|Posted by Crayzon Deeyon on July 19, 2019 at 3:55 AM||comments (2)|
DON’T EXPECT ADOS TO BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE CHINESE IN AFRICA
As always, the fight to reclaim our-story amid his-story is an immense undertaking, to one day overtake to reclaim once greatness, in this land called America. No matter the writing or photographic mis-recorded record, often replaying-in white-wash, ADOS built the United States of America, we as a people-built America from the soil up! Clearing the land to the dirt roads, to the railroads, to the paved roads, to the highways and byways.
When we arrived, there was no America, it hadn’t been built yet. Considering that fact alone, makes America—not an immigrant story, but an ongoing discussion on correcting the mis-record, to provide people, who toiled hard and long, their rightful place amongst those who stir the direction this Country, we love, is going.
Many persons question, who may appear to resemble those of Us who fought the good fight to be “Free Human Beings” thru Civil Rights, to Human Rights—"why does it matter, we are all Black, right?” They go on to concern themselves and involve themselves in the discussion of Reparations for ADOS.
The question is not when, but how soon all the various Black Nations, within Countries, will request Reparations for the ills continuously put upon them by those who are in deficit of melanin.
And the answer we will give those of Jamaican, Haitian, Brazilian, etc., and those migrating to America from those lands, others and Africa is—get your reparations, and we will not ask for yours, for what you went through, as you should not ask for a piece of ours—no matter how you’ve blended-in, in America, under the term “Black”. Besides—there are many Africans who owe ADOS Reparations for their crucial involvement in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. You might say, the Africans are broke, there is no money from Africa. Well, like Reagan—don’t expect ADOS to be any different than the Chinese (now) or any other colonizers of the origin-land of human beings, and man(kind).
Crazy Dee is An Independent Writer/Film Review, who is Editor for Lordlandfilms.com
|Posted by Crayzon Deeyon on October 18, 2018 at 4:45 PM||comments (3)|
Have we forgotten the special counsel Ken Starr?
Ken Starr was empowered to investigate President Bill Clinton & his wife; Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky, etc., he turned in his report, the Republican House (Repubs) drew up the articles of impeachment, voted to impeach, and it moved to the Senate to convict Bill Clinton.
Impeachment is a two-part process where the accused office holder is indicted (impeached) and then, if voted on, convicted (found guilty of the offense of high crimes while holding office). In the case of Bill Clinton he was impeached by the House, but the Senate did not vote to convict, so he was able to remain President of The United States, but he lost his ability to practice law, etc.
So, basically-- millions of taxpayer dollars where spent for Ken Starr to investigate Bill Clinton, his wife, Whitewater & Monica Lewinsky, but in the end Trent Lott wasn't able to whip the votes necesssary to convict Bill, and as a result that was the end of Trent Lott's career, as his prominence fell to the back, like Joseph McCarthy.
And, this is exactly why there will be no impeachment of President Donald J. Trump.
There are lots of American Taxpayer dollars being spent on the investigation by special counsel Mueller to find if the 2016 Presidential Election outcome was influenced by operatives from Russia, and more over-- if the Trump Campaign colluded with the Russian operatives to win the 2016 election. Facts have leaked to the media, much like facts leaked during President Clinton's Presidency, and the media has done the usual feeding frenzy-- finding the most salacious extras to throw-in on the Trump story, to absurdity-- just like they did with Bill Clinton, and previously, what they did to candidate Gary Heart, which now has been found to be a setup and not an extra marital affair.
Why there will be no impeachment, you ask? The Democrats (Dems) are too genteel. After American Taxpaper money is spent, millions upon millions, like Ken Starr-- Mueller will be paid, his staff paid, lawyers, who have ideological bent, will be next for the supreme count, like Brett Kavanaugh, but on the opposite ideology; the report turned over to the House, if the Repubs are in, will be discredited and wither to the root,
Nancy Pelosi, who wants to be House Majority Leader again, until she gets so old that she can't possibly keep down the body-shakes won't move on it, and if she did-- which she won't-- the Dems in the Senate under the leadership of Chuck Schumer won't want to impeach, because-- for some reason-- after 'taking the Senate & House', the Dem members will be in fear of losing seats. Have you noticed-- that is the Dems' Method of Operation and excuse why they never move on anything-- the worry of losing seats.
So, what the Dems will do-- Pelosi helping Schumer not feel/see/repeat the fate of Trent Lott will not push impeachment of Trump. Instead, they will push to try to defeat him in the upcoming Presidential Election, in 2020. And that is why Impeachment of the President-- Not Going To Happen-- due to the history made/learned during the Clinton impeachment.
|Posted by Crayzon Deeyon on October 15, 2018 at 8:35 PM||comments (0)|
Is it me, or is the media discarding Michael Avenatti?
Wasn't it great? Wasn't the media salacious when reporting Avenatti's client's claims of a sexual encounter with, then, regular old businessman Donald Trump? Weren't they almost too zealous in their pursuit of stories concerning President 45, when he was a cheating businessman, and didn't Michael Avenatti fore fill that need?
Sure he did! He kept the stories coming, even to the point where 45's personal lawyer, through examination within the Mueller probe, brought partly by what Avenatti brought to light, cooperated with the probe, and is now indicted. Yes, Michael Avenatti was the media darling, the media had to have him on their various news shows-- Rachel, Jack Tapper, etc. But, what went wrong?
True indeed, what he brought forth shook even 45, who could deny, or even claim to be able to shoot a person, and still be elected. His (Avenatti's) witnessed accounts of misdeeds by 45 and his cohorts paid-out dividends, ratings gold-- sensational headlines, follow-up reporting months on end, on end, on end.
Donald Trump Beats Stormy Daniels Defamation Lawsuit
But I ask once more-- what went wrong? Could it be Avenatti made a miscalculation? Did he move and make a misstep? What happened, wasn't his information credible, vetted and used by the media? Yes, his information was credible, but within hubris, a person who has had success with what they bring to the masses, can many times build or be built-up for the fall, for displaying excessive pride in their confidence to continue to deliver.
Was it his declaration or his hint of a possible run for President 46, which made the media pump breaks on information Michael Avenatti provided during the Kavanaugh hearings? Or, was it the nervousness of the Democrats?
The Dems, those spineless, non-message having haters of their on party and party constituency. They say-- Trump is not a politician, but he sure is whooping their butts, getting everything the Republicans (Repubs) want passed. Able to talk to the usual suspects thought enemies of The State, without need of worry of being called a trader for negotiating with terrorists, or enemy States. Unlike President 44, he (45) was able to get an associated justice appointed to the supreme court, who was under accusations of sexual misconduct.
The Dems, the party of the so-called resistance-- is painted and is nothing more than a party of obstruction. The collective "leadership" have no new ideas, and they have no message, but to remain genteel while the Repubs impugn their character in hearings. So worried about gentility they (Pelosi & Schumer) dared to talked down on Maxine Waters, who spoke up and out about the so-called "resistance".
The Dems, who claim to be better politicians than Trump. The ones who say he's not qualified, due to not being a politician for years into decades; well there lies the problem with Michael Avenatti. Once he hinted at running for President, his usefulness, with the facts on Businessman Trump-- his usefulness became 'nuisance' when he, a non-politician, began to explore the presidency.
And, there, right there-- there where he hinted is where the decision to begin to ignore him began. He provided information, to the media, that could have helped the Democrats fight to right the Kavanaugh confirmation to, instead, desolvation-- where the support of Repubs would have been removed, leaving Kavanaugh's chances ended, but the Dems, in fear of a Democrat President, not coming from the career ranks of Democrat politicians, is why as a collective-whole, talking-points, the dems dismissed Avenatti's vetted 3rd Kavanaugh accuser.
Once the media heard the dems talk discredit of Michael Avenatti, the media outlets, who had once loved Avenatti's facts on Trump to salacious reporting, began to speak like the dems, and say the accuser of Kavanaugh, though vetted like Avenatti's Trump accuser, was not credible.
There is where the dems and the liberal as well as conservative media outlets have let down the American Citizen, as I close. Being in Washington DC, doing "the people's business", has become about only career politicians doing "the people's business"; and as long as the media is conservative or liberal leaning-- willing to be tools for the dems or the repubs, we will not have fair and balanced reporting-- when those, like 45, who are inconvenient for career politicians, can be silenced, with a dismissive word.
Did the media use and discard Michael Avenatti? Sure they did, and the reasons why are written above.
|Posted by Crayzon Deeyon on October 7, 2018 at 2:55 PM||comments (0)|
left, Numagomedov; right, McGregor
First, in my opinion, Nurmagomedov must of been on drugs. There is no way that "talk" causes a reaction of jumping into the audience to fight. And, the rivalry between Ireland & Russia, didn't know there was one, but since there is-- it's still no cause for this type of irresponsible action on Khabib's part.
Second, the reaction from Dana White is a little suspect to me. From the playback, it appeared the scene turned into a WWE battle royale, and somewhat appeared to be staged. If it wasn't staged, how would one explain Dana's reaction? It's the biggest night, ever, for UFC, obviously spurred on by the popularity of McGregor coming-off the Mayweather fight; they should be thanking Floyd every change Dana, UFC & McGregor get.
Let's stay on 'second' for another paragraph. How do you explain Dana's attitude? The Governor of Nevada was in the arena, he had to be rushed out, the more than probable law suites which are coming, we know they are coming because- with that maylay-- someone had to have gotten injured. He (Dana White) isn't in dismay? He's calm as can be, which makes it look as if it were staged. Plus, he still-- when I turned it off-- was prepared to let Nurmagomedov talk at the post fight. McGregor wasn't pressing charges? And, the ramifications seemed to be less than what would be expected.
Third, with all of the excuses the talking heads where coming up with to protect Khabib, as if they were his PR, you'd think he just, a few seconds before, wasn't using his hands, and body, that are considered lethal weapons, to pound on someone in the audience. The collective attitude of the announcers, Dana White, McGregor toward Khabib, a man who they say wasn't experienced in the pre-fight buildup, where insults are hurled like body-blows to build interest in the fight, was somehow overwhelmed, so, mentally, by the pre-fight insults, that he couldn't control himself after winning against McGregor. The same Nurmagomedov who wore a blond afro wig after defeating Michael Johnson; we know what the truth about Russia is concerning anti-Black rhetoric and mentality, especially us who have researched and have learned how the caucusoids forced the original Russians out. Oh-- the original Russians where Black. Do the research.
Which brings me to my close. What would the attitude toward Khabib Nurmagomedov's post maylay have been if he were Black? Let's setup the reality of the night. The Governor was there, rushed out of the arena, thousands, if not millions were spent to secure the venue, the audience was subject to a mad push/rush of bodies involved and avoiding the after fight, Metro had to enter the Octagon, and McGregor was assaulted by one of Khabib's teammates.
What would have happened, and what would be the attitude concerning the finish of the night, if Khabib Numagomedov and his team were Black? And, with having the answer to that question be so obvious-- the same aftermath: charges, fines, suspensions, loss of passport, etc., etc., etc., should happen to Nurmagonmedov.
|Posted by Crayzon Deeyon on October 5, 2018 at 5:15 PM||comments (0)|
THE DEMS ARE ALREADY WET DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH
The Dems are about to be washed during the mid-terms. They eat against and on each-other, but are soft-acting when it comes to where they stand on demographic social economic cultural issues. Don't hold your breath, thinking the Dems are taking The House-- they have said nothing to move the people, they're about to be washed.