Left-Wing ‘Fact-Checkers’ Meet Their Match

Abortion kills … Jacob Isaac, a Republican congressional candidate in Texas, issued the following statement in a League of Women Voters guide:

I will work to end abortion, which is the leading cause of death for black Americans and kills as many as 1,000 black children every day.

Our friends at NewsBusters have a lengthy rebuttal to a PolitiFact “fact-check” that rates this sentence as “mostly false.” PolitiFact uses CDC terminology and the fact that some pregnancies would have resulted in stillbirths and miscarriages to say the statement is false. As NewsBusters says, “All this tweaking your terminology doesn’t change the biological fact that a living human baby with human organs and limbs and bones is being destroyed in an abortion.”

Keeping the “fact-checkers” honest … The Media Research Center, which runs NewsBusters, announced a new project yesterday. “Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers” will serve as a check on the use of opinion masquerading as fact to say conservatives are not telling the truth. The article mentioned above is part of that new project. Keeping the fact-checkers honest is a full-time job.

Oopsie … Sometimes the words just don’t come out right, as Brian Kilmeade found out this morning. Tomi Lahren has been doing man-on-the-street interviews for Fox News lately. Kilmeade, in a hilarious gaffe, thanked Lahren for “working the streets – uh, for us.” Kilmeade quickly realized what he’d said, and co-host Ainsley Earhardt covered for him. It’s well worth the quick watch. This sort of thing happens to the best of us.

Yes, people are calling for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment … At the crack of dawn this morning, CNN’s Chris Cuomo replied to a tweet by saying, “this is a lot of bunk. no one calling for 2A repeal. Stop with the bogeymen.” That’s when Commentary’s Noah Rothman stepped in with five prominent calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment — just since Monday. According to Rothman, those calling for repeal included a former Supreme Court justice, a GWU law professor, an Esquire op-ed, A Seattle Times op-ed, and a Democratic candidate in California.

This doublespeak by liberal journalists isn’t going to work any more. For decades, they’ve hid their anti-freedom agenda by saying they weren’t calling for the banning of all guns or the repeal of the Second Amendment. But that is what the end goal has always been. And now prominent people are coming out and saying it.

It wasn’t grassroots … CNN really wants you to believe that the march to suppress natural rights over the weekend was a purely grassroots effort. The network even published an article about how the “March for Our Lives” event came together. It was heavy on saying it was student-organized. While mentioning the groups that really put the event on, it downplayed them as merely helping the students instead of being the main drivers.

(For more from the author of “Left-Wing ‘Fact-Checkers’ Meet Their Match” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Did It Take Two Weeks to Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?

“Can you believe these kids?” It’s been a recurring theme of the coverage of the Parkland school shooting: the remarkable effectiveness of the high school students who created a gun control organization in the wake of the massacre. In seemingly no time, the magical kids had organized events ranging from a national march to a mass school walkout, and they’d brought in a million dollars in donations from Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney. . .

In other words, the response was professionalized. That’s not surprising, because this is what organization that gets results actually looks like. It’s not a bunch of magical kids in somebody’s living room. Nor is it surprising that the professionalization happened right off the bat. Broward County’s teacher’s union is militant, and Rep. Ted Lieu stated on Twitter that his family knows Parkland student activist David Hogg’s family, so there were plenty of opportunities for grown-ups with resources and skills to connect the kids.

On Twitter, I lost track of the number of bluechecks rhapsodizing over how effective the kids’ organizational instincts were. But organizing isn’t instinctive. It’s skilled work; you have to learn how to do it, and it takes really a lot of people. You don’t just get a few magical kids who’re amazing and naturally good at it.

The real tip-off should have been the $500,000 donations from Winfrey and Clooney. Big celebrities don’t give huge money to strangers on a whim. Somebody who knows Winfrey and Clooney called them and asked. But the press’s response was to be ever more impressed with the kids.

For two weeks, journalists abjectly failed in their jobs, which is to tell the public what’s going on. And any of them who had any familiarity with organizing campaigns absolutely knew. Matt Pearce, of the Los Angeles Times, would have been ideally placed to write an excellent article: not only is he an organizer for the Times’s union, he moderated a panel on leftist activism for the LA Times Book Festival and has the appropriate connections in organizing. Instead, he wrote about a school walkout, not what was behind it. (Read more from “Why Did It Take Two Weeks to Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Soros and Planned Parenthood-Sponsored ‘March for Our Lives’ Hypocritically Protests Our Only Real Protection Against Violent Crime

Police are on our side, for the most part, and many of them lay their lives on the line nightly to serve and protect fellow Americans and immigrants in neighborhoods that the rest of us avoid. But do they have a legal duty to respond quickly or effectively to our 9-1-1 calls?

No. If police arrive in time to prevent a tragedy, that’s nice, but it’s up to them. They aren’t legally obligated to dispatch, patrol or operate well. It’s been litigated from different angles, and it was eventually settled by the Supreme Court.

In March 1975, two men kicked down a Washington DC single mother’s door and raped her. Two upstairs neighbors heard her screams, called 9-1-1 and were told help was on the way. But it wasn’t.

When they didn’t arrive for 12 minutes, the neighbors called 9-1-1 again and were told again to sit tight, that police were coming. One shouted down to encourage the downstairs mom that police were en route.

This alerted the rapists to the women upstairs. They broke into the upstairs apartment, kidnapped all three women at knife-point, and for the next 14 hours, beat them, raped them, robbed them and forced them to perform sexual acts on one another.

The victims later sued the District of Columbia municipal government, which employs the police. The government fought the women’s lawsuit and did not settle out of court. That city, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in America, argued in court that its police owed no specific duty to the brutalized victims. The courts agreed.

The Supreme Court settled the law on this issue in a 2005 ruling. In that case, police failed to enforce a court order against a Colorado ex-husband who abducted his three daughters, ages 7, 9 and 10. The girls’ mother reported the abduction and violation of the court order, and provided reliable information on their location, but police did not follow up. The ex-husband later shot his three girls dead.

The bereaved mother later sued, based on the court order’s language that “you shall arrest” the violator. When the lawsuit reached its final appeal, the Court held that the fatal inaction was “within a well-established tradition of police discretion” despite “apparently mandatory arrest statutes.” The law of the land, since 2005, is that you have no legal right to police protection.

You do, however, have a legal right to keep and bear arms. The government is Constitutionally prohibited to infringe that right. And so you have a capacity, if you can keep it, to protect yourself, your daughters and your downstairs neighbor from violent criminals.

The 2nd Amendment was under attack Saturday, just across town from where the three women were overwhelmed and dehumanized by knife-wielding criminals in 1975. March for Our Lives organizers claimed that 2 million adolescent supporters participated, including over 800 “sibling events” across the nation. They assure us that their attack on gun rights will continue during the midterm elections this Fall.

If you have trouble remembering which is the March for Life and which is the March for Our Lives, just remember that the March for Life is the annual prolife rally that is largely ignored by the mainstream media, not breathlessly promoted. Or you can remember that the March for Life is a protest against the killing of over 60 million defenseless, unborn American children since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision.

The March for Our Lives, on the other hand, was partially funded by Planned Parenthood, an organization that has committed 8,058,657 abortions, by one count, since 1970.

“Everyone has a right,” Planned Parenthood tweeted Saturday with breathtaking irony, to lead “a life that is healthy and free of violence.” A Planned Parenthood spokesperson boasted to BuzzFeed News that the government-subsidized organization is “teaching and hosting trainings” for young anti-gun activists. They provided the students with “logistics, strategy and planning” assistance. Likewise MoveOn.org, underwitten by billionaire immigrant George Soros.

But the March for Our Lives is also funded by a number of large contributions from Hollywood celebrities, entertainers and corporate donors, including $50,000 from Joshua Kushner, brother of Trump son-in-law Jared. Some of the celebrities attended the anti-gun rally, protected by armed security.

Law enforcement failures are apparently of little interest to the NeverAgain movement. The police officer who stood inert in front of the high school he was assigned to protect, the ignored warnings about the shooter’s intentions, the FBI’s failure to follow up – none of this seems to matter as much as the opportunity to launch impassioned attacks on Republicans and the NRA. Why not?

At what point do we admit that this is not a children’s crusade? Hardened leftist adults, with other fish to fry, have provided its infrastructure, funding and even its goals. The kids have compelling and tragic stories that give them value to people who would have happily crushed their skulls and dismembered them less than two decades ago. But the kids are not in control of this movement.

I’m not a mind-reader. I don’t know how sincere the adolescents are. I’m not sure that I could have resisted, at their age, the seduction of the spotlight, the opportunity to feel like a rock star. It wouldn’t be fair to expect wisdom of them. Not now.

Although a few have surprised us: Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv, for example, considers himself a NeverAgain supporter but seeks a middle ground of hardening targets and improving security without infringing his fellow citizens’ right to keep and bear arms.

“The only way change will be accomplished,” the high school junior said, “is if we stop using inflammatory language, we sit down and have a logical discussion, we don’t call the person the enemy, we don’t shout at them and we don’t boo them. That’s the only way a positive change will be made.”

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Derangement Syndrome Strikes Again

Make Peru great again? … CNN “Republican” analyst Ana Navarro is back at it again. This time she responded to the news that Peru’s president is resigning by tweeting, “Oh how I wish we were Peru, right now.” Really, you wish we were Peru? Let’s look at some quick facts about Peru: The per capita GDP is $13,300, which is 22 percent of the US GDP per capita of $59,500. The unemployment rate in Peru is 6.7 percent, and over 20 percent of the population is in poverty. Ana, you really don’t wish we were Peru; that’s your Trump Derangement Syndrome talking again.

Biased … The media went apoplectic over the weekend when Donald Trump tweeted about the firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. That led to the Associated Press “fact-checking” the president’s tweets. As NewsBusters shows, the AP played fast and loose with the “facts” it used to perform its analysis. The cherry-picking shed the worst possible light on the tweets. Bias by omission is real, and the AP is a master at it . . .

Uh … The New York Times published obituaries of people that it missed over the years. The piece opens with, “Since 1851, obituaries in The New York Times have been dominated by white men. Now, we’re adding the stories of remarkable women.” As CR’s Chris Pandolfo noted on Twitter, the first obituary in this new format is of a man. The Times describes Marsha P. Johnson as a “transgender pioneer and activist.” The piece goes on to list many others, but really — that’s who they put at the top of the list.

Roseanne fights back … Next week, the reboot of 1980s/90s classic “Roseanne” is premiering on ABC. Roseanne, who in real life is a supporter of Donald Trump, has said it’s realistic that her TV character would support Trump, since many of his voters are blue-collar middle-Americans. That has the media upset. The Washington Post says that Roseanne’s character reminds them of bigoted Archie Bunker. Roseanne fired back that the show is “about love.” It is a welcome sign that ABC is willing to present American families as they are, not as Hollywood wants them to be. You can read all about Roseanne’s reaction here. (For more from the author of “Trump Derangement Syndrome Strikes Again” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Iran-Pakistan Border Is a Geopolitical Powder Keg

The Iran-Pakistan border contains all the ingredients for a geopolitical explosion – regional rivalries, Sunni-Shia conflicts, ethnic insurgents, espionage, drug smuggling and human trafficking.

China considers the stability of the region so important that it brokered a series of border security meetings between Iran and Pakistan over the past year.

Much of China’s multi-billion-dollar investment in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) hinges on the commercial viability of the Pakistani port of Gwadar, near the Iranian border, for which it has a 40-year operational lease. Moreover, CPEC is the regional linchpin of the Belt and Road Initiative, an ambitious plan to connect Eurasia, the Middle East and Africa to China through a series of land-based and maritime economic zones.

Additionally, the planned Chinese naval base on Pakistan’s Jiwani peninsula, even closer to the Iranian border and located at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, is a critical military node in China’s “String of Pearls” facilities designed to dominate the strategic sea lanes in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean.

Such ambitions present a direct economic and military threat to India. Commercially, Gwadar competes with joint Iranian-Indian development of the port of Chabahar, just 150 miles to its west.

According to numerous reports, Saudi Arabia contributes to the instability of the border region by sponsoring virulently anti-Shia Sunni militant groups, such as Jaish al-Adl, who launch attacks on Iran from safe havens in Pakistan.

Iran retaliates by supporting the Baloch Liberation Front (BLF), an ethnic separatist group, whose sanctuaries and leader, Dr. Allah Nazar Baloch, are claimed to be inside Iranian territory and routinely conduct cross-border operations against Pakistani government targets. Members of the BLF are suspected to be in contact with Iranian intelligence, often through drug lords acting as intermediaries. BLF members are occasionally confused with their anti-Shia counterparts. Some months ago, a BLF team was mistakenly attacked by Iranian border guards. One member, shot in the encounter, was taken to Imam Ali Hospital in Chabahar for treatment, but later died of his wounds. The other team members were subsequently released by Iranian forces.

There are also narco-terrorists groups on the Pakistani side of the border with indirect links to the government in Islamabad. Lashkar-e-Khorasan, a alleged Islamic State affiliate, has been reportedly involved in “cleansing” western Balochistan of Sufi Zikris, Shia Hazaras, Hindus, Christians, Ahahmadis, Sikhs or anyone else who refuses to convert to the extreme form of Sunni Islam. The purported leader of Lashkar-e-Khorasan is Mullah Shahmir Bizenjo, a resident of Turbat, whose cousin is Senator Hasil Bizenjo, a member of the National Party and currently Pakistan’s Minister of Maritime Affairs. According to the Daily Beast, one of the drug world’s most notorious opium traffickers, also from Turbat, is Imam Bizenjo aka Imam Bheel, a National Party financier, whose son, Yaqoob Bizenjo, served as a member of the Pakistan National Assembly until 2013.

A more ominous portent of Iran-Pakistan border instability, is the return of the “Zainebiyoun” brigade. As a result of its involvement in the Syrian conflict, Iran created a unit composed of

Pakistani Shia volunteers trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC), who have gained extensive combat experience fighting for the Assad regime against Sunni militants. It is rumored that “Zainebiyoun” members are now infiltrating back into Pakistan to provide the cadre for a Hazara self-defense force, a community long under attack by virulently anti-Shia extremist groups in Pakistan.

Chinese efforts towards Iran-Pakistan reconciliation has borne some fruit. In recent months, there has been a flurry of agreements in trade, defense, weapons development, counter-terrorism, banking, train service, parliamentary cooperation and, most recently, art and literature.

Iran seeks to separate Pakistan from Saudi Arabia, while Pakistan tries to balance relations with both states. China benefits by reducing tensions among all the regional players in order to advance its wider economic and military aims.

The lesson for the United States is that Afghanistan is swimming in a sea of instability and not, as we seem to presume, the focal point of that instability. American policy should be focused on burden shifting, managing and, when appropriate, exploiting instability to thwart Chinese hegemony. (For more from the author of “The Iran-Pakistan Border Is a Geopolitical Powder Keg” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Lawsuit Is a Real Threat to Trump

By The Blaze. Summer Zervos, a contestant on “The Apprentice” in 2005, is bringing a defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump.

Trump’s lawyers tried to get the case thrown out, but on Tuesday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter ruled that “no one is above the law” and Zervos can bring her case. Schecter wrote in her decision that the accusations were not related to any of Trump’s presidential duties and cited the precedent set when Paula Jones sued Bill Clinton for sexual harassment in the ’90s . . .

Glenn and Stu analyzed this story and the dangers for Trump on today’s show. Trump will obviously be in a lot more trouble if Zervos can provide evidence during her day in court, but one of the biggest risks for anyone in this situation is having to speak under oath, increasing the chances that you will make a mistake . . .

Stu pointed out that you can be pinned for a “wrongly worded phrase” once you’re under oath.

“The goal would be to wreck [Trump],” Stu said. “Just get him on something.” (Read more from “This Lawsuit Is a Real Threat to Trump” HERE)


‘No One Is Above the Law’: Trump Loses Bid to Dismiss Defamation Lawsuit by ‘Apprentice’ Contestant Who Says He Groped Her

By CNBC. A New York state judge Tuesday said “no one is above the law” as she denied President Donald Trump’s request to dismiss a defamation lawsuit by a former “Apprentice” contestant who claims he sexually groped her.

Manhattan Court Justice Jennifer Schecter’s decision, which allows the suit by Summer Zervos to proceed, rejected Trump’s argument that a sitting president cannot be subject to a state court’s jurisdiction.

Schecter cited the U.S. Supreme Court case that found a federal sexual harassment lawsuit against President Bill Clinton by former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones, who accused Clinton of exposing himself to her, could proceed when Clinton was in the White House. (Read more from “‘No One Is Above the Law’: Trump Loses Bid to Dismiss Defamation Lawsuit by ‘Apprentice’ Contestant Who Says He Groped Her” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Secret to Winning America’s New Civil War

Many people think Americans are more divided today than at any time since the Civil War – and further, that we are involved in another albeit different sort of “civil war” between two intensely opposed groups of Americans.

If this is true, we are in desperate need of understanding what we’re dealing with and why our beautiful, once-unified nation is being ripped apart – and hopefully reversing course. . .

You cannot understand America solely through a political lens anymore. A new California law, SB 219, signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown, says you can be thrown into prison for 12 months for failing to use the correct transgender pronoun. That is, for refusing to use words that never existed before – newly created pronouns like co, en, ey, xie and yo, which correspond to dozens of new genders that also never existed before in human history, like genderqueer, pangender, hijra and genderfluid . . .

If we want God to be on our side, we need to make sure we’re on His side. That means we need to repent of our own sins and obey His Commandments – first and foremost to love God and love our neighbor – and even, as Jesus Himself said, to love our enemy. Hate the sin, but never the sinner. There’s real magic in that.

Somehow, my friends, we have to discover how to overcome the angry, delusional, hysterical, anti-American, anti-God agenda that has captured the minds of too many of our fellow Americans, while at the same time embracing Christ’s way, when He said: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.” (Read more from “The Secret to Winning America’s New Civil War” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Is Right on Drug Traffickers: Heroin and Fentanyl Are Killing U.S.

Those who claim to be morally outraged by Trump’s proposal of the death penalty for drug traffickers, especially cartel leaders, either have no heart themselves or are oblivious to the worst drug epidemic ever and how it came about.

To understand the severity of the situation, we must first properly define the “opioid crisis” as it exists today and what has happened over the past four years.

What exactly is the “opioid crisis”?

We’ve always had drugs flowing into this country. But the supply and dangerous nature of the drugs coming into this country from Mexico (or from China and then distributed by the Mexican cartels) since 2013-2014 are at an epidemic level, dwarfing anything we’ve seen before. It all began with the suspension of immigration enforcement from 2010-2014 and suspension of interior enforcement. Transnational drug cartels worked with gangs and human smugglers to take advantage of Obama’s unprecedented dismantling of our borders in order to launch what should be described as chemical warfare on this country. If you read former senator and now Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ timeline on Obama’s dismantling of immigration security and border control, the timing of the drug crisis makes perfect sense.

Long before the medical profession was pressured in the ’90s (in part by government) to treat pain more often with prescription opioids such as oxycodone and hydrocodone, we had a culture of illicit drug use in this country. It was mainly marijuana and cocaine. Then it moved on to methamphetamine, and then to the more severe heroin. For the most part, this was not about pain-driven addiction, but a cultural collapse.

Beginning in the late ’90s, as prescription painkillers began to become a regular part of medical practice, the rate of overdoses on prescriptions steadily rose. The vast majority never became addicted and enjoyed a better quality of life thanks to the drugs, but commensurate with the increased use was an increase in drug overdoses by those who did become addicted.

The rate of prescriptions kept going up and peaked between 2010 and 2012 as a debate raged in the medical community and in state legislatures over whether prescription opioids were being overprescribed. Almost every state set up a monitoring program, and more than half of the states began to place restrictions on them, some of them severe. After peaking at 81.3 prescriptions per 100 persons in 2012, the rate declined precipitously, to 66.5 in 2016, according to the CDC, all the way down to 2002 levels.

The numbers are even starker on a state level. Let’s examine the states with the highest rates of drug deaths since 2012. West Virginia’s prescription opioid rate dropped from 136.9 per 100 persons in 2012 to 96 in 2016. In Ohio, it dropped from 97.5 to 75.3.; in New Hampshire, 83.7 to 64.3 (below the national average); in Pennsylvania from 83.3 to 69.5.; in Rhode Island from 83.2 to 60.3 (below national average). Yet the overall drug deaths skyrocketed to unimaginable levels in those states after prescription opioids became heavily regulated and the numbers plummeted.

Rather than a steady decline in fatalities from overdoses to match the decline in prescription opioids, everything went bonkers from 2013 to the present, after the public and politicians turned against the use of prescription opioids. We saw a spike in deaths of unfathomable proportions, getting worse every year through 2014, 2015, and 2016. The level of fatalities doubled and tripled in those states as, not surprisingly, heroin and fentanyl flooded the market.

Overdoses from illicit substances accounted for 78 percent of the 64,000 deaths in 2016, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. And all signs from 2017 state data I’ve examined point to an even sharper trajectory since then.

This chart says it all:

Maryland is one of the crisis states, with drug deaths quadrupling over the past five years, even as prescription opioid rates have dropped well below the national average. This one chart from the Maryland Department of Health is worth 1,000 words:

And here is the story in Ohio, the second worst drug overdose state:

Amazingly, some states with sky-high opioid prescription rates, such as Alabama and Arkansas, have some of the lowest overdose death rates in the country. And in Ohio, with the second highest rate of deaths from overdoses, just 13.9 percent had prescription opioids listed on the death certificate, while 58 percent had fentanyl and 38 percent heroin. Many of the latter had both. Prescription opioid deaths accounted for only 18 percent of overdose deaths in Maryland in 2017 and 12.2 percent of overdose deaths in Pennsylvania in 2016. The numbers of cocaine and meth overdoses have also gone up in Ohio and most states, but not nearly as much as heroin and fentanyl.

What is happening and why?

The epidemic we are facing today is not from prescription opioids, at least not more than it has been for an entire generation. The number of prescriptions has already been reduced dramatically, and the overdose rate has leveled off and even dropped in some of the most affected states since 2016, like Ohio. Almost the entirety of the increased fatalities above the long-term existing trajectory beginning in 2012 were from illicit drugs and mainly from the most dangerous one – heroin. Then, as heroin use began to skyrocket in 2013-2014, we began to see the growth of the cursed synthetic drug – fentanyl – which is 50-100 times stronger than morphine and can kill in small quantities. It’s often laced into heroin. In pretty much every state, fentanyl has skyrocketed to such a level that it has overtaken heroin as the leading drug killer. Cocaine and meth overdoses have also gone up a lot but are not nearly as serious.

Thus, we don’t have “an opioid crisis;” we have a heroin and fentanyl crisis.

Even worse, beginning in 2016 and 2017, carfentanil, which is 10,000 times stronger than morphine, has hit the streets. It is used in elephant tranquilizers and is essentially a form of chemical warfare against this country. One grain of this substance will kill someone, and you essentially need a hazmat team to deal with it or even get near it. Dozens of people died from it in my home state of Maryland and in many other states hardest hit by this epidemic.

The drug cartels have launched chemical warfare against us – and we are helping

What happened circa 2013 and just before? As I have noted before and will write extensively about in the coming weeks, this was the result of suspending our borders, the promise of amnesty, and the surge of hundreds of thousands of young Central American males who served as drug mules, enriching the drug cartels who control the smuggling routes and earn a profit from every illegal smuggled over – whether that illegal is a bad hombre or merely “doing the jobs Americans won’t do.”

Mexican heroin used to be dirty, impure, black tar heroin. Now, it’s high-purity powder heroin because the cartels were so enriched by the DACA-drive smuggling that they were able to ramp up their production and networks while using the new mules and gangs entering the country to expand their empires. They also began producing fentanyl, and with their expanded distribution network on our soil, were also able to traffic the Chinese fentanyl and carfentanil sent initially by mail.

The correlation with the rise in MS-13 as a result of the UAC surge in 2013-2015 completes the circle of cause and effect, because in recent years MS-13 gangs have become the distributers for the drug cartels. In a 2013 report, the Texas Department of Public Safety warned of the developing relationships between the drug cartels and the gangs and that the gangs “increase their power and acquire wholesale quantities of drugs at lower prices, while the cartels extend their network of connections deeper into the United States.” In subsequent reports in 2016 and 2017, the Texas DPS noted that the relationship remained “steady” and that “as long as illicit cross-border crimes are profitable, the relationship between cartels and gangs will continue.”

Sanctuary cities have ensured that this relationship is profitable. The 2017 Director of National Intelligence Worldwide Threat Assessment noted “the staying power of Mexican trafficking networks” as a cause of the skyrocketing drug crisis.

Judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas, in a December 2013 order, charged that the Obama administration essentially “successfully complet[ed] the mission of the criminal conspiracy” of drug smugglers to smuggle people over the border on behalf of parents “at significant expense” to taxpayers. He observed that the DHS was taking actions that were “dangerous and unconscionable,” “subject to the whims of evil individuals,” resulting in the “absurd and illogical” outcome of helping “fund the illegal drug cartels which are a very real danger for both citizens of this country and Mexico.”

Hanen pointed out that “time and again, this court has been told by representatives of the government and the defense that cartels control the entire smuggling process.” He also observed that the cartels knew that teenagers would be treated leniently if caught with drugs. He therefore concluded that by dismantling immigration enforcement and promising amnesty, “the government is not only allowing them to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so.” In a footnote, Hanen ominously warned about the heroin smuggling that would likely follow, based on past history.

And the rest is indeed history. From 2013 to 2016, according to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), the level of heroin production in Mexico tripled. And not surprisingly, right after 2013, is when the entire fentanyl phenomenon took off:

There is your culprit. There is your crisis. We have gone to war around the world for much less, yet Mexican drug cartels operating on our border and on our soil are never treated as the chemical warfare it is. The politics with “our Mexican friends” always prevents us from doing what it takes to stop them, even though many of their politicians are roped in with the cartels. We treat DACA – the cause of all of this – as the solution!

We could abolish doctors and pharmaceuticals tomorrow, and it would not change the problem: chemical warfare on our country from the Mexican drug cartels who now use MS-13 and similar gangs to distribute their poison. In fact, it can be posited that some of sudden spike in the crisis after the flow of prescriptions was tightened helped push more people into the illicit drug market, which is much more dangerous. At this point, any further effort to focus solely on prescriptions without dealing with the underlying cause of the explosion in supply of the most deadly illicit drugs is the worst policy outcome possible. Worst of all, those who are throwing billions of dollars at unproven federal treatment programs refuse to support tougher sentences for drug traffickers and, in fact, are trying to dismantle the existing mandatory sentences.

There is no penalty strong enough for these monsters

Which brings us back to the drug traffickers. The very people virtue-signaling about the “opioid crisis” and demanding a national prescription-monitoring database, endless government programs to enrich the health care industry, and severe restrictions on doctors are coddling the drug cartels and doubling down on their policies that fueled the worst elements of the worst drug epidemic. How dare they oppose minimum penalties for drug traffickers?

Rep. Jim Butler, a state representative from Ohio and a health care expert, spoke to me on my podcast earlier this week and explained how the ACLU blocked legislation in Ohio that minimally raised penalties on those who sold fentanyl to people coming out of drug rehab!

As we’ve noted before, there is a bipartisan obsession with retroactively releasing drug traffickers (not drug addicts) from prison and dramatically reducing penalties. Believe what you want about marijuana and cocaine, but today we are dealing with chemical warfare in our country. Obama released close to 2,000 drug traffickers from federal prison during his final two years, many of whom committed other violent crimes in addition to trafficking meth and heroin. Yet most members of Congress want to be even more lenient. Nor do they want to deal with interior immigration enforcement. We should at least all agree to severe penalties for fentanyl trafficking. And when you look at the tens of thousands of dead Americans as a result of fentanyl, the only problem you should have is that we can only kill these people once.

For those who are “offended” at the notion of giving the death penalty to those who peddle fentanyl and carfentanil, maybe they’d be happier if we punished traffickers by having them consume their own product. After all, it’s only drugs. (For more from the author of “Trump Is Right on Drug Traffickers: Heroin and Fentanyl Are Killing U.S.” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Judges Are Destroying Our Republic

Each new day brings another court ruling more absurd and damaging to our republic than the previous one. And each new ruling is met with stunning silence from the other two branches of government. This time, courts are preparing a new constitutional right to access someone else’s Twitter account, even as they violate the inviolable provisions of the First Amendment – to abide by one’s conscience with one’s own private property.

When I saw the CNBC article on Thursday titled, “A federal judge is skeptical about whether Trump can block Twitter users,” I thought it was an early April Fools’ parody. But then I remembered that U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald had actually granted standing to a random plaintiff to sue Trump for blocking him on Twitter. Because we now live in a time when judges can place any political question – even a teenager catfight on social media – into court as a justiciable case, and the other branches of government will regard their judicial malpractice as “the law of the land.”

For years we had an epidemic of frivolous lawsuits between two parties under civil law. They were disruptive to our economy. But now we have frivolous constitutional lawsuits that are literally destroying our republic – erasing the most unambiguous rights of the Constitution while creating new imaginary rights that infringe upon the real rights, all the while elevating the role of the district judge to that of a king and even God.

On Thursday, during oral arguments in the Twitter catfight case, judicial goddess Buchwald reportedly told Trump’s lawyer, “Once it [Twitter] is a public forum, you can’t shut somebody up because you don’t like what they’re saying.”

By the way, Buchwald is the same person who accused Sarah Palin of using her son with Down syndrome, Trig, as a prop during the 2008 election. I guess she doesn’t want anyone blocking her insensitivity from their timelines on Twitter.

This is an exceedingly dangerous territory the judicial statists have just entered. They are now saying that merely blocking someone from following you on Twitter is tantamount to physically shutting them up from talking and is a violation of the First Amendment.

Think about this for a moment: The federal courts are almost unanimously saying that you must violate your conscience and serve gay weddings with your private property. You are not allowed to merely mind your own business; you will be forced to take action for someone else, according to the corrupt legal profession. And now these same people think that you have the right to someone else’s Twitter account.

Isn’t it also interesting that the Left has no problem with the Twitter corporation itself banning conservatives as “haters” (while they allow ISIS accounts), but private users cannot block other people from seeing their tweets?

Folks, this is really simple. Private property is private property. All of the following is true:

Twitter, as a private company, has the right to grant an account to anyone it chooses. I have a right to talk and write about anything I want without the government locking me up, but I don’t have a right to someone else’s forum. Yes, Twitter can ban me or anyone else.

Your private Twitter account granted to you by the organization is yours (until suspended), and nobody has a constitutional right to see your tweets.

I have the right to run my private business in accordance with my conscience, and you have no right to obtain employment or services from me.

In all of these cases, people are free to make political arguments against the policies and views of individuals and companies. We have the right to real free speech, using any platform we can find, to show Twitter’s hypocrisy as a matter of policy. Others have the right to make fun of Trump for blocking them. Still others have the right to weigh in on the prudence or “morality” of a private entity denying a service. But nobody has a constitutional right to be entitled, as a legal matter, to someone else’s property.

In the past, it took about 15-30 years for liberals to transform their political positions into legal imperatives. Now we have reached a crisis in the legal profession where essentially every Democrat political belief is now instantly enshrined as a constitutional right or mandate.

For example, last week, a unanimous ruling from the Sixth Circuit, which is not even the most liberal panel, wrote transgenderism into civil rights employment discrimination law. The Sixth joined the Seventh and Second Circuits in doing so. No matter how strongly liberals might desire this political outcome, there is no way one can posit that transgenderism is included in the 1964 law. You can’t rewrite the law from the bench. But every single Democrat appointee and even a few GOP judges have done so because they conflate their political desires with legal and constitutional mandates.

Not only are judges warping the Constitution in service of an ideology against the Constitution’s most sacred precepts, they are simultaneously elevating their power to do so.

Judicial review doesn’t mean that courts get to decide on the constitutionality of every law and political act, even when they are properly interpreting the Constitution. They can only grant relief to an individual plaintiff who has a meaningful and tangible injury from the said policy or from the act of another private citizen. Not being able to directly access someone’s Twitter account is not an injury our Founders had in mind when they vested the Supreme Court with the judicial power.

Inane rules of standing have now allowed any political movement to argue their policy preferences in court and have the judge rule on abstract policies while applying them nationwide. Just last week, Judge William Alsup, the same judge who said it’s illegal not to violate immigration law, gave standing to random kids to sue the government over global warming without an individualized, tangible, and proven grievance. What’s next? A debate about UFOs in district court?

So far, Congress obsequiously toes the line of every utterance from one of these rogue judges. To his credit, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is directly challenging the notion that a district judge has such power, but the administration is still refusing to take it to the next level.

What’s next?

It’s time for Trump to demand that Congress pass Rep. Dave Brat’s judicial reform bill, which explicitly denies lower courts the power to issue nationwide injunctions on political issues.

If not, we are about to be treated to the spectacle of the president of the United States as a lame duck who won’t even control his own Twitter account. (For more from the author of “Judges Are Destroying Our Republic” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Famous Atheist Proves the Bible Is True

It would probably be Richard Dawkins’ worst nightmare if the famous atheist said something that proved the Bible is uncannily true.

But that’s just what he did when he asked when Americans would get over their hang-ups over cannibalism. He thinks we should all start eating lab-grown “human meat,” for a reason which I think will become clear in this commentary . . .

Elsewhere, in the Ten Commandments, for example, the murder of other humans is condemned. But the Bible elsewhere clearly condemns cannibalism as a curse, as in Leviticus 26:27-30, Deuteronomy 28:52-57, Ezekiel 5:7-11, Lamentations 2:16-21 and Jeremiah 19:7-10. It’s a punishment that results from disobedience and rejection of God and His commandments. In addition, in 1 Corinthians 39, there’s a clear distinction made between the flesh of humans from the flesh of animals . . .

He apparently has reached something of a new zenith in rejection of God in human history. That’s not to say that there haven’t been societies that resorted to cannibalism or willingly chose it in history. There is little doubt some cannibals are still around today. But there’s a difference with Dawkins. He is advocating cannibalism for others even though it’s unlikely he has actually participated in it himself. He sees cannibalism as a Judeo-Christian “taboo” that should and must be overcome . . .

It means when we purposely and systematically reject God and His ways, we are corrupted. Those, like Dawkins, who profess themselves to be wise, become fools. We become much more likely to embrace abominations – like cannibalism. Thus, Dawkins unwittingly provides evidence the Bible is true – something he is loathe to do but simply can’t help himself. (Read more from “Famous Atheist Proves the Bible Is True” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.