Friday, June 9, 2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 WASHINGTON — Former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders became 
agitated and hostile on Wednesday during the questioning of Deputy Budget 
Director nominee Russell Vought, as he noted a social media post written by 
Vought that remarked that Muslims “do not know God because they have 
rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.”
Sanders began by reading a joint letter from the Arab American Institute, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, and Muslim Advocates, which expressed objection to Vought’s nomination because he had “denigrated Muslims” and therefore has shown “hostility to religious pluralism.”
He then pointed to a portion of an article written by Vought last January in response to the Wheaton College controversy surrounding then-professor Larycia Hawkins’ assertion that Christians and Muslims “worship the same God.” Hawkins’ remarks had resulted in an investigation by the college and generated much discussion nationwide as to whether or not the Christian school was right to take action when such messages are put forth by its staff.
“Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned,” Vought, an alumni of Wheaton and a Christian, wrote in part in commenting on the controversy.

“Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?” Sanders asked during questioning on Wednesday.
“Absolutely not, Senator. I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith,” Vought replied. “That post, as I stated in the questionnaire to this committee, was to defend my alma mater, Wheaton College, a Christian school that has a statement of faith that includes the centrality of Jesus Christ for salvation.”
Sanders then asked Vought if he believes Muslims are condemned by God for rejecting His Son.

“Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned? Is that your view?” he inquired.
“Again, Senator, I’m a Christian, and I wrote that piece in accordance with the statement of faith at Wheaton College,” Vought responded.
“I understand that. I don’t know how many Muslims there are in America—maybe a couple million. Are you suggesting that all those people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned, too?” Sanders questioned.
Vought again sought to emphasize that he is a Christian, and Christians believe that Christ is the only way to God.
“I understand you are a Christian!” Sanders erupted angrily. “But this country is made of people who are not just—I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world.”
He repeated, “In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?”
“As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that’s how I should treat all individuals,” Vought replied.
Sanders, finding it disrespectful to state that those who reject Jesus stand in danger of God’s judgment, again pressed Vought.
“You think your statement that you put into that publication, ‘They do not know God because they rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned,’ do you think that’s respectful of other religions?” he asked.
“Senator, I wrote a post based on being a Christian and attending a Christian school that has a statement of faith that speaks clearly in regard to the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation,” Vought repeated.
Sanders then remarked that Vought is unAmerican and therefore should not be confirmed.
“I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about,” he said.
He also released a statement about Vought later in the day, remarking that “condemning an entire group of people because of their faith cannot be part of any public policy.”
Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
He also declared in John 3:18, “He that believeth on Him (the Son of God) is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
Does Bernie Sanders Hate Christian America?
 Published on Jun 9, 2017
David Knight and Owen Shroyer break down a video of Bernie Sanders berating a government servant for holding personal, religious beliefs that happen to be of the Christian faith.
Bernie Sanders: Trojan Horse For Radical Islam 
 Published on Jun 9, 2017
Owen Shroyer and David Knight interview Matt Dubiel about an upcoming pro-Muslim event in Chicago in which Bernie Sanders will be speaking.
Nice guy Bernie Sanders blows his stack on a Christian who believes Jesus is the only way. 


 Confirmed: Comey Committed Perjury to Congress
 NYT debunked: Trump didn't directly order end of Flynn investigation
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Despite admitting President Trump “simply hoped” the FBI would drop its probe into former national security advisor Michael Flynn, former FBI Director James Comey said he interpreted this as a direct order, which contradicts his sworn Senate testimony on May 3.
Comey now confirms Trump simply hoped the investigation into Flynn would end during their Feb. meeting in the White House, which Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) pointed out was a “wish” rather than an actual directive from the president:

But Comey claims he interpreted Trump’s wish as a direct order, which contradicts his sworn Senate testimony on May 3 in which he said from his experience, the Trump administration did not try to stop the investigation.
The former FBI director even told Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) it would “be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that – without an appropriate purpose.”
“But I’m talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It’s not happened in my experience,” he said.
Here’s that exchange from May 3:
Comey’s statement to Rubio also contradicts his February memo that the mainstream media claimed was a “smoking gun” against Trump, particularly the New York Times article from May 16 which sourced Comey’s memo to claim Trump asked him to shut down the probe.
MORE Videos: Resistance News

 Bombshell: Comey Admits Leaking Memos to Press

Former FBI director admitted to giving memos to friend to leak to the press following President Trump's tweets



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Former FBI Director James Comey admitted Thursday to orchestrating leaks to the press in hopes of prompting the appointment of a special prosecutor in the FBI’s Russia probe.
The fired FBI director had kept written memos of his meetings with President Trump.
In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey admitted to giving his memos to his Columbia law professor “good friend” Daniel C. Richman to leak to the press following Trump’s tweets insinuating he had recorded his conversations with Comey.

Under oath, Comey told Sen. Susan Collins:
“The president tweeted on Friday after I got fired that I better hope there’s not tapes.
I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night cause it didn’t dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our conversation, and my judgement was I needed to get that out into the public square and so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter, didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.
The Twitter-sphere immediately cried foul after the former FBI head admitted to leaking his own memos, with some wondering whether he’d committed a criminal offense and others speculating he could have also leaked confidential info.

The president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., commented the FBI director was more than willing to leak damaging info against his father, but nothing that exonerates him, as also highlighted during the hearing by Sen. Marco Rubio.

In subsequent testimony to Sen. Roy Blunt, Comey claimed he believed it OK to have his memos leaked as they were his personal “recollections” as a “private citizen.”
Here’s a transcript of their exchange, via Politico:
BLUNT: You said something earlier and I don’t want to fail to follow up on, you said after dismissed, you gave information to a friend so that friend could get that information into the public media.
COMEY: Correct.
BLUNT: What kind of information was that? What kind of information did you give to a friend?
COMEY: That the — the Flynn conversation. The president had asked me to let the Flynn — forgetting my exact own words. But the conversation in the Oval Office.
BLUNT: So you didn’t consider your memo or your sense of that conversation to be a government document. You considered it to be, somehow, your own personal document that you could share to the media as you wanted through a friend?
COMEY: Correct. I understood this to be my recollection recorded of my conversation with the president. As a private citizen, I thought it important to get it out.
BLUNT: Were all your memos that you recorded on classified or other memos that might be yours as a private citizen?
COMEY: I’m not following the question.
BLUNT: You said you used classified —
COMEY: Not the classified documents. Unclassified. I don’t have any of them anymore. I gave them to the special counsel. My view was that the content of those unclassified, memorialization of those conversations was my recollection recorded.
BLUNT: So why didn’t you give those to somebody yourself rather than give them through a third party?
COMEY: Because I was weary the media was camping at the end of my driveway at that point. I was actually going out of town with my wife to hide. I worried it would be feeding seagulls at the beach. If it was I who gave it to the media. I asked my friend, make sure this gets out.
BLUNT: It does seem to me what you do there is create a source close to the former director of the FBI as opposed to taking responsibility yourself for saying, here are the records. Like everybody else, I have other things I’d like to get into but I’m out of time.
The Trump administration has made it known it would aggressively pursue “criminal leaks.”

“The FBI is totally unable to stop the national security ‘leakers’ that have permeated our government for a long time,” the president noted on social media in February, at the time unaware the FBI director was leaking to the press.

Last month, the president tweeted he had specifically asked FBI director Comey to help find leakers.

Update: President Trump’s lawyer Marc Kasowitz issued a response to Comey’s testimony saying the former FBI director shared “unauthorized disclosures” with the press a day BEFORE Trump’s tweet, directly contradicting Comey’s remarks Thursday in which he stated he leaked the memos after the president’s tweet.
From Kasowitz’s statement, via the Los Angeles Times:
The President also never told Mr. Comey, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty” in form or substance. Of course, the Office of the President is entitled to expect loyalty from those who are serving in an administration, and, from before this President took office to this day, it is overwhelmingly clear that there have been and continue to be those in government who are actively attempting to undermine this administration with selective and illegal leaks of classified information and privileged communications. Mr. Comey has now admitted that he is one of these leakers.
Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the President. The leaks of this privileged information began no later than March 2017 when friends of Mr. Comey have stated he disclosed to them the conversations he had with the President during their January 27, 2017 dinner and February 14, 2017 White House meeting. Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he leaked to friends his purported memos of these privileged conversations, one of which he testified was classified. He also testified that immediately after he was terminated he authorized his friends to leak the contents of these memos to the press in order to “prompt the appointment of a special counsel.” Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey’s excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory. We will leave it the appropriate authorities to determine whether this leaks should be investigated along with all those others being investigated.
​In sum, it is now established that the President was not being investigated for colluding with the Russians or attempting to obstruct that investigation. As the Committee pointed out today, these important facts for the country to know are virtually the only facts that have not leaked during the long course of these events.
 James Comey: The Wannabe J. Edgar Hoover 
 Top Ten Facts From Comey's Testimony
  Comey Calls Himself A Coward To Make Trump 
Look Like A Bully
 Comey Admits He Leaked Info Against Trump
 Unbelievable! Comey Admits Lynch Ordered Him To Cover Up Clinton Crimes
  Comey Rationalizes Why He Refused To Inform Public Trump Was Not Under Investigation
 James Comey Details How He Leaked To The NY Times
 James Comey Admits New York Times is Fake News! 
 Published on Jun 8, 2017
At the Comey Hearing, former FBI director admitted that a New York Times story based on an anonymous source was fake news when asked. He was under oath, and if he didn’t answer honestly, he would have risked being charged with perjury. Media analyst Mark Dice has the story.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 President Trump's Lawyer Responds to 
James Comey Testimony
  Video: Comey Self Destructs In Front Of The World
 James Comey Senate Hearing (6.08.17) 
Recap And Reaction 
 Published on Jun 8, 2017
James Comey voluntarily attended a Senate Hearing to discuss his dismissal from Donald Trump’s administration which centers around his ability or lack thereof to properly handle the Russian hacking and election interference investigation. This has been widely anticipated by individuals on both sides of the political aisle and even some political agnostics, whether they be government employees or civilians. During the campaign, many on the left were calling for James Comey to be fired due to the letter he wrote in reference to Hillary Clinton’s corruption 11 days before the election.
A common theme during this Senate hearing was the constant talk about “feelings” and interpretation of things said rather than actual tangible facts. At the start of the hearing, Comey basically says he is confused as to the reason why he got fired. He says Trump told him that he was doing a good job and that everything was going well at the FBI. A lot of positive reaffirmation. Then one day he wakes up and his job is gone and Trump speaks to the media about Comey’s performance in a different way that does not add up. He also said that Trump lied about the FBI’s performance and morale and also his performance as FBI director.
Not a lot was learned during the Senate hearings that people who are plugged into politics did not already know. A few things were confirmed, however. First, Donald Trump was not under investigation by the FBI. The campaign was, and some surrogates may have been, but not Trump himself. Second, the reason why the letter about Hillary came out 11 days before the election is because of Bill Clinton ambushing Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Phoenix Arizona to have a 30 minute closed-door meeting while Hillary was being investigated by both the DOJ and the FBI. Third, Comey says that he kept a written record of all meetings he had with Trump because he didn’t quite feel comfortable around him alone and also with a large number of meetings. Comey revealed that he leaked information about those written records - not necessarily the written records themselves - to the FBI.
A lot was said during the public hearing but much more was probably said afterwards in the closed-door meeting where no media is allowed. As for what is known publicly, this whole ordeal was essentially a nothing burger with a few confirmations that help the right and not the left.
 Comey Serves Senate Intelligence Committee 
Big, Fat Treason Burger



(Friday Church News Notes, June 9, 2017, 2017,, 866-295-4143) - 
At its General Synod in July, the Church of England will consider a proposal for a new baptism service "to celebrate transgender individuals who have transitioned genders" ("Church of England Considers Baptizing People into New Gender,", Jun. 2, 2017). This church, so-called, already has transgender priests. One of these, Rachel Mann, said, "Trans people feel powerfully called to be recognized in their 'chosen' name. An opportunity to be publicly introduced to God is therefore significant." We are not sure what "God" Mann is talking about, but it is not the Creator God who made man male and female. Scripture teaches that the Creator forms each individual in the womb according to a preexisting plan, and being male or female is no accident of nature. True churches don't celebrate moral perversion; they preach the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ whereby sinners are converted from wickedness and given a new mind to love truth and righteousness. The transgender movement of the 21st century is the logical consequence of the feminist unisex movement of the 20th. "Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them" (Psalm 139:16).
 Church Of England Considers Baptizing People 
Into New Gender 
 Streamed live on Jun 3, 2017
The Church of England is considering baptizing transgender people into their new gender.


U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Releases Statement Recognizing ‘LGBTI Pride Month’ 



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

 WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson released a statement on Wednesday recognizing “LGBT Pride Month,” an act that some have noted President Donald Trump has not done, unlike predecessor Barack Obama, who released such a statement each year.

“In recognition of LGBTI Month, the Department of State affirms its solidarity with the human rights defenders and civil society organizations working around the world to uphold the fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons to live with dignity and freedom,” Tillerson said in a national press release.
He decried discrimination against homosexual and transgendered persons and vowed as diplomat to continue to support their rights around the world.
“We also recognize that LGBTI persons continue to face the threat of violence and discrimination. Violence and discrimination targeting any vulnerable group undermines our collective security as well as American values,” Tillerson stated.

“When all persons are protected on the basis of equality and with dignity, global stability is strengthened,” he said. “We will continue to support the human rights of LGBTI persons together with like-minded governments, businesses, and civil society organizations globally.”
As previously reported, Tillerson, a former president of the Boy Scouts of America, was stated to be instrumental in the organization’s decision to allow openly homosexual scouts and leaders.
“I can’t get into the intimacy of these conversations, but he agonized over this. He prayed on it, and ultimately he came to the conclusion the only thing that can guide him here is what’s best for the young boys,” John Hammer of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told the Dallas News in 2014. “I think he became a key leader in helping the group come to a consensus.”

The Baptist Press also reported in 2013 that Tillerson, a Congregationalist, met with the Southern Baptist Convention’s Frank Page, and explained why he believed the Boy Scout’s policy on open homosexuals should be overturned.
“There are changing cultural winds on the issue of homosexuality, Tillerson said,” the outlet reported. “Local scouting organizations would retain control over their local leadership, he said, and national gatherings of scouts would accommodate troops who don’t have gay leaders.”
Some had consequently expressed concern about Trump’s selection of Tillerson as secretary of state, while others contended that homosexuality wouldn’t have anything to do with his job as diplomat.
“Trump calls Rex a ‘world class player and dealmaker,’ but if these are the kinds of deals Tillerson makes … risking the well-being of young boys under his charge in an attempt to placate radical homosexual activists—then who knows what sort of ‘diplomacy’ he would champion at DOS?” asked Tony Perkins of Family Research Council in December.
Trump’s daughter Ivanka likewise issued a statement recognizing Pride Month, posting two remarks to Twitter on June 1.
“[W]ishing everyone a joyful #Pride2017. This month we celebrate and honor the #LGBTQ community,” she wrote, as well as, “I am proud to support my LGBTQ friends and the LGBTQ Americans who have made immense contributions to our society and economy.”
As previously reported, Ivanka Trump also met with Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards in January as part of her listening tour.
While President Trump did not issue any statements in recognition of Pride Month, he has made several remarks over the past year about homosexuals, and sold “LGBT for Trump” t-shirts and pins during his presidential campaign.
Proverbs 14:34 reads, “Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.”
(Friday Church News Notes, June 16, 2017, 2017,, 866-295-4143) - U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson issued a statement on June 7 promoting homosexual rights worldwide. "In recognition of LGBTI Month, the Department of State affirms its solidarity with the human rights defenders and civil society organizations working around the world to uphold the fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons to live with dignity and freedom." LGBTI stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex. The very concept of LGBTI is brazen rebellion against the holy Creator, who made man male and female and forbade man to have sexual relationships outside of holy matrimony, which the Bible defines as a marriage of one man and one woman. The pushing of homosexual rights by the United States government has already resulted in oppression of Bible-believing Christians, and it will escalate as the power of government is brought to bear against those who refuse to bow to its immoral stance. President Donald Trump has done nothing to stop this trend. The only thing that will hinder this apostasy is effectual intercession by individuals and churches that are on "praying ground." (For more on this see "What Rights Others Lose When Homosexuals Gain Their Rights," "Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision" (Psalm 2:1-4).


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
DOVER, Del. — Lawmakers in Delaware have passed a bill that would ensure that abortion remains legal in the state should the U.S. Supreme Court ever overturn Roe v. Wade.
The House passed Senate Bill 5 on Tuesday, which amended current law that made it illegal for abortions to be performed except in the cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother. The law had been considered unenforceable following the 1973 ruling of Roe v. Wade.
“This Act modernizes Delaware’s laws on abortion to be consistent with the scope of the right protected by the United States Constitution and the practice in Delaware for the past 43 years,” a synopsis of the bill explains. “In doing so, this Act permits the termination of a pregnancy prior to viability, to protect the life or health of the mother, or in the event of serious fetal anomaly.”
The measure had been hotly debated in the legislature, with some lawmakers asserting that they support a mother’s “right to choose” despite their feelings on the issue, and others stating that abortion is murder and therefore is not a lawful choice.

“This legislation ensures that physicians have the ability to provide the care that’s compassionate [and] medically appropriate under the circumstance,” remarked Rep. Deb Heffernan, D-Bellefonte.
“The fact of the matter is that this bill represents a license to murder. Period. No questions about it,” said Rep. Joe Miro, R-Pike Creek Valley.
Pro-life groups also rallied against the legislation, including the Delaware Family Policy Council, which had invited abortion survivor Melissa Ohden to speak.

Ohden’s teenage mother had obtained a saline abortion as a way to undo her unplanned pregnancy. An assistant to the abortionist heard Ohden crying in the medical waste container where she had been discarded following the procedure.
“What I know is that when I was born alive—certainly it was very shocking, right? This is not supposed to happen. Demands were made to leave me to die in that hospital room,” Ohden shared at the rally. “No one’s life should hang in that balance.”
“You would never know by looking at me that I should’ve been poisoned to death in the womb, but when I first survived, the doctors didn’t think I would live for very long—yet I’m standing here today perfectly healthy,” she declared.
Senate Bill 5 now heads to the desk of Gov. John Carney, who is expected to sign the legislation.
“We will exert the same pressure upon Governor Carney, a Catholic, to uphold the sanctity of life for those innocent unborn children whose lives depend upon his vetoing this radical bill,” Delaware Right to Life spokeswoman Moira Sheridan told Reuters.
As previously reported, the 1973 ruling of Roe v. Wade centered on a Texas woman named Norma McCorvey who sought an abortion over an alleged rape. McCorvey later admitted that she had lied, writing in her book “I Am Roe” that she made up the rape story at the advice of her feminist attorneys to make her case more convincing.
She also never obtained an abortion, but placed her child up for adoption and went on to become a vocal pro-life advocate, even going to court in an effort to overturn the ruling.
“My decisions were wrong and I am fighting with every breath to change what has occurred,” McCorvey said in 2008.
She died in February at an assisted living facility.