I hear the spirit of compromise is useful tool. But considering the conditions under which our Constitution was drawn up is a profile not only in brilliance of or founders but also of courage for each of the authors were sought after men and lost all that they had. The term Compromise today is a contaminated word. There is nothing proper about conscessions regarding a document that is so clearly written by or Founding Fathers. And we did not lose the election - the 2012 election was stolen and the same morons who support an illegal government refuse to say anything about the ill-gotten office of this illegal Obscumbo. This guy is pure evil - I have never sen anything so vile as he and this administration. Agree with me or disagree with me I dont care.
One more thing, I note that Ladybird is leaving too. Ladybird wondered if my father, who was one of General Pershing's 100 heros in WWI and won the Distinguished Service Cross, was a wild drunk or perhaps died young. My father lived to 94. Oh, and Mr. Watson informed me that I'm an old man with only a few years to live, not to mention the Dean of this great movement, the Colonel, who informed me that I'm arrogant and egotistical. I don't buy his Jesus. That's the big problem here--the reason for all the remarks. I have my own idea of Jesus. Is it any wonder that the Tea Party lost the election, why the liberal media calls you racist and every other derogatory name they can think.
Right or wrong, the Tea Party lost the presidential election, and probably America as we've known her. Right or wrong, America is going bankrupt morally, spiritually, and fiscally.
Can we agree that we've wandered far away from the Constitution our Founding Fathers gave us?
Can we agree that the American people are more concerned with "my rights" than living by the Golden Rule?
Can we agree it is self-evident we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Thomas Jefferson wrote this in the Declaration of Independence.
Jefferson was not a Christian. I'm holding in my hand The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. Jefferson extracted textually from the Gospels all that eliminated the supernatural God Christians worship. I don't read Jefferson's Bible. I read the King James version. I don't read what the Christians here read, who have the gall to judge me.
I don't belong here. I fought for the ideals laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I was spared in World War II. It was a miracle. I've been miraculously spared more than once, I feel deeply for a purpose. The spokesmen for this Tea Party have their ideas, which they are quick to tell me are not their ideas.
I know in my heart that I've been spared for a purpose, to spread the Word of Jesus, my savior and redeemer. Christians don't own Jesus. Thanks for listening. Now I'll be moving on.
‘WikiLeaks Can’t Protect Their Sources’ Is The CIA About To Reveal Names Of DNC Leakers
The saga surrounding who leaked sensitive DNC documents to WikiLeaks may take an interesting turn, hints former CIA officer Fred Rustmann.
The Central Intelligence Agency knows the identities of the people who leaked DNC emails to the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks during the heat of the 2016 presidential campaign, a former CIA officer contends.
Fred Rustmann, who served as an operations officer in the CIA’s National Clandestine Service for 24 years and was a member of the agency’s elite Senior Intelligence Service, said in an interview with WND that WikiLeaks’ ongoing release of classified information is “disgusting.”
“WikiLeaks says they want to protect their sources – Julian Assange said that he wouldn’t reveal his sources, but he would say that it wasn’t the Russians,” Rustmann said. “But the agency knows a lot of the information. I suspect they may have a pretty good idea of who provided that information to WikiLeaks.”
Rustmann’s comments raise questions about potential plans for the CIA to reveal the names of those who allegedly leaked DNC documents to WikiLeaks.
Recently, the CIA made a veiled threat to WikiLeaks in respect to protecting their sources.
“WikiLeaks may think they are protecting those who provide them with classified information & other secrets, but they should not be certain of that,” the CIA statement said.
In a statement to WND, Robert L. Deitz, a former advisor to CIA head Michael Hayden, called the threat “unprecedented.”
“It’s pretty unusual for the CIA to make a threat to WikiLeaks so publicly. It’s pretty unprecedented; one ought to be skeptical about this. That is not the way that CIA officials should operate,” Deitz said.
“This is the kind of thing, if somebody were to make this kind of threat it would come out of a different organization, DOD, State or maybe the White House. Traditionally it would certainly not come out of the CIA,” Deitz added.
WikiLeaks is in the news after both CNN and CBS falsely reported the group granted Donald Trump Jr. access to future leaks.
However, WikiLeaks had tweeted a link to the information days before the email reached Trump Jr.’s inbox. The fake news media claim this was stone cold proof of collusion, as WikiLeaks has long been smeared as a Kremlin puppet.