law, equal justice under the law, democratic (“man-made”) governance; individual freedoms, separation of church and state, an independent judiciary, to name just a few – is indeed cause for concern. Every single one of them is contradicted by Islamic Sharia law or radical Islam.

Why should it be against the law to outspokenly disagree with aspects of a different religion or culture? Especially if it outspokenly threatens one’s own?

Interesting to note, there are no such terms as Christianophobia, or Judeophobia, that define a dislike or prejudice against a Judeo Christian worldview and Jews and Christians, especially as a political force. And, when Googling anti Zionism, a photo appears of Islamist Muslims condemning Jews and a State of Israel. What if Christians and Jews petitioned for anti Christianophobia and anti Judeophobia motions condemning “all” forms of these? Would we all put duct tape on our mouths? And, it is true that Christians and Jews would never be allowed to petition for this in any Middle Eastern country on the face of the planet.

Canadians are worried that with the Rise of Islamic Extremism In Canada , the country is on its way to becoming like Europe, with no-go zones. That is why we must keep the secular state and religion completely separate, so that no one’s religion, and in Islam’s case religious ideology, is given special treatment or singled out.

Our goal is, and must remain, equal treatment for all. Equality and pluralistic respect can only be achieved when the government acts constitutionally without bias or favoritism towards any particular religion or religious ideology. Our Western Constitution is one that is founded upon the notion that all men, and women, are created equally, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; free from the harassment of oppressive tyranny inspired by dogma of any sort; religious or political.

It is also important to know who sponsors such articles in the media and why politicians lack information to make accurate assessments and informed conclusions.

For more information, please read about Politics of ‘Islamophobia’ – source of, and purpose of the term.

In Islam, politics and religion are inseparably intertwined. For this reason, apostasy in Islam is equivalent to treason. A notable expression in Islam says it all, “Islam is a religion and a state.” The Penal Code of The Islamic Republic of Iran Mandates Death for Converts. Article 225-1 of this code reads, “Any Muslim who clearly announces that he/she has left Islam and declares blasphemy is an Apostate.” In the Qur’an, Bukhari (52:260) repeats this view clearly: “The Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’” According to Ayatollah Khorasani, a prominent Shiite leader in Iran, “The promotion of Christianity in Iran must be stopped and stated that The Bible (The Gospel) is distorted and the Bible is not the Word of God.” (Farsi)

The Ayatollah’s views are directly of a mind with statements found in the Quran. Verses supporting death for apostates in the Qur’an are: 2:217, 9:73-74, 88:21, 5:54, and 9:66.

Article 19: Universal Declaration of Human Rights States:” Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Canadians must have the right to critique any ideology or religion. Preventing Canadians from speaking about Islam, is about denying Canadians the right to warn about a potential threat to their nation. A warning is not treason, but preventing a warning is. Isn’t this government sponsored Petition against the laws of the Constitution of Canada? CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 PART I

If the government prevents us the right to criticize any ideology, our government overrides our most basic freedom—the freedom of speech—and at the same time will undermine diversity, the “value” the Trudeau Liberals take pride the most in.

“Islamophobia” is used as a tool by political Islam to shut down criticism of Islam. At what point does western civilization demand that as a free society, all ideological matters conform to some common ground?

Can Canada simply ignore what is happening particularly in Europe, no-go-zones? Many places in Europe have become a breeding ground for radical Islam where they enforced their own sharia law.

Again, Canadians are worried that with the Rise of Islamic Extremism In Canada, the country is on its way to becoming like Europe, with no-go zones.

That is why we must keep the secular state and religion completely separate, so that no one’s religion, and in Islam’s case religious ideology, is given special treatment or singled out.

Our goal is, and must remain, equal treatment for all. Equality and pluralistic respect can only be achieved when the government acts constitutionally without bias or favoritism towards any particular religion or religious ideology.

Our Western Constitution is one that is founded upon the notion that all men, and women, are created equally, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, free from the harassment of oppressive tyranny inspired by dogma of any sort; religious or political.

In reference to the above, I urge you to take the time and read the following article by Canadian investigative journalist, Christine Williams – “Canadian parliament passes anti-Islamophobia motion!”

Obama to pardon cast of HAMILTON for cultural appropriation

As all of us on the progressive left already know, the racist hate crime of “cultural appropriation” is only to be enforced against those of the white male heterosexual persuasion. However, since the rigged electoral victory of November 8, 2016 and the pending hostile takeover of the American presidency by the fascist politically incorrect Donald J. Trump, all rules of social justice enforcement are now in jeopardy.

Fears among the social justice warriors and safe-spacers are that Mr. Trump will utilize the powers of his phone and pen to apply racial fairness among the masses. As such, reports from inside the White House are that President Obama will soon take the unprecedented action of issuing a presidential pardon to the entire cast and crew of the hit Broadway show HAMILTON for its cultural appropriation of dead white men from the 18th century.

obamahamilton.jpg
Cultural Appropriation – Hate Crime
drex.jpg

Not Cultural Appropriation – Not a Hate Crime
hami1.jpg

When asked about the impending pardon, HAMILTON actor and cast mouthpiece Mr. Brandon Victor Dixon said:

We sir, we, are the not-so-diverse cast of HAMILTON who are alarmed and anxious that the new administration will not protect our right to appropriate dead white men — or defend us and uphold our inalienable politically correct rights, sir. But we truly hope that this pardon will force Mr. Trump to uphold our un-American values.

The White House could not be reached for an official response.

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire by El Presidente originally appeared on The Peoples Cube.

The Times that Try Men’s Souls

Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr., publisher of The New York Times, and Dean Baquet, executive editor, issued their reflection to their readers.  After reviewing it several times, I realized that the election of Donald J. Trump to the highest office in our country did much more than anyone could have anticipated.  Not only did Trump fight the establishment, press and academia, and motivate American citizens to awaken from an eight-year period of fear and despair to demand a reversal of Obama’s executive orders, but he inspired the principals to make an unprecedented outreach to the public with a kind of desultory apology.  They professed a purpose of rededication “to report to America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories…impartially and unflinchingly.”  Although it was their use of biased analyses and writing assumptions over accuracies that diminished their readership, it is evident that they miss the point when they attempt to reassure their depleted readership that they can they can “rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage.”  It is precisely that same coverage and same corruption that the American public will no longer tolerate.  

Is it possible for a publisher and executive director to plan for a future without defining and owning up to the past?  Will they re-educate the same staff writers who pandered to the establishment, the leftists and the globalists; the Soros- and Islamic-supported hatemongers of (BLM) Black Lives Matter, J-Street, (SJP) Students for Justice in Palestine and the (MSA) Muslim Student Association; the anti-Semitic revisionists; the corrupt elitists and academicians who delight in seeing their skewed views validated; the youths, immersed in socialism, who have been taught not how to think, but what to feel; and the populace that could not discern fact from propaganda?

Upon what standard lies were the Times readers nourished?  When the Times repeatedly accused Israel of planning new “developments” northeast of Jerusalem that would allegedly split Judea-Samaria (West Bank), despite the map that was produced to prove the impossibility of their claim, a correction was never issued.   When they claimed that singer-songwriter Eric Burdon was boycotting Israel, it was another falsehood not rescinded.  When an article blamed Ariel Sharon’s entry into the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem in 2000 for triggering the second intifada, he truth was that Sharon never entered the mosque and the second intifada was verified to have been planned in advance.  When the Times repeatedly asserts that Gaza is occupied by Israel, but Israelis left in 2005 and Hamas is the sole occupier.  When John Kerry spoke about brokering peace between Israel and Palestinians, and The New York Times amended it with a Palestinian narrative.  Israel is routinely portrayed by the Times as being the obstacle to peace, while the Palestinians have consistently rejected all Israeli positions.

The Times overlooks Israel’s archaeological and historic ties to the country, her amazing technological and medical achievements, and her first-responder activities to America’s Boston Marathon, California droughts, and countries hit by natural disasters.  The infamous slaughter of the Fogel family never made first page, and Israelis beaten or knifed are often disregarded. Further, the Times omits stories of Palestinian children practicing jihad and beheadings or declarations that they intend to harvest Jewish skulls.  The reporters restructured stories of Boko Haram’s terrorizing and systematically kidnapping, converting and killing Christian female students in Nigeria, or burning students to death, and butchering entire villages while intoning Allahu Akbar, Allah is the greatest.

Following the UNHRC, United Nations Human Rights Council’s resolution to blacklist Israeli companies that operate or trade with Israel beyond the 1949 Armistice Lines (Obama’s arbitrary division), a bipartisan legislation, titled Protecting Israel Against Economic Discrimination Act was introduced to combat the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. It would also now include international organizations that strive to economically isolate Israel.  Another major assault on Israel is UNESCO’s denial of the 3,700-year Jewish connection to the Land of Israel – the 400-year monarchy and the constant link of Jews to their land, verified by archaeological discoveries.  Legitimate critics accept Israel’s right to exist; anti-Semites do not, and the Times has opted to join the United Nations in this civilizational jihad by querying the strong biblical and historical basis for the Jewish claim to divinely promised land.  Although Palestinians claim Jerusalem’s holiness, it is not mentioned in their Koran and, despite oil money, they allowed it to turn to squalor – without running water, electricity, or plumbing.  Youths have been videotaped playing soccer with real severed heads on this “third holy site of Islam.” 

Another offensive is the latest Palestinian claim to the Dead Sea Scrolls.  Unable to conquer Israel by warfare, they use the UN and media, including a cooperative New York Times.    Jane Cahill, archaeologist and practicing attorney, in her Times article “Historical Certainty Proves Elusive at Jerusalem’s Holiest Place,” claimed that standard proof is not beyond a reasonable doubt. Predictably, we see the Times’ blend of witlessness and malevolence. Reporter Rick Gladstone also contested whether the Jewish Temples were precisely on that spot or a small distance away, suggesting Zionist aggression.  History proves that Islam builds atop other religions’ holy sites and that the Dome of the Rock, never mentioned in the Koran, was constructed precisely over the Temple because they acknowledged its sanctity to the Jews. 

CAMERA’s (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) six-month study of The New York Times found it replete with skewed headlines and misleading photos, supporting a double standard that de-emphasizes Palestinian attacks and avoids revealing Israeli fatalities.  When reporting of Israeli retaliatory strikes against Palestinians for Israeli casualties, the Times will often use a photo of a grieving Arab mother.

Ira Stoll wrote of several issues covered by the Times, from which I chose the following to illustrate the nature of their leanings.  In 2016, the paper’s art section featured an exhibit, “The First Jewish Americans: Freedom and Culture in the New World,” at the New York Historical Society (in New York for New York readers), in 1100 words with three photographs. It should be noted that the exhibit included paintings, one of them of Commodore Uriah P. Levy, War of 1812 naval hero and philanthropist who was instrumental in abolishing flogging.  Other items were threadbare memoirs and prayer books that withstood the centuries, a charred Torah scroll, a pair of exquisite silver-belled ornaments crafted for a Torah scroll by venerated silversmith Myer Myers, an ancient illustrated marriage contract, and thank you letters from Jewish congregations to George Washington for being so welcoming. Despite the beauty and solemnity of the exhibit that validates a culture that contributed to every component of American history, the New York Historical Society’s president, Louise Mirrer, provided a demeaning quote, in which she joins The New York Times in the blame-the-victim mentality: “In the exhibit, we see the kind of religious fervor that promotes a kind of violence against certain groups.”   

Now compare this to another Times exhibit, “The Art of the Qur’an: Treasures from the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts,” not held in New York (home of the readers) but at the Sackler Gallery, Washington, DC. This rated a review on the front cover of its weekend arts sections, warranting 1700 words, seven photographs, and about three times the column space. Instead of a demeaning quote there was exaltation, “It’s a glorious show… art of a beauty that takes us straight to heaven. And it reminds us of how much we don’t know — but, given a chance like this, will love to learn — about a religion and a culture lived by, and treasured by, a quarter of the world’s population… everything seems to glow and float, gravity-free… miraculously beautiful things.” 

How will the “new” New York Times re-educate its readers about the ties between the holy site of the Temple Mount and Jewish history, and retract and revise its previous delegitimization and denial of the Jewish people’s right to their Jewish homeland?  A friend to fascism, with decades of unprofessionalism dating back to the Holocaust, the Times has ignored all pertinent evidence that does not support the Muslim narrative, thereby denying the Jewish State and the right of Jews to live anywhere in their country. How will the Times present the Palestinians as they now challenge the 99-year Balfour Declaration that paved the way for Jewish and Arab states in Palestine, as held by the United Nations’ majority vote?  How will the Times handle the recent Muslim ultimatum to either build mosques in Italy or surrender the Vatican? How will it present Hamas-CAIR’s threat to overthrow the U.S. government? 

On the home front, when separate swim times were established to accommodate Muslims in Toronto, the Times praised it as a “model of inclusion,” but when a Brooklyn pool did the same to accommodate Orthodox Jewish women, the Times denounced the practice.  The paper also denounced the use of chickens in a Jewish ritual, but reported impartially about a Senegalese ritual involving caged birds. Such disparate evaluations are typical of the Times and if they continue to treat their readers to “the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage,” then a vanishing readership is predictable.

With the election of President-elect Donald J. Trump, and heightened tensions, The New York Times ran AP (Associated Press) information with the fear-provoking headline, “Hate Crimes against Muslims up by 67 percent in 2015.” Not only does this fault Mr. Trump, but in a nation of more than 300 million Americans, of which 2.57 million are Muslim, only 257 crimes against Muslims were reported, and not all violent. Such reporting supports the narrative that America is a racist country – the accusation of racism is a form of jihad to depict Muslims as victims and to reinforce Islamophobia against our freedoms of speech and the press.  Omitted were the FBI statistics of 664 hate crimes against Jews, an increase of 9 percent, and the dozens of false accusations against Trump supporters.

Will the New York Times, AP, and other news sources rethink their purpose and values, or join the dustbin of history? 

More than 70% of the American people expressed their distrust of the media during the 2016 election period; it appears that the proverbial cat is out of the bag.  President Obama has had his personal records permanently sealed from public scrutiny and, by contrast, President-elect Trump has been in the public eye all his adult life and recently hosted a show of his life on Fox Cable News, yet Sulzberger and Baquet called Trump an enigmatic figure.  We naturally conclude that the promises issued by the New York Times will not be worthy of the paper on which they were printed and signed, and that the operative word will be the thrice-repeated “same.” 

The National Popular Vote Fallacy

My most recent column exposing the fraud that is the national popular vote movement has finally struck home. On Tuesday, November 15, I received a lengthy response from a staff member of the National Popular Vote (NPV) organization, attempting to refute my claims for the superiority of the Maine-Nebraska system of electoral vote allocation.

As I read their arguments, it could not help but consider the political risks of making false and unsubstantiated claims for the national popular vote to members of the state legislatures, none of whom are dummies.  The following is my response to the national popular vote email:

NPV:  “Dividing more states’ electoral votes by congressional district winners would magnify the worst features of the Electoral College system.”

PRH:  I can’t respond to that statement because I have no idea what “worst features of the Electoral College system” you refer to.  Anyone who reads the Federalist Papers will understand that the Framers wanted the members of the lower house of the legislative branch, the U.S. House of Representatives, selected by the popular vote of the people.  They wanted the upper house of the legislative branch, the U.S. Senate, selected by the political institutions of the states (the state legislatures), and they wanted the president and vice president to be chosen, not by the people and not by the political institutions of the states, but by the states themselves.  That’s why electors are state officials for a day.  I suspect that few Americans have taken the time to learn this distinction.  To short-circuit the Electoral College in favor of a national popular vote is to totally reverse the original intent of the Founding Fathers.

NPV:  “If the district approach were used nationally, it would be less fair and less accurately reflect the will of the people than the current system.”    

PRH:  That simply is not true and cannot be proven.  How is it fair for all of California’s 55 electoral votes to go to a single presidential candidate when the voters in 14 of the state’s 53 congressional districts vote for Republicans up and down the ballot?  And how is it fair for all 20 of Illinois’ electoral votes to go to one presidential candidate when voters in only 10 of the state’s 18 congressional districts prefer Democrats over Republicans?

NPV:  “In 2012, for instance, when Obama garnered nearly a half million more votes in Michigan than Romney, Romney won nine of the state’s 14 congressional districts.” 

PRH:  This is not an anomaly of the Electoral College system.  It is a function of the Democrat Party’s long campaign to capture the votes of large political constituencies by promising them “stuff.”  This electoral anomaly is created by those political constituencies that want something from government that they could not have earned at the ballot box or in a competitive market.

NPV:  “With the present deplorable 48 state-level winner-take-all system, 38+ states (including California and Texas) are ignored in presidential elections; however, 98% of the nation’s congressional districts would be ignored if a district-level winner-take-all system were used nationally… The district approach would not provide incentive for presidential candidates to poll, visit, advertise, or organize in a particular state or focus the candidates’ attention to issues of concern to the state.” 

PRH:  That simply is not true.  The exact opposite is true and if anyone had ever tried to tell me a whopper like that one I’d take it as an insult to my intelligence.  For example, had the Maine-Nebraska system been in effect in all states in November 2016, Donald Trump could not have ignored the 14 electoral votes available to him in California or the 9 electoral votes available to him in New York.  Conversely, Hillary Clinton could not have ignored the 11 electoral votes available to her in Texas or the 5 electoral votes available to her in Michigan.  By assigning more importance to local elections under the Maine-Nebraska system, interest in local politics would be enhanced and much of the negative impact of the 17th Amendment would be reversed.

I can understand why Democratic presidential candidates tend to ignore all but the coastal states, as well as the states of Illinois and Minnesota in “fly-over” country.  Just one cursory glance at the county-by-county electoral map of the past five presidential elections… all but totally red with an occasional splotch of blue… to convince any candidate that campaigning anywhere but in the population centers of the east and west coast could be a waste of time.  For example, in 2012 Obama carried 653 (21.06%) of the 3,100 counties in the country, compared to Romney’s 2,447 counties (78.94%).  In 2016, Hillary Clinton carried just 568 counties (18.32%), compared to Donald Trump’s 2,532 counties (81.68%).  So is it any wonder that Republicans control the governors’ mansions and both house of the legislature in more states than ever before?

NPV:  “Awarding electoral votes by congressional district could result in no candidate winning the needed majority of electoral votes.  That would throw the process into Congress to decide the election, regardless of the popular vote in any district or state or throughout the country.”

PRH:  Again, that simply is not true.  And again, I’d take it as an insult to my intelligence if someone tried to make me believe that bit of nonsense.  In order for that assertion to have even a smidgen of truth, you’d have to give me a list of congressional races that have been won by third party candidates.  They are “scarcer than hens’ teeth.”

If there is a problem with the Electoral College, it is the lack of knowledge and training among individual electors.  When I was elected to my first term in the Electoral College I took that responsibility very seriously.  I researched and read everything I could find on the origin and the purpose of the institution.  For example, as an expression of the fear of foreign influence that motivated and inspired the Framers, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “These most deadly adversaries of republican government (cabal, intrigue, etc.) might actually have expected to make their approach from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?”

Clearly, we don’t have to look far to find examples of exactly what Hamilton was referring to.

In 1996, when Bill Clinton and Al Gore ran for reelection to a second term, a major portion of their campaign funds came through intermediaries from the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.  Is it any wonder then that, at the behest of the Chinese and Japanese governments, the Clinton administration attempted a legislative coup d’etat in 1997 that would have destroyed a core function of the U.S. government, the engine of our economy and our standard of living, the U.S. patent system?  What was it that Barack Obama promised in exchange for the huge sums of money, from unknown sources, that was funneled into his 2008 campaign after being laundered through the United Bank of Switzerland (UBS)?  And what was it that Bill and Hillary Clinton promised to foreign political and business leaders in exchange for the hundreds of millions of dollars contributed to the Clinton Foundation?  It was precisely these kinds of people that the Electoral College was intended to identify and deter.          

In Federalist Paper No. 68, arguing in favor of the Electoral College, Hamilton explained that, “A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.”

Reading those words, it is easy to see how the Electoral College has failed in its responsibility in three presidential elections: 1880, with the election of Vice President Chester A. Arthur, and in 2008 and 2012 with the election of Barack Hussein Obama… both of whom were sired by men who were not American citizens.  Both of their fathers were British subject at the time they were born.  In each instance, it was the responsibility of members of the Electoral College to assure themselves that these men were “natural born” U.S. citizens.  In each instance they failed to do so.  The Republican members of the Electoral College in 1880, and the Democratic members of the Electoral College in 2008 and 2012, lacked “the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.”

In fact, I am aware that letters were sent to a large number of Democratic electors in 2008 advising them that Barack Obama was ineligible for the office he sought and that it was their duty to reject him.  However, when the electors voted, every single one of the 365 Democratic electors were so anxious to elect the first black president that they violated their oaths and cast their votes for Barack Obama.  If Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, or Niki Haley had won the Republican nomination for president or vice president during either of my two terms in the Electoral College, could I have voted for any of them?  Absolutely not!  Like Barack Obama, all are products of foreign parentage; none are “natural born” citizens.

In 2012, instead of a 332 to 206 vote victory for Obama-Biden in the Electoral College, the Maine-Nebraska system would have produced a comfortable 282 to 256 vote victory for Romney-Ryan.  What this tells us is that the national popular vote movement is merely an attempt to obtain through trickery, that which the left could never achieve at the ballot box.

As one who has spent a career as chief lobbyist for a Fortune 25 corporation, I am acutely aware of the consequences of purposely misleading members of Congress or the state legislatures.  Those who are selling the “virtues” of the national popular vote in state legislatures all across the country are seriously misleading and misinforming legislators.  When the legislators finally see the truth of the matter they will not be pleased.  More and more states will consider leaving the NPVIC.