Media mad at Trump because Mueller said media misrepresented his report

The left is all enthused today because they think they can retcon--that's geek speak for changing history--the Mueller report so that it condemns Trump for treason and bad hair.

They've discovered that Mueller complained to Barr about Barr's summary of his report.

Given that Barr is Mueller's boss who cares since bosses can overrule their subordinates because that's why they're bosses.

But even if we ignore that and assume that Mueller has absolutely no bias--which we know isn't true-- we have the full report, or at least the full summary, now so that we can read in words approved of by Mueller what his report says.  And we find that Barr's summary was accurate.

Even Mueller says that Barr's summary is accurate.  In the insanely overhyped article that the left is losing it's mind over it says:

"When Barr pressed him whether he thought Barr's letter was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not, but felt that the media coverage of the letter was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

So Mueller's problem wasn't with Barr but with the media.

Yet today the media are trying to make Barr the villain and incorrectly imply that Mueller said that some parts of what Barr wrote were incorrect which their own article contradicts.

I guess after lying constantly for 2 years the #FakeNews media has forgotten how to tell the truth.

CNN's Chris Cuomo endorses fascist violence

More and more often the left in America is stopping it's incessant lying and telling what it really believes.

Chris Cuomo has dropped his mask and told the world that the new brown shirts, the new fascists, Antifa have a good cause.

Antifa isn't an anti fascist organization it's a fascist organization that believes it has the right to use violence to silence voices it doesn't like.

What's interesting is that while the left is condemning Trump for supposedly saying white nationalists  are fine people the left is either supporting or staying silent about fascist violence by the left wing Antifa.

While reading what Trump actually said makes it clear that the fine people he was referring to were those Southerners who didn't want statues to Civil War heroes taken down not the Nazi's and racists.  Note that unlike the left Trump also said that there were fine folk who wanted the statues taken down; the left declared that anyone who didn't agree with them were evil.

What Cuomo and people like AOC and Ilhan Omar are doing is telling the American people what the Democrats really support.  Every election cycle Democrats have shamelessly lied--unless they're in safe districts--about what they really stand for.

That's going to be harder in 2020 because while the #FakeNews media is doing their best to hide from America what the Democrats are saying it's starting to leak out.

And Americans whether they be conservative or liberal don't like the idea of brown shirts roaming the streets assaulting anyone who disagrees with them.  But that's precisely what the Democrat leadership and the #FakeNews media are for.

Democrats add 4th Amendment to parts of the Constitution they ignore

The Fourth Amendment states:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The idea is that the government doesn't have the right to access all of our private data without having some good reason.

We've all seen TV shows where the cops know that some person is guilty of something but they can't get a warrant precisely because having a feeling isn't the same as having facts.

That's a good thing.  Could you imagine how Democrats would have reacted if Congressional Republicans had subpoenaed Obama's college transcripts?  And they would have been right.  The purpose of Congressional investigations isn't to dig up dirt on political opponents.

But today the Democrats are weaponizing the House as a key aspect of the Democrat party's opposition research. They have no evidence of any criminal or unethical behavior by Trump but they know in their bones that he is guilty and so they're trying to use the full authority of Congress to make public all of Trump's private information.

Now they'll say that the information will be kept private by Congress but given how Democrat Adam Schiff leaked supposedly confidential information and the Democrats general lack of any morality other than that which advances their quest for power we all know that if they find anything that would make Trump look bad--maybe he's not as rich as he says he is--they will leak it to the NYT or WaPo.

We knew that the Democrats hate and refuse to support the 1st Amendment--they're all for censorship, and against people's right to practice their faith-- and the 2nd Amendment--they want us defenseless and they want criminals who use guns to get shorter sentences-- but this is the first clear proof that they also despise the 4th Amendment.

It makes sense of course.  Modern Democrats are fascists at heart who believe that they are superior to us and hence have the right to rule over us rather than represent us.  Once when asked how the Constitution limits what Congress can do Nancy Pelosi couldn't think of any examples.  That's because in the minds of Democrats there are no limits on what they do; there are only limits on what others do.

So because Democrats love pornography and flag burning they believe both are protected by the 1st Amendment.  But since Democrats love abortion they also believe that they can restrict the rights of people to protest at abortion mills because that speech isn't protected by the 1st Amendment in the minds of Democrats.

The same is true of the 4th Amendment. If Senate Republicans suddenly demanded all of the financial records of every Democrat presidential candidate in hopes of finding some dirt the Democrats would scream; and rightly so. But those same Democrats think it's fine to try and get all of Trump's financial records.

Democrat hypocrisy: Buttigieg sexual assault

Supposedly two radical right wingers were trying to get gay men to lie about Democrat Buttigieg sexually assaulting him.

If true, and given the Covington story we have to wait until we have very clear evidence, those men should be condemned and prosecuted.

However what they are accused of doing is no different than what Democrats did to Judge Thomas and Judge Kavanaugh. In both cases Democrats got women to claim they'd been sexually assaulted or harassed when in fact there was no evidence for the claims.

The only difference appears to be that the right wingers couldn't find people who were willing to go along.

The same media who will be howling over this latest scandal cheered on Michael Avenatti when he produced a woman who initially claimed that Kavanaugh had taken part in multiple gang rapes even after it became clear that she was lying through her teeth.

To this day the #FakeNews media acts as though Anita Hill's claims of sexual harassment were credible even though she followed Clarence Thomas from job to job while he was supposedly being sexually harassed.

We need to stop the weaponization of the #MeToo movement because it destroys the credibility of people who have really been raped or sexually assaulted.

But to do that we can't just condemn right wing scum we need to condemn everyone who lies about sexual assault to achieve a political objective.

Baby Sea Otters

Why Democrats bemoan the killing of Muslims, and Jews--sometimes--but rarely Christians

The biggest obstacle to Democrats desire to have complete power over us is not Trump; it's the Christianity.  Now Jews would be a problem too but there aren't enough of them in the US to thwart Democrats attempt to overthrow our democracy.

Christianity says that we are all created equal; that our rights flow not from government but from God.  Which means it puts strict limits on just how tyrannical a government can be.

Further Christianity, or at least the Catholic Church and most Protestants, also reject the sexual hedonism that is the core of the Democrats moral perspective.

That's why Democrats have been waging a war on Christians in America.  Thanks be to God they haven't started killing us yet but they've done all they could get away with.

They've declared that the religion adhered to by 72% of Americans can't be represented in the public square.

They've tried to force Catholic nuns to cooperate in providing abortions.

They've tried to force a Protestant baker to bake for a gay wedding.

They've prevented a Catholic group with a superb record helping trafficked women from operating because they won't refer for abortions.

They've tried to force Doctors to learn how to perform abortions.

The list goes on and on.

The reality is that most of the Democrat politicians and the left wing thought leaders aren't bothered too much when Christians are murdered.  That's why you don't hear about the hundreds of Christians killed in Nigeria every few months but you did hear endlessly about the killing of 50 Muslims in Christchurch.

It's not that it's wrong for the media to tell us about Christchurch because that was a horrible act by a left wing fan of the Chinese communists which should be roundly condemned.  The problem is that the #FakeNews media always make a huge deal about any Muslims being killed so that they can try and paint Christians, and Trump, as monsters.

Essentially Democrats weaponize the deaths of Muslims to attack people they, the Democrats, don't like.

They do the same thing but to a lesser extent when Jews are killed. We know that Democrats are pretty antisemitic given their tolerance of Ilhan Omar but they believe they can hurt Trump by first declaring that he hates Jews, despite his clearly pro-Jewish record, then blaming him for violence against Jews.

But there is no way that Democrats can weaponize the killing of Christians to hurt Trump or Christians so they are generally silent about the world wide wave of terror directed against Christians only uttering an occasional tut tut.

So now you know why Democrats react so differently to the slaughter of Christians, Muslims, and Jews.  All that matters to them is how those monstrously evil acts can help them get more power.

Democrats want you to be unsafe which is why the want your guns

It's amazingly bizarre that in the wake of an attempted mass shooting at a synagogue that was thwarted by a man who had a gun that the Democrats are calling for ensuring that we the people can't have guns.

The attacker used a "assault like gun" which means he used the equivalent of a hunting rifle.  One of the big gun control lies is that semi-automatic weapons are the same as military assault rifles.  The reality is that every time a bullet is fired from a semi-automatic weapon the user has to pull the trigger  while military assault rifles will continue to fire as rapidly as possible once the trigger is held down.

In the movies when you see guns spewing out a continuous stream of bullets those are automatic weapons. When you see someone shooting much more slowly that's a semi-automatic weapon.

It's illegal for we the people to own fully automatic weapons built after the mid 1980s so there is no problem of assault rifles in America--none of the mass shootings has involved automatic weapons.

But because the AR-15 looks a little like the M-16 military assault rifle leftists like Swalwell have been lying to us and trying to convince us that millions of Americans possess "assault rifles".

The real problem is that Democrats are working hard to make it impossible for us to defend ourselves.  If someone hadn't had a gun at the synagogue the attacker would have had the time to unjam his gun and kill many more people.  Yet if Democrats had their way no one at the synagogue would have had a semi-automatic pistol to defend themselves with.

Every year thousands of people's lives are saved because they could defend themselves or were defended by others who had a gun.  In the US it's very unlikely that someone will break into your home while you're home because they know that you might have a gun to protect yourself with.  In England where people can't have guns home break-ins often occur when the home owners are at home.

Like all power hungry fascists Democrats are eager to ensure that you are disarmed and powerless to defend yourself against criminals or tyrants.

Democrats Big Lie about Anita Hill

Because they are racists the Democrats treated Clarence Thomas horribly at his hearing.  But they couldn't find anything that they could condemn him for.

They had to find something because the thought of having a conservative Black man on the court was unacceptable to them.  That's because to Democrats Blacks are only Blacks if they toe the white leftist political line.

So they manufactured what we'd now call a #MeToo charge.  Anita Hill claimed that Thomas had sexually harassed her. No assault; he supposedly just made advances on her.

We know that she was not stating the truth because long after the harassment supposedly started Thomas switched jobs and she voluntarily followed him to the new workplace.  Clearly a truly harassed woman when given the option to no longer have to work for a harasser isn't going to follow him to another job.

There were plenty of other inconsistencies not the least of which was that no other woman who worked with him had seen any indication of the sort of behavior Hill was accusing Thomas of nor were there any other women who accused him of anything inappropriate.

As we well know Democrats are eager to ignore #MeToo charges against Democrats, ie their lack of concern over Biden's serial groping of women, but are very enthused about pursing fake charges against their political foes, as in the Kavanaugh case.

Democrats are counting on the fact that few Americans remember the racist behavior of the Democrats at the Thomas hearing and the fact that the #FakeNews media can be counted on to continue to spread the lie today.

Like pretty much every claim Democrats make their story about Anita Hill is a lie.

The real H8ers

Democrats and their stooges in the #FakeNews media are constantly condemning Republicans and Trump supporters for being haters; we're homophobes, transphobes, islamaphobes, nazi's, antisemites, racists, and we support murdering illegals.

The reality is of course is that it's the Democrats who are constantly spewing hate speech.  Aside from the vast number of incorrect labels they ascribe to us, as mentioned above, they're always lying about us.

This is necessary because Democrat's positions are such that they are indefensible.  Hence to continue to gain power, which is all that Democrats care about, they must dumb down the population by turning our public schools into indoctrination centers and by doing everything they can to censor and silence any voice that disagrees with them.

They hate us; they call us deplorables.

They contend that we are evil and that we should be imprisoned for daring to disagree with them.

They eagerly work to ensure that illegals, felons in prison, and felons out of prison be allowed to vote  as well as supporting a wide range of voter fraud in order to dilute our votes.

It's time to point out to your friends that it's the Democrats who are the haters and the source of most of the real hate speech in America today.

Ilhan Omar is responsible for the Poway shooting

While it's true that Omar isn't in fact responsible for the antiTrump antisemite who shot up a synagogue in San Diego by her own logic she is guilty.

After all she said that Trump was responsible for the death threats against her because he tweeted out a video of her speaking.  If quoting someones own words makes one responsible for how people react to those words then Omar's repeated antisemitism is surely responsible for inciting someone to attack a Jewish synagogue.

Of course the other antisemites on the left who publish vile antisemitic cartoons-- that's you New York Times-- declare that Jesus was Palestinian not Jewish, support Palestinian terrorism while condemning Jews defending themselves, and who call for the destruction of Israel are partners with Omar in inciting violence against Jews.

It's also interesting how the media is covering this shooting.  Lots of concern and interest, which is good, but only because it allows the media to attack Trump.

The difference in coverage between Christchurch and Sri Lanka isn't just because Democrats and the #FakeNews media hate Easter worshipers but also because they can't blame Trump for the mass murder of Christians.

Because the left can't win an actual debate they have to resort to demonizing and silencing their opponents.  In Trump's case they declare he's racist, even though people like Jesse Jackson gave Trump an award, and he hates Jews even though the Jews of Israel don't think he is.

It's time for us to demand that the lying Democrats be held to the same standard that they try and impose on the rest of us.

Peggy Noonan explains why DC is evil

Sadly Noonan thinks she's defending the DC Swamp when she's actually condemning it.

She admits that half of the people in DC were willing to do anything to get rid of Trump.

The other half however were so magnanimous that if Trump conformed to their vision they would let him stay:

"But the other half of official Washington, though to varying degrees disapproving of Trump, often for reasons that were almost aesthetic, was willing to be surprised. They were open to persuasion. They didn’t say this but they thought it. They’d give him time and watch events closely."

Noonan is so used to the Swamp that she has no idea how that sounds to Americans who work to pay for our government. We don't think that our vote has to be approved of by the unelected over paid under worked DC denizens.

The sheer hubris of Noonan and her DC friends is clear; a president isn't a president until the beltway insiders approve of him.

She goes on to say;

"Pretty quickly and to the entire edifice of Washington, it became clear Donald Trump was not a Jacksonian shock to the system, which is what his supporters think he was. He was a daily system overload, a one-man frying of the grid."

Only bubble people don't realize that America wants DC fried. We're tired of bureaucrats who declare that they have the right to rule us.  We're tired of those incompetents who populate the government trying to run every aspect of our lives.

But like the plantation owners of old Noonan honestly feels that she and her ilk are better than those of us who actually pay the bills.

One of her big beefs with Trump is that he didn't hire the "right" people.  Of course her idea of the "right" people is based on the Bubbles criteria.  Here's her take on Mueller:

"He was a patriot looking to finish a distinguished career with integrity."

Given that he did everything he could to give "breadcrumbs" to Democrats to impeach Trump even though he didn't find any evidence of any criminal or impeachable offenses it's clear that he's a patriot in the DC sense; someone who wants to enrich the Bubble people and grow the government while using the full power of the government to crush anyone who disagrees with the Bubble view on any issue.

Noonan concludes by saying:

"Seriousness and calm would be nice, and after the past few years would serve as a welcome counterpoint. There is an unarticulated wish out there to return to some past in which things were deeply imperfect and certainly divided but on some level tranquil, and not half mad."

So to her the fact that in the past Catholic nuns were being forced to cooperate in abortions, that the US turned Libya into a failed state and terrorist producer, that the economy was horrible, that unemployment was high, weren't important.  What mattered is that the denizens of the Swamp had calm.

In the end Noonan's clear message is that the whole idea of a government for, by, and of the people is stupid.  Rather the "smart" cultured self styled elites in DC should be given power to run the lives of the Americans who do the work that pays the bills.

Democrats want the nut who killed the woman at Charlottesville to vote

Democrats have always supported felons voting.  Now they're campaigning on the idea that felons in prison should be able to vote.

They're also campaigning on the Big Lie that Trump endorsed racists as fine people at Charlottesville. The reality is that Trump said that non-racists who just didn't want civil war statues taken down were fine people and that he, Trump, directly said that the racists and white nationalists were evil.

But what's interesting is that if Democrats get their way the evil man who ran down and killed a woman at Charlottesville will be able to vote.

So which is worse; Trump pointing out that not everyone defending the civil war statues were evil or Democrats working hard to ensure that an evil murderer of a woman at Charlottesville can vote?

Democrat hypocrisy: Kamala Harris guns for me but not for thee edition

Democrat presidential candidate Kamla Harris has admitted to owning a handgun for self protection.

She's also constantly saying that if elected she will do all she can to make it hard for other people to buy guns in America.

What's really amazing is that for a long time Harris had an armed guard protecting her so she had less need of a gun than the people she wants to ensure can't buy a gun do.

This is one more example of how Democrats view themselves as our rightful rulers not as our representatives.

Democrats hate America: Tlaib 9/11 edition

Democrat and antisemite Tlaib said that she was afraid of her fellow Americans after 9/11.

That's understandable given how President Bush was preaching hate for all Muslims, the many Muslims who were murdered by angry mobs, and the moving of Muslims to special camps in the American desert.

Just kidding.

The reality is that after 9/11 pretty much every commentator was talking about how we shouldn't be mad at all Muslims and there was little, if any, violence directed at random American Muslims.

Yet Tlaib is telling us she was afraid of us.

Just one more example of Democrats hating Americans as evidenced by their assumption that we're all vicious thugs; except the illegals of course.

Is Biden colluding with China?

In December of 2013 Biden and his son, Hunter, flew to China together on Air Force 2.

Biden met with Chinese officials and as per normal Obama administration practice didn't really confront China about any of its predatory trade practices.

What's interesting is that ten days after Hunter returned to the US his tiny private equity company got a $1 billion dollar deal with the Chinese government.

Compared to the supposed Trump building a hotel in Moscow story it's clear that this is a much bigger example of at least potential collusion.

The very fact Biden's son is so beholden to the Chinese is highly troubling even if the deal wasn't a straight up bribe to Biden to go easy on China.

But of course the #FakeNews media won't investigate this because they never investigate anything related to possible Democrat corruption.

Mueller ignored collusion with Russia

While Mueller conclusively proved that Trump didn't collude with Russia Mueller for some reason refused to investigate Hillary's collusion with Russia.

It's well known that Hillary had her law firm pay Fusion GPS which in turn paid British ex-spy Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on Trump from Russian sources.

Even though that report was a key aspect of the entire two year long collusion controversy Mueller showed no interest in it other than to basically say it was all unverified and in some cases clearly wrong.

Given that Mueller's mandate was supposedly to investigate Russian interference in our election one would think that a bunch of dirt from high level Russian sources about one candidate would be worth investigating.

Mueller probably avoided it because if he had investigated he knew he would have found that Hillary was colluding with Putin, albeit unknowingly.

Steele's cover had been blown years ago and he himself couldn't, and didn't, travel to Russia.  Instead he reached out to a long list of Russian sources he claims to have. Supposedly those sources provided second and third hand accounts of bad things Trump had done.

The problem is how likely is it that after his cover was blown that the Russian secret police didn't find out who he'd been talking to and put the fear of Putin into them?  Further when approached  by Steele  how likely is it that those sources report it to Russian intelligence?  Remember enemies of Putin often die so aiding Steele could have been very dangerous.

On the other hand it makes a lot of sense for Putin to use Steele as a channel to disrupt the US election.  Remember that the same intelligence agencies that said that Putin favored Trump told us the Soviet Union was doing fine and that Iraq had WMDs.

But even if Putin favored Trump he'd want to weaken Trump if Trump won which the Steele dossier would do.

While Mueller investigated Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian lawyer about dirt on Hillary Mueller assiduously avoided looking into Hillary paying Russians for dirt on Trump.

One reason could be that Mueller was really just targeting Trump and didn't really care about collusion.

The other reason is that while Mueller is partisan he's not stupid. It's likely he realizes that Steele getting all this fake news out of Russia without Putin knowing about it would be highly unlikely so that if he investigated it he'd likely find that Hillary had either knowingly or unknowingly colluded with Putin.

This has always been the big hypocrisy in the whole collusion narrative; the same people who said that Trump Jr meeting with a Russian but not getting any dirt on Hillary was treasonous said that Hillary paying Russians for dirt on Trump was find.

It should be clear by now that if the Steele dossier was actually sourced in Russia that it was most likely a Russian disinformation activity.

Biden declares support for Antifa violence

According to Joe Biden the Antifa thugs who used violence at Charlottesville and elsewhere are "courageous Americans".

In launching his campaign he lied about Trump equating the white nationalists and the thugs on the left.  It's been well established that Trump said that the people who came to peacefully defend the statues but who weren't racists were fine people.  Trump wasn't talking about the racists and antisemites.

What's interesting is that Biden in the same speech condemns people who spew antisemitic comments  and extolls the people who opposed them.  That's odd because he hasn't condemned the vile antisemitic comments of Democrats like Ilhan Omar and he hasn't commended the people who have resisted her.

By declaring the Antifa thugs Biden is making it clear that he's all for political violence by people on the Left.

Democrats want lawyers for criminals but not for Republicans

As part of their desperate attempt to make sure that illegals count for apportioning House seats Elijah Cummings, the head of the House Oversight Committee,wants John Gore to testify about how it was decided go add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census.

Without that question Democrat states with lots of illegals will get extra seats in the House and probably more Federal money for welfare.

Trump is glad to let Gore testify but as per usual DOJ practice the DOJ wants a lawyer to be present to address issues of executive branch privilege.  Obama and all presidents have defended the right of the Executive branch to have confidential discussions about issues; the idea is that the presidents team can't have open and honest discussions if they know every word they say could show up on the evening news.

But Cummings refuses to allow the lawyer to be present.

Of course as a Democrat Cummings undoubtedly believes that anything a criminal says without a lawyer present shouldn't be used against him.

Democrats and the media are labeling the DOJ wanting a lawyer present as Trump refusing to cooperate.

Interestingly Republicans allowed Comey to have an FBI attorney present when he testified.

Democrats back antisemitism; declare that Jesus isn't Jewish.

Democrat Ilhan Omar retweeted a tweet that declared that Jesus Christ was a Palestinian.

The New York Times ran an article that declared that Jesus was a Palestinian.

Aside from the obvious historical evidence of Jesus being Jewish there's the problem that the Palestinians are Arabs who didn't reach the Holy Land until the 7th century.

The question of course why would anyone lie about Jesus not being Jewish?

In this context the motivation seems to be to raise support for Palestinians and Black people.

Omar is trying to get Americans to identify with Palestinian Muslims rather than Israeli Jews.  Given the close links between Judaism and Christianity and the fact that Islam is a 7th century version of Scientology--a made up religion designed to enrich its creator-- it's hard for antisemites like Omar to generate support for Palestinian terrorists by telling the truth.

The Black man who wrote in the NYT is trying to tell us that only Blacks feel like outsiders in our society.  Conservatives in California, Catholics in any number of places, Eastern Europeans etc are all discriminated against by other whites yet in the left's victimhood culture a first generation Ukraine Catholic immigrant has the same White privilege as a Rockefeller.  He feels that having Jesus look white is evil.  Of course it's easy to get pictures of Jesus as a Black which are equally incorrect--Jesus was likely on the brown side-- and if you're going to get hung up over Jesus not looking like you then it's women who are the most oppressed.

Of course we are made in God's image not in terms of our visual appearance  but in terms of our souls so the fact we do or don't look like Jesus is irrelevant.

This is just one more example of how the left will lie about anything to advance their agenda.

Either AOC hates veterans or she's clueless

Everyone is familiar with the horror stories about how the VA is failing many, but far from all, veterans.

Yet Democrat Ocasio-Cortez is telling us we shouldn't change anything because "if it's not broke don't fix it"

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) claims that the VA provides the "highest quality of [health]care" to veterans, says: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" pic.twitter.com/bYFEprdYRS

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) April 22, 2019

So either she hates veterans and thinks that substandard care is ok or she's so clueless she hasn't heard about the problem.

Of course the real answer is number 3; she doesn't care about veterans, she doesn't care about us, but she wants the government to control our medical care so she has more power.

With Democrats pushing for Medicare for all the last thing they need is the American people realizing we already have Medicare for all veterans and it's not working too well.

If the government can't manage health care for just veterans why would anyone believe that the government can manage the health care of all Americans?

Democrats like AOC don't care if we the people get lousy healthcare, they'll undoubtedly have a better plan for themselves--remember as passed Obamacare wasn't forced on law makers--, they only want more power over we the people.

Islamic radicals murder hundreds of Christians; WaPo says the problem is far right anger

Analysis: Sri Lanka church bombings stoke far-right anger in the West https://t.co/seWuJwgzwG

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) April 22, 2019

That's right to the WaPo the problem isn't the targeting of Christians for execution and persecution by a wide spectrum of evil people ranging from Muslims to the government of China.  Instead the problem is that some people take umbrage to terrorist attacks on Christians.

Every time Muslims do something horrendous the main concern of the WaPo isn't for the victims but for Muslims who might have to live with the consequences of their Scientology of the 7th century religion.

Just as the left hates Trump for defending himself the left hates Christians, and others, who point out that murdering Christians is bad.

Do you recall the WaPo talking about how we shouldn't blame Christians/conservatives after the Christchurch attack?  Do you remember the WaPo castigating Muslims for condemning all non-Muslims for the attack?

Neither do I.

The left hates Christians with a passion because Christianity stands between the left and complete power over we the people.  That's the same reason the Chinese tyrants hate Christians by the way.

Democrats want convicted terrorists to be able to vote

Democrats oppose laws which prevent convicted felons from voting because criminals apparently have a natural affinity for the Democrat party since the vast majority of them vote for Democrats.

Historically felons haven't been allowed to vote because murders, thieves, rapists, child molesters, and terrorists have been considered to not have the best interests of society in mind; for example pedophiles voting for a DA who wouldn't enforce age of consent laws.

When questioned at a town hall meeting Bernie Sanders said that rapists and the Boston Bomber should be allowed to vote from their prison cells.

Kamala Harris says we should talk about letting felons in prison vote but that former prisoners should obviously be allowed to vote.  Kamala has since "clarified" her position, ie dramatically changed it.  However we should expect if she were to be elected she'd follow her heart and do whatever gets more  Democrat votes.

Just one more example of how the Democrats are on the side of criminals not honest citizens.  This helps explain why Democrats are simultaneously working to reduce time in prison for criminals and making it harder for we the people to defend ourselves.

The Trump litmus test; are you a real conservative or East coast poser?

Trump has unleashed another of his tweet storms in response to the #FakeNews media's desperate attempts to recover from the Mueller report.

Krugman at the NYT, who famously predicted that if Trump were elected the stock market would crash and never recover, declared that the Republican party no longer supported American values.

With the Democrats pushing socialism and infanticide as well as having spent 2 years fruitlessly trying to nullify the 2016 election through a coup Krugman is clearly pushing propaganda not truth.

Real conservatives are glad that Trump is fighting back but the old money beltway "conservative" establishment is aghast.

That's how you tell who's really working to advance the conservative agenda and who's more concerned about following correct political etiquette; if they're glad that Trump is fighting back they're one of us, if they're upset that Trump dares to defend himself they're not.

Islamic group was responsible for the mass murder in Sri Lanka

While leftists keep telling us the threat is from  conservatives and Christians no one thought either group was responsible for the terrorist attack in Sri Lanka.

Now we know that it's an Islamic group we'll start hearing about how we shouldn't blame all Muslims; which is true there are good Muslims.

What's interesting is that after any of the very rare attacks against Muslims we're immediately told that everyone who doesn't think Muslims are perfect is at fault.

Similarly whenever some neoNazi or communist commits a terrorist act all conservatives are to blame.

Ilhan Omar declares loyalty to Somali warlords

Black Hawk Down is a phrase used to describe the battle of Mogadishu. It was a fight between the troops of Somali warlords and American soldiers who were trying to ensure that relief supplies actually got to the people.

As part of that mission US forces were tasked to arrest key leaders of one of the groups that were creating chaos in Somalia.

Thousands of Somalis militiamen fought back since they benefited from the corruption and theft.

As a result 18 Americans died trying to help save the Somali people from the warlords.

Democrat Ilhan Omar's take is that it was the US that was the terrorist and the warlords thugs who were the victims.

In his selective memory, he forgets to also mention the thousands of Somalis killed by the American forces that day! #NotTodaySatan https://t.co/wrFocrZymQ

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) October 16, 2017

It's clear that Omar's loyalty is to those warlords not to America.

How else can we explain first her exaggeration of the number of Somali's killed and her identifying the Somali militiamen as the victims not the American soldiers who died trying to free her country?

Democrat Buttigieg builds a Jesus of his very own

Democrat candidate keeps telling us he's gay.  He celebrates the fact that he's a "wife" to another man.

He also says that God's cool with that.

But scripture and 2000 years of Christians all say that God is not cool with that.

And for good reason, the normal gay lifestyle is a horrible affront to Jesus's call to love one another.

That's because contrary to the fake image that Hollywood has been selling us the gay lifestyle is nothing like the heterosexual lifestyle.

We don't know about Buttigieg's personal life but gay friendly researchers like Kinsey say that only around 5% of gays establish monogamous relationships that last more than 5 years.  Gays are massively promiscuous sex addicts who have far more "partners" than straight people on average.

If you doubt the studies then remember that when the AIDS epidemic started the public health officials in San Francisco wanted to shut the bath houses where gays met for sex with strangers.  But gays fought tooth and nail against that even though they knew that their lifestyle was killing them.

Gays themselves have admitted that long term gay relationships are based on infidelity; the more the two "partners" cheat the longer they're likely to stay together.

In Europe, where  gay "marriage" has been legal longer, a study showed that the typical gay marriage lasts for 2 years and during those 2 years each of the "spouses" had sex with a stranger, on average, once a month.  The fight about gay "marriage" wasn't about letting gays marry, since few do, but about forcing society to declare that the massively promiscuous gay lifestyle is good.

None of this changes the fact that God loves gays, and Buttigieg, just as He loves all of us sinners.

The problem though is that instead of acknowledging that he's going against God Buttigieg redefines Jesus into a God who approves of active homosexuality; essentially Buttigieg is making a Jesus that he likes rather than following the Jesus who is.

Essentially people like Buttigieg are weaponizing Jesus by constructing a version of Him who supports everything they do and who condemns all of their opponents.

By saying that Jesus supports the active gay lifestyle, as opposed to the truth that Jesus loves people who suffer from same sex attraction, Buttigieg is attacking Christians who believe in the real Jesus.  Buttigieg is effectively saying that Christians who follow the real historical Jesus are bad because they don't share the supposed compassion of the Jesus he's made up.

We all try and rationalize our own sins; it's human nature.  But we need to stand up to people who redefine Jesus and then use that made up god to attack people who follow the real historical Jesus.

Trump fights back

Democrats are abusing their power in the House to demand Trump's confidential financial records.

They have no evidence of any crime; they're eagerly violating Trump's 4th Amendment rights in the hope that they'll find something, anything, that they can use against Trump.

Were Congress to do this to any individual other than Trump the media would be furious because nothing spells totalitarianism more than a Government which can wage war against one of its citizens for no reason.

Fortunately Trump, unlike many Republicans, isn't going to be the Democrats punching bag.  He's filed suit to end the Democrats fascist misuse of their power.

This is one of the reasons that Democrats hate Trump so much; he doesn't roll over and play dead when they attack him.

Pray for the Christians of Sri Lanka

On Easter, the day when we remember the Resurrection of Jesus and how that means that we too will rise from the dead, hundreds of Christians were killed by terrorist attacks on the island of Sri Lanka.

While initial reports indicate that these attacks were part of the global war being waged by radical Muslims against all other faiths no matter who turns out to be eventually responsible it shows how Christians are the most targeted and least violent of our planets religions.

Please pray for those innocent victims.

Happy Easter; He is Risen!

Whenever you're depressed about how insane the world is know this; He has won.  We can win by living our lives as He wants us to.  No one else's actions or words can separate us from Him.

Only by rejecting Him can we suffer in eternity.

He was perfectly happy and we do nothing to change that but He created us anyway even though He knew that would mean that He's have to be tortured to death for us.

That's how much He loves not us as a group but each one of us as a person for He would have died for any one of us.

Jesus won the victory all that we see in the world is just His allowing us to choose Him or to reject Him.

We need to pray that everyone accepts Him because that's what He wants and the alternative is so sad.

Be at peace; know that your salvation rests in your hands.  God will give you the Grace you need to be saved; the question is will you accept it or will you reject it?

Why America depends on Christianity and Judaism

The huge step forward taken by America in terms of cultural evolution was declaring that all men are created equal.

Historically cultures had always believed that some people were better than others and that those superior people had the right and even the duty to run the lives of the rest.

By declaring that rights flow from God and that political power belongs to the people the Founders created a society where the government worked for the people and there were representatives not rulers.

But those ideas hinge on one line that that says:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The Jewish and Christian religions are the only ones that declare that men have intrinsic value due to God.  The Christian faith has a more complete view of the matter because it points out that we are made valuable because God has made us His children.  

So long as our culture believes in the God of the Bible it will be able to hang on to that revolutionary idea that we the people rule ourselves.

That's why Democrats are so opposed to Christianity.  Democrats desire the power to rule our lives.  Hillary Clinton has even said that religions have to change their teachings to conform to the every changing hedonistic "morality" espoused by Democrats.  But if the Founders were right then government has limits. There are things it cannot impose on we the people.

But Democrats are throw backs to the English aristocracy or the Soviet Unions nomenclatura; they believe that they are inherently better, smarter, nicer, kinder, and better informed than we the people.

To achieve their objective of becoming our rulers Democrats have to oppress Christians and Jews just as the tyrants in China do.

We can only win if we stand up for what we believe and prevent the Democrats from oppressing us.

Did Mueller conspire to influence the 2018 election?

We now know that Mueller found no evidence of collusion with Russia by any Americans.  Yet going into the 2018 elections the media was saturated with stories that Trump was a traitor who was in Putin's pocket.

Given that Mueller's final report--which probably took a long time to write given how it artfully converts statements of fact, "there was no obstruction", to subtle condemnation, "maybe this could have been obstruction if the law was different"--was released now it's likely that Mueller really knew that there was no collusion before the 2018 election but intentionally chose to say nothing.

It can be argued that a prosecutor isn't supposed to say anything until he passes charges but the reality is that the Mueller investigation had been leaking like a sieve from the beginning.

What's odd is that all the leaks turned out to be lies that favored the Democrat narrative.  Given the report we have in our hands any truthful leaks should have been favoring Trump.

Take the infamous BuzzFeed story that said that Cohen had testified that Trump told him to lie to Congress.  It was supposedly based on law enforcement sources. Interestingly this story was so over the top that Mueller did correct it.  The question is why didn't Mueller correct all the stories about Trump being a traitor when he knew that after over a year of investigation he hadn't found a shred of evidence to support that?

Given Mueller's friendship with Comey, his history of publicly going after people who turned out to be innocent, and his affection for the FBI it's hardly implausible to suggest that he may have wanted to get Trump.  He could have been motivated by ideological bias or merely by his own historically demonstrated desire to always indict someone for something.

But by effectively collaborating with the #FakeNews media to smear the Republicans prior to the 2018 election Mueller corrupted our electoral process far more than the tiny number of ads the Russians bought.

The Democrats, Mueller, and the #FakeNews media succeeded in destroying American's trust in our elections where Putin had failed.

Thanks to Mueller's silence and the active lying by Democrats and the #FakeNews media 52% of Democrats believe that Russia successfully tampered with the vote tallies to get Trump elected.

Yet there is not one jot of evidence that that was the case.

In the end Mueller's silence probably gave the Democrats the House.  If he honestly didn't have his answers at the time, if he had credible reason to believe that the truth was just around the corner, then that's still a problem because he didn't correct the continual #FakeNews media reporting that said that he had evidence of Trump's guilt.

An honest man who didn't want to be used to advance the Democrat narrative would have stated before the election that as of this time there was no evidence that Trump was a traitor but that the investigation was on-going.

Instead Mueller chose silence.

It's Good Friday; God died for you, what have you done for Him lately?

God was perfectly happy.  He didn't need us at all.

Yet He decided to make us knowing that it would entail His taking on a human nature and being tortured to death for us.

That's how much He loves us.

Ask yourself if you've returned that love.

Since He's perfectly happy we can't really do anything for Him.

However because He loves us more than we love ourselves He has given us two ways to return His love.

We should love Him above all others.

We should love our neighbor as ourselves.

Jesus suffered and died on the cross for you.  Return the favor by helping the poor and the sick, by being kind and considerate to your neighbor.

Essentially the best way to thank God for having made you despite knowing that that would inevitably lead to His dying on the Cross is to be like Him; be love.

The most amazing thing is that loving our neighbors doesn't make us sad rather it brings us true happiness.

Contrary to the claims of the world being selfish doesn't lead to happiness only to isolation, greed, and an unquenchable sorrow.

The reality is that all God asks of us in return for His suffering on the Cross is that we be the best people we can be.

Given that we all should want to be the best person we can be it's clear that God isn't asking us to repay Him for His suffering but rather He's using His suffering to show us the path to what will make us happiest; as in all things God is totally unselfish, the perfect Father.

Use this Good Friday to see if you're following the path to perfect happiness that Jesus described.  If you're like most of us you'll see that some level of course correction is needed.

By reflecting on how much God loves you it will become clear that He doesn't command us to love out of selfishness but because He knows that if we truly love others, including Him, we will be happy.

Good Friday is sad because we are reminded about how our sins lead to God's suffering.  But it should also be an occasion of joy because it shows us just how much God loves us and how much He wants us to be perfectly happy with Him in Heaven.

Embrace that joy by following the perfect guide Jesus Christ and love God and your neighbors.

NYT endorses "guilty until proven innocent"

A NYT posting this morning said that one of the key points to come out of the Mueller report was that Trump hadn't been exonerated.

We know that Mueller didn't indict Trump.

We know that Mueller said that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia.

We know that Mueller didn't find one instance of obstruction; the report talks about things that might be obstruction but it doesn't say that any were obstruction.

Yet the NYT is saying that Trump was't exonerated.

In a sense they're right; when there is no evidence of a crime it's impossible to exonerate anyone.

If someone were to say that Beto O'Rourke murdered his parents he couldn't be exonerated, and he wouldn't need to be exonerated, because there has been no credible accusation that he did murder his parents.

Similarly Trump doesn't need, and in fact can't be, exonerated for something that didn't happen; collusion with Russia.

As to obstruction Mueller didn't cite a single example. Rather in a decidedly political and dishonest way he cited things that might be obstruction.  As a prosecutor Mueller's job is to seek out the facts not advance possible things that he can't show to be true.  Mueller didn't cite any actual legal reasoning that would show that any of the events he cited as obstruction were in fact illegal acts.

In fact all the things that Mueller cites are nothing more than an innocent man trying to end a partisan witch hunt aimed at nullifying the 2016 election.

It's a matter of fact that Trump didn't fire Mueller or even replace him.

It's a fact that Trump at no point exercise privilege claims and provided Mueller with unlimited access to documents while allowing senior aides to testify.

That's why Mueller never says that any of the things that the Democrats are now talking about were obstruction.  He only said that perhaps someone somewhere might think they were obstruction.

Which is basically Mueller's dishonest attempt to criminalize Trump defending himself. In Mueller's world Republicans should just sit back and do nothing while dishonest men like Mueller smear their reputation through bogus investigations and unending inaccurate leaks.

Mueller's bogus obstruction claims

Mueller cites a few things that he thinks could be obstruction but it's clear none of them are.

1) Trump asked Comey to go easy on Flynn: First note that just months before Comey had said that even though Hillary had intentionally placed highly classified information on an insecure server in direct violation of multiple laws she shouldn't be prosecuted.  He clearly "went easy" on Hillary.

Trump asked Comey to give a US hero similar treatment not over anything significant but over his supposedly lying to the FBI.  Given that the agents who ambushed him--they didn't tell him it was an interrogation, he thought it was a coordination meeting--didn't think he lied it's clear that leniency was warranted.

Note that Trump didn't order Comey to drop the charges which he could do as President. So clearly this isn't obstruction in any rational sense.

2) Trump asked Comey to lift the cloud of suspicion: Comey had told Trump that he wasn't under investigation. But the #FakeNews media was saying he was.  How can asking Comey to repeat in public what he'd said in private be obstruction?

The real obstruction was Comey acting in a way to make Trump look guilty when Comey knew the Trump wasn't under investigation.

3)Firing Comey:  Mueller admits that Trump wanted to fire Comey because Comey refused to acknowledge what he'd told Trump; that Trump wasn't under investigation.  To argue that a President firing an FBI head who was deliberately misleading the public in an attempt to attack the President is obstruction is amazingly dishonest.

Imagine if Obama's FBI head had told Obama that they were investigating the IRS scandal but that they weren't investigating Obama in private but when the media started saying that Obama was being investigated that FBI head wouldn't tell them that in fact they weren't investigating Obama.  The same people who are attacking Trump for obstruction would be supporting Obama firing that clearly dishonest FBI leader.

4)Trump wanted Sessions to curtail the Mueller investigation:  Once again note that Trump didn't order anything.  But more importantly Trump knew that he didn't collude with Russia so that he knew that there was nothing to investigate. Further he knew that the whole Mueller probe was based on lies.  Hence it makes sense for him to tell his AG to quit wasting the public's time and using tax payer dollars to advance the Democrat cause.

Given that Mueller has now concluded that in fact Trump didn't collude everything Trump said is now prove to be true. There was no need for the investigation and it was just a deep state ploy to hurt his presidency.

Stopping politically motivated witch hunts is not obstructing justice it's upholding justice.

4) Concealing emails about the infamous Trump Tower meeting:  First thing to note even if the Democrats were right about the Trump Tower meeting all it would mean is that Trump Jr. listened to a Russian peddling dirt on Hillary.  Given that it's a matter of public record that Hillary paid Russians for dirt on Trump, via Steele, it's unclear how that could be a bad thing if we assume that the rules apply equally to all Americans.

But of course when the Russian said she didn't have any dirt Trump Jr. left the meeting.

So basically Mueller is saying that hiding emails about an embarrassing event is obstruction. Note that it's perfectly legal to hide emails until a search warrant is produced, it's that pesky 4th Amendment that says people can't be randomly searched by the government, and there is no indication that Trump continued to conceal those emails from Mueller.

Given that Hillary deleted 30,000 emails and no one thought that was obstruction arguing that what Trump's team did was obstruction is dishonest at best.

5) Trump asked Sessions to retake control of the Justice Department:  Trump told Sessions: "I'm not going to do anything or direct you to do anything."  Essentially Mueller is arguing that Trump expressing his concern about what we now know was a baseless investigation--and remember that Trump knew for sure that he hadn't colluded--but not ordering Sessions to do anything is obstruction.

But somehow Bill Clinton meeting with Lorreta Lynch while Hillary was under investigation isn't obstruction.

6) Efforts to have Mueller removed for conflicts of interest:  Mueller was a good friend of Comey's, Mueller was a big fan of the FBI, Mueller was probably very mad about Comey being fired; all good reasons that he shouldn't be leading an investigation which started with Comey illegally leaking information to the press.

Note that removing Mueller wouldn't stop the investigation.  What's interesting is that Trump ordered McGhan to remove Mueller but McGhan said no.  And then Trump did nothing.  Wow if that's obstruction then what isn't?

Further Trump publicly declared that he wanted Mueller removed and replaced with someone who would conduct the investigation fairly even though that would draw out the investigation.  Clearly and unequivocally Trump said that replacing Mueller wasn't the same as ending the investigation.

To call this obstruction one has to ignore the valid basis for Trump's concerns and believe that only Mueller could get to the truth.

7) Asking Flynn if he had information that would hurt Trump and praising Manafort:  Flynn and True had a joint legal defense agreement which Flynn ended.  Trump's lawyers asked Flynn's lawyers to give them a heads up if Flynn was saying anything harmful about Trump to Mueller.

Note once again that Trump knew he was innocent and hence anything Flynn was saying that disputed that was incorrect.  So basically Trump's lawyers were asking Flynn to give them a heads up if he started lying to protect his own skin.  Note Trump's lawyers conveyed Trump's support for Flynn and in no way suggested that Flynn conceal the truth or lie.

Asking for information pertinent to their legal defense of the President can hardly be considered obstruction.

As to Manafort Mueller is claiming that Trump's saying nice things about him was obstruction.  While Hillary was under investigation Obama said nice things about her.  Yet no one called that obstruction.

8) Trump stopped being nice to Cohen after Cohen attacked him: This is really insane.  According to Mueller the fact that once Cohen started attacking Trump Trump called him a "rat" was obstruction.

This is one more example of Mueller attempting to declare that Trump making any comment on the investigation while the #FakeNews media was peddling lie after lie based on leaks from Mueller's team was obstruction. Essentially what Mueller is saying is that Trump should have sat back and not responded to the unending stream of propaganda his investigation was intentionally creating.

Not one of these can be construed by an honest person as obstruction.

Especially when, under Obama, many government organizations deliberately refused to supply information requested by Congress and no one was charged with obstruction.

Note that if Trump's comments were driven by frustration and anger at being lied about they don't meet the legal definition of obstruction.  It's clear that Trump didn't want to end an honest investigation into Russian interference but he did want to end a politicized witch hunt.

It's clear from these examples that Mueller is desperate to criminalize Trump defending himself in any way from a baseless witch hunt.

But that's the left's way. If the truth is on the table leftists will never win an argument and if people can defend themselves from the left's baseless charges the left won't be able to railroad them.  That's why the left is constantly working to hide the truth and prevent people from defending themselves.

How can preventing a witch hunt be obstructing justice?

We now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump didn't collude with Putin because if he had Mueller would have found out.

So we know that the entire purpose of Mueller's investigation was invalid; there was no collusion.  Which in turn means that Mueller was investigating an innocent person.

Given that the purpose of justice is to punish the guilty and clear the innocent anything that Trump did in order to end an investigation into a crime that didn't happen wouldn't be obstructing justice it would be helping ensure that justice triumphed.

Imagine for a moment that Hillary was being investigated for cannibalism based on a rumor from Russia that was dug up by a British ex-spy who was being paid by Trump.  Would anyone, including conservatives, think that it would be obstruction of justice for her to do everything she could to end what was clearly an unjust investigation?

The basis for the whole Mueller investigation was even less credible.  It was started because Trump fired Comey, the guy that the Democrats had been calling for to be fired for months.

But Trump fired Comey because Comey was lying to the American people and all of a sudden we were told that Trump must be a crook. Remember Comey told Trump that Trump wasn't under investigation. When Trump told the world that Comey refused to confirm it until he was forced to while testifying to Congress under oath.  Given that the #FakeNews media were saying Comey was investigating Trump Comey was lying by omission.

Hence the firing of Comey served justice by ending the politically motivated lying.

Trump saying Mueller would end his presidency was a comment on bias not an admission of guilt

Democrats and the #FakeNews media are lying through their teeth about Trump's comment.

Trump knew he was innocent and he knew that he wasn't obstructing justice.  So when a special prosecutor was appointed he knew what was coming; two years of lies, leaking and dishonest reporting.

You can be sure that Bill Clinton was upset when he was investigated but that would be because he knew he was guilty as sin.  Yet back then I don't recall the #FakeNews media complaining about Clinton being mad about being investigated.

Ever since Trump declared he was running for office the #FakeNews media had been lying about him.  Any sane person would know that a dedicated swamp creature like Mueller would do everything he could to smear Trump.

All Trump was doing was stating the obvious.  Mueller was given broad sweeping powers unheard of in America; essentially Mueller was tasked with investigating Trump to find something, anything, he might have done which was wrong.  In America we don't do that. We investigate people when we find evidence that they've done something criminal.

Essentially through a series of continuous leaks Mueller has put Trump on trial for the last two years without having enough evidence to convince a Grand Jury to actually indict him.

Trump was smart enough to see that was what was going to happen.

In fascist and communist states where people, not crimes, are investigated the targets are generally destroyed since the objective is never the truth but rather increasing the States power.  So too with Mueller; he wasn't conducting an American case he was conducting a communist one since at no point was there any evidence of either collusion or obstruction.

At any point Trump could have fired Mueller but he didn't.  Trump could have refused to cooperate with Mueller but even Mueller admits that Trump cooperated fully.  Further Mueller has unequivocally concluded there was no evidence of collusion so that means that it is legally impossible for Trump to have obstructed justice.

When an innocent man tries to shut down an investigation he's actually furthering justice because justice means clearing the innocent not just convicting the guilty.  Hence an innocent man could only obstruct justice if he tried to make it look like he was guilty when he wasn't.

Mueller's report is biased: #FakeNews media wants life to be a grand jury

I haven't read the Mueller report but I can state without any hesitation it's biased.  That's because it, like every Grand Jury, is intrinsically biased against the person being accused.

You've probably heard that a good prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich.  The reason for that is that the people on the Grand Jury only hear one side of the story.  Since there is no defense attorney around to argue for the defendant things like biases on the parts of witnesses or evidence that isn't supportive of the prosecutors claim won't get brought up.

The same is true of Mueller's report.  At no point have Trump's attorneys been able to cross examine witnesses or physical evidence or introduce exculpatory evidence.

The Mueller report is Mueller's best effort to show Trump is evil using only one side of the story.  But Mueller himself admitted, because he didn't indict anyone for collusion, that after two years, millions of dollars, and an all Democrat team he couldn't put together a one sided story that was compelling enough to convince anyone that collusion had occurred.

Of the snippets of his report I've seen it is written in a very biased way; namely it complains that it can't prove that Trump didn't do anything wrong.  That's a fascist world view.  In America the job of the prosecutor is to convict the guilty and free the innocent.  If he can't find the evidence of guilt he can't say well the guys still evil because I can't prove he didn't do anything criminal.  That's assuming people are guilty until they can be proven innocent which is what communists and Nazi's do.

Of course Democrats and the #FakeNews media are all enthused about making all of life a Grand Jury where only one side of an issue is discussed.  That's why Democrats are so eager to censor any perspective that disagrees with them.  While a prosecutor may be able to get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich he's not going to be able to get a jury to convict the sandwich since the jury will see all the evidence.

So to it is with Democrat arguments.  They can't win when people have all the facts so they try and win by hiding and lying about everything. They get away with it because the #FakeNews media will lie as much as is needed to protect Democrats.

What we're probably going to see is that when forced to the Mueller report will admit that they didn't find any evidence of collusion or obstruction. But there will be plenty of innuendo that implies the Trump is guilty but they just couldn't find any evidence.

We already know that the #FakeNews media is playing Grand Jury with the obstruction charge.  When Trump fired Comey the Democrats had been calling for him to be fired for his treatment of Hillary and Comey had lied by omission by refusing to confirm that he'd told Trump that Trump wasn't under investigation.  The #FakeNews media mention neither of those very pertinent facts.  

Take everything you hear about the Mueller report that is supposedly bad for Trump with a few vats of salt until we've had time to digest the report because everything in the report is a one sided story by people who desperately wanted to indict Trump but couldn't.

Mueller Report Quick Take: It's profoundly fascist in nature

In America we're innocent until proven guilty.  That means that the prosecutors job to find evidence that we're guilty and then charge us with a crime.

But in the Mueller report they say that they couldn't prove that Trump didn't collude which is saying that they assumed that Trump was guilty and they couldn't clear him.

pic.twitter.com/lrPMQxtIxp

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 18, 2019

If we apply the same reasoning to the Clinton email case we would have to declare that we couldn't clear Hillary on the 30,000 emails she deleted and hence imply that she was in fact guilty something the leftists who ran the Mueller probe would never ever do.

How the #FakeNews media will play the Mueller report

I'm going out on a very short very sturdy limb and by saying that the #FakeNews media which has been lying to us for the last 2 years about collusion are going to say, within minutes of the Mueller report being released, that it in fact shows that Trump did collude.

Now we will know that they're lying unless we believe that Mueller was secretly in Trump's pocket all along.  Because if Mueller isn't Trump's stooge and there was evidence of collusion Mueller would have indicted him.

We know this because of Mueller's history.  In the past he's been so desperate in high profile cases to get an indictment that he's hounded innocent people; the government had to pay one of his targets millions of dollars in compensation.

Also given the incessant leaking from his team, all of which was detrimental to Trump and none of which turned out to be true, it's very unlikely that Mueller wasn't eager to get Trump.  He wasn't completely dishonest, which is why he fired two people who were caught being too blatant in their partisanship, but he certainly showed that he didn't mind doing what he could to paralyze the government for two years and help the Democrats win the House.

Keeping in mind that not only didn't Mueller indict Trump he didn't indict anyone for collusion.  Not one single person.  The man who was used to justify the spying on the Trump campaign wasn't charged with a single crime.  Mueller only indicted some Russians who he thought would never see a courtroom and some people who "lied" to the FBI or who had committed totally unrelated crimes.

But the #FakeNews media will find things in the report that they will spin.  For example if Mueller doesn't definitively state that the Steele dossier was proven to be false the #FakeNews media will declare that the charges in it are true.

Another key problem is that at a Grand Jury the defendant isn't defended.  So a witness who is secretly in the pay of say Hillary Clinton could give testimony and it would never come up that he has a strong financial incentive to lie.  Data that would show that this or that witness isn't reliable or that there are contradictions between witnesses who are called and people who have a different take who aren't called won't be in the report even though they may have shaped Mueller's team's perceptions.

Hence there could be a document that says that person z did something from a source that isn't credible.  But the #FakeNews media will treat it as credible.

After lying to us for 2 years the #FakeNews media are going to be willing to go to any lengths to cover up their bias so get ready for the biggest propaganda drive since Obama told us we could keep our doctors if we liked them.

Bernie Sanders declares that lies that help Democrats are good

As part of the civil war in the Democrat party between Democrats who are somewhat sane and those who are totally insane Bernie Sanders attacked a left wing article that pointed out the truth about Elizabeth Warren's Native American heritage; namely she doesn't have one.

Bernie wrote:

"My friend and colleague Elizabeth Warren was unfairly targeted by a November 2017 article on ThinkProgress that echoed Donald Trump’s bad faith claims that she was being a hypocrite about her ancestry. That attack that was linked on the Drudge Report and immediately immersed her into a rather unhelpful debate. Again in October 2018, you published an article stating that she was hurting Native American people."

But the reality is that we now all know that Warren is less Native American than a huge swath of Americans. 

We know for a fact that she lied about her ethnicity to gain jobs; including a cushy gig at Harvard where she was paid more than $300 thousand a year to teach one class.  Those jobs should have gone to real minorities not the white privileged Warren.

For Bernie to object to that is a clear and unequivocal statement that he thinks that lies that help Democrats are good.

Democrats use public schools to campaign

When public schools make projects about Rev. Martin Luther King Jr it's ok because we're remembering only the good things he did, as we do with George Washington, and because he's dead.

On the other hand Democrats are weaponizing the public schools to campaign for living Democrats.

At least one public school has had students color a picture of Democrat Ilhan Omar and then write a report on her.  It's unlikely that reports that talk about her anti-semitism or the fact that she married her brother for several years as part of some scam will get good grades.

Propagandizing for Democrat politicians in public schools is common.  During the Obama years every few weeks we'd hear about this or that public school having their students sing his praises. Now teachers expel students for wearing MAGA hats.

This sort of blatant propaganda is supposed to be kept out of American public schools; it's the sort of thing you see in Third World dictatorships or communist countries.  The schools are supposed to teach kids the facts not indoctrinate them.

But given the inherent dishonesty of many teachers and their unions we're seeing more and more that public schools are not only extolling the virtues of hedonism but they're also brainwashing kids about how wonderful Democrats are.

This needs to be stopped and the people involved should be immediately fired.

Now if a high school teacher wants to discuss Omar and present both the positive and negative about her that's fine but to have kids who are so young that they are given a coloring assignment as homework be subjected to a one sided indoctrination session is not.

Democrats demand we give while they keep

In a not surprising revelation the Democrat presidential candidates who are constantly condemning the "rich" are themselves very rich.

Beto O'Rourke and his wife made a cool $370k in 2017.  Bernie Sanders and his wife made $566k in 2017.  Kamala Harris and her husband made around $2M in 2018. While Elizabeth Warren and her husband made just short of $1M in 2018.

All of these "champions of the people" are constantly attacking the "rich" for not paying their fair share.  But they count on the #FakeNews media to hide from we the people the fact that they are the very people they supposedly condemn.

Not only that but with all the money those supposedly caring and charitable Democrats make they give very little to charity.

O'Rourke:    $1,166  0.3%
Harris:       $27,000  1.4%
Warren:     $55,000  5.5%
Sanders:   $16,980   3.0%

Yet they say that we must raise taxes on everyone else in order to help the poor.  Of course when we use tax dollars to pay the poor the rich Washington bureaucracy skims a lot off of the top.  If we look at the total we spend on helping the poor and divide it by the number of poor families each family of 4 should get around $66k a year. Clearly that's not happening and it's not happening because the government employee's who run those programs make about twice as much as workers in the private sector.

But most charitable organizations run much leaner and direct around 90% of the money collected to the people who are actually in need.

Yet the Democrats won't give their own money but they will demand that you give your money to them so that they can spend it as they want to; the reality is all they care about is buying votes.

O'Rourke's defense is that his going around campaigning so that he can become even richer and more powerful is his "charitable" contribution.  It's like a salesman saying that the hours he spends away from home selling things so he can make more commissions are charitable contributions.

That's right Beto says he blesses us with his presence so that's his bit of charity.

If these Democrats actually cared about the poor they'd be giving far more of their own money to private charities than they do.

You can be sure, and Bernie has admitted, that none of these Democrats pay a cent more in taxes than they need to and that they use expensive lawyers/tax accountants to make sure that they get every tax break possible.

Yet they demand that Americans, who give billions of their own money to charities every year, give more of their hard earned money to the government so these already very rich people can spend it.  You may not be able to send your kid to college because of the crushing tax burdens that Democrats impose but they will be able to ensure that someone who could work but doesn't want to will have a comfortable life and, more importantly, vote Democrat.

Remember the best way to define a leftists is "A Leftists is someone who wants to be philanthropic with other people's money".

Democrats declare violence against Republicans is ok

Kellyanne Conway was approached from behind, grabbed, and shaken on her birthday which was being celebrated in a restaurant.

The assailant was angry at Kellyanne because the assailant didn't like Kellyanne's politics.

The assault occurred in Montgomery County Maryland a bastion of leftism and anti-Trump fanaticism.

The Democrats who run the place have now dropped the charge against the assailant saying that it's ok to attack Republicans.

That's not what they literally said but we can be sure that if a Trump supporter came up behind the radical leftist congressman who represents Montgomery County grabbing and shaking him the Trump supporter wouldn't walk.

We know this because the prosecutors lied about what happened. They said:

Was this woman rude? Yes. Did she violate Ms. Conway’s space and try to embarrass her? Yes and yes. Is this a case where criminal sanctions would have been appropriate? No.

But it's a matter of fact that the assailant did more than violate Ms. Conway's space and try to embarrass her; the assailant physically grabbed and violently shook Kellyanne.

We would all agree that merely coming up close to someone and trying to embarrass them is not assault which is why the prosecutor lied.  By misrepresenting what happened the Democrat was effectively declaring open season on conservatives.

This is just one more example of where the left is fully comfortable with using violence against people they don't like while simultaneously declaring that speech they don't like is equivalent to actual violence.

Lies Hollywood told me

If Americans knew the truth there would hardly been any Democrats in Congress.  But because the majority of Americans have been and are being lied to by the #FakeNews media and Hollywood they vote for Democrats.

We're all pretty familiar with the lies told by the #FakeNews media but the subliminal propaganda being pushed by Hollywood in pretty much every show is actually more pernicious.

Hollywood acknowledges their power when they point to how they've managed to change the people's view of smoking.  In the 1960s even after the Surgeon General said that smoking causes cancer smoking was viewed as what the cool people did.

Yet now after decades of Hollywood mostly portraying smoking as uncool and stupid the vast majority of Americans view smoking as a bad thing.

The reality is that when we hear a message day in and day out in all the entertainment we watch we tend to absorb it without really thinking about it.  While it's a good thing that Hollywood has conveyed the truth about smoking the problem is that Hollywood uses that same power to push messages that aren't true; like no one goes to church.

Here's a few of the lies that Hollywood injects into the blood stream of the body politic pretty much every day:

1)No one goes to church:  When's the last time you saw a family, even in a supposedly family friendly show, go to church on Sunday?  Even in the golden age of TV Ricky and Lucy didn't go to church.  The problem is is that we tend to soak in the message that religion isn't that important a thing.  Contrary to what entertainment shows back in the 1960s most Americans took religion pretty seriously and even today many still do.  Yet by never showing that Hollywood is getting us to think that no one really takes God too seriously.

2) Women are into casual sex not love: In entertainment women are all comfortable with having sex after at most a date or two and they consider it a wonderful thing if a man wants to move in with them.  Essentially nearly all women in entertainment are portrayed as what promiscuous men want women to be.  In reality of course women want men who love them and commit to them. But by showing women as sex addicts Hollywood pressures women to accept hedonism and it convinces men that women want to be sluts.

3) Women are the same as men: How many times have you seen some 5 foot tall 98lb woman beat the crud out of more than one 6 foot plus 220lb man?  Now if the man was out of shape and had no training and the woman was a skilled martial artist then sure but instead Hollywood shows those tiny women easily beating up highly trained men.  It's no wonder that so many people are ok with men competing in women's sports; Hollywood has been telling them for decades that women are just as athletic as men.

4) Businessmen are always crooks: It's very rare to see a businessman, or woman, in any bit of entertainment portrayed as the hard working caring person that most of them are.  Instead they're the ones who commit the crimes and exploit others.  It's far more likely for example that a defense contractor will be shown hiring hitmen to kill people that stand in its way than it is for that same contractor to be shown making systems that keep our soldiers safe.

5)Criminals always have a heart of gold: People who make their living by prostituting themselves, stealing, and mugging are often shown to be really caring unselfish people when the chips are down. Compared to how businessmen are treated Hollywood is clearly telling us that criminals are the good side of humanity.

6) People of faith are always hypocrites:  It's rare these days to ever see the true humility and charity that characterizes the lives of people of faith shown by Hollywood.  Instead we see that most people of faith are evil monsters who hide behind their faith.

7) The gay lifestyle is just like the straight lifestyle: Gays die young due to the various diseases their massively promiscuous lifestyle spreads. According to gay friendly researchers, and gays themselves, only 5% of gay relationships last more than 5 years and are monogamous.  Children of gays are exposed to highly sexualized environments.  Yet if you get your perception of gays from Hollywood, which most Americans do since only 2% of Americans are gay according to the CDC, you'd be forgiven for thinking that they are just like straight people.  The reality is that they're just like massively promiscuous heterosexuals not like the vast majority of heterosexuals.

8) There are lots of gays:  When polled the average American thinks that 25% of the population is gay. The truth, according to the CDC, is that 2% of American men are gay and another small percentage is bisexual.  But Hollywood has more gays in its shows than it has Asians.  With multiple gays being in nearly every show it's hardly surprising that Americans think gays are far more prevalent than they really are.

9) It's easy to buy fully automatic weapons: Criminals are shown using military grade fully automatic weapons on a regular basis. In at least one show it was said that they bought their new fully automatic guns at a gun show in Arizona. The problem is that it's currently illegal in the US for anyone to own a fully automatic weapon manufactured after 1986.

10) Every person on trial is innocent:  Ever since the Perry Mason TV show Hollywood has been giving us story after story where there is a ton of evidence pointing to a person being guilty but it turns out that in fact they're innocent.  We've been conditioned to believe that it's more likely that someone who is on trial is innocent when that's not the reality at all. Yet that incorrect belief provides support for all the "go easy on the crook" policies that Democrats support.  It's that mindset that let many people think Jussie Smollett is innocent in spite of the evidence.

There are plenty more examples like this but the point is that by creating a fake reality Hollywood is subliminally propagandizing us into believing in things that aren't true.

For example if people think that gays live a mostly monogamous lifestyle and that they make up 25% of the population then those people are more likely to support redefining marriage than they would be if they realized how few gays there are and how gay marriages are rarely monogamous.

Leftists think charity is raising your tax rates

Beto has released his tax returns and it turns out he's very wealthy and doesn't give much to charity.

In 2017 Beto and his wife made $370,412 and gave $1,166, 0.3%, to charity.

But Beto is saying that Christians who tithe, give 10% of their incomes, to charity are greedy if they don't support massive tax increases.

This is one more example of the adage that "A Leftists is someone who wants to be philanthropic with other people's money".

Also given that Beto is in the top 2% of Americans in terms of yearly income and that Bernie is a millionaire the whole leftist call for attacking the rich seems to lack a bit of credibility.

Especially since on the Fox News Town Hall with Bernie he said that he didn't pay what he calls his "fair share" in taxes.  Instead Bernie only paid what he had to.  Which seems odd in that he and other Democrats are condemning the rich in America in general for what they themselves do; namely pay the taxes that they owe.

Russia was trying to help Bernie not Trump

A key component of the big lie about Trump colluding with Russia has always been that Russia preferred Trump over Hillary for President.

But we now have very good reason to believe that the candidate that the Russians really wanted to win was Bernie Sanders which makes sense since Bernie is a pacifist who honeymooned  in the Communist Soviet Union and who was very unlikely to do more than verbally complain about anything Putin did.

The new information comes from Mueller's indictment of certain Russians.  Those indictments contained emails where Julian Assange was asking Russian for new material to hurt Hillary so that Bernie could be nominated.

Then magically a short time later Assange was able to leak DNC emails that showed that the DNC was violating its own rules in favor of Hillary.

Once we realize that Mueller has told us that the Russians weren't enthused about Trump but they were enthused about Bernie the obvious question is why didn't we hear about the big Mueller investigation into Bernie?

Yeah the fact that WikiLeaks was working with Russia to help Bernie doesn't in any way mean or indicate that Bernie was involved but then WikiLeaks working with Russia to help Trump didn't mean that Trump was involved but that didn't stop Mueller from spending 2 years investigating him.

This is just one more bit of proof that the whole Mueller investigation was nothing but a politically motivated witch hunt designed to nullify the 2016 election.