Thursday, July 25, 2024
Is everything kosher about the $126 million that poured in for Kamala?
Kamala, we were told, raised more money in a few hours than any other candidate in history. Sometimes, though, when things sound too good to be true, they’re probably not true at all. Many people are raising questions about whether Kamala received $81 million in donations from 888,000 grassroots donors in just 24 hours and another $44 million in the next 48 hours or whether the announcement of Joe’s withdrawal and Kamala’s likely role as the Democrat presidential candidate created a useful opportunity for massive money laundering, including money from foreigners gaming the American election.
ActBlue, the clearing house for all donations to Democrat parties and causes, has long had fundraising practices that, coincidentally or not, make money laundering easier. It allows donations from unverified credit cards, untethered to the cardholder’s name and address.
This means that there’s no way at all to know who these donors are, paving the way for fraud. Thus, Joe Shmo in Abilene can knowingly donate using a card that actually belongs to Klaus Schwab! Or, Klaus Schwab could donate using the unwitting Joe Shmo’s name.
Another way to know who donors are is through their employment status, which is information all donors are required to submit. This prevents “employers” from hiring “staff” whose sole purpose is funneling employer money to a politician or cause. If an unreasonable number of people with the same employer appear in the rolls, the FEC can see a problem.
Weirdly, in 2019, 48.4% of ActBlue’s donors claimed to be unemployed, while only 4% of donors to WinRed (the Republican clearinghouse) made the same claim. Perhaps that just highlights that the earners are conservative and the takers are leftists, or perhaps it points to something more serious, such as campaign money laundering.
Regardless of ActBlue’s motives (and I would not presume to guess them), the result of this approach to handling donations is that the ActBlue database has a lot of suspicious small-dollar donations that, when added together, create big donations. James O’Keefe has been all over this story since last year: CONTINUE
Why The ‘Pronoun Revolution’ Is Devastating To American Society
I’m sure most of us never expected to hear much about pronouns after our high school English classes. However, over the last decade, pronouns have escaped from those classrooms and seem to have taken over our society, constantly being discussed on social media, news networks, and even on the floor of Congress!
And though you may have thought pronouns were difficult to remember in grade school, today they are even more confusing.
Traditionally, personal pronouns refer to the sex of the person: male pronouns are he/him, female pronouns are she/her, and a group’s pronouns are they/them. Today, according to many liberals, an individual’s preferred pronouns can be whatever comes to mind, being based on a person’s “gender” rather than a person’s sex.
This means an individual can change their pronouns merely if they believe their gender is different from their sex (e.g., female rather than male), which leads to the chaos we see today. “Hi, my name is _____, and my pronouns are she/him . . . or maybe it/itself, or ze/zeir, or ey/em, or clown/clownselves.” (Yes, that last one is real!)
The Problem
This pronoun revolution is part of the overarching LGBTQI+ agenda, which has been devastating to American society in many areas, including language. As I have discussed in a previous article, words have meanings, and haphazardly changing their definitions erodes those meanings. In order to have proper communication, all speakers of a language must be able to clearly understand what other speakers are saying.
Such clear communication is lost when masculine or feminine personal pronouns no longer refer to biological men and women respectively.
As philosopher Daniel Moody argues, males cannot enter a female restroom because “as soon as we permit males to enter, the restroom ceases to be the female restroom. Sure, it still has the word ‘Female’ on the door, but its function has changed. Likewise, pronouns cease to be pronouns as soon as we de-sex them.” Such reckless destruction of pronoun usage dangerously provides a slippery slope, especially in the legal realm, where words must have clear and specific meanings.
As you probably know, the LGBTQI+ agenda has divided communities, families, and even churches over the last decade. The Bible clearly condemns LGBTQI+ practices, including homosexuality and transgenderism; yet many Christians are indifferent about these issues, and some even play the preferred-pronoun game, referring to transgender “women” as she/her rather than he/him, even though these individuals are biologically male. CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
www.youtube.com/MilitaryTimesOnline Romans1:20-22
-
www.gotquestions.org Yes, Jesus ate meat. Several passages lead to this clear conclusion. Genesis 9:3 is the first mention of eating meat...
