KORAN KISSING POPE FRANCIS' PUT DOWN, BREAK DOWN, TAKE DOWN OF TRADITIONAL CHRISTIANITY AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY~INSERTS ISLAM INSTEAD

"ISLAM WILL BE USED AS THE OPERATING SYSTEM TO OPPRESS THE WEST"

Steve Quayle: The Pope's Secret Alliance With Islam Is Out

Published on Aug 11, 2016

Guest Steve Quayle talks with Alex Jones about the attempt by the global elite to re-shape the world and turn it into 3rd World Status.
http://www.stevequayle.com/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/...
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/08/10...

"EVERY CHANCE HE (THE POPE) GETS; HE PUTS DOWN JESUS CHRIST"

OBAMA, KHIZR KHAN, LYNCH & THE CLINTONS: A CIRCUMVENTION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

A CIRCUMVENTION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

Published on Aug 10, 2016

The United States is being handed over to the United Nations. Obama recently announced that he will bypass Congress and seek a United Nations Security Council resolution to outsource the United States nuclear policy to an International Body. The Daily Caller reports "The Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) does not require Congressional approval, but likely binds future U.S. government policy towards Iran."

Obama’s U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch wants to federalize the nation's police with the United Nations backed Strong Cities Network. An infiltration of communities across America with nefarious new world order intentions.

In 1999 Lynch was appointed by Bill Clinton to head the U.S. Attorney's office in New York and In 2002, according to Lynch's bio, she " joined Hogan & Hartson LLP (now Hogan Lovells) as a partner in the firm’s New York office. While in private practice, Ms. Lynch performed extensive pro bonowork for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, established to prosecute those responsible for human rights violations in the 1994 genocide in that country.

Human rights violations where between 500,000 and 1 million Rwandans were killed by their own countrymen. Bill Clinton apologized for standing by silently and doing nothing. The same company, Hogan Lovells, employed Gold Star Father and recent Trump annoyance Khazir Khan. Lynch and Khan come from the Clinton Foundation stable of attorneys tied to Saudi Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood, and a who’s who of foreign dictators.

Be forewarned America. With Hillary in the White House, the Clinton's and any of their lackeys will seek to hijack any all crisis for their own benefit. And with Saudi Arabia reportedly funding 20% of Hillary's campaign. It is vitally important to the aforementioned and other Clinton plants that Sharia law circumvent the U.S. Constitution. And with the recent arrest of a DC Metro officer assisting ISIS....Alarm bells should be ringing as to the scale of the infiltration by a radical jihadist network operating at all levels of our government.

THE REALITY OF TRUMP ENDORSEMENTS

THE REALITY OF TRUMP ENDORSEMENTS
SEE: 
http://www.newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh337.htm;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

By Kelleigh Nelson

August 11, 2016
NewsWithViews.com

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” —Mahatma Gandhi

“Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature... If the NEXT CENTENNIAL does not find us a great nation... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.” —James Garfield, 1876 Speech on the 100th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence

Trump’s Incumbent Endorsements

    

My friend Jim said this,

Yes, many people are unhappy with Trump’s endorsements of Ryan, McCain and Ayotte. However, Trump is ever the pragmatist and is keeping "his eyes on the prize." He has zero interest in winning battles, but losing the war.

I expect he'll do whatever needs to be done in order to become POTUS. Roughly speaking, I think that the “Primary Trump,” the “Presidential Campaign Trump,” and the “POTUS Trump,” will allow us to see three distinct facets of the man. A “one trick pony” he ain’t.

If you’ve read, “Art of the Deal,” you’ll understand exactly what Jim is saying.
My friend, Henry, commented,

Kel, what do you think would have been the reaction if last night the Donald had said the following, “I have been asked by the GOP establishment to endorse Paul Ryan, John McLame and Kelly Ayotte in their primaries for the sake of party unity. Since these people stand in opposition to most of what I and the American people stand for, I will not endorse them but rather endorse their opponents.”

I think the crowd would have gone bonkers, and he would have gained thousands more voters, and let the chips fall where they may. I do not think that his lacking the support of the GOPe traitors or a divided GOP party will harm his chances of being elected. Just my 2 cents. Plus, it would show once again that the Donald is a man of integrity and does not budge in that regard. We would all love it.

I agree with both of my friends, but my take is just a bit different. If all three of these globalist traitors are reelected, how do you suppose Mr. Trump would get them to work with him when he’s elected? They may still give him a hard time, because he is not in their globalist cabal, but you know they’d never help him at all without the endorsement.

Here is the video where Trump endorsed Ryan, McCain, and Ayotte. Skip to 1:12 and listen. Note that he had to read this portion of his speech. He rarely reads anything.

I want them all to be dumped, I hope their challengers win in a landslide, especially Paul Nehlen and Kelli Ward!

Legend Phyllis Schlafly thunders for Ryan’s ouster and says, “Get rid of him!” [Link] This 91-year-old woman attended the RNC Convention, and is all for Donald J. Trump!

As the dapper Roger Stone has said many times, much of the electorate really doesn’t care. We certainly do, but we are political animals; most of our dumbed down fellow citizens are more interested in sports, beer, and the latest music and movies.

We would all like a purist, and someone who did not have to play the political games, but for the sake of expediency and of gaining the prize, Trump takes them all on and then brushes them aside.

Behind the scenes, Trump’s people are working to elect the challengers. In Arizona, the third person spoiler has dropped out, and now the primary is between Kelli Ward and John McCain. So far, McCain cannot seem to get higher than 40% ratings. Go Kelli!

Bottom line, Mr. Trump does have to keep his eyes on the prize, the rest is just a distraction. The war is against Hillary for the White House.

Democrats Endorse Trump

Ohio Democrat and former businessman, Ken Lanci, is backing Trump! He ran unsuccessfully for Mayor of Cleveland, Ohio in 2013. He had a life changing experience that he wrote about in a book entitled,Working for the Good of All.

On 5 August 2016, he was interviewed by Anna Kooiman on Fox Business. The life changing experience he had was a massive cardiac arrest. He said he died, saw the bright white light, saw the love of God and was, “Good to go.” Several hours later he woke up on a respirator and the rest is history. Ken said he didn’t need to come back, he was raised in Cleveland’s projects, had only a high school education, but a great family and a great community, and was helping a lot of local people, and learning to survive and thrive.

Ken Lanci answers a question from Anna regarding his support of Mr. Trump by saying, “Donald Trump doesn’t fully realize yet the plan God has for him.” He then talks about doubting Thomas who needed to see Christ’s hands and side to fully believe he was alive, and then he says, “When Donald Trump puts his hands on that Bible, the Hand of God will be there with him because there’s no man or woman, who can do the job without strong faith and the help of God.”

Muslims Endorse Trump

Now this just absolutely blows my mind. Louis Farrakhan has actually endorsed Trump, and what he says in this interview withAlex Jones, most conservatives would agree with. Yes, I know he’s a Muslim, and I know he called his people to kill white folks.

And we know other things that Farrakhan has said, that are anathema to the freedoms of all Americans. Yet, I would still urge you to watch this video because it’s surprisingly telling and it’s only 12 minutes long.

Civil Rights Leader Endorses Trump

Charles Evers, brother of slain civil rights leader, Medgar Evers, has endorsed Donald Trump for president. Although Charles Evers, 93, also has a storied history in Mississippi’s civil rights movement, he was also the state’s NAACP field secretary and the first black mayor in Mississippi post-Reconstruction. He became a Republican in 1980, and endorsed Ronald Reagan for president that year.

Evers said, “I haven’t seen any proof of Trump being a racist. All of us have some racism in us. Even me.”

This is a righteous and decent man, a man who needs to be lauded for seeking truth.

Losers who Were #NeverTrump

The adamant #NeverTrump lawmaker, Rep. Tim Huelskamp, has lost to pro-Trump challenger Roger Marshall. Though Huelskamp is considered ‘tea party’ he was one of the most vocal anti-trump members of Congress and has close political ties to Senator Cruz. Does this surprise anyone????

From the AP on Huelskamp, “A doctor backed by agriculture and business groups ousted U.S. Rep. Tim Huelskamp Tuesday in a Kansas Republican primary race that focused on the tea party-backed incumbent’s battles with GOP leaders and criticism that he was too cantankerous to be effective.

Great Bend obstetrician Roger Marshall won the tough contest against Huelskamp in the 1st District, which spans western and much of central Kansas.”

Trump’s Campaign Donations

For the month of July, the Trump campaign raised $80 million, nearly $30 million more than in June! That’s an all-time record! However, the love fest between the DNC/MSM said absolutely nothing!

The Jeff Bezos owned Washington Post reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign raised $63 million, and was praising the amount that they raised. Bezos hates Trump, but he apparently can’t add or subtract, because Trump raised much more than Hillary.

Wonder why we never hear a word about it? It’s because the DNC and MSM are in bed together, and you can bet that if Hillary raised this amount, it would be on every station and every talking head would be yammering about it.
Paul Ryan is No Friend of Freedom

Paul Ryan warned large Republican donors this week that his chamber's majority in Congress could be weakened this fall because of Donald Trump's campaign for the presidency. Well, honestly Speaker Ryan, if Paul Nehlen wins, it will be wonderful to kiss your leftist backside goodbye.

Ryan says he’s worried about the Republican majority in Congress! What a joke. He’s so in bed with Obama that he should have a “D” behind his name rather than an “R,” but then there’s so danged many of them in Congress who are just like him, including John McCain.

Ryan issued the forecast at a private meeting with top contributors during the summit held in Colorado Springs by globalists and pro-Agenda 21 brothers, Charles and David Koch, The New York Times reports. These two multi-billionaires plan to spend more than $42 million on this election cycle to keep the GOP majority in the Senate. Their efforts include fully disavowing Trump, even if it could distance his core voters, and developing ads that distinguish GOP candidates from Trump. These Marxist globalists do not want the status quo to change. [Link]

McCain Should Retire

Surely by now we all know about McCain and his extreme leftist leanings, not to mention his wife and daughter’s leftist activities. But that aside, McCain took the side of Sharia promoting Khizr Khan rather than standing by America’s Republican choice for president. By now, everyone knows what Khizr Khan really is all about and what a blatant traitor to his son’s sacrifice this man became. Why? Because he’s promoting someone who will allow Muslims to overtake America, and that someone is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Bill Koch Supports Trump

Another Koch brother is endorsing Trump and raising money for him. Bill Koch, a lesser known Koch brother, who with his brother Frederick, split from Charles and David years ago, is hosting a fundraiser for Mr. Trump. Bill Koch plans to host a private fundraiser at his Cape Cod, Mass. home. Tickets for the event will range from $2,700 a person to $50,000, depending on commitment-level of supporters. [Link]

Supporters and Detractors

Here is a long list of those who endorse Mr. Trump, yet it is not complete.

By now we all know those who are against him, and we should take notice that those very same people do NOT have the interests of the American people in their hearts or minds.

Those who are against Trump, and I’m not just talking about Ryan, Kasich, Cruz and other top dogs, but the likes of Bilderberger Irving Kristol, Ron Paul, Tom Sowell, Brent Bozell, Erick Erickson, Club for Growth’s pro-amnesty David McIntosh, Michael Medved, Cliff Kincaid, controlled-opposition Heritage Foundation’s Ed Meese, Cal Thomas, and other so-called “conservatives.” Excuse me, but man’s best friend doesn’t deserve to be equated with these globalist toadies. My apology to toads.

The word “conservative” loses its meaning when applied to this ilk. These people are no more conservative than Feinstein or Schumer. They are the neo-conservative Trotskyites, or slow Marxists…and by now, many Americans have caught on to them. Remember too that the media is all owned by leftists, so stop listening to their lies.

Donald J. Trump rallies are still huge, while Hillary suffers to even fill the seats. So take heart folks! The man of the people is still the front runner, and we desperately need him to lead our nation. Pray for him and his family.

CATHOLIC SUSAN COLLINS, LIBERAL REPUBLICAN SENATOR OF MAINE, WRITES OP-ED ON WHY SHE CAN'T SUPPORT TRUMP

"Her entire argument against her party’s nominee boils down to her dissatisfaction with comments that Trump has made that are not nice." 

Liberal Republican Senator Writes Op-ed on Why She Can’t Support Trump

BY WARREN MASS

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/23832-sen-susan-collins-pens-op-ed-in-washington-post-on-why-she-can-t-support-trump; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Liberal Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine (shown), who scored just 30 percent onThe New American’s latest Freedom Index, wrote an op-ed piece for the Washington Postexplaining why she will not support for Donald Trump for president.

In her brief article, Collins, who has a record of being anti-Second Amendment, pro-abortion (despite identifying as a Catholic), and in favor of giving an Obama Supreme Court nominee a hearing, did not mention a single issue upon which she bases her opposition to a Trump presidency. Her entire argument against her party’s nominee boils down to her dissatisfaction with comments that Trump has made that are not nice. 

After acknowledging that Trump “was connecting with many Americans who felt that their voices were not being heard in Washington and who were tired of political correctness,” Collins charges: “But rejecting the conventions of political correctness is different from showing complete disregard for common decency.”

Collins continued, "Mr. Trump did not stop with shedding the stilted campaign dialogue that often frustrates voters. Instead, he opted for a constant stream of denigrating comments, including demeaning Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) heroic military service and repeatedly insulting Fox News host Megyn Kelly."

Looking at Trump’s feud with Kelly, which was conducted before Trump secured the nomination and when Kelly was the moderator of several Fox News-hosted presidential debates, there is little doubt that Trump’s choice of names directed at Kelly were at times intemperate, at best. It can also be said, however, that as moderator, Kelly seemed to bait the candidate by asking him questions that were not about any substantive issue but about derogatory remarks she said Trump had made about women. Considering that both Kelly and Trump were likely to benefit from the attention and improved ratings any “feud” between them would generate, it is quite possible that the entire “feud” was as fake as professional wrestling and amounted to little more than a publicity stunt willingly engaged in by both of them.

Trump said his reaction to Kelly after the first debate might have been partly responsible for his success, indicating that he might have regarded the “feud” as simply part of his campaign strategy. Trump talked about this in an interview conducted by Kelly on Fox News in May, during which the two smiled and seemed at peace with each other. Trump told Kelly: “I could have done certain things differently. I could have maybe used different language in a couple of instances, but overall I have to be very happy with the outcome.”

“If I would not have fought back the way I fought back, I don’t think I would have been successful,” Trump said.

Regarding Trump’s statements about McCain, the controversy started over a year ago, during the candidate’s appearance at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, and it was definitely not Trump’s best moment. After moderator Frank Luntz questioned Trump’s criticism of McCain, suggesting it was inappropriate to criticize a “war hero” (McCain spent over five years as a POW in North Vietnam) Trump momentarily took exception to the description. But after the two argued over what constitute a “war hero,” Trump gave ground, saying, "He’s a war hero, because he was captured, okay? I believe, perhaps, he’s a war hero. But right now he said some very bad things about a lot of people."

When asked about the exchange afterwards, Trump said, “Four times, I said [McCain] is a hero but you know … people choose selective pieces.”

In fairness to McCain, it must be said that while becoming a POW is not, in and of itself, an act of heroism, he did exhibit heroic behavior by refusing the North Vietnamese offer to be released before others who had been POWs longer than he was, an offer that was made because his father was a Navy admiral. In refusing their offer, McCain told his captors, “The prisoners must be sent home in the order in which they were captured.”

What is odd, however, is that while Collins has offered Trump’s alleged shabby treatment of McCain as a key reason for withholding her endorsement of the GOP nominee, McCain has apparently not been as upset by the year-old statement as Collins is.

Speaking on CNN’s State of the Union in May, McCain said he would stick to his promise to back the Republican Party’s presidential nominee and urged other GOP party leaders to get on board.

“You have to listen to people who have chosen the nominee of our Republican party,” said the Arizona senator. “I think it would be foolish to ignore them.”

Indicating that any rift between them was not important enough to preclude support of each other’s candidacies, Trump endorsed McCain on August 5, stating, “I hold in the highest esteem Sen. John McCain for his service to our country in uniform and in public office, and I fully support and endorse his re-election.”

Collins offered nothing of substance in her op-ed piece, and even the two people she named as being victims of Trump’s “demeaning” and “insulting” words have largely mended fences with him. 

As for why Collins cannot also let bygones be bygones and patch things up for the sake of a Republican victory in November, one explanation is that she is very liberal for a Republican. As noted above, she scored and anemic 30 percent on The New American’s latest Freedom Index. He record on social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage would not put her out of sync with the party if she changed her affiliation from Republican to Democrat. On October 21, 2003, she joined Senate Democrats, and was one of the three Republican senators to oppose the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act.

On December 18, 2010, she voted in favor of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 (to allow gays, lesbians, and bisexuals to serve openly in the U.S. armed forces) and was the primary Republican sponsor of the repeal effort.

When she won reelection in 2014, Collins became the first Republican senator to be reelected while supporting same-sex marriage.

Collins has demonstrated little regard for the Second Amendment and voted for the Manchin-Toomey amendment to expand background checks for gun purchases.

In June, Collins unveiled what she proposed as a ”bipartisan” gun control bill that would have denied the right to purchase a gun to anyone appearing on the government’s “no fly” list. As was noted in an article in The New American in June, Collins’ bill infringed on rights protected not only by the Second Amendment, but also by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Among those cosponsoring Collins’ bill was Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.)

In her article, Collins did not say whom she was voting for in November, but she might as well endorse the Clinton-Kaine ticket, and change her party affiliation to Democrat while she's at it — and get the charade over with.

Related articles:

Senator Collins’ Anti-gun Bill Likely to Be DOA

Senators Ask For Immediate Vote on Abortion Bill

Some Republicans Open to Giving an Obama SCOTUS Nominee a Hearing

Greens Target Pro-Life Evangelicals with EPA Propaganda Blitz

COMMUNIST PARTY GOES ALL IN FOR HILLARY CLINTON AFTER SUPPORTING SANDERS IN VAIN~WHY THEY BELIEVE IN A LANDSLIDE FOR HER

Communist Party Goes All In for Hillary

BY SELWYN DUKE

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/23834-communist-party-goes-all-in-for-hillary; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

There’s an old saying, “Tell me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are.” If this be true, Hillary Clinton’s got some 'splainin’ to do — because the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is all in for her candidacy.

Oh, the CPUSA hasn’t technically endorsed Clinton; that would hurt its street cred because she’s not an out-of-the-closet Marxist. But they certainly are burning red with Democrat passion. As WND.com writes:

That passion was in full display with a seven-person team of “reporters” covering their national political convention last month. And their convention was the Democratic National Convention that nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton as their undisputed candidate for president of the United States.

… The Communists, who for decades ran their own candidates for president and vice president but supported Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, don’t just like Hillary and Bernie [Sanders]. The party also gave a big thumbs-up to Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine.

“He’s a great choice,” wrote staffer Larry Rubin on the first day of the convention. “Kaine pushed the political envelope of Virginia, an erstwhile red southern state, in a progressive direction — and won! He was elected mayor of Richmond, then governor of the state and then senator. Everyone agrees: he’s a sincere, nice guy.”

This matters because it’s obvious that, with communist adherents’ history of murdering 100 million people during the 20th century, they’re all about advancing nice guys. And Kaine and Unable fit the bill.

And if the above doesn’t convince you that the CPUSA and the Democratic Party are currently, if unofficially, joined at the hipster, consider that Charisma News reported on Tuesday that “CPUSA National Chairman John Bachtell actually supported U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. But when it became obvious to everyone — except the Sanders supporters — that Hillary Clinton would be the Democrat nominee, he announced he would vote for her in the November election.” Charisma News then pointed out that Bachtell wrote the following in a June CPUSA website article:

What direction the country goes in depends in large measure on the fight for unity, the ability to build a broad multiracial labor-led movement working with the Democratic Party that can reach, educate and mobilize millions of voters and turn them out on Election Day….

There has been the growth of a broad democratic alliance over the past 25 years on a range of economic, political, social and environmental issues. Today, there are broad majorities in support of progressive ideas like taxing the rich, curbing greenhouse gases, higher minimum wage, criminal justice reform, reproductive rights, immigration reform, marriage equality, etc. This was a driving force behind the Sanders campaign.

Of course, Sanders, who was very much at home in the Democrat primaries and drew huge support, has long been an avowed socialist. Note that under Marxist doctrine, socialism is the transitional stage between economic freedom (what the socialists termed “capitalism”) and communism; contrary to popular belief, this socialist stage involves government ownership of the means of production — something people incorrectly associate with “communism” — which actually is the culmination of the socialist revolution and is the stage at which, the theory goes, the government will just melt away and “the people” will live in harmony in a state of economic equality and bliss. This is why the despotic U.S.S.R. did, without any false advertising, stand for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. And it’s why Cuban leader Fidel Castro did call his government a “socialist regime” in 1961.  

And where does Clinton stand relative to socialist Sanders? FiveThirtyEight.com wrote last year that based on the OnTheIssues.org scale, “She is as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and barely more moderate than Bernie Sanders.” Even more alarming is a testimonial from former Bill Clinton political operative Larry Nichols. He said in 2015 that the first time he met Hillary, she was wearing a medal around her neck stating, “Proud member of the American Communist Party” (video here; forward to 6:07). Of course, this having been in Arkansas in the 1970s, some will no doubt shrug the matter off as a “youthful indiscretion.” Note, though, there’s no record of a Clinton political “conversion,” of someone who knew her “when” saying, “Wow, she was pretty radical, but, boy, did she ever change.” So perhaps, just maybe, this explains why the CPUSA appears quite comfortable going all in for Clinton.

And a July 26 People’s World (their website) editorial bears witness to their desire to get Clinton elected. As they wrote:

Donald Trump steals wages. He'd pick your pocket in a New York minute. He lies and spreads hate. He's a racist and a bully.

… While the establishment GOP was surprised by the successful insurgency of so-called outsider Trump, they are united in purpose: delivering more inequality, more misery, more instability and violence against working-class people of all races, genders, religions and sexual orientations. They are united with giant corporations and the billionaire class in their drive to lower wages and living conditions and increase their profits and power.

As opposed to the CPUSA, of course, which has purely altruistic motives.

Many, no doubt, will scoff at the notion that Americans could elevate in government a Marxist in shepherd’s clothing. But it has already happened. New York City mayor “Bolshevik” Bill de Blasio used to raise money for the Sandinistas (Nicaraguan Marxists), subscribed to their newsletter, and honeymooned in Cuba. Barack Obama’s former “green jobs czar” Van Jones proclaimed himself to be a communist, and the president’s former communications director Anita Dunn called Mao Tse-tung one of her “two favorite political philosophers” (perhaps his philosophy on how to kill 60 million people impressed her). Obama himself was mentored as a boy by the notorious Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying member of the CPUSA. And the teaching apparently stuck. Note here that ex-Marxist Dr. John Drew maintains that when he met Obama at Occidental College in 1980, Obama was "in 100-percent total agreement" with his communist professors and was a flat-out "Marxist-Leninist" who believed in old-style communist revolution.  

Given the above, it’s not surprising that David Kupelian, managing editor of WND.com, had the following to say about the Democrat Party’s devolution. Writes WND.com:

“Amazing as it may seem, Barack Obama has dragged the entire Democratic Party so far leftward over the past seven-plus years that today’s Democratic Party has become almost indistinguishable from the Communist Party.

“If that sounds hyperbolic to you, just stop reading right now and pull up the CPUSA’s website,” he added. “Spend some time reading and digesting it. Try to discern any major differences between the Communist Party’s concerns, sensibilities and solutions — on issues from ‘gay’ rights, to unfettered immigration, to renewable energy, to wealth redistribution, to condemning cops as racist, to universal health care — and those of today’s Democratic Party.”

This all brings to mind the somewhat famous quotation about how “under the name of 'liberalism,'” Americans “will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." This has been, apparently, incorrectly attributed to socialist Norman Thomas. Yet the sentiment certainly was expressed to Thomas by socialist author Upton Sinclair, who stated, “The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label.…There is no use attacking it [our enemies] by a front attack, [sic] it is much better to out-flank them.”

And whoever said it first, it now certainly seems prophetic. So much so, that some patriots might lament: Where is Joe McCarthy when you really need him?

NEUROLOGIST & DOCTOR CONCUR: HILLARY’S “LONG HISTORY OF UNEXPLAINED FALLS” SHOULD BE EXPLAINED

NEUROLOGIST: HILLARY’S “LONG HISTORY OF UNEXPLAINED FALLS” SHOULD BE EXPLAINED

Transparency on Clinton's health a must, 

Dr. Fiona Gupta tells Fox News

BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON

SEE: http://www.infowars.com/neurologist-hillarys-long-history-of-unexplained-falls-should-be-explained/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Dr. Fiona Gupta told Fox News that Hillary Clinton’s “long history of unexplained falls” should be explained by her campaign making a full record of her health issues publicly available.

The segment began with clips emphasizing how the health of 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain was a massive talking point for the left during the election cycle.

However, the same media outlets have responded to questions about Hillary’s bizarre behavior and documented health problems by dismissing the whole issue as a “conspiracy theory”.

Asked about photos that show Hillary being helped up some steps during a campaign stop in South Carolina, Dr. Marc Siegel said that a new bar has been set since 2008 that the medical records of candidates should be released.

“Donald Trump is 70 and Hillary Clinton is almost 69 – I wanna see both their records, let’s be fair,” said Siegel, noting that Hillary had a “huge concussion” and a blood clot on her brain four years ago.

“I’ve been asking since 2012 to see her neurological records,” added Siegel.

Neurologist Dr. Fiona Gupta concurred with Siegel that the release of the records was in the public interest.

“Neurologically speaking…. for both candidates’s medical history, neurological history has to be transparent – this is a long and rigorous campaign,” said Gupta, adding that Clinton had a “long history of unexplained falls” that led to post-concussive syndrome.

“I think follow up is important,” said Gupta, adding that speculation was unnecessary but a “good history” of Hillary’s health should be made available.

Watch the video below that re-ignited the controversy, which is now approaching 2 million views on YouTube alone.

According to Steve Pieczenik, MD, PhD, American psychiatrist, and former US Department of State official, Hillary is suffering from a severe health crisis.

"IT'S DANGEROUS TO BELIEVE": THE GROWING PERSECUTION OF U.S. CHRISTIANS~A BOOK BY MARY EBERSTADT

Mary Eberstadt's Book 

"It's Dangerous to Believe": 

The Growing Persecution of U.S. Christians

BY STEVE BYAS

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/books/item/23833-mary-eberstadt-s-book-it-s-dangerous-to-believe-the-growing-persecution-of-u-s-christians; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The late Cardinal Francis George of Chicago predicted almost 10 years ago, “I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”

Such a grim prophecy of the fate of Christian leaders in the United States, long noted for its Christian culture, would have been met with derision by most believers just 20 years ago. But as author Mary Eberstadt (shown) says in her relatively short volume full of examples that tend to support the cardinal’s expectations of coming Christian persecution, “By 2016, in many influential cultural, political, and intellectual precincts, C for Christian has become the new scarlet letter.”

When young Alexis de Tocqueville traveled throughout America in the 1830s, he was struck by the pervasiveness of the Christian influence upon the culture. He attributed the greatness of the country — at which Europeans marveled — mostly to the churches, and predicted that as long as America remained a good country, it would remain a great country.

We have always had the “village atheist,” but few took him seriously. But now, this anti-Christian bias is growing exponentially, to the point that the whole “village” seems to be overflowing with atheists — or at least enemies of the Christian faith.

In Houston, Texas the mayor actually subpoenaed the sermons of five Protestant ministers, to determine if their words from the pulpit about sexuality ran afoul of a new city ordinance. An American military chaplain was reassigned due to his faithfulness to traditional Christian views. A Christian staffer was fired from working in a day-care center. The offense? Refusal to address a six-year-old boy as a girl.

These are not just random examples cited by Eberstadt. The idea that one’s Christian-oriented political views should not cost someone a job is no longer an accepted viewpoint among these militant anti-Christians. The creator of the JavaScript programming language, Brendan Eich, was fired from his job as CEO of Mozilla in 2014. His offense was that he had donated one thousand dollars to Proposition 8 in California, the ballot initiative that limited marriage to a man and a woman. Once this became public, Eich quickly got the boot.

Similarly, the fire chief of Atlanta was fired after self-publishing a Christian book to use in his Sunday School class. The problem was that a portion of the book declared that homosexual behavior was wrong, and despite his not having discussed these views on the job, it was an "offense" still considered worthy of termination.

Eberstadt has spoken with many younger Christians who fear they will not even be considered for a good job if they are seen to be "too" Christian. Even the aging and retired Baptist evangelist Billy Graham said last year that American believers should “prepare for persecution.”

How did America turn from a country where God and His people were honored, if not always emulated, to a nation that is just a few years behind the paganism sweeping Europe?

Eberstadt theorized that the assault upon the Christian faith began in some elements of the Enlightenment, and continued into the French Revolution (brought on by anti-Christian secret societies such as the Illuminati and the Jacobins). In the 19th century, the Darwinian evolutionary theory was used to attack the Christian religion. And, of course, the radical statist movements of communism and fascism were mortal enemies of religion as an impediment to their totalitarian goals.

Next, Eberstadt cited court decisions that contributed to the secularization of the public schools. She noted that the motion picture industry still made many movies with a Christian worldview in the 1950s (such as The Ten Commandments and The Robe); however, with the advent of the 1960s, Christianity came under attack in a series of movies — something that would have been unthinkable just a few short years earlier.

While she could have named a multitude of movies, she gave as examples The Da Vinci Code and The Life of Brian, both of which questioned the deity of Jesus Christ. The 1960 movie Inherit the Wind was among the first films to make a frontal assault upon Christianity, with agnostics and atheists such as H.L. Mencken and Clarence Darrow cast as heroes, and Christians such as William Jennings Bryan depicted as villains. As I demonstrate in a chapter of my book History’s Greatest Libels, this movie was full of historical inaccuracies, all designed to advance the plot idea that Christians were a detriment to progress in society.

Finally, after several years of this persistent undermining of the historic Christian faith, a “New Atheism” has arisen today — an atheism that is not content to live and let live, but is determined to bury Christianity under an avalanche of attacks. Eberstadt posits the thesis that one reason for the growing militancy of atheists is social media. According to this proposition, before the Internet many atheists felt isolated, but now they can interact with other such “free thinkers” on Facebook and Twitter, and are emboldened to make the most vicious insults of Christianity. It is unthinkable that Brendan Eich would have lost his position as Mozilla CEO had it not been for the agitation found on social media.

What harm can those who believe in a God who rules over the universe — a personal God who sent His Son to die on the cross for our salvation — present to these non-believers? After all, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, it doesn’t break their legs if Christians believe in Jesus Christ as the Second Person of the Trinity, does it?

It appears that this militant anti-Christian movement does fear Christians, or at least they say they do. Chris Hedges, writing in American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, expressed fear of a “core group of powerful Christian dominionists who have latched on to the despair, isolation, disconnection and fear that drives many people into these churches.” Hedges insisted that American Christianity resembled fascist movements.

Kevin Phillips, once a respected Republican political analyst, argued in his book American Theocracy that “strong theocratic pressures are already visible in the Republican national coalition.” Damon Linker added his own salvoes against American Christians in his book The Theocons: Secular America Under Siege.

Of course, Eberstadt contends that this picture of theocracy — the belief that the Church should rule the world — is the opposite of what is actually happening. “The place at the table in Washington, D.C.” that “Christians experienced in the 1980s and early 1990s” — “that world is no more.”

But this image of an America ruled by Christian “theocrats” and “dominionists” is not just the loose talk of a few malcontents such as Kevin Phillips. Even if Christians are not considered a threat to force us all to submit to some Christian version of the Caliphate, they are seen as a convenient group to attack for political favor.

Who can forget when then-candidate Barack Obama dismissed evangelical Christians as “bitter[ly] cling[ing] to their guns and their religion,” adding that they were “less than loving.” Eberstadt asked if one could ever imagine this president referencing “less than loving Muslims"?

And it is not just the Democratic nominees of 2008 and 2012. This year’s nominee, Hillary Clinton, declared during her 2015 keynote speech at the World Conference on Women in China that “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Ashley Samuelson McGuire of the Becket Fund wrote that “both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been caught using the phrase ‘freedom of worship’ in prominent speeches, rather than the ‘freedom of religion’ the president called for in Cairo … Both the president and his secretary of state have now replaced ‘freedom of religion’ with ‘freedom of worship’ too many times to seem inadvertent.”

Certainly it was not “inadvertent” when Obama left the word “by their Creator” out when he quoted the portion of the Declaration of Independence which reads, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Of course, if God is not the source of these rights, then government can simply take them away.

Who can forget when the delegates at the 2012 Democratic National Convention actually booed the inclusion of God in their party’s platform?

As Eberstadt said, Christians “are the only remaining minority that can be mocked and denigrated --- broadly, unilaterally, and with impunity. Not to mention fired, fined, or otherwise punished for their beliefs.”

In 2014, the Christian group InterVarsity was kicked off 23 college campuses in California because it required its leaders to be Christians. Chi Alpha, a student organization affiliated with the Assemblies of God denomination, was de-recognized at California State, charged with “religious discrimination.” Their offense? They refused to open their leadership positions to non-Christians.

One negative about the book is that Eberstadt makes a few, brief comparisons to the attacks upon Christians as similar to the “McCarthy” era of the 1950s, implying that Senator Joseph McCarthy smeared “innocent” people. It is unfortunate that those such as Eberstadt use such comparisons, because McCarthy’s narrow interest was ferreting out Soviet spies who had widely infested the American government — especially the State Department. Unless someone believes that a spy for a hostile foreign power deserves a government job, McCarthy can hardly be faulted for wanting to rid our government of such individuals loyal to a system that had murdered millions of people --- many of them Christians. It may well be that, while Eberstadt did extensive research in compiling the shocking incidents in her book, she may just have been repeating what she believed was that actual history of the 1950s. In my book History’s Greatest Libels, I devote a chapter to explaining how it is unfair to the historical Joe McCarthy to imply that he smeared "innocent" people.

Other than Eberstadt’s unfair characterization of the heroic McCarthy, this is a book I can highly recommend to all who treasure religious freedom.

It’s Dangerous to Believe: Religious Freedom and Its Enemies, by Mary Eberstadt, New York, New York: Harper Collins, 2016, 128 pages, hardcover.