FA+
Shop
"The Fallout" (Part 3)
3 months ago
General
Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 3 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous parts, with their respective links, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.
Parts prior to this one
Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/
Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/
Disclaimers
1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.
2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.
3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.
That said, and to get to the point, here is the last section of the subtopic dedicated to Donald Trump (started in the first part and continued in the second one), which contains more general information about him, and related:
Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with Donald Trump, as well as, occasionally, his relationship with other people (political figures or not), and political parties in the United States as well.
4) Donald Trump never was a Christian or a Catholic.
Evidence A.
Trump: 'Why Do I Have to Repent or Ask for Forgiveness If I Am Not Making Mistakes?' (Video)
https://www.christianpost.com/news/trump-why-do-i-have-to-repent-or-ask-for-forgiveness-if-i-am-not-making-mistakes-video.html
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “Following Donald Trump's appearance last week at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, CNN's Anderson Cooper sought out clarification on Trump's assertion that he's unsure if he ever asks God's forgiveness.”
2- “Clarifying his comments on forgiveness, Trump declared, "I go to communion and that's asking forgiveness, you know, it's a form of asking forgiveness." During the interview the current GOP frontrunner stressed that he "likes to work where he doesn't have to ask forgiveness."”
3- “Cooper followed up asking Trump if "asking for forgiveness" is a central tenet in his faith life.
"I try not make mistakes where I have to ask forgiveness," Trump answered.
When further asked about repentance again by Cooper, Trump said "I think repenting is terrific."
"Why do I have to repent or ask for forgiveness, if I am not making mistakes?" asked Trump. "I work hard, I'm an honorable person."
In talking about his Iowa appearance, Trump said, "We were having fun when I said I drink the wine, I eat the cracker, the whole room was laughing."”
Warning 1: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Links to the video mentioned in the source cited above as evidence (A), plus an additional one:
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKLVIm7Q0IQ
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXaC0zqPFRM
Evidence B.
Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw
Evidence C.
Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw
Evidence D.
Trump elicits laughter quoting Bible verse to evangelicals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PX2SicPw1A
Evidence E.
Trump: 'Religion And Christianity Are The Biggest Things Missing From This Country'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhjhgf0vn0
Evidence F.
Donald Trump admits that he is not a Christian and his plans to dismantle democracy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XthEwsqcVGE
Evidence G.
DONALD TRUMP SECRETLY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM IN 2017
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIAQkgTJyKA
• https://www.bitchute.com/video/PHsOUtDqJfhh/
• https://rumble.com/v3e4710-the-first-american-jewish-president.html
Link to one of the sources mentioned in the videos above, as evidence (G):
Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official
https://web.archive.org/web/20190829004959/https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02/donald-trump-converted-to-judaism-two-years-ago.html
Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (G), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence H.
Link to the sources corresponding to the above citation, as evidence (H):
• https://archive.org/details/trumpwa.....0dona/mode/2up
• https://ifunny.co/picture/quote-from-his-2004-book-the-way-to-the-top-308lPZJNB
Links with additional information about who Eitan Yardeni is:
• https://theorg.com/org/kabbalah-cen...../eitan-yardeni
• https://onehouse.kabbalah.com/en/pe.....eitan-yardeni/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-1/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-2/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....hottest-cult-3
Warning 3: Some of the sources cited above, regarding Eitan Yardeni, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence I.
Sanhedrin Calls on President Trump to Uphold Seven Noahide Laws (January 26, 2017)
https://israel365news.com/313462/sanhedrin-blesses-trump-calls-president-uphold-seven-noahide-laws/
Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:
Warning 4: The source cited above, as evidence (I), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Links with additional information about what the Seven Noahide Laws are:
• https://judaicapedia.org/explaining.....-noahide-laws/
• https://www.chabad.org/library/arti.....ahide-Laws.htm
Warning 5: The sources cited above, regarding the Seven Noahide Laws, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; reader discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (4).
Considering that the rules and clarifications regarding the content of this topic (part one), as well as the disclaimers present in this one, will not be sufficient in this case for some individuals, especially given that this segment has content based on religions, cults, and Donald Trump all rolled into one, I am going to take a small detour to address this in another way. But since I don't know how to do it without offending someone in the process, I'll do it anyway while ranting a little; sorry, not sorry.
To get to the point, for anyone reading this, regardless of their tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts about something or someone, here are some additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:
• one, yes, everyone has the right to like something or someone, as well as the opposite of that, regardless of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other individuals;
• two, no, any act that is considered transgressive, based on whatever motives, after being analyzed first on the basis of morality and ethics, is not and will never be tolerated, regardless of the legality of the act itself;
• three, I am agnostic;
• four, I am a philosopher;
• five, I am indifferent to most of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other people, and I only oppose the actions of other individuals (if possible, of course) when they are considered transgressions, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• sixth, for everything else, again, read or re-read the disclaimers if necessary about something or someone.
On the other hand, for any Christians or Catholics reading this ( without meaning to offend, of course), here are some other additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:
• one, no, Christianity (religion) and Catholicism (cult) are not the same thing, and never will be, no matter how much one may believe so;
• two, no, the Crusades, and everything related to that, is and always has been about Catholicism, not Christianity;
• third, forgiveness (Christianity) is something that is obtained, only and only, when one makes amends the faults one committed, through actions based on repentance, commitment, and devotion;
• fourth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to act based on the beliefs, rites, and traditions of that religion, as long as they do not become transgressions against other individuals or groups, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• fifth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to defend their beliefs, as well as the rites and traditions associated with it, from transgressions by other individuals or groups, as long as this does not create conflicts with what is mentioned in the fourth point;
• sixth, since I was a child, I went to multiple Christian and Catholic schools, and in the first ten years of schooling, I had to read and study as much the Old Testament as the New Testament, and believe me when I say that I still have basic information about the difference between the two, in general terms;
• and seventh, I have many relatives, family members, and friends who are Christians or Catholics, and believe me when I say that, even to this day, I can see the difference between the two groups, in general terms as well.
And as for Donald Trump... Well, the fact that he pretends to be whatever he wants in order to get what he wants won't change who he really is, regardless of what anyone believes or thinks about him; that's not only a fact, it's also life. Besides, considering how enormously douchey, shameless, childish, and eccentric he is, if it were discovered that all this time, he actually always worshipped Apollo, the Roman god of the sun, as seen in some of the paintings in his exclusive penthouse on Fifth Avenue in New York, I don't think that would be a surprise for some, including me...
(Ahem) So... Yeah, that's all I wanted to say; we better get going.
5) Donald Trump, as an outsider, ruined the Republican Party of the United States after taking it over.
Evidence A.
Did Donald Trump Break the Republican Party or Was It Already Broken? (March 14, 2016)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/did-donald-trump-break-republican-party-or-was-it-already-n540241
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “Marco Rubio's withdrawal from the presidential primary, after he was blown out in his home state by Donald Trump, was a resounding rejection by voters of a candidate embraced by influential Republicans. It suggests the power of party elites is “overstated” in the GOP, and perhaps in politics overall.”
2- “For a while, the 2016 Republican race had no clear form, with so many candidates combined with the rise of Trump confusing many party insiders. On the eve of Super Tuesday, however, the Republican Party in effect did make a decision: it tapped Rubio. The Florida senator received a wave of endorsements from sitting governors and senators in the last two weeks of February.
Just as significantly, Ted Cruz and Trump, who had actually already won primaries and caucuses, “were endorsed by almost no one.””
3- “And it’s not just that Rubio lost, but that all of the elite-backed candidates “failed”. Last spring, many party donors and officials backed Jeb Bush. A more conservative bloc of the establishment was behind Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, while “another wing” viewed Rubio as “a more electable, charismatic alternative” to those two men.
Instead, three "outsider" candidates are in the final round of the nomination contest. Cruz and Trump are both hated by many Republicans in Washington. Ohio Gov. John Kasich was not encouraged to run by party elites, in part because Bush, Rubio and Walker were already in the race.”
4- “...Trump is a highly unusual candidate, both appealing to an untapped but large segment of GOP voters (those without college degrees and in rural areas in particular) and able to command media attention like no one else.”
5- “...decades of wage stagnation and the growing diversity of the country had created a weary, frustrated GOP electorate that establishment candidates were ill-equipped to appeal to. (Looking back, perhaps the Cuban-American candidate who wrote a bill to create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants (Rubio) and the man who bragged of speaking Spanish more than English at home (Bush) were very imperfect fits for the Republican voters of 2016).”
General note 1: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence A), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.
Warning 6: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence B.
Why Trump’s control of the Republican Party is bad for democracy
https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-control-of-the-republican-party-is-bad-for-democracy-221828
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “...There are three reasons “personalist parties” are harmful to democracy,all of which have clear parallels to experiences with Trump and the Republican Party.
1. Loyalty to the person, not the party
Personalist party elites are loyal to the leader. A classic indicator of party personalization is the ouster of politically experienced people in the party elite, who are often highly qualified and more independent of the leader – and their replacement with less experienced people who are personally loyal to the leader. These people are more likely to view their political success as being intertwined with that of the leader rather than the party. They therefore are more likely to support the leader’s agenda, no matter how harmful it may be for democracy.”
2- “2. Official endorsement of leader’s actions
In personalist parties, elites endorse the leader’s actions, cueing (some) voters to do the same. Ordinary citizens* who support personalist parties “often” go along with leaders’ efforts to dismantle democracy, even if they care about democracy, because they are highly receptive to signals provided by the party elite. When the party higher-ups endorse – rather than condemn – the leader’sundemocratic inclinations, supporters get the message that nothing is wrong, and they* fall in line.”
Note about the second fragment: It is advised to reread this fragment, especially for what is underlined, replacing the words marked with an asterisk (*), in this case, “Ordinary citizens” with “Those,” and “they” with “some of them”; more context later on.
3- “3. Polarizing society with controversy
Leaders of personalist parties polarize the societies they govern.
While many kinds of leaders demonize their political opponents, we have found that “personalist party” leaders’ anti-democratic behaviors– such as attempting to overturn an election they’ve lost – split society into polarized factions: those who support them and everyone else.
When opponents of the leader raise concerns that the leader’s actions are harmful to democracy,as the Democrats regularly have since Trump won office in 2016, (some) supporters dig in their heels in defiance, incredulous that there is cause for concern. Affective polarization, where citizens increasingly dislike their opponents, deepens. With the opponents vilified, the leader has the political support to take actions to keep the other side out of power, even if those actions undermine democracy in the process.”
General note 2: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence B), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”), between parentheses “()” and/or marked with asterisks (*) as well; more context later on.
Warning 7: The source cited above, as evidence (B), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (5).
Regarding to the information presented in evidence A, in this segment, I can only say that it will be quite relevant at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion. And regarding to the information presented in evidence B, also in this segment, I will only clarify three things, and nothing more:
1) it can still be used for cases related to the Democratic Party in the United States, as there is no mention of any reason why it cannot be done;
2) it is related to what I mentioned and shared in the segment 3, part 2, of this topic;
3) it will have some importance at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion;
4) In terms of human behavior, it talks about things related to fanaticism and collectivity, which I already explored in one of my journals more than five months ago, What does “echo chamber” actually mean?.
6) The majority of the main political donors in the US (directly or indirectly) bet on Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential elections.
Evidence A.
The Biggest Political Donors of the 2024 Election
https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2024-11-05/the-biggest-political-donors-of-the-2024-election
Highlighted/extracted information from the article above as evidence:
Top contributors of the Republican Party (by rank)
1. Mellon, Timothy > Dem.: -$2,900 | Rep.: $172,042,500
2. Uihlein, Richard & Elizabeth A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $137,775,196
3. Adelson, Sheldon G. & Miriam O. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $136,855,700
4. Musk, Elon > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $133,038,600
5. Griffin, Kenneth C. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $101,405,484
6. Yass, Jeffrey S. & Janine > Dem.: $1,500 | Rep.: $96,122,180
7. Singer, Paul E. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $59,299,100
8. Schwarzman, Stephen A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $39,103,046
9. Dunn, Timothy M. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $35,415,200
10. Bigelow, Rob > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $34,991,500
Top contributors of the Democratic Party (by rank)
1. Bloomberg, Michael R. > Dem.: $43,453,634 | Rep.: $1,000,000
2. Moskovitz, Dustin & Cari > Dem.: $38,785,700 | Rep.: $0
3. Eychaner, Fred > Dem.: $31,057,700 | Rep.: $0
4. Simons, James H. & Marilyn > Dem.: $ 30,757,103 | Rep.: $0
5. Hoffman, Reid Garrett > Dem.: $26,659,700 | Rep.: $400,000
6. Mandel, Stephen F. Jr. & Susan Z. > Dem.: $22,934,500 | Rep.: $63,200
7. Simon, Deborah J. > Dem.: $19,830,960 | Rep.: $0
8. Jordan, Wayne D. > Dem.: $14,488,811 | Rep.: $0
9. Larsen, Christian > Dem.: $13,442,479 | Rep.: $6,600
10. Heising, Elizabeth D. > Dem.: $12,638,350 | Rep.: $6,600
Warning 8: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (6).
I can only say that the information in this segment will be very important at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion; that's all.
Phew.
Okay, folks, I want to inform you that we have reached the end of the subtopic of Donald Trump per se, and related...
My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHsJdUv7k9Y
* breath * Which means that only two-thirds remain to finally finish this super-topic...
My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE
The next part of this topic, part 4, on the other hand, is where we will begin with the subtopic dedicated to political parties in the United States, in general, and related to them; that's all for now.
Well, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.
Parts prior to this one
Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/
Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/
Disclaimers
1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.
2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.
3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.
That said, and to get to the point, here is the last section of the subtopic dedicated to Donald Trump (started in the first part and continued in the second one), which contains more general information about him, and related:
Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with Donald Trump, as well as, occasionally, his relationship with other people (political figures or not), and political parties in the United States as well.
4) Donald Trump never was a Christian or a Catholic.
Evidence A.
Trump: 'Why Do I Have to Repent or Ask for Forgiveness If I Am Not Making Mistakes?' (Video)
https://www.christianpost.com/news/trump-why-do-i-have-to-repent-or-ask-for-forgiveness-if-i-am-not-making-mistakes-video.html
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “Following Donald Trump's appearance last week at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, CNN's Anderson Cooper sought out clarification on Trump's assertion that he's unsure if he ever asks God's forgiveness.”
2- “Clarifying his comments on forgiveness, Trump declared, "I go to communion and that's asking forgiveness, you know, it's a form of asking forgiveness." During the interview the current GOP frontrunner stressed that he "likes to work where he doesn't have to ask forgiveness."”
3- “Cooper followed up asking Trump if "asking for forgiveness" is a central tenet in his faith life.
"I try not make mistakes where I have to ask forgiveness," Trump answered.
When further asked about repentance again by Cooper, Trump said "I think repenting is terrific."
"Why do I have to repent or ask for forgiveness, if I am not making mistakes?" asked Trump. "I work hard, I'm an honorable person."
In talking about his Iowa appearance, Trump said, "We were having fun when I said I drink the wine, I eat the cracker, the whole room was laughing."”
Warning 1: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Links to the video mentioned in the source cited above as evidence (A), plus an additional one:
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKLVIm7Q0IQ
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXaC0zqPFRM
Evidence B.
Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw
Evidence C.
Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw
Evidence D.
Trump elicits laughter quoting Bible verse to evangelicals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PX2SicPw1A
Evidence E.
Trump: 'Religion And Christianity Are The Biggest Things Missing From This Country'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhjhgf0vn0
Evidence F.
Donald Trump admits that he is not a Christian and his plans to dismantle democracy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XthEwsqcVGE
Evidence G.
DONALD TRUMP SECRETLY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM IN 2017
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIAQkgTJyKA
• https://www.bitchute.com/video/PHsOUtDqJfhh/
• https://rumble.com/v3e4710-the-first-american-jewish-president.html
Link to one of the sources mentioned in the videos above, as evidence (G):
Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official
https://web.archive.org/web/20190829004959/https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02/donald-trump-converted-to-judaism-two-years-ago.html
Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (G), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence H.
"..my Kabbalah teacher, Eitan Yardeni.."
Quote from the book TRUMP The Way to the Top: The Best Business Advice I Ever Received de Donald Trump (2004), page 188.Link to the sources corresponding to the above citation, as evidence (H):
• https://archive.org/details/trumpwa.....0dona/mode/2up
• https://ifunny.co/picture/quote-from-his-2004-book-the-way-to-the-top-308lPZJNB
Links with additional information about who Eitan Yardeni is:
• https://theorg.com/org/kabbalah-cen...../eitan-yardeni
• https://onehouse.kabbalah.com/en/pe.....eitan-yardeni/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-1/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-2/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....hottest-cult-3
Warning 3: Some of the sources cited above, regarding Eitan Yardeni, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence I.
Sanhedrin Calls on President Trump to Uphold Seven Noahide Laws (January 26, 2017)
https://israel365news.com/313462/sanhedrin-blesses-trump-calls-president-uphold-seven-noahide-laws/
Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:
“The Sanhedrin then calls on President Trump to follow the Seven Noahide Laws, given by God as a binding set of laws for all of humanity. The Sanhedrin described the laws as a framework that will benefit all mankind.
“It is essential to return to the divine order that was given at Mount Sinai to all of Man, to the fundamental principle that is common courtesy and common sense preceding everything,” the letter emphasizes. “It is important to return to the seven guidelines given to Noah and his offspring that protect all human and moral obligations.”
The Sanhedrin also urges the president to adhere to his campaign promise of renewed support of Israel, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, so that Israel can fulfill its Biblical role as a light unto the nations.
“As an honorable President, you are aware of the importance of Israel as an ally, especially a cultural ally, of the United States. The whole world anticipates the instilling of Bible values – God’s morality given on Mount Sinai for all the world.
“We must work together so that these values will be the inalienable property of all mankind,” the rabbinical body proposes.”Warning 4: The source cited above, as evidence (I), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Links with additional information about what the Seven Noahide Laws are:
• https://judaicapedia.org/explaining.....-noahide-laws/
• https://www.chabad.org/library/arti.....ahide-Laws.htm
Warning 5: The sources cited above, regarding the Seven Noahide Laws, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; reader discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (4).
Considering that the rules and clarifications regarding the content of this topic (part one), as well as the disclaimers present in this one, will not be sufficient in this case for some individuals, especially given that this segment has content based on religions, cults, and Donald Trump all rolled into one, I am going to take a small detour to address this in another way. But since I don't know how to do it without offending someone in the process, I'll do it anyway while ranting a little; sorry, not sorry.
To get to the point, for anyone reading this, regardless of their tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts about something or someone, here are some additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:
• one, yes, everyone has the right to like something or someone, as well as the opposite of that, regardless of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other individuals;
• two, no, any act that is considered transgressive, based on whatever motives, after being analyzed first on the basis of morality and ethics, is not and will never be tolerated, regardless of the legality of the act itself;
• three, I am agnostic;
• four, I am a philosopher;
• five, I am indifferent to most of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other people, and I only oppose the actions of other individuals (if possible, of course) when they are considered transgressions, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• sixth, for everything else, again, read or re-read the disclaimers if necessary about something or someone.
On the other hand, for any Christians or Catholics reading this ( without meaning to offend, of course), here are some other additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:
• one, no, Christianity (religion) and Catholicism (cult) are not the same thing, and never will be, no matter how much one may believe so;
• two, no, the Crusades, and everything related to that, is and always has been about Catholicism, not Christianity;
• third, forgiveness (Christianity) is something that is obtained, only and only, when one makes amends the faults one committed, through actions based on repentance, commitment, and devotion;
• fourth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to act based on the beliefs, rites, and traditions of that religion, as long as they do not become transgressions against other individuals or groups, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• fifth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to defend their beliefs, as well as the rites and traditions associated with it, from transgressions by other individuals or groups, as long as this does not create conflicts with what is mentioned in the fourth point;
• sixth, since I was a child, I went to multiple Christian and Catholic schools, and in the first ten years of schooling, I had to read and study as much the Old Testament as the New Testament, and believe me when I say that I still have basic information about the difference between the two, in general terms;
• and seventh, I have many relatives, family members, and friends who are Christians or Catholics, and believe me when I say that, even to this day, I can see the difference between the two groups, in general terms as well.
And as for Donald Trump... Well, the fact that he pretends to be whatever he wants in order to get what he wants won't change who he really is, regardless of what anyone believes or thinks about him; that's not only a fact, it's also life. Besides, considering how enormously douchey, shameless, childish, and eccentric he is, if it were discovered that all this time, he actually always worshipped Apollo, the Roman god of the sun, as seen in some of the paintings in his exclusive penthouse on Fifth Avenue in New York, I don't think that would be a surprise for some, including me...
(Ahem) So... Yeah, that's all I wanted to say; we better get going.
5) Donald Trump, as an outsider, ruined the Republican Party of the United States after taking it over.
Evidence A.
Did Donald Trump Break the Republican Party or Was It Already Broken? (March 14, 2016)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/did-donald-trump-break-republican-party-or-was-it-already-n540241
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “Marco Rubio's withdrawal from the presidential primary, after he was blown out in his home state by Donald Trump, was a resounding rejection by voters of a candidate embraced by influential Republicans. It suggests the power of party elites is “overstated” in the GOP, and perhaps in politics overall.”
2- “For a while, the 2016 Republican race had no clear form, with so many candidates combined with the rise of Trump confusing many party insiders. On the eve of Super Tuesday, however, the Republican Party in effect did make a decision: it tapped Rubio. The Florida senator received a wave of endorsements from sitting governors and senators in the last two weeks of February.
Just as significantly, Ted Cruz and Trump, who had actually already won primaries and caucuses, “were endorsed by almost no one.””
3- “And it’s not just that Rubio lost, but that all of the elite-backed candidates “failed”. Last spring, many party donors and officials backed Jeb Bush. A more conservative bloc of the establishment was behind Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, while “another wing” viewed Rubio as “a more electable, charismatic alternative” to those two men.
Instead, three "outsider" candidates are in the final round of the nomination contest. Cruz and Trump are both hated by many Republicans in Washington. Ohio Gov. John Kasich was not encouraged to run by party elites, in part because Bush, Rubio and Walker were already in the race.”
4- “...Trump is a highly unusual candidate, both appealing to an untapped but large segment of GOP voters (those without college degrees and in rural areas in particular) and able to command media attention like no one else.”
5- “...decades of wage stagnation and the growing diversity of the country had created a weary, frustrated GOP electorate that establishment candidates were ill-equipped to appeal to. (Looking back, perhaps the Cuban-American candidate who wrote a bill to create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants (Rubio) and the man who bragged of speaking Spanish more than English at home (Bush) were very imperfect fits for the Republican voters of 2016).”
General note 1: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence A), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.
Warning 6: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Evidence B.
Why Trump’s control of the Republican Party is bad for democracy
https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-control-of-the-republican-party-is-bad-for-democracy-221828
Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:
1- “...There are three reasons “personalist parties” are harmful to democracy,
1. Loyalty to the person, not the party
Personalist party elites are loyal to the leader. A classic indicator of party personalization is the ouster of politically experienced people in the party elite, who are often highly qualified and more independent of the leader – and their replacement with less experienced people who are personally loyal to the leader. These people are more likely to view their political success as being intertwined with that of the leader rather than the party. They therefore are more likely to support the leader’s agenda, no matter how harmful it may be for democracy.”
2- “2. Official endorsement of leader’s actions
In personalist parties, elites endorse the leader’s actions, cueing (some) voters to do the same. Ordinary citizens* who support personalist parties “often” go along with leaders’ efforts to dismantle democracy, even if they care about democracy, because they are highly receptive to signals provided by the party elite. When the party higher-ups endorse – rather than condemn – the leader’s
Note about the second fragment: It is advised to reread this fragment, especially for what is underlined, replacing the words marked with an asterisk (*), in this case, “Ordinary citizens” with “Those,” and “they” with “some of them”; more context later on.
3- “3. Polarizing society with controversy
Leaders of personalist parties polarize the societies they govern.
While many kinds of leaders demonize their political opponents, we have found that “personalist party” leaders’ anti-democratic behaviors
When opponents of the leader raise concerns that the leader’s actions are harmful to democracy,
General note 2: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence B), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”), between parentheses “()” and/or marked with asterisks (*) as well; more context later on.
Warning 7: The source cited above, as evidence (B), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (5).
Regarding to the information presented in evidence A, in this segment, I can only say that it will be quite relevant at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion. And regarding to the information presented in evidence B, also in this segment, I will only clarify three things, and nothing more:
1) it can still be used for cases related to the Democratic Party in the United States, as there is no mention of any reason why it cannot be done;
2) it is related to what I mentioned and shared in the segment 3, part 2, of this topic;
3) it will have some importance at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion;
4) In terms of human behavior, it talks about things related to fanaticism and collectivity, which I already explored in one of my journals more than five months ago, What does “echo chamber” actually mean?.
6) The majority of the main political donors in the US (directly or indirectly) bet on Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential elections.
Evidence A.
The Biggest Political Donors of the 2024 Election
https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2024-11-05/the-biggest-political-donors-of-the-2024-election
Highlighted/extracted information from the article above as evidence:
Top contributors of the Republican Party (by rank)
1. Mellon, Timothy > Dem.: -$2,900 | Rep.: $172,042,500
2. Uihlein, Richard & Elizabeth A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $137,775,196
3. Adelson, Sheldon G. & Miriam O. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $136,855,700
4. Musk, Elon > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $133,038,600
5. Griffin, Kenneth C. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $101,405,484
6. Yass, Jeffrey S. & Janine > Dem.: $1,500 | Rep.: $96,122,180
7. Singer, Paul E. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $59,299,100
8. Schwarzman, Stephen A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $39,103,046
9. Dunn, Timothy M. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $35,415,200
10. Bigelow, Rob > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $34,991,500
Top contributors of the Democratic Party (by rank)
1. Bloomberg, Michael R. > Dem.: $43,453,634 | Rep.: $1,000,000
2. Moskovitz, Dustin & Cari > Dem.: $38,785,700 | Rep.: $0
3. Eychaner, Fred > Dem.: $31,057,700 | Rep.: $0
4. Simons, James H. & Marilyn > Dem.: $ 30,757,103 | Rep.: $0
5. Hoffman, Reid Garrett > Dem.: $26,659,700 | Rep.: $400,000
6. Mandel, Stephen F. Jr. & Susan Z. > Dem.: $22,934,500 | Rep.: $63,200
7. Simon, Deborah J. > Dem.: $19,830,960 | Rep.: $0
8. Jordan, Wayne D. > Dem.: $14,488,811 | Rep.: $0
9. Larsen, Christian > Dem.: $13,442,479 | Rep.: $6,600
10. Heising, Elizabeth D. > Dem.: $12,638,350 | Rep.: $6,600
Warning 8: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.
Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (6).
I can only say that the information in this segment will be very important at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion; that's all.
Phew.
Okay, folks, I want to inform you that we have reached the end of the subtopic of Donald Trump per se, and related...
My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHsJdUv7k9Y
* breath * Which means that only two-thirds remain to finally finish this super-topic...
My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE
The next part of this topic, part 4, on the other hand, is where we will begin with the subtopic dedicated to political parties in the United States, in general, and related to them; that's all for now.
Well, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.
