The Whitey House STONEWALLS On The Unabomber Story!!!

Werbung:

Rutgers professor calls white people 'villains' who need to be taken out​

View attachment 21573

View attachment 21574
History supports her opinion. So you can just stop trying to pretend that whites are hated for no reason. There are 249 years' worth of reasons why this professor makes that claim.
 
History supports her opinion. So you can just stop trying to pretend that whites are hated for no reason. There are 249 years' worth of reasons why this professor makes that claim.
Leftists began rewriting US history from a radical left-wing Alinsky point of view about the same time Hillary was being discipled by Saul Alinsky. I don't subscribe to the leftist revisions of history.


Essay: Revisionism: A New, Angry Look at the American Past​

12 minute read
TIME
February 2, 1970 12:00 AM EST
EVERY epoch recreates its own concept of the past. As the climate of opinion shifts over the course of a generation, so do historians’ views of history. A series of events as related by one historian may be altered beyond recognition by a later one. Such is the case with American history today. Traditional notions of the past are being brusquely challenged from the left by a group known as revisionists who emphasize not the homogeneity and accomplishments of the American heritage but its massive dislocations and conflicts. Though forming a diffuse movement rather than a well-defined school, they have a growing influence on the study of history; at last December’s meeting of the American Historical Association, their candidate for president, Staughton Lynd, the ex-Yale professor who now works with Radical Organizer Saul Alinsky, received nearly one-third of the vote.
 
Trump did keep his hands off staff workers in federal buildings, unlike Joe Biden and Bill Clinton.
Clinton had a consensual relationship. Biden never touched anyone, and Trump was found liable for rape. So again, stop lying.
 
Leftists began rewriting US history from a radical left-wing Alinsky point of view about the same time Hillary was being discipled by Saul Alinsky. I don't subscribe to the leftist revisions of history.


Essay: Revisionism: A New, Angry Look at the American Past​

12 minute read
TIME
February 2, 1970 12:00 AM EST
EVERY epoch recreates its own concept of the past. As the climate of opinion shifts over the course of a generation, so do historians’ views of history. A series of events as related by one historian may be altered beyond recognition by a later one. Such is the case with American history today. Traditional notions of the past are being brusquely challenged from the left by a group known as revisionists who emphasize not the homogeneity and accomplishments of the American heritage but its massive dislocations and conflicts. Though forming a diffuse movement rather than a well-defined school, they have a growing influence on the study of history; at last December’s meeting of the American Historical Association, their candidate for president, Staughton Lynd, the ex-Yale professor who now works with Radical Organizer Saul Alinsky, received nearly one-third of the vote.
The only revised history is the one we were taught whereby whites were the heroes in everything. In short, the mess you believe is revised history. What you call revised history are attempts to show accurate history.
 
Clinton had a consensual relationship. Biden never touched anyone, and Trump was found liable for rape. So again, stop lying.
Let's get the facts straight:


Bill Clinton, the 42nd president of the United States (1993–2001), has been publicly accused of sexual misconduct, including rape, harassment, and sexual assault. Additionally, some commentators have characterized Clinton's sexual relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky as predatory or non-consensual, despite the fact that Lewinsky called the relationship consensual at the time. These allegations have been revisited and lent more credence in 2018, in light of the #MeToo movement, with many commentators and Democratic leaders now saying Clinton should have been compelled to resign after the Lewinsky scandal. ...

In 1994, Paula Jones initiated a sexual harassment lawsuit against Bill Clinton, claiming he had made unwanted advances towards her in 1991; Clinton denied the allegations. In April 1998, the case was initially dismissed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on the grounds that it lacked legal merit.
Jones appealed Webber Wright's ruling, and her suit gained traction following Clinton's admission to having an affair with Monica Lewinsky in August 1998.
In 1998, lawyers for Paula Jones released court documents that alleged a pattern of sexual harassment by Clinton when he was Governor of Arkansas. Robert S. Bennett, Clinton's main lawyer for the case, called the filing "a pack of lies" and "an organized campaign to smear the President of the United States" funded by Clinton's political enemies.
In October 1998, Clinton's attorneys tentatively offered $700,000 to settle the case, which was then the $800,000 which Jones' lawyers sought.
Clinton later agreed to an out-of-court settlement and paid Jones $850,000.
Bennett said the president made the settlement only so he could end the lawsuit for good and move on with his life.
During the deposition for the Jones lawsuit, which was held at the White House,
Clinton denied having sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky—a denial that became the basis for an impeachment charge of perjury.

In 1998, Kathleen Willey alleged that Clinton had groped her in a hallway in 1993.
Also in 1998, Juanita Broaddrick alleged that Clinton had raped her in the spring of 1978, although she said she did not remember the exact date.
To support her charge, Broaddrick notes that she told multiple witnesses in 1978 she had been raped by Clinton, something these witnesses also state in interviews to the press.
Broaddrick had earlier filed an affidavit denying any "unwelcome sexual advances" and later repeated the denial in a sworn deposition.
In a 1998 NBC interview wherein she detailed the alleged rape, Broaddrick said she had denied (under oath) being raped only to avoid testifying about the ordeal publicly.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

New Information Emerges Around Biden Sexual Assault Allegation​

April 29, 202010:14 PM ET
Asma Khalid
gettyimages-1206760451_wide-e08ed652d2f4bc2e3ab7bf72465c1e96f052df95.jpg


Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, faces an allegation of sexual assault from 1993.
Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
Editor's note: This story contains graphic descriptions of an alleged sexual assault.

Updated at 12:56 p.m. ET

New information has emerged in recent days about a sexual assault allegation against the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden, made by Tara Reade, a former staff assistant in Biden's Senate office. For the first time, someone has gone on the record to say that Reade detailed the allegation to her decades ago in the same way Reade is describing it now.

The revelation, first reported by Business Insider, comes with increasing calls from Republicans for the accusation to be examined more openly and pressure on Democrats to respond. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who endorsed Biden on Monday, expressed on Thursday that she has a "great comfort-level with the situation."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Why Trump Was Found Liable for Sexual Abuse—but Not Rape
 
The only revised history is the one we were taught whereby whites were the heroes in everything. In short, the mess you believe is revised history. What you call revised history are attempts to show accurate history.
You can believe your favorite version of history, but I will continue to believe the history as taught in public schools for generations before Obama and BLM came onto the scene with their radical 'fundamental transformation of America as we have known it.'
 
You can believe your favorite version of history, but I will continue to believe the history as taught in public schools for generations before Obama and BLM came onto the scene with their radical 'fundamental transformation of America as we have known it.'
Obama and BLM don't teach history. Nor did they transform a fng thing. The history you learned is a lie. It is that history you want t force on people that has this nation in the trouble it is in today.

Understand this white man, America is not and has never been a white country. Your ancestors floated over here and were met on the shores by brown skinned people. Any history that doesn't show everything whites did to get control is revised history and a lie. If your white fragility has you unable to face what whites have done, too bad, because they shouldn't have done it, you shouldn't continue doing it and you just have to accept the consequence of your behavior.

Stop being a racist.
 
Obama and BLM don't teach history. Nor did they transform a fng thing. The history you learned is a lie. It is that history you want t force on people that has this nation in the trouble it is in today.

The problem with modern textbooks may lie in the fact that schools in America began dumbing down decades ago and now college graduate textbook writers with excellent curved grade scores don't have the elevated skills and knowledge of graduates in the past.

1753077710884.webp


1753077682239.webp

1753077576911.webp

History revisionism in core curriculum refers to the practice of revisiting and reinterpreting historical events and narratives to challenge traditional understandings and assumptions.
 
Trump made the deal. He created the deadline. Trump is to blame.
tell me did biden have to keep the deal or could have he modified it . yep he could of he could of done what he wanted with a exective order which he did regularly.
well why don't you read this and learn something there was a escape clause Biden could of used ,


simple fact Biden wanted the glory and good press about the withdrawal but he fucked it all up and had to blame someone who else but trump the former former former president . thats the truth you can not handle
 
Obama and BLM don't teach history. Nor did they transform a fng thing. The history you learned is a lie. It is that history you want t force on people that has this nation in the trouble it is in today.

Understand this white man, America is not and has never been a white country. Your ancestors floated over here and were met on the shores by brown skinned people. Any history that doesn't show everything whites did to get control is revised history and a lie. If your white fragility has you unable to face what whites have done, too bad, because they shouldn't have done it, you shouldn't continue doing it and you just have to accept the consequence of your behavior.

Stop being a racist.
yes America was a white nation at one time , when white men came to america it was not a nation there was no america whits and blacks fought the British to form America which was mainly a white natin at the time. the number of bative bon white Indians shrank considerably from war and disease to a couple a mear 250000 or so in the 1800s.
indains mostly did not claim the new america as thier nation and the ammount of blacks was still not huge
 
Last edited:
Werbung:
Back
Top