Daily Archives: February 8, 2020

‘Bullets, Not Hugs’: Mexico Deploys Elite Marines To Fight Drug Cartels In Response To Pressure From Trump Admin | ZeroHedge News

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has deployed Mexico’s largely sidelined elite marine force to fight drug cartels, following pressure from the Trump administration to beef up its fight against illicit substances, according to the Wall Street Journal – which notes that the move marks a shift from a “counternarcotics strategy that largely ended the pursuit of high-profile arrests and focused almost exclusively on poverty alleviation.”

“We are operating again,” said one senior Mexican navy officer, adding “The targets we need to go after have been defined.”

Marines presented Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán to the media in Mexico City after his capture in 2014. He later escaped, and was recaptured in 2016. (Photo: ronaldo schemidt/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images)

The new strategy comes amid growing alarm in Washington that Mexico has failed to control the drug trade highlighted by the November murder of nine US citizens by suspected cartel hit men. According to preliminary numbers, 2019 murders in Mexico are on track to exceed 2018’s record of 36,685, according to the report.

Spearheading the Trump administration’s push is US Attorney General William Barr, who has visited Mexico twice to encourage AMLO to bring the marines back to counternarcotics enforcement, as well as beefing up extraditions of suspects who have fled the US while wanted for crimes. In January, Barr urged the Mexican government to target fentanyl labs, as well as crack down on seaports used to deliver precursor chemicals used in the labs.

President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico, right, met with U.S. Attorney General William Barr at the National Palace in Mexico City in December.

In exchange for the enhanced crackdown, the US has agreed to step up efforts to prevent guns from being smuggled into Mexico, according to the Journal‘s sources.

The marines, the Mexican security force that U.S. officials say they trust the most, were behind most high-profile arrests and killings of cartel leaders in the past two decades, including twice capturing drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán.

The elite navy force was largely sidelined by Mr. López Obrador soon after he took office in late 2018, part of a strategy by the new government to halt the pursuit of top cartel figures and focus instead on attacking poverty—an approach it dubbed “hugs, not bullets.”

Last year, the marines took part in few counternarcotics operations. But in recent weeks, marine units have been involved in a flurry of high-profile arrests, including of the head of a Mexico City cartel and close relatives of two major drug lords. –Wall Street Journal

Mexico-city based security consultant Eduardo Guerrero told the Journal that the “Hugs, not bullets” approach is changing, and that he expects Americans ” to take a very proactive role in pushing Mexico to confront the most powerful groups, especially the Sinaloa and the Jalisco New Generation cartels.”

The Trump administration began increasing pressure on Mexico in November following the murders of three mothers and six of their children in a fundamentalist Mormon compound in the northern state of Sonora. Cartel gunmen reportedly ambushed the families while fighting for control of the area where the victims lived.

After the massacre, Mr. Trump said the U.S. would designate Mexico’s drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a move that Mexico strongly opposed. Mr. Trump suspended the decision after Mr. Barr met with senior officials during a trip to Mexico in December. –Wall Street Journal

Barr’s visits have shown measurable results thus far, with Mexico stepping up the pace of extraditions (37 since December out of 58 in all of 2019) according to the Mexican Attorney General’s office.

Source: ‘Bullets, Not Hugs’: Mexico Deploys Elite Marines To Fight Drug Cartels In Response To Pressure From Trump Admin

Rudy Giuliani predicts Trump will be ‘totally vindicated’ by ‘smoking gun’ in Hunter Biden probe: ‘We’ve got the documents’

Three witnesses are ready to “name names” in an investigation into Hunter Biden and alleged Ukraine corruption, Rudy Giuliani claimed Saturday night.

Source: Rudy Giuliani predicts Trump will be ‘totally vindicated’ by ‘smoking gun’ in Hunter Biden probe: ‘We’ve got the documents’

Tulsi Gabbard Defends Trump Firing Vindman Brothers, Sondland. Rips DNC, Bloomberg. | The Daily Wire

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) defended President Donald Trump’s decision to fire two brothers at the National Security Council (NSC) and an ambassador on Friday in an interview on Fox News.

Late on Friday, news broke that the Trump administration removed Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and attorney Yevgeny Vindman from the NSC, and also recalled U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.

“You know, the president yesterday, as you probably know, Congresswoman, fired Gordon Sondland, our Ambassador to Ukraine, and Alexander Vindman, top security official,” host Neil Cavuto said. “A lot of people were likening it to another, you know, Friday night massacre akin to what Richard Nixon did back in the ‘70s. Do you agree with that?”

“Ultimately, whether people like or not, there are consequences to elections,” Gabbard responded. “And the president has, within his purview, to make the decisions about who he’d like serving in his cabinet.”

At an earlier point in the interview, Gabbard took aim at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg when asked what she thought about the DNC making the rules easier for Bloomberg to qualify for the debates.

“It’s wrong. It’s wrong,” Gabbard responded. “The fact that a billionaire can come in and have that kind of influence to change the rules of the DNC all of a sudden, not coincidently, to be able to benefit Michael Bloomberg while voters here in New Hampshire and across the country are saying, hey, we want to be able to make the best informed decision possible before we go in and cast our vote, understanding the seriousness of this election.”

“But they’re not able to do so so long as both the DNC and some of the corporate media partners are enacting these rules where they are playing favorites,” Gabbard responded. “They are picking winners and losers before voters have the opportunity to do so.”



NEIL CAVUTO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: So poking around the state here, we’re seeing a lot of the candidates show up at various rallies and events, including Joe Biden who is busy crisscrossing the state as well. A lot of the candidates will be doing that, including my next guest, the Hawaii Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard who joins us right now in the flesh.

Good to see you.

REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI), 2020 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Good to see you. Thanks for having me.

CAVUTO: You saw this debate over what happened in Iowa.


CAVUTO: A lot of people think even Tom Perez, the head of the Democratic National Committee, he should go. What do you think?

GABBARD: I think first, they should actually solve some of the problems. I think the more we learn about all of the things that went wrong really are a disservice to the voters in Iowa who went and they spent their time to let their voices be heard. And yet, their voices have not been heard in a resounding and very clear way.

I would think that, whether it’s the Iowa caucus chair working in concert with the DNC chair, they would proactively, themselves, want to go and make sure that those results are accurately counted to best serve the residents of Iowa.

CAVUTO: You know — as you know, Iowa holds a unique position as the first in the nation contest. Do you think it should have that four years from now?

GABBARD: That’s up to the states to decide. The states determine when they hold their primary elections. What I’ve been advocating for now for years are some very key reforms to our Democratic primaries. I think they should be open primaries.

I think they should allow same-day registration so you don’t have people in New York, for example, who if they didn’t register, I don’t know, something like five months before election day, they can’t go and vote. And I think we need to get rid of superdelegates.

Once again, this is continuing to be an issue of concern to voters here in New Hampshire who are worried about their vote actually being counted and how they don’t want it to be overruled by a small group of individuals who can come in and say, you know what, I don’t — I don’t think you guys know what you’re doing. We’re going to come in and decide —


CAVUTO: Well, you know they’re talking that way again —


GABBARD: — this election —

CAVUTO: — Congresswoman, right?

GABBARD: That’s the concern —

CAVUTO: I mean, since the emergence of Bernie Sanders as a possible nominee, they’re revisiting this rule in place now —


CAVUTO: — that superdelegates can’t vote on the first ballot. If they do that — change that, what do you think?

GABBARD: Well, the issue is — you know, I think, moving it back from the first ballot to the second ballot was a very small step in the right direction. But I want to be clear, we’ve got to get rid of superdelegates all together. And that change was not anywhere near enough, once again, to make sure that we as Democrats are standing by the decision that voters make on who our Democratic nominee should be.

CAVUTO: And you like the idea of an open primary where this way — you know, not just anyone in any party — any stream (ph) would be able to vote. If that were the math, I mean, you would poll a lot better because Conservatives are drawn to you, Independents are drawn to you. But in some of these rules, you’re kind of between a rock and a hard place.

GABBARD: Well, this is bigger than — this is not about me or my campaign. This is something I’ve been calling for for years, since the 2016 primary elections where I saw and I heard and met with people who are Democrat, who are Independents — who are here in New Hampshire — who are undeclared and who want to make sure that their voice is heard. We need to make it as easy and as accessible as possible for people to go in and participate in our democracy.

CAVUTO: How do you feel — and let’s say, you weren’t able to participate in the debate last night and yet they recently made rules in the party to all but grease the skids for Michael Bloomberg being able to debate. What do you think of that?

GABBARD: It’s wrong. It’s wrong. The fact that a billionaire can come in and have that kind of influence to change the rules of the DNC all of a sudden, not coincidently, to be able to benefit Michael Bloomberg while voters here in New Hampshire and across the country are saying, hey, we want to be able to make the best informed decision possible before we go in and cast our vote, understanding the seriousness of this election. But they’re not able to do so so long as both the DNC and some of the corporate media partners are enacting these rules where they are playing favorites. They are picking winners and losers before voters have the opportunity to do so.

CAVUTO: Do you think you’re just the odd-woman-out in this environment, though, that going after Hillary Clinton, now suing Hillary Clinton out, for saying you’re an agent of the Russians and all that — challenging the way they go about establishing a nominee and the process they use, that it’s an uphill battle for you —

GABBARD: Of course.

CAVUTO: — that you’re going against the tide —

GABBARD: We’re — I think it’s how you determine what the tide is. If you’re looking at the powerful elite in Washington, absolutely. I and so many people across the country are challenging the powerful elite who have shown they are not working for the best interests of the people.

So we’re calling for the truth, we’re calling for a straight-forward process for voters to make sure that their voices are heard in this democracy and so that we can actually have a government that’s of, by, and for the people — not of, by, and for the powerful elite in Washington.

CAVUTO: All right. You’re up against, you know, a fundraising disadvantage. I was noticing, Congresswoman, in this state Tom Steyer has already spent north of $15.5 billion if you include New Hampshire and surrounding media markets.


CAVUTO: Michael Bloomberg, who essentially is getting — you know, not focusing on this state. He’s spent $6.2 million, Bernie Sanders $3.7 million, Mayor Pete, at recently $1.4 million. You are at about $390,000.

GABBARD: We are at a disadvantage. I’ll take the opportunity now to ask your viewers if you’d like to contribute to my campaign — go to tulsi2020.com because we really are — I’m focused on really delivering my message directly to voters here in New Hampshire and across the country, understand what —

CAVUTO: Could you accept any of those other candidates, though — if any one of them became the nominee, could you support them?

GABBARD: I’m focused — I’m focused on — on winning.

CAVUTO: No, I’m sure you are but —

GABBARD: And here’s why — and here’s why —

CAVUTO: You don’t join the camp that says a socialist in Bernie Sanders is the nominee is political suicide?

GABBARD: No, I don’t. I don’t believe that.


GABBARD: What I believe and what I hear from voters here is that they want a new generation of leadership. But they also want someone who has experience — experience to walk in on day one prepared to lead and to serve as Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces and experience to be able to work with Congress to be — to actually be able to get things done, to solve problems.

And what I bring to the table is experience in both of those areas, having served at the federal, state, and local levels of government, serving in Congress now for seven, going on eight, years, and having served in the military for 17 years and deploying twice to the Middle East, able to bring people together, heal these divides in our country where while we can agree to disagree on certain issues, even strongly, we stand together motivated by this love for our country and an understanding that when we stand and work side-by-side as Americans, we can accomplish anything.

CAVUTO: You know, the president yesterday, as you probably know, Congresswoman, fired Gordon Sondland, our Ambassador to Ukraine, and Alexander Vindman, top security official. A lot of people were likening it to another, you know, Friday night massacre akin to what Richard Nixon did back in the ‘70s. Do you agree with that?

GABBARD: Look, I disagree with so many of Trump’s decisions, especially as it relates to foreign policy. I’ve been very outspoken in that area. Ultimately, whether people like or not, there are consequences to elections. And the president has, within his purview, to make the decisions about who he’d like serving in his cabinet.

CAVUTO: All right. Congresswoman, thank you very much.

GABBARD: Thank you very much.


CAVUTO: And you have a long day —

GABBARD: Good to see you, Neil.

CAVUTO: — days of campaigning —

GABBARD: Yes, we do. Seventy-two hours.

CAVUTO: All right. Tulsi Gabbard, thank you very, very much.

Source: Tulsi Gabbard Defends Trump Firing Vindman Brothers, Sondland. Rips DNC, Bloomberg.

Rudy Giuliani Has Damning Memo on Shady January 2016 White House Meeting with Ukrainian Officials (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

Trump Attorney Rudy Giuliani joined Jesse Watters on Saturday night to discuss President Trump’s acquittal.

Rudy also revealed information on the January 2016 meeting in the Obama White House organized by the anti-Trump CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.

As was previously reported in November 2019…

Records show Obama and his Deep State actors in the White House pressured the Ukraine to provide dirt on candidate Trump and his team in early 2016.

Highly respected investigative reporter John Solomon called the 11 AM January 19, 2016 meeting in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building “one of the earliest documented efforts to build the now-debunked Trump-Russia collusion narrative and one of the first to involve the Obama administration’s intervention.”

Suspected Schiff whistleblower Eric Ciaramella chaired that meeting, which was also attended by his frequent collaborator Liz Zentos.

The meeting was ostensibly arranged by the Obama administration for anti-corruption training and coordination, but it didn’t take long for the Ukrainian participants, during the meetings and afterward, “to realize the Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.”

The Obama Department of Justice officials were interested in reopening a closed 2014 FBI investigation that “focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm long had been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.”

Nazar Kholodnytskyy, then Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor and a meeting attendee, said he saw evidence in Ukraine of political meddling in the U.S. election, when the “black ledger,” key evidence against Manafort, who had joined Trump’s campaign on March 29, 2016 and then was promoted to campaign chairman on May 19, 2016, was suddenly released to the media in May 2016.

According to Andriy Telizhenko, then a political officer at the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington DC and a meeting attendee, U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over (it is believed that the FBI attended the January 19, 2016 meeting). Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company, was under investigation in Ukraine for improper foreign transfers of money. At the time, Burisma allegedly was paying then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter as both a board member and a consultant.

All of the above suggests that the Obama Administration used U.S. government personnel in an attempt to enlist a foreign nation to provide negative information about political opponents and to quash investigation of political allies.

And when the Ukrainians did not agree, it appears that the U.S. government pressured the Ukrainian government to replace obstinate Ukrainian officials with more compliant ones.

* * * * * * * * * *

On Saturday night Rudy Giuliani told Jesse Watters that he has three witnesses who claim in January 2016 members of Obama’s NSC violated the law Mueller was investigating Trump of violating.
The Obama officials asked foreigners for dirty information on an American citizen who was going to be involved in a political campaign.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported on the attendees at Ciaramella’s meeting

Rudy says he has a memo and there is no doubt who was at the meeting.

Rudy also claims he has a money laundering evidence that involves Hunter Biden.


via Rudy Giuliani Has Damning Memo on Shady January 2016 White House Meeting with Ukrainian Officials (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

Too Big To Jail?… — The Last Refuge

According to reports late last year U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr were spending time on a narrowed focus looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. One quote from a media-voice increasingly sympathetic to a political deep-state noted:

“One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that “it is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services””. (Link)

It is interesting that quote comes from a British intelligence official, as there appears to be mounting evidence of an extensive CIA operation that likely involved U.K. intelligence services. In addition, and as a direct outcome, there is an aspect to the CIA operation that overlaps with both a U.S. and U.K. need to keep Wikileaks founder Julian Assange under tight control. In this outline we will explain where corrupt U.S. and U.K. interests merge.

To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to CIA interests, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the CIA were in 2016. It is within this network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok is clearly working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI operations.

By now people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor now generally admitted/identified as some kind of a western intelligence operative who was tasked to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}

In a similar fashion the CIA tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Mr. Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.

The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier.

One of the more interesting aspects to the Durham probe is a possibility of a paper-trail created as a result of the tasking operations. We should watch closely for more evidence of a paper trail as some congressional reps have hinted toward documented evidence (transcripts, recordings, reports) that are exculpatory to the targets (Page & Papadop). HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes has strongly hinted that very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. I digress…

However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the CIA; only this time due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S. the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies starts to become important.

Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok has a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and it is almost guaranteed the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane” was co-authored from the CIA by Strzok…. and Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief intelligence officials around Australian Ambassador to the U.K. Alexander Downer.

In short, Peter Strzok appears to be the very eager, profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe, who acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.

Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons.

It was also Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double-agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.

Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan fell out of a helicopter to his death (just before it crashed).

Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep}

All of this context outlines the extent to which the CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit.

International operations directed by the CIA, and domestic operations seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]

Recap:Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Trump, and Donald Trump Jr (FBI).

Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion-GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate.

All of this engagement directly controlled by U.S. intelligence; and all of this intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate is presumably what John Durham is currently reviewing.

The key point of all that background is to see how committed the CIA and FBI were to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ, put a hell of a lot of work into it. Intelligence community work that Durham is now unraveling.

We also know specifically that John Durham is looking at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA.

From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

On Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

♦The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time.

♦The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.

Why the delay?

What was the DOJ waiting for?

Here’s where it gets interesting….

The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange; and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.

Within three months of the grand jury the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018. The EDVA sat on the indictment while the Mueller probe was ongoing.

As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).

As a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is too coincidental.

It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.

This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.

Now Watch This Brief Interview:


The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election. The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC contractor.

The CIA holds a massive conflict of self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim. The FBI holds a massive interest in maintaining that claim. All of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a vested self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.

Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack.

This Russian “hacking” claim is ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus…. Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public.

Now, if we know this, and you know this; and everything is cited and factual… well, then certainly AG Bill Barr knows this.

The $64,000 dollar question is: will they say so publicly?

brennan and haspel

  • Share
  • 1

via Too Big To Jail?… — The Last Refuge

Rudy Giuliani Discusses the Evidence of Corruption The DOJ and Congress are Intentionally Ignoring…. — The Last Refuge

Rudy Giuliani has spent over a year gathering evidence of wide-scale corruption, money laundering and fraudulently created political operations deployed against Donald Trump.

Unfortunately, because of the successful defense strategies of an alliance of interests: Obama White House officials, democrats, republicans, media and current DOJ officials to include AG Bill Barr, Mr. Giuliani has been alinsky’d – isolated, ridiculed, marginalized and controversialized. A once great corruption investigator, prosecutor, New York City mayor and presidential candidate, is now reduced to hosting a podcast.

As a direct result of the DC protective agenda, ie. marginalize the messenger, nothing Giuliani has uncovered will be used, discussed or acted upon by any officials in/around the institutions of government; including the DOJ.  However, Giuliani discusses the evidence with Fox News host Jesse Watters.


via Rudy Giuliani Discusses the Evidence of Corruption The DOJ and Congress are Intentionally Ignoring…. — The Last Refuge

February—8 The Poor Man’s Evening Portion

I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys.—Song 2:1.

Yes! dearest Lord Jesus, thou art all this, and infinitely more to my soul; more fragrant than both, and more precious than all the flowers of the field. Help me, this evening, to contemplate my Lord under those sweet similitudes. Do I not, and shall I not henceforth, in the red blushing beauty of the rose; behold thy human nature, which thou hast assumed for the redemption of thy people? Are not thy bloody sufferings, and thy red apparel, strikingly set forth by the image of the rose; as thy spotless purity is shown under the loveliness of the white lily? Can the sweet-scented rose, even of Sharon, vie with the perfume of the incense of thy righteousness to a poor sinner’s soul? Or can the beauty of the lily be as grateful to the eye as the purity of Jesus to a mind conscious of its own pollution, and beholding itself complete in his salvation, who is “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens?” But wherefore Sharon’s rose, and the valley’s lily, unless it be to speak thine infinite greatness in the excellency of Sharon, and thine infinite humbleness in the lowest part of the earth, as the valley. And indeed, Lord, in thine own wonderful person, thou comprehendest all things, in the length, and breadth, and depth, and height! Thou art both the Alpha and Omega: the first and the last. And though Lord of all, thou didst condescend to become servant of all. Be thou to me, my Lord, every thing that is precious and lovely, as the rose of Sharon, and as the lily of the valley. And oh! give me a sweet conformity to thyself, and thy loveliness. And though my sins be red as scarlet, do thou make them whiter than the snow: though they be as the crimson, do thou make them as the wool! Cause me to be washed in that fountain which thou hast opened for sin and for uncleanness; and bring me to join that happy multitude before thy throne, “who have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb!”[1]


[1] Hawker, R. (1845). The Poor Man’s Evening Portion (A New Edition, pp. 44–45). Philadelphia: Thomas Wardle.

February 8, 2020 Evening Verse Of The Day

Their sin involved an element of omission: They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them (32:8). It was no time at all since they had entered into covenant with the Lord (24:3–8; compare Gal. 1:6), but ‘have turned aside quickly out of the way’ (NKJV). It was the command of their King they had ignored, not merely advice given them by a guide (such as Moses) as to the route they should travel in their lives. There was also the sin of commission: and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ Aaron is not specifically mentioned; he is viewed as merely a tool in the hands of the people. The Lord clearly repudiates the notion that their worship was in some way addressed to him. Israel were worshipping, and sacrificing to, an idol. Whatever Aaron had hoped to achieve by declaring it ‘a festival to the Lord’ had quite clearly failed.[1]

32:8 the way that I commanded them Referring to what is commonly called the Ten Commandments and the laws of the covenant (chs. 20–23), particularly the prohibitions against images (20:4–6, 23). The people accepted the terms of this covenant in 24:3.[2]

8. They have turned aside quickly out of the way. So speedy a transgression, as I have said, aggravates their crime. God then states the nature of their corruption, that they have worshipped a molten calf, that is to say, the work of their own hands. But it is to be observed, that what they had put forward as a colouring for their ungodliness is alleged last, as the climax of their sin; for, when they said that these were their gods which had brought them up, their object was to advance a legitimate excuse, as if they were not falling away from the worship of the true God, and their Deliverer, but that rather it was an evidence of their more fervent zeal, that they should fall down as worshippers before the calf in honour of Him. But God retorts this upon them, and complains of the gross indignity which was put upon Him, when the dead image of a calf was substituted in the place of His glory.[3]

[1] Mackay, J. L. (2001). Exodus (p. 532). Fearn, Ross-shire, Great Britain: Mentor.

[2] Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Ex 32:8). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

[3] Calvin, J., & Bingham, C. W. (2010). Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony (Vol. 3, p. 339). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

In Preparation for the Lord’s Day: Sometimes a Light — The Thirsty Theologian

Sometimes a Light Surprises

imageSometimes a light surprises
the Christian while he sings;
it is the Lord who rises
with healing in His wings;
when comforts are declining,
He grants the soul again
a season of clear shining,
to cheer it after rain.

In holy contemplation,
we sweetly then pursue
the theme of God’s salvation,
and find it ever new.
Set free from present sorrow,
we cheerfully can say,
“E’en let the unknown morrow
bring with it what it may.”

“It can bring with it nothing,
but He will bear us through;
who gives the lilies clothing
will clothe His people, too;
beneath the spreading heavens
no creature but is fed;
and He who feeds the ravens
will give His children bread.”

Though vine nor fig tree neither
their wonted fruit should bear,
though all the field should wither,
nor flocks nor herds be there,
yet God the same abiding,
His praise shall tune my voice;
for while in Him confiding,
I cannot but rejoice.

Hymns to the Living God (Religious Affections Ministries, 2017).


Another Arrangement:

The current hymnal for this series is Hymns to the Living God, published by Religious Affections Ministries. This is such a good hymnal that I’m pretty sure I could happily post every hymn it contains, but I’ll be limiting selections to hymns I have never posted here before, especially those unfamiliar to me (of which there are many). For more information and to purchase this hymnal, visit Religious Affections Ministries.

via In Preparation for the Lord’s Day: Sometimes a Light — The Thirsty Theologian

February 8 Streams in the Desert

Lo, I am with you all the appointed days.” (Matt. 28:20.) (Variorum Version.)

DO not look forward to the changes and chances of this life in fear. Rather look at them with full hope that, as they arise, God, whose you are, will deliver you out of them. He has kept you hitherto; do you but hold fast to His dear hand, and He will lead you safely through all things; and when you cannot stand, He will bear you in His arms.

Do not look forward to what may happen tomorrow. The same everlasting Father who cares for you today will take care of you tomorrow, and every day. Either He will shield you from suffering, or He will give you unfailing strength to bear it. Be at peace, then, put aside all anxious thoughts and imaginations.—Frances de Sales.

“The Lord is my shepherd.”

Not was, not may be, nor will be. “The Lord is my shepherd,” is on Sunday, is on Monday, and is through every day of the week; is in January, is in December, and every month of the year; is at home, and is in China; is in peace, and, is in war; in abundance, and in penury.—J. Hudson Taylor.

HE will silently plan for thee,

Object thou of omniscient care;

God Himself undertakes to be

Thy Pilot through each subtle snare.

He WILL silently plan for thee,

So certainly, He cannot fail!

Rest on the faithfulness of God,

In Him thou surely shall prevail.

He will SILENTLY plan for thee

Some wonderful surprise of love.

Eye hath not seen, nor ear hath heard,

But it is kept for thee above.

He will silently PLAN for thee,

His purposes shall all unfold;

The tangled skein shall shine at last,

A masterpiece of skill untold.

He will silently plan FOR THEE,

Happy child of a Father’s care,

As though no other claimed His love,

But thou alone to Him wert dear.

E. Mary Grimes.

Whatever our faith says God is, He will be.[1]


[1] Cowman, L. B. (1925). Streams in the Desert (pp. 43–44). Los Angeles, CA: The Oriental Missionary Society.

February 8 Bury It, Move On

Pulling down of strongholds … casting down imaginations … bringing into captivity every thought.
(2 Corinthians 10:4–5)

Today God’s giving you the power to pull down those old strongholds that have ruled your life; He’s giving you authority to cast down those imaginations that have had such influence over you and to bring into captivity every thought that doesn’t line up with His Word. If you don’t, they’ll refuse to relinquish their hold over you. God will not do this without you, but He will do it through you! Old thought patterns and unhealed wounds will always try to re-establish control over you. Be careful who your friends are! If they can barely stay afloat themselves, how can they lift you? What you need is release, not reinforcement.

As long as these old issues reign in your life, Christ’s seat is taken. If they are on the throne, then Christ is still on the cross. Put Christ on the throne and your past on the cross.

In the Old Testament a priest could not come into God’s presence if he had touched anything dead. (See Numbers 19:11.) What a picture. If you are going to walk with God, you must bury the past. Forgive those who’ve hurt you—including yourself; then move on with God. Don’t even “touch” those old dead issues anymore. The issue is not whether you remember, but how you remember. God is able to take the sting out of the memory and still leave the sweet taste of victory intact.


No longer will you be limited by what you have been through. Instead you’ll be enriched! (See Romans 8:28.)[1]


[1] Gass, B. (1998). A Fresh Word For Today : 365 Insights For Daily Living (p. 39). Alachua, FL: Bridge-Logos Publishers.

EPIC! Facebook and Twitter Smack Down Pelosi’s Request to Delete Trump Video Meme of Her Tearing Up SOTU Speech — The Gateway Pundit

Tyrant Pelosi demanded Facebook and Twitter take down a very powerful TPUSA video meme tweeted by President Trump of her tearing up his SOTU speech.

President Trump tweeted out the video meme titled, ‘Powerful American Stories RIPPED To Shreds By Nancy Pelosi.’

The video, which can be viewed below, showed Pelosi ripping up Trump’s SOTU speech every time President Trump honored a powerful American story on Tuesday evening.

Pelosi pre-ripped the speech as Trump mentioned Rush Limbaugh’s lung cancer diagnosis, proving she pre-planned the theatrical stunt.

Pelosi is an evil, calculating witch and lashed out at reporters who suggested her ripping up the SOTU speech backfired.

The tyrant then demanded the video be taken down.

The Hill quoted Pelosi spokesman Drew Hamill on her demand to take the video down.

“Hammill said Pelosi’s office has asked both Twitter and Facebook to take down the video.”

Democrat Congressmen also demanded the “deceptively edited video” be taken down.

Twitter and Facebook smacked down Pelosi’s demand and refused to take down the video.

CNBC reported:

Both Facebook and Twitter decided against removing the Trump video, although the companies cited different reasons for their decisions.

Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesman, replied to Hammill on Twitter: “Sorry, are you suggesting the President didn’t make those remarks and the Speaker didn’t rip the speech?”

Hammill fired back: “What planet are you living on? This is deceptively altered. Take it down.”

In the end, both Facebook and Twitter declined to remove the Trump campaign post, citing corporate policies.

Facebook’s Stone told CNBC, “I can confirm for you that the video doesn’t violate our policies.”

Not. Tired. Of. Winning.

Make sure to share the Trump video of Pelosi shredding American stories far and wide!

via EPIC! Facebook and Twitter Smack Down Pelosi’s Request to Delete Trump Video Meme of Her Tearing Up SOTU Speech — The Gateway Pundit

It could take years and cost $1 billion to make a vaccine for the Wuhan coronavirus. But top scientists told us the work could still help halt future outbreaks. | Business Insider


  • Drugmakers are working on vaccines to counter the spreading Wuhan coronavirus. But it will take years to fully test the injections, experts told Business Insider.
  • The research still holds great value for public health, as another coronavirus outbreak is likely to happen in the future.
  • “It will be folly to think that this won’t happen again,” said Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group. “It absolutely will, and history has shown that to be the case.”
  • Previous efforts to make vaccines for similar outbreaks didn’t progress beyond early studies focused on safety. It remains to be seen if new nonprofits focused on vaccines can bring development efforts to completion in this case.
  • Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

As drugmakers race to come up with vaccines to halt the deadly Wuhan coronavirus outbreak, their efforts are likely to come up against the same challenges that have hindered previous searches.

Chief among them: a coronavirus vaccine will most likely take years of development and testing before it can reach a large population, experts told Business Insider. That means that any vaccine is likely to play a limited role in this outbreak, even as urgency builds to address a virus that has killed at least 600 people and sickened more than 31,500.

“When people get up there and say we are going to have a vaccine in months, it is misleading,” Dr. Gregory Poland, the director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research group, said in an interview. “That is not going to happen in the US.”

Poland, who works on vaccine development, said it can cost roughly $1 billion for a vaccine to be approved in the US. It will likely take years for a coronavirus vaccine to progress through the multiple stages of human testing required to assess a vaccine’s safety and effectiveness, he said.


Academics have struggled to definitively pin down the typical R&D cost for vaccines. Estimates have ranged from as low as $200 million to as high as $1.5 billion. Despite that variance, there’s consensus it is a costly and timely endeavor to undertake.

Pharmaceutical and biotech companies like Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, and Inovio Pharmaceuticals have risen to the challenge, unveiling in recent weeks plans to find a vaccine.

Research on a coronavirus vaccine has a lot of value for public health, but it won’t yield a quick cure

The research holds immense public health value, experts said, and could help fight the next outbreak. In the short term, some drugmakers are looking into testing approved medicines for HIV or hepatitis against the virus.

The fact that vaccine research may only pay dividends years down the road creates a substantial challenge.

Pharmaceutical companies will have to commit large amounts of money to research that may fall short, or that might only yield a vaccine after the current outbreak has ended. Governments and nonprofit groups open their wallets when outbreaks dominate headlines, but that funding has historically withered when attention dies down.

Read more: Drugmakers are dusting off their Ebola playbooks as they race to develop coronavirus treatments and vaccines. Here’s how 5 top firms are tackling a contagion that’s already killed 400.

That’s what happened in previous coronavirus outbreaks, including SARS in 2002-2003 and MERS in 2012. In those cases, vaccine candidates haven’t yet progressed beyond early safety testing in people, though researchers are still working on a MERS shot.

Ebola proved the exception, with vaccine efforts restarted in earnest around the 2014 outbreak, building off of decades of prior research.

Ongoing Ebola outbreaks, including a 2018 resurgence in Africa, kept a sense of urgency, and the first Ebola vaccine was approved in December 2019. Reaching that point required several years of testing in thousands of people by Merck, one of the world’s largest drugmakers.

The timeline for a vaccine will be measured in years, not months

Vaccine development experts said it will take years to validate a potential vaccine’s safety and effectiveness — likely not in time to counter this virus’s spread.

“I would be extremely happy to be wrong, but I don’t really see how a vaccine can get put together in time to help out with the likely course of this current outbreak,” Derek Lowe, author of the industry blog In The Pipeline who has more than 30 years of experience in drug discovery, said in an interview.

There have been great improvements over the past few years to create vaccines from scratch more quickly, said Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who has been involved in vaccine research since 1958 and played a big role in developing the rubella vaccine in the 1960s.

Despite those advances, the process still takes years, Plotkin, now an emeritus professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said in an interview.

“For a new coronavirus vaccine to be available for large populations, I would say it’s a matter of two years minimum,” he said.

US health officials have put forward a speedy timeline, but it represents just the first steps of drug development. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Health’s infectious disease unit, said Friday the agency plans to start testing Moderna’s potential vaccine in people within the next next two and a half months, barring any setbacks.

Shares in the biotech climbed more than 15% Friday after Fauci said there have yet to be any “glitches” in using Moderna’s platform.

These first human trials focus on the vaccine’s safety, testing different doses, often in healthy volunteers.

“In less than a year, I’m hopeful we can get at least that piece of the answer,” said Elena Maria Bottazzi, co-director of the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development.

After that, the next round of testing will select a few doses to test in several hundred people.

That tees up late-stage testing, the most challenging stage of drug development. Mayo Clinic’s Poland said it typically requires tens of thousands of patients and hundreds of millions of dollars to run the final phase of testing to make sure a vaccine works and monitor its side effects.

“This will be a good test of how rapidly we can make progress with a protective vaccine,” Plotkin said.

‘It will be folly to think that this won’t happen again’

Despite the multiyear process of testing, the work still holds public health value even if this outbreak subsides before a vaccine is prepared. As the third major outbreak of a coronavirus in the past 20 years, joining SARS and MERS, experts said it’s only a matter of time until the next one.

“It will be folly to think that this won’t happen again,” Poland said. “It absolutely will, and history has shown that to be the case.”

From here, the outbreak can go in two directions, Poland said. It could dwindle out like SARS did or evolve into a full-blown pandemic.

Vaccine investment dries up once epidemics fall out of the news

When thinking back to the previous SARS, MERS and Zika outbreaks, the world’s responses have repeatedly fallen victim to a short attention span.

“A big problem in emerging pathogen vaccine development is it’s in the news, it’s a big issue, governments respond by throwing money on the table,” Poland said. “That disappears once it’s not in the news anymore.”

Structural problems have created this cycle. Drugmakers are for-profit companies with limited money, and these outbreaks carry uncertainty on when they will recur. Additionally, these infections often strike developing countries, where it can be more difficult to make money from vaccine sales.

Plotkin and two other medical experts called in 2015 for a global vaccine development fund to fix what they called a “crisis” in vaccine development.

A version of that launched in 2017, called the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. CEPI for short, the group is backed by governments as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, and the World Economic Forum.

Read more: A coalition backed by Bill Gates is funding biotechs that are scrambling to develop vaccines for the deadly Wuhan coronavirus

Its effectiveness is playing out in real time with the coronavirus. Last month, the group awarded initial funding for three vaccine efforts, and there is an open call for more applications.

The World Health Organization also announced Thursday a February 11-12 meeting of scientists, public health agencies, and funders to accelerate the work being done for a vaccine, along with other medicines and diagnostics.

In the case of Bottazzi, she was involved in developing a SARS vaccine candidate. Funding eventually dried up as the outbreak dwindled. If there had been sustained funding to keep on with development, she said we would have been better prepared for this outbreak.

“We’ve gone through at least three rounds of these epidemics — SARS, MERS and this one,” Bottazzi said. “I really hope the community learns the lesson: do not leave things halfway.”

NOW WATCH: What’s really going on inside an insect-munching venus flytrap

See Also:

Source: It could take years and cost $1 billion to make a vaccine for the Wuhan coronavirus. But top scientists told us the work could still help halt future outbreaks.

Christians Forced to Choose Between State Benefits and Faith | Bitter Winter

Local officials throughout China are intimidating people of faith to renounce religion and start worshiping the Communist Party and its leaders, past and present.

by Tang Zhe

 Ever since President Xi Jinping took office, his portraits and quotes started invading places of worship and even believers’ homes, pushing his personality cult to unprecedented levels. People are also threatened to have their poverty alleviation and other government aid removed if they don’t replace religious symbols with portraits of Xi Jinping or Mao Zedong.  Bitter Winter continues to receive more such reports.

In Fenyi county of the southeastern province of Jiangxi, Caochang township officials came to the home of a Three-Self church member on December 27, 2019. They forced the believer of more than 30 years to replace two religion-themed pictures with a portrait of Xi Jinping.

A Caochang township believer was forced to hang at home a portrait of Xi Jinping.

Village officials visited the woman’s home several times to ensure that she doesn’t host religious meetings or read the Bible, threatening to revoke her subsistence allowance if she does.

In June, government officials tore down a picture with the cross from a wall in the home of a 60-year-old believer in Fenyi county’s Dongcun township. They threw it into a trash bin and posted portraits of Xi Jinping and other CCP leaders in its place.

Portraits of Xi Jinping and other CCP leaders posted in a believer’s home.

“The government is imposing stricter and stricter control over religion. I’m afraid we won’t be able to attend Sunday service in our Three-Self church,” a local churchgoer said worriedly.

Believers in the eastern province of Shandong face similar suppression. On November 15, government officials raided a Three-Self meeting venue, spanning the history of more than 40 years, in Heze city-administered Shan county. They forced their way inside when no one was there and replaced a painting depicting Jesus and embroidery of the cross, displayed in the center of a wall in the hall, with a Xi Jinping portrait. The officials threw away the religious paintings and moved all the tables and chairs into the courtyard.

The next day, they returned to the venue again, threatening to demolish the building if the owner continued renting it to the church and ordered him “not to praise Jesus but the Communist Party because it supports his livelihood.” “You must listen to the Party and follow it forever and ever,” the officials warned before leaving.

In December, two more elderly believers in Shan county had paintings depicting Jesus replaced with images of Xi Jinping. Officials threatened one of the women to revoke her subsistence allowance if she continued believing in God. “You are allowed to worship Xi Jinping only,” the elderly believer was pressured.

“Believing in God is deemed a crime in China, where believers are restricted every day, as their rights and liberties are obstructed,” an elderly Christian from Shandong’s Penglai city, who was also threatened to lose her subsistence allowance, told Bitter Winter. “The CCP propagates the freedom of religion, but persecutes old women like me for their faith.”

In October 2019, a Sola Fide house church member for 26 years from Lu’an city in the central province of Anhui was ordered by a local official to take down a picture with Chinese characters for “God loves the world” she had at home. The woman refused and was warned that her poverty alleviation subsidy would be revoked if she continued resisting. She chose her faith over money, but the officials still took down the picture, saying that she could not keep it even if she gave up the subsidy because “this is the Party’s policy.” He then forcibly took down the picture, replacing it with portraits of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, the first Premier of the People’s Republic of China. He took photos afterward, to send them to the higher-ups.

Portraits of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai were posted in a believer’s home in Lu’an city.

Three minutes to save independent information about China – and perhaps to save human lives

Source: Christians Forced to Choose Between State Benefits and Faith

February 8th The D. L. Moody Year Book

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing.—1 Corinthians 13:1, 2.

A MAN may have wonderful knowledge, may be able to unravel the mysteries of the Bible, and yet be as cold as an icicle. He may glisten like the snow in the sun. Sometimes you have wondered why it was that certain ministers who have had such wonderful magnetism, who have such a marvellous command of language, and who preach with such mental strength, haven’t had more conversions. I believe, if the truth was known, you would find no divine love back of their words, no pure love in their sermons.[1]


[1] Moody, D. L. (1900). The D. L. Moody Year Book: A Living Daily Message from the Words of D. L. Moody. (E. M. Fitt, Ed.) (p. 32). East Northfield, MA: The Bookstore.

Why the Lord Gives us Crosses to Bear — The Fight of Faith

Our Lord had no need to undertake the bearing of the cross except to attest and prove his obedience to the Father. But as for us, there are many reasons why we must pass our lives under a continual cross… We readily esteem our virtue above its due measure. And we do not doubt, whatever happens, that against all difficulties it will remain unbroken and unconquered. Hence we are lifted up to stupid and empty confidence in the flesh; and relying on it, we are then insolently proud against God himself, as if our own powers were sufficient without his grace.

He can best restrain this arrogance when he proves to us by experience not only that great incapacity but also the frailty under which we labor. Therefore, he afflicts us either with disgrace or poverty, or bereavement, or disease, or other calamities. Utterly unequal to bearing these, in so far as they touch us, we soon succumb to them. Thus humbled, we learn to call upon His power, which alone makes us stand fast under the weight of afflictions.

-John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion-

via Why the Lord Gives us Crosses to Bear — The Fight of Faith