Standing in support of Israel, Jews, and believers in all the nations, in the name of Jesus (Yeshua). Sharing biblical truth, encouragement, news and prophecy.
The newest batch of John Podesta emails from WikiLeaks shows President Barack Obama's transition team kept lists of Muslim and Asian candidates for administration jobs.
The 2008 emails show Podesta was sent lists of Muslims and Asians to be considered for White House jobs, with Arab Christians excluded or relegated to a separate list.
In the email exchange, an aide wrote, "In the candidates for top jobs, I excluded those with some Arab American background but who are not Muslim (e.g., George Mitchell). Many Lebanese Americans, for example, are Christian. In the last list (of outside boards/commissions), most who are listed appear to be Muslim American, except that a handful (where noted) may be Arab American but of uncertain religion (esp. Christian)."
Also notable, there was concern that some of the Muslims suggested would not survive media scrutiny, with one aide writing, "High-profile Muslim Americans tend to be the subject of a fair amount of blogger criticism, and so the individuals on this list would need to be ESPECIALLY carefully vetted."
The aide added, "I suspect some of the people I list would not survive such a vet — but I do personally know, at least in part, virtually all of the candidates in the 1st two categories (but I know very few of those listed for outside boards/commissions)."
The emails show an administration obsessed with gender, race and religion. Within the lists themselves, candidates were further categorized by their nationality, sex and sometimes race.
Another Wikileaks release showed the Obama transition team keeping lists of non-white candidates for administration posts.
*CBN neither supports nor opposes any candidate for public office.
Some Republicans say they will not vote for Trump-Pence in this election. Why? They don't like his gruff talk, his past mistakes violate their conscience, or they prefer to play the "long game," or in other words, lose this election and build for the future. Not voting for Trump would be a horrible mistake!
Hillary understands that Christians and conservatives place great value on "conscience." She is playing us. She knows that if enough demoralized Christians stay home on Election Day she will win this election! But if Hillary wins, we will then face direct attacks upon our faith and conscience! We must upset Hillary's plan!
In 1976, many evangelicals had no conscience problem supporting "born-again" Jimmy Carter who taught Sunday school. We ended up with abortion on demand, 20 percent-plus interest rates, 18 percent inflation and radical Islamists ruling Iran.
No reason is sufficient to justify not voting for Trump-Pence because the consequences of Hillary's policies would profoundly harm America and those we love! To think that a Republican Congress would protect us from her actions is delusional and defies recent experience.
I understand the reluctance of some conservatives to vote for Trump. But in the practical world, would we impose a "purity" test on a fireman before he saves our home or a police officer before he saves a life? No!
Does God's call to forgive play a role in public life, or do we only apply forgiveness in private? Do we pass personal judgment on Trump's very troubling words spoken a long time ago and for which he begged forgiveness, so we can justify not voting now for someone who "violates our sensibilities" when Hillary's actions clearly attack and violate our fundamental principles?
The real question is: Can our personal sensitivities allow us not to vote, thus enabling Hillary to become president, when we know she will force her radical homosexual and transgender agenda in our grade schools, remove any reference to our Creator in public life, erode religious freedom, weaken property rights, involve us in Middle Eastern wars, enact higher taxes, pay for more abortions, further destroy the moral and financial solvency of our nation and diminish our liberty and freedom, including the right to defend ourselves with an Australian-like gun confiscation program?
Republicans who think sitting out this election to play catch-up later should think again. Progressives like Hillary want online voting and no voter ID. Hillary's path to amnesty and citizenship for those illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and those who will flow through open borders will pay the favor back with votes.
This fact coupled with the WikiLeaks proof of Democrat incitement to violence, planned voter fraud and current voting irregularities could spell the end of Republican election victories for a very long time.
How can our conscience tell us it is fine to do nothing to stop Hillary when her policies will further destabilize the world, probably start a war with Russia and Syria over her no-fly zone plan in Syria (which our Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dunford said would probably lead to war), further facilitate the spread of ISIS, and encourage massive refugee resettlement, including ISIS operatives, in our country?
The Defense Department recently lifted its ban on women serving in combat. How long will it take for Hillary to mandate that our wives, daughters and granddaughters register for the draft to fight civil wars in the Middle East?
Donald Trump will scrap the nuclear deal that gave Iran, a country that has vowed to destroy us, $150 billion! He recognizes that paying billions to ransom hostages encourages more hostage-taking. And surprise! Iran wants more ransom payments for its latest hostages! Trump promises a strong national defense to defer aggression, while the current administration began tax-paid sex-change operations in the military. Whose policies will better protect America?
Donald Trump understands finances and imbalanced trade deals that hurt America's economy. Who is more likely to save American jobs for our children and solve America's $20 billion debt?
The Clinton Foundation's "pay to play" led to the State Department approving sale of uranium to Russia needed for their nuclear weapons. Hillary's insecure email server potentially compromised national security. Clinton destroyed vital evidence despite congressional subpoenas. Not voting for Trump-Pence will allow double standards of justice and the culture of corruption to continue.
In 2015, Hillary said, "deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed" to protect abortion and LGBTQ rights. In the last debate, she celebrated Planned Parenthood's 100th anniversary despite its racist origins and sale of aborted baby body parts. She continues to defend abortion up to the ninth month of pregnancy! Our conscience should tell us we must stop her.
Hillary's Supreme Court Justices will support Roe v. Wade, and so-called LGBTQ "marriage." Trump is the only presidential nominee to publish a list of constitutionally minded, pro-life and pro-Second Amendment Supreme Court nominees. I am unaware of any other nominee who ever made such a promise.
Trump will work to repeal Obamacare. Hillary will expand it. Premiums will continue to skyrocket until she is able to reach her ultimate goal: socialized medicine. Perhaps the prospect of waiting months for an MRI or necessary operation will make some think further about sitting out this election.
Under Hillary, will your private, religious and home schools continue to satisfy state school attendance laws, and will their courses of study continue to be approved to fulfill college admission requirements? Will your son or daughter be able to obtain a student loan if the chosen college is religious or private?
Under Hillary, will doctors, counselors, teachers and others lose their professional licenses to practice for failing to adhere to the state-mandated "religion" that mocks millennia of Judeo-Christian teaching? Trump will fight for religious liberty, including allowing pastors to speak without losing their church tax exemption. For this alone, is it worth voting for Trump?
Under Hillary, will you suffer limits to your Second Amendment rights, while she has armed guards to protect her? Would she issue unconstitutional executive orders to require universal background checks to make future gun confiscation possible, or make it criminal for parents to gift a firearm to a grown child without federal background "checks"?
Our Constitution empowers the vice president to break ties in the U.S. Senate. Tim Kaine will vote to continue punishing the Little Sisters of the Poor and others for not including abortion pills in their insurance plans. He supports allowing 17-year-old transgender boys into girls' locker rooms and showers and wants small businesses to participate in same-sex weddings. Would you rather have Pence or Kaine breaking these ties?
This election is not simply about a particular man or woman who is running for president, nor about speeches, spouses, candidate flaws or personal virtues.
This election is about the soul of a country and the policies the president's team will implement and enforce, including nominating Cabinet heads, agency directors and Supreme Court justices. Hillary's policies will increase debt, taxes and wars. Trump-Pence will "drain the swamp" and make America stronger and safer.
The only way to stop Hillary is to vote Trump-Pence. I sincerely hope you will.
May God have mercy on our nation!
Virginia Del. Bob Marshall was elected in 1991 to the Virginia House of Delegates. He authored Virginia's Marriage Amendment, Partial Birth Abortion Ban, non-compliance with federal detention of U.S. citizens, ban on warrantless searches of cell phones and computers, and other liberty-preserving legislation. In 2008, he won a unanimous decision in Virginia's Supreme Court against unelected taxing authorities.
This article was originally published at conservativehq.com. Used with permission.
3 Reasons Why you should read Life in the Spirit. 1) Get to know the Holy Spirit. 2) Learn to enter God's presence 3) Hear God's voice clearly! Go deeper!
Has God called you to be a leader? Ministry Today magazine is the source that Christian leaders who want to serve with passion and purpose turn to. Subscribe now and receive a free leadership book.
That almost every aspect of the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign is scripted down to the last dotted I and crossed T should come as no surprise, even to the most casual observer. But thanks to WikiLeaks, we now know the painstaking detail her staff puts into every form of communication.
In an email dated June 19, 2015, the staff was debating how to respond to Pope Francis' call to address "climate change." Teddy Goff, Clinton's top digital communications adviser and a former Obama campaign staffer, said he preferred one of the two options, but had a concern.
"Adding Podesta here too for his review," he wrote. "I vote #2, but defer to the non-Jews on this thread if anyone thinks 'amen' might rub people the wrong way."
Podesta responded to the discussion, saying the campaign had been late in getting to the issue, and suggested a different approach. Eventually, they agreed to a revised version that did not include "Amen."
It's troubling that the Clinton campaign might find the word too controversial for a tweet that was supposed to be written by the candidate herself. But the email also exposed another lie about the campaign.
It has previously been stated that any tweet from her official Twitter account that includes the "-H" tag at the end was written personally by the candidate. But this email proves her staff writes those too.
3 Reasons Why you should read Life in the Spirit. 1) Get to know the Holy Spirit. 2) Learn to enter God's presence 3) Hear God's voice clearly! Go deeper!
Has God called you to be a leader? Ministry Today magazine is the source that Christian leaders who want to serve with passion and purpose turn to. Subscribe now and receive a free leadership book.
The mainstream media doesn't think you should hear about it, just like they don't think you should hear about the WikiLeaks revelations or other stories that could help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton. (REUTERS/Paolo Bona/Files)
The Undeniable, Glaring Bias of the Mainstream Media
On March 30, 2016, the National Enquirer released a bombshell report, accusing Sen. Ted Cruz of having five mistresses, and the mainstream media was all over it, pressing him on the accuracy of the charges, reading between the lines if he didn't explicitly deny every detail of the report, and talking about it incessantly for days.
Yet all of this was based on one single report from a notorious tabloid, and without any substantiated claims at that.
More recently, after the 2005 video surfaced of Donald Trump's infamous conversation with Billy Bush, a number of women came forward accusing Trump of inappropriate sexual behavior (serious charges to be sure), and he too was dogged with this incessantly by the mainstream media, which now had even more salacious material to report.
The women were interviewed on TV, and their accusations dominated the headlines day after day. This—in contrast with the flood of stunning, Clinton-hurting, WikiLeaks revelations—was big news. This was what really mattered to the American people. This is what they needed to hear in the closing weeks before the elections.
And then yesterday, Oct. 18, lightning struck again, but this time, it was Hillary Clinton being accused of sexual scandals (with both men and women), and the accuser was actually someone who allegedly worked closely with the Clintons for years.
The bombshell was reported once more by the National Enquirer, and it was given immediate, massive exposure by being featured as the lead story on the Drudge Report, read by millions of people each day.
You might say, "That's odd. I didn't hear anything about that."
But of course. The mainstream media doesn't think you should hear about it, just like they don't think you need to hear about the WikiLeaks revelations or other stories that could help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.
Yet it was nothing more than an Enquirer story that launched the non-stop attacks on Ted Cruz, and from the initial reports, it appears that the witness indicting the Clintons is far more credible than those attacking Cruz. Yet thus far, the mainstream media is largely silent on the matter.
As I scanned the online news sites of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, along with the New York Times, the Washington Post, TIME and Newsweek, not one of them had one syllable about these charges against Hillary Clinton—and I searched these sites eight hours after the Drudge headline went live.
At the same time, almost all of them had one or more article about Trump's alleged sexual sins. (But wait. I stand corrected. The Washington Post website really did have much more important news to cover, giving pride of place to this story: "First Lady Shimmers in Versace at the Obamas' Final State Dinner." Yes, this is far more important than the other, national news.)
Why the ridiculously obvious double standard? Why the frenzied reporting of a National Enquirer report accusing Cruz of sexual infidelities but such studious silence when the same publication accuses Hillary? Did this notorious tabloid suddenly become reputable when it targeted the staunchly conservative Cruz but again became disreputable when it targeted Hillary?
Worse still, as others have pointed out, the mainstream media has all but ignored the WikiLeaks email dumps, although the information contained in them so far would be enough to sink most campaigns. The coverage has been minimal, at best, and quite understated at that, giving the viewer the feeling that the news is marginal, while what really matters is whether Trump touched a woman on a plane 30 years ago (or more recently in other settings).
To further underscore this glaring double standard, if the current batch of WikiLeaks emails had come from the Trump campaign rather than the Clinton campaign, with his people insulting Catholics and with his right-hand man expressing disappointment that it was a Muslim, not a white American, who was one of the San Bernardino murderers, the media would virtually crucify Trump, with shrill calls across the nation demanding that he step down and that he fire his campaign manager immediately.
But when it is Hillary Clinton and John Podesta at the center of the firestorm, the email scandals take a very distant back seat to the sex charges against Trump (which, to repeat, I absolutely do not minimize, if true).
And what if Trump had been guilty of using a private email server for classified government correspondence, as Hillary was? What if his staff had destroyed his laptops and cellphones, refused to answer more than 100 incriminating questions from Congress, pleading the Fifth Amendment and then were granted immunity? The media would shout hysterically, "Cover up! Expose the dirty rascals!"
Instead, when it is Hillary at the center of these very serious charges, they join in the cover-up.
But should this surprise us when recently released reports indicate that political donations from the media are 27-1 in favor of Hillary over Trump? And should it surprise us when off-the-record meetings are set up with media elites and the Clinton campaign?
As if further evidence of the media's extreme bias was needed, just look at the mainstream media's virtual blackout of two damning videos (see here and here) produced by James O'Keefe's Project Veritas, apparently documenting serious campaign abuses by operatives allegedly working directly with the Clinton campaign.
You didn't hear about those either? No surprise. The media doesn't seem to think you should hear about them either.
Recently, conservative pundits Pat Buchanan and George Will have agreed with Trump that, on some level, "the system" is rigged, with Buchanan claiming that, "Big Media is the power that sustains the forces of globalism."
But again, none of this should surprise us.
As I noted in Outlasting the Gay Revolution, liberal media bias "has been documented for several decades, beginning in 1981, when professors S. Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman 'released a groundbreaking survey of 240 journalists at the most influential national media outlets—including the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, TIME, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS—on their political attitudes and voting patterns.' The survey found these 'media elites' to be shockingly liberal, to the point that '54 percent did not regard adultery as wrong, compared to only 15 percent [of the general public] who regarded it as wrong,' while, 'Ninety percent agree that a woman has the right to decide for herself whether to have an abortion; 79 percent agree strongly with this pro-choice position.'"
I say it's high time for a media revolution and a listener-viewer-reader revolt, which would mean the media leaders report the news in an unbiased way, and if that is not possible, they then clearly declare their biases.
And if they won't do either (or if their biases are too offensive), we take our business elsewhere.
3 Reasons Why you should read Life in the Spirit. 1) Get to know the Holy Spirit. 2) Learn to enter God's presence 3) Hear God's voice clearly! Go deeper!
Has God called you to be a leader? Ministry Today magazine is the source that Christian leaders who want to serve with passion and purpose turn to. Subscribe now and receive a free leadership book.
Did you enjoy this blog? Click here to receive it by email.
