Remember that I told you that I thought that Trump only said he was most concerned about Biden in 2020 to sucker punch Biden?
Trump just said that Biden is only a threat to himself in 2020. He knew that the left would eat Biden alive to get rid of him because the lefties also know that Biden can't beat Trump.
Don't you just love watching the lefties eat their own?
And it isn't just Biden; they are doing their best to devour each other as quickly as possible.
Remember that I told you that the lefties make me think of a school of cannibalistic piranha eating their way to the top of the school? Do you understand why now?
They are so power mad and greedy that they will destroy anyone and anything to get what they want because the only person or thing any of them care about is themselves and their bank accounts.
You are watching Satan's people do what they do best; destroy everything and everyone, including each other just like I told you they would.
Al Capone Sharpton
Remember that I told you that in a dream, God showed me that, when Obama leads an army of lefties and Muslims to invade Israel, the lefties will be second class citizens and subservient to the black Muslims?
I got this from American Thinker By Rick Moran:
"Democrats running for president in 2020 made the pilgrimage to New York city to attend Al Sharpton's National Action Network convention. Sharpton swears that the candidates don't have to "kiss my ring" because he doesn't wear one.
Sharpton is right. He's actually more like a mob boss, with Democrats standing in line to pay tribute, as any good capo would."
You have to understand that both Al Capone Sharpton and Jesse James Jackson are best friends and underlings to Black Muslim leader, Louis Farrakhan. They are both poser Christians and closet Muslims.
The lefties are already subservient to the black Muslims. Gee, what a coincidence.
Listen, when Obama and his black Muslims pals stage their coup, you are going to find out who all of the closet Muslims are because they will come out of hiding like cockroaches stampeding for cover. None of them will stay in hiding and ALL of your eyes will be opened.
Remember that I have been telling you that Britain will have less to lose and more to gain by leaving the EU than the EU will and May is too stupid and/or corrupt to see it?
I got this from American Thinker By Chriss Street:
"With the fall of the Soviet Union, Europe was intoxicated with a triumphal unification wave demanding a single market with the 'four freedoms' for movement of goods, services, people, and money. The 1993 'Maastricht Treaty' on the European Union began with 12 Western European states, including the U.K.
But the British people expressed deep reservations about the pillar system extending E.U. jurisdiction over members regarding foreign policy, military, criminal justice, and judicial cooperation. Misgivings over treaty amendments that grew E.U. membership to 28 states with 343 million residents caused the U.K. not to join the 'euro' common currency.
The British were initially told they would have a modest E.U. 'net contribution' payment each year. But the U.K. by 2017 was paying an $18-billion E.U. budget contribution and receiving only $5.5 billion of E.U. spending, for a net contribution of about $12.5 billion.
Despite strong assurances that the four freedoms would provide fair and balanced trade among E.U. members, 2017 U.K. exports to the E.U. were $359 billion, and U.K. imports from the E.U. were $446 billion, for a trade deficit of $89 billion or 3.3 percent of U.K. GDP."
So, the UK will increase their economy by almost $100 billion per year and the EU will lose almost $100 billion per year, if the UK Brexits with no deal and May can't figure that out? What, did she flunk grade school math or is she on the take?
The UK should be in the driver's seat with this Brexit deal but May is permitting the corrupt EU leaders to tell her what she can and cannot do, you know, like an idiot or traitor.
Hey, just leave with no deal and watch the EU cave in.
I told you that Britain and Germany were propping up the EU and, without Britain, the EU will fold.
Gee, you think that maybe that is why Germany is making nice with Russia by increasing their business with Russia?
Remember that I told you that Sucksberg censoring conservatives, causing conservatives to leave FB, which is causing FB to lose money, would bite Sucksberg in the butt because FB investors would get upset at him and probably threaten to fire him?
Why is Sucksberg saying that the government should "control political speech on FB"?
Because, with Sucksberg censoring conservatives, the conservatives are getting mad at Sucksberg, leaving FB, and FB is losing money, which has put Sucksberg in the hot seat with investors. But, if it is the government censoring conservative speech, then the people will get mad at the government and not Sucksberg and not leave FB so Sucksberg won't lose FB and its investors' money.
Gee, you don't think the investors threatened to fire the spoiled rotten overgrown child, do you?
Upper Class Trash
Remember that I have been telling you that the upper class trash only talk the talk about caring about you?
This video points out part of that.
They really don't care about you and it is all talk to get you to vote for them with them either not caring or knowing that their promises sound great to you but are bad for you.
Remember that I have been telling you that, following this revolutionary war, you have to purge the lefty judges, DAs, and law enforcement to prevent this from happening again?
Mark sent me the following, which makes a great example of what I have been telling you:
The First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The underlined portion, 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,' is the Establishment Clause.
The italicized portion, 'or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' is the Free Exercise Clause.
The greyed out portion is not of interest in this discussion.
In most cases, the Establishment Clause effectively nullifies the Free Exercise Clause. It prohibits our free exercise of Christianity in government owned facilities and institutions, both at the state level and at the federal level. This often carries over into private institutions as well brought on by the fear that allowing the free exercise of Christianity in those places may promote discord and/or lawsuits. Because of this, more and more citizens have bought into the notion that the Separation of Church and State actually prohibits Christian expression in public.
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940).
Prior to this decision, the Bill of Rights were limits only on the federal government; states were bound only by those rights granted to its citizens by their own state constitutions.
This decision held that the First Amendment's federal protection of religious free exercise applied to the States as well as to the Federal Government. This case set up the ability of the courts to apply all federal laws to the states, effectively eliminating the Tenth Amendment.
Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947).
This decision made the 'Separation of Church and State' the law of the land.
Justice Hugo Black wrote the following opinion about the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment:
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)
The Supreme Court that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools. The ruling said that reciting prayer in public schools violated the Establishment Clause.
Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963).
This was originally Madalyn Murray O'Hair's case against school prayer. The Supreme Court ruled that both Bible reading and the Lord's Prayer violated the Establishment Clause. It affirmed that the study of Religion and of the Bible in public schools was acceptable only as long as it was 'presented objectively as part of a secular program of education.' This made secularism the official religion of the land.
Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987)
The Court considered a Louisiana law requiring that where evolutionary science was taught in public schools, creation science must also be taught. The Court ruled that this law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion.
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980)
The State of Kentucky had a statute that required the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments on the wall of each public classroom in the state. Private funding was used to purchase the copies. The Supreme Court Ruled that the Kentucky statute was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacked a nonreligious, legislative purpose.
Glassroth v. Moore, CV-01-T-1268-N, and its companion case Maddox and Howard v. Moore, CV-01-T-1269-N, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002)
This is the case where the U.S. District Court in Montgomery, AL, ruled that the Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama Supreme Court building was unconstitutional. Moore appealed the ruling to the The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta, which affirmed the trial judge's decision. The US Supreme Court refused to hear the case and the Monument was removed and Alabama Supreme Court Justice Moore was dismissed from office for his opposition to the removal of the monument.
Loving v. Virginia (1967)
This case makes the list because it sits as the goalpost for the same sex marriage movement. It struck down all state laws banning interracial marriage as violations of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This eventually led to removing laws against same sex marriage.
Lee v. Weisman (1992)
The court ruled that schools may not sponsor clerics to conduct even non-denominational prayer.
Bob Jones University v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983)
The upshot of the ruling is that it allows tax exempt status to be revoked form a religious institution if the institution opposes a 'Compelling Government Public Policy.' In other words a religious institution may not speaker out against the government and remain tax exempt.
And of course both Roe V. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) made abortion the law of the land.
There is an exhaustive list of cases opposing religious practices at Wikipedia. Not all of them apply to the removal pof Christianity, but many do. The list is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_involving_the_First_Amendment
Thanks, Mark, for the intel.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of what Satan's lefties have spent several centuries doing. They have been unconstitutionally using the courts to rewrite the law and the US Constitution a little bit at a time so people would not realize they were losing their rights.
You see, if the legal system doesn't enforce the law or Constitution, then the law or Constitution is ineffective and changed. If the DOJ and FBI don't enforce the US Constitution, then the US Constitution becomes ineffective and the lefties can "do as they will", you know, live by Satan's law.
Satan's lefties know this so they have been infiltrating and taking over our legal system for well over 100 years. You see, Satan used the pagan British government to try to prevent God from setting up a Christian nation in the US and, when that failed, Satan didn't hesitate, he stepped right in and started trying to infiltrate our government to destroy it from within, which is what he has finally succeeded at doing. A big part of that was done by infiltrating his evil pagans into our legal system because, if the legal system doesn't enforce the laws, then there is no law, only do as you will.
The lefties have been unconstitutionally using the courts to write law because the US Constitution clearly states that the only branch that can write law is the legislature. I learned how the left has corrupted our government when I studied law. They changed it so that the courts and the executive branch can write law and Trump is using their own corrupted system against them.
You also have to understand that, to take over a nation, you don't have to replace everyone in the government of that nation, just the people at the top giving the orders and enough pagans down through the system to make sure those orders are obeyed. 80% to 90% of the government can be good people as long as the top 10% to 20% are evil people and the government will do evil and it can't just be the head of state, like Clinton or Obama, he has to have a team of people supporting and enforcing his wickedness.
This is why the left is making such a big stink about Trump infiltrating conservatives back into the legal system. Trump is quickly undoing what the left has clearly spent more than a century screwing up.
To get our nation back, you MUST purge all of the wicked people within the government in all three branches or this will just quickly happen again, which means you can't just get rid of the bad politicians but also the bad judges and DAs.
Think I am wrong?
I got this from American Thinker By Derrick Wilburn:
"For years, many have bemoaned the slide of America's higher education system down the slippery slope of moral relativism and the embracing of virtually all facets of progressive dogma while rejecting most elements of conservatism. The mere invitation of a conservative commentator to speak on college campuses is now reason enough for rioting and mass student protests. Bozo the Clown has a better chance of giving a commencement address at an Ivy League school than does Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, or their conservative contemporaries. Nowhere is this truth more prevalent than at our most prestigious law schools, and the products of those schools are now reflecting that decades-long liberal drift.
Individuals from this new class of legal eagles have advanced in all branches of government and at all levels -- local, state, and federal. They have attended notable law schools, they are African-American, and they are hellbent on ushering in an era of seeking what today's liberal law schools are pouring into their students by the bucket full -- not 'justice' but 'social justice.'"
Our modern lefty judges and attorneys are a huge part of the problem. The politicians have been using the lefty judges to unconstitutionally change law and the Constitution in ways that would get the politicians voted out of office. These judges and attorneys have proved that they will not prosecute the upper class trash and their puppets for their crimes, you know, like Jussie Smollett, the Clintons, and others. Get the picture yet?
Whoever controls the enforcement of the law, controls the law and everyone under that law. If they will not enforce the law, then the law might as well not exist and has no meaning. Therefore, to get your nation back, you MUST purge the lefties out of law enforcement.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.