Saturday, November 30, 2019

Melania Trump censored by Facebook

Skip to content
Alex Jones' InfoWars

Big Tech ramping up censorship efforts ahead of 2020 election - NOVEMBER 30, 2019 49 Comments 
Facebook Deletes Melania Trump Photos, Claims They're 'Hate Speech'

In its latest attack on free speech, Facebook deleted photos of Melania Trump on Black Friday, calling them “hate speech.”

A woman who goes by Amy in D.C. posted a warning she received from Facebook for posting a photo of the First Lady.

“FB just removed this from a political page I’m co-editor on,” she wrote. “Hard to see the meme another editor shared, but it’s a picture of our First Lady and says ‘You can keep your Lady Gaga, we’ve got Lady MAGA.'”

“Hate speech? Really?” she added.

The ridiculous censorship by Facebook further highlights their escalating war against free speech because the photos clearly suggest nothing hateful.

The social media platform is simply trying to eradicate conservative content – however innocuous – from its platform to demoralize conservatives and influence the 2020 election outcome in Democrats’ favor.

Alex Jones breaks down the state of censorship and the authoritarian communication control plan.

Get DNA Force 50% off and get a free bottle of Brain Force Plus now!



Starbucks barista writes 'Pig' on police officer's cup
 Ronan Farrow Says Hillary Clinton Gave Him The Cold Shoulder When He Exposed Weinstein


Search for articles

Podcast | Listen | On Demand | Archive
How To Get The Banned Infowars Podcasts On Your Smartphone - Find out how to subscribe to our shows!
Epstein Contest: Patriots Spread The Truth About Epstein’s Murder With Viral Song
VIDEO: London Bridge Attacker Was Convicted Terrorist & Melania Trump Banned From Facebook
Watch The Left Defend The New London Bridge Stabber
Watch: Thanksgiving Is Cancelled
NKorea Threatens ‘Imbecile’ Shinzo Abe With ‘Real Ballistic Missile’ Over Japan
Facebook Deletes Melania Trump Photos, Claims They’re ‘Hate Speech’
Get the latest breaking news & specials from Alex Jones and the Infowars crew.

Email Address
Your Price: $29.95
On Sale: $24.95
Available in a larger size, the 3.4 oz. container of SuperSilver Skin Cream will help you take care of your skin!



How will Trump fare in 2020?

 win by a landslide
 win by a small margin
 lose by a landslide
 lose by a small margin
View Results

Infowars Life
Watch Alex Jones Show
Most Recent
About Alex Jones Show

© 2019 is a Free Speech Systems, LLC Company.
All rights reserved. Digital Millennium Copyright Act Notice.


Christian faith missing ingredient in Mr. Rogers film

Skip to content
Primary Menu
National Review
 Search National Review
Search Text 
Nov. 30, 2019
Christian Faith Is the Missing Ingredient in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
November 29, 2019 6:30 AM
Tom Hanks as Fred Rogers in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (Lacey Terrell/Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Tom Hanks delivers his latest paean to secular humanism.
In Polar Express (2004), Tom Hanks kept urging “Believe!” without specifying what to believe in. Some of that same damnable over-secularization threatens to ruin Hanks’s new film, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood. Hanks plays Fred Rogers, creator and host of the TV series Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood (aired 1966–2001 on public broadcasting), which taught life lessons to children. The movie re-creates those homilies by artificially re-creating scenes of the show’s videotape and alternating them with the real-life story of optimistic Rogers (Hanks) being interviewed by cynical journalist Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys).

Director Marielle Heller attempts a sensitive, almost spiritual evocation. She intersperses TV-show sets and toylike miniatures among scenes of desolate realism in which pious Rogers is tested by pessimistic Vogel. Rogers looks past Vogel’s sarcasm, almost divining the writer’s private pain. It’s a dramatization of Rogers’s uncanny calm and childlike patience — qualities that modern society distrusts, preferring to put stock in Freudian explanations.

This concept is almost too philosophically large for the kind of movie Heller is making. Scenes where Vogel reveals lifelong resentment of his philandering father (Chris Cooper) apply Rogers’s TV teaching to an adult’s family crisis. But Heller and screenwriters Micah Fitzerman-Blue and Noah Harpster don’t show enough faith in Rogers’s remedies — and not enough interest in their religious origins.

In short, the movie seems wary of faith (it briefly mentions that Rogers was an ordained minister) and settles for secular sentimentality to account for his sensibility and behavior. This not only weakens the film, but it also hobbles Hanks’s characterization.

When Hanks attempts to replicate Rogers’s sangfroid and gentleness, he avoids the remarkably complex mixed feelings of his conman role in The Ladykillers and falls back on Forrest Gump simplemindedness. While Heller strives to show Rogers as a lay Christian, Hanks succumbs to oddity.

NOW WATCH: 'Chick-fil-A Stops Donations to Christian Organizations'

I always found it ironic that pop musician David Byrne once referred to Fred Rogers as “creepy” when it is Rogers whom the art-savant Byrne most resembles. Hanks’s misguided performance (not scornful yet neither is it absolutely guileless) hints at the same mistrust as his hollow “Believe!” exhortations in Polar Express.

The film’s title suggests kinship; the lessons Rogers imparts to Vogel suggest forgiveness and spiritual belief. But it is all background to the story of a gloomy Esquire magazine writer who is meant to be the audience’s surrogate: Vogel is a white liberal whose good intentions are signified by his having a black wife and a biracial infant.

With progressive politics as the opiate of Hollywood, there’s no way to find true meaning in Fred Rogers’s life story, reducing it to the Christmas-without-Christ cheerleading. Using Rogers’s TV show as a replacement for religion — as if it merely demonstrated our need for psychoanalysis — fights Heller’s own sensitivity. (She brought sympathy to the larcenous scoundrels of her previous film Can You Ever Forgive Me?) Heller’s most daring tactic occurs when Rogers tells Vogel to “think of all the people who loved you into being” and the movie observes a full minute of silence.

This should be a bravura sequence. Hanks acts it simply, and Rhys’s anguish (he’s like a scared Bill Murray with anger issues) rouses intense neediness. But the moment fails because of a cultural catastrophe: Hollywood does not customarily express spirituality.

Heller based that scene on one of the remarkable moments in last year’s Fred Rogers documentary Won’t You Be My Neighbor? where witnesses to Rogers’s life respond to his call for reflection and gratitude. Doc director Morgan Neville briefly acknowledged Rogers’s faith by his interviewees’ personal testimony. They went beyond Freud.

Neville’s documentary also revealed Rogers’s contempt for TV habits, especially as they infect children — and adults. Neville recounted Rogers’s mission: “We are all called upon to be tikun olam, repairers of creation: to bring joy and light and hope and faith and pardon and love to your neighbor and to yourself.” Rogers insisted on this enlightenment for a medium that regularly fed stupidity, violence, and selfishness to children. He felt that addressing the community of children was a way of addressing the nation.

Heller’s attention to this idea makes her one of the few contemporary female filmmakers to display moral sensitivity above political correctness. A Wonderful Day in the Neighborhood resists Christian belief yet still promotes secular humanism.


Movie Preview: A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Tom Hanks as Fred Rogers in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood

Lacey Terrell/Sony Pictures Entertainment

ARMOND WHITE, a film critic, writes about movies for National Review and is the author of New Position: The Prince Chronicles. @3xchair
Why Al Pacino Matters
Queen & Slim, a Meme Movie for Black Lives Matter Fans
An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
The Founding vs. The Old West in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Toy Story 4: A National Anthem
An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
Toy Story 4’s Nursery Stoicism
Ingmar Bergman, Entertainer
 30 Bad movies that caught critics off guard
30 Bad movies that caught critics off…
New Arena
 97% Of Christians Can't Pass This Basic Knowledge Quiz
97% Of Christians Can't Pass This…
 Her Dress Stole The Show At The People's Choice Awards
Her Dress Stole The Show At The…
[Gallery] Student Fights Back After…
New Arena
They messed with the wrong girl...
 Born Before 1985? Gov't Will Pay $271/Month Off Your Mortgage If You Qualify
Born Before 1985? Gov't Will Pay $271/Month Off Your Mortgage If You Qualify
Genius Aluminum Foil Hacks That Almost Nobody Knows About
Editor Choice
 An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
CDC: U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop
CDC: U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop
CDC: U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop
The Most Beautiful Abandoned Places On Earth
Editor Choice
 Two Priests Sentenced to Prison Time for Abuse of Deaf Children in Argentina
Two Priests Sentenced to Prison Time for Abuse of Deaf Children in Argentina
Two Priests Sentenced to Prison Time for Abuse of Deaf Children in Argentina
 Kamala Harris Mocked As Her Campaign Sinks
Kamala Harris Mocked As Her Campaign Sinks
Kamala Harris Mocked As Her Campaign Sinks
Here's What Dental Implants Could Cost in 2019
Here's What Dental Implants Could Cost in 2019
Montascale | Sponsored Listings
 Early Symptoms Of Metastatic Breast Cancer You Don't Want To Miss!
Early Symptoms Of Metastatic Breast Cancer You Don't Want To Miss!
Metastatic Breast Cancer | Sponsored Results |
 Culture with Kat Timpf: Kamala’s Attack on Tulsi Exemplifies Dangerous Partisanship
Culture with Kat Timpf: Kamala’s Attack on Tulsi Exemplifies Dangerous Partisanship
Culture with Kat Timpf: Kamala’s Attack on Tulsi Exemplifies Dangerous Partisanship
Think Dental Implants Are Expensive? Think Again (View Prices)
This Is What Dental Implants Should Cost You In
This Is What New Dental Implants In Should Cost You
72-Year-Old Grandma Shocks Doctors: Forget Botox, Do This
An Emetic Day in the Neighborhood
Jeremy Corbyn Reminds Us Why Israel Exists
AOC’s District Poll Numbers Are Bad
Bloomberg Campaign Manager Says Impeachment Probe Is Making Trump’s Reelection ‘More Likely’
Are Thought Crimes Impeachable?
On Abortion, Democrats Need to Adjust to Political Reality
This Pilgrim Republic
Queen & Slim, a Meme Movie for Black Lives Matter Fans
There’s Less to the McGahn Ruling Than Meets the Eye
It’s a Wonderful Time to Be Alive

The Corner
Bench Memos
The Morning Jolt
The G-File
Books, Arts & Manners
All Articles
All Authors
Politics & Policy
White House
Film & TV
PC Culture
Economy & Business
Latest Issue
Gve NR as a Gift
Customer Care
Magazine FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
The Masthead
Contact Us
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
NR Institute
E-mails & Alerts

 Morning Jolt (M-F)
 NR Daily (M-Sa)
 Breaking News (M-Su)

© 2019 National Review



60%-Off Sale Ends Tonight

Twitter bans GOP candidate running against Omar

Twitter Bans GOP Candidate Running Against Rep. Omar
Twitter Bans GOP Candidate Running Against Rep. OmarRep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. (AP)
By Cathy Burke 
Saturday, 30 Nov 2019 2:19 PM

Join in the Discussion!

A Republican candidate running to challenge Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., had her Twitter account permanently suspended for repeated violations of Twitter rules.

Danielle Stella’s campaign account on Twitter, @2020MNCongress, was bounced after posting at least twice about hanging the progressive freshman who’s frequently been the target of attacks from the right, the Washington Times first reported.

Each Stella tweet involved a baseless accusation that alleges she shared sensitive information with the Iranian government — a claim the congresswoman has since rejected as “outlandishly absurd.," the news outlet reported.

“If it is proven @IlhanMN passed sensitive info to Iran, she should be tried for #treason and hanged,” Stella’s campaign said in the first tweet, The Washington Times reported.

The campaign subsequently tweeted the link to an article that aggregated her remark, accompanied by a crude depiction of a stick figure hanging from gallows, The Washington Times reported.

The account has since been permanently suspended for repeated violations of Twitter’s rules.

A defiant Stella told The Washington Times that her “suspension for advocating for the enforcement of federal code proves Twitter will always side with and fight to protect terrorists, traitors, pedophiles and rapists.”

Omar said the alarming attack was among the “misinformation and conspiracy theories” that have been aimed at her, CNN reported.

"This just shows how far the Republican Party has fallen under Trump. Their campaign strategy is just threats, disinformation and smears against their opponents and the people will continue to reject it," Omar said in a statement, CNN reported.

On Friday, Omar tweeted that "violent rhetoric" leads to "violent threats."

"This is the natural result of a political environment where anti-Muslim dogwhistles and dehumanization are normalized by an entire political party and its media outlets," she posted. 

At least five candidates, including Stella, are currently seeking the Republican nomination to run in 2020 against Omar in the GOP primary next Aug. 11, The Washington Times reported.

Related Stories:

Rep. Omar: Facebook, Twitter Fuel White Nationalism
Rep. Omar Hits Trump Over Attacks on Minn. Mayor

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Join in the Discussion!
 Join the Newsmax Community Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
» Register to share your comments with the community.

» Login if you are already a member.
Powered by  


'No, Not That Guy': Booker Super Pac Ad Pokes Buttigieg, Praises Booker's Creds
Poll: Most in GOP Say Trump Better President Than Lincoln

Biden's Bus Tour Seeks Iowa Rebound
GOP to Use Impeachment Against Dems in Congressional Races
CNN: Ukrainian Officials Aiming To Improve Standing With Trump
More Politics 
Powered by  
back to top 
Contact | Advertise

Privacy Policy   Terms & Conditions

NEWSMAX.COM America's News Page 
© 2019 Newsmax Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Newsmax TV & Web
FREE - In Google Play

Read Newsmax: Twitter Bans GOP Candidate Running Against Rep. Omar 
Urgent: Do you approve of Pres. Trump’s job performance? Vote Here Now! 

Bread delivery man with firearm made honorary sheriff's deputy for stopping armed robber


Bread delivery man with firearm made honorary sheriff's deputy for stopping armed robber
Clayton County has a new honorary deputy
Scott Olson/Getty Images
A bread delivery man who was in the right place at the right time early Saturday thwarted an armed robbery at an Atlanta-area Hardee's.

Ditch the fake news ==> Click here to get news you can trust sent right to your inbox. It's free!
According to WAGA-TV, Damario Kentrell Parrish entered a Hardee's in Clayton County around 6:30 a.m. Saturday, jumping the counter and pointing a firearm at a female employee while demanding money.

At the same time, Joseph Chilton, a bread delivery man, saw employees running from the store and heard a woman screaming for help. WXIA-TV reported that Chilton then sprung into action, retrieving a firearm from inside his delivery truck and confronting Parrish.

Clayton County Sheriff Victor Hill said Chilton exchanged gunfire with Parrish — stopping the robbery and forcing Parrish to flee. Chilton managed to shoot Parrish twice before he fled, preventing him from stealing any money.

Investigators later located Parrish inside a local residence. Once he refused to surrender to police, law enforcement called in the SWAT unit. Fortunately, Parrish then surrendered.

Hill was so impressed with Chilton for "defending those who could not defend themselves" that he made the delivery man an honorary Clayton County sheriff's deputy.

Parrish is being treated at a local hospital for his injuries. He will later be transferred to the Clayton County jail.


Daily News Highlights
Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.

Your email
Top Personal Injury Lawyers of 2019 in Spartanburg
Personal Injury Lawyers | Search Ads
50 Reasons Why No One Messes With The M1 Abrams
Yeah! Motor
If Your Dog Follows You Everywhere, Here's What It Means!
How South Carolina Dealers Get Rid of Unsold Cars
Discount Drivers
20 Cool Gadgets That Make Great Christmas Gifts
Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox
Enjoy hand-picked news stories and the best conservative commentary and analysis available, every morning and afternoon with TheBlaze newsletters.

18-year-old breaks into house in middle of night and heads upstairs. But rifle-wielding homeowner doesn't let him get any further.
Things ended badly for an 18-year-old who police said broke into a home in Clayton County, Georgia, in the middle of the night Friday.

About |Staff |Advertise |Help |Newsletters |Terms |Privacy


The reason Schiff starts off the hearings with long opening statements

The reason Schiff starts off the hearings with long opening statements: The reason Schiff starts off the hearings with long opening statements and ends the hearings with long closing statements is to set the narrative for the media, which dutifully regurgitates it. The reason he set the rules to give him and his chief counsel the first 45-minutes of every hearing, is a

Holmes is another disgruntled bureaucrat, who reported to a disgruntled bureaucrat

Holmes is another disgruntled bureaucrat, who reported to a disgruntled bureaucrat: Holmes is another disgruntled bureaucrat, who reported to a disgruntled bureaucrat. He claims to have overhead a call with the president and Sondland at a restaurant. Sondland has no recollection of what Holmes alleges to have overheard, and it wasn't until recently that this alleged overheard cal

From Fiona Hill's opening statement

From Fiona Hill's opening statement: From Fiona Hill's opening statement:

“A fictionally narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russia security services themselves ...” and goes on to say that “some on this Committee [Rs] have been advancing this“ and “I would ask that you not promote politically-driven falsehoo

Thursday, November 28, 2019

Saturday, November 23, 2019

Trump winning impeachment war with super guest Alex Jones

Full show is up with super guest Alex Jones! We delve into impeachment games and so much more!

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

The REAL Bombshell!! “I want nothing from Ukraine” “No Quid Pro Quo”

The REAL Bombshell!! “I want nothing from Ukraine” “No Quid Pro Quo”

"Impeachment" Circus Continues 🤡

"Impeachment" Circus Continues 🤡

Gordon Sondland: ‘President Trump Never Told Me Aid Was Conditioned’ on Investigations - The REAL Bombshell!! “I want nothing from Ukraine” “No Quid Pro Quo”

Show Trial Update Gordon Sondland: ‘President Trump Never Told Me Aid Was Conditioned’ on Investigations U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland appeared to contradict himself in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee during testimony Wednesday in the fifth public hearing as part of the impeachment inquiry.

The real bombshell: 'I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo'

Rush Limbaugh
For a better experience, 
download and use our app!


The Real Bombshell: “I Want Nothing. I Want Nothing. I Want No Quid Pro Quo.”
Nov 20, 2019

RUSH: We are at the moment rolling off some audio. Jim Jordan interviewing — or questioning, I should say — Gordon Sondland (and it’s good) about some mythical meeting that didn’t happen. Jordan made a couple of good points, though, that I want to share with you. Grab audio sound bite number seven. This sound bite is the gold mine of the day, and it’s become even more golden.

This is Ambassador Sondland responding to a question from Pencil Neck today about a quid pro quo — Trump demanding from Zelensky — before there would be aid, security assistance offered to Ukraine, and Pencil Neck says to Sondland, “Is this an accurate reflection of your discussion with the president?”

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. And he just said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.” Jim Jordan asked Ambassador Sondland why he didn’t include this in his opening statement, which I have to confess I missed. I mean, I didn’t realize this was not in it I did, but it didn’t make sense, because the bombshell is that Sondland somehow said today that Trump demanded a quid pro quo. And yet in the answer you just heard, he plainly says the president said he wanted nothing.

“I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Well, it turns out Sondland did not put that in his opening statement, a 23-page opening statement. Jim Jordan said, “Why did you not put it in there?” and Sondland said, “I ran out of room.” And Jordan said, “You ran out of room? In a 23-page opening statement, you didn’t have the space, you didn’t have the time, you didn’t have the room to include this?” “No, I didn’t. (muttering) I — I couldn’t squeeze it in.” So if Pencil Neck hadn’t asked the question the way he asked it, Sondland may never have said this.

Pencil Neck, at the end of the day, ends up sabotaging himself inadvertently with this question. But that is a really, really curious thing, that Sondland omits this from his opening statement which allows everybody to write that bombshells have dropped, that Trump demanded a quid pro quo. I saw that. I watched the opening statement and I didn’t hear that. I turn around, I look at Drive-By Media headlines: Bombshell here, bombshells dropped there.

Then I hear Sondland’s answer to the question, and it’s exact opposite of what they’re saying. And then Jordan elucidates from Sondland, “I didn’t have time to put it in the opening statement.” He was hiding it! And then Jordan started talking about the whistleblower to Sondland, and made another good point. “Do you remember how we were first informed of this phone call, Ambassador?” “Well, I… (muttering)” Remember what we were told?

The news media told us that a whistleblower had come forward and said that this call was frightening, that it was scary what the president had done in this phone call, what the president had said. “It was frightening. It was outrageous. I had to report it immediately.” And of course, we now have the transcript of the phone call. (laughing) There’s nothing in the phone call. There is literally nothing impeachable. Every witness has been asked, “What is the impeachable offense in that phone call?”

Dead silence has been the answer. Crickets has been the answer. Folks, we are… I don’t care what day of the week it is, and I don’t care what the status. We are all being played in a major, major way. We are all being victimized by an ongoing creation of a grand illusion that the Democrat Party and their cohorts in the media are jointly perpetrating upon us. It is a giant illusion — and I’m using that word specifically and purposely. It isn’t true. It’s made to look like something that isn’t.

The phone call contains nothing scary, nothing frightening, nothing illegal, nothing impeachable. That’s why we’re here, the whistleblower and that phone call and his original report — which was secondhand — is why we are here. We have had Ambassador Sondland admit today that he had no idea that Burisma meant Bidens. We’ve had Ambassador Sondland admit that he didn’t know anything about Ukraine’s efforts to undermine the Trump campaign in 2016.

We’ve had Ambassador Sondland omit the real bombshell of these hearings from his opening statement. The real bombshell — play it again, Sam — is audio sound bite number 7. This is it.

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. And he just said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want to quid pro quo.” That was not in his opening statement. It came in the answer to a question from Schiff later on. Here’s Devin Nunes, sound bite number 32. This is Nunes — I applauded this; I told you about it — attempting to provide the context for all of this, as I so artfully and timely did in the first hour of today’s busy broadcast.

NUNES: Let’s talk about things that we do know are facts. President Trump does not like foreign aid to start with. Is that correct, Ambassador?

SONDLAND: I’ve heard that, yes.

NUNES: Now looking back at clearly the challenges and concerns the president had with the involvement of high-level Ukrainian government officials — including the ambassador here in the United States — that attacked him during his presidential campaign, the concerns of leaks that were leaks or just made up-stories and conspiracy theories that were spun in the Steele dossier, that the Democrats on this committee own. They paid for it.

Other DNC operatives that were working with the Ukrainian ambassador here in Washington, D.C., to dirty up your boss, the president of the United States. We’re not gonna hear from those witnesses, just like we’re not gonna hear from the person we deposed on Saturday. We’re not gonna hear about what the real reason, the person who’s in charge of making sure that foreign aid is delivered, we’re not gonna hear about what actually happened with the foreign aid.

RUSH: There it is. That’s the reference to the testimony from Mark Sandy on Saturday behind closed doors that Pencil Neck and the Democrats are not releasing. He’s the person in charge of making sure foreign aid is delivered. He cuts the checks, if you will. We’re not gonna hear what actually happened in the case of Ukraine from the guy responsible for it. We’re not going to hear from any of the witnesses that participated in dirtying up Trump during the 2016 campaign.

It was during some of this line of questioning that Sondland admitted he didn’t know anything about any of that. Let’s go to CBS. Jonathan Turley. This was this afternoon during CBS coverage of the House Intelligence Committee impeachment hearing. During a recess, Norah O’Donnell, who is the new infobabe anchorette with CBS Evening News, was talking to Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law school professor, and she is seeking his reaction to the testimony to that point.

TURLEY: I think Republicans did gain ground today. In fact, today was the first day where I felt they had made progress. And what they did is they tied together the August 31st call with Senator Johnson, who said that the president was adamant and angry that there was no quid pro quo. And that was before the whistleblower thing came out. And they tied that, then, to September 9th, where he’s equally adamant and angry, according to Ambassador Sondland, and then two days later the aid is released. Those are actually hits below the water line for the Democrats.

RUSH: Right. You’re not gonna get that take anywhere else in the media, but the Republicans are making progress. And again, just at the top of this hour, Representative Michael Turner was questioning Sondland; got him to admit that he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo. Sondland not only testified earlier today that the president said he didn’t want one, Sondland had to admit that he didn’t know, he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo.

But, folks, the headlines have gone out. The headlines from this morning were already written before Sondland even testified based on the release of his statement. “Bombshells dropped today! Republicans nearing time to walk the White House to tell Trump to resign” was the subheadline. And even Ken Starr was promulgating that was probably next up, all because Sondland had dropped the “bombshell” that Trump did demand a quid pro quo.

How does this happen, when Sondland later testified that Trump said explicitly to him “no quid pro quo” and then mere moments ago Sondland said under questioning to Michael Turner that he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo? It was just his presumption. Like every other witness who has testified, it’s their assumption, it is their opinion based on media reports, based on conversations with colleagues. None of these people know anything. This is why Snerdley, I’m telling you, they are following somebody’s orders.

Somebody is running these witnesses. Somebody is commanding them. Somebody is scripting them. Somebody is orchestrating this. Vindman, Yovanovitch, Kent, Taylor, now Sondland — who’s only changed his testimony three times. He admitted he had no evidence of Trump quid pro quo. It was all his presumption based on media reports, based on conversations with colleagues. But, as I say, the headline’s already gone out. Let’s see. What is Drudge saying here: “Ambassador drops bombs. Followed president’s orders.

“Giuliani pushed quid pro quo. Pence knew.” See, that stuff’s already out there. Those are just links to stories. Don’t blame Drudge. Those are just links to story that are out there already. They’re AP, they are Yahoo News, they’re Reuters — and they were prewritten. Bombshells dropped. And yet Sondland’s testified Trump explicitly said to him he didn’t want a quid pro quo, and now just admitted that he just presumed that Trump did, and they tried dumping it all on Rudy earlier today.

Rudy has tweeted the following: “During the July 24 conversation @realDonaldTrump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky without requiring an investigation, any discussion of military aid or any condition whatsoever.” “During the July 24th conversation…” The phone call was July 25th. “During the July 24 conversation @realDonaldTrump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky…” This is before the phone call. The day before, Rudy says, “Trump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky without requiring an investigation, any discussion of military aid or any condition whatsoever.”

And Rudy says, “This record shows definitively no quid pro quo, which is the same as no bribery. END OF CASE!” which is what Trump said today on the way to Marine One. The case is over. This is over. There was no quid pro quo. There couldn’t have been any bribery. But the headlines have gone out. Bombshells dropped today. Schiff called a press conference and said it’s getting to be time now to take the march to the White House. Trump has done what Nixon did. He’s obstructed justice!

It’s an abomination, is what this is, folks.

It is a literal abomination.

I don’t know what else to call this.


RUSH: People have been patiently waiting. Edgewater, New Jersey. Victor, hello, sir. You are up next. Hi.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. How are you doing today?

RUSH: Good, sir. Good, sir. Thank you.

CALLER: All right. So my point is that Trump used the word “favor” asking Zelensky on the phone call — the transcript of the phone call — for a favor. A favor, by definition, is something done without monetary compensation. So Trump’s using the word “favor” automatically negates the idea that it was a bribe or quid pro quo. This led Schiff to kind of convince Vindman in his testimony yesterday to recharacterize the word “favor” as really being an order.

As the power disparity between Trump and Zelensky was so great, Zelensky had no option but to do it. That immediately destroys the bribery charge because you don’t have to bribe somebody that has no choice.

RUSH: Oh, you don’t have to bribe somebody… Yes, that’s true. You don’t have to bribe somebody that has no choice.

CALLER: (cat meows) So if it’s a favor, then that automatically destroys the idea that there’s a bribery charge because there’s no money involved in favors. If it was an order, then you don’t have to bribe somebody that you’re giving orders to.

RUSH: There wasn’t any bribery. We’re moving. That was yesterday. Today we’ve got it. There was no quid pro quo. This is major, what has happened today. The point about that yesterday was that Vindman was trying to assume that there is some chain of command among world leaders that Trump’s at the top of and other world leaders have to bow down and kiss his feet. “When he asks for a favor, that’s like my general asking me for a favor. It’s not a favor.” It was absurd. Your point about bribery is well taken, but that’s blown up today because Sondland had been forced to admit that nobody ever told him there was a quid pro quo ever.


RUSH: Here we have the Jim Jordan sound bites that I referenced earlier. This is Jordan asking Sondland about his statement that the president told him he didn’t want anything from Ukraine, and we have Sondland’s response.

JORDAN: Why didn’t you put that statement? Your opening statement? I think you couldn’t fit it in. Is that right?

SONDLAND: (scoffs)

JORDAN: We might be here for 46 minutes instead of 45 minutes?

SONDLAND: (snickers) It wasn’t purposeful, trust me.

JORDAN: It wasn’t purposeful?


JORDAN: You couldn’t put it in a 23-page opener, the most important statement about the subject matter at hand: The president of the United States, in a direct conversation with you about the issue at hand, and the president said — let me read it one more time — “What do you want from Ukraine, Mr. President?” “I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. I want this new guy, brand-new guy in politics, his party just took over, I want Zelensky to do the right thing. I want him to run on and do what he ran on, which is deal with corruption.” And you can’t find time to fit that in a 23-page opening statement?

RUSH: Bingo. Bingo. I told you he said it but there you’ve heard it from his own mouth. So a Democrat congressman has been leading a boycott effort of Sondland and his wife’s businesses, and after Sondland’s opening statement — which the media has reported, “Bombshell: Sondland says quid pro quo,” the Democrat congressman Blumenauer tweets, “Welcome to the resistance, Gordon Sondland.” You think anything’s gonna happen to this congressman, Mr. Snerdley? (interruption) No. Nothing’s gonna happen to this congressman.

He’s gonna get a medal, because the media got its headlines today. The media was able to literally lie about Sondland’s testimony because he did. One more Jim Jordan sound bite. Now, there’s a context to this that I’m not quite sure of, and I wish I was able to tell you. It’s brilliant. You’re gonna love this. You’re gonna be standing up and cheering. It’s about a meeting that didn’t happen, but I don’t know any more than that. I didn’t hear this. I heard the tail end of it during a commercial break; so I don’t know what meeting that didn’t happen this is referring to. It begins with Jordan asking, “Ambassador, when did it happen?”

JORDAN: Ambassador, when did it happen?

SONDLAND: When did what happen?

JORDAN: The announcement! When did President Zelensky announce that the investigation was gonna happen? On page 14 you said this: “Was there a quid pro quo?” Your opening statement: “As I testified previously with regard to a White House meeting, the answer is, yes. There needed to be a public statement from President Zelensky.” When the chairman asked you about the security assistance dollars, you said there needed to be a public announcement from Zelensky. So I’m asking you a simple question: When did that happen?

SONDLAND: Never did.

JORDAN: Never did. They got the call July 25th. They got the meeting, not in the White House but in New York on September 25th. They got the money on September 11th. When did the meeting happen again?

SONDLAND: Never did.

JORDAN: You don’t know who was in the meeting?

SONDLAND: Which meeting are you referring to?

JORDAN: The meeting that never happened. Who was in it?

RUSH: The meeting didn’t even happen. When did President Zelensky announce the investigation was gonna happen? See, I think what this is about is that Zelensky had been demanding a meeting, an Oval Office meeting or whatever with Trump. No, it can’t be that, because that did happen. “When did President Zelensky announce the investigation was gonna happen?” and he didn’t because there wasn’t one. The investigation never did happen.

I guess that’s what the meeting is, the investigation. “There needed to be a public statement from President Zelensky. When the chairman asked you about the security assistance dollars, he said there needs to be a public announcement from Mr. Zelensky. When did it happen?” “It never did.” So I guess the announcement is what Jordan means by meeting here, unless I’m still missing something.


RUSH: Also about the Jordan thing, I think what he was illustrating, is “the meeting” was a stand-in for all of these things that supposedly happened that never did. And by getting Sondland to admit that that meeting didn’t happen and Zelensky never had to do what he was being made to do, that that didn’t happen. I think what Jordan was doing was illustrating that all of this is a bunch of caca.


RUSH: Jim Jordan is exhausted, folks. He got some things confused. The meeting he was talking about was a meeting supposedly promised to Zelensky in Oval Office. Remember the story that Zelensky desperately wanted a meeting in the Oval Office and for credibility and for the high-profile nature of it, the power denoted to it. And supposedly the message was that Trump was saying, “You don’t get the meeting unless you investigate the Bidens.

“You don’t get the meeting unless you find out what they were doing,” and it turns out that there was a meeting. It was in New York. They met in New York during the United Nations confab there. The meeting that we’ve been told was part of the quid pro quo, it happened. What didn’t happen, there was never any announcement from Zelensky. This is what Trump was demanding, supposedly. Trump was demanding that Zelensky publicly announce to the world that he was gonna investigate the Bidens — and if he didn’t do that, he wouldn’t get the meeting.

He didn’t do it. There still isn’t an investigation of the Bidens, and yet he got the meeting, which was the point that Jordan was making, that there wasn’t an announcement. And the meeting was not in the Oval Office, by the way. Zelensky wanted the Oval Office, but they met in New York. Anyway, Jordan’s point was that everything everybody’s been saying about Zelensky demanding this or Trump demanding Zelensky do something for the meeting, he got meeting and didn’t have to do a damn thing for it.

Zelensky didn’t ever announce an investigation.

He didn’t do one thing to get the meeting.

It just happened.

Meaning, nothing happened! There could not have been any bribery or quid pro quo which has been stated that there wasn’t. But the truth of all this has been buried by the headlines this morning: “Sondland says quid pro quo!” We’ll see. Everything has backfired on these people so far; I think this is going to as well. Every time they’ve gone public with stuff like this, they start feeling their oats and it comes be back and bites ’em — and this will, too, now especially if the news of Sondland’s wife’s businesses is being boycotted by the Democrat congressman… We’ll see.

Related Links Trump’s Attitude on Ukraine Makes Perfect Sense in Context - 11.20.19
Breitbart: Gordon Sondland: ‘President Trump Never Told Me Aid Was Conditioned’ on Investigations
Daily Wire: Ambassador Sondland Strikes At Democrats’ Impeachment Narrative: Trump Told Me He Wanted ‘No Quid Pro Quo’

Share This - © 2019 Premiere Networks. All Rights Reserved. 
Contact | Privacy Policy | Contest Rules | Rush 24/7 Terms & Conditions | AdChoices Ad choice

Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Mike Adams joins Alex Jones and Millie Weaver to break down the reality of weaponized food and how President Trump could have encountered it.

Mike Adams joins Alex Jones and Millie Weaver to break down the reality of weaponized food and how President Trump could have encountered it.

Catastrophe! $6.4 Trillion Wasted On 20 Years Of War! (Liberty Report)

A new report by Brown University's Costs of War Project now estimates that by the end of fiscal year 2020, the US will have "spent" $6.4 trillion on a global "war on terror" in which more than three million people have died. And what do we have to show for it? And what will happen when payment is actually due (i.e. the Fed can no longer hide the costs by printing money)?

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]

Prince Andrew's Wall Of Denial

The creepiest portion of The Duke of York, Prince Andrew’s recent wall of denial tv interview was his strange response when asked if he had any regrets for having known international sex trafficking pimp Jeffrey Epstein. Other than that admission. Prince Andrew had an answer for everything concerning his alleged illegal relationship with Epstein’s sex slave Virginia Roberts. Seemingly scripted and well rehearsed in order to curb the embarrassment plaguing Buckingham Palace.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]

Mike Pence Betrays President Trump With Staffer Testifying During Impeachment (HA Goodman)

I thought this development was interesting. It shows that, once again, the quantity of the accusers, now with this Pence aide on the Ukraine call, has no bearing on the quality of the claims being made - the fictional quid pro quo, 'undue pressure' etc. The number of claimants do not count in what is a highly politicised environment because EVERYTHING they say, the hearsay second and third hand testimony, is contradicted by 1st hand accounts and transcripts. Their own testimony under cross examination fails via simple admissions that no crimes occurred.

This keeps happening in Washington - ever since the election - where all the insinuations in these sorts of hearings (theatre) are groundless and reek of being a coordinated political action. And yet the Mainstream Media sells what is happening to the public as if everything were above board (often omitting or downplaying the counter veiling critique).

Meanwhile we have things like illegal military occupations, classified email espionage, unprosecuted bankers and whole host of other things that are ignored by both parties. It looks like what is happening is one corrupt side of politics, closest to the Deep State globalists, is trying to protect their grip on things while a more nationalist corrupt side is trying to get control.

At least some attention is being paid to the blackmail pedo networks after the recent re-arrest and (cover-up) murder of Jeffery Epstein. A fair chunk of the globe is now looking outside the box thanks to that development.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]

Pardon Roger Stone Petition #FreeRogerStone

Free Roger Stone:

Pardon Roger Stone Petition #FreeRogerStone

The Shrinking Range Of Acceptable Debate

David Icke talking about the global pedo cover-up and media complicity, plus the Zionist control over the media. He goes on to talk about woke culture programming in schools - that they are pushing ideas such as 100 gender identities - as a destruction of humanity. There are actually only two sexes - male and female - whilst there are various psychological aberrations that deviate from the functional male/female partnering needed to create offspring.

Other methods of distorting or destroying the truth comes with the imprisonment of Julian Assange to discourage whistleblowing. Alternative media I a big target now that the Internet has effective taken control of the political narrative around the world.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]


Food tester was first rushed to hospital, and doctors believe there was exposure to time-delayed poison

An inside source says President Trump’s food taster became ill after ingesting an unnamed substance, which is why the president made a surprise hospital visit on Saturday.
In an official statement, the White House said President Trump visited the Walter Reed Military Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland, for  a “quick exam and labs.”
The hospital visit was not listed on the president’s public schedule, according to media outlets which indicated that the visit was not a routine physical exam.
Additionally, the inside source said his food taster was rushed to the facility after becoming extremely ill.
Doctors and staff reportedly found the byproduct of a type of toxin that’s very hard to detect and has a time-delayed onset of symptoms.
Additionally, the toxin is a newer concoction that’s not typically tested for since it’s not well-known, according to the source.
The president was later taken to the same facility where a battery of tests were performed to assess whether he had ingested the same toxin.
There’s an ongoing investigation into the matter.
During the Clinton administration, the chief chef was designated the “presidential food taster,” according to the former White House chef Walter Scheib.
“He said, ‘Yeah, the chef is the taster. We are the last ones to taste it before it goes out,'” [writer Adrian] Miller said of his talk with Scheib.
What’s more, he said, the White House has an elaborate system to keep food for the first family and even state dinners safe. Primarily, the kitchen works with companies that have undergone background checks.
“Discretion is valued,” he said. “If you find somebody bragging about that, you shouldn’t trust them,” said Miller.
Interestingly, Scheib also said that sometimes the most secure way to serve food to the president is to “just go to the store and shop at the last moment.”
That might explain Trump’s ongoing penchant for fast food.
And, according to a 2013 article by Business Insider:
It’s very likely the President has a food taster, and despite criticism of the practice under President Barack Obama, the mystery anti-poison position apparently goes back to the days of Ronald Reagan.
The recent taster controversy was sparked after a report of the President not eating at a lunch with Republican senators earlier this month.
“Apparently he has to have essentially a taster, and I pointed out to him that we were all tasters for him, that if the food had been poisoned all of us would have keeled over,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) told the Daily Mail after the lunch. “He did look longingly at it and he remarked that we have far better food than the Democrats do, and I said that was because I was hosting.”
White House sources have confided to Alex Jones that there’s been other poisoning attempts against the president in the past. We’re going to break down this live on air while also analyzing other components of the Deep State coup.
Despite the fact that this news broke over the weekend, there’s hardly any coverage regarding the fact that the president made a very rare, unexpected visit to a medical center.
Historically, time-delayed poisons were popular with assassins due to their ability to get past food tasters and other chemical tests that are done on food before it’s eaten.
Powerful leaders were routinely drugged or poisoned throughout the ages.
The president isn’t showing any outward signs of being sick, but he was put though a battery of tests as a precaution.
Additionally, investigators are also considering whether the secret service agent who died while travelling with President Trump in July 2018 was poisoned, according to a source.
In the early stages of Trump’s presidency, Infowars reported that the president may have been drugged which led to a slowdown of his speech.
The president was also sabotaged in various other ways, including the removal of documents and news articles from his desk and the outright blocking of his directives from being carried out.
Attorney General William Barr has also said the executive branch is being sabotaged from doing its basic functions.
This bureaucratic resistance against the president is all part of the climate of division and “civil war” occurring in the country – and it’s par for the course historically when someone is trying to be removed from power – and poisoning is the logical next step given historic trends.

Impeachment Process: The Dumbing Down Of America

Gerald Celente exposes the fraudulent impeachment proceedings and how America is being dumbed down in the process.

Celente warns that people are being distracted away from other important events.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]

Free Roger Stone

Roger Stone was railroaded by a system that feeds on its own power. In order for that type of power to exist, corruption must fuel the engine. And so it was with the accelerated witch trial of Roger Stone, who faces prison for the remainder of his natural life for confronting what lies at the heart of that corruption. Sending a chilling effect toward those that would follow in Stone’s courageous footsteps.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 20th, 2019.]

Thursday, November 14, 2019

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

Democrats Are Going INSANE Due To Politics, Survey Shows EVERYTHING Makes Them Angry (Tim Pool)

But the question is really about trust in media. Republicans are less angry because they just assume the news is fake mostly, Democrats believe it all and are being driven mad.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 14th, 2019.]

Friday, November 8, 2019 Being Censored For No Good Reason - I'm Even Reposting This Video Because The Account It Was On Was Totally Deleted For No Specific Reason Being Censored For No Good Reason - I'm Even Reposting This Video Because The Account It Was On Was Totally Deleted For No Specific Reason

DEBUNKED: Why 'Hate Speech' Doesn't Exist!:

Team Tulsi Responds To 9/11 Truth Letter

In what looks to be an actual written response followed by an auto response they said...

Aloha John, Thank you for sharing that we have forwarded your message onto Tulsi and the team

Team Tulsi

Auto response starts right above this text


Here's My Letter To Tulsi Gabbard About 9/11 Truth... Will YOU Please Send One Too?:

Here's My Letter To Tulsi Gabbard About 9/11 Truth... Will YOU Please Send One Too?

Here's My Letter To Tulsi Gabbard About 9/11 Truth... Will YOU Please Send One Too?

Dear John-Michael,

Thanks for your note! My team and I read every email that comes in and your feedback, ideas, stories, prayers, hopes and dreams are important to us. This campaign is about lifting up the voices of the people. Your voice. Our voice.

Dear Future President,

Thank you for your 9/11 related efforts, but I assure you as an intelligent respected researcher/activist, 9/11 was an inside job to some extent. Even if we accept that bin Laden and gang were the masterminds of 9/11 it does not negate a slew of evidence indicating that they were allowed to succeed and had their results amplified. 9/11 very well could have been an inside and an outside job.

The physical evidence, NORAD stand-down, and whistleblowers, prove the case.

Please look into the info below. Thank you for fighting to stop the endless regime change wars.

JM Talboo

The below link proves that many thousands of family members want a new investigation and think 9/11 was an inside job to some degree. Likely the amount of people killed that day is outnumbered by these 9/11 victim's family members.

9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Target - Guide to 9/11 whistleblowers:

Firefighters for 9/11 Truth:

Peer-Reviewed Papers:

Rogue Members of the US Government Involved in 9/11?

Rogue Elements of US and Other International Intelligence Agencies Involved in 9/11?:

Foreknowledge and NORAD Stand-Down:

They REALLY oughta know better - Critiques of claims made by several prominent and semi-prominent 9/11 debunkers:


Tucker Carlson interviews Tulsi Gabbard and 2 family members--very different from his former interviews with Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin: