Was John F. Kennedy Jr. a U.S. Senate frontrunner before his “suspicious” plane crash in 1999?

First of all, it’s hard to believe that was 20 years ago already!

Then getting back to the question…, the answer is yes…, and no.

jfkjr 6

No…, because JFK Jr. had not “officially” declared himself a candidate in New York’s U.S. Senate race before dying in the July 1999 plane crash.

Yes…, because JFK Jr. was extremely well known and extremely popular, and all he would have had to have done was announce his candidacy and the senate seat would have been his.

jfkjr 2

It would not have been long after that that he would have been considered a front runner to be president.

As with the Senate, if he had then decided to run for president he would have been president.

jfkjr 3

This is precisely the trajectory that Hillary Clinton was hoping to take…, except her popularity was nowhere near JFK Jr.’s.  And her timetable was a lot shorter as well.

First lady and Senator-elect Hillary Rodham Clinton gestures to reporters at the end of a press conf..

JFK Jr. was potentially the only stumbling block in her political future.

I’m not saying anything new here…, I’m just saying it.

JFK Jr.’s death in that plane crash was just very advantageous for Hillary Clinton…, that’s all.

Very advantageous.

Very, very, very advantageous.

Did I mention that it was very politically advantageous for Hillary Clinton that John F. Kennedy Jr. died in that plane crash in 1999?

According to Bethania Palma on Snopes.com, “John F. Kennedy Jr. was a popular public figure from his childhood until he died in a plane crash at the age of 38 in 1999.

While there is never a shortage of conspiracy theories surrounding the Kennedys, or for that matter, the Clintons, an unfounded rumor circulating in political circles during the 2016 presidential election claimed that John-John was on the cusp of a successful U.S. Senate bid until Hillary Clinton threw her hat in the ring — with the insinuation that Kennedy was killed to clear the way for her candidacy.”

“Earlier this year, in one of the best-kept secrets in state politics, Kennedy considered seeking the seat of retiring Sen. Daniel Moynihan in 2000, friends confirmed.”

“The friend who expected Kennedy to seek office in the ‘foreseeable future’ also told of speaking with Kennedy earlier this year about the Moynihan seat. ‘I asked him was he casually thinking about it, or was he serious. He sort of said, “I’m not sure. Let me think about it.”’”

“But the second friend called Kennedy’s interest ‘pretty serious,’ adding: ‘I think he was intrigued by the idea … Would he have decided in the end to go for it? I don’t know. But he was clearly thinking about it.’”

“Clinton won the Senate election on 7 November 2000, beating Republican Rick Lazio more than a year after Kennedy Jr. was killed along with his wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, 33, and his sister-in-law, Lauren G. Bessette, 34, in the crash of the single-engine plane he was flying to Martha’s Vineyard.”

So what exactly was determined about this crash?

“The implication that the Clintons had somehow engineered the death of Kennedy Jr. to prevent him from challenging her in her first bid for elective office is contradicted by the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) report on the accident, which assigned the probable cause to pilot error.”

“The probable cause of the accident, as stated in the accident report, is:

The pilot’s failure to maintain control of the airplane during a descent over water at night, which was a result of spatial disorientation.  Factors in the accident were haze and the dark night.

‘There was nothing suspicious about the circumstances of the crash,’ this article’s author surmises.”

The fact that the report says “There was nothing suspicious about the circumstances of the crash,” is suspicious.

Well, isn’t it?

jfkjr 5

“But, in an article from the New York Times, written by Mike Allen, ‘Investigators said Mr. Kennedy’s plane was plunging at 5,000 feet per minute just before radar contact was lost Friday night, and pilots and aviation authorities said the description that has been provided seems to indicate a “graveyard spiral,”’ a corkscrew descent in which the pilot becomes disoriented and, desperate to right the plane, loses control.’”

This report would seem to be in conflict with the report that blamed the crash on confusion over where the horizon was, and disorientation during his descent, caused by haze and darkness, into Martha’s Vineyard.

How were they in a “graveyard spiral,” “corkscrewing” down at 5,000 feet per minute, when, in effect, the NTSB is saying they just lost track of their altitude and nosed into the ocean?

Those are two completely opposed scenarios which are mutually exclusive of one another…, meaning it had to be one or the other, not a combination of the two.

jfkjr 1

“John Kennedy Jr. had won the nation’s heart when at two years old he was seen on camera saluting his father’s coffin during the nationally televised funeral procession after President Kennedy’s November 1963 assassination. Nicknamed John-John, he grew up handsome and charismatic and was thus seen as a potential heir to the family’s glory days of political influence and celebrity.”

jfkjr

President John F. Kennedy,John F. Kennedy Jr.

“While his death was untimely and no doubt a tragedy, it was ruled an accident.”

There are accidents and then there are “accidents.”

What do you think?

 

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.

Deal or no deal? No deal!

The “Green New Deal” failed its vote, to just begin the debate on the resolution, in the Senate 0-57!

That’s ZERO in favor of this whacky socialist proposal.

Zero!

But there are a hundred senators, you may recall.  So why are there only 57 votes?

Because 43 of our esteemed guardians of democracy (senators) are complete and utter cowards…, that’s why.

They chose to not vote “yea” or “nay,” but voted “present” instead.

The “Green New Deal,” is a sweeping democrat proposal, dreamed up by some of the more liberal and socialist leaning members of The House  of Representatives, for dealing with climate change, and a favorite topic of discussion of the current democrat presidential candidates.

green-new-deal-revealed

NONE of them chose to go on the record here in the senate and support this socialist dream scenario gone wild.

Not Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, not Sen. Amy Klobuchar, not Sen. Elizabeth Warren, not Sen. Cory Booker, not Sen. Kamala Harris, and not even Sen. Bernie Sanders could muster up the courage to cover the bill for the checks their mouths have been writing regarding “The Green New Deal” while on the campaign trail.

green new deal

Like I said…, cowards, and misrepresentative shysters.

“The Green New Deal” is really less about climate change and more of a “radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy,” as described by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY.

In keeping with their usual incomprehensible ramblings, the democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, called the vote a “sham vote” that aimed to draw attention away from a real debate on the consequences of climate change.”

Ooooooooookay.  So let me get this straight.  This vote to begin debate on “The Green New Deal,” which is a proposal to deal with climate change, is a vote “aimed to draw attention away from a real debate on the consequences of climate change,” according to comrade Schumer?

“Climate change is an existential threat, and confronting it requires bold action,” Sen. Kamala Harris said in a statement following the vote.”

I guess voting “for” the “Green New Deal” wasn’t a “bold” enough action for her.

“Today’s #GreenNewDeal vote is a partisan stunt to side-step needed debate on climate action, and give Republicans cover to put oil lobby checks over our kids,… I don’t play ball with bad-faith farces.  ” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tweeted after the vote.

My first question is “what the hell are you talking about?”

My next comment, Sen. Gillibrand, would echo my reply to comrade Schumer.  So you’re saying this vote to begin debate on “The Green New Deal,” is a “partisan stunt to side-step needed debate on climate action…?”

Again…, amazing.

“[McConnell’s] stunt is backfiring and it’s becoming clearer and clearer to the American people that the Republican Party is way behind the times on clean energy and that Democrats are the party willing to take action,” added Senator Schumer, who also asked, “… What’s the Republican Party proposal?  Is it more coal?”

If I may…, most conservative Americans believe that even if humans are capable of affecting the global climate, there’s not a damn thing we (The United States alone) can do about it now that is going to make one bit of difference.  We, of course, would prefer “clean” energy, and we want to move in that direction, but not a pace that would sacrifice our standard of living and our economic health.

How’s that for a response?

Isn’t that entirely reasonable?

CNN chimed in with an incredibly insightful observation when “reporter” Ted Barrett stated that the “Green New Deal” stalled in the Senate after, “largely political debate.”

You don’t say Ted?  Political debate in the Senate?  Really?  Who’d a thunk it?

Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX, correctly pointed out that “The Green New Deal,” “is a “radical environmental policy that also includes Medicare for all, free college, and guaranteed jobs.”  “You might as well throw in free beer and pizza!” he added.

Some administrative workers in the Senate claim to have heard Mr. Schumer whisper to his friends, “Hey…, ya…, we could spring for the pizza and beer if that’s what it would take.”

0-57.

Just more WINNING.

And I’m not getting tired of it yet!

Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez_Donkey_Braying

 

Thanks to Samuel Chamberlain and Chad Pergram of Fox News and The Associated Press for contributing to this article.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Reading George Washington’s Farewell Address, on the floor of the Senate, is an annual tradition.

Do you recall what “party” George Washington represented?  Was he a Democrat?  Was he a Republican?  I believe he was neither.  I believe he would only classify himself as an “American.”

He was “the father” of of our nation, and he loved it like it was his child.  Let’s be clear about this…, there would be no United States of America if it were not for George Washington.

President Washington’s integrity and patriotism were unquestioned.  His only desire was to do what was best for his country and its citizens.  It is in this regard that I feel President Trump has a lot in common with our country’s first president.

George washington 3

We all know that President Trump is technically a Republican, but do you really think his party affiliation is paramount to him?  I don’t think so.  I don’t think he’d have any problem being recognized as a Democrat, or working with Democrats, if they were joining with him in trying to do what was best for the country or We the People.

According to Chad Pergram of Fox News, “Senator Deb Fischer, R-Nebraska, will follow an annual tradition when the Senate next convenes.  The first order of business is for Fischer to read George Washington’s Farewell Address aloud on the floor.”

I wonder how many Senators will be there in the Senate to actually hear the reading?  Pergram says, “Most senators will be jetting back to the Beltway after the Presidents’ Day recess, not yet on the ground to hear Fischer’s presentation.”

George Washington’s complete Farewell Address is 32 handwritten pages.  I encourage you to read it sometime.  Below you’ll find sections of his address which I have selected for one reason or another, along with my own comments.

george washington farewell address

President Washington begins by addressing his “Friends and fellow citizens,”

“The period for a new election of a citizen, to administer the executive government of the United States, being not far distant, and the time actually arrived, when your thoughts must be employed designating the person, who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprize you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.”

Washington’s second term is up, but he does not want another term, although he would almost unanimously be voted in.

“The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize.”

Washington observes that the American people value and hold dear their new, unique, form of government.

“But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.”

President Washington warns, however, that our government and our freedoms will come under attack from within our own country and from the outside, and that we must “cherish” and protect our way of life.

“The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.”

Washington says we should be proud to be called an American.  He also points out what they all had in common at the time.  This definitely is not the case anymore with most “Americans.”

“All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests.”

Washington warns here of the dangers of “factions” and “enterprising minorities” putting their wants ahead of what is best for the nation as a whole.

george washington 1

“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.”

“This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.”

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”

Are the results of putting party ahead of country not deteriorating our liberty on a daily basis?

“Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”

Washington advises us to keep our eyes open, to be aware of those who would threaten our liberty and our country, and to fight against them and their efforts.

“It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

“There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.”

We have to stay on top of these people who attempt to sway our fellow citizens into forgetting why our country was formed and pretend to have a better way, while trying to drive a wedge between our citizens and between our citizens and their country.

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”

No matter what other foreign governments may say, they do not have our best interests at heart unless it benefits them.  We must put America first and guard her interests.

georg Washington 2

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith.  Here let us stop.”

“Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.”

“In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course, which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself, that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.

George Washington, United States – September 17, 1796

Source: “The Independent Chronicle” newspaper, September 26, 1796.

 

You have to love George Washington.  He was a great leader and an eloquent communicator.

I wonder what he would do with “Twitter” today?

What would he have to say about “the fake news?”

What would he say about this growing support of Socialism and “open borders?”

I believe President Trump is representing President Washington’s beliefs quite well for the time being.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

I hope I’m wrong about our next Attorney General…, but I’m pretty sure I’m not.

President Trump has nominated William (Bill) Barr to be the next Attorney General of The United States.

Mr. Barr has been going through his confirmation hearings in The Senate this week, and it appears he will be confirmed.

So, who is this guy?

First off, he’s a lawyer.

From 1973 to 1977, Mr. Barr was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency.

He was then a law clerk to Judge Malcolm Wilkey of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1977 through 1978.

He served on the domestic policy staff at the Reagan White House from May 3, 1982 to September 5, 1983, with his official title being Deputy Assistant Director for Legal Policy.  He was also in private practice for nine years with the Washington law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge.

In 1989, at the beginning of his administration, President George H. W. Bush appointed Barr to the U.S. Department of Justice as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, an office which functions as the legal advisor for the President and executive agencies.

In May 1990, Barr was appointed Deputy Attorney General, the official responsible for day-to-day management of the DOJ.  According to media reports, Barr was generally praised for his professional management of the Department.

During August 1991, when then-Attorney General Richard Thornburgh resigned to campaign for the Senate, Barr was named Acting Attorney General.

President Bush then nominated him to be the next Attorney General, and served in that role from 1991–1993.

Upon leaving the DOJ in 1994, Barr became Executive Vice President and General Counsel of GTE Corporation, where he served for 14 years.

In 2008, when GTE merged with Bell Atlantic to become Verizon Communications, he left that position. While at GTE, from 1997 to 2005 Barr also served on the Board of Visitors of the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg.

In 2009, Barr was briefly of counsel to the firm Kirkland & Ellis.

From 2010 until 2017, he advised corporations on government enforcement matters and regulatory litigation.

He rejoined Kirkland and Ellis in 2017.

So, he has played this game before, and he seems to be considered a “conservative.”

But is that good enough?  Let’s take a closer look.

First of all, the Senate democrats don’t seem to be putting up much of a fuss against Mr. Barr.  That’s the first indication that he may not be what he appears to be.

If Bill Barr is confirmed, he would become Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s supervisor.

Barr has had a “personal relationship” with Robert Mueller for more than 25 years, according to Richard Manning of Fox News.

Also, “Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham revealed that Barr worked with Mueller when Barr previously served as attorney general from 1991 to 1993 under President George H.W. Bush. But on top of that, the two were “best friends” and their wives attended Bible study together.”

Oh…, c’mon!

“When added to the knowledge that Mueller had attended the weddings of Barr’s children, it is clear that Barr’s relationship with the special counsel is extremely close.”

Okay, we just jumped from DEFCON 1 to DEFCON 5!

I may be mistaken, but wouldn’t Barr’s personal relationship with Robert Mueller be reason enough for him to end up recusing himself from the whole situation like Jeff Sessions did?

Just sayin’.

Richard Manning then added, “Hopefully, President Trump has found the honest man who not only can shine a light on the corruption within the Justice Department but also has the guts and the legal gravitas to do something about it, becoming the swamp’s worse nightmare.”

“With that background and perspective, Barr could be a brilliant choice to run the Justice Department. With public confidence in the Justice Department and FBI at the bottom of the barrel, Barr’s intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the department would allow him to begin the cleanup that is desperately needed.”

Then again, he may be just another “swamp monster” in disguise.

It is common knowledge now that Robert Mueller knowingly used Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants based on Democratic research that has since been called by the then-FBI Director, James Comey, “salacious and unverified” as the foundation its Russia probe.

And the Justice Department was so committed to their partisan, treasonous, mission that officials deliberately turned a blind eye to very real concerns about the relationship of both former President Barack Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, with both Russia and Hillary Clinton’s apparent violations of laws related to handling classified documents.

“As Attorney General, will Barr excuse his old friend Mueller and former Justice Department colleagues, giving them a pass?” Richard Manning asks.

I’m pretty sure the answer to that question is a big “yes.”

“Or hopefully, President Trump has found the honest man who not only can shine a light on the corruption within the Justice Department but also has the guts and the legal gravitas to do something about it, becoming ‘he swamp’s’ worse nightmare.”

I hope I am wrong and that this is the case, Mr. Manning, but history would suggest that I am not wrong, and that not much will change, and that all of these “swamp rats” will remain above the law.

I’ll keep you posted.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

bill barr

 

 

 

 

The “biased, liberal, fake news media” shows its true colors once again!

In a special “runoff” election Tuesday night, the last Senate seat up for grabs in 2018 was claimed by the Republican, Cindy Hyde-Smith, by a 54% – 46% margin over the Democrat, Mike Espy.

I guess the “blue wave” didn’t make it too far ashore in the state of Mississippi!

But I digress.

Not only did Hyde-Smith win, giving the Republicans a 53-47 margin in the Senate, she was the first woman elected as a senator from the state of Mississippi.  So it was historical in that aspect as well.

Other than possibly the news regarding the migrant caravan on our southern border, this election story should probably have been the most newsworthy item out there this morning.

So, how did the “biased, liberal, fake news media” choose to cover this election story?

Well, let’s take a look the day after the election.

On “The Washington Post’s” website, you have to scroll down to the 28th story listed there.  The headline reads: “Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith wins racially charged election over Democrat Mike Espy.”

On “Yahoo News,” we have to scroll down to the 100th story listed there, where the headline reads: “Mississippi voters send Hyde-Smith back to the US Senate after runoff marred by controversy.”

On the MSNBC website, there is no mention of election results at all until we see a reference to a story that appears on their show, “Morning Joe,” regarding the election.  And we only see this after scrolling over halfway down the website, past 39 other stories.

Lastly, we have our good friends over at CNN.  Of the 100 articles listed on their website, we find no headline about the actual election results.  The only story we find is titled: “What we learned from the 2018 Senate race.”

We can see that even when the story is mentioned, albeit as an afterthought, it only appears with some sort of negative connotation along with it.

You see, when reality doesn’t support the narrative, reality is just basically ignored by the “biased, liberal, fake news media.

I call this “propaganda by omission,” and it is conducted by the “biased, liberal, fake news media” almost every day.

Alternatively, suppose the democrat had won the election in Mississippi.

Do you think the “biased, liberal, fake news media” would have covered the story any differently?

Do you think the story would have appeared more prominently in their “story pecking order?”

Do you think we may have seen more positive headlines, bordering on being almost joyous in nature?

The answers to these questions are YES, YES and YES.

So once again, we have a blatant display of how the “biased, liberal, fake news media” operates.

They can deny their bias, preferential treatment, misinformation and propagandizing all they want, but we are wise to their tricks now and they have our full and undivided attention. Their days of getting away with this are over!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

time-welcome-to-america-its-because-they-are-fake-news-34343909

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑