Like the Clintons, the Obamas have amassed a considerable fortune from politics. Also like the Clintons, they’re not going away. They continue to have an influence over politics and American culture. By becoming Netflix producers, the Obamas made sure their leftist propaganda gets attention.
Neither Michelle nor Barack have said anything about the Netflix program titled “Cuties,” in which young girls are shown in sexually charged poses on a glitzy stage. Susan Rice, a former Obama advisor, is on the Netflix board. She has also been reticent about what many are calling ‘pedophilia.’ Some say their silence is complicity. I agree.
Under Obama’s administration, the ‘trans’ mania began. Boys at high schools could pretend they were girls and win awards in athletic events. Restrooms suddenly became a problem. Then came the claim that there were dozens of genders and various sexual identifications. Anyone who objected got labeled as haters. Eventually, people became fearful. If they used the wrong pronoun or offended an easily offended trans-whatever, they could be fired, banned, or expelled.
I don’t know if Michelle Obama is a transgender or not. The matter is a long-running internet meme. That meme was reinforced when Joan Rivers casually said Michelle was a ‘tranny’ and that it was ‘okay.’ Days later she was dead. Maybe it was okay to her, but not to other powerful people who wanted to keep it under wraps. Even Barack himself has referred to Michelle as “Michael” on several occasions. There have been many who have said Barack Obama is gay. It’s plausible, but such speculation can also easily lead to social media bans.
Now the lying mass media are denouncing Q and his followers. They ridicule those who think there is such as thing as child trafficking and pedophilia occurring among the elite and powerful. Anyone who claims there are plenty of pedophiles pulling top levers of power must obviously be a conspiracy theorist, according to CNN, MSNBC, and all the rest. Yet a lot of evidence does exist. Epstein’s “Orgy Island,” for example.
The fact that the Obamas did not exert influence to stop a show containing obvious pedophilia can only mean they are complicit. Perhaps they want pedophilia to be normalized just as they wanted sexual dysphoria normalized. Meanwhile, they and their colleagues are doing their best to shut down Christians who object.
President Trump has astute political instincts… that’s one of the reasons why those who know him longest (and best) simply remind everyone to just let Trump be Trump. Our president knows our nation needs joy… He not only senses it, he inherently is tuned into it.
Leaders of large private sector institutions and large corporations all carry this skill-set. It establishes the tone and humanity of the organization. Follow this lead.
.
The value of this positive national message is far beyond measure. Most professional political observers do not have a frame of reference from which to value the importance and visibility of this campaign messaging.
Right now those who wish to “fundamentally change” our nation are waging a full frontal assault against our constitutional republic. The bombardment seems overwhelming.
Leftist city and state leaders have abandoned rule of law in favor of supporting the mob effort to destroy our sense of national unity. Political activists, left-wing ideologues under the guise of democrats, and a host of media allies are conducting an information war on behalf of their objective. Big tech social media companies are attempting to remove the voices of those who are fighting back.
There is a great deal of purposefully driven anxiety and fear amid our nation as this multi-faceted internal war takes place. However, there is a primary element to this effort that each person can shield themselves from, and act to counter. Do not let your sense of self succumb to this assault. Do not let them win the battle for your peace of mind.
It might, heck, -check that- it does seem overwhelming at times. But that is the nature of this collectivist strategy. That is the purpose of this bombardment. We must hold strong and push back against their lies and manipulations. If you look closely at their attack, it is weak and much of it is psychological bait. Do not fall into the trap of despair.
When I share the message “live your best life”, it is not without purpose. Every moment that we allow the onslaught to deter us from living our dreams, is a moment those who oppose our nation view as us taking a knee. Do not allow this effort to succeed.
You might ask yourself how can I, one person, a flea looking into a furnace, retain an optimistic disposition while all around me seems chaotic and mad.
That’s the point; it ‘seems’ chaotic and mad because it has been created to appear that way. There are more of us than them; they just control the systems that allow us to connect, share messages and recognize the scale of our assembly.
Every second that you live your life with thankfulness for the abundance within it; every moment that we CHOOSE to engage with fellowship; every day that we accept guidance from God – however you define him to be; and every moment we cherish this time to be a beacon of optimism; is a moment that we withstand that barrage and hold the flag in place. It is a genuinely patriotic position not to succumb to the attack.
If you allow yourself to be drawn into crisis and despair, you allow them to win. If your center of normal is based around this overwhelming onslaught, you will eventually concede liberty in favor of peace. Once we stop living in liberty, we no longer have peace.
It took me a while to fully understand just how damaging empty streets, soulless eyes, the lack of smiles, shuttered businesses and the absence of joy would become. But as I travel around trying to deliver a very specific message to a very specific audience, I now recognize just how much damage is being done; not just to our nation as a whole, but also to every individual within it – personally.
We must shake this mindset. We must withstand this onslaught and rally to the origin of our true national spirit. We must rally to a standard of Americanism and accept this is not that. In essence, we must individually take a stand. Purposefully, deliberately and with forethought, we must engage those around us to get rid of this sense of foreboding.
This approach is how we win the larger battle.
All around us, in every tribe and region, there are people who need you to show them the strength that you have. Strength of spirit. Strength of fellowship that you will not relent from expressing. No matter what noise is shouting from the loudspeakers we must withstand it; we must make eye contact and remain joyful. We cannot allow despair to be the status quo.
Trust me, this ain’t easy…. through my own research, I have torn open the dungeon doors and stared into the dark space; and yes, the scale of corruption amid our national body politic sticks to you; it manifests as cynicism.
However, our president’s MAGA message is optimistic; and we must fight against any tendency to allow the leftist hatred and scheme against our American value system to impact delivery of that message, our message.
If you listened to the responses from democrat voters watching the RNC convention, you would have noted the most consistent point mentioned was their disconnect from the party that has allowed hate and division to dictate policy. It is only getting worse.
Democrats and independents are flocking to the MAGA movement in larger numbers than ever before. Our political opposition is seeing the result in terms of voters turning away from them and they are apoplectic.
Which is the point of writing this. Our nation needs more people like you, right now. Don’t wait… engage life, get optimistic however you need to do it. Then let that part of you shine right now… This is how we will win this 2020 campaign. Hold up that flag; give the starter smile… rally to the standard you create and spread fellowship again.
God knows our nation needs it; and each of us can choose to deliver that message.
Earlier today as he departed the white house for dual campaign stops in Ohio, President Trump stopped to make remarks and ¹take questions from the press pool.
[¹Note: as customary during his entire term, President Trump takes all questions and makes himself available without issue. Contrast availability to ultra-controlled Biden]
.
[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: So we’re going to Ohio. Things seem to be very good. We have been doing very well with the China virus, but they’ve had a pretty big spike in Europe, as you know, and UK in particular. And I’m sure they’ll have that under control, hopefully soon.
But we’re in very good shape. The vaccines are coming along. I just got a report: The vaccines are coming along rapidly. Therapeutics are coming along very well. And we’ll see what happens. But too bad about Europe. Too bad.
Q Is there a chance you would announce your Supreme Court pick before Friday?
THE PRESIDENT: I would say on Friday or Saturday I’ll be announcing the pick. It’s — five women are being looked at and vetted very carefully. Five. And we’ll make a decision probably Saturday, but Friday or Saturday.
Q Do you plan to meet with any of them in person? Do you plan to meet with any of them in person before you make your decision?
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, I will.
Q When are you going to do that?
THE PRESIDENT: During this period of time.
Q Do you think all five?
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t know. I doubt it. I doubt it.
Q But in person?
THE PRESIDENT: We’ll meet with a few, probably.
Q Have you talked to any of them yet?
THE PRESIDENT: Say it?
Q Have you talked to any of them yet?
THE PRESIDENT: I have. I have.
Q Today? On the phone?
THE PRESIDENT: Today and yesterday, the day before.
Q Is it better to have a vote on your nominee before the election or after?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’d much rather have a vote before the election because there’s a lot of work to be done, and I’d much rather have it. And we have plenty of time to do it. I mean, there’s really a lot of time.
So let’s say I make the announcement on Saturday — there’s a great deal of time before the election. That’ll be up to Mitch in the Senate. But I’d certainly much rather have the vote. I think it sends a good signal. And it’s solidarity and lots of other things. And I’m just doing my constitutional obligation. I have an obligation to do this. So I would rather see it before the election.
Q Are you worried about some senators — Republican senators who may be a little reluctant?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’ll have to see. I would think that that would be very bad for them. I think their voters — the people that voted them put them there because of a certain ideology or certain feel. And they don’t want to have somebody do that. I think it’s very bad if they do that.
Q What makes you think that the last words — supposedly the last wishes of Justice Ginsburg were made up? Because it supposedly came from her granddaughter, not from one of the Democrats.
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, it just sounds to me like it would be somebody else. I don’t believe — it could be. It could be. And it might not be, too. Just too — it was just too convenient.
Q What would be your concern if the vote happened after Election Day?
THE PRESIDENT: No concern. I just think it would be better. They asked, “Would I rather have it…” I’d rather have it before the election. I think it would be better for our country.
And we — we’ll pick somebody that’s outstanding, very qualified. They’re all qualified, but somebody that is outstanding. And I’d rather see it all take place before the election, so before November 3rd.
Q Are you concerned if you lost the election, it would be harder to get the person confirmed?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don’t think so. No. I think we’re going to win. If you look at the polls — the real polls — we’re doing very well.
We’re going to Ohio tonight, and we’re packed. We’re packed everywhere. So people — there’s never been — we’ve never had spirit like we have now. Even four years ago, the spirit now is greater even than it was four years ago.
Q What will be your message tomorrow to the U.N.? And did you just tape it?
THE PRESIDENT: I did. I just taped — I just did it just now. My message is a strong message on China, and basically — you’ll see it. You’ll see it tomorrow. But I just did it a little while ago.
Q Are you leaning toward one candidate over another? Are you leaning toward —
THE PRESIDENT: I have one or two that I think are — they’re all outstanding, but I have one or two that I have in mind, yeah.
Q Who do you think poisoned Alexei Navalny?
THE PRESIDENT: Say it?
Q Who do you think poisoned Alexei Navalny in Russia?
THE PRESIDENT: We’ll talk about that at another time.
Q Is Amy Coney Barrett one of the leading contenders, in your mind?
THE PRESIDENT: She’s one of the people that’s very respected, but they’re all respected. She is certainly one of the candidates, yes.
Q When you go down to Miami, will you meet with Barbara Lagoa?
THE PRESIDENT: I may. She’s highly thought of and has got a lot of support. You know, a lot of people — I’m getting a lot of phone calls from a lot of people. She has a lot of support. I don’t know her, but I hear she’s outstanding. And she’s one of the people we’re looking at.
Q Did you push the DOJ to name Seattle and New York and Portland “anarchistic cities”?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think they are. But that’s up to DOJ. That’ll be up to — that will be up to the Attorney General. But certainly they are. If you look at Portland, if you look at what’s going on there, what a mess.
Go ahead.
And we can straighten it out — all Democrats. All radical left. We could straighten it out so fast.
Go ahead.
Q When will you make a final decision on TikTok?
THE PRESIDENT: That’s working its way through. I’ve given a preliminary okay. They will work — they’re two great companies — Oracle and Walmart. Larry Ellison is a — you know, a great genius at that kind of thing. The technology is incredible.
And so if we can save it, we’ll save it. And if we can’t, we’ll cut it off. But they have preliminary. We’ll see what they can do.
We have to have total security. That’s the only thing — very important. We have to have total security.
For President Trump’s second rally of the day he heads to Grande Air in Swanton, Ohio for a Great America Comeback Rally and peaceful protest. Anticipated start time 7:00pm ET.
President Donald J. Trump will hold two campaign events today in Ohio. First by delivering remarks on fighting for the American worker in Vandalia, Ohio at 5:00pm EDT, then a Great American Comeback rally and peaceful protest event in in Swanton at 7:00 PM EDT.
President Donald J. Trump holds the first campaign event at Wright Bros Aero in Vandalia, OH. Anticipated start time 5:00pm EDT – Livestream Links Below
The battle to replace iconic 87-year-old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg went white-hot as soon as she passed. Angry arguments against Trump’s immediate replacement now fill the airwaves. But Trump has a legal right to replace Ginsburg now. Since Democrats have gone native with proxies burning down half our cities, this is no time to lapse into sentimental blather about “honoring Ginsberg,” etc.
10 Reasons Why Trump MUST Replace Ginsberg Immediately
Rules Allow Replacement
Make no mistake, current rules regarding appointment of a supreme court justice ALLOW REPLACEMENT—even within months of a re-election. So it is LEGAL. See Section 2 of US Constitution.
Stolen Years
Obscene Democrat lies falsifying charges against President Trump must now be punished. What better way than swift replacement of their leftist icon? Falsified “treason” before inauguration with the Russia “investigation” hasn’t been punished. Further, Dems still won’t cooperate, but doubled down with Ukraine “impeachment” while Biden’s son perversely profits from Ukrainian graft. Unpunished evil destroys a nation. Having stolen Trump’s reputation and subsequent opportunities, this alone justifies this legal act. Replace Ginsburg NOW!!
Ginsburg ‘Dying Wish’
As Urban Folklore, claims Ginsburg made a dying wish days before death to wait for replacement is a crown jewel confabulation. Ginsburg supposedly whispered, “my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” to granddaughter Clara Spera, a fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union. Anybody smell a rat?
2016 “Precedent”
Despite apparent precedent, the Senate blocking Judge Merrick Garland’s vote is different. The Republicans then controlled the Senate under Obama, didn’t want Garland, so the vote would have been a waste of time since Supreme Court Justices are chosen by simple majority.
What Dems Would Do
Does anyone doubt if Dems had a chance to replace Kavenaugh they would not do so immediately?
Ginsburg Hated Trump
Even wildly liberal WA Post termed Ginsburg’s intemperate Trump criticisms “Inappropriate.” Terming Trump a “faker.” Ginsburg didn’t bother to hide her animus against POTUS, one reason she became the judicial superstar of the so-called “Resistance.” Ginsberg should have recused herself from any cases involving Trump. She finally appologized, but the damage was done. For reasons of her absurd public bias, Ginsburg should be replaced NOW.
To Winner Goes Spoils
Trump ran on a promise of replacing judges with true conservatives.
Avoidable Conundrum
As a frequent cancer victim, aged almost 90, Ginsburg could have retired during Obama’s tenure, but chose not to. Whose fault is that? Ginsburg caused this dilemma, tainting her legacy.
Dems Already Destroying US
Democrats have supported the protesters/rioters and still resist condemning them, despite $1 billion in insurance claims, arson, assaults and murders. Another liberal SCOTUS member is an existential danger when America is fighting off liberal anarchy.
Fighting for Survival
America is fighting for survival, while one party pushes for radical change—like allowing mob violence without punishment, to stop enforcing “quality of life” laws, pushing racial division, defunding police and using riots to scare the middle class into standing down.
CONCLUSION
As America’s future hangs in the balance, while the Democrat party has given up all semblance of honor or honesty, Trump has an absolute duty to replace Ginsburg now to save the Republic.
Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa? Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al. And you might as well sue Mao.
Three posts from July 23-August 8, from this author, compare China’s Cultural Revolution to Black Lives Matter/Antifa. The series began with:
“The Chinese Communist Party’s Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) was the precursor to today’s urban protests involving Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa. As America’s Cancel Culture spread into several Big Blue Cities, largely governed by Democrat politicians for decades, city officials stood back and let it happen.” (Links to parts 1, 2, and 3.)
Frustrated by long delays in receiving any response from Beijing, “thousands descended upon Beijing personally to press their grievances. With official channels clogged and response times painfully slow, many petitioners took to the streets, posting handwritten appeals (known as xiaozibao, or ‘small character posters’) at Xidan, Tiananmen, and elsewhere…Most of the petitioners who descended on Beijing were poor, many were in dire straits. Some had traveled long distances on foot, carrying their possessions in knotted bundles; others had hitched rides into the cities on freight trains or trucks…In all, more than 100,000 out-of-towners descended upon Beijing and Shanghai in 1979, hoping to have their cases reopened…Despite government pledges to review all appeals objectively and impartially, many petitioners complained of receiving unfair treatment.” (Baum, p.76)
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP), led by Chairman Mao Zedong, planned and launched the Cultural Revolution.
America: In the wake of the 2007-08 financial failure in America the saying that applied to the big banking institutions was: “Too big to fail.”
In the wake of the damage done by China’s Cultural Revolution, it was: “Too big to blame.”
What will we say when BLM/Antifa is over?
In the wake of the on-going damage to people and private property brought upon many of America’s Big Blue Cities (BBC) at the hands of (1) BLM street posters involving many white, both male and female, virtue-signalers between 17-27 years old, march through residential neighborhoods late at night, stall daytime traffic in downtown areas, and verbally intimidate evening diners in outdoor restaurants, paired up with (2) Antifa thugs dressed in all black who excel at destroying property and beating-up weaker people, we wonder: What will be America’s version of “The Petitioners’ Movement” in post-Cultural Revolution China?
China: The Petitioner’s Movement happened when Chinese victims of the Red Guard sought redress for damages done to them and their property. They eventually went to Beijing for redress, because they knew that’s where it all started.
The unspoken mantra for China’s Petitioners’ Movement was, essentially: “We can’t blame any one person, because that would mean blaming Chairman Mao. And he lives above blame.”
America: Can we count on the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute and, when guilt is proven, punish those in the BLM/Antifa movement who injured persons and damaged private property?
Can we expect the Democrat-elected prosecutors in the BBCs to indict and try those who injured persons, and destroyed property? Perhaps a few—those not elected with Soros money.
So, who will hold those accountable for the carnage that continues to mount-up in the run-up to the General Election, and may escalate after November 3?
China: The CCP led by Mao Zedong gave the green-light to China’s Cultural Revolution. Then stood back, and watched it unfold assuming a life of its own, free of any one person’s control.
It was to the CCP that many of the Cultural Revolution’s victims petitioned for redress for the physical and material damages they sustained. They knew the source, but prudence meant not saying it out loud.
America: Who will Americans petition for redress for the damages that BLM/Antifa brought into their communities?
Shall claims be directed at the big corporations, foundations, and wealthy individuals who seek to buy virtue by donating big money to the BLM/Antifa Movement? (Operationally, the organizations are two heads of the same snake.)
Should victims of the BLM/Antifa movement petition the U.S. Government for damages? That would be like suing the United States Postal Service if one of their trucks hits your new car.
Perhaps those insurance companies that pay out tens-of-millions in damages to looted chain stores will consider recouping part of their loss by suits aimed at BLM’s growing financial assets? But, no, that would tarnish their corporate image by putting the patina of white supremacists on their brand.
That leaves those small, independent businesses that sustained damage to seek redress at the local level. The same local level that let it happen.
Those physically and materially injured by BLM/Antifa may sue their local Blue government for not dispatching their tax-funded Police Departments to bring order to the chaos when it first began, instead of letting it get out of control. Perhaps some of the defunded police money could go to the destroyed small businesses. Or not.
Problem is, more than a few of those municipalities run perilously close to bankruptcy. (See Chicago and NYC.)
To restate the question: How will America’s version of China’s “Petitioners’ Movement” seek to redress the damages done to persons and property by BLM/Antifa?
In short, who pays?
In China, little was done for the victims of the Cultural Revolution. It was born a child of the one-and-only political party, and conceived in the mind of its near deity, Chairman Mao.
Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa?
Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al. And you might as well sue Mao.
Appellate Judge Amy Coney Barrett is at the top of the list for replacements for Justice Ginsberg. Like hydroxychloroquine, simply because Trump nominates her she will be vilified. She is a Catholic and already the Democrats are preparing to tear her apart based on her religions. After graduating from the University of Notre Dame’s law school at the very top of her class. In fact, in 1997, she graduated first in her class, which earned her the Hoynes Prize, the Law School’s highest honor which was very impressive with respect to her thinking process.
Amy then worked as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who was a strict constructionist. It was Scalia who pushed for reform in the way the courts were treating those charged. The jury was not determining every fact, and Scalia saw this as unconstitutional and argued this position until the rest of the court saw his constitutional argument. Finally, in APPRENDI v. NEW JERSEY No. 99—478. Argued March 28, 2000–Decided June 26, 2000, Scalia defended the citizen’s right to a jury trial which had been eroded by the procedure.
In the Spirit Justice Ginsberg, Amy was the only female law clerk in the Supreme Court at that time. Besides being sitting on the court of appeals, she was also a University of Notre Dame law professor. Ironically, because she has been a dedicated mother of seven, her Catholic faith was turned against her by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein who questioned whether or not she could separate her religious faith from her duty as a judge. “The dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein said during the confirmation hearing for the Court of Appeals hearing. Barrett insisted that her professional beliefs and her religious beliefs would be kept separate. Ironically, the right to an abortion is deeply entangled with the right to privacy. In the recent case involving the anti-abortion law in Louisiana(1), even conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. struck it down saying that respect for precedent compelled him to do so.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. To understand the foundation of Roe v Wade and why it cannot be overturned without jeopardizing our right to privacy in the face of this contrived pandemic is critical. In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a law banning the distribution of birth control to married couples, ruling that the law violated their implied right to privacy under the U.S. Constitution, GRISWOLD v. CONNECTICUT, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). How do you enforce that a married couple illegally used a condom during sex? Does an FBI agency have to watch? And in 1972, the Supreme Court struck down a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried adults. Again, there is no way to enforce such laws without a government agent observing every sexual act.
To overturn Roe v Wade, would mean that the government can order you to take vaccines that violate your religion that even alter your DNA. While I would never condone an abortion personally, my personal belief cannot blind me to support overturning Roe v Wade opening the door to absolute tyranny. To do so would allow someone like Bill Gates to bribe politicians to pass laws to compel women to have Chips inserted to prevent pregnancy. It would be just one tiny step to then compel you to obtain permission from the government to have a child. They could just as easily impose an IQ test and determine you are not qualified to have children. Gates has already funded remote control birth-control by implanting chips into women. He is obsessed with population control.
The US Supreme Court actually upheld the eugenics views of the in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), where the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., actually ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, “for the protection and health of the state” did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Supreme Court actually wrote: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). This case has not been overturned, but if it were challenged, then the same right to privacy from which Roe v Wade stands would come into play. Overturn that case, and a lot more tyranny will follow. The only possible way to overturn Roe v Wade must involve the Due Process Right to life and liberty without somehow overturning the right to privacy. That can be a real Pandora’s Box.
After reading some of her decisions and this article she wrote regarding the Suspension Clause, I believe she would NOT overturn Roe v Wade simply because of her religion. Here she clearly states that she believes that the statutes involved, which have never been activated since the Civil War domestically, delegate too much discretion to the President. Her reasoning falls in line with Strict Construction championed by Scalia, and therefore I would support her. I believe the far more important question turns on her view of the power of government. She is not a rubber stamp and that is vital to our liberty in the future. I will note, for those who will say I support here only because she is a conservative nominated by Trump, I reviewed the decisions of Brett Kavanaugh and stated on this blog that I would have voted against his nomination.
POLITICO, the leftist view, as usual, states: “Barrett has stated that “life begins at conception,” according to a 2013 Notre Dame Magazine article. She also said that justices should not be strictly bound by Supreme Court precedents, a deference known as stare decisis, leaving open the possibility that she could vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if seated on the court.” Their view is to hell with every other issue, it’s all about abortion exclusively.
Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi who is in the House, not the Senate which decides appointments to the Supreme Court, has bluntly stated that she doesn’t rule out impeachment to delay Trump’s picks for the Supreme Court. She is so out of her mind and is clearly engaging in the Obstruction of Justice. She is in the House – not the Senate. The House does not preside of these appointments. As a matter of law, she or any senator is not allowed to ask a judge how they would vote on abortion. The Senate is not permitted to nominate a person based upon a prearranged vote. Chief Justice Roberts, a conservative appointed by President Bush, upheld Obamacare. It is often a matter of constitutional law and trying to guess how Barrett will vote exclusively on abortion is impermissible constitutionally. This assumption is discrimination based upon the fact that she is Catholic and has 7 children, two of whom are adopted from Hati.
Diane Feinstein is running again and she 87 while Nancy Pelosi is 80. These two women liberationists from the 60s no longer represent women today. They are traditionally anti-religion and Feinstein’s question of Barrett before illustrates her hatred of not just religion, but the fact that Barrett even has 7 children which she finds obviously disgusting.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the expanding peace agreements in the middle-east between Israel and Arab nations.
The administration approach toward the assembly of a peace alliance has been an incredible result of the Trump Doctrine. By changing the originating dynamic away from discussions of conflict; and focusing attention on the economic opportunities to improve the life of everyone in the region based on a prosperity model; the Trump administration has found a synergy, a common alignment, between all regional interests.
The assembly of the alliance, and the specific expectations from the original 2017 strategy toward confronting extremism, has yielded a result that can now be duplicated in the 2020 Abraham Accords. The same regional peer pressure from the Gulf Cooperation Council, that resulted in the cessation of promoted extremism, is now being applied toward gathering ‘prosperity partnerships’. President Trump changed the paradigm completely.
.
As the Palestinian Authority recognizes their Arab support base is now partnering with Israel for stability, peace and prosperity, the PA will eventually have to drop their hostile posture and return to the negotiating table with far less support. This result is part of the bigger background picture; and once again President Trump is achieving this objective by working around the conflict itself.
♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought North and South Korea together away from the table of conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought Serbia and Kosovo together away from the table of conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy rallied the Gulf Cooperation Council to stop Qatar’s support for Islamic extremists via the Muslim Brotherhood. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Turkey and the Kurdish forces together away from war and conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy created a ceasefire to stop the bloodshed in Syria. President Trump mediated a cessation of hostilities between India & Pakistan in the Kashmir region. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Israel and the UAE together… and there will be more.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 