top of page
Search

Wednesday - The Week is Half-over

Wednesday 3-13-24


Verses for today:


The LORD is nigh unto all them that call upon him, To all that call upon him in truth.

Psalm 145:18 KJV

 

Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the LORD thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.

Joshua 1:9 KJV

 

Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

James 1:17 KJV

 

Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Romans 5:1 KJV

 

 

 

Jill Biden’s “work husband” accused of sickening crime:

The White House is in an uproar. And now someone’s going to jail.

Because Jill Biden’s “work husband” was accused of a sickening crime.

 

A top Biden White House official has tormented and verbally s*xually harassed coworkers for more than a decade, but he is regarded “untouchable” since first lady Jill Biden considers him her “work husband.”

Anthony Bernal, the first lady’s top adviser with immense clout in both White House operations and Democratic politics, has often commented in the workplace about colleagues’ p*nis sizes, according to three sources with firsthand knowledge.


Two people said Bernal, 50, communicated with them an idea that the size of a person’s thumb corresponds to the size of their g*nitalia, referencing the hypothesis both at the White House and in previous capacities during President Biden’s campaign and vice-presidential administration under President Barack Obama.

“It is to make people uncomfortable and to have power over them,” said one source who told The New York Post they heard Bernal make the crude remarks over several years while they worked together.

“It is Me Too — classic Me Too,” the source added.

A second source stated that Bernal “often” speculated inside the White House about the endowments of fellow political aides and even Secret Service agents.

 

A third source described a nasty “jab” during a professional quarrel in which Bernal claimed a colleague had a small p*nis, as well as a subsequent interaction in which the top assistant “remarked on another staffer’s b*lge in his khakis.”

The third former coworker stated that each of these occurrences occurred prior to Biden’s administration.


“It was a lot of inappropriate remarks — talking about other people’s attractiveness and speculating about their s*x lives at very weird moments,” the person said, adding that he had come to see “that’s actually s*xual harassment.”

Meanwhile, four people say Bernal has speculated loudly in the workplace about colleagues’ s*xuality, including at the White House, in a way that has made others uncomfortable.


“I have heard him say inappropriate things about people’s s*xuality or pry inappropriately into people’s personal lives,” one former co-worker recalled of Bernal, who is openly gay.

“I heard him ask if people are gay all the time.”

Another source who has worked with Bernal said, “I could think of more than one instance where he pontificated on whether someone was gay or not or said, ‘They are definitely gay.’”

 

The sources, who had varied degrees of terrible personal experiences with Bernal, said they were coming out to hold him accountable for what they characterize as a long history of bullying.

Some insiders also believe it is “hypocritical” for Biden to have Bernal on his staff when the president promised on his first day in office to terminate aides “on the spot” if he learns they had exhibited “disrespect” to others in their professional conduct.

“It reflects poorly on the president and the first lady,” stated one of the sources who described the verbal abuse.

“They talk a big game about integrity, decency, and kindness but when you work for the Bidens, you experience anything but that,” said another former White House adviser, who, like other sources, asked for anonymity in order to speak candidly and for fear of retaliation.

The D.C. Daily Journal

 

A.    The Deep State is Real, Here's Why it Matters:

This is a “Must-See” VIDEO

 

B.      A Brilliant Idea to help with Entitlements:

A FANTASTIC approach to a Saving Plan for the Whole Country!

Thank you,

Daniel Brooks

 


 

Justice Department projects decrease in budget that could harm Smith case against Trump:

In President Joe Biden's budget proposal to Congress, the Justice Department has projected a significant decrease in anticipated spending for special counsels in the next fiscal year.

According to the proposal, special counsels are estimated to require $4 million, contrasting sharply with the $29 million expected to be spent in the current fiscal year.

 

The forecast

This forecast comes amidst the handling of high-profile criminal cases involving former President Donald Trump and Hunter Biden.

The reduced estimate arrives amid uncertainty surrounding ongoing cases overseen by special counsel Jack Smith, particularly those involving Trump.

One case revolves around allegations that Trump unlawfully possessed classified information at his Mar-a-Lago estate, with a scheduled trial date of May 20. Due to pretrial litigation and unresolved issues, such as Trump's claim of immunity, trial postponements are probable.

 

The 2020 election case

Another case against Trump, focusing on his alleged involvement in overturning the 2020 election results, also faces uncertainties regarding timing and proceedings pending a Supreme Court decision.


In tandem, special counsel David Weiss is preparing for trials in two criminal cases against Hunter Biden, the son of President Biden.

These cases, one in Delaware concerning gun-related offenses and another in Los Angeles regarding alleged tax evasion, have varying trial dates, with one set for June 20 and the other pending.

 

The motivations

The decrease in projected spending is attributed to the conclusion of investigations led by two special counsels, John Durham, and Robert Hur, during Biden's tenure.

Durham's inquiry into alleged misconduct related to the Russia probe resulted in limited outcomes, while Hur's review of claims against President Biden concluded without criminal charges.

 

Despite the decline in projected spending, ongoing legal challenges and potential trial delays suggest that some work will carry over into the next fiscal year. Financial reports reveal that investigations incur both direct expenses, charged to the prosecutor's budget, and indirect expenses, borne by federal agencies for personnel and other costs.


Funding for special counsels originates from a congressional appropriation established when independent counsels were authorized under a now-expired law. The Government Accountability Office affirmed in 2004 that the appropriation remains available for special counsels appointed under DOJ regulations.

 

While the projected spending decline reflects the conclusion of certain investigations, the complexities of ongoing cases indicate continued financial and operational challenges for Smith and his cases against Trump in the days ahead as the 2024 election ramps up.

The American Digest

 

 

 

Key witness blows up Jack Smith's indictment against Donald Trump:

A pivotal figure in the classified documents case involving former President Donald Trump has broken his silence, shedding light on his involvement in a controversy that has gripped the nation.

Brian Butler, a seasoned employee of Mar-a-Lago with two decades of service, has emerged as a central witness, offering unprecedented insights into the events surrounding the alleged mishandling of sensitive records.

 

The details

In a recent interview with CNN, Butler disclosed details of his role in moving boxes of classified documents from the Florida resort to Trump's plane in June 2022.

Until now, Butler had been anonymized as "Trump Employee 5" in the federal indictment brought against Trump by special counsel Jack Smith.

By revealing his identity and sharing his recollections, Butler has added a new dimension to the case, potentially complicating the legal landscape.

 

The charges

Trump faces a litany of felony charges, including accusations of deliberately withholding classified information and obstructing justice.

Alongside Trump, Walt Nauta, a trusted aide, and Carlos De Oliveira, Mar-a-Lago's property manager, have also been implicated in the case. Despite the severity of the allegations, all three defendants have maintained their innocence.


Butler's decision to speak out publicly has sparked debate among legal experts. Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, expressed concerns over the implications of Butler's disclosures on the integrity of the legal proceedings.

Rahmani cautioned that public statements by cooperating witnesses before trial could introduce inconsistencies in their testimony, potentially benefiting the defense.

 

New information

Indeed, Butler's interview with CNN provided a wealth of new information not previously included in the indictment. His detailed account of events, including the timeline of moving the documents and the deterioration of his relationship with De Oliveira, offers a more comprehensive understanding of the case. Rahmani noted that such disclosures resemble trial testimony, a departure from the norm before a trial has even commenced.

 

Butler's decision to come forward carries significant risks, particularly given Trump's fervent support base. Rahmani highlighted the potential for backlash against witnesses who speak out against the former president, citing previous instances of harassment and intimidation directed at individuals involved in Trump's legal battles.


Despite the challenges, Butler expressed a sense of duty in revealing his identity. He emphasized his desire to inform American voters ahead of the November election, underscoring the importance of transparency in the democratic process. However, the prospects of the case reaching trial before the election appear slim, with pending motions to dismiss and unresolved legal matters awaiting resolution.

 

As the legal saga unfolds, Butler's courageous decision to speak out may reshape the narrative surrounding Trump's alleged misconduct in the days ahead.

The American Digest

 


 

Uh Oh! France Parliament APPROVES Bi-Lateral Security Agreement with Ukraine:

French President Emmanuel Macron will give an urgent address to the nation Thursday evening at about 8:00 PM local time, to discuss the situation in Ukraine.  I reported this on last night's Hal Turner Radio Show.  It gets worse . . .

The French parliament approved the French president's strategy towards Ukraine and supported the bilateral security agreement signed by Macron and Zelenskyy.

 

Under a Bi-lateral security agreement, a country like France can agree to send its active-duty military troops into Ukraine, which would be separate and distinct from a "NATO" action.

Trouble is, Russia has already made clear that if foreign troops enter Ukraine, they will be legitimate military targets.  That would necessarily mean Russia kills the French troops.

 

PRESUMING that France is going to send troops, since France will have entered Ukraine with the permission of the Ukraine government, when Russia hits those troops, can France turn around and claim that "France has been attacked by Russia?"   Could France then try to invoke NATO Treaty Article 5 "Collective Self Defense?"


Russia has made clear from the beginning of its Special Military Operation inside Ukraine, that if NATO declares Article 5 Collective Self Defense against Russia, "It will be a war that no one will win" which means a nuclear war.

 

The fact that the French Parliament has approved Macron's Bi-Lateral Security Agreement is a terrible development.  It heralds the coming of an out-of-control escalation of the Russia Ukraine conflict that could catapult the world into World War 3. Tomorrow.  When Macron reveals his plans . . . .

The Hal Turner Radio Show

 


Seriously!

Our Freedom is at Great RISK!

See following example:

Donna Warren

 



Jordan Peterson Calls Out Pope Francis?

Donna Warren



Dr. Phil:

The Department of Education was not spared either.

 

“They knew that those schools were a lifeline to those kids ... and they shut it down anyway,” lamented TV personality and psychologist Phil McGraw, commonly known as Dr. Phil, on Jordan Peterson’s podcast.

He said, “You [CDC and Department of Education] had information that these children were not as susceptible to this disease as everyone else was. You knew they were in a mental health crisis. You knew this was their lifeline, and you yanked it out from under them, and you damn well knew what you were doing when you did it.”

 


Dr. Phil contends that the mentioned government agencies knew that schools staying open were essential for protecting children from their abusers at home because teachers, bus drivers, coaches, etc., were key to identifying signs of child abuse.

“They shut all of that down,” the psychologist condemned. “And when they did, those [child abuse] referrals dropped 40% to 50% in some major markets. And these kids were sent home behind closed doors, locked up with the very abusers. It’s not that the abuse went down 40% or 50%. It probably went up because of the frustration of being locked up at home behind those doors. And they shut the schools down without any plan for bringing them back.”


“And so, you ask questions about it,” continued Dr. Phil, “and they say, ‘Well, we did the best we could with what we knew at the time.’ No, you DID NOT do the best you could with what you knew at the time.”

Dr. Phil’s anguish over school closures during COVID-19 is palpable as he reflects on the profound negative impact these decisions have had on children’s welfare and safety. He vehemently criticized the CDC and Department of Education for their actions, suggesting that these agencies had clear evidence that children were less at risk from COVID-19 but chose to ignore the data and allow children to suffer anyway.


An analysis by the Institute of Economic Affairs criticizes the lockdowns, suggesting that they were a costly failure — and that there was no need for them. The broader impacts of lockdowns, as outlined by the study, include not only economic and social costs but specific damages to children’s education and mental health, highlighting the need for a more balanced approach to managing public health crises​​.


The full interview with Dr. Phil is available to watch in the video following:

The Vigilant FOX

Related Stories on Vigilant News:

1.                   Dr. Phil Issues Big Warning All Parents Need to Hear







Rumors – Rumors - Rumors – Rumors – Rumors

 

RUMOURS Circulating out there...:

You need to MAKE-UP Your own MIND!


SUMMARY


What we think we know as of Tues. 12 March 2024:

 

Global Financial Crisis:

 

The Real News for Tues. 12 March 2024:

End




33 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page