Purpose Of This Website
Copyright Law
Did Hillary Clinton And Lester Holt Conspire To Attack Trump Using Hand Signals

Watch the video closely and notice at least 6 times, Hillary scratches her face and within seconds, Holt allows Hillary to respond to something Trump is saying. This is as someone said, "age-old tactics" and has been used for years for deception and deceit.

If it turns out to be true, it is just more proof of the extent to which crooked lying Hillary will go to win this election.  NBC and Mr. Holt should never be allowed to moderate another debate.

I looked at other video's of Hillary at her rallies and when she debated Bernie and she is not seen ever scratching her face. 

I also read tweets of comments the liberal-left wing dumbo-crats are saying about the issue of Hillary's itching face, calling it another nut-case conspiracy theory.  This lame brain believe anything to support lying Hillary as though she is not capable of devious methods to get elected and then blaming it on conspiracy nuts is exactly what she and the liberal democrats are counting on, so you liberals are being duped and played like a fiddle!  What does that make you - FOOLISH! 

If Hillary Clinton becomes president, it will not take long before it is obvious her policies are going to tax everybody including the Middle Class and there will be job losses not job gains as she portends.

Here are some things she is going to do:
  • She will redistribute wealth (“We also have to make the economy fairer.”)
  • Federal regulators will control profits (“I want to see more companies do profit-sharing.”)
  • Additional job-destroying federal mandates (“Let’s have paid family leave, earned sick days.”)
  • A new generation of government dependents (“Affordable child care and debt-free college.”
  • And the usual liberal codes words for taxes, taxes, taxes (“We’re going to do it by having the wealthy pay their fair share and close the corporate loopholes.”)1

All of the above spells economic stagnation not prosperity. And there is no such thing as a free ride for education, paid family leave, earned sick days, child-care, etc. - the taxpayers - you and me pay for all of it not just the top 1% as the democrats keep saying. For the past several presidential elections, the democrats like a broken record attack the wealthy as though they don't pay any taxes or they don't pay enough. That is nonsense as the top 2% pay most of the taxes and that is a fact!

If the wealthy investors took all their money out of our economy, we would see a deep recession and sky-high prices as a result.  Having wealth is not a bad thing, but a good thing for the rich invest their money in America. The more money they invest the more jobs are created.  High taxes and burdensome regulations keep the country from prospering, but the democrats want to penalize the rich.  As radio talk show host, Rick Roberts said he didn't recall a poor person ever offering him a job or the person standing in line at the "meal line".   

The liberal left-wing Communist - Marxist want our money so they can spend it on liberal issues that suck the life-blood out of the economy and create more debt. Barack Obama created more debt during his 8 years than all of the presidents before him combined. Hillary Clinton wants to continue spending and adding to the enormous debt now approaching $21 trillion when we are technically and actually a bankrupt nation.  Trump is right, the Feds policies of creating artificial interest and inflation rates is a bubble about to burst and when it does, our money and assets will be worth "zero"!  That day is coming for we cannot continue to print worthless bogus fiat money and spend like there is no tomorrow.

1Source: email alert


Will Americans Elect A Career Criminal As President?

"Criminal:  a person who commits crimes for a living; malefactor, evildoer, transgressor, culprit, felon, crook."

    "Of all the astonishing and historic aspects of the 2016 presidential election, perhaps the most vexing is the fact that something like half of America's voters seem content to elect a pathological lying career criminal as president.
    How can this be? Has the electorate grown stupid - or morally dead?  In some cases yes, but many more are just abysmally ignorant, as revealed by an Annenberg Public Policy Center poll  showing almost two-thirds of Americans cannot name the three branches of the federal government. Millions are just not paying attention.
    Contributing to this massive reality deficit are the "mainstream media" who, so absurdly biased toward Hillary Clinton that they've abandoned their former pretense of objectivity, have been successfully protecting their favored candidate from public exposure despite her three-decades long record of crime, corruption, and sleaze.
    Even more inexplicable than the millions  of low-information, left-of-center voters ignorantly favoring Clinton despite her lifetime of corruption are the "NeverTrump" Republicans, some of whom actually claim America would be better off under a Hillary Clinton presidency than under Donald Trump.
    Nevertheless, repeated polls show fully two out of three American voters, including many Democrats believe Hillary Clinton to be dishonest, and untrustworthy. It is likewise undisputed that her husband Bill Clinton, is a serial sexual abuser. Yet these appalling aspects of the Clintons' record seem  to be, as Democrat pundits say, "old news" - and already "baked in" to the way many people regard the Clintons.
    There is,  however, something else that tends to blind many voters from seeing the Clinton crime family for what it really is. Dishonesty, deceitfulness, demagoguery,  - traits typical of so many politicians - are things the public understands. Lying they understand; politicians lie. Liberal versus conservative, pro-abortion versus anti-abortion, socialism versus capitalism, amnesty versus deportation, sexual anarchy versus biblical values - they understand that candidates hold vastly different views on these important issues and they support or oppose them on that basis.
    However,  actual criminality - the kind that lands people behind bars - is something else, and the reality of Hillary and Bill as career criminals hasn't truly penetrated the public mind."

Source:  excerpts from Whistleblower Magazine, published by WND, September 2016 issue; article by David Kupelian.

BWV Comment

I strongly recommend subscribing to Whistleblower Magazine (annual subscription $49.95) and reading not only the full article by David Kupelian, but the entire September 2016 issue - "Will We Elect A Criminal?"  You can subscribe to the magazine by going to or call toll-free 800-496-3266.  I have been a subscriber for many years. You will enjoy every monthly issue sent to your mailbox.

How can someone like Hillary Clinton with so much negative baggage even be allowed to run for the highest office in our land and why would intelligent people vote for her?  David speaks to that in his article as seen in the above excerpt. 

I also believe many Americans, especially those on the left, have lost their moral compass and with it developed a "dead conscience" - the inability to choose right over wrong. 

The Bible addresses this spiritual sickness:

I Timothy 4:1-2 NKJV

1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron,...

Their conscience is so dead that it is callous and hardened to the truth.

Do you ever marvel at how Democratic pundits seem totally unable to accept the facts even though it stares them in the face with every passing day. The answer is this Scripture.  The conscience is a function of man's spirit not his soul (the functions of the soul are mind, emotions and will).  Christ Jesus said that if the eye is evil then the whole body is full of darkness and if the light that is in you is darkness then how very great is that darkness (Matthew 6:23). In that passage, Jesus is using a metaphor (the eye or sight) as likened unto our spirit (conscience) from which we are guided to do either right or wrong.  If our eye or conscience is so dark that it cannot affirm or be guided by truth then lying becomes a way of life - good becomes evil and evil becomes good. I am afraid Obama, Hillary and Bill have lived a lie for so long that they have a dead conscience.  What are the consequences of a dead conscience? The Holy Spirit cannot convict a heart of wrong doing that is dead in spirit. It is a very serious condition. 
Trump - Hillary Debate

I agree with Joseph Farrah of World Net Daily that Hillary cleaned Trump's plow. It was obvious Trump was not prepared for the debate and his poor debating skills showed-up. He has a bad habit of not staying on point and jumps around like a rabbit in a brier-patch. He also missed several opportunities to go on the offensive against Hillary, but for some reason he allowed her to keep him on the defensive most of the debate.

In the next two debates Trump better take Hillary more seriously and hone his debating skills for she will eat him alive.  Hillary has a ton of baggage and Trump should have nailed her on those. Obviously the moderator favored Hillary and was wrong about "stop and frisk" being unconstitutional.  The Warren Supreme Court ruled on it in 1963 and declared it constitutional for police officers to stop and frisk someone they considered suspicious.  Just because a lower court judge in New York said "stop and frisk" was unconstitutional does not mean it is for a lower court cannot overturn a Supreme Court Decision. SCOTUS would have to overturn their own ruling.  So Mr. moderator was wrong and he should have fact-checked his own statements.

The other thing Mr. moderator, Lester Holt, was wrong about was Trump's public stand against the war in Iraq.  He was always against the war even before we invaded Iraq in 2003.  The media has spun the truth about Trump's opposition to that war.

Why he did not bring up Benghazi in regard to her poor judgment as well as her private server is beyond me.  He should have reminded the American people of her lying about an internet movie as the cause for the attack on our diplomatic compound in Benghazi and quoted FBI Director Comey's comments about her mishandling of classified information.  He had enough ammunition against Hillary to give her heart burn, but he tried to be Mr. nice guy. That did not work when Senator McCain and Romney debated Barack Obama. 

I really fault his campaign staff for not having him better prepared to debate a seasoned pro like Hillary Clinton. She is more articulate and last night showed a lot of poise. As concerning stamina, she showed no signs of fatigue or ill health and looked as fresh when it was over as when it began.  In fact, I thought Trump looked nervous.

He also needs to get rid of those stupid facial expressions when his opposition is speaking.  He did that during the GOP debates and looked foolish.  I don't why his advisors haven't addressed that.

I disagree with those who say he won the debate - really!  I guess they did not see the same debate I did.

I was very disappointed in Trump and his performance was poor - a D-!  


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Speaks Bold Truth To Anti-Israeli UN

The video of PM Netanyahu's speech to the UN is long, but I encourage you to watch it. You have to admire him for his willingness to speak truth to a prejudiced bias body of nations against Israel.

At one point in his speech he praises Israel for supporting the Gay/Lesbian agenda, but does not realize that is not something to be proud of, but actually an indictment of Israel for rejecting the Torah (the five books of the law) in condemning homosexuality as an abomination of God AND IT IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE!  (See Revelation 11:8).   Do you understand the meaning?

He also does not understand there is not going to be any peace in Israel until Messiah Jesus returns and establishes His kingdom on this wicked earth. It is only at that time a remnant of Jews will repent and accept Jesus as their God and Messiah. Because of the promise and covenant God made with Abraham, this end-time remnant will be allowed to have their own nation in  the land of Israel without the threat of attack or invasion from foreign hostile Arab nations.  In my book, The Day of the Lord, the Key To Understanding the End-Time Prophecy, I discuss this as a mystery of God for this end-time Jewish remnant is not part of the Church of God. (See Amos 9:11-15).

It is also not a coincidence the barren fruitless fig tree (Israel) is back in the land of Israel for the Lord Jesus predicted it (Read Matthew 24:32-35). It is there ONLY to fulfill prophecy not make it a special nation of chosen people. The majority of Jews will accept the Jewish Antichrist (Joel Richardson are you paying attention?) and only a third of them will repent and accept the Lord Jesus.  (See Zachariah 13:8-9).

Mr. Netanyahu does not understand this because like all Jews he rejects the New Testament - an indictment upon him and all unbelieving Jews. God is not going to excuse ignorance. If you do not believe me then read the Book of Hebrews. (Read the whole chapter Hebrews 10).

From many years as a dispensational pretribulation believer, I favored the Jews and Israel and probably sympathize with their situation more than the Arabs. However, as my eyes were opened to the truth about secular Zionism I understood the dichotomy between secular Israel and biblical Israel. It is daylight and dark.

End-time prophecy revolves around the city of Jerusalem and the nations that come against it.  The land of Israel belongs to the Lord as well as the city of Jerusalem. He is zealous for both.  This does not diminish the part the Church, the bride of Christ has in the end-time sequence of events.  The Jews today have the privilege of coming into the Body of Christ, the real Israel of God because the Church is the spiritual habitation of God.  The Jews that survive the last days (tribulation) and receive the Lord Jesus at His Second Coming receive a lessor blessing than those that accepted Jesus in the present age for they are part of the Church,  the body of Christ and the One New Man because they receive their glorified bodies in the First Resurrection and rapture and from that time become spiritual eternal beings. This is what the Book of Titus refers to as the blessed hope not a pretribulation rapture. I cover this in detail in my prophecy book on the Day of the Lord. (See Romans 11: 25 - 28 keeping in mind the unbelieving Jews are not all Israel). (See Romans 9:6-8).

My heart went out to Prime Minister Netanyahu because his yearning for peace is void of the Prince of Peace, Yeshua Jesus.  He is a lost Jew because he has rejected his true Messiah and does not understand that difficult days are ahead for Israel not an acceptance of a UN body that will embrace the Antichrist.

The New Testament clearly tell us the Church is to evangelize the Jews (first), but how many Christian Churches do that?  Modern day evangelical Christians are all hung-up on the third Jewish temple, the red heifer, the temple ornaments, the Sanhedrin, the high priest, etc. and not on the crucified resurrected, ascended soon to return Lord Jesus. (See Romans 1:16).

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem - the return of Messiah Yeshua Jesus for there will be no lasting peace until he returns only war and destruction.  (See Daniel 9:26-27).



Tulsa Police: Terence Crutcher Was On PCP Maybe; Ignored Police Commands

"Tulsa police officer Betty Shelby, who shot and killed 40-year-old Terence Crutcher last Friday, has given her side of the story, stating that Crutcher was “on something” when she encountered his stalled SUV on the road while responding to a different domestic violence incident. She was alone with him for about 90 seconds, where she says he was mumbling things, ignoring commands, and fired on him when she felt that he was armed and her life was in danger. The story goes that Crutcher was reaching inside the vehicle, though enhanced footage paints a different picture, as a blood streak appears—that could only occur if the window was rolled up. Still, Crutcher ignored commands and walked towards his vehicle, which led to him being tragically shot by Shelby. Again, the Dinkheller incident explains why this could happen to someone who isn't complying with law enforcement. The Justice Department is now investigating the case".

Read the full article...

BWV Comment

I'm sorry, but I am not buying this.  Officer Betty Shelby could have tazered Terence Crutcher not murdered him and that is what she did. A tazer would have prevented Crutcher from harming Ms. Shelby.  Even though she didn't know he was unarmed and maybe felt her life was in danger, she could have reacted differently and Mr. Crutcher would be alive today.  The policemen in the helicopter hovering over the scene thought she was going to tazer Crutcher not shoot him.

We are talking about a human being's life that was snuffed out by an unfortunate quick decision by a police officer that was the wrong decision! 

Suppose the victim was White and the police officer was Black. What would be your reaction - a trigger-happy Black cop thought it necessary to shoot and kill a White man?   I think I know the answer to that question.

Our priority should be to protect life - all life!  


Massachusetts Supreme Court Gives Green Light For Blacks To Flee Cops

"In a decision certain to influence the debate over police interactions with black suspects, the Massachusetts Supreme Court dismissed the gun conviction of a black man arrested by Boston police, ruling his fleeing from officers can be considered legitimate given black males’ fear of being racially profiled."

Read the full article...

BWV Comment

There have been two bad decisions rendered by the high courts this week - this one by the Massachusetts Supreme Court and the other one by the SCOTUS.  The ruling by the MSC is obviously tainted with politics particularly in view of recent cop killings of two Black men in Tulsa and Charlotte.  The United States Supreme Court in ruling without a case before them that the DOJ can hack into our cellphones and computers is somewhat unprecedented although presumably there is some legal procedure that allows SCOTUS to rule on issues without a case.  I would like to know what that is and the legal premise for it.

Our nation is being ruled by an out-of-control Executive Branch and court system both of which are doing end-runs around Congress. The courts primary and only responsibility is to interpret cases before them according to the rule of law and the Constitution not become legislators that make decisions based on their personal whims and the PC nonsense. This is what made Justice Scalia a great Supreme Court Justice - he based his rulings on the Constitutional and strict rule of law.

The very bad decision of the Massachusetts SC will only make things worse for the police not better nor will it help mediate racial tensions.  Because of their stupid prejudicial ruling, the cops will now have to make split second decisions on whether to pursue a Black man fleeing the police (Notice in the ruling it is only for Blacks not Whites or other ethnic groups) even though he or she is caught in the act of committing a crime. The MSC ruling further places in jeopardy evidence gathered at the crime scene if the cops give chase to a fleeing Black man. None of this solves the problem of trigger-happy cops or Blacks that don't have any respect for police authority. 

The solution is for all police departments to get rid of bad cops that shoot innocent people be they Black or White.  If this female cop is found guilty of over-reacting then she should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and that means the death penalty.  Cops that kill innocent Blacks or for that matter anyone, should get the death penalty.  Moreover, parents of young Black men should teach them to obey the cops, that is, if a cop says, get your hands in the air or get down on the ground, that is what you do.  You don't talk back to the cops or agitate them. It is called submission!  Be submissive when confronted by the cops and if one of them oversteps his or her authority, then they should be fired from the police force and never allowed to wear a badge or carry a gun again.

Watching Fox News tonight the protest has turned into rioting, looting and one person shot and killed.  Blacks need to go back and study how Dr. Martin Luther King conducted peaceful protest and he accomplished more than the Black Lives Matter organization and others like them will ever do.  Retaliation and taking revenge is never the way to bring about change. It only creates more hate and unrest.  The innocent hard-working people whose businesses are being trashed, burned and looted didn't do any thing to these angry young Blacks. They are not endearing themselves to the American people. 

Black people rightly so do not like to be called uncivilized savages, but in the eyes of many American's, and yes many White folks, that is exactly what they are seeing take place - out of control Blacks going on a rampage against the police, local businesses, news networks and those who want peaceful protest. They end up being their own worst enemy.

Do we need social discourse about racial injustice? Yes, we do.  The killing of unarmed Black men by the police has got to stop and I would be one of the first to stand with them as long as the protest was peaceful and productive.  Most of the radio talk show hosts I listened to today said after watching the video of the Black man gunned down by the police in Tulsa, it was disturbing and it was.

The reason I wanted to know if the murdered Black man in Tulsa was right or left-handed is that if he was right-handed, then reaching into his car with his left hand meant he was not trying to retrieve a weapon. If he was left-handed then that would make a difference except no gun was found on his person and in his car.  He was unarmed.

I have another question. When the female officer arrived on the scene she observed or should have a car stalled in the middle of the road with the caution lights blinking and a Black man standing on the side of the road. Why didn't she pull up close to the Black man, get out of her car and stand behind it while asking him if he was having car trouble or what was the problem. She could plainly see he was unarmed.  That would have diffused some of the tension.  Perhaps he would have told her the problem with the car. By that time, the other police officers arrived on the scene and could have checked his car for weapons while the female officer engaged the Black man in conversation.   The police were responding to a stalled vehicle in the road which  could happen to anyone. There was no reason to jump to conclusions the Black man was a threat to the police because he was Black.  It does look like racial profiling for no reason, like the policeman said in the helicopter, "he looks like a bad dude"! Why, because he was Black? I know a lot of White men that look like bad dudes, but that is a statement without knowledge because I do not know them.

White police officers that shoot and kill innocent Black men not only give Whites a black eye, but just add more fuel to the fire of racial hatred.

We all need to follow the Golden Rule:  Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.  Christ Jesus said we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Who is my neighbor? Everyone we meet in life. 


White Female Police Officer Fatally Shoots And Kills Unarmed Black Man

"TULSA -- A police spokesman says the Oklahoma officer who fatally shot an unarmed black man had a stun gun at the time but did not use it.

Tulsa Police Sgt. Shane Tuell tells The Associated Press that officer Betty Shelby was certified on the use of stun guns. Police say Shelby fatally shot 40-year-old Terence Crutcher on Friday while responding to a report of a stalled vehicle.

Police say Crutcher did not have a weapon on him or in his SUV.

Shelby’s attorney, Scott Wood, told the Tulsa World that Shelby opened fire and another officer used a stun gun when Crutcher’s “left hand goes through the car window.”

Read more....

BWV Comment

I watched the video numerous times of another unfortunate killing of an innocent Black man on a rural Tulsa road.  It appears to me that he had car problems and his car was stopped in the middle of the road. His caution lights were on, which indicates he was warning other motorists of his stalled vehicle. Apparently he had walked over to the side of the road to get out of the highway.

The White Female officer arrived first on the scene as the Black man is slowly walking back to his car. You can hear what sounded like the White police officer telling him to put his hands up, which he did immediately.  He then walks slowly back to his car with the female police officer following him.  Several other police officers arrive on the  scene (all male) and join the female cop.

The Black man leans over and reaches inside the driver side of his car with his left hand (I would like to know if he was right or left handed). At that moment shots are heard and the Black man falls to the ground and blood is seen on his white shirt.  He is dead, shot in cold blood.  This White female officer had a tazer and was trained in how to use it. Why didn't see taze him? The policemen in the helicopter hovering over the scene remarked that she was getting ready to taze him. They sounded a little stunned that she shot him instead of using her tazer. 

One of the cops in the chopper is heard to say the "Black man looks like a bad dude!"  He doesn't know anything about the Black man so that was a racist statement.  I have personally known Black men that were intimidating due to their size and facial expression, but were actually gentle as lambs and complete gentlemen.  As the saying goes, you cannot judge a book by looking at the cover. 

What was the Black man trying to do - recover his car keys; retrieve his cell phone?  One thing is clear, which the Tulsa police chief admitted, the Black man did not have a weapon on him or in his car. He was unarmed.

The evidence seems to imply that we have another case of a trigger-happy cop that could easily have taken down the Black man with her tazer and he would be alive today.  The White female officer if found guilty of killing an innocent Black man should be confined on death row until executed.  This killing of unarmed Black men has got to stop or there will never be any peace between the White and Black races.  On the other hand, if a Black man attacks a White police officer as did Michael Brown and is killed, the Black community should own up to their responsibility and not make a false national incident out of it.  The White police officer says the Black man was disobeying her orders to stop and get on the ground. I did not hear that on the video. That is no excuse to have killed him! 

This situation no doubt will cause more rioting by Blacks, which is already occurring, and in this situation, I cannot blame them.  I just hope it doesn't cause another Dallas, TX with open season on White cops.

Hillary Clinton is totally wrong when she rebuked a Black man with the Black Lives Matter movement for saying we need a heart change in America. She said, we don't need a heart change,  we just need to change our laws. That proves she has no spiritual depth and sees things from a strictly secular viewpoint. 

I feel for the Black family that lost a loved one to police over-reaction. 


Democratic Left-Wing Lesbian, Donna Brazile Slips Up In Interview With MSNBC

While appearing as a guest on MSNBC "AM Joy" show, Donna Brazile, misspoke and said Hillary had to be lifted up into the Van as she was not in control of her body. That is the first time we have heard she did not walk into the Van, but had to be lifted into it.

The American people should begin to demand that Hillary allow an independent team of doctors examine her, not just her personnel physician. If this were Donald Trump who was showing signs of a serious illness, old Hillary would be one of the first to yell and scream about his poor health as well as demand he be examined by independent doctors. However, the Clinton's and the DNC thinks the rules do not apply to them that somehow they are an untouchable elitist class and better than everyone else.


Read the full article.

Did you see where the top editor at arch liberal Huffington Post has written Hillary's political obituary - doesn't believe she can beat Donald Trump. Hope he is right.


Josh Earnest, We Are In A "Narrative War" With ISIS

While the media and members of Congress are trying to figure out what Obama clone, Josh Earnest, meant by a "narrative war", former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton explained it rather succinctly this morning on the Fox News network. 

He said that from day one of Obama's administration, he has launched an attack on the English language by changing and twisting the meaning of words in order to confuse the American people of his real agenda to lead by deception.  Ambassador Bolton did not use those exact words, but it was clear what he meant and I agree with him.

Webster's dictionary defines "narrative" as something that is told in full detail such as a story.  Do you suppose ISIS thinks of the war against the West as a story to be told in full detail or a violent aggressive murderous action that not only kills and rapes innocent people and destroys massive amounts of property, but strikes fear into the hearts of peace-loving people. As for me, I will go with the latter.  John Bolton also said ISIS understands one thing - "strength".   There was a time not too long ago that ISIS would not have dared raised its ugly head against the United States or even tried to conquer the Middle East for fear that we would retaliate in massive power and wipe them off the face of the earth, but they knew Obama was weak and would not come after them with the power of the United States. The whole world is paying a price for that kind of stupid strategy. One day soon, ISIS is going to hit our nation with a massive blow that is going to kill many Americans and destroy a lot of property. While I do not want it to happen for sure, I just hope if it does occur that it happens on Obama's watch and maybe that will wake-up the people to realize Obama has not protected our homeland as he swore to do in the oath of office he took as President.  

As you know, I keep saying Obama under the Constitution has committed treason against the American people many times and he has. The granting of citizenship to some 858 refugees from the war-torn Middle East, which the FBI had vetted for deportation is inexcusable and another act of treason:  Here are excerpts from an article at ABC News:

"The U.S. government has mistakenly granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants from countries of concern to national security or with high rates of immigration fraud who had pending deportation orders, according to an internal Homeland Security audit released Monday.

The Homeland Security Department's inspector general found that the immigrants used different names or birth-dates to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and such discrepancies weren't caught because their fingerprints were missing from government databases.

DHS said in an emailed statement that an initial review of these cases suggest that some of the individuals may have ultimately qualified for citizenship, and that the lack of digital fingerprint records does not necessarily mean they committed fraud.

The report does not identify any of the immigrants by name, but Inspector General John Roth's auditors said they were all from "special interest countries" — those that present a national security concern for the United States — or neighboring countries with high rates of immigration fraud. The report did not identify those countries."

Read the full article.

This proves what FBI Director Comey said, that we cannot possibly vet all the refugees coming into our country. By granting citizenship to refugees the FBI had ready for deportation is an act of treason by President Obama - clear and simple TREASON! 

The oath he swore to keep was to protect the American people from enemies both domestic and foreign. Does what did in granting citizenship to criminal refugees sound like protecting the American people?  What nutcase believes that?  Many of the terrorists Obama released from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have returned to fight on the side of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban and have killed more Americans. Does that sound like protecting the American people from foreign enemies? 

Unfortunately, we don't have a single Congress man or woman with the guts to put forth articles of impeachment against Obama - NONE, NOTTA!  They are so afraid of their political careers they are  useless as protectors of truth. This sort of thing is what is attracting the surge in the electorate for Donald Trump. The American people, at least a large percentage of them, are tired and fed-up with lying wimpy politicians. I am one of those.


What Is The FBI Hiding?
By Judge Andrew Napolitano

"Earlier this week, Republican leaders in both houses of Congress took the FBI to task for its failure to be transparent. In the House, it was apparently necessary to serve a subpoena on an FBI agent to obtain what members of Congress want to see; and in the Senate, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee accused the FBI itself of lawbreaking.

Here is the back story.

Ever since FBI Director James Comey announced on July 5 he was recommending that the Department of Justice not seek charges against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a result of her failure to safeguard state secrets during her time in office, many in Congress have had a nagging feeling that this was a political, not a legal, decision. The publicly known evidence of Clinton's recklessness and willful failure to safeguard secrets was overwhelming. The evidence of her lying under oath about whether she returned all her work-related emails that she had taken from the State Department was profound and incontrovertible.

And then we learned that people who worked for Clinton were instructed to destroy several of her mobile devices and to remove permanently the stored emails on one of her servers. All this was done after these items had been subpoenaed by two committees of the House of Representatives.

Yet the FBI -- which knew of the post-subpoena destruction of evidence and which acknowledged that Clinton failed to return thousands of her work-related emails as she had been ordered by a federal judge to do, notwithstanding at least three of her assertions to the contrary while under oath -- chose to overlook the evidence of not only espionage but also obstruction of justice, tampering with evidence, perjury and misleading Congress.

As if to defend itself in the face of this most un-FBI-like behavior, the FBI then released to the public selected portions of its work product, which purported to back up its decision to recommend against the prosecution of Clinton. Normally, the FBI gathers evidence and works with federal prosecutors and federal grand juries to build cases against targets in criminal probes, and its recommendations to prosecutors are confidential.

But in Clinton's case, the hierarchy of the Department of Justice removed itself from the chain of command because of the orchestrated impropriety of Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, who met in private on the attorney general's plane at a time when both Bill and Hillary Clinton were subjects of FBI criminal investigations. That left the FBI to have the final say about prosecution -- or so the FBI and the DOJ would have us all believe.

It is hard to believe that the FBI was free to do its work, and it is probably true that the FBI was restrained by the White House early on. There were numerous aberrations in the investigation. There was no grand jury; no subpoenas were issued; no search warrants were served. Two people claimed to have received immunity, yet the statutory prerequisite for immunity -- giving testimony before a grand or trial jury -- was never present.

Because many members of Congress do not believe that the FBI acted free of political interference, they demanded to see the full FBI files in the case, not just the selected portions of the files that the FBI had released. In the case of the House, the FBI declined to surrender its files, and the agent it sent to testify about them declined to reveal their contents. This led to a dramatic service of a subpoena by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on that FBI agent while he was testifying -- all captured on live nationally broadcast television.

Now the FBI, which usually serves subpoenas and executes search warrants, is left with the alternative of complying with this unwanted subpoena by producing its entire file or arguing to a federal judge why it should not be compelled to do so.

On the Senate side, matters are even more out of hand. There, in response to a request from the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI sent both classified and unclassified materials to the Senate safe room. The Senate safe room is a secure location that is available only to senators and their senior staff, all of whom must surrender their mobile devices and writing materials and swear in writing not to reveal whatever they see while in the room before they are permitted to enter.

According to Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI violated federal law by commingling classified and unclassified materials in the safe room, thereby making it unlawful for senators to discuss publicly the unclassified material.

Imposing such a burden of silence on U.S. senators about unclassified materials is unlawful and unconstitutional. What does the FBI have to hide? Whence comes the authority of the FBI to bar senators from commenting on unclassified materials?

Who cares about this? Everyone who believes that the government works for us should care because we have a right to know what the government -- here the FBI -- has done in our names. Sen. Grassley has opined that if he could reveal what he has seen in the FBI unclassified records, it would be of profound interest to American voters.

What is going on here? The FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton has not served the rule of law. The rule of law -- a pillar of American constitutional freedom since the end of the Civil War -- mandates that the laws are to be enforced equally. No one is beneath their protection, and no one is above their requirements. To enforce the rule of law, we have hired the FBI.

What do we do when the FBI rejects its basic responsibilities?

BWV Comment

Answer:  We have no rule of law when the premier law-enforcement agency of our nation, the FBI, abdicates its responsibility under the Constitution.  We become a lawless society just as Jesus Christ predicted as recorded in Matthew's gospel, Chapter 24. Look it  up.  


911 Conspiracy Gets Support From Physicists Study

"WASHINGTON – For 15 years, there’s been a small band of investigators who have questioned the idea that the Twin Towers in New York City collapsed because of the intense heat and fires raging following two terrorist-directed plane crashes.

But they have largely been dismissed as crazy conspiracy theorists.

Now, however, Europhysics Magazine, the respected publication of the European physics community, has published a report by four experts who say “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.”

“Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” the four physicists conclude."

Read more.....

BWV Comment

The anti-conspiracy crowd will have a field day with this. Did two passenger jets hit the twin towers in NYC on September 11, 2001? Yes, without doubt, but Building 7 wasn't hit by any planes yet it fell to the ground in a planned-like demolition. In addition, NYC firemen going into the buildings are on record testifying they heard a "boom, boom, boom" sound like demolition charges going off.  I listened to the tape recording on that one and it is a fact they thought they were hearing demolition charges going off.  

Whatever you believe happened on 9-11, there are still unanswered questions, which these distinguished physicists question. One thing that was suspicious to me was how quick the buildings fell after the jets penetrated the steel structure and the way they fell - straight down like would occur in a planned demolition. 

Some who are gullible enough to believe our own government would not participate in a cover-up scheme against the American people are blind as bats and most naive. They also are uninformed about a Shadow Government working in secret behind the visible government that controls much of what happens in Washington, D.C.  If you think that is more right-wing nut cases, then you just called President Franklin D. Roosevelt a nut case for he is quoted as saying, "Nothing takes place in Washington that is not already planned behind closed doors." 

Powerful men and women meet annually in the secret societies to plan and coordinate global activities that includes world governments. For those of you who don't know anything about the Greek language of the New Testament (it is not the same as national Greek; the Greek language of the New Testament is Koine Greek so you would have to understand biblical Greek), the Apostle Paul mentioned the secret societies in his second letter to the Thessalonians, Chapter 2. Do you know which verse and word(s)?  What secret society would he be talking about in about A.D. 51 when he wrote 2 Thessalonians?  Anyone know? 

Secret societies and conspiracies in one form or another are about as old as mankind and have become more prominent in the past two millennia (most prominent since about 400 A.D.)

A literary work everyone should read, that is, if you want to know the truth about conspiracies, is a book by Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand, An Introduction to the Conspiratorial View of History.  It is 436 pages supported with copious references.  I read it some years ago and still find it up-to-date and fascinating.    

The stupid people are the ones who are afraid to think outside the box of what is considered the "norm" as well as to question what passes for truth in the media and what comes out of Washington, D.C. and the governments of the world. None of that is the biblical worldview (God's worldview).