Where’s the “quid pro quo?”  Look at “quid pro Joe!”

ajoe 9

Now that the impeachment attempt (the coup attempt) against President Trump has failed miserably for the democrats…, what are we left with?

ajoe 8

I’m sure we’ll have a pathetic vote in Congress to still impeach the president, even though their witch hunt (part two) failed to uncover ANYTHING President Trump actually did wrong.

ajoe 12

The Senate will then dispatch the fraudulent impeachment fairy tale in short order, and the democrats will be left to concoct yet another anti-Trump fairy tale.

The democrats and their co-conspirators, the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media,” will not be getting the impeachment of The President for Christmas!

They have not been very nice, but rather quite naughty!

Quite a few democrats and fake news journalists” will be finding coal (“beautiful clean burning coal”) in their Christmas stockings this year!

I also have a feeling that the upcoming Senate hearings and the newly announced investigations by the Ukrainian government will combine to make 2020 a bad year for Joe and Hunter Biden, the democrats, and the deep state in general.

ajoe 1

It’s a wonderful life!

I’d like to refer you to my blog from November 6, 2019 titled, “This is how President Trump could destroy Joe Biden in a debate in about 5 minutes:”

https://mrericksonrules.com/2019/11/06/this-is-how-president-trump-could-destroy-joe-biden-in-a-debate-in-about-5-minutes/

ajoe 5

ajoe 4

With the Inspector General’s report dealing with FISA court abuses, and U.S. Attorney John Durham’s criminal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation results coming out just in time for Christmas, 2020 is shaping up to be a bad year for the democrats, which will be capped by another crushing defeat at the hands of President Trump and all of the loyalist American deplorables!

ajoe 16

ajoe 14

WINNING!!!

KEEP AMERICA GREAT!

USA! USA! USA!

ajoe 13

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

What are we left with if we ban anything that bothers anyone?

The answer is a paralyzed hot mess.

A “free” society is not a society that is worried about an individual’s feelings above all else.

A “free” society is a society which allows and tolerates everybody’s beliefs and feelings.

anyt 14

That being said, according to Brian Flood of Fox News, “The New York Times says airing the national anthem on TV could trigger viewers who hear ‘political overtones.’”

“Trigger?”

“Political overtones?”

anyt 5

Are we getting “political overtones” confused with patriotic overtones?

What is “political” about hearing and/or seeing the national anthem unless you’re anti-American?

anyt 13

“The New York Times ‘poo-pooed’ the long-standing tradition of television stations airing The Star-Spangled Banner because some night owl viewers could be offended by the ‘politically charged’ national anthem.”

Wait…, what?

The New York Times “poo-pooed?”

Well, like I said, they are creating a “hot mess” after all.

Again…, if you’re “offended” by the national anthem and consider it “politically charged,” then you’re probably either a very confused liberal…, someone here illegally in the first place…, or you are an enemy of our country…, and in any case I’m glad you’re offended.

anyt 4

“The piece, written by culture reporter Julia Jacobs, is headlined ‘Local TV Revives a Bygone Tradition: Airing the National Anthem,’ and declares that the song can ‘be a dividing line’ for some Americans.”

anyt 1

“Culture reporter?”  Why, how snooty and pretentious of you!

“The Times [Ms. Jacobs] noted that ‘one of popular culture’s generational divides’ is whether or not you are old enough to remember the days when ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ aired on television stations. The national anthem was historically played late at night, going back to the advent of television, typically amid visuals of patriotic imagery before the station signed off until the next morning.”

Oh really?

THIS is a generational divide of our culture?

I hardly think so, seeing that most of the people under 30 don’t even watch what us older folk would consider TV per se.  They watch things on their TV, but they don’t watch typical TV channel broadcasts, or even satellite or cable for that matter.

‘“Now, the early morning hours are filled with rebroadcasts and infomercials, eliminating any practical reason for a formal sign off,’ the Times [Ms. Jacobs] wrote.”

What kind of imbecile has nothing better to worry about than whether they’re playing the national anthem on TV at 4:00 AM in the morning or not?

That’s really digging deep to promote your anti-American ways!

anyt 2

“Some stations have revived the tradition but the Times wrote that some viewers ‘might hear political overtones’ as a result. Gray Television, CBS and Nexstar Media Group have led the way, with the National Anthem now played on more than 350 stations across America, according to the Times.”

‘“The decision to revive the anthem tradition comes at a time when overt allegiance to The Star-Spangled Banner has become one of the lines that separate blue and red America,’ the Times reporter wrote.”

Why say “blue and red?”  Why not say liberals and conservatives, or democrats and republicans?

Let’s not be afraid to name those who are overtly anti-America and those who are overtly pro-America.

Let’s draw a clear line and let people choose what side they’re on.

anyt 6

“Author, Tim Young asks, ‘Should it shock anyone at this point that the New York Times is trying to get people to be outraged at the airing of the National Anthem?’”

anyt 12

‘“It’s inspiring that local news is returning our National Anthem to an important place in our culture.  It’s astonishing that The Times would see that as a bad thing,’ Media Research Center vice president Dan Gainor told Fox News. ‘But if you pay close attention to the story, the paper admits that the left, including journalists, doesn’t like the national anthem.  That shows exactly who and what they really are.’”

Yes it does, Mr. Gainor…, yes it does.

“The paper admits that television executives haven’t heard many complaints and feedback has been ‘overwhelmingly positive,’ but that tidbit is buried roughly 1,400 words into the story.”

anyt 9

“Political satirist and author Tim Young told Fox News that this story “truly reveals the mindset” of the Gray Lady [“the Gray Lady” is a nickname for The New York Times newspaper].”

‘“Should it shock anyone at this point that the New York Times is trying to get people to be outraged at the airing of the national anthem? Their piece is written as if viewers should be skeptical of every element of the song and accompanying video,’ Young said. ‘They don’t like America and its anthem and they want you to dislike it as well.’”

anyt 11

“In the span of a week, the Washington Post calls a terrorist psychopath a ‘religious scholar’ and the Times is upset about the national anthem being played. These are supposed to be America’s top two news publications, and they seemingly hate America.”

anyt 10

What if I said I find The New York Times and The Washington Post offensive?

Would they maintain their integrity and shut down the publication of their newspapers?

Of course not.

People who find liberal speech or actions offensive are dismissed out of hand and ignored by the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

In this fascist, liberal socialist world, they are promoting, the arbiters of what is deemed offensive are the ones who wield the power.

And “they…,” “the ones…,” would be the anti-Americans…, the liberals…, the democrats.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Politics will never be the same, thanks to President Trump.

President Donald Trump has shattered the mold as to how conservatives interact with the American people, the opposition, and the media.

abt 10

You may argue that “the opposition” and “the media” are one in the same thing, and I would have to grant you that…, but for the sake of this article, and its intentions, I am choosing to address them as separate entities.

I contend that due to President Trump’s complete overhauling of the way politicians, especially the president, communicate with the American people, the opposition, and the media, we should properly identify the year based on the event of President Trump’s presidential campaign and election.

President Trump showed all of the conservatives that it was OK to take a conservative stand, and not apologize for it.

aspring 9

President Trump showed all of the conservatives that it was OK to stand up to the fake news media and call them out for what they are.

averitas 2

Therefore, I am proposing that the year President Trump was elected (2016) be designated as “Year Zero.”

“Year Zero” will stand out as a miraculous year.  This is the year that Donald Trump won the presidency of the United States, despite the democrats, of course, being against him, most republicans being against him, most of the media being against him, and many countries around the world contributing millions and millions of dollars to defeat him on Hillary Clinton’s behalf.

abt 7

abt 8

abt 6

abt 5

abt 1

abt 2

abt 3

“Year Zero” was the year that average Americans stood up and said, “We’re taking a stand for ourselves and our country, and we’re not taking this same old political crap anymore!”

“Year Zero” was the first year in a long, long, time, that our president worked solely on behalf of the American people.

“Year Zero” was the first year in a long, long, time, that our president wasn’t beholden to anybody or any special interest groups, other than the American people.

“Year Zero” was the first year in a long, long, time, that our president wasn’t put our country’s concerns and the American peoples’ concerns first.

“Year Zero” was the first year in a long, long, time, that our president began to take our government back from the unelected and unaccountable, treasonous, deep state…, otherwise known as “the swamp.”

“Year Zero” should be remembered just like we remember 1776!

The years before President Trump was elected should be designated as “BT,” or “Before Trump.”

The years after President Trump was elected should be designated as “AT,” or “After Trump.”

“BT” would act as “BC” does now and “AT” would act as “AD” does now.

Soooo, 2015 would now be 1 BT, 2014 would 2 BT, etc.

2017 would be 1 AT and 2018 would be 2 AT, etc.

Using the Trump year designators would allow to put things in the proper political perspective.

For example:

The ObamaCare law went into effect 6 BT.

9/11 occurred in the year 15 BT.

We are currently in the year 3 AT.

President Trump will be re-elected in the year 4 AT.

Either Mike Pence or Ivanka Trump will be elected our 46th president in the year 8 AT.

And so on.

Let me know what you think about the idea!

Perhaps we can promote some grassroots support and make the Trump year designators a reality!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

ABC News and the Jeffrey Epstein case…, just another example of “the fake news media” tailoring what “news” they want you to hear…, or to not hear! 

In this recent case, we have learned that ABC News quashed a story about Jeffrey “Mr. Pedophile” Epstein and his perverted partners in crime, Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton and “Britain’s finest,” Prince Andrew, the Duke of York.

aep 4

Appearing in supporting roles were George Stephanopoulos (former White House Communications Director and Senior advisor to the president under Bill Clinton, and now chief anchor and political correspondent on ABC) and Alan Dershowitz (a prominent lawyer who was on the defense teams for O.J. Simpson, Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein).

aep 8

aep 9

You obviously lean towards those with quite a high “sleaze factor” when selecting your clients, don’t you, Mr. Dershowitz?!

According to Brian Flood of Fox News, “ABC News anchor Amy Robach was caught on a hot mic claiming ‘network honchos’ killed a story that would have exposed claims that now-deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein forced an alleged victim to have sex with Prince Andrew.”

aep 6

“Network honchos,” huh?

More like “network puppets/tools.”

Don’t these “people” and their enablers just make you sick?

I know they make me sick.

On a side note…, whatever happened to that #METOO movement?

I guess women’s rights only go so far.

Anyway…, “Robach filmed an interview with Prince Andrew accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre in 2015 that never aired, and she vented about ABC killing the story during a ‘moment of frustration’ that was published Tuesday by Project Veritas.”

aep 7

Note: For more information on “Project Veritas,” please refer to my blog from October 31, 2019, “CNN exposed as propaganda arm for the democrats!”

“ABC News president James Goldston recently dined with members of the royal family, including Prince Charles, according to Page Six. In the leaked footage, Robach complained that ABC would not air her sit down with Giuffre – who has claimed Epstein paid her to have sex with Prince Andrew, although the prince denies the allegations.”

‘“The Palace [Buckingham Palace] found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways,’ said ABC News anchor Amy Robach.”

“Giuffre told NPR in August that she ‘viewed the ABC interview as a potential game-changer’ and said the network never explained why it didn’t air.  ABC News has said it didn’t meet its standards.”

“Didn’t meet its standards?!”

Oh…, now all of a sudden they have “standards?!”

Where were these journalistic “standards” when they reported on wild and unsubstantiated Russian collusion nonsense on a nightly basis?

Where were these journalistic “standards” when they reported on wild unsubstantiated claims regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh?

The list could go on.

The point is, in the world of the fake news media, “journalistic standards” means the proper application of the liberal propaganda of the day.

aep 10

And what about the rest of the fake news media and this story?

“Fox News found no coverage on CNN, MSNBC, CBS News, or NBC News from noon through midnight ET on Tuesday while the story was lighting up social media. During that same time frame, Fox News covered the scandal on five different programs, including its entire primetime lineup.”

‘“That there has been so little coverage about ABC avoiding the Epstein story demonstrates again that mainstream media too often make news judgment based on sociocultural or political implications rather than journalistic values,’” DePauw University professor and media critic Jeffrey McCall told Fox News.”

adebate 9

Like I said…, “Just another example of ‘the fake news media’ tailoring what ‘news’ they want you to hear…, or to not hear!

“During the NBC interview, Giuffre repeated accusations she has made in court papers that when she was 17 in 2001 she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew. A photo released by a New York appeals court in August showed Andrew with his arm around Giuffre’s bare waist.”

aep 3

“Giuffre said it was taken in the apartment of Epstein’s longtime girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, in 2001.”

Please note that if Ghislaine Maxwell isn’t already dead, she will be experiencing an accidental suicide very soon.

Just sayin’.

“Ghislaine woke me up in the morning and said, ‘You’re going to meet a prince today.’ I didn’t know at that point I was going to be trafficked to that prince,’ Giuffre told NBC News three years after her interview with ABC that never aired.”

‘“Ghislaine said [Prince Andrew’s] coming back to the house and I want you do to for him what you do for Epstein,’ Giuffre said in the interview. ‘I couldn’t believe it.’”

“Giuffre said she and Andrew had sex two more times. The encounters happened in Epstein’s New York apartment and at his Virgin Islands estate, she alleges.”

“A Buckingham Palace spokesperson has emphatically denied Giuffre’s allegations against Andrew.”

Of course they did.

Good show!  Bloody good show!

aep 1

aep 2

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

This is how President Trump could destroy Joe Biden in a debate in about 5 minutes.

The democrats and the fake news media are accusing President Trump of a “quid pro quo” arrangement with the Ukrainian president, and attempting to impeach him for it.

In case you’re not familiar with it, “quid pro quo” is a Latin term…, “quid” meaning “money,” “pro” meaning “for, and “quo” meaning “something received.”

Let’s fast forward to a potential presidential debate during the fall of 2020.

adebate 3

President Trump is giving his opening statement:

“I’m sure you’re aware, Joe, of what you and your democrat friends tried, and failed, to impeach me for.”

“They tried to imply that I threatened the Ukrainian president, which I didn’t, with a withholding of funds, which we didn’t, if he failed to investigate your possible corruption prior to the 2016 election, which he didn’t do.”

“It’s pretty hard to have a “quid pro quo” arrangement, Joe, when there is no “quid” and there is no “quo.”

“You, Joe, are on tape, however, bragging about doing EXACTLY what you and your friends accused me of doing.”

adebate 5

“You said, and I’ll read your EXACT quote.  You said, ‘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 bitch. He got fired.’”

“Now THAT, Joe, is a textbook example of the president of The Ukraine being threatened with a “quid pro quo.”

“What you actually DID is what you and your friends, and the fake news media, tried to hang on me.”

adebate 2

“You not only admitted it in your own words, but you bragged about it!  And all of your friends there in the fake news media laughed about it!”

“None of your democrat friends or the fake news media seemed to have any problems with what you DID, but they spent the last 6 months fighting to breathe life into the hoax that I did what you actually did.”

“And you and your democrat friends will not admit that the fake news, mainstream media, is an arm of the democrat party used for liberal propaganda, when it is quite obvious they are.”

“In my opinion, we can bypass any investigation involving you and Ukraine and proceed right to the sentencing phase.  You obviously broke multiple laws and you publicly confessed to breaking those laws.”

“Secondly, we have the events surrounding your son, Hunter, Joe.”

adebate 4

“Here we have a young man who flies into China with you on Air Force Two, and somehow flies home with millions of dollars in his investment fund.  Then he ends up being put on the board of a Ukrainian gas company and gets paid over $50 thousand a month.  Both of these countries being places where you have quite a bit of influence, being The Vice President of The United States.  But you claim to have no knowledge of any of his activities.”

adebate 8

“I’m not even going to argue the legality or the appropriateness of any of that right now, Joe.”

“But I am going to ask the American people to please stop and consider what I’m about to say.”

“Suppose my sons, Eric or Don Jr., or my daughters, Ivanka or Tiffany, were involved in some sweetheart deals like your son, Hunter?”

adebate 6

“What do you think your democrat friends or the fake news media would have to say about that?”

“I think they all would have lost their minds and would have launched endless investigations into my children and I.”

“Seriously, it would have been an absolute circus.”

“Can anybody even argue that assumption?”

adebate 7

“Now I ask the American people, why does the fake news media choose to look the other way in Hunter Biden’s, your son’s case, Joe, but you know darn well they would absolutely crucify my children and I?”

“It’s not just a bias, Joe…, it’s a concerted effort to misinform and manipulate the American people.”

adebate 9

“It’s like I said before, you and your democrat friends will not admit that the fake news, mainstream media, is an arm of the democrat party used for liberal propaganda, when it is quite obvious they are.”

“I am appealing to the American people to recognize what has been going on here with the fake news media.  Hold them accountable, and demand that they report the news fairly and honestly on your behalf and in your interests…, not the best interest of just one party…, the democrat party.”

And that is how President Trump destroys Joe Biden, the democrat party, and the liberal propaganda, fake news media within 5 minutes of their first debate.

And you don’t have to take my word for what Vice President Biden said at the time…, you can watch the actual video of Biden bragging about his “quid pro quo” below.  Put your cursor on the link, press the “Ctrl” key and click with your mouse.

https://youtu.be/Q0_AqpdwqK4

Hey…, the democrats are the ones who decided to open up this can of worms…, and these worms ain’t going back in the can!

Remember democrats, be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

The Washington Post’s and CNN’s resident anti-American liberal and ISIS apologist…, Max Boot.  

It’s true.

Max Boot is as about as disgusting a liberal tool as they come.

awapo 1

But he’s the perfect writer and contributor for the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

averitas 3

According to Brian Flood and Joseph A. Wulfsohn of Fox News, “The Washington Post is under fire over Al-Baghdadi obituary headline.”

awapo 6

“The paper’s obituary called the ISIS leader an ‘austere religious scholar!’”

Sure…, just like Adolph Hitler was an austere political scholar!”

awapo 4

Can a newspaper be any more confused and propagandistic than that?

Where do people like Max Boot come from and what are their ultimate goals?

What exactly is he trying to achieve here with his ISIS friendly words?

I’m serious.

Is he married to Osama bin Laden’s niece?

Does he have a vacation home in norther Iraq?

Or is he just your standard anti-America liberal.

I’m going with “he’s just your standard anti-America liberal.”

awapo 12

“The Washington Post columnist Max Boot was forced to backtrack after initially declaring that President Trump was wrong to label dead ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi a coward.”

awapo 5

“[President] Trump announced on Sunday that al-Baghdadi killed himself as U.S. Special Operations forces raided his compound in northern Syria. Trump said the terror leader – who set off a suicide vest, immediately killing himself and three children – ‘[ran away, whimpering and crying before he] died like a coward.’ Boot, who is also a CNN analyst, was apparently offended that Trump criticized the ISIS leader.”

‘“The assertion that Baghdadi died as a coward was, in any case, contradicted by the fact that rather than be captured, he blew himself up,’ Boot wrote in a widely criticized column.”

No, Mr. Boot, and I’m reluctantly using the term “Mr.” here…, Al-Baghdadi taking his own life, along with the lives of three of his children was either the ultimate act of cowardice or the ultimate act of selfishness, if he really did believe he was going to join Allah.

Al-Baghdadi definitely chose the coward’s way out.

“Boot became a trending topic on social media as critics lampooned his theory, but the Washington Post columnist eventually changed his tune and deleted the bizarre sentence.”

‘“An earlier version of this column included a sentence questioning whether Trump was right to call Baghdadi a coward because he blew himself up. The line was removed because it unintentionally conveyed the impression that I considered Baghdadi courageous,’ Boot wrote in the updated edition.”

These people crack me up.

Revisionist history.  It’s a common tool in the liberals’ bag of tricks.

You’re a professional writer!

I don’t think anything you write “unintentionally conveys” anything!

I think your writing conveys exactly what you want it to.

And if that’s not the case, maybe he should go into a different line of work…, perhaps American public relations liaison for ISIS or Al Qaeda.

“But Boot’s gaffe wasn’t the only odd moment in the Post’s coverage of al-Baghdadi’s death.  Columnist Greg Sargent said Trump’s announcement featured ‘deeply sick and twisted’ rhetoric.”

awapo 2

Ah, excuse me…, but I heard President Trump’s announcement, live, from beginning to end, and I didn’t find anything he said “deeply sick,” “sick,” or “twisted.”

In fact, I feel the only people who might have been bothered by his words were friends of Al-Baghdadi, his ISIS comrades, your general Muslim extremist, or just your standard anti-America liberal.

So which are you Greg Sargent?

Again, I’m going with “just your standard anti-America liberal.”

None of the anti-America and anti-President Trump propaganda should be taking any of us by surprise anymore, however…, especially from the liberal propagandists at CNN or The Washington Post.

awapo 13

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

CNN exposed as propaganda arm for the democrats!

Brian Flood of Fox News reports, “CNN ‘whistleblower’ claims network is ‘pumping out propaganda.’

Like I’ve said before, one good “whistleblower” deserves another!

“Tweeeeet!”

averitas 2

averitas 1

“According to ‘Project Veritas [Veritas meaning ‘truth’],’ a conservative activist group…, undercover recordings made by an alleged ‘whistleblower’ capture CNN employees casually confirming the network’s anti-Trump bias and show company president Jeff Zucker telling top news executives to focus solely on impeachment even at the expense of other important news, according to the conservative activist group that posted the bombshell footage online.”

averitas 4

“Project Veritas, whose founder, James O’Keefe, describes himself as a ‘guerrilla journalist’ — built up the release on social media with an ‘#ExposeCNN’ hashtag, and Monday published the first segment of what is billed as a multi-part series. The video features Cary Poarch, who claims he was a satellite uplink technician at CNN’s Washington Bureau before, he says, his ‘dream job’ quickly turned into a nightmare due to CNN’s blatant bias.”

“Poarch allegedly recorded ‘several’ of Zucker’s conference calls, in which he claims Zucker runs the daily meeting ‘with an iron fist’ aimed directly at ‘hammering Trump’ or ‘Republicans in general.’ Poarch told O’Keefe that several high-powered CNN executives join Zucker on the daily call, including senior vice president of newsgathering Virginia Moseley and political director David Chalian.”

averitas 5

“Zucker is also heard telling staff to call out Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and encouraging CNN on-air personalities to attack Fox News.”

“In the clip, Poarch said he decided to wear a hidden camera because of CNN’s perceived bias, and that he secretly recorded Zucker’s 9 a.m. rundown conference call because the network was ‘pumping out propaganda.’”

“It’s basically me wanting the news to be what they used to be — news — and not infotainment or a game show or chasing the ratings,” Poarch told O’Keefe. “CNN purports it to be facts first and that’s clearly not the case.

averitas 6

averitas 8

“I noticed after… that there was a strong group-think that permeated through the halls and that everyone was on board the ‘I hate Trump Train.’”

“The video also showed someone identified as a CNN media coordinator Nick Neville being secretly recorded.  ‘Jeff Zucker, basically the president of CNN, has a personal vendetta against Trump… it’s not gonna be positive for Trump. [Zucker] hates him. He’s going to be negative,’ the person identified as Neville said in the highly edited video.”

averitas 11

“CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment.”

That’s odd…, NOT!

For the followers and readers of MrEricksonRules, none of this comes as a surprise.

All the Veritas Project is doing is confirming for us what we already knew:  That CNN is a propaganda arm for the democrats, an enemy of The President and an enemy of the American people.

Press your “Ctrl” key and “click” on the link below to watch the Project Veritas hidden camera footage from inside CNN (part 1).

https://youtu.be/m7XZmugtLv4

WINNING!

averitas 10

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Another case of CNN spreading its liberal propaganda: regarding the democrats’ letter to The Ukraine.

Daniel Dale’s article for CNN is titled, “Fact check: Trump falsely claims Democrats’ letter made threat to Ukraine.”

First of all, the whole premise of this article is wrought with bias and inaccuracies.

His article is not a “fact check,” it is an opinion piece, and a biased opinion piece at that.

Dale claims, “We fact checked Trump’s claims about Biden and Ukraine here.”

This statement is either a lie, or they are admitting they looked into Biden and Ukraine and they are just ignoring Biden’s illegal activity there.

demletter 6

Let me conduct my own “fact check” for a minute here.

Joe Biden is on video proudly admitting he threatened the Ukrainian government!

ON VIDEO!

Joe Biden lied about his communications with his son about his son’s “sweetheart” deal with a Ukrainian gas company.  Joe Biden said he “never” discussed this with his son, although his son has said they did.

demletter 5

A picture with Joe Biden, his son, and executives from the Ukrainian gas company has surfaced.

demletter 4

A PICTURE!

But even after all of this, CNN chooses to pursue President Trump for possibly doing what Joe Biden has already been proven to have done.

All you can do is shake your head.

The “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” is not even concerned how slanted and unfair it looks anymore.

These media outlets are just simply co-conspirators in perpetrating these endless hoaxes on the American people in an attempt to take down President Trump.

Dale immediately proclaims the letter from the democrat senators is, “a request, not a threat.”

Dale’s article does not even provide the letter for us to read on our own and make our own determination…, but I will.

demletter 1

 

Dale claims, “The 2018 letter from Sens. Patrick Leahy, Dick Durbin and Bob Menendez did not include any threat at all, about US assistance to Ukraine or anything else; it did not even mention US assistance.”

How else would Mr. Lutsenko “take” this letter, if not as a threat?

What are three US senators doing writing him an official letter anyway?

Has a US Attorney General ever received a letter from members of a foreign government suggesting what they should do?

Just sayin’.

Nowhere in The Constitution does it say that Senators are to communicate with foreign governments regarding investigations of any kind. In this case, the now debunked Mueller investigation.

These senators are most obviously operating outside of their constitutionally dictated areas of responsibility.

“The Senators’ letter was written in response to a New York Times report that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General was considering not cooperating with the Mueller Probe out of concern that President Trump would cut off aid as punishment.”

Ha! And we all know that New York Times articles are always accurate!

demletter 7

Please see my numerous blogs on The New York Times commenting on the contrary.

The democrats have a bad habit of justifying their actions based on articles in The New York Times…, that they have planted there themselves!

Like I said, “These media outlets are just simply co-conspirators in perpetrating these endless hoaxes on the American people in an attempt to take down President Trump.”

The senators wrote, “If these reports are true, we strongly encourage you to reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

What would you understand the words “we strongly encourage you” to mean?

Again…, how else would Mr. Lutsenko “take” this letter, if not as some sort of threat?

Perhaps we should contact Mr. Lutsenko and ask him how he took the letter?

The only reason we wouldn’t hear about Mr. Lutsenko’s feelings is if they failed to go along with the narrative being pushed by the democrats and the fake news media.

WINNING!

demletter 8

 

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Who exactly does Nancy “dazed and confused” Pelosi pray to?

Last week, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said “I pray for the president all the time,” while talking to MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough.

My only question is, who might Mrs. Pelosi be praying to?

George Soros?

Barack Obama?

“The Squad?”

Satan?

It certainly can’t be God.

prayer 2

Or she might just be lying and she really hasn’t prayed at all.

I’m going with “she’s lying and hasn’t prayed at all,” or Satan.

According to Shira Tarlo of Salon.com, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., revealed that she frequently prays for President Donald Trump while discussing the allegations that he urged Ukraine to procure dirt one of his chief political rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden, with assistance from the Justice Department.”

prayer 1

‘“It’s really sad. We have to be very prayerful.  I pray for the president all the time,’ Pelosi said Friday morning in an exclusive interview with ‘Morning Joe.’ ‘I pray for the safety of his family — wish he would pray for the safety of other families and do something on guns — but I also pray that God will illuminate him to see right from wrong.’”

prayer 3

It’s hard to swallow all of these God references from a woman who would fight to keep the practice of abortion, and the killing of millions of babies annually, alive at all costs.

prayer 4

“Pelosi’s comments came a day after the public release of a complaint filed by a whistleblower in the intelligence community. The complaint discusses a July 25 call in which Trump repeatedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to ‘initiate or continue an investigation’ into Biden. The whistleblower named Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and his attorney general, William Barr, as his ‘personal envoys on these matters’ and alleged the White House engaged in a scheme to cover up Trump’s conduct.”

Let me go on record right now by saying this “whistle blower,” and I’m really coming to detest that term, is nothing more than a “swampy tool” who is being used by the liberal, anti-Trump, machine.

Think of a poor man’s “Peter Strzok” or “Lisa Page.”

The “complaint” filed by the “whistle blower,” is a well-crafted legal document, which was not just put together by someone filing a genuine complaint of concern.

The democrats knew exactly what was in the transcript released by President Trump before he even released it, thanks to their spy, the “whistle blower.”

This will all come out very soon.  Mark my words.

“The explosive revelations are at the center of House Democrats’ formal impeachment inquiry into the president, which was announced earlier this week by Pelosi.”

prayer 10

‘“This is no cause for any joy. This a very sad time for our country,’ Pelosi said Friday on MSNBC. ‘The impeachment of a president is as serious as our congressional responsibilities can be apart from declaring war. We have to be very prayerful, and we always have to put country before party.’”

Excuse me…, but I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

I really wish Nancy would keep “my country” out of her mouth.

It’s just disgusting and embarrassing.

prayer 6

I would have to agree with Nancy, however, when she says, “This is a very sad time for our country.” It is the democrats who are causing all of the sadness, however.

prayer 12

prayer 11

‘“This is about the national security of our country, and the president of the United States being disloyal to his oath of office, jeopardizing our national security and jeopardizing the integrity of our elections,’ the speaker added.”

Just like the Russian collusion hoax was, right Nancy?

Like I said earlier…, my nickname for her is Nancy “dazed and confused” Pelosi.  The prior paragraph demonstrates her level of confusion pretty well I believe.

prayer 9

prayer 8

‘“This is my wheelhouse, as I said to the president,’ Pelosi declared. ‘Twenty-five years of experience in intelligence . . . I was there when we wrote the whistleblower laws. I was there when we wrote the law establishing the office of the director of national intelligence. That’s only since 2004.’”

Yes…, we know Nancy…, you’ve been in Congress a looooong time.

Way too long.

I notice you failed to sign the Constitution when it was enacted.

I apologize…, actually, I believe you were elected a few years after that.

prayer 13

Mrs. Pelosi has now become a merely a sad caricature of herself.

I’ve heard it said that if you want to find out what Nancy is going to say today, look and see what Alexandria Ocasio Cortez tweeted last night.

prayer 7

And there you have it…, the clueless leading the confused.

Lord, help us all.

Hey…, if it’s good enough for Nancy…

prayer 14

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑