Daily Archives: September 26, 2019

September 26 Saved by Grace

Scripture Reading: 2 Corinthians 5:14–17

Key Verse: 2 Corinthians 5:17

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

Grace is God’s goodness and kindness freely extended to the utterly undeserving—you and me. Because of His grace, He offers salvation through Jesus Christ so that we might have a relationship with Him. In that relationship, His viewpoint of us has changed. God, in His grace, does these things for us:

  • Declares we are righteous. Christ’s righteousness is credited as our own (2 Corinthians 5:21). The guilt and shame of sin has been removed (Romans 8:1). We can live boldly for Jesus no matter who we once were.
  • Claims us as family. A spiritual adoption has taken place so that we might become children of God and call Him “Father.” No matter how insignificant the world says we are, we are to live our days remembering we’re children of the King.
  • Gives us, who were spiritually dead, a new heart and a new spirit. We are born again. We have a fresh start in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17).
  • Raises us out of the life we used to live into a new life with Him. The seal of this new life is the presence of the Holy Spirit, whose fruit is love, joy, and peace.
  • Sets us free from the power of sin, Satan, and self. Obedience and victory become a reality as we grow in faith and trust.

Praise God for His unending grace!

Thank You for Your unending grace, Lord. Thank You for declaring me righteous and claiming me as family, providing an inheritance, setting me free from sin, and raising me from the old life to a new life.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2006). Pathways to his presence (p. 281). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Joel Osteen Opens Church Cafe That Only Serves Lukewarm Beverages — The Babylon Bee

HOUSTON, TX—Lakewood Church has everything you could want for a fine day of churchgoing, shopping, and fine dining. But Pastor Joel Osteen was never comfortable with the church’s cafe, which only served hot or cold beverages.

“These hot and cold beverages are making me uncomfortable and their negativity is really rubbing off on me,” Osteen said at a recent leadership team luncheon as he opened up a fortune cookie, immediately scribbling down whatever it said for use in his next sermon. “I think from now on we should just serve lukewarm coffees and teas—not too hot, not too cold, just middle of the road, easygoing, not rockin’ the boat too much, you know?”

Church leaders jumped into action and began making the switch. The cafe’s grand reopening occurred this past Sunday. Lakewood church attendees reported they were very happy with the lukewarm beverages, as they weren’t “too extreme” but had just the right amount of complacency for a satisfying taste and mouthfeel.

“The problem with hot or cold beverages is that I want to spit them out of my mouth,” Osteen said. “I’m always like, ‘Oh, how I wish it were lukewarm, like a victorious Christian life!'”

via Joel Osteen Opens Church Cafe That Only Serves Lukewarm Beverages — The Babylon Bee

September 26 Staying on Course

Scripture Reading: Philippians 3:7–10

Key Verse: Philippians 3:8

Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ.

Jesus was very clear when He gave parting instructions to His followers: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19 nasb).

This is the mission of the church today—or should be. Some churches, large and small, drift away theologically and doctrinally from the absolute truth of Scripture. Others suffer from a lack of Christ-centered leadership, with much friction between the pastor and the staff. And some leaders forfeit the trust of the congregation by willfully pursuing sin. If not addressed, these problems bog down the church and cause it to lose sight of the ultimate purpose.

Take a serious look at the vitality and activity of your church:

  • Is Bible teaching a priority?
  • Is evangelism emphasized?
  • Are people involved in service to the community?
  • Is the worship service meeting the needs in your life?
  • Are there real opportunities for fellowship and support?

If you find the answers to these questions less than satisfying, ask God to show you how to pray for its leaders. Be willing to obey Him, and make it your goal to worship with people who are committed to Christ above all else.

O Lord, let my church be a place where Your Word, worship, and evangelism are emphasized. Draw us to serve our community. Make our fellowship one of mutual support. Bless our leaders. Help us stay on course to accomplish our mission.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (1999). On holy ground (p. 281). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

September 26 Born for Adversity

Scripture reading: Psalm 35:9–15

Key verse: Proverbs 17:17

A friend loves at all times,

And a brother is born for adversity.

You’ve probably heard the homespun phrase that you never know who your real friends are until trouble comes. But perhaps you didn’t realize that a biblical principle is behind the saying.

Today’s verse states, “A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.” Maybe you’ve wondered who among your friends would love you at all times, not just when there are peace and plenty. But have you ever stopped to consider whether you are that kind of friend? Are you a brother or sister who was born for adversity?

One of life’s most difficult challenges is to be a stalwart for a hurting friend, particularly if his trial involves potential wrongdoing or error on his part. Sometimes we are quicker to judge and condemn than to pray and be available to vicariously share a burden.

Take a moment to consider how you have reacted to the adversities of your friends throughout the years. Did you steer clear for a while until the situation settled? Did you cease relations altogether? Or did you put an arm around your struggling buddy and lend an ear, encouragement, and prayer?

Christ called His disciples friends. And when they hurt, He was there. Always. His example remains perfect today, and you’ll never know what kind of real friend you are until their trouble comes.

Dear Lord, help me be a true friend to those in need, a strength to the weak, a comfort to the hurting.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2000). Into His presence (p. 281). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

President Trump Delivers Remarks About Ukraine Call and IC “Whistleblower” From Joint Base Andrews… — The Last Refuge

Arriving at Joint Base Andrews President Trump delivers remarks to the press pool about the ongoing fiasco with an unnamed hearsay “whistleblower” and the political use of a constructed controversy.  [Video Below, Transcript will Follow]

“I just watched a little of the news on TV. It’s a disgrace.” – “It’s Adam Schiff making up stories.” – “Democrats are going lose the election and they know it. That’s why they are doing it.” – “It should never be allowed.” – “I have to put up with Adam Schiff on an absolutely perfect phone call with the new president of Ukraine. That was a perfect call.” – “But Adam Schiff doesn’t talk about Joe Biden and his son walking away with millions of dollars from Ukraine, and then millions of dollars from China.”…

via President Trump Delivers Remarks About Ukraine Call and IC “Whistleblower” From Joint Base Andrews… — The Last Refuge

Judicial Watch Sues for Records of V.P. Biden Pressuring Ukraine | CNS News

Joe Biden (Getty Image/Joshua Lott)

Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records about the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor after then-Vice President Joe Biden threated to withhold aid. The lawsuit was filed Wednesday against the U.S. Department of State (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:19-cv-02893)).

The suit was filed after the State Department failed to respond to a May 7, 2019, FOIA request seeking access to the following records:

  1. Any and all records regarding, concerning, or related to Viktor Shokin’s investigation of Mykola Zolchevsky and Shokin’s resignation at Ukraine’s Prosecutor General.
  2. Any and all records of communication between any official, employee, or representative of the Department of State and any official, employee, or representative of the Office of the Vice President regarding Viktor Shokin.

In a widely distributed video, Joe Biden confirmed that he successfully pressured, under threat of withholding $1 billion in U.S. government aid, the Ukrainian government to fire Shokin, who had allegedly launched an investigation into Burisma, which had purportedly paid Biden’s son Hunter $50,000 a month.

“The latest assault on President Trump is an obvious attempt to protect Joe Biden from the corruption scandals involving his son,” said Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch’s latest lawsuit will be the first to of many to try to get to the bottom of this influence-peddling scandal.”

Source: Judicial Watch Sues for Records of V.P. Biden Pressuring Ukraine

FIGURES. Rep. Ratcliffe Reveals Trump-Hating Whistleblower Based His Complaint on Anti-Trump Fake News Media Including WaPo, NY Times, and Politico (VIDEO) (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

The House Intelligence Committee led by Rep. Adam Schiff and ranking member Rep. Devin Nunes held a committee hearing on the anti-Trump whistleblower report with DNI Director Maguire.

Rep. John Ratcliffe stood out during the hearing. Ratcliffe destroyed all hopes for impeachment during his questioning of DNI Maguire.

Ratcliffe, who was asked by President Trump to take over the Director of National Intelligence but withdrew his name, tore into the liberal media lies and omissions.

Rep. Ratcliffe pointed out numerous errors, conjecture and lies in the whistleblower report on President Trump’s July conversation with President Zelensky from Ukraine.

Ratcliffe then revealed that the anti-Trump whistleblower based his complaint on fake news outlets The Washington Post, New York Times, Politico, The Hill, etc.
Wow!

Rep. Ratcliffe: The Democrats are intent on impeaching President Trump for lawful conduct… The whistleblower then goes on to say, ‘I was not a direct witness to the events described’ … In other words, all of this is secondhand information. None of it is firsthand information. The sources the whistleblower bases his complaints on include the Washington Post, The New York Times, Politico, The Hill, Bloomberg, ABC News and others. In other words, much like the Steel Dossier the allegations in whistleblower’s complaints are based on third-hand mainstream media sources, rather than first hand information

Rep. Ratcliffe DESTROYED the liberal hack and whistleblower.
It was an incredible drubbing of this latest Democrat clown show.

via FIGURES. Rep. Ratcliffe Reveals Trump-Hating Whistleblower Based His Complaint on Anti-Trump Fake News Media Including WaPo, NY Times, and Politico (VIDEO) (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

IT BEGINS: Pelosi Accuses Trump of “Cover Up” After Trump-Zelensky Transcript and Whistleblower Complaint Declassified, Released to Public (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) accused the Trump Administration of a “cover up” in spite of the transcript of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the ‘whistleblower complaint’ being declassified and released to the public.

Pelosi and her Democrat Caucus have nothing to pin on Trump so they are desperately trying to shape public opinion in favor of impeaching President Trump.

“The complaint states that the White House tried to lock down all records of the call…that gave the whistleblower reason to believe that they [the White House] understood the gravity of what transpired in that call,” Pelosi said.

“This is a cover up,” Pelosi said reading the part of the complaint that alleged Trump stored the transcripts of his call with Zelensky in a classified electronic records system. *Gasp*

This so-called whistleblower doesn’t even have first-hand knowledge of Trump’s conversations, but Pelosi is moving full steam ahead with her ‘impeachment inquiry.’

WATCH:

The whistleblower complaint was declassified Wednesday night and released to the public Thursday morning.

Congressman Nunes broke down the complaint Thursday morning during Acting DNI Joseph Maguire’s hearing:

  • The complaint relied on hearsay evidence provided by the whistleblower.
  • The Inspector General did not know the contents of the phone call at issue.
  • The Inspector General found that the whistleblower displayed “arguable political bias” against Trump.
  • The Department of Justice investigated the complaint and determined no action was warranted.

The Trump-Zelensky transcript was declassified and the full, unredacted 5-page transcript was released Wednesday morning.

The transcript destroyed the Democrat-Deep State-media narrative that Trump threatened Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky or engaged in quid pro quo to get him to agree to investigate Joe Biden’s son Hunter for his involvement with Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company.

The transcripts show a very pleasant exchange between President Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky.

The conversation between the two leaders was very cheerful and Zelensky was delighted to speak with President Trump — there were no threats, no quid pro quo.

In spite of Trump’s transparency and willingness to declassify and release documents to the public, Pelosi is still accusing him of a cover up.

The Democrats refuse to accept the results of the 2016 election and will do anything to remove President Trump from office (or prevent him from winning in 2020).

“A whistleblower with second hand information? Another Fake News Story! See what was said on the very nice, no pressure, call. Another Witch Hunt!”Trump said in a tweet Thursday afternoon.

via IT BEGINS: Pelosi Accuses Trump of “Cover Up” After Trump-Zelensky Transcript and Whistleblower Complaint Declassified, Released to Public (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

September 26, 2019 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

Qohelet once again resorts to “better-than” proverbs. He promotes the end over the beginning of a matter in the first colon. In the second colon, he prefers patience over pride.

At first glance, this verse has no obvious connection with the broader context. In addition, it is not immediately obvious how the first colon of the verse is related to the second. Closer analysis, however, recognizes a link with the overall theme of death.

In 7:1b, for instance, Qohelet preferred the day of death (the end of life) over the day of birth (its beginning). While v. 8a has a much broader application, it is surely connected with the idea that the matter here is life.

The second proverb of the verse gives the relative value of patience over pride. Literally, the terms are translated “length of spirit” and “height of spirit,” respectively, and these spatial terms are used metaphorically here. Bringing this out more explicitly, we might translate, “Better long patience than soaring pride.” The expression for patience (ʾerek rûaḥ) is a hapax, but its meaning cannot be disputed. It is synonymous with another expression for patience, namely ʾerek-ʾappayim (“long of anger”), found in Proverbs 14:29 and elsewhere. rûaḥ substitutes for ʾappayim here because of the parallel with gᵊbah-rûaḥ. Also, rûaḥ connotes “anger” (Isa. 25:4; Prov. 16:32) and “impatience” (Mic. 2:7; Prov. 14:29).

R. N. Whybray has suggested a plausible connection between the two parts of the verse: “self-control is needed to carry through any project.” I would go on to add that no one can know the outcome of anything until it is completed, so patience, not pride, is called for, the latter presuming to control the future or outcome. Crenshaw quotes the proverb in 2 Kings 20:11: “Let not the person putting on armor brag like the one taking it off.”[1]


7:8 It seemed to Solomon that the end of a thing is better than its beginning. Perhaps he was thinking of the tremendous inertia that must often be overcome to begin a project and of the drudgery and discipline that go into its early stages. Then by contrast there is the sense of achievement and satisfaction that accompanies its completion.

But it doesn’t take much insight to realize that the rule does not always hold. The end of righteous deeds is better than the beginning, but the end of sin is worse. The latter days of Job were better than the beginning (Job 42:12), but the end of the wicked is indescribably terrible (Heb. 10:31).

The Preacher was on firmer ground when he said that the patient in spirit is superior to the proud in spirit. Patience is an attractive virtue, whereas pride is the parent sin. Patience fits a man for God’s approval (Rom. 5:4), whereas pride fits him for destruction (Prov. 16:18).[2]


8. connected with Ec 7:7. Let the “wise” wait for “the end,” and the “oppressions” which now (in “the beginning”) perplex their faith, will be found by God’s working to be overruled to their good. “Tribulation worketh patience” (Ro 5:3), which is infinitely better than “the proud spirit” that prosperity might have generated in them, as it has in fools (Ps 73:2, 3, 12–14, 17–26; Jam 5:11).[3]


Ver. 8.—Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof. This is not a repetition of the assertion in ver. 1 concerning the day of death and the day of birth, but states a truth in a certain sense generally true. The end is better because we then can form a right judgment about a matter; we see what was its purpose; we know whether it has been advantageous and prosperous or not. Christ’s maxim, often repeated (see Matt. 10:22; 24:13; Rom. 2:7; Heb. 3:6, etc.), is, “He that shall endure unto the end shall be saved.” No one living can be said to be so absolutely safe as that he can look to the great day without trembling. Death puts the seal to the good life, and obviates the danger of falling away. Of course, if a thing is in itself evil, the gnome is not true (comp. Prov. 5:3, 4; 16:25, etc.); but applied to things indifferent at the outset, it is as correct as generalizations can be. The lesson of patience is here taught. A man should not be precipitate in his judgments, but wait for the issue. From the ambiguity in the expression dabar (see on Ch. 6:11), many render it “word” in this passage. Thus the Vulgate, Melior est finis orationis, quam principium; and the Septuagint, Ἀγαθὴ ἐσχάτη λόγων ὑπὲρ ἀρχήν αὐτοῦ, where φωνή, or some such word, must be supplied. If this interpretation be preferred, we must either take the maxim as stating generally that few words are better than many, and that the sooner one concludes a speech, so much the better for speaker and hearer; or we must consider that the word intended is a well-merited rebuke, which, however severe and at first disliked, proves in the end wholesome and profitable. And the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit. “Patient” is literally “long of spirit,” as the phrase, “short of spirit,” is used in Prov. 14:29 and Job 21:4 to denote one who loses his temper and is impatient. To wait calmly for the result of an action, not to be hasty in arraigning Providence, is the part of a patient man; while the proud, inflated, conceited man, who thinks all must be arranged according to his notions, is never resigned or content, but rebels against the ordained course of events. “In your patience ye shall win your souls,” said Christ (Luke 21:19); and a Scotch proverb declares wisely, “He that weel bides, weel betides.”[4]


8 Many commentators (e.g., W. Zimmerli, R. Gordis) consider vv 8–10 as a unit in which Qoheleth offers advice that is very much like traditional wisdom. It is certainly true that vv 8–9 reflect such wisdom.

Taken independently, v 8a could be understood as a comment on vv 1–2. But paired with v 8b, it suggests a venerable wisdom ideal. The sage is better off for being at the end than at the beginning. He is not subject to overconfidence or pride (v 8b); he knows, for experience has taught him. The patient spirit is the opposite of the “short of spirit” (Prov 14:29), who lacks self-control (cf. Prov 25:28). The impatient and proud cannot wait for the final result; they act precipitously; cf. 1 Kgs 20:11. Instead, the wise are careful and cautious. The metaphors with רוּחַ, “spirit,” are determined by extension in space. If רוּחַ is stretched out, it is patient; if stretched high, it is proud (cf. Prov 14:29, “short of spirit”; 16:5, “high of heart”).[5]


[1] Longman, T. (1998). The Book of Ecclesiastes (pp. 187–188). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

[2] MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 901). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

[3] Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 1, p. 409). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[4] Spence-Jones, H. D. M. (Ed.). (1909). Ecclesiastes (p. 158). London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.

[5] Murphy, R. (1992). Ecclesiastes (Vol. 23A, p. 65). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.

Mark Levin: Today’s Hearing on Trump-Ukraine Is Another Spectacle, Another Drama for the Media | CNS News

Nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin (Screenshot)

Editor’s Note: This blog has been updated as of 11:36AM.

In a post on his Facebook page on Thursday at 9:53AM, nationally syndicated radio talk show host, TV host, author and American lawyer Mark Levin blasted today’s hearing on the whistleblower complaint about President Donald J. Trump’s comments to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as “just another spectacle, another drama for the media, another sham.”

“We will learn nothing,” wrote Mark Levin on social media. “This is just another spectacle, another drama for the media, another sham.”

Mark Levin’s remarks stem from an ongoing hearing, wherein Acting Director of National Intelligence (“DNI”) Joseph Maguire is testifying about the whistleblower complaint at the center of the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, and came after the White House declassified and released a transcript of the phone conversation between President Trump and President Zelenskyy of Ukraine and after the release of the whistleblower complaint.

“Today’s hearing, already … now we have the spectacle of Schiff trying to pressure the acting DNI, trying to put words in his mouth that were written by a so-called whistleblower, the latter of whom was not a direct witness to virtually anything, and who is represented by counsel who once worked for Clinton and Schumer,” Levin began his social media post.

“A hearing on hearsay — ,” Levin continued later in his post, “should the so-called whistleblower be the first witness, his identity known, his complaint question[ed] and scrutinized, etc., before questioning the acting DNI about the complaint? Of course, but that wouldn’t serve the purpose of the Democrats and the media.”

In an earlier Facebook post on Thursday morning at 8:15AM, Levin expressed that “our government constantly works with and coordinates with foreign governments on criminal investigations,” and suggested that the president, as head of the executive branch, “can suggest to another head of state that his prosecutor talk to our attorney general.” Levin also commented on the “corrupt Bidens,” suggesting they “are not above the law,” further noting that there is “no constitutional issue” here and that “the president didn’t say anything untoward or improper.”

“We don’t know who the so-called whistleblower is,” Levin wrote in another Facebook post on the hearing Thursday morning at 11:14AM, “yet he is being defended by the Democrats and the media because they like what he wrote in his complaint. Meanwhile, we, the people, know nothing about the so-called whistleblower except he did not have direct, firsthand information about which he wrote his complaint and his lawyer worked for Clinton and Schumer. Yet, we are supposed to believe everything this so-called whistleblower has written and that he or she is a patriot. That’s not how any truth-seeking body is to operate. But, then again, this is not about truth-seeking.”

Levin concluded in yet another Facebook post Thursday at 11:22AM, “The Schiff hearing is another dud.”

Source: Mark Levin: Today’s Hearing on Trump-Ukraine Is Another Spectacle, Another Drama for the Media

THE TIDE TURNS: Democrats FREAK OUT After Transcript Reveals POTUS Trump Is on Crowdstrike Trail — He’s Going After Origins of Russia Hoax! — The Gateway Pundit

On Wednesday the Trump Administration released the White House transcript of President Trump’s call with President Zelensky of Ukraine.

In the transcript released today President Zelensky brought up Rudy Giuliani and his investigations with President Trump.

It was Zelensky who brought up the Biden investigation and NOT PRESIDENT TRUMP!

President Trump then asked Zelensky to look into the 2016 election including information on Crowdstrike.

The President did not ask President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden as was widely reported by the lying mainstream media.

The transcript sent shock waves through the Democrat Deep State.

The transcript revealed President Trump is going after the origins of the Trump-Russia witch hunt.

Trump is going after the Deep State — Trump said he was going to clean the swamp and he meant it.

Foreign Policy expert Tony Shaffer says this is what the left is most worried about.

Rush Limbaugh focused on this bombshell from the transcript on his Wednesday show.

Now, just a little bit more about CrowdStrike ’cause I have paid attention, there’s not a single — I haven’t seen a single report focus on CrowdStrike in this transcript. Now, I know why the Democrats are ignoring it. The Democrats are bent out of shape that Trump even knows about CrowdStrike. They think Trump’s an idiot. With Trump specifically zeroing in on CrowdStrike the Democrats have learned today, after reading that transcript, what Trump is really doing here.

Trump is soliciting assistance from allies all over the world to help Barr prove the scam run against him. That’s what’s going on. That’s what the Democrats have learned today with that word “CrowdStrike” being in the transcript. CrowdStrike, the founder of CrowdStrike is a Russian emigre who hates Putin with a purple passion. It seems to color CrowdStrike’s security work.

Prime example being when CrowdStrike claimed that the Russians had hacked the Ukraine artillery software during the time Russia was invading Ukraine. CrowdStrike claimed the Russian hack caused the Ukrainians to fire on their own troops, killing thousands of them. They were dead wrong about it! And that’s a massive thing to be wrong about. Because the only problem was Ukraine said there was no such hack and no such battle and there were no such casualties.

They said that CrowdStrike had made all of it up. And guess what? CrowdStrike withdrew its report and admitted that it was wrong. Now, this, whether it sounds like it or not, don’t doubt me, this is highly relevant to this entire Russian collusion story, which is why Trump was asking about it and why the Democrats don’t want the Ukrainians to reinvestigate it.

The reference to CrowdStrike, mark my words, is momentous in this transcript today. I know damn well the whistleblower didn’t tell the Democrats about that or they would have a different strategy laid out for this. Because another thing — don’t doubt me on this — what this really means, folks, is that Trump — he was asking for assistance on Biden, but it’s all related. What Trump actually was asking the president of Ukraine to do was to help the attorney general.

President Trump is going after the criminal deep state.
He’s going after the criminals who lied and put America through the Trump-Russia witch hunt.
President Trump is going to clean the swamp.

This has Democrats scared to death.

via THE TIDE TURNS: Democrats FREAK OUT After Transcript Reveals POTUS Trump Is on Crowdstrike Trail — He’s Going After Origins of Russia Hoax! — The Gateway Pundit

Rand Paul Slams Democrats’ ‘Desperate Witch Hunt’ Against Donald Trump | LifeZette

As Democrats push forward with requests for an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump, one of the president’s staunchest allies is calling their bluff.

That ally is Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

“Ever since Donald Trump was declared the winner of the 2016 presidential election, Democrats have been on a mission to reverse those results, even though it’s meant dragging the country through one desperate witch hunt after another,” Paul wrote.

He made his comments in an exclusive op-ed for Breitbart.

See the tweet below on this point.

While some might consider “witch hunt” to be strong language for the campaign against the president, it’s a characterization of Democrats’ tactics that Trump uses himself.

Trump even said on Tuesday it was “greatest witch hunt in American history.”

Paul mocked Democrats for taking the impeachment path even though House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) or anyone had not heard the actual phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, the transcript of which was released by the White House on Wednesday.

Democrats believe Trump decided to withhold U.S. dollars from Ukraine because they refused to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden.

Both Trump and Ukraine’s president deny this.

Related: Lindsey Graham: Dems ‘Out of Their Minds’

Wrote Sen. Paul, “I’ve heard the president both in private and repeatedly in public call for European countries to pay their fair share for NATO and for the defense of Ukraine … Having the U.S. pay less and our allies pay more has been a consistent theme of the president’s since he ran for office, and it should surprise no one that he hit on the need for Europe to play a larger role once again in the transcript he indeed released this morning.”

“What the transcript confirms he did not do on the call, and what much of the controversy has been about, was condition U.S. aid on Ukraine investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter,” Paul noted.

Then the senator really let the Democrats have it.

“If the Democrats want to argue the threat is implied, well, they may want to check the stability of the moral high ground they claim to be standing on, as Democrats are guilty of the exact same behavior they want to impeach the president for,” he said.

Indeed.

Democrats can’t just make up whatever narrative suits their purposes in the moment — and not expect the same absurd standard to not be applied to them.

But Paul understands this is just the beginning for all those Dems aching for impeachment.

Facts have nothing to do with it.

“The transcript will not be enough,” Paul wrote. “The full whistleblower complaint, which I support Congress receiving, will not be enough.”

“Testimony from the whistleblower — even if every single employee of the national security state testified in front of Congress on any topic — would not be enough,” he added.

“If there’s nothing to be found here, Democrats will simply try to find something else or return to old accusations.”

“The hatred for the Trump presidency runs deep on the Left, and hate is consuming,” Paul concluded.

Related: Biased News Anchor Cuts Off Trump

“It’s consuming Congress’ energy and time and the American people’s patience, for starters, and it’s time for the games to stop.”

The games should stop.

Unfortunately, they’ve only just begun, as we see it.

This piece originally appeared in The Political Insider and is used by permission.

Source: Rand Paul Slams Democrats’ ‘Desperate Witch Hunt’ Against Donald Trump

Schiff Rewrites Trump Transcript So It Says What The California Congressman WISHES It Said — The Gateway Pundit

Rep. Adam Schiff has long been a Trump hater. But he took that hatred to an all new high as he chaired a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Thursday featuring testimony from acting Director of National Intelligence  Joseph Maguire.

Midway through his opening statement, the California Democrat decided to deliver a “parody” of what transpired in a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“What happened on the call?” Schiff said.

“Zelensky begins by ingratiating himself, and he tries to enlist the support of the president. He expresses his interest in meeting the president and says his country wants to acquire more weapons to defend itself. And what is the president’s response? Well, it reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates.”

Then Schiff played Trump as a mafioso. ” ‘We’ve been very good to your country, very good, no other country has done as much as we have, but you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy — you’re going to love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking, and so I’m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again, I’ll call you when you’ve done what I’ve asked.’

“This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office,” Schiff said.

But that’s not what transpired in the [phone call — not even close.

In a transcript of the call released Tuesday, here’s exactly what Trump said regarding Biden’s son:

“I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

That’s it. He never demanded Zelensky “investigate” Biden’s son, simply asks him to if he can “look into it.”

But that also has to be taken in context. Trump had previously expressed his interest in allegations that Ukraine had played some role in meddling with the 2016 election. Here’s what Trump said to the Ukraine president:

“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.”

That was clearly an effort by Trump to probe backward into the 2016 election. That’s the “favor” Trump was asking — no pressure, just a favor.

As for that quid pro quo, that didn’t happen, either.

In the call, Trump told Zelensky the US has been “very, very good” to Ukraine.

“A lot of European countries are the same way, so I think it’s something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine,” he said.

Zelensky agreed, telling Trump the United States has been a “much bigger partner” to Ukraine than other European countries regarding sanctions on Russia. Then he said Ukraine was “almost ready” to buy additional Javelin anti-tank missiles from the U.S.

Trump makes no mention of the $391 million in foreign aid that he had directed Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, to put a hold days before the July 25 call. Trump has said that the money was put on hold to press foreign leaders in the region to pony up their own aid. The White House released the funds to Ukraine in September.

So, no quid pro quo, either.

After a Republican bashed Schiff for making light of a serious situation, Schiff said: “As an aside, I want to mention that my colleague is right on both counts. It’s not OK, but also, my summary of the president’s call was meant to be at least part in parody. The fact that’s not clear is a separate problem in and of itself. Of course, the president never said if you don’t understand me, I’m going to say it seven more times. My point is that’s the message that the Ukraine president was receiving in not so many words.”>Watch the video below (skip to 3:58).

via Schiff Rewrites Trump Transcript So It Says What The California Congressman WISHES It Said — The Gateway Pundit

‘He Had Help’: Former CIA, NSC Official Questions ‘Too Convenient’ And ‘Too Perfect’ Whistleblower Report | ZeroHedge News

In light of Thursday’s public release of a ‘whistleblower’ complaint, who was “not a witness to most of hte events described” in their allegation that President Trump abused his office to request that Ukraine investigate former Vice President Joe Biden’s dealings in the country, former CIA analyst and National Security Council (NSC) official Fred Fleitz has provided his take on the whole thing via Twitter.

Notably, Fleitz – CEO of the Center for Security Policy – points out that “The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help,” adding “I know from my work on the House Intel Commitee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?

Fleitz then writes that “that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower,” adding “Were other IC officers involved? Where outside groups opposed to the president involved?

Read the thread below (emphasis ours):

1/ As a former CIA analyst and former NSC official who edited transcripts of POTUS phone calls with foreign leaders, here are my thoughts on the whistleblower complaint which was just released. . . intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/…

2/ This is not an intelligence matter. It is a policy matter and a complaint about differences over policy. Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jusrisdiction over these calls.

3/ It appears that rules restricting access and knowledge of these sensitive calls was breached. This official was not on this call, not on the approved dissem list and should not have been briefed on the call.

.3/ The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help. I know from my work on the House Intel Commitee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?

.4/ It is therefore important that Congress find out where this complaint came from. What did House and Senate intel committee dem members and staff know about it and when? Did they help orchestrate this complaint?

5/ My view is that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower. Were other IC officers involved? Where outside groups opposed to the president involved?

6/ This complaint will further damage IC relations with the White House for many years to come because IC officers appear to be politicizing presidential phone calls with foreign officials and their access to the president and his activities in the White House.

7/ Worst of all, this IC officer — and probably others — have blatantly crossed the line into policy. This violates a core responsibility of IC officers is to inform, but not make policy.

8/ This is such a grevious violation of trust between the IC and the White House that it would not surprise me if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.

Source: ‘He Had Help’: Former CIA, NSC Official Questions ‘Too Convenient’ And ‘Too Perfect’ Whistleblower Report

Blatant Media Lies About Trump-Ukraine Non-Scandal Are Never-Ending — The Federalist

The media’s smear campaign on President Trump rests on information that is obviously fabricated — and the whole charade sounds all too familiar.

The entire news cycle this week has revolved around one thing: President Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine. The problem is, this story sounds all too familiar.

The media propped up a story about Trump-Russia collusion and prolonged a false narrative over the course of three years. The “story” ended with the Mueller report, which proved absolutely no collusion.

Now the mainstream media is running with a new narrative, one that claims Trump directly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to dig up dirt on Joe Biden.

Having learned nothing from 2016, the media are deliberately spreading misinformation, just as they did with the Trump-Russia story. It’s time to straighten this out.

1. Based on the Transcript, There Is No Clear ‘Quid Pro Quo’

The media are running with the idea that there is a clear quid pro quo.

“This really looks like evidence of a damning quid pro quo,” Vox writer Zack Beauchamp wrote.

CNN hopped on the train as well, saying:

The transcript of a July phone call between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky amounts to a clear case of a (barely) unspoken quid pro quo involving the digging up of dirt on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

“Quid pro quo” has become a buzz word when discussing this story, but what does it actually mean? Essentially, it means asking for a favor with the expectation that something will be returned. Was that actually what happened, according to the transcript? No.

2. In Order to Impeach Trump, a Clear Quid Pro Quo Is Needed

NBC News, however, does not believe a clear quid pro quo is needed to successfully impeach Trump.

The law is very clear that a quid pro quo need not be explicit for a crime to have taken place. It can be inferred from the facts as a whole.

Even if there was no quid pro quo (no withholding of military aid, in this case), Giuliani was clearly acting on behalf of Trump’s campaign in seeking to persuade Ukraine to “investigate” the Bidens.

Federal law prohibits a foreign national from directly or indirectly making a “contribution or donation of money or other thing of value” in connection with a U.S. election, and prohibits a person from soliciting, accepting or receiving such a contribution or donation from a foreign national. Damaging information about a political opponent could fit within this definition, meaning Trump and Giuliani solicited an illegal “thing of value” from a foreign national in connection with an election.

What this NBC author deceptively left out was that this isn’t just a “federal law,” it’s the “contributions and donations by foreign nationals” law. The word “thing,” means a tangible item or donation. This isn’t some overarching federal law. It’s a law about contributions, donations, and other tangible items.

Information in no way falls into these parameters, contrary to this NBC reporter’s claims.

3. Biden Was Not Mentioned Eight Times During the Ukraine Call

According to the transcript, Biden was mentioned three times — twice in the same sentence and once in the following sentence.

The transcript reads:

The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General that would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.

Yet prior to the release of the transcript, the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post both claimed Trump mentioned Biden’s name eight times.

4. The Acting Director of National Intelligence Never Threatened To Resign

The headline for the Washington Post article read, “Acting director of national intelligence threatened to resign if he couldn’t speak freely before Congress on whistleblower complaint.”

According to the Washington Post’s own story, an unidentified official told the Post that Joseph Maguire threatened to resign if he wasn’t able to speak freely before Congress. But in the next paragraph, Maguire denies ever having said that.

“At no time have I considered resigning my position since assuming this role on Aug. 16 2019,” Maguire said. “I have never quit anything in my life, and I am not going to start now. I am committed to leading the Intelligence Community to address the diverse and complex threats facing our nation.”

The direct source denying he wants to resign is a better source than an unidentified “official.” But that doesn’t fit the media’s narrative.

5. Trump Did Not Ask the Ukrainian President To Investigate Biden as a ‘Favor’

The word “favor” came some 540-odd words before Biden’s name was ever mentioned. Yet the mainstream media is reporting directly that Trump asked Zelenksy to do him a favor by investigating Biden.

The “favor” Trump asked for was for Ukraine to investigate Crowdstrike, a cybersecurity company. Some 540 words later, Trump asked Zelensky to look into Biden’s interference with a Ukrainian prosecutor, not as a favor the way the media are portraying it to be.

READ: CNN Just Yadda-Yadda-Yadda’d 540 Words To Frame Trump For ‘Favor’ He Never Requested

CNN just skipped right over it on air earlier this afternoon. pic.twitter.com/1cirnrMglW

— Andrew Clark (@AndrewHClark) September 25, 2019

Chrissy Clark is a staff writer at The Federalist. Follow her on social media @chrissyclark_ or contact her at chrissy@thefederalist.com.

via Blatant Media Lies About Trump-Ukraine Non-Scandal Are Never-Ending — The Federalist

Rep. Schiff Fabricates What Trump Said In Ukraine Telephone Call Transcript | The Daily Caller

California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff read a portion of a transcript of a telephone conversation between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart Thursday before the House Intelligence Committee — but the congressman largely fabricated the president’s words.

Schiff claimed he was reading “the essence” of the president’s words to the committee’s witness, Acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire.

“This is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good, no other country has done as much as we have, but you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good.” (RELATED: Adam Schiff Calls On Trump To Release Transcript Of His Call To Ukraine)

The congressman on Wednesday compared Trump’s words to Volodymyr Zelensky as akin to a “Mafia-like shakedown” and he apparently read that perception into his interpretation of the transcript of that conversation.

Schiff continued, making it up as he went along:  “I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my attorney general Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him.” (RELATED: Devin Nunes: ‘The Russia Hoax Has Transformed Into The Ukrainian Hoax)

U.S. Attorney General William Barr delivers remarks during a farewell ceremony for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at the Robert F. Kennedy Main Justice Building May 09, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

U.S. Attorney General William Barr delivers remarks during a farewell ceremony for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at the Robert F. Kennedy Main Justice Building May 09, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The House Intelligence Committee chairman even suggested that Trump told Zelensky, “‘And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy — you’re going to love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking, and so I’m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again, I’ll call you when you’ve done what you’ve asked.’ This is the sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s Oath of Office.” (RELATED: Schiff Clarifies His Fabricated Account Of Ukraine Transcript By Calling It ‘Parody’)

Schiff has said he believes impeachment of the president can be used as a “tool” to expose Trump’s alleged misconduct.

Source: Rep. Schiff Fabricates What Trump Said In Ukraine Telephone Call Transcript

Adam Schiff Makes Up His Own Transcript Of Call Between Trump And Ukraine President — The Federalist

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., made up his own version of a transcript between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart Thursday.

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., made up his own version of a transcript between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart to fit the false narrative being peddled by Democrats and many in the media to frame the president for a crime that never happened.

In his opening statement at a congressional hearing featuring acting Department of National Intelligence Director Joseph Maguire, Schiff gave a fictional retelling of the conversation between the two leaders.

In opening statement, Rep. Schiff makes up dialogue to represent what Trump said to Zelensky. A rough transcript of the president’s words exists, and is available, but Schiff’s version is more dramatic. pic.twitter.com/f7gS4KIPge

— Byron York (@ByronYork) September 26, 2019

Here is what Schiff said:

And what is the President’s response — well it reads like a classic organized crime shake down. In essence, what the President Trump communicates is this: We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. You know what I mean? I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of dirt, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, and not just any people. I’m going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States — my Attorney General, Bill Barr — he’s got the whole weight of American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy, you’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking, so I’m only going to say this a few more times, in a few more ways. And don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

The actual transcript says no such thing. The “favor” in question was Trump seeking assistance with the Department of Justice’s probe into the 2016 election meddling by Ukraine. On the phone call, Trump later suggested that Ukrainian officials look into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter for their shady business dealings with a Ukrainian energy company to root out corruption in the European country. While overseeing the administration’s policy toward Ukraine, then-Vice President Biden played a role in firing the Ukrainian prosecutor going after the Ukraine company whose board Hunter sat on for $50,000 a month despite no prior experience working in the industry.

Later in the hearing, Schiff admitted that his fictional account of the transcript was a “parody.”

“My summary of the president’s call was meant to be at least part in parody,” Schiff tried to clarify. “Of course the president never said if I — if you don’t understand me, I’ll say it seven more times.”

Schiff on making up his own Trump call transcript: That was just a “parody”! pic.twitter.com/qCsGRXXkns

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 26, 2019

Democrats and many in the media, however, have pushed a narrative that seeks to charge Trump with conspiring with a foreign leader to meddle in the next U.S. presidential election, mirroring false claims made three years ago when the president was accused of colluding with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Read the full unclassified and unredacted transcript between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky here.

via Adam Schiff Makes Up His Own Transcript Of Call Between Trump And Ukraine President — The Federalist

“I Was Not A Witness To Any Of It” – ‘Whistleblower’ Complaint Released To Public | ZeroHedge News

“I Was Not A Witness To Any Of It” – ‘Whistleblower’ Complaint Released To Public

The House Intel Committee has released the full (modestly redacted) complaint letter from the so-called ‘Whistleblower’ regarding Trump’s “urgently concerning” conversations with Ukraine.

“In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S.
Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to
solicit interference
from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”

“Over the past four months, more than half a dozen U.S. officials have informed me of various facts related to this effort.”

“I am deeply concerned that the actions described below constitute “a serious or flagrant
problem, abuse, or violation of law or Executive Order”
that “does not include differences of
opinions concerning public policy matters,”

So to the crimes and misdemeanours…

 The Ukrainian side was the first to publicly acknowledge the phone call. On the evening of 25 July, a readout was posted on the website of the Ukrainian President that contained the following line (translation from original Russian-language readout):

“Donald Trump expressed his conviction that the new Ukrainian government will be able to quickly improve Ukraine’s image and complete the investigation of corruption cases that have held back cooperation between Ukraine and the United States.”

Well that doesn’t exactly sound “deeply concerning”? But there’s more…

“Aside from the above-mentioned “cases” purportedly dealing with the Biden family and the 2016 U.S. election, I was told by White House officials that no other “cases” were discussed.”

Oh so other people confirmed that Trump did not seek more, but the ‘whistleblower’ claims calls and documents were “locked down” – in some nefarious manner?

“In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior WhiteHouse officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the  official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary—by the White  House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials  understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.”

“White House officials told me that they were ’directed’ by White House lawyers to remove the electronic transcript from the computer system in which the transcripts are typically stored”

And here’s the “smoking gun”…

“During this same timeframe, multiple U.S. officials told me that the Ukrainian leadership was led to believe that a meeting or phone call between the President and President Zelenskyy would depend on whether Zelenskyy showed willingness to “play ball” on the issues that had been publicly aired by Mr. Lutsenko and Mr. Giuliani. (Note: This was the general understanding of the state of affairs as conveyed to me by U.S. officials from late May into early July. I do not know who delivered this message to the Ukrainian leadership, or when.)

Shortly after President Zelenskyy’s inauguration, it was publicly reported that Mr. Giuliani  met with two other Ukrainian officials: Ukraine’s Special Anticorruption Prosecutor, Mr. Nazar  Kholodnytskyy, and a former Ukrainian diplomat named Andriy Telizhenko. Both Mr.  Kholodnytskyy and Mr. Telizhenko are allies of Mr. Lutsenko and made similar allegations in  the above-mentioned series of articles in The Hill.”

The entire note reads like a journalist or lawyer wrote it, and citing NYTimes numerous times lends it even less credibility.

Simply put, some folks told some other folks about administration folks that might be talking to some Ukrainian folks?

Perhaps the most interesting part is the following…

“I was not a witness to most of the events described… However, I found my
colleagues’ accounts of these events to be credible…

Perhaps he would better named a “gossip-blower”

Full Letter below:

Source: “I Was Not A Witness To Any Of It” – ‘Whistleblower’ Complaint Released To Public

Dozens Of Failed Climate Predictions Stretch 80 Years Back | ZeroHedge News

Authored by Peter Svab via The Epoch Times,

Apocalyptic climate and environmental catastrophes of global proportions have decimated the world many times over in recent decades – at least based on dozens of predictions made by various scientists, experts, and officials over the past 80 years.

Newspaper clippings documenting the predictions were recently published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. Many of those were first collected by geologist and electrical engineer Tony Heller, who frequently criticizes—on his RealClimateScience.com website—what he considers fraud in the current mainstream climate research.

The predictions, some going as far back as 1930s, not only at times contradict each other, but sometimes foretell the same imminent catastrophe repeatedly for years, even decades, seemingly undeterred by past failures.

Arctic Meltdown

“All the glaciers in Eastern Greenland are rapidly melting,” the Harrisburg [Pennsylvania] Sunday Courier reported on Dec. 17, 1939.

“It may without exaggeration be said that the glaciers—like those in Norway—face the possibility of a catastrophic collapse,” the paper quoted Prof. Hans Ahlmann, a Swedish geologist, from a report to the Geographical Society after his Arctic expedition.

Ahlmann, a world authority on climate and glaciers in his time, was even more graphic eight years later.

“The possibility of a prodigious rise in the surface of the ocean with resultant widespread inundation, arising from an Arctic climate phenomenon was discussed yesterday by Dr. Hans Ahlmann, a noted Swedish geophysicist at the University of California Geophysical Institute,” a 1947 article in The West Australian said.

“The Arctic change is so serious that I hope an international agency can speedily be formed to study the conditions on a global basis,” Ahlmann said.

Stories about a melting Arctic were still in vogue with the media in the 1950s.

“The glaciers of Norway and Alaska are only half the size they were 50 years ago,” said Dr. William Carlson, an Arctic expert, according to the Feb. 18, 1952, edition of The Cairns [Australia] Post.

“There are now six million square miles of ice in the Arctic. There once were 12 million square miles,” said Arctic explorer Adm. Donald McMillan, according to the March 10, 1955, issue of Rochester, New York’s Democrat and Chronicle.

‘Population Bomb’

In the 1960s, a new environmental prediction was on the rise—overpopulation.

“It is already too late for the world to avoid a long period of famine,” The Salt Lake Tribune reported in 1967, citing Paul Ehrlich’s prediction of famines by 1975.

Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist and author of “The Population Bomb,” proposed lacing staple foods and drinking water with sterilizing agents to cut the growing population of the United States, according to the report.

Ehrlich was on fire by 1970, getting two dozen speaking requests per day and predicting that America would be rationing water by 1974 and food by 1980, California’s Redlands Daily Facts reported.

But around the same time, a new prognosis was on the horizon.

Global Cooling

“Scientist predicts a new ice age by 21st century,” The Boston Globe reported on Apr. 16, 1970, saying that pollution expert James Lodge predicted that “air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the new century.”

In 1972, two Brown University geologists wrote a letter to President Richard Nixon, reporting that a conference attended by “42 top American and European investigators” concluded “a global deterioration of climate, by order of magnitude larger than any hitherto experienced by civilized mankind, is a very real possibility and indeed may be due very soon.”

“The present rate of cooling,” they said, “seems fast enough to bring glacial temperatures in about a century, if continuing at the present pace.”

By 1975, the writing was on the wall, with major publications including The Washington Post, The Guardian, and Time magazine running their own stories on the predictions of a coming ice age.

“An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere,” The New York Times reported in 1978.

A year later, the paper was reporting the opposite—a prediction of an Arctic meltdown, blaming global warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions.

“There is a real possibility that some people now in their infancy will live to a time when the ice at the North Pole will have melted, a change that would cause swift and perhaps catastrophic changes in climate,” the 1979 article said.

Apparently, The Chicago Tribune didn’t get the memo, still reporting the “global cooling” narrative in 1981.

Arctic Meltdown 2

By the late 1980s, the narrative had switched to global warming for good, again predicting polar ice melting on a catastrophic scale.

“A senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000,” California’s San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989. “Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos, said Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program.”

The first to disappear were to be the island nations teetering just a few feet above the ocean level.

The small nation of Maldives was threatened to be completely covered by “a gradual rise in average sea level,” Agence France-Presse reported in 1988, noting that “the end of the Maldives and its people could come sooner if drinking water supplies dry up by 1992, as predicted.”

Yet 31 years later, the Maldives are thriving. Its population has doubled since the 1980s, and its picturesque islands are “set for a flurry of new resort openings,” Hotelier Maldives reported in 2018.

After a pause from the 1950s to the 1980s, the predictions of an Arctic meltdown are back in full swing in recent decades. The region was meant to be ice-free in summer by 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2018, based on various predictions.

Yet the Greenland Climate Research Centre reported plenty of ice in the Arctic in August 2019.

Some scientists have argued the earth is currently undergoing warming largely caused by carbon emissions due to fossil fuel burning; other scientists disagree, assigning the dominant effect to other forces or even disregarding the warming as insignificant.

Source: Dozens Of Failed Climate Predictions Stretch 80 Years Back