Who is this Tim Walz guy?

As difficult as it was, I forced myself to listen to a half hour of that Satanic Circus frequently referred to as the Democratic National Convention last Wednesday night (08/21).

I must admit that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz gave a well-constructed, and even engaging, speech.  Unfortunately, while it was long on style, it fell short on substance, and was almost completely devoid of truth. That comes as no surprise to those of us out here in 'Rocks and Cows' country - as the old bull, Tim Walz, derisively refers to rural Minnesota - the place where many of us live who have suffered under the Walz administration's reign of terror for the past 5 or 6 years.

 

Yes indeed, Walz certainly talks a good game - projecting himself as either grandpa, coach, socialist neighbor, Robin Hood or Santa Claus, depending on the situation.  But what he actually delivers... well that ranges anywhere from a steaming pile of bovine scatology to despotic tyranny.

As has become all too typical with the political party of the far left, the speech itself was a barrage of unsupported accusations, aspersion casting, psychological projection, and just outright lies - commonplace diversion tactics in the critical attempt to hide their radical views from the voting public. Truly, his speech was all that.  But he didn't stop there.

For starters, he claimed - actually implored us to "trust me on this" - that Trump and Vance have a playbook. I agree that they do - and making this possibly one of the very few times he actually told the truth last night.  Although they didn't write it, their playbook is most commonly referred to by patriotic Americans as the Constitution of the United States of America.  And as such, you can be sure it is utterly incomprehensible to either Kamala Harris or Tim Walz.

Truth be told, the Harris and Walz ticket also have a playbook.  No, they didn't write theirs either - that would assume a level of seriousness that neither of them possess.  But in their case, they didn't need to.  

 

Karl Marx already wrote their playbook (as updated by Gramsci) in 1848. According to Antonio Gramsci, no cultural revolutionary worth his salt is without his long march through the institutions and history.  Walz is no exception.

Walz may be a former high school social studies teacher, but he is first and foremost a prevaricating politician. As such, his attempts at historical revisionism are pathetic, but expected - believable only by sycophantic party members and the brainwashed masses in attendance.  One such example was when he straight-facedly said:  "We know what they'll do if they get back in the White House. They'll jack up costs on middle-class families."  A charge that is laughable on its face.

To make such a charge against his opponents, willfully ignores the indisputable fact that in their 3 1/2 years, the Biden/Harris regime ushered in the highest inflation rates this country has seen since Jimmy Carter.  Yet Walz had the temerity to accuse the Republican ticket of planning to raise costs on families - consumer costs that have risen steadily since Harris and Biden assumed office and implemented their inflationary economic policy.  Inflation, more precisely, that was fueled by the cynically-named Inflation Reduction Act and which was only enacted by means of Ms. Harris' tie-breaking vote in the Senate.

Given that inflation is widely considered by economists to be the cruelest tax of all - hitting hardest those with the least means - this nonsensical claim was both a show of his utter lack of factual integrity and a clear appeal to ignorance within the Democrat base.

 

His economic illiteracy is illustrated further, given that only days prior, his running mate had announced her economic plan - or more accurately her plan to institute an obtrusive centrally planned economy.  A key component of which was wage and price controls to combat, in her words, "price gauging."  We can only speculate, but their plan will likely include asking Congress to repeal the law of supply and demand. 

As an aside, he also accused his opponents of wanting to repeal Obamacare.  Which ironically, is an action that, if passed through Congress would most certainly reduce health insurance prices to working Americans.

He also attempted to stir patriotism by appealing to his dubious military service claims (a topic for another time and another person) and by declaring that freedom was a big part of "what this election is about."  That, in some strange way, may be one of the few statements he made that Republicans might possibly agree with.  But any illusory point of agreement ends upon further examination of what he means.

Again, this truth-shifting sophist leveled the ironic charge that it is actually Republicans - not Democrats - who would be the threat to our freedom.  Such a fantastical claim can only be understood when you realize that his definition of freedom has little to do with the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 10th amendments, parts of the Bill of Rights which he has big disagreements with, but primarily the so-called 'freedom' to kill babies - unborn and even newborn - via surgical and chemical abortions, for any or no reason, and by any method, however gruesome.

More interestingly, the freedom charge is rife with hypocrisy coming from a man who reigned as a little dictator during COVID - someone who shut down his state, who set up a snitch hotline for neighbors to turn against neighbors, who sent armed police forces to shoot paintballs at citizens who were sitting on their front porches, who fined and jailed small business owners for remaining open, ordered COVID-infected patients into nursing homes, and who shut down churches while opening up candy stores, liquor stores, and strip clubs, while continuing his unchecked Emergency Powers months after COVID was no longer a threat.  This is the charlatan accusing Republicans of being a threat to freedom.

 

Indeed, quite a strange notion of freedom, these Democrats.

Despite all that, it would be a huge mistake to presume that Walz is a low IQ individual on par with his presumptive boss, Kamala Harris. Quite the contrary, he's probably better described as a diabolical genius, a master propagandistic rhetorician, and an opportunistic wannabe dictator.  In this writer's opinion, that's not 'Minnesota nice'.

 

 

 

 

A Costly 'Get Out of Jail Free' Card

There are two things I can say with near certainty about Joe Biden:

• Joe Biden is a crook
• Joe Biden will not be held accountable for any of his crimes

Most of us have seen the now-famous picture of a 60's era Corvette parked in the driveway, in front of an open garage.  Inside the disheveled-looking garage, are beat up boxes of papers - sitting there right out in the open on the floor in front of the open garage door.

Today we learned that the owner of that garage and the man who previously claimed that he was "surprised" when boxes of illegal classified documents were found in his house and garage, (while feigning outrage that Donald Trump had retained classified documents among his personal papers)  1  - has admitted under questioning by Special Counsel Robert Hur and his deputies, to knowing that he illegally held classified documents in his possession.

Hur's findings, outlined in a report which came out on Thursday, February 8, established that Biden, "willingly retained and disclosed classified materials," including "military, foreign policy, and sensitive national security secrets."  Additionally, Biden "knew he kept classified information in notebooks stored in his house and he knew he was not allowed to do so."  

Proving yet again how this corrupt Justice Department maintains a two-tiered justice system, Biden will not be charged (much less, impeached by the House of Representatives) for his illegal activities. In fact, Mr. Hur refuses even to prosecute the theft of classified documents from a secure SCIF while Biden was a U.S.Senator.  Meanwhile Merrick Garland moves forward with the Trump indictment for far less serious circumstances.

Nope.  Instead, doing his best impersonation of Jim Comey protecting Hillary Clinton, Special Counsel Hur declined to prosecute, even after authoring a 388 page report laying out the legal grounds for such a prosecution.

The Special Counsel did, however, throw at least one bone to Biden's conservative critics.  Hur laid bare Biden's drastic and severe cognitive decline when he revealed that Biden's memory had "significant limitations" and that he failed to recall such significant milestones as the time of his Vice Presidency or the date of his older son's death.  The report says, "Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations."

In fact, one excuse given for not charging Biden with these felonies was that after his presidency ends, Biden's legal team would likely present him at his trial as "a sympathetic, (I would say 'pathetic') well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."  Funny, but that sounds to me more like a consideration to be left for the sentencing phase of a trial, instead of the legal basis for blanket prosecutorial immunity from serious crimes.

Not that logic and reason count for much with this bunch, but, it certainly does put Biden and his handlers in a rather difficult logical conundrum.  As Victor Davis Hanson points out, how exactly does he argue against the report?  No, I'm not cognitively challenged and therefore should be indicted after my terms ends - or - He's right to not prosecute because I am in cognitive decline and therefore no longer qualify under the 25th amendment to be president. 2

In the final analysis, however, if we desire to protect our country from another four years of this tyrannical and lawless regime, if we wish to spare the country from increasing international embarrassment, disrespect, and scorn, and if we hope to save the United States from this mentally diminished, bumbling Mr. Magoo-like character in the oval office, we can't count on the news media, the 25th amendment, or the courts.  To do that, patriotic citizens like you and I will have to vote him out of office.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. When asked for his thoughts upon hearing that President Trump had kept classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, President Biden replied, "How that could possibly happen?  How could anyone be that irresponsible?" (60 Minutes interview, 09/18/2022)

2. U.S. Constitution.  Amendment 25. Section 4 - "Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President..."

 

 

A Dream Interrupted

 

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.  ~  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Some 60 years ago (and just months before I was born), Martin Luther King gave what became one of the most heralded speeches yet to have been delivered in the English language.

At the time, hopes that this dream laid out by Rev. King would become widely accepted were largely aspirational.  His words that day hearkened back - in more than one way - to those of a similarly gifted orator, Abraham Lincoln.  You may recall, in urging for reconciliation how President Lincoln had appealed to "the better angels of our nature," in his first inaugural address.

In both cases, the nation moved forward, however imperfectly, until both of these great men's visions advanced from aspiration to realization.

 

In fact, not that many years ago, acceptance of the notion that all people should be judged by the content of their character was nearly ubiquitous among both conservative and liberal constituencies.

More recently, however, a worrisome trend has emerged.

This troubling new vision substitutes reconciliation with Balkanization.  It is a vision of division instead of unity.  No longer is the appeal to our nature's "better angels", as it once was, but to something far less noble:  tribalism, avarice, and retribution.

This vision pushes back against the very notion of good character as a virtue.  Such ideals have been watered down, redefined - or rejected outright.  No longer is the vision one of character qualities over superficial appearance, but rather tribal affiliation based on skin color over all else.

So in our current political climate, while the conservative cause has fully embraced King's colorblind creed, it seems that the political left has gone in a new and dangerous direction.  In doing so, they have abandoned the dream, and embraced a nightmare.

 

 

Like Sodom and Gomorrah - but with Lakes, Rocks, and Cows

With that soothing baritone voice of his and a Santa Claus-like physique, one could easily assume Minnesota DFL Governor Tim Walz was harmless.  And you'd be very wrong.

In an age of hyperbole, even by 'Minnesota nice' standards, it is hardly understatement to say he is a dangerous, tyrannical extremist.  Walz came on the scene in 2018 with a campaign giving lip service to a slogan "One Minnesota", but it didn't take him - or voters - long to realize his radical policies were extremely unpopular in outstate Minnesota and that his base of support was a handful of Democrat stronghold urban counties in the Twin Cities metro, plus Duluth and Rochester. For the most part, suburban and rural areas - the land of "mostly rocks and cows" as he so famously dismissed them - rejected his divisive talk and disastrous policy prescriptions.

Not satisfied with the typical Democrat favorite pet projects, such as expanding the already bloated welfare state, funding pork-barrel spending construction projects, and dumbing down the education system, Walz had his sights set on much more far reaching structural changes, but was held back, by a legislature that his party didn't fully control.  At least until COVID, where we got our first true glimpse of a man acquiring a taste for tyrannical power - a man who would come to be affectionately known to some as 'Timmy the Tyrant'.  Using ambiguous and arcane emergency rules, Walz assumed near marshal law status, by continuing to extend his peacetime emergency powers for well over a year beyond when any true COVID emergency may have possibly existed.

Then came the unthinkable.

Rather than being punished by voters for his divisive, erratic, and downright ineffective leadership during the George Floyd riots, Feeding Our Future scandal, and COVID, Walz was inexplicably swept back into office and given a Democrat majority in both chambers of the legislature to back him.  They quickly conspired to seize on the opportunity for action to turn our charming land of 10,000 lakes into a diabolical landscape of 10,000 boiling cauldrons of corrosive far-left politics.

In a flurry of activity, all hell literally broke loose as the 2023 legislative session began.  Without any effective checks and balances.  Walz and his party wasted no time enacting an agenda that seemed to many of us "rocks and cows" types, too extreme for even Satan himself.

Revealing their top priority - death and destruction - the first bill from both chambers (HF1/SF1) removed virtually all abortion safeguards or restrictions and guaranteed gruesome child-killing for any or no particular reason, up until the moment of birth. Walz only too happily signed it into law.  Keep in mind that was despite denying a charge from his campaign opponent that he supported abortion up to the moment of birth and claiming that he supported maintaining current abortion laws. 1  (The bill followed nicely in the footsteps of his 2022 executive order which gave state sanction to 'abortion tourism' by refusing to cooperate with neighboring states which don't allow the grisly procedures. 2 )

Although I'm not going to take time to outline all the bad and outright evil policies and laws inflicted upon Minnesotans by Governor Walz (expensive carbon-free electricity, felon voting, and illegal alien driver's licenses immediately come to mind), we must mention his most egregious action of all, at least to this point:  Walz's 'Gender Transition' executive order.

Executive order 23-03, signed on Wednesday, March 8, leapfrogs the legislature and effectively transforms Minnesota into a sanctuary state for so-called gender transitions. The order guarantees access - and punishes denial of services - to what they euphemistically call "gender affirming healthcare services." 3  (A writer for Hot Air points out that it even goes to the lengths of protecting non-custodial parents from consequences for kidnapping a child and bringing them to Minnesota for the purposes of receiving such 'services.' 4)

Their deliberately vague and obfuscatory language deserves to be unpacked.  Completely unheard of a decade ago, the term "gender affirming healthcare services", encompasses a range of horrific practices and procedures, of which I hesitate to even mention, such as the administration of cross-sex hormones, powerful and still not fully tested puberty blocking drugs, genital mutilation surgeries, breast removals, and castration of children.  Indeed Dr. Mengele would be proud of this governor and his administration!

A boy insists he is a girl so he can shower with the cheerleaders?  Great!  A girl wants to be a boy, because the other girls in her class are mean to her?  We can make that happen!  Your 2nd grade son says he wants to be a pirate, so they surgically remove an eye from it's socket and give him a patch and amputate half his leg to fit him with a pegleg.  That is doable!  Your kindergarten daughter says she wishes she were a purple polka-dotted unicorn... well you see where this foray into fantasy land goes.

And so, we have Walz's Lt. Governor, Peggy Flanigan, out there publicly insisting that she knows "what it means to be a good parent," emphatically claiming "it is our job as grown-ups to listen and believe" whatever a child may say about who or what they are. 5   For the extremists in charge, it has nothing to do with providing wise guidance and religious direction to children through times of trouble and confusion.  Instead, she insists logic, reason, genetic science, and all that is true must be tossed aside in a dogged pursuit of the lunatic left's cause du jour.

The intent of these things is not to affirm genetic science, X and Y chromosomes, or a reality-based concept of male and female, but rather to obscure them.  This done, not in the name of truth, but in the name of politically motivated theories revolving around gender fluidity - a cause celebre of the far left LGBTQ+ABCXYZ sexual deviancy movement.

Having received both public recognition and government sanction to their unholy unions, and left unsatisfied even by the continuous positive publicity being puffed in the legacy media and pop culture, the sexual deviancy movement continues to progress into evermore sinister areas of depravity such as indoctrination, recruitment, molestation, and even mutilation of children.  In the case of minors, the innocent-sounding term, "gender-affirming care" actually cares nothing about the actual havoc raised in the lives of it's young, confused, or mentally ill victims.  There is a profitable and sexually-charged political agenda to be advanced at their expense.    

In actuality, the result is little more than the official enabling and even celebrating of an untreated mental disorder - in this case, one called gender dysphoria. 

While it may be hard to even fathom this depth of evil by those of us in the land of rocks and cows, it has been adopted wholesale from a political party and it's leader in St. Paul that has a central vision of sexual confusion, immorality, and mutilation.  Sadly, it's portends a legacy of broken lives, destruction, and death that targets children, who will bear the imprint for decades hereafter.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 - https://minnesotareformer.com/briefs/gov-tim-walz-does-not-support-abortion-up-to-the-moment-of-birth-contrary-to-jensen-claim/

2 - https://m.startribune.com/small-devoted-group-at-state-capitol-shares-in-gratitude-for-roe-being-overturned/600185247/

3 - https://alphanews.org/gov-walz-signs-order-making-state-a-sanctuary-for-gender-transitions/

4 - https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/03/09/minnesota-about-to-become-a-kidnapping-sanctuary-state-n535743 

5 - https://alphanews.org/flanagan-good-parents-believe-kids-when-they-tell-us-who-they-are/

Their Most Sacred Sacrament

If there was any ambivalence or doubt left about the diabolical nature of the Democrat party's agenda - or for that matter, the depth of depravity required of those who aspire to be one of the party's elected officials - well, all doubt about it was erased last week.  An uncomplicated bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives which simply affirmed the common understanding among civilized people that the attending medical personal would provide children with the necessary postnatal medical care after a successful delivery.

As Lifenews reported:  "The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act requires that, when a baby is born alive following an abortion, health care practitioners must exercise the same degree of professional skill and care that would be offered to any other child born alive at the same gestational age."

And yet, 210 Democrats voted against the measure.

How could that be?  Had all the House Democrats just been on a whisky drinking and crack smoking bender in the Congressional Cloakroom and were too high to comprehend the issue before them?  Or perhaps they were distracted by their planning meetings for the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Trump post-presidential impeachment debacles?  Or maybe they were simply confused about which bill it was that they were casting their vote on?  Sadly, all of those excuses could be understandable, were they actually the reason.

One would think that this would be a no-brainer;. An easy, albeit rare, unanimous "Yes" vote in an age characterized by political acrimony.  Unless, of course, you are a Democrat, in which case you will fight any perceived threat to the few remaining tenets of your unholy religious cult.

Thankfully, the bill passed without their help.  Yet only one lone House Democrat voted in favor the bill that would simply mandate medical attention for children who survive an abortion and live through the trauma of it, (in actuality, these are children who have survived a murder attempt at the hands of an unethical abortionist) ...and as best I can tell, it was solely due to their peculiar religious beliefs.

We have seen time and time again that for Democrats, the ends justify the means, there are simply no ethical guardrails or guideposts for the lunatic left.  Thus as a political party, they have come to a place where no principle within their party platform is sacrosanct in their diabolical quest for control.  Almost none, that is.  You see, they aren't quite as godless as they seem.  There still is one principle - one exception to the rule.

The bedrock principle, the seemingly single non-negotiable tenet, the unwavering and supreme precept - serving as the centerpiece of their death-cultic creed - is their absolute and unquestioning support for abortion for any or no reason.  The cruel and barbaric gods the Democrats serve demand child sacrifice on the Planned Parenthood altar to appease their diabolical bloodlust.  And it rivals, if not surpasses, anything the Aztecs, Incas, or Mayans may have engaged in.

No challenge to that absolute guiding principle can be tolerated.  No compromises can be entertained.  No tactic is too extreme in the defense of their most sacred sacrament - even to the point of a full-throated support of infanticide by refusing medical care to infants.

Abortion has become the most sacred of Democrat Party sacraments.

 

https://www.lifenews.com/2023/01/12/210-democrats-voted-to-deny-medical-care-to-babies-who-survive-abortions/

 

 

A response to Christianity Today

Yesterday (December 19), Christianity Today's Editor-in chief, Mark Galli launched a bombshell into the midst of the current culture wars, planting his editorial flag firmly on the top of the Democrat's impeachment hill:
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html?fbclid=IwAR0S0-Negk1nbkaIPnSAf4BFlTYt5cXThacnyWzqSoxzGmjFF-o_yl_BeUo

I don't know Mark Galli. As editor of the neo-evangelical publication Christianity Today (CT), I accept the brother's claims that he is a Christian, with but just a twinge of a hesitation. Personally, I had long ago abandoned CT for similar reasons that I don't give credence to Sojourners, Mother Jones, the Atlantic, The New Yorker, Slate, and the New York Times - in that they are all hopelessly and unapologetically leftist in their biases. While others have questioned Galli's motives or point to his longstanding Trump opposition - I prefer to avoid that direction with a brother in Christ. However, given the editorial leanings of his publication, I certainly do question his judgement. And based on his most recent opining, it appears to me that he has been an undiscerning consumer of MSNBC's opinion hosts and the DNC's latest talking points.

So while I do not know Mr. Galli, I do know this:  the claims he made in Friday's shocking editorial are dubious, if not straight up untruthful. For starters, he needs to pull out a copy of Websters and look up the word "unambiguous".  The facts behind the most recent Democrat attempt to undo the results of the 2016 election are anything but "unambiguous", as Galli claims in his piece. In fact, the whole procedure abandoned both past precedent and due process in a blind pursuit of a predetermined and politically motivated outcome. For anyone who actually listened to portions of the Intelligence and Judicuary Committee hearings, the so-called 'unambigueous' impeachment facts are notorious only for their absence. So much so that not one firsthand witness could be found to bolster the extravagant and ever-changing Democrat claims of extortion, bribery, or even quid pro quo.  As a result, their case was left with conjecture, supposition, and opinion based primarily on hearsay, with a sprinkling of liberal law professors thrown in for good measure.

Despite everything President Trump's detractors threw up against the wall, nothing stuck, so to keep things on schedule, they were left to hastily cobble together just two bogus impeachment articles. The disingenuous obstruction of Congress article and a nebulous abuse of power charge - neither of which are actual, specific crimes, much less a high crime or misdeameanor.

Mr. Galli also disingenuously states that the President exhibited "profoundly immoral" motives (motives are something I am deliberately not speculating on in regards to Galli) to "harass and discredit" a political opponent. If Galli did not hear - along with the rest of the nation - the relevant portion of the Ukraine transcript, the Democrat's bribery, extortion, and quid pro quo charges were blown completely out of the water when Trump called their bluff and he publicly released it early on - even before chairman Schiff's show trial's basement hearings could begin.  So much so that they were forced to misrepresent its contents to try to buttress their evidenceless and weak case.  If anything there is "profoundly immoral", I suggest it is Galli's attempts to ascertain the motives of someone he does not know, on a subject he is not well informed, about a situation he is clearly misrepresenting.

Further, Galli seems to conveniently dismiss the fact that the president is duty bound to enforce anti-corruption laws domestically as well as in regards to Ukraine and morally obligated to ensure foreign aid tax monies are not used to line the pockets of corrupt politicians. If those politicians are foreigners, that means cooperating with Ukraine to root it out. And whether those politicians are vice presidents who are intending to run against him - or their flawed sons - they still do not get a grant of immunity.

Further, Galli's political philosophy lacks thoughtful consideration at best, and is utterly hypocritical at worst. We participate in a system where we almost always are presented with a binary choice in selecting our political representaves and president. In essence, since Jesus himself is not on the ticket, every election provides a series of choices between the lesser of two evils.

It is certainly not, as Galli posits, an affront to our creator to choose and support the candidate which best defends our Constitutional liberties to life, property, and freedom to worship (even when that person speaks using biting, sarcastic, and even embarrassingly hurtful language at times). In a display of hyperbolic absurdity, Galli goes even further when he makes the claim that our "loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments" itself is to be questioned if we don't throw in with Pelosi and the Democrats and support the president's removal by any means possible.  Leaving us - I can only presume - the fiendish choice of either risking our very soul by lending support to Trump on the one hand or choosing the diabolical Democrat agenda of partial birth abortion and infanticide, unfettered homosexuality and sexual perversion in our schools, libraries, & society, radical environmental extremism, and the cherry on top of the ice cream - revisionist judges who will rewrite the Constitution to suit the latest whims of the far left.

Additionally, as someone I read has previously pointed out, CT does not hesitate to hold high the noble and remarkable achievements of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, despite his well known moral failings - and rightly so. But yet, it now claims it to be incumbent on today's evangelicals to ignore the unprecedented achievements in the protection of the preborn, religious liberty, and appointment of originalist judges - and instead excoriate and abandon President Trump because of his very similar moral failings. While such a stance might help us gain acceptance in secular socialist and post-modern circles, it will ultimately lead to our own (and countless children's) demise.

Finally, I want to quickly note that in an apparent attempt to give some credence to his ill-thought-out opinion, he several times invokes the name of the founder of his rudderless publication, the Rev. Billy Graham. Huge mistake there! Alas, this tactic almost immediately blew up in his face, when a clearly perturbed Franklin Graham fired back by not only postulating that his father would have been displeased with Galli's words, but also revealing for the first time that his father had actually voted for and had been a silent Trump supporter.  The elder Graham believed "that Donald J. Trump was the man for this hour in history for our nation."

I am very disappointed in the publication which presumptuously calls itself Christianity Today. Opinions are one thing, but facts, they continue to be in short supply these days.