Cleveland, OH Black Pastor Darrell Scott Introduced Donald Trump
Pastor Scott realizes the media's brainwashing on American's to paint Donald Trump as a racist. This man brought down the house with his introduction of Trump at a Cleveland rally in March, 2016.
Pastor Darrell Scott of New Spirit Revival Center Ministries speaks and introduces Donald Trump at a rally in Cleveland, OH.
Black Pastor Brings Down The House at Donald Trump Cleveland Rally!
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCHZbB-M9oE
Please, you owe it to yourself to listen to Pastor Scott. It gives me holy goose bumps every time I listen to this Spirit filled man of God! He tells you what kind of man Trump really is.
I hope that Pastor Scott gets to introduce Trump at the Republican National Convention (July 18-21), this guy is on FIRE!"Who are you to say that the vast majority of black people are being bamboozled?"
I didn't say that. I don't understand how you can have such a wonderful imagination. err...Hitting the crack pipe?
"Isn't that a bit arrogant on your part?"
Heavy on the "your part" my brother.
So surreal! - Louis Fraakham agrees with Trump's temporary ban on not letting Muslim refugees into the USA. Mr. Fraakham is a minister, and one of the most influential black Muslin leaders in America.
"Donald Trump - Black Muslims support Trump"
2:11 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6LsL-G9Gb0
I think Fraakham is an intelligent man from what he had to say in agreement with Trump. However, Fraakham, is a racist, so I do not have any respect for the man. He advocates killing white people, tyrants in government...he believes in the Quran and that is what he teaches, VIOLENCE! I think he actually believes what he says.
The difference between Pastor Darrell Scott and Louis Fraakham is: light and darkness. Or, God and the devil! ... Farrakhan says about Hillary Clinton: 'That's a Wicked Woman". He has even invoked 'Satan' as He unleashed on Hillary Clinton.
Uncle Tom's are nothing new in the black community. There were also Orthodox Jews who helped the Nazi's. And so we can understand that being a traitor is not unique to one race. The fact that this man parrot's the perverse phrase "Let's Make America Great Again", confirms that he is very uneducated, or that he is an Oreo who simply doesn't care. I have no respect for such people. Many have spoken this evil phrase that mocks the hundreds of millions who have suffered and died beneath this yoke of racism and oppression, but no one has of yet been able to cite exactly when that time was when America was great. In fact, no one in this Forum can name that time because such a time never existed!
But the callousness of Americans is nothing new. The lyrics to "America The Beautiful" were written in July 1893 by Katherine Bates. In February of the same year the black teenager Henry Smith was tortured, mutilated, and burned alive in front of approx 15,000 white spectators in Paris Texas. Vendors were set up and serving refreshments while Smith screamed in agony as he was being tortured and mutilated for nearly an hour. And when he screamed the crowd of psychopaths would cheer. Just 3 years earlier, over 150 unarmed Lakota men, women , and children were massacred by the 7th Calvary at Wounded Knee South Dakota. Twenty soldiers received the Medal of Honor for this crime against humanity. And this was not the first atrocity committed by the European Invaders against the people. Yet this white woman,who happened to be a school teacher, found beauty amidst the evil of racism, torture, and genocide.
But the list of atrocities and crimes against humanity is very long, and it includes the invasion and overthrow of the Hawaiian government, the forced removal of Chagossians from Diego Garcia, and of course the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And most recently the destabilization of the Middle East by imperialist profiteers in the American government. Men like this pastor are a greater threat to the black race than white supremacists. But unlike another pastor, the great Martin Luther King, this man will most likely live to be very old.
If you are so easily offended then I suggest that you invest in a thicker skin. If a black man ignores the historical record and jumps on the "Let's Make America Great Again" bandwagon, then what is he but an Uncle Tom? What would you call an Orthodox Jew who supports neo-Nazi's and chants slogans like "Let's Make The National Socialist Party Great Again?
Yes, that would seem rather odd wouldn't it. But the black man in America is not expected to have a "black' identity. The black man in America is expected to be the "good hard working Negro". He is expected to remain branded with a slave name like "Jones","Washington",or "Smith". He is expected to speak the white man's language and attend "integrated" schools where he can learn the Eurocentric version of history, and climb the ladder of success as defined by the white man. This is why you are offended. It is because I have challenged the stereotypical "good Negro" who supports a Capitalist who is as much a part of the system, and part of the problem, as anyone else.
And I do believe you have me confused with someone else. I am not a Brit. In fact I have never been to Europe. I am Aniyunwiya/German and I grew up near the Mason Dixon line. My parents were Civil Rights activists during the late 50's and 60's. And so my education about America and racism began at a very young age.In fact, it was so racist where I grew up that my parents were involved in several gun battles with white supremacists. And so, much of what I know about the evil of America I have learned firsthand, and not out of a book.
To suggest that someone who has been an activist against racism his entire life is also a racist is absurd. It appears you have been bitten by the PC bug. And what should I call Ted Bundy or John Wayne Gacy? If I call them rapists and murderers, does it reveal that I am an insensitive bigot? No, there is nothing racist about calling someone an Uncle Tom who actually fits the description. And if for no other reason, he earned the title when he parroted the phrase,"Let's Make America Great Again". And so I will ask you: From the perspective of the African in America, The Indigenous First Nations, other minorities, the white working class, poor whites, or white women, when was America ever "Great". No one has of yet answered this question. Not even Donald Trump!
As far as Europe is concerned, many are not aware that the United States has remained a British Colony since the Revolutionary War. And so, it is not possible to separate the Imperialist aggression of the United States from the global machinations of Great Britain.
A man who fits the definition of a traitor is most likely a traitor. Uncle Tom is simply slang for "traitor". You cannot deny that he said in the video, "Let's Make America Great Again", and when he did so he defined himself. My opinion, or his opinion, or your opinion, has nothing to do with it. There has been no time in the history of America, since 1492, when the Indigenous or African have not been collectively oppressed under colonialist rule. The historical record verifies this. And so, his pandering to white mainstream America by making such a statement is a denial of over 500 years of white racist oppression. He is playing the "good Negro" and of course many white Americans love this kind of freak show. To the educated mind, regardless of race, it is a disgusting display of ignorance.
Neither is he a man of God as he claims. He is a hypocrite, as we can understand that the evil rise of America and materialism is directly opposed to the teachings of Jesus. Jesus did not condone rape, theft, murder,materialism, or genocide. Yet, it is upon these elements of evil that the foundations of America were laid. But instead of rebuking evil, this man has embraced a legacy of evil. So yes, this man has defined himself as an Uncle Tom, as well as a hypocrite.
Yes, I am filled with hatred for evil. When I see women and children living in the squalor of refugee camps I am filled with hatred for the evil that led them there. When I see innocent unarmed citizens (white and black) being gunned down and murdered by miscreant cops, I am filled with hatred for a system that allows a majority of these thugs to kill with impunity. When I see working class people struggling for a lifetime in a system of oppression that was designed to keep them in perpetual servitude, I am filled with hatred for those who champion the lie of freedom and democracy to a nation of wage slaves. And yes, I am filled with hatred for those who make apologies for crimes against humanity while they reap the benefit, and enjoy the fruits of evil.
Hate is like pain. It can be a positive or a negative. In the human body, pain is good because it alerts us to a problem and keeps us healthy. But if we inflict pain on someone just to hurt them, and hear them cry out, then that can only be defined as an evil act. Hate functions in the same way. By hating evil we are recognizing a problem. And the first step in fixing any problem is to recognize that it even exists. When I comment about certain issues in these Forums, like a nerve in the human body, I am alerting the community that there is a problem. When I offer, or implement a solution, I am behaving as an antibody in the bloodstream.
Even Jesus said: "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." When we consider Jesus and his teachings, we can clearly understand that Jesus has no love for America overall, as it is the embodiment of evil.
And as far as "forgiveness" is concerned. Forgiving an individual,entity, or government does not mean that you encourage, enable, or allow any of the aforementioned to continue committing crimes against humanity, or to continue glorifying their evil deeds with monuments,holidays, and patriotic songs. You have used a common tactic of trying to turn the tables and paint me as a hateful person in order to steal my thunder,to tarnish my character, and to dilute my message. But the only thing that can stop me is a bullet. And then that would only be temporary, as this is not my first rodeo.
CLEVELAND BACKS OFF BAN ON TRUMP SPEECH
Citizens for Trump wins case against the City of Cleveland
* http://www.infowars.com/cleveland-backs … mp-speech/
The way the City of Cleveland was setting up things, its like they were asking for violent protesters to wage a war against peaceful Trump supporters who are going to protest for our 1st Amendment rights for free speech.
"LOL, here you are again, "puzzled.""
And here you are again, laughing and contributing nothing of substance about the quote in question.
"We all get to decide, to some extent, what indicators we will use to judge whether we think a politician is "racist.""
No kidding. I am suggesting that we err on the side of caution and give people the benefit of the doubt when making such serious accusations. If you have enough evidence of Trump's racism it should be easy to compile a list of his racist behaviour and demonstrate it beyond reasonable doubt.
"The fact that you are "puzzled" is meaningless."
Meaningless to what? All I'm saying is I don't understand how you came to your conclusion about Trump's racism. I think it's relevant to the discussion, if you care to elucidate me on the matter.
"If enough people view Trump's words and behavior as evidence of racism, he will lose their votes or, in some cases, gain their votes."
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
"Based on the vast database of Trump tweets, speeches, and interviews, it is not strange for a large number of people to think he is probably racist."
Yes, there's such a large database yet I'm the only one that's provided an actual quote of his to try and understand what portion of that quote demonstrates racism. It's incredible, there's so much data and so little of it is provided, let alone analysed.
"You can accept that or not,but it is silly to argue whether or not he is racist or whether people's opinions of his racism are right or wrong. "
it's silly to argue whether something is true or false. We'll agree to disagree on that one.
"There is enough body of Trump behavior and words for everyone to decide on their own."
Yes, and I'm asking you (or anyone else) to provide that overwhelming body of evidence to me so I can update my estimation. Maybe I am not privy to the database that you have. Or maybe you are ill-informed and buying into propaganda.
Yes, Donald Trump is considered a racist. And Mother Teresa is considered a saint... doesn't make it true. That's why I'm asking for evidence.
Where have I ever made an excuse about the source you've provided? This is the second or third time you accuse me of such a thing when I've never once complained to you about the source. I'll repeat what I've told you once before:
I am not picky with the origin of the source. The information presented ought to be challenged in the same way regardless of where it comes from.
Read it carefully and remind yourself that Mr P. doesn't care where your source comes from, so stop accusing him of making excuses about the sources, because he's never done that and he's gone out of his way to make it clear that he doesn't care where your source comes from.
Anyway, I guess I'll have to do the "legwork" of outlining the articles claims, since the only thing you're keen on doing is pasting a link and expecting me to go through every single claim:
Claim 1: discrimination by the Trump family business.
We've already been over this. Despite my reservations in assuming settlements to be indications of guilt, I've already agreed to assume this is racist, even though there could be other explanations for disparities (something I've tried to explain to you at length in past threads).
Claim 2: "A well-educated black has a tremendous advantage."
How is this racist? The statement could be wrong, but is it racist? Would it be racist to say a well-educated white has a tremendous advantage? Or that white people have tremendous advantages in general? We had an entire thread about that, remember? Should I accuse you of racism for supporting that statement? There's a distinction between racial statements and racist statements.
Claim 3: "BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY. BRING BACK OUR POLICE"
Is this a reactionary claim to something without evidence? Yes. Is it an accusation against black and Latino teens? Yes. This could be a reaction based on racism, but this could also just be a reaction based on a false sense of justice or fear. Whatever, let's call it racism just because.
Claim 4: "Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes… Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else…Besides that, I tell you something else. I think that’s guy’s lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks."
Now this would be racist, if it were true. But this quote goes back to a single disgruntled employee who recalled something said months after the fact and put it in quotes. And who tried to profit off of it with a book. How credible are such statements?
Claim 5: "They don’t look like Indians to me and they don’t look like Indians to Indians."
He is referring to the typical Native American look, given their cultural attire and clothing. Was it a dumb, blunt and insensitive statement? Yes. Is it racist to say that Native Americans have a particular look? No. They do, it's very distinct and quite beautiful in my opinion.
Claim 6: Obama is not American.
Another dumb statement. Is it based on race? Yeah, probably. Does it mean he is racist? I'd be more inclined to think he's stupid and conspiratorial as opposed to racist, but I can give you this one.
Claim 7: He called Mexicans rapists.
No, he called a majority or significant proportion of not-best illegal immigrants drug dealers and rapists, and that "some" were good people.
Claim 8: He proposed a ban on Muslim immigration.
Muslims are not a race. The ban would be based on ideology which is largely incompatible with Western principles. And it would be temporary.
Claim 9: He made fun of Chinese businesspeople with broken English.
For crying out loud, does nobody actually look at the context of his statements? First of all, he wasn't talking about only Chinese businessmen, he was talking about Japanese too (should I assume that the author of your link is racist for equating Japanese to Chinese?). Second, it was a compliment! He's saying that Asian businessmen are direct and don't lolly gaggle with small talk. Third, he was quoting the specific businessmen he was negotiating with. If they said "we want deal" in broken English, quoting them verbatim is not racist.
Claim 10: He said “my African American" again and again.
Well, this is definitely racist, it clearly implies that he owns the African American, as if he were a slave. *Sarcasm*.
Claim 11: He called Gonzalo Curiel a Mexican, and that he was biased against him.
Calling into question the bias of someone because of their race is nothing new. You yourself have done this by accusing "old, white men" in the justice system of being racist and corrupt. The difference here is Trump is accusing one specific man of Mexican background of bias, whereas you made a generalization about all or most old white men. If you stated a specific judge was biased because he was white I wouldn't accuse you of being racist against whites, I'd just ask for evidence. Whatever, I'll say this is racist, but then I have to conclude that you are racist yourself (I'd rather think you and Trump are misinformed or ignorant, but oh well).
Claim 12: He did not hire many black or Hispanic executives.
Not having a specific % of a demographic in executive positions is not evidence of racism, discrimination or hatred. He also didn't hire any dwarves, does that mean he hates dwarves?
--------------------------------------
Those are all of the claims I can find in your link. 5/12 are potentially racist. But I'm being generous. A 43 year old settlement, an accusation by a disgruntled employee in a book 25 years ago, and calling for the death sentence and jumping the gun against presumed criminals doesn't prove he is racist.
The other two incidents with Obama's birth certificate and Justice Curiel are potentially more compelling, but I am still hesitant to judge him as a racist against blacks and Mexicans on a whole two events against a whole two individuals. I'm a big fan of Hanlon's razor: never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by ignorance. And this is more than adequately explained by ignorance.
The rest of the claims are blatant distortions of what Trump said and/or are not racist by any measure. But at least now I understand where you supposedly come from. Now I know that 3 questionable incidents 25-43 years ago, and 2 recent incidents against specific individuals, are enough evidence of a person's racism, in your eyes.
(I mean, I had to substantiate all of your evidence for you and make a number of exceptions in your favour, but that's fine. Like you (erroneously) said, I need to do some legwork for a change, even if it's legwork that you're supposed to be doing.)
Now you keep asking about my evidence. Of what? What do you think I'm claiming here? Being skeptical of your claim does not mean I'm making a claim of my own. Being skeptical of fairies doesn't mean I am definitely stating that fairies don't exist. I've already gone out of my way to substantiate your claims and now you want me to substantiate non-claims? Be reasonable for a change.
Of course, the default position is to assume that Donald Trump is not racist, just like the default assumption is to assume that fairies don't exist. There's no evidence that would "prove" that Trump is not a racist, or that fairies don't exist. The proof is in the absence of evidence to the affirmative claims. If you don't understand the distinction read up on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence
Once you understand that, you'll realize that asking for proof of something being absent, or demanding that I take a position when my position is the null/absent default, is silly. I'm beating a dead horse because I've already stated as such, but maybe if I repeat the same thing enough times, with different examples (I've used Bigfoot before, now I'm using fairies), it'll get through to you:
"the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate Trump's racism, not on me to demonstrate his non-racism. How could anyone prove that a person is not a racist? How could anyone prove that Bigfoot doesn't exist? The only proof I have is evidence of absence i.e. there's no evidence of Bigfoot, therefore he doesn't exist. But that might just be my "weird" science talking."
So I'll reiterate: how could anyone prove that a person is not a racist? What evidence would you need to see to conclusively state that Trump is not a racist?
As for Trudeau why are you mentioning Trudeau after complaining about my mentioning of Hillary and Obama? He's not even American.
If you must know I would have voted for Trudeau, but I was out of the country visiting family and neglected to vote in advance. I actually made a minor donation to his party and participated in my university's Young Liberals group - it's not much of a contribution, mind you, but still enough to render your silly accusation, well, silly. It just seems that no matter how many times I tell you that I am a liberal, you ignore it, because if I disagree with you I must be a scary rightwinger and I must hate all liberals, including young Canadian prime ministers, because reasons.
If you're having this much trouble understanding that I'm a liberal, then I can't imagine what the shock would be if I were to say that I'm a Latino immigrant from South America, which would make me part of two groups that Donald Trump is supposedly discriminatory against (maybe three if you include liberal).
Claim 1:
"I have no reservation about assuming that settlements are indications of guilt, often times, they are."
'Often' is not always. There are many settlements which are forced on a defendant because of pressure. Consent decrees like in this case specifically amount to a non-admission of guilt. Anyway, I already said I'm agreeing that this is racism, despite my reservations.
Claim 4:
"It is sheer conjecture on your part to say that this employee was lying about the statement."
The employee's accusations are sheer conjecture. Why are you okay with his conjecture, but not with my conjecture about his conjecture? It could be true, it could be false, we don't know but we should be skeptical of a disgruntled employee's claim.
""O’Donnell’s report was shocking, but Trump did not contest it at the time. In 1997 he was interviewed for Playboy by author Mark Bowden and he confirmed that the O’Donnell book was “probably true.” "
Probably true =//= definitively true. Trump didn't read the book or know of the claims. I like how you're believing this quote but not Trump's later quote where he disavows the claim.
"So, I guess I don't really care if Trump refers to O'Donnell as a disgruntled employee, what sort of excuse were you expecting?"
It's not that Trump referred to him as a disgruntled employee, it's that he was a disgruntled employee. He didn't like how Trump referred to one of the managers who passed away in a helicopter crash and was later fired. That would make anyone disgruntled.
Claim 5: Ah, your link didn't give as much context. He was questioning their legitimacy based on appearance. Though I think questioning legitimacy based on appearance is not in itself racist, I can give you this one.
Claim 12: I've already agreed that this is racist for your sake, but asking Trump to provide evidence =//= that he is automatically racist. He might have no evidence, just like there's no evidence that old, white judges are racist. We can assume that he is making this unfounded claim based on race or stupidity.
"So, I say that it is racist to assume that people entrusted with a solemn responsibility are not going to do their jobs impartially merely because of their surnames and ethnic heritage"
Do you remember our white privilege thread? That thread was largely about questioning people's impartiality based on their surnames and ethnic heritage. The difference is that their background was white. You were doing so, as were others. Should I assume that you did so out of racism? Or that you were trying to look for an explanation?
Claim 13 is claim 6... you can't repeat the same point twice
You've yielded claim 3, I've yielded claim 5. The final tally remains 5/12.
But can you see where I'm coming from? The success ratio of these claims is less than 50%, and that's after we went through each and every one of them with diligence and honesty, and with a good source. Accusations of racism even against someone as questionable as Trump have not been reliable or accurate, and yet we continue to push these buttons of bigotry for every little thing an influential figure says. (And note that only 2 of these claims happened within the last 5 years. Some of the most oft-repeated claims about him are of his racism against Mexicans and Muslims and that he wants to "deport all of them," both of which aren't true.)
I agree that he's more overt with his questionable behaviour than other candidates. But again, less than 50% of the dirt thrown his way are indicative of racism. When that many accusations are inaccurate, I have to remain skeptical.
My suggestion is, instead of shunning him via accusations of racism (not only because it's sketchy, but because it just doesn't work), why don't we just prove him wrong? Why don't we look at the % of rapists and drug dealers in the immigrant population and see if they're a cause of concern? Why don't we challenge him on providing evidence regarding his accusations against Justice Curiel? Why don't we show Obama's birth certificate?
(oh wait, we did that last one, and Trump did shut up about it - after patting himself on the back for a job well done)
All I can do is laugh and shake my head.I know that feeling... https://www.google.com/search?rls=aso&a … ama+is+gay
- did you forget to take your medication or something? You promised that I'd eat crow about Mateen's attack being evidence of Islamic terrorism, not about Trump's racism.
Do you remember your claims? "I still think that all this Islamic terrorism stuff is just a hoax to save the conservative's face on the issue of homophobia which they work hard to conceal." Your ridiculous claim is that this registered Democrat used Islam as a cover for conservatives' homophobia.
Here's something that you might find interesting: http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-no-e … K&IR=T
The FBI found no evidence that he was gay.
Do you also remember the little bet we made, about 80% of terrorist attacks that weekend being Islamic in nature? Take a look at last weekend's terrorism, how much of that was Islamic in nature?
I'll save you the trouble: 100%. In fact, of the known causes in the entire month of June, all of them have been Islamic in nature.
Anyway, let me know how the crow tastes.
Mr. Popo, I'm so glad you have patiently taken your time on this thread to try to address issues that others have. I honestly don't see the issue at all. Your input is always appreciated and I respect how forthright you are.
Here is a video link to the Donald Trump press conference with African-American Pastors in Norcross, GA (10-10-15)
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1J6dDi6Z0w
I am happy to see many African-American Pastors supporting Trump, especially with their prayers.
CNN investigative correspondent Drew Griffin narrated a segment Friday detailing various donations the Clinton Foundation had accepted from foreign governments prior to Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, but he completely botched the repeatedly proven fact that the Clinton Foundation has failed to reveal the identities of over 1,000 foreign donors.
Part of Griffin’s report featured Trump saying in a speech earlier this week that “Maybe the motivation lies among the 1,000 foreign donations Hillary failed to disclose while at the State Department.”
Griffin then falsely asserts that “There’s no evidence that is accurate.”
But in fact, last April, the Washington Post and Bloomberg News both reported that 1,100 hidden Clinton Foundation foreign donors were “bundled” into a $25 million donation from Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership.
* http://www.breitbart.com/hillary-clinto … donations/
That's really sad, a lot of people watch CNN expecting excellent reporting, but instead they listen to lies to protect Hillary Clinton and try to paint Trump negatively. The brainwashing!Already a 21st Century Theologian and Scholar in his own right, Dr. Darrell went on to receive his Doctorate of Divinity in November of 2004.
CLEVELAND, Nov. 5 2004/PRNewswire/ -- Pastors Darrell and Belinda Scott of the New Spirit Revival Center (NSRC) will be awarded honorary Doctorate degrees from St. Thomas Christian College.
2010
http://bethelburnett.blogspot.com/2010/ … stasy.html
Pimpoliscious LOLWell, since she misquotes people, complaining seems a bit hypocritical.
Related Discussions
- 189
Donald Trump just announced he will pass Term Limits? Will this help him win?
Donald Trump just announced he will pass Term Limits? Will this help him win?At a rally today Trump spoke about a Constitutional Amendment on Term Limits for Congress. This should be supported across the asile - thoughts?
- 303
Why are Republicans in denial about Donald Trump and his many scams and lies?
Why are Republicans in denial about Donald Trump and his many scams and lies?When someone engages contractors and agrees to pay them and then goes bankrupt on that promise it is basically a lie. When a man has a wife AND a mistress, he is certain to be lying to one, or more likely both of...
- 50
President Donald Trump's poll number remain steady.
Even after being indicted, President Donald Trump's poll numbers remain solid. Could be a result of people losing faith in the legal institutions such as the FBI an DOJ? Is it possible the blatant use of them against a political opponent is obvious to more and more people?"Donald...
- 13
Donald Trump Continues to do Well with Uneducated White Males
Another way to put this is that Trump is losing with educated, white voters, particularly women. What can Hillary Clinton do to appeal to the uneducated white voter and why do you think that she's losing in this particular demographic?http://fortune.com/2016/07/11/donald-tr … te-voters/
- 40
Congressional Resolution Declares No Insurrection by Donald Trump
Gaetz, Stefanik offer resolution declaring Trump ‘did not engage in insurrection’Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) unveiled a resolution Tuesday that declares former President Trump “did not engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States.”The resolution — which...
- 22
Will you move out of the United States if Donald Trump becomes president? Where
Will you move out of the United States if Donald Trump becomes president? Where would you go?