The truth about Martin Luther King Jr shows why history shouldn’t be whitewashed…or excised

“Yesterday, in British magazine Standpoint, Martin Luther King Jr. biographer David Garrow penned a rather explosive piece revealing previously undisclosed FBI files that detailed shocking events in the life of the legendary civil rights activist. According to the article written by Garrow, King was not only a prolific philanderer, but also an abuser of many women and someone who reportedly laughed while a friend raped a woman.”

The article title says it all…

“MLK’s Alleged Abuse Of Women Does Not Negate His Achievements”

No man is without flaw…no history is without flaws. We should no sooner tear down the many memorials of Dr. King, than we should any of our Founding Father memorials.

No one thing should be judged solely by its past, but by what’s done to correct flaws.

E.g. – Slavery was wrong…but hundreds of thousands died to correct that flaw. We will be judged – history will be judged – by how we correct the flaws along its trajectory.

The REAL reason Democrats have a problem w-impeachment is H-U-G-E…

Nancy Pelosi told a late-night host the problem with trying to impeach the President is that a Republican-controlled Senate would acquit him…but there’s more she didn’t say.

Democrats would have a huge problem with total exposure of exactly what transpired during the last three years…and a trial in the Senate would be sure to expose that.

Their hoax failed…

…and their Obama-weaponized federal agency wrongdoings are even now subject to enhanced scrutiny…their media accomplices can only obscure realities for so long.

A presidential impeachment with a Senate trial cannot be so easily obscured, and as the accused, President Trump would have the right to call out EVERY bad actor…

…foreign…and DOMESTIC.

That’s the type of national-stage high drama even network majors can’t obscure.

Prediction: on impeachment, ‘talk’ will continue…but ‘action’ won’t happen.

Here’s an answer to the ‘can’t be charged, then why investigate?’ question, Rush

Rush Limbaugh posits the question often over the months since Mueller spewed a 448-page hit piece errrr…report…into the public maelstrom swirling around Pres Trump.

There’s a very clear answer to the question ‘why a DoJ probe, if a sitting President can’t be charged with a crime’…Congress doesn’t have the investigative powers DoJ has.

Once Sessions was suckered into recusing, deep-state DoJ powers chose to appoint a special counsel, providing Executive branch agencies for the investigative clownshow.

The fix was in…the game was rigged…with Robert Mueller as circus ringmaster.

But, O-M-G…despite all their (rigged) efforts, they couldn’t find any proof! 

What was left, but to use non-resolution, full of sly innuendo and false narratives.

Mueller clearly was tasked by Democrats to keep impeach-fires burning by issuing a non-resolution rather than do his job, implying Trump’s guilt ‘cuz there’s no proof of innocence…which turns innocent-til-proven-guilty legal standards upside down.

We say clearly, because his job was to investigate if there was any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia…after two years, no evidence supports that claim.

It would’ve taken 5 words to report that result: no proof, no charge recommended.

But Mueller took about 200 pages, laced with innuendo, ending with ‘can’t say he’s innocent’. As a prosecutor IT WASN’T HIS JOB to proclaim innocence. So, the 200 pages of ‘here’s what they said was done, we can’t prove it wasn’t done’ smear.

Then he follows up with 240-some pages on ‘obstruction’ ending with similar innuendo and the implication that, since he can’t be indicted, no final resolution was possible.

Any bright objective first-year journalist could’ve asked why Mueller didn’t recommend a charge…since the actual decision to indict wasn’t the special counsel’s responsibility.

But we digress…everyone knows why Mueller’s done what he’s done.

As noted, the reason a DoJ investigation was launched is simple: because Congress wouldn’t have the more powerful investigative agencies available that the DoJ has.

When you think of it, what’s remarkable is how clean this President and his campaign was, withstanding the investigation of the FBI-CIA-NSA without any relevant charges.

Without even any (dare we say it?) trumped-up charges.

Incredible. And largely, gone unremarked by the media.

Mueller’s final sabotage presser is FURTHER PROOF no crime was committed

Now that Mueller’s finally spoken, it’s time to realize he EXONERATED the President.

Because he WOULDN’T exonerate the President.

Confused? Don’t be – this is all part of the Potomac Two-Step: high theater for the deep state, in-the-weeds head bobbing for pundits…but time-wasting for ordinary Americans.

The special counsel was tasked to investigate for ‘collusion’; to recommend charges if any prosecutable offenses were committed. PERIOD. (This is crucial to exoneration.)


Forget whether a sitting President can be indicted. For the purposes of this discussion it makes no difference at all – none…because a special counsel DOESN’T INDICT.

Andrew McCarthy noted this in a May 8th article at National Review:

If there is sufficient evidence, then it is the prosecutor’s job to recommend indictment. The question of whether the OLC guidance should then be invoked to delay indictment should then be up to the attorney general.” (bold, underline emphasis added)

Lost in the latest Mueller head-fakery (deliberately so) is the fact that a recommendation doesn’t equal an indictment. Let this sink in: Mueller could’ve recommended charges to the Justice Department if there were any legitimate reason to do so…without prejudice.

(It’s obvious he would’ve, if he could’ve. Swamp creatures defend the Swamp; any honest person acknowledges his assembled team was partisan Democrat to the hilt.)

Therein lies the PROOF that Trump was innocent. Mueller could’ve, but didn’t. Why?

Mueller’s problem – from the beginning – was being under tremendous pressure to find ANY chargeable offense, where there was none. Had he attempted to recommend that charges be made absent credible evidence, he would have been laughed out of town.

(Not to mention, probably disbarred for malpractice.)

His only alternative, then, was to create a false narrative based on innuendo, that would smear the President, arm Trump’s detractors, and quietly make his exit, stage Left.

Mueller’s false narrative? He didn’t indict because a sitting President can’t be indicted.

Total B.S. The special counsel doesn’t indict…he recommends.

And he couldn’t recommend.


Woodpile skunk – ‘though we can’t indict, we can incite’ smear-bait

By this time, Mueller has to be wondering how many more times he has to come out of the woodpile and skunk-spray President Trump before Democrats get the message.

His original 440-+ page report was supposed to be the hit-job that got it done, got the impeachment process started…but those cantankerous Democrats waffled instead.

So, yet again, Robert Mueller has to emerge from the woodpile, doing his best ‘incite by implication’ schtick, in a renewed effort to give the waffling Democrats what they want.

But, funny thing – reading the transcript of his comments, it reads more like an ‘I refuse to testify and incriminate myself’ than an indict-by-implication assault against Trump.

No matter how he fancies it up, there’s no evidence against the President or aides that collusion with foreign nationals occurred…he just doesn’t want to say so in those terms.

How else can one define “…if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so” phrasing? Confidence? What kind of cheap-shot phrasing is that? His job is to report on evidence found, not confidence felt.

Here’s an ‘i’ word he refuses to verbalize: I-N-N-O-C-E-N-T

Of course, Mueller’s intent here was to (once more) give media the implication-gasoline to throw on impeachment fires…in yet another attempt to rid the Swamp of its enemy.

If Mueller’s lucky, everyone will be so focused on that they’ll overlook that he failed to follow crucial elements of his instructions, which he’d have to answer for otherwise.

You know, the part where he was instructed to “…conduct the investigation including any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation…” (our emphasis)

I.e., matters like…

  • Democrats funded the dirt-dossier that was used to start the investigation;
  • Democrats colluded to use foreign agent disinformation for election-meddling;
  • Democrats funded the only outfit that analyzed their ‘hacked’ servers;
  • Democrats refused to allow the FBI access to those servers;
  • Democrats hid the fact they financed the efforts.

Today, Mueller said “The matters we investigated were of paramount importance.” 

Yeah, sure…

…just not important enough to investigate thoroughly…as evidenced by the lack of critical analysis of the dossier, or the Democrat obscured involvement in the CREATION of that dossier: a dossier used as the ENTIRE REASON for a ‘collusion’ investigation.

You’re damn right Mueller won’t testify…he’s crawling back in the woodpile.

‘Nothing to add’…except smearing innuendo…

Mueller makes a statement this morning, saying he’s got ‘nothing to add’

…the ‘report speaks for itself’

…then spews ‘wink, wink’ innuendo obstruction bile, contradicts what AG Barr says Mueller told him (re, why no obstruction determination)…to keep hysteria alive.

Finally, with his ‘can’t indict a President’ comment, Mueller gave media ammo to smear upcoming AG Barr investigations, implying Barr was a liar (without calling Barr a liar).

What a skunk.

And Mueller knows he’s exposed as a partisan: that’s why he couldn’t wait to state that, if he did testify before Congress, it wouldn’t go beyond what’s already in his report…

…’cuz then he’d have to answer uncomfortable questions concerning why he never bothered to investigate the predicate behind the probe (the dirt-dossier), or its funders…


And, hopefully, some Republican with backbone could’ve asked Mueller if it’s a Special Counsel’s responsibility to smear…without evidence…the target of an investigation.

Any ‘dirt’ on Pres. Trump would’ve been exposed long ago

Seriously – what politician could have stood up under the type of hostile scrutiny Pres Trump has gone through over the last three years? None, Nada, Zip, Zilch, Zero.

Given 8+ years of weaponized federal agencies and a flood of leaks, what fool doesn’t realize ANY bad info on Trump, including IRS data, would’ve been exposed by now?

Given the extent his opposition has shown (daily) they’re willing to go, it would’ve been SCORCHED EARTH before the election, and definitely NUCLEAR after his election.

That said, what ‘cover-up’ innuendo they’re throwing at him now is just that: innuendo, meant to smear, delegitimize…and a desperate attempt to create doubt before 2020.

Reportedly, Obama’s IRS-FBI-CIA-DoJ-STATE agencies were illegally sifting NSA data on Americans, including Pres. Trump, since 2011. The NSA Dir. blew that whistle.

So, seriously: if there was any ‘dirt’ on Trump, it would’ve been out there long ago. The really incredible story here is how it’s gone unremarked how CLEAN his history is.

That’s a REAL cover-up.

A dishonest media is doing its best to hide all these truths…

…displaying for all to see why they truly are the ENEMY of the people.