My Response to the Debate

by Dutch Sheets

Since I am confident about who should and shouldn’t be our next President, I did not watch last night’s debate live, but spent the time walking my backyard praying. I have, however, seen many clips, heard much analysis, and read quite a few responses.

I was confident Trump would be in command of the issues, as he was. In light of that, I felt that His demeanor and attitude would determine the effectiveness or inadequacy of his performance. Most feel he did well in this regard: strong but not mean-spirited, assertive but not overly argumentative, confident but not arrogant.

Biden, of course, was an unmitigated disaster in every way, which was no surprise to many. This begs the question: What is the overriding plan in all of this? The left is devious but not stupid. They have a plan.

It is now time to make some direct statements saying what many believe but are hesitant to say. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that Biden is unfit for the Presidency. With no disrespect whatsoever, most would say that were he an ordinary citizen and the possibility existed, he wouldn’t be trusted with a solo trip to the local drug store. No caring family would dare trust him with the car keys, not just for his own safety, but for that of everyone else on the road. And no family - or leaders of a political party - would trust him to debate in front of millions, let alone run a nation. Biden is clearly not in charge. All of which raises several questions:

Did Biden’s decline escalate and progress more rapidly than expected? Did those pulling the strings initially think they could use him for eight years? If they thought so, this is clearly no longer the case.

Did the Dems really want the debate? I doubt it. The conditions were so outlandish and unfair that NO ONE would say yes to their terms. But Trump did! Which probably sent panic to those in charge, along the lines of hell’s panic when Jesus showed up demanding the keys.

When Trump said yes, did Biden’s handlers hold out hope that with a week of rest, dozens of hours of prep by 15-20 “experts” (and probably the list of questions), possible drugs, and their lopsided terms, Biden could bluff his way through 90 minutes? If that was their hope, it was dashed in less than 10 minutes. But I’m not sure those in control could have been that delusional.

Was the embarrassment of Biden’s Thursday night performance part of a plan to replace him? I’ve repeatedly said that I don’t believe Biden will be on the ticket in November. That isn’t prophecy, just an educated opinion and a feeling I have. I’ve felt that with his rapid decline, he could not continue to fool Americans enough to be reelected and remain the puppet of the puppeteers behind the curtain. BUT THESE MANAGERS HAVE NO INTENTION OF STEPPING ASIDE. When seeing Biden’s freefall, was this debate the beginning of their replacement plan? Perhaps.

If so, will Biden continue cooperating with those in control and step aside at the most fortuitous time for the replacement to be inserted?

Or, has he, in his demented state, bullish nature, and tremendous arrogance, convinced himself that he is fit and up to the job? Has he now rebelled against his handlers? He says he isn’t stepping down; this, of course, could simply be part of the plan to wait for the right time.

If Biden does buck those in charge, what will they do? They DO have a plan. And they WON’T willingly give up power. Biden is unelectable and WILL be removed, unless they have a plan or crisis prepared with which to take the election in some other way.

And finally, who are “they”? “They” do exist. There may be a point person, but clearly, a group of people is ruling America. I don’t know who, but they would have to be comprised of:

• Ultra-rich individuals - the money behind them is mind-numbing.

• Globalists - they are intent on fundamentally changing America into a weaker, poorer nation no longer capable of leading the free world.

• Marxists - they espouse socialist ideologies, not capitalism and free enterprise.

• Those with antichrist dogmas and ideologies - they oppose the church, biblical morality and ideals, and America’s Christian roots.

• People connected to the Democrat party - this is who they have placed in power.

• Ruthless individuals - they want power at ANY price, including money or blood.

Call me a conspiracist - I don’t care. Any honest person can see that Biden is not in control of the Presidency. And the most likely scenario is that a small group of people is now pulling the strings, trying to destroy the America we have known.

I am blatantly stating these things to emphasize that we must keep praying. The powers trying to overthrow America are not finished. I say again, they have a plan. Part of that plan has been to destroy and/or defeat Trump, one of the few people in the world who can withstand their attacks. I believe they will fail. But they are so entrenched in our nation that only God can enable us to defeat them and turn America around, regardless of who is President.

We have a promise that America shall be saved. I, like many others, have a clear word from the Lord that He is not finished with America. If we continue to repent and appeal to Him for His aid and support, He will do as He promised.

Keep praying, church, keep praying.

Copyright © 2024 Dutch Sheets Ministries, All rights reserved.

Monday Political Cartoons

Judge Brett Kavanaugh

From Rev. Franklin Graham:

As you may know, Judge Brett Kavanaugh is strongly defending his word, his character, and his integrity. He and his wife talked with media last night. He also sent the following letter to Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Grassley yesterday. I urge you to take a moment to read it here and to pray for Judge Kavanaugh, his family, his accusers, and all of the Senate involved in this process as Thursday's hearing approaches.

September 24, 2018

Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein: 

When I testified in front of the Senate three weeks ago, I explained my belief that fair process is foundational to justice and to our democracy.

At that time, I sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 31 hours and answered questions under oath. I then answered more questions at a confidential session. The following week, I responded to more than 1,200 written questions, more than have been submitted to all previous Supreme Court nominees combined.

Only after that exhaustive process was complete did I learn, through the news media, about a 36-year-old allegation from high school that had been asserted months earlier and withheld from me throughout the hearing process. First it was an anonymous allegation that I categorically and unequivocally denied. Soon after the accuser was identified, I repeated my denial on the record and made clear that I wished to appear before the Committee. I then repeated my denial to Committee investigators—under criminal penalties for false statements. All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening. I asked to testify before the Committee again under oath as soon as possible, so that both Dr. Ford and I could both be heard. I thank Chairman Grassley for scheduling that hearing for Thursday. 

Last night, another false and uncorroborated accusation from 35 years ago was published. Once again, those alleged to have been witnesses to the event deny it ever happened. There is now a frenzy to come up with something—anything—that will block this process and a vote on my confirmation from occurring.

These are smears, pure and simple. And they debase our public discourse. But they are also a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country. Such grotesque and obvious character assassination—if allowed to succeed—will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service.

As I told the Committee during my hearing, a federal judge must be independent, not swayed by public or political pressure. That is the kind of judge I will always be. I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process. The coordinated effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. The last-minute character assassination will not succeed.

I have devoted my career to serving the public and the cause of justice, and particularly to promoting the equality and dignity of women. Women from every phase of my life have come forward to attest to my character. I am grateful to them. I owe it to them, and to my family, to defend my integrity and my name. I look forward to answering questions from the Senate on Thursday. 

Sincerely,
Brett M. Kavanaugh

GOA: Boehner Secretly Plotting to Stab Gun Owners in the Back

Gun Owners of America Boehner Secretly Plotting to Stab  Gun Owners in the Back  In a closed-door meeting of wealthy contributors in Las Vegas, House Speaker John Boehner said he was "hell-bent on getting [anti-gun immigration amnesty] done this year." And earlier this week, the Speaker viciously mocked conservative Republicans for opposing him on this issue. The wily Boehner had led his conservative Republican members to believe the issue was shelved for the year.  Now it appears that Boehner is simply planting a trap for Republicans and gun owners -- springing this Obama-backed proposal when it's too late to primary anti-gun Republican amnesty supporters. Gun Owners of America has argued all along that Second Amendment supporters have "a dog in this fight." In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed an immigration amnesty bill for about 3 million illegals.  It was supposed to be accompanied by new enforcement measures -- which never happened.  Instead, the prospect of citizenship only attracted over ten million new illegals.  And those granted amnesty in 1986 turned California from a "swing state" into an anti-gun nightmare.  A Pew poll from last year indicated that if illegal immigrants were given citizenship, they would vote for liberal, anti-gun candidates by an 8-to-1 margin.  So by the time that a net 8,000,000-plus additional anti-gun voters emerge from Obama's new proposal, it will be far too late to do anything about it.  Handgun bans.  Total gun registration. Confiscation programs.  SWAT teams.  These will be the inevitable consequence of adding 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters to the electorate. Boehner's Republican members understand that anti-gun immigration amnesty could cost Republicans the Senate and House in November -- and would damage their prospects even more in long-term. This is why, up until now, he was pretending to shelve the issue. Boehner thinks he can get away with bushwhacking the Republican members who elected him Speaker. But the good news is that there is a procedure for unseating the Speaker, and we are beginning to work with members in order to invoke it. ACTION:  1. Contact your Representative. Please urge him to oppose any efforts to move anti-gun amnesty legislation -- regardless of his party affiliation. But if he is a Republican, ask him to move for Boehner's removal if, as reported, he betrays his own members -- and jeopardizes control of the House. 2. Contact Speaker Boehner and tell him to get off his "hell-bent" road to anti-gun amnesty. There is absolutely NO WAY for you to communicate with the Speaker (via email) if you live outside of his district. So if you wish to communicate with him, please contact his office using the following methods: * Phone: (202)225-6205 * Fax: (202)225-0704 Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable. Please forward this e-mail to friends and family Gun Owners of America 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 22151 703-321-8585 www.gunowners.org Contact Form If this alert was forwarded to you, you can subscribe to receive alerts directly by clicking here.

A Message from Tom Gresham of GunTalk Radio

"Last Sunday I announced Operation Gun Rights. The reason I did it is because I know that senators and congressmen are being swamped with the "we must DO something" mantra of CNN, the New York Times, and other "news" sources. We must replace that message with an even stronger one.

"So, here's the call to action. This is what each of us must do right now. Take the pledge. It's very simple.

 

"I'm asking you to commit to contacting your two senators and your representative(s) in the house once a week for eight to 12 weeks. (If your reps are strongly anti-gun, I'll have advice for you in a minute.) Simple. Easy. Quick. Once a week. For eight to 12 weeks.

"The message is simple.

1.  We won't stand for scapegoating. 

2.  No new gun laws.

3.  Remove the phony "gun free" zones which enable killers to go unchecked.

4. Work with us or we will work to retire you.

"I've worked with a number of smart and experienced people on these "talking points," and I'm convinced that offering any suggestions to Congress is a recipe for losing. Some have asked me to supply sources of information to back up their counter-arguments to gun control. Honestly, I think that's a waste of time.

"I don't want to convince them we are right. I want to convince them we will hurt them politically if they vote the wrong way. That's the way Washington, DC, works. Bare knuckles and 2x4s."

The Bengazi Affair: It Won't Go Away

Roger O'Daniel over at the Patriot Action Network has been following the string of scandal, changing cover stories, cover-ups, and lies. Here's his summary of what's happened, so far:

Facts (well, paraphrased facts):

1. E-mail #1 sent to Pentagon, WH situation room, CIA, to multiple names within each location. Help! We have solid evidence that we will be attacked.
2. E-mail #2 sent to same list. Help! Attack seems imminent. This e-mail or the one that followed identified the name of the perpetrator and his allegiance to Al Qaeda. He claimed responsibility the following morning to celebrate the anniversary of 9/11. The attack had nothing to do with the video about Muhammad.  BTW, his own people poisoned his lamb dinner.  How’s that for loyalty and devotion?
3. E-mail #3 sent to the same list. Help! We are under attack and hunkered down. The whole place is on fire.
4. Two US Military, a SEAL and Special Ops, are in an annex a short distance away. A remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) is in the air photographing everything. Photos captured from the ground and the air show that there was no crowd in the area. It was a precision mortar attack, carefully planned in advance, with known coordinates of every target hit by the mortars for maximum effect. Whoever is in the White House situation room is watching. The Pentagon is watching. The pilot flying that RPA and the pilot flying the RPA that took its place is watching. The CIA is watching. One of the US Military is on the roof risking sniper fire while he "paints" the source of the mortar fire with a laser. He would not risk his life if he did not know that A: the RPA was overhead and within target range, and B: it had a hellfire missile on board. Predators do that. By the way, it is a remotely piloted aircraft, not a drone. A real live human pilot handles the controls. A C-130 equipped with side-firing Gatling guns could decimate that area. So could an A-10. Both are less than 30 minutes away.
5. The hellfire missile never fired. The C-130 and A-10 stayed on the ground in Sicily.  If the RPA had stayed until morning, it could have photographed several buildings in Benghazi flying Al Qaeda flags.
6. The US Military in the annex requested permission to rescue the trapped embassy employees twice. They were turned down twice. The SEAL went anyway, saved their lives by moving them to the safer annex and also moved the body of a fallen comrade so his body would not be desecrated. He faces court marshal for disobeying orders. The person who ordered the US military and CIA to "stand down" should be court marshaled instead for treason.
7. Panetta, the former Chief of Staff (a 5-star general) and now head of the CIA said that the CIA did not order the military to stand down and added that the President at least knew everything that was going on as it happened and had ample opportunity to go to the situation room and watch. In political speak, Panetta threw Obama under the bus.
8. General Petraeus also threw Obama under the bus by saying the same thing. The Pentagon and the CIA said the alerts were timely and none of us told anyone to stand down. We even sent the RPA to even the score and were ordered not to use it. Obama said he did not know the facts in the third debate and claimed that he is responsible. Mitt Romney told the moderator and the listeners to remember this moment for the record. The moderator knew in advance all questions that would be asked, and affirmed that Obama told the truth, waving a piece of paper in the air as she spoke. We now know that he (and she) lied.

Prior facts:

1. Shortly after his inauguration as President of the United States (POTUS), Obama visited several heads of state in the Middle-East, skipping Israel. It was noticed. POTUS bowed before the king of Saudi Arabia; a public symbol of deference. This gesture is also done by foreign dignitaries who are non-cleric Muslim believers. The world noticed, especially Israel.
2. Throughout his Middle-East tour, Obama apologized for the foreign relations "misdeeds" of his predecessors and promised change, with a focus on the Palestine problem. The world noticed, especially Israel.
3. The White House leaked intelligence, picked up by Wikileaks, and broadcast to the world how US and Israel targeted a cyber attack that destroyed 1,000 Iranian centrifuges used to separate fissionable uranium from its non-fissionable isotope. The virus over-spun the centrifuges so they would throw their rods, thereby releasing highly toxic and radioactive uranium hexafluoride into the chamber. Israel took a dim view of that revelation. They knew that they could not trust Obama and his minions so long as any of them were in power.
4. Symantec, Network Solutions and other companies that fight cyber intrusion reported that Communist China continues to be the number 1 malware source. The Ukraine is number 2. Israel is number 3. Does that give us a hint of Israel's level of trust in US shared intelligence?
5. After the raid that killed Osama Ben Laden, Obama broke the code of secrecy of SEAL Team 6 by revealing classified information. This is a felony offence that Eric Holder chose to ignore. A couple of months later, an outpost in Afghanistan came under attack. SEAL Team 6 was ordered to intervene. Several things were very odd about this operation. Special Ops normally do this type of work. The military transport vehicle used to move combat personnel is armored, armed, and equipped with sensors to detect the presence of the enemy. This aircraft, a helicopter, was normally used to transport cargo. It was not armored, not armed and had no sensors onboard. The aircraft flew low between two ridge lines to avoid visual detection. At least three insurgents were ready and waiting armed with shoulder-fire guided RPGs. All hit their mark and the helicopter crashed with no survivors. After the crash, the attackers to the outpost disappeared. Did someone at a very high level of command give Al Qaeda an opportunity to avenge the death of their founder?

Link: Ends and Means

A Call to Wings: Ends and Means ... excerpt:

So.
Someone got caught.

I think I've said elsewhere.... 2008 was the year I stopped believing I was seeing an unconscious bias simply arising from the fact that we all see the world from our own perspective, and started to see that I was being actively, deliberately lied to.

Look, left, right, libertarian, green - I don't care. But media outlets, let me repeat..... some day, that "American Hitler that looks like John Wayne" really is going to show up.

Is Joe Miller him? Could be. I don't think so. I've looked him in the eyes, took his hand, asked him questions face to face and measured his words - while I'm sure we'd disagree on all sorts of things, I don't recognize the man I met on the news stories I see in the papers. And if I watched TV, I suspect I'd be saying the same thing about the KTVA stories.

But I digress. So - about that John Wayne-esque killer demogogue. Let me repeat. Yes. Someday we probably will see a man like that. And the reason he'll get power is because no one will believe you when you start screaming warnings. Because of crap like this.

Go read the whole thing. Nailed it, she did.

Ugly Politics in the Last Frontier

The race for the U.S. Senate in Alaska is getting uglier.

New ads are appearing which make further allegations of wrong-doing on Joe Miller's part ... or rather, they hint that he might have done something wrong, without coming right out and saying so. One such ad has been running for the last week or so, claiming that when he & his family first moved to Alaska, they applied for (GASP) a low-income hunting permit.

I'm here to tell you that it takes a metric boatload of money to move a family & household up here. We arrived with only our clothes and two cars, and had to start over. Literally, from scratch. Although my wife was blessed with a good job after only one week, I bounced around for a year, from one barely-sufficient job to another, before landing a decent income.

So his income was low when he first arrived? Sorry, Murkowski-ites, but that's normal.

The newest ad claims that his wife worked for him several years ago. Omigosh, it can't be nepotism*, can it? (/sarcastic whisper) The ad doesn't exactly SAY it was nepotism, you see; it hints that it might have been.

Typical.

He was a part-time federal magistrate from 2002 - 2004. It's entirely likely that his budget didn't allow for a full-time staff.

The latest move is literally from the 2008 Obama/Democrat playbook. You'll recall that Missouri Democrats formed a hit squad of sorts, purportedly to go after any local TV or newspapers which supported McCain/Palin. The Governor of that state had to step in & slap a few local pols into place, to make it stop.

Now, the Murkowski campaign (she's running now as an independent, write-in candidate) is accusing the Tea Party Express of running ads "littered with lies and mischaracterizations."

The 2008 tie-in?  I quote: "They're demanding that the ads not be aired and have sent a letter to Alaska broadcast stations reminding them that they will be liable for knowingly running false information."

Murkowski, who claimed to be a conservative during the last 2 weeks of the primary campaign, then toyed with the idea of running as a Libertarian. When the Alaska Libertarian Party stated clearly that they wouldn't make room for her on their ticket - AND that she does not share their values - she stated that she is a moderate, and wouldn't change her views just for a chance to get party backing.

Right. So now her campaign muscles up, and in true Chicago-esque manner, leans on local news outlets with thinly-veiled threats.

Sorry, Princess; you'd be my second choice.  My first, you ask?

Whomever else is running ... and in this case, the Constitutionalist.


* As Jenny points out in comments, this charge of nepotism, coming from the camp of a Senator who was appointed to her father's Senate seat by her father, is ironic, no? Yes, she won reelection in 2004 - but let's not forget how she got there in the first place.