Bobulinski: Hunter Biden Attempted to Broker Deal For Chinese Energy Company to Buy 14% Share in Russian State Oil Company…Joe Knew

Breitbart.com reports that

During an interview aired on Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” former Hunter Biden business associate Tony Bobulinski discussed his meeting with 2020 Democratic presidential nominee former Vice President Joe Biden at the Beverly Hilton and said there was “no other reason” for him to meet with Biden “than to discuss what I was doing with his family’s name and the Chinese,” and that it is “a blatant lie” for Joe Biden to declare he didn’t know about his son, Hunter’s, business dealings.

Bobulinski said, “There was no other reason for me to be in that bar meeting Joe Biden than to discuss what I was doing with his family’s name and the Chinese, CEFC.”

Bobulinski added that Joe Biden’s claim that he didn’t know about his son’s business dealings is “a blatant lie.”

He also stated, “Hunter introduced me as, this is Tony, dad, the individual I told you about that’s helping us with the business that we’re working on and the Chinese.” And that it was “crystal clear” that Hunter Biden had told his father about his business dealings.

Bobulinski also said, “I didn’t request to meet with Joe. They requested that I meet with Joe.”

And, what was the business that they were working on with the Chinese?

Per Breitbart.com,

Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, allegedly acted as the “personal attorney” for Ye Jianming, the chair of a major Chinese energy firm, in a deal to buy a 14% stake in a Russian state oil company facing U.S. sanctions.

The stunning accusation was made by Tony Bobulinski, a former business partner of the Biden family, during an interview Tuesday evening with Tucker Carlson on Fox News.

Bobulinski explained that he was to have been the CEO of a new firm, Sinohawk, that was to be a joint venture between CEFC — the “capitalistic side of the Chinese government” — and the Biden family. He said he met with Joe Biden in 2017 to discuss the arrangement, contradicting Biden’s denials on the campaign trail.

However, the deal fell through, he explained, partly because CEFC tried to buy a 14% stake in Rosneft, the Russian state oil company. At that time, Russia faced sanctions because of its invasion of Ukraine and seizure of Crimea in 2014. The Financial Times reported that the CEFC deal was to help Rosneft find new markets “as relations deteriorate with the west.”

That deal, too, eventually fell through, as CEFC was investigated for corruption by China and other countries as well.

Bobulinski recalled that in July 2017, Chinese premier Xi Jinping was in Moscow for meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bobulinski recalled that he was shocked to learn of CEFC’s interest in Russia, which placed Sinohawk in a precarious position.

In September 2017, once CEFC had announced the deal to buy a stake in Rosneft, and the $10 million that CEFC was supposed to have invested in Sinohawk had never materialized, Bobulinski grew more concerned.

In October, he said, “I did reach out to Hunter Biden … asking him, ‘Hey, listen, they haven’t funded the $10 million, have you done something that I’m not aware of? Have you gone around us? Have you started a parallel discussion with Chairman Ye that I should be conscious of?”

Bobulinski said that Hunter Biden informed him, via text message, “I’m acting as the personal attorney to Chairman Ye.”

“Hunter Biden is now telling me,” Bobulinksi recalled, “that he’s meeting personally, one-on-one with Chairman Ye in his $50 million penthouse in New York, and if he can’t meet him, he’s picking up the phone and calling him, but they only discuss things in person.

“You can imagine my frustration,” Bobulinski said. “You’re acting as the personal attorney to Chairman Ye while they’re tendering for 14% of the Russian state-owned energy company, a deal valued at $9 billion? What am I missing here?”

Hunter Biden is reportedly licensed to practice law in the state of Connecticut.

So, boys and girls, wrap your heads around this:

Joe and Hunter Biden are guilty of the very thing that President Donald J. Trump was investigated for by a Special Counsel, his minions, and Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the House of Representatives: COLLUSION!

Joe Biden has been lying to American voters concerning his involvement with his son’s nefarious foreign deals, which makes him a security risk to our Sovereign Nation who should never have been able to run for President of the United States of America.

To say that Sleepy Joe is compromised is putting it mildly.

He and his heathen son are both as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Another thing, Special Counsel Robert Mueller was chosen in May of 2017.

His investigation was underway while the Biden Crime Family was brokering deals for personal gain with our two biggest enemies.

Given the fact that this Father and Son enterprise had been in “business” since Biden was Vice-President, and that several prominent Democrats were on lists to be contacted by the Bidens about certain endeavors,it sheds a whole new light on the sham impeachment of President Trump.

Were the Democrats attempting to cover their own dealings with the Biden Crime Family?

It’s certainly possible.

Action needs to be taken by the Department of Justice.

Joe Biden needs to withdraw from the race immediately.

Calling the Democrat Elite a bunch of hypocrites does not even begin to cover the depth of their corruption.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Two Former Fox News Employees File Lawsuits Alleging Sexual Harassment Against Hannity and Carlson and Rape Against Ed Henry

Henry Carlson Hannity

WashingtonTimes.com reports that

Fox News Channel stars Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Howard Kurtz were accused of sexual harassment by a frequent on-air guest in a lawsuit filed Monday that the network called frivolous and untrue.

In the same case, a former Fox employee said she was harassed and raped by news anchor Ed Henry, who was fired July 1 shortly after the network became aware of the accusations.

Henry’s lawyer, Catherine Foti, said Monday that her client’s accuser, Jennifer Eckhart, initiated and encouraged a sexual relationship.

Hannity and Carlson represent two-thirds of Fox’s lucrative prime-time lineup, while Kurtz hosts the weekend “Media Buzz” show. None of the men have been mentioned before in any misconduct allegations at Fox until the charges were made by Cathy Areu.

The lawsuit filed in New York describes Areu’s discomfort with a March 2018 incident on the set of Hannity’s show where the host allegedly put $100 on a desk and challenged the men on his staff to take her out on a date.

She said she was a guest on Carlson’s show in December 2018 and that after it was over, he told her he was staying in a hotel room in New York that night without his wife and children. In 2019, she said Kurtz invited her to his hotel room to discuss her hope of getting a full-time job at Fox. When she instead invited him to dinner with her and a friend, he declined, she said.

In the cases of Carlson and Kurtz, Areu believed the men were making sexual advances, the lawsuit said. Areu said she was also propositioned by Gianno Caldwell, a Fox contributor.

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

Well, there’s always two sides to every story…

Fox News spokesperson Jessica Ketner issued a statement to Heavy.com. It said:

Based on the findings of a comprehensive independent investigation conducted by an outside law firm, including interviews with numerous eyewitnesses, we have determined that all of Cathy Areu’s claims against FOX News, including its management as well as its hosts Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity & Howard Kurtz and its contributor Gianno Caldwell, are false, patently frivolous and utterly devoid of any merit.

We take all claims of harassment, misconduct and retaliation seriously, promptly investigating them and taking immediate action as needed — in this case, the appropriate action based on our investigation is to defend vigorously against these baseless allegations. Ms. Areu and Jennifer Eckhart can pursue their claims against Ed Henry directly with him, as FOX News already took swift action as soon as it learned of Ms. Eckhart’s claims on June 25 and Mr. Henry is no longer employed by the network.

Henry tweeted, “I will fight with every fiber of my being.” He also released a statement from his attorney, Cathy Foti, denying the accusations and saying he was in a consensual relationship with Eckhart:

The MeToo movement has helped to bring to light a number of injustices in our society, and everyone that has suffered deserves to be heard. This is not one of those cases. The evidence in this case will demonstrate that Ms. Eckhart initiated and completely encouraged a consensual relationship. Ed Henry looks forward to presenting actual facts and evidence, which will contradict the fictional accounts contained in the complaint. That evidence includes graphic photos and other aggressively suggestive communications that Ms. Eckhart sent to Mr. Henry.

Okay, we are all very familiar with the accused.

What do we know about the accusers?

Per her LinkedIn.com Profile Page,

Jennifer Eckhart is a female powerhouse in the media industry who bridges the gap between producing and being an on-air personality. Jennifer joined the Fox News team in January 2013, and is frequently featured on Fox programming, including Fox News Radio & Fox Nation. She also produces one of the top rated business shows in America, “Countdown to the Closing Bell.”

..Jennifer’s proudest achievement, however, is giving some of the youngest and brightest entrepreneurs aiming to disrupt entire industries a chance at the national spotlight.

Before joining Fox News, Jennifer was as a correspondent for ESPN Radio where she hosted the 2011 ESPN College Football Awards live from the red carpet in Orlando, FL. Jennifer also served as an Entertainment Anchor for WUFT-TV, a PBS affiliate in Gainesville, Florida.

In her personal life, she is dating a corporate lawyer and has an Instragram Page under a very interesting non de plume: “aho 187″.

Don’t ask me to spell that out for you. I am too much of a gentleman for that.

According to Cathy Areu’s Instragram Profile, she listed as a Journalist, a Former Washington Post Contributing Editor, CATALINA Founder, host of “Liberal Sherpa” & “Catalina” podcasts, and she did Op-Ed’s on Fox News.

CATALINA is a magazine for Latina Women.

Areu is known as a Liberal Political Activist.

Now, I am no lawyer but my almost 40 years of experience working in corporations tells me a couple of things:

Concerning Ms. Eckhart’s claims, Fox did not want take the chance that it might be true, so they got rid of Ed Henry for safety’s sake.

Second, their sticking behind Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity tells me that they believe what their spoekesperson wrote: that her stories are a bunch of garbage.

Not to be insensitive, but…

If you are going to file rape and sexual coercion charges against someone, you probably should have changed your Instragram handle proclaiming yourself to be “aho”.

Otherwise, the public will think you and you associate are going after these men for the sake of fame, money, and politics.

I’m just sayin”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Liberal Bishop Wants America to “Extend Compassion” to Migrant Caravan…Libs’ Social Justice = Our Money

181021_tw_migrant_caravan1_crop_hpMain_16x9_992

Charity is willingly given from the heart. – Rush Limbaugh

Per FoxNews.com

Tucker Carlson had a must-see segment Thursday night in which he debated a bishop of the United Methodist Church who believes the United States should not turn away the caravan of migrants that has gathered at the southern border.

Bishop Minerva Carcano said the migrants have a right to flee poverty and violence in their home countries, and to seek asylum and receive due process.

“These are people who need humanity to extend compassion to them and love and care. It may discomfort some, but this is a moment in which we can show the best of humanity,” Carcano said.

Tucker raised the issue of the massive cost to U.S. taxpayers when it comes to housing, health care, education and other basic services for illegal immigrants. 

“Some estimates suggest the cost is hundreds of thousands per immigrant over a lifetime. The Methodist Church is not paying that bill, U.S. taxpayers are,” Tucker argued. 

Carcano argued that immigrants contribute “much more” to the economy than they take out, to which Tucker responded that studies have shown that people who come to the U.S. with less than a high school education take more from the system than they put in by a “huge margin.”

Tucker noted that Carcano’s church — as a religious institution — is exempt from paying taxes.

“If you’re encouraging people to come here, why don’t you have an obligation to provide them education, housing, food, medical care? But you offload that onto taxpayers. And I wonder if that’s a Christian thing to do,” Tucker said. “How can you feel virtuous when you’re not paying for the things you’re encouraging?”

Carcano said that all the members of the United Methodist Church who live in America pay their taxes like every other citizen, and the church itself spends “millions of dollars” caring for immigrants.

“American taxpayers spend $135 billion on this,” Tucker replied. “I’m just saying, if you’re going to encourage people to come in here, I think you should pitch in a little bit more than you are.”

As a former member of the United Methodist Church, I believe that they should, also.

Christian Charity is one thing. “Social Justice” being funded by American Taxpayers is another.

And, that got me to thnking…

This time of year, Americans’ thoughts and hearts turn toward helping those who are less fortunate.

We are reminded of the plight of others every time we pass by a volunteer at a Salvation Army Kettle.

And, that got me to thinking, Who actual gives more to charity, the Vocal Minority, America’s Liberals…or the Silent Majority, Christian American Conservatives?

I have noticed over the years, that when a Christian American Conservative, such a myself, writes an article concerning Christianity in America, Liberal activists in Liberal Churches, such as the Bishop in the above article, jump up on their hind legs and start complaining that Conservatives ARE the problem with Christianity in America, and, that Christian Conservatives are the least charitable, least caring of Americans.

A pretty silly statement, when you think about it. One that is so blatantly false, it’s laughable.

Realclearpolitics.com posted the following article by George Wills (before he completely lost his mind) on March 27, 2008,  featuring information gathered by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, who published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism”…

— Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

— Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

— Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

— Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

— In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

— People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and “the values that lie beneath” liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

The single biggest predictor of someone’s altruism, Willett says, is religion. It increasingly correlates with conservative political affiliations because, as Brooks’ book says, “the percentage of self-described Democrats who say they have ‘no religion’ has more than quadrupled since the early 1970s.” America is largely divided between religious givers and secular nongivers, and the former are disproportionately conservative. One demonstration that religion is a strong determinant of charitable behavior is that the least charitable cohort is a relatively small one — secular conservatives.

Reviewing Brooks’ book in the Texas Review of Law & Politics, Justice Willett notes that Austin — it voted 56 percent for Kerry while he was getting just 38 percent statewide — is ranked by The Chronicle of Philanthropy as 48th out of America’s 50 largest cities in per capita charitable giving. Brooks’ data about disparities between liberals’ and conservatives’ charitable giving fit these facts: Democrats represent a majority of the wealthiest congressional districts, and half of America’s richest households live in states where both senators are Democrats.

While conservatives tend to regard giving as a personal rather than governmental responsibility, some liberals consider private charity a retrograde phenomenon — a poor palliative for an inadequate welfare state, and a distraction from achieving adequacy by force, by increasing taxes. Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: “A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity.” Brooks, however, warns: “If support for a policy that does not exist … substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others.”

In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore’s charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore “gave at the office.” By using public office to give other peoples’ money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.

The Methodist Bishop on Tucker Carlson’s program is a great example of the closing statement in Will’s article.

After the eight long years of the previous Administration, Liberals have come to expect American Taxpayers to pay for their latest cause in “the Battle for Social Justice”. In this case, it’s the Liberals who run the United Methodist Church.

The thing is, I was always taught that true charity comes from the heart. That Christians get together as a congregation and help the needy, like the small group I attend who are providing “Santa” for a little girl living with her grandmother.

I’m having an issue with welcoming an invasion carrying their country’s flag who refuses to enter our Sovereign Nation the right way and who, when blocked from forcibly crossing our Southern Border, arrogantly tell authorities that if we give them $50,000 a piece they will return to their home country.

That positively reeks of humility and being downtrodden, doesn’t it?

Or something.

So, Bishop, if you really want to help those “poor souls” in the Migrant Caravan, take some money from the coffers of the United Methodist Church Headquarters, go to Tijuana, and start passing it out.

As for me, I think I will take some canned goods to the Food Bank which my local church helps to sponsor.

Charity begins at home.

Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him. – Mark 12:17 (ESV)

Until He Comes,

KJ

Trump Fires Back, Calls Former CIA Director Brennan “A Very Bad Guy”

4E5BF4AD00000578-5964479-image-a-2_1531874315085

“I think John Brennan’s completely unhinged”. – Sen. Rand Paul, “The Story”, Fox News Channel. 7/17/18

FoxNews.com reports that

President Trump denied he was “pro-Russia” and slammed former CIA Director John Brennan in a Fox News interview airing Tuesday night, after the ex-intelligence chief described Trump’s news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin as “treasonous.”

“I think Brennan is a very bad guy and if you look at it a lot of things happened under his watch,” Trump told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson on Monday. “I think he’s a very bad person.”

The “Tucker Carlson Tonight” interview was recorded in Helsinki following the Trump-Putin news conference, at which Trump appeared to dismiss the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia meddled in the 2016 election. Trump backtracked on Tuesday, claiming he meant to say he didn’t see why Russia “wouldn’t” be responsible for the meddling.

On Monday, Brennan tweeted that Trump’s performance at the news conference “rises to & exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors.'”

“Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin,” added Brennan. “Republican Patriots: Where are you???”

In his interview, Trump compared Brennan to FBI official Peter Strzok, former FBI attorney Lisa Page, former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

“When you watch all of the things that have happened … you look at the deception, the lies,” Trump told Carlson. “These are people that in my opinion are truly bad people, and they’re being exposed for what they are.”

When Carlson asked Trump if he considered Russia America’s greatest adversary, the president answered: “I won’t even use the word adversary. We can all work together. We can do great. Everybody can do well and we can live in peace.”

Trump also invoked the Soviet Union’s role in fighting Nazi Germany during World War II: “In World War II, Russia lost 50 million people and helped us win the war. I was saying to myself the other day, ‘You know, Russia really helped us.'”
“I’m not pro-Russia, pro-anybody,” Trump went on. “I just want to have this country be safe. … You know, Russia and the United States control 90 percent of the nuclear weapons in the world and getting along with Russia – and not only for that reason – it’s a good thing, not a bad thing.”

When President Trump described John O. Brennan as “a very bad guy”, he wasn’t kidding.

Brennan was “Deep State” before “Deep State” was “en vogue”.

Courtesy of discoverthenetworks.org,  here is a brief overview of Former CIA Director John O. Brennan…

  • Longtime CIA official

  • Served as a senior advisor to Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign

  • Said in 2009 that he was “pleased to see that a lot of Hezbollah individuals are in fact renouncing … terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political process in a very legitimate fashion”

  • Believes that tactics like waterboarding are not only inconsistent with “our ideals as a nation,” but also “undermine our national security” because they “are a recruitment bonanza for terrorists”

  • Explains that “jihad” means “to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal”

  • Supports trials of Islamic terrorists in civilian courts rather than in military tribunals

  • In 2011, he called for the FBI to eliminate its “offensive” curriculum/training materials which made reference to “jihad” and “radical Islam.”

  • Was involved in crafting the false talking points that then-Secretary of State Susan Rice gave regarding the 9/11/12 terrorist attack against a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi

  • Was appointed as CIA director by President Barack Obama in 2013

…In 1976 he voted for Communist Party USA presidential nominee Gus Hall. As historian Ron Radosh points out, “The CPUSA at that time was dedicated to gaining support for Soviet foreign policy, with the intent of defeating the United States in the Cold War…. Moscow regularly gave Hall thousands of dollars to enable the Communists in America to carry on their work.” Brennan has explained that his motivation for supporting Hall was that he (Brennan) was unhappy “with the system” and saw the “need for change.”

…In September 2012, Brennan was involved in crafting the false talking points that then-Secretary of State Susan Rice gave regarding the 9/11/12 terrorist attack against a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. Specifically, Rice claimed that according to the “best information at present,” the deadly attack was not premeditated, but rather, a “spontaneous reaction” to “a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world.”

…On January 7, 2013, President Obama nominated Brennan for the position of CIA director. During his Senate confirmation hearing on February 7, 2013, he called waterboarding a “reprehensible” practice that “never should’ve taken place in my view.” “As far as I’m concerned, waterboarding is something that never should’ve been employed,” Brennan told Senator Carl Levin, “and, as far I’m concerned, never will be if I have anything to do with it.”

…In February 2013, John Guandolo, a former Marine who subsequently worked eight years in the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division as a “subject matter expert” regarding the Muslim Brotherhood and the global spread of Islam, stated that Brennan had converted to Islam years earlier in Saudi Arabia. Said Guandolo:

“Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on the behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia. That fact alone is not what is most disturbing. His conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him. The fact that foreign intelligence service operatives recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior U.S. government position in a foreign country means that he either is a traitor … [or] he has the inability to discern and understand how to walk in those kinds of environments, which makes him completely unfit to be the director of Central Intelligence…. The facts of the matter are confirmed by U.S. government officials who were also in Saudi Arabia at the time that John Brennan was serving there and have direct knowledge. These are men who work in very trusted positions, they were direct witnesses to his growing relationship with the individuals who worked for the Saudi government and others and they witnessed his conversion to Islam.”

As you have just read, for Former Director Brennan to call President Trump “treasonous” is the height of irony.

As seems to be the case with a lot of those who served in the hierarchy of America’s Intelligence Agencies under Former President Barack Hussein Obama, they appear to have a skewed perspective, fueled by an egomaniacal sense of self-importance, concerning what it meant to serve our Sovereign Nation and protect America’s “best interests”.

All of these “bad actors” firmly believed that it was in the best interest of themselves, first, and America, second, to stop Donald J. Trump from becoming the President of the United States of America by any means necessary.

Just as I have often referred to the “foot soldiers” of the Far Left Democrats as the “New Bolsheviks”, so these Deep State Operatives, including Brennan, who was involved in the FISA Fiasco, are all involved in this new “Russian Revolution”.

Which is another bit of irony, if you think about it, as those who are seeking to overturn the will of the American people by circumventing our Constitution and nullifying a fair election, are accusing a fairly elected President of “colluding” with the Russians, while it is they who have been “colluding” all along to overthrow a sitting government like Lenin and his followers did a century ago.

All of the hyperbole concerning Trump’s Press Conference after meeting with Putin was purposefully disseminated propaganda meant to divide the American people and to somehow bring down the President, since all of the Far Left Democrats’ schemes, including the Russia Probe itself, have failed miserably so far.

The question is, now that President Trump has explained his comments, what are the desperate Democrats and their Deep State Operatives going to try next?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Liberals Make Fun of Trump for Referring to Sweden in Melbourne Speech. Here’s What They’re NOT Telling You…

Weak-Spot-600-LI.jpg

During his speech in Melbourne, Florida on Saturday Afternoon, President Trump made a remark about the country of Sweden that Liberals all day yesterday made fun of. Here is what he said:

“We’ve got to keep our country safe,” he said. “You look at what’s happening in Germany. You look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what’s happening in Brussels. You look at what’s happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris.”

What the President was referring to was an interview by Fox News Host Tucker Carlson in which he talked to Ami Horowitz, a documentary filmmaker who has recently spent a great deal of time investigating Sweden and the current hidden refugee crisis.

Within the last 2 years, thanks to the influx of Muslim Refugees, Sweden has become “the Rape Capital of the World.”

The Daily Caller published an article about the situation on 10/23/15, which reported on this developing crisis…

As Europe confronts the social and financial realities of its largesse in opening its doors to millions of Muslim immigrants, it is time the tale of two countries is told.

The tale is an important one as the two countries involved have taken completely different approaches to Muslim immigration and the preservation of their own culture. As such, both provide examples of the proverbial canary in the coal mine on this matter.

Sweden began opening its doors to Muslim immigrants in the 1970s. Today it pays a high price for having done so. The group suffering the severest consequences of such an open door policy has been Swedish women.

As Muslim men immigrated to Sweden, they brought with them an Islamic culture sanctioning rape. It is a culture bad enough inherently in the treatment of its own women. Under sharia, Muslim women serve little more purpose beyond catering to their husbands’ sexual demands. A non-submissive wife runs the risk of being raped by her husband.

But under sharia, this rape culture also impacts upon Swedish women as they are “infidels” and, as such, are — according to Allah’s teachings — sanctioned targets for rape by Muslim men. Such an Islamic belief system has born witness to a drastic increase in rapes in Sweden — more than a thousand fold — since first opening its doors to Muslim immigration.

A 1996 Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report bears this out. It noted that Muslim immigrants from North Africa were 23 times more likely to commit rape than Swedish men. It is no wonder why today Sweden is deemed the rape capital of the Western world.

Even more shocking, however, is the political correctness overshadowing the reporting of these crimes. Sensitive about accusations of Islamophobia, the Swedish press refuses to sound a warning alarm for native women about who these sexual predators are. Thus, when a Muslim commits a rape, the media only refers to him as a Swedish male.

But this failure to shine the light on Muslim male rapists leaves them hiding in the shadows to commit even more egregious sex crimes.  With no fear of accountability, these predators have adopted a pack mentality. A crime non-existent in Sweden in the 1970s is now commonplace today as the country has become a breeding ground for gang rapes.

These “Syrian Refugees” have caused mass chaos in Europe, pushing the European Union to the brink of implosion.

And yet, the self-identified “Smartest People in the Room” responded to Trump’s comment from Saturday as if he was crazy.

Trump was correct.

It’s the Liberals who are not concerned about the “Refugees” who are crazy or suffer from a terminal case of naiveté born out of arrogance.

Just who are these Refugees…really?

When the “Refugees” began their invasion of Europe, Ben Shapiro, writing for Breitbart News, asked and answered that important question…

Who Are These Refugees? That competition to accept refugees would be fine if we knew that the refugees plan on assimilating into Western notions of civilized society, and if we knew that they were indeed victims of radical Muslim atrocities. Unfortunately, we know neither. It is deeply suspicious that major Muslim countries that do not border Syria refuse to take in large numbers of refugees, except for Algeria and Egypt.

Turkey has taken in nearly two million refugees, according to the United Nations, and keeps the vast majority in refugee camps — a typical practice in a region that has kept Arab refugees from the 1948 war of Israeli independence in Arab-run camps for seven decades. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq have taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees as well, but all border the chaotic, collapsing Syria, and thus have limited choice in the matter. Iran has taken in no refugees. Neither have Pakistan, Indonesia, or any of the other dozens of member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain all refused to take any refugees, and explicitly cited the risk of terrorists among the refugees, according to The Guardian (UK).

These fears are not without merit, as even Obama administration officials have acknowledged: back in February, director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen called Syrian refugees “clearly a population of concern.” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach explained, “Databases don’t [have] the information on those individuals, and that’s the concern. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that terrorist infiltration was “a possibility. I mean, you can’t, you can’t dismiss that out of hand.” He then added, “Obviously, if you look at those images though, it’s pretty clear that the great majority of these people are innocent families.”

Actually, images show a disproportionate number of young males in crowds of refugees. And those images reflect statistical reality: according to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Mediterranean Sea refugees are overwhelmingly male: just 13 percent are women, and just 15 percent are children. The other 72 percent are men. Compare that population to the refugees in the Middle East from the same conflicts: 49.5 percent male, and 50.5 percent female, with 38.5 percent under the age of 12. Those are wildly different populations.

It was also reported that these “refugees” left a trail of waste, human and otherwise, in their wake.

In other words, these guys believe that hygiene is a girl that they used to “date” back home.

Classy, huh?

And, these are the same people that Obama was importing into our Sovereign Nation without vetting.

And now, Trump wants to be more careful as to whom we let enter into OUR country and somehow, Modern American Liberals are proclaiming him to be a “bigot” because he wants to protect us, including American mothers and daughters from the Sexual Barbarism which Sweden is now experiencing?

Hey, Pajamaboys…

Tell me once again WHO’S crazy?

Thank you, Mr. President.

Until He Comes,

KJ