Mueller Is Doing A Disservice to America

For roughly two years Robert Mueller has run an investigation supposedly to seek out proof of "collusion", but only when it involves Republicans. He seems to have no interest in investigating the collusion that we already know occurred with Democrats and Russians. But that is not the point of this post.

During these last two years the anti-Trump media and progressives have been feeding Americans with a vast amount of propaganda and even outright lies about what the investigation is turning up, basing their rants not on facts, but on what they WANT to believe. As an example, take the court filings on the Cohen case. Although there was NOTHING in those filings to say that Trump had committed any wrongdoing, the media immediately made bold (and untrue) assertions that it "proves Trump is guilty of two felonies". The court filings made no such connection. But that did not stop the dishonest media from telling millions of Americans that it is a fact that Trump broke the law.

And this is where Mueller is harming America - whenever the media reports things that are NOT factual and true, Mueller has an OBLIGATION to set the record straight. Yet, he stays mum, because he, too, is anti-Trump and he is purposely creating the toxic environment that breeds false facts and innuendo.

While it is true that Mueller should not be discussing the findings of the investigation, he does have a responsibility to let the public know what is NOT factual or true. By keeping his mouth shut, Mueller is actually fanning the flames of hate, division and promoting fake news.

By NOT telling us what is NOT true, he is allowing - even encouraging - the fake assertions being made by anti-Trump media. He is personally responsible for allowing the media to poison America's collective mind with false information and unfounded assertions.

Mr Mueller, either stand against fake news, or end your bogus investigation. After all, a Special Counsel is supposed to only investigate crimes, and your "investigation" was initiated to investigate something that is not even a crime (collusion), so your investigation is bogus from the start. If you were really an unbiased arbiter of truth, you would stop this BS that is doing so much harm to America. If nothing else, at least speak up when the press lies to America, and set the record straight. Otherwise, you are no different from any of the other corrupt people already ousted from the FBI and DOJ.

The Sickness In The Media

ABC has put out a list of Christmas songs that should be banned. Among them, my favorite - "All I Want For Christmas Is You".  They say it shows women as placing all their worth on a man.

There are MANY things wrong with their assessment of that and other songs.

1) The song never mentions her wanting a MAN. I would bet the low I.Q. crowd that is waging war on men at ABC and elsewhere would have no problem with the song if the woman was wanting another woman for Christmas. The media and liberal elites are waging war  on men (as well as on Christmas) and we all know it.

2) It souonds to me like the singer is simply trying to point out that  all she wants is her mate, and all those other commercial goodies mean nothing in comparison. And wanting your mate above all else is actually what we would call - let's see, what is the word - oh, yes - NORMAL! But not in the sick minds of politically correct idiots like those in most of todays media.

2) Who are they to tell ANYONE what they should or should not want? They  would be the first to scream if we tried to tell them what THEY should or should not want.

3) Since when did it become wrong for a man to want a woman, or a woman to want a man? I believe that is what life is all about in the real world - according to science (and the Bible) we are here to procreate. Is the left suddenly opposed to science? (We know they are opposed to the Bible except when it suits them)

4) And when was ABC or anyone else made arbiter of what is right or wrong? And why do they mistakenly believe they have any right to ban ANYTHING? Maybe we should ban those who ban.

Why am I even bothering to post about this? Because I, a man, only want ONE thing for Christmas - my loving, beautiful wife! My wife has been my best friend, my rock, my gyroscope these last 29 years. And she is all I want. And that is a good thing, not a bad thing.

To those at ABC and elsewhere who cannot understand that, I truly pity them.

We should all want that which makes us happy. My wife and I make each other happy. Apparently what makes the politically correct crowd happy is to ruin traditions, wage war on men and on Christmas, and to make miserable anyone who disagrees with them. At the time of year we should most want love, peace and happiness, ABC and other liberals are doing their level best to prevent it. That is so sad - and sick!

The Truth About Slavery in America

Most people - white and black alike - think they know all about slavery in early America. But do they?

Slavery existed in America for 250+ years. For the first 140 years, the vast majority of slaves in America were WHITE. These consisted of:

 * The Redemptioners, Germans whose family members were frequently sold to different masters

* Indentured Servants, promised a better life in the New World - which never came to pass

* Poor people of London, Bristol and Liverpool (Men, Women, Children) kidnapped and sent to the colonies under the  Royal policy of "POOR RELIEF". These were the poor and vagrants (Men, Women, Children) of the United Kingdom

* Loose or lewd women (prostitutes) that wealthy, moralist Europeans & the UK wanted gone

* Convicts and criminals. Maryland and Virginia were convicts’ states

* War prisoners, mostly Irish & Scottish Irish and Scottish ( Monmouth Rebels , Covenanters etc). This was known as the “Irish slave trade” that history books seem to overlook

It was not until there was a shortage of white slaves to meet demand that the black slave trade began, and blacks were kidnapped in large numbers from Africa.

So, the narrative from liberals, the media and blacks that only blacks suffered slavery is one of the many "great lies" being fed to us in order to fuel an agenda.

Gee, I wonder - will liberals demand that whites get reparations, too? Somehow, I doubt that.  It would not fit their dishonest narrative.

The Dr. Ford "Timeline"

Dr. Christine Ford has accused Brett Kavanaugh of groping her at a party 36 years ago. She says she wants to testify before Congress. But considering the timeline of events, I am not sure that would be a good idea - and I am unconvinced that she will ever testify.

At the time of the supposed incident, Ms Ford never told anyone. She never filed a criminal complaint. She cannot say where it happened, or when, or how she got home.

Fast forward to 1996, Dr Ford's parents were being foreclosed upon. When the foreclosure entered the court, the judge found in favor of the foreclosing institution and Dr Ford's parents lost their home. That judge was Brett Kavanaugh's mother.

In 2012 or thereabouts Dr Ford apparently sought therapy. It is reported that she had "repressed memories" of the supposed party where she was groped. From what is being reported, she does not appear to have mentioned the name of the groper.

Repressed memories have been shown to be false memories more often than not, as in the case of the person who "remembered" being decapitated, or of alien abductions. But let's assume there was a party and she was groped.

Dr. Ford now sends a letter to Democrats in Congress, stating, apparently, that the "groper" was Brett Kavanaugh. As far as anyone can determine for certain, this may be the first time she associated Kavanaugh with the groping. This seems to be a rather convenient development, considering both Dr Ford and her first attorney (and now her new attorney) are all liberals. In fact, her new attorney, Katz, was filmed last year at a "resistance rally" at which she stated they would fight Republicans to the end.

Dr Ford then puts forth that there was a witness - a boy named Judge who pulled Kavanaugh off her. But Mr Judge says he has no recollection of any such thing. Now Dr Ford says there was another witness - a girl named Keyser. But Ms Keyser also states that she was not present at any such party, and does not recall any such thing happening.

Now, Dr Ford's "resistance attorney" keeps moving the goal post for a senate hearing to iron this out. And she keeps insisting on requirements that are designed to give Kavanaugh no chance to defend himself - a "kangaroo court".

While I cannot prove anything (any more than Dr Ford can), I suspect that this entire story is strictly political. I don't doubt she was groped at a teen party - most girls who go to teen "mixers" do get groped. But I seriously doubt it was by Brett Kavanaugh. I suspect she, being a far left liberal, along with her attorney (a resistance queen) attached Mr Kavanaugh to the story for the sole purpose of destroying any chance of him becoming a Justice on the Supreme Court. And they are dragging this out for the sole purpose of harming Republicans in the mid-terms, with the help of the far left liberal media who side with Dr Ford and automatically believe Kavanaugh to be guilty because that is what they want to believe. And even though Republicans have been bending over backward to accommodate Ms Ford, the media and Democrat politicians, like Gillibrand and Blumenthal, accuse Republicans of "bullying" Dr Ford, simply because they are attempting to help her testify as she said she wanted to do.

I also find it strange that this accusation never cane up when he was appointed to the 2nd highest court 12 years ago, and it never came up in six thorough FBI investigations into  his background.

I also believe that Dr Ford and her attorney are only dragging this out in order to effect maximum damage in the media. It would not surprise me at all if Dr Ford has no intention of testifying at all; that this is just a hit-and-run ambush by the "resistance" movement.

Just my opinion. But right now it's the only one that makes sense, given what few fact we have.

Beware HughesNet "High-Speed" Internet

Anyone looking for a high-speed internet provider would do well to steer very clear of HughesNet.

While it is true that no internet provider is without its shortcomings, it almost seems that HughesNet goes out of its way deceive and to screw customers over.

In June we planned to move from Maine to Virginia, so we researched internet providers in the area we were moving to. The HughesNet ad sounded very promising - high speed internet with downloads up to 25Mbps (actually, that is not "high speed" at all). When we inquired of the rep on the phone about whether it was unlimited, we were told "Absolutely". After all, someone who uses multiple units and works on the internet can easily download a terabyte in a  month.We told the rep we run a business online and needed unlimited access at high speed. Again he told us that is what we would get. And it would only cost about $55/month. A third time we asked, and were assured that we would get high-speed unlimited internet.

We got none of that.

We did, however, get lied to. A lot.

After a frustrating 6 weeks of speeds so slow we could not even START running a Youtube video, and even email took minutes to load, we contacted HughesNet to find out what was going on.  And now that we had signed a contract they started telling us the truth. For example, instead of no data caps, it was capped at a meager 10G, and they informed us that we used that up within days. And guess what? Once you exceed 10g, your speed is cut to 1-3Mbps instead of 25. No wonder nothing worked - 1-3Mbps is totally useless, and we would be stuck with that about 25 days out of every month!

"Oh", they said, "you can always UPGRADE to more data", for a lot more money. But even then it was only a piddling 50G.

Where we came from in Maine, for $48/month we got a steady 56Mbps download speed and no data caps. And here was HughesNet charging us $65/month for a useless 1-3Mbps, and a 10G cap
And even though we were very direct with the first rep that we REQUIRED paper billing, because we had been hacked before when we paid bills online, and the rep told us that was standard, HughesNet did not honor that - after two months we have yet to see a bill, but they keep sending emails that we can pay online.

So, here is my opinion on HughesNet - I believe they are a rip-off, and use deceptive and unethical advertising and their reps are dishonest - at least the one we spoke with. Their "service" is a  sham, and is no way considred "high speed" by today's standards.

I realize that Time Warner, Comcast and other providers anger many of their customers, but they would have to stoop a lot lower in order to be as low as HughesNet.

So, if you do decide to give HughesNet a whirl, don't say you were not warned.

Twitter Declares War on Conservatives

I am a conservative. Not far-right - just conservative. Yesterday I received the following email from Twitter, regarding my account

"Your account has been locked for violating the Twitter Rules.
Specifically for:
Violating our rules against hateful conduct.
You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease."

Here is the tweet that they say threatens, oir harrasses based on race, ethnicity etc....

Rusty K
@chelseahandler calls Sarah Huckabee Sanders a "trollop" for wearing make-up. Hey, Handler, if make-up makes one a trollop, then you lead the pack. Look in a mirror, bimbo

(for the record, the definition of "bimbo" is :

bim·bo

[ˈbimbō]

NOUN

informal

1. an attractive but unintelligent or frivolous young woman.

In this case, it fits - although I, personally do not find her to be attractive.

My question, then: Is there ANY threat of ANY kind?

The answer to all is a resounding "NO". So, what is REALLY going on here?


Twice I have called out Chelsea Handler for her malicious slandering of Sarah Huckabee Sanders (the first time was in Dec 2017) and BOTH TIMES my account was immediately blocked for "threatening", when neither threatened anyone. It would seem someone at Twitter has a crush on Handler, and/or a severe hatred of conservatives.

In the news this week it has been reported that the anti-American radicals at Twitter have been systematically locking and/or deleting the accounts of CONSERVATIVES. If you doubt this, check it out at https://www.bing.com/search?q=twitter%27s+war+on+conservatives&pc=MOZI&form=MOZTSB. At one point they even deleted the President's account. And Twitter has been using dubious (to say the least) excuses for their purge of conservative thought, much the same as Berkley U. has been doing the same. Twitter has declared war on conservatives and conservative thought.

From Conservative HQ website:

On January 3rd 2018 at a San Francisco restaurant, Abhinov Vadrevu, a former Twitter Software Engineer explained to Project Veritas a strategy, called “shadow banning,” that to his knowledge, Twitter has employed:

“One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content. So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it.”

 
Twitter is in the process of automating censorship and banning, Twitter Software Engineer Steven Pierre told Project Veritas on December 8th of 2017:

“Every single conversation is going to be rated by a machine and the machine is going to say whether or not it’s a positive thing or a negative thing. And whether it’s positive or negative doesn’t (inaudible), it’s more like if somebody’s being aggressive or not. Right? Somebody’s just cursing at somebody, whatever, whatever. They may have a point, but it will just vanish… It’s not going to ban the mindset, it’s going to ban, like, a way of talking.”

 
Olinda Hassan, a Policy Manager for Twitter’s Trust and Safety team explained to Project Veritas on December 15th, 2017 at a Twitter holiday party that the development of a system of “down ranking” “shitty people” is in the works:

“Yeah. That’s something we’re working on. It’s something we’re working on. We’re trying to get the shitty people to not show up. It’s a product thing we’re working on right now.”

 
Former Twitter Engineer Conrado Miranda confirmed to Project Veritas on December 1st, 2017 that tools are already in place to censor pro-Trump or conservative content on the platform. When asked whether or not these capabilities exist, Miranda says, “that’s a thing.”

Everyone knows that Twitter is populated primarily by what is known as "trolls" - radical, hateful far-left nuts who use Twitter to attack conservatives on every minute issue, right down to what shoes Melania wore. And Twitter has yet to lock any of them out. But when a far-left radical like Chelsea Handler publicly calls a conservative woman like Sarah Sanders a "trollop" (which is not only hateful, but slanderous), Twitter turns a blind eye, but locks the account of those who call her out for her disgusting rhetoric.

It's a fairly well-known fact that Twitter is extremely damaging to society as a whole, as it provides a platform for the real haters and cancers to spread their vile agenda, and far too many ignorant people take it all in as if it were God's own words. And it is sick that so many in the mainstream media actually get their news from these anonymous Twitter trolls that live in mommy's basement.

Perhaps the time has come for We, the People, to declare war on Twitter and stop using it, and to stop reading it.


/

   

Will Liberals Gain Permanent Control of America?

The answer could very well be "YES". Under the current immigration system, which is what the liberal Democrats are fighting to preserve, Democrats will gain permanent control over this country within two decades.

And it has little to do with DACA. The Democrats do not care at all about DACA or the Dreamers. To liberal Democrats, the "Dreamers" are nothing more than a vessel for bringing in more immigrants through chain migration.

What Americans need to understand is that liberal Democrats are planning long term, for total and complete control, forever. They do not want to have to worry about winning elections. They know each Dreamer can easily bring in as many as 20 "relatives" through chain migration under the current system. And while it is true those immigrants are not allowed to vote, each of  them will very likely have at least three children - and every one will be an American citizen, with the right to vote in 18 years.

Think about that - if 1,000,000 Dreamers bring in just 3,000,000 relatives, in just two decades, allowing chain migration to continue  can easily result in 10 million or more new Democrat voters. In a nation where the White House, senate and house is usually determined by just a few million votes, that almost guarantees the Democrats will gain control of everything - White House, Senate and House - and keep it. They keep it because THOSE 10 million "children" will father another 30,000,000...

Let's be clear - the Democrats do not care one whit about Dreamers except for their ability to bring in more immigrants through the chain migration. THAT is what Democrats want to preserve, and the lack of a wall would insure even more illegals get in to have "child citizens". If Trump builds a wall and ends chain migration, the Democrats will not have the huge, insurmountable edge they are trying to gain in the long term.

And that is exactly why we need both a wall, and an end to chain migration. It is essential if America is to continue as a democracy.