If these next few quotes – used with permission – sound like anyone you know, then you know they (or you…) are not alone. “I am throwing up! I don’t want to hear any more lies!” Variations on those expressions have been commonplace in recent weeks.
Those specific quotes are from Soheyla Kovach, the co-founder of MHProNews. Soheyla is angry. Frustrated. Hurt. Disappointed. While there is more to our operation than news, reports and analysis, that is a significant part of all that we do.
So, her personal feelings and reflections are a rejection of all the corruption in and beyond our profession. By many accounts, to various degrees, it is not uncommon. But perhaps those emotions are more profound among immigrants who left corrupt regimes behind looking for the American Dream.
“I thought I came to the land of freedom. From Iran, where it is corrupt, and the news is just what the mullahs want the people to hear,” Soheyla told me during a discussion hours before dawn today.
“Always in Iran [when thinking] about the Islamic Revolution, I was wondering who brought these Revolutionary Liars?! These mullahs? Russia?”
“Now, I don’t know where to go…” her voice trailed off. She loved what President Trump was doing for everyday Americans. Having that “stolen” in such a brazen fashion was ‘too much’ for her.
“Some people think that freedom is to get naked, sex, and maybe later marriage,” Soheyla mused. “But that thinking is from which part of America? Hollywood, America.”
“The ‘news’ or whatever it is on TV, that ‘news’ is mostly just to entertain people. There is no solution [offered]. It is just to entertain people. Air…” she said.
“That’s all my feeling. I said what I wanted to say. If you want to write that, that’s my feeling.”
A few moments of silence go by, Soheyla continues her personal ruminations. “It is sad. The land of opportunity. Then there are people like Amazon that use their power against their own country.” She adds they and other billionaire oligarchs are using “their power” against others beyond the U.S. too. That is an issue being raised in other nations that are concerned about monopolistic practices, perhaps especially those of the so-called tech titans.
Soheyla has not completely tuned out what is going on, as her own comments reveal. Nor has she stopped her part of our daily operations.
She resumed venting by sharing her sentiments on our discussion last night about Robert F. Kennedy Jr, J.D. Kennedy, the nephew of the late President John F. Kennedy (D) and son of the late Senator Robert F. “Bobby” Kennedy (NY-D), leads a nonprofit and is involved in several causes. Kennedy had much to say of late focused on about the machinations of Warren Buffett’s ally and buddy, Bill Gates.
That discussion sparked these additional thoughts from our co-founder.
“From the news we hear [from Kennedy about] Bill Gates, there seems to be some connections between him and much of what is happening with respect to COVID. To “reset” the economy. No one ever heard about this [kind of alleged] thinking and behavior at such an outrageous level before. It is sick! I am throwing up!”
Soheyla winds down with, “I understand that my huzzy [i.e. Tony] has to listen [to the news] and write about it, but I don’t…” she said. For those who have never sat in a restaurant, in a living room or dining room table, and had a real conversation with Soheyla, it can be a mesmerizing treat. Her voice is delicious. She is warm, authentic, passionate, insightful, and funny.
But when she is unhappy about something, Katy bar the doors.
Soheyla loved the American Dream before coming to the USA. While her “coming to America” was legal, a similar magnetic attraction of the hope for a better life is causing the Obama-Biden style caravans and illegal southern border crossings of the past to revive under Biden-Harris. That said, freedom and opportunity are powerful attractions when much of what someone has lived under was corruption, fear, and oppression.
European university educated, Soheyla had her 15 minutes of fame when her MHProNews post endorsing then candidate Trump in the 2016 election cycle was re-posted on the official 2016 Trump Campaign website. Apparently, they thought it was compelling.
The popular pro-Trump Gateway Pundit website and thousands of others shared, commented on, or linked what Soheyla had to say.
That year, she was not yet a citizen. Soheyla could “support” but not yet vote for a candidate. Later, having done the study and jumping the various hoops needed to earn her citizenship in 2019, Soheyla waited joyfully to cast her first ballot for President Trump in 2020.
Soheyla, our son Tamas, and I watched the election returns on November 3, 2020 as tens of millions of others did. When it was ‘apparent’ that President Trump was about to be ‘re-elected,’ we did what millions of others did. We turned off the ‘election coverage’ on TV and went to bed.
The next morning, the nightmare began for us as it did for others.
The days that turned into weeks and months of ‘evidence’ of ‘election fraud’ that was contradicted by even several Fox News personalities that flatly asserted ‘did not exist.’ Sidney Powell. Rudy Giuliani. Jenna Ellis. L. Lin Wood. A stream of Trump family and seemingly pro-Trump officials, all saying some version of the election was stolen, pointing to evidence. Then, there are those in the GOP who were happy to have Trump support to get re-elected or accept an appointment that later turned against the 45th President and the first family. Some walked parts of their flip-flops back, but others have not.
There were endless lies, hyperbole, claims out of context – propaganda (see report linked above) – all that pushed back against what was initially dozens and then hundreds of claims under oath by witnesses that asserted election irregularities and fraud. Several of those claims were made by Democrats. Others were asserted by people who were not particularly political. There were interviews. Videos. Affidavits under oath. Expert testimony.
The endless, relentless pushback by pro-Biden forces in big tech, in mainstream media and by others. Courts that failed to act, most often for technical reasons like “jurisdiction” or “laches.” While much of that came from the left and the billionaires that backed them. But there are perhaps lonely voices in that camp that had the chutzpah to say the obvious – what anti-Trump mainstream media would not say.
Fast forward to the nightmare on January 6th at the “Save America” “Stop the Steal” rally in Washington. We watched every word President Trump said that day. It was frankly not his most eloquent appeal. Perhaps the president sensed that the day would not go his way. But he, Rudy Giuliani, his son Don Jr., and other speakers were not calling for a riot or to storm the U.S. Capitol. The words “fight” or “fight like hell” have been used by untold numbers of politicians and politics from both major parties.
A another version of defense video are the clips shown below.
One of the video clips played debunks the years of deliberately misedited and often repeated claims about President Trump supporting KKK types at Charlottesville. It never happened, as this longer – and not mis-edited – video from left-of-center CNBC reflects.
The Trump defense also showed video that revealed how the House Democratic “impeachment managers” selectively edited videos that if played further would have revealed the attempts at deception. They made the point that growing evidence from law enforcement that the riot was apparently pre-planned. So how could President Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021 have sparked. For those who sufficient paid attention and sought information from more than just one source, the evidence was there.
The point is that this is part of what thinkers across the left-right spectrum have called – to use Greenwald’s phrase “a blinding propaganda.” A person does not have to like President Trump, or his policies, in order to be fair and honest about events.
One thing is clear that Rush Limbaugh noted years ago. The Establishment in Washington could not afford to let President Trump succeed.
Indeed, jobs that the Obama-Biden administration said where ‘never coming back’ did come back in just 3 years under Trump-Pence. Who said? Data reported by CNN, the Washington Post – both anti-Trump sources – and then more pro-Trump Fox News. “Promises Made, Promises Kept.” That’s arguably why some 10 million plus more voted for President Trump in 2020 than did in 2016.
Then came COVID.
That needs to be unpacked because “a blinding propaganda” about COVID is being woven before our eyes.
Sanjeev Sabhlok was far from alone in making such common sense and fact-based assertions. Literally thousands of medical professionals have made similar statements, most notably, in the Great Barrington Declaration. So why is it that much of the media has ignored that and focused on things that have benefited the billionaires and their business/political interests?
For months, there have been voices that have said that fear and fake or manipulated scientific or medical data was being deployed against Americans. That in turn was being used to help defeat President Trump’s reelection effort.
Whatever the final Senate vote, the defense attorneys for President Trump were applauded by his supporters for their presentation yesterday. That stands in contrast to their being panned earlier in the week. They solidly wove together legal arguments and visual evidence that millions needed to see and hear.
For Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and others to brazenly censor the President of the United States (POTUS) Donald J. Trump and then to arguably spin or lie about it was just too much. Disagree all they want to, but censor, delete, cancel, and what Chris Plante calls the leftist efforts to “limit freedom of speech and his freedom of reach” through social media. That may yet prove to be a bridge too far for millions.
Back to “I Want to Throw Up!”
This writer listened to much of the Senate “impeachment trial” (sham-parchment) yesterday as I was working and writing. But Soheyla did not want to listen. She certainly did not listen to the Democratic pitch. The pain is just too deep.
But that rejection of politics is arguably the kind of response that the powers that be want from anti-Establishment and Trump supporters, isn’t it?
The notion and phrase “info wars” predates the website by that uses that phrase in their name. It is acknowledged by some on both sides of the left-right divide. While phrased differently, here are some examples – from during the Obama-Biden years.
Propaganda often relies on paltering, as MHProNews has reported several times in recent years. It is a mix of truth, half-truth, spin, or outright deception.
If someone happens to be on the right, often it is useful to cite a source from the political left to make your points with those who believe what “the Establishment” and their string pullers are peddling.
From left-of-center Axios is this quote.
“CEOs (a/k/a the fourth branch of government) are at or near the top [the] list of trusted institutions.” Axios said that on January 21, 2021. The key phrase there is that corporate “CEOs…” are “the fourth branch of government.”
On 1.12.2021, Axios stated that “Tech giants including Facebook, Google, Amazon and Twitter have moved to quiet Trump and the far right. Other corporations are pulling political funding from all legislators who supported overturning the result of November’s free and fair election.
- And all of this has happened before the House of Representatives can even schedule an impeachment vote.”
For their “backstory: Axios first told you about CEOs as America’s new politicians in 2019…”
That source also said:
- “Then corporate leaders mobilized last spring on coronavirus response, last summer over racial justice, and now they are joining ranks on climate change.
What’s next: CEOs must be considered a permanent political force, wielding awesome power. This week’s actions won’t be the last.”
Without naming names, that Axios narrative fits neatly into what MHProNews has reported on Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and George Soros, among others.
Axios continued: The bottom line: In his final days in office, Trump has managed to unify corporate America — against him. The country’s CEOs in general, and its tech CEOs in particular, have found themselves capable of projecting their power onto the White House in a way that was both successful and unprecedented.” Revolutions, even large protests, they take money to organize.
The developments with respect to the 2020 contest are not necessarily being decried by Axios, perhaps because it happens to fit their political bias.
But that the factual part of their report – as opposed to their bias – begs the serious questions that MHProNews has been probing for years. It also happens to be what attracted people to President Trump, who took on those powerful corporate interests. Then, it is left-leaning Time magazine and their writer Molly Ball who made some outrageous statements that were not silenced by big tech.
It is not just the left, of course, that is saying such things.
John Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute and Zero Hedge, stated this.
“In other words, we are being ruled by an oligarchy disguised as a democracy, and arguably on our way towards fascism: a form of government where private corporate interests rule, money calls the shots, and the people are seen as mere subjects to be controlled.”
Molly Ball in an already famous – or infamous? – report for Time that celebrated the defeat of President Trump what she pitched as corporate powers that that worked with others to ‘save democracy,’ said the following pull quotes.
“This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election,” she said. Oh? This type of leftist and anti-Trump conspiracy is okay?
Ball said that her “inside story” was “based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster.”
“Hundreds of major business leaders…” Ball wrote, became engaged in “a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans.”
As Brett Kimball commented, “It’s interesting to note Ball’s choice of the word “saved” as used in the title of her [Molly Ball’s Time] article. It’s clear she sees the work of this shadow campaign as unobjectionably good and necessary. But conservatives read Ball’s words as an admission of guilt on the part of the institutions they had already suspected of conspiring against their candidate, and with good reason.”
Kimball also points out that “Ball admits that Trump was right to question the quick push to declare Joe Biden president.” He pointed out that “The surest example of this group’s secret efforts came when the New York Post released their expose of Hunter Biden just weeks before the election, detailing highly credible accusations of corruption and wrongdoing on the part of the Biden family. Almost immediately the Silicon Valley tech infrastructure united to bury the story and claim “misinformation.””
Ball asserts in her lengthy (some 6500 word) thesis that all told, thousands of individuals were involved in this scheme to stop Trump’s reelection. MHProNews may dip back into Ball’s report more deeply at some point.
But for now, with the permission of the Daily Torch, is their analysis that seeks to strike a balanced understanding of what Ball’s contention may reflect. There are [brackets] added by MHProNews to clarify the meaning.
On 2.10.2021, under the title: “TIME: ‘Shadow Campaign Saved 2020 Election.’ Is that true?”
Political outsiders reading this shockingly brazen piece [by Molly Ball] believe it proves a ‘cabal’ colluded against Trump. Political insiders say this is just how politics works.
By Catherine Mortensen
A Time magazine article, ‘The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election,’ written by Molly Ball, TIME’s National Political Correspondent, is getting a lot of attention in conservative circles because it seems to make the case that the election was, in fact an insider hit job on President Trump.
There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of [pro-Democratic] labor [leaders] came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.
The handshake between business and labor [leaders] was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted.
Some conservatives believe this proves there was “coordinated voter manipulation to swing votes against President Trump.” However, at least one conservative political insider says the piece is “needlessly provocative and unsupported” by the facts. For two different takes on the piece, we go the political newcomer Brett Kimball, a guest columnist for the Daily Torch and Dan McGlaughlin, senior writer at the conservative National Review Online. For McGlaughlin’s take on the piece, we pulled from his National Review Online column, Irresponsible Hype from Molly Ball and Time Magazine.
Is the Time piece worth reading?
Kimball: Everyone should read the full article, if only to see firsthand the excruciating details with which Ball describes the efforts, pre and post-election, to secure a Joe Biden victory.
It’s interesting to note Ball’s choice of the word “saved” as used in the title of her article. It’s clear she sees the work of this shadow campaign as unobjectionably good and necessary. But conservatives read Ball’s words as an admission of guilt on the part of the institutions they had already suspected of conspiring against their candidate, and with good reason. She’s just admitted as much. She claims this “well-funded cabal of powerful people” was not attempting to “steal” the election; “they were fortifying it.” But anyone who reads this shockingly brazen, pretentious piece knows exactly what they were “fortifying” against: the possibility of a victory for Donald Trump.
McGlaughlin: [Writer] Molly Ball would like to convince you that, if you’re worried about a conspiracy run by a wealthy, invisible cabal to rig the election against Donald Trump, you’re right. But the facts in her own story don’t entirely support her own breathless rhetoric. Are she and her editors at Time withholding more evidence? Letting overeager sources hang themselves in their headlong rush to burnish their reputations and fundraising lists? Or just being completely reckless and irresponsible in feeding the conspiracy-theory machine for clicks? Ball’s article raises some legitimate concerns, but it is written in a needlessly provocative style. Time’s article is irresponsible hype.
What is your reaction to these particularly provocative sections of the article?
This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. . . . The participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream — a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.
Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.
Kimball: This is a stunning admission. Many on the Left just last month vilified anyone who dared encourage the idea that Trump was right about his claims of conspiracy against him.
The surest example of this group’s secret efforts came when the New York Post released their expose of Hunter Biden just weeks before the election, detailing highly credible accusations of corruption and wrongdoing on the part of the Biden family. Almost immediately the Silicon Valley tech infrastructure united to bury the story and claim “misinformation.” Twitter banned the account of one of the oldest papers in the country’s history while other sites did their part to bury the story as well. Mark Zuckerburg, under pressure from Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and other “civil rights activists,” agreed to crack down on content on his site deemed to be “false information.” Gupta, who runs in social and professional circles that include Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and tech giants, has been nominated for Associate Attorney General by President Biden.
McGlaughlin: There is a lot going on here. In Ball’s framing of the story, a single conspiratorial cabal that started with “the galactic center for a constellation of operatives across the left” united progressive activists, Big Tech, media, state elections officials, lawyers, business, labor, street activists, and a handful of Republicans. They worked to change voting rules to advantage Democrats, and plotted to thwart Republican efforts to challenge the rules they had already changed or the outcomes they had helped create.
Ball mixes and matches together into a single stew the story of efforts to (1) strategize among Democrats to beat Trump, (2) change voting rules to allow more mail-in balloting, (3) convince voters to vote by mail, (4), finance protective equipment for polling places, (5) win preelection lawsuits for Democrats over Republicans, (6) enlist Big Tech leaders such as Jack Dorsey of Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook to actively police “disinformation” on their platforms, (7) spread public awareness of the challenges of vote-counting in 2020, (8) promote in-person and mail-in turnout by black voters in particular, (9) control the timing of street protests on the left, and (10) pressure or convince Republican elections officials and state legislators to resist Trump’s post-election schemes. Ball presents this narrative as if it were a single, unified plan directed by the people that she interviewed. We are given no evidence, however, of which people and groups were involved across multiple different tasks, or how coordinated those efforts really were.
Does the writer prove their was a nefarious scheme, or does she just explain how insider politics works?
Kimball: It was total hit job on Trump. Ball admits that Trump was right to question the quick push to declare Joe Biden president. According to Ball, the “architect” of this secret alliance to “protect” the election, was a man named Mike Podhorzer. As senior adviser to the president of the AFL-CIO, Podhorzer has “marshaled the latest tactics and data to help its favored candidates win elections… [for nearly a] quarter century.” If that isn’t concerning enough, she goes on to describe how Podhorzer created a group ironically titled the “Democracy Defense Coalition,” whose first goal was “overhauling America’s balky election infrastructure.” This group of leftist activists from various institutions and ideologies worked hard to implement the messy and unsecure voting practices which raised concerns for millions after the election.
Many had expressed concern over new voting procedures allowing for an unprecedented amount of mail in votes which historically offer a high probability of potential fraud. Coupled with new rules allowing for ballot harvesting on a scale never seen before, and with the encouragement to vote by mail coming from all corners of the leftist institutional spectrum, there certainly seemed a case to be made for fears of potential malfeasance in the process of distributing and counting those largely unverifiable ballots. Those making claims such as those were quickly dismissed, but it seems they had good reason to suspect there was something larger at play.
McGlaughlin: The reaction to this story among those on the right has been precisely what anyone familiar with American politics would have predicted. The most egregious example of the story’s slanted, partisan framing is its efforts to have progressives take credit for the actions of Michigan House speaker Lee Chatfield, Michigan Senate majority leader Mike Shirkey, Detroit canvasser Aaron Van Langevelde, and Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, all Republicans who did their jobs under pressure from Trump to undo the results of the election. The article spins hypothetical theories about what Trump could offer these people, and tries to portray its progressive heroes as important to their decisions. But no evidence whatsoever is presented to show that any of the groups in the article had any influence on Republican decisions to act honorably — decisions that, unlike those of the Democrats quoted throughout this article, were not simply a matter of advancing their own partisan self-interest.
What is your biggest takeaway from the article?
Kimball: Trump and his supporters were right to question the unprecedented voting procedures being implemented in the lead-up to the election in various key states. They were also right in questioning the motives of those who pushed so feverishly to accept the initial results of the election just one day after. This came after the Left claimed for months that it may take weeks to fully count the votes and that any premature declaration of victory on Trump’s part would be nothing short of a “threat to democracy.”
McGlaughlin: Ball and her editors had to know, with absolute certainty, that this is how her article would be received. So why write it that way? When you look closely, there is less than meets the eye in some places, and more than a few reasons to think that her sources are puffing up their own roles in order to advance their own standing in the progressive world as master operators and saviors of democracy. And there are many unanswered questions, some that cast doubt on her premises, others that should justifiably raise conservative eyebrows.
Ball has typically been a diligent reporter, and there are things in this article worth knowing and exploring. But she really should have been much more careful about throwing around terms like “conspiracy” and “cabal,” and asked harder questions about what her sources were really up to. ##
Catherine Mortensen is Vice President of Communications at Americans for Limited Government.
###
Both Kimball and Dan McGlaughlin raised some valid points. Certainly Ball and her editors had to know that it would be a lightening rod for both the political left – which celebrates what she wrote – and for the right and pro-Trump supporters, that “with absolute certainty, that this is how her article would be received. So why write it that way?” One possible answer to McGlaughlin question is posted in the comments section on the Daily Torch report above.
Betty Rader said: “This Time article is an in your face admission of “yes we cheated and we stole the election from Trump and what are you going to do about it”! She just used nicer words!”
It is arguably meant to discourage Trump supporters, while admitting what a range of voices across the left-center-right are saying. America is not ‘becoming’ an oligarchy rather than a Republic with small “d” democratic features. It is already is an oligarchy that is increasingly obvious.
Or as candidate turned President Trump and voices on the left have said, “The system is rigged.”
What McGlaughlin and others might have noted is this. Yes, certainly some in Ball’s report were no doubt puffing up their role. The lack of documentation provided to support her thesis has to be noted. But that does not necessarily betray the overall contentions Ball has made.
But perhaps more important is this. While millions on the left may be celebrating this “steal” of the election that they have framed as “saving democracy” from President Trump. But that is a tactic older than the hills. It is common for an opponent to demonize their opposition. Far more important than Ball’s turns of this or that frame is the general admission that there is a conspiracy between big business, billionaires, and the Democratic Party that also includes some numbers of never-Trump Republicans and RINOs.
To Soheyla’s point, this is repugnant and does make many want to vomit it is so brazen and abhorrent to the foundational ideals of the American Republic.
This is a dark time, indeed, as the Rutherford Institute and others have contented. But perhaps – perhaps – this is just the pitch darkness of night before the dawn’s early light.
Darkness makes any light seem to shine all the brighter. Sit in a black room and then light a single candle. That darkness is ‘fought’ by that single light.
MHProNews and our MHLivingNews sister site have made the argument for some years that a limited group of routinely uber-wealthy ‘leftist’ billionaires have rigged the system in our industry, but also in other professions too.
But who is it that are suffering from that scheme? Isn’t it often independent businesses and those whom they employ?
That means that the very people that many Democrats or some RINOs claim to be fighting for – minorities and those with lower incomes – are in fact being betrayed. The Democratic Party, and some Republicans too, have been bought and paid for by the billionaire class and their minions. That is what Axios and others have said. They are building what kind of society? An authoritarian one, argues progressive Glenn Greenwald.
There are the seeds for a new coalition that the Trump campaign already proved exists.
It remains to be seen once ‘impeachment 2.0’ is concluded what President Trump will do next. Will he fight Biden-Harris using Quo Warranto? There is silence on that from the Trump team, even though several sources across the left-right divide have said that the merits of the argument are authentic.
It is an often natural reaction for the body to ‘vomit up’ that which is poisonous. Perhaps, to some extent, it is natural or even good that some want to “throw up” over the disgusting display of pure power politics in what is supposed to be the land of the free.
But freedom has never been free. It has always come at a cost. To avoid the Great Reset that Robert Kennedy Jr. and others across the left-right divide say is approaching, to avoid a possible future where control over the food supplies or surveillance state tech work together to subvert American freedoms, it must start with solid eternal principles and an understanding of what has occurred.
Thus, exploring and exposing what Ball wrote, what Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros, Zuckerberg, and others have put forth is necessary.
There are lessons in the this week’s hard-fought Congressional victory – months after the election – discussed in the report linked below.
They are getting richer as the much of the world is getting poorer. Who says? How about a member of the famous Kennedy clan? Do not miss Kennedy’s deep dive into those issues, in the report linked below.
There is a arguably a split in the GOP, but the case can be made that there are more in the ‘fight like hell’ Trump camp than there are in the Establishment RINO camp. It is bad. Arguably the worst it has been in modern American history. But if enough people of good will act, it is not over.
Yes, many are tired of all the vomitus lies. But it is only the truth combined with prayerful action that will set people free.
Stay tuned for more of what is ‘behind the curtains’ as well as what is obvious and in your face reports. It is all here, at the runaway largest and most-read source for authentic manufactured home “Industry News, Tips, and Views Pros Can Use” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) (See Related Reports, further below. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)
By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.
Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.
For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.
This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position, and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.
Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach
Related References:
The text/image boxes below are linked to other reports, which can be accessed by clicking on them.
