It’s Miller Time!


Stephen Miller- he looks like a weenie. Image from Washington Post

The Atlantic is publishing articles about how to talk to Trump supporters on Thanksgiving. Not one article on how Trump supporters can talk to insane liars like the people on the Left who report lies about stuff they see with their own eyes, rather it’s how the insane liars on the Left can talk to Trump supporters as if supporting the President is the problem, as if Trump supporters are the ones living in a different reality despite how the hard evidence proves otherwise. We don’t believe their spin, so we’re evil and ignorant. Nazis and terrorists.

No, the problem is condescending partisan hacks like you who believe so much that anyone opposed to you is an untermensch that must be patronized simply because they find your lies despicable and insulting to their intelligence. Yes I acknowledge Trump has flaws, yes I know there could be problems with Stephen Miller, but they’re nowhere near what you’re making them to be and if you weren’t such an arrogant lying asshole to begin with then we’d never be at this stage of partisanship where Republicans have to defend flawed fighters like that lest they back a limp-wristed ninny like Jeb who’d never win against the Left’s war machine! If it weren’t for your media and your partisanship and your bubbles pushing you away from us (I can verify that it’s YOU who are moving farther from the center- remember in 2008 when you voted for the anti-illegal immigration candidate? Remember how that’s now far-right white nationalist thought, the very thing you voted for only 11 years ago? Barack Obama, whom you voted for, is a white nationalist according to you. Whereas with George W. from 19 years ago the biggest criticisms the Right have is what they always had- not a fighter but tolerable. So who moved, the guys who could get along with themselves 19 years ago, or you who’d be punching your Nazi self from 11 years ago?) we’d have Jeb Bush as President and it’d be civil business as usual, the kind of civility we saw under Eisenhower and Kennedy. Or you guys would’ve picked Jim Webb instead of crooked Hillary, whom you’d have ruled out for covering for her husband’s misdeeds and for the strong whiff of scandal and rigged systems that follows her around.

But nope, that’s not what happened, you want a damn civil war because you think people who don’t believe your propaganda are “Lebensunwertes Leben”, not even the same species, so you create fake studies (and you have fake news purveyors Washington Post saying conservatives that don’t read their lies are more likely to believe fake news than liberals) and write articles like the one that started this rant which all serve to objectify your political enemy as an inferior form of life despite the untruth of that idea, making it easier to hate this “other” and segregate yourselves from them. Because the worst thing a liberal might do is question the liberal orthodoxy. Funny I should mention that, as it turns out that you guys with your authoritarianism and intolerance are actually psychopaths, according to the people behind a study you used to love citing that said conservatives were the psychos.


I ask where your brains are at. Nevermind, I found them. Brains Strauman. Image from WWE

Tell me something smart guy- if you’re so smart how’d Trump win over all the Obama folks? How come your Mueller fellow came up short? How come you have to lie all the time? How come you have to ban people from arguing against you? How come you always resort to insults and even mob violence rather than arguing your point? If you’re so damn smart, why do you act like a savage? How come you’ve had solid evidence of criminal impeachable offenses by Trump for two and a half years according to your geniuses, yet right now two of your own smart guys defected to join Republicans because they think impeachment is a loser and all your smart guys on Mueller’s team put together with millions of dollars couldn’t oust Trump? And if you’re so smart, why do you unconditionally believe everyone who lied to you about blue waves and Mueller impeachment and now Ukraine impeachment? How come you believe the people who can’t even tell the truth about their economic plans? How come you yourself aren’t smart enough to do some rudimentary math and figure out that there’s no way to pay for what the smart people want you to pay for? If you’re so smart, why don’t you like taxing the rich liberal donor class especially if you are rich yourself? Also, if you are so smart, why did you support a (by your standard as linked later) white nationalist named Obama in 2008 and a (by your standards of #BelieveAllWomen) rapist-enabler named Hillary in 2016? Well? Show me your brains!

Maybe it’s your measure of intelligence that’s flawed. You think ivy-league degrees in coloring coloring books or petting puppies mean you’re intelligent. You think being able to parrot the latest talking points from your favorite candidate, uncritically, makes you into a smart person. You think shouting down the opposition, punching them even, and calling them every bad name you can think of makes you smart. You think blind obedience to your own party makes you intelligent. You get lost when people aren’t telling you what/how to think. You also don’t believe minorities are intelligent, you white supremacist. No wonder you voted for xenophobe Obama in 2008.


It’s been over a year now, I really need to finish that book…

See, you view free thought as the enemy. That’s why you write elitist garbage like that piece from The Atlantic that I’ve seen over and over from many other liberal outlets over the years (also want to point out this study, which shows that people who love economic freedom tend to be quite intelligent too, and basically says someone who loves economic freedom and is socially liberal would be the brightest crayon in the box, meaning the socialists aren’t terribly bright). Funny too how they all just brief your readers on the liberal talking points of the day, as if your readers aren’t able to think on their own or able to create their own arguments. Isn’t that a measure of intelligence? Or do you view “intelligent” as “able to memorize liberal talking points” and don’t really care about understanding them? Some socialist you are, socialist leader Khrushchev thought people like that were idiots.

I don’t read rightwing talking points I don’t read rightwing stuff like that if there is any, does that mean I have superior mental agility to the Left since you guys apparently need to be told what to think and how to interpret things and view anyone that doesn’t see reality as you do as an “other” that must be destroyed because you don’t understand and can’t tolerate them?

You might also notice that I don’t directly quote stuff that supports my point from the links, I kind of expect anyone reading this to be intelligent enough to look through it and figure out for themselves how my point is supported. I don’t believe in insulting people’s intelligence, unlike you liberal who think conservatives and minorities alike are idiots as linked above.

You know, this was the original first paragraph here, but then I became annoyed. Anyway what had started this post was how President Trump’s longtime adviser Stephen Miller, a Jew, is being accused of white nationalism by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal group who sees white nationalists under their bed, like their partners in crime the Anti-Defamation League who thinks the “ok” hand gesture is racist and who think The Beatles with their bowl cuts are white supremacists. ADL should be taken seriously, people are getting fired over their partisan garbage. SPLC merely goaded Chik-Fil-A into abandoning the LGBT community in order to support SPLC.

Smearing The Accuser

SPLC spends most of their time drafting charges of hate against Republicans, and then Democrats refer to this arm of the DNC as an independent institute dedicated to fighting racism. Basically, imagine if Donald Trump created a think tank called the Trump Institute and whenever he wanted a policy change he cited studies from the Trump Institute supporting it. That’s the SPLC’s relation to the Democratic Party right now. They have all the credibility of Snopes or CNN– meaning they’re a buncha partisan liars and you should pay as much attention to them as you would to Farrakhan

Actually, there is a certain irony in this story, speaking of Farrakhan. You see, the Congressional Black Caucus is following SPLC’s lead in attacking Stephen Miller. The CBC goes right on along with all of SPLC’s accusations against the Right. The trouble is that back when SPLC was sort of legitimate, they put Farrakhan on their naughty list. The CBC is composed of Farrakhanites as I’ve mentioned before. So, by legitimizing SPLC’s claims against anybody, CBC is making itself look like a bunch of racists. Or at least they would be if Democrats had any sense of decency. But they don’t, as evidenced by their perversion of SPLC into a partisan group whose sole contribution to society today is to call anyone opposed to the Democratic Party a racist, while letting Democrats get away with genuine racism.


Surely you remember the guy in the middle and the guy on the right, they’re two of only four white people I know who are allowed to wear blackface according to the SPLC.

Where is SPLC on Hillary Clinton saying Gandhi worked at a gas station, or Biden working with segregationists (incidentally, liberal, didn’t you say all the Dixiecrats had become Republicans by the time Biden was in the Senate?), or Kamala Harris taking white cash to put blacks in jail, or AOC’s racist Green New Deal that’ll obliterate minority communities and minority voting districts by forcing them out of their homes and businesses, or Ayanna Pressley’s bigoted statement that all people MUST conform to the stereotypes she lays out for them, or Ana Navarro’s racist stereotyping the black community (she’s the one who was filing her nails to make the point that she did not care about Latinos dying, a vile disgusting creature who gets fat off ignoring or encouraging the suffering of others), or Rashida Tlaib’s anti-Semitism, or Ilhan Omar’s antiSemitism, or CAIR’s anti-Semitism, or the racism of New York Times’ Sarah Jeong, or Jimmy Kimmel wearing blackface to mock a black athlete, or Ralph Northam wearing blackface, or Mark Herring wearing blackface? They don’t care when their OWN side does it, if Democrats put blacks back into slavery tomorrow SPLC would label it as a heroic step to solve the problems of housing and unemployment.

I’d say that about wraps up their case, but don’t take my word for it. They had to pay a $3.4 million settlement after wrongfully accusing a Muslim activist of being anti-Islam, because the activist resisted anti-Semitism and resisted terror-linked groups like CAIR. SPLC was supporting anti-American terrorists and anti-Semites and radical Muslims. Yet supporting people who love Female Genital Mutilation and acid attacks against women somehow isn’t bigotry, according to SPLC.

The only reason the Left, like all those people quoted by NPR, decided to start caring about illegal immigration is because they know it means votes, it means flipping districts, it means POWER. That’s why their solution is to force illegal immigrants on a death march to this country, force many of them to leave their loved ones dead in the desert on the way here, leave a trail of bodies stretching to central America, and endure all kinds of abuse and rape just to get here. Do you hear the Left saying “hey, if they need to flee these countries why don’t we cut aid to them or go and fix them ourselves?” No, that is NOT the Left’s solution (well, Julian Castro had an idea like that, but he’s polling so low that you wonder if only his campaign staff support him). The Left’s solution is to drain them of anyone who’d affect change in those countries, and bring such people here to vote Democrat. Revolutions happen when people can’t tolerate the social conditions and have no way out. Democrats are deliberately giving them a way out, to prevent revolution and to ensure they have a never-ending stream of future Democrat voters. The Democratic Party is profiting off human suffering, and works to perpetuate it so that they may continue profiting from it. And the people they force to endure this suffering, the people whose countries they ensure are unstable hellholes, all happen to be nonwhites. Democrats are deliberately making nonwhite people suffer, to profit off them. Isn’t that one of the big problems we had with slavery? Well, historically (and presently) Democrats were the guys who supported that institutionalized human suffering, and as a teacher of mine used to say “a leopard doesn’t change its spots”.

Defending Miller’s Sources

I’ll start by saying that for some of these sources, we don’t really know how Stephen Miller came to be aware of them. Does he regularly Google subjects that these sources support so they keep showing up? I mean, my Google results always include links to the Washington Post but I hate them and don’t actively seek out their lies, unless there’s relevance to what I’m writing. So is it like that, with these results just constantly appearing because they’re the only ones talking about what Miller is looking for? Or does he actually check these sources routinely? Or did some guy he knows forward them to him? That is not made apparent by SPLC, either because they don’t know or because the answer would hurt their narrative.


What do they have on Stephen Miller? According to The Hill, the most scandalous stuff is that he coordinated coverage with Breitbart, and The Hill cites stories from VDare as being examples of white nationalism. (Sigh) I have to defend THEM now? Look, their tone is crude, and they pick on immigrants of all kinds by reporting negative info on them, but you know what? SOMEONE has to. If it were up to the Left, you’d think everyone with white skin was a Nazi trying to kill people and that everyone without white skin had a spark of divinity. You hear them saying MS-13 are angels, but never white people. Always on the attack against white people. So if THAT’S not racist, then surely pointing out legitimate flaws in people coming into this country, whites included since VDare wants ALL immigration to stop, isn’t racist.

Oh wait, the guys saying everything a white person does is racist are the ones who follow SPLC. Nevermind. Remember: the people saying VDare is racist, saying Miller is racist, saying SPLC should be obeyed, they’re the same ones who not only excuse racism in their own party, but also believe that criticizing a non-white lawmaker for ANY reason, legitimate or not, is an act of racism. According to them, if you attacked Kamala Harris’ record on putting blacks in jail, you’re a racist. BUT, according to them, if you attack Dr. Ben Carson and call him an idiot you’re NOT a racist.

Do you understand NOW who these people are saying these things are racist? If they weren’t out silencing facts and silencing dissenting opinions and silencing debate by saying everyone who disagreed with them was a bigot, if they were neutrally reporting facts on non-whites and immigrants of all kinds legal and otherwise, then we wouldn’t NEED a buncha crude people to get together and form sites like VDare that, while delivering hard evidence on these matters, comes off with such a harsh tone and no finesse. If the truth was already being reported, if the truth were not being suppressed, if you weren’t called a racist for believing truths that Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party believed a mere 13 years ago, then people would be way less motivated to come up with sites like VDare, so really it’s a creation borne of the Left’s relentless inquisitions. When you suppress knowledge, people hunger for it, and will listen to anyone telling the truth, even if they have a lousy delivery.


According to The Hill, another problematic organization was the Center for Immigration Studies. I shouldn’t even have to defend them, they’re not far-right and the only reason you’d call them a racist is if you supported open borders and thought that somehow America’s welfare system can sustain 7 Billion people. I know them quite well.


American Renaissance is another group I guess I have to defend (spoiler alert: I can’t. Though sometimes they make legitimate, data-backed points, their framing is often repugnant- they are Don Lemmoning it. So rather than defend them I’m going to wonder at why you aren’t defending them because you’re as much a racist as they are.), so let’s twist it up and use the Left’s own rhetoric to defend it. NPR (I almost laughed when a popup asking me to donate to support NPR’s “independent journalism” came up. It’s funded by the government thus beholden to Democrats that believe in expanding money for it, and most if not all of their reporting seems like a reprint of DNC talking points) says AmRen’s big racist issue is that it acknowledges races are different. That’s how NPR frames it anyway. They could have just quoted the site, they aren’t shy about thinking whites are superior and have a bunch of stats backing it up. But instead, NPR says the idea that having too much testosterone makes you more aggressive has been debunked. So NPR basically said anyone complaining about toxic masculinity is a liar. They also say it’s a problem to think races are different, even though that’s the entire thrust of why the Left says whites can’t comment on black or Latino issues. Oh well.

But if viewing one race as superior is a problem, then why is it that only Black Lives Matter, not Latino Lives or All Lives? Why did Ocasio-Cortez favor Latinos with her Latino Supremacist Green New Deal? Why do Asians face hardship getting into college that others don’t? Why do Latinos get to flout the laws with sanctuary cities that release murderers while American citizen murderers are kept in prison? Also, how can it be wrong to view races as being different when liberals will tell you all the time how evil white people are. White people are a race too, y’know!

So clearly the problem the Left has with AmRen isn’t that they acknowledge races are different, or even that they believe one race is better than another, it’s just that AmRen backed whites over the others. And remember in the opening how I mentioned liberals see their opponents as an inferior “other” that must be exterminated? AmRen might see other races as inferior but they don’t advocate concentration camps. The Left on the other hand

As to my own thoughts on American Renaissance, this one is more problematic as it does openly favor whites. But at the same time they show favoritism towards anybody that wants to be part of American culture, at least as the site defines it. By the way- they support Democratic Presidential Candidate Julian Castro’s plan to help Central American countries fix themselves, which I ranted about earlier since Democrats don’t want that. So… since Julian Castro has the backing of a white nationalist group, does that make him racist too?

Anyway, AmRen actually is kinda racist (I can say “kinda” because of all the examples of racism I’ve mentioned regarding liberals that liberals have no problem with, which are much more egregious than here, for example unlike Rashida Tlaib and CAIR, AmRen does not advocate or support people who advocate exterminating entire races. AmRen is perfectly willing to co-exist with likeminded races from what I read, but with the idea that whites are better, and from what I’ve heard in black entertainment awards ceremonies about blacks being superior I think we can let AmRen get by with this relatively harmless if not narcissistic variant of white supremacy) though some stuff AmRen publishes might make legitimate points, tainted as they may be by the site’s underlying ideology. Afterall, the Nazis proved that cigarettes kill you, does the fact that they were Nazis mean they were wrong about cigarettes and they’re actually good for you? Consider that- racists actually can make good points. As mentioned in other posts I’ve linked to, liberal, you’d agree on that point because you and David Duke both support Ilhan Omar.

Some French Novel No One Heard Of (not the one that started Planet of the Apes)


A TV show based on a movie series based on a movie based on a book based on a planet where apes evolved from men? Image from

Both NPR and The Hill agree that part of the problem is Miller liking some French fictional story about immigrants destroying civilization or whatever. But isn’t that EXACTLY what the Left says happened? To the Native Americans, by white people? Isn’t that why they want to get rid of Columbus Day and Thanksgiving Day? For the very reason that those days celebrate white immigrants destroying the culture and civilization of the natives? But now that’s RACIST to say?! I’d ask if we needed a playbill to keep up, but there is a very easy formula to the Left’s ideas in case you hadn’t noticed: “white people bad, nonwhite good”. That makes this little fragment of hypocrisy make sense: the French novel is bad because it depicts the destruction of white civilization as a bad thing but it’s actually GOOD and what the Left WANTS, but the destruction of nonwhite civilization by whites is bad so ban Thanksgiving and ban Columbus Day.

Defending Miller

I like how NPR says the reaction on the Right is “muted”. Fake news, from where I sit. I’m on the Right and I’m ready to make the nearest Lefty spit teeth. I’d make this entire post full of caps and exclamation points and swearing, but none of that is conducive to readability. But I’ve also been at this too long, so my nerves are shot and tolerance is at zero- I was paying attention since 2008 when the Left said you were a racist because you did NOT vote for the candidate who said illegal immigrants hurt our country, as I hammered home in previous posts linked previously in this post.

The Hill points out an email from Miller emphasizing the race of a shooter, where Miller wanted that angle played up in reporting, as if that were racist. Well, guess what, if that’s racist then linking all these other shooters to white nationalism and saying white people have a problem with producing mass shooters as the media loves to do is racist too. I covered and debunked that garbage already, at length, somewhere in all these posts (pssssst: by the way, this is where all the “Obama is a white nationalist” arguments are). But somehow, Miller trying to counter the narrative that all white people are mentally unhinged mass shooters is an act of racism.

According to the article in The Hill I cited above, SPLC’s big beef seems to be with rolling back TPS protections. TPS = Temporary Protected Status. Meaning someone can come into the country with that, then get lost somewhere and never leave. Just another way to cheat the system. See, I KNOW a non-white immigrant who has been trying to get into this country the RIGHT way for years now. When Obama was giving amnesty, this person was being denied by Obama’s immigration judges. It’s like liberals want to punish you for trying to come here legally. And oh how they praise those who do come here illegally! How many stories do you see celebrating ILLEGAL immigrants who cheated the system and whose entrance into this country was memorialized by giving our laws, law-abiding citizens, and law-abiding noncitizens the finger? Now how many times does the Left celebrate in their “news’ media people coming here legitimately? Crickets. NOW, how many times has the Left conflated “illegal immigration” with “immigration” to make it look like hating the criminal one was the same as hating the legal one?


I suppose it would be Pelosi of all people to say MS-13 was composed of angels. Her city believes the NRA is a terror group and criminals should be called the “justice-involved”.

There you go. The Left rewards lawbreakers, at the same time they’re trying to impeach Trump for allegedly breaking the law. Why does the immigrant class of lawbreaker get protection while citizen lawbreakers don’t? That is blatantly unconstitutional, as it has something called the “equal protection clause” which says outright the law won’t favor one group over another. But that’s not what the Left is about, but you saw that earlier when I tore into SPLC.

What’s Your Conclusion?

One legitimately racist source, the rest are ok despite the Left’s lies. I really didn’t even want to believe AmRen was racist because statistically it was just the Left crying wolf again, but unlike liberals I actually looked at the problem and found yeah they are. Not in the “exterminate everyone” way, but in the narcissist “we’re just better” way. And that’s it, that’s the best they have on accusing Jewish Stephen Miller of being a Nazi. They don’t even know how he got to that site or if he’s seen the problematic posts by them. Was he just following links sent by a friend? Did Google direct him there? Who knows, but if it’s something you can make a big deal about then do it! Turn this into a Steven Scalise situation.

Whereas on the other side, you have people that think The Beatles and Barack Obama are racists saying Stephen Miller needs to be fired for acknowledging the problems with immigration in general, illegal immigration in particular, our immigration system overall, and challenging the anti-White narratives the media deals in.

At best, neither side is right and neither side is fit to comment on the racism of the other. Maybe they cancel out and that’s how equality happens, though Miller would need to do a heck of a lot more to match the modern Left’s racism.


Impeachment In The Air


I was going to have an image of Pelosi to start this post since it starts off talking about her, but the first word below is “hot” and I don’t want to sicken any readers by associating that word with her image. So instead, here is an image of some literal hot air as liberals burn things down because they were “sad“. Images from AP, RWC, Fox News, Quora

Hot air anyway. Amazing how times change, only 19 years ago did the Lefties at The Simpsons have Lisa say that “it’s… irresponsible to present rumors as facts”.

Of all the things to impeach over, why did Pelosi pick the whistleblower complaint? They have Mueller give them 10 points of alleged obstruction of justice they could impeach over, complete with research and all. Instead, Pelosi chooses to impeach over something Trump is alleged to have said, alleged by some guy who didn’t even hear it, alleged by some guy with a political bias against Trump according to the Inspector General, an allegation not backed by the transcript. Heck, the media has to lie about what the transcript said and selectively edit quotes from it to make it look bad! Further showing that she doesn’t know up from down on the issue, Pelosi said that the acting DNI broke the law by not referring the matter to Congress, even though the matter does not involve bad actions by intelligence officials, and might not even have been WITNESSED by an intelligence official unless that’s who the whistleblower got his second-hand information from.

In a real court the whistleblower would not be allowed to testify, anyone who went to law school would have it thrown out as hearsay, assuming the case even went to trial since both the victim (Ukraine) and accused deny that it happened, the transcript of the call shows nothing happened, and there is no other evidence contradicting this, to the point that the Washington Post even said the call “had nothing to do with a quid pro quo”. But impeachment isn’t about “facts” or even “laws”, otherwise as I’ll get into later Democrats would’ve had to impeach Obama and Biden would be polling at 0. Instead, Democrats feel impeachment is about letting a partisan rumor overturn an election you don’t like. Because the riots I started this post with pictures of failed.

You’ll also notice that once the transcript came out, the goal posts were immediately moved (or in some basket cases, the Left and NeverTrumpers just went with the tried and true “dog whistles” idea, saying that “see, we were right, but you just have to believe that these words that clearly mean something else mean what we tell you they mean, but you have to be smart like me to see it. And you’re smart, right?” Other basket cases like the New York Times wrote misleading headlines like “Trump Asks Ukraine’s Leader to ‘Do Us a Favor’ and Also Urges Inquiry of Biden” making it look at first glance like the quid pro quo was about Biden, when really the favor was about something from the foreign interference in the 2016 election that Democrats had in the past wanted investigated. They also make it sound like Trump was pressuring Ukraine on the Biden matter when the Ukrainian President was the one who brought it up in the first place. Then NPR went and outright LIED about what was said- they directly connect Trump’s “do us a favor” remark with Biden’s son, when the remark as I just said HAD NOTHING TO DO with Biden. NPR ironically says their edited remarks, the same editors behind the Charlottesville lie no doubt, provide a “kernel of truth” about the whistleblower story. I don’t know why NPR linked to the transcript right there, it DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS their reporting.). It went from being “Trump should be impeached for threatening to withhold aid unless a foreign leader interfered in the election” to “Trump should be impeached for asking a foreign leader to investigate corruption in their country involving a Democrat”. As I’ll get into shortly, their new goal post would make Joe Biden unfit for office by the Left’s standards because he did more than just ask about an investigation in that same foreign country; he outright got their prosecutor- who was going after his son’s company- fired!

Is This Their Best Shot?

Democrats have been saying since day one that Trump needs to be impeached. They tell you he obstructed justice, they tell you that despite what Mueller found he colluded with Russia, they tell you that he is violating the emoluments clause. So what do they proceed to impeachment with? Some guy says he heard through the grapevine some stuff happened, and those with direct knowledge of the event who spoke about it say what that guy said was not true and are backed by the transcript. Basically, this is the Left’s attitude on the matter (except it was not absurdly found to be true for the sake of humor and story).

For those thinking “of course Ukraine would lie since Trump was blackmailing them”, the best I can say because I’m not a mind reader is read the phone call’s transcript and that his present stated rationale matches his moves for NATO and the UN and what he was talking with the Ukrainian President about in the transcript. And kinda represents one of the reasons people like me voted for him. Ukraine hasn’t come out swinging against Biden, yet they got paid anyway a week before this whistleblower complaint hit the news. And if you think Trump faked the transcript (it sure reads like it’s verbatim as this author notes) then there’s not much I can do for you.

This story also has more potential backblast than a M72 LAW. If Democrats are asserting that Trump asking a foreign leader to provide dirt on Biden is an impeachable offense, then Obama should have been impeached when he did the same thing with the British and Italians (even if you claim the intel communities were helping Hillary not necessarily under Obama’s orders- which shows Obama’s incompetence if that’s your argument- Obama would’ve known), and Hillary should have been thrown out as a candidate once she did the same thing with the Ukrainians, Russians, and Australians. Biden shouldn’t even be showing his face in this race.

And Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) should be impeached too, because he threatened to hurt Ukraine if they helped Trump’s 2020 campaign, meaning he threatened a foreign country if they helped his party’s political opponent, which is kinda what his party wants to impeach Trump for doing. Also, Democrat Senators Menendez, Durbin, and Leahy.

Rep. Maxine Waters gets her own sentences for her statement that “when you talk about Russia, you have to bring in Ukraine”. Because if those two are so inextricably linked then how could Clinton working with Ukrainian officials not tie her in with Russia (as if she needed help being connected to them)?


Batting a thousand with the Left these days, ain’t ya? Image from Techcrunch

Aside from attacks for hypocrisy, Democrats risk calling attention to Biden’s possible misdeeds. That is what Trump was allegedly blackmailing the Ukrainians into doing, so people would be asking what it was Trump wanted the Ukrainians to look into, right? Unless you’re a Democrat in which case you feel betrayed when the New York Times mentions Biden’s potential bad conduct. You can hear and read more about the allegations elsewhere, but the story basically goes that Biden’s son was with some corrupt people and the Ukrainian government was set to prosecute until Vice President Biden stepped in and threatened to withhold aid money unless the Ukrainians fired the prosecutor. Biden admits to threatening the Ukraine over the prosecutor, but didn’t mention that his son was involved.


Anyway, if you’re saying that it warrants an impeachment inquiry that Trump merely talked about his political opponents to another foreign leader, not necessarily acknowledging that the quid pro quo part happened, I have to ask: why? He’s chewing the fat with someone who just won an election, so what? And he tells the guy he should investigate Biden’s dirty ties in his country, after that person mentions his willingness to cooperate. Ok, what’s wrong with that? Obama funded Netanyahu’s political opponent and Obama campaigned against Brexit, at rallies in the UK. Obama allowed UN poll watchers to make sure he won in 2012 or whatever (I’m intentionally hyperbolizing here) and Obama allowed our government to help Hillary by using foreigners and Obama allowed the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election because he thought Hillary would win. So… what’s your problem with what Trump did? Is it just because you don’t like him?

Forget Impeachment, Execute Him!

Excecute Trump for treason, because he chatted with a foreign leader? Or execute for treason because he asked a foreign leader to look at a potential 2020 rival? Because if that is the case, then Obama and Biden and Hillary will be next in line for the firing squad because in 2016 they had the British, Ukrainians, Italians, and Australians helping them against Trump. And Bill Clinton will be in line too, because of all that money the Chinese gave him and his delivery of our missile secrets to them. And if  Democrat hero Ted Kennedy were still alive, HE’D be in line for the firing squad.

So… how many Democrats do you want to kill just to get rid of Trump? Oh wait, I see the flaw in my assumption. You’re not going to apply the laws equally. Hillary Clinton (jokingly I hope) in 2016 promised to sell off Republican districts to China; if she had actually done that you would back her 100%. When your Democratic leaders reached out to foreign countries to spy on their 2016 Republican rival, you celebrated and later buried the move. But when Trump is only RUMORED to have pressured a foreign leader to investigate some very shady Biden things that even the New York Times felt it worth mentioning, that’s worth sending Trump to the gas chamber over!

I know, I know, Weld is a Republican, but what he said was pretty welcome on the MSNBC set. Also, to those NeverTrumpers like him who think Trump should be executed, you’d have to do Mitch McConnell and Elaine Chao next because China has them wrapped around its finger.

So go ahead Weld, kill everyone who disagrees with you. Go ahead Dems, kill everyone who disagrees with you. Kill everyone who’s BETTER than you. You’ll be sending hundreds of millions to their death, but that IS what socialism’s biggest accomplishment has been so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. I thought liberals were pretty vicious, but these NeverTrumpers are just as much the psychopath. After hearing Bill Weld, I’m not sure if I should say “I’m no longer a Republican, just a Trump fan” or if I should say “NeverTrumpers are not Republicans”.

I think the former, since NeverTrumpers are just Abe Lincoln Republicans- “do what I say or I will hurt you”. I’m not talking about the Emancipation Proclamation so don’t get started on your fake outrage about racism Democrat (your website claims that protecting slavery was a civil rights cause), I’m talking about Lincoln’s and his subordinates’ liberal attacks on people/journalists who spoke fondly of the Confederates, because remember: the nation was only split for a few years. If you had family in the Confederacy that you loved, or even if you thought it ironic that the man saying he’s fighting to save the Constitution was suspending its provisions, you could be imprisoned for expressing these views under Lincoln’s laws. Of course modern liberals don’t really understand the family ties part, how could they if they want to be able to murder their own kids months after they’re born? So I don’t think they’d quite get the problem with what Lincoln did. Maybe this analogy will help: it’s like if a President Ocasio-Cortez wanted you executed for saying you still love your spouse even though they voted for white nationalist Obama with his xenophobic bigoted border policies and homophobic bigotry in 2008.


From their own website, they said (as of I think 2017 when I first saw this, or maybe 2016) that “[f]or more than 200 years” they have “led the fight for civil rights”. Included in that 200 years is the time that Democrats formed their own country to protect the institution of slavery, claiming that was protecting the civil right to own property, soooo… here they are celebrating their own racism.

What’s This Impeachment Outbreak Really About?

On Trump’s end, I think he kept the mystery going until the Democrats were ready to impeach, just to pull the rug out from under them and make them look crazy. CNN tried to do a little damage control the night before the transcript’s release, saying that it was a victory and the Trump Administration was finally crumbling to Democrat pressures. NPR flat out lied about what the transcript said, as referenced in a parenthetical in the first section of this post. NeverTrumper Mitt Romney probably got away with saying what he said simply because of all the “if trues” he put into it, but NeverTrumper Bill Kristol went farther out on the limb so hopefully he plummeted.

As for the Democrats, Trump struck too close to home. Biden is the candidate that establishment Dems like Nancy Pelosi want. If Ukraine reveals that the corruption there is true, that Biden really did force out a prosecutor in a foreign country by threatening to withhold aid because that prosecutor was going after his corrupt son, then his already tenuous lead will slip and establishment Democrats will be left with a candidate they’ve decided is unelectable. So naturally Democrats themselves are threatening the Ukraine if they do reveal any info about the Biden allegations, thus becoming guilty of the very thing they accuse Trump of doing. It’s about, in a word, “desperation”. That’s why this bit of hot air was enough to set off their impeachment dynamite, rather than the possibly lit matches from the other stuff.

This explains some other things too. Why are NeverTrump “Democrats in disguise” like Romney and Kristol talking impeachment? Why is Trump’s NeverTrump GOP challenger saying Trump needs to be executed? Because they want Biden, like they wanted Hillary in 2016. And they’re terrified too that this will put an extremist in who’ll lose the election and give us four more years of Trump.

The hope is that by hitting Trump with impeachment and having all the media talking heads stuck yabbering about that, then Biden can quietly win the Democratic Primaries since no one is talking about his corruption, with the bonus that anyone who does hear about it will merely assume it’s part of the collusion between Trump and Ukraine. Normally it’d be a problem that the closest thing to evidence they have is “this guy says these guys said Trump said it”, but as you saw in Pelosi’s statement she’s talking like it’s a fact that Trump did say this stuff, so maybe they’re hoping that if they say it happened many times people will forget that it’s a lie.

Like, what if I told you that some guy told me some guys told him that Biden is a serial rapist and Pelosi acts as a pimp to make sure he gets a lot of underage girls? I now have as much evidence as Democrats have for impeachment, more in fact because there’s nothing like a transcript refuting my allegations,  and I have a slight edge since the victims are women and we’re supposed to believe all such accusations according to Democrats. See the problem here? If not, I can guess your IQ has as many digits as “IQ” has letters, and speaking of letters I can authoritatively say you only vote for people with the letter “D” appended after their names.


There are of course… other reasons why my accusation might be more believable than the High School gossip Democrats are using to impeach Trump. Image from PJ Media

Writing In Spirit (Of The Gun)


One fallacy the gun control club spreads is that if we’re using guns to resist a hostile government, it would wipe us out quick. I think there’d be a good chance against the aluminum-skinned Bradley, pictured here at the tank museum in Danville, VA. This is a joke at the military’s expense, much like the Bradley itself. Implicit in the gun control club’s use of that argument is their willingness to use the military against American citizens for exercising Constitutionally-protected rights, and the Left’s stupidity because of how they started buying guns to #Resist Trump while still demanding an end to the 2nd Amendment I guess so that tyrant Trump can oppress them. An ex-Democratic Presidential Candidate even suggested using nuclear weapons against people who did not surrender their guns, which I’m sure would play great if one Republican in the middle of Democrat Baltimore refused to surrender. Not that there’d be much difference between Baltimore before and after the Democrats nuked it. This is afterall the party that says you can kill a human if you never really accepted them, at any age, so I doubt they’d mind nuking their own party members just to prove a point. In the long history of Leftwing socialist tyrants, one constant was a disregard for the lives of the people they ruled. So when we see socialists like Swalwell or AOC encouraging the same stuff, you understand why the Right gets a little nervous.

This is part 2 of the post I put up on Sunday. It was looking very very very long, so I split it when I realized it was 7am and I had been working at it for 9 hours in a row after spending much much much more time than that during the week pulling together the misc sources and quotes and whatnots. Believe it or not, what you see below is still only about a third of what I had left to address.

There’s a common fallacy that I want to address (or re-address, I don’t remember). Liberals keep blaming Trump and Fox News for spreading white nationalism. They keep blaming conservative opinion leaders for any dissent against Democrats. I must be a man alone on this one, because my judgments come straight from Democrats. I see their quotes, I see what their people are saying, and I am disgusted. I am driven to an angered frenzy. “How can they get away with lying like that?” “How come no one’s calling them out?” “I feel so helpless…” and so on. The lies I see from the Left’s media outlets serve to divide this country and promote economic ruin for us all, and serve to advance what appears to be an attempt to install a Stalinist regime. They want show trials of their enemies, every liberal from TV to twitter said as much with Kavanaugh. We often see them demonizing their political opponents, dehumanizing them as some “other” that needs to be “exterminated” as you’ll see one of their Congressman said below.

They don’t believe in free speech or a free exchange of ideas: if they disagree with you on anything it’s not up for debate, you are automatically labelled a bigot and/or mentally incompetent. An enemy or an inferior, either way someone who needs to be isolated from the population, someone whose ideas cannot be allowed. The Left’s own intolerance, their own thirst for power, is what pushes me so far into Trump’s camp that at this point I’m voting for him just to keep Democrats out, rather than for anything Trump has done. Trump hasn’t called for any mass exterminations or for any particular race to become second-class citizens, whereas when it comes to their political opponents Democrats have called for exterminations and when it comes to whites Democrats have demanded that they become second-class citizens, and blame this country’s problems on them as you’ll see between this post and last week’s post picking up remarks about how everything from sexism to mass shootings is the fault of white people according to prominent Democratic Party figures. As I said last time, 32% of the Democratic Party already believe that white people are never right if it conflicts with what a non-white politician says; 32% of the Democratic Party believes race determines whether you are factually correct on a topic.


Granted, it’s a shorter trip from far Right to far Left than it is to the Center. Image from DemocracyNow

You want to talk radicalization? I knew someone who was borderline alt-Right. Not a neo Nazi, not a racist, but pretty harsh on illegal immigration and all that. Within three months of joining a liberal forum, this person openly told me they were ready to murder everyone at the Heritage Foundation, wanted mass rapes and executions for every citizen of the state of Alabama, and wanted to murder everyone in the One Percent, and believed white people were to blame for every problem in the world. Those views were common amongst the forum-dwellers this person associated with. I pointed out the extreme violence involved, that not everyone was evil, and the response I got was a dehumanizing justification, saying that none of them would bow to this person’s demands if asked so they all need to die. So yeah, I’ve seen the face of the Left. The Dayton Shooter and El Paso shooter do not surprise me. And why all the murder? Because this person wanted free stuff. That’s it.

So let’s move on to this item that thematically sets up the rest of this post. At the first link, the author talks about some lie about white supremacists opposing abortion, easily debunked by the fact that a white supremacist founded Planned Parenthood to kill black kids. But the author here goes on to mention the Left’s habit of lying. They just spew out like machine gun fire into a line of British soldiers attempting a breakthrough. The tactic is simple- overwhelm and devastate. How can you defend yourself when everyone from Hollywood to the nightly news to the 24/7 DNC propaganda outlets MSNBC and CNN to their newspapers are spewing lies. Now add in social media. For the average person out there, they just see the lies, and even if they see the corrections there is still this impression left in their head about you. And it’s impossible to protect against the lies anyway. Humans evolved in limited tribes, our brains aren’t ready for this interconnectedness, so you have a caveman brain used to dealing with maybe 150 people in their lifetime dealing with 63 million enemies out for blood. As you’ll see below, blood is what the Democrats want. You’ll also see in only 10 days, even when cut in half between two posts, the accusations just kept piling on. Many are similar. Some different. Democrats discovered a corollary to that “Big Lie” theory attributed to Hitler’s propaganda minister- you tell a lie over and over until the public believes it, but even if they don’t they’re still left with the impression you’re a bad person just from all the bad things they hear even if they know all of it’s garbage.

How does this sound for calls for blood? Twitter even censored it when Sen. Mitch McConnell’s team posted it. They said it was glorifying violence even though it was posted by McConnell’s campaign team to condemn violence. Meanwhile, Twitter has done nothing to stop #AssassinateTrump which is a supreme glorification of violence. But it’s one Twitter agrees with. Twitter openly declared their bias and activism, so it should be no surprise they’d use the McConnell thing as an excuse to ban his account and hide videos of liberal protesters threatening McConnell and his family. Kills two birds with one stone. I’ll have more on Twitter in another post that I’ve been gradually assembling over the months, that will finally end up looking something like this probably.

To tie it all together for you, this relates directly to the whole gun violence and mass shooting topic from last time. You might recall (and you’ll see later) that liberals keep saying Trump is a violent man encouraging hate and mass shootings and they say he has blood on his hands. Anyone who listened to Trump knows this is a total lie, like what I debunked last time about how the Left lied on what Trump said in the wake of Charlottesville (they lied about that “good people on both sides” part, Trump specifically said right there in the speech before and after that he was not talking about white supremacists when he said that).

An interesting aside here- the Left loves to say Trump’s hateful rhetoric sparked the mass shootings, that Trump encourages Neo Nazis and the like. The problem is Trump DOESN’T. If you listen to his speeches and not the media’s spin on them, he’s really saying little more than you would’ve heard out of Democrats up until 2010 or so. And then awkward moments are caused when Nancy Pelosi says rapist killers are angels because she got caught up in the Left’s web of lies about what Trump says. Or maybe it was just a Freudian slip, revealing that folks like Epstein and MS-13 are the core of the party.


The Left’s idea of an angel makes them devils. Image from wikimedia

Remember how Kavanaugh was obliterated by the Left as an inhuman monster? Remember how the Left said Republicans deserved to die for supporting Kavanaugh because of an unproven rape accusation? Well here we have those SAME liberals saying a gang of rapists and monsters deserve our love and affection and our deepest respect since they are people like us. They show KNOWN rapists and killers more consideration than a Republican accused with very shaky evidence. And like I pointed out then, they have ignored or hidden or downplayed accusations like that against members of their own party. Believe all women, unless you need the MS-13 vote or they accuse one your own.

Pelosi is supposed to be a feminist icon, but there she was saying rapists were angels. Well, she was pretty quiet about the Epsteins and Weinsteins and Clintons of the party, as are the other liberal women until it’s convenient for them to speak out and oppose these folks. So I guess rape doesn’t matter if it’s a Democrat or people from a desired demographic doing it, they’re angels. They want to relax the voting laws to the point where convicted rapists can vote for them. Seems like the party of women is courting a very anti-woman demographic. But keep in mind, Islamic purist Linda Sarsour who believes in female enslavement (Sharia) is considered a good Democrat and feminist icon.

The Dayton shooter took part in Antifa-type activities. The media encourages that behavior. Though he’s not a member of any particular Antifa terror cell, he often expressed support for them and ideological solidarity. Given the loose brotherhood that Antifa is, he certainly qualifies as a member as much as anyone else. It’s like Bernie Sanders pretending to be an independent despite always siding with Democrats and running for the Democratic Presidential nomination twice- do you have to be a member to earn the label? So far, crickets from the Left. You don’t hear CNN saying “oh boy, did we goof by supporting this group?” Liberals are smarter than us, as I keep repeating, so maybe CNN didn’t goof at all and got the result they want. Based on CNN’s own assessment of how “hate speech” works, CNN’s own network has been trying to cause extreme acts of violence. Just like how the media and Democratic Presidential candidates are, by their own standards of how it works when Republicans talk, guilty of spawning various near-fatal attacks on ICE.

In fact, CNN arguably already did and have been very silent on it. They gave glowing coverage of an Antifa group who’s member that the host was seen with later tried to murder ICE agents. That Antifa group SUPPORTED the attempted massacre by their man. CNN glorified the Antifa member, CNN consistently demonizes ICE agents as inhuman monsters that are evil incarnate, yet when an Antifa member they glorify acts on those words, somehow there’s no connection. Just like they made no connection between that terrorist’s words and the very similar words of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). Whereas when the El Paso shooter openly says Trump had nothing to do with him, CNN says that Trump is responsible for the attack. After lying about all the times Trump denounced hate crimes and the like, claiming Trump only encouraged them. Hey, I wonder if CNN will hold itself to its own standards and claim responsibility for when an illegal alien murdered 5 people while dodging ICE agents after CNN glorified him. That’s twice in two months that someone CNN profiled killed/attempted murder/praised an attempted murderer.

As for El Paso… so the shooter believes immigrants strain welfare and hurt jobs, like Obama said as noted last time. The shooter believes races need to remain separate like black students at Williams College and like leftwing icon Spike Lee and like Obama/CBC/Cory “Moral Clarity anti-Semite loverBooker buddy Louis Farrakhan and like many people at Obama’s alma mater Columbia University. The shooter blamed overpopulation for environmental damage like Ocasio-Cortez. The shooter decided to riot/fight in the streets/spill blood like Ocasio-Cortez/Tim Kaine/Loretta Lynch, respectively. So where in all of that do you get “Trump is the bad guy”? The shooter even said in the manifesto that he WASN’T inspired by Trump! He said is ideas predate Trump, much like Obama’s ideas.

“[O]ur lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country,” 
Crusius writes. “Corporations are … shamelessly overharvesting 
resources. … [M]ost of y’all are just too stubborn to change. … 
So the next logical step is to decrease the number of people 
in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, 
then our way of life can become more sustainable.”

That’s an eco-terrorist talking. That’s Ocasio-Cortez talking, as linked above.

So is it also encouraging violence to demand Trump be “eliminated“, as a Congressman did? We won’t hear about it, CNN didn’t want to condemn death threats against McConnell that I mentioned above. The Left wants everyone opposed to them to be “eliminated”. Speaking of elimination, that lie by an MSNBC anchor I think I mentioned last week about Trump wanting to exterminate Hispanics, it turns out her apology rings pretty hollow since that’s been the network’s position.

Tying-in with my rant above about how Democrats stomp on women, here we have them throwing all their female victims under the bus in an effort to attack Trump. Bill Clinton flew with Epstein on his plane of underage girls at least 27 times. A member of the Clinton Admin and a Democrat Senate Majority Leader both had sex with an underage girl, according to that girl. Now, maybe Cory and Joy at the link above forgot, but we’re supposed to believe all women. Or do we not believe this one because she was a little girl at the time? This same victim said to her knowledge Trump had nothing to do with the operation, and didn’t even flirt with the sex slaves. You’ll notice that in the link, New York Magazine uses the Mueller precedent of “guilty until proven innocent”. To sound smart, they even pretend they know how to be law-talkin’ guys by quoting Mueller’s “totally exonerate” line and applying it to this matter. In fact, Trump was the only one who cooperated. Trump also banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after unconfirmed reports he fondled an underage girl there. Whereas Bill flew with Epstein’s underage girls.-Yet despite that ban, MSNBC’s Joy Reid still insists Trump was friends with Epstein, and insists on ignoring Democratic ties with him. Why is that- do victims of Democrats matter so little that Reid has to invent scandal around Trump to make people hate Epstein? Real victims aren’t good enough so she has to lie about Trump who actually took some action against Epstein, and who agreed to fully cooperate with federal authorities against Epstein unlike many of those subpoenaed? Maybe Democrats hate Trump now because he tried to help the little girls that Democrats were raping?

CNN says anyone opposed to them, and anyone supporting Trump, is racist. New York Times outright said all Republicans are white nationalist terrorists. MSNBC says in one show (and says even before the mass shootings) that Trump supporters are all racists, MSNBC says in another show they are all stupid, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) says they are all racist AND stupid.  So, across the vast spread of liberals, they believe anyone with contrary views are racists, stupid, and terrorists. They sling these terms around with no support, except the occasional lie about a quote as I mentioned last time with the Charlottesville thing. They’re lying to dehumanize and delegitimize their opposition. No one wants to be known as a racist or a terrorist, so they tell viewers that if they disagree with the Left on anything that’s what they are.


Liberals think you’re this type of Deutschlander if you don’t goose step with them. Also, when they say they want to ban military-style rifles, keep in mind that all rifles at some point in history were considered military-style going back to the musket. So they pick on the AR-15 now, but then mass shooters will just use another type of gun. The another.  You get folks like those at the LA Times who look on us with such disdain that they think we’d buy their insipid arguments that certain guns need to be banned and that’s all the Left is after. Firstly- liberal political leaders and their public said that wasn’t the case, but secondly: really any gun that you don’t need a trained minuteman to load can be used in a mass shooting. The guy who shot JFK got off three rounds in 7 seconds, and his was a bolt-action rifle. That’s a type of rifle where the bullets don’t load automatically after firing, instead you pull a bolt back and that lets the next bullet enter the chamber. And if you’ve seen some of Clint Eastwood’s spaghetti westerns, you’ve seen how fast a revolver can be fired, and while revolvers are definitely “military style weapons” given how they were used for like 150 years by the military, they’re not a “military style assault weapon” or “assault style weapon”. And look at the evolution of that term too. Assault rifles to assault weapons to military style rifles and assault style weapons. Gets vaguer and vaguer and vaguer. Almost like the AR-15 and its kin weren’t there only target. Hmmmmm…

To instill fear in the conquered populations, the Romans would take three random criminals and crucify them. That would send a message that the Romans meant business and you should just shut up and do what they command, otherwise you’ll end up crucified. That is what the tolerant Left wants. Out of one side of their mouths they claim that disrupting their speech in any way is harmful to Democracy, but then out of the other side they verbally crucify anyone who disagrees. They don’t do it with facts; they do it with accusations and lies. They dehumanize you and make you someone no one wants to defend, until you’re no longer a bother. When was the last time Cortez asked “do Trump supporters have a point on this issue?” Never, she says they are stupid racists and not worth listening to. Life unworthy of life.

That’s what the Leftist establishment believes of anyone opposed, you’ve seen plenty about what they say to reach that conclusion. They don’t even give you the dignity of addressing the merit of your idea, they just dismiss you as a worthless stupid bigot and move on after screaming that loud enough to scare away any support. And then they complain about Democracy dying if they perceive someone is impacting their rights in some way, after they trash the subhuman others, after they threaten to destroy the subhuman other, after the Left’s mobs attack the subhuman others with support of the Left’s establishment. As bad as Stalin was, the best case you can make offhand for him thinking groups of people were inferior is that he liked Georgians and trusted them more than other varieties of Soviets, so to say what the Left is doing is pure Stalinism leaves out that inferiority component. No, that part of the Left’s ideology is lifted directly from Stalin’s contemporary in Germany, who himself got it from American progressives- the intellectual elites we see today supporting Antifa. Liberals with beliefs like Planned Parenthood’s founders.

Let’s do a contrast here, in light of this recent story about illegal immigrants raping a little girl. The Left wants to pass anti-gun laws, no matter how ineffective, because “if it just saves one life it’s worth it”. But they want open borders, so that more 11 year olds will be raped. Even if you believe that illegals aren’t criminals like the rest of the American population (an assertion I debunked last time), you MUST concede that if they were not present at all then crimes like this where two illegal immigrants rape an 11 year old would not happen. So what if the crime figure from illegal immigrants is lower; the reason we have a border is so that figure will be zero!

And liberal, if it means one little girl isn’t raped repeatedly over several months, isn’t it worth it? Just like if your useless gun laws save one life, they’re worth it? Or do you believe taking away peoples’ right to defend themselves is more important than protecting 11 year old girls from rape? What’s wrong- does it only matter if the claim is against a Republican? Well, I guess we saw that answer when you said anyone not voting for rapist-enabling Hillary in 2016 was sexist but then tried to lynch Kavanaugh in 2018 over an event with even less evidence than what Bill’s accuser had.

All women must be believed… only if they accuse a Republican. All illegals must be protected, right? You’d gladly sacrifice your own body or your daughter’s body or your mother’s body for them, apparently, based on your desire for open borders.

Am I characterizing all illegals as rapists? You characterize every white Trump supporter with a gun as a potential mass murderer based on a couple of mass shootings done by liberals, so I don’t see why I shouldn’t characterize illegals as rapists. And I can certainly skew the stats any way I want since we have black-centric-liberal-favorite news outlet NewsOne saying “Reminder: White People Commit Mass Shootings Way More Than Any Other Group” despite the fact that, as stated in my last post, black men are TWICE as likely to be a mass shooter than a white man.

Remember: more incidents of sexual assault were committed by illegal immigrants in 2018 (80) than fatalities from white nationalists by any means in 2018 (49), so if anything I’d be even MORE justified with claiming all illegals are rapists than you are with your slander/libel. And those stats are just based on what illegal immigrants in the U.S. are convicted of doing: on the way here, over 180,000 rapes are predicted to happen at the hands of traffickers and fellow illegal immigrants though there’s sometimes overlap between those categories.

But I don’t believe that about all illegals, like Trump said some are good and some are bad. Isn’t that true about all groups? Don’t Trump supporters have the same “Spark of Divinity” that Pelosi said MS-13 rapists have? The only difference is that the illegal immigrants should not be here for us to roll the dice on if they’re good or bad. Guns are protected in the Constitution, but illegal immigrant rapists are only protected by liberals. “Spark of divinity” is what you believe they have; obviously you don’t believe their victims have that, or even matter, otherwise you’d adhere to your “if it saves just one life” policy and be standing guard on the border yourselves until a wall was built.

Irony. Joe Scarborough says that Elizabeth Warren is better than Trump because she won’t inspire mass shootings. Except in Dayton. And I guess her anti-ICE rhetoric won’t inspire any more terrorist attacks on ICE facilities either. Also, that entire segment was about how they oppose Trump because he is assaulting the Constitution, and by doing so they WANT to vote in a Democrat who will be just a bad, they openly say it doesn’t matter how bad the Democrat is. So according to MSNBC, only Republicans inspire mass shootings and terror attacks so Warren must be a Republican and so must the media otherwise a few items I’ve talked about here wouldn’t have happened, and it’s ok if a Democrat burns the Constitution as long as they beat Trump because Trump is a threat to the Constitution. As long as the threat is a Democrat, it’s not a threat. MSNBC’s anchors proudly declared that belief. CNN said a recession is awesome, all those job losses and everything, because it will hurt Trump. Remember last time how I mentioned that liberals DO NOT CARE what happens to you? Who do you think a recession will hurt? The poor minorities that Democrats claim to represent, or the rich white Republicans they want the recession to hurt?

In fact, CNN WANTS it to hurt the poor minorities so they’ll keep voting Democrat, they said as much. They said they want a recession so that it hurts Trump, right? Well how would it hurt Trump if it weren’t hurting people who’d vote for him? And how would it hurt people who voted for him without hurting people who vote Democrat as well? Exactly. They want their own voters to suffer, to lose their jobs, to starve in the streets, just so they can get rid of Trump who hitherto had been doing a good job with the economy.

I honestly can’t remember if I mentioned this last time, or if this here is what I wanted to mention last time but instead transferred to here. Or maybe I just linked to it as part of another topic and moved on. It bears examining here though- Ex-Rep. Robert Francis “rich and white” O’Rourke said racism in America and intolerance is common and has always existed here. Racism and intolerance by white people.


Normally I’d say of Robert O’Rourke’s appearance what my mom says about Daniel Craig’s: he’s an ugly man with a stupid face. But I genuinely think this is the best picture taken of him; his face is the least goofy in it. Why yes, this image from CBS’ Dallas affiliate IS a mugshot. Rich White Robby was arrested for burglary (charges later dropped because he is a rich white kid, do you think Kamala Harris or Cory Booker at that age would’ve gotten away with it? How about someone Hispanic named Beto, would THEY get away with it?), and drunk driving/crashing his car/fleeing the scene of the accident. Now he’s running for President. Democrats did want the felon vote. Also, as a 15 year old little Bobby wrote a nice long fantasy about murdering children.

So if all whites are racist, why are you running? Do you think you, some idiot rich white kid who was a backbencher in Congress for 6 years (I didn’t even know he existed until he ran against Ted Cruz, and I’ve been looking at this garbage for over 8 years now), is superior to a person of color like Cory Booker who was a Senator (which you failed to achieve) and a mayor? Or do you think you are superior to a woman of color, Kamala Harris, who is also a Senator (which you failed to achieve) and before that was attorney general for a state? Why do you think you’re more qualified than they are? Objectively speaking, comparing resumes, I’d honestly say Cory Booker is the most qualified (Kamala ran the prosecutor’s office, but wasn’t mayor or governor. President is closer to mayor than it is to prosecutor). Kamala and Cory are definitely more qualified than YOU Robert, so why are you still in the race except to steal votes from minority candidates, except to oppress those minority voices you are running against? Why do we need a rich white failure (or another rich white failure depending on your views on Trump) in the White House? Huh, Robert? Why are you superior to these other people, because it really looks like white privilege is the only thing you have over them.

I have another problem to pose about the Left’s sexism; it’ll take a moment to get there. Enjoy the ride.

So why is it that when a white person shoots up a place with motives coming from both sides of the aisle it’s solely Trump’s fault, yet when a Muslim cites the Koran and shoots up a gay nightclub you make his homophobic extremist father that doubtless inspired the attack an honored speaker at your Presidential convention, and then you say any condemnation of anything Islam is evil and Islamophobic even if the various jihadists cite the Koran as motivation? You go out of your way to connect Trump to El Paso, yet when a Muslim commits jihad and quotes their own religious texts you go out of your way to protect them, you even invite people on from Hamas-offshoot CAIR to tell us how bad we are for associating Islam with violence. Then you associate Trump and whites with violence and terrorism.

Are you saying whites are inferior? Are you saying they are untermensch? White males in particular, you love attacking them, are you saying that is the lowest form of life on the planet? So what happens when a white woman decides she is trans and wants to be a man? Are you saying that person is evil, or mentally unstable? Afterall, in your view white males are scum, life unworthy of life, so if a female wants to transition to male then that would be inflicting harm on them, according to everything your media and celebrities and just the average liberal on Twitter have been saying about whites and white males. One of your Presidential candidates even said that violence stems from evil male testosterone only. So are you saying that a white female-to-male transsexual isn’t actually trans in that case, but just sick in the head? Or do you believe that a white FTM is superior to white cisgendered men? If so, then aren’t you saying that a FTM does NOT truly become a man?

How can a female-to-male transsexual be superior if the transition is complete as you tell us it is? Why are you trying to trigger an attack of gender dysphoria by telling that FTM they are different from the biological males? Or are you now saying that all men and women are really equal? That it’s just toxic masculinity that’s the problem? If so, how can men and women truly be equal if only MEN are capable of suffering toxic masculinity? And can a FTM suffer from toxic masculinity too? No? Then I guess they don’t really become men, since you say all men are susceptible. So you’re not really tolerant of the trans community, are you liberal.

Here is a montage of Obama attacking whites and telling his supporters to get into the faces of their opponents, and also tells Republicans they need to sit in the back of the bus. We also have Obama smiling next to Louis Farrakhan, the black David Duke. Obama never had to answer for it. AOC and her staff never had to answer for quoting and supporting actual Nazis. Yet because a shooter acted based on what the media says Trump said, not what Trump actually said, Trump is evil. And the Left is not, even though the Dayton shooter was one of theirs and an Antifa member tried to launch a terrorist attack, and the Bernie Sanders terrorist shot at Republicans. The Left has produced acts of terrorism, and they’re fundraising off them, while saying Trump is evil for something he never even encouraged, unlike the Left which has encouraged its terrorists in mainstream outlets.

Jesse Watters has it right, in case you hadn’t been paying attention. AOC says we need to riot, a socialist shoots up an ICE facility. AOC says ICE agents are Nazis, an Antifa member tries to blow them up. Yet the Left did not link AOC to those events. Trump… makes no real racist statements and does not support white supremacy except in the media’s fantasies, yet the Left tells you that any rhetoric not supporting a Democrat or their policies will lead to a mass shooting. I was liking Donna Brazille up until her rebuttal of Jesse Watters’ point on that. Jesse was correct as you’ve seen me point out above and elsewhere, and if Donna was listening then Fox News would not be the only place she heard the Left denying culpability while blaming the Right for everything.

Honestly, Donna just has to check out New Republic. If you look at their pages you’d think that Chicago didn’t exist and the Dayton shooting never happened! You’d think the only people who even owned a gun in this country were white Trump supporters,  based on some of the headlines over there. They try to say gun culture is solely from white people, but have that not listened to a single rap song in their entire lives? I’ve listened to 5 DMX albums, one G-Unit album, one 50 Cent album, and one Coolio album. I can safely assert rap is pretty dedicated to gun culture. But the New Republic and other liberal outlets have a whiteness blind spot. Basically if they see white, that’s what they focus on to the exclusion of all other issues and detriment of racial unity.

I’ll stop with this odd one. An MSNBC analyst criticized Trump for the delivery of his speech. As if reading off the teleprompter is bad and shows Trump was forced to say what he says, does that mean Obama enabled black supremacists who wanted to kill cops? No? Also, his spiel about 8-8 sounds utterly insane, and Brian Williams sounds even worse. WHO THE HECK WOULD MAKE THESE CONNECTIONS?! This guy might as well say Trump is a Neo Nazi because he ate a Reuben on Hitler’s birthday! Actually, Obama is a Neo Nazi for ordering bombings of non-whites that started on 8-8 according to NBC’s stoic analyst.

Or how about this? I’ve decided that “NBC” stands for “Nazi Broadcasting Company”. Whoops, by YOUR logic it looks like you guys had better change your companies name! Especially since “MSNBC” stands for “Mengele’s Special Nazi Buchenwald Clinic”. So if these definitions spread among white supremacy groups and we start twisting everything you say to be a racist white supremacist dog whistle, does that mean you’ll apply the same standards you do to Trump and condemn yourselves? Nah.

I will say I agree with Brian Williams. It is chilling that people could be as stupid as they are. And for those of you who disagree with Jesse Watters on the idea that the Left is trying to criminalize all speech against it, here’s evidence in support of Watters. We can’t even count to 88 anymore without being Neo Nazis, and apparently everything we do August 8 is symbolic to Neo Nazis so we should erase that date from the calendar. The Left is willing to stretch to great lengths to call Trump a racist.

I’ll do one better. If the measure is “we can’t do anything that Neo Nazis interpret as enabling them”, and if raising an American flag on 8-8 counts as supporting Neo Nazis, then I assume being white and speaking English on 8-8 must also count as support. Afterall, it’s kinda their thing. Racial supremacy, English as our language and all that. So Brian, are you going to enable Neo Nazis by doing your show on 8-8? Even being white is triggering and a sign of hate according to the Left, thus it must be a sign of support according to Neo Nazis, certainly a more realistic sign of support than raising flags on 8-8, so why are you even doing your show? In fact- why do you have one to begin with? You realize a wise Latina would be better able to do that show for you, right, and that your occupation of that time slot is stealing it from someone who needs it more. Right?

My mother pointed out that on 8-8 we had a pro-democracy uprising in Myanmar and the forming of the liberal-lauded ASEAN. So I guess those are also white supremacist dog whistles since they happened on 8-8.


Using the same geometric logic that Jewish-owned NBC’s analysts and pundits used to determine that Trump is a neo Nazi because he did something on 8-8, I have determined that the analyst is secretly an agent for Mossad. Only after drawing the picture and writing all this and putting the links in did I realize that it looks kind of like I’m saying the Fredo in this picture has a big nose, which is a stereotype of Jews. So I guess now I’m anti-Semitic and anti-Italian despite being like fourth or fifth generation of each. Maybe I should declare myself a Democrat now and a trans or homosexual, the outrage mob won’t go after bigots if it’s their own party and they have one or two oppression points like that. Image from MSNBC.

Jews are secretly Neo Nazis too according to NBC. Hanukkah lasts 8 nights, and celebrates an occasion where enough oil for one night was divided into 8 nights. 8-8. H-H. So making the same leap of logic NBC might, NBC must believe that the Holocaust never happened because the Jews have a religious ceremony commemorating Hitler. Maybe NBC believes that the Jews fabricated the Holocaust once the Nazis started to lose, so that nobody would blame them for World War II. I mean, given what NBC believes about 8-8 and given their support of anti-Semites like Omar, Tlaib, and Farrakhan and their allies, it stands to reason that NBC would believe this too, and it even works according to NBC’s own logic.

Also, if you saw any coverage NBC and MSNBC do of Hamas’ attacks on Jews (because remember: exterminating Jews is in their charter, which is why Pelosi said Hamas was a humanitarian organization, because she believes it is humanitarian work to murder Jews and she believes MS-13 rapists and killers are divine beings) you’d think NBC and MSNBC thought that Hamas consisted of God’s chosen people. They have on people from CAIR, an offshoot of Hamas, all the time. If David Duke’s deputy founded an organization for the rights of oh I don’t know white men and the people in the organization said they wanted to wipeout all non-whites in the U.S. and Fox News had them on, you’d certainly claim that it was proof Fox was white supremacist. Yet you do the same with an organization that wants to eradicate all the Jews in the world whose members said they wanted to eradicate all religions aside from Islam from the United States. Somehow it’s ok when the targets are Jews and non-Muslims, but it’s wrong when the targets are Muslims and non-whites? Liberal logic- genocide is ok if the right group wants it. NBC’s logic- Jews deserve to die.

Speaking of preachy sanctimonious outlets, how come after warning of doom and gloom for the environment the Washington Post and New York Times are still polluting with their papers? The forests are being harvested, the plants that manufacture the millions of newspapers sold are belching pollution into our skies and require cars and trucks and resources to build them and require land that could be used as a nature preserve, then we get to the cars and trucks and airplanes carrying the papers to their destinations, and finally the used papers taking up landfills. This is leaving a hefty environmental cost just so that we can get the daily preach about how we need to help the environment. It’s like how Obama’s EPA saved the environment by polluting a river; I guess it makes sense to liberals.

That was a bit of an aside. How about we go back to Democrats and horrible reactions to shootings? Elizabeth Warren immediately rose to the top of monstrousness. The shooter in Dayton was a hardcore supporter of her and of gun control, so Warren sent out an email fundraising off the shooting, basically turning the man into a martyr for Warren’s cause. What message does that send? “Shoot people so that my campaign can get money!”

Bringing it all the way back to the top of this section, why haven’t you told that stupid-faced rich kid Robert O’Rourke to pack sand since he’s competing against non-white candidates on 8-8, trying to say he’s better than them even though he clearly isn’t. He is literally saying a white person is superior to non-white people with better resumes, and he’s doing it on 8-8! How is THAT not a Neo Nazi dog whistle?


How is it not a dog whistle that this sea of white faces is trying to say they’re all better than a latino man, black man, and black woman? How is it not Neo Nazi that nine of the white faces here are trying to convince you they’re superior to the Jewish man pictured? How is it not a white nationalist neo Nazi dog whistle that this is all happening on 8-8?

Setting The Barr Low; or, The ABC’s Of Bigotry


from wikimedia commons

Yes, it’s a little late, but time has no meaning to me. Playing DKC on the GBC does that to you.

Oddly enough (to the thinking of some of you in the audience), I do believe Roseanne’s remarks are a little racist. Spot on about the Muslim Brotherhood part, but racist with the “Planet of the Apes” reference. Not that I’m condemning her for anything except lacking awareness about the reprisal such remarks would bring. As I will outline in a moment, we all are entitled to our opinions, to condemn others would be to condemn ourselves (yourselves, liberal, as you will read if you dare).

I should clarify- I meant the reprisal that statements like Roseanne’s SHOULD bring. You see, ABC is lacking some awareness itself. Here are some folks ABC still supported wholeheartedly, fervently, and partisanly despite similar remarks to Roseanne’s- or worse, real attitudes they hold (which should always be the measure).

  • The Presidential Candidate that they lobbied very hard for, that they were disappointed lost, once made a racist joke about Indians and participated in a faux pas related to the African American community… make that TWO (and it’s amazing how forgiving media outlets such as ABC and Democrats were over Hillary’s superpredator remark when and how they voted for her- and don’t say too much time passed, ABC went after Steve Scalise with the rest of the media wolves over a fake racist incident that would have been 12 years old if it had really happened- yet when President Trump refers to MS-13 gang members as animals Democrats and media outlets like ABC suddenly decide that all gang members are divine creatures who cast down bullets of love upon us, who are merely filling women with love when they rape them, who merely are spreading the word of peace when they put a knife into us a hundred times, as opposed to VOTING FOR Hillary Clinton when she said much the same thing about African Americans) (ALSO, listen again to the Gandhi clip. You hear the people laughing at Hillary’s remark? It’s clearly a racist joke, yet your party of tolerance that has called Trump a racist more times than a pulsar will emit a beam of EM radiation in its lifetime is sitting there LAUGHING at a racist joke!)
  • ABC’s buddy Joe Biden once said Obama was the first mainstream African American candidate who was “clean” and “articulate”. Joe Biden ALSO picked on folks of the Indian persuasion, so I guess since he became Vice President after he said that and Hillary Clinton was almost President after mocking Gandhi, that means Democrats are perfectly ok with being racist towards Indians. That kinda takes the wind out of the sails of their anti-Apu movement.
  • ABC’s buddy Harry Reid once said Obama had “no Negro dialect” (something ABC didn’t let others get away with) and made an Asian joke that ABC decided wasn’t even newsworthy. (ABC also failed to mention when Harry Reid said “why would I want to do that” in response to being asked if he’d fund children’s cancer research, so there you go.)
  • ABC’s buddy DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison was/maybe is an anti-semite (note how he had issued a statement as Wolf noted saying his association with Farrakhan is long ended, admits to being associated with Farrakhan in that clip, but says he has always forever and ever opposed anti-Semitism despite his admitted association with Farrakhan)
  • ABC’s party of choice, the Democrats, standing behind anti-Semitic hate-monger Farrakhan (Hillary Clinton allegedly called her husband’s campaign manager a “Jew bastard” so in its love for Hillary, ABC already established its forgiveness of anti-Semiticism if it comes from a Democrat. Because as we know from the Associated Press still claiming Steve Scalise spoke at a white supremacist rally 16 years ago when that is factually untrue and was disproven 3 years ago, journalists like you’d find at ABC won’t let the truth get in the way of a good slur if it’s against a Republican)

Why so many Democrats listed? What do they have to do with ABC you ask despite the links linking them? Read the chart.


ABC is well-represented on this list of journalists working with someone who has a history of making racist remarks, who is involved with a Party that has a history of racism, one which still appears today as evidenced throughout this piece.

And of course, ABC itself currently has, or had, other racists/bigots/misogynists/folks of ill-repute in their employ who were not canned. ABC’s choices of news and programming arguably support much the same thing.

  • ABC’s Joy Behar dressed as a black woman for Halloween, and shared the picture with the cast of ABC’s The View on ABC one morning, saying she looked cute when dressed in blackface. (so while Roseanne simply made a throwaway remark on Twitter to her relatively small following, Behar was proud of having dressed in blackface and showed millions how happy she was about it on ABC’s network, and yet Behar kept her job)
  • ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel (and Joy Behar) smearing Christians (without at least equal time to other religions, not one joke or attack directed at Islam has passed their lips, what do you call it when you single out a group because of certain stereotypes about them but let another arguably worse group get a pass?)
  • ABC ignoring Farrakhan’s history while praising an event featuring him (he praised Hitler, for example, but that was never mentioned by ABC)
  • ABC supporting sexism by not exposing links between sexual assaulters and Democrats
  • ABC’s very feminist act of ignoring an alleged rape because the accused were illegal immigrants rather than white frat boys
  • And then of course ABC’s programming consists mostly of hateful diatribes, keeping in line with the personalities it hires. (guess I shouldn’t be surprised about some of this, after all, ABC news folks were happy to call America sexist and seemingly agree with Hillary’s ‘deplorables’ remark)
  • Don’t forget to consider just about any time ABC airs anything by Spike Lee, whose least-racist quirk is glaring at interracial couples

It’s perfectly fine, if you are a liberal, to be bigoted or to support bigots (we’ll even throw the Left’s favorite playbook at them- why didn’t ABC denounce Farrakhan 55 times while praising his rally? Why has ABC never denounced the New York Times or Esquire over their association with a racist?) is perfectly acceptable. Party of tolerance indeed!

Maybe They Just Didn’t Like Her

It’s readily apparent that ABC simply hated Roseanne. Her show was a ratings smash, but not with the right regions (New York, Los Angeles. You’ll notice that the networks tend to promote shows that resonate with them, as they’re the top ad markets in the country. Suburbs of a big city, apartments in a big city, nerd scientists in a big city, singing a pure propaganda song about your big city on New Year’s with millions watching while said songworthy big city makes cesspools look like mountain springs, crimes in a big city. Big city nights! The suburbs and rural areas are full of crooked rednecks and people killing each other. What’s the backdrop painting for the late shows? A cityscape. And by the way, where do all the journalists live?).

ABC was champing at the bit to find an excuse to cancel this politically toxic (to them) show, like with Tim Allen’s “Last Man Standing”. Tim Allen’s show was ABC’s second-highest rated series, but the first excuse they found (production costs) they dumped it because they hate anything that appeals to anyone who is not already waving a Soviet flag from their Brooklyn apartment window. Want more evidence for this? What does ABC replace the Trump-country appeal of the Roseanne revival with? A spinoff that takes it to the Left.

Or to put it simply- Roseanne didn’t embody “New York Values”.


Just one example of New York Values, from wikimedia commons

The Big Apple Didn’t Fall Far From The Tree

  • ABC’s parent company hiring misogynist Keith Olbermann.
  • ABC’s parent company not bothering to release Jemele Hill over her racially charged remarks (which tended to be anti-White, and tended to be almost anything she said)
  • ABC’s parent company not even punishing Bomani Jones after he said all American sports fans were racists

Just To Be Clear…

I’m not saying ABC doesn’t have the right to hire and fire who they want, if they want 24/7 bigotry and misogyny that’s their business. I’m saying it’d be nice if they weren’t so openly biased and applied their rules equally. Oh well, what do you expect from liberals? Typical. They can’t even play by their own rules because they know they’d lose. You know, their “rule” that says we should all be tolerant and open-minded. Their other rule that states such things as were said by the above folks are racist/sexist/bigoted/etc. Clearly, that only applies to people they hate, not to themselves.

Just For Fun…

Let’s end with some more bigoted liberal quotes (Liberal leader Al Sharpton sure didn’t seem like an LGBTQ buddy in the one at that link!). A quick glance into the world that ABC wholeheartedly supports, the world of Democrats. Maybe Roseanne was just a token sacrifice so that no one will question ABC’s liberal ethos when it supports the below intolerance. (NOTE: ABC has yet to apologize for or denounce or otherwise distance themselves from the below remarks, nor from the above incidents, aside from Roseanne’s statement… whereas if even one Trump supporter is shown as a racist the President must answer for that individual’s beliefs as if they were his own according to ABC and the media’s playbook, interesting how when a Muslim jihadist attacks it’s never Islam’s fault yet every indication of racism from a Trump supporter reflects that entire side of the aisle)

  • “Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them.” – Mary Frances Berry, former Chairwoman, US Commission on Civil Rights, someone thinks this is an inspiring quote. So is her quote about accusing Republicans of racism to distract from real issues.
  • “(I get to) kill all the white people… How great is that?” – Jamie Foxx discussing his Django Unchanged role on NBC’s Saturday Night Live, a statement made to a cheering crowd.
  • “(Blacks and Hispanics) are too busy eating watermelons and tacos to learn how to read and write.” – Mike Wallace, CBS News 1982
  • “White people shouldn’t be allowed to vote. It’s for the good of the country and for those who’re bitter for a reason and armed because they’re scared.” – Left-wing journalist Jonathan Valania
  • “I want to go up to the closest white person and say: ‘You can’t understand this, it’s a black thing’ and then slap him, just for my mental health.” – New York City Councilman, Charles Barron (who also said we attacked Libya for oil… just like Iraq I suppose because we never got any from Libya either!). His full quote was about him saying that blacks needed reparations in part because they paid for facilities under segregation they never could use. So did whites. And yet he was happy to impose Obamacare on people so that people who object to abortion would be forced to pay for it. Typical. Also, Barron, I have a question: if a white person can’t understand certain aspects of being black, how the hell does a black understand what being white means? Does your race have this magic ability to see beyond its skin color simply because you think it’s superior?
  • “We got to do something about these Asians coming in and opening up businesses and dirty shops. They ought to go.” – Former DC Mayor Marion Barry who was busted smoking crack with a prostitute
  • “The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person…” – Barack Obama, who is known for not being a fan of whites.
  • (Obama’s) a nice person, he’s very articulate this is what’s been used against him, but he couldn’t sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic.” – Dan Rather, CBS Evening News
  • “A few years ago, (Barack Obama) would have been getting us coffee.” – Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy
  • “Hymies.” And “Hymietown.” — Jesse Jackson’s description of New York City while on the 1984 presidential campaign trail (Jesse used “Hymie” as an anti-Semitic slur. Hey, remember when the Left went after Ted Cruz for being an anti-Semite because he said “New York values”? Why does the Left still love Jesse Jackson after his Jew-hatred was revealed like a mushroom cloud over the Nevada desert?)

And of course, the patron saint of welfare himself-


Phony Comey Wants You To Give His Book A Look


An appropriate picture, as for both sides of the aisle Comey is the face of the DOJ and FBI. Except if you look at the reasons you’d wonder what universe the other side of the aisle was in. Image from CNN

Former FBI Director James Comey either lied to Congress or the American people, so naturally he’d call Trump a liar and say “facts really do matter”.

Ironically, his statement on facts was when discussing a leak he executed, one of his memos to a friend. He said that since it was an unclassified conversation it wasn’t a leak. Facts matter Mr. Comey, as you said. Maybe that one incident you spoke of was unclassified, but at least two of the memos you leaked to your buddy contained classified information. On top of that, the FBI claims that your little “diary” as you called it is really government property. And remember when you tried to punish your agent who leaked details of the unclassified meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton? So while you’re free to promote your book, others have been jailed for similar crimes, and the FBI itself UNDER YOUR WATCH tried to punish an agent for a similar leak.

Then again, facts also didn’t matter with Comey when he told Congress that Trump said “I hope” the investigation into Flynn would be dropped. Comey decided that this statement meant that Trump was ordering him to drop the investigation, thus committing obstruction of justice, but under examination Comey denied that Trump ordered him to drop the investigation and couldn’t come up with any instances where someone was charged for obstruction for hoping something. Of course Comey forgot about this embarrassing examination and sticks to his obstruction story.

So Comey is saying that because of how he chose to interpret a statement Trump made, an interpretation not based on any words Trump used as mentioned in Comey’s testimony, Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice, because facts matter or something. Ok, fine. If that’s the measure for a crime, then I say Obama is just as guilty of obstruction of justice for when he said Hillary was innocent of any charges before the investigation had even interviewed her!

Oh, by the way, Comey also lied about Lt. Gen. Flynn. Because facts matter. As it turns out, the agents that interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn was lying. Comey overrode them and went after Flynn. Flynn of course had to plea guilty because he didn’t have the money to defend himself. Since we know Comey lied multiple times already, including about Flynn to the point Flynn was in legal jeopardy over it, and since Mueller seems inclined to believe Comey’s account as you’ll see below, it’s no wonder Trump’s legal team believes the Mueller Probe’s desire to interview him is a perjury trap, like what happened to Flynn.

Peas And Carrots


Certain other events also led the media to believe that George was lying when he told them about the rabbits after they’d done a bad thing.

What Comey did here is a typical liberal argument tactic, so it’s no wonder he’s now a media darling. Someone says x. You decide that they really mean y even if they never said it. Then when enough time passes and everyone forgets that x was said, or if someone never knows x was said, you say that particular someone said y. This is what liberals did to the Bush Administration when they claimed the Bush Administration said the invasion of Iraq was connected to 9/11 (a fallacy which some liberals still believe). NO ONE in the Bush Administration said anything like that. But after enough time passed, the mainstream media started attacking the Bush Administration for tricking the American people into supporting the invasion of Iraq in part by saying Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11. When the media were confronted by the fact that they invented that narrative, their reaction was to say it’s what the Bush Administration wanted them to think. MIND TAKING! BOOOOOOWEEEEEOOOOO!

So the media claims that their own stupidity and rabid partisan fervor was in fact a deliberate manipulation by the Bush Administration. And after lying about this, they continue to lie about WMDs being found in Iraq because guess what, THEY WERE according to the New York Times itself (and for you hair splitters who say that these weren’t the active WMDs we were promised, Obama’s intelligence chief believes those went to Syria, so what are you going to do, criticize Obama?)!

And of course by pointing all of this out, the Left will say I’m attacking the First Amendment (because an attack on the press is only an attack on the First Amendment when a liberal is the victim, none of these Lefty journalists attacking Trump complained about Obama’s crusade against Fox News) and don’t want a free press. A free press would be nice, yes, and it’s too bad we don’t have one in this country.

This is about Comey though.

Ball-less little lyin’ pansies like Comey, who was never an FBI agent in his life but was chosen by Obama to lead the organization, don’t have any respect for rule of law, nor do they have the guts to actually confront their opponents (without the security of a court room and government protection anyway). It’s ironic that Comey prosecuted the Gambino crime family, they actually HAD integrity and honor when compared to Comey. Can it be declared a mistrial if the prosecutor is more of a scumbag than the defendants?


Comey’s next book will be a romance novel about his… “intimate” knowledge that rumors of Obama’s sexuality are true. Image from

So you ask why Comey would leak his memos? Comey said he did so because he wanted a Special Counsel to investigate Trump for collusion with Russia or obstruction of justice or pretty much anything. Probably because Hillary lost, since Comey’s family was all over her (and protesting Trump) and Comey himself was in love with Obama. Comey even happily went along when then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch told him to refer to the Clinton investigation as a “matter”, and did not even think of looking into whether that tarmac meeting constituted collusion or obstruction or whatever as evidenced by the lack of followup to it and Comey himself said his only response was to make his July announcement about the investigation.

The pattern around the Comey memo leaks goes like this: the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein recommended that Comey be fired, Trump fires Comey, Comey then leaked his memos to his friend with the hopes of triggering a Special Counsel investigation, then the Deputy Attorney General obliges and appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel, with Mueller being tasked with looking into if Trump’s firing of Comey at the recommendation of the Deputy Attorney General was obstruction of justice. So based on this pattern of facts it’s very hard not to conclude (unless you’re Newsweek, who want to dismiss this and the Clinton campaign/DNC paying money to Russia for the Fusion GPS dossier as a conspiracy theory, ie dismissing FACTS, thus indicating the folks at Newsweak aren’t even reliable enough to spell their own name right) that Rosenstein tried to set Trump up for an obstruction of justice charge by suggesting Comey be fired. It’s icing on the cake that Trump refused to hire Robert Mueller again as FBI Director, that Rosenstein knew of this bias but appointed Mueller, and that Mueller did not recuse himself.

What Else Has Comey Done For Us?

Of course leaking isn’t the first issue Comey’s been a hypocrite on. Naturally I can point out that Comey DID NOT take notes on any meetings with Barack Obama or even Loretta Lynch after he stated he would’ve been suspicious of her motives. Gee, I wonder why he only took notes on Trump?

He attacked Former New York Mayor Giuliani, saying he was a terrible leader. But under Comey, the FBI was decimated as a legitimate institution. Comey and his number two man Andrew McCabe became leakers, and a conspiracy to hurt a Presidential candidate/sitting President was initiated. So uh… about that leadership thing? Comey ought to know that the leader sets the tone at the top. But that’s par for the course for the Obama Administration’s appointees, I guess.

There are other players out right now who have no integrity, in relation to the Comey issue. You know how the Left and the media are praising Comey over his book and his integrity and stuff?  How they’re touting his pronouncements about Trump being unfit to be President because Comey believes Trump is unethical? Here’s what they used to say about Comey:


George Stephanopoulos interviews James Comey while several Democrat politicians, DOJ officials, and members of the media look on. Image from quora

Well, Democrats and I agree I guess on something afterall- that Comey sucks. Comey is a glory-seeking piece of human filth that probably decided to make the Trump memos and make his Hillary email statements so that regardless of who won he’d have a book. No wonder Jorge Estebanlos interviewed him, peas in a pod since they have the same ethical standards. And when talking with George, Comey said he hopes Trump is not impeached because that would “let the American people off the hook”. I personally feel that folks like Comey are best seen on hooks, through their mouths, maybe as some vengeful Gambinos lower him to the bottom of the Hudson with a fashionable summer ensemble consisting of a navy blue three piece suit from Savile Row, alizarin crimson silk kravat, and the latest in cement dress shoes.

Didn’t He Have A Book?

Oh right, I was supposed to touch on the book in here somewhere. Well I never read it. Its title is A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership. I wonder what that loyalty is to- he’s thrown Democrats under the bus and is attacking Trump hard, and he can’t mean higher values given that we’ve established Comey is incapable of telling the truth and lies whenever it suits him (and in general is a terrible leader). I’m not sure on what grounds Comey is declaring that he has the moral authority to attack Trump in his book, or that his book has any moral authority whatsoever. There’s an old saying about casting stones if you live in a glass house. Comey lives in a freakin’ brandy snifter. He’s already well past the point of having enough character flaws to make him an A-Team villain.

California Attacks Islam


The “C” is for “California”, image from wikimedia

What a salacious headline! Bear with me while I establish the background on AB 2943

I know, I know. You read about this bill on Snopes or FactCheck or Politifact or in your favorite mainstream media outlet, and believe these groups. Despite the fact that they didn’t bother quoting the relevant parts of the bill; the only quotes were merely assurances from its writers. Just like the folks at the San Diego Tribune, who I guess think that the writers and proponents of any piece of legislation should be believed regardless of what the words in the legislation actually say. Well didn’t California’s own Nancy Pelosi once say you have to pass the bill to know what’s in it (you’ll notice that ol’ snopey gives Pelosi the benefit of the doubt, and even tries to interpret her words for her, to the point where they answer “did Pelosi say x” with a “mixture of fact and truth”, as if somehow you can say something but NOT say it, and then they try to prove that! A courtesy snopey does not extend to the other side of the aisle.)?

These Lefty groups want this thing to be made into law, or they simply don’t think they have to do any research because a liberal reassured them. Well, read the bill for yourselves. It’s rather obvious our fact checkers and media are lying once again. Pretty much any time a liberal says some rightwing claim has been debunked, no matter how allegedly respectable the propaganda rag they write for is, you can bet your bottom dollar that they’re lying or their idea of “debunking” is simply to say “it’s not true” without presenting any evidence. Which leads to embarrassing retractions, like when the New York Times said it was a rightwing conspiracy theory that the Palestinians paid millions of dollars in pensions to the families of terrorists. NYT had to issue a retraction for that, even though if the author and editors and fact checkers had engaged for even the briefest of intervals in the act of journalism they would’ve realized that their biased opinion didn’t reflect reality and that statement never would’ve been published.

From now on, when referring to “articles” written in liberal “news” outlets such as Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Huffington Post, CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, etc I should refer to the reporters as “authors”, given how far removed from reality their “journalism” is. It’s like they took a cue from Obama, but instead of hiring an egotistical hack novelist who is neither experienced nor knowledgeable about national security to be National Security Advisor, the Leftstream media hired a bunch of egotistical novelist hacks as reporters. Meanwhile, the Left forgets Obama’s choice (and Obama’s pre-Presidential record) and constantly criticizes Trump for being inexperienced and picking inexperienced people. Psychologists call this “projection”- “humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.”

A Step Into The Left’s Mind


Jackasses. Image from wikimedia commons

You see, to the Left, anything they say is the truth. That’s the rationale behind the protesters, whether it’s David Pigman or Sharpy Sharp And The Dull Bunch. Whether they’re protesting Trump’s victory or protesting the idea that people here illegally who had 6 years to register themselves with no penalty should’ve done so by now. Or a protesting mob of scientists who think faked data is grounds for worldwide communism and population control (I wonder what standards the Left will use to determine who lives or dies in their model, probably the same standard of who should be arrestedwhen legitimate, respected liberal thinkers start sounding like Bond villains you’d think that the Left might realize how far out they are, but nope, they simply double down and fight harder… guess that mentality explains all the nameless henchmen the Bond villains have). Doesn’t matter, liberalism today is about imposing your self-made factless reality on the rest of the world. That’s why we are told science is sexist because it deals in absolute truths. That’s why everyone gets their own truth that outweighs reality. In their minds, they might not actually be lying to you deliberately. Maybe the fact checkers and liberal media actually believe that if a liberal tells them something it must be the truth because liberals don’t lie. I mean, most women are liberal and we already know women can do no wrong, according to the feminists that liberals support. Lying would be included in that list of wrong things women can’t do.



The Left lives in a world just as magical, but a bit more trippy. Image from

This denial of reality goes into why they are so violent towards anyone who opposes them. They KNOW they are right. They KNOW they are smarter than anyone else. If they truly believed there was another point of view, that would shatter their myth of superiority (so they want to ban anything that challenges how right they are, basically admitting that their worldview CANNOT hold up to scrutiny). Which is why they’re atheists too, by the way, they can’t tolerate the idea that they’re not at the top of the pecking order. But it’s also why they don’t listen- if they’re right, then you MUST be wrong if you disagree. For a group that supports more gender types than episodes of Star Trek that I’ve seen, they are EXTREMELY binary when it comes to worldview. You’re either with them, or against them. And you must be evil when you oppose them, because they know they are right, so if they’re right and YOU claim to be right too, that must mean you’re a liar, and since everything a liberal stands for is good, that must mean you stand for evil because you oppose them. That really is their worldview. Just ask. And there certainly aren’t any facts opposing my claim, in fact every day there is more support to my assertion that this childish reasoning is all they have. Diversity of flesh, but not diversity of thought, to the point that you are judged by the color of your skin rather than the content of your character… unless you have the appropriate skin color but DON’T think appropriately.

Or Maybe I Misjudged The Case Here

The other alternative of course as I mentioned is that the fact checkers read the bill, and LOVED what they saw, but that again goes towards the whole “we have our own truth that we’re imposing on you” thing. In the Left’s mind, religion is a blight on society (just read the comments section for any given YouTube video touching on religion). It’s the sole cause of wars and the Dark Ages and what holds everyone back from being peaceful communists living together. Ok, that’s overgeneralizing, CHRISTIANITY is a blight on society. Just ask Senator Cory Booker (D), who unilaterally did the very unconstitutional thing of giving a Trump nominee a religious test, and attacked his beliefs later… but seems fine with having an Islamic Deputy Chair. You know, Islam, the religion that’s usually MORE oppressive than Christianity. Liberals are cool with every religion* except Christianity, and also aren’t cool with a Jew that’s pro-Israel. Or rich. Or… ok, they hate Jews too but not as openly. They see Christians (and Jews) as ignorant savages and see religion as an oppressive force so naturally any bill that attacks it gets a pass, like say the bill I start this article with.

*for you Shintoists in the audience who might note that I only mention 3 religions above, the Left ignores your existence unless someone in your group runs counter to their ideology, much like how it treats Asian Americans when they talk about the prejudices they face– see the section above on skin color for more details on this pattern

They don’t see the bill or similar items as an attack; they see it as a means of educating the population, a means of suppressing misinformation (afterall, like everything else in the liberal world, religion is just caused by some outside condition, akin to their reasoning for why whites are always privileged and blacks are always oppressed). Which makes me wonder now if people in China and North Korea genuinely believe that “re-education” camps are merely learning institutions, because if liberals pulled that same thing here you can bet anything from dollars to navy beans that Snopes would believe whatever they’re told about the camps as long as the source was a liberal.

To The Bill At Hand

So I’ve established that the bill can be used in an extremely anti-Christian way if you read it rather than listen to its leftwing advocates, as the fact checkers and our allegedly free press did, and I explained why the Left wouldn’t bother reading the bill itself and just rest with the assurances of its authors, but I have yet to explain how the terrifying headline is anything close to accurate. Well, you see all this evidence about how the language in the bill puts Bibles on the chopping block and makes it so it would be illegal for churches to ask for donations or even be funded, all because of what the Bible says about homosexuals, can be used against Islam too. So let’s see what Imams and the Koran say about gays…

Islamic scholars overwhelmingly teach that same-gender sex is a sin.

The Muslim holy book, the Koran, tells the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom – and sodomy in Arabic is known as “liwat,” based on Lot’s name.

Men having sex with each other should be punished, the Koran says, but it doesn’t say how – and it adds that they should be left alone if they repent.

The death penalty instead comes from the Hadith, or accounts of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. The accounts differ on the method of killing, and some accounts give lesser penalties in some circumstances. “

Noble Verses 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29 were sent to me by brother Bassam Zawadi, may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

“Would ye really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people (grossly) ignorant!  (The Noble Quran, 27:55)”

“And (remember) Lut: behold, he said to his people: “Ye do commit lewdness, such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you. “Do ye indeed approach men, and cut off the highway?- and practise wickedness (even) in your councils?” But his people gave no answer but this: they said: “Bring us the Wrath of God if thou tellest the truth.”  (The Noble Quran, 29:28-29)

Also, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:

‘Abd al-Rahman, the son of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, reported from his father: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said:  “A man should not see the private parts of another man, and a woman should not see the private parts of another woman, and a man should not lie with another man under one covering, and a woman should not lie with another woman under one covering.   (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Menstruation (Kitab Al-Haid), Book 003, Number 0667)” “

Gee, under this bill you wonder how anything Islamic involving the exchange of money wouldn’t be banned. And no, that part about gays repenting is NOT enough to let Islam get a pass if it were treated equally, because if you’d read the sources you’d know that the bill dealt with anything that attempts to say homosexuality is wrong. Repenting is the act of admitting you are wrong. (I’m going to love reading the comments that say my use of Koran quotes means I’m a bigot for explaining this detail about Islam in its own words. As if liberal Marie Harf dictating what a group of Muslims believe contrary to what the group itself said wasn’t bigoted. And as for repenting, California already has a bill that makes it illegal for heterosexuals who were molested by someone of the same sex to obtain psychological treatment for any homosexual feelings that may have come from that trauma, so it’s rather obvious California wouldn’t look kindly upon repenting either)

So Where Are The Outraged Muslims?


Intersectionality works because Muslims have a thing called “taqiyya“- they can lie to infidels and pretend to have beliefs which they really don’t so long as it advances Islam. Kinda explains Linda Sarsour, either that or she is functionally illiterate. Image from GetReligion

Well, this is where we get into something called “selective enforcement”. There are way too many laws on the books to enforce against everyone who violates them. Due to the amount of regulations on the books, we’re all guilty of a crime whether we know it or not. We all probably commit one every day whether we know it or not. Your kids aren’t safe either, 12 year olds in the U.S. have been handcuffed for eating french fries. Heck, I bet none of you reported your eBay purchases to the IRS this past tax day. That leaves the government with a disturbing option- all of its opponents are guilty of something, so go after them while ignoring the violations of its friends.


The Muslims know that the Left is their bestest good buddy. Muslims won’t bite the hand that feeds them. Not yet. Remember- the Left claims slavery is freedom when it comes to Islam. The Left declared Islamist Linda Sarsour, who believes in an oppressive version of Islam and called for a jihad against Trump, to be a feminist celebrity. The Left almost fetishizes the oppression of women under Islam, claiming that symbols of such oppression are symbols of liberation (contrary to the opinion of people who had live with said oppression, but the Left loves dictating what people should think from its guarded fantasy world). Heck, liberals think so much of Islam that they cheered Palestine’s flag being waved at the Democratic National Convention, whereas no American flags were even present. At first, but the physical ones wheeled in were kind of off to the side in the shadows. Liberal anti-Israeli protesters did bring an Israeli flag too, but they burned it. They burned American flags too.

More importantly and pertinently to the “selective enforcement” argument, consider this: how many Muslim bakers have been forced out of business over discrimination? None. How about Christian ones? Get the picture?

And of course we have the liberals Europe, the ones that the Left tell us we should be more like, letting the Muslims get away with rape gangs that had thousands of victims, blaming the victims of said rapes, because the police and government are too scared of being labelled as racists. In fact, they’ve even said that people reporting on these crimes were racist and gave the rapists lighter sentences because they were not white and their victims were. UK’s government believes that rape is not a serious crime if the victim is white and the rapist is not, that is what their own internal conclusion is. Germany took the approach of siding with the Muslims and saying the rape victims were responsible for what their attackers did. So Muslims know that if the Left literally will let them get away with raping the Left’s own kids (or let a Muslim get away with assault because in the Judge’s mind, a judge who threatened the victim, Islam takes precedence over the First Amendment… and for you women out there, even in America those liberal activist judges I alluded to think a Muslim should be allowed to rape you), then they’ll certainly give the Islamic faith a pass when it comes to this bill.


So I guess Democrats and Islam have something else in common- peace is so old school for both of them.

You’ll notice I didn’t distinguish between “radical” Islam and ‘regular’ Islam. That’s because I’m trying NOT to insult the Muslims. I’m not Muslim, so I have no right to make that distinction. The whole sectarian struggle in the Middle East is about what version of Islam is extremist and which is not. I can say I like certain brands, but I’m not going to decide which one is radical because quite frankly if you ever read the Koran ALL THE WAY THROUGH and the hadiths too you’d notice that ISIS is acting mostly as an adherent to the rules (later, violent sayings and stories overrule older and peaceful ones, so Islamic scholars of Islam currently and historically said- this is called “abrogation”), whereas if you stopped reading while Mohammed was still in Mecca you’d think that the peaceful Westernized vision was the true way. Me saying “radical” here is no different than if a Muslim were to say Protestants had it right and Catholics were the radicals, from a Christian point of view.  I don’t want to encourage certain groups by saying “radical” Islam is bad, because to each group there’s another group that IS radical Islam (even non-Muslims disagree on what “radical” is, with the SPLC saying someone who is against “radical” Islam is in fact a “radical” Islamic extremist), so instead I’ll encourage them all to clean house and get their defecation consolidated by lumping the bad and good together as simply Muslims, much like the Left always does with Christians.

The point is: if this bill is passed, there will be legal grounds to attack your religion, Mr.-or-Mrs.-Muslim-what-reads-this. Once the Right is gone, if you think the Left’s not going to put up a fight against you, you’re very naïve. Just like any liberal who doesn’t think that the Alliance To End Republicans (or Hulkamania) will fall to pieces once that common enemy is obliterated. I mean come on, do you seriously suspect that your whole intersectionality idea will hold you together with all those ideologies competing against each other? The only glue holding you together is your common hatred for certain groups, so you will desperately try to find one boogeyman after another to hate against in order to maintain your power. That’s probably also why the only emotions we see from you are hate-based: if you didn’t spend every minute of every day filling your mind with hate for your common enemy, differences between you and your allies might just enter into your mind.

I’ll cover what happens with that in another piece, but Harvey Weinstein was just a preview, as was the mention of Asians earlier. You can also look at how your side treats blacks from Africa to see the state of your so-called tolerance. You see, apparently there was an “African Holocaust” in the U.S., and according to the Left and the few african americans who claim to suffer from said holocaust (obviously they feel black Americans are superior to Jews or anyone else who experienced a real genocide), folks from Africa are wealthy (compared to the holocaust-stricken  African Americans) and never had any problems. Ever. So I guess these conflicting worldviews that will come to blows once there isn’t a common enemy are what happens when we each have our own truths, like African Americans who think they’re worse off than folks in Darfur (and liberal women who think Islam is a model for achieving a feminist utopia).

If You Still Believe The Bill’s Authors And Media, Even Over The Language Of The Bill Itself

And for those on the Left, who would be glad the above lies were told and see no problem with them nor the results of the laws that came to pass because of these lies, I present the below so that you may have empathy for my position:

You don’t believe Trump, you claim he’s a liar, well I just outlined how YOU TOO are a liar, so why would I EVER believe the assurances of your lawmakers on this matter, ESPECIALLY when the freakin’ BILL ITSELF says the opposite of what its writers and your “fact checkers” are telling us! “Fact Checker” is now an Orwellian euphemism, they belong to the Left’s “Ministry of Truth”. This bill does not target Christians/Muslims, chocolate rations are up 20%, and we’ve always been at war with Eurasia (a terrifying example of life imitating art thanks to the DNC’s sudden anti-Russian-warmongering furor, and remember: it’s been nearly 2 years and we STILL don’t know if the Russians hacked the DNC! And no, 17 intel agencies DID NOT say that Russia did it no matter how much liberals want to memory hole the truth. Read the news sometime! And ask the DNC why it destroyed evidence if it’s so eager to show Russia is behind its hacking, and ask why the DNC ironically set itself up for being accused of the crime of destroying evidence by claiming that hacking its servers was a criminal act by Trump and Russia).



    Minitrue mark article doubleplusungood crimethink.                         Miniluv remake goodthink fullwise.                    Image from DailyBeast, doubleplusgood bb duckspeak friend

BREXIT Day: An open letter to the British People

Congratulations!! You are finally on your way to being free from the dictatorial tyranny of the EU. Many people have fought hard for this day and it was hard fought indeed. In a clear show of spite, many have tried to stop this even after a democratically held election showed the desire to leave. And many people will try to sabotage this process as time goes on. Even now the EU council is trying to extend the process to 3 years so they have time to continue to lob political attacks at 10 Downing Street. But I know you will pull through this even with those inside your own country trying to stop you. This day is an affirmation, a show of gratitude for every soldier who fought so that Britan would be free 70 years ago. Many died or risked their lives then to make sure that Britan has the right to determine their own rights.

Somewhere along the line, the promise came that the European Union would ensure economic prosperity, and Britan joined that bloc not knowing what they were getting into. And gradually as time went on and more power was taken away from Britan quietly, the youth of the country began to forget about those sacrifices and take them granted. They were fed the idea that they could not live without that EU. Many became dependent on the monster that took and took from Britan without realizing what kind of Demon they were dealing with.

Finally, somewhere at some point, somebody cried out into the dark at the injustice and hypocrisy and the movement for your freedom began. With your own government working against you the right to hold a referendum was secured. And then despite being told you wouldn’t win you campaigned and voted. And on that glorious summer day in June of 2016 history was made when Great Britan Voted to throw off the oppressive yoke of the European Union. And even though the fight has not stopped since then, your momentum and overwhelming love for your own country have all but guaranteed victory.

You have made your voices heard and it is brilliant. In the face of lies and intimidation, you have won and you keep winning. Truly my grandfather who was stationed in Britan with the US Army during the great war would be smiling if he were alive today to see this. Many angry people are claiming that you are taking yourselves out of Europe, but this is untrue. Britan will always be part of Europe as it always has been, you are now just taking a step forward to secure your own future in a world that will soon remember the EU as a brief mistake of history. In your darkest moments, remember this song that my grandfather admired for its show of the strength and optimism of the strong British people:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

When Britain first, at heaven’s command,
Arose from out the azure main,
This was the charter of the land,
And Guardian Angels sang this strain:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The nations not so blest as thee
Must, in their turn, to tyrants fall,
While thou shalt flourish great and free:
The dread and envy of them all.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful from each foreign stroke,
As the loud blast that tears the skies
Serves but to root thy native oak.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Thee haughty tyrants ne’er shall tame;
All their attempts to bend thee down
Will but arouse thy generous flame,
But work their woe and thy renown.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

To thee belongs the rural reign;
Thy cities shall with commerce shine;
All thine shall be the subject main,
And every shore it circles, thine.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The Muses, still with freedom found,
Shall to thy happy coasts repair.
Blest isle! with matchless beauty crowned,
And manly hearts to guard the fair.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The (Not) Russian (Not) Hackers Story


The Facade of the United States Supreme Court. Image from

Editors Note: This post was originally Scheduled for 3/15/17, however, I have moved it forward because of an extremely dangerous situation that is currently emerging. In January of 2017, 3 Individuals filed a Writ of Mandamus to ask that the entire 2016 election be nullified because of alleged Russian Hacking. It was assigned docket number 16-907. Instead of throwing out this trivial and ludicrous claim, the court decided on February 21st, 2017 to distribute this petition among the justices and schedule a hearing for March 17th, 2017. You can read more of the details and why this is so alarming by clicking on this link here. This is a direct threat to our democracy. The fact that the justices even decided to hear arguments on this writ is extremely distressing since it means they are taking it seriously despite the extreme lack of real evidence which I will be explaining in this article. I am aware to some readers my articles are too long winded and wordy for them to digest but since expressing the actual facts of this case is extremely important, I will quickly summarize the points of this article so you can read the critical pieces of evidence that prove these claims are false:

  • Both Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange and Former British Ambassador turned Wikileaks Operative Craig Murray have repeatedly stated the DNC and Podesta Email leaks did not come from the Russian Government. Craig Murray states that they were DNC insiders and that he actually met one of them while picking up documents to be leaked in a Washington DC Park.



  • The report was authored in the Final Days of the Obama Administration. It has been proven that many times during his administration Information was altered by his agencies to fit the White House narrative. Two examples are the CENTCOM Scandal and Obama’s Unemployment Numbers. He and his party made no attempt to hide their visible fury over the Election of Donald Trump which accompanied by the facts listed above and recent revelations that he has remained in DC to coordinate efforts to get President Trump impeached makes it very hard to believe any information that was put forward under his Administration or by his Appointees.

The combination of these facts means the claim put forward by the plaintiffs has no legal merit and should have been immediately thrown out. This is why the hearing on March 17th is extremely alarming and should greatly concern the reader. Please contact your state’s Senator and House Representative to share your concern about this, or write to the Supreme Court in The District of Columbia. And please read my article for more information on why these claims of Russian Hacking are not just false but dangerous, and what motivation there was to spread this narrative. 


Editor’s Note 7/1/17: Last week another huge hole was punched into the fake Russian Hacking Narrative. First, on Monday, June 24th 3 CNN reporters were forced to resign after CNN had to retract a piece they wrote falsely connecting Hedge Fund Manager and Trump Ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian Investment Fund under investigation by the Senate. Then on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday admitting that the Russian Hacking Story has no validity and that they push it for ratings among other reasons. The Friday release also confirms that CNN has a hard left bias, and also features the subject of the sting admitting that CNN thinks American voters are “Stupid as Shit”. This is a huge development and will hopefully lead to the final death of this fake news tirade and punishment for those pushing it.


Last year’s election cycle was a real mess and has uncovered a lot of dishonest sore losers. I mean there have been protests, riots, calls to abolish the electoral college cause they don’t like it (of course there was nothing wrong with it when Obama was elected twice), attempts to legitimize violence against anybody even slightly Right of Left, boy if you name it we have seen it since November 9th, 2016. But the most dangerous tantrum, however, has been an irresponsible campaign of falsehood that has only demonstrated that US Intelligence and the Mainstream Media are acting as the obedient exemplars of this nation’s political left. It only serves as another in a long line of dishonest attempts not only to try and undermine the legitimacy of the presidency but to cover up the misdeeds of the Left. I am of course speaking of the factually inaccurate claims that the damaging email leaks which revealed the severely dishonest behavior of the Democratic Party and which ultimately cost Hillary the election, came from Russian Government Hackers.

This claim is on its face ridiculous. There is nothing to corroborate the claims, there is, in fact, plenty of evidence to the contrary. But of course, a little thing like the truth has never gotten in the way of the Media and the Left. They firmly believe that if they scream their false claims louder then they will somehow become true. Sadly in the minds of their dependent followers and the eager war hawks, this really happens.

The first leaks that started with the DNC emails happened on July 22nd, 2016, 3 days BEFORE the Democratic National Convention. It is important to remember that as it will come up later in this article. In any case, the documents leaked revealed among other things that the DNC and the Media had cooperated with the Clinton Campaign to not only actively rig the convention against Bernie but also smear the reputation of the Senator and his supporters. So there is inconsistency #1, the group that would have gained the most by leaking the Clinton Emails would be Senator Sanders Supporters working inside the DNC who would have been pissed to find out what had been going on. This has actually been pretty much corroborated by Wikileaks operative and former British Ambassador Craig Murray which by the way is inconsistency #2 in the Left’s narrative.


Former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray. Image from


Of course, after this happened there was a 2 or 3-week tirade by Hillary and the left about how it was Russian Hackers. This was not only to deflect responsibility for her malicious rigging of her party’s primaries but to give her a bogeyman style figure to harp on about in an attempt to gain support by stirring up fear. Remember, just like with all parties of Fascism, the Democratic Party relies on both fear and propaganda. Still, though, after 2 or 3 weeks it died down and she shifted her shrill lying tongue to the sexual assault allegations against Trump that would later be proven entirely false as well. And of course no real investigation was done since the administration not only knew at the time that it was a false allegation, they felt no need to validate its authenticity with fabricated evidence, since they were convinced Hillary would win with the help of her Media Cronies making an effort to manipulate what information the public saw. (just a hint, we were not supposed to see ANYTHING negative about Hillary if they could help it.)

Pretty much the same thing happened with the Podesta leaks when they were incrementally leaked starting on October 7th, 2016. These, of course, being closer to the 8th, they focused their fury not on the imaginary Russian hackers but rather on Donald Trump. It is interesting to note these emails revealed more dishonest and potentially illegal behavior not just by Hillary but by President Obama himself. The leaks revealed things that ranged from outrageous to simply amusing. Among other things, it was revealed that Obama was well aware of Clintons Homebrew Email server and helped in the undertaking of a coverup, discussion about Obama committing voter fraud in 2008, the Clinton Campaign received debate questions in advance from former CNN correspondent Donna Brazile, illegal efforts by the Clinton Campaign to actively coordinate with a SuperPAC, and how the Clinton Campaign intentionally worked behind the scenes to boost “pied piper” candidates like Trump for the GOP Primaries. There were also the equally horrifying personal views and remarks of campaign workers that were revealed such as how John Podesta wished the San Bernadino Shooter had been white, how Clinton Staffers made disparaging remarks about Catholics, and many other embarrassing remarks. Also, let’s not forget that his email account was secured with “password” as the Password which made it so easy to hack a 14-year-old could have done it.

Anyway there was again no effort put into finding the so-called Russian source of the leaks because the administration not only knew it was a false claim, they were also still 100% convinced Hillary was going to win despite the FBI investigation into her improper use of a private email server during her tenure at the state department, and I submit this as Inconsistency #3 in the Left’s narrative. But we all know just how wrong they were. It is after this, after the calls to overturn the electoral college, after the protests. Only after the disastrously failed recount attempt that Jill Stein was put up to starting at the behest of the Clinton Campaign who didn’t want to look like the hypocrites they were. Only after all of this did these fake claims come up again with the ironic addition of claims that Julian Assange is a Russian Spy, and only then did Obama instruct the intelligence community to “investigate.”


This Funny Meme pretty much sums up the Left’s 180-degree turn on Julian Assange, another example of transparent left wing hypocrisy. Image from

By investigating I mean that they were to put together a flimsy set of data that the Joker in Cheif could throw around to impress the impressionable. Now before you accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist I have to point out this isn’t the first time Barak Obama instructed his agencies to manipulate information for him. Besides Obama’s totally false claims that he was leaving with only 5% unemployment which Gallup quickly debunked, there was a huge scandal revolving around CENTCOM rejecting information that didn’t reflect the administration’s narrative on how the battle against ISIS was going well. It is unsurprising to me then that the “Intelligence” Report that was supposed to be “Evidence” Russia was responsible for taking those emails only mentioned Russia 3 times, had multiple disclaimers, and didn’t make any mention of Wikileaks or Podesta. Even former House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra expressed extreme skepticism not only of the validity of the report but also of the motivations behind it.


Pete Hoekstra Image from

The only people who are satisfied by this report are Democrats bitter over their crushing election loss and Cold War Holdover War Hawks like John Mc.Cain. Even private bloggers have debunked the report entirely. The best one I have read is this one by Zero Hedge in which they prove that none of the over 800 of the ISPs which were presented as evidence of the “Russian Hacking” are related in any way to the Russian Government. No wonder the so-called intelligence agencies which authored this wrote disclaimers and were not willing to stand by their assessment. It will also interest you to know only 3 agencies, not all 17 as is customary, participated in crafting this document which lacked dissenting assessment. This, however, did not stop Obama from writing an executive order evicting 35 Russian Diplomats from the country under accusations of spying that are backed by practically no evidence, which I am pretty sure by the way is a violation of the Geneva Convention.


Barack Obama Image from

Now that I have covered all of the facts of the matter its time for me to connect the dots. I asked you to remember a few key points in this summary because they are important inconsistencies. Even if you don’t buy those when I am done my outline here then you should still employ Occam’s Razor. After all the simpler narrative is always proven to be true over the far-flung ones. The Russian hacker narrative is as far flung as you can get.

The best place to start is with the people who documented the leaks, Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange, as well as Wikileaks Operative Craig Murray both swear that the documents were not given to them by anybody involved with the Russian Government. Say what you will about Mr. Assange, but over the last 10 years he has been nothing but honest in his crusade against government corruption and he makes thorough efforts to vett the documents he receives so he can guarantee their authenticity. In addition, as I said earlier, Craig Murray has said he personally met with one of the leakers, actually picked up documents from him in a DC Park that would later become part of the Election related Leaks. He also said these leakers are inside men that were angry over the fact that Senator Sanders was being screwed, and one would assume also because the Clintons were trying to manipulate the outcome of the entire US Election. So far it looks like the ONLY party trying to manipulate things from behind the scenes was the Clinton machine.


Senator Bernie Sanders (VT) image from Buttfeed

Another thing to pay attention to is the timing of things. The major contesting claim of the Left is that the Russians wanted Trump in office, but if that is so why would they leak the DNC documents BEFORE the Convention and risk them coming out early enough to cause a wave of outrage against Clinton. That would practically be handing the nomination to Bernie Sanders who was already polling above Trump as Trump was Polling above Clinton in terms of favorability, it is conceivable the DNC would have had to hand it to Sander’s if there had been enough serious protest. Considering the earlier claim then by Craig Murray this reinforces the likelihood that the documents were leaked by angry Bernie Sanders Supporters. They have more to gain from the documents being leaked and would have had easier access to them.

Again with timing, I turn to the actions of the Administration themselves. I can say with 100% certainty that they knew there was no Russian Hacking and that this was a fabrication. If they had suspected there was any possibility of this there would have been an immediate and thorough investigation and Obama would have immediately taken punitive action against Russia. There was none taken though, there was no intelligence assessment made. It is quite clear the claims were made simply as an attempt to distract people from the extensive list of corrupt actions taken by the DNC and Hillary’s campaign which these Email Leaks revealed. And the only reason the claims were resurrected was to serve as a way to undermine the legitimacy of the incoming president and cover up possible crimes by the outgoing administration which made very little effort to hide their disdain and bitterness over the defeat of their preferred candidate.

Okay guys, so I have totally dismantled their “Intelligence” with proof that the list of IP addresses in their report is not connected with Russia, and also the fact that they broke procedure by excluding the assessment of 14 US Agencies who should have been consulted. I have destroyed their fabricated motive they claimed Russia acted on by proving the timeline doesn’t match up. I also showed you the Administration knew there wasn’t a security threat. I have given you evidence that points to a different set of perpetrators with a more solid motive that fits the timeline. And I have further established a motivation to tell the lie and commit to it.

Occam’s Razor Time Guys!! The simplest explanation backed by solid evidence is always the correct answer, so tell me which of these two scenarios sounds more probable to you. The first is that Russian Government Hackers spent untold amounts of money so they could Hack and Leak documents from the DNC and Podesta in order to put Trump in office before they could even be sure he was the nominee, thus influencing and undermining our election. The second is that a DNC Staffer who supported Senator Sanders got wind of the plan by Hillary and her backers to influence both parties primaries and angry at learning about this he/she and a few other supporters of Senator Sanders came together and acquired the documents which they would readily have had access to, then having acquired them they leaked them to Wikileaks hoping to damage Hillary for sabotaging their preferred candidate. I dunno guys, which one of these scenarios seems more likely and less batshit crazy to you?


Hillary Clinton and Bat Boy Side by Side. Image from

My Thoughts on the recent Scandal surrounding Milo Yinnopoulos


Recently there has been a lot of controversy surrounding Milo Yinnopoulos. On February 18th it was announced that Milo would be a Keynote speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference. This decision was made with some protest from certain members, but he was invited because of the UC Berkley riots as well as his work before that exposing Liberal Thuggery on college campuses. On February 19th however, a Twitter group called The Reagan Battalion posted a video that apparently shows Milo attempting to justify pedophilia. Despite Milo’s statement that the videos were heavily edited and that he, in fact, did not condone pedophilia; on February 20th CPAC disinvited Milo. The very same day Publisher Simon & Schuster canceled the publishing of Milo’s Autobiography entitled “Dangerous”, Citing the leaked video from The Reagan Batallion. The Next day on the 21st amid calls for Breitbart to terminate his employment, Milo held a press conference where he announced that he was resigning from his position at the media outlet.

Pedophilia is a reprehensible act. It is, in fact, one of the few criminal acts I feel should come with a mandatory death sentence for the adult criminal. There is no excuse for it whatsoever. I understand Milo comes from Britain where the age of consent is 16, that is all fine and well. Still, though, the age of consent in my home state of Maryland is 16 too but I could never engage in sexual relations with or date a 16 or 17-year-old much less anyone younger. I have a hard enough time as is trying to show interest in anybody under the age of 20 who pursues me even if they are extremely nice. “Why”, you ask? There is a clear difference in maturity as well as life experiences and besides the huge effort they would have to make to convince me of their maturity, the fact remains that at the end of the day we have very little in common for the most part and I feel much more fulfilled in a relationship where I can reminisce about the good ole’ times with my partner rather than one where I tell my doe-eyed partner stories about the good ole’ times. Relationships where there is an immense age gap, are rarely healthy, it’s a simple as that.

I personally have not seen this video nor do I intend to. Considering the reaction of Milo’s peers I have heard all I need to hear. Even heavily edited his remarks were reprehensible. However, considering the mitigating factors, I cannot condemn Milo. I also cannot defend him. He made his own bed and he now has to sleep in it, that is the sum of it all.

I can, however, condemn and criticize his detractors. Starting with the actions of The Reagan Battalion which claims to promote traditional conservatism. Their Guerrilla tactics stink of the same kind of sabotage that Social Justice Warriors employ against their opponents minus the veiled Homophobia. No, The Reagan Battallion indeed displayed outright Homophobia indicative of the Bible Thumping Fundamentalists that are nearly killing the Republican Party and the conservative movement. This cannot even be called righteous outrage on their part, if indeed it was they would have released this months ago however they waited until Milo’s  crowning moment to release it causing the most damage because he was gay. A newsflash for these Soros-funded bigots, you did just as much damage if not more to the conservative movement you claim to fight for. But that’s exactly what your Nazi master Soros intended right? These morons deserve a good portion of disdain as well as Milo since they enabled the downfall of a prominent conservative figure during a critical moment for our movement, giving the left-wing media something to gloat over.

There are also the Hypocritical Celebrity and Media detractors of Milo. While the Press celebrates with their smug and gleeful victory lap they prove once more that they are to be despised as the peddlers of fake news that they are. How are they doing that in this instance you ask? I ask you, isn’t inconsistency and the withholding of facts fake news just as much as a totally fabricated story? As Bill Maher and George Takei gloat in unison with the Media let us not forget how there has been total silence about George and Bill’s past promotion of Pedophilia.

It is a huge mess indeed, and there are guilty parties on all sides. Who are the real victims though? If you thought for a second I would say, “Milo”, then you don’t know me too well. The victims first and foremost are young gay men and victims of Pedophilia. Now that second one is easy to explain, any victim of pedophilia who is aware of being a victim will surely feel pain over such things. Hearing someone justify your victimization causes the worst emotional pain whether you were a victim of rape by someone much older than you or a victim of police/judicial corruption, hearing someone try to justify or trivialize something that has caused you a kind of pain you can’t put into words is like a punch in the gut.

This hurts gay men as well as the conservative movement too. Milo represented a new way, a new ideal. He was proof that contrary to the fascist indoctrination of the regressive liberal LGBT community, not all gay men (or women either actually) had to believe the same things politically or all act the same way. As the LGBT community attempted to shame guys who preferred fit guys and masc guys over fem guys and fat guys Milo attacked that supremacy they tried to exercise with his flamboyance and shocking statements. I don’t agree with everything he says (for instance I am an advocate for trans people), but when I first learned of him I was at a time in my life where I felt like I was a one of a kind aberration and there was nobody remotely like me out there in the world.

Yes, even though he also combatted toxic feminism and politically correct fascism on university campuses his most significant contribution was being that beacon of individuality. He represented the hope for young gays who didn’t agree with the hypocritical ideas they were taught gays were supposed to believe in. The very act of him, a gay man, standing on the stage and espousing ideals contrary to those of the LGBT Community sent a message that there were others out there just like us who were different and that there was some hope.

I know this first hand because despite kind of knowing I was gay since the age of 13 I was not even able to accept that I was attracted to men till I was 21 and I was not able to accept I was gay till shortly before I was 23. I spent my teenage years afraid to be who I really was not because I had a Catholic Family (Who with the exception of my grandmother readily accepted me when I did come out), or because people were less accepting of gays where I was from when I was a teenager; I could not accept who I was because I saw how selfish, ridiculous and irrational gay people acted back then and I was afraid. I didn’t know some of the decent gay people I know now and I didn’t know any gay conservatives, so I was afraid that if I accepted being gay that I would become just like the image of gay people that I saw back then and the thought of being that way frightened me and made me feel sick. I have come to accept who I am later in life than most and so I will always regret that lost time of my teenage years, but what hurts the most is that I now realize if there had been someone as prominent and well-known as Milo to show me I didn’t have to fit a cookie-cutter mold that I may have been able to accept myself a lot sooner and not miss out on all of the passionate romances and fulfilling relationships I could have only had as a teen. That’s who Milo may have hurt in the long run, conservative gay youth.

A few groups too will be affected but less drastically. In the short-term, college republicans will lack an energetic rallying point to encourage them to push back against liberal fascism in academia. The conservative movement will also lose another beacon of the diverse makeup of our ideology (one that has conservatives of every color, conservatives of many religions, LGBT conservatives, even  Conservative Environmentalists). Milo’s words, as well as the despicable actions of The Reagan Battalion, have set our movement back. Despite this, however, the movement as a whole is still going strong. But unless someone steps into Milo’s Gay Conservative shoes and shows the world there are gays who can be individuals, it’s young men a lot like I was who will suffer the most because of this.

Finally, before I wrap this up I have a personal message for Milo in case he ever reads this for some reason:

Milo, I am very disappointed in you. I can never say I looked up to you but I did admire what you had accomplished. Your downfall does not please me at all and what The Reagan Battallion did by sitting on this information till you were at the peak of your popularity and releasing it was wrong, but you did bring this upon yourself. A few words may have toppled all of the good you have already done and could have done. There is no coming back from this though. As much as it pains me to say this the fact remains that if you want to do the least amount of damage to the causes you care about then it would be best to let yourself fade into anonymity. I sincerely hope a charismatic conservative speaker who is also gay can come in to fill the gap you are leaving (I myself have considered trying to go for it), but even if one doesn’t you will do more damage now if you try to remain in the spotlight than you could do by just fading away. I am so sorry to see this happen Milo but what’s done is done and it cannot be changed.

The “Proof Hillary committed a Federal Crime” starter kit (Special post.)

So really a quick story, I was essentially accused of lying by a misinformed friend of mine today when I said Hillary committed a crime. This was in response to the email scandal. He said she was merely accused of a crime. I tried to explain to him Comey admitted she committed a crime as described by the Espionage Act of 1917 so she was indeed guilty of a crime many people before her have been jailed for, but she was let off the hook for being a Clinton. He then deleted the comments and accused me of falsehood. (he didn’t use my name but it was clear he was referring to me.)

I’m not one to let a sleeping dog just lay there especially if the sleeping dog is the truth. So I rebutted him with these easily obtained sources. And now I’m going to share them with you to save you the 5 minutes it took me to find all of these.

First is FBI Director Comey’s Statment when he recommended not prosecuting Hillary.

Next is the 1917 Espionage Act. Be sure to draw their attention to Title 1, Section 1, Article E.

And finally to put the nail in the coffin link them to this article which has a list of 10 times people were punished for the less incompetent handling of classified documents than Hillary.
If they can deny the truth after that then I can’t really advise you any further on how to handle that. The most you can do is spread the truth with evidence to back it up and let people come around on their own. Ta ta now. 🙂