Here at the From Rome Blog, my posts regard both history and conjectures about why that history came about or what it means.
Having recently viewed a video by someone who follows a man who claims to be Christ in His second coming, because the video referred extensively to posts at the From Rome Blog, I see that not everyone who reads my blog understands how to discern facts from conjecture.
A Blog, it must be said, is a very personal publication. As human beings we naturally seek to know the truth. Some of that we can know directly through the facts of history, and some of that we cannot know directly, so we must resort to interpretations. The weakest kind of interpretation is the conjecture, for a conjecture is an interpretation in which the facts (to prove it) and which are not know, are conjectured to exist.
Conjectures by their very nature tend to follow the sensibility as much as the rationality of those who write them. My conjectures do the same, and some of them might seem sensationalist. But I know how to distinguish my own conjectures from reality.
I write this post because I see that not everyone of my readers understand this.
So for clarity, I make this declaration.
That Pope Benedict XVI is the pope is statement which is not a conjecture, but rather the presumption of the law, because the law of the Church says that a pope resigns when he renounces his munus. And since Pope Benedict XVI has never done that in the way canon 332 §2 requires him to do it (fact), as the man who is the pope, we all must recognize that he is still the pope.
However, why he resigned the ministry and not the munus, and more so, why he even resigned, is something of which not a few Catholics do not see sufficient explanation in what has been reported, said, stated and repeated. This is because there is an inherent irrationality about saying Pope Benedict XVI resigned for this or that reason, and not finding the facts which make that evident (for example, in Non solum propter, he says he is resigning for health reasons, but he is still in rather good health after 6 years).
Since I seek the truth I understand that conjectures to complete the information lacking in what we know are possibly as much correct as incorrect, but at the same time I recognize that historically those who engage in such conjectures are more often wrong, because to make a conjecture which turns out to be verified by future revelations of facts, takes a great deal of familiarity with all the known causes which could have possibly influenced the event about which one is conjecturing. That is why insiders normally are better at conjecturing. And I am not an insider.
So please do not take my conjectures as dogma or history. They are not.
The fact is, that Pope Benedict XVI has never resigned according to the norm of Canon 332 §2.
But why he has or has not, is not certain to us. We would have to ask him, and he has not, to my knowledge, ever been asked why he renounced the ministerium and not the munus. So conjectures go on and on.
However, when it comes to canonical arguments, those arguments are as sound as the canons, principles and reasoning based upon them. Their certitude is thus much higher.
So when reading my blog, please keep this in mind.
Here is a new video explaining how and why Benedict XVI is still the pope.
Many thanks to Brian Murphy, the narrator and producer, as well as to all who worked on this Video.
Apart from Ann Barnhardt’s videos on the failed renunciation, this is the first I know of which attempts to present the entire problem and is produced by those who understand its canonical, theological and political implications.
The text of this video was produced to make this video a good introduction to every Catholic. I encourage all to share it on social media.*
Catholics need to share the information that shows Benedict is still the Pope. It is the truth and we are obliged to remain faithful to the Pope, no matter what — no matter if he is confused or lucid, no matter whether the Cardinals are faithful to him or not, no matter if the entire Church knows he is or is not the pope.
As I reported the other day, NOT EVEN ONE OF THE MOST EMINENT CANONISTS AT ROME can refute these facts and arguments. It seems unbelievable, but it is true. I can testify to it in court.
*The only thing I disagree about, is that in the video it says that Pope Benedict XVI intended to split the papacy. I am of the opinion, that the evidence can just as well indicate that he resigned only the ministry, after the example of the last Hapsburg Emperor of Austria, as both a sign that those demanding this of him, were Freemasons, and to prevent them obtaining the papal office. — Though, I concede that the sign might not apply, because that there is a sign here, is my interpretation based on a lot of conjecture, but that there is an effect here, is based totally upon canon law.
The Mafia of St. Gallen rules by lies. Their entire project is built upon a lie, which they were successful in passing off to the world and defending during nearly seven years.
I speak of the false notion that Pope Benedict XVI resigned the papacy, when in truth all he did was resign from active ministry.
The Mafia of St. Gallen should really have a second name, the Mafia of Holy Gall, because if they are anything, they are bold liars. Nevertheless, they are bold because being composed of those practiced in sexual abuse of others, they know how to gaslight the faithful.
These tactics they have used on the Bishops and clergy, and through them, by getting them to spread false ideas of virtue and prudence, they have succeeded in gaining control of nearly all Catholic Media.
ON POINT
For those Catholics, like myself, who have been trying to get the world see their lies, the most effective weapon this Mafia has against us is not to directly attack us, but to ignore us in public. Then to get other Catholic news agencies to ignore us in public. Then to get Catholic social media sites to ignore us.
The present sites have decided to ignore totally all which is published at The From Rome Blog: Church Militant, The Remnant, Rorate Caeli, Catholic Family News, Gloria.TV (since Nov. 19), Chiesa e Post Concilio, UnaVox, etc. etc. etc., and nearly all sites for the Traditional Latin Mass. — There is no need to mention sites run by the clergy, as they ALL ignore The From Rome Blog. None of these groups do this by chance, its by a predetermined deliberate decision. In many cases they have been asked by members of the clergy or Cardinals to do this. In other cases its because of who funds them or their fear of losing funding or advertisement if they buck the Great Narrative.
This is important, and not merely a personal lament. Because, you see, all the work that investigators like myself do, is pointless if no one ever knows about it.
But there is something you can do, and that means you have to recognize that it is not enough that you visit sites which expose the Mafia for what they are, YOU NEED TO SHARE THAT NEWS ON SOCIAL MEDIA with others.
I have repeatedly seen that when I specifically ask 1 friend to share 1 of my blog posts, that The From Rome Blog will receive about 750 hits in the next 36 hours on account of that 1 friend sharing one post, on, let’s say, FaceBook.
At present, there is only one of the 20,000 sometime readers of my blog who share my posts on Facebook. I won’t name the other sites which regularly feature a link to one or more of my posts, lest they be attacked by the Mafia. (THOUGH I THANK THEM PROFUSELY).
But I think you can see, that YOU my readers need to step up and do your part.
Because, we must ask ourselves: Will the Mafia of St. Gallen succeed?
And, we must respond: YES, IF YOU LET THEM.
______________
CREDITS: Many thanks to ComplicitClergy.com for the use of their graphic. They do excellent work exposing the Lavender Mafia, and you should be reading their site regularly to know how to avoid the tentacles of the ecclesiastical Mafia.
In a scholarly article in the Remnant, Helen Weir, MI, showed that Francis is “reminiscent of Hitler”:
“It might be objected, at this stage, that playing the ‘Hitler Card’ against the Amazon Synod is a bridge too far. After all, Bergoglio is purportedly the Vicar of Christ on earth. Many quotes could be adduced to show that he is a believer (if those quotes, quite conveniently, happen to escape juxtaposition with their own stark and copious self-contradictions).” “Moreover, many of the loquacious Argentinian’s less palatable statements are typically excused by fans and critics alike with the assertion that they do not represent what Bergoglio really means, or by the insistence–as though the one justification doesn’t abjectly invalidate the other—that they are amenable to realignment within the parameters of perfect orthodoxy.”
“The problem comes in when we recognize that Adolf Hitler once wrote and spoke in what has come to be known as ‘word salad,’ too. His habit of presenting himself ‘publicly as a Christian’[7] was calculated, and took the form not only of being seen and photographed leaving church, but especially of mixing Catholic theology into the lethal ideological cocktail of his overall message.” “The Führer made about as much sense, in other words, as Bergoglio does, and like the latter took predatory advantage of the confusion occasioned by his subversion of Christian-sounding verbiage. As incredible as it sounds, people at the time believed Hitler when he claimed that, in serving capital-n Nature, he was “fighting for the work of the Lord”.[8] “
“The ‘good Germans’ were incapable, evidently, of drawing the distinctions necessary to tell the ‘vague religiosity’[9] of Mein Kampf’s hijacked theological terminology from the real thing—to borrow the apt phrase by which Cardinal Müller has characterized the verbal smokescreen found specifically in the Instrumentum laboris. The fact, in other words, that Bergoglio is ambiguous in his statements of belief doesn’t make him less reminiscent of Hitler, but more so.”[https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/4635-capital-n-nature]
Is Francis “reminiscent of Hitler” in his “self- contradictions”?
“… Schellnhuber is also known for his advocacy of a one-world government. In order to avoid his catastrophic predictions for unchecked climate change.”
“… Schellnhuber is also a full member of the Club of Rome.”
Francis is in alliance with the United Nations, the Club of Rome and Schellnhuber in calling for a one-world government.
On May 9, the New American reported on the “unholy alliance” between the one-world regime globalists and the Pope:
Francis said “‘When a supranational common good is clearly identified, it is necessary to have a special authority legally and concordantly constituted capable of facilitating its implementation. We think of the great contemporary challenges of climate change, new forms of slavery and peace,’ his holiness told those gathered to discuss ‘Nation, State, and Nation-State,’ the conference theme.”
“Pope Francis put a pretty fine point on his message, claiming that planetary problems are exacerbated by ‘an excessive demand for sovereignty on the part of States.'”
“… Our only hope for planetary peace and progress is to make room for ‘international organizations’ to develop into governing bodies, supplanting the ‘state interests’ with the will of the United Nations, he stated.”
“… Those people pushing for unlimited access to abortion loathe the Roman Catholic Church and its centuries-long opposition to the murder of children in utero are the very people standing with the head of that church in the fight to kill sovereignty and establish a one-world government.”
“That seemingly bizarre and undeniably unholy alliance should be enough to compel people to question what the underlying goal of the globalists must be.”
Also, apparently in alliance with Francis and the Club of Rome is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) in their attempt to bring about a abortionist eugenicist one-world government:
“Ocasio-Cortez is the leading champion of the Green New Deal, in collaboration with a Rockefeller-funded left-wing astroturf advocacy group called the Sunrise Movement [SM]… “
“The Green New Deal is exploiting the popularity of social democratic ideals as sugar coating to disguise the globalists’ poison pill. According to reporting by Inside Philanthropy, institutional funders made up about 55 percent of Sunrise Movement’s 2018 budget, which includes donors like the Rockefeller Family Fund, Wallace Global Fund, and the Winslow Foundation. The Wallace Global Fund was originally founded by former US Vice-President Henry A. Wallace. Winslow is run by Wren Winslow Wirth, who is married to former politician Tim Wirth.[3]SM was launched in April 2017 by six principal co-founders—veterans of the Occupy Movement—who had developed a friendship with Michael Dorsey of the Rockefeller-funded globalist institution, the Club Of Rome; Dorsey was also a former Sierra Club board member, whom President Barack Obama had appointed to the EPA’s National Advisory Board in 2010 and 2012.”[http://www.conspiracyschool.com/blog/green-astroturf-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-agent-globalist-conspiracy]
Who is Dorsey who is apparently one of AOC’s major players behind the scenes pulling strings with his Rockefeller connections which are funding Ocasio-Cortez?
It appears that Ocasio-Cortez is a fellow traveler with the abortionist eugenicist one-world agenda of the Club of Rome who promote “birth control and the killing of pre-born children”: “‘Our planet is going to hit disaster if we don’t turn this ship around and so it’s basically like, there’s a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult,’ Ocasio-Cortez said while chopping up food in her kitchen during an Instagram live video. ‘And it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, ‘Is it okay to still have children?'”[https://www.dailywire.com/news/43880/ocasio-cortez-people-maybe-shouldnt-reproduce-due-ryan-saavedra]
By coincidence it appears that Ocasio-Cortez’s former Chief of Staff Saikat Chakrabarti is a fan of a ally of Hitler:
“Based on a recent clothing choice, Chakrabarti might justifiably be considered a Nazi sympathizer. But really? Well, yes. In his latest love-fest video for AOC, Chakrabarti is sporting a tee-shirt that features a portrait of Subhas Chandra Bose. Not familiar with this former Indian head of state? Here a few facts:”
“Bose was an ally of Adolf Hitler and met with him personally in 1942.”
“Bose founded the Free India Legion (FIL) made up of troops captured by Nazi Field Marshal Rommel’s Afrika Korps.”
Also, by coincidence Ocasio-Cortez and her Chief of Staff Chakrabarti happen to be pro-choice like the one time wannabe one-world government abortionist eugenicist leader Adolf Hitler.
As the German Media covered up Hitler’s many eugenic scandals, the Nazi Media proudly promoted the pro-choice Hitler.
Pro-choice Hitler’s next step after legalizing abortion was sterilization which lead to eugenicswhich lead to the mass murder of not only the innocent unborn babies, but the disabled, poor, unemployed, Nazi opponents, gypsies and Jews.[http://www.klannedparenthood.com/nazis-and-abortion/hitler-was-pro-choice/]
Author and visiting lecturer at the University of Illinois Allen Chase wrote that the Francis Vatican hosted Ehrlich was:
“[A]n open and blunt advocate of genocide political policies… Dr. Ehrlich has neither the intellectual right and professional right… to speak for biology in particular and for the scientific community in general. Genocide remains genocide, whether advocated in a Munich beer hall in the 1920 or in a Texas college auditorium in 1967.” (Counterpunch, “Population Bomb or Bomb the Population?,” April 3, 2019)
The New Atlantis showed the racist implications of Ehrlich’s policies:
“In 1968, Paul Ehrlich wrote in The Population Bomb, ‘I have yet to meet anyone familiar with the situation who thinks India will be self sufficient in food by 1971, if ever’… By 1972-1973, the number of sterilizations in India reached three million per year.” (The New Atlantis, “The Population Control Holocaust,” By Robert Zubrin, Number 35, Spring 2012, pp. 33-54)
When most people think of eugenics and forced sterilization they think of Nazi Germany, but tragically Francis’s Vatican is hosting and promoting the foremost one-world government abortionist eugenicist leaders of those same policies such as Ehrlich.
The Francis and the Club of Rome agenda for a one-world regime is also Ehrlich’s goal according to Fox News:
“President Obama’s ‘science czar,’ John Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, ‘compulsory sterilization,’ and the creation of a ‘Planetary Regime.'”
“… [Holdren propounded this ‘Planetary Regime’ policies in a] textbook he co-authored in 1977, ‘Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,’ a copy of which was obtained by FOXNews.com”
“The 1,000-page course book, which was co-written with environmental activists Paul and Anne Ehrlich. (Fox News, “Obama’s ‘Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as Population Growth Solutions,” Published July 21, 2009, Last Update January 27, 2015)
Remember that Hitler’s next step after legalizing abortion was sterilization which lead to eugenicswhich lead to the mass murder of not only the innocent unborn babies, but the disabled, poor, unemployed, Nazi opponents, gypsies and Jews for a one-world government or “Planetary Regime” for the master race “new world elite.” Moreover, Gloria.tv shows how the “new world elite” are acting “like a new master race”: “Among the so called political elites, there is an “unleashed hatred” of the Catholic Church, said Cardinal Gerhard Müller at a November 21 book presentation in Weltenburg Abbey, Germany.”
“The elites want to create a ‘unified religion’ as kind of ‘spiritual union for all people in material wealth but without any transcendence,’ Müller explained.”
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on THERE IS A STRANGE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN THE WRITINGS OF FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL AND ADOLPH HITLER AS FAR AS THE BASIC PHILOSOPHY IS REVEALED
Confessions of a hard-headed and lazy-minded friar
Don’t give up on your brothers and sisters who uncritically accepted that Bergoglio is the pope. Keep trying to get through to them, and give them some time. Most people are either too busy with their own lives or not yet intellectually or emotionally prepared to hear that Pope Benedict XVI is still the pope because he never resigned validly.
To help you understand this, I will confess myself till last fall to have been one of these Catholics.
On Feb. 11, 2013, I was in Rome. I was studying theology and canon law at the Faculty of Saint Bonaventure. When I returned from classes that afternoon, my landlady knocked on my door, and asked me: “Have you heard, the Pope resigned!” — “What, I said!?” — “Come see it on television.
I should have immediately sought to find out what the Pope actually did say.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I should have immediately been suspicious that the journalists were playing with the facts.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
Feb. 12-16: The next days, I should have gone to the Vatican to get a copy of the Latin.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In my Canon Law class, I should have asked a question about the Renunciation, or at least sought out my professor about it.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I was, as the days passed, somewhat suspicious that the Latin text was not being published. I should have kept my suspicion and acted on it.
BUT I DISMISSED MY SUSPICION
Feb. 20: A friend on the internet sent me a copy of Prof. Radaelli’s appeal to the Pope to take back his Renunciation. I read it, and should have strove to understand it better.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I should have payed attention to everything that was happening on Feb. 28.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I should have gone to the Vatican to speak with some Cardinal or Bishop to understand what had happened.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
Then there was the Conclave and Bergoglio was elected. Rorate Caeli blog published immediately a denunciation, saying this man was a heretic an raving nutcase. I should have taken them more serious.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I came to know more and more that Bergoglio was a left wing looney. That should have left me some motive to investigate how and why the Renunciation took place.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
The English translation of the Act was published near the end of March, 2013. I knew the delay meant that something was rotten in Denmark. I therefore should have looked at the Latin (I am nearly fluent in Latin).
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
I let the months pass.
I let the years pass.
2016: Someone told me that Ann Barnhart was saying the Renunciation was invalid. “Who is Barnhardt, I asked?” “She is the woman who burned the Koran on video”. “Oh, I said, Hmm”. I should have searched to know what she had said, for anyone who can burn a Koran is worth listening to.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
Then someone told me a few months later that Ganswein had said in his talk at the Gregorian that Benedict was till the pope. I should have investigated.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In 2017, someone told me again about Barnhardt. I should have taken the time to find her blog.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
Someone then told me that Father Gruner said the Renunciation was invalid in some video. I should have looked into this, because I know that Fr. Gruner was no loony.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In 2018, in the Spring someone told me about Barnhardt again. This time I found her blog and read a little of it. I should have read all of it and listened to her videos.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In August of 2018, someone told me about Barnhardt again, and I read her core argument. She seemed to have a good argument. I should have opened up my Latin version of the Code of Canon Law and looked at what Benedict had said in Latin.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In September 2018, the topic became more talked about, since Veri Catholici at the beginning of the Month was proposing a Second Synod of Sutri. So I looked more at the issue, but not enough. I was still reading the English translation of the Code, even though I had the Latin on my bookshelf. I could have opened it.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In October 2018, I heard someone say that Pentin quoted Bux about there possibly being substantial error in the act of the Renunciation. I know of Bux and know he is a theologian of repute. So I read the Text of the Renunciation in Latin and the Code of Canon Law in Latin and saw immediately that the Renunciation WAS INVALID. I should have done something.
BUT I NEGLECTED TO DO THIS.
In November, 2018, after burying my mom, I had more time, now that I was not carrying for all her needs during the night, to examine this problem of substantial error. I saw the issue was grave and needed to be studied. I finally resolved to do what Mons. Bux said and investigate the issue. So I wrote my Scholastic Question, gathering all the arguments on both sides of the debate.
CONCLUSION
I often wonder why it is so hard to convince others of the truth of the failed renunciation. And you may also. Maybe you are tempted to give up on others who simply do not want to listen or care.
I hope that this sincere confession of my own encourages YOU to realize that some of the greatest and most zealous souls to fight for Pope Benedict may be among those priests and religious who have on many occasions ignored you or this issue, have yet to seriously consider it. Just like I did for 6 years.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on C0NFESSION IS GOOD FOR THE SOUL !!! I PRAY THAT THE LORD WILL APPLY A LITTLE MUD/SPITTLE PASTE TO OUR EYES TO OPEN THEM TO SEE CLEARLY WHAT WE MUST DO TO HELP THE CHURCH IN THIS MOMENT OF CRISIS
It was evident several weeks ago that U.S. chargé d’affaires to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, is one of the current participants in the coup effort. It was Taylor who engaged in carefully planned text messages with EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland to set-up a narrative helpful to Adam Schiff’s political coup effort.
George Kent (left) – Bill Taylor (right), bagmen for the Foreign Service Office.
Bill Taylor was formerly U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine (’06-’09) and later helped the Obama administration to design the laundry operation providing taxpayer financing to Ukraine in exchange for back-channel payments to U.S. politicians and their families.
Today Rudy Giuliani has released a letter to Senator Lindsey Graham outlining how Bill Taylor has blocked VISA’s for Ukrainian ‘whistle-blowers’ who are willing to testify to the corrupt financial scheme. Unfortunately, Senator Graham, along with dozens of U.S. Senators currently serving, may very well have been a recipient for money through the aforementioned laundry process.
U.S. senators write foreign aid policy, rules and regulations thereby creating the financing mechanisms to transmit U.S. funds. Those same senators then received a portion of the laundered funds back through their various “institutes” and business connections to the foreign government offices; in this example Ukraine. [ex. Burisma to Biden]
The U.S. State Dept. serves as a distribution network for the authorization of the money laundering by granting conflict waivers, approvals for financing (think Clinton Global Initiative), and permission slips for the payment of foreign money. The officials within the State Dept. take a cut of the overall payments through a system of “indulgence fees”, junkets, gifts and expense payments to those with political oversight.
If anyone gets too close to revealing the process, writ large, they become a target of the entire apparatus. President Trump was considered an existential threat to this entire process. Hence our current political status with the ongoing coup. The letter:
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, because, well, in reality all of the U.S. Senators (both parties) on the Foreign Relations Committee [Members Here] are participating in the process for receiving taxpayer money and contributions from foreign governments.
A “Codel” is a congressional delegation that takes trips to work out the payments terms/conditions of any changes in graft financing. This is why Senators spend $20 million on a campaign to earn a job paying $350k/year. The “institutes” is where the real foreign money comes in; billions paid by governments like China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Ukraine, etc. etc. There are trillions at stake.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell holds the power over these members (and the members of the Senate Intel Committee), because McConnell decides who sits on what committee. As soon as a Senator starts taking the bribes lobbying funds, McConnell then has full control over that Senator. This is how the system works.
The McCain Institute is one of the obvious examples of the financing network. And that is the primary reason why Cindy McCain is such an outspoken critic of President Trump. In essence President Trump is standing between her and her next diamond necklace; a dangerous place to be.
So when we think about a Senate Impeachment Trial; and we consider which senators will vote to impeach President Trump, it’s not just a matter of Democrats -vs- Republican. We need to look at the game of leverage, and the stand-off between those bribed Senators who would prefer President Trump did not interfere in their process.
McConnell has been advising President Trump which Senators are most likely to need their sensibilities eased. As an example President Trump met with Lisa Murkowski last week. Senator Murkowski rakes in millions from the Oil and Gas industry; and she ain’t about to allow horrible Trump to lessen her bank account any more than Cindy McCain will give up her frequent shopper discounts at Tiffanys.
WASHINGTON DC – Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is getting a high-profile perch as he joins the Senate during his latest clash with President Trump.
Romney was named on Thursday to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, giving him an opening to wade into several looming foreign policy battles between Congress and the White House. (link)
Now do you see how McConnell works?
Oh yeah, about those recess appointments…. Once you see the strings on the Marionettes you can never go back to a time when you did not see them.
The far-left Vanity Fair got its Trump-hating hands on some exclusive impeachment data, and it is all bad news for Democrats and their fellow coup plotters in the media.
The headline reads: “Polling Suggests Democrats’ Impeachment Push Could Alienate Key Voters.”
The sub-headline reads: “Data exclusive to Vanity Fair shows impeachment could be a losing issue for Democrats hoping to recruit Independents in 2020. ‘Lots of people who don’t like Trump who are still prepared to vote for him,’ says one political science expert.”
And here is the math, and some of it is stunning.
We’ll start with my favorite numbers…
By a yuge margin of 62 to 22 percent, the all-important Independent voters who will decide the 2020 election, especially in key states, say that impeachment is “more important to politicians than it is to me.”
Get this…
By another yuge margin, 61 to 23 percent, Independents say impeachment is more important to the media than it is to me.”
Vanity Fair concludes that these numbers can only mean “Impeachment proceedings are viewed as bread and circuses for the anti-Trump crowd in Washington and the media.”
Ya’ think?
Another juicy number is that on the list of priorities Independents hold dear, only 27 percent describe impeachment as a top priority, which means it polls well below the deficit (74 percent), health care (72 percent), and infrastructure (70 percent) — and infrastructure is an issue Trump truly cares about, something he regularly talked about even in the years preceding his presidency. Infrastructure is something that could have happened had Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat-run congress not become coup-obsessed, something I expected Trump and the Nervous Nancy to make a deal on.
Wait, it gets better…
Hilariously, as Vanity Fair is forced to acknowledge, “Even Trump’s absurd border wall scored as a higher priority for Independents.”
“Independents suffer from scandal fatigue and overall confusion,” Vanity Fair adds. “They agreed with the statement ‘[It is] difficult to tell all the investigations in Washington apart’ by a roughly two-to-one margin.”
The left-wing publication blames part of this confusion on Trump: “This no doubt reflects a successful Trump strategy to sow confusion and spread blame. By constantly charging others with acting badly and by creating such a long litany of disputable acts, Trump has in effect led many voters to dismiss the whole mess as the type of bad thing that all politicians do.” How absurd.
Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have been using hoaxes to investigate Trump for three years now, starting with the failed Russia Collusion Hoax. How are voters supposed to differentiate one hoax from another? If it’s not Trump’s taxes, it’s his charity, it’s the emolument hoax, it’s the hoax about Trump saying nice things about Nazis, it’s strippers and Twitter and on and on and on until… ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
When everything is a bombshell and everything is white supremacy and everything means the walls are closing in on Drumpf, then it all means nothing.
Vanity Fair tries to close on a positive note, but it is an act of kidding one’s self.
“The news isn’t all bad for Democrats. Independents are paying attention to the story at relatively high rates. Viewing numbers for the hearings are high, and in the polling, 50% of Independents say they heard a lot or some about the testimony of Ambassador Yovanovitch.”
Actually, this is terrible news for Democrats. It means voters are paying close attention and are still not convinced this impeachment proceeding is anything other just another stupid, partisan exercise performed by a Democrat Party and media (but I repeat myself) who still haven’t come to terms with losing the 2016 election.
The truth is this…
The media’s propaganda campaign failed. Badly.
All the cable news outlets and all the broadcast networks hoped that airing the impeachment hearings live would give legitimacy to something that was totally illegitimate.
On top of that, even as we watched the air go out of the Ukraine Hoax for two weeks as witness after witness admitted they had witnessed nothing, as witness after witness proved there could be no quid pro quo, no bribery, no extortion when Ukraine didn’t know the aid had been put on hold, the fake media still screamed BOMBSHELL every 15 minutes — but no one was listening.
Adam Schiff’s Failure Theater launched with a pathetic 13 million viewers, and over the next two weeks that already humiliating number was cut by more than half. After three years of media hysteria, of BOMBSHELLS that never exploded, the American people know an over-cooked hoax when they see one.
What’s more, the American people also know that investigating Joe and Hunter Biden’s looting of Ukraine for millions of dollars is “investigating corruption,” and no amount of media spin can decouple the two.
When Trump asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, he was doing his job. He was looking out for American taxpayers. He was rooting out corruption.
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.
I don’t know more than a few Latin words and phrases. A former Episcopalian, I take for granted the liturgy in the vernacular. I’ve never been punctilious about ritual. I can’t tell you the difference between the “Introit” and the “Gradual.” The names for clerical regalia escape me. And there is little in my theological outlook that would attract me to the old form of the Mass, often called the “Tridentine rite” because it arose out of reforms mandated by the Council of Trent. I went to the Latin Mass two or three times in years past. I was disoriented and put off. In spite of all that, I’ve been attending a Latin Mass in Manhattan for more than a year.
My initial reasons for switching to the Tridentine rite had to do with the revelations about Theodore McCarrick in the summer of 2018. I was angry, exasperated by the feckless leadership of bishops and their tolerance of moral corruption in their own ranks. But anger, however righteous and fitting in the moment, can turn into bitterness, even despair, corroding faith and undermining the spiritual life. So I knew I had to find an affirmative way to express my disgust with the status quo in the Catholic Church.
Under these circumstances, I turned to the Latin Mass. In church parlance, it is called the Extraordinary Form, as opposed to the order of the Mass established after Vatican II by Paul VI, which is called the Ordinary Form. These terms are exactly right. The Ordinary Form is the almost universal mode of worship for American Catholics, while the Extraordinary Form marks the exception. Thus, my decision to make the Tridentine rite my regular Sunday Mass was a vote of no confidence in the status quo, but not one that pushed the Church away. Going to the Extraordinary Form was a way of drawing nearer, entering into the great storehouse of the Catholic tradition.
There are Mass booklets for the Extraordinary Form that allow you to follow along with a facing-page translation. Even with this aid, it takes time to get oriented. It is not easy to know where you are in the Mass amid the cascading Latin, long silences, and sudden shifts from kneeling to standing. It took me a couple of months before I was comfortable enough to begin to appreciate what the Latin Mass has to offer.
From the outset I was romanced by the long silences. The Tridentine rite emphasizes the priest as mediator. He faces the altar, not the congregation, and he speaks many parts of the Mass in a whisper. His words are directed, on our behalf, toward God, not toward us. This dynamic of prayer—a dialogue between priest-as-representative and God—affects the worshiper in subtle ways. It encourages each individual member of the congregation to enter into his own silent conversation with the divine. This is especially true during the consecration of the elements.
The Extraordinary Form uses the old lectionary, which means that the Sunday readings differ from what the rest of the Church hears when worshiping in the Ordinary Form. The old rite also has two readings rather than three, one from the Epistles and the other from the Gospels. The Old Testament is present only in brief verses, usually from the Psalms, chanted at various points in the liturgy. The reform of the liturgy after Vatican II restored the Old Testament to its place in the Liturgy of the Word—an important and salutary change. Nevertheless, I’ve been enriched by the pairings of Scripture in the old lectionary, which tend toward resonances that are more mystical and evoke the Church Militant more often than does the new lectionary.
For example, during Lent last spring, one of the Gospel readings was Luke 11:21–22: “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace, but when one stronger than he assails him and overcomes him, he takes away his armor in which he trusted and divides his spoils.” The reading sharpened the focus of my Lenten preparations for the triumph of Christ over sin and death. Jesus is that stronger man. He is a triumphant warrior, defeating the fell powers that would hold us in thrall.
Many priests are suspicious of the Latin Mass. Some are hostile. These responses are understandable. Going to the Latin Mass requires me to decide against attending the Ordinary Form, which is of course widely available throughout New York. And because the priestly vocation comes into its most intense focus in the sacrifice of the Mass, this decision can easily be seen casting doubt on the education and formation of priests over the last fifty years.
But my experiences with the Extraordinary Form have been otherwise. The more familiar I have become with the old rite, the more I see and feel the profound continuities with the new one. The elements of the Mass are the same in both. Furthermore, my experience with the Tridentine Mass allows me to appreciate the intentions of the liturgical reformers of the twentieth century. The old rite is colder and less immediately communal. It presumes a well-catechized congregation. By contrast, the use of the vernacular, the more fulsome lectionary, and the clear articulation by the priest of all the elements of the liturgy make the Ordinary Form more effective as a means for inculcating into the faithful the basic teachings of the Church about the nature of God and the role of Christ as the sacrament of our salvation. And not just the faithful. The Extraordinary Form has an other-worldly allure that might attract unbelievers, but both the Latin language and the ritual remoteness of the rite make it difficult to hear the gospel message. By contrast, the Ordinary Form makes the gospel audible.
At the same time, by attending the Extraordinary Form on a regular basis I have learned more about what has been lost. In the Latin Mass, the priest risks tending toward the caricature of remote hierophant engaged in mysterious rites at a distant altar. In the Ordinary Form, he risks tending toward the caricature of mediocre TV host chatting with his daytime audience of distracted housewives. If forced to choose between the two perversions, I vastly prefer the former.
The Extraordinary Form may lack Old Testament readings, but it is closer to Old Testament realities than the Ordinary Form, at least as it is currently celebrated. Aside from Yom Kippur, synagogue services retain few echoes of the temple sacrifices in Jerusalem. By contrast, a priest celebrating the Tridentine Mass operates according to ritual patterns that reach back to the Old Testament priesthood. The altar, however close to the congregation in physical terms, is spiritually remote. The priest engages in careful, precise ritual preparation before entering the Holy of Holies to offer the sacrifice of the Mass. All of this is present in the new Mass but attenuated by the imperative of congregational engagement.
In simple terms, the Extraordinary Form invites a more transcendent orientation in worship. There is something about the liturgy in Latin that discourages the use of childish Andrew-Lloyd-Weber-goes-to-church melodies, bad folk-inspired praise songs, and felt banners. In the Tridentine rite, the priest faces God, not the congregation, and this lends itself to an unturned countenance—not just his, but that of all engaged in worship. The solemnities of silent prayer invite contemplation. The faint whispering of the priest reminds us of the mysterious, intimate commerce between God and man made possible in Christ Jesus, a commerce into which we, too, can enter in our own stumbling, barely audible words.
Benedict XVI observed that the Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms are two usages of the self-same Roman rite. This does not mean that they do not have distinct charisms, as it were. The Ordinary Form is well suited for evangelization and catechism. My own entry into the Catholic Church was greatly eased by the accessibility of the Mass in the vernacular. Its more horizontal orientation encourages a sense of Christian community, as the liturgical reformers intended. The reduced emphasis on ritual precision shifts attention to the central gospel truths announced in the readings and reiterated in a liturgy readily heard in the language of the people. All these elements enrich the Catholic Church.
The charism of the Extraordinary Form is needed as well. At a time when all the institutions of the West, including the Church, are wobbling, the antiquity of the Tridentine Mass anchors corporate worship deep in the Church’s past. The remoteness of Latin, a “dead” language, builds a spiritual wall around the Church that helps protect her from capture by the whims and fashions of the contemporary world. The vestments, incense, and ritual create another world, in which it becomes easy to see oneself entering into the precincts of the divine, a prospect at once daunting and joyful. Centuries of use have tuned the Latin Mass to a near perfect pitch. In its more elaborate forms, the orchestrated layers of music, movement, and prayer interweave into a liturgical Gesamtkunstwerk, which is why, although the Mass I now attend is thirty minutes longer than the Ordinary Form liturgy, it seems shorter.
I have not become an ardent proponent of the Extraordinary Form. It has limitations, which is why it was reformed in the last century. But I have come to think the Latin Mass can make a contribution to the Church’s renewal. In the twentieth century, influential theologians called for ressourcement, a return to the sources of our Christian faith. We need always to soak ourselves in the living water of the tradition. The Tridentine rite offers an opportunity for ressourcement. This is not an opportunity to be shunned, because Ordinary Form, too, has it limitations, as most of us know only too well. Those limitations are to be expected. We are only at the first stage of what will be an ongoing refinement and perfection of the Mass in the vernacular. And this process, so needed in order to realize the full promise of what was begun at Vatican II, can be enhanced by the example and inspiration of the Extraordinary Form.
An Arizona company described as a “human chop shop” must pay $58 million for illegally selling dead bodies for a profit.
On Tuesday, a Maricopa County Superior Court jury reached its decision against Biological Resource Center (BRC) of Phoenix, Arizona, ordering that it pay the $58 million to ten families that it deceived into donating the bodies of their family members, Breitbart reports.
Described as a “human chop shop,” BRC encouraged families to donate their loved ones’ bodies to medical research on Alzheimer’s disease and other disorders; but once the company received the bodies, it “chopped the bodies up and sold the parts to other body brokers for profit,” Michael Burg, a lead trial lawyer for the families, said in a statement.
The disturbing human body parts trafficking seems eerily similar to what undercover journalists with the Center for Medical Progress uncovered at Planned Parenthood. However, in that case, the journalists are the ones being punished for exposing the unethical and potentially illegal sales of aborted baby body parts at the largest abortion chain in America.
Linking to a Washington Post article about the jury decision, Live Action President and founder Lila Rose noted how differently the two cases have been treated.
“WaPo reports on a ‘chop shop’ selling human remains without consent that is being forced to pay $58 million in damages,” Rose tweeted. “Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood chop shops that kill babies & sell their body parts are funded daily w/ $1.4 million in taxpayer dollars.”
Concerns about the Phoenix company prompted a raid by the FBI in January 2014. FBI investigators made a number of gruesome discoveries, including “head sewn onto a mismatched body, a bucket of limbs” and a cooler filled with genitalia, according to AZCentral. Reuters reports BRC sold full bodies for $5,893.
David TeSelle, one of the attorneys for the families, warned that there is very little oversight of human body donations in the United States.
“What people don’t realize is that the illicit body broker trade is something going on right now across the nation,” TeSelle said. “Unlike organ transplant donation, which is heavily regulated, there is very little regulation or oversight – and in most states, none at all – into body donation at death, to ensure that the donors and their families’ wishes are being met.”
Planned Parenthood has not faced prosecution, though there is strong evidence that it may have violated several laws, allegedly putting women at risk by changing abortion procedures to better harvest intact aborted baby parts and allegedly selling the parts for a profit.
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.
The expose videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all 14:
In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”
In the eighth video: StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer admits Planned Parenthood sells “a lot of” fully intact aborted babies.
The ninth video: catches a Planned Parenthood medical director discussing how the abortion company sells fully intact aborted babies — including one who “just fell out” of the womb.
The 10th video: catches the nation’s biggest abortion business selling specific body parts — including the heart, eyes and “gonads” of unborn babies. The video also shows the shocking ways in which Planned Parenthood officials admit that they are breaking federal law by selling aborted baby body parts for profit.
Unreleased Videos: Unreleased videos from CMP show Deb Vanderhei of Planned Parenthood caught on tape talking about how Planned Parenthood abortion business affiliates may “want to increase revenue [from selling baby parts] but we can’t stop them…” Another video has a woman talking about the “financial incentives” of selling aborted baby body parts.
The 11th video: catches a Texas Planned Parenthood abortionist planning to sell the intact heads of aborted babies for research. Amna Dermish is caught on tape describing an illegal partial-birth abortion procedure to terminate living, late-term unborn babies which she hopes will yield intact fetal heads for brain harvesting.
The 12th video in the series shows new footage of Jennefer Russo, medical director at Planned Parenthood in Orange County, California, describing to undercover investigators how her abortion business tries to harvest intact aborted babies’ bodies for a local for-profit biotech company and changes the abortion procedure to do so.
The 13th video: exposes a Planned Parenthood medical director admitting that babies born alive after abortion are sometimes killed.
The 14th video: catches Planned Parenthood executives discussing gruesome abortion procedures and the sale of body parts from aborted babies for profit.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on The disturbing human body parts trafficking in Phoenix, Arizona seems eerily similar to what undercover journalists with the Center for Medical Progress uncovered at Planned Parenthood in California. However, in that case, the journalists are the ones being punished for exposing the unethical and potentially illegal sales of aborted baby body parts at the largest abortion chain in America.
Listening to the pearl-clutching from State Department foreign service officers; and looking at the circular laundry operation where DC politicians send taxpayer funds overseas and then use networks, friends and families to capture those same funds for their own personal financial benefit; while overlaying how much Hillary Clinton corruption the U.S. Justice Department, State Department and intelligence community hid in the 2016 election; the big picture emerges.
When politicians in Mexico or Afghanistan accept bribes we call it corruption, but when DC politicians participate in the exact same process we call it “lobbying”. It is no wonder the Clinton Foundation starts losing money as soon as the political influence over policy no longer exists. It is also no surprise why those same donors hate President Trump.
In the larger picture it is clear the Obama administration weaponized institutions of government to target their political opposition. It is also increasingly clear a Hillary Clinton administration would have further monetized the U.S. government.
President Obama’s team used the IRS, DOJ, CIA, FBI and State Dept. to target their opposition. The intelligence apparatus was weaponized; one small example that scratches the surface is the FBI/NSA FISA(702) database exploitation. Black files on DC politicians, private sector groups and individuals facilitating leverage, and we are still seeing the ramifications.
When business executive Patrick Byrne discussed his role within the “political espionage” operations, he was describing this exact process; not coincidentally he also seems to have retreated into a safe-space.
Big multinational interests, Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Global Banking interests, etc, were exclusively supporting both President Obama and candidate Clinton. The domestic politics of the U.S. were/are tools toward an end; and, so long as the person occupying the Oval Office did not interfere with multinational objectives, they too would benefit financially.
It is also obvious the opposition to President Trump, those who are really coordinating and manipulating the grassroots sheeple, are funded by these same multinational interests.
The college kid wearing a pink pussy hat is oblivious, but the executive offices of the Deep State FBI and Intelligence Community under James Comey, Andrew McCabe, or even Christopher Wray and AG Bill Barr are not; they know.
Additionally, the current occupants must also know that we know. Likely a great many more people are aware of the bigger issues than ever before. Perhaps this explains the dynamic of DC resistance angst amid those same occupants.
Think about how much the DOJ and FBI did to protect candidate Clinton.
Obviously, in their down-time discussions, they would have discussed and recognized some benefit would be forthcoming.
No entity would go so far out on an obvious limb of corruption if they did not perceive some personal benefit on the horizon.
Think about how much leverage James Comey would have held over the institution of the Office of the President if they had succeeded. If the sum total of dirt on Trump filled a bucket, by comparison Hillary Clinton owns a landfill.
Thousands of bills written by the multinational lobbyists were awaiting her arrival. Think of the scale of multinational effort behind TPP (Asia), TTIP (Europe), Paris Climate Treaty (Global), etc. Literally tens of trillions of graft and scheme within reach of those global financial networks; at the fingertips of the multinational Big Club,… until Donald Trump.
Think of the scale of wealth headed to the top of the pyramid that President Trump halted. Domestically, all of those lobbyist-written bills worthless on November 9th, 2016. All of the DC politicians, sales people indulged to sell those bills, left teetering on the border of functional obsolescence…. It’s quite stunning to think about.
Thus, after the initial shock, all of those interests lashing out in rage; weaponizing every group they can muster. Dispatching urgency to the corporate media forces. The pure unmitigated hatred that started immediately becomes much more understandable in this context.
Years of leftist planning led to President Obama’s ability to weaponize government without being held accountable in the process. Years of assistance by corporate media allies, all building toward the same end goal. How rich would Hillary and Bill have become by simply allowing phase two, “the monetization“, to proceed?
Remarkable to contemplate.
James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, John Brennan, Susan Rice, Sally Yates, Denis McDonough, Valerie Jarrett, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and many more, including the aforementioned foreign service officers, all knew and anticipated the professional power and personal financial benefits that would have followed…
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on “When politicians in Mexico or Afghanistan accept bribes we call it corruption, but when DC politicians participate in the exact same process we call it “lobbying”. It is no wonder the Clinton Foundation starts losing money as soon as the political influence over policy no longer exists. It is also no surprise why those same donors hate President Trump.”
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.