There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. —Soren Kierkegaard. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
The Modern Church Exposed: Paul Washer’s Top Ten Indictments – Part 1 | WRETCHED TV Episode 2380
Join Todd Friel on Wretched TV as he breaks down Paul Washer’s “Ten Indictments Against the Modern Church.” In this first part, we explore Washer’s criticism of how today’s churches are missing the mark. From relying too much on secular ideas to simplifying the Gospel, these issues are tackled head-on.
Indictment #1: Modern churches are criticized for undermining the sufficiency of Scripture by over-relying on secular methods and psychology, rather than solely trusting in Biblical teachings for all aspects of life and faith.
Indictment #2: Many Christian bookstores are faulted for offering superficial self-help books, rather than providing deep, theological content that enriches understanding of God.
Indictment #3: Modern evangelism is criticized for its failure to address the human condition and sin with impactful, convicting preaching, contrasting it with the more heartfelt messages of the past.
Indictment #4: The Gospel is often reduced to trivial or self-centered teachings by some preachers, neglecting its full, transformative power.
Indictment #5: There is a lack of understanding about true conversion, with many failing to grasp that regeneration involves a profound, supernatural change rather than just a superficial decision.
Job 30:21 — Ah, Job’s sorrow is taking a wrong turn. He is accusing God of cruelty.
2 Corinthians 2:14 — Very rarely should we use absolute words or phrases like “always” or “every time”. God can though … God always causes us to triumph in Christ! Sing along with the WILDS.
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. (Matthew 6:33)
See how the Bible opens: “In the beginning God.” Let your life open in the same way. Seek with your whole soul, first and foremost, the kingdom of God, as the place of your citizenship, and His righteousness as the character of your life. As for the rest, it will come from the Lord Himself without your being anxious concerning it. All that is needful for this life and godliness “shall be added unto you.”
What a promise this is! Food, raiment, home, and so forth, God undertakes to add to you while you seek Him. You mind His business, and He will mind yours. If you want paper and string, you get them given in when you buy more important goods; and just so all that we need of earthly things we shall have thrown in with the kingdom. He who is an heir of salvation shall not die of starvation; and he who clothes his soul with the righteousness of God cannot be left of the Lord with a naked body. Away with carking care. Set all your mind upon seeking the Lord. Covetousness is poverty, and anxiety is misery: trust in God is an estate, and likeness of God is a heavenly inheritance. Lord, I seek Thee; be found of me.
A few years ago, I met Ben Shaw at an apologetics conference when he was a research assistant to Garry Habermas which is the foremost expert on the resurrection of Jesus. I am so happy to see he has been able to publish his first book on the reliability of the New Testament, While there have been extensive books on the historicity of the New Testament (i.e., Craig Blomberg’s massive The Historical Reliability of the New Testament) I have always sensed we need more resources that are concise and provide the proper talking points about the reliability of the New Testament. Please note I am not saying Blomberg’s book is not needed. It is an awesome book. But Shaw’s book helps fill in the gap here!
Shaw provides a systematic and introductory view of the reliability of the New Testament by appealing to 13 points (see pgs. 6-8). I will give a small summary as well as some input as well.
1. New Testament textual evidence: Does our modern New Testament contain the words that were originally written? How can we know?
Shaw says, “Textual critics are scholars who look at different manuscript copies of an ancient writing such as Plato or the Gospel of Matthew. Since we do not have the originals (autographs), textual critics compare different copies of these works in order to make sure what we are reading today is likely what the original authors wrote. The New Testament is the best textually attested work in the ancient world. There are over five thousand manuscript copies of the New Testament in the Greek language alone, with some of them coming within a century or two of the writings. Given the plethora of copies, we would expect differences in the manuscripts of the New Testament (especially since they were all handwritten). The overwhelming majority are accidental mistakes (e.g., spelling). Textual critics, including the skeptical ones, acknowledge that core or essentials of Christianity are not affected by any textual difference.”- pg. 21.
Remember even Bart Ehrman says, “Textual scholars have enjoyed reasonable success at establishing, to the best of their abilities, the original text of the New Testament. Indeed, barring extraordinary new discoveries or phenomenal alterations of method, it is virtually inconceivable that the character of our printed Greek New Testaments will ever change significantly.” (The Text of The New Testament In Contemporary Research, 2nd ed., pg. 825).
2. New Testament genres and audience expectations: How were ancient readers expected to understand the New Testament writings? If readers expected the accounts to be historical, then this would add to the text’s credibility in that it was expected to be taken seriously. On the other hand, if the audience knew that they were fanciful novels, then this would indicate that the authors were free to invent fictional material.
Here Shaw mostly follows Richard Burridge’s lead in saying that “the Gospels are Greco-Roman biographies and were not expected to freely invent materials (like novels would), while Paul’s writings were in-house discussions that were not considered to be forms of propaganda addressed to nonbelievers.”- pg. 31.
I should note that there is still some debate over the genre of the Gospels. I recommend the chapter called “The Genre of the Gospels” by Wes Olmstead in the book The State of New Testament Studies which is a series of essays edited by Scot McKnight and Nijay K. Gupta. But when I first saw the push for the genre of the Gospels fitting into the category of Graeco- Roman biography, I find myself wondering whether the Gospels fit more within a Jewish biography genre. However, from what I gather, while the Gospels contain plenty of Jewish elements and with the possible exception of Philo’s Life of Moses, which many scholars do not regard as biography, there are no clear examples of biographies of Jewish sages written around the time of Jesus.
3. New Testament dating: When were these works written? Events that are reported closer to the time they took place are generally to be preferred over those that are reported later. If these works were written during the apostles’ lifetime, this would be a good sign.
Shaw mentions the current findings of Jonathan Bernier who argues against both sets of dates for the Gospels mentioned above in his work Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament. He argues it’s possible that all four Gospels were written even earlier than Paul’s letters. The verdict is still out on Bernier’s book. I do know Craig Blomberg told me he isn’t convinced Bernier has provided a plausible case for John’s Gospel being written before 90 ad.
Shaw thinks all of the Gospels were written well within the lifetimes of those who were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life and ministry. It is widely accepted that the Gospels were written within decades of Jesus’ life. Paul’s letters were written even earlier than the Gospels. He was writing around twenty years after Jesus’ death.- pg.42.
4. New Testament authorship: Who wrote the different books of the New Testament? It would be better to have sources that were written by those involved in the events or those who knew the ones involved.
Shaw says, “There are thirteen letters that bear Paul’s name. Of these letters, even critical skeptics accept seven as undisputedly Pauline letters. I should not there are good arguments that Paul wrote all 13 letters.
Shaw says, “Though the Gospels are technically anonymous, it is unlikely that they were functionally anonymous and intended to be anonymous. There is an incredible consistency regarding the names associated with each of the Gospels, originating early. The only names associated with the four Gospels are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John”- pg. 52. What does he mean by “functionally anonymous?”
He says “ Accordingly, for the Gospels-as-functionally-anonymous argument to work, we would need to believe the Gospels were copied multiple times, by different people and different churches, across a wide geographic range, and over a period of time. Throughout this process, different churches in different areas of the Mediterranean decided to start ascribing names to these writings. It just so happens to be the case that they all agreed to the same name. Of course, this did not happen just one time but four. This scenario seems highly unlikely and rather ad hoc. The Gospels are likely to have had the same names precisely because they were not anonymous.”- pg. 48-49.
5. New Testament creedal traditions: First, what is a creedal tradition? Second, what do they have to do with the claims of the New Testament? As we will see, these are not the later creedal traditions, such as the Nicene Creed, but highly evidential formulas within the New Testament itself.
Shaw says “There are many creedal traditions in the New Testament. These creeds reflect oral traditions that existed prior to the writing of the New Testament itself. It is widely accepted by scholars that traditions that Paul cites likely go back to around the 30s AD. We know that Paul met with two major figures of Christianity, Peter and James, in Galatians 1–One of the best and earliest creeds in the New Testament is the one beginning in 1 Corinthians 15:3. This tradition is connected with eyewitnesses such as Peter, James, and Paul. It is also considered to be the earliest historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection, since it predates the Gospels and Paul’s writings.”- pg.61-62.
I should note that this argument pushes back against legendary embellishment. The central claims about Jesus were started every early after his death and resurrection.
6. Historical criteria: What convinces historians that an event occurred? Historians use various criteria that, if met, can often add to the probability of an event’s occurrence. These criteria help historians navigate sources they might even consider unreliable, biased, or mistaken.
Shaw gives 4 criteria here and applies it to Jesus predicting his death and resurrection.
Multiple attestation: Jesus’ predictions are multiply attested in different sources. For example, Jesus tells the disciples about his impending death and resurrection, leading Peter to rebuke Jesus. Jesus’ response to this is to rebuke Peter by saying, “Get behind Me, Satan.” This account is found in Mark 8:31-33 and Matthew 16:21-23, while Luke 9:22 has the prediction only. When an event is found in Mark, Matthew, and Luke (the Synoptics), it is typically considered to be only one source.
Multiple forms: They are mentioned in the Gospel narratives and in the creedal material of 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. While there are narrative accounts of Jesus making these predictions, there are also parables, such as the parable of the wicked tenants (Mk 12:1-12). The sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-40) is another example. We thus find reports of these predictions in a multitude of forms (narratives, creeds, parables, etc.).
Reported early: Events found in multiple forms, such as those mentioned, are considered to be early. In addition, we find the creedal material in Paul referencing the Last Supper. Of course, it is also found in the earliest Gospel, Mark.
Embarrassing testimony: While Peter’s rebuke of Jesus may be considered embarrassing (Mk 8:32), Jesus’ referring to Peter as Satan certainly is (Mk 8:33)! This is all the more embarrassing since Peter became one of the “pillars” of the early church (Gal 2:9) and this account is included in Mark, who is often believed to have been Peter’s interpreter. It is not something he would have been likely to make up. Additionally, the manner of Jesus’ death is highly embarrassing (1 Cor 1:23), and some find Jesus’ prayer in the garden before the crucifixion disconcerting (Mk 14:32-41). – pgs. 69-70.
Shaw also notes that, “The historical criteria discussed here are intuitive and used today regarding current events. Historical criteria are typically used to add probability to the historicity of an event. These criteria can be applied to reports to better discern whether an event occurred. The criteria can be effectively applied to sources that are considered reliable or unreliable.”- pg. 71.
7. Undesigned coincidences: Why does the same account look different when reported in two different sources? What are we to think if the two accounts come together like puzzle pieces and form a bigger picture? When two independent reports illuminate each other in ways that appear to be undesigned or unintentional, this can add to the likelihood of an event’s occurrence.
Shaw follows the work of Lydia McGrew here. He says: “Undesigned coincidences are when two texts corroborate each other unintentionally. Additionally, it would be difficult for two sources to support each other if they were both fictional accounts. Undesigned coincidences can illuminate two different texts by bringing a bigger picture together, similar to bringing two puzzle pieces together. In these instances, the reliability of these reports is increased because of the corroboration between the two accounts. They provide complimentary reports that offer confirmation of each other.” -pg. 80.
8. Archaeology: Is there any physical evidence that supports the claims in the New Testament? Have any material remains survived that affect our understanding of the New Testament? Have there been archaeological findings that challenge the New Testament? Physical evidence that has survived into the present can shed light on various aspects of the claims in the New Testament, which can be shown to be either consistent or inconsistent.
Shaw says, “Archaeology is a somewhat distinctive category for studying the past. It can confirm physical remains but typically adds verisimilitude to reported events (e.g., Caiaphas’s tomb compared with the words and actions of Caiaphas). There are several archaeological finds that contribute to our knowledge of the New Testament and add to its reliability. Among these important findings are the temple warning and Yohanan the crucifixion victim.”- pg. 89.
I should note that there are several archaeological findings that corroborate the witness of the New Testament. See Titus Kennedy’s work on this.
9. Non-Christian sources: What do non-Christian sources report? Are there sources that confirm or are consistent with the teachings of the New Testament? Are there sources that challenge the New Testament reports? If non-Christian sources corroborate claims of the New Testament, then this would seem to add reliability to the New Testament texts.
Shaw says, “There are multiple non-Christian sources outside the New Testament that reference either Jesus or early Christians. Despite apparently being tampered with, Josephus’s text can reasonably be reconstructed and provides an important non-Christian source for Jesus. Tacitus and Pliny the Younger also provide important comments about Jesus and early Christianity. These sources corroborate the information we have in the New Testament. They do not, for example, claim that Jesus was crucified in Egypt or Greece.” -pg.99.
While I agree with this, when people ask me for writings outside of the New Testament, I always ask them why can’t they trust the New Testament? They generally respond by saying the authors are biased. Shaw addresses this point by saying,
“I want to emphasize that just because an author is a Christian, this does not automatically negate what that author reports. It merely bids us to be aware of the author’s bias (as well as our own). Skeptic Bart Ehrman argues that no historian would reject early accounts from the Revolutionary War just because their authors were Americans. They should be used as significant sources. This includes accounts from George Washington and his supporters. “To refuse to use them as sources,” Ehrman writes, “is to sacrifice the most important avenues to the past we have, and on purely ideological, not historical, grounds.” What is the implication for the Gospels? “So too the Gospels.”- pg. 92.
10. Noncanonical Christian sources: What do noncanonical Christian sources report? In other words, what did the early church report about Jesus and the apostles? Do these sources paint a picture consistent with the New Testament? Or do they introduce new teachings? If these sources corroborate the claims of the New Testament, then this would add another layer to the reliability of these texts.
Shaw nots the following: “Noncanonical Christian sources are those not found in the New Testament. Many of these sources are nevertheless early and provide valuable insight into early Christianity. There are several early noncanonical Christian sources such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna.”- pg.107.
11. New Testament Canon and Credibility: How did the New Testament become a collection? What about texts that were excluded from the New Testament? Are they better evidenced than the New Testament? If the New Testament was created using methods that depended on and/or desired reliable texts, this would also indicate that the texts are reliable.
Shaw makes an important point by saying, “While the criteria provide a useful framework for understanding the canon, we need to remember that it would be anachronistic to say that the early church went around looking for reliable writings. Rather, they already had writings they believed were reliable (to varying degrees). In other words, these criteria were the “church’s attempt to explain what it already had, rather than a process of deciding what to have.” Thus, these reasonable criteria provide just one angle for understanding the New Testament canon. Although they were helpful, as Bruce Metzger notes, “the Church did not create the canon but came to recognize, accept, affirm, and confirm the self-authenticating quality of certain documents that imposed themselves as such upon the church. If this fact is obscured, one comes into serious conflict not with dogma but with history.”- pg. 111.
12. Spiritual and life transformation: Is there evidence of lives transformed in a manner consistent with New Testament teachings? In other words, if New Testament reports about Jesus’ life and actions are true, along with the teachings of the early church, we would expect to find lives transformed.
I think this is an overlooked point and I am glad Shaw mentioned it. I have had enough encounters with Mormons and Muslims who tell me the Book of Mormon and the Quran has changed their lives. He says, “To be clear, I am not arguing that simply because a book has made an impact, it is reliable, nor am I saying that transformation equals trustworthiness. I want to stress that the argument here is one of consistency. Clearly, a book could have an impact and be false, untrustworthy, unreliable, and so on. Effect or impact does not confer trustworthiness but is consistent with it. The point here is that if the New Testament teachings specifically are true, then individuals and communities will feel their effects.”- pg. 119. He also says, “I am not arguing that the influence of Christianity confers trustworthiness on it. Instead, its impact is consistent with its trustworthiness. If Christianity is true, we would expect it to have the effects Lecky describes. Yet, as Mangalwadi points out, as we read the New Testament to understand it, its teachings confront and challenge us as well. Millions of people have read these writings, recognized their sin, turned from immorality, and followed Jesus. These direct experiences have led to lives so radically transformed that even those around them can indirectly attest to the positive change.”- pg. 127.
13. Minimal facts approach: Can the events central to the gospel message be confirmed even if the New Testament is unreliable in some areas? Are there historical facts related to Jesus’ death and resurrection that scholars from wide-ranging theological backgrounds agree on due to their being highly evidenced? If so, this would indicate that other arguments, such as the dozen above, have greater viability.
Here Shaw lays out the minimal facts approach. The minimal facts approach uses two criteria: (1) facts that are supported by multiple lines of historical reasoning and (2) facts that are widely agreed on by scholars from various backgrounds (from skeptics to believers). The minimal facts approach uses a bottom-up approach that begins with the most reliable events. Shaw appeals to the minimal facts such as:
1.Jesus died by crucifixion. 2. The disciples had experiences of the risen Jesus. 3. The disciples were willing to suffer and die for their beliefs. 4. James, Jesus’ skeptical brother, converted. 5. Paul, a persecutor of the church, converted.
Overall, I love the way Shaw has presented the material. I prefer a systematic overview, and this book did not disappoint. I think it will be an excellent teaching source for apologists, scholars, as well as the lay person to use. It can also be a book to hand to someone who is questioning the reliability of the New Testament. I hope you will get a copy.
31What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?32He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?33Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies.34Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?36As it is written:
“For your sake we face death all day long;
we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”[a]
37No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.38For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[b] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,39neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:31-39, New International Version)
Original Meaning
The Work of God for Us in Christ (8:31–34).Paul here launches into a new direction with a question. “These things” (v. 31) refers to the many reasons for our confidence that Paul has rehearsed in chapters 5–8. All those reasons can be neatly summed up in one statement: God is “for us” (v. 31). Who, then, Paul rightly asks, can be “against us?” Of course, we know many people and things still oppose us. But Paul’s point is that with God on our side, none of this opposition ultimately matters.
Verse 32 reinforces Paul’s point. God’s being “for us” is seen climactically in his giving of his beloved Son. If he has done that, we can be certain he will also give us “all things”—or, to put it in the terms of verse 31, nothing can ultimately oppose us.
“Bring [a] charge” (v. 33) is the first of several judicial terms. Again, Paul’s point is not that nothing will ever try to prosecute us in the court of God’s justice. But the prosecution will be unsuccessful, for God has chosen us to be his and has justified us already. Paul alludes at this point to Isaiah 50:8–9.
Verse 34 provides more evidence for the same point. No one can successfully condemn us because Christ has died for us and has been raised to life to be our intercessor before the Father. With such a defense attorney, it is no wonder the prosecution loses its case!
The Love of God for Us in Christ (8:35–39).The question at the beginning of verse 35 sets the tone for verses 35–39 by introducing Christ’s love into the picture. Christ not only defends us but loves us and enters into relationship with us, and nothing will ever separate us from that love. To make sure we get the point, Paul specifies some threats at the end of verse 35. As a comparison with 2 Corinthians 11:26–27 and 12:10 reveals, Paul himself has gone through most of these. He has learned by experience that they cannot disrupt his relationship with Christ.
The quotation of Psalm 44:22 in verse 36 is a bit of a detour in the logic of Paul’s argument. But the detour reveals two of his key concerns: to remind us that suffering is a natural and expected part of the Christian life, and to root the experiences of Christians in the experience of God’s old-covenant people.
With verse 37, Paul returns to the main line of his teaching in verse 35. In all the varied difficulties of life, we are “more than conquerors.” Paul concludes his celebration of God’s love for us in Christ with his own personal testimony: “Iam convinced . . .” (vv. 38–39). There is nothing in all the world—whether we are dead or alive, whether they are things we now face or things we will face in the future, whether they are above us or below us—that can separate us from the “love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (v. 39). As the chapter began with “no condemnation” (8:1), so it ends with the bookends of “no separation” (8:35, 39).
Application.Paul’s emphatic assertion that no spiritual being can separate us from Christ is needed in the church today. We need to recognize and proclaim that God in Christ has won a victory over the “powers and authorities” (Col 2:15) and that they have no power to keep us from inheriting the salvation God has promised to all who love him. Nothing on earth can separate us from God’s love for us in Christ, and neither can anything in heaven.
Read more like this in theThe NIV Application Commentary on the Bible,a masterful blend of content written by today’s top academics in a way that is compelling and easy to understand for anyone–no formal training or seminary degree required. Now on sale!
Ukraine advances another 1-3 km, captures 2 more settlements in Russia’s Kursk Oblast, Zelensky says Ukrainian forces have advanced 1 to 3 kilometers in some areas of Russia’s Kursk Oblast, further capturing two more settlements in the region, President Volodymyr Zelensky said in his evening address on Aug. 25. Zelensky, who received the information from Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi, did not detail which settlements were captured by Ukrainian forces, but did note that fighting is ongoing to capture one additional settlement.
Brooklyn Bookstore Faces Backlash After Canceling Event to Avoid Hosting a ‘Zionist’ “Less than an hour before the launch of my book Tablets Shattered, a conversation with Rabbi Andy Bachman, powerHouse Books [sic] in Brooklyn told me they are unwilling to host the conversation with Andy because they would not permit a Zionist on the premises,” Leifer wrote on X.
Arabs on social media call Hezbollah leader Nasrallah ‘chicken hunter’ for foiled attack against Israel Responding to news that the IDF intercepted most of the missiles Hezbollah fired at it on Sunday, many Arabs critical of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah took to social media. They referred to him as a “chicken hunter.” The moniker was inspired by news that a few of the Hezbollah rockets that weren’t intercepted landed in chicken coops in Israel. “Is it reasonable that my ally Hezbollah would respond to the assassination of the party’s top military commander by killing chickens?”
Israel and US officials hunt for Hamas leader Sinwar who remains elusive The US has provided ground-penetrating radar to detect movement in the tunnel system, a technology Israeli officials have described as “priceless.” However, some US sources told the New York Times that the intelligence sharing between the two countries has been ‘lopsided,” with the US giving Israel more information than the other way around.
Hezbollah’s target was Mossad HQ in central Israel The main target of Hezbollah’s Sunday morning attack was likely the Glilot base near Herzliya, the site of Mossad headquarters and various military intelligence units, according to preliminary Israeli assessments.
MBS seeks US and Israeli assurances in Saudi deal amid fears of backlash – opinion Saudi Crown Prince MBS demands US and Israeli commitments on a Palestinian state, citing security fears as he negotiates a historic deal. In exchange for commitments by the US to Saudi Arabia covering, among other issues, security, technical assistance with developing a civilian nuclear program, and investment in areas such as hi-tech, Saudi Arabia would limit its dealings with China and normalize its relations with Israel.
Who fact-checks the fact-checker?: PMO hits back at ‘misleading’ fact-checking by TIME Cortellessa asserted in his fact-checking that some responses “lacked context, were not supported by facts, or were not true.” The PMO directly disputes this and says, “Everything Prime Minister Netanyahu said was true, and Eric Cortellessa misled TIME readers.”
Israel Is Not A Fluke, Its Modern Existence Is A Direct Fulfillment Of Bible Prophecy The scoffers tell us that the miraculous reappearing of Israel as a nation in 1948 has nothing to do with the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. In spite of God’s supernatural protection of the nation through many wars, the naysayers tell us there’s nothing to see here and insist that the church is now the recipient of God’s kingdom promises. On May 14, 1948, Israel again became a nation “in a day,”
“Musk Should Be Nervous” – Deep State Lackey Admits Real Target Following Telegram Founder’s Arrest “The arrest of Pavel Durov means there is no freedom of speech – it means that freedom of speech in Europe is dead,” she continued. “Now basically they have a hostage and they will try to blackmail Russia, they will try to blackmail all the users of Telegram and not only try to get control but also try to block the network here in Russia.”
IDF launches preventative attack against Hezbollah, sirens in northern Israel Israeli Air Force fighter jets are currently striking targets belonging to the Hezbollah terrorist organization that posed an imminent and extensive threat to the citizens of the State of Israel, IDF Spokesperson Daniel Hagari said early Sunday morning.
Did Israel’s Massive Pre-Emptive Strike Delay All-Out Apocalyptic War That Is Coming to The Middle East? One day in the not-too-distant future, someone in the Middle East is going to push things too far, and it will set off a tsunami of destruction that will shock the entire planet. Israel is armed to the teeth, and Israel’s enemies are armed to the teeth. An all-out war in the Middle East should not be an option for anyone, but we are now dangerously close to such a conflict.
When did the Globalists’ plan to enslave the world using chronic illness begin? Many writers in the resistance try to figure out when the crisis began – the crisis being that global monopoly capitalism is trying to enslave the entire developed world via chronic illness. “When one works through a wide range of different possible points of origins one can make a strong case that the problem goes back to original sin,” Toby Rogers writes.
Europe is being deliberately destabilized, Islamic activist says Shahid Bolsen, who has been accused of inspiring waves of Islamic terrorism in Egypt and having ties to extremist groups, says that the recent UK riots were part of the global oligarchy’s deliberate strategy to destabilize Europe.
Karen Kingston: The covid-mpox-HIV supervirus They are attempting to develop a virus that combines RNA from SARS-CoV-2, mpox and HIV. The aim is to have a “supervirus” that can be aerosolized, and then from the resulting pox infections, HIV can be transmitted to others through direct skin-to-skin contact, Karen Kingston says. Why do they want to develop HIV that is skin contagious? Because the aim is to weaken our immune systems; all of our immune systems, not only those who have been vaccinated.
FDA Admits There’s ‘Zero Scientific Evidence’ That ‘Monkeypox Virus’ Exists Newly unsealed documents have revealed an explosive confession from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) about the so-called “monkeypox virus.” The documents were obtained by investigative reporter Christine Massey from a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. According to one document published by Massey, the FDA admits that there is “zero scientific evidence” to prove that the “monkeypox virus” even exists.
“There is not a more important and fundamental principle in legislation, than that the ways and means ought always to face the public engagements; that our appropriations should ever go hand in hand with our promises. To say that the United States should be answerable for twenty-five millions of dollars without knowing whether the ways and means can be provided, and without knowing whether those who are to succeed us will think with us on the subject, would be rash and unjustifiable.” —James Madison (1790)
ON THIS DAY in 1968, the Democratic National Convention kicked off in Chicago, featuring a party jilted by a president who declined to run for reelection and marked by violent protests conducted by anti-Vietnam War protesters. Just last week, the DNC in Chicago happened after a president was ousted from the ticket, and protesters marched against Israel.
Douglas Andrews, Thomas Gallatin, & Jordan Candler
Politics & Policy
Yet another lie from lying liar Tim Walz: By now, informed citizens are aware that Democrat vice-presidential candidate Snitchy McTampon is a deployment-dodging, valor-stealing, Chi-Com sympathizing fabulist. But the hits, they keep a-comin’, with Walz’s latest apparent lie having to do with an award he falsely claimed to have received from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce. Unlike some of his other lies, which he’s tried to massage as merely a case of misspeaking, this golden oldie indicates a disturbing degree of premeditation. “When Walz first ran for Congress in Minnesota,” reports Fox News, “he touted on his campaign website that he received an award from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce in 1993 for his work with the business community, according to a 2006 article from the Post Bulletin. … ‘We researched this matter and can confirm that you have not been the recipient of any award from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce,’ the letter addressed to Walz on Nov. 1, 2006, reads.” The dude is pathological.
Study: Networks deliver massive media honeymoon to Kamala Harris (NewsBusters)
Humor: Kamala explains 93% of staff quit because they couldn’t handle the joy (Babylon Bee)
Trump splits the baby, again: Abortion is perhaps the only battlefield on which the Democrats want to fight this presidential election, and that’s understandable. It’s a perilous issue for Republicans, and it’s about all the Democrats have. Donald Trump is well aware of this, as a recent post to Truth Social made clear: “My Administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights.” It was an interesting choice of words, and it was seized upon by Philip Klein, one of his many critics at National Review. “It’s one thing to argue that abortion should be left up to the states, which is a position of disagreement among pro-lifers of good faith and one to which I am sympathetic. … The latest Truth Social post is different. The idea that his administration would be ‘great’ for ‘reproductive rights’ is hard to interpret in any other way than as an affirmatively pro-choice statement.” Or maybe Trump is just trying to cut through the lie, repeated ad nauseam during last week’s Democratic National Convention, that he’d “ban abortion across this country, with or without Congress.” Indeed, VP nominee JD Vance asserted over the weekend that Trump would veto a federal abortion ban if it came to his desk.
Trump considers dropping out of ABC News debate over “biased” interview with Senator Tom Cotton (NY Post)
Election Integrity
Lawsuit: Governor Hobbs illegally designated Arizona agencies as voter registration, ballot drop-off sites (The Federalist)
Wisconsin struggles to set standard for ballot drop boxes (Daily Signal)
Security
A whistleblower outs the Secret Service: We’ve been skeptical that the Secret Service could police itself in the wake of the near-assassination of Donald Trump, and we thought that just maybe the forced resignation of Secret Service Director and DEI hire Kim Cheatle would bring some candor to the investigation. Wrong. As The Federalist reports, Cheatle’s replacement, Acting Director Ronald Rowe, may have lied to Congress “when he testified that all manpower requested to protect former President Trump had been approved for the event where the GOP presidential nominee came within centimeters of being assassinated.” A recent X post from Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley to Rowe pressed that issue and included a two-page letter with a demand for additional answers. “If you wanted more conspiracy theories,” said Hawley’s Republican colleague Ron Johnson in an interview Friday, “you couldn’t do a better job at creating them than what the Secret Service and the FBI are doing right now. It seems like they’re hiding something. And you have to ask yourself: Why?” Answer: Because they want to avoid making Donald Trump a sympathetic figure prior to the November 5 election.
Afghan retreat internal memos: Upon the third anniversary of the Biden/Harris administration’s disastrous exit from Afghanistan, a recent review of internal Pentagon memos shows that what was being communicated to the American public at the time was not what was being said to officials behind the scenes. While Department of Defense Secretary of Communications John Kirby was painting a picture of an orderly and controlled withdrawal, there was a frantic effort to gain control of a rapidly deteriorating situation on the ground. At the airport in Kabul 10 days before a suicide bomber killed 13 U.S. military personnel, an email reported, “The crowd was out of control; the firing was only done to defuse the chaos.” It added, “Hundreds have flooded the flight line and in at least one case, have forced themselves onto at least one US mil (and other civilian) aircraft. Crowds continue to run alongside planes, including mil aircraft.” Pentagon officials told Kirby that the situation on the ground was “chaos” and “chaotic” over two dozen times. Following the disaster, Kirby rejected any notion that this could “have been done in a more orderly manner,” stating, “I respectfully disagree.” Well, the internal records say otherwise.
Hezbollah’s failed attack: A massive Hezbollah rocket and drone attack launched against Israel over the weekend may have ended any possibility of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas in the war in Gaza. More than 500 missiles were launched against civilian and military targets in Israel by the Iran-backed, Lebanon-based terrorist proxy group Hezbollah on Sunday. Thankfully, Israel’s missile defense system was able to take out the vast majority of the missiles, with only one Israeli reportedly killed during the strike. Following the bombardment, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned, “If the result is not enough, then we retain the right to respond another time.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded, “This is not the end of the story.” The Biden/Harris administration has been working on a ceasefire deal, which Netanyahu signaled his willingness to agree to last week. However, that deal is now likely dead. As former National Security Council official Richard Goldberg observed, “Please ask yourself why Hezbollah would attack Tel Aviv on the weekend of Gaza ceasefire talks. This is Iran’s chess game with the objective being to squeeze Israel with a ring of fire. Stop pressuring Israel for a ceasefire and start pressuring the head of the octopus: Tehran.”
The Islamist terrorists have been busy: While millions of Americans across the political spectrum have been unhappy with Joe Biden’s tenure as president, one group can rightly be pleased: Islamists. Indeed, while Donald Trump made quick work of ISIS during his administration, Biden has mostly allowed the terrorists to recover and regroup. To illustrate this, we can point to numerous examples: Houthi terrorists recently destroyed yet another tanker in the Red Sea, and Hezbollah terrorists have launched scores of rockets and drones in attacks on Israel. Meanwhile, in smaller-scale acts of terrorism, multiple people were stabbed at a “diversity” festival in Wuppertal, Germany, by an “Arab-looking man,” while cars were blown up and buildings were set on fire next door in France during an attack on a synagogue.
Sullivan to make first China visit this week (Axios)
France arrests Telegram CEO over content issues (Morning Brew)
Culture
Racist allegedly a plagiarist: One of America’s premier white race hucksters, Robin DiAngelo, has made her living promoting white guilt, writing a best-selling book called White Fragility. She insists on holding her “fellow white people” accountable, also insisting that they need to “always cite and give credit to the work of BIPOC people who have informed your thinking.” She explains that these citations include “when you use a phrase or idea you got from a BIPOC person.” Well, as is so often the case with these self-appointed social justice warriors, it appears that DiAngelo is a hypocrite. In her 2004 dissertation, DiAngelo quoted an Asian-American professor, Thomas Nakayama, and his coauthor, Robert Krizek, without offering citations or even quotation marks. That’s not all. DiAngelo borrowed from Asian-American professor Stacey Lee, her University of Washington classmate Kristin Gates Gloyes, Cal State Monterey Bay emerita professor Debian Marty, Queen’s University’s Cynthia Levine-Rasky, a professorial fellow at the University of Melbourne Bronwyn Davies, and the deceased philosopher and psychologist Rom Harre. According to Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, “It is never appropriate to use the secondary source without acknowledging it, and even worse to present it as one’s own words.” The word for that is “plagiarism.”
Paralympics now letting trans athletes ruin women’s sports (The Federalist)
The Final Frontier
Lost in space: “We have had so many embarrassments lately, we’re under a microscope. This just made it, like, 100 times worse.” So lamented a Boeing employee regarding NASA’s announcement that the two astronauts stranded on the International Space Station following the maiden flight of Boeing’s Starliner space capsule will be rescued by Elon Musk’s SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. “We hate SpaceX,” the employee added. “We talk s**t about them all the time, and now they’re bailing us out.” NASA’s associate administrator, Jim Free, said, “This has not been an easy decision, but it is absolutely the right one.” The two stranded astronauts — Butch Wilmore, 61, and Suni Williams, 58 — are in good spirits despite having to wait six months before SpaceX is ready to launch a rescue mission in February. Wilmore’s wife, Deanna, stated that friends and family “were praying for a safe return on whatever spacecraft that may be.” Despite the long delay, she added, “We know that it’s the Lord’s plan.”
Misc.
4th Circuit decision in Maryland sets up next potential 2A showdown at Supreme Court (Daily Signal)
Biggest proposed supermarket deal in U.S. history goes to trial (Morning Brew)
Biden-Harris admin warns kindergartners climate change will leave entire U.S. cities underwater (Washington Free Beacon)
Harris campaign announces massive $540 million haul since launch (Washington Examiner)
Tom Cotton destroys Jon Karl on Kamala’s inferred policy flip-flops (NewsBusters)
Humor: Post Office issues new commemorative Kamala Harris “Fweedom” stamp (Babylon Bee)
“The American people don’t vote on policy prescriptions,” declared Virginia Democrat Representative Gerry Connolly last week. In a way, that was an excuse for why Kamala Harris’s campaign website still doesn’t have a policy section more than a month after she became the undemocratically selected Democrat nominee. It’s why the candidate herself avoids policy like it’s a communicable disease.
In a sense, however, Connolly’s statement is also more true this election than perhaps ever before.
Donald Trump had an outstanding record as president. His economic policies, in particular, led to growth and prosperity. Most people who will vote for Trump want those policies back, but the majority of his most loyal supporters care primarily about him — defending him from the leftist legal assault and the Leftmedia’s dishonesty about everything even peripherally associated with him.
As for Harris, she has been Joe Biden’s sidekick for more than three and a half years. She has a record of policy failure. No, scratch that — policy disaster. As border czar, she’s overseen a record surge of illegal border crossings. She’s had a hand in the economic malaise, too. For example, she cast the deciding votes for both the American Rescue Plan, which lit the fire of inflation, and the Inflation Reduction Act, which did everything but reduce inflation. What little economic prescription she has provided would only exacerbate inflation and the federal debt, all so she can wage class warfare.
Fortunately, the Republican National Committee bought https://kamala2024policies.com/ and used it to set up a website listing the policies Kamala Harris and Tim Walz would enact. The setup begins:
Not only does Kamala Harris own the weakness, failure, and chaos of the Harris-Biden administration, she is so radical that she makes “the Squad” look like moderates. She wants to abolish our borders, let criminals control our streets, surrender our communities to cartels and a plague of fentanyl, wage war on American energy, and destroy the American Dream.
It lists and explains these key items:
Fighting to Set Murderers Free
More “Bidenomics” — it’s “Working,” Rising Costs Are Nothing to Worry About!
More Taxes to Ensure the Middle Class Pays Their “Fair Share”
Abolish Borders
Bring Back the Green New Deal
Kamala Believes in Freedom for Individuals Associated With Violent Behavior (Formally Referred to as Violent Criminals)
Ending “Wrongheaded Thinking” That More Police Mean Safer Communities
Eliminate Private Health Insurance
Give Social Security and Medicare to Illegal Aliens
Each clickable list item explains what will happen under Harris/Walz. For example, in 2019, Harris called for eliminating the Trump tax cuts. “Get rid of the whole thing,” she said. Since then, she has moderated to claiming she wants to keep the cuts for the middle class (which, most of the time, Democrats deny ever happened), but she aims to raise taxes on upper-income levels and implement a tax on unrealized capital gains, and she wants to massively hike corporate taxes, which will squarely hit workers hardest.
Then there’s her horrendous prescription for price controls, which fell so flat among even Democrats that she never even brought it up in her convention speech.
In short, a Harris/Walz administration will mean higher taxes and more spending, both of which will hurt the middle class. And if she staffs her administration as Biden did his, then no one with any real economic experience will be steering the ship.
As for abolishing borders, that’s an arguable interpretation of the effective result of Harris’s policies. She has already declared, “The previous administration just practically destroyed the [immigration] system,” and her work for the Biden administration was “to undo a lot of that work.” Boy, has she ever.
A note to any “fact-checkers” who rush to Kamala’s defense: No, Harris has never said, “I want to abolish the border.” But if millions of people can illegally cross the border, get “processed” and released by the Border Patrol, and never show up at court hearings, do we even really have a border anymore? Isn’t the border effectively abolished?
Next up is climate change. Back in December, Harris boasted about “proudly delivering on the most ambitious climate agenda in history.” What does that mean? Well, she has opposed (and then flip-flopped on) fracking, which is a key component of fossil fuel development, while pushing subsidies for renewable (and unreliable) energy. She even supports banning plastic straws and reducing consumption of red meat.
Yet if you really want to know what Harris wants to do, take note that she cosponsored Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s $93 trillion Green New Deal. The real agenda there is red, not green.
Let’s move to healthcare. “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” Barack Obama uttered that BIG lie early and often. Harris disagrees. She wants to eliminate private health insurance, having cosponsored Bernie Sanders’s $32 trillion single-payer government plan to replace it.
Kamala Harris is campaigning on themes of fear and division, and the media will happily avoid policy as much as she does to focus on shaming Americans into voting for the woman of color. Harris, Democrats, and their Leftmedia propagandists will avoid policy in order to make this election a referendum on Donald Trump. But make no mistake: The policies she has already implemented and plans to enact or expand will be nothing short of destructive.
Douglas Andrews: Of Election Seasons and Illegal Votes — This cycle, the Democrats will once again benefit from weak enforcement, sloppy voter rolls, and an uninformed electorate.
Thomas Gallatin: Biden’s EV Boondoggle May Hurt Harris — EVs have proven unpopular to the vast majority of Americans and costly to automakers, and they might mean big trouble for Kamala Harris’s election bid.
Brent Ramsey: China in Space — Beijing’s space policy and its meteoric rise to near the top in the world should concern every American.
Roger Helle: Don’t Be Hatin’! — America’s fundamental problem isn’t the divide between political parties. It’s the spiritual divide between good and evil.
In Brief: What Kamala Harris Didn’t Say — Giving the best speech she possibly could, Harris conspicuously avoided some big topics.
Veep Thoughts With Kamala Harris (Vol. 19) — Harris was once again heavy on vibes and light on policy last week during her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.
‘Trust Women’: DNC Features Abortion Liar Kate Cox — She claims that Texas tried to force her to carry a non-viable baby that threatened future pregnancies, so she had to flee the state. Except nearly the entire claim is untrue.
“[Democrats] are … trying to put forward male figures — Tim Walz being one of them, Doug Emhoff last night — who can speak to men out there who might not be the sort of testosterone-laden, you know, gun-toting kind of guy who wants to listen to Hulk Hogan and the kind of players that came out of the RNC.” —CNN’s Dana Bash
Sexism Bait
“It’s okay in 2024 to be a man comfortable in his own skin who supports a woman.” —Dana Bash
Non Compos Mentis
“If you cannot control when and how you choose to bring your children into this world … there is no American Dream.” —Oprah Winfrey
Projection
“[Trump] encouraged Putin to invade our allies.” —Kamala Harris
The BIG Lies
“I know the importance of safety and security, especially at our border.” —Kamala Harris
“We will pass a middle-class tax cut.” —Kamala Harris
Village Idiot
“Kamala Harris’s proposed price-gouging ban might irritate academics, but it makes sense to everyone else.” —law professor Zephyr Teachout in an Atlantic op-ed titled, “Sometimes You Just Have to Ignore the Economists.”
For the Record
“The last time Harris vowed to help fix inflation, she was the ‘tie-breaking vote’ on the effort to pump hundreds of billions of dollars into an overheated economy.” —David Harsanyi
Political Futures
“The 2023-2024 campaign season is not just the strangest on record, it’s also arguably the most anti-democratic. … Have those who lectured us about democracy in danger now decided to save it by destroying it?” —Victor Davis Hanson
“If voters truly understood the policies the Harris/Walz ticket intends to impose on the country, this election would already be over.” —Laura Hollis
Belly Laugh of the Day
“[Harris has] been in office for the last three and a half years so she has a record of accomplishments.” —California Governor Gavin Newsom
Kamala Harris is attempting to change the rules for the upcoming ABC debate on September 10. Reports indicate that she is demanding a seated format and permission to use a “cheat-sheet” during the live debate.
This is yet another example of Harris’s reluctance to face tough questions and her inability to handle the pressure of live debates.
Harris campaign spokesman Brian Fallon claimed that the campaign now insists on keeping microphones live at all times, per AP.
“Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own,” Fallon said.
“Harris is ready to deal with Trump’s constant lies and interruptions in real-time. Trump should stop hiding behind the mute button.”
Jason Miller, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, highlighted the hypocrisy of Harris’s demands. He pointed out that her campaign had previously agreed to the same rules set for the CNN debate but is now attempting to backtrack.
“Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate,” Miller said.
“The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules.”
“If Kamala Harris isn’t smart enough to repeat the messaging points her handlers want her to memorize, that’s their problem,” Miller added.
“This seems to be a pattern for the Harris campaign. They won’t allow Harris to do interviews, they won’t allow her to do press conferences, and now they want to give her a cheat-sheet for the debate. My guess is that they’re looking for a way to get out of any debate with President Trump.
These demands come after Trump has brought in former Hawaii Democrat Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as he begins preparation for his debate showdown with Harris next month in Philadelphia.
Gabbard has faced Harris in a debate and proved incredibly successful. During a July 2019 Democratic Presidential debate on CNN, she destroyed Harris’s garbage record as California Attorney General and San Francisco District Attorney.
On Sunday, President Trump expressed his skepticism about the integrity of the ABC debate.
In a post on his Truth Social network, Trump blasted ABC for their biased coverage and questioned why he should even participate in a debate hosted by a network he claims is riddled with “Trump Haters.”
President Trump also weighed in on the situation during a stop in the Washington area on Monday after visiting Arlington National Cemetery.
“We agreed to the same rules. I don’t know. It doesn’t matter to me. I’d rather have it probably on, but the agreement was that it would be the same as it was last time. In that case, it was muted. I didn’t like it the last time, but it worked out fine.”
“I mean, ask Biden how it worked out. It was fine, and I think it should be the same. We agreed to the same rules, same rules, and same specifications, and I think that’s probably what it should be, but they’re trying to change it. The truth is they’re trying to get out of it because she doesn’t want to debate. She’s not a good debater. She’s not a smart person. She doesn’t want to debate.”
WATCH:
JUST IN – Trump on debate with Kamala Harris:
“We agreed to the same rules. I don't know. It doesn't matter to me. I'd rather have it probably on, but the agreement was that it would be the same as it was last time. In that case, it was muted. I didn't like it the last time, but… pic.twitter.com/oZUrQ3KVQ2
TGP previously reported that Kamala Harris has officially backed down from participating in the highly anticipated debate against former President Donald Trump, scheduled for September 4th on Fox News.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The presidential race took a sobering turn this morning, as a reporter who asked Vice President Kamala Harris a question was arrested and charged with committing a hate crime.
The incident occurred during a brief campaign stop in which Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, visited a local deli that had been evacuated and repopulated with fake employees and campaign staff posing as customers. A stunned silence spread throughout the shop after a reporter from the press pool traveling with the Harris campaign asked her a question.
“Madam Vice President, can you tell us about your foreign policy?” the reporter asked with clearly vicious and evil intent. Before he was able to obtain an answer or follow up with an explanation for his heinous actions, Secret Service agents and local law enforcement officers swarmed him, wrestled him to the ground, and placed him under arrest. Thankfully, Vice President Harris was reportedly unharmed by the question.
“We were all witness to a terrible hate crime today,” a campaign spokesperson said later when addressing the media. “This is the type of America Donald Trump and J.D. Vance want to usher in, where reporters can just wantonly ask political leaders questions without any regard for the harm that could result. We can proudly state that Vice President Harris is currently recuperating from being asked a question and should make a full recovery.”
At publishing time, the reporter was being held without bail at an undisclosed location and faced hate crime charges and potential indictment for attempting to destroy democracy itself.
Watch how a D.E.I. consultant magically turns a video game into… well, something else entirely.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Attorney General Merrick Garland responded to questions about election integrity and the peaceful transfer of power Friday by reminding everyone that questioning the results of a lawful election is illegal — unless Trump wins.
“I think our prosecutions have made it clear what we think about people who try to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, which is an essential and fundamental part of our democracy,” Garland said, threatening everyone in the room. “But it’s still okay if Trump wins seeing as he can’t win, so if he does win, then obviously something fishy went down and we’ve got to contest the election right away since that lawful election was, in fact, not lawful since Trump won.”
The room full of reporters quickly followed that up with: “What?”
“Ohhhhhhhh!” said a reporter from the Washington Post. “Now I get it!”
Garland continued, “I think our prosecutorial record has shown to everyone how seriously we take this. If you contest the results of an election and interfere with the peaceful transfer of power we will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law — again, the one exception being if you complain about a Trump victory.”
At publishing time, Merrick Garland prosecuted the entire White House Press Corps for asking questions.
Watch how a D.E.I. consultant magically turns a video game into… well, something else entirely.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is a well-funded organization many consider terrorists that is permitted to wreak havoc on the global population with no repercussions.
Klaus Schwab and his “forum” have been proclaiming how they will change the lives of the masses for years but everyone turns a blind eye.
They told us we will eat bugs, they told us we will own nothing, they’ve been warning of their sinister plans for some time.
The WEF infiltrated government cabinets and altered the left side of politics in every single Western nation.
Earlier this week, the WEF recently released an ominous article, warning that we must prepare for “an era of shock events” in the near future.
Power disperses in a post-superpower era
The forum stated years ago that one of its goals was to remove America’s title of global superpower.
“Since the pandemic eased, the reality is we haven’t had enduring global leadership on much, and it’s hard to imagine that changing soon. This is partly because superpowers are terribly burdened with global wars and domestic challenges,” the WEF warned.
A global government is their proposed solution.
A big election year won’t stop our recurrent crisis of political legitimacy
The WEF warns that “disinformation” is threatening “the biggest election year in history,” hence the need for global censorship both on the streets and online.
The forum warns that democracy is declining, largely due to policies it implemented.
Civil unrest is rising and the WEF is prepared for the dissent. Furthermore, they already recognize that no one will accept the results of the election.
“People have fought back in all political systems, driven by a conviction that there must be a better, more effective way to govern. In most countries, even after their vote, citizens will continue to challenge their leaders, questioning whether they have the capacity to tackle our many post-pandemic risks,” the article notes.
In other words, the people have become unruly and are turning on governments. The World Economic Forum is prepared to crush any rebellion before it occurs.
A more complex global mental health crisis
Countless studies show that mental health drastically declined among every nation that implemented lockdowns.
Two years of 24/7 fear mongering, business and school closures, job losses, and isolation have permanently changed our society.
The World Economic Forum now that’s that there is ‘new type of anxiety “leading to a sense of alienation that makes it hard to function and even suicide.”
ECO-ANXIETY and AI.
Those who believe the claims that the world will end every few years have become ill. The climate change hysteria is wreaking havoc, as intended so that governments can continue to spend on an unidentifiable problem without the masses questioning their perpetual spending.
Then we have the claims that 50% of the workforce will be replaced with AI, leaving human being utterly useless and disposable.
Again, both of these fears have been orchestrated by the same organization that wants to ease them.
An era of shock events
Perhaps the most ominous piece in this article is Schwab’s promise that the world is on the cusp of “an era of shock events.”
“Enduring global leadership, democratic ideals, globalization and liberal values have all been notably challenged and superpowers are overstretched,” the forum stated, further adding,
“This period of muddling through means anything can happen in our post-pandemic era. Look for global risks to be further exacerbated by unexpected, destabilizing shock events.”
These are the three major shock wave events that the WEF plans to orchestrate:
1. A new global extremist group emerges
The world will be “distracted with multiple major wars and leadership in decline,” providing the globalist cabal with an opportunity to install a “new extremist group.”
2. A cyber pandemic – that is intentional
The forum believes this group will implement AI in its “new phase of terrorism.”
The massive global IT outage in July 2024 led to $5.4 billion in damages.
Was that a test?
The forum warns that we should expect a “grander scale” of cyber-attacks that will attack BANKS, hospitals, and retailers and lead to a halt in worldwide services.
Flights will be impacted and the people will be forced to stay in place.
3. Climate change claims its first island nation in the post-pandemic era
Last but not least, the forum believes an island nation will soon be lost to climate change.
“The COP28 plan to phase out fossil fuels may take decades and it’s unclear if world leaders will follow through,” the cabal notes.
They are willing to orchestrate an event that will lead to mass death and destruction.
A clear, identifiable tragedy that can be blamed on the changing climate, forcing people to believe that the hysteria surrounding climate change is justifiable. What world leader can question climate change if or when an island nation is lost?
Klaus Schwab’s organization is promising civil unrest, economic collapse, World War III, and the evaporation of a nation.
They will use all of the aforementioned fear tactics to drain the people of their power.
The globalists are willing to batter the masses with a series of attacks that will act as a staunch warning that there is nowhere to run.
The government will come in to save the day from the crises they create.
Which government?
A global government that is capable of assembling to control the entire human population.
More on President Trump’s private meeting to discuss vaccines and medical freedom.
The Gateway Pundit reported on a recent private meeting between President Trump and five advocates for medical freedom and vaccines. It was a successful meeting.
The following is a takeaway from the meeting with President Trump’s response.
President Trump agreed with what the group had to say.
The women present shared the following:
We were honored to be personally invited to meet with President Trump, where we had the unique opportunity to discuss crucial medical freedom issues like vaccination choice for children, schools, and employment, access to treatment options, and why they are important to Americans.
President Trump is adamant on NO vaccine mandates.
The President asked many insightful questions and engaged deeply in our conversation.
As the evening drew to a close, one of the guests, Melissa Alfieri-Collins RN, BSN expressed her gratitude, saying, “Thank you, Mr. President, for hearing me.” He responded, “I hear you, I heard you, and tell your people I hear them.”
More good news for America.
This news comes at the same time President Trump has announced the formation of an expert panel to join forces with Robert Kennedy, Jr. in tackling the alarming rise in chronic diseases in children.
As reported earlier – In a groundbreaking announcement that has sent waves through the political and medical communities, President Donald Trump has unveiled his plan to form an expert panel in partnership with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to address the alarming rise of chronic diseases in children.
This announcement, made at a rally in Glendale, Arizona, signals a direct challenge to Big Pharma, whose unchecked influence has long been suspected of contributing to the health crisis facing the nation’s youth.
For years, Big Pharma has been raking in billions while the rates of chronic diseases, including autoimmune disorders, autism, and obesity, have skyrocketed among children.
During the rally, Trump praised Kennedy’s relentless dedication to advocating for the health and well-being of American families, particularly children.
“I also want to salute Bobby’s decades of work as an advocate for the health of our families and our children. Nobody’s done more,” Trump said.
“Millions and millions of Americans who want clean air, clean water, and a healthy nation have concerns about toxins in our environment and pesticides in our food. That’s why today I’m repeating my pledge to establish a panel of top experts working with Bobby to investigate what is causing the decades-long increase in chronic health problems and childhood diseases,” he added.
The Trump-Kennedy alliance is more than just a political partnership; it is a testament to what can be achieved when leaders put aside partisan differences to focus on the well-being of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens.
Truth2Freedom's Blog 