Connecting the Dots; The Real Collusion Story

I've posted something similar to this in the past. But, because it's so damning, it needs repeating with an interesting additional twist at the end.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

Let’s follow the trail......  Everyone needs to read this. Slowly, and patiently, because it’s very important...... 
 
Here's what it looks like when all the dots are connected  together. 

 

---

>From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

A Grand Jury had been impaneled.

Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”.

Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared.

Hmmm, now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.

Guess who took over this investigation in 2002?

Bet you can’t guess.

None other than James Comey.

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

Guess who was transferred in to the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS?

Your friend and mine, Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner.

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

It gets better, well not really, but this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right?

Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005?

No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame?

I know, it’s a miracle, just a coincidence, just an anomaly in statistics and chances, but it was Robert Mueller.

What do all four casting characters have in common?

They all were briefed and/or were front line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation.

Now that’s just a coincidence, right?

Ok, lets chalk the last one up to mere chance.

Let’s fast forward to 2009......

James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin.

Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, on her own personal email server, by the way.

The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of Hillary.

Like all good public servants do, you know - looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.

Now, you would think that this is a fairly straight-up deal, except that it wasn’t: The People got absolutely nothing out of it.

However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for a one hour speech, then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours.

Ok, no big deal right?

Well, not so fast: the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.

Guess who was the FBI Director during this time?

Yep, Robert Mueller.

He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009.

Guess who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland?

No other than, Rod Rosenstein.

Guess what happened to the informant?

The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.

How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole, providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?

Guess what happened soon after the sale was approved?

~145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal.

Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division?

No other than, Lois Lerner.

Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences.  Nothing to see here, right?

Let’s fast forward to 2015.

Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that The Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server.

He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law.

He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email. ( Let's not forget  - at least 10 CIA spies in china were killed by the Chinese because of the leaks, and god knows what else occurred )

Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

Now this is amazing:  guess who became FBI Director in 2013?

Guess who secured 17 no-bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer?

No other than James Comey.

Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh?

Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and exonerates her.

Nope.... couldn’t find any crimes there.

Can you guess what happened next?

In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy.

They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury.

Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 5th of 2016, and exonerates The Hillary from any wrongdoing.

Can you see the pattern?

It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.

FISA Abuse, political espionage.... pick a crime, any crime, chances are...... this group and a few others did it.

All the same players.

All compromised and conflicted.

All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves.

All connected in one way or another to the Clintons.

They are like battery acid, they corrode and corrupt everything they touch.

How many lives have these two destroyed?

As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

Let us not forget that Comey's brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation's taxes.

And see, the person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies?   Yep, that would be Hillary R. Clinton!


WHO IS LISA BARSOOMIAN?

Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background.

Lisa H. Barsoomian, a US Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protege of James Comey and Robert Mueller.

Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998.

Lawrence also represented:

Robert Mueller three times;

James Comey five times;

Barack Obama 45 times;

Kathleen Sebelius 56 times;

Bill Clinton 40 times; and

Hillary Clinton 17 times.

Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.

You may be saying to yourself, OK, who cares? Who cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman?

Apparently someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets (?). 

Someone out there cares so much that the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian.

Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. And, although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa Barsoomian at NIH gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health.

This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities.

It’s a cover, so big deal, right? I mean what does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?

It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix …. and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention?

BECAUSE….

She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s WIFE….That’s why!!

GET THIS INFORMATION OUT TO EVERYONE YOU CAN.

Jaw dropping, shocking and extremely sad that this info has never been exposed- It smells like conspiracy and treason to me.
 
DO YOUR PART IN PLASTERING THIS INFORMATION EVERYWHERE .... it’s bullet proof and cannot be blown off by leftists ... and will convince many not paying attention that we have a soft coup happening now. 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Can't say I'm surprised one bit... This is extremely frustrating to realize that we have two-teared justice system in our country today. Until any one of these people mentioned in this piece are "frog walked" in orange jump suits on camera into a prison, I will not change my mind about this condition we are seeing happen right before our eyes; white collar crooks getting away with treason against our nation all because they are obsessed with power and consider themselves elites!

Dr. Inslee Will See You Now

On a more local, but potentially national issue rearing its ugly head... AGAIN! This missive is from the folks at ShiftWA.org, who watch and report daily on important issues affect us "working stiffs" and retirees and who pay their taxes, while getting shafted by the elites in Olympia who apparently believe we work for them in the Democratic Party.

= = = = = = = = 



Friends,

We know with all the fanfare around the start of the 2019 session, it can be easy to miss key policy proposals coming out of the Legislature or the Governor’s mansion. Well, let us tell you about a doozy. [It's Deja Vu all over again, folks! Emphasis mine.]

Governor Inslee set aside any inhibitions about being labeled an extremist and announced his intention to push policy this session that will lead our state down the path to socialized medicine. Inslee’s proposed public health care option is nothing more than a massive government-takeover of health care.


Add your name here to say NO to government-run health care

[ADD YOUR NAME HERE]

We could call it “Insleecare” but all Inslee cares about is his presidential ambitions. He definitely doesn’t care about the quality of your health care or the immense burden his plan would place on taxpayers. We know what he does care deeply about. The caucus goers in the states of Iowa and Nevada.

He wasn’t even able to provide an idea of how much this enormous government program would cost. We’d say this entire thing is a joke, but radical Seattle leftists were elected in November and they’re taking government health care plan seriously.

In Inslee’s nanny state, government knows best and will decide which plan is best for you. Eventually, only one government-approved and taxpayer-funded health insurance plan will be available. But don’t worry, Dr. Inslee assures us his plan if fair.



Do you want Inslee involved in your health care decisions? Add your name to say NO to government-run health care.

Comparing White House Staffs and Salaries

Trump's Salary & Staff

On Friday, the Trump administration released their annual report to Congress on White House Office Personnel. It includes the name, status, salary and position title of all 377 White House employees. The report also said that Trump decided not to take a dime of his salary; instead he donated it to an amazing cause.

  

The report also showed that President Trump is far better at saving money.

The total annual White House salaries under Trump are $35.8 million vs. $60.9 million under Obama, a savings of $25.1 million.

Here are some other key findings:

There are 140 fewer employees on White House staff under Trump than under Obama at this point in their respective presidencies.

Thirty-nine fewer staffers are dedicated to The First Lady of the United States (FLOTUS). Currently, there are only five staffers dedicated to Melania Trump vs. forty-four staffers who served Michelle Obama (FY2009).

However, it's what the report said Trump did with this salary that has everyone talking.

Instead of taking his salary, Trump donated all $400,000 to the Department of the Interior where it will be used for construction and repair needs at military cemeteries! [Did we hear anything about what Obama did with his salary? And they fawned over him for 8 years! This tells us a lot.]

 

AMAZING! It's so great to have a President who loves our brave military men and women so much!

Oh, and where's the media coverage of this?

That's right, they don't cover anything decent that the President does. [Their mantra is, "Only what hurts our enemy is covered... even if we have to make it up!"]

It should be pointed out here that, while this information is similar to previous reports which have been mixed with both truth and fiction, this one does not compare FLOTUS Obama to FLOTUS Clinton, but FLOTUS Obama to FLOTUS Trump. The only inaccuracy in this report is the amount of Pres, Trump's salary donated. Here's an alternate source to back up this report.

Kamala Harris: Seven Key Facts About Democrats’ Top 2020 Contender

The Democratic Party field of presidential contenders is already filling up quickly. Liberal/Socialists rarely lack hubris and ambition when it comes to seizing power; just consider Hillary's attempt in our last election.

As my sources provide information on these candidates, I will happily share them here.

= = = = = = = = = = = =

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) declared Monday that she will run for President of the United States.

She is already drawing comparisons to Barack Obama, who once praised her good looks. Like him, she is a left-wing first-term U.S. Senator with little experience and few accomplish-ments in office. Harris, who declared on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. day, also has a diverse background, and is the first woman of color to be a top presidential contender.

 

Here are seven other key facts about her:

1. Kamala Harris’s career received a boost from a patronage job in dubious circumstances. In 1994, then-outgoing Speaker of the California State Assembly Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) appointed Harris to a state board with a $72,000 salary. The Los Angeles Times reported: “Harris, a former deputy district attorney in Alameda County, was described by several people at the Capitol as Brown’s girlfriend.” (Brown was married but separated.)

2. Kamala Harris barely won her first race for California Attorney General in 2010. As in many of the 2018 congressional races in California, Harris won despite losing on Election Night: “Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley had declared victory on election night, only to see the race flip-flop between the two candidates in the coming days as counties around the state continued to tally mail-in and provisional ballots,” SFGate.com reported.

3. Kamala Harris was accused of using her state office to attack political enemies and reward friends. Harris was sued by conservative groups for forcing them to disclose donor information that the IRS allows them to keep confidential. She was also sued by a healthcare company that claimed she imposed undue restrictions when it tried to buy another company because she wanted to help her ally, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

4. Kamala Harris was criticized for financial mismanagement during her 2016 U.S. Senate campaign. In 2015, the Sacramento Bee reported that Harris’s campaign had a “spending problem,” and was “burning through campaign cash nearly as rapidly as she raises it.” She won the general election against Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) after sewing up the support of the Democratic establishment, including then-President Barack Obama.

5. Kamala Harris has been the star of viral video confrontations, but has done little else in Washington. In committee hearings in the Senate, she has a habit of badgering witnesses — then claiming, when stopped, that male, Republican Senators are trying to silence her, and raising money off the resulting outrage. She tripped herself up in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, falsely claiming that he wanted to take birth control away from women.

6. Kamala Harris faces new questions about a close aide who settled a $400,000 harassment lawsuit. Despite posturing as a champion for women, Harris claimed that she did not know about a major settlement when she was California Attorney General in which one of her “top deputies,” Larry Wallace, had been accused of “gender harassment.” Harris mentioned Wallace positively in her new book, which she is using to promote her candidacy.

7. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kamala Harris’s California colleague, prefers another candidate. Feinstein has made clear that her preferred candidate in 2020 would be former Vice President Joe Biden. Feinstein, though lately a target of conservative criticism for her role in the Kavanaugh hearing, is the more moderate of the two, taking pragmatic stances on issues like water and working across the aisle — an approach Harris largely rejects.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day

In observance of this man's contribution to our nation, which unfortunately has been totally warped, or ignored, by the Democratic Party and liberal/socialists of today, I'm posting this message provided by My Faith Votes.com. There's a link at the end of this message which provides an actual audio recording of this address and is accompanied by a transcript of the entire speech.

For over 50 years we have set aside a day each January to remember Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., best known for his leadership in the civil rights movement. Less known is the fact that he was a pastor whose life was guided by the Word of God.

Here’s an excerpt from a sermon he delivered in 1954 to Ebenezer Baptist Church in Detroit Michigan. His words still ring true and are relevant for our culture today.

“There is something wrong with our world, something fundamentally and basically wrong. I don’t think we have to look too far to see that. I’m sure that most of you would agree with me in making that assertion. And when we stop to analyze the cause of our world’s ills, many things come to mind.

We begin to wonder if it is due to the fact that we don’t know enough. But it can’t be that. Because in terms of accumulated knowledge we know more today than men have known in any period of human history…”

He went on to provide the answer to man’s problems.

“I think we have to look much deeper than that if we are to find the real cause of man’s problems and the real cause of the world’s ills today. If we are to really find it I think we will have to look in the hearts and souls of men.

The trouble isn’t so much that we don’t know enough, but it’s as if we aren’t good enough. The trouble isn’t so much that our scientific genius lags behind, but our moral genius lags behind. The great problem facing modern man is that, that the means by which we live, have outdistanced the spiritual ends for which we live. So we find ourselves caught in a messed-up world. The problem is with man himself and man’s soul…

My friends, all I’m trying to say is that if we are to go forward today, we’ve got to go back and rediscover some mighty precious values that we’ve left behind. That’s the only way that we would be able to make of our world a better world, and to make of this world what God wants it to be and the real purpose and meaning of it. The only way we can do it is to go back, and rediscover some mighty precious values that we’ve left behind.”

What are those precious values Rev. King believed our nation had left behind?

1. “The first is this—the first principle of value that we need to rediscover is this—that all reality hinges on moral foundations. In other words, that this is a moral universe, and that there are moral laws of the universe, just as abiding as the physical laws…”

2. “Then there is a second thing, a second principle that we’ve got to go back and rediscover. And that is that all reality has spiritual control. In other words, we’ve got to go back and rediscover the principle that there is a God behind the process...”

As we remember Rev. King’s legacy today, I encourage you to take some time to listen to or read his sermon “Rediscovering Lost Values” in its entirety. You will be inspired to carry on the timeless biblical values that our nation is so prone to forget.

What It Takes To Become A Millionaire

Okay, it's time to explode one of the biggest myths that drive socialists, the misguided notion that those rich 1% don't deserve the riches they have. You know, these people.

What’s the difference between America’s millionaires and the rest of us? Chris Hogan, author of Everyday Millionaires, and his research team interviewed over 10,000 millionaires to find out, and what they discovered exploded a number of common myths.

This is the kind of information that too many public schools ignore, or refuse to teach, because too many teachers among the ranks of public schools are too busy focused on social justice agendas. 

That agenda only fosters an attitude of resentment and hate by those who buy into the "social justice" meme. To illustrate the difference, be sure to first watch the linked video above. Then, watch this video here below.

Obsession of the Anti-Trump Democratic Party

Although long, this excellent article by Prof. Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School, is well worth the time to read. (Thanks, Doug, for sharing this.)
= = = = = = = = = = = =

The Anti-Trump Party: How The Democratic Party Has Lost Its Defining Values In The Obsession With Trump

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the evolution of the Democratic Party under the Trump Administration.

Here is the column:
 

Washington has long been a stranger to principle other than the principle of self advancement. Yet, something new seems to be emerging across the country. Politicians have long felt the need to disguise raw political agendas in the pretense of principle. That pretense has disappeared.

 

In this age of rage, voters seem to have no patience, let alone need, for leaders speaking of abstract principles. They want immediate unequivocal action in supporting or opposing President Trump. For Democrats, that all consuming purpose has led to the abandonment of core unifying values, including many that first drew me to the Democratic Party. While they would vehemently deny it, Trump is remaking the party in his inverse image. This past month shows how far that transformation has gone.
 

The remaking of the Democratic Party was evident last week with the reaction to the decision to withdraw troops from Syria. There was a time when a sizable number of Democrats opposed undeclared wars and unending military campaigns. Now, they are appalled that Trump would not continue a war in one of the myriad countries with American troops engaged in combat operations. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called the withdrawal a “Christmas gift to Vladimir Putin,” while Tim Kaine, David Cicilline, and other Democrats called it “irresponsible” or “hasty.”
 

Of course, this “hasty” move is after seven years of intervention in the civil war, including personnel on the ground since 2012. Our military also has been in Iraq since 2003 and in Afghanistan since 2001. One study estimated the costs of the wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan at $5.6 trillion. More importantly, thousands of military personnel have been killed and tens of thousands have been wounded. Yet, Democrats now espouse the same lines denounced during the Bush administration.
 

Popular cable programs with Democratic and liberal viewers are equally full of recriminations over withdrawing from these wars. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow criticized the plan to withdraw troops as merely an effort to distract the public, despite Trump campaigning in 2016 on promises to withdraw from such wars. “Morning Joe” host and former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough denounced the president as a “quivering coward” who failed to understand that we must fight “enemies like ISIS abroad, so we do not have to fight them in our own schools, churches and airports.” Liberals once rejected the premise that we should engage in continual wars in other countries or face terrorism on our streets at home.*
 

Democrats are now defined by Trump the way that antimatter is defined by matter, with each particle of matter corresponding to an antiparticle. Take the secrecy. Democrats once were the party that fought against the misuse of secret classification laws by the FBI and other agencies. They demanded greater transparency from the executive branch, which is a position that I have readily supported. Yet, when oversight committees sought documents related to the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation of Trump associates, Democrats denounced the very thought that Republicans would question the judgment of the FBI that any such disclosures would be tantamount to jeopardizing national security.
 

Democratic Party leaders including Pelosi declared that the oversight committees had moved beyond “dangerous irresponsibility and disregard for our national security” and “disregarded the warnings of the Justice Department and the FBI.” Likewise, House Intelligence Committee ranking minority member Adam Schiff expressed shock that the FBI was not given deference in withholding the information in the surveillance investigation.
 

Yet, when the information was finally forced out of the FBI, including the disclosure of previously redacted material, it was clear that the FBI had engaged in overclassification to shield not national security but to shield the bureau itself from criticism. It included discussion of the roles of high ranking FBI officials and their reliance on such sources as the Christopher Steele dossier, which were already publicly known. Democratic House members like Schiff presumably knew what was in the redactions and, nevertheless, wanted deference to the classification decisions of the FBI.
 

In supporting the investigation of Trump, Democrats have embraced expanding definitions of crimes like obstruction, conspiracy, and the like. Historically, Democrats have resisted such efforts to stretch the criminal code to criminalize broader and broader areas of conduct. During the Trump administration, Democrats sound like legal hawks in demanding criminal charges for conduct long treated as civil matters, such as campaign finance violations and foreign agent registration violations.
 

In pursuing Trump, Democrats have also adopted a type of “red scare” mindset. While Republicans long pumped up the Russian menace as a political Cold War narrative, Democrats are now adopting the same type of rhetoric over the Russian attempt to interfere with the 2016 president election. 

Democrats for the past two years speak about how Russians “stole” the election or destroyed the legitimacy of the results, with little empirical data to support such irresponsible and unfounded claims.
 

While many of us support the Mueller investigation and the need for sanctions against Russia for its interference, Democrats now routinely refer to Russia as our “enemy” and accuse any people with alleged connections to Russians as “traitors.” Special counsel Robert Mueller may have more to reveal on Russian hacking, but there is little evidence that either the trolling operation or leaked emails of the Hillary Clinton campaign had a material impact on the 2016 presidential election.
 

In building up the Russian menace, Democrats ignore that we have not only hacked the emails of our enemies but of our allies as well for years. Moreover, we have routinely intervened in or influenced foreign elections. Likewise, other nations from Israel to Mexico to China and many more, have long tried to influence our elections. Still, Democrats are escalating their calls for greater action against Russia, including criticism of being too dovish in not confronting Russian military elements around the world.
 

A party requires more than hatred for an individual. A party has to stand for something that transcends the immediate or the visceral. Yet, in the age of Trump, the public is not interested in nuance or niceties. The watchword is “resist” and that means to push back at all costs, even against our core values. So the question is not what the Democratic Party will do but what it will be after Donald Trump eventually leaves office.

 

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at  George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

* Prof. Turley’s paragraph I’ve changed into italicized font in the above article reveals accurately just how irrational the Media (D) has become with Trump as president. I recall that 12 years ago, Glenn Beck was telling us that soon things would turn inside out and upside down. And it certainly has! The argument which Prof. Have we forgotten the multitude of terrorist incidences we’ve had over the last ten years? The Army base massacre in Texas, the Boston Marathon bombing, the night club in Florida… need I go on?

As I’ve long maintained in prior posts, these liberal/socialists early on were the ones defending, if not encouraging, Muslims coming into the country and claiming that they were not a threat to the security of our country. However, what they were not admitting to as part of their agenda was that they were looking long-term at taking over total control of the country through sheer numbers. If it is to take decades, then so be it. 

Haven’t they denied past “lone wolf” terrorist acts having connection with the Jihadis of Islam? Why? Because they know they need to assuage the fears and concerns of the general public about the multiple and repeated incidences. They know that if they’re patient long enough, they’d eventually have sufficient numbers to implement Sharia Law in a majority of urban centers across the land. They aren’t called “progressives” for nothing!