Secret FBI document reveals attempt to discredit Martin Luther King as a sexual degenerate

No it's because he never said he touched anyone's *****. It really is that simple.

Nearly all of which magically appeared right before the 2016 election. Moving the goal posts of sexual impropriety from molestation to beating hookers doesn't vindicate your argument.

That's what's going to happen when you buddy up to a bunch of Kremlin agents. D'oh.

You haven't proven that. You asserted it by drawing an analogy. FBI files on King and his companions were the result of years of informants, being followed, being wiretapped.

No, it wouldn't. Trump's accusers merely accused. That's hearsay. It's he said/she said. You seem to not question a claim of raping a 13 year old that emerged many years after the alleged act, in which charges were never filed, by an accuser that stayed silent until right before the election. You should be embarrassed.

Yes, it is true that federal surveillance has more weight than hollow pre-election accusations.

Trump never said anything of the sort, this is beyond a false analogy and into outright lies.

Except when the evidence is the form of a federal wiretap, apparently. You aren't even willing to wait for those records to be released to see if it's true. You think "proof" of it being false is that the FBI didn't enforce local prostitution laws.

You seem to think I blindly believe every accusation against MLK. I never said that. I said the primary issue was his anti-capitalist statements and that he was in bed with a gang of Kremlin agents. And he was. I've already illustrated this.

Reposting the same crap 60 times isn't proof he grabbed anyone by the *****.

If he really was. Clearly you've ignored multiple of my posts which have traced that multiple of his associations WERE CPUSA members and thus Kremlin proxies.

MLK self-identified as an anti-capitalist who associated with Marxists. It's not hard to put the pieces together.

This isn't one incidental contact; it's multiple longterm ones that formed MLK's inner circle. Most people could draw a hint from that, at least if they weren't busying themselves with circling ideological wagons.

Because somehow it's blameworthy to try to bring down a guy in bed with a gang of Kremlin agents. What was Hoover thinking, the naughty boy?

Criminal involvement with communists? What is this moved goal post?

I said he was neck-deep in Kremlin proxies and he was.

And blow an international FBI investigation regarding the activities of Soviet agents in the United States. You don't seem to understand - or want to understand - that law enforcement has never operated that way. They often look away from the small fish to go after the big ones, or follow the small fish to the big ones.

Repeatedly crying that he wasn't arrested for prostitution on the spot isn't proof that he didn't hire prostitutes.

I've posted repeatedly that his associates were tied to the CPUSA to the point of posting a FBI file link to West whose poetry bragged about being a "Bolshevik."

Would you think a white activist who surrounded himself in agents of the Nazi regime and KNEW who they were to be an innocent baby or joined at the hip with them?

You just decide to look away, in spite of that the file named an informant while you go on about the validity of accusers of Trump.

Hoover didn't have to be "obsessed with linking MLK to communism," MLK linked himself by forming an inner circle of them. There is no FBI plot here; the West surveillance file was marked SECRET as my screenshot showed. They even hid that information from the American public for decades.

Trump's words never said he engaged or attempted to engage in sexual assault. Unsubstantiated allegations - not one ever having filed charges - of criminal behavior timed right before a presidential election isn't evidence. That's hearsay.

Credible evidence of MLK being up to his neck in Marxists willfully? Shitloads of it.

You don't surround yourself with agents of foreign governments known to have hostile views toward the United States and reasonably expect to not attract federal attention. Derp.

Asserting a leftist hack, biased website's credibility doesn't establish it.

Prove that Trump tried to keep Muslims out of the country? I'd like to see it especially in light of that the single largest Muslim country in the world - Indonesia - was never barred on the list.

That you'd invoke a biased, agenda-driven website like the HP and blindly repeat a media hoax they republished speaks volumes.

Tell us why Trump never had nearly all Muslim countries on the planet on his list and how that was a "Muslim ban." I gotta hear this.

 

Science isn't racist propaganda.

MISTRA is a good start. You know the one that Nisbutt fallaciously tried to attack and got called out on it by more than one scholar?

Since adult IQ is heavily genetic and group averages are not equal, the end result of having mixed-race kids between two IQ-disparate groups is obvious and predictable.

Prove that interracial divorce rates are a product of social racism than lack of compatibility due to racial and cultural background. That you admit they have higher rates in and of itself is quite meaningful, as children are most successful and less likely prone to poverty (which you claim is a big factor in depressing IQ) in single-parent environments, so why would you want to encourage such a bad childhood environment by normalizing relationships most likely to cause them? That makes no sense, dude.

Mixed kids report not knowing where they fit because they don't fit into traditional population groups. They feel like square pegs because they are. It doesn't matter how much social support is around them.

Transplantation compatibility is directly related to coming from a different population group that isn't genetically compatible with another one. Yes, genetic admixture is the issue: Mixed-race people are known to have issues with transplantation. Trying an ideological end-around doesn't change the source of the problem that racially mixed people have problems with transplants. It is KILLING people.

Blacks don't like donating organs. It seems another area that's heavily dependent on white charity. Good luck with that one.

By the way, if Graves' claim that races don't exist was true, we wouldn't be here discussing transplantation problems.

You can call them race or population group or whatever you want, but genetic differences DO exist.

To find a marrow match for anyone is hard. Even within one's own family, the chances of finding one are only about 30%. According to the World Donor Marrow Association, while two out of three Caucasians find a match, the chances of a patient from another ethnic background can be as low as one in four. Despite rapid improvements in marrow registries around the world, the global registry is still disproportionately represented by the U.S., U.K. and Germany — all predominantly Caucasian countries. For a multiracial person, the chances are usually even worse. Athena Mari Asklipiadis, the founder of the California-based Mixed Marrow, one of the only outreach groups devoted to recruiting mixed race donors, says "the numbers are quite staggering ... People compare it to winning the lottery."

It does apply because blacks have massive out of wedlock birth rates, meaning that if a white parent has a child with a black person, they're massively more likely to have one out of wedlock - and thus more prone to poverty - because of black high out of wedlock birth rates, high black unemployment rates, and high black poverty rates.

You go ahead and prove your usual go-to excuse of "institutional racism" is the cause. Hint: Early 20th century black out of wedlock birthrates were markedly LOWER than today.

Slavery adds to economic diversity. That doesn't mean it's right. Such hollow cliches aren't an argument. "I want white puzzy" isn't one, either. That's a self-absorbed view driven by impulse lacking any contemplative thought on the myriad consequences.

But who cares about people that die from transplant mismatches and identity-confused kids from broken homes because the parents can't see beyond their genitalia and have a political drum to beat.

Actually he always had scandals, but he also had the media protecting him. The media hate Trump.

The media never deeply dug into Obama's radical past and let Obama pretend he wasn't a socialist. Obama's affiliation with the DSA and his running for local office on the New Party ticket say otherwise. The media didn't do it with Bernie's radical leftism and associations with the CPUSA, either.

“I think the media have been harder on Trump than any other president certainly that I’ve known about... I think they feel free to claim that Trump is mentally deranged and everything else without hesitation.” -- Jimmy Carter

 

You sure out-did youself with the Racist propaganda stuff.

"NRA Lifetime Member"
The N.R.A. has a Life Member program among other higher categories.
You might wish to correct that obvious error..... snicker....

 

Well that was easy.

You were left with a personal attack written in bad grammar as an "argument."

 

Discrediting Prominent Blacks is a Tradition.

 

Yes, the French and every other Country way back to the dawn of time had Wives, concubines, strompets, tarts, washer women, chamber maids, wee girls and prostitots.

Or the Politician Page boy scandals or Catholic Priest Altar boy molestation trials.
The same people condemning consensual adult homosexuality, are the same people sexually molesting underage children.

Most of the People making the unfounded accusations have been guilty of much worse.
Very unforgiving of others sins too.

Example:

John 8:1-11King James Version (KJV)

1. Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4. They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6. This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11. She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
------------------------------
*******

This is the part Religion does not teach well enough, non condemnation and repentance and forgiveness, they are too busy accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of.