Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog
A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
We are less than one month away from the presidential election. Joe Biden has called a lid, which means he stopped public appearances for the day, dozens of times over the past month. He still dodges reporter questions, and he straight up refused to answer questions the American people want to know during the first presidential debate. So, here are 10 things you need to know about Joe Biden.
Kamala Harris fought Mike Pence in the first and only vice presidential debate of the 2020 election. Mainstream media predictably reported that the debate was either a draw or that Harris had won it, which correlated with how radically extreme the news agencies were. Based on these defensive behaviors, the real winner should be easy to guess. While the journalistic reactions were quite predictable, some very meaningful things were said during the debate nonetheless. They were especially meaningful for many Democrats who happen to be oblivious to the real direction that the Democratic Party has been taking, which is namely the path toward communism and a desire to transform the United States into a vassal state of China. Those of us in-the-know consider the party's agenda to be treasonous. Pence masterfully exposed it, while never dropping his gentlemanly demeanor. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/
BY BOB ADELMANN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Former Vice President Joe Biden is under an active criminal investigation into his role in the Ukraine influence-peddling scandal, following the release of additional documents concerning Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 election. Paul Sperry, a Washington-based investigative journalist and Hoover Institution media fellow, tweeted on Tuesday:
House investigators have now joined the Senate in requesting the FBI open a criminal investigation into possible foreign influence-peddling & embezzlement involving Joe Biden and his younger brother and son based on suspicious financial activities flagged by US Treasury.
The next day Sperry confirmed that the investigation is active:
Joe Biden is the subject of an active federal criminal investigation into his role in the counterintelligence investigation directed @ the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, including the former vice president’s activities in Ukraine. Ukrainian witnesses are cooperating.
Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said “the report raises serious questions that former Vice President Biden needs to answer. There are simply too many potential conflicts of interest, counterintelligence and extortion threats to ignore.”
The Jewish Voice wrote back in July that the investigation was likely, stemming from complaints of Biden’s interference in Ukrainian internal affairs by a former Ukrainian prosecutor:
Biden, the presumptive Democratic president nominee, has been formally listed in a criminal case for the crime of firing Ukraine’s former prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in exchange for dropping an investigation into his son, Hunter.
Chanel Rion of One America News Network (OAN) confirmed the report:
Shokin formally called for an investigation into his firing back in February of 2020, claiming the Ukrainian government at the time released Shokin of his post in exchange for one billion dollars in loan guarantees promised by Biden.
But at the time Shokin called for this case back in February, the courts named one of the defendants as an “unnamed American,” an individual widely understood to be Joe Biden, Obama’s Ukraine point man. But Biden was never formally named.
Now the courts have ruled it is improper to conceal Biden’s name and that there is sufficient evidence to proceed with an investigation.
Biden bragged about his interference in Ukrainian internal affairs during a public conversation at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in 2018:
I remember going over and convincing our team, others, to convince that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from [former Ukrainian President] Poroshenko and from [former Ukrainian Prime Minister] Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.
So they said they had — they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to — or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said — I said, call him. [Laughter] I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.
Well, son of a b-tch. [Laughter] He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.
There was enough evidence in the Congressional reports released in September on Hunter Biden’s corrupt dealings while his father was Vice President that Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) referred Hunter to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation.
From that report it was learned than Hunter benefited far beyond the $50,000 monthly salary he was being paid for being on the board of Burisma. Relationships developed from his presence resulted in him making “millions of dollars,” according to the report.
Worse than that, “The committees also said they obtained records from the U.S. Treasury Department that ‘show potential criminal activity relating to transactions among and between Hunter Biden, his family and his associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakh and Chinese nationals’.… In addition the younger Biden had ‘business associations with … Chinese nationals linked to the Communist government and the People’s Liberation Army.… Those associations resulted in millions of dollars of cash flow.”
It is reasonable to expect that there will be much more evidence of the senior Biden’s influence-peddling and political interference in the 1,000 pages just released to John Durham, the federal prosecutor, on Wednesday.
That investigation will likely extend into President Trump’s second term if he wins in November. If he doesn’t, expect this investigation to disappear into the ether under a Biden administration.
Related article:
BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
The leading mayoral candidate in Portland, who says “I am Antifa,” appears to be a little more than that.
If you believe her attire, Sarah Iannarone is a fangirl of communist mass murderers, if not an open communist who might have mass murder as her own plan for whom she calls “Red Hats.”
Journalist Andy Ngo, a frequent target of Antifa thugs who don’t like him filming their revolutionary violence, posted the evidence on Twitter. Iannarone is wearing a skirt bearing Che Guevara, Mao Tse-tung, and a third less-clear figure that appears to be Fidel Castro.
Iannarone’s campaign manager is an open communist.
The Skirt
Proof that Iannarone is at least a sympathizer with mass murder came in a tweet from Ngo.
“Look at the skirt,” Ngo wrote over a photo of Iannarone with a skirt.
The images of Mao and Guevara are clear, although a third is not. It appears to be Castro, although the Daily Caller identified the third likeness as Stalin’s.
Regardless, Iannarone explained lionizing the bloodthirsty, democidal tyrants this way in an interview with the Washington Examiner:
The picture in question was taken with Reverend Billy, whose spectacle of the absurd is a treat whenever it comes to town. I dressed flamboyantly that day in a skirt that features pop art — art that is meant to satirize the subjects. While most Americans are focused on stopping COVID from taking our lives and jobs, some internet commentators are focused on how I dressed during a performance art appearance in 2016. I’m focused on winning a Green New Deal and Housing for All Portlanders, not on false controversy meant to distract from real issues.
Then again, Iannarone uses the language of dangerous revolutionaries by dehumanizing her political opponents.
“To those who say Antifa are violent thugs,” she tweeted a year ago. “I am not a violent thug and I am Antifa.”
Then came the identification of the real evil:
I am Antifa because the Red Hats are coming after brown & black people, after Jews, after queer & trans people, and more.
They are coming after our democracy.
“Red Hats,” meaning Trump supporters, are preparing a second Final Solution, Iannarone says:
And if you don’t understand why the Red Hats would want to exterminate Jews (many of whom present w/ white privilege) or trans people or even women’s rights, then you need to get educated on what the ethnostate they’re fighting for is about.
That tweet carried a story headlined “As White Supremacy Falls Down, White Nationalism Stands Up” that was illustrated with a still photo of William Foster, the protagonist portrayed by Michael Douglas in 1993’s Falling Down.
Frighteningly for normal Portlanders, Iannarone is polling 11 points of ahead of opponent, incumbent Mayor Ted Wheeler, who permitted and encouraged Antifa to seize control of Portland’s streets,
“I Am a Communist”
Ngo also provided another piece of information that voters will appreciate. Ianarrone’s campaign manager is an open communist, not merely a fanboy who wears Guevara T-shirts.
On May 5, 2019, McKelvey explained the difference between a run-of-the-mill Antifa anarchist and real Red:
1. Most anti fascists are not communists.
2. Most of the people you refer to as antifa are anarchists not communists.
3. I am a communist.
As with so many leftist men, McKelvey landed in hot water with the #MeToo movement. During college, he was arrested on a charge on what appears to be domestic violence.
In 2018, OregonLive.com reported that McKelvey “was jailed six years ago on suspicion of strangling and kidnapping an ex-girlfriend while he was an 18-year-old student at Oregon State University, records show.”
Official records of McKelvey’s arrest were expunged. But the Corvallis Gazette-Times reported that cops “responded to a report of a physical altercation between McKelvey and an ex-girlfriend at an Oregon State University residence hall” in September 2011.
“McKelvey had just started his freshman year at OSU,” the newspaper reported. The girl was 17 and still in high school.
In his statement, McKelvey said his ex-girlfriend was upset and had been drinking when she arrived at his dorm on the weekend before her 18th birthday and later became “physical” with another woman there. McKelvey said he then stepped in….
“There was never any allegation that I struck her.”
Maybe, but McKelvey is a confessed communist.
And his boss thinks wearing clothing bearing the likenesses of mass murderers “satirizes” them.
BY JAMES MURPHY
SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/president-trump-declares-he-wont-participate-in-virtual-debate/;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Just hours after the Commission on Presidential Debates announced that the second debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat challenger Joe Biden would be a virtual event, Trump nixed the idea, saying he wouldn’t waste his time with such an event.
Trump made the declaration in an interview with Fox Business Channel anchor Maria Bartiromo, saying that such a format was “not acceptable to us.”
“I’m not going to waste my time on a virtual debate,” the president said. “That’s not what debating is all about. You sit behind a computer and do a debate. It’s ridiculous, and then they cut you off whenever they want.”
The Commission on Presidential Debates released a statement early this morning saying that the town-hall style debate scheduled for October 15 would be a virtual affair. According to the statement, the decision was made “in order to protect the health and safety of all involved with the second presidential debate.”
“The second presidential debate will take the form of a town meeting, in which the candidates would participate from separate remote locations,” the statement read.
Although they never come right out and say it, the CPD’s decision to make the debate virtual was likely influenced by the president’s COVID-19 diagnosis. Over last weekend, Trump was treated at Walter Reed Medical Center for the virus. He was released on Sunday evening after reportedly responding well to treatment.
Trump claims that the CPD’s decision was made unilaterally, without any input from his campaign.
“They didn’t even tell us about the debate, Maria,” Trump told Bartiromo. “We learned it the same way you learned it. They called up two minutes ago and it was announced.”
Trump claimed the decision to hold a virtual debate is an attempt to insulate Biden from scrutiny. At times during the campaign season, the former vice president has looked confused and has struggled to finish sentences when off the teleprompter.
“They’re trying to protect Biden, everybody is. Like that NBC disaster when he went on the show with Lester Holt. It was meant for a child. It wasn’t meant for a grown person,” Trump said.
The Trump campaign quickly blasted the CPD’s decision. Campaign manager Bill Stepien released a statement of his own in which he referred to the decision to make the debate virtual as “pathetic.”
“For the swamp creatures at the Presidential Debate Commission to now rush to Joe Biden’s defense by unilaterally canceling an in-person debate is pathetic. That’s not what debates are about or how they’re done,” Stepien said.
“Here are the facts: President Trump will have posted multiple negative tests prior to the debate, so there is no need for this unilateral declaration,” Stepien said. “The safety of all involved can easily be achieved without canceling a chance for voters to see both candidates go head to head. We’ll pass on this sad excuse to bail out Joe Biden and do a rally instead.”
The Biden campaign is looking forward to some sort of event on October 15. Biden had previously declared that if Trump was still testing positive for COVID-19, the next debate should be canceled.
In a statement, Biden’s Deputy Campaign Manager Kate Bedingfield announced that the Biden camp would “find an appropriate place to take questions from voters directly on October 15, as he has done on several occasions in recent weeks.”
President Trump’s COVID-19 diagnosis changed everything with regard to the debates. The virus gave the allegedly objective CPD the opportunity to assist the Biden campaign by making the second debate virtual. Now Biden can continue to hide and answer staged questions from friendly hand-picked voters, all while portraying Trump as the one who is afraid of scrutiny.
While next week’s debate looks like it’s not going to happen, another debate is still scheduled for October 22.
BY MATT MARGOLIS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
It was a stunning moment in the vice presidential debate Wednesday night when Senator Kamala Harris claimed that neither she nor Joe Biden endorses banning fracking.
Vice President Pence was clearly very well prepared for this, as he utterly destroyed her by pointing out that both Biden and Kamala had campaigned on banning fracking.
Of course, Kamala denied this, claiming that “Joe Biden will not ban fracking. That is a fact.”
Except Joe Biden campaigned on banning fracking. And said so on many occasions.
Not only did Joe Biden commit to banning fracking, Kamala Harris did too. “There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking,” Harris said during a CNN town hall on climate change in September 2019. She committed to this as a Day One priority in a Harris administration.
So, the question is, why did they suddenly start claiming they won’t ban fracking?
As I’ve noted before, Biden and Kamala publicly flip-flopped on this issue when polls showed a tight race in the state of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania, of course, is a crucial swing state where fracking and natural gas are important to the economy.
CBS News didn’t even try to deny the flip-flopping on this issue.
But, Jack Brewster of Forbes claimed Pence “falsely accused” Biden of wanting to ban fracking.
The above videos don’t lie.
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can continue telling the truth about the 2020 election? Join PJ Media VIP TODAY and use the promo code LAWANDORDER to get 25% off your VIP membership.
Matt Margolis is the author of the new book Airborne: How The Liberal Media Weaponized The Coronavirus Against Donald Trump, and the bestselling book The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter @MattMargolis
BY TYLER O'NEIL
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Kamala Harris must have been so proud of herself. During the vice-presidential debate on Wednesday, she argued that President Donald Trump should not have nominated Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and she cited as her precedent none other than Abraham Lincoln himself — “Honest Abe.”
As it turns out, however, Kamala Harris was being less than honest in her portrayal of Abraham Lincoln’s record.
“In 1864… Abraham Lincoln was up for reelection, and it was 27 days before the election, and a seat became open on the United States Supreme Court. Abraham Lincoln’s party was in charge not only of the White House but the Senate,” Harris began.
“But Honest Abe said, ‘It’s not the right thing to do. The American people deserve to make the decision about who will be the next president of the United States and then that person can select who will serve for a lifetime on the highest court of our land.'”
Yet Lincoln said no such thing. In fact, the polarization of the Supreme Court is a fairly recent phenomenon, dating back to the living Constitution approach of activist judges amending the Constitution by fiat — “discovering” a right to abortion in the Fourteenth Amendment, for example. Before Roe v. Wade (1973), and really before Joe Biden led the smear campaign against Robert Bork in 1987, Supreme Court nominations often proceeded as a matter of course.
Harris was correct that when Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney died on October 12, 1864, President Lincoln did not nominate his successor, Salmon P. Chase, until after the election. This had nothing to do with letting “the next president” choose the nominee, however.
As National Review‘s Dan McLaughlin explained, Lincoln delayed because the Senate was not in session when Taney died. In fact, the Senate session ended on July 4, 1864, and did not convene again until December 5, 1864. “It was once common for the Senate to be out of session for much of the summer and fall,” McLaughlin wrote. The Senate session calendar confirms this.
As McLaughlin noted, Lincoln nominated Chase on the very day that the Senate reconvened, and the Senate confirmed him that day.
In fact, historian David Donald claimed that Lincoln dangled a potential Supreme Court nomination before Chase in the hopes that Chase — a former senator, governor, secretary of the Treasury, and presidential candidate — would support Lincoln’s reelection. He did so, and the president won reelection—a reelection that was vital to winning the Civil War.
Lincoln did not delay the nomination out of some high democratic principle. He certainly did not do so in order to prevent President Donald Trump from nominating a successor to Ruth Bader Ginsburg 156 years hence. He did so because the Senate was out of session, and that may have worked to his benefit in corralling Chase to support his reelection.
Make no mistake: Kamala Harris twisted history on Lincoln and the Supreme Court — and she did so in order to dodge a far more pertinent question: whether she and Joe Biden support packing the Court, fundamentally changing the rules of the game to support the very “living Constitution” judicial activism that politicized the Court in the first place.
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can expose and fight the Left’s radical plans for the Supreme Court? They will stop at nothing, so your support for conservative journalism is more important than ever. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code SCOTUS to get 25% off your VIP membership.
Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.