Where Abortion Stands Legally Today

As giant abortion provider Planned Parenthood celebrates its 100th anniversary this week, pro-lifers led by The Stream are commemorating #100forlife to remember all who have died due to abortion.

It comes forty-three years after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade — permitting abortions during the three trimesters of pregnancy, and allowing greater regulatory power by states during the second and third trimesters. To come up with this odd, three-tier ruling, the court relied upon a tortured interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, finding in the “penumbras” of the Constitution a right to privacy fundamental to the concept of liberty.

While abortion remains legal in the U.S., the laws governing it have changed significantly in recent years. Some of those modifications are state laws that impose additional requirements before having an abortion, or restrictions on when or how an abortion may be procured. Most of the laws came as the focus of the pro-life movement expanded from abortion center protests and sidewalk counseling to include passing state and federal legislation.

The movement was emboldened to take this route by Gonzales v. Carhart in 2007, in which the Supreme Court upheld a nationwide ban on partial-birth abortions.

These laws, which added new requirements and regulations for abortions, have successfully resulted in the shutdown of abortion centers. Five states now have only one abortion facility. According to the abortion rights research organization Guttmacher Institute, in the late 1980s, there was a high of 705 centers nationwide. By 2011, that number had dropped to 583, and others have closed since.

The laws may also be contributing to a decrease in the number of abortions. The Guttmacher Institute reported a high of 1,590,750 abortions in 1988. That number has declined almost every year since then, to 1,058,490 in 2011, equivalent to the level in the mid-1970s shortly after abortion was legalized.

Significant Supreme Court Victories That Reversed the Abortion Trend
Since Roe v. Wade, there have been several Supreme Court decisions that struck down or upheld state laws regulating abortion — overall, in balance favorable to the pro-life movement. In the 1980 decision Harris v. McRae, the court upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits most federal funding of abortions, except in the case of rape, incest or danger to the mother’s life.

Nine years later, in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the court upheld Missouri’s ban on the use of public facilities and employees for abortions, and the state’s requirement that doctors test for fetal viability at 24 weeks.

A Supreme Court case in 1992 dealt the biggest blow to Roe v. Wade. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court backed off from the convoluted, messy Roe precedent prohibiting states from regulating abortion during the first trimester. It permitted states to implement laws requiring such things as pre-abortion counseling, waiting limits and parental consent, so long as the requirements did not impose an “undue burden” on women.

A Legal Setback in 2016

Despite years of strides, the pro-life movement suffered a significant defeat in June when the high court struck down two abortion center regulations in Texas. In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the court invalidated laws that required abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and held abortion facilities to the standards of outpatient surgical centers. The court held that the onerousness of the regulations outweighed the state’s interest in regulating health.

Will the Generally Pro-life Trend Continue?

The Supreme Court ultimately has the final say, rightly or wrongly, on abortion laws. Whether pro-life advocates will be able to continue the trend of stripping away parts of Roe v. Wade depends on the future makeup of the Court. If Democrat Hillary Clinton becomes president, she will appoint left-leaning justices who will make up a majority of the court and strike down pro-life laws. If Republican Donald Trump wins the election, he has promised to appoint mostly right-leaning justices who will have the opposite effect. (For more from the author of “Where Abortion Stands Legally Today” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Limbaugh: Still Voting for Trump; Must Defeat Clinton

Each passing day, this presidential election becomes more distasteful, but that doesn’t relieve me of my duty to do what I believe is right.

During the primaries, there were 17 GOP candidates, and I chose the one I believed would be the best for America. Now my realistic choices have been narrowed to two candidates — Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton — one of whom will be the next president.

What does this mean for me? Well, some people on the right faced with this binary choice have concluded they can’t in good conscience vote for Trump, no matter how bad Clinton is. Some acknowledge that Clinton is terrible but believe that Trump could do more damage to conservatism and thus the nation in the long run — even more than a Clinton presidency at this precarious moment in our nation’s history.

I confess that I momentarily weighed all the possible scenarios, but I could never remotely convince myself that a Trump presidency would be worse for the nation than a Clinton one. I have not changed my mind despite the recent charges against Trump.

We are used to seeing Republicans beating one another up during the primaries, and the most recent three cycles — 2008, 2012 and 2016 — involved extremely vicious infighting in some cases. As a frequenter of Twitter, I have witnessed this firsthand. This year’s primary was hands down the worst, but that’s not the only way this year is different. In the previous two cycles, there was some residual discontentment, but most eventually united around the GOP nominee, notwithstanding lingering rumors that millions of evangelicals sat out the 2012 election.

The fighting among the never-Trumpers, the Trumpers and the never-Hillarys is approaching a fever pitch, with mutual accusations of abject immorality.

As the election gets closer, I see the horrors of a Clinton presidency in increasingly clearer relief. I acknowledge that this may cause me to rationalize some of my earlier distaste for some things about Trump, but I have to remember that my vote for Trump isn’t an endorsement of everything he’s done. I’m not saying I no longer have reservations about him or his policies. I do.

My decision to vote for Trump isn’t a contradiction of my position during the Clinton impeachment that character matters or that private conduct is relevant in the election of public officials. Nor am I betraying my Christian values to vote for a candidate who, in almost any scenario I can imagine, would be better for America than Clinton. People suggesting that Christians voting for Trump have sold their souls are ignoring the moral implications of not voting for Trump and thereby enabling Clinton’s destruction of our nation. Now that, my conscience wouldn’t tolerate, though I don’t judge those who disagree with me on this.

If I were voting for Trump in a vacuum, this would be different. But Clinton isn’t a vacuum. She’s more like a vulture lying in wait to end the republic as we know it. Accuse me of hyperbole or alarmism if you must, but I genuinely fear Clinton could do irreversible damage to the country. And millions agree with me.

Some say, “Look at what you are condoning if you vote for Trump.” And I say, “I’m condoning nothing, but if you want to use that metric, look at what you’re condoning if you don’t try to do everything you can to prevent another Obama-Clinton term.” Evangelicals withdrawing their support for Trump need to consider what they’re abetting by not doing everything in their power to prevent Clinton’s election. In my view, we can’t pretend we have other choices and wash our hands of responsibility by sitting this out. Nor does acknowledging that God is in control absolve us, as Christians, from doing our part.

If you want to know what we’d be in for with Clinton, consider what she’s done and how she’s wholly escaped accountability for all of it. In every respect, she is worse than the worst allegations against Trump, including the treatment of women.

Look at what happens when Democrats are in control. The Justice Department and IRS have been politicized. If recent reports about the outrage of FBI agents over Director James Comey’s refusal to indict Clinton for her email felonies are even 25 percent true, this is incredible. Clinton won’t even get a wrist slap. Consider also the Clinton Foundation corruption, as well as the WikiLeaks bombshells and the media collusion in ignoring them.

Fear a Trump presidency if you choose, but in electing Clinton, America would be ratifying her egregious misconduct, her self-serving corruption and President Obama’s agenda on steroids. It would be giving her a mandate from hell.

It’s not just about Supreme Court appointments, though more liberal activists would enable an unprecedented assault on our liberties and the Constitution. A Clinton presidency would result in more babies destroyed in the womb; more encroachments on the Second Amendment; further degradation of the military; open borders and all that entails; the continued disaster of Obamacare and possibly worse with single-payer, which has always been Clinton’s dream; higher taxes and dramatically increased regulations; ongoing economic malaise; more government dependency; continuing escalation of racial tensions; a further breakdown in law and order, with more violence in the streets and an ongoing war on cops; the acceleration of the dangerous national debt and of the insolvency of our entitlement programs; an escalation of the war on business; more demonization of the so-called wealthy; further deterioration of our vital relationship with Israel; more domestic and foreign terrorism; furt! her proliferation of the Islamic State group; the sucking of more revenue and human resources into environmental and globalist projects; a possible IRS vendetta against Clinton’s Republican and conservative opponents; nightmares from Iran; and more hostility to the energy industry, making us less energy-independent.

We’ve already seen the one-sidedness that allows Clinton to escape scrutiny and accountability, and she’s not in power. Imagine if she were. Could a Clinton presidency finally succeed in suppressing the dissent of political opponents — including through the so-called Fairness Doctrine, designed to emasculate conservative talk radio?

In short, if Clinton were to win, in all likelihood, she would consummate Obama’s crusade to fundamentally transform America into something the Framers and most of us never envisioned and couldn’t tolerate. Suffice it to say that I am not going to be shamed on moral grounds for fighting to prevent this calamity. (For more from the author of “Limbaugh: Still Voting for Trump; Must Defeat Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Drop the Act and Hand Over Your Catholic Card, Tim Kaine

This week vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine, D-Va. (F, 0%) proved once again that the only “ism” he’s interested in defending is progressivism.

Kaine appeared on ABC’s “The View” Thursday, where he was asked to comment on this week’s Wikileaks email dump that exposed the anti-Catholic views of top Clinton campaign officials, as well as the active role of progressive think tanks in promoting antipathy for traditional Church teachings on marriage, contraception, and abortion.

But instead of taking the opportunity to address the content of the emails, Kaine, a self-professed Catholic, pointed the finger at Russia:

“First thing on the WikiLeaks … I mean, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence has said that this is hacking that Russians are behind it, the Russian government is behind it. So, anybody that would hack to try to destabilize an election, you can’t automatically assume that everything in all of these documents … are even real.”

Unlike the Virginia senator, Catholic officials did not hesitate to condemn the contents of the leaked emails — as well as the Clinton campaign’s refusal to do so — the Catholic Herald reported.

Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput called the emails “contemptuously anti-Catholic.” On Thursday, the diocesan website posted a column by Archbishop Chaput: “About Those Unthinking, Backward Catholics.”

“Of course it would be wonderful for the Clinton campaign to repudiate the content of these ugly WikiLeaks emails,” he writes. “All of us backward-thinking Catholics who actually believe what Scripture and the Church teach would be so very grateful.”’

Louisville Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, also released a statement in which he called the Clinton campaign emails “troubling both for the wellbeing of faith communities and the good of our country”:

“I encourage my fellow Catholic brothers and sisters, and all people of good will, to be good stewards of the precious rights we have inherited as citizens of this country. We also expect public officials to respect the rights of people to live their faith without interference from the state. When faith communities lose this right, the very idea of what it means to be an American is lost.”

Speaking on “The View” Thursday, Kaine made his case for why voters should trust the Clinton-Kaine ticket despite the leaks:

“The best way to tell about the character of somebody in public life, in my view, is to look and see, do they have a passion that showed up before they were in public life? Something that animates and drives them. And then, have they held onto that passion throughout their life?”

He went on to say that Hillary Clinton has proven herself trustworthy for the Oval Office by displaying a life-long passion for “empowering families and kids.”

Well, we all know about Hillary’s so-called “pro-family” track record, and it’s certainly not compatible with Catholic doctrine. Like Clinton, Kaine has proven time and time again that he, too, holds a “public and private position” when it comes to policy. And judging by his own standards, Kaine’s passion for pushing the progressive Leftist agenda is far stronger than his so-called Catholic values. (For more from the author of “Drop the Act and Hand Over Your Catholic Card, Tim Kaine” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Revenge for Snub? Trump Accuser’s Kin Says Her Claim Is a Grab for Fame

Two more women accused Republican nominee Donald Trump of sexual assault Friday, with a relative of one of them saying that the allegation was “an attempt to regain the spotlight.”

Summer Zervos, a former contestant on Trump’s NBC reality show “The Apprentice,” said the real estate mogul kissed her and groped her after meeting at a Beverly Hills hotel in 2007 to discuss a potential job. Zervos, accompanied at a Los Angeles press conference by attorney Gloria Allred, said she was later offered a lower-paying job at a Trump golf course . . .

Late Friday, the Trump campaign released a statement purporting to be from statement in which a cousin of Zervos said he was “shocked and bewildered” by her account.

John Barry of Mission Viejo, Calif., said in the statement that Zervos spoke glowingly of Trump until the real estate mogul rebuffed an invitation to visit her restaurant during the primary campaign.

“I think Summer wishes she could still be on reality TV, and in an effort to get that back she’s saying all of these negative things about Mr. Trump,” Barry said. “That’s not how she talked about him before.” (Read more from “Revenge for Snub? Trump Accuser’s Kin Says Her Claim Is a Grab for Fame” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

American Aid Worker Kidnapped in Niger, Official Says

Gunmen stormed the house of a longtime American aid worker in Niger, killing two people before fleeing with the man toward the border with Mali, authorities said Saturday.

It is believed to be the first time an American citizen has been abducted in the vast Sahel region, where al-Qaida and criminal gangs have long targeted French nationals and other Europeans for kidnappings and demanded millions of dollars for their release.

“We are aware of reports of the kidnapping of a U.S. citizen in Niger,” a State Department official said after the abduction late Friday. “The U.S. Department of State has no higher priority than the safety and security of U.S. citizens overseas. (Read more from “American Aid Worker Kidnapped in Niger, Official Says” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What One Woman Is Doing to Take Down Planned Parenthood

While Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, is celebrating its 100th anniversary Sunday, one organization is working tirelessly to put Planned Parenthood out of business.

CEO Brandi Swindell founded Stanton Healthcare in 2006. According to the Stanton Project’s website, it has branched out from a room in a doctor’s office to an international affiliate program.

Stanton Healthcare is a nonprofit medical facility that provides pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, client advocacy, and other life-affirming programs that respect the “dignity of both mother and child.”

‘Replace’ Planned Parenthood

“Planned Parenthood is coming up on their 100th anniversary and we are coming up on our 10th. We are looking to replace and outlast Planned Parenthood,” Swindell told The Daily Signal in a phone interview.

“I founded Stanton Healthcare in 2006,” said Swindell. “I had been doing pro-life work for 16 or 17 years prior and had worked on the national level and co-founded Generation Life.”

Swindell said the pro-life mission has been a driving force in her life, but a realization of the horror of abortion came during her college years.

“This cause has been a passion of mine. I was raised with an understanding of the dignity of human life. However, the realization of what abortion was really hit me in college when my roomate got pregnant and had an abortion,” Swindell said. “Through this I really understood what abortion was and that Planned Parenthood leaves a legacy of tragedy.”

In 2011, five years after opening her first office, Swindell opened another medical clinic, Stanton Healthcare Boise, next door to a Planned Parenthood clinic.

Swindell said that she faced opposition from Planned Parenthood immediately after opening Stanton Healthcare Boise.

“When we opened our doors in Boise, Planned Parenthood was not happy to see us there. We exposed their heart that they are not about true choice. Planned Parenthood claimed that we were violating HIPAA [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act] laws and confidentiality,” Swindell said.

hen covering this confrontation, a reporter approached Swindell and asked to hear about Stanton Healthcare’s position on confidentiality and HIPAA.

“I showed the reporter a plaque prominently displayed on our waiting room office wall that says, ‘We voluntarily comply with HIPAA regulations.’ This claim from Planned Parenthood was comical because our stance in regards to both HIPAA and confidentiality was posted for all to see,” Swindell said.

A ‘Life-Affirming’ Clinic

Looking to expand Stanton Healthcare to other areas, the very first Stanton mobile unit opened in 2013, meeting the needs of women living in rural and immigrant communities throughout the state of Idaho. Modeled after the very first Stanton mobile unit, the Stanton Alabama mobile unit will soon be serving the communities of Birmingham.

Swindell established the Stanton International Affiliate Program in 2014 with the goal to reach as many women as possible with care that respects both mother and child.

The purpose of this program is to “replace abortion businesses around the world because we believe that women deserve access to quality, coercion-free cared, and compassionate alternatives to abortion,” according to the program’s website.

Along with the training center that Stanton Healthcare is working on establishing, it will also be opening a mega-center in Idaho where women can receive first-class care.

“Our center opening up in Meridian will be the first-ever life-affirming mega-clinic. We are also working on developing a Stanton Healthcare conference center where we will be training staff from across the country and around the world,” Swindell said.

Besides offering the typical services that clinics provide, Stanton Healthcare’s Meridian location will also be offering an 18-month support program that includes “options counseling, doctor referrals, parenting classes, practical support, and encouragement. Our clients and their babies get a chance at a brighter future.”

This 18-month support program is already offered at Stanton Healthcare Boise and will be expanded to all of Stanton’s affiliate clinics around the nation.

With these services available, Stanford Healthcare’s goal, according to its website, “is to be the first choice for every abortion vulnerable woman in Idaho and beyond.”

To Swindell, Stanton Healthcare is not only about providing quality health care to all women but also protecting and preserving human rights. She said:

I am primarily pro-life because I believe in human rights. Abortion has no business being in women’s health care. Planned Parenthood has sabotaged women’s health care. I founded Stanton Healthcare because I believe that Planned Parenthood has failed us and failed women.

A New Pro-Life Generation

Swindell believes that youth especially have a critical role to play in the pro-life movement.

“Stanton Healthcare has a heart for the emerging generation. Millennials are part of the Stanton revolution,” Swindell said. “We have students coming to us from across the nation that want to be part of the Stanton mission.”

The goal of Swindell and Stanton Healthcare is to reach all women with health care that respects both mother and child.

“Our goal at Stanton Healthcare is to be where Planned Parenthood is. We are setting up next to their clinics and are building a presence in Washington, D.C., and the U.N. We are the true, authentic genuine voice in women’s health care,” Swindell said.

“Women deserve better than the cold doors of an abortion facility. Pregnancy resource centers respect the dignity of every mother and child by empowering women facing difficult situations with life-affirming options,” said Melanie Israel, a research associate for the DeVos Center for Religion & Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation. (For more from the author of “What One Woman Is Doing to Take Down Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Involves Our Military in Another Islamic Civil War

Forget about Syria; the new rage is Yemen.

Obama has finally found a way to get tough on Iran. He is attacking their proxy, the Houthi rebel group in Yemen. The only problem? These Shiite rebels are fighting Al Qaeda and other Sunni factions backed by Saudi Arabia. Is this the beginning of a new Sunni-Shiite dumpster fire into which Obama will send ground troops?

Over the past few days, the Houthi rebels launched two unsuccessful missile attacks on the USS Mason, a destroyer operating in international waters in the Mandeb Straight between Yemen and the horn of Africa. Late last night, according to the Pentagon’s press office, the U.S. Navy retaliated by launching Tomahawk cruise missile strikes against three Houthi radar installations. The Houthis control the western part of Yemen, abutting the key waterway between the Horn of Africa.

On the one hand, this sounds like news to celebrate. Obama is finally retaliating against Iran, at least in a very limited way, after an enemy faction attacked our Navy. This is especially significant as today is the 241st birthday of the Navy. The problem is this is the worst hill to die on as it relates to confronting Iran. Why should we side with Saudi Arabia and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in this civil war? This is similar to the approach of attacking Assad because he is an Iranian ally, while helping ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria. Why can’t we stay out of Islamic civil wars?

Contrast this action taken by the Navy against an Iranian proxy locked in a war with Al Qaeda to Obama’s scandalous indifference to Iranian aggression mano-a-mano with the U.S. Iran has been harassing U.S. ships operating in the Persian Gulf all year, including the time they actually seized a boat and humiliated the crew, a provocation that would have been an act of war in any other era. Instead of retaliating against Iran, Obama has made them his biggest ally and has continued to violate the terms of the nuclear agreement in their favor. Meanwhile, Obama continues to serve as the Shiite air force in Iraq where our military is giving air support to Iranian-backed militias being directed by Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) Commander Qassem Soleimani.

Of all times to get tough with Iran, involving our military in the Yemeni civil war — which in itself is a creation of this administration’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood Arab Spring — is not one of them.

The only thing coherent about this administration’s Middle East policy is to involve the U.S. military in exactly wrong theaters while ignoring the real threats to our strategic interests. (For more from the author of “Obama Involves Our Military in Another Islamic Civil War” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Hits Back at Accusers by Promising to Refute Their ‘Lies’

Following a story in The New York Times on Wednesday that featured four women going on the record to accuse Donald Trump of inappropriately touching them, the Republican presidential nominee fired back hard during a rally in West Palm Beach, Fla., Thursday.

“These vicious claims about me of inappropriate conduct with women are totally and absolutely false,” Trump exclaimed.

He continued, “And the Clintons know it, and they know it very well. These claims are all fabricated. They’re pure fiction, and they’re outright lies. These events never, ever happened, and the people that said them meekly fully understand.”

In addition to denying the accusations made by his accusers, Trump said he had evidence that would prove his innocence.

“We already have substantial evidence to dispute these lies, and it will be made public in an appropriate way and at an appropriate time, very soon,” he said.

This all comes on the heels of Trump’s apologizing for comments he made in 2005 while with Access Hollywood host Billy Bush, where the real estate mogul bragged about trying to sleep with a married woman and boasted that because he was rich and famous, women would let him do anything to them, including grabbing their genitals.

Trump described these comments as “locker room talk” when questioned by moderator Anderson Cooper about them during Sunday’s presidential debate.

He also said it was simply “talk,” contrasting it with the alleged sexual misconduct of former President Bill Clinton, the husband of his opponent, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

Trump also said Thursday he believed the accusations from the four women were part of a coordinated effort to take him down.

“Now we address the slander and libels that was just last night thrown at me by the Clinton machine and The New York Times and other media outlets as part of a concerted, coordinated and vicious attack,” he said.

Trump said the timing of the allegations — matching up directly with recent document dumps by WikiLeaks that were unfavorable to Hillary Clinton — was not something that happened by chance.

“It’s not [a] coincidence that these attacks come at the exact same moment and all together at the same time as WikiLeaks releases documents exposing the massive international corruption of the Clinton machine, including 2,000 more emails just this morning.”

Trump’s attacks on The New York Times followed a letter his lawyers wrote to the newspaper Wednesday threatening a lawsuit over its “libelous” and “defamatory” article if it did not retract what was written about the four accusers. (For more from the author of “Trump Hits Back at Accusers by Promising to Refute Their ‘Lies'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hidden Camera Catches Clinton Campaign Approving Destruction of GOP Voter Registration Forms

With the help of a hidden camera, members of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff were caught condoning destroying Republican voter registration forms and making inappropriate remarks.

In the video, released Wednesday by Project Veritas Action, a journalist pretending to be a worker on the Clinton campaign spoke with Trevor LaFauci, a field organizer for the Florida Democratic Party.

The journalist told LaFauci he had ripped up several GOP registration forms, and asked if he was “OK with that.”

“Yeah,” he said.

The reporter went on to explain that he had received three Trump registrations in a row when “something in me snapped.”

“So we’re OK with that? We’re solid?” the man asked, to which LaFauci nodded and answered, “Yeah.”

When he said he was concerned about getting in trouble for ripping up the forms, LaFauci assured him it was OK and he would not be reporting the incident.

“As long as you don’t make it a habit,” LaFauci said.

LaFauci was confronted later and asked if it was alright to rip up Republican voter registrations, to which he responded, “I’m not sure what you’re talking about.”

He denied speaking with the Project Veritas reporter about the ripped up ballots before he retreated to his vehicle and left the area.

This is not the first time the Clinton campaign has been secretly videoed seemingly condoning questionable voter registration practices.

In an earlier video released by Project Veritas, taken in Las Vegas, attorney Christina Gupana was caught saying, “Do whatever you can. Yeah. Whatever you can get away with, just do it, until you get kicked out like totally.”

The video also shows staff members favoring Clinton over the other nominees.

According to anonews.co, the video has led to an investigation into possible violations of election law.

The video released Wednesday also caught one staff member discussing what he felt he could get by with and not get fired.

“They’re not going to fire me, I would like have to grab [a co-worker’s] a— like twice …” Wylie Mao said.

He went on to say, “I think the bar of acceptable conduct on this campaign is pretty, pretty low.”

When confronted about his remarks, Mao remained silent and walked away, while the journalist was asked to leave. (For more from the author of “Hidden Camera Catches Clinton Campaign Approving Destruction of GOP Voter Registration Forms” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ex-Lobbyist Jack Abramoff Goes off on Hillary

Jack Abramoff thinks Hillary Clinton should be in prison.

The former super lobbyist, who spent nearly four years in prison himself for fraud and corruption, explained why on the latest episode of “The Jamie Weinstein Show” podcast, where he also discussed the 2016 presidential race, how to fix Washington corruption and the lessons he learned over his infamous career.

Speaking of Hillary Clinton’s role in the Clinton Foundation, Abramoff said she “is the most corrupt person in the history of the United States to get this close to the presidency, including by leaps and bounds Warren Harding.”

“She’s been involved in activities that frankly I was put in prison for and that I was in prison with other people who did other things that she did,” he said.

Abramoff said Clinton was clearly “selling special access” with her and her husband’s charitable foundation. (Read more from “Ex-Lobbyist Jack Abramoff Goes off on Hillary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.