Gorsuch Responds to Sexism Allegation From Former Student

During his Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Judge Neil Gorsuch addressed accusations from a former law student claiming he had encouraged sexist hiring practices in the classroom.

The student in question, Jennifer Sisk, took one of the Supreme Court nominee’s classes at the University of Colorado Law School and wrote in a letter sent to lawmakers Sunday night that Gorsuch said “many” working women exploit employers when receiving maternity benefits.

The Daily Signal reported Monday that Sisk has close ties to the Democratic Party. She is a former political appointee of the Obama administration and worked for former Sen. Mark Udall, a Democrat. In covering Sisk’s allegations, multiple media outlets did not initially disclose her ties to Democrats and President Barack Obama.

After being questioned about the letter by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Gorsuch—who noted the first time he heard about this was the night before his confirmation hearing—responded to this accusation by implying that it was a misunderstanding he wanted to clear up.

“I teach from a standard textbook … there is one question in the book that is directed at young women—because sadly, this is a reality that they sometimes face,” Gorsuch said.

“The problem is this: Suppose an older woman at the firm that you’re interviewing at asks you if you intend to become pregnant soon, what are your choices as a young woman?” Gorsuch asked rhetorically. “You can say yes, and tell the truth … and not get the job and not be able to pay your debts [from law school]. You can lie, maybe get the job, say no, that’s a choice, too, it’s a hard choice. Or you can push back in some way, shape, or form.”

The judge added that the question raised by the textbook was a part of a broader discussion on the hardships lawyers face in life, including high suicide rates, alcoholism, divorce, depression, and financial difficulties.

“We talk about the pros and cons in this erratic dialogue and they can think through things on how to answer very difficult questions,” Gorsuch said.

Gorsuch then asked that everybody who has heard questions like this from employers to raise their hand—attempting to make the point that these “inappropriate questions about family planning,” as he said, are fairly common.

“It still happens every year,” Gorsuch said. (For more from the author of “Gorsuch Responds to Sexism Allegation From Former Student” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


The Unforeseen Consequences of Transgenderism

Determining one’s own sex or that of another used to be a simple matter.

First, there was the matter of appearance, whether a person looked like a male or looked like a female. If appearance produced some uncertainties, one could determine sex by examining a person’s birth certificate.

If appearance and a birth certificate produced uncertainties, the ultimate, absolute proof of sex was a person’s chromosomes; XX marked a female, and XY marked a male. Case closed.

But those old-fashioned, simple methods of identifying sex have changed. In fact, relying on those old tried-and-true methods of sex identification qualifies one for opprobrium, with the charge of being homophobic.

Today—independent of appearance, genitalia, birth certificate, and chromosomes—one is a male or female based on how one labels oneself.

This new liberty applies to not only sex but also race.

Rachel Dolezal, born Caucasian, chose to be a black person. By becoming a black person, she became the president of the Spokane, Washington, office of the NAACP and an instructor of Africana studies at Eastern Washington University.

As far as she is concerned, she’s still a black person now, and she has a new legal name, Nkechi Amare Diallo, which means “gift of God” in Ibo.

A notable beneficiary of racial fakery is Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who claimed that she was of Cherokee Indian ancestry. That helped her land a $430,000 job for a year at diversity-hungry Harvard University as a professor of law.

If Diallo and Warren were not leftist, learned college professors and students would condemn their behavior as racial appropriation.

But let’s explore further the idea of freeing oneself from the oppression of biological determinism. There is no better testing ground than America’s colleges, which are at the forefront of transgenderism, for seeing how this might work.

How tolerant would college administrators be of conservative male students, if they said that they feel womanish, going into the ladies’ bathroom and showering facilities? Would these men, claiming to be women, be eligible for tryouts for the women’s basketball or field hockey team?

Suppose a college honored the right of its students to free themselves from biological determinism and allowed those with XY chromosomes to play on teams formerly designated as XX teams.

I would anticipate a problem competing with other colleges. An unenlightened women’s basketball team might refuse to play against a mixed-chromosome team whose starting five consists of 6-foot-6-inch, 200-pound XYers.

The NCAA should have a rule stating that refusal to play a mixed-chromosome team leads to forfeiture of the game. It’s no different from a team of white players refusing to play another because it has black players.

It’s not just college sports that would yield benefits for those escaping biological determinism. What about allowing XYers who claim they are women to compete in the Women’s International Boxing Association?

Then there are the Olympics. The men’s fastest 100-meter speed is 9.58 seconds. The women’s record is 10.49 seconds.

What about giving XY people a greater chance at winning the gold by permitting them to compete in the women’s event? They could qualify by just swearing that they feel womanish or suffer from gender dysphoria.

You say, “There you go, Williams, picking on colleges again!”

I applaud the fact that some colleges are taking a leadership role in fighting biological determinism. Barnard College President Debora Spar wrote:

There was no question that Barnard must reaffirm its mission as a college for women. And there was little debate that trans women should be eligible for admission to Barnard.

With that announcement, Barnard College joined a growing list of women’s colleges—along with Smith College, Mount Holyoke College, Mills College, and Simmons College—that have updated their admissions policies to take transgender women’s applications into consideration.

The question that remains is just how much equality these enlightened colleges will permit between XXers and XYers.

Will they sexually integrate all of their facilities? Or will they endeavor to develop the morally repugnant policy of “separate but equal”? (For more from the author of “The Unforeseen Consequences of Transgenderism” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

29829421110_c710ea2e3c_b (2)

Trump Makes Next Move to Shape Federal Judiciary

President Donald Trump has tapped a federal district judge from his list of potential Supreme Court picks to be his first nominee to a federal appellate court—putting Trump slightly behind President Barack Obama, but ahead of President George W. Bush in shaping the judiciary.

The White House announced Tuesday that Trump intended to nominate U.S. District Judge Amul R. Thapar to serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.

Thapar, son of Indian-American immigrants and a former federal prosecutor, now serves as a federal judge in the Eastern District of Kentucky. Bush appointed him in 2008.

The announcement for a nomination comes as Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, is going through his confirmation hearings in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Appeals court judges can be nearly as important as Supreme Court judges since the high court is limited in the number of cases it accepts.

There are 19 appellate court vacancies across the United States that Trump could fill, and 96 on federal district courts, according to Elizabeth Slattery, a legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

There are also two vacancies on the U.S. Court of International Trade and six on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. There are a total of 677 authorized district judgeships and 179 total court of appeals judgeships.

“This is a great sign that President Trump takes lower courts seriously,” Slattery told The Daily Signal. “The last administration did not make lower court judges a priority, and that ended up being good for conservatives because it has left Trump with a lot of opportunities. There was a lot of thought that the president would wait until the Gorsuch nomination reached its conclusion.”

Given his position on the Trump campaign’s Supreme Court list of 21 names, this could be grooming Thapar for the Supreme Court, said Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative legal group, and a senior legal fellow for FreedomWorks.

“Everyone on that list was ranked somewhere from good to great as far as being a constitutionalist,” Levey told The Daily Signal. “Certainly if he is qualified to be on the Supreme Court, he is qualified to be on an appeals court. He would be the first Indian-American on the Supreme Court. There is no better way to give him credentials.”

Obama’s first appeals court nomination was on March 17, 2009, naming David Hamilton to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Obama had 49 appeals court judges confirmed to the bench during his two terms. Obama made his first district court nomination on June 25, 2009, naming Jeffrey Viken to the U.S. District of South Dakota. A total of 270 Obama district court nominees were confirmed.

Bush’s first appeals court nomination did not happen until May 9, 2001, when he named Roger Gregory to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That same month, Bush nominated Richard F. Cebull to serve as the judge for the U.S. District of Montana. Bush named a total of 61 appeals court judges that the Senate confirmed and filled a total of 263 vacancies on district courts.

President Bill Clinton outdid both Bush and Obama, naming 62 appeals court judges and 306 district judges.

As for Thapar, before serving on the bench, he was the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. He was previously an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of Ohio and in the District of Columbia.

Thapar began his legal career in private practice. He clerked for Judge S. Arthur Spiegel on the District Court for the Southern District of Ohio and then with Judge Nathaniel R. Jones of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, to which Trump has selected Thapar to serve on. Thapar received his bachelor’s degree from Boston College in 1991 and his Juris Doctor from the University of California, Berkeley. (For more from the author of “Trump Makes Next Move to Shape Federal Judiciary” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


Where the Fight Against ISIS Stands, and How the US Can Win

The Trump administration has invited 68 countries and international organizations to attend a summit in Washington on Wednesday to coordinate policies to defeat the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will lead the two-day gathering of foreign ministers in synchronizing coalition efforts to destroy ISIS on the battlefield, prevent it from staging a comeback, and deprive it of money, arms, and recruits.

The military campaign launched by the anti-ISIS coalition has made considerable progress in recent months. The ongoing offensives to push ISIS out of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, and seize Raqqa, the de facto ISIS capital city in Syria, will be key topics at the summit.

The Iraqi army, in coordination with Iraqi Kurdish and Shiite militias, launched the offensive against Mosul in October, and has surrounded and retaken most of the city. They have been aided by a U.S.-led air campaign and supported by U.S. advisers, trainers, artillery batteries, and special operations forces.

Defeating ISIS in Syria is likely to be much more difficult than in Iraq because of the lack of reliable partners on the ground.

Syria’s brutal dictatorship has long been hostile to the United States. Backed by Russia and Iran, President Bashar al-Assad’s regime has focused its military attacks not on ISIS, but against more moderate rebel groups, including some supported by the United States.

Washington has been working with Syrian Kurdish militias, which have been effective military forces, but they are handicapped by the fact that they are feared and resented in the predominantly Arab areas that ISIS controls.

Moreover, Turkey considers them to be terrorists due to their affiliation with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a terrorist group that Turkey has been fighting on and off since 1984.

The Pentagon in recent weeks has deployed several hundred Army rangers and Marines to Syria to bolster Syrian rebel groups and provide artillery support to help them defeat ISIS. This is in addition to an estimated 500 American special operations personnel already in Syria.

The Trump administration’s revised plans for seizing Raqqa reportedly call for an enhanced U.S. military role, including the deployment of additional U.S. special operations forces, artillery, and attack helicopters.

More Help Needed

Washington also should press its NATO allies and Arab coalition members to provide more military forces and support for the impending offensive against Raqqa.

The anti-ISIS summit also is an opportunity to develop a supportive international framework for transforming the military defeat of ISIS into a sustainable long-term political defeat.

The summit meeting should focus on how to restore law and order and enable self-government in areas of Syria liberated from ISIS. This means recruiting as many local Sunni Arabs as possible to root out ISIS and preclude it from resurging.

Washington also should press coalition members to take more effective steps to choke off fundraising for ISIS, combat its internet recruitment efforts, and discredit its propaganda.

The summit meeting also should focus on enlisting coalition members–particularly the rich Sunni Arab oil kingdoms—to provide adequate financial support for humanitarian aid for Syria’s huge refugee population and help Syrians to eventually rebuild cities shattered by the war.

But as long as Syria’s ferocious civil war rages on, international efforts to ease the humanitarian catastrophe, stabilize the country, and permanently bury ISIS will remain precarious exercises.

Washington should lead international diplomatic efforts to pressure the Assad regime to accept a political settlement to end the conflict, including the full autonomy of regions that have expelled the regime’s repressive presence.

To nail the ISIS coffin shut, Washington must use the summit meeting to coordinate coalition efforts not only on the military front, but on the diplomatic, counterterrorism, humanitarian, and self-government fronts as well. (For more from the author of “Where the Fight Against ISIS Stands, and How the US Can Win” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

25982302985_7cf1db94e3_b (1)

Report: FBI Investigation Into Trump-Russian Connects Instigated by Clinton Opposition Researcher

The FBI investigation into potential connections between the Trump campaign and the Russian government began just weeks after a former British spy doing opposition research for Hillary Clinton supporters briefed bureau agents on evidence he had collected on such ties, Yahoo News reported Monday.

According to Chief Investigative Correspondent Michael Isikoff, Christopher Steele, a former British MI-6 intelligence officer specializing in Russian operations, had been hired as an investigator by Fusion GPS, an opposition research firm working on behalf of Clinton. On July 5, 2016, Steele went to the FBI with what he’d compiled on contact between Trump advisers and Kremlin officials.

The early contact between Steele and the bureau now appears to have set in motion a chain of events that led to Monday’s extraordinary testimony by Comey that the bureau has been actively investigating possible links between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin since “late July” — or more than three months before Election Day.

If true, this would put the match of the fuse for this Russian business in the hand of someone with a vested interest in helping Hillary Clinton take down Trump. Further, the calendar raises an intriguing possibility.

The Curious Timing of the Plane on the Tarmac

Why is the July 5th date significant? For starters, it is the day FBI Director James Comey stood in front of the nation, explained all the egregious ways Hillary Clinton had violated and flouted the law in the handling of classified information, then said he was recommending against prosecuting her.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch quickly accepted the recommendation.

Days earlier, on June 27, Lynch had secretly met on a tarmac in Phoenix with Bill Clinton. In the dust-up after the rendezvous was revealed, Lynch recused herself from the Hillary email investigation.

But perhaps all eyes were on the wrong prize. Perhaps emails had as much to do with the meeting as photos of grandchildren. Let’s add Steele into the mix.

Would Steele have taken his bag of goodies to the FBI first? No. He would go to his client, Fusion GPS. The opposition research firm then goes to their client, and soon the Clinton campaign has their hands on explosive allegations that Donald Trump is in cahoots with the Russians. What are the Clinton’s going to do with the information?

Naturally, bring the goodies to someone who can do the most damage with it. Namely, their old friend, the Attorney General of the United States.

Bill’s pitch would be pretty simple: “We have information to share about potential criminal wrongdoing and interference in the election by a foreign power, and I have to deliver it to you personally.” (This would also explain the still-simmering mystery over why Lynch would agree to meet with Clinton, knowing that, given the on-going Hillary investigation, such a meeting was a gross breach of ethics.)

If Lynch Bites

Here’s the beauty. If Lynch bites, you have Donald Trump under investigation during the final months of the campaign. You have justification to have friendly electronic ears and eyes trained on his operations, and who knows what will emerge? Even if she doesn’t bite, you and your billion dollar campaign war chest still have Steele’s information to use politically.

Or maybe Lynch just says, “Bill, don’t get me involved. If you really have something, have your guy take it to the FBI.”

Is that what happened? We do know that within days of that prearranged secret meeting, the Clinton opposition researcher was knocking on Comey’s door and an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia was set in motion with all the snooping and surveilling that would entail. We also know the fruit of that intelligence was spread around the administration and friendly media outlets like orange slices at a youth soccer tournament.

Questions for the Attorney General-Turned #Resistance Champion

If Lynn has a few moments between her calls of support for the anti-Trump resistance, perhaps she can answer a few questions:

“When did you first hear of any Trump-Russian connections?”

“From whom?”

“What action did you take with that information?”

“When did the White House get wind of it?”

“Did you discuss in any way shape or form Donald Trump, his associates and/or the Russians during your secret meeting with Bill Clinton?”

“Would you care to say that under oath?”

“Given you met with the husband of Donald Trump’s opponent right around the time the FBI got involved in investigating Trump, did you recuse yourself from that investigation?”

“Do you consider yourself a political opponent of Donald Trump?”

And finally, “Do you agree with The Federalist‘s Mollie Hemingway that ‘we really should be having a conversation about the surveillance of a political opponent during a campaign and what that means’?”

Perhaps Lynch already did have a conversation about the surveillance of a political opponent during a campaign.

“A Big Gray Cloud”

House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif) says the FBI bombshell announcement of the on-going investigation — presented by Comey with the permission of an Obama hold-over at the Department of Justice — has left a “big gray cloud” over Trump’s White House.

So let a full investigation continue. And as more sunlight enters into the situation it’ll be curious to see who, despite the clouds, ends up burned. (For more from the author of “Report: FBI Investigation Into Trump-Russian Connects Instigated by Clinton Opposition Researcher” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


Neil Gorsuch Shows Christians Why We Need to Build up Our Own Elites

Judge Neil Gorsuch’s performance before the Senate has been very encouraging. His knowledge, training and intellectual rigor put the demagogic Democrats to shame. So far he seems like a worthy heir to Antonin Scalia. Let’s hope that America watches these hearings and learns that there is a strong and substantive intellectual case for respecting the Constitution as it was written.

And let’s be thankful for a moment for the existence of Christian or pro-Christian elites. It’s a gravely endangered species, as ruthlessly hunted and rare as white rhinos or tigers, and arguably even more important.

Populism Is Great, But It’s Not Enough

I have written quite a bit in defense of the impulse behind today’s populism, both in Europe and America. Donald Trump’s victory in the primaries over “made man” Jeb Bush, wunderkind Marco Rubio, and self-made legal genius Ted Cruz (among others) was stunning. His defeat of Hillary Clinton was nothing less, I think, than divine intervention. It gave our country what might be its last chance to step back from the brink.

Both victories were possible because Trump saw that our country’s anointed elites — and even the elites within the GOP — are profoundly out of touch with the views, worries, and day-to-day experience of ordinary Americans. That’s true on issues from culture and foreign policy to mass, low-skill immigration.

Europe’s dominant classes are even more disconnected. They shrug at the Continent’s plummeting birth rate, tell their drivers to avoid the “no-go” areas now dotting their countries’ major cities, and count on millions of sullen, barely employable radical Muslims to fund their collapsing pension plans. Yeah, that will work out just fine.

We Need Faithful Elites

As someone who backed Pat Buchanan in 1992, 1996, and 2000, I think have the populist street cred to say this: We also need elites.

We need the right people, with top talent and the best training, to take on the worst that our enemies have to throw at us, and give as good as they get.

We need Christians and conservatives who can argue with icy logic before the Supreme Court, and lovingly stroke the heart strings when speaking to the public.

We need academics rigorously trained in the humanities to pass on the glorious culture that is Christian humanism.

We also need research scientists who can analyze and debunk the grandiose claims of techno-utopians. When some guy in a white lab coat from MIT promises us that mixing the DNA of humans and pigs will allow us to upload our souls onto the Internet and live forever as gods (or something), we need another guy in an even whiter coat who can dismantle those ideas in detail. Just waving the Bible or the Summa Theologica isn’t enough. That’s how we lose.

Learn from the Scopes Monkey Trial

Watch that great piece of anti-Christian (and largely fictional) propaganda, Inherit the Wind. The film shows how in the Scopes “Monkey Trial,” atheist Clarence Darrow used his very slight advantage in scientific knowledge to paint the great William Jennings Bryan as a scripture-blinkered rube.

In fact, historians have pointed out that Bryan’s deepest concern was not for the inerrancy of scripture, but the wicked uses that eugenicists were already making of Darwin. Even as that trial unfolded, Margaret Sanger was conspiring with misanthropic elitists to impose forced sterilization laws in a dozen American states. Their “scientific” basis? Appropriated Darwinism. This toxic pseudo-science even made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, as Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in defense of such forced sterilization laws that “three generations of imbeciles is enough.”

It’s too bad that Bryan didn’t have the science background to put the pseudo-science of eugenics itself on trial.

Where Will the Next Neil Gorsuch Go to Law School?

Imagine if Neil Gorsuch had not been trained in legal and moral thinking at (among other places) Oxford University, by a brilliant scholar and consistent thinker like John Finnis. How would he be doing under hostile questioning by ax-grinding Democrats armed with carefully crafted talking points by dozens of left-wing judicial activists?

Actually, you don’t need to make the imaginative experiment. Just read up on the performance of the poorly prepared attorney picked by the Trump team to defend its first Executive Order on immigration. It was embarrassing. When a conservative administration’s representative can’t out-perform the clowns on the Ninth Circus Court, you know you have a personnel problem.

That problem’s about to get much, much worse. We need to figure out what to do about it. I worked for ten years with Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a nexus for conservative faculty in a dozen different fields. We had members with brilliant records in history, English, law, political science, you name it. One thing those people have in common: Most of them are over 50. A lot are over 60. Some of the best have already retired, or gone to God.

As graduate schools in such fields become more radicalized, as tenure committees use both affirmative action and blatantly political standards in picking future faculty, they are strangling the next generation of conservative elites in the cradle.

Would the next Neil Gorsuch, or Ted Cruz, even get into a top-tier law school? (Harvard Law just eliminated the requirement for the LSATs, freeing its admissions staff to be more arbitrary.)

Would they get recommendations to work at a top law firm? Would such a law firm hire them, given that it was almost impossible to find attorneys willing to oppose the LGBT lobby in Obergefell v. Hodges, for fear of boycotts and harassment? How long will it before membership in the Federalist Society, the lawyers group that drew up President Trump’s “short list” of potential SCOTUS nominees, is a crippling career impediment? Where will find the people with credentials in the humanities to train future mainstream scholars in social sciences and the humanities?

We Need Graduate Schools and Law Schools of Our Own

Conservatives and Christians have made attempts to work around the legal bottleneck, with mixed success. A faithfully Christian law school in Canada, Trinity Western, lost its accreditation because of its commitment to biblical values. While American “alternative” law schools such as Ave Maria and Regent University law schools turn out very competent lawyers, I doubt very much that we’ll be seeing Supreme Court nominees who graduated from either one anytime soon.

We’re about to enter a cultural, political, and legal desert, as the left’s stranglehold over elite institutions exerts its long-term intended effect. Christians and conservatives need to wake up and start pouring money and thought into how we can smuggle our future leaders past the left’s starvation blockade. (For more from the author of “Neil Gorsuch Shows Christians Why We Need to Build up Our Own Elites” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


Teens Abusing Opioids Are Getting Their Painkillers Legally

A majority of teens abusing opiate based painkillers began their addictions through legally prescribed medication from a doctor, according to a new study in the journal Pediatrics.

Researchers gathered data from 1976 through 2015 and found a correlation between painkiller abuse and previous prescriptions. Roughly eight percent of teens are currently abusing opioid medication, according to the researchers from the University of Michigan. The majority of those abusing the pills were found to have previously been prescribed opioids by a doctor, reports Live Science.

Hospitals are experiencing steep increases in the number of teens and children admitted for opioid poisoning and experts blame over-prescribed pain medications. The number of prescription pills saturating the U.S. market quadrupled since 2000, sparking the opioid epidemic and predisposing young individuals to severe addiction. Hospitalizations for opioid poisoning are up 176 percent among people ages 15 to 19 years old.

“Health professionals who prescribe opioid medications to adolescents can play an important role in reducing prescription opioid misuse,” Sean McCabe, study author and research professor at the University of Michigan, told Live Science. “We consider any rate of non-medical use of prescription opioids alarming, based on the known adverse consequences associated with this behavior.”

The majority of new heroin addicts begin with a dependence on prescription painkillers, before transitioning after building high tolerances that make the pills too expensive. Heroin use among U.S. teens more than doubled over the past 10 years. Officials with the Drug Enforcement Administration say four out of five heroin addicts started with painkillers. (Read more from “Teens Abusing Opioids Are Getting Their Painkillers Legally” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


That’s Not Carry-On! Five-Foot Snake Loose on Alaska Flight

Anna McConnaughy was flying to Alaska’s largest city when the announcement came over the intercom: a passenger on a previous flight had brought a pet snake on board . . .

“The pilot came, and said, ‘Guys, we have some loose snake on the plane, but we don’t know where it is,’” McConnaughy said Tuesday . . .

A little boy, one of seven passengers on the Ravn Alaska commuter flight Sunday from the Alaska village of Aniak to Anchorage, was climbing on his seat when he spotted the slumbering snake. It was lying partially covered by a duffel bag near the back of the plane. (Read more from “That’s Not Carry-On! Five-Foot Snake Loose on Alaska Flight” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


US-Israel Partnership Just Added Something Revolutionary

The defense partnership between the United States and Israel is set to reap the benefits of perhaps its greatest combined innovation to date.

Israel will soon add a revolutionary new missile defense system to its defense arsenal, a senior Israeli Air Force official said Monday. Known as “David’s Sling,” or “Magic Wand,” the joint U.S.-Israel creation will become fully operational at the beginning of April.

David’s Sling will protect Israel from medium-range missiles, as part of its three-tier defense system that also guards the country’s citizens from smaller short-range rockets and long-range ballistic threats.

Iron Dome, which achieved incredible success (with a 90 percent interception rate) in Israel’s latest flare-up with the Hamas terrorist group in 2014, guards the country against short-range threats. Multiple Iron Dome batteries are often activated amid conflict so Israel can deter threats aiming to overwhelm the systems.

Its Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 systems protect against long-range ballistic threats. The newly deployed Arrow was used for the first time on Friday to intercept a 440-pound missile fired from Syria. According to the Associated Press, the Syrian missile targeted Israeli jets returning from a strike on a Hezbollah weapons convoy.

David’s Sling, Iron Dome and Arrow have all been developed jointly by Israel and the United States, highlighting the successes and innovation produced by the defense partnership.

“In the next two weeks we will declare operational the David’s Sling and at that time we will have completed our multi-tier (defence capability),” an Israeli official said. “I’m sure that together with the Iron Dome and the Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 it will enhance our ability to deal with threats.”

David’s Sling has been jointly developed by Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and the American defense company Raytheon. It is promoted as a more advanced version of the U.S.-made Patriot surface-to-air missile.

Much of the $3.1 billion in annual aid Israel receives from the United States goes toward bolstering the aforementioned missile defense projects. The defense shield can fire upon and target both enemy aircraft and incoming cruise missiles. David’s Sling has a range three times that of the Iron Dome, and the integrated system can undergo constant upgrades.

Israel faces a variety of threats from several local terrorist groups and enemy states, which include Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and ISIS, to name a handful. (For more from the author of “US-Israel Partnership Just Added Something Revolutionary” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Barack_Obama_at_Las_Vegas_Presidential_Forum (2)

Do We Have a Country or Not? Trump Must Cancel Obama’s Amnesty

We swore to ourselves that when Obama unilaterally granted work permits and Social Security cards to people here illegally — something even King George couldn’t do without Parliament — we would reverse this imperial act at the first opportunity. Now, if Trump’s DHS continues illegally handing such documentation to a class of illegal aliens that absolutely does not exist inside of law, he will be branded with a painful and embarrassing reality. Obama’s illegal immigration order defying the most foundational statutes will be left standing, while Trump’s own order, deeply rooted in statute, presidential power, and national sovereignty, will remain nullified.

It’s been several days since the judicial coup against Article I and Article II immigration powers, yet there is no sign that Trump plans to pursue any of our six recommendations for Congress to defund refugee resettlement, cut off funding for visas from dangerous countries, and reform the courts. In fact, Trump’s own budget blueprint continues funding the refugee program without placing any specific conditions on the origin of refugees.

Not only has Trump failed to aggressively push back against the courts and use his political capital with Congress to codify his executive order into the budget, but he is continuing to allow Obama’s amnesty to stand. DHS Secretary John Kelly told reporters on Friday that recipients of Obama’s illegal amnesty are “the least of my worries.” This sentiment misses the point because A) not all of them are outstanding residents and B) this is not just about declining to deport illegal aliens, this is about illegally granting them affirmative status outside of the law. How can a Trump administration continue to actively steal American sovereignty and violate the law for even one day? The law doesn’t say that if people are here illegally but don’t rob a bank, they are entitled to Social Security cards.

But it gets worse.

As we noted last month, the same courts that are engaging in civil disobedience and nullifying Trump’s common sense lawful immigration guidance are also demanding that Arizona offer driver’s licenses to recipients of Obama’s amnesty. A world turned upside down, indeed. Does the president not feel any sense of embarrassment or impotence at the fact that the courts are eating his lunch while his own DHS secretary continues the illegal immigration order of his predecessor and enables the courts to steal the sovereignty of the states and the people?

Ideally, Trump would work with conservatives to immediately enact his immigration agenda through Congress and most immediately through the budget process. But absent such action, can he at least get rid of Obama’s illegal immigration order?

“Obama immigration order alive, Trump order dead” is not exactly the slogan we want Democrats chanting in 2018, but that is the end-game unless the president acts immediately.

To quote candidate Trump, “we either have a country or we don’t have a country.” (For more from the author of “Do We Have a Country or Not? Trump Must Cancel Obama’s Amnesty” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.