Blurred Lines

Does anyone else have problems distinguishing what politicians really believe, disbelieve, support or stand against? Legislation, social concerns, and issues, criminal justice, Constitutional matters, foreign policy, which laws we should enforce, which we should not, etc: all very important areas in which elected officials make very important determinations every day. In each, those decisions are more often than not critical decisions.

Many of those politicians prefer to keep their positions quiet — until for political purposes, their specific issue revelations are absolutely required. Why the secrecy? It feeds the narrative in Washington politics: “Blurred Lines:” keep quiet until you absolutely must weigh-in because usually, those revelations turn half of the voting populace against them. Remaining quiet as long as possible keeps voters guessing!

Great way to run a country, isn’t it?

Honestly, it’s a SAD way to run a home, a business, a state, and certainly the U.S. government. We can NEVER trust what we see and hear our leaders tell us. Bill and Hillary Clinton when serving two terms in the White House were against same-sex marriage. But they saw the light, didn’t they? Barack and Michelle Obama were against same-sex marriage. They too saw the light — the same light as the Clintons.

Federal laws passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and signed into law by the President banned possession and use of marijuana. Barack Obama told his Justice Department head — Attorney General Eric Holder — to NOT prosecute marijuana offenders. Further, the U.S. has pretty specific laws against illegal immigration. Yet dozens and dozens of members of Congress, the entire Democrat Party including members and leadership, and pretty much everyone in the U.S. media want open borders with virtually unlimited illegal immigration. But that’s the way it goes: “Blurred Lines.”

Yep, “Blurred Lines.” That’s a famous song sung by Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams. I love the sound — love the beat. But even that song is controversial to many. It actually made it to #1 on the Billboard Music charts long before it was understood that its veiled message was about rape and the brutalization of women:

If you can’t hear, what I’m tryna say
If you can’t read, from the same page
Maybe I’m going deaf
Maybe I’m going blind
Maybe I’m out of my mind

OK, now he was close
Tried to domesticate you
But you’re an animal
Baby, it’s in your nature
Just let me liberate you
You don’t need no papers
That man is not your maker
And that’s why I’m gon’ take you

It’s a really catchy song. But unless you isolate the words and think things through, it would sound simply like another catchy 21st-century pop song.

That’s kinda what’s happening to Americans today. All those veiled messages, like the ones hidden in “Blurred Lines,” are finding their way into every critical part of the American infrastructure: government, social media, media, the Church, and especially into our schools. We’ve already talked about government. Let’s take a peek at those other categories.

Social Media

Facebook and Twitter both took the entire world by storm. And they’re not alone. There are a plethora of social media sources for all to use. There are plentiful statistics one can find that reveal just how dependent are people in the world — especially in the U.S. — on Social media. I’ve got to be honest: I spend too much time surfing Twitter and Facebook myself.

Isn’t it odd that we all without thinking let the posts we read impact the way we think? Certainly, there are many goods that result from social media. But there are probably more bad than good. But that’s a conversation for a different day. Today we are discussing how everyday things that we use and depend on impact the way we think and the decisions we make.

How many times have you read a long post from a legitimate “source” that you simply believe and accept as factual and real without thinking about its source or any real reasoning? We do that all the time! Those situations impact even the hard and set-in-stone standards in our lives. Why? Because we allow them to.

Think of the current ills being exposed almost daily of Facebook especially, and how they apparently have policies that directly impact First Amendment rights that give everyone the right to say and/or write anything they choose to express their thoughts and opinions for anyone and everyone to see. Remember: Facebook is a media giant whose top brass are petrified that the federal government is going to step in and restrict some of the things they allow AND disallow on their platform. Yet we hear almost daily that Facebook does that EXACT thing themselves by editing what people CAN and CANNOT post on THEIR pages.

“Blurred Lines!”

The Church

Don’t misunderstand me: “The Church” is not Baptist, Catholic, Episcopalian, Methodist, or Presbyterian. “The Church” we are referring to is all the people together who from different denominations combined comprise the total group of Christians — or “The Church.”

Christians take as their roadmap The Holy Bible. They believe it is God’s word and that it gives all people the guidelines and instructions of how to best live for Christ.

Yes, there are various interpretations of different parts of The Holy Bible, but there is too an abundance of absolutes: “Thou Shalt Not Kill, Thou Shalt Not Steal…….” Those are a couple of the Ten Commandments. There too are other instructions for Christians throughout the 66 Books contained in it. And some are “interpretive” while others are “literal.” Let’s look at a topic that most Christians have for centuries felt is an absolute that some Christians have today decided is NOT absolute but is “interpretive.”

Homosexuality is one of the most controversial topics today that even perplexes many Christians. It isn’t specifically referenced in the Ten Commandments, but it is many times elsewhere: Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, I Corinthians 6:9-11, I Timothy 1:9-10. (We won’t take the time to detail each, but I suggest you look those up yourself)

In those specific scriptures, homosexuality is deemed to be wrong. I know that statement is controversial and I’ve heard all the hundreds of explanations of those who believe homosexuality is OK. We’re not today going to argue that point. What we ARE pointing out is the “Blurred Lines” that are exposed in this controversy. Are you a practicing Christian? Do you believe The Holy Bible? Do you believe it is God’s Word?

If your answer to those is “Yes,” then for you to OK homosexuality requires you to turn away from your belief in The Holy Bible and that it IS God’s Word. How do we reconcile that?

Before I answer that question, let me say this: I have homosexuality in my personal family — for 40+ years. My family is comprised entirely of people who were raised in the church, believe The Holy Bible and that it is God’s Word, but still, are involved in homosexuality. Two obvious questions pop-up immediately: 1) How do THEY reconcile their beliefs with the scriptures, and 2) How do I reconcile and accept their homosexuality?

The answer is also two-fold: 1) the scriptures tell us that we are ALL to “Work out our salvation in fear and trembling.” They’re handling it however they choose is between them and God. 2) I don’t have to reconcile it because it’s none of my business! THEY answer to God for their choices and not to me. I answer to God for my choices and not anyone else.

But here’s where the lines get blurred: we are taught today by many sources that anyone that does NOT believe in homosexuality and all that goes along with it, is homophobic, and that homophobia is evil. In other words, a segment of society considers their opinion on homosexuality to be superior to someone else’s opinion. Yet many of those people will loudly proclaim their belief in The Holy Bible.

“Blurred Lines!”

(There are a number of similar Biblical topics that we could touch on here to further examine this process, but for the sake of time we will not. Feel free to express your thoughts on the front page of this website or drop me an email at and ask questions, and express your opinions. If we receive enough, we’ll do another story for this and let YOU write it with your comments!)


I must be honest: I am horrified at what I see played out every day in our schools. Principles that once were pillars of living in the U.S. have been obliterated by educators, only to be replaced by other “principles” presented by teachers and professors as “Gospel.”

  • Excellence in achievement is now painted to be unfair and too restrictive. It’s been replaced with “participation trophies.”
  • American government — especially Capitalism — is no longer the pillar of financial freedom and personal accomplishment students should push to achieve. Capitalism is now an evil threat to American democracy and should be replaced ASAP by Socialism. Those same teachers that damn Capitalism and give Socialism heavenly diety fail to teach the structure of Socialism to our students. They certainly never mentioned in class that there is not ONE Socialist country on Earth today or even in the history of the World that has succeeded in any way. Professors certainly do not explain any socialist failures in those countries were and are direct results of the structure of Socialism itself. The fundamental principle of Socialism is that all people are treated equally in every way. BUT….the government is given autonomy over every part of the citizens’ lives to determine what is right and what is wrong regarding use of the elements of life: education, healthcare, finance, retirement, etc. What Big Brother says always goes. But in every case, Big Brother takes too good care for himself and lets the citizenry suffer. That’s why Socialism fails.

“Blurred Lines”

The Media

Last, but not least, is today’s Media. Where do we start? Let’s start with the role that Media played in a country that fawned over its government, its healthcare, and its Media….and was destroyed: Germany.

Propaganda within Nazi Germany was taken to a new and frequently extreme level. Hitler was very aware of the value of good propaganda and he appointed Joseph Goebbels as head of propaganda.

Propaganda is the art of persuasion – persuading others that your ‘side of the story’ is correct. Propaganda might take the form of persuading others that your military might is too great to be challenged; that your political might within a nation is too great or popular to challenge, etc. In Nazi Germany, Dr. Joseph Goebbels was in charge of propaganda. Goebbel’s official title was Minister of Propaganda and National Enlightenment.

To ensure that everybody thought in the correct manner, Goebbels set up the Reich Chamber of Commerce in 1933. This organization dealt with literature, art, music, radio, film, newspapers, etc. To produce anything that was in these groups, you had to be a member of the Reich Chamber. The Nazi Party decided if you had the right credentials to be a member. Any person who was not admitted was not allowed to have any work published or performed. Disobedience brought with it severe punishments. As a result of this policy, Nazi Germany introduced a system of censorship. You could only read, see and hear what the Nazis wanted you to read, see and hear. In this way, if you believed what you were told, the Nazi leaders logically assumed that opposition to their rule would be very small and practiced only by those on the very extreme who would be easy to catch.

Is the U.S. Media directed by the U.S. Government as was the German Media under Hitler?

Certainly not. They disdain America’s current leader. They fawned over Barack Obama. So what’s wrong today? Where are the lines Blurred?

Today’s Media has become in the U.S. what Hitler and Goebbels were in WWII Germany. The U.S. Media today pick WHAT the U.S. should see and hear and what they should not. THEY determine what is good and what is bad. Take news from that liberal bastion of Americanism out West: San Francisco.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed said Wednesday she supports a decision by two judges allowing police to search freelance journalist Bryan Carmody’s home and office, as the first city official spoke out against the raid.
The raid last Friday was part of a criminal investigation into what the San Francisco Police Department says was the illegal release of its report about the Feb. 22 death of Public Defender Jeff Adachi. Carmody said a confidential source gave him the police report, which he then sold to several news outlets.
“Our role is to follow the law, and the judges ultimately make the decisions,” Breed said. “They made the decision. And so at this point, you know, I support their decision.”
But Supervisor Hillary Ronen disagreed: “The police have gone about this completely wrong.”
“I don’t love that (Carmody) took this document that should never have been released in the first place and sold it off to news outlets as a salacious story to hurt Jeff’s legacy and his family,” Ronen said. “But that doesn’t mean that we undermine one of the most important hallmarks of our democracy because we don’t like what this individual is doing.”

Did the New York Times or Washington Post put this story on the front page? Nope. You’d think that such an intrusion of the First Amendment rights would be blasted everywhere. But not regarding California’s flagship Sanctuary City regarding a member of its press. The “State” felt it was best to just let sleeping dogs lie. The Media chose who was right and that in this case freedom of the press was no good.

Then there was this:

Mr. Trump made his animus toward the news media clear during the presidential campaign, often expressing his disgust with coverage through Twitter or in diatribes at rallies. So if his campaign is any guide, Mr. Trump seems likely to enthusiastically embrace the aggressive crackdown on journalists and whistle-blowers that is an important yet little understood component of Mr. Obama’s presidential legacy.
Criticism of Mr. Obama’s stance on press freedom, government transparency and secrecy is hotly disputed by the White House, but many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.
Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.

This was an editorial in the New York Times. It is noteworthy and topical here today because it is an editorial and NOT a news story. This paper and almost every other paper in large American cities felt that Barack Obama could do no wrong. But, in fact, just below this sentence we have listed a link to a story that lists the 11 times President Obama unilaterally attacked the First Amendment while the American press looked away:

“Blurred Lines!”


Here’s the danger that we are today living in: this blurring of lines across our society has become so rampant, so egregious, but so “normal” that Americans just automatically look the other way. Every time it happens it’s just no big deal. THAT’S HOW HITLER ROCKED GERMANS TO SLEEP, TOOK OVER THEIR MEDIA, THEIR MILITARY, THEIR CHURCHES, AND SYSTEMATICALLY RAN ROUGH-SHOD THROUGH EUROPE SLAUGHTERING PEOPLE LEFT AND RIGHT! Even the German people did not really think there was a systematic killing of people that were “different” from most Germans: the Jews that lived in Germany and elsewhere. And, certainly, the German press never mentioned it at all.

In every area of American life, the power junkies are routinely bending the truth to fit their specific narratives. But let’s be real: their doing so is NOT unique; it is NOT without precedent, and it is NOT without the full knowledge of the power junkies in charge.

But now it MUST be put directly in the faces of the American people. And that must happen quickly. One more national election in which those who are part of whatever this is find themselves stacking the deck of government with those who will further blur the lines between good and evil, right and wrong, justice and injustice find themselves in power. Too many are there now. Americans can afford no more.



Why Single-Parent Homes?

We have been inundated for decades about single-family homes, absent father, welfare, and about all those who fall into these categories. And, quite honestly, most of those conversations include characterizations about welfare recipients that are not very flattering. Stories about minority Americans filling a grocery basket with ribeye steaks, wine, beer, and high dollar snacks then paying for them with food stamps and driving away in a luxury car. I’m not certain about the truth of such stories but I AM certain about negative characterizations of single moms and others who receive government assistance.

Make no mistake: there are those who take advantage of the welfare system. Abuse occurs in every government program in which someone receives benefits there certainly is abuse here. But the fundamental premise of this system is to provide to those who find themselves in dire situations in which suffering without help is real assistance to provide for needs while that person or persons get through their crisis. That’s what Americans do: help each other.

What is also true is that single-parent homes in the U.S. are rapidly climbing in numbers. And with that comes much talk, finger-pointing, and blame.

Before we launch into our investigation of this system, let me make one statement: there are far more Caucasian people that are recipients of welfare and other government assistance than there are African-Americans. Needing and receiving government assistance is NOT color specific: it impacts all races, ethnicities, religions, and those from multiple places of origin. What IS common among them is “need.” That need is why welfare was established and why it has been updated and even expanded over the last decades. Does it need changes? Is there abuse? These are things that need to examined and constantly monitored.

Let’s look at the big picture of this process, get some facts, and objectively begin to understand what those who find themselves receiving government assistance are going through. There’s not wrong with facts to be able to make reasoning decisions!

Truths of the Story

CNN’s Don Lemon says more than 72% of African-American births are out of wedlock. Here’s a look at the numbers Lemon’s uses to support that statement:

Race/Ethnic Group                         Percentage Single-parent

Non-Hispanic Whites                                            25%

Hispanics                                                                   42%

American Indian/Alaskans                                    53%

African-Americans                                                   67%

There has been no significant increase in the number of married-couple families with children in the U.S. since 1965. By contrast, the number of single-parent families with children has skyrocketed by nearly 10 million, rising from 3.3 million in 1965 to 13.2 million in 2012. Since single-parent families are roughly four times more likely to lack self-sufficiency (and be officially poor), this unraveling of family structure has exerted a powerful downward pull against self-sufficiency and substantially boosted the official child poverty rate. When the War on Poverty began, 36 percent of poor families with children were headed by single parents. Today, the figure is 68 percent.

Since the inception of the War on Poverty in 1964, the welfare state has promoted single parenthood in two ways. First, means-tested welfare programs financially enable single parenthood. It is difficult for single mothers with a high school degree or less to support children without the aid of another parent. Means-tested welfare programs substantially reduce this difficulty by providing extensive support to single parents. Welfare thereby reduces the financial need for marriage. Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, less-educated mothers have increasingly become married to the welfare state and to the U.S. taxpayer rather than to the fathers of their children. As means-tested benefits expanded, welfare began to serve as a substitute for a husband in the home, and low-income marriage began to disappear. As husbands left the home, the need for more welfare to support single mothers increased. The War on Poverty created a destructive feedback loop: Welfare promoted the decline of marriage, which generated a need for more welfare.

A second major problem is that the means-tested welfare system actively penalizes low-income parents who do marry. All means-tested welfare programs are designed so that a family’s benefits are reduced as earnings rise. In practice, this means that, if a low-income single mother marries an employed father, her welfare benefits will generally be substantially reduced. The mother can maximize welfare by remaining unmarried and keeping the father’s income “off the books.” For example, a single mother with two children who earns $15,000 per year would generally receive around $5,200 per year of food stamp benefits. However, if she marries a father with the same earnings level, her food stamps would be cut to zero. A single mother receiving benefits from Section 8 or public housing would receive a subsidy worth on average around $11,000 per year if she was not employed, but if she marries a man earning $20,000 per year, these benefits would be cut nearly in half. Both food stamps and housing programs provide very real financial incentives for couples to remain unmarried.

There are so many stories about the Welfare System: who benefits from its use, the dangers, the abuses, and the dollars involved. We thought it best to go back and look at its history in the modern world. Bill Clinton took the bull by the horns in his second term and Congress on his watch made the last significant changes in the system. Let’s take a look back so we can (with an educated and factual perspective) know exactly where the U.S. Welfare System is today in the U.S.

Welfare in 21st Century America

April McCray thought she had finally caught a break in late 2005. That’s when the state of Louisiana granted cash assistance to the single mother through the Temporary Assistance of Needy Families (TANF) program. (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) It was her first experience with America’s welfare program.

McCray, who had been in and out of work, struggled to make ends meet. This, she hoped, would at least help soften the burden.

But a month later, the state stripped her of the benefits without a clear explanation, she said. Since then, she says Louisiana, which controls state and federally allocated TANF dollars, has denied her requests for assistance several times.

“It gets depressing,” said McCray, who in 2019, was still struggling. With three kids and rarely more than a part-time job, she says she needs help she can’t seem to get from a welfare system that was overhauled 20 years ago.

Overhauling welfare was a hallmark of then-President Bill Clinton’s time in office. When he signed welfare reform into law on Aug. 22, 1996, he declared at a ceremony in the White House’s Rose Garden that it would “end welfare as we know it.”

Twenty years later, few would dispute the accuracy of that prediction. Welfare is, and has been, a vastly different system than it was prior to the law, which gave states wide control over their own welfare programs by allocating to them block grants.

So, two decades-plus later, are those changes working? It depends whom you ask.

TANF’s legacy has divided policy experts, with supporters saying it put an emphasis on work and increased employment among single mothers in the process while also reducing poverty overall. The program’s critics say it tore a hole in the safety net for people who remained in poverty and couldn’t find steady work, like McCray.

“(TANF) did shift the emphasis toward work. I think that is something where there has been a lot of agreement,” said Heather Hahn, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute. “… As far as whether people are better off, I do think they are, in some cases, worse off.”

What America’s welfare system used to be

Welfare didn’t exist in America before the Great Depression and Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal. It officially came into being as a rule under the Social Security Act in 1935, offering aid to families with dependent children (AFDC).

In establishing the program, the federal government, for the first time, took responsibility for helping children with a parent who was dead, gone or otherwise incapacitated. Previously, those children most likely would have been institutionalized.

Over several decades, AFDC went through several changes and revisions, perhaps most notably in 1961 when it expanded its definition of a “deprived child” to include one who had an unemployed parent. And, though the benefits were small, many families did end up dependent — and the criticism poured in.

The program was blamed for encouraging unwed mothers, and for discouraging work. It included phaseout rates, meaning that dollars earned meant less dollars in assistance.

Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan chipped away at changes, instituting job training and work requirements for AFDC participants. But by the 1990s, calls were clearly pouring in for change.

Enter Bill Clinton, who championed the most radical overhaul of America’s welfare system to date. Clinton, amid a re-election campaign, made reforming the program part of his bid to win back the White House.

When TANF became a law, a lot changed

The newly minted Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) put an emphasis on getting people out of poverty and to work.

Under TANF, recipients in most cases are required to participate in work activities for 30 hours a week. Combined with expansions to the Earned Income Tax Credit, a tax credit for people with low- to-moderate-income jobs, TANF succeeded in getting people to work, especially during Clinton’s presidency.

From 1996 to 2000, employment rates among never-married mothers shot from 63% to 76%, according to the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). Additionally, both poverty rates among families with single mothers and overall poverty rates dropped.

“The welfare reform legislation moved us in the right direction by being much more aggressive about employment for the single mother population,” said Robert Doar, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who was formerly the commissioner of welfare in New York City.

Employment and poverty rates have leveled off in the long term, which has resulted in disagreement among policy experts about just how effective TANF has been in increasing employment, though most agree that it at least helped move the needle.

Where the law has failed, experts say, is by leaving behind those at the very bottom — the group of people in deep poverty who typically haven’t been able to find work, like McCray.

Studies have found that since TANF was instituted, deep or extreme poverty has increased. A 2011 study by the University of Michigan’s National Poverty Center found that families living on less than $2 per person a day more than doubled from 1996 to 2011.

Block grants: The good and the bad

Hahn of the Urban Institute and Liz Schott of the CBPP each attribute the rise in deep poverty largely to TANF. They pointed to three main flaws with the legislation: the block grants don’t adjust for inflation; states have often spent large portions of their TANF dollars on things other than basic assistance; and states sometimes have incentives to cut needy recipients loose from the program.

Since TANF became law, states have received fixed block grants from the federal government. When lawmakers were constructing TANF, Democrats in Congress wanted to include an inflation adjustment for the grants, said Ron Haskins, a Brookings Institution senior fellow who helped draft welfare reform as a staff member on the House Committee on Ways and Means.

An inflation adjustment would have enabled the amount of the block grants to increase along with inflation. But the law passed through a Republican-held Congress without one.

“Remember, in 1996 we were in midst of a huge budget fight, and Republicans were trying to balance the budget and savings were a huge deal,” said Haskins, who considers the reform mostly a success.

Not adjusting for inflation has caused the block grants to erode by about a third since 1996, according to the CBPP. That has essentially reduced the benefits states can give out, as well as the number of families that receive benefits, even as the number of needy families hasn’t been going down.

In addition, states have great flexibility in how they can spend their block grants. The money spent must fit into one of TANF’s four main purposes: assisting needy families; promoting work and marriage; reducing out-of-wedlock pregnancy; and increasing two-parent families.

States have wide discretion in determining what falls under those broad purposes, and that has led to significant spending on things other than core welfare services.

That’s a problem, Hahn said, because providing families with cash or helping parents find jobs are the two most effective ways to lift families out of poverty, since both provide them with incomes. In the most recent data available, 26% of national TANF spending went toward cash welfare, while only 8% went to work programs, according to the CBPP.

“It doesn’t always have to be about cash, but it should be about getting people to work,” Schott said.


Donald Trump didn’t often discuss welfare reform or TANF during his presidential campaign or so far in his presidency. But in his 2011 book, Time to Get Tough, Trump praised welfare reform for emphasizing work and said other welfare programs should follow the same approach.

While discussing welfare in an interview with Fox’s Sean Hannity, though, Trump said people need even more of an incentive to work — which he would seek to create.

“Right now, they have a disincentive,” he said in the interview. “They have an incentive not to work.”

The Trump Administration has paid an enormous amount of time in examination of the U.S. social safety environment. They have made remarkable changes in areas in which Americans have suffered and seemingly been ignored. It is likely that between today and the day of the 2020 election we will see dramatic and positive moves made by this Administration to improve America’s welfare system.

One thing we know for certain: Mr. Trump cares tremendously for Americans. That’s NOT just true about today. His life before politics was full of stories in which he helped numerous Americans who faced problems of many kinds that were no fault of their own. I imagine he’s still the same man and feels the same about his fellow Americans.


The Evil Among Us

Evil is everywhere, in everything, and spreading.

Let’s be clear: in this conversation, we are NOT speaking of “Evil” in the “axe murderer” connotation. We are speaking of evil that not only is a principle in lawbreaking but the evil that people make part of their minds and hearts which result in their acting-out on that evil — actually committing evil acts.

Example: in the Mueller Report, it is stated that President Trump reportedly called his White House Attorney Don McGhan and told him to call then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and tell Sessions that Mueller has serious conflicts of interest. Because those conflicts disqualified Mueller to serve as Special Counsel in the Russian Collusion investigation, Sessions should fire Mueller. Evil was NOT in that phone call. The evil was in the REPORTING of details of that phone call. Let me explain:

The President was angry because of the mistreatment he was receiving in what has proven to be a devious investigation based on totally false information disguised as “factual evidence.” (But that’s another story) In anger, he did NOT tell McGhan his attorney to fire Mueller as Democrats and the Leftist Media stated over and over, he told McGhan to tell Sessions to do so. The President followed protocol: Sessions as the Attorney General was who should take such action if necessary. But MUELLER WAS NEVER FIRED! And even if he had been fired by the President or his Attorney General, President Trump has the Constitutional power to do just that.

So where’s the evil? That evil lies specifically in the hearts of those Democrats and members of the Media who hold such hatred for Mr. Trump they would parse their reporting to make the President appear evil and that he obstructed justice in that incident. No crime was committed; there was no evil act on the part of the President. Yet many in America believe there was simply because of lies given in the Media. That’s evil.

By the way: there is NO federal statute that states if someone in anger tells another to tell someone else to fire someone, in doing that alone is NOT obstruction of justice.

Evil Itself

Evil is not just present in mass shootings, racial crimes, sexual assaults, barbarism, or financial crimes. Evil lives among all of us. Every human being deals with evil, often without recognizing it or understanding it. But it’s there. For Christians, evil’s product is sin. What is sin? There are 10 basic “Thou Shalt/Thou Shalt Not” sins in the Bible: the Ten Commandments. But the evil in sin far surpasses those ten. The determination of the ten from the Bible is pretty easy. Figuring out all the others can be a job. But make no mistake: by the time little boys learn what little girls are, they know the difference between right and wrong. The same holds true for those little girls.

For this conversation, let’s exclude the discussion of the really evil things most can agree are sins: murder, rape, theft, etc. Most will accept those as sin. Let’s talk about those other evil acts, like “little white lies.” You know: those whispers when the phone rings and your kid answers it and you whisper, “tell them I’m not here” because you don’t want to talk to whoever called. Maybe stealing a candy bar from a convenience store, or faking a business deduction on your tax return to get that extra couple of hundred dollars in your refund. The problem is, telling those “little white lies” is lying. Lies are a product of evil, and therefore sin.

In America today because of the internet and satellite television, Americans are inundated with lies all day every day. We hear lies from politicians. We see lies in television ads. “Lose 15 pounds in 5 days, guaranteed,” and “Buy this watch and get the look of a Rolex, not for $25,000, but for only $200!” We hear so many lies we have become de-sensitized to lies of all kinds — except to those with which we object. And that is where the evil lies.

We are accustomed to hearing, repeating, or originating lies that fit our narrative, no matter the subject. And for those subjects that do not directly impact us or our narrative, we simply ignore them. That dismissing of those lies, in essence, legitimizes the lies themselves, but more importantly legitimizes our doing so again and again which numbs us to lying and says “Lying is not evil — especially when it fits MY narrative or that of those who I determine to be allowed to lie.” Examples?

Barack Obama when “selling” Obamacare: “If you like your doctor, under this plan you can keep your doctor.” “If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan.” “Premiums for the average family will decrease by $2500 per year.” “It will not add to the nation’s deficit.”

Congressman Anthony Weiner when confronting with sexting: “This was a hoax. It was committed on me, it was a prank, it was a relatively easy one to do, making fun of my name.”

President Bill Clinton: “I did NOT have sexual relations with that woman.”

Today’s political news is overrun with lies — far too many to chronicle here. But we don’t need to: everyone sees and hears them over and over again. And that’s part of the problem! Lies are so common we have become desensitized to them. They’ve become part of life and are acceptable to most people — just like those “little white lies.” They may be little and seem inconsequential, but all lies are evil and erode at the fabric of truth and the established principles in the U.S. and in our homes.

Although evil has been alive and thriving since recorded history began, we are witnessing a gush of evil in this century and this decade never-before-seen in the U.S. Evil deeds seem to be steadily climbing in number, increasing in their perverseness, and are certainly being reported breathlessly by a press that (for the purposes of advertising dollars) cannot find a single evil act too nasty to blast across the nation. Evil among us is degrading even the most precious and historically sacred pieces of our life. What has caused this to happen and dramatically increase in number and severity?

  • What possesses a young man to viciously open fire on defenseless movie-goers in Aurora, Colorado? Why did James Holmes intentionally create a bloodbath of horror, killing twelve people and injuring scores of others? Would anyone in his right mind do that?
  • What possesses an old football coach at Penn State University to sexually molest grade school boys? Why did Jerry Sandusky recruit fatherless children through a foundation promising to help them and then abuse them?

We are perplexed about motivation. We’d like some kind of explanation. Is it insanity? Demon possession? Drug addiction? Is it brainwashing from watching violent video games or graphic pornography? What’s prompts people to perform such horrendous deeds?

What’s Going On?

Our society is dying. Infected by a plague that is making our once proud and God-fearing nation a soulless pit; the slow decay of our collective sense of evil and good is affecting every one of us. Many speak of how our country is divided between liberals and conservatives. The truth is that this division represents those that are awake and aware of what is occurring and those that for whatever reason have allowed the temptation of the easy path to blind them to the evils of going down that road. Whether an individual is clueless in his defense of evil or simply chooses to remain silent is irrelevant, failure to speak out against it is aiding in its advancement.

There are also those that believe that attaching a physical object to evil is a way to rid the world of it, as if removing a gun from an honest person’s hand will change the heart of those who are intent on committing murder because their heart has been infected by this sickness; this inability to be able to discern right from wrong — not because there is something wrong with an individual who can no longer make this distinction, but because right and wrong have become nothing but concepts with no absolute values assigned to their definitions. Right and wrong have been erased from the consciousness of millions as the very idea of something being right and something being wrong has come to be considered offensive, and an obstacle to the quest for total equality. In short; moral relativity has destroyed us.

In early August of 2013, in Oklahoma, a man was gunned down by three attackers whose only reason for committing such a heinous crime was because they were bored and thought killing a man would be fun. This story was being reported on all local media outlets, and because it was in a rural part of the state it was just assumed that the three teenagers were white kids. Honestly, no one even cares about the race of these kids. It was just a cold and heartless act driven by the fact that society had failed to instill the value of human life in them. These kids are just as much victims as is the man they killed; victims of a race-baiting machine that places no value on human life but rather hustles race issues for money while teaching it is okay to hate a certain kind of person, to blame a certain kind of person for all of your problems. That’s right, these kids were black, and they murdered a white man because they thought it would be fun.

Recently in Georgia, a public school in Newton County allowed one of its students to hang a poster they had made declaring that God is dead. We all know full well that if it was a poster praising Christianity, it would have been banned. When are we going to make the necessary connections and see that the further our nation strays from the God our founders referenced and called on repeatedly in prayer, the darker our days become? How on earth can we value life if we no longer value the reason we are living? This is what happens when the philosophies of Marx and Darwin infect society’s conscious. How could anyone hold any value for life when life itself has no meaning because we are just an accident of evolution needing to be controlled by an all-powerful state for own good? This is the sickness that is consuming our society, and it is being done on purpose by those craving power and control.

Oh, don’t forget about Washington D.C. If we tried to list all the evil committed in U.S. politics daily and who the perpetrators are, we’d never stop writing. It happens so frequently that all those who are part of the political process in Washington have become so numb to it those acts are just accepted as a regular part of operating the political process.

Remember all the prayers, all the references to God in documents, “In God We Trust” on all our currency, the Ten Commandments blazoned across walls in halls of government, and “One Nation Under God…?”

Remember the swearing-in of witnesses who are testifying before trial judges and juries? “I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God?”

Even that phrase is being pushed out of our government.

Congressman Steve Cohen (D-TN), just days ago swore-in several witnesses prior to a U.S. House Subcommittee meeting. He “forgot” to include the last line of the oath that has been used for several hundred years, “So help me God.” Watch and listen as our good friend Congressman Mike Johnson (R-LA) questions Cohen and suggested repeating the swearing-in but using “So help me God” in doing so. Notice that Cohen and Jerald Nadler (D-NY) poo-pah Johnson’s idea. I wonder why?

In truth I have no authority to claim that Cohen and/or Nadler are evil. But what CAN be said is it becomes more and more obvious that evil is stealthily finding its way into every crevice of the government process in Washington D.C. And it finds a home more and more often in the U.S. Congress. These are the people we elect, empower, and pay dearly to operate “Government OF the People, FOR the People, and BY the People.” If members of Congress were committed to adherence to their oaths of office and not so committed to propping up their party’s political narrative at all costs, they would be leading in honesty rather than in an evil atmosphere driven soley by what’s best for US and not THEM.

Do you know what else is happening and about to get crazier? Our sources have confirmed that  a few current and many former government officials are about to receive subpoenas and even some arrested through indictments already issued. Those should occur before June 15, 2019.

But that’s really NOT news. What IS news is what is about to happen RIGHT NOW. Listen closely:

  • We know the Left have gone all-in to get rid of Donald Trump, and nothing else matters;
  • We know that even with the completion of the Mueller Report and that its findings show no direct or even indirect illegalities on the part of the President or members of his campaign staff, those Leftists have amped up THEIR investigation. And in doing so, they’re gasping for air. What is their purpose?

Here’s today’s SUMMARY in answer to that question:

The Left is throwing absolutely as much as they can up in the air. They’re calling in all their cards and obligations from the Media lapdogs to help establish and build the furor in the Media against President Trump. They KNOW that truth and justice for them are both on the horizon. They know they will NO LONGER be able to hide the evil that has permeated their actions in D.C. since the beginning of the 2016 campaign season. That evil includes all types of lies, committing of felonies, violations of classified materials laws, and even possibly treason! In short, they are facing the death of the Democrat Party. And its death is coming at the hands of the confrontation between the forces of good and the forces of evil. And we’re not talking about Superman, Wonder Woman, or the Justice League!

Their rhetoric, as loud and consistent as it has been, will become deafening. It will ALL be aimed at Donald Trump with continuous cries about all those previously claimed illegal acts allegedly committed by the Trump Campaign, but will be joined by new and more outrageous attacks that will become increasingly more vile and more in number.

Why are they going to do all this, especially when no one can even now believe how ridiculous their screams against this president are? One and only one reason: Their only hope is to make so much noise and so many allegations against Donald Trump et al, their screaming will deafen American voters so as for those voters to ignore those scurulous charges against them! And the American Media will come willingly to the fray, joining their now very public partners in Wasington: the Democrat Party.

“Evil will be revealed and Truth will out.”

In fact, they’ve all been given opportunities to come clean, but all have declined. In fact, many believe their own lives and ignore their own evil!

But, “Be sure your sins will find you out.” The bright light of Truth will take care of that for all Americans.

It’s about time somebody kicked Evil’s butt in Washington!




All Alone

Normally we tackle the negativity and ridiculousness of the muck in Washington D.C. in American politics. We do so at the expense of some of the most costic, bombastic, and self-centered Americans in politics who have no real concept of what Nationalism and the Rule of Law really are. The U.S. Constitution? They “say” they love it, but their actions say differently. But today we are taking a different path. We’re not even going to talk about politics. We’re today having a conversation about “real” life.

There’s pretty much no worse feeling than to find oneself totally alone. Whether you’re a soldier who is part of a platoon on a combat mission who finds himself separated from his unit, or a single mother who daily faces the choices of not eating herself just to be able to feed her babies, being alone is usually very frightening.

Those instances in which we find ourselves alone often result in the feeling of loneliness. Loneliness is a complex and usually unpleasant emotional response to isolation. Loneliness typically includes anxious feelings about a lack of connection or communication with others. Loneliness often is heightened by fears of solitude extending into the future.

Research has shown that loneliness is common throughout society, including for people in marriages, relationships, families, veterans, and those with successful careers. It has been a long explored theme in the literature of human beings since classical antiquity. Loneliness has also been described as social pain—a psychological function meant to motivate an individual to seek social connections. Let’s face it: when a person is alone — especially for quite a while and with few or no connections with others — the results are seldom positive and often morph into unpleasant happenings.

Here’s a thought: are those who seem to have everything going their way — a great family, good job, wide circle of wonderful friends — ever susceptible to loneliness?

Gustavo Paez

Gustavo is the pastor of a large and thriving church in Central America. He is an amazing pastor, his congregation is large and growing rapidly every day, and he is a prophet and evangelist in great demand throughout the world — but especially in the United States. As great a minister and pastor as he is, he is a greater husband and father. Yet he too battles loneliness.

I was with him yesterday in the midst of a meeting with hundreds of Americans who were hanging on his every word. He speaks with knowledge of how tough life can and often is, and also how to beat life’s foes while simply being human and fighting for survival each and every day.

Yet late in his message, he stated this: “Sometimes when I speak to thousands of people and see dramatic changes and results in their lives from what I am able to share with them, I find myself — even though they hang on every word and shout and applaud and want to know more and more —  later alone in my hotel room wishing I could just have a hug.”

We see and here story after story about famous folks who end up dying alone, victims of self-inflicted drug overdoses or other suicides. But we’re not speaking today about that type of loneliness. We’re talking about situations in which people get stuck, and those dire circumstances come directly from choices in which they have no or very little responsibility.

Folks Alone

I wrote a column in my college newspaper: the Tech Talk. I think the best one I wrote in my years there was titled “Alone: All, All, Alone.” Why was it “good?” Not because of the writer, believe me! It was so right-on and representative of those situations of being alone that are not the direct results of OUR actions. Maybe they’re the result of some action or inaction of another. In my case, it came as the result of the nasty divorce of my parents and the quick and horrible results for me from that. I’ll give you the “10,000-foot perspective” of it, just to build the basis this specific perspective of loneliness.

I was 16 at the time. We lived in a small town in south Louisiana. My Dad was the pastor of a small church that couldn’t pay him a fulltime salary. So he worked in construction about 45 miles away, commuting daily. Times were tough financially, but — from a kid’s perspective — things were good…until December 22, 1969. Dad left that day.

I had listened over the past months to Mom and Dad argue. I never saw any verbal or physical abuse. I never thought my Dad was involved with another. I thought those arguments came from the fact that Dad was holding down two jobs, driving to one at 5 AM Monday through Friday, getting home at 9 PM daily, and pastoring a church of 50 people at the same time. Certainly, those factors weighed heavily. But for whatever reason or reasons, Mom and I spent Christmas Day in 1969 alone.

Things went downhill from there. Mom had a nervous breakdown; I couldn’t take the stress and left home and moved to a friend’s garage apartment in the town in which I grew up, 45-miles away. I finished my junior year in high school while working parttime at a radio station.

Things changed dramatically that Spring. (That’s another story worthy of not just a TNN column, but a book! We’ll share that in the future) But the next Fall found me as a freshman at Louisiana Tech University, the home of the “Tech Talk.”

In the 20-months between Christmas 1969 and late August 1971, I discovered what REAL, “non-self-inflicted” loneliness was all about. I will say this: God miraculously intervened in my life in the interim. My story would well have ended tragically if He hadn’t. In fact, circumstances were amazing for me, and those circumstances kept me alive and moving forward.

But what those wonderful occurrences could NOT do was change the fact that I had lost my family as a result of decisions made by two others in which I had no input, that changed the course of my lifetime. That’s not even mentioning that the relationships I had with my mother and father were permanently altered. I found myself on a university campus in Ruston, Louisiana having no idea what life ahead could possibly be. I was alone.

Just Getting-By

For most of that almost 2 years, I tried my best to just make it. I was just a kid. I had no idea what life objectives even looked like. Moms and Dads — especially when kids are in high school — usually give kids some life templates from which to choose about this time. I simply struggled to put the pieces of life together that I found each day popping up AS they popped up. Thankfully God put people in my life that were there for me! Things would probably have gone unimaginably wrong without them. Yet that emptiness and hollowness that resulted from my loneliness showed up every day. And I had to deal with it every day.

I guess my youth, already-present entrepreneurial spirit, and the love of an unofficially adopted family factored heavily in keeping me on the road to successful real life, thank God! And things turned out really good. I’ve had 65 pretty good years, have a great immediate family and a wonderful extended family. But in all that, I’ve never been able to totally eliminate thoughts of that dark, hollow, achy, and gut-wrenching loneliness — especially as it hit home for the first time about 8 AM, December 22, 1969.

So what’s it all about?

People are simply not made to be alone — PERIOD. Human beings are social beings. And even though — social experimentation being what it is — people attempt the manufacturing of social scenarios in which Superman doesn’t need Superwoman or Super Kids or Super Friends, or anyone at all; that “all I need is ME” to live a happy, fulfilled, and contented life, that doesn’t work. PEOPLE NEED PEOPLE!


No, I am not a Shrink: I have NO psychological or psychiatric expertise or training. And I am NOT trying to give any psychological advice to anyone, or at least advice to do anything specific in or because of life circumstances. I am simply pointing out that sometimes, life is not fair. Sometimes we find ourselves in circumstances not of our own making that are horrendus, and that come with loneliness as a great part. What I am saying is that when this loneliness pops-up in our lives and our heads, we MUST find ways to get through them. And we can.

This would normally be the spot where a journalist would make some monumental and impactful suggestions, like “Here are 5 sure ways to guarantee you’ll never be loney,” or “Do you want to know how to always be fulfilled and happy?” I’m not going to do that. I don’t think there’s a magic prescription or pill that takes care of that. There certainly are people who maintain there are such panaceas for loneliness.

But what I WILL say and what I DO know is this: being alone is NOT fun — when it comes from bad circumstances that one inherits from decisions not their own or were not based on their own selfish motives. And loneliness is NOT the kiss of death.

But finding one self alone and its resulting loneliness and staying there almost always results in despair. And despair often initiates drastic measures.

Isn’t it ironic though that when someone as a result of loneliness and resulting despair commits suicide or worse, kills someone else, how many people who really care show-up in the aftermath? It happens a lot.

What if those who enter the picture only at a wake or funeral who weep for the deceased and cry “If only I had known” had been an initiator of helping that person when alive to work-through their loneliness?

A suggestion: Be open to all those in your life. Keep the lines of communication clear. Make certain ALL of those you care for understand that they can speak to you about anything with the certainty there will be no chastisement or disdain on your part for their simply sharing their feelings of loneliness and its results with you.

Most of the time doing so will be costly. Sometimes doing so will even hurt — and hurt deeply. But there’s a truth that makes that process pretty clear. It’s best revealed in the title of a song my brother — my “adopted” brother from the family that took me into their family in 1970 — wrote years ago: “Anything word having is worth hurting for.”

Truer words have never been spoken.

Why not try it: it probably will work. And if your trying doesn’t save a life, it will probably make someone’s life a whole lot better.



Liberalism vs. Conservatism

Have you ever puzzled over the differences between Liberalism and Conservatism? Make no mistake: there are DRASTIC differences between philosophies and stark differences between Liberals and Conservatives.

I’ve wondered for years myself. Here at TruthNewsNetwork we have written several times about one major difference between Liberals and Conservatives: “When a Conservative disagrees with a political policy of a Liberal, the Conservative doesn’t like the policy. But when a Liberal disagrees with a political policy of a Conservative, the Liberal HATES THE CONSERVATIVE!”

I know that is probably a stretch. But often it seems that way. One thing is certain: Liberals are much more adamant and vocal about their ideas than Conservatives are their own. And Conservatives are more accepting of differences between themselves and Liberals. Those differences are never unseen and certainly are NEVER unheard.

But after diving into research and investigation, we have determined there is a more fundamental reason for these differences. Those differences are layered: some lie deep within one’s soul and intellect while others are closer to the surface and held not so tightly. Some are more visible than others.

What am I talking about?

“In The Beginning”

It is far simpler for people to deal with others if those “others” are part of a group. Certainly, even in a group of people, there are as many differences between those as there are people. But for centuries people have often just grouped people together under one sign. And through the centuries while Man has become more educated, more sophisticated, and more civil regarding social norms, Man has become more committed to put people in groups. Nowhere can this trait be illustrated better than here:

In that incident, a presidential candidate in the 2016 election — Hillary Clinton — created a group in which she put half of the other candidate’s followers: Donald Trump. It is certain that those she put in that group shared at least one thing — support for Mr. Trump. All of those people (and it turned out to be 62 million in total which means “half” by her characterization would be a 31 million member group of ”deplorables”) were simply “one” in Hillary’s mind.

And she wasn’t the first.

Think about it: human nature guides us all to at least perceptually group people who have similar characteristics together: racially, historically, religiously, geographically, spoken language, educational similarity, hobbies, professions, etc. Human nature being what it is leads us to do that. But human nature does NOT automatically grade those in those groups: people do.

Historic “Groups”

In the Bible the groups in similarity were everywhere. Even then people with similarities “hung” together. For the Jewish people, descendants of Ishmael — Abraham’s illegitimate son — became the Arab people. They could not bear Jews and the feeling was reciprocal. In fact, almost without fail, people ALL feel that “their” group is superior to other groups with which they interface.

Remember the Crusades? Almost universally Crusades are remembered as a time when Christians wanted to impose Christianity in the Holy Land. Actually, the “first” Crusades were started by the Muslims in the year 630 A.D. when Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. all because those ”groups” were different.  The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try to stop the Islamic aggressive invasions.

We’re not here to debate who did what, who was right and who was wrong. We are simply pointing to the history of one group, (that was created by “someone”) that was marked by those of another group, (that too was created by “someone”) and then taking actions  against that “other” group because that group was better than the other.

It’s happened hundreds if not thousands of times.

American History

There had to be an America established before there could be American History. Why did that happen?

In short, in England groups of upper class people (Royals) looked at groups of low class people (Commoners) and treated them in ways that were literally less than humane. Those Commoners had enough. They wanted to seek somewhere else to live that was free from “group society.” They fled to America.

Then they wanted freedom from the tyranny under which they were forced to live even in a New World. As tyranny does, it followed them to their new land and forced its way into their society from the beginning.

They determined to force that group of Royals to give them total independence. It resulted in the American Revolution from which was birthed an independent and free America that became the United States of America.

The U.S. has been embroiled in numerous “group wars” through its history: President Thomas Jefferson actually declared war on the Barbary Pirates. Why? U.S. ships conducting trade with Northern African countries were being attacked and held by the Barbary Pirates for ransom. (Those Pirates were Muslim slave traders.) The American President refused to pay the ransom to mthat “other” group. War decided it.

There was the French and Indian War and the War of 1812. But the greatest example of American “group war” was the Civil War. What were the groups? Those for slavery and those against.

The war was brutal: 600,000 people died. But slavery was put down in the U.S. But the “grouping” never stopped. Those Africans that had been brought to America and were the subject of the Civil War were freed, but in most respects that freedom was just talk. Legally they were free, but were still part of a “group” that was considered by many to be “less than” others. Though slaves were legally free, their “group” was NOT equal in any way. That racial difference and resulting “group think” has kept the difference fires burning for generations. Citizens of the greatest country on Earth can simply not put that war to death.

There are those from one group who have never accepted the Civil War outcome. There are those from the other group who have never felt like the war ended. They react to the other group in many ways, few of which are positive.


Politics has been with us for who knows how long. Men created it. Why? To draw lines between groups, of course! Politics has played a very significant role in American history, much of which has not been positive for the country. Nevertheless, the differences between people have dictated its perpetuation for generations. And politics is the chief fuel for creating and growing differences between people.

Politically, Conservatives and Liberals have pretty much dominated U.S. politics. (There you go: groups that Men decide who has to be part of which one) Since World War I, the two major political parties have been Republican and Democrat. Though the policies of differences between those in each group have changed in many ways, fundamentally they each have kept a fairly specific core of principles. The party that has mastered the art of grouping and that dwarfs its counterpart in structure and political ideals is the Democrat Party.

Members of the Democrat Party have always excelled in politically acting in group fashion far more than Republicans. Unification in policies, ideals, who’s in and who’s out, who is credible and who is not, who is worthy and who is not, has pretty much over decades remained the responsibility of party leaders.

Republicans on the other hand have operated more independently regarding party structure. They have shared core values for a long time, but there has never been unity as the Democrat Party has.

(We’re not here to discuss specifics of those differences, just to give us basis for the balance of today’s conversation.)


What are the modern day groups that Democrats and Republicans have created? To be honest there are far more groups than just those created by politicians. But for this conversation we’ll concentrate on those political creations, and only a few of those.

Religious groups: primarily Christian and non-Christian. Regardless of what some politicians maintain, America was established on well defined Christian principles. For whatever reason, the last few decades many on the Left (the Democrat side) have fought against those principles.

Not only have there been attacks by the Left against Christian principles, there has been massive support of other religions in the World at the expense of Christians and Christianity.

Islam and the Muslim faith has been growing exponentially everywhere on the Globe — even in the U.S. Political support from the Left for the religion and those who embrace it has become dramatically obvious. Democrat leaders have in almost total unity shown massive support for the Muslim faith and Muslim people. Their support has never been so obvious than when horrors are perpetrated by Muslims both in the U.S. and in other nations.

There are multiple examples. But the most recent came from Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar who recently described the 9/11 attacks and that day in this way: “Some people did some thing.” She very obviously did NOT use the term “terrorists” or “terrorism” in her statement about the slaughter of 3000 Americans that day. Further, she did NOT refer to the perpetrators as “Islamists” or “Muslims” or “Terrorists.” She referred to them as “Some People.”

Democrat leaders refused to censure her or even make a unified statement against her characterizations. Why? “Group-Think” and Unity.

To further illustrate how this has become so prevalent, Easter Sunday more than 300 Christians were murdered by a series of suicide bomb attacks against worshippers in 3 churches and several hotels in Sri Lanka. While most Republican leaders when issuing statements about the horrible slaughter of primarily Christians worshipping God in their churches on Easter Sunday — the most holy day of the year for Christians, former President Obama and Hillary Clinton in their statements refused to use the word “Christians” when describing who were murdered.

It is important to note that both aggressively damned Islamophobia when a white Christian from Australia several weeks earlier killed a number of Muslims in New Zealand in a Mosque. Ms. Clinton tweeted her outrage: “We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms. White supremacist terrorists (another “group” created by Democrats) must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.”

She made sure to condemn “Islamophobia,” but she wrote not a word about the far more destructive and widespread hatred of Christians in the Muslim world, seen in Muslims’ virtual elimination of the Christian communities in the Middle East, the regular murder and kidnappings of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and the murder of Christians in Nigeria. She calls on “leaders everywhere” to condemn “white supremacist terrorists,” one of the smallest hate groups on Earth, but never calls on leaders everywhere to condemn Islamist terrorists, the largest hate group on Earth.

Essentially, the Left’s rule is that nothing bad — no matter how true — may be said about Muslims or Islam and nothing good — no matter how true — may be said of Christians or Christianity.

Obama and Clinton refused to use the term ”Christians” when referring to those killed opting to both use the exact same term ”Easter Worshippers” instead. Think there was some Democrat talking-point coordination?

Racial groups: The most obvious time of racial unity in the U.S. came with the attack on Pearl Harbor. It seems that such horrors bring people together rather than divide them. For years Americans dropped (in most cases) all the garbage that came for years from racial groupings and all the resulting tension and uproar between Americans. It has become commonplace for African Americans and Caucasians to be incessantly in conflict with each other. It seems there’s very little effort to find commonalities and concentrate on those rather than concentrating on differences. (That’s not just in racial groups and their differences but between ALL groups)

I would be remiss if I did not point out some dangerous results from this regarding intentional blurring of racial truths. Democrats have always branded Conservatives (Republicans) as the bad guys when it comes to dealing with racial differences. Of course that means Democrats are the good guys. And there are plenty of lies in that regard that have been perpetuated for decades:

  • Democrats did NOT end slavery as many maintain. Abraham Lincoln led the Civil War to end slavery. He was a Republican;
  • Democrats did NOT give African Americans the right to vote. In fact, in great majority Democrats voted against the Constitutional Amendment giving them voting rights. Republicans voted it in;
  • Democrats did NOT pass the Civil Rights Act in the early 1960’s. President Johnson (a Democrat) could not get close to a majority of Congressional Democrats to vote for it. Republicans with a majority of THEIR votes passed the law;
  • Democrats did NOT get approval for blacks to serve in the U.S. military. Former General and President Dwight Eisenhower (a Republican) led the charge to get Republicans to approve that bill that eventually became law.

Here’s where the Democrats (who are masterful at getting its members in locked-step to back the party’s positions, policies, and actions) have really messed up: getting their adherents to believe in almost anything and most everything their leadership puts out has resulted in millions of Americans to believe untruths. Benign and blind following not only finds Democrat followers walking down the wrong paths, they’re walking hand in hand with other Democrats who because of the group they are in blindly agree to those paths.


We can go much farther down the road in this conversation, but I’m certain you understand what’s happening around us in this regard. No doubt there are “group-thinkers” in the Republican Party. Why? There are simply many people who prefer to blindly follow than to creatively dig to find facts on their own to believe.

And there is no doubt the Republican Party is full of people who are wrong about many things they believe. That is a product of human nature. Human nature is what powerful politicians have discovered in its weakness, it can be exploited to assist in a political party in achieving Mob Rule, sometimes called “Group-Think.”

I am NOT a Republican nor a Democrat. I am registered in my state as “Other.” But don’t be naive: there are plenty of people in the U.S. and the World who put people like me and those in the “Other” designation with me as a “group.” Some think those in our group are good people while others certainly think those in that group are evil.

What we must learn is that such has always occurred and always will. What we must also learn is responsibility to impact our world by teaching independent thinking and feeding the hunger of the quest for the Truth.

I am convinced that Truth is available for all those who diligently seek it and those who refuse to settle for less. That doesn’t mean everyone must think the same about everything. Such determination must be individual and will always draw from one’s personal circumstances and environment. But Truth is NEVER to be something that is a result of the denigration of anyone else. Your worth is never changed by anything that someone else thinks, says, or does.

God made us all individuals. And there’s no one on Earth identical to you!

Managing Crisis and Chaos

“I finally figured out that not every crisis can be managed. As much as we want to keep ourselves safe, we can’t protect ourselves from everything. If we want to embrace life, we also have to embrace chaos.”
Susan Elizabeth Phillips

Wouldn’t the world be a much better place for us all if we knew factually that no matter what crisis we ever face, we can work right through each every time they show up?  Count my vote as “Yes” for that ability.

Everyone faces a crisis at some point in their life. Every company and organization deals with a crisis every once in a while. Unsuccessfully understanding and dealing with a crisis every time leads to chaos. Chaos will destroy any organization, individual, or even a family if not dealt with promptly and thoroughly. Leaving loose-ends in any crisis is suicide for the entity or individual to which it occurs.

Most Americans universally feel like the U.S. government is in a state of chaos right now, ushered in by both real and unreal crises. No doubt there are a plethora of issues that come up daily in governmental operations. That has and always will be ”business as usual.” The difference today is that an always-critical media shines a continuous spotlight on everything to do with our government, but not always with an objective purpose in mind. They often, it seems, are agenda-driven in crisis reporting. And their interpretations are too.

We have several “crisis of the month,” “crisis of the week,” or “crisis of the day” it seems in perpetuity. And we have one boiling over today. Are you surprised?

“Selective” Outrage: Congressman Steve King

A few weeks ago, we looked in to see a GOP Congressman chastised, excoriated, derided, and benched from House committees for speech:

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, was stripped of his committee assignments by his fellow House Republicans Monday evening following bipartisan condemnation of King’s recent remarks on white supremacy and white nationalism.

“We will not tolerate this type of language in the Republican Party … or in the Democratic Party as well,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters. “I watched what Steve King said and we took action.”

In a formal statement, McCarthy said King’s comments were “beneath the dignity of the Party of Lincoln and the United States of America. His comments call into question whether he will treat all Americans equally, without regard for race and ethnicity. House Republicans are clear: We are all in this together, as fellow citizens equal before God and the law. As Congressman King’s fellow citizens, let us hope and pray earnestly that this action will lead to greater reflection and ultimately change on his part.”

In a statement of his own, King insisted that his comments had been “completely mischaracterized” and blasted McCarthy for what King called “a political decision that ignores the truth.” According to his website, King was previously a member of House committees on the judiciary, agriculture and small business.

A senior member of the U.S. House of Representatives getting stripped of prestigious committee assignments is a really big deal, believe me. It wasn’t just fellow Republicans, of course, the anti-conservative Mainstream Media weighed in:

Congressman King was not the only member of Congress who in this very young 2019 stepped across the “racist faux pas” line.

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN)

 Freshman representative from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, cheerfully repeated this anti-Semitic trope, implying that AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, pays politicians to support Israel. Top Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have called on Omar to “reject anti-Semitism in all forms,” according to The Washington Post, while Republicans have argued that her comments reveal the depth of anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party. “I unequivocally apologize,” Omar said in a tweeted statement. “At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA, or the fossil-fuel industry. It’s gone on too long and we must be willing to address it.”

The CBS Evening News gave this scathing analysis of Omar’s actions:

Who Determines When Outrage in D.C. is Justified?

That requires an answer if we are to understand when outrage in D.C. is real. And that answer in today’s news cycle is easy: whoever is writing or broadcasting about that specific “outrage of the day!” But we, unfortunately, can narrow that answer even further: if President Trump is involved, it’s ALWAYS an outrage — not so much Democrat leaders in Washington or Democrats anywhere else in the U.S.

Here’s the scary thing about all this: remember the little boy who cried “Wolf?” He did it so often his audience was numbed to his cries. So when there really was a wolf and he cried, no one paid attention. In the case of Donald Trump, more and more Americans are growing “Wolf-numbed” at the constant attacks on the President and all in his camp. And it’s beginning to appear that Democrats are trapped in the “wolf” mode, and that they cannot get out of it.

America is dangerously close to watching as their government loses all of its once amazing power and credibility. Our elected officials have abandoned all reason in governing and have simply walked away from integrity. Political partisanship dominates every conversation, every policy discussion, and every legislative item. If Democrats like it or think it is good, Republicans automatically reject it as worthless for the American people. The opposite is true in the same way.

And we wonder why Congress gets very little done? Take a look at the current fallout from the release of the Mueller Report.

Integrity in D.C.

What a joke! Democrats and Republicans alike must literally think Americans have not discovered YouTube yet. EVERYTHING — yes EVERYTHING — that is said by legislators shows up in a YouTube video. Yet still members of Congress double and triple down on lies that are exposed over and over via some recorded news report or interview. And by doing so they expose one thing to Americans: THEY SIMPLY DON’T CARE! They say what they say when they say it in total disregard of what they have said about  the same issue previously. That can be for only one reason: they think Americans are so stupid we don’t remember!

That comes as no surprise to me. Don’t agree? Want some examples?

In 2017, Adam Schiff and fellow Dems went bonkers at the release by Congressman Devin Nunez of a Memo. Schiff stated that by doing so, “Congressman Nunes was ignoring the serious nature of the information contained in the memo that would certain jeopardize national security interests of the U.S.” Nunes sent the memo to the President for his final approval before its release to the public.

That was Congressman Schiff then voicing his concerns about sensitive information being released publicly and that doing so would damage national security. But today, Schiff is singing a different song about the same issues:

Schiff has maintained his strong belief that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, after the nearly two-year probe came to an end last week without directly implicating the president.“

“Undoubtedly there is collusion,” Schiff told The Washington Post on Tuesday. “We will continue to investigate the counterintelligence issues. That is, is the president or people around him compromised in any way by a hostile foreign power? … It doesn’t appear that was any part of [special counsel Robert] Mueller’s report.”

Schiff made these demands without SPECIFIC knowledge of what is contained in Robert Mueller’s 300+ page report, knowing full well that names of individuals who are undercover intelligence operatives are contained in the counterintelligence report. Further, their demands include for full release of grand jury testimony which is illegal without a presiding judge’s full approval to do so.

Schiff’s doing so — especially in light of his charade in 2017 to NOT release that memo because of national security damage — proves he does NOT care what his previous position on any issue was. All that matters is what Democrats want today.

Congressman Jerold Nadler (D-NY) who is Chair of the House Judiciary Committee went bonkers during the Bill Clinton impeachment matter when Ken Starr was pressured to release his report on the Lewinsky Scandal to the public. Nadler demanded the report be released only to members of Congress.

Imagine Nadler’s position today looking at a report release from the OTHER side of the aisle. He has actually threatened President Trump, Attorney General Barr, and others with criminal subpoenas if the entire report is not only released in full, BUT BY THURSDAY OF THIS WEEK!


There is no doubt there has been, still is, and will be for years to come all-out crisis and chaos in Washington D.C. Why is that so? Because partisanship is the only thing lawmakers can think of to try and maintain their upper hand in negotiations of any kind regarding any issue (no matter how large or small) so as to give their minions the appearance that they are working hard for the People. Poppycock!

What is encouraging for conservatives to note, however, is that in spite of what Democrats want Americans to believe, Donald Trump did not bring Crisis and Chaos to D.C. the day of his inauguration. He didn’t bring it at all. IT WAS ALREADY THERE! What Donald Trump did was from Day #1 shine a light of exposure on all the chaos and every crisis every day! His using Twitter to circumvent the Drive-By media and take his message directly to the American People is the reason the nation awakened to the fact that there IS Crisis and Chaos in D.C. Further, Americans now understand sending Donald Trump — the “Fixer” — to D.C. was the right thing to do to tackle both Chaos and Crisis. Why? Because his history is getting things done.

He certainly has gotten things done, hasn’t he!

What happens when the light gets turned on in the middle of the night in the kitchen? Roaches scramble to get away from the light.

Those D.C. roaches are getting bright light in their eyes everyday! And (hopefully) they’ll see the same light every night for the next 5+ years!



Post Mueller: The Plan

We finally got through the Mueller investigation and everyone came through unscathed: well ALMOST everyone. A bunch of folks came through it with egg on their faces. Some have accepted the results; some still cling to a thread of hope that President Trump can still be guilty. Guilty of what? They’ll accept anything-anything at all.

In retrospect, I’ve been trying to reach an objective summary spot to identify a solid basis from which to move forward. I’m comfortable with what has been revealed so far. But I’m still puzzled at why and how the folks that still clamor for a pound of Trump flesh and his expulsion from Planet Earth can justify their vitriol and hatred. It’s true that there are political and personal differences they hold with the President. It’s true that their differences run very deep and that they do not accept the results of the Mueller investigation — at least the summary provided by Attorney General Barr. But at some point, these folks must decide that life goes on, that political differences have always and will always exist, and that the United States as a whole is far more important than any political pundit’s personal or political agenda. Folks just have to let go. And they will: hopefully!

That release may not come for a while. It may not come for a long while for many. I am certain the producers, writers, directors, and announcers at the cable television outlets are destined to live in shock for a bit. But at some point, reason and facts must overtake anger and hate. At least I hope so.

Those members of the media that are heartbroken that Donald Trump was not snapped up in the Mueller probe and forced to wear prison stripes for life still have jobs to do. Granted, they failed miserably at basic Journalism in the runup to the Mueller report, but they still represent their organizations that purportedly report the news. The need for real news has not lessened. And it will not regardless of their personal animus and disdain for the president or for anyone else.

The very nature of news should make it totally objective. News has never been a collection of opinions and hypotheses. The news is a group of facts about events and people that are simply put together and presented to an audience — at least that’s the way it originated and existed for centuries. It is true that 21st media on the most part have taken a different approach, but facts and real news have not and do not change. Facts are just that: facts. And facts are absolute. Otherwise, they would not be facts. It doesn’t matter if a known reporter maintains something they report is factual, unless it is true they are reporting what is simply their opinion on the matter. America’s news media as a whole lost sight of that during the Mueller probe. And Americans are paying the price for it.

For a couple of decades, the media have taken Americans for granted. And they’ve gotten away with doing that. How? Members of the media have borrowed from the very thing that gave their predecessors for decades the honor of deservedly wearing the banner of integrity bestowed upon them by our parents and their parents. Those men and women took great pride in being reporters — people like Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Frank Reynolds, and then Roger Mudd, Walter Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, and Peter Jennings, Chris Wallace, Frank Blair, Howard K. Smith, and Tom Brokaw. To most Americans, these became staples of evening wrapups of world occurrences of the day. Seldom did any American question the veracity of what they saw and heard from these media members. Their credibility was impeccable. They made electronic news media the most trusted source for news in United States History. When did it begin to change?

Cable News Television: CNN. Ted Turner with his upstart cable satellite news network created a new industry. It swept journalism through satellite locations around the world. Americans found a new way to get their daily news from an entirely different source from a new breed of reporters. And the quest for ratings took over. From the lobby of the Omni Hotel in downtown Atlanta, Georgia, CNN changed journalism and in doing so destroyed truth in news.

But no one told America what was happening. It was taken for granted that what we saw and heard via broadcast or satellite  — both radio and television — was just an amped-up version of Walter Cronkite or Peter Jennings. Those new anchors wore their hair longer, sharper clothes and more makeup made them look a little better, but everyone was certain the news was still the news. But the storm was brewing without most of us even smelling what was happening: satellite television opened journalism to a new way of making money — BIG money. Ratings became the force behind everything programmed on cable news. And ratings quickly and quietly began to steer cable stations and the “new” news format: 24/7 instant content that had to “look” better, “be” better, and attract a larger audience. And it worked. But the news suffered. And it still does.

Internet Death

When Al Gore invented the internet, (Ha!) news made another big leap. The hunger and subsequent demand for 24/7 news forced the delivery of non-stop information about anything and everything in human life. Not just Americans, but people on every continent, from every language, every ethnicity, and culture demanded around-the-clock “feeding” every day. It became a really tall order for the stalwarts of information to quell that hunger for news. ABC, CBS, NBC, the BBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, and newspapers from major cities around the Globe found it tougher and tougher to keep up with that demand for news. Competition devoured the industry.

The internet made it much easier to transmit instant news. As technology developed at breakneck speed, the ability to produce network programming in video and audio and put it in the eyes, hands, and ears of people nonstop created intense competition to be first in reporting every tidbit of information. Being first was most important. Being most accurate — which had been the ONLY important thing in news and information for decades — was relegated to Page 2 of the D Section. Being first is all that mattered.

And Journalism died.

We have the internet to thank for that death along with the ravenous cries for instant information. Without access to 24/7 instant everything, there would still be a demand for the news, but that demand would still be required to pierce the prism of absolute truth in every story reported.

But the internet is always open for business. And that prism takes just a little too much time for the instant news cycle. We don’t need to scrub stories for truth anymore. Americans can’t wait! So the “truth” prism got put on the top shelf in the storage closet. Who’ll know, right?

Little did we know through the decade of the 90s that the news industry was gasping for air.  Many of those superstars of honesty and integrity — some of who are listed above — went by way of retirement to a more peaceful place. Some hung on as long as they could. But most had enough of this “new” news and just walked away. It wasn’t the news anymore. It was Internet Soap Opera every day. And pretty much the same day after day.

An Australian billionaire, already a media mogul, decided to create a 24-hour conservative cable news channel. Rupert Murdock birthed FOX News, seeing the need in journalism for “real” news and not just “fake news” that really wasn’t news at all. America found television news that was real news. And just as talk radio devotees had found Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, television news junkies quickly found FOX News and stuck to it like glue.

Real news and real Journalism was given new life. And that created Donald Trump. Trump is the antithesis of everything conventional wisdom dictates a president should be to be successful. But his straightforward way of communicating his blue-collar messages in his Queens crudeness resonated with middle-Americans. And for the first time in a long time, Americans felt there was someone who understood that most of the U.S. lies between coastal states and interior states with a few big cities. And that the people who lived in the fly-over country had been left out of the political process for far too long. Better yet, he made promises – BIG promises. They gave him a shot. He won. And he began to aggressively do everything he promised he would do if Americans gave him their votes.

The Plan

Fast forward to the “Days of the Mueller Probe.” Two years of news pandemonium welcomed Donald Trump to D.C. Every day all day, mainstream media hammered home into the heads and hearts of their followers the evil and corruption of Donald Trump. Never mind none of their allegations came with any evidence. Never mind that Mueller and a team of 19 Democrat attorney loyalists dissected millions of documents, hundreds of testimonies, 500+ subpoenas, and put several people in jail. Never mind that no implications of Donald Trump resulted from any of this even though several people were charged and jailed as a result. None of the dirt uncovered had anything to do with Donald Trump. It truly has proven to be a witch-hunt.

What happens now? Unfortunately for the nation, the same witch-hunt just paged forward to Chapter 2. What has been uncovered is what we here predicted two years ago was actually in all this investigating from the beginning: a coordinated all-out war against Donald Trump spearheaded by the Democrat Party. The war is cycling into Chapter 2 with a vengeance with Trump as the sole target.

Here’s the only difference: the truth has started finding sunlight for the first time since the 2016 campaign that started it all. More and more bad players are being exposed. “Truths” told by Democrat sycophants like John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, etc., are being found out.

And the Democrat Party leadership has revealed the nuts and bolts of this Chapter 2: amp Chapter 1 up! The Democrat Party has poured fresh fuel into their attack arm that is ignoring the Mueller Report that for 2 years they universally demanded would implicate Trump, kick him out of the White House, and send him to prison. They threatened any who dared question the veracity of the Mueller investigation. Robert Mueller was the Democrat Party Messiah sent to save Earth from that devil Donald Trump.

Schiff and his House Committee showed on Thursday the nuts and bolts of that plan: keep screaming “Collusion, Obstruction, and Corruption!” They’ve attacked Attorney General Barr’s 4-page summary of the Mueller report, because they were told the report is 300+ pages. That means that “Barr is hiding bad Trump stuff with his 4-page summary.” Their attacks are exactly the same: Speaker Pelosi passes out the talking points, Democrat Party attack dogs — MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, and every Democrat in Congress have simply turned up the volume of their attacks against the President.


What’s their plan? Simple: win the White House in 2020. Increase their House majority and take control of the U.S. Senate. And between now and Election Day 2020, obstruct anything and everything that in their opinion could be a possible victory for Donald Trump.

To my fellow Americans of the Democrat Party, I encourage you to open your eyes to see the truth. If you DON’T listen to us here, if you DON’T listen to other conservative news sources, spend some time in thoughtful consideration of what “FACTS” you discern on your own — by reading, watching, asking questions, and being open to consideration of responses that may not align with your own thoughts and opinions at the time.

”Just because you think something is right doesn’t mean it’s right. Just because you think something is wrong doesn’t mean it’s wrong.”

And, by the way, you might want to go back to last week here at TruthNewsNetwork and read the list of real Trump accomplishments during his first 2 years. Yes, there really ARE many significant, life-changing accomplishments this President led the nation into in 2017 and 2018. You haven’t heard about a single one from mainstream media.

I’ve said this before: I’ve always been a news journalist junkie. I grew up in broadcasting. I loved Paul Harvey. I honored Peter Jennings of ABC Nightly News. Before those two was Walther Cronkite on CBS. They were all brilliant broadcasters. Jennings and Cronkite exceptional news reporters. Neither editorialized the news and they respected members of their audience. And they trusted us, too. You don’t see that in mainstream media today. Why is that? They do NOT trust you or even consider your ability to discern truth. Quite honestly, they don’t want to allow you to think for yourselves. Yes, that sounds quite a bit like a State Media existence. Under Obama, that was already under serious consideration. Today, that concept is being exposed everyday.

And the media that has been weaponized by the Democrat Party are afraid. They have been exposed!



Mass Hysteria

I am back among the living! Thanks for the prayers and support. While I was recovering, Mueller’s report release set the political world on fire! And it’s just the beginning.

Most Americans felt Mueller’s report would exonerate the President which would get our government back to work. Not so. It just started a new chapter of “Dump Trump.”

Here’s what is quietly happening (and has been for two years): there’s far more to this story than the story itself. We have a two-fold bombshell to drop on you after extensive research, collection of intelligence not yet in the public domain, and conclusions that when all put together explain exactly what is driving this “Dump Trump” movement. 

Apologies for not unfolding it today, but we felt it would be better to present it all both with the written story and with the audio story. Unfortunately, the flu stole my voice 6 days ago and it’s just coming back sufficient to present to you.

Again I thank you for your support and tolerance of my temporary setback. One thing I know: I have now met the “bad” flu and I hope to never say hello to it again!

See you in the AM!


The Flu

It got me! Flu came calling  and it ain’t the ”good kind” if there is such. And it showed with ALL of its buddies. Ughhh…

Obviously no article or podcast today. But there are numerous goodies in the pipeline. And we’re all over them. Stay Close!



Jussie: Guilt or Innocence

Sixteen indictments were issued against Jussie Smollett by a Cook County grand jury on Friday, March 8 — felony indictments. Yes, a person is always (under U.S. law) “Innocent until proven Guilty.” And, no, Jussie has NOT been proven guilty. So why have the lines formed of people who are demonstrably declaring his guilt OR declaring his innocence?

I think it’s because it “appears” to be that Smollett attempted to in some way use the system, his ethnicity, his fame along with his sexual preference to sway the court of public opinion for some personal advantage. That in itself if true is sad on many levels. But there’s more to this story and its ramifications that haven’t been but should be discussed.

If allegations against him contained in these sixteen felony indictments are proven in court and he is found guilty, this case will prove to be just one more blight on today’s international media stage. This case so far has been nothing more than a three-ring circus. Wanna guess what specifically is on display in each of the three circus rings?

Jussie Smollett Is Famous: Ring #1

I’ve always heard: fame comes with a price. Maybe Jussie is finding that out firsthand.

He began his career as a child actor in 1987 acting in films including The Mighty Ducks (1992) and Rob Reiner’s North (1994). In 2015, Smollett attracted attention and received a highly positive critical reception for his portrayal of musician Jamal Lyon in the Fox drama series Empire (2015). Smollett has also appeared in Ridley Scott’s science fiction film Alien: Covenant (2017) as Ricks and in Marshall (2017) as Langston Hughes.

He doesn’t just act. Smollett signed a recording contract with Columbia Records and would be releasing an album in the future. Smollett co-wrote the songs “I Wanna Love You” and “You’re So Beautiful” on the Original Soundtrack from Season 1 of Empire album, which was released in March 2015. In March 2018, Smollett released his debut album, Sum of My Music.

Of course, his “current” fame stems from his starring role in the Series Empire. It has been alleged that part of this “circus” that has consumed his life of late came from his desire to get more fame and subsequent pay increase for his role in that series. “Alleged” is the magic word — nothing is proven yet.

Jussie Smollett is Gay: Ring #2

Smollett came out as gay during a televised interview with Ellen DeGeneres in March 2015.

In a 2016 interview with Out, he clarified his sexual orientation by stating “If I had to label myself, I would label myself as a gay man.” However, he stated his belief that openness to love is more important than gender, revealing that “If I fall in love down the road with a woman, I’m going to love that woman.” When Smollett’s gay character from Empire engaged in a tryst with a female character, Smollett defended the plot development by stating that he and Empire‘s creator Lee Daniels were trying to create a conversation about sexual fluidity in the gay community. Daniels has stated that while he and Smollett are gay, they both occasionally want to have sex with women. Daniels stated that “We’re showing life on Empire,” in that both he and Smollett were incorporating their own sexual fluidity as gay men into the show.

Smollett told his parents he was gay when he was 19.

Jussie Smollett is African American: Ring #3

Smollett grew-up in Santa Rosa, California, a small city in the Wine Country about 50 miles north of San Francisco. He is the third of six children of Janet (née Harris) and Joel Smollett (1956–2014). He has three brothers and two sisters: Jake, Jocqui, Jojo, Jurnee, and Jazz, several of whom are also actors.

Smollett is actually biracial. His mother is African-American and his father was Jewish (his family emigrated from Russia and Poland). He has said that his father would have “killed you if you called him white.”

Jussie Smollett is a Professional Entertainer: Ring #4

Yes, I know this is a “three-ring” circus. But in Jussie’s case, his circus has a fourth. Of course, we’ve all seen in past years the never-ending Hollywood circus. I don’t know exactly why, but it seems that folks who breathe Hollywood air and who work in the entertainment field  (acting, directing, music, etc.) have a propensity to concentrate on self-awareness. Jussie is definitely qualified as a member of that group.

Smollett Support from the Rich and Famous

On January 30, 2019, public figures expressed support for Smollett on social media. Entertainment industry figures, including Shonda Rhimes and Viola Davis, tweeted their outrage over the attack and support for Smollett. Democratic senators and presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Cory Booker both described the attack as an attempted modern-day lynching. Booker urged Congress to pass a federal Anti-Lynching bill co-sponsored by him and Harris. Smollett faced skepticism regarding his claim of being attacked; he responded by saying that he believed that, if he had said his attackers were Mexicans, Muslims, or black people, “the doubters would have supported me much more … And that says a lot about the place that we are in our country right now.”

Entertainment industry figures who worked with Smollett speculated about what may have motivated the actor to stage the hate crime. Some of the cast members of Empire believe that Smollett might have gotten the idea to stage a hate crime after the show’s creator, Lee Daniels, discussed a homophobic assault against his cousin with the show’s cast. Smollett’s co-stars theorized that the actor might have wanted to gain Daniels’ favor and become an “LGBT hero” by staging the attack. Director Lucian Read drew a connection between the hoax and a May 2018 episode of the Epix series America Divided about lynching which he directed; Smollett narrated and appeared in the episode. Epix also released a statement saying “with respect to the sensitivities around recent events…Epix is no longer making available the episode of America Divided featuring Jussie Smollett.”

What Happened to Jussie?

A recent Billboard Magazine article talked about a widespread lack of awareness about the importance of mental health in the jazz/hop Los Angeles music community. Six up-and-coming artists were invited to discuss how they took care of themselves. Among them was Jussie Smollett, who, in addition to his own fledgling solo musical career, played Jamal Lyon, a singer on the hit Fox series Empire. Smollett stressed the importance of honesty in his own internal struggles. “I admit that I’m jealous, I admit that I’m insecure and that I’m not good at certain things,” he said. Then, in a comment that didn’t get any attention at the time, Smollett suggested that these pressures might be catching up to him. “I’m in my 30s and I’m trying my best to learn that I can’t bend anymore,” he said. “I’m about to break.”

Six months later, he may have done just that.

On Jan. 19, 2019, the actor tweeted, “Depression is a real thing Y’all.” Three days later, a threatening letter targeting Smollett arrived at the Empire production offices in Chicago. And a week after that, the actor told Chicago police that two masked assailants had attacked him in a wealthy Chicago neighborhood as he walked home from a Subway at 2 a.m. while he was on the phone with his music manager, Brandon Z. Moore. Because Smollett, who is black and openly gay, identified his attackers as white males who shouted “This is MAGA country” and claimed they hung a noose around his neck, his case was immediately held up as an example of the growing problem of hate crimes in the Trump era. In Hollywood, where the alleged attack played perfectly into the community’s worst fears about prejudice, support for Smollett was strident. Robin Roberts interviewed him sympathetically on Good Morning America. Ellen Page called out the Trump administration for the incident on Colbert.


There are no doctors here at TruthNewsNetwork (TNN). There’s no way for us to draw any meaningful and educated decisions about what has been going on with Smollett and what could lead him down the path on which he finds himself. One would think he has some personal issues that fed this narrative. One can only speculate about what they are. And speculation ran amuck in the early days following the report of the “alleged” hate crime. Speculation like we see and hear in this NBC News report:

I doubt anyone will ever be able to provide an accurate “why” answer for Jussie’s creation of this alleged crime. Certainly, many factors contributed: disdain for President Trump, struggling with mental and professional pressure he felt, whether real or perceived job stress and personal insecurities. Honestly, most every American deals with those issues in their life at some point. And thankfully, most Americans do not find themselves where Smollett is today: career destroyed, dozens if not hundreds of friendships ended because of betrayal, disdain more than ever for being gay, and nowhere to turn for a peaceful way out of this dilemma.

It is a good thing that most Americans have the resources that come through family members, friends, business associates, and medical professionals necessary to successfully work through the issues that apparently drove Smollett to this point in his life. In Jussie’s case, however, it seems that all the things and circumstances that gave him the fame and fortune in which he found himself are actually major contributors — if not THE contributors — to the state of mind that created the Hate-Hoax scenario surrounding Jussie.

We have been accused of being too hard on the media at TruthNewsNetwork. And sometimes, maybe we are. But in this century and in this decade, everyone needs to understand the power of media communication. And those in media of every kind need to understand that with that power comes responsibility.

Jussie himself railed loudly and constantly against President Trump. I doubt Smollett stopped to consider the power of HIS words, of HIS political stances given in public that even though were his opinions, in most instances were swallowed by his followers as factual. Why is that? His fame and his universal support by those in his industry: Entertainment. Unfortunately, success in the U.S. entertainment industry resonates to many who watch and listen-in as integrity, honesty, and they give those stories total acceptance.

Maybe Jussie just flipped out; maybe he really believes the extent of American racism he expressed; maybe he really believes President Trump is a racist, an Islamophobe, and homophobe. If that is true, we could more easily understand his acting on those beliefs in the manner in which he did.

But one thing is certain: the American media fawn over those in Entertainment from Hollywood and Manhattan and elsewhere in the U.S. And it seems to be the same thing in American politics and even professional sports. Heretofore those in the media have rejected any calls for responsibility on their part. In a way, they are justified in doing so. Their reasoning? The media in part are the driving sources for the monumental adoration of Americans for all those in the movies, music, and professional sports. Without their news coverage, they maintain, stars in sports and entertainment would not have anything close to the adoration of adoring fans that they experience. For that, the media have forsaken any responsibility for any Jussie Smollet stories or any others. And there are many.

I’ll close today with a personal story to help explain what, why, and how Jussie Smollett happened. In 2006, I owned a professional arena football team. The availability of a really good quarterback was made known to me by an assistant coach for the Dallas Cowboys. Quincy Carter became available when the Cowboys released him and no other NFL team picked him up. “If he was so good, why did the Cowboys cut him and why did no other NFL team sign him?” I was asked. There’s a reason…or two. Believe me.

Quincy grew up in Georgia. He was a stellar athlete who was pampered because of his outstanding athletic abilities from a very young age. He excelled in football in middle school. He picked apart the defenses of high school football opponents. He rocked the Southeastern Conference playing for the University of Georgia. And he was the first quarterback to take the Dallas Cowboys to the NFL playoffs since Troy Aikman. But Quincy had some issues.

Few knew that he was the victim of Bipolar Disorder. He had dramatic mood swings that were uncontrollable and unavoidable. When diagnosed, the prescribed medication worked well at helping to control his wild swings in temperament and concentration. But he hated taking the medicine. It left him feeling funny. He tried marijuana, and marijuana worked. Quincy while at the University of Georgia began self-medicating with marijuana.

Marijuana was not acceptable, not only in the National Football League but in the Arena Football League as well. Quincy’s professional football career was over in the NFL — unless we could change things. We were called to see if we could work with him in the AFL and get him back to doing the right things medically. We agreed, but with conditions: Quincy had to agree to drug treatment prior to our 2006 season and throughout our season, he had to speak to a chosen (by our team doctors) drug counselor every day — either in person or via telephone when the team was traveling. It went well — at first.

Quincy was a quarterback phenomenon. He comfortably made the transition from outdoor football to indoor and the field half the size as that of an outdoor field. He easily won our starting QB job in training camp. We started our season 5-0, primarily because of Quincy. He was benched for game 6 for “team infractions.” We lost. And then Quincy came back with his head straight and led us to the Conference Championship game against our arch rival, only to lose on a freak play.

During that season, we saw firsthand why the Jussie Smollett’s and Quincy Carter’s and other in similar shoes fought different demons from most of the rest of us. Quincy was a god in Texas. We played against 5 Texas teams in our division. Everytime we played in one of those Texas team stadiums, they sold out. THEIR fans came to the games wearing Quincy Carter Dallas Cowboy jerseys, not those of their home team. And after games, Quincy was flooded with fans getting his autograph and a picture with him. Media interviews had to be closely monitored and scheduled. All through our league, conversations about Quincy were top of the news all season long.

The week after we lost that conference championship game, Quincy was arrested for DWI: marijuana.

We cannot blame that on the media. We cannot blame that on rampant fan support. We cannot blame that on Quincy’s upbringing in Georgia. We cannot even blame that on marijuana. But each one of those “things” in Quincy’s life was a huge contributing factor in the fall of Quincy Carter.

Jussie Smollett just like all of us has a bunch of “stuff” in his closet. Some of it Jussie’s friends and family members know about. There are probably other things Jussie keeps in that closet and with the closet door closed.

So what should Quincy have done about those things? What about Jussie? What about you and me? I’m fairly certain there’s no absolute answer to those questions. But one answer that I DO know for certain: doing NOTHING about them is NEVER the right answer.

So next time we see or hear about the failure of a movie or television star, a college or professional basketball, baseball, football, soccer, or golf star that has failed, let’s think through these and other possible factors that usually together put that person in the position in their life where that failure happened. And while we’re trying to understand, remember this: “But for the grace of God, that could be me.”