Russian Hacking Story Completely Fabricated By Former CIA Director John Brennan (VIDEO)

Adolf Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, in Nazi Germany was quoted as saying:

“Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth.”

Conservatives have seen this in Leftwing News, and “Fake News” is the epitome of Goebbel’s infamous tactics in telling the people what to think. The “lie” part is of no consequence to the Left because they have no morals – only an agenda. Getting the job done is the name of the game. The Leftwing “sheeple” will believe anything they hear from CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the MSM.

The Left was Stunned

After the American people spoke, and voted President Trump into office – the Left had a meltdown.  How could this happen?  They were told that Hillary had it in the bag!  The polls showed that she would win – handily!

In this case, the blatant lies about the polls backfired on the Left.  How could this happen?  They knew that the polls that were coming out were not real – but they had planned to discourage Conservatives to stay home and not cast a vote.

As Pastor JD Farag says…..”But God……”  and this truly was a blessing from our Lord.  He would not allow the Clintons to once again inhabit the People’s House. He gave us a reprieve from the evil. The writing was on the wall for all Christians to read.  Our rights were in jeopardy of being taken away.  But God…..

But the Lie goes on and on and on……

The Left, in their disbelief at what had happened, had to come up with a reason. It couldn’t be that the the American people had finally had their eyes opened to the destruction of America under Barack Obama’s regime. The Left needed a scapegoat,  and Russia was chosen behind closed doors. Yes! They would blame Russia for interfering with our elections.

UMBRAGE

In June of this year, a story broke about a program that was written by one of BHO’s CIA lackeys, that could mimic “Russians hackers.”  Here is the article:

CIA’s Program “UMBRAGE” Mimics Russian Hackers: Plan To Take Down Trump

For some reason, this story (although having legs) seemed to fade away.

From consortiumnews.com

Believing the Russian ‘Hacking’ Claim

Government lies are common when seducing a population to support a war, but the Russian “hacking” claims are unusual in that U.S. officials supply no evidence while the “fact” is just assumed, as David Swanson explains.

When the U.S. public was told that Spain had blown up the Maine, or Vietnam had returned fire, or Iraq had stockpiled weapons, or Libya was planning a massacre, the claims were straightforward and disprovable.

CIA Director John Brennan addresses officials at the Agency’s headquarters in Langley, Virginia. (Photo credit: CIA)

Before people began referring to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, somebody had to lie that it had happened, and there had to be an understanding of what had supposedly happened. No investigation into whether anything had happened could have taken as its starting point the certainty that a Vietnamese attack or attacks had happened. And no investigation into whether a Vietnamese attack had happened could have focused its efforts on unrelated matters, such as whether anyone in Vietnam had ever done business with any relatives or colleagues of Robert McNamara.

All of this is otherwise with the idea that the Russian government determined the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. U.S. corporate media reports often claim that Russia did decide the election or tried to do that or wanted to try to do that. But they also often admit to not knowing whether any such thing is the case.

There is no established account, with or without evidence to support it, of exactly what Russia supposedly did. And yet there are countless articles casually referring, as if to established fact to the . . .

“Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election” (Yahoo).

“Russian attempts to disrupt the election” (New York Times).

“Russian … interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election” (ABC).

“Russian influence over the 2016 presidential election” (The Intercept).

“a multi-pronged investigation to uncover the full extent of Russia’s election-meddling” (Time).

“Russian interference in the US election” (CNN).

“Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election” (American Constitution Society).

“Russian hacking in US Election” (Business Standard).”

“Obama Strikes Back at Russia for Election Hacking” we’re told by the New York Times, but what is “election hacking”? Its definition seems to vary widely. And what evidence is there of Russia having done it?

The “Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections” even exists as a factual event in Wikipedia, not as an allegation or a theory. But the factual nature of it is not so much asserted as brushed aside.

Former CIA Director John Brennan, in the same Congressional testimony in which he took the principled stand “I don’t do evidence,” testified that “the fact that the Russians tried to influence resources and authority and power, and the fact that the Russians tried to influence that election so that the will of the American people was not going to be realized by that election, I find outrageous and something that we need to, with every last ounce of devotion to this country, resist and try to act to prevent further instances of that.” He provided no evidence.

Activists have even planned “demonstrations to call for urgent investigations into Russian interference in the US election.” They declare that “every day we learn more about the role Russian state-led hacking and information warfare played in the 2016 election.” (March for Truth.)

Belief that Russia helped put Trump in the White House is steadily rising in the U.S. public. Anything commonly referred to as fact will gain credibility. People will assume that at some point someone actually established that it was a fact.

Keeping the story in the news without evidence are articles about polling, about the opinions of celebrities, and about all kinds of tangentially related scandals, their investigations, and obstruction thereof. Most of the substance of most of the articles that lead off with reference to the “Russian influence on the election” is about White House officials having some sort of connections to the Russian government, or Russian businesses, or just Russians. It’s as if an investigation of Iraqi WMD claims focused on Blackwater murders or whether Scooter Libby had taken lessons in Arabic, or whether the photo of Saddam Hussein and Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands was taken by an Iraqi.

A general trend away from empirical evidence has been extensively noted and discussed. There is no more public evidence that Seth Rich (a Democratic National Committee staffer who was murdered last year) leaked Democratic emails than there is that the Russian government stole them. Yet both claims have passionate believers.

Still, the claims about Russia are unique in their wide proliferation, broad acceptance, and status as something to be constantly referred to as though already established, constantly augmented by other Russia-related stories that add nothing to the central claim. This phenomenon, in my view, is as dangerous as any lies and fabrications coming out of the racist right. source

Today, I found this:

From truthuncensored.net     (Please forgive vile language used)

Seymour Hersh: “Russian Hacking” Story Was Completely Concocted By Former CIA Director John Brennan (Video)

Journalist Seymour Hersh, a Pulitzer Prize investigative journalist and political writer, has given us good reason to believe what many have long suspected: that the “hacking” of the Democratic National Committee was an inside job.

This is yet another blow delivered to the “Putin did it” conspiracy theory, one that may indeed prove fatal.

Hersh claims that the whole ‘Russian Collusion” story was completely concocted by former CIA director John Brennan.

In the audio tape that was obtained by Big League Politics, Hersh says he saw an FBI report leaked to him by an insider which confirms that Rich had contacted Wikileaks with sample emails from the DNC leak and asked for payment for the full data dump.

“All I know is that he offered a sample, an extensive sample, I’m sure dozens of emails, and said ‘I want money.’ Later, WikiLeaks did get the password, he had a DropBox, a protected DropBox,” he said. They got access to the DropBox,” added Hersh.

Although he thinks Rich’s murder was a robbery gone wrong, Hersh acknowledges that the former DNC staffer was concerned for his safety.

“The word was passed, according to the NSA report, he also shared this DropBox with a couple of friends, so that ‘if anything happens to me it’s not going to solve your problems,’” said Hersh. “WikiLeaks got access before he was killed.

”In an interview with Ed Butowsky, a Republican operative who has been financing an investigation of the Seth Rich affair, (here’s a transcript), Hersh told Butowsky that Seth Rich, who worked for the DNC and was murdered on July 10, 2016, was in contact with WikiLeaks, and wanted money for access to the DNC emails.

Strange how the MSM only talks about Seth Rich when they can spin it to damage Trump. Seymour Hersh’s huge revelations IGNORED.

Hersh contends that, upon Rich’s death, the District of Colombia police went into his apartment – with a warrant — and examined his computer, but they couldn’t get into it. So they called in the DC cyber unit, which didn’t do much better, and so they called in the FBI’s Washington field office, the cyber unit, and they got in. “What I know came off an FBI report,” says Hersh. “Don’t ask me how. You can figure it out.” Well, yes, we can indeed, Mint Press News reports.

He goes on to say:

“And so what the report says is that sometime in late spring, we’re talking June you know summers in June 21st, late spring would be after, I presume, I don’t know, I’d just say late spring, early summer and he makes contact with WikiLeaks. That’s in his computer and he makes contact.”

Hersh notes that the last DNC/Podesta emails posted by WikiLeaks are from late May 2016, or “early summer,” a timeline that fits in with the sequence of events: his contact with WikiLeaks followed by his death in what appears to be a random shooting. Hersh continues:

“So, they found what he’d done. He had submitted a series of documents, of emails. Some juicy emails from the DNC, and you know, by the way all this shit about the DNC, um, you know, whether it was hacked or wasn’t hacked, whatever happened, the Democrats themselves wrote this shit, you know what I mean? All I know is that he [Seth] offered a sample, an extensive sample, you know I’m sure dozens of emails and said ‘I want money.’”

This note of realism – “I want money” – for the first time provides us with something that has previously been missing from the arguments of those who have claimed that the “hacks” were an inside job, and not a case of Russian cyber-warfare: motive. After all, why would Rich, supposedly a loyal employee of the DNC and a committed Democrat, hand over embarrassing emails that would hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign? Well, now here we have it. If true, this not only explains why Rich would do such a thing, but also why the Rich family is furiously denying that their son was in any way connected with the DNC/Podesta email revelations.

Hersh goes on to detail what is in the FBI report:

“Then later WikiLeaks did get the password, he had a Dropbox, a protected Dropbox, which isn’t hard to do, I mean you don’t have to be a wizard IT, you know, he was certainly not a dumb kid. They got access to the Dropbox.”

And so, according to Hersh, WikiLeaks must have reached a deal with Rich, and the rest is history. It’s not clear to me what “They got access to the Dropbox” means: is Hersh talking about WikiLeaks, or the FBI? In any case, Rich apparently took precautions to cover his ass, as Hersh relates:

“He also, and this is also in the FBI report, he also let people know, with whom he was dealing, and I don’t know how he dealt, I’ll tell you about WikiLeaks in a second. I don’t know how he dealt with the WikiLeaks and the mechanism but he also, the word was passed according to the NSA report, ‘I’ve also shared this box with a couple of friends so if anything happens to me it’s not going to solve your problem.’ Ok. I don’t know what that means.”

Well, something did happen to him, but we’ll pass over that and note that Hersh mentions “the NSA report.” So the FBI, in investigating this case, turned to the National Security Agency, which has access to everyone’s online communications, and came up with evidence confirming that Rich was in contact with WikiLeaks, that he had a secure Dropbox, and that he was concerned that he might be in danger. Hersh says “the word was passed” – but to whom? There are more mysteries here than we can uncover with just these bits of information.

According to Hersh, a warrant exists for the DC police entry into Rich’s residence. There’s also a report from the FBI, which Hersh has not seen, as far as I can tell, but which has perhaps been read to him. As Hersh puts it:

“I have somebody on the inside, you know I’ve been around a long time, and I write a lot of stuff. I have somebody on the inside who will go and read a file for me. This person is unbelievably accurate and careful, he’s a very high-level guy and he’ll do a favor. You’re just going to have to trust me.”

Hersh’s record speaks for itself: from exposing the My Lai massacre to ripping the lid off the false flag Syrian “chemical attack,” he’s made a career out of unmasking the lies and machinations of the War Party. I’ll take his word over the word of some anonymous spook leaking to the Washington Postany day of the week. And perhaps this is the time to point out that there’s just as much evidence for what Hersh is telling us as there is for the tall tales of “collusion” with Moscow that have been retailed by the “mainstream” media for a solid year.

The “Russia-gate” conspiracy theory never had any real evidence to support it aside from the arbitrary assertions of three US intelligence agencies: the “proof” they submitted to the public was laughable,as Jeffrey Carr and other cyber-warfare experts have pointed out. Yet we don’t have the actual evidence to support Hersh’s contentions, although if he’s right there is indeed a paper trail: the warrant, the FBI and NSA reports, and probably more.

However, it is an exercise in elementary logic to take the simplest explanation for how the DNC/Podesta materials got out – an insider with access did it for money —  rather than assume it was an elaborate Russian conspiracy involving teams of hackers, the Russian intelligence agencies, and Vladmir Putin himself. Apparently our brainless media, not to mention our not-very-intelligent “intelligence community,” have never heard of Occam’s Razor.

Hersh, who has been around the block several times, and is intimately familiar with how the intelligence community operates – as well as being personally familiar with the individuals involved – is onto the game that’s being play here. In his words:

“I have a narrative of how that whole f**king thing began, it’s a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation and f**king the fu**ing President, at one point when they, they even started telling the press, they were back briefing the press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, f**king cock-sucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the GRU, the Russian Military Intelligence Service, who leaked it. I mean [it’s] all bullshit…. Trump’s not wrong to think they all f**king lie about him.”

It’s all bullshit: Russia-gate, the “collusion” gambit, and the whole avalanche of fake “news” that purports to describe a Russian conspiracy to “undermine our democracy.” It’s a lie, pure and simple. More than that: it’s an exact inversion of the truth. Because what’s happening is that a vast intelligence-gathering apparatus is being utilized to undermine an elected President and undertake what is in effect a “legal” coup d’etat. But then again, projection has always been an essential element of the War Party’s methodology.

I’m not surprised that Hersh’s revelations have been studiously ignored, even by some “alternative” news sites. Despite this ominous silence, there has been one attempt to cut Hersh off at the pass: National Public Radio ran a piece about the lawsuit Butowsky is being served with in which Hersh’s conversation is quoted. NPR tellingly edits out what Hersh actually said in that conversation, but does cite Hersh purportedly saying Butowsky misunderstood him.

However, it looks like Hersh didn’t know he was being recorded, because the recording directly contradicts both Hersh and what NPR is reporting. An email exchange between Butowsky and Hersh, in which the former pleads with the famous journalist to go public, has been published, and when a reporter called him for comment Hersh clammed up:

“‘I’m not going to comment about that stuff, I mean, come on, I live in the real world.’

“When asked to confirm that it was him speaking on the bombshell audio recording, he stated, ‘I’m not going to talk to anybody about that. No comment.’”

While Hersh is being called on to clear this matter up, there are several reasons why he might not do so, at least quite yet. He could be working on his own story, and – in the same vein – doesn’t want to burn his source, who would be understandably nervous about possibly being outed.

WARNING:  VERY FOWL LANGUAGE IN VIDEO

   source

So there you have it.  The lie told over and over has come back to bite those who have defiantly repeated  it.  Will they fess up?  That’s doubtful, unless they are looking at jail time.

But doesn’t it seem that the Left seldom pay for their crimes?

Shalom b’Yeshua

MARANATHA!

 

 

 

 

 

 

The American Left: The ONLY Way That Christians Can Fight Back

WHO is the father of lies, the author of confusion and the accuser of the brethren? Every true believer knows the answer to this question.

And WHO do you think has deceived half of the U.S. into believing that our president is a fascist? Only the father of lies could pull this off. Brethren, we must remember what the Word tells us:

“Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Ephesians 6: 10-13). (Emphasis added)

The Big Lie

I’m certain that most of you have read stories from the NY Times, Washington Post and other Leftist bogus news sources, that our president is a fascist.

From townhall.com  (Written in 2015 during the reign of BHO)

What, Exactly, Is a Fascist?

It’s hard to find a self-respecting liberal these days who doesn’t denounce Donald Trump as “a fascist.” If you Google “fascist,” the first thing that pops up on the screen is a photo of Trump.

University professors, Democratic pundits and members of the media who don’t call him a fascist resort to over-the-top, sneering terms like “racist,” “repellent” and even “Nazi.” After Trump’s call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, here are a few of the choice words from those tolerant people on the left:

“He is running for President as a fascist demagogue,” said Martin O’Malley, Democratic presidential candidate.

“Trump wants to literally write racism into our law books,” said Huma Abedin, aide to Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton.

“It is … entirely fair to call him a mendacious racist,” said Ben Smith, editor-in-chief, BuzzFeed.
“America’s modern Mussolini,” said Dana Milbank of The Washington Post.

“Trump is a proto-fascist, rather than an actual fascist. He has many ideas that are fascistic in nature,” wrote Peter Bergen, CNN’s national security analyst.

At the end of this sneering commentary, Bergen launched into a fascinating tutorial on what a fascist is. Here are several key characteristics of a fascist leader according to CNN:

1. “The superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason.”

2. “The belief of one group that it is the victim, justifying any action.”

3. “The need for authority by natural leaders (always male) culminating in a national chief who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s destiny.”
Wait a minute. What modern politician best fits this description? Could it be Barack Obama, the Messiah, the chosen one, the man who holds political rallies with gothic columns in giant amphitheaters, who enters the stage as if he were a Greek god? Obama is the greatest demagogue of modern times, who convinced the vast electorate that they are “victims” and that the key to happiness and prosperity is to take from the rich: people, he says, who have way more wealth than they could possibly need.

Obama’s whole political success rests on identity politics — on persuading blacks, Hispanics, Jews, women, the disabled, gays, students, the poor and immigrants that they are victims of a vast American government conspiracy against them.

As for belief in the “superiority” of the leader’s powers “over reason,” Barack Obama, omnipotent, tells his followers that he has the capability of “healing the planet,” changing the earth’s weather pattern and stopping oceans from rising. He is promising miracles that require people to suspend all reason and believe that he can achieve the equivalent of Moses parting the oceans.

Read rest of article here

Dinesh D’Souza has written a book which puts everything into clear perspective. This brilliant Conservative man has the ability to see things as they truly are, and to explain those things to the general public. He did it during the Obama regime, and at one point angered BHO to the point that Dinesh was jailed for a time. He emerged unscathed and has continued his fight for truth.

From breitbart.com

Dinesh D’Souza on ‘The Big Lie’: ‘Fascism Has Crept Deeply into the Bowels of the Left’

Author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza talked about his new book, The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left, with SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Friday’s Breitbart News Daily.

“There’s a deep fascist streak in politics now. Ironically, the fascism of today marches under the banner of anti-fascism, and it claims the moral credibility of anti-fascism,” D’Souza said. “In other words, it tries to take all the odor of fascism – stained as it is with the Holocaust, Auschwitz – and project it onto Trump and on the right.”

“This is a massive historical deception. That’s the Big Lie at its core,” he said. “If the premise is true that fascism has now crept deeply into the bowels of the left, we can’t pretend like that hasn’t happened and continue with politics as usual.”

“The Republicans that I watch on TV think it’s the 1980s,” he complained. “This is Reagan vs. Tip O’Neill. It’s a gentleman’s fight. They can both go out to a bar and have a beer afterwards. That’s not the America we live in now.”

D’Souza saw the election of former President Barack Obama as the tipping point for left-wing fascism.

“It wasn’t even Bill Clinton because Bill Clinton was largely living in the aftermath of Reganism. He was, largely, in policy terms, pulled by the Reagan tide. Remember, he signed welfare reform, for example,” D’Souza recalled.

“When Obama came in with his sort of Alinskyite sensibility, and Hillary, of course, having the same, a kind of gangsterism came into American politics.” he continued, “a gangsterism that said things like, ‘Let’s deploy the IRS against our opposition. Let’s wiretap using the FBI. Let’s try to put our opponents in prison.’ This is sort of fascist behavior, and this is the kind of thing that I don’t think – I mean, Jimmy Carter would not have dreamed of it. Neither would JFK or Truman.”

D’Souza said the left was driven to embrace these tactics by “the glimpse of being able to establish exactly what the fascists always wanted: a complete centralized state.”

“Remember, for example, that with the NSA today there are surveillance technologies that were completely unavailable to Mussolini in the 20s or Hitler in the 30s,” he pointed out. “So in a sense, true fascism, full-scale fascism, is more possible today than it was in the twentieth century.”

“This is sort of the leftist objective. Now, they thought that they were almost there – and then, out of nowhere, comes this bizarre guy Trump, and he sort of turns the tables. He takes over, and they’ve suddenly lost all three branches of government, and they can’t believe it. This is the fury out of which they’re striking back,” he said.

D’Souza cited National Review writer Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism as another effort to track the evolution of fascist thought into modern left-wing politics, although he thought Goldberg was too reluctant to draw a solid link between today’s Democrats and the tyrants of the previous century.

“Now, I’m not comparing the left to the Nazis of Auschwitz,” he added. “But I am comparing them to the early Nazis, and, in fact, I would insist that the history of the Democratic Party – look at its 150-year history of racism, slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan. This history is actually more reminiscent of Nazism than of, say, Mussolini-style fascism.”

“Mussolini didn’t actually have concentration camps,” he elaborated. “He didn’t persecute the Jews in the systematic fashion Hitler did. He didn’t have segregation. Mussolini’s fascism, in a sense, was much less racist. So if you want to compare racism, you’ve got to compare the Democratic Party with the Nazis – both those groups imbued, over most of their history, with deep racism.”

Kassam proposed that much of this truth has been hidden by rebranding left-wing heroes of the past, such as Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s transformation from eugenicist to “women’s health” pioneer.

“Margaret Sanger’s basic premise was eugenics,” D’Souza agreed. “More children from the fit and less from the unfit. She was in support of fairly extreme measures, including segregation and then, notoriously, forced sterilization in order to deprive lower-class and uneducated women of the chance to reproduce. She was very explicit about that.”

“Now, when the Nazis did it in 1933, Margaret Sanger gave speeches praising it. She said, ‘Look, the Nazis, the Germans, are ahead of us. We’ve got to catch up to them.’ This is the actual Margaret Sanger, but it’s not the Margaret Sanger you’ll find in Planned Parenthood brochures,” he said.

Kassam asked what conservatives, Republicans, and non-political average Americans can do to combat false allegations of fascism and extremism leveled against them by the left.

“Number one, I notice that the Republicans very rarely answer the accusations that are made against them,” D’Souza replied. “For example, all Trump needs to say is something like, ‘Hey, guys, it’s very interesting you call me a fascist. First of all, you guys slay me on every existing platform. I turn on the TV, comedians are ridiculing me. The media is blasting me. Hollywood people are railing. If I was really a fascist, do you think I would allow that to happen? Do you think Mussolini would allow the radio in Rome to be blasting him? No, he’d send some people over. They’d shut down the radio station. That would be the end of that.’”

“Real fascism doesn’t tolerate that kind of dissent,” he noted. “The pervasiveness of it is clear proof that Trump is not an authoritarian; he’s not a fascist.”

“The reason that the left makes the headway that they do is that they’ve actually redefined things, and this is an intellectual task of some time. It began in academia; it’s been promoted by Hollywood and the media,” he said. “For example, a lot of ordinary educated people think right now that fascism equals nationalism. By that definition, Trump would seem to be closer to fascism than, let’s say, Bernie Sanders. But the truth of it is that nationalism is not a key defining feature of fascism at all.”

“I was born in India. Gandhi was a nationalist. Mandela was a nationalist. All the anti-colonial leaders were nationalists. Churchill was a nationalist. The American Founders were nationalists,” he pointed out.

“Obviously, all these people weren’t fascists, so clearly nationalism, although descriptive of Hitler and Mussolini, doesn’t actually get to the core of what fascism means. We need to do the intellectual work to understand these things and then get them out,” D’Souza advised.

D’Souza said his book uncovers “parallels between things that were happening in America and things that were happening in Mussolini’s Italy or Nazi Germany.”

“In reality, I found causal relationships. The guys, for example, who wrote the Nuremberg laws, the senior Nazi officials, are literally standing there and debating these laws holding in their hand the blueprints of Democratic laws of the Jim Crow South. And they’re basically saying, ‘All we need to do, in effect, is cross out the word black and write in the word Jew, and we’re home free.’ Literally, the Nuremberg laws were not parallel to, they were based upon – they were directly derived from – Democratic laws formed in America, in the South,” he said. source

As Christians, we know that the Word of God reigns supreme in the hearts of true believers. When we read fake news from the Left, we must understand that this grand deception comes from the the deceiver himself. Yes, there are those like George Soros who propagate the lies, and make sure that these lies become “truth” in young minds on campuses across the U.S. But Soros is merely a puppet for Satan. His power comes from “principalities, powers, and rulers of the darkness of this age; spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.”

What can we do?

Understanding that this is not a physical war is the first and most important step in our response to the evil. WE MUST PRAY. We must petition our Father with prayers for our country, our government, our universities; and for those who are completely deceived by the lies.

And right now I believe that prayers for President Trump and his safety are of  the utmost importance!

But we must also understand that God allows events to happen to further fulfill His Prophetic Word.

But as Christians, we should ALWAYS speak out against evil!

And we should ALWAYS be in prayer to our Father in heaven.

MARANATHA!