EVENTS IN TIME (BIBLE PROPHECY LITERALLY FULFILLED)(BY GOD)

I WRITE NEWS ABOUT AND PUT NEWS ARTICLES ABOUT ISRAEL AND JERUSALEM PERTAINING TO BIBLE PROPHESY HAPPENINGS.JOEL 3:20 But Judah (ISRAEL) shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation.(THATS ISRAEL-JERUSALEM WILL NEVER BE DESTROYED AGAIN)-WE CHRISTIANS ARE ALL WAITING PATIENTLY FOR THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE TO OCCUR.SO WE CAN GO TO JESUS AND GET OUR NEVER DYING BODIES.SO WE CAN RULE OVER CITIES OURSELVES.WHILE JESUS RULES FROM DAVIDS THRONE FOREVER IN JERUSALEM.

Friday, July 26, 2019

MAXIME BERNIERS THE PEOPLES PARTY OF CANADA-WE WILL STOP ALL THIS REDICULOUS FLOODING CANADA WITH MUSLIMS AND FOR GODS MORAL CANADA WE NEED THE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE PARTY TO BE VOTED IN ALSO. NO OTHER PARTIES.

WORLD TERRORISM

2 PETER 2:5
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

2 PETER 3:7
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men

LEVITICUS 26:16
16 I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you( sudden) terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart:(WARS AND DEATH) and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it.(CHINA CONTROLS AMERICAS ECONOMY BY BUYING UP DEBT)

GENESIS 16:11-12
11 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael;(ARAB/MUSLIM) because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.
12 And he will be a wild man;(RIOTS-BURNING-MURDEROUUS RAGE) his hand will be against every man,(ISLAM WANTS WORLD DOMINATION) and every man's hand against him;(DEFENDING THEMSELVES) and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.(ARAB/MUSLIMS LIVE WITH ISRAELIS)

ISAIAH 33:1,18-19 Woe to thee that spoilest,(destroys) and thou wast not spoiled;(destroyed) and dealest treacherously, and they dealt not treacherously with thee! when thou shalt cease to spoil,(destroy) thou shalt be spoiled;(destroyed) and when thou shalt make an end to deal treacherously, they shall deal treacherously with thee.
18 Thine heart shall meditate terror. Where is the scribe? where is the receiver? where is he that counted the towers?
19 Thou shalt not see a fierce people, a people of a deeper speech than thou canst perceive; of a stammering tongue, that thou canst not understand.

JOHN 16:2
2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.(ISLAM MURDERS IN THE NAME OF THEIR MOON GOD ALLAH)

ITS TIME TO TAKE CANADA BACK FROM MUSLIM (SEX FOR MURDER DEATH CULTISTS). SODOMITE SEX CULTISTS AND BABY MURDERER LIBERALS AND DEMOCRATS (WHO ARE ONE-NO DIFFERENCE IN BOTH GROUPS) WHO BELIEVE ANY SIN GOES. YOU CAN WORSHIP ANYTHING BUT JESUS. THESE ISRAEL HATERS GOTTA GO. ITS TIME FOR IMMIGRATION CONTROL IN CANADA. AND TO BAN ALL MUSLIM MALES OVER 6 YEARS OLD FROM CANADA. WE DO NOT WANT CANADA ANOTHER STAN COUNTRY AS PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN ETC. WE MUST STOP ALL THIS LIBERAL SUCK HOLING UP TO MUSLIMS, GAYS AND ABORTION BABY KILLER LOVERS. WE MUST VOTE IN OCTOBER IN CANADA FOR MAXIME BERNIERS THE PEOPLES PARTY. TO CONTROL OUR BORDERS. AND KEEP CANADA A CANADIAN COUNTRY. NOT ANOTHER MUSLIM NO GO COUNTRY. VOTE THE PEOPLES PARTY OF CANADA IN OCTOBER. ALL THE OTHER PARTIES INCLUDING THE SO CALLED CONSERVATIVE PARTY. ALL SUCK HOLE UP TO MUSLIMS, SODOMITES AND ABORTION LOVING ANY SIN GOES. AND FLOOD CANADA WITH MUSLIMS AND ANY OTHER PEOPLE. ITS DEFINATELY TIME TO GET RID OF LIBERALS RULE OF DESTRYING CANADA. AND VOTE MAXIME BERNIERS. THE PEOPLES PARTY OF CANADA. AND TAKE CANADA BACK. AND THE SECONDARY VOTE FOR CANADA SHOULD BE. THE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE PARTY. THE PEOPLES PARTY TO CONTROL ISLAM AND THE BORDER. THE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE PARTY TO KEEP GOD AND MORALITY IN CANADA. CANADA SHOULD ONLY VOTE THESE 2 PARTIES IN AND NO ONE ELSE.

FAITH GOLDY AS OF NOW WILL BE VOTING MAXIME BERNIERS PEOPLES PARTY IN OCTOBER-AND ME TO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7jbiWDD8fU

MAXIME BERNIER ON MIGRATION
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=mXGj3FGJeqc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1348&v=1IykyFOsSZg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=59QcNSeRNkM

PEOPLES PARTY OF CANADA
https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/our_leader
THE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE PARTY
https://www.chp.ca/

About CHP Canada-Who are the people of the CHP? christian heritage party

We’re your neighbours, and we want the same things you want: safe communities, a strong economy, and a good future for our children and grandchildren. We come from all parts of the nation, and from all walks of life.Why a specifically Christian political party? The CHP was not started because there were no Christians in the other parties — there are. However, party discipline in Ottawa is so restrictive that Christian members of Parliament in the major parties are not permitted to bring their deepest convictions into parliamentary debates: they are told by their caucuses what to say, and when. Therefore, we saw a great need for a national political party that would encourage Christians to put forward the Biblical perspectives upon which Canada — and indeed, western civilization itself — was founded.Is CHP membership broad-based? Yes. There are no denominational tests for membership, and no church directs our efforts. CHP members include Anglicans, Baptists, Brethren, Catholics, Christian & Missionary Alliance, Mennonites, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Reformed – and probably many others: we don’t keep track. From our various backgrounds, we come together to seek a consensus about the best way to apply proven Judeo-Christian principles of justice and compassion to Canada’s contemporary public policy needs.We invite you to work with us in this project: to help restore those principles – the very principles already enshrined in the Preamble to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada’s Constitution – to a place of respect and pre-eminence in the public life of our nation.Is the CHP trying to impose Christianity on those of other faiths? Absolutely not! We’re politicians, not evangelists. Our purpose is to place ourselves under the authority and guidance of the principles of the Gospel – principles like justice, honesty, compassion, diligence, thrift and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”The Secularist minority in Canada dominates four powerful institutions that shape all our lives: governments, courts, the public education establishment, and the major news and entertainment media. The best defence of the religious freedom and intellectual liberty of the minority faiths (which at 9% all together total only about 1/2 the 24% who are Secularists) is to make common cause with the 67% of Canadians who identify themselves as Christians.* We are thus a bulwark defending religious liberty – for everyone – against a militant Secularist juggernaut that seeks to exclude all faiths from the public square.What is the CHP in a nutshell? The CHP is Canada’s only pro-Life federal political party, and the only federal party that endorses the Judeo-Christian principles enshrined in the Canadian Constitution: ‘Canada was founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God’ – capital ‘G': the God of the Bible -‘and the rule of law.’ * Statistics Canada 2011 census.

Speech - The People’s Party of Canada Position on Immigration and Multiculturalism-July 24, 2019-MAXIME BERNIER

I want to discuss with you today the People’s Party position on immigration.For decades now, there has only been one acceptable position among our political and intellectual elites: more, and more, and more immigration.There is a taboo around this topic. As soon as you raise a concern about the level of immigration, someone will accuse you of harbouring anti-immigrant views and being racist or xenophobic.The result is that all the other parties have the same position. They are all in favour of mass immigration.The Liberals have increased immigration levels from an average of 250,000 per year during the last decades to 350,000 in 2021, a 40% increase.Andrew Scheer gave a speech on immigration a few weeks ago. He did not say anything relevant or significant. He did not mention any number. Instead, he spent half an hour pleading that he is not racist.No lessons to receive-I’m not going to spend 30 minutes rejecting accusations of racism. Only 30 seconds. That’s all I need to refute a false and ridiculous accusation.I don’t care one bit about people’s race or skin colour. I have said many times that racists and bigots are not welcome in our party. We care about shared values, culture and identity.You can be of any ethnic background or faith, and be a Canadian, if you share fundamental Canadian values, learn about our history and culture, and integrate in our society.There are nominated candidates of all races and religions in the PPC. With names like Salim Mansour, Rocky Dong, Jigna Jani, Tahir Gora, Jude Guerrier, Jing Lan Yang, Salomon Rayek, and many, many others.We have no lessons to receive from anyone about openness and inclusiveness.And the journalists who don’t want to recognize this and keep coming back with questions about bigotry can just take a hike! No taboo-Immigration is a very important question. It’s completely absurd to turn it into a taboo subject.And the majority of Canadians agree with us.The reason those in favour of mass immigration don’t want to have any debate on this issue is because they know they would lose it.Every survey that has come out in recent years shows that a large proportion of Canadians, depending on the question, support a lower immigration level.In an Angus-Reid poll last year, 49% said it was too high, while only 6% wanted Canada to accept more immigrants.Who are the extremists? The left-wing media and activists say we are extremists because we want to cut immigration.But they are the extremists! The Liberals are the extremists! We are the mainstream! Canada already accepts more immigrants than almost any other country: 21% of our population was born outside of Canada. More than one in five.Our ratio is higher than in the US, where it is 15%. It is almost double that of European countries like France, Germany and the UK, where the foreign born constitute only 12% of the population. And where there have been for many years social tensions related to immigration.Canada has always been a country largely open to immigration, because of its vastness and its relative youth. I believe that by and large, our immigration policy has been very successful.But that doesn’t mean this will always continue, as we keep increasing immigration to new record levels. We are not immune to the conflicts and social tensions happening elsewhere.I want Canada to still be a peaceful, prosperous and harmonious society 25 years from now, with well-integrated immigrants.Maintaining Canada’s national identity-So let’s ignore the critics and discuss the specific reasons immigration levels should be lowered.Most fundamentally, it has to do with social harmony and the maintenance of our Canadian national identity.Last year, in August, just before I left the Conservative Party, I published six tweets that caused quite a controversy.I was criticizing Justin Trudeau’s slogan that “diversity is our strength.” I attacked the Liberal cult of diversity and extreme multiculturalism.I recognized that of course, Canada is and has always been a diverse country. We have First Nations and Inuit, two official languages, a multiethnic population, and very different regional cultures. The culture of Cape Breton is very different from that of the Eastern Townships in Quebec, or that of southern Alberta, or Nunavut.All these regional cultures are intrinsically Canadian. They developed in Canada. They don’t exist anywhere else in the world. They deserve to be nurtured and to survive.My problem with Trudeau’s slogan, and with the policies that go with it, is not that I am against diversity. It’s the belief that more and more diversity is always better. And that there is no limit to it.As I wrote in one of my tweets, if anything and everything is Canadian, does being Canadian mean something? Shouldn’t we emphasize our cultural traditions? What we have built and have in common? What makes us different from other cultures and societies? In the past, immigrants who came here gradually integrated into our society. They kept some aspects of the culture of their country of origin, of course. And that influenced and changed our society. They became Canadian, but with a distinct flavour.This is a type of multiculturalism that enriches our society. And it is perfectly fine.But that is very different than coming here to recreate the society and culture you left behind.Living permanently in an enclave apart from the larger Canadian society.And moreover, being officially encouraged by the government to continue to do so rather than to integrate into Canadian society and adopt Canadian culture and values.A nation must be based on a sense of belonging, of participating in a common national project, sharing the same values, being different from the rest of the world.It’s only when these sentiments are widely shared that we can develop the trust and common understanding necessary for our institutions to function.Our country was almost torn apart because of the misunderstandings between Francophone Quebecers and the rest of Canada.Many First Nations members feel alienated from Canadian society.So why would we want to emphasize cultural, religious and ethnic differences, which have been one of the main causes of conflict throughout human history? This is insane.We can already see the consequences in the way ethnic politics has become the norm among the other parties. They don’t talk to Canadians. They address themselves to ethnic voting blocs. To Ukrainian Canadians, Italian Canadians, Chinese Canadians, Muslim Canadians, Sikh Canadians.Trudeau does it, Scheer does it, Singh does it.Even our foreign policy now depends on appealing to these ethnic political clienteles, instead of being based on the interests of Canada as a whole.If we continue on the present course, all these little tribes will have less and less in common, apart from their dependence on government in Ottawa.Multiculturalism and balkanization-Some people have accused me of abandoning my free-market ideas because I talk about these issues. But this is totally misguided.Mass immigration, open borders, unvetted immigration, extreme multiculturalism: all of this has nothing to do with freedom.On the contrary, it’s a very dangerous type of social engineering. It amounts to large-scale government intervention in society and culture.It will bring increasing cultural balkanisation, distrust, social conflict, and potentially violence, as we are seeing in other countries where division has reached a critical level.In his 1991 book on multiculturalism, the late advisor to John F. Kennedy, Arthur Schlesinger, warned that “countries break up when they fail to give ethnically diverse peoples compelling reasons to see themselves as part of the same nation.”Three years later, Canadian author Neil Bissoondath published Selling Illusions: The Cult of Multiculturalism in Canada. That’s a very good title! Bissoondath wrote that encouraging ethnic differences leads immigrants to adopt a psychology of separation from the mainstream culture. And he blamed multiculturalism for creating enclaves that isolate ethnic groups, at the expense of the unity and cohesion of our society.Let me cite one more scholar. In his current research, Canadian political scientist Eric Kaufmann shows that lower immigration rates also help newcomers themselves. Because the lower rates bring greater integration, while also making the established population more welcoming.In case there is a CBC journalist reporting this. Please note that these writers are not Far Right white supremacists. Just trying to help my good friends at CBC here! Protecting Western Values-And let’s stop being politically correct. We must recognize that not all values, not all social customs, not all cultures, are equally valuable.Our distinct values are those of contemporary Western civilization. They include democracy, individual rights and freedoms, including freedom of religious belief and freedom to criticize religion.Our distinct values also include equality between men and women, the equal treatment of all citizens regardless of ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation, the rule of law, separation of state and religion, tolerance and pluralism, and loyalty to the wider society instead of to one’s clan or tribe.When I say that newcomers to Canada must integrate into our society and share our values, it is to these Western values that I am referring.Values that our ancestors fought for. Values that explain why we are one of the freest, most dynamic, and most prosperous societies in the world. Classical liberal values.In most non-Western societies still today, these values are not widely accepted or practiced. In fact, that’s precisely the reason why millions of people from around the world want to come to Canada and other Western countries.Among the threats to our values and way of life is political Islam, or Islamism, the fastest-growing and most dangerous radical ideology in the world today, which is responsible for so much violence in so many countries.There is growing evidence that Islamists are pushing their agenda here in Canada, with the support of money from the Middle East.One of the main critics of Islamism in Canada is our star candidate, Salim Mansur. He too wrote a book about multiculturalism a few years ago.In it, he described official multiculturalism, sponsored by the state, supported by taxpayers, and enforced by human rights commissions acting as the thought-police, as a lie.A lie based on the idea that all cultures are equal. A lie destructive of our Western liberal democratic heritage, traditions, and values based on individual rights and freedoms.The biggest peddler of this lie in Canada is of course Justin Trudeau.He simply doesn’t care about Canada’s culture and identity, heritage and traditions. He sees himself as a citizen of the world.That’s why he described Canada as the first post-national state, with no core identity. This fits with his support for globalism, and for the United Nations.I’m not exaggerating when I accuse the Liberals of putting Canada on a road to destruction. Because if we allow Trudeau to implement his globalist vision, Canada will eventually cease to exist as a distinct nation.We have to reverse this trend if we want to make sure that we, and our children, still have a country that is like the Canada we know, with its values and its unique identity intact, 25 years from now.The downsides of mass immigration-Let me move on to other arguments.The main argument that is presented in favour of immigration is the economic one. Immigrants bring their skills, their entrepreneurship, and their dreams. They fill manpower shortages, as our society ages and our workforce declines. This makes our society richer, younger and more dynamic.This is certainly true, but only to some extent. It depends on the kind of immigrants we welcome.Immigration is actually very costly for governments. There’s all the government programs to manage it of course. But a larger cost is the fact that immigrants pay on average about half as much in income taxes as other Canadians but absorb nearly the same value of government services.A study from 2011 put the cost to taxpayers at roughly $6,000 per immigrant. For a total annual cost of somewhere between $16 billion and $24 billion.$24 billion is a lot of money. Eight years later, and with a much higher level of immigration, the costs can only have gone up.One reason for this is that immigrants generally have lower wages than non-immigrants.But another key reason is that the proportion of immigrants who come to Canada because they have the right skills, based on their education, work experience and knowledge of an official language, is not very high. And it has been dropping under the Liberal government.Right now, only about 55% of newcomers are selected through the economic program. The rest come through the family reunification program or are refugees.But even that 55% does not tell the whole story. It consists of the principal applicants and their immediate family. If you remove the spouses and children, only 26% of all the people who come to Canada every year actually fulfill our economic needs.If you are not grasping the significance of this, let’s look at it from the other side. It means that three quarters of all immigrants who come to Canada are dependents, do not have the right qualifications that we need, may not master any of our official languages, or are too young or too old to work.These people do not contribute very much or at all to our economy. But they cost a lot in terms of social services.Canadians are a compassionate people and we should be. But at what cost? Are Canadians happy to subsidize 74% of our current immigrants? If the main objective of Canada’s immigration policy is to fulfill the economic needs of our country, it’s an obvious failure.And it won’t be fixed by simply increasing the total number of immigrants. That will cost us even more.Another justification we often hear for an increase in immigration levels is that we are an aging society, and we need immigrants to reverse this trend.However, demographic studies have shown that this is a myth. Newcomers are a bit younger on average than Canadians, but not enough to have a noticeable impact on the rate of aging.The Liberal government is making matters worse by increasing the number of parents and grand-parents accepted under the family reunification program every year, from 5000 to 20,000.This, of course, is an easy way for them to pander and buy votes among immigrant communities. But again, it defeats the purpose.I can understand why immigrants would want to bring the rest of their extended family here, including older ones who will benefit from our health care system.But we cannot be the welfare state of the planet. Canadians know that government funding is limited and we already fall short of caring for our own. We have long waiting lists for surgeries, and so many other problems to solve here first.Another economic downside of mass immigration is that it inflates housing prices in our big cities. More than 41% of all immigrants to Canada settle in Toronto and Vancouver, which have some of the least affordable housing among big cities in the world.There are other reasons for these sky-high prices of course, including zoning laws and monetary policy. But lower immigration would bring demand down and allow more Canadians in these cities to afford a house.All these economic arguments in favour of reducing immigration levels are rarely discussed. It’s time to break the taboo and have a real debate.Refugees-Finally, there is the issue of refugees.There are horrible cases of wars, persecution and human rights violations in the world. With the result that there are about 25 million refugees.It’s absolutely tragic. I encourage Canadians to do what they can to help through private organizations. But at the level of government, my duty, my moral obligation, must be to first help those in need among our own population.Justin Trudeau however sees himself as some kind of world minister already, managing a file in a world government. And so in 2018, Canada welcomed more resettled refugees than any other country. More than the United States, a country with ten times our population. And as many as all of the European Union.In addition to this, we have had to deal with tens of thousands of asylum seekers illegally crossing our borders over the past three years.Accepting all these refugees will cost Canadian taxpayers billions of dollars.The UN’s Global Compact for Migration, which the Liberal government signed last year, aims to normalize this kind of situation, and to make it easier for millions of people to move to Canada and other Western democracies.What is going on is exactly what you would expect. The Liberals haven’t lost control of our borders. They are deliberately attempting to erase it.Policies-Given all these considerations and principles, here are the policies that the People’s Party of Canada proposes to implement if it forms the next government.First: immigration levels.Canadian society cannot successfully integrate 350,000 immigrants and refugees every year, as the Liberals, and probably also the Conservatives, are planning to do.This is equivalent to adding one Nova Scotia to our population every three years, or one Manitoba every four years. And pack the majority of them in a few crowded cities.Support for immigration will continue to diminish, and social tensions are likely to rise, if we continue doing this. We need to slow down.A People’s Party government will substantially lower the total number of immigrants and refugees we accept every year, from 350,000 to between 100,000 and 150,000, depending on economic and other circumstances.Second: Multiculturalism.In a free society, immigrants have the right to cherish and maintain their cultural heritage. It should be clear that the People’s Party will never support any government measure to force them to abandon it. But that doesn’t mean we have any obligation to help them preserve it either, with government programs and taxpayers’ money.When they decide to move from their country of origin to this one, immigrants must be willing to leave some of their life behind, and be prepared to become full members of their new country.The vast majority of Canadians rightly expect them to learn about our history and culture, master one of our official languages, and adopt widely shared Canadian values.Official multiculturalism is based on the false idea that there is no unified Canadian society, no distinct Canadian culture, to integrate into. That we are just a collection of tribes living side by side.We are all Canadians. We must focus on what unites us as Canadians, not what divides us.A People’s Party government will repeal the Multiculturalism Act and eliminate all funding to promote multiculturalism. We will instead emphasize the integration of immigrants into Canadian society.Third: Focusing on economic immigrants.If the main economic benefit that we derive from welcoming immigrants is that they answer the needs of sectors where there is a scarcity of manpower with specialized skills, then we should make sure we have a much higher proportion of skilled immigrants who can fulfil this need.It’s irresponsible to have only 26% of all immigrants and refugees in this category. If we reduce the total number of immigrants, but double that proportion to 50%, there will be no reduction in the absolute number of economic immigrants compared with previous years.A People’s Party government will reform the point system and the various programs to ensure that our immigration policy is focused on accepting a larger proportion of economic immigrants with the right skills.We will accept fewer resettled refugees and will considerably limit the number of immigrants accepted under the family reunification program, including abolishing the program for parents and grand-parents.And we will change the law to make birth tourism illegal. Canada is not a shopping centre, where any foreigner expecting a child can come and buy a citizenship or future education and employment opportunities for their children, without following the proper immigration channels.Fourth: Selecting immigrants who share our values.The safety and cohesion of our society depends on citizens accepting the basic Canadian values and societal norms I mentioned earlier.A People’s Party government will ensure that every person hoping to immigrate to Canada undergoes a face-to-face interview and answers a series of specific questions to assess the extent to which they align with these values and societal norms.We will increase resources for CSIS, the RCMP and Canadian Immigration and Citizenship to do these interviews and thorough background checks on all classes of immigrants. With fewer immigrants to process, there will be more resources available to achieve this.Immigrants whose responses or background checks demonstrate that they do not share mainstream Canadian values will be rejected.Finally, on the issue of refugees.A People’s Party government will take every measure necessary, in partnership with our American neighbours, to stop the flow of illegal migrants at the border.We will declare the whole border an official port of entry and send back to the US anyone trying to enter illegally.Instead of making it easier to enter Canada and helping these illegal refugees, as the Liberal government has done, we will make it more difficult, by fencing off the areas where it takes place such as Roxham Road in Quebec.For resettled refugees, in addition to accepting a smaller number, we will rely on private sponsorships instead of having the government pay for all the costs of resettling these refugees in Canada.We will stop our reliance on the United Nations for refugee selection. And we will give priority to refugees belonging to persecuted groups who have nowhere to go in neighbouring countries.For example, Christians, Yazidis, and members of other minority religions in majority Muslim countries. Members of the Ahmadi community, and other Muslims in these countries who are persecuted because they reject political Islam and adhere to Western values. And members of sexual minorities.And finally, we will take Canada out of the UN’s Global Compact for Migration. Our immigration laws will be made in Canada, for the interest of Canadians.Conclusion-This has been a long speech. So my conclusion will be brief.The primary aim of Canada’s immigration policy should be to economically benefit Canadians and Canada as a whole.It should not aim to forcibly change the cultural character and social fabric of Canada, as radical proponents of multiculturalism want. Canada has its own distinct identity, worth preserving, among the nations of the world.It should not put excessive financial burdens on the shoulder of Canadians in the pursuit of humanitarian goals. Canadians are generous, but it is not our responsibility to solve all the world’s problems.And it should not be used as a political tool to pander and buy votes among immigrant communities. This kind of ethnic politics practiced by all the other parties will lead to even more social division.We are all Canadians. The People’s Party will unite Canadians with an immigration policy designed to benefit all of us.Thank you.

THE DOW WAS UP 51 POINTS TODAY

JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)

HOARDING OF GOLD AND SILVER

JAMES 5:1-3
1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten.
3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.

REVELATION 18:10,17,19
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.(IN 1 HR THE STOCK MARKETS WORLDWIDE WILL CRASH)
17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.

EZEKIEL 7:19
19 They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed:(CONFISCATED) their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the LORD: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity.

LUKE 2:1-3
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.

REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he(THE FALSE POPE WHO DEFECTED FROM THE CHRISTIAN FAITH) causeth all,(IN THE WORLD ) both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(MICROCHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark,(MICROCHIP IMPLANT) or the name of the beast,(WORLD DICTATORS NAME INGRAVED ON YOUR SKIN OR TATTOOED ON YOU OR IN THE MICROCHIP IMPLANT) or the number of his name.(THE NUMBERS OF HIS NAME INGRAVED IN THE MICROCHIP IMLPLANT)-(ALL THESE WILL TELL THE WORLD DICTATOR THAT YOUR WITH HIM AND AGAINST KING JESUS-GOD)
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:(WORLD LEADER) for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM (6006006)OR(60020202006)(SOME KIND OF NUMBER IMPLANTED IN THE MICROCHIP THAT TELLS THE WORLD DICTATOR AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER THAT YOU GIVE YOUR TOTAL ALLIGIENCE TO HIM AND NOT JESUS)(ITS AN ETERNAL DECISION YOU MAKE)(YOU CHOOSE YOUR OWN DESTINY)(YOU TAKE THE DICTATORS NAME OR NUMBER UNDER YOUR SKIN,YOUR DOOMED TO THE LAKE OF FIRE AND TORMENTS FOREVER,NEVER ENDING MEANT ONLY FOR SATAN AND HIS ANGELS,NOT HUMAN BEINGS).OR YOU REFUSE THE MICROCHIP IMPLANT AND GO ON THE SIDE OF KING JESUS AND RULE FOREVER WITH HIM ON EARTH.YOU CHOOSE,ITS YOUR DECISION.

1 KINGS 10:13-14
13 And king Solomon gave unto the queen of Sheba all her desire, whatsoever she asked, beside that which Solomon gave her of his royal bounty. So she turned and went to her own country, she and her servants.
14 Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold,

GENESIS 49:16-17
16 Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel.
17 Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.

REVELATION 6:5-6
5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.
6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.(A DAYS WAGES FOR A LOAF OF BREAD)

DOCTOR DOCTORIAN FROM ANGEL OF GOD
then the angel said, Financial crisis will come to Asia. I will shake the world.

BANK RELATED INFORMATION
http://israndjer.blogspot.ca/2015/09/bank-related-links.html
CURRENCIES
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/currencies
COMMODITIES
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/commodities

UPDATE-JULY 26, 2019-12:00AM

DOW MARKET FRIDAY-JULY 26,,2019
09:30AM-5.07
10:00AM-10.94
10:30AM-1.28
11:00AM-7.77
11:30AM-27.92
12:00PM-25.54
12:30PM-20.01
01:00PM-16.85
01:30PM-13.01
02:00PM-12.52
02:30PM-15.34
03:00PM-60.60
03:30PM-64.65
04:00PM-51.47+ 27192.45 - S&P +22.19 3025.86 - NASDAQ +91.67 8330.21
HIGH +65 LOW -05
TSX +42.86 16,531.04 - GOLD $+04.80 $1,431.80 - OIL $+00.03 $56.05

EARTHQUAKES

EZEKIEL 37:7,11-14
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.(POSSIBLE QUAKE BRINGS ISRAEL BACK TO LIFE-SO NOISE AND SHAKING-QUAKES WILL ALSO DESTROY ISRAELS ENEMIES)
11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.
12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

MATTHEW 24:7-8
7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.

MARK 13:8
8 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:(ETHNIC GROUP AGAINST ETHNIC GROUP) and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.

LUKE 21:11
11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places,(DIFFERNT PLACES AT THE SAME TIME) and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.

UPDATE-JULY 26, 2019-11:55PM

1 Day, Magnitude 2.5+ U.S.51 of 51 earthquakes in map area.

    3.0-14km W of Kingfisher, Oklahoma-2019-07-26 18:52:24 (UTC)-2.8 km
    2.6-82km NW of Nikiski, Alaska-2019-07-26 18:41:43 (UTC)-12.8 km
    4.6-48km E of Nichinan, Japan-2019-07-26 17:11:50 (UTC)-34.5 km
    4.9-103km NNE of Wera, Indonesia-2019-07-26 16:59:04 (UTC)-581.3 km
    3.0-21km WNW of Searles Valley, CA-2019-07-26 15:38:15 (UTC)-8.2 km
    2.7-11km NE of Coso Junction, CA-2019-07-26 14:57:55 (UTC)-1.3 km
    2.6-70km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico-2019-07-26 14:43:22 (UTC)-24.0 km
    2.5-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 13:59:10 (UTC)-2.3 km
    3.0-7km ESE of Ridgecrest, CA-2019-07-26 12:13:19 (UTC)-2.5 km
    2.9-10km ENE of Coso Junction, CA-2019-07-26 11:32:03 (UTC)-1.6 km
    2.7-22km S of Trona, CA-2019-07-26 10:51:11 (UTC)-4.1 km
    4.1-14km NNE of Maketu, New Zealand-2019-07-26 10:02:19 (UTC)-250.5 km
    2.7-23km SSE of Helena, Oklahoma-2019-07-26 09:05:18 (UTC)-2.0 km
    3.1-124km NW of Arctic Village, Alaska-2019-07-26 09:01:34 (UTC)-0.0 km
    2.7-124km NW of Arctic Village, Alaska-2019-07-26 09:00:51 (UTC)-4.9 km
    3.2-19km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 08:28:55 (UTC)-1.9 km
    4.7-10km NNE of Itbayat, Philippines-2019-07-26 08:13:49 (UTC)-10.0 km
    4.3-88km NW of Iquique, Chile-2019-07-26 07:38:02 (UTC)-17.6 km
    3.0-9km ENE of La Romana, Dominican Republic-2019-07-26 07:10:18 (UTC)-98.0 km
    2.6-89km NNE of Punta Cana, Dominican Republic-2019-07-26 06:46:25 (UTC)-15.0 km
    3.6-6km WSW of Volcano, Hawaii-2019-07-26 06:43:52 (UTC)--0.4 km
    4.2-10km E of Yilan, Taiwan-2019-07-26 06:39:56 (UTC)-64.7 km
    2.7-32km NE of Fajardo, Puerto Rico-2019-07-26 06:22:37 (UTC)-107.0 km
    4.5-8km SE of Mamasa, Indonesia-2019-07-26 05:59:28 (UTC)-28.4 km
    2.8-47km NNE of Isabela, Puerto Rico-2019-07-26 05:05:36 (UTC)-7.0 km
    3.2-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 05:03:59 (UTC)-1.6 km
    2.5-4km E of Pahala, Hawaii-2019-07-26 04:49:29 (UTC)--0.4 km
    2.9-128km W of Willow, Alaska-2019-07-26 04:22:18 (UTC)-0.0 km
    4.3-74km ESE of Isola Capo Rizzuto, Italy-2019-07-26 04:07:55 (UTC)-10.0 km
    4.2-52km ENE of Tanggulashan, China-2019-07-26 03:24:26 (UTC)-10.0 km
    2.7-17km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 02:08:05 (UTC)-2.1 km
    4.3-99km W of Arica, Chile-2019-07-26 01:56:51 (UTC)-34.3 km
    3.0-14km SSW of Searles Valley, CA-2019-07-26 01:42:09 (UTC)-9.4 km
    2.9-40km NNW of Valdez, Alaska-2019-07-26 01:39:19 (UTC)-55.8 km
    2.5-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 01:24:38 (UTC)-1.8 km
    2.9-14km SSW of Searles Valley, CA-2019-07-26 01:20:16 (UTC)-10.6 km
    2.7-24km S of Trona, CA-2019-07-26 01:18:03 (UTC)-4.8 km
    3.1-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:57:40 (UTC)-1.0 km
    2.6-19km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:51:36 (UTC)-2.2 km
    2.6-19km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:47:08 (UTC)-2.6 km
    3.0-19km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:45:55 (UTC)-2.6 km
    3.4-19km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:45:34 (UTC)-2.5 km
    2.8-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:44:24 (UTC)-2.5 km
    4.7-18km E of Little Lake, CA-2019-07-26 00:42:47 (UTC)-1.9 km
    2.7-2km ENE of Salvaleon de Higuey, Dominican Republic-2019-07-26 00:05:52 (UTC)-64.0 km
    4.5-83km ESE of Haebaru, Japan-2019-07-25 23:56:16 (UTC)-19.6 km

Thursday, July 25, 2019

MY MOHAWK 2019 HARNESS RACE PREDICTIONS RD 155

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

THE RUSSIA HOAX SCAM IS DONE.TRUMP NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. MUELLER DID NOT EVEN WRITE THE REPORT. ALL THE TRUMP HATERS ON HIS COUP TEAM DID.

ISAIAH 5:20-25
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
25 Therefore is the anger of the LORD kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcases were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.

2 TIMOTHY 3:1-5
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous (DANGEROUS) times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

1 TIMOTHY 1:9
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

ROMANS 3:13-18
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

2 TIMOTHY 4:3-4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

MUELLERS TRUMP HATE BIAS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKpOsV9wFxo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsPsfrkZxiE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHasBjRJAbc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFDnuMAT66U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrf7U8bUE24

NOW WE KNOW WHY MUELLER ALWAYS SAID. HE WILL ONLY STAY IN THE REPORT. HE NEVER WROTE IT. ALL THE TRUMP HATER COUP LAWYERS WROTE IT. MUELLER WAS NEVER IN CONTROL OF THE REPORT. HE WAS JUST THE PUPPET FAKE LEADER. MUELLER WOULD NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BEGINING OF THE SCAM HOAX. HOW THE PERSON THAT STARTED THE SCAM NEVER GOT CHARGED FOR LYING TO MUELLER 3 TIMES. BUT EVERY TRUMP PERSON WHO LIED. GOT JAIL TIME. PROOF RIGHT FROM THE BEGINING THE BIAS TRUMP HATERS-QUEEN CLINTON SUPPORTERS. ONLY CHARGED TRUMP PEOPLE. BUT NOW THAT THIS RUSSIA SCAM IS COMPLETE IN PART 1-THE HOAX TO DESTROY TRUMP. IS COMPLETE. THE 2ND PART IS HOW THE SCAM BEGAN IN THE FIRST PLACE. HOW CLINTON AND THE HERD OF LIBERAL SEWER RATS SPYED ON TRUMP PEOPLE THREW FRAUD MEANS. THEN COMEY LEAKED INFO TO THE PRESS TO GET THE COUP STARTED. THEN MUELLER COLLUDED WITH ROSENSTEIN TO CONVINCE TRUMP TO HIRE MUELLER TO BE THE PUPPET LEADER. OF THIS NON EXISTANT HOAX COUP CONSPIRACY. TO GET RID OF TRUMP. SO CLINTON COULD BECOME PRESIDENT. ANDREW WEISSMANN THE LEADER BEHIND THE SCENES OF THIS COUP. HE CALLED THE SHOTS ON EVERYTHING. ALL THIS WILL COME OUT BY BARR AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. AND LIKE A MUSLIM SEX FOR MURDER DEATH CULTIST WOULD SAY. HEADS ARE LITERALLY GONNA ROLL. WE THOUGHT HANNEBAL LECTOR WAS A DANGEROUS JAIL BIRD. THE DOORS WILL BE CLOSING ON SOME OF THESE TRUMP HATERS WHO DEFRAUDED THE PHISA COURT. AND DEFRAUDED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH LIES.
https://israndjer.blogspot.com/2019/07/liberal-sewer-rats-claim-wednesday.html

The Memo: Mueller's stumbles distract from substance-By Niall Stanage - 07/24/19 06:54 PM EDT-THE HILL

Robert Mueller lost major points on style during his testimony on Capitol Hill on Wednesday — a lapse that obscured the serious jabs he delivered to President Trump on substance.Mueller’s halting, tentative demeanor was the main talking point for much of the political world, especially in the first of the day’s two hearings, before the House Judiciary Committee.President Trump and his supporters pounced instantly. Trump sardonically tweeted his “thanks” to the Democrats for bringing the former special counsel before them. Later, speaking at the White House, Trump told reporters, “We had a very good day today.”But some of the points that Mueller enunciated were seriously problematic for the president.Mueller began the day agreeing with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) that his report did not “exonerate” Trump — despite the president’s constant proclamations to that effect.Later, Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) asked whether it was true that Trump had “tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify records relevant to an ongoing investigation” — something that seems a textbook example of obstruction of justice.“I would say that’s generally a summary,” Mueller affirmed.And, in a somewhat unexpected exchange with a Republican — Rep. Ken Buck (Colo.) — Mueller suggested that Trump could be charged with obstruction of justice after leaving office.That chimed with Democrats’ contention that Mueller backed off a more incriminating finding against Trump only because of his belief — based on Justice Department guidelines — that a sitting president cannot be indicted in a criminal matter.Where Mueller stands on that specific point remains opaque — much to Democrats’ frustration.At one point in the first hearing, he seemed to confirm in an exchange with Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) that it was the guidelines alone which prevented him indicting Trump. But he walked that position back at the beginning of the second hearing, before the House Intelligence Committee.The partisan schism over Mueller’s entire probe was on full and predictable display throughout Wednesday.The former FBI director fended off most attempts by Democrats to prod him into saying anything truly incendiary.Mindful of the risk of his appearance being used as a political prop, he also declined invitations to read portions of the report aloud, instead telling Democratic members that he was “happy” for them to do so.On the flip side, Mueller was faced with persistent efforts by Republicans to cast doubt on his integrity and that of his team.GOP members highlighted, for example, the number of his investigators who had donated money to Democrats and the reported presence of one key team member, Andrew Weissman, at the 2016 election night event for Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.Mueller’s efforts to push back against the Republican charges sometimes lacked vitality, especially early in the day.Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), a third-term congressman, became an instant star on the right for his aggressive questioning of Mueller.Ratcliffe argued that Mueller and his team had placed an unfair “inverted burden of proof” on the president in relation to obstruction of justice — in essence, demanding that Trump should prove his innocence, rather than being entitled to the presumption of it.Mueller’s relative quiescence was even more notable when confronted by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas.).Gohmert, known for his high-octane style, accused former FBI agent Peter Strzok of hating Trump and questioned Mueller’s own credibility, with only gentle pushback from the former special counsel.Those were the kinds of moments that left independent media figures and some liberal commentators perplexed.“On optics, this was a disaster,” Chuck Todd said on NBC News.On Twitter, David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Obama, wrote: “This is delicate to say, but Mueller, whom I deeply respect, has not publicly testified before Congress in at least six years. And he does not appear as sharp as he was then.”But Mueller did rally to his own defense at other times.On questions of bias, he asserted that during his whole career in law enforcement, “I have not had occasion, once, to ask somebody about their political affiliation.”As for the report itself he said, “I don’t think you’ve reviewed a report that is as thorough, as fair, as consistent as the report that we have in front of us.”By Wednesday evening, however, the same old question hung over Mueller’s testimony: What does it change? Mueller has always enjoyed much higher approval ratings from Democrats than Republicans — though a Pew Research poll released on Tuesday suggested his support among GOP-leaning voters had increased, perhaps because his report was not as damning as Democrats had hoped.Still, much of the reaction on Wednesday fell along politically tribal lines.Trump’s campaign manager, Brad Parscale, said the hearings had been “a disaster for Democrats.”A number of Democrats, including 2020 presidential candidates Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, renewed calls for impeachment proceedings.The likelihood of impeachment is receding almost by the day, however. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is reluctant to move in that direction. Congress is about to begin its summer recess, something that further saps the energy for an impeachment drive.Mueller said important things on Wednesday.The likely reality is that none of them was explosive enough to shift the political dynamics in a fundamental way.The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage, primarily focused on Donald Trump’s presidency.

Trump impeachment drive takes hit as bombshell-free Mueller hearings rehash report-By Brooke Singman | Fox News-JULY 24,19

Democrats pin impeachment hopes on Robert Mueller's testimony-Lawmakers go all-in on former special counsel Robert Mueller's scheduled appearance on Capitol Hill; reaction and analysis on 'The Five.'Democrats hoping that hours of testimony by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller might fuel their case for President Trump’s impeachment were left with little new material at the conclusion of Wednesday's back-to-back hearings, as Republicans gloated that the spectacle failed to make the case to oust the president.“It’s time for the curtain to close on the Russia hoax. The conspiracy theory is dead,” said Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., top Republican on the intelligence committee.REPUBLICANS CONFRONT MUELLER WITH ALLEGATIONS OF DOUBLE STANDARD IN RUSSIA PROBE-Mueller stood by his team's findings at Wednesday's hearings—reiterating that the special counsel’s office found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Trump associates and Russia, while also stating that the president was not exonerated on allegations of obstruction of justice despite his assertions to the contrary.But in doing so, he also repeatedly refused to drift beyond the bounds of his report.This was, to an extent, expected as Mueller had signaled he would only address material already in the public record. But the absence of any political bombshells, coupled with a hearing performance by Mueller that was at times halting and flustered, left unclear whether anti-Trump Democrats would be able to use any of it to further their calls for impeachment.“This is all about their last best chance of convincing the American people that the president ought to be impeached,” Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, told Fox News. “They haven’t succeeded thus far and I think this is that effort.”Nunes called it the "last gasp of the Russia collusion conspiracy theory."Mueller declined to go down the road of the impeachment topic, under questioning from both Republicans and Democrats.Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, of the Judiciary Committee, directly questioned Mueller on whether he was suggesting that Congress impeach Trump.“You explained [in May] ... that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Escobar said, quoting Mueller’s remarks during his press conference in May. “That process other than the criminal justice system to accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing—is that impeachment?”“I’m not going to comment on that,” Mueller said, as she continued to press the issue, citing a footnote in the report.“What are other constitutional processes?” she said.Mueller replied: “I think I heard you mention at least one.”“Impeachment, correct?” she pressed.“I’m not going to comment,” he said-MUELLER ISSUES CLARIFICATION, TAKES BACK BOMBSHELL STATEMENT ABOUT INDICTING TRUMP-In May, Mueller’s statement was taken by many on the left as a green light to intensify talks about impeachment proceedings, and to ramp up existing Trump-focused investigations.But on Wednesday, even as Republican Rep. Mike Johnson of Louisiana attempted to get an answer from Mueller on impeachment, the former special counsel wouldn’t bite.Johnson said Democrats “desperately wanted you today to tell them they should impeach the president.”“The report does not recommend impeachment, does it?” he asked.Mueller maintained that he was “not going to talk about recommendations,” and when asked again, he stated clearly that he was “not going to talk about that issue.”Rank-and-file Democrats have been calling for impeachment for months, as several House committees lead Trump-focused investigations into his alleged obstruction of justice, his financial history, and ties to foreign individuals.“I think there is a broad consensus in our caucus,” Rep. David Cicilline, R.I., said Wednesday, suggesting that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will get on board, despite being cool to the idea and helping turn back a recent impeachment resolution on the floor. “I think ultimately the majority of our caucus wants to move forward with an impeachment inquiry.”Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, said that the Mueller hearing laid “the building blocks” for an impeachment inquiry.But, despite rank-and-file hopes that Mueller's testimony would change the political calculus of Democratic leaders who have been reluctant to pursue impeachment, Pelosi signaled the hearings barely rose to her attention.When asked if she had watched the hearing, Pelosi, D-Calif., said Wednesday, “Just a little bit,” adding that she only watched a few moments “because we’ve been so busy.”Mueller started his day with testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and ended with a hearing before the House Intelligence Committee.In between hearings, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham tweeted: “The last three hours have been an epic embarrassment for the Democrats.”Even fierce Trump critics voiced concern that the hearings were doing Democrats no favors. Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe called the hearing a "disaster" that "sucked the life" out of the Mueller report.The president has, since its inception, decried the investigation as a “rigged witch hunt,” and maintained his innocence, repeatedly stating that Mueller found “no collusion” and “no obstruction.”But Mueller, on Wednesday, maintained that the president “was not exculpated,” and when asked directly by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., if his report totally exonerates the president, as Trump has argued, Mueller replied, “No.” He also rejected descriptions of the probe as a "witch hunt" or "hoax."Meanwhile, Republicans on both panels peppered Mueller with questions about the origins of the Russia investigation, the role of the anti-Trump dossier authored by ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, and alleged misconduct by the FBI during the bureau’s initial July 2016 investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with members of the Trump campaign. Mueller declined to entertain those questions.Republicans also repeatedly confronted Mueller with lines of questioning meant to illustrate a double standard with regard to how his office pursued allegations against Trump and his associates and how they reviewed allegations of misconduct by others.Mueller, though, repeatedly said he could not comment and continued to say the issues were outside of his “purview.”Mueller was appointed on May 17, 2017 by former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who assumed oversight of the Russia investigation after former Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the probe due to his involvement with the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. Mueller’s investigation lasted nearly two years, ultimately finding no evidence of a criminal conspiracy and not reaching a conclusion on whether the president obstructed justice.Fox News' Henry Erlandson and Alex Pappas contributed to this report.

Dems disappoint with Mueller show-By Chris Stirewalt | Fox News-JULY 24,19

Mueller: The report is my testimony and I will stay in that text-DEMS DISAPPOINT WITH MUELLER SHOW -Fox News: “While Democrats were hoping for a memorable hearing performance that might offer clear-cut testimony on crimes by the president, the result of hours of grueling testimony before two committees -- like the report itself -- was more ambiguous. [Special Counsel Robert Mueller] at times appeared flustered, often asking lawmakers to repeat questions, while referring back to the report or stating topics were outside his purview whenever questioners sought to drag him outside the bounds of his written findings. Mueller notably declared Wednesday that, despite Trump's assertions to the contrary, the report does not exonerate the president of obstruction of justice. … Much of the hearing provided a forum for Republicans to fume at Mueller over the way he conducted the other part of his probe, on the obstruction component.”Voters already tuned out - Fox News: “Few voters expect former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony will make a difference to their views of President Trump. The latest Fox News Poll, conducted Sunday through Tuesday, finds nearly half, 49 percent, say there is ‘no chance at all’ that something Mueller says on Capitol Hill Wednesday could change how they feel about Trump. Another 23 percent say there is ‘only a small chance’ their views could change. About one in five seem moveable, as they say there is a ‘strong’ (8 percent) or ‘some’ chance (11 percent) the testimony will change their mind. Republicans (52 percent) and Democrats (49 percent) are more likely than independents (38 percent) to say there is zero chance something in Mueller’s remarks will change their feelings about Trump. Support for impeaching Trump and removing him from office has stayed between 39-43 percent since June 2018. Currently, 42 percent of voters support that approach. Another 5 percent want him impeached but not removed, while 45 percent oppose impeachment altogether.”McGahn could be up next - NBC News: “The man whose testimony could ultimately prove crucial in a potential impeachment battle isn’t appearing before a congressional committee this week. The biggest question facing Democrats is whether he will ever testify at all. …Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler is readying his next step: seeking to compel testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn, the person considered to be the potential linchpin of an obstruction of justice case against President Donald Trump. Few names appear more often — more than 500 times in the redacted version of Mueller’s final report — than McGahn’s. The longtime Republican insider who served as both Trump’s campaign counsel and first White House counsel sat for more than 30 hours of voluntary testimony before Mueller’s team.”House readies other approaches - Politico: “House Democrats are preparing to pass a measure intended to strengthen their court case to access President Donald Trump's personal financial information, a direct response to questions raised by a Trump-appointed judge during an Appeals Court hearing earlier this month. The proposal, filed Tuesday afternoon by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), would formally declare that any committee subpoenas related to President Donald Trump, his family, current and former White House officials and the Trump Organization are presumed to have the blessing of the full House of Representatives. The Rules Committee is expected to advance the measure Tuesday night, and the House is expected to pass it on Wednesday. … The measure, recommended by House counsel Doug Letter, responds to a line of questioning by Neomi Rao, a judge on the federal appeals court in Washington, who is one of three judges weighing a Democratic subpoena to access records from Trump's personal accounting firm.”Trump sues House to protect tax returns - WSJ: “President Trump sued the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee and New York state officials on Tuesday, seeking to protect his state tax returns from being turned over to the congressional tax-writing committee. The lawsuit seeks an injunction to block the application of a new New York state law that enables the Ways and Means Committee chairman to obtain Mr. Trump’s state tax records by asking the state tax commissioner for them.”

PROOF HALF ON EARTH DIE DURING THE 7 YR TRIBULATION PERIOD (8 BILLION ON EARTH)

ISAIAH 66:15-16
15 For, behold, the LORD will come with fire,(NUKES) and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many.

ISAIAH 26:21
21 For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity:(GOD/ISRAEL HATE AND BRAKING OF HIS COMMANDMENTS) the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.(WW3,1/2 earths population die - 4 BILLION).

ISAIAH 13:6-13 KJV
6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
7 Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt:(FROM FRIGHT)
8 And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames.
9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

REVELATION 6:7-8 (8 BILLION- 2 BILLION = 6 BILLION)
7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.
8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse:(CHLORES GREEN) and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth,(2 BILLION) to kill with sword,(WEAPONS) and with hunger,(FAMINE) and with death,(INCURABLE DISEASES) and with the beasts of the earth.(ANIMAL TO HUMAN DISEASE).

REVELATION 9:15,18 (6 BILLION - 2 BILLION = 4 BILLION)
15 And the four(DEMONIC WAR) angels were loosed,
18 By these three was the third part of men killed,(2 BILLION) by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.(NUCLEAR ATOMIC BOMBS)

HALF OF EARTHS POPULATION DIE DURING THE 7 YR TRIBULATION.(THESE VERSES ARE JUDGEMENT SCRIPTURES NOT RAPTURE SCRIPTURES)

LUKE 17:34-37 (8 TOTAL BILLION - 4 BILLION DEAD IN TRIB = 4 BILLION TO JESUS KINGDOM) (HALF DIE DURING THE 7 YR TRIBULATION PERIOD JUST LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS)(GOD DOES NOT LIE)(AND NOTICE MOST DIE IN WAR AND DISEASES-NOT COMETS-ASTEROIDS-QUAKES OR TSUNAMIS)
34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken,(IN WW3 JUDGEMENT) and the other shall be left.(half earths population 4 billion die in the 7 yr trib)
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken,(IN WW3 JUDGEMENT) and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken,(IN WW3 JUDGEMENT) and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.(Christians have new bodies,this is the people against Jerusalem during the 7 yr treaty)(Christians bodies are not being eaten by the birds).THESE ARE JUDGEMENT SCRIPTURES-NOT RAPTURE SCRIPTURES.BECAUSE NOT HALF OF PEOPLE ON EARTH ARE CHRISTIANS.AND THE CONTEXT IN LUKE 17 IS THE 7 YEAR TRIBULATION OR 7 YR TREATY PERIOD.WHICH IS JUDGEMENT ON THE EARTH.NOT 50% RAPTURED TO HEAVEN.

MATTHEW 24:37-42 (THESE ARE JUDGEMENT SCRIPTURES-SURE NOT RAPTURE SCRIPTURES)
37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken,(IN WW3 JUDGEMENT) and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken,(IN WW3 JUDGEMENT) and the other left.
42 Watch therefore:(FOR THE LAST DAYS SIGNS HAPPENING) for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

S. Korea says N. Korea fires 2 short-range missiles into sea-[Associated Press]-YAHOONEWS-July 24, 2019

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea fired two short-range missiles into the sea on Thursday, South Korea's military said, the first weapons launches in more than two months as North Korean and U.S. officials struggle to restart nuclear negotiations.The South's Joint Chiefs of Staff said the missiles fired from around the North's eastern coastal town of Wonsan flew about 430 kilometers (270 miles) before landing in the waters off the country's east coast.A South Korean defense official, requesting anonymity citing department rules, said that the United States analyzed one of the missiles that flew longer than 430 kilometers. The official said that an initial South Korean analysis showed both missiles were fired from mobile launchers and flew at the maximum altitude of 50 kilometers (30 miles).Some observers say the North's intentions could be to show the U.S. and others what would happen if diplomacy fails. But the relatively short flight distance by the missiles also suggests the launches were not a major provocation, such as a test of a long-range missile capable of reaching the U.S. mainland, and that North Korea doesn't appear to be pulling out of a U.S.-led diplomacy on its nuclear program.In recent days, North Korea has been ramping up the pressure on the U.S. and South Korea over their expected summertime military drills that it views as an invasion rehearsal. Last week, the North said it may lift its 20-month suspension of nuclear and long-range missile tests in response to the drills. President Donald Trump has considered the weapons moratorium a major achievement in his North Korea policy.Some experts say it was a negotiating tactic by North Korea to take issue with the drills in order to get an upper hand ahead of the possible resumption of talks. North Korea wants to get widespread sanction relief to revive its dilapidated economy, but U.S. officials want the country to take significant disarmament steps before they give up the leverage provided by the sanctions.A senior U.S. official said the Trump administration was aware of the reports of a short-range projectile launched from North Korea. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide a response, said the administration had no further comment at this time."If they were ballistic missiles, they violate the U.N. sanctions, and I find it extremely regrettable." Japan's Defense Minister Takeshi Iwaya told reporters in Tokyo.It was the first such launch since Seoul said North Korea fired three short-range missiles off its east coast in early May. Many experts said at the time that those missiles bore a strong resemblance to the Russian-designed Iskander, a short-range, nuclear-capable ballistic missile that has been in the Russian arsenal for more than a decade.South Korea's military said it and the U.S. military were analyzing details of Thursday's launches. South Korea said it was monitoring possible additional launches by North Korea.During a third summit at the Korean border late last month, Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un agreed to resume nuclear negotiations, which had been deadlocked since their second summit in Vietnam in February ended without an agreement because of disputes over U.S.-led sanctions.Both the launches in May and on Thursday won't end that weapons test moratorium, which applies to firing intercontinental ballistic missiles.On Tuesday, North Korean state media said Kim inspected a newly built submarine and ordered officials to further bolster the country's military capabilities. The Korean Central News Agency said the submarine's operational deployment "is near at hand."After analyzing North Korea-dispatched photos of the submarine, experts said the submarine likely has three launch tubes for missiles. South Korean government documents say North Korea has about 70 submarines, but analysts say they mostly have a single launch tube.The construction of such a new submarine suggests North Korea has been increasing its military capability despite nuclear diplomacy that it began with the United States early last year.The latest launches came amid a recent flare-up of tensions on the Korean Peninsula after South Korean fighter jets on Tuesday fired hundreds of warning shots to repel a Russian reconnaissance plane that Seoul says violated its territorial airspace. Before that alleged intrusion, Seoul said Russian and Chinese warplanes including the reconnaissance aircraft made an extremely unusual joint entrance into South Korea's air defense identification zone, prompting South Korean military jets to scramble.Russia and China have said they carried out their first joint patrol in the waters between the Korean Peninsula and Japan but said none of their planes violated South Korea's airspace. Experts say the joint patrol may have been aimed at testing readiness of trilateral security cooperation among the United States, South Korea and Japan.___Associated Press writers Deb Riechmann in Washington and Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo contributed to this report.

LIBERAL SEWER RATS CLAIM WEDNESDAY MUELLER WILL PROVE TRUMP OF HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANERS.AND WILL BE ABLE TO IMPEACH HIM.WHEN MUELLER ANSWERS QUESTIONS TO CONGRESS.EVERYBODY KNOWS IT WAS A COUP AGAINST TRUMP TO LET HITLARY 2ND CLINTON QUEEN OF THE LIBERALS WIN IN 2016.

ISAIAH 5:20-21,24-25
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
25 Therefore is the anger of the LORD kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcases were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.

1 TIMOTHY 1:9
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

ROMANS 3:13-14
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:

2 TIMOTHY 4:3-4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

2 TIMOTHY 3:13
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

JEREMIAH 17:9
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

THE LIBERALS ARE SO SCARED THAT THE TRUTH WILL COME OUT WEDNESDAY WHEN TRUMP HATER ROBERT MUELLER. GOES TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS REPORT. THE LIBERAL SEWER RATS ARE SO SELF DELUDED. THEY THINK JUST CAUSE MUELLER ANSWERS QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS REPORT. TRUMP WILL BE PROVED OF HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANERS. THE LIBERALS ARE IN THEIR CRY ROOMS WITH EVERY THEOROPY GOING. PRAYING TO SATAN TO GIVE THEM KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT QUESTIONS TO ASK MUELLER WEDNESDAY. BECAUSE THEY KNOW THIS WILL BACK FIRE ON THEIR HEADS. AND THE LIBERALS WILL BE THE ONES THAT WILL BE IMPEACHED BY JAIL SENTENCES IN THE NEAR FUTURE. THE REPUBLICANS KNOW WHAT QUESTIONS TO ASK. AND THE QUESTIONS WILL BE ABOUT HOW THIS FRAUD WITCH HUNT STARTED BY A FRAUD DOSSIER. THAT THE LIBERALS AND HITLARY 2ND CLINTON PAID BIG BUCKS FOR AND DREAMED UP WITH THEIR RUSSIAN AGENTS AND CLINTON LOVER STEELE AND THE OHRS. AND FUZION. THE LIBERAL MENTAL CASES ARE SO SELF DELUDED THEY THINK THEY CAN PROVE THAT TRUMP COMMITED CRIMES. ANALYSTS ARE SAYING THE REASON MUELLER CHANGED THE QUESTION DATE FROM JULY 17TH TO JULY 24TH. IS BECAUSE IN SECRET MUELLER AND THE LIBERAL MENTAL CASES WERE COLLUDING TOGETHER TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS THAT WILL MAKE TRUMP LOOK LIKE A CRIMINAL. WHEN ITS SETTLED A LONG TIME AGO. TRUMMP AND HIS ADMINISTRATION ARE INNOCENT OF ALL COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA. AND ANY OTHER CRIMINAL CHARGES. BUT YOU CAN NOT GET THAT THREW BRAIN DEAD-LIBERALS THAT ARE SO SELF DELUDED. THEY BELIEVE THEIR OWN LIES. AND BELIEVE. THEY CAN STILL SCHEME UP A WAY TO IMPEACH DONALD JOHN TRUMPY. THE LIBERAL SPIN DOCTORS AND THE MEDIA ARE REALLY ON HIGH ALERT SCARED MODE. AND WILL BE SAYING ANYTHING UNTILL WEDNESDAY. TO TRY TO GET THE AMERICANS AGAINST TRUMP. BUT I GOT NEWS FOR THE LIBERALS INSTEAD OF LOCK JUST HER CLINTON UP. THE NEW CHANT WILL BE. LOCK THEM ALL UP. THE LIBERALS THAT ALL COLLUDED WITH RUSSIAN AGENTS AND TRYED TO DO A COUP AGAINST TRUMP BY TREASONOUS MEANS. STARTING WITH THE QUEEN SEWER RAT OF THE LIBERAL TRUMP HATERS HITLARY 2ND CLINTON, JAMES COMEY, LISA PAGE, AND HER ADULTEROUS LOVE BIRD PETER STRZOK, CHRISTOFER STEELE, JOHN BRENNAN, JAMES (CLAP ON CLAP OFF) THE CLAPPER, ROD ROSENSTEIN, NELLIE AND BRUCE OHR, FUZION GPS, ANDREW MCCABE, JAMES BAKER THE LEAKER-ONE OF MANY IN THIS FRAUD TREASONOUS WITCH HUNT AGAINST TRUMP.AND ALL THE FAKE NEWS LEFT MEDIA, CNN, MSNBC, CBC, CTV, AND ALL THE OTHER LEFT WING RETARD LOSER SEWER RAT FAKE NEWS TRUMP HATER LIBERAL MEDIA AND HOLLYWOOD OF COURSE.

Webb: Questions for Robert Mueller-By David Webb, opinion contributor — 07/16/19 07:03 PM EDT

I know it is a take from “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” and close to what Democrats have been saying for months. For you Bueller fans who feel slighted, remember that imitation is the greatest form of flattery.The delayed testimony before the House Oversight and Reform and House Judiciary committees gives you time to digest the questions and there is still time to review the Mueller report, if so inclined. It is possible the former special counsel Robert Mueller who testifies will be the one who wants to be invited to the Martha’s Vineyard parties and asked to speak at Harvard. It’s possible that the Mueller who wants to walk away from 22 months, millions of dollars spent and nothing of presidential level consequence in his plea deals and convictions says little and references his report. We’ve seen that play before.Who asks the questions also matters. Too often politicians pontificate and play to their donors and their base regardless of party. They don’t follow a line of questioning the way a prosecutor or defense attorney would. There are times to continue the line of questioning and there are times to pivot.In Michael Isikoff’s book, “Russian Roulette,” he explains that Christopher Steele’s own business partner didn’t believe the information in his reports was accurate. Likewise, Clinton vendor Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS couldn’t use Steele’s increasingly outrageous reports because they weren’t sourced or documented. Instead, to get the Steele info in play, they gave it to the FBI and then briefed national security reporters about the info to stir the pot, including the tip that the FBI was investigating the info. Isikoff took the bait and wrote one of the first stories at Yahoo News. CIA Director John Brennan called then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to download info and encouraged Reid to politicize the Russia-Trump connection in October.Imagine that. The CIA director politicizing unverified information that originated with the Clinton campaign. This information turned out to be false.Two days later, Reid penned a letter to Comey demanding an investigation into Trump. Most information in Reid’s letter was sourced to public news reports, but one issue alluding to Carter Page — reporting falsely that he met with a high Kremlin official — was not public. It came from Brennan or the Clinton campaign or law firm Perkins Coie. At that point, Brennan was directly coordinating campaign messaging. Since the subject was the obsession of the nation’s law enforcement institutions, intelligence agencies and national press corps, and the info was put into national circulation by the Clinton campaign and Steele Dossier, determining the original source and accuracy of that dossier should have been the first step of a thorough investigation.There is no indication such an inquiry occurred in the Mueller report. Mueller assumed the accuracy of the report, started with it, and investigated Trump. He should have started with the dossier info and tested it first.They all seem to feel the need to speak but in many cases some should not. Republican or Democrat here are some key questions.Since the Steele Dossier reported contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians, the truth and accuracy of the dossier should have been an important part of your investigation. Explain everything you did to investigate the accuracy of the Steele Dossier and if not, why not? The accuracy is not discussed in your report, why not? Mueller’s mandate was to look at Trump’s Russia collusion. The obvious follow-up question is why did you prosecute Paul Manafort for completely unrelated matters from a decade back? Were you aware that the Eastern District of Virginia had essentially declined that same case? Why didn’t you decide the question of obstruction? Wasn’t that your job? Wasn’t that why you were hired as special counsel? Were you concerned about the fallout from being “the guy who cleared Trump?”Isn’t it true that you spoke to Attorney General William Barr the day after your letter to him? Didn’t he specifically ask if you thought anything about the summary was inaccurate? Didn’t you say “no?”Don’t you agree that on a declination it is Department of Justice policy to not then attack the investigation subject with all kinds of negative facts? Shouldn’t the case be declined with nothing more said? You have been a prosecutor for years. Have you ever exonerated anyone on a declination? For example, on a bank robbery investigation would you say “I’m clearing the alleged robber?” because the next day you might come across a video of him robbing the bank.What facts merited a 400-plus page report if not for political reasons? Digest these questions and come up with your own in a reasonable form. We will see if the donkey and pony show happens in Congress next week.Webb is host of “The David Webb Show” on SiriusXM Patriot 125, host of “Reality Check with David Webb” on Fox Nation, a Fox News contributor and a frequent television commentator. His column appears twice a month in The Hill.

Lisa Page Transcripts Reveal Huge Preferences For Clinton During Email Scandal Investigation-The Lisa Page transcripts reveal how politics corrupted the two critical investigations that influenced the 2016 election: the Clinton email scandal and the investigation into the Trump-Russia hoax.By Adam Mill-March 19, 2019

Did the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice use their awesome powers to interfere in the 2016 election? The recent release of the Lisa Page transcripts takes us one step closer to understanding how politics corrupted the two critical investigations that influenced the 2016 election: the Clinton email scandal and the investigation into the Trump-Russia hoax.Page, an FBI lawyer at the time who served directly under the now-disgraced former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, clearly revealed herself as an early Russia hoax true believer on a team of “saviors” blind to the bigger picture in both investigations. Let’s take a closer look at some of the key revelations in her testimony to Congress and their chilling warnings about the integrity of future American elections.The Fix Was In-“Midyear Exam,” the code name for the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information using a private server and email address, formally closed on July 5, 2016, with a public announcement by James Comey, then the FBI director. Page confirmed there was little question about the outcome from early in the investigation.Readers recall President Obama’s 2015 “60 Minutes” interview in which he articulated a pre-conclusion hauntingly similar to the July 5, 2016, final announcement exonerating Clinton. Obama suggested that Clinton had made a “mistake,” and never intended to violate the law. It, therefore, comes as no surprise that Page told Congress, “Every single person on the team, whether FBI or [sic] knew far earlier than July that we were not going to be able to make out sufficient evidence to charge a crime.”While Comey claimed he did not coordinate the decision to exonerate Hillary Clinton with the political appointees in the Department of Justice, Page contradicted this assertion. Among the Department of Justice attorneys overseeing the Clinton-email investigation: John Carlin. He is the notorious DOJ attorney who misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about widespread illegal and unconstitutional spying on Americans that so troubled the court and the National Security Agency that the NSA supposedly shut down the powerful surveillance program to remove the temptation from bureaucrats.Readers remember that disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok, McCabe, and others began working on Comey’s speech exonerating Clinton long before she even submitted to an investigative interview. Page told Congress that the DOJ set the standard by which Clinton could be held criminally liable as “intentional” because a “gross negligence” standard (in the DOJ’s view) would be unconstitutionally vague. The DOJ simply redefined the FBI’s burden of proof too high to reach any other outcome.The DoJ Meddled with FBI Techniques-Page told Congress that the DOJ meddled in the Clinton investigation over the FBI’s objection. She and other agents sought to interview Clinton in a two-on-two arrangement. Instead, both sides were allowed to bring a host of participants and observers. This allowed Clinton to get her story straight, in real time, with other fact witnesses.Page testified that she felt the FBI lacked the leverage to restrict the Clinton team. When asked whether Clinton could have been prevented from bringing people to assist her if she had been required to appear before a grand jury, Page acknowledged that in such a situation Clinton would have been forced to answer questions without any assistance, including a lawyer.For some time, the DOJ was criticized for not allowing the FBI to use grand jury subpoenas to compel testimony in the Clinton email probe. Page said she and “everyone” in the FBI objected to the format that allowed Clinton to appear with other fact witnesses, but that somebody in the DOJ directed otherwise. Page did not know who, which means that the person who exercised this authority has so far escaped public accountability.Page also objected to the government bringing several of its representatives. She and the rest of the FBI favored a standard two-on-two format preferred in interviews. She felt the large contingent of government participants made the government appear to have “loaded for bear or guns blazing,” with an army of agents and lawyers.Look Ma, No Leaks!-Rep. Sheila Jackson (D-TX) asked Page a series of questions suggesting if Page or Strzok really wanted to stop Trump from getting elected, it would have been as simple as leaking the existence of the FBI investigation. Jackson argued that the absence of FBI leaks about the investigation proved that Page and Strzok set aside their personal feelings about candidate Trump to investigate dispassionately.This is wrong. As fellow Federalist writer Margot Cleveland identified in her own research, the existence of the investigation not only leaked, but the FBI felt the need to also leak the absence of any clear evidence linking Trump to Russia.At least two FBI officials are or have been investigated for leaking to the press during the 2016 election cycle: McCabe and former General Counsel James Baker. McCabe is believed to have leaked information confirming an investigation into the Clinton Foundation. Baker is believed to have leaked something to David Corn, who was among the first reporters to break Trump-Russia collusion stories prior to the election. Corn denies using Baker as a source for the pre-election Trump-Russia dossier story.Nevertheless, Jackson has something of a point. There were Trump-Russia collusion leaks in the run-up to the election but these arguably happened in spite of, not because of, the FBI. Indeed, Democrats were outraged by the perceived double standard at the publicity surrounding the Clinton investigation versus the relative discretion that the Trump campaign received in the Russia investigation. Ironically, it was this outrage that led to a call for the very inspector general investigation that revealed the Strzok-Page texts with pro-Clinton bias.It’s Only Bias If You Disagree with Me-In her testimony Page repeatedly congratulated herself on her lack of bias, arguing that prioritizing the Trump-Russia collusion scandal over the Clinton scandal was the logical outcome of weighing the seriousness of the two allegations. She said, “And with respect to how threatening that would be––again, if it were true––the notion that there might be more emails that have not previously been seen that existed on Hillary Clinton’s email server just simply don’t even enter into the realm of the same room of seriousness.”Page and the FBI generally missed the point of the Clinton scandal. The most serious problem with Clinton’s mishandling of the emails was not the leak of potentially classified information but that the whole purpose of the email server in the first place may have been to hide a large-scale influence-for-sale operation from a cabinet post. The voting public had an interest in knowing whether the same operation would be scaled up to the U.S. presidency. This is why the Midyear Exam investigation was arguably more critical to the future of the republic than the Russia investigation.Did Page ever see any political bias in the FBI? Her answer revealed everything. The only bias she perceived was anti-Clinton sentiment. She revealed, “I am aware of senior FBI officials talking to subordinate FBI officials on the Hillary Clinton investigative team who unquestionably had anti-Hillary sentiment, but who also said: ‘You have to get her…. We’re counting on you.'”These officials, Sandy Kable and Randy Coleman, had an early role in the Clinton email investigation but at the time they made these statements “were no longer in a position of authority over the Clinton investigation.” This leaves one to wonder whether the FBI policed anti-Clinton bias in the investigation but not pro-Clinton, anti-Trump bias.Similarly, Page saw no indication her anti-Trump bias influenced the Trump-Russia investigation. In her mind, FBI agents frequently despise targets because of their criminal behavior. Her enmity towards Trump was no different than that she might feel towards a child molester or another target of an FBI investigation.Obviously, if an FBI agent hates a target because of the suspected crime and it later turns out that the crime never happened, one expects that enmity to evaporate. If, as in the case of Page, the enmity starts with Trump’s boorish but not illegal behavior, her enmity will persist whether or not the facts bear out the Russia collusion hoax. Thus, there’s a huge difference between an agent being passionate about fighting crime by investigating a target and an agent wanting to use a criminal investigation to get a target.The good news for America is that the Page transcripts indicate the anti-Trump FBI agents appear to have drunk the Russian collusion Kool-Aid but didn’t brew it. In contrast to senior DOJ attorney Bruce Ohr, who pushed the Trump-Russia theory that his own wife was paid to work on, the FBI seems to take some pains to prevent its work on the Russia-collusion case from affecting the election. This is why former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) found it necessary to send an October 31, 2016, open letter to the FBI accusing the FBI of sitting on “explosive” information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump and the Russian government.Adam Mill is a pen name. He works in Kansas City, Missouri as an attorney specializing in labor and employment and public administration law. Adam has contributed to The Federalist, American Greatness, and The Daily Caller.

The Hill's Morning Report — Mueller Time: Dems, GOP ready questions for high-stakes testimony-By Alexis Simendinger and Al Weaver - 07/22/19 06:41 AM EDT

Welcome to The Hill’s Morning Report. Happy Monday! Our newsletter gets you up to speed on the most important developments in politics and policy, plus trends to watch. Co-creators are Alexis Simendinger and Al Weaver (CLICK HERE to subscribe!). On Twitter, find us at @asimendinger and @alweaver22.After months in the making, former special counsel Robert Mueller is scheduled to appear on Capitol Hill on Wednesday as House Democrats say they hope his appearance spurs committees’ ongoing probes of President Trump.Although Mueller has he won’t go beyond the four corners of his 448-page report, House Democrats are expected to shine a spotlight on its most untoward and unpleasant aspects as they try to move the ball in their investigation of Trump. Meanwhile, House Republicans are expected to defend the president and question the origins of Mueller’s 22-month investigation. It is also likely that they will invoke Mueller’s finding that there was no collusion among Trump, his campaign associates and Russians.Morgan Chalfant looks at 10 questions that lawmakers on the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees could pose to the former special counsel. Among them: Whether he would have charged Trump if it weren’t for the Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Why his office wrote a letter to Attorney General William Barr objecting to his four-page memo detailing the report’s main conclusions.Whether the investigation exonerated Trump on the questions of collusion and obstruction of justice. The Hill: Key numbers to know for Mueller's testimony.James Comey: What I would ask Robert Mueller.Mueller’s appearance will be time-limited as his team negotiated constraints for the former special counsel with each panel. He is slated to testify before the House Judiciary Committee for three hours and before the House Intelligence Committee for two hours. It is unlikely that all lawmakers on the Judiciary Committee will be able to ask questions due to the time limit.With Mueller set to testify and comply with a subpoena more than three months after his report was released, House Democrats are defending the looming testimony and do not believe that the country has moved past the report in the meantime. In an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nalder (D-N.Y.) noted that most people did not read the full report, necessitating Mueller to speak about it publicly.“The country has not moved on. The president and the attorney general have lied to the American people about what was in the Mueller report,” Nadler said. “That it found no collusion — that was not true. That it found no obstruction — that is not true.”“People don’t read a 448-page report, and I believe that when people hear what was in the Mueller report then we’ll be in a position to begin holding the president accountable and to make this less of a lawless administration,” he added. The president, who labeled the investigation “bullshit” during a campaign rally in North Carolina last week, told reporters on Friday that he will not be watching Mueller’s appearance on Wednesday, redirecting the conversation to the House’s vote last week on impeachment. The House voted 332-95 against launching impeachment proceedings, although Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) have vowed to continue the push to impeach the president (The Hill).Republicans agree with Trump and are hopeful to make the president’s case at the hearings. As Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a top ally of Trump who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, told The New York Times, “We are going to re-elect the president.”The New York Times: In 88 trips to Capitol Hill, Mueller grew weary of partisanship.The Washington Post: Hostile witness or Democrats’ hero? Mueller’s past appearances before Congress offer clues.Politico: Democrats to face off against a reluctant Mueller.The Hill: Rudy Giuliani: Mueller should not testify before Congress.Axios: Mueller's day on the Hill.Jonathan Turley: What to expect when Mueller testifies: Not much.The New York Times: Mueller hearings on Wednesday present make-or-break moment for Democrats.

This week: Mueller dominates chaotic week on Capitol Hill-By Jordain Carney and Juliegrace Brufke - 07/22/19 06:00 AM EDT

All eyes will be on special counsel Robert Mueller this week as he delivers his first public testimony since wrapping up his two-year investigation into 2016 Russian election meddling and the Trump campaign. Anticipation over Mueller's Wednesday testimony comes as Congress is facing a jam-packed week as lawmakers wind down their work ahead of the August recess. The House is set to leave town on Friday; the Senate is scheduled to leave next week. But Mueller's first hearing, and any potential fallout from his testimony, is dominating chatter around Washington even as lawmakers have other looming deadlines, including wrapping up budget talks. Mueller, who is appearing under subpoena, is slated to testify before the House Judiciary Committee for three hours followed by two hours of questioning before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. He has said he will not discuss anything outside of the details of his report, but that’s expected to do little to stem the flow of questions as lawmakers try to push him to shed new light and answer long debated questions about his investigation. Democrats are expected to grill Mueller on potential obstruction by the administration during his investigation into Russian interference during the highly anticipated hearings.Top Democrats said it’s necessary to give the American people answers on the 448-report, arguing they feel it was initially misrepresented by Attorney General Bill Barr, who they argue spun its content in favor of the president."I think there's a lot of he can shed light on in terms of the course of his investigation, a number of the decisions that were made in terms of specific prosecutorial matters, some of the factual allegations he makes on the report," House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) told The Hill shortly after the hearings were announced. "But also things that are beyond the report that involve other witnesses, other relevant issues. We know very little, for example, about the role of the counterintelligence investigation that was taking place contemporaneous with the criminal probe,” he continued.Schiff said Sunday he believes the president could still be indicted.“It’s been clear from Bob Mueller that he felt and the Justice Department feels bound by the Office of Legal Counsel opinion you can’t indict a sitting president. [Trump] is essentially an unindicted co-conspirator,” he said during an appearance on Face the Nation. “... In my point of view, he should be indicted. It’s the view of the Justice Department in that indictment that Donald Trump coordinated the legal scheme. He’s not above the law.”Democrats are expected to press Mueller on whether or not he would have charged Trump with obstruction of justice in the absence of an OLC opinion from the Justice Department that says a sitting president can’t be indicted.They’ll also likely try to get Mueller to weigh in on the party’s ongoing debate about whether or not to start impeachment proceedings against Trump.Mueller, during a nine-minute public statement on his findings did not mention impeachment but said the Constitution “requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing”Though Democratic leadership was able to squash a bid to impeach Trump last week, the issue is far from over with several new lawmakers endorsing starting impeachment proceedings. Reps. Al Green (D-Texas) and Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who have been in the middle of the impeachment fight, are pledging to move forward with their impeachment later this year. Republicans — who have argued that bringing Mueller in testify is a political ploy by Democrats and an unnecessary move after he already released the report — are expected to inquire into alleged FBI misconduct during the Russia investigation.“I think he wrote the report as critical of the president as he could be and almost anything we ask him now is going to cast it in a better light,” said Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a member of the Intelligence Committee. “I think we have a real opportunity here.”Trump told reporters on Friday that he won’t be watching Mueller’s testimony. Though Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman (R-S.C.) has asked Mueller if he wants to testify, there are no expectations that the former special counsel will make a repeat performance before the Senate.

EVENTS IN TIME (BIBLE PROPHECY LITERALLY FULFILLED)(BY GOD)

IMPORTANT LINKS