Coming Apart at the Seams

In a January 24, 2017 column for National Review magazine, conservative columnist Dennis Prager wrote: “with the obvious and enormous exception of attitudes toward slavery, Americans are more divided morally, ideologically, and politically today than they were during the Civil War.  For that reason, just as the Great War came to be known as the First World War, once there was a Second World War, the Civil War will become known as the First Civil War when more Americans come to regard the current battle as the Second Civil War.”

He went on to say, “This Second Civil War, fortunately, differs in one other critically important way:  It has thus far been largely non-violent.  But given the increasing leftwing violence such as riots, the violent taking over of college presidents’ offices, and the illegal occupation of state capitols, non-violence is not guaranteed to be a permanent characteristic of the Second Civil War.”  The problem with Prager’s premise is that, since the close of the First Civil War, only one side… the political left… has been fighting, while conservatives and Republicans have decided to simply “take it on the chin.”

One wonders where Prager has been hiding for the past sixty or seventy years.  Is he not aware of the non-stop reign of terror carried out by pro-slavery Democrats such as the night riders of the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camellia, and other Democrat terror groups founded at the close of the First Civil War, or the violent tactics of organized labor during the 20th century?

To say that we live in troubled times is a vast understatement.  Here in the United States we find congressional Democrats and other party leaders nearly foaming at the mouth, unable to come to grips with the fact that, on November 8, the American people sent them a very strong message.

In mid-November 2016, Rutgers University professor Kevin Allred, was taken to Bellevue Hospital in New York for psychiatric evaluation after burning an American flag and tweeting that it was time to start killing white people.

Upon retiring, liberal Massachusetts college professor, Noel Ignatiev, gave a ranting tirade in which he lambasted white males as the “cancer of the world.”  He ranted: “If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live.  You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world!  They only murder, exploit, and oppress non-whites!  At least a white woman can have sex with a black man and make a brown baby but what can a white male do?  He’s good for nothing.  Obviously, all whites need to be destroyed, but why not start with white males?  If you are a thoughtful person with a social consciousness who considers himself white, you will consider suicide.”

Professor Ignatiev is, himself, a white male.  However, his obituary has not as yet appeared in the Boston Globe, along with the text of his suicide note, and probably never will.

In a Seattle street demonstration, a woman wearing a Black Lives Matter jacket took over the microphone and screamed that “it’s time we killed some people.”

For Democrats, this is nothing new.  Tuskegee Institute records tell us that, between 1882 and 1964, years during which the KKK served as the principal paramilitary arm of the Democratic Party, Democrats murdered some 4,742 people.  Of those, 3,445 victims were black and 1,297 were white, nearly all white Republicans.  No one knows how many people were murdered by Democrats in the 17-year period between Christmas Eve 1865, when the KKK was founded, and 1882, a period during which lynching statistics were not kept.

I have seen the violent nature of Democrats first hand.  For example, in October 1964, when it was announced that the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, Sen. Hubert Humphrey (D-MN), would visit our city for a campaign speech, I joined a group of eleven other Republicans in a peaceful demonstration at the Tulsa International Airport, welcoming the senator to our city.  As we did, we were attacked and severely beaten by a mob of some 300 Democrats.  Not only was I kicked and beaten, left lying unconscious on the airport tarmac, I received several painful burns when my attackers stubbed out their cigars and cigarettes on my bare skin.

In 1966, as I organized and led a statew, de election reform campaign in Oklahoma, a campaign designed to provide voting booths in 44 of the state’s 77 counties for the first time since statehood, my associates and I received word through third parties that, if we tried to come into some heavily Democratic counties with voting booths they’d be waiting for us with shotguns and rifles and we’d all go back to Tulsa in pine boxes.  Ultimately, it became necessary to have National Guard troops and trucks deliver voting booths to county courthouses across the state.

Since that time, I have been victimized by Democratic violence and threats of violence on other occasions, so much so that I am all but convinced that fraud, violence, and intimidation come as naturally to Democrats as night following day.  It is in their DNA.

Now, in the days following President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change, it appears we have entered the “Chicken Little Era” of world history.  If one were to believe the pained rhetoric of American liberals, Democrats, and assorted environmental extremists, one could easily conclude that the sky really is falling.

What is most interesting is that, if we analyze the ultimate impact of the public policies that liberals and Democrats support, whether political, social, or economic, we are forced to conclude that, if they have their way in the political world, the United States will be an unfit place in which to live within a generation or two.  North America may be just as unlivable as the hellholes of those who now risk life and limb to enter our country.

But all is not lost… yet… because there exists a far more deadly and far more imminent threat that may ultimately cause Democrats to conclude that the survival of their country and its culture is far more important than their party fortunes.  I refer to the threat posed by the increased number of Muslim immigrants and refugees who now demand access to our country.

Muslim immigrants represent a clash of cultures that no amount of “feel-good” multiculturalism and diversity-worship can ever resolve.  And while Americans are generally welcoming and generous people, happy to share the blessings of liberty with all who share our love of freedom, we must demand that all those who come here must share our values, learn our language, and assimilate socially, politically, and economically.  That has been true of every ethnic minority that has come to America in more than 250 years…  until now.

Muslim immigrants have demonstrated little or no desire to become “Americanized.”  Instead, as their numbers grow, we find an ever-increasing number of Muslims who insist upon maintaining their ethnic identity, even to the extent of forming “no-go” zones, communities which exclude all non-Muslims.  In doing so, they insist upon living under a separate legal code… Sharia Law… that is, in many respects, totally incompatible with American law and constitutional principles.

We could find no clearer example of the deadly consequences of this clash of cultures than the recent murder of a beautiful Australian woman, Justine Ruszczyk, by a black Muslim police officer, a Somali immigrant named Mohamed Noor.  Muslims are taught from childhood that women and girls are not allowed to venture outside their homes unless their bodies are fully covered and they are accompanied by a male member of their family.  Western women, on the other hand, have great latitude in their dress and in their personal conduct, so long as their bodies are covered in all the appropriate places.

In Minneapolis, on Saturday evening, July 15, just before midnight, Ms. Ruszczyk dialed 911 to report what she thought was a sexual assault in progress near her home.  When Noor and his partner, Matthew Harrity, arrived at the scene, Ms. Ruszczyk ran to the driver’s side window of the patrol car dressed only in her pajamas.  Officer Harrity was behind the wheel, but as he prepared to lower the window to speak with Ms. Ruszczyk, Officer Noor unholstered his weapon and fired past Officer Harrity’s head, through the driver’s side window, striking Ms. Ruszczyk in the abdomen and killing her.

Officer Noor is refusing to cooperate with department investigators as they attempt to learn what possible motive he may have had to fire his handgun under those circumstances.  Could it be that he does not have a motive that he can share with investigators because his motive is rooted in his religious beliefs?  Although news reports have totally avoided mention of the religious issue it is entirely possible, perhaps likely, that when Officer Noor was surprised to see a beautiful young woman, dressed only in pajamas, approaching the driver’s side window of his patrol car, her flowing blond hair fully exposed, his Muslim training and beliefs came to the fore and he simply executed her.

In the Judeo-Christian world we are all taught from childhood that “Thou shalt not kill,” while Muslims are taught from childhood that “Thou shalt kill” all those who do not believe as Muslims believe.  Those who believe, foolishly, that those two cultures can ever coexist side-by-side, sharing the same piece of real estate, are kidding themselves.  They are also risking the lives of all those of us who are realistic about the threat of radical Islam.

As Dennis Prager reminds us, we in the United States are now more divided than at any time since the First Civil War.  We are, in fact, coming apart at the seams and it’s time we all figured out, before it’s too late, exactly who our natural allies are and who we can count upon to watch our backs.

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College.  He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.










Posted in Today's Misinformation | Leave a comment

The Oklahoma City Bombing – Conspiracy and Coverup

In October 1939, as Europe teetered on the brink of war, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill referred to the Soviet Union as “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”

The same can be said of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, in which 169 American citizens were killed and nearly 700 injured.  Although the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice called a premature halt to the investigation as soon as they had what they felt was sufficient evidence to convict two former Army buddies, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, local law enforcement officials, investigative reporters, freelance writers, county grand jurors, and state and federal lawmakers continued their search for truth.  They had evidence showing that at least seventeen other individuals were involved.

In addition to McVeigh and Nichols, the FBI and federal prosecutors charged one additional conspirator, Michael Fortier, an Army buddy of McVeigh and Nichols, of Kingman, Arizona.  He signed a plea agreement in which he admitted to knowing about the attack in advance and failing to inform federal authorities.  He was released from prison on January 20, 2006 after serving 10½ years of a 12-year sentence.  That is the sum and substance of what the American people were told about Michael Fortier and his participation in the bombing.

However, what the media have failed to report is that Fortier apparently played a much larger role in the terror attack.  For example, in his book, The Oklahoma City Bombing – Case Revelations, writer Patrick B. Briley tells us that the media have failed to report that Fortier and his wife, Lori, drove from Arizona to Oklahoma City in December 1994, at which time McVeigh showed the Fortier’s the building that was to be bombed just four months later.  Nor have the media reported that eyewitness accounts place Fortier and his wife in Oklahoma City, with McVeigh, one week before the bombing, and on the morning of April 19, 1995.

So why has McVeigh been executed and why is Nichols serving life in prison, while Fortier served just 10½ years of a 12-year sentence and his wife was granted immunity?  It may come as a surprise to the American people to learn the story behind the plea agreement that Fortier signed.  According to former FBI Assistant Deputy Director, Danny Coulson, in his book, No Heroes, the initial draft of the Fortier plea bargain agreement was drafted at the White House by Howard Shapiro, Bill Clinton’s legal advisor and FBI liaison, and hand delivered to Fortier in Kingman, Arizona, by Coulson himself, on April 29, 1995, ten days after the bombing.

According to the March 20, 1996 edition of the Strategic Investment newsletter, “A classified report prepared by two independent Pentagon experts has concluded that the destruction of the federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995 was caused by five separate bombs.  The two experts reached the same conclusion for the same technical reasons.  Sources close to the Pentagon study reported to have said that Timothy McVeigh did play a role in the bombing but peripherally, as a “useful idiot.”

A report in the Freedom Network News shortly after the bombing indicated that “seismograph readouts at the University of Oklahoma (20 miles south of Oklahoma City) indicated more than one blast impulse.  Independent ordnance experts including a Navy Commander, unanimously agreed that a car-bomb with low intensity fertilizer explosives could not have inflicted such extensive damage to the building and that it was highly likely that high-intensity explosives had been wired directly to the columns (in the parking garages beneath the building).  The Strategic Investment report, edited by former CIA Director William Colby, indicated that the multiple bombings had a “Middle Eastern signature.”

But what is most disturbing is the fact that federal officials had advance knowledge that the building would be bombed.  In his book on the Oklahoma City bombing, writer Patrick B. Briley quotes federal court transcripts in which U.S. Department of Justice Prosecutor, Beth Wilkinson, made a startling admission. In a November 1996 preliminary hearing before Federal Judge Richard P. Matsch and McVeigh’s attorney, Stephen Jones, in Denver, Wilkinson admitted that the entire federal family of judges, U.S. Marshals, and FBI agents in Oklahoma City had been forewarned of an attack against the Murrah Building, as the result of a fatwa (a non-binding Islamic legal opinion) issued by radical Islamists in connection with the trial of Islamic terrorists charged in the 1993 bombing of the New York World Trade Center.

It has been established that federal officials took the threat far more seriously than previous bomb threats.  In fact, Federal District Judge Wayne Ally avoided going to his Murrah Building office that day and kept his grandchildren out of the Murrah day care center.  FBI and BATF agents also decided to stay away from their offices that day. But none of those federal officials bothered to warn employees of other federal agencies headquartered in the Murrah Building.

In the intervening years since the attack, those investigators who knew that there was much more to the crime than the FBI and the BATF were willing to admit, and that the mainstream media were willing to report, have continued their efforts to learn the motives and the identities of those involved.  But why did the FBI and the BATF close out their investigations prematurely when additional evidence pointing to others was being developed?  Could it have been Bill Clinton’s assurance just days after the bombing that, “There is no Middle Eastern connection?”

For example, why did the FBI move quickly to confiscate the video tapes from all outdoor security cameras in the vicinity of the Murrah Building?  And why did they find it necessary in the days immediately following the bombing to have all security cameras in the neighborhood removed, the mounting holes filled in and painted over, and the electrical wires removed from inside the walls, making it appear as if the security cameras had never existed?

And why did the FBI find it necessary to have some 400 duplicates made of the videotapes and then refuse to allow anyone else to view the tapes even when ordered to do so by the federal courts?  And while the FBI now claims that the original tapes and all of the duplicates have been misplaced and can’t be found, is it not reasonable to speculate that the duplicate tapes were intended to be used as “insurance policies,” so that no one who was required to compromise their integrity by participating in one of the greatest cover-ups in history, could ever be used as a scapegoat by powerful people in Washington?

Anyone who reads any of the many books already published, or the comprehensive report in author Craig Roberts’ soon-to-be published book, The Medusa File II – The Politics of Terror and the Oklahoma City Bombing, will certainly be confronted with one overriding question: What was it about the Oklahoma City bombing that attracted the attention and the active involvement of literally every law enforcement organization… state, local, county, and federal, that might conceivably have some interest in the crime?

The list of organizations and individuals who  played some role in the investigation and subsequent coverup included: Bill Clinton, President of the United States; Janet Reno, John Ashcroft, and Alberto Gonzales, Attorneys General of the United States; Jamie Gorelick, Deputy U.S. Attorney General (author of the infamous “Gorelick Wall,” the DoJ policy that prohibited the FBI and the CIA from sharing intelligence information that likely would have prevented the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon); the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Directors Robert Mueller and Louis Freeh; John Negroponte, Director of National Intelligence; Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security; Howard Shapiro, Bill Clinton’s legal advisor and FBI liaison; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tax, and Firearms (BATF); the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA); the Department of Defense (DoD); the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); Frank Keating, Governor of Oklahoma; the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI); the Oklahoma Highway Patrol; the Oklahoma County Sheriff’s Office; the Noble County Sheriff’s Office; the Oklahoma County District Attorney; the Oklahoma City Fire Department; the Oklahoma City Police Department; the Tulsa Police Department; as well as FBI, BATF, and U.S. Attorney personnel too numerous to mention.

If a disgruntled postal worker walked into an Oklahoma City post office and relieved himself of some deep-seated resentment, the crime would more than likely attract the attention of the U.S. Postal Inspector; the FBI, the OSBI; the Oklahoma County Sheriff’s Office; the Oklahoma County District Attorney; and the Oklahoma City Police Department.  So, what was it about the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building that attracted so much official attention?

Clearly, the answer lies in the untold number of file cabinets and file boxes that federal agents were unable to retrieve from the basement of the Murrah Building, and which now lie entombed in tons of rubble, soil, and twisted steel beneath the shimmering reflecting pool of the Oklahoma City National Memorial.  Perhaps more importantly, the answer lies in the truckloads of files retrieved from the basement levels of the building on the morning of April 19, 1995, and from the 7th and 9th floor offices of the DEA and the BATF in the late afternoon and evening of that day… files and file boxes that were so critically important to someone in the highest levels of the federal government that the FBI shut down all rescue and recovery operations for several hours while the screams and moans of the trapped, wounded, and dying filled the air.

If some brave patriot would come forward to divulge the current location of all those documents, documents that some of the most powerful people in Washington prized far more than life itself, we would finally have the answer to the “myth” of Oklahoma City.  The riddle, the mystery, and the enigma of one of the greatest crimes of all time would be solved and the lives of all those dead and maimed could be avenged.

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College.  He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.





Posted in Today's Misinformation | Leave a comment

The Myth of Oklahoma City

A July 1, 2017 Washington Post article by Stephanie McCrummen was headlined, “Love Thy Neighbor?  When a Muslim doctor arrived in a rural Midwestern town, ‘it felt right.’  But that feeling began to change after the election of Donald Trump.”

The article describes in detail the experiences of 42-year-old Ayaz Virji, his wife, Mussarat, and their three children who moved to rural Dawson, Minnesota (population 1,450), where Dr. Virji accepted a position as Chief of Staff and Medical Director at the Johnson Memorial Health Service, a small three-doctor hospital.

The Washington Post article was later described by Jihad Watch as a “puff peace” and as “yet another mainstream media whitewash of Islam.”  The Post article goes on to describe several speeches arranged by a local Lutheran minister in which Dr. Virji attempted to proselytize local residents, convincing them that Islam is, in fact, a “religion of peace.”   The Jihad Watch article goes on to say that, “Virji’s popular claim, based on FBI studies, that “non-Muslims have perpetrated 94 percent of American terrorist attacks between 1980 and 2005″ is still frightening, considering that Muslims are only one percent of Americaâ’s population.”

The Jihad Watch article cites a study of American terrorism in the years 1990-2006 which claims that, “If you remove two outlier events… the September 11 (2001) terrorist attacks and the Oklahoma City Bombing… far-right extremists have killed more than twice as many people (272) as Islamist extremists (130).”  The old adage that “figures don’t lie, but liars figure” has never been more appropriate. Or,  as Benjamin Disraeli once said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

Having spent a good deal of time over the past six weeks helping to edit a soon-to-be-published book on the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, I am fully aware that the only way Dr. Virji can conclude that far-right extremists are more deadly, statistically, than Islamic terrorists is by assigning all 169 of the Oklahoma City deaths to the actions of right wing anti-government zealots.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

The book, The Medusa File II — The Politics of Terror and the Oklahoma City Bombing, is written by a friend and neighbor, Craig Roberts, a 27-year veteran of the Tulsa Police Department and the author or co-author of some twenty books, both fiction and non-fiction.  Because of his vast international network of contacts, Roberts was the only local police officer assigned to investigate the bombing at the specific request of the FBI.

The U.S. Senate confirmation hearings for FBI Director-designate Christopher Wray have been very instructive.  Having read the 350-page Medusa manuscript three times, as well as Patrick B. Briley’s book, The Oklahoma City Bombing — Case Revelations, and investigative reporter Jayna Davis’s book, The Third Terrorist, one time each, I can only conclude that Mr. Wray and the Judiciary Committee members who questioned him exist in an alternate universe.

The picture we get of the FBI while listening to the senate confirmation hearings is 180 degrees out of sync with reality.  Given the FBI’s criminal coverup of the TWA Flight 800 shoot-down, the Oklahoma City Bombing, the assault on the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, and other disasters, there is not much about today’s FBI that resembles in any way the agency depicted in the long-running ABC television series of the 1960s and ’70s.

For example, while the lead investigative agency, the FBI, was quick to conclude that the attack on the Murrah Federal Building was carried out by just two anti-government radicals, former Army buddies Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, unimpeachable eyewitness testimony confirms that there were at least four terrorists present at the Murrah Building in the minutes before the explosions (plural) occurred.

In the minutes prior to the first explosion at 9:03 AM, eyewitnesses saw Timothy McVeigh and a dark-complexioned Middle Eastern man, referred to as John Doe No. 2, park their Ryder truck, containing a large Ammonium Nitrate/Fuel Oil (ANFO) bomb, at the intersection of NW 5th Street and North Harvey Avenue, just one block west of the entrance to the Murrah Building.

Why were they parked a block west of their target?  They were parked at that location because the parking space at the entrance to the Murrah Building was temporarily occupied by a United Parcel Service delivery truck.  When the UPS driver reentered his truck and drove away, two other Middle Eastern men, both dressed in blue jogging suits, stepped into the vacant parking space and signaled McVeigh to come forward with the Ryder truck.

Eyewitnesses testify that, when McVeigh had parked the Ryder truck at the entrance to the Murrah Building, his Middle Eastern companion walked briefly to the rear of the truck before hurrying across the street with McVeigh to the Journal Record parking lot where McVeigh’s yellow Mercury Marquis had been pre-positioned.  They entered the getaway car and sped away, nearly running over a Journal Record employee who was taking a smoke break outside his workplace.  The two Middle Eastern men in blue jump suits who had saved the parking space for McVeigh, ran to a late model brown Chevrolet or GMC pickup truck with a dark plastic bug shield on the front of its hood, parked at the intersection of NW 5th Street and Broadway, just yards in front of the Ryder truck.  They made a right turn onto Broadway and sped away.

One might ask, weren’t there security cameras in the neighborhood to record all of that activity?  The answer is, yes, there were security cameras, all of which recorded the activity in front of the Murrah Building.  In addition to the security camera on the front of the Murrah Building itself, which was likely destroyed in the explosion, a security camera mounted on the Regency Towers apartment building, across the street and one block west of the Murrah Building, and a security camera mounted on the nearby Oklahoma Water Resources Building, recorded everything that took place in the minutes before and after 9:00 AM.

However, the only people who have ever seen those tapes are FBI agents assigned to the case.  A former employee of an Oklahoma City videotape duplication service has told investigators that he produced 400 copies of the tapes and that two FBI agents were at his side throughout the entire process to ensure that he did not “purloin” a copy or two for himself.  It was later learned that one rogue FBI agent attempted to sell a copy of the tapes to a Los Angeles TV station for $800,000.

In addition to reproducing some 400 copies of the tapes, the FBI ordered all security cameras in the area removed, the mounting holes filled in and painted over, and the electrical wires removed from inside the walls.  They made it appear as if the security cameras had never existed.  Since that day, the FBI has refused to allow anyone to view those tapes, not even when ordered to do so by the federal courts.

Just after 10:00 AM, one hour after the bombing, as first responders were combing the building, looking for the injured and dying, the FBI ordered everyone out of the building.  Then, for the next hour or two, as the screams and moans of those still trapped inside filled the air, a team of 40-50 federal agents, dressed in black raid jackets with no identifying FBI or BATF markings, were seen loading a large number of file cabinets and file boxes into ambulance-type vehicles backed up to what was left of the Murrah Building.

Asked when rescuers could reenter the building to search for more dead and injured, FBI spokesman Gene Pogue replied, “It’s unfortunate, but no one is allowed back until the files are secured.”

Because of the large pit blown into the floor of the building’s subterranean parking garage from a second, but larger, bomb placed inside the building, it is unlikely that the federal agents could retrieve all the file cabinets and file boxes that they were sent to recover.  That being the case, it is understandable that the federal government ordered the building leveled to the ground at the earliest possible time.

We may never know what critical “secrets,” more important than life itself, are buried forever beneath the shimmering reflecting pool of the Oklahoma City National Memorial.  And unless Craig Roberts’ new book is able to create renewed interest in the terror attack that everyone from Bill Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno, down to federal prosecutors and dozens of FBI and BATF agents were so anxious to mischaracterize and cover up, we may never know the identities of all those who participated in the murder of 169 people that day.

What is most interesting about the investigation that followed is that, even though Bill Clinton himself assured the nation just days after the bombing that there was “no Middle Eastern connection,” local law enforcement officials, freelance writers, and investigative reporters were quick to determine that a number of individuals of Middle Eastern descent were directly involved in the attack.  Within days, a number of those individuals were identified as employees of an Oklahoma City realtor and slumlord, a Palestinian named Samir Khalil.

So, what is most interesting about Mr. Khalil?  Almost any reasonable person would begin to draw conclusions upon learning that Mr. Khalil was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in New York… unless, of course, we are agents of the FBI, the BATF, or prosecutors for the U.S. Department of Justice.  Then, and only then, would we view the active participation of Mr. Khalil and his Muslim employees as nothing more than an “unfortunate coincidence.”

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College.  He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.


Posted in Today's Misinformation | Leave a comment