Friday, December 30, 2016

The Absence Of Intent And The Presumption Of Guilt:Richard Nixon And Watergate



When Hillary Clinton was facing prosecution for over 33,000 leaked emails apologists in the media and Dept. of Justice kept citing an absence of criminal intent as an excuse for avoiding prosecution. During the Watergate hearings, President Richard M. Nixon was afforded no such out. In fact, he wasn't even afforded the presumption of innocence, a mainstay of the American judicial system since its inception.

I recently watched a film about the last days of the Nixon Administration and attempted Watergate cover-up. The movie was a typical Hollywood smear job but several things stood out. First was Nixon's integrity which, despite their efforts to obfuscate it, showed him to be a man who put the nation ahead of himself. Second was his love of his family and concern for them above himself. Another thing that was painfully obvious was a complete lack of impartiality in the investigation. Throughout the film I listened for the word intent- it was never used. Nixon's intent, however, was apparent. His only intent was to preserve the integrity of the office of the president...at any cost. In doing this he embarked on a road that would inevitably cost him his presidency.

Watergate was a political witch hunt from beginning to end. When the "burglars" were caught and turned out to be operatives of the White House, the Democrats lost no time in bringing down the president. A Special Prosecutor was appointed and Congressional hearings begun. The media went into a frenzy. In any objective investigation the impartiality of the investigators in paramount. The very fact that Hillary Clinton, given her radical political affiliations, worked for the Congressional committee doing the investigating shows that impartiality was never a concern. This was a blatant attempt to bring down Nixon.

The Democrats and Special Prosecutors demanded tapes, some 64 of them, that contained not only issues pertinent to Watergate, but conversations with his family, foreign diplomats and others that would essentially strip the president of any vestige of privacy. This is what Nixon objected to. He offered to give Congress transcripts of all pertinent material, but that wasn't good enough- they wanted everything. In his attempt to preserve the privacy and integrity of the presidency, Nixon made some pretty bad blunders. This just added fuel to the fire. However, if you think about it, how comfortable do you think foreign leaders would be talking in the Oval Office, if everything they said was to be made public? Nixon had a point.

But the Democrats and media were unrelenting. I wonder why they weren't equally unrelenting during the attack on Benghazi. I wonder what transcripts of Obama's communications with Valerie Jarrett or Hillary Clinton would have revealed. Or, perhaps communications between Bill Clinton and Communist Chinese donors, who had access to the Lincoln Bedroom. But these issues were never even raised. The Democrats have historically represented everything reprehensible in America. They were the party of slavery. They were the party of Tammany Hall and the party of Richard Daley's political machine in Chicago. They were also the party of the undoing of a man that hopefully history will vindicate. The movie does make one good point: If the private conversations of every president were made public, how many would have been able to continue as president?

Nixon was, after all, a pretty competent president. He normalized relations with Communist China and opened trade negotiations. He also did more for Middle-East relations than any other president. He was able to negotiate with Leonid Brezhnev one of the most hard-line Premiers of the USSR in the Cold War era. Nixon funded Johnson's Great Society programs and started the EPA. He also won the Vietnam War...Yes won it. This video shows how the North Vietnamese, Viet Cong, and South Vietnamese, along with the U.S. initialized the Paris Peace Accords and were ready to sign them a short time later. This is why the Democrats had to bring Nixon down.


In the end, Richard M. Nixon was guilty of being a decent, honorable human being, albeit a flawed one- like the rest of us.He was guilty of putting country and family first, ahead of political expediency. If he had stuck it out, he would most likely have prevailed, but at what cost? He didn't want to put the country or his family through the scandal. Unlike Bill Clinton who has no concept of decency, he stepped down for the good of the nation he loved. The Nixon presidency and its undoing say more about the Democrats who have come after than the man himself. History, I'm certain, will vindicate him.

Friday, December 23, 2016

The Reason For The Season: A Christmas Message For Christians

Anyone that calls themselves Christians needs to watch this video, at least5 the first 45 or so minutes.



It's Christmas time, a time for celebrating the life of Jesus Christ, our Savior. While it's doubtful that He was born on Dec. 25th, we do, however, know why He was born and when He died...and why. While everybody is opening presents from Santa and enjoying time with family, we must never forget that Jesus laid down his life so that we might have life everlasting. Are you willing to go that far for Him?

Are you willing to lay down your life so that Jesus word might survive in America? It may come to that. There is a growing antipathy toward Christians in this country and we must all determine what side we will be on. This life is a test, nothing more...a test to determine where you will spend eternity. There are two choices; the easy, comfortable one and one that is much more difficult. It's easy to say "Yes, I'm a Christian." But, it's far more difficult to be one. It's easy to embrace the pop-culture Jesus and a watered down version of Christianity being proffered in churches where all one has to do is claim kinship to Jesus and declare "I'm Saved!" But, that's not Christianity.

Christianity is about how you choose to live your life. The Bible talks about "the narrow way." The narrow way is never the easy way despite what many preachers tell us. The Joel Osteens and Benny Hinns of the world lure people away from the Word, offering them an easy way to salvation. In James, the Bible tells us that "faith without works is dead." The Bible also tells us that "man cannot serve two masters." Will you serve God or mammon?

In II Thessalonians God talks of a "Great Delusion" that he will set forth upon men. This delusion is saved by faith alone. This is called Luther's revelation and was, in fact, a political ploy by the Venetians to cause dissent among 100,000 German lancers that were closing in on the city. This "vision" was given to Luther courtesy of one Gasparo Contarini, a high ranking political figure in Venice.

We are saved by Grace and by Faith, but not alone. In Isaiah it says that "I will turn your heart of stone into one of flesh...and I will make you Israel." The word Israel does not refer to a country- it means literally wrestles with God. Or in common parlance, one with God. Therefore, being one with God would naturally change one's behavior. If one is to be a Christian, it is not enough to say you're a Christian...you have to act as one.

There is a saying that Satan's greatest accomplishment was convincing mankind he doesn't exist. I say his greatest accomplishment was getting people of faith to fight amongst themselves. As Christians, we must never forget that we are on the same side- Catholics, Methodists, Baptists... For Christianity to survive we must stop fighting amongst ourselves, or Satan wins. Because we are divided, pop-culture has taken over. The Joel Osteens sell a feel-good brand of Christianity that is easy to do. Christianity is difficult. If you are not willing to live or die for Christ...you are not a Christian. Merry Christmas!

Monday, December 19, 2016

Stealing America: The MSM's Last Ditch Effort To Silence Dissent



In the aftermath of Hillary Clinton backed lawsuits' failure to overturn the election results in four states, the Globalists have decided on a couple of new strategies. Still blaming Russian intelligence for the loss the MSM narrative is attempting to influence the Electoral College in swaying "Hamilton Electors" to change their party affiliation and vote for Hillary Clinton "for the good of the country."

What they fail to understand is that the last election was a revolution of sorts...a rejection of the Obama/Globalist worldview. This view is similarly held by the mainstream media, a global organization owned by six mega-corporations. Throughout the election the globalist elites, through their propaganda machine did everything in their power to get Clinton, a corrupt power-hungry globalist puppet elected. What this election really boiled down to was the elitist worldview vs. Donald Trump, the populist voice of the people.

Current polling shows the MSM with a less than 10% believability rating, with most people (nearly 50%) preferring to get their news from alternative news sources, mostly on social media. In their attempt to counter this, many social sites have attempted to silence dissenting voices. One of the more popular sites, Facebook, has begun fact checking so called "Fake News" by comparing information to what is being confirmed by Move On.org and Snopes...both owned by George Soros, a globalist backer of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, hardly the voice of impartiality. What these social media outlets are doing is to affirm the same globalist agenda as the MSM.

To further attempt to sway the electors, a group of washed up actors have made a video pleading with them to change their votes. This is a last gasp effort that showcases the desperation of the globalists. This video, by Anonymous, traces the efforts of the pro-Clinton global elites in their efforts to overturn a legitimate democratic election.


What I find particularly fascinating about the video, comes when J.P. Morgan-Chase instructs their investors to seek alternative sources of news when formulating investment strategies. If you think back to the housing bubble bursting in 2008, the question arises- where was the MSM. As the movie The Big Short points out, a few shrewd hedge fund were able to spot the inconsistencies in the housing bond market...How? Because they looked, it's as simple as that. Where the experts in the MSM? There is certainly no shortage of financial wizards in the MSM, yet the only people smart enough to see what was about to happen was a couple of offbeat hedge fund managers. Everybody else was asleep at the wheel.

During the election the political wizards in the MSM were apparently asleep again. The polls consistently showed Hillary as a shoe-in candidate; or were they deliberately trying to deceive the American people? Either way, the American people won and the globalists lost. One thing is certain, they haven't given up. You can expect them to attempt to derail President Trump's efforts attempt to restore America at every turn.

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Pizzagate and Child Sacrifice: An Update



When I started writing about Pizzagate and especially the "killing room," people started saying "it's pedophilia, it's pedophilia." I wrote a piece about the cult of youth that pervades circles of powerful people. We live in a cult of youth in America today...everything is about living longer, looking younger. I fear that's what Pizzagate is going to turn out to be.
I wrote something about the Countess Elizabeth Bathory killing young girls and drinking their blood to keep her youthful appearance. That's what I believe is going on in the killing room at Ping Pong Pizza. The cannibals in New Guinea, eat the flesh of fallen adversaries to imbibe their warrior spirit.

It's possible that Hillary Clinton's erratic behavior could be linked to Kuru, a disease contracted through the consumption of human flesh. In the Pizzagate investigations, allegations of Satanic rituals, particularly where John Podesta and his brother, Tony are concerned. Also the art work displayed at Ping Pong Pizza is anything but wholesome. For something to be Satanic, does not necessarily require people in hooded robes burning black candles and chanting esoteric incantations. If someone, or anyone, is killing children and eating them, or drinking their blood...it's Satanic. God does not condone such behavior. Behavior is either good or bad. If it is good, it's of God. If bad, it's from Satan...It IS that simple.

Then there is the Abramovic woman and her "spirit cleansing": All of this New Age garbage is Satanic, despite it's pretenses of spiritual healing, or noble intentions. Remember, the Left is masterful at manipulating language to make heinous acts appear benign. If you think back to the movie, The Exorcist...the girl was just playing with a ouija board and summoned a demon. Her intent wasn't evil...it just happened. No such excuse can be made for those involved in Pizzagate. They are deliberately doing evil with the intention of extending their own longevity. Consuming the flesh or blood of children will, in their warped reality, keep them younger longer.
If this is correct, and it appears to be to me, it provides a framework to view what's happening in a somewhat different light. It's at least worth considering. Thank you!

Monday, December 5, 2016

The Federal Reserve: A Bankster's Wet Dream




"Who controls the issuance of money, controls the government." Nathan Meyer Rothschild
I'm writing this for a friend who asked about how the Fed works and why they've been allowed to get away with what they have. So, I thought I'd kill two birds with one stone.
For anyone unaware, the Federal Reserve (Fed) is not a part of the government, it is a private central bank. Central banks have been dominating banking in Europe for centuries but when Alexander Hamilton attempted to introduce the concept here it was met with resistance- primarily from Thomas Jefferson. Hamilton was able to found the First national Bank of the United States which lasted until Jefferson did away with it a while later.
Similarly, the Second National Bank was defeated by Andrew Jackson but that was , unfortunately, not the end of central banking. Abraham Lincoln, despite his protestations to the contrary, was in favor of a central bank and theories that his opposition was what caused his assassination are false. Lincoln was assassinated because he murdered 675,000 of his countrymen in the name of freedom. The reason that Jefferson and Jackson were opposed a central bank was because they opposed fractional reserve banking.
Jumping ahead to 1910, a group of banksters including Sen. Nelson Aldrich met incognito at J.P. Morgan's estate on Jekyll Island to hatch a plan to implement a central bank in America, once and for all. Taking advantage of an economic downturn Sen. Aldrich put before Congress a plan for a central bank which would have been called The Aldrich Act. Knowing him to be a shill for the Morgan/ Warburg banking cartel, Congress defeated it soundly. To show how much attention Congress pays to prospective legislation, the very same bill was renamed The Federal Reserve Act and it passed by a landslide.
What is wrong with central banking? Central banking is based on fractional reserve banking. Fractional reserve banking requires only a fraction of deposits be held in reserve, when lending money. In other words, if the bank is only required to have 10% on hand, it can lend out $9.00 on every $10.00 it takes in. If there is a run on the bank, the depositors lose their money because the banks have lent it out. In 1929 when there was a bank run, the banks tried to call in loans to meet the depositors demands, but the borrowers didn't have it and the banking system collapsed. (This is an oversimplification, but fundamentally what happened...there was speculation on Wall St involving selling stock on credit, etc.)
Another problem is that after the Coinage Act of 1792, with the exception of the Civil War, the country has been on the Gold Standard. This was/is anathema to the banksters. To fully control the country and the economy, they needed to get us off the gold standard. This way they could issue fiat currency (money backed by faith alone, instead of gold). Naturally, with fiat currency, the Fed can control the value because it isn't tied to anything stable. According to the Coinage Act, the issuance of currency is the responsibility of Congress. After the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, it became the responsibility of the Fed...Congress voluntarily gave up it's most critical role in the American economy. After we got off the gold standard, the Fed (a private bank) had a monopoly on monetary policy and the national economy.
Originally, the dollar was to be worth 1/20 oz. of gold. That changed in the 1930's (1933 I believe) to 1/35 oz. In other words, an ounce of gold was worth $35.00. By 1973 the Fed had messed around with interest rates and printing money (inflation) and gold was around $125.00. European banks began turning in their American currency for gold and for every ounce that went out...we lost $90.00. So, President Nixon took us off the gold standard- temporarily! This was the break the Fed was looking for. By 1976, gold was at $350.00 oz.
This is important to understand. Prices are tied to supply and demand. For anyone not aware: when supply is up...demand goes down and so does prices. Conversely, when supply goes down...demand goes up and so does price. The supply of gold remained fairly stable (because Nixon stopped it from being depleted). Why did the price go up? Inflation...it was done artificially by increasing the money supply (the amount of paper money in circulation). What this means in the real world is, the more money in circulation, the less it's worth...the less actual buying power it has. That's basically why things cost so much more now than they used to. Here's something to think about: when gold was $350.00 oz. the supply was fairly unchanged so, the buying power of the dollar (remember 1/35 oz or $35.00 oz) is $.10 or 10 cents. Right now gold is around $1300 (last time I checked) so in terms of buying power, it's worth about 2 cents (actually 1.8). For every dollar you spend, you receive 1.8 cents worth of merchandise.
About 4 or 5 decades ago a single income family was able to afford a home, a car, some savings and probably a college fund for the kids. We're not talking about some wealthy CEO, just a guy working at a factory, or a mid-level office job. Now both have to work just to make ends meet. The reason for our extensive national debt is because of the Fed not in spite of it. By releasing so much currency into circulation it has become watered down to the point of being virtually worthless. We all have the Fed and the banksters they represent to thank for the country's financial problems. What is truly criminal...they did it on purpose!

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Racism For Fun & Profit: How Politics Brought it Back



This is the second part of How Music Killed Racism. Previously I wrote about how music helped erase racial barriers and gave America's young people common ground on which we could come together. By the late 1960's and early 70's race relations had improved greatly...I admit that they weren't perfect, but they never will be. There are people on both sides of the racial divide that will harbor old animosities- especially when they have something to gain.

The Civil Rights Movement was also instrumental in bridging the racial gap. Whites that weren't aware of issues that faced blacks were moved by the speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King who called for integration and brotherhood. Lamentably, he was murdered in 1968 and the movement was usurped by radicals. Also, around this time the government became involved in attempting to legislate racial harmony. I remember when the geniuses in the Massachusetts Legislature came up with forced busing. Although their intentions may have been good, the results were disastrous- they set racial progress back decades.


People such as Malcolm X, Jesse Jackson as well as groups like the Black Panthers did more to exacerbate the problem than to fix it. I have contended for years that Jackson was responsible for Dr. King's death in a coup to take over the Civil Rights Movement. Jackson's step-brother was in the leadership of one of Chicago's violent gangs and I believe that he was the one that murdered Dr King. When something like that happens, I look for who had the most to gain. James Earl Ray, a racist to be sure, had nothing to gain from MLK's death. On the other hand, Jackson rose to national prominence as a result. That's just my opinion, for what it's worth.


Another beneficiary of the racism industry was the Rev. Al Sharpton. Sharpton was an obscure figure before the Civil Rights Movement became radicalized and upon Dr King's death, like any good pimp, saw an opportunity for fame and fortune. What catapulted Sharpton into national headlines was the infamous Tawana Brawley case. For anyone too young to remember, Tawana Brawley was a young black woman (a teenager, in fact) who stayed out all night and to avoid punishment, she concocted a story about getting kidnapped and sexually assaulted by four white men (one a police officer who committed suicide not long after and a local prosecutor). It was completely false, but Rev Al saw an opportunity to get on TV and he ran with it. He organized protests and appeared on TV constantly. The fact that it was all a lie didn't matter at all. The girl had written KKK and Nigger on herself and the black community was understandably outraged. This, unfortunately, has become emblematic of how an entire race of very good and decent people are being exploited for personal gain.

I went to college in the early 90's. I was in my mid-forties with a wife and four kids trying to provide them with a better life. I witnessed professors (mostly white) attempting to radicalize black students. The university I attended was in Michigan and many of the black students were the children of executives from large corporations in Detroit. They dressed nicely and drove new cars and talked incessantly about "white privilege," parroting what the prof's said. There was something ironic and  yet disingenuous about listening to this drivel from young people who, had they been told the truth, could have been friends. But, there isn't much to be gained from the truth.

Currently, race relations has become a million dollar industry. The reasonable integrationist policies of MLK have given way to the rantings of groups like Black Lives Matter. I've written before that they have done more damage to racial harmony than the KKK. They and their ilk are supported by the president whose claim to fame was being black. Before becoming president he was an unheard of  politician and community organizer from Chicago. If America is as racist as the race-baiters claim, how did he become president. There is a vicious circle in politics: power gets money and money gets more power. That's what the race game is all about now- money and power.

All of the gains in race relations from the 50's to the present would seem to be in jeopardy, if one were to listen to the radicals. Yet somehow despite them, we still are able to get along. I live in "the racist South"where people of every color seem to have been able to overcome the rantings and established amicable relationships on our own. I don't know any racists, but I know a lot of people of both colors who are very concerned with how those in charge are exploiting us. Divide and conquer. If they can keep us fighting, we won't question their motives, at least that's what they think. I can't speak for anyone else, but I intend to keep my friends of every color, race and creed close and the race pimps as far away as possible.