‘Whom Will Ye That I Release Unto You?’

We are on the eve of the only election that will ever matter. There are several disturbing phenomenon.  Among the intelligence community, which does release some information through various alternative media, we are in the midst of a “soft” or “velvet” coup of a takeover of this nation by corrupt and evil criminal forces.

What does that mean? It means that regarding one of the candidates, 650,000 emails have been released.  In addition, emails from Wikileaks have uncovered satanic rituals and pedophile connections.  If you don’t know that, it is because the mainstream media will not cover it.  This is the recent stuff.  Of course, prior to this we have Benghazi, Libya, Syria, Iraq, money to a private bank account in Qatar, lies, and more.  This is the candidate being protected by the FBI, the Justice Department, and the media as the soft coup is in play.

We have an FBI director who just played the part of Judas, betraying this nation.  Do you really believe that 650,000 emails were studied in depth in a matter of days?  With a Justice Department that seeks to protect the guilty, what was sanitized and redacted out of those emails?

We are at the point (in parallel) where Pilate stood before the people and asked, “Whom will ye that I release unto you?” (Matthew 27:17)  And they said, “Release unto us Barabbas.” (Luke 23:18)

There are some differences in the parallel.  We have a Judas and we have a Barabbas.  We have a point of decision.  However, we are dealing with a political election so don’t expect the third party to be Jesus Christ in the flesh.  However, the third choice does stand for religious freedom, the Constitution, and the law.

The crowd is not boisterous this time.  In this case the crowd is meek, mild, silent, unstudied, including those who don’t bother to think deeply, are ignorant, asleep, busy being entertained, lazy, slothful, and those unwilling to rock the political boat or risk money or power to speak the truth.

The release of Barabbas this time comes not from those who are shouting, “Release unto us Barabbas.”  No, instead, the release is coming, in part, from the Christian community – those who are unwilling to talk about politics, get involved in “dirty politics,” and those who would rather leave the fight for this nation, Western civilization, and the world, to others.

The release of Barabbas may be due to the unwillingness of the Christian, Catholic, and Evangelical communities to read the signs of the times and to wake up and get involved.

We are at the last day.  Two paths are before us.  One candidate has ties with satanic and pedophile rings as revealed by recent revelations released through Wiki-Leaks.  The other candidate is a highly successful businessman who will protect religious freedom, appoint conservative judges, protect a nation, rebuild its economy, bring down its debt, and most importantly, “drain the swamp” of political corruption in Washington, D.C.

Those are the choices.  One pathway is good.  One pathway is evil.

Christians who stay home and don’t want to vote due to not wanting to get their spiritual hands dirty will be participating in bringing in a pedophile and Satan-worshipper.  That future blood will be on their hands.  There is no easy way to say it.  Those are the facts.

You have one choice this election.  Vote for Donald Trump.  A vote for Donald Trump is a vote against Hillary Clinton.  If you stay home and do not vote, you have voted for Hillary by default.


By Cheryl Jones



  1. Patrick Gannon Reply

    What utter garbage. What irresponsible journalism. To cast aspersions about satanic activity without providing any source material or documentation? That’s unethical yellow-journalism; which unfortunately we get quite a bit of here.
    I’m no fan of Hillary, and will be voting for Johnson, but this journalistic garbage cannot go unchallenged by anyone who wants facts rather than innuendo and unfounded charges, carefully timed to mislead voters just before they vote. This author, Cheryl Jones is not an ethical journalist. Remember that in the future when you read her posts.
    As for the subject of the emails, Marina Abramovic has insisted “I’m not a Satanist! Stop it!”
    Note that searching, sorting, collating, classifying those 650,000 emails can be done on an old computer, probably in a matter of hours. Keep in mind that our NSA tracks billions of phone calls every day. The author is apparently ignorant of modern computer technology, and even older computers could do the job pretty quickly – minutes or hours according to experts.
    From Wired(dot)com:

    “In this case in particular, forensics experts say, investigators’ jobs might even be particularly easy: Because the new collection of emails under investigation were taken from the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the husband of Clinton Aide Huma Abedin, only a portion of those emails would be messages sent to or from Clinton or anyone else on the campaign rather than those sent to or from Weiner’s contacts. Simple filtering by “to:” or “from:” could cut out hundreds of thousands of messages.
    Next, the agents could filter out duplicate emails from those they’d already analyzed in their months-long investigation earlier this year. According to multiple media reports, the vast majority of emails the FBI examined over the last week were, in fact, duplicates. Those copies could be spotted by their message ID, points out Zdziarski, a unique alphanumeric identifier for each email. Or if any duplicate messages somehow had different message IDs—say, because they had been copied into replies or forwarded—the FBI agents could use a forensics tool like Encase or AccessData Forensics Tool Kit to make cryptographic “hashes” of full messages or chunks of them. That hashing process converts portions of text into shorter character strings that uniquely represent the text: running a hash function on that same text will always produce the same short string of characters, but any tiny change in the text produces a different hash string. And that allows a program to quickly compare and match text samples.”

  2. Pamela Marquez Reply

    Thank you for this comment. I think it’s horrible how the author of this article states that those who don’t vote for Trump will have t”that future blood on their hand” what a horrible thing to write. This election has weighed heavy on my heart. With the way Trump has projected himself and the unfiltered words that come out of his mouth worries me about the fate of our country. Hilary’s support of abortion and supporting Planned Parenthood was what turned me off about her. I would much rather vote for a third party candidate, but unfortunately that candidate would have a very slim chance of winning. So for the sake of our country I will vote for Hilary. I feel she would do the least harm for our country.

Leave a Reply