Trump Refuses to Play by the Rules: by skipping the debate he owns it.
by Rush Limbaugh
January 27, 2016
RUSH: Okay, where are we on the situation here with Trump and the debate? So far Trump says he’s not showing up. He claims he’s not showing up because Megyn Kelly is going to continue to be a moderator. And if you believe that, I can give you substantive reasons. And it’s all in The Art of the Deal. Trump is not that hard to understand if you pay attention to him and read his books. In The Art of the Deal, one of the things that he makes a huge deal about is being able to know when to walk away and have the guts and the courage to do it.Trump is so far outside the formula that has been established for American politics that people who are inside the formula can’t comprehend it.
They don’t understand why somebody would want to venture so far outside it, because it is what it is, and there’s a ladder of success that you have to climb. And somebody challenging it like this in more ways than one, as Trump is doing, has just got everybody experiencing every kind of emotion you can: They’re angry, they are flabbergasted, they’re shocked, they’re stunned — and all of it because he’s leading.Everything he’s doing goes against the book. Everything that any analyst or consultant or professional would tell you not to do, Donald Trump is doing it, and he’s leading the pack. This creates its own set of emotions and feelings and thoughts that run from person to person. Now, the political business, if you want to look at it that way, is like any other business. It has its people who are considered the elites in it — and like any business, they hate outsiders. They don’t want outsiders just storming in trying to take over, and much less succeeding at it.Like any group of elites, they’re exclusionary.They want to keep people out.They want to be in charge of who gets in the club. They want to be in charge of who’s allowed to rise or climb the ladder in the club. Politics is no different, and all of those determinations are made by who gets money and who doesn’t. But Trump is functioning totally outside this structure that has existed for decades. As such, the people who are only familiar with the structure and believe in it and cherish it and want to protect it, feel threatened in ways that you can’t even comprehend. So that leads them to try to figure out: How is all this working for Trump? Why do his followers grow? Why does his support expand every time he busts a rule wide open?
It probably isn’t necessary, but let me again say that whatever I say today about this or anything else today is not coming from a position of support for any candidate or opposition to any candidate. So whatever I happen to say about what I think of Trump skipping the debate, reaction to it, it’s not rooted in — and don’t even consider that it’s rooted in the fact that you think I might be doing it in support of Trump or in opposition to Trump or in support of Cruz or anybody else. It’s none of that.
He controls the media when he’s asleep. Nobody else has been able to do anything like this short of the Kennedys, and they’re pikers compared to the way Trump is doing this.
You’ve heard the phrase “the game.” Every business has aspects of it that are considered the game, and that’s the routine. And the game is characterized by everybody knowing the rules of the game. People involved in it play by the rules. Some venture outside now and then, but the rules pretty much of the game are adhered to because it’s a matter of respect for the game in which everybody is in.
And in this business one of the games is that when the media calls, you answer, and when the media wants you, you go, and when the media is going to host a debate and it’s part of a Republican presidential campaign, you go. You just do it, no matter what the media’s done to you in the past, no matter what you think of it, whether you want to go or not, you go. That’s the game.
Trump is so far outside this game, he’s so far outside the rules, he’s never been a player in this game. He’s always been an outsider. I heard people on Fox last night talking about this. “Who does he think he is? He can’t control the media.” I got news for you: He is controlling the media, and it’s his objective. He is controlling the media. He controls the media when he’s not on it. He controls the media when he is on it. He controls the media when he’s asleep. Nobody else has been able to do anything like this short of the Kennedys, and they’re pikers compared to the way Trump is doing this.
Poll: Evangelicals flocking to Trump
By NICK GASS 01/26/16 06:06 AM EST
Donald Trump’s outreach to Christians is bearing fruit, if results of the NBC News/Survey Monkey weekly online tracking poll out Tuesday are any indication.
Among white evangelical Republican voters nationally, Trump earned the support of 37 percent, while Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, whose father is a pastor and has played a key role in recruiting faith leaders to support his son, is at 20 percent. In the same survey conducted the previous week, Cruz registered 9 percentage points higher. Below the top two contenders, Ben Carson earned 11 percent among evangelicals, and Marco Rubio took 10 percent.
The Manhattan business mogul, who is Presbyterian, made headlines throughout the course of the past week for his various interactions with fellow Christians, including a stop at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia, last Monday. Delivering the weekly convocation address, Trump caused a stir when he made reference to a book in the Bible a “Two Corinthians,” rather than the usual nomenclature, “Second Corinthians.” (Trump later claimed that it was written that way in his notes, and besides, his mother was Scottish and would have said it that way.)
Trump also attended a Presbyterian service in Muscatine, Iowa, on Sunday, at which the pastor made reference to the ongoing immigration crisis, a central plank in the Republican’s campaign, and humility, in general. “I don’t know if that was aimed at me,” Trump said later.
The poll’s overall week-to-week standings show little shift with Trump leading the field at 39 percent, Cruz at 17 percent and Rubio at 10 percent. No other candidate received double-digit support.
On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton’s advantage remained in double digits, at 51 percent to Bernie Sanders’ 37 percent.
Mario’s note: This is not presented as an endorsement of Donald Trump but to report what is going on. Something is happening in our nation that we should be paying attention to. In the coming months the church will have to pray through on whether Trump is a blessing or a curse.
National Review, in its issue dedicated to taking down GOP front-runner Donald Trump, has made a big mistake. With so much on the line for America, how is it smart to close the door to Trump’s voters and to populism in general?
The folks at NR launched a similar effort to excommunicate conservatives in 2003, with a much-hyped cover story titled “Unpatriotic Conservatives.” Back then it was Pat Buchanan and the now-deceased Bob Novak who were the targets. Former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum, a dear friend, made the case that these men and others who stood against our invasion of Iraq, had “made common cause with the left-wing and Islamist antiwar movements.” In other words, these “disgruntled paleos,” weren’t truly conservative because they opposed the war in Iraq.
As it turned out, of course, that small band of thinkers knew more about what was in the national interest than anyone at National Review or myself, who was also a strong advocate for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
“I never received an apology note,” Buchanan told me on my radio show. “They’re Davos conservatives,” he added, referencing the annual meeting of the world’s elites in Switzerland.
Whatever you think of Trump personally, his supporters are pushing for three big things:
A return to traditional GOP law and order practices when it comes to illegal immigration.
A return to a more traditional GOP foreign policy that would put the national interest ahead of globalism.
A return to a more traditional GOP trade policy that would analyze trade deals from the perspective of the country as a whole and not blindly support any deal — even one negotiated by President Obama.
On each of these issues, Trump’s voters are calling for a return to policies that were GOP orthodoxy as recently as the late 1990s.
The matriarch of the conservative movement, Phyllis Schlafly, who likes but isn’t endorsing Trump, put it this way: “I’m not going to tell you that Donald Trump is perfect, or right on everything … but immigration is the top issue today, and he’s the one who made it a front-burner issue.”
‘This might help elect Clinton, but it would preserve something of conservatism’
By refusing to make room for these ideas within conservatism, NR risks creating the impression that the revolution brought about by George W. Bush — in particular, his belief in open borders, his effort to create a permanent U.S. military mission in the Middle East, and his notion that trade can never be regulated, no matter how unfair — is now a permanent part of conservatism that can never be questioned. They are also inviting those who disagree with Bush on those points to leave conservatism and start seeking their allies elsewhere.
This is an absolute disaster for conservatism. It is obvious by now that Bushism — however well-intentioned it may appear on paper — does not work for the average American. It is also clear that Bushism has almost no support within the rank and file of the GOP, much less within the country as a whole. Making the tenets of Bushism into an orthodoxy that conservatives cannot question will cripple conservatism for years to come.
National Review’s Manhattan-based editors brand Trump as a “menace to conservatism” and even ding him for his “outer-borough” accent. But who really is the menace — the rough-edged Queens native or the smooth-talking GOP Establishment that has brought us open borders; massive giveaway trade deals; monstrous debt; bank bailouts; and a sprawling government that never stops expanding? The failure to ruthlessly oppose and defeat such existential threats to the country — and the passivity in the face of such peril — is the real menace to the credibility of conservatism.
National Review Editor Rich Lowry and his people will be left preaching their narrow doctrine to a smaller and smaller audience.
If blue-collar Americans are told that their concerns on immigration, trade, and foreign policy cannot be addressed within the conservative movement, they will look elsewhere — just as they looked elsewhere in the late 1960s after they learned that their problems couldn’t be addressed within liberalism. National Review Editor Rich Lowry and his people will be left preaching their narrow doctrine to a smaller and smaller audience.
There is room for all voices in the GOP “big tent” — including relative newcomers like Trump, who has garnered such a following. That’s why I have an open door on my radio show to everyone from Marco Rubio to Ted Cruz. (We look forward to having Lowry on radio soon.)
Back in 2008, another populist was running for president, and ended up winning the Iowa caucuses. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who’s running again in 2016, sympathized with Trump in the NR dust-up. Recalling that the publication also took after him during his primary fight with Arizona Sen. John McCain, he said, “This is a fool-hearty effort … [by] the elitists who live in their own little bubble.”
NR is “completely out of touch … [and] represents big business, not the American people,” he added, noting NR’s support for the 5,500-page Trans-Pacific Partnership. “Out here in Iowa, they are not representative and their views are not representative.”
Of course there is ample room to criticize Trump’s approach and his lapse into sloganeering where substance is needed — as I have done on many occasions. But if NR rejects the Trump voters, it will be reversing the decision by Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, and others to welcome blue-collar voters, Democrats, and independents into the conservative fold. Whatever that means for the country, it will do major damage to conservatism. If the conservative movement devotes itself to defending the legacy of George W. Bush at all costs, it will become irrelevant to the debate over how to make things better for most Americans.
In the end, NR’s attempted hit-job on Trump won’t won’t matter much. Folks who like Trump will continue to like him. Those who don’t will feel reconfirmed in their views. One of the many reasons I loved Reagan is that he understood how important it was to grow the conservative movement.
“Conservatism,” Reagan biographer Craig Shirley said, “transcends any individual or organization, because it’s ultimately about the God-inspired belief that we are destined to be free.”
Hillary Clinton is still laughing. Now she claims that the FBI, and the Intelligence Community (IC) is working with Republican Senators to bring her down.
No rational campaign adviser would allow a candidate for President to say something this insane. Is she saying this out of total desperation and delusion? She continues to laugh this off, even now that it is a proven fact that she is mishandled the very highest form of classified information.
(As strange as it seems…there is a slight chance that Hillary may not be indicted. Obama may spare her for two reasons: 1. she is the third term of Obama. A Republican president would most certainly wipe out all of Obama’s executive orders and allow Obamacare to die under its own weight. He simply does not want to lose his legacy. 2. He has a low opinion of voters and believes that she and he can survive the scandal.)
Nevertheless, with each day that passes indictment seems inevitable. An insider said, “A decision not to make a criminal referral when the nation’s beyond-top-secret intelligence has been exposed would discredit the FBI as a politicized agency. Given the personal history of James Comey and the 150 special agents reportedly involved in the investigation, I would wager a substantial sum that a criminal referral will result.”
Let’s get back to her claim that the Intelligence Community is part of a right wing conspiracy. Do you realize who the Intelligence Community is?
All of these agencies are out to get her?? If she is elected, how is she going to work with these agencies after such a hare-brained accusation?
It is the Inspector General (IG) of Central Intelligence that concluded Hillary’s emails were above top secret. Even after this, Hillary accused the IG of being part of the right wing conspiracy.
Small wonder that Charles Krauthammer said this “So the IG is part of a vast right-wing conspiracy! And inverting logic, the ultra-secret contents weren’t classified because they weren’t marked as such. Ahem, emails are marked because they are secret; they are not secret because they are marked. Clinton’s outright initial denial that her server contained classified information is now a joke.
It is hard to overstate the significance of the latest revelations about the national security catastrophe caused by Hillary Clinton’s private email server. The nation’s highest-level secrets were kept on an unsecure server that is believed to be have been hacked by multiple overseas parties.
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign Wednesday accused the intelligence community’s top oversight official of conspiring with Republicans in the Senate to leak sensitive information about her personal e-mail server. That’s a risky move, considering that it has produced no hard evidence of a conspiracy and the accused parties are denying it.”
For Hillary Clinton it has been a long, long, road filled with scandals that she has skillfully dodged. This sure looks like the end of the road. Unless of course—the White House refuses to indict Hillary and—America is willing to accept a tyranny that is worse than Barack Obama.
The game has changed. Once upon a time, all the ENRAGED LEFT had to do was lie about someone to get rid of them. Trump changed that. Lying just doesn’t work the way it used to. In fact—something odd is happening—lying about Trump only makes him stronger.
Dragging out Harry Belafonte from the waxworks of the 1960’s to sing Trump away won’t work. Hillary’s diatribes won’t work. Even conservatives railing against Trump will fail. Today, the Weekly Standard—that Conservative Bulwark—has uncorked an article that is touted as the death knell of Trump. Okay, read my lips—it won’t work. My guess is the current barrage will add maybe 5 points to his poll numbers.
I write you this as a spirit-filled evangelist. I am not endorsing Trump. Anyone who accuses me of endorsing him is doing out of their hatred of Trump and not because they read this all the way through. There is a very strong Republican field and anyone of them is infinitely better than Clinton. (I really like Ted Cruz.)
The entire reason for this article is about why lying has finally stopped working—more on that later. For now let us clear the air on Trump. He maybe a lot of things…but he is not these things:
Racist? If you ask yourself some simple questions you will see why I believe Trump is not racist. How many beheadings, terrorist bombings, and wholesale murder of gays have you read about from Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other world religion besides Islam? Is it a coincidence that rape has exploded in Germany and Sweden since their mass migration of Muslim refugees? Was the ISIS inspired terrorism in San Bernardino not worthy of a fresh look at how we bring Muslim immigrants here?
Trump never called for a permanent ban on Muslims he asked for a halt until our government could do a better job than Germany, France and Sweden did to guarantee the safety of Americans. If you think that is racist… seek help.
Sexist? Listen to his daughter Ivanka: “He is highly gender-neutral and doesn’t discriminate when it comes to doling out unflattering comments to men and women alike. If he doesn’t like someone, he’ll articulate that, and I think it’s also part of what resonates about him—he’ll say what he’s thinking.”
“If he didn’t feel that women were as competent as men, I would be relegated to some role subordinate to my brothers,” she adds. “I think this is one of his great strengths: He fully prioritizes merit and accomplishment and skill and ability over background, education and gender. This company, over four decades, has always had women in its highest ranks … I think he’s one of the great advocates for women, and he has been a great example to me my whole life … He 100-percent believes in equality of gender … [He has] confidence in women to do any job that a man can do, and my whole life has been proof of that.”
Of course I would prefer a fiery and wise Christ follower in the White House. But I am not electing a pastor or an evangelist. If I hire a plumber I don’t look for a fish symbol on their truck. I look for someone who can do the job.
America needs a leader who is proud of America—who will make our economy work—who will make our enemies fear us…and you know what? America knows that.
Be careful to explain away Trump’s popularity. It is way too easy to dismiss it as simple populism. Americans are fed up. Americans are done with both Obama and RINOS.
And remember to take a closer look at where the true hate is coming from. It is coming from political elites who have held unquestioned power over our lives. Those chains are starting to break.
So the bottom line is that I am talking about something way bigger than Trump. He was perhaps the trumpet that sounded the charge but this message is about the charge…a charge that harks back to another time in history. During the Revolutionary War a dual fire burned in American hearts. One part of that fire led to victory against Britain. The other element of that fire brought the GREAT AWAKENING.
Millions are sick of our leaders taking God out of everything. Jesus is still—by far—the most admired historical figure in America. A trembling is in the ground…Trump is but a symptom of it. A seething boiling hunger for truth grows in our land. A backlash of Biblical proportion is at work.
It may wear a surface label of Tea Party or Conservative, Libertarian or Trumpism…but beware! If you insult it, you will only make it spread. If you denounce it, you will only make more people look into it. If you lie about it, you will only make it stronger.
With just 21 days until the presidential primaries officially begin in Iowa, Hillary Clinton’s support among Democrats nationally has taken a serious tumble, falling eight points to 43%, according to the latest IBD/TIPP Poll. Support for her chief rival, Bernie Sanders, rose six points to 39%.
As a result, Clinton’s lead over Sanders, which had been 18 points, is now just four points.
Other polls have shown the race tightening in Iowa, which holds its caucuses on Feb. 1, and New Hampshire, which has its primary eight days later. Two recent New Hampshire surveys have Sanders in the lead, and the latest NBC poll in Iowa has Sanders just three points behind Clinton.
But the IBD/TIPP Poll is the first to show the race significantly tightening nationwide.
Clinton Goes On Attack
Clinton, in response to her sagging poll numbers, has started to turn up the heat on Sanders, after all but ignoring the self-described socialist whose maverick campaign has been surprisingly resilient. CNN reported over the weekend that “a sense of anxiety is cascading through Hillary Clinton’s campaign” over Sanders’ gains.
Clinton recently attacked Sanders on his position on gun control, and released a campaign ad in Iowa and New Hampshire asserting that she is “the only one” who can beat whoever the Republican Party nominates.
And on Monday, in a clear attempt to appeal to Sanders’ supporters, Clinton announced in Iowa her plans to impose a 4% “fair share surcharge” on incomes over $5 million. Sanders has proposed a series of tax hikes on the rich in the name of “income equality.”
Clinton in recent weeks also has decried drug “price gouging” and attacked big merger deals, despite receiving heavy Wall Street donations, to try to shore up her left flank.
The IBD/TIPP Poll shows that regionally, Clinton saw her support drop most in the Northeast (where it fell to 36% from 50%) and the West (37% down from 49%). Sanders now holds the lead in both places. Clinton support also tumbled among suburban voters, dropping to 39% from last a month’s 50%. And she has lost backing among moderate Democrats, falling to 44% from 58%. Sanders picked up 10 points among moderates, to 37%.
Trump Extends GOP Lead
On the GOP side, Donald Trump extended his lead over his GOP rivals, with 34% now backing the real estate tycoon, up from 27%. His support is now nearly equal to his three closest rivals combined.
“The [FBI] has so much information about criminal conduct by her and her staff that there is no way that they walk away from this,” Joseph diGenova, formerly the District of Columbia’s U.S. Attorney, told Laura Ingraham in a Tuesday radio interview. “They are going to make a recommendation that people be charged and then Loretta Lynch is going to have the decision of a lifetime.
“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”
DiGenova is referring to the Watergate scandal’s “Saturday Night Massacre” Oct. 20, 1973, when President Richard Nixon sacked Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox and Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus resigned in protest.
DiGenova is well-sourced throughout the law enforcement community and his assessment has to be taken seriously. But interviews with other knowledgeable Washington insiders present a somewhat less concrete scenario developing around the former secretary of state.
At the center of Clinton’s difficulties is her use of a private email account and a home-brew server located in her New York home to conduct official business while serving as America’s chief diplomat between 2009 and 2013. Several of her closest aides also used the private server.
Clinton clearly didn’t abide by federal regulations requiring officials like her to use government computers and email accounts to conduct official business and take all of the necessary steps to preserve all such correspondence concerning official business.
As first reported by The Daily Caller News Foundation, Clinton emailed Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden Sept. 7, 2010, asking for advice on what she, President Barack Obama and Democratic campaign officials should do to prevent a Republican victory in the upcoming congressional elections. “Do you and CAP have any ideas as to how to change the dynamic before it’s too late? Losing the House would be a disaster in every way,” Clinton told Tanden. The CAP chief responded at length with clearly partisan recommendations, noted her supposedly non-partisan think tank’s polling efforts to identify winning themes for Democrats and described her conversations relaying her advice to Obama and other senior White House officials.
On its face, the Sept. 7 Clinton email appears to be a violation of the Hatch Act, which bars partisan political activities by officials using government property while on official duty. But Clinton found a clever way to get around the law, according to a senior non-profit official with extensive experience investigating such activities. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.
First, that official said, by not preserving her email records until after she resigned as secretary of state, Clinton avoided an investigation by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which handles Hatch Act violations. The reason is simple — OSC has no authority over former federal employees in Hatch Act matters.
Second, by refusing to comply “with Federal Records Act requirements to use an approved system for preserving records, [Clinton] arguably did not engage in political activities while on official duty or while using federal resources because she communicated with a personal computer,” the official said.
In other words, “had Secretary Clinton used a State Department e-mail address and a government computer and had Secretary Clinton complied with federal record-keeping and open government laws, [her] violations would have been discoverable under the Freedom of Information Act and could have been remedied while Secretary Clinton was still in office.”
Thus, don’t expect a Clinton indictment for a Hatch Act violation.
But Clinton is far from out of the woods, according to a congressional source who is deeply involved in the multiple investigations of Clinton. This source, who also spoke only on condition of anonymity, pointed to the hundreds of Clinton emails that contained classified information.
“Her problem is the sheer volume of emails that were deemed classified,” said this source. “Her first defense was that she didn’t send any classified information in her emails. But that claim has been clearly rendered false because so many of the emails were later marked classified.”
As the Department of State has released the Clinton emails she provided after leaving office, more than a thousand were marked classified after being reviewed prior to their public release. So what about Clinton’s subsequent distinction that she sent no information in her emails that was “marked classified” when it was sent?
“The volume matters because a reasonable person knows somebody like the Secretary of State, who is allowed herself to classify materials, who has handled it for 25 years or more, at some point the law says you are responsible for recognizing classified material when you see it. That gets to the negligence issue,” the issue said.
Negligence is critical because Clinton signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement in 2009 regarding classified information that stated, among much else, that “Sensitive Compartmented Information involves or derives from intelligence sources or methods that is classified or is involved in a classification determination …”
Clinton and several of her closest aides must have read information “derived from intelligence sources or methods” on a daily or near-daily basis.
There is an ominous sentence buried in that agreement Clinton signed: “Nothing in this agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violations.”
What if Clinton is indicted for negligence in handling classified information? DiGenova predicts a showdown within a couple of months that will put Lynch in the same hot seat that prompted Nixon to fire Cox for getting too close to the truth about Watergate.
A Republican with direct knowledge of the investigation predicted political chaos if Lynch doesn’t decide to prosecute Clinton, a chaos that “would be the gift that keeps on giving right through the election.”
With or without resignations of FBI officials to protest such a decision, there would be a blizzard of news releases from congressional GOPers condemning Lynch, followed by hearings in which both the attorney general and FBI Director James Comey would be put under oath and asked about their actions.
There is no longer any possibility of innocent Christian support for Obama. There is no way the “prophetic movement” will have any legitimacy if it ignores the true role of prophets.
It came to a head when I met with the leader of a famous revival organization. I assumed that this would be the last place I would find compromise. To my horror and surprise he warned me that my comments about Obama were opposite their culture. In other words, I had to shut up about Obama or I couldn’t preach there anymore.
My response was immediate and direct. “What if this is the same cheap grace, false honor excuse that the pastors of Germany used to remain silent while Hitler expanded his power? What if God is ordering His vessels to rebuke Obama? Do you want to be one of those men of God with blood on his hands because you remained silent when you should have rebuked the tyranny?” He said he agreed with me but I never heard from him again.
Turn on Christian television and it won’t be long before you see a false prophet today. He will tell his victims that they are about to be blessed and favored. Then he will make an utterly meaningless, high probability prediction. It always sounds sickeningly similar. “The Lord has shown me that you are about to be wealthy beyond your dreams. You do not realize how much Daddy loves you and wants to bless you.”
This kind of ministry, in this current crisis, is extreme denial bordering on insanity. Christian television should be calling the Christians to action against the war on our values!
Since the first misguided “Christian psychologist” discovered that Christians needed to feel valuable, we have been treated to an unending stream of toxic sludge that has left the army of God flabby, drowsy and AWOL during America’s greatest moral disaster.
At some churches, rolling on the floor, drooling while making animal noises is considered the “moving of the Spirit.” Then there is the other extreme: Pastors preach sermons that sound like a late night monologue, stringing together phrases straight out of fortune cookies, making sure that they end on time and leave the audience spiritually unscathed.
Both extremes carry the same lie: We have become too valuable for sacrifice. We are too blessed for the Cross. We are too entitled to join the rest of the Christian world in persecution and holiness.
God is sending the “Preachers of Los Angeles” and all the rest a solemn warning: START LIVING AND TELLING THE TRUTH OR THE ANOINTING AND BLESSING ON YOU WILL VANISH. . God is issuing a dire warning to the false prophets who infest the church: REPENT OR IT WILL COST YOU YOUR LIFE AND YOUR SOUL!
Barrack Obama has left us no choice. He never says anything good about Christians. He never says anything bad about Islam. He foments racial hatred, destroys marriage, and respect for the police (he has given more due process to the terrorists in Guantanamo than to our cops). He punishes Israel. He is working to wipe out the freedoms and hopes of the next generation.
He is a wounded animal bent on destroying everything we hold dear. If the ministers of God had obeyed the Holy Spirit they would have risen up in one voice of holy outrage and driven the king out of office.
Moses rebuked Pharaoh. Samuel rebuked King Saul. Nathan rebuked David. Daniel rebuked Nebuchadnezzar. John the Baptist rebuked King Herod. Stop it! Don’t use the title prophet unless you are willing to rebuke Obama and his abomination. Speak truth to power or you are nothing but a prophetic poser.
There are signs of hope. A very successful pastor prepared to do a series based on the Wizard of OZ at his mega church. He spent thousands on props. He wanted to dazzle his congregation. Then one night he woke up from a deep sleep and realized that God had left him. He felt utterly devoid of God’s presence and peace In his life. He despaired of life itself.
In his desperation he cried out to God. God was grieved by his entire ministry. He had ceased telling the truth. He repented to the bone. The congregation joined him in tearing down the props as if they were idols. “We were once a harmless congregation,” he said. “Now the Holy Spirit is moving in our meetings with great power. We are becoming a mighty army!”
Millions have left the church. This is the reality that Christian leaders do not want to talk about. However, facts do not go away. The facts are these: an entire generation has virtually discarded the faith of their parents.
Not only this, but many who were on fire for God and even effective vessels have fallen and have abandoned their faith in Jesus. A famous Christian singer announces that he is now an atheist. Is that shocking? The real shock is that the church is not shocked because this kind of recanting of faith is now common.
Maybe you were wounded on the battlefield and did not get up again. The reasons are as varied as the people themselves are. It may have been an abusive church. It may have been an old habit that raged its way back in control. It may have been a divorce, a false teaching that weakened you, or the gravitational force of unbelief and skepticism of this age.
The most common cause is sudden tragedy. Something horrendous happened that ran off of your theological map. You felt that you had no choice but to abandon your faith. You may be angry with God. You are not alone. There are millions in this condition.
The Holy Spirit has burned a message into my soul that I cannot contain. I want this message to get into the hands of as many people as possible. I have never felt as great an urgency to open my heart to you. Millions have left the church.
Let me be frank, I believe that God is turning your heart back to Him. He is doing this on a massive scale.
He has done this before. Right before the fire fell on Mount Carmel, Elijah prayed these words, “Hear me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that You are the Lord God, and that You have turned their hearts back to You again (1 Kings 18:37).”
He is doing this not just because He loves you but because He is trying to spare America: “and he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse (Malachi 4:6).”
You are most likely a casualty of the lukewarm American church. Widespread compromise left her unprotected. The active ingredient was left out of preaching; that ingredient is surrender. The power of God to stand against tragedy and evil never kicked in for this very reason.
The Holy Spirit is intensifying His voice to the fallen, the wounded and the forgotten. While His wooing is loving and hopeful, it does not mask the truth.
In America entire churches are backslidden! And it is not unprecedented. Look at these verses: “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 17 Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. 19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me (Revelations 3:15).”
Okay, you may have been caught in the cultural crossfire of the compromised church, the toxic church and even the false church, but why lose your soul to get back at false ministers and sick churches?
This is about you and Jesus. This is about a destiny that God still keeps for you. There is one thing that Satan does not want you to remember. It is the one thing that can break the chains of lies and heartbreak.
What Satan does not want you to think about is this: if you brush away the cobwebs of church politics, hypocrites, and unexpected tragedy you will admit that the best days of your life were when you walked with God in fervent commitment. Those were the days of peace and joy.
The best days were the days before anybody and anything came between you and Jesus. You prayed and sensed that no matter what everything would come out alright. Even your questions were harnessed by a total trust in the character of God!
You have never felt anything like His presence. Those were the best days. Those days can come again. Jesus is knocking and wants to have dinner with you alone. “I will sup with him” Jesus promised.
I will admit that I am speaking a divine desperation to come over you. I want you to break, I want you to yearn to come home to your best life, your only life. There is an army rising up, made of people that Satan thought he had but is about to lose on a grand scale. Welcome back to the war!
In a closed-door meeting with Jewish donors on Saturday night, former President George W. Bush delivered his harshest public criticisms to date against his successor on foreign policy, saying that President Barack Obama is being naïve about Iran and the pending nuclear deal and losing the war against the Islamic State.
One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance, transcribed large portions of Bush’s remarks. The former president, who rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea of re-entering the political arena was something he didn’t want to do. He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the U.S. in “retreat” around the world. He also said Obama was misreading Iran’s intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily.
According to the attendee’s transcription, Bush noted that Iran has a new president, Hassan Rouhani. “He’s smooth,” Bush said. “And you’ve got to ask yourself, is there a new policy or did they just change the spokesman?”
Bush said that Obama’s plan to lift sanctions on Iran with a promise that they could snap back in place at any time was not plausible. He also said the deal would be bad for American national security in the long term: “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the deal.”
Bush then went into a detailed criticism of Obama’s policies in fighting the Islamic State and dealing with the chaos in Iraq. On Obama’s decision to withdraw all U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2011, he quoted Senator Lindsey Graham calling it a “strategic blunder.” Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw those troops, but the idea had been to negotiate a new status of forces agreement to keep U.S. forces there past 2011. The Obama administration tried and failed to negotiate such an agreement.
Bush said he views the rise of the Islamic State as al-Qaeda’s “second act” and that they may have changed the name but that murdering innocents is still the favored tactic. He defended his own administration’s handling of terrorism, noting that the terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who confessed to killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, was captured on his watch: “Just remember the guy who slit Danny Pearl’s throat is in Gitmo, and now they’re doing it on TV.”
Obama promised to degrade and destroy Islamic State’s forces but then didn’t develop a strategy to complete the mission, Bush said. He said that if you have a military goal and you mean it, “you call in your military and say ‘What’s your plan?’ ” He indirectly touted his own decision to surge troops to Iraq in 2007, by saying, “When the plan wasn’t working in Iraq, we changed.”
“In order to be an effective president … when you say something you have to mean it,” he said. “You gotta kill em.”
Bush told several anecdotes about his old friend and rival Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bush recalled that Putin met his dog Barney at the White House and then later, when Bush went to Moscow, Putin showed him his dog and remarked that he was “bigger stronger and faster than Barney.” For Bush, that behavior showed him that Putin didn’t think in “win-win” terms.
Bush also remarked that Putin was rich, divorced his wife and loves power. Putin’s domestic popularity comes from his control of Russian media, according to Bush. “Hell, I’d be popular, too, if I owned NBC news,” he said.
Regarding his brother Jeb’s potential run for the presidency, Bush acknowledged that he was a political liability for Jeb, that the Bush name can be used against him, and that Americans don’t like dynasties. He also said that foreign policy is going to be especially important in the presidential campaign and that the test for Republicans running will be who has got the “courage” to resist isolationist tendencies.
Regarding Hillary Clinton, Bush said it will be crucial how she plays her relationship with the president. She will eventually have to choose between running on the Obama administration’s policies or running against them. If she defends them, she’s admitting failure, he said, but if she doesn’t she’s blaming the president.
For George W. Bush, the remarks in Vegas showed he has little respect for how the current president is running the world. He also revealed that he takes little responsibility for the policies that he put in place that contributed to the current state of affairs.