Do Americans Really Oppose a Government Shutdown?

Oh no, it’s government shutdown time again!

We are always told that a government shutdown is the worst thing in the world. And even if it isn’t the worst thing in the world, everybody thinks it is. The voters will simply not tolerate shutting down the government, and any political party that attempts it will surely suffer the consequences at the next election. Never mind that this was conclusively proven to be untrue when, in the 2014 election, Republicans made significant gains despite having shut down the government earlier that year. Forget about that. It’s history. The important thing is that, as government funding is about to expire, Congress must unconditionally authorize more spending … or else!

To demonstrate this point with data, the folks at Politico are touting a poll that claims 63 percent of Americans want Congress to avoid a shutdown AT ALL COSTS. Only 18 percent think a temporary shutdown is okay as a bargaining chip to further policy goals. And 19 percent have no opinion one way or the other.

So there you have it. “At all costs” is pretty unambiguous. For a majority of Americans, there is literally nothing more important than keeping the government (or at least the 17 percent of it actually affected by a shutdown) up and running. Except none of that is true.

A close look at the data reveals that the words “at all costs” actually translate to “as long as it doesn’t cost anything I care about.” When pollsters ask more detailed questions about specific programs (What if a shutdown is needed to reauthorize CHIP, the children’s health insurance program? What if a shutdown is needed to address DACA or other immigration concerns?), suddenly shutting down the government doesn’t seem so scary. It turns out most people are perfectly willing to shut down the government temporarily in order to achieve an outcome they favor, even if they won’t admit this right out to pollsters.

What does this mean? It means that, contrary to the overwhelming media narrative that endless, bottomless, and limitless government funding must come before all else and that shutdowns are terrible symptoms of broken democracy, the actual American people don’t really care. What people actually care about is the implementation of specific policies that align with their values and priorities. How we get there and whether a shutdown is a path toward implementation aren’t really important. To put it another way, voters don’t want to see how the sausage is made; they just want to eat it.

Despite the Left’s fondness for polls, statistics, and the illusion that number-crunching will yield useful insights about inherently unpredictable things like human behavior, more often than not we see methodology being manipulated to produce a result that fits a political narrative. If we learned anything from the 2016 election, it should be that we can’t trust polls, at least not at face value. How you ask the questions matters. Who you ask matters. Even the person doing the asking matters. Presenting topline numbers, as Politico has done, and using them to draw conclusions about what the American people actually think, especially about issues many people don’t really understand, yields neither knowledge nor wisdom. It just allows hack journalists to make claims that support what they already believe. (For more from the author of “Do Americans Really Oppose a Government Shutdown?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mueller Probe ‘as Partisan a Hack Job as I’ve Ever Seen’

LevinTV host Mark Levin began his radio show Tuesday highlighting the extreme bias of “special impeachment counsel” Robert Mueller in his investigation of alleged Russia collusion in the 2016 election.

“This is as partisan a hack job as I’ve ever seen,” Levin commented, reacting to the revelations that several members of Mueller’s team have had a great anti-Trump bias. “Mr. Mueller is completely out of control. Mr. Mueller is a hack — I don’t care if he’s registered as a Republican or not. What does that have to do with anything?”

Levin reminded his audience that when Mueller was first nominated for FBI director, one of his “primary sponsors” was former California Sen. Barbara Boxer, known for her far-left stances and ideology.

“He’s hired a bunch of hacks,” Levin said of Mueller and his special counsel team. “Disgusting left-wing pukes.”

Levin also discussed the breaking Judicial Watch story regarding another top Mueller deputy, prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who cheered on former administration official Sally Yates in her efforts to fight President Trump’s agenda. Listen:

(For more from the author of “Mueller Probe ‘as Partisan a Hack Job as I’ve Ever Seen'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

It’s Time for a U.S. DACA: Deferred Action From Criminal Aliens

Only in our dystopian remnant of America can an illegal alien come here after being deported several times, snuff out the life of a young woman, and walk away scot-free. We are strangers in our own land of illegal alien supremacism and nobody in the political class wants to hear our side of the issue.

Late Thursday evening, a San Francisco jury acquitted Jose Garcia Zarate — an illegal alien from Mexico — of all murder charges, including manslaughter, for the death of Kate Steinle on July 1, 2015.

The 32-year-old woman was killed when Zarate decided to pick up a 40-caliber SIG Sauer he claims to have found on a pier bench and randomly fired it into her back. She died in her father’s arms.

This is not a random story. Sadly, there are well over a million criminal aliens in this country who are roaming the streets. Zarate was deported five times previously and racked up seven felony convictions in America, but was allowed to roam our streets and “accidentally” fire a gun because of sanctuary cities like San Francisco.

Many commentators will focus on the absurdity of the jury’s decision; there is certainly a lot to say about the jury pool in places like San Francisco. One has to wonder if we are entering an era reminiscent of the Jim Crow South, where in certain jurisdictions we can’t get justice if the perpetrator is of the right ilk, in this case being an illegal alien.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions already announced that DOJ might bring a federal lawsuit against Zarate. He is right to pursue federal charges because even if one believes the discharge was accidental, it is still a felony for an illegal alien to be in possession of a firearm, not to mention reentering the country illegally four times.

But the bigger issue here is not an individual trial or a jury pool but the broader questions of sanctuary cities, border security, and interior enforcement.

The Steinle killer was the poster child for sanctuary cities, because less than three months before the shooting Zarate was released by San Francisco Police after being arrested on drug charges.

Federal immigration officials had requested that he be detained for 48 hours so they can pick him up and deport him, but the neo-confederates of San Francisco took their nullification policies to such an extreme that even someone with the rap sheet of Zarate was set free.

This is part of a broader pattern. A few months ago, two illegal aliens stole a gun from a San Francisco cop and allegedly murdered someone with it. They had previously been arrested for other crimes but were released in defiance of an ICE detainer request. One of the suspects came here through the asylum loophole the politicians refuse to close.

And now judges, including federal judges in San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Chicago, are declaring sanctuary policies and prohibiting states from cooperating with ICE or creating an entitlement for sanctuary cities to obtain federal funds and even for sanctuary cities to obtain state funds.

It was so bad that the plaintiff in the Massachusetts case that served as the impetus for their sanctuary policies was later re-arrested for slapping and robbing a wheelchair-bound woman leaving a bank. A 2014 analysis from ICE of sanctuary cities found that 8,145 individuals were released during a nine-month period and 1,867 were subsequently re-arrested a total of 4,298 times on nearly 7,500 criminal charges.

Overall, nearly one million have already received final deportation orders, and these are, for the most part, criminal aliens. Yet only a small percentage of this pool of illegals are deported in a given year. When will either party treat this issue like the emergency that it is?

We have a lot of violence in this country, but there are limits to what we can do about our inherent domestic problems. We don’t need to import the violent criminals of other countries. They should be deported immediately, and this should not be a partisan issue. While any murder is senseless, the death of Kate Steinle is even more tragic because Zarate should never have been in the country in the first place.

DACA is the cause, not the solution, to the violence

Appallingly, even some of the “conservatives” in Washington won’t stop talking about a “DACA fix” for “Dreamers.” What about a sanctuary fix in the budget? What about an asylum fix? What about a border surge fix?

Obama’s amnesty is exactly what broke the system and has led to a surge in criminal alien killings in this country. Over the past three years, 22 percent of all those arrested for involvement with MS-13 were Central American “children” who crossed the border.

This is the legacy of the DACA amnesty and yet the politicians have the temerity to talk about amnesty as a “fix.” A fix to what? Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., should hang their heads in shame for marshaling their respective state’s resources to focus on lawbreaking rather than representing their constituents.

It’s time to go on offense — President Trump and the Freedom Caucus should demand five particular things in addition to the border wall.

1. A denial of federal grant funds to sanctuary cities to be placed in the budget bill this month. Also, the defund effort should include transportation funds because California has granted 800,000 driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.

2. There’s an epidemic of illegal alien drunk-driving fatalities, and while states can do what they want with driver’s licenses (except for when they don’t want to issue them to illegals and courts mandate it), they should also face consequences when it comes to federal funds. Let Democrats risk a shutdown in order to protect criminal aliens and lawless jurisdictions.

3. Passage of the Davis-Oliver interior enforcement act, which punishes sanctuary cities, deputizes states to enforce immigration laws, and bolsters expedited deportations. Why has leadership held this bill up from a floor vote for three years after passing committee twice?

4. Finally end the practice of dumping Central American unaccompanied children (UACs), many of whom are extremely violent, into our communities.

As we’ve noted before, almost none of them fit the statutory description of “severely trafficked” victims who are entitled to refugee resettlement. In fact, most are smuggled in by their families and many, as stated above, have ties to MS-13.

In FY 2017, over 42,000 were resettled, and their numbers are growing. Remember the MS-13 body count in once-peaceful Long Island we reported on last week?

Fox News reports that thousands of UACs have been dumped into their schools and local officials say their schools have now become breeding grounds for gang activity. So much for being victims. The victims here are our own communities, not criminal aliens.

5. Trump should order his IRS to stop giving refundable tax credits to illegal aliens.

And when, oh when, will Congress and Trump wake about regarding the stolen sovereignty from the courts? Congress could take immigration away from the lower courts in a heartbeat.

Trump’s tweets regarding Steinle were on message, but now is the time to see whether he is indeed serious about putting Americans first in practice. It’s time for an American DACA –Deferred Action from Criminal Aliens. (For more from the author of “It’s Time for a U.S. DACA: Deferred Action From Criminal Aliens” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Supreme Court Backs Away From Second Amendment With Its Silence on Atrocious Lower Court Rulings

Under our current erroneous system, Supreme Court precedent is more powerful than God, certainly much more than any other branch of government. But that’s only true when SCOTUS decides to nullify the Constitution and natural law. When the Supreme Court decides to recognize the plain meaning of the Constitution in a particular case, then precedent means nothing, and states and lower federal courts are free to violate it with impunity.

That was essentially the message from the Supreme Court yesterday when it refused to grant an appeal of yet another lower court ruling that violated its Heller decision. This proves, once again, that the Supreme Court is a one-way street and a dead end on the Constitution. We will lose our country to judicial supremacy that is destroying the states and preventing the federal government from following the Constitution. It appears that not even the SCOTUS will rein in states that violate the most foundational portions of the Bill of Rights.

With this ruling, the Supreme Court telegraphed the message to the radical district and circuit courts that the Second Amendment and the inherent right to self-defense are not really rights and that the Heller decision was a joke.

Unlike red states that obsequiously follow the letter of every lawless court decision, blue states immediately began pushing back against Heller. They maintained or expanded both anti-carry laws and bans on AR-15-style rifles and all handgun magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. And unlike conservative lower court judges, liberal ones are willing to push back against Supreme Court decisions. Almost every circuit has upheld these state laws. Yet the Supreme Court has consistently declined to grant certiorari to gun-rights organizations appealing the decisions.

The Fourth Circuit ruling at issue here was particularly egregious, as it upheld Maryland’s ban on misnamed “assault weapons” and larger magazines. The Fourth Circuit literally used Justice Breyer’s dissent in Heller instead of the majority opinion. In Kolbe v. Hogan, 10 of the 14 judges on the radical Fourth Circuit ruled that 45 commonly owned semi-automatic rifles are military weapons and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. The court used Breyer’s dissent to create a state interest-balancing test to limit the Second Amendment, a test explicitly rejected by the majority opinion.

There are clearly at least six justices, presumably including Kennedy and Roberts, who are speaking loudly with their silence and refusal to grant an appeal. The court also refused to grant certiorari to those appealing the Florida ban on open carry.

Making this more than tragic for Marylanders is that violence in the Baltimore area is spiraling out of control while MS-13 activity in Montgomery County has reached new levels. Despite these tough gun laws, or more likely because of them, Baltimore has become a war zone, with cops mowed down by criminals and suburbs plagued with car-jackings. Yet law-abiding citizens are the only ones who can’t carry firearms. As a resident of central Maryland, I laugh when liberals question the need for larger magazine capacities. They should come to Baltimore, and they will see that the cowardly hyenas often travel in packs when they attack people. They are also souped up on drugs. For citizen self-defense, there is a need for as many bullets in the pipe as one could carry.

There’s also a very important lesson here for those on the “legal right” who refuse to recognize the judicial emergency, be truthful about the proper role of the courts, and support Congress in taking back power from the judiciary. They seem to think that we can use judicial supremacy to our benefit to “strike down” unconstitutional state and federal laws/actions the same way the Left uses it to strike down the building blocks of society, such as sexuality, marriage, life, and immigration laws. This case is a testament to the fact that the judiciary is a one-way street and a dead end for conservatives.

Heller was one of the very few victories, and perhaps the greatest, that we’ve achieved through the concept of judicial supremacy over the past decade. But the Left feels no constraint in pushing back against precedent. Just look at what the lower courts have done with marriage and immigration, two areas in which precedent had both great weight and long history behind it.

Justices on the Supreme Court are extremely political. They are willing to violate the Constitution on an earth-shattering political issue but will only do so if they feel public opinion is behind them. They use the lower court judges as their advance guard because so many of them are shameless. They create jurisprudential velocity over time and help sway public opinion. This is how Kennedy was able to arrive at Obergefell just two years after writing that states have plenary power over marriage. For two years, the lower courts shamelessly abolished marriage, so that by the time it came before the Supreme Court, nobody cared about sound legal arguments any more. The political die had been cast.

Therefore, for those still reluctant to exercise congressional control over the jurisdiction of the courts, remember that there will be no return to the glory days of to the glory days of Lochner, when “conservative judges” upheld economic and personal liberties in the face of liberal political decisions. On the other hand, by continuing to legitimize the specter of judicial supremacy, we are losing election districts, election integrity laws, basic regulations of abortion, marriage, religious liberty, the ability to enforce immigration law, and even the ability to keep suicidal mental illness out of the military. Nothing is beyond the reach of the federal judiciary. We are getting no trade-offs that are worth the price of judicial supremacy. (For more from the author of “Supreme Court Backs Away From Second Amendment” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

China Will Decide When the Afghanistan War Ends

It is simply a matter of reverse engineering. If you get to the Taliban through Pakistan and you get to Pakistan through China, then clearly, Beijing is in the driver’s seat. Pakistan merely holds the valve that regulates the Taliban and the supply of our troops.

The conflict will end in a whimper, a political settlement whose main purpose is to provide a graceful exit that politely delays the announcement of a Taliban victory and a humiliating defeat for the U.S. and NATO, all choreographed by China, who will then set up shop as the dominant regional power.

China’s strategy is based on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), part of the One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative, which aims to connect Asia through land-based and maritime economic zones. CPEC is an infrastructure project, the backbone of which is a transportation network connecting China to the Pakistani seaports of Gwadar in Balochistan Province and Karachi in Sindh province, both located on the Arabian Sea.

Control of Afghanistan via its proxy Pakistan will allow China to complete transportation corridors, power grids and oil and gas pipelines throughout Central and South Asia. China can then begin to exploit Afghanistan’s estimated $3 trillion in untapped mineral resources, in addition to Balochistan’s $1 trillion in gold, copper, oil, precious stones, coal, chromite and natural gas.

CPEC calls for the influx of up to 500,000 Chinese professionals into Gwadar for port and naval facility development as well as expansion of the international airport to handle heavy cargo flights. The Chinese have visited and bought land in Sonmiani, which houses Pakistan’s spaceport and space research center as well as a planned liquid natural gas terminal. In addition, Balochistan’s Arabian Sea coast will become dotted with Chinese military bases, from which Beijing will dominate the vital sea lanes leading to the Persian Gulf and provide a link to the Chinese base in Djibouti at the entrance of the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, both strategic choke points.

Breitbart News Executive Chairman and former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon warned recently that America’s attention needs to be focused on China, or it will be left behind in the communist country’s wake.

Bannon stated that China would become the dominant global power if that country achieved five things in the coming years and the U.S. did not thwart them:

1. The rollout of fifth generation mobile technology – known as “5G.”

2. The expansion of the One Belt One Road Initiative – a transport system to go through central Asia and connect China to the Middle East.

3. Plan 2025 – 10 industries the Chinese have aimed to dominate by 2025. Bannon described the Chinese as “way ahead.” Bannon said three of those are silicon chips, robotics, and artificial intelligence.

4. Conversion of all oil transactions into Chinese currency, which he said will end America as a reserve currency and force the U.S. to start paying off the 20 trillion debt.

5. Financial technology. Bannon said the true piece of leverage with North Korea is the ability to decouple countries from the world’s financial system, sanction companies, and shut banks off from capital markets. He predicted that in 5-10 years that ability is gone.

The continued presence of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan remains an obstacle to China’s regional ambitions (Bannon’s item #2), which are both economic and military.

The United States and NATO have been expending huge quantities of blood and treasure to create a stable and democratic Afghanistan, free from transnational Islamic extremists and as a “useful platform for the regional counterterrorist effort,” so claims retired Gen. David Petraeus, although he doesn’t use the word “Islamic.”

Never mind that the “useful platform” has been unable for over sixteen years to counter the terrorists operating freely from safe havens just across the border in Pakistan or that the transnational terrorists that struck on 9/11 originated from outside of Afghanistan, that is, Pakistanis and Arabs.
Compared to 2001, there are now a far greater number of terrorist epicenters from which strikes can be made against the U.S. or its NATO allies, not the least of which are Islamic terrorists inside western societies linked to those epicenters.

Current U.S. Afghanistan policy can profit from a healthy injection of realpolitik.

The U.S. has actually more to gain by leveraging instability and thwarting Chinese ambitions in South Asia than by continuing the expensive and exhausting tasks of counterinsurgency and nation building in Afghanistan from which we will accrue a diminishing number of strategic benefits. (For more from the author of “China Will Decide When the Afghanistan War Ends” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Al Franken Spins ‘Apology’ Into Fake Feminism Shield

Senator Al Franken, D-Minn., is trying to spin his apology to a woman who accused him of sexual misconduct into evidence that he’s a champion of feminism.

On Thursday, Leeann Tweeden accused Sen. Franken of forcing her to kiss him and shoving his tongue down her throat during a comedy tour to entertain U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2006. She also shared a photograph of Franken appearing to grope her breasts while she was asleep.

Tweeden said she felt “disgusted and violated” by Franken. The picture of Franken with his hands over her breasts made her feel “embarrassed. Belittled. Humiliated.”

There were immediate calls for Franken to resign from the U.S. Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has called for the Ethics Committee to begin an investigation into Franken’s conduct.

In a statement responding to the photographic evidence Tweeden provided, Franken apologized and then asserted that he respects women.

“I respect women,” Franken said. “I don’t respect men who don’t. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.”

Franken went on to say the recent widespread reports of sexual abuse in Hollywood, the media, and in politics are cause for reflection.

“I don’t know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn’t matter. There’s no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn’t funny. It’s completely inappropriate. It’s obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture.” Then he turns.

“And, what’s more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it—women who have had similar experiences in their own lives, women who fear having those experiences, women who look up to me, women who have counted on me.”

Though Franken says he doesn’t remember shoving his tongue down Tweeden’s throat, he says he understands “why we need to listen to and believe women’s experiences.”

He will “gladly” cooperate with the ethics investigation, he says. And whatever people think of Franken and his perverted behavior toward Tweeden, captured in a photograph, is “far less important than what people think of women who continue to come forward with their stories.”

“They deserve to be heard, and believed. And they deserve to know that I am their ally and supporter. I have let them down and am committed to making it up to them,” Franken concluded.

This apology is the real joke. Franken doesn’t respect women. He’s made demeaning and inappropriate, sexualized jokes about women for decades. Now that there’s photographic evidence that he’s acted in the disgusting manner he joked about for years, he wants to hide behind his liberalism.

Franken issued this apology, and Tweeden accepted his apology, but only after the evidence of what he did was made public. Tweeden noted that he did not apologize at any time during the 11 years following the tour.

What is the standard here? If we disqualify our elected officials from holding office upon credible allegations of sexual misconduct, then Franken has got to go. This pathetic “apology” changes nothing. (For more from the author of “Al Franken Spins ‘Apology’ Into Fake Feminism Shield” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Efforts to Derail Roy Moore Are Right out of the Establishment’s Playbook; Here’s How

Whether you believe any or all of the allegations against Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, the establishment/mainstream media’s playbook to thwart the insurgent is being executed by the numbers.

I witnessed firsthand the same methods employed against GOP U.S. Senate nominee Joe Miller while serving as his press secretary in 2010 in Alaska.

The Tea Party favorite shocked the political world when he came out of nowhere to upset incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski and win the Republican primary. Between her and her father Frank, who appointed her to the position after being elected governor in 2002, the Murkowskis had held the seat since the early 1980s.

Miller headed into the general election as the hands-down favorite in red Alaska against the little-known Democrat nominee, Sitka Mayor Scott McAdams. But then, the establishment/media onslaught began.

Both Miller and Murkowski had promised days before primary election day in late August that they would honor the results, but in mid-September, just weeks after losing the race, the senator announced her write-in bid, saying that she was “taking the gloves off.”

Like Moore’s race, the media attacks against Miller followed a familiar pattern: finances; allegations of past unethical, even illegal conduct in relation to his past employment; and accusations against his wife in relation to her employment with him as a judge.

The attacks were very similar to the ones leveled at Moore and his wife Kayla by the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnnell-affiliated Senate Leadership Fund and The Washington Post in relation to the couple’s non-profit, The Foundation For Moral Law.

Having addressed and weathered all the allegations, and throwing in a bizarre incident in which a Barack Obama-supporting FBI informant took it upon himself to conduct a citizen’s arrest of a reporter at a Miller town hall, the candidates were running neck-and-neck just days before the general election.

Perhaps that’s why the local CBS affiliate KTVA, which had been very hostile toward Miller, hoped they would find a sex scandal to knock the conservative candidate out once and for all.

The weekend before the election, I received a call from Nick McDermott, a producer with the station. It went to voice mail. As Fox News reported, I soon received a text from him in which he wrote, “D— iPhone … I left you a long message. I thought I hung up. Sorry.”

What was captured in the message was part of a strategy meeting ahead of a rally former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be headlining that night.

A female reporter or producer is heard yelling, “Child molesters!”

A male reporter responds, “Oh, yes. Can you repeat Joe Miller’s list of people, campaign workers, which one is the molester?”

A female reporter then added, “We know that out of all the people that will show up tonight, at least one of them will be a registered sex offender.”

“We have to find that one person,” a male reporter responds.

A female reporter chimed in, “And the one thing we can do is — we won’t know. We won’t know but if there is any sort of chaos whatsoever, we can put out a Twitter/Facebook alert saying what the — ‘Hey, Joe Miller punched at rally …’”

“Kind of like Rand Paul, I like that,” another replied.

KTVA admitted to the meeting and ultimately fired two of the producers who were part of it; however, one of the station’s anchors, Matt Felling, would go on to become Murkowski’s communications director shortly after she won re-election, 39 percent to Miller’s 35.

Two accusers have come forward in the case of Roy Moore alleging they were sexually assaulted by him in the 1970s.

The candidate has denied the allegations, saying he never even knew the women. The former Alabama chief justice has shown no inclination to exit the race.

McConnell has stated he is actively looking for a write-in candidate to run against Moore and the Democrat.

On his radio program on Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh said McConnell is on a “search-and-destroy mission.”

“Whether Judge Moore did the deed or deeds or not, what’s really happening here folks, if you really want to know — it’s a multi-faceted search-and-destroy mission here,” Limbaugh stated.

“But what’s really driving this — do not doubt me about this. But what’s really driving this is Mitch McConnell saying to Steve Bannon, ‘Really? You think you’re going to get your guys elected? You think you are going to get your guys elected and me kicked out of here? Really? Seriously? OK, watch this,’” he added.

In 2016, the establishment and the media employed the same strategy of trying to make Donald Trump the unacceptable choice in relation to Hillary Clinton, going after his finances in the form of demands that he release his tax returns, allegations of past unethical conduct in relation to his employment, and accusations of sexual harassment and other misconduct.

The efforts, though vigorous, ultimately failed.

Alabama voters will have to decide whether they believe Moore or his accusers, but one thing is certain — the establishment/media playbook to take out a candidate is being executed to a T. (For more from the author of “Efforts to Derail Roy Moore Are Right out of the Establishment’s Playbook; Here’s How” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Could the Senate Really Expel Roy Moore After the Election?

On Monday, a second woman, Beverly Young Nelson, accused Judge Roy Moore of sexual assault when Nelson was 14 and Moore an adult in his 30s. This is similar to the timeframe established by the previous accuser.

Shortly thereafter, the chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Cory Gardner, said that he would support the expulsion of Moore by the senate, should the people of Alabama elect Moore for the Senate seat vacated by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

While constitutional, as Politico’s Steven Shepard noted, an expulsion attempt of a directly elected senator has never succeeded.

There is little the Senate Republicans or the Alabama Republican Party could do to affect the special election and still win. For his part, Moore, the duly certified Republican Party nominee, shows no signs of backing out, even amid the new accusations and chorus of calls for him to do so.

Despite some initial confusion last week when the news broke of a woman accusing Moore of sexual misconduct, there is no way for Moore’s name to be taken off the Dec. 12 general election ballot, Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill told the Washington Examiner. The ballot was certified on Oct. 18 and “a lot of people have already voted,” explained Merrill.

However, despite Alabama’s “sore loser” law, write-in votes for Moore’s primary challengers would be counted, Merrill told the Examiner. But would a write-in candidacy do anything but elect a Democrat?

In the event the state and/or national party backs a Republican write-in candidate, it’s very likely that such a move would split the vote between likely Republican voters who think the accusations are disqualifying and those who outright don’t believe the accusations — providing the Democrats a significant advantage.

If Moore wins the Dec. 12 election, after he is sworn in, the case could be sent to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics for its own investigation into the matter. The committee would then vote whether or not to recommend Moore for expulsion. If the committee votes to recommend expulsion, the matter would go to the full Senate.

According to Article II of the Constitution, the threshold to remove a member of either chamber of Congress is a two-thirds majority. If successful, the seat would again be vacated in Alabama and start the special-election process all over again. State Gov. Kay Ivey would also appoint a person to fill the vacant seat on an interim basis.

According to the U.S. Senate website, the Senate has considered expulsion 30 times and voted to expel 15 members. Fourteen members were expelled for supporting the Confederacy and one for “anti-Spanish conspiracy.” Of the remaining 15, five resigned before action could be taken, one had his term expire, and nine had no action taken or were not expelled.

Since the adoption of the 17th Amendment in 1913, there has not been a vote in favor of expulsion in the United States Senate.

The Senate Select Committee on Ethics has previously recommended expulsion for members without conviction for crimes, such as in the sexual misconduct and abuse-of-power case against Oregon Sen. Bob Packwood.

In other cases, it has not acted — most notably when Sen. Edward Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident in which Mary Jo Kopechne died after Kennedy drove off a bridge in Chappaquiddick. Nor has the Senate taken action on the corruption charges currently facing Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J.

It would be constitutional for the Senate to vote to expel Roy Moore should he win the election. That course of action would be extraordinary, especially since the people who vote in the election would have had the time to weigh the information from Moore’s accusers before casting their votes. (For more from the author of “Could the Senate Really Expel Roy Moore After the Election?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Alabama, Roy Moore, and the Truth

A political firestorm has kicked off in the Alabama special Senate election.

According to a report at the The Washington Post Thursday, a woman says GOP nominee Roy Moore sexually assaulted her in 1979 when she was 14 and he was 32. Two other women told the Post that Moore pursued them decades ago when they were underage.

Moore denied the report, calling it “garbage,” “fake news,” and “intentional defamation.”

Sens. Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and others called for Moore to step aside if the allegations are true. “However, we need to know the truth,” Cruz added, “and Judge Moore has the right to respond to these accusations.”

Sen. Rob Portman said he believes the allegations at face value because the accusers identified themselves on the record, and Sen. John McCain called the allegations alone “disqualifying.”

Many readers are wondering what this means for the Alabama race. Moore’s name cannot be removed from the Dec. 12 special election ballot, according to Alabama law. reporter Christopher Harress quoted this section of the code in his Thursday report:

“Any amendment filed after the 76th day before a primary or a general election shall be accepted by the judge of probate or the Secretary of State but shall not be cause for reprinting of the ballots,” according to the statute.”

The name of a candidate who is the subject of the amendment and who is disqualified by a political party or who has withdrawn as a candidate shall remain on the ballot, not be replaced by the name of another candidate, and the appropriate canvassing board shall not certify any votes for the candidate.”

If the Republican Party chooses to remove Moore as the party’s candidate, any votes he receives would not be certified under the law, according to a report citing John Bennett, deputy chief of staff for the Alabama secretary of state’s office.

Initial reports suggested that current Sen. Luther Strange and Rep. Mo Brooks (Moore’s challengers in the GOP Senate primary) would both be ineligible as write-in candidates in the special election. However according to an Alabama Secretary of State press release, Brooks and Strange would be eligible as write-in candidates.

The allegations against Moore are deeply troubling, as are the obscene, partisan attempts to minimize or justify child molestation.

The only acceptable defense is the truth, and right now, only Roy Moore and his accusers know for sure what that is.

Every American, and especially every Alabama voter, has a moral obligation to trust but verify. We have a duty to put politics aside, scrutinize the facts, hold true to our principles, and as always, seek truth and justice. (For more from the author of “Alabama, Roy Moore, and the Truth” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How the KGB Birthed the JFK Assassination Conspiracy Industry

President Donald Trump’s release of the classified documents connected with John F. Kennedy’s assassination is a crucial step toward helping the United States – and the rest of the world – to understand the Kremlin’s “science” of disinformation. Its deliberate lies about the circumstances surrounding that assassination have generated 54 years of alleged American involvement in that hideous crime, 45 years of Cold War, and the still-emerging evidence of Kremlin interference in our 2016 election.

Unfortunately, President Trump’s courageous exposure of the KGB lies may now endanger his own life as well. The recent cold-blooded assassination of Boris Nemtsov, a leader of Russia’s opposition, shows that the KGB (under whatever name) – which has killed 20 million people within the Soviet Union alone – is still secretly assassinating its enemies.

One of the most important things I have learned in the 64 years I have been involved in the intelligence business – 27 in the Soviet bloc and 37 in the U.S. – is that disinformation is an arcane and duplicitous undertaking, and that in the hands of the Soviets it developed into a whole philosophy. To really understand the mysteries of the Kremlin’s disinformation, it will not help to see a spy movie, read a spy novel, or watch TV news about Russia, as entertaining as those might be. You must have lived in that world of secrecy and deceit, and even then you may not fathom all its darker moments unless you are one of the few at the very top of the pyramid.

At the end of a summit meeting held in Slovenia, President George W. Bush said, “I looked the man [Putin] in the eye [and] found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy.” But Robert Gates, who as director of the CIA became familiar with KGB disinformation, looked into Putin’s eyes and saw “a stone-cold killer.” Familiarity with the super-secret, widely unknown Russian “science” of disinformation could indeed change day into night.

Ten years ago, I published “Programmed to Kill: Moscow’s Responsibility for Lee Harvey Oswald’s Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.” My book was introduced at an Organization of American Historians conference with a review by professor Stan Weber of McNeese State University, who described it as “a superb new paradigmatic work on the death of President Kennedy and a must read for everyone interested in the assassination.” (Read more from “How the KGB Birthed the JFK Assassination Conspiracy Industry” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.