Unreal: The GOP Establishment Resurrects Crony Ex-Im Bank

It’s hard to be a proud Republican these days. The party of limited government has capitulated to a plethora of Obama’s big government demands, while achieving no conservative victories of their own.

Yet, it’s one thing to surrender to Obama. But it’s an entirely different thing when the Republican party actively seeks to promote their own big government, cronyist agenda.

Once again, the Republican establishment is up to its old antics.

Congressional Republicans are now attempting to strip any role Congress has in stymieing the operations of the big business, lobbyist-loving, taxpayer-funded Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im).

The Ex-Im Bank is an independent government agency that provides taxpayer-backed loans and insurance to foreign businesses that seek to purchase American products. Yet, most of the loans protect goods purchased from the largest, and wealthiest, U.S. businesses.

A Mercatus Center study finds that at least 76 percent of the billions of dollars in financial assistance ends up with companies like Boeing, General Electric, Applied Materials, and Caterpillar. These are multibillion dollar companies that should not be supported by the taxpayer.

Last year, conservatives were successful in temporarily allowing the bank’s charter to lapse. However, that victory was short-lived when five months later the Republican establishment renewed the charter by forcing it into the “must-pass” highway funding bill.

Still, conservatives had one more trick up their sleeve.

Although the bank returned to operations, it was able to do so only partially. It still faced another problem: the bank’s charter requires a quorum of at least three board members to vote on any deals in excess of $10 million. But the board currently only has two members; the third board member, an Obama nominee, is currently help up in the Senate.

Without the necessary board members, the Ex-Im Bank is seriously curtailed. According to the Financial Times, more than two-thirds of the loan money provided by the Bank cannot be spent without at least three members on the board; thus, the Bank can do very little.

The conservative hero responsible for delaying this nomination is Republican Senator Richard Shelby, R-Ala. (C, 70%). Shelby chairs the Senate Banking Committee, that has jurisdiction over the bank and the nomination process. So far, Shelby, who opposes the mission of the Ex-Im Bank, and refused to process the nomination to fill the third seat on its board, is the only one doing anything to attempt to stop this from going forward.

As usual, every battle fought by conservatives seems to be met with a more ruthless counterattack by the Republican establishment. That brings us to the latest attempt to crush this conservative cause …

Originally, I raised the concern that Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. (F, 44%) may attempt to bypass Shelby’s committee altogether and bring the nominee up for a vote on the Senate floor. While that hasn’t transpired (yet!), there is a more deceptive plan in the works.

On Tuesday, the House Appropriation Committee debated the annual State and Foreign Operations spending bill. In doing so, Republican amendments were considered. One amendment that was considered, and passed, was an amendment by Republican Charlie Dent, R-Pa. (F, 30%).

Dent’s amendment actually modifies the Ex-Im Bank’s charter by doing away with the need for a board to approve any financial transactions larger than $10 million, through September 2019. This effectively removes the important oversight and accountability at the Bank by simply scuttling the need for the board to be involved in the Bank’s actions.

That’s just how desperate Republicans are to re-instate their corporate cronyism. Why fight a nominee when you can just legislate his importance at the bank out of existence? This is cronyism on steroids.

That’s the pathetic nature of the Republican Party today. This is the party that we’ve become: a party that no longer believes in the spirit of political debate, or the adherence to their own process or principles. It’s a party that simply doesn’t recognize the voices of its own members, and would rather legislate away the tools and rights of those members than listen to them. This is the state of our party – and it’s certainly nothing to celebrate. (For more from the author of “Unreal: The GOP Establishment Resurrects Crony Ex-Im Bank” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Man Who Wants to Marry Computer Files Suit Against Kim Davis

A federal lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis for denying a man a license to marry his laptop computer.

Mark “Chris” Sevier of Vanderbilt Law School has a history of being litigious, despite the suspension of his law license in 2011.

Sevier previously filed similar suits in Texas and in Florida. He has told reporters that he is trying to prove that marriage between a same-sex couple has the same legitimacy as a human marrying an inanimate object. (Read more from “Man Who Wants to Marry Computer Files Suit Against Kim Davis” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Young Adults Both Want and Fear Marriage

When we interviewed Carly, 31, in the summer of 2010, she had been in an on-again, off-again cohabiting relationship with the father of her child for about 12 years. Never married, she called marriage a “piece of paper.”

One year later, however, she had broken up with her longtime boyfriend and was engaged to a different man.

Why did she accept his marriage proposal?

Contradicting what she said a year before, Carly (not her real name) told us: “Everybody says, ‘Oh, it’s just a piece of paper.’ But that piece of paper is … more binding than just really being together.”

She explained that her experience in a long-term cohabiting relationship had taught her that marriage was indeed different.

As we learned in our interviews with over 100 young adults in a mostly white working-class town in Ohio, most young people are neither adamantly opposed to marriage nor completely supportive: They are conflicted about marriage. They hope to get and stay married, providing for their own children the family stability that many of them did not have growing up.

One national study found that in 2001-2002, more than 80 percent of young adults said that marriage was important in their life plan. But many are also uncertain about how to achieve that aspiration and unsure about whether marriage retains the meaning they believe it should have.

Many of them witnessed the separation or divorce of their parents as children, or barely knew their dad or mom. Others saw their parents stay in marriages marked by abuse, drinking, drugs, or misery. Others admired their parents’ marriage but were shaken by the divorces of relatives or friends, or by hearsay about high divorce rates.

The legacy of the divorce culture is trauma and a crisis of trust. A study conducted in the mid-2000s found that of 122 working–and middle-class young people in cohabiting relationships, more than two-thirds expressed concerns about divorce that were related to their views about marriage. Many respondents said that they were reluctant to marry because they wanted to “do it right,” by which they meant marrying only once.

That legacy of divorce is reinforced by the cultural deregulation of sex and dating. As divorce-weary young people form their own romantic relationships, they hear from the culture that “sex is sex, regardless of who it’s with,” love should be “effortless,” and “you got one life to live, and you got to live it the way you want to live it.”

Those messages undermine their pursuit of a trusting and resilient lifelong relationship.

As a result, many young Americans are left on the outside looking in, admiring marriage but paralyzed with anxiety about becoming another divorce statistic or worried that their boyfriend or girlfriend is not trustworthy. Thus, more Americans are delaying marriage longer, and more (though still the minority) are forgoing marriage altogether.

In other words, the declining marriage rate is not so much a reflection that marriage is no longer desired, but that, in a culture of distrust and divorce, it is fragile.

The bad news is that young Americans have less confidence in marriage than their grandparents did and are carrying profound wounds. The good news is that, as one adult child of divorce said of his peers from fragmented families, “They lived it and they want a change.”

As another adult child of divorce told us, “I think my home life as a kid made me more driven to be like, ‘I’m not gonna have a broken home.’”

Many young people are afraid of marriage, but that does not mean they are giving up on it. If anything, they possess a hard-earned understanding about the suffering wrought by family fragmentation. They want a better life for their own children, and they deserve the support of everyone from cultural leaders to policymakers to business leaders as they seek that better way. (For more from the author of “Why Young Adults Both Want and Fear Marriage” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

At Least Five Police Officers Killed by Snipers During Dallas Protest

By Fox News. President Barack Obama called the shootings in Dallas that left five police officers dead and several others wounded during a protest against police on Friday a “vicious, calculated and despicable attack on law enforcement” . . .

Dallas Police Chief David Brown said earlier Friday that it was ”our assumption” that four suspects were working together with rifles, triangulating at different positions.” He had no information on a possible motive or the identities of any of the suspects. He also noted that police were not completely certain that every suspect was in custody.

Brown also said authorities had earlier taken a woman into custody near the garage. Two men were also being questioned after police pursued their vehicle away from downtown onto Interstate 35.

A fourth man was in an hours-long standoff with police. He was firing at officers and around 2:15 a.m. local time and told police “the end is coming.” He later died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to KDFW-TV. Police were sweeping the area for possible explosives.

Late Thursday, Brown confirmed the four fatalities — three Dallas PD officers and one transit officer — and said seven other officers and one civilian were wounded in the shooting. Three of the injured officers reportedly were in critical condition and two others were in surgery. The Dallas Police Association confirmed a fifth officer had died in a Tweet early Friday. (Read more from “At Least Five Police Officers Killed by Snipers During Dallas Protest” HERE)


Woman Streams Aftermath of Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting

By Eliott C. McLaughlin. As Philando Castile’s head slumps backward while he lies dying next to her, Diamond Reynolds looks into the camera and explains a Minnesota police officer just shot her fiancé four times.

The nation is, by now, accustomed to grainy cell phone videos of officer-involved shootings, but this footage from Falcon Heights, outside Minneapolis, is something different, more visceral: a woman live-streaming a shooting’s aftermath with the police officer a few feet away, his gun still trained on her bloody fiancé.

“He let the officer know that he had a firearm and he was reaching for his wallet and the officer just shot him in his arm,” Reynolds said as she broadcast the details of Wednesday’s evening shooting on Facebook. (Read more from “Woman Streams Aftermath of Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Endorses Clinton While Press Secretary Makes Important Admission

Throughout the ongoing scandal regarding Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified emails on a private server, it has been maintained by the Clinton campaign that the FBI’s investigation is merely a security review and not criminal in nature.

However, recent statements from White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest may undermine whether the Obama administration believes this is actually the case.

Earnest met with reporters Thursday to discuss President Barack Obama’s recent endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president.

Earnest was questioned on the appropriateness of such an endorsement in light of the continuing investigation.

The reporter asked, “I wonder if you could address for us the potential conflict of interest that might exist when the President of the United States … is openly saying ‘I want this woman to succeed me in the Oval Office.’”

Earnest answered saying, “You noted instances where the president was asked about the FBI investigations. And in each of those answers the president made clear that that is being conducted independent of any sort of political interference.”

He added the president feels confident in making the endorsement because he knows the investigation will be conducted by people not swayed by political forces.

Earnest ended saying, “And that’s why the president … has reiterated his commitment to this principle that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference and that people should be treated the same way before the law regardless of their political influence, regardless of their political party, regardless of their political stature and regardless of what political figure has endorsed them.” (For more from the author of “Obama Endorses Clinton While Press Secretary Makes Important Admission” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ben Carson: America Is ‘Like a Cruise Ship’ Headed Towards ‘Tremendous Carnage and Death’

Former Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson said that the United States may be on a course to “tremendous carnage and death” during an interview Monday on Fox and Friends.

“America, right now, is like a cruise ship that is about to go off of Niagara Falls with tremendous carnage and death,” Carson said. “What you have to do first is recognize the problem, stop the ship, turn it around and then move in the other direction” . . .

Carson, a surrogate for Donald Trump, also addressed reports that an independent candidate may run for president, arguing that a third-party bid by an independent could lead to victory for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton in November over “petty little differences” with the Republican candidate.

(Read more from “Ben Carson: America Is ‘Like a Cruise Ship’ Headed Towards ‘Tremendous Carnage and Death'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

In Dark of Night, GOP Traitors Vote To Make Obama’s Transgender Insanity the Law of the Land

Many are asking what Republicans plan to do to stop Obama’s executive war on culture and religious liberty in pursuit of cultural Marxism. Now we know that not only will this party do nothing to stop Obama, they will use their control of Congress to codify Obama’s agenda into law.

Late Wednesday night, Republicans allowed a vote on an amendment from Rep. Sean Maloney (D-NY), which codified Obama’s executive order 13672 making transgenderism the law of the land. Obama’s executive order, promulgated in July 2014, instructed bureaucrats to sever contracts with companies that don’t follow the Obama mandated sexual identity agenda. This could include companies that don’t allow men into female bathrooms in their private corporate offices. The Maloney amendment to the $37.4 billion FY 2017 Energy &Water Appropriations Bill (H.R. 5055) codified that unilateral act into law.

The amendment passed 223-195 with 43 Republicans supporting it. The GOP House just supported arguably the most radical Democrat agenda item in the dead of night.

Defenders of House leaders will contend that leadership had to allow this amendment to come to the floor. After all, they promised an open amendment process and they just couldn’t stop all the RINOs in the conference from voting with Democrats. This argument is weak on many accounts:

1. GOP leaders are forever blocking key conservative initiatives and legislation in order to violate the GOP platform; certainly they can block an anti-religious liberty transgendered amendment from Democrats to protect the integrity of the GOP-controlled House. Could you imagine Democrats allowing an amendment to pass on an issue that violates their very essence while they are in control of the chamber?

2. GOP leaders are always twisting arms to get conservative members to vote for bad bills. Somehow we are to believe they were impotent in ensuring “moderate” members (what is moderate about transgenderism?) adhere to the party’s platform?

3. The reality is that Paul Ryan has long been a supporter of ENDA (Employment Non Discrimination Act), the legislative vehicle for enshrining transgenderism into law and mandating adherence to its dogma on private businesses. That is why he’s been absent in this fight. Moreover, Republicans have failed to allow a single anti-religious bigotry bill to the floor since the illegal gay marriage decision was issued by the Supreme Court, despite the ubiquitous threats against private businesses, states, and private property. Clearly, whipping against this vote was not a priority.

Once the Maloney amendment passed with GOP votes, Republicans proceeded to do what they always do so well. They offered side-by-side amendments in an attempt to cover up the damage. They passed the “Pitts amendment” as a second-degree by voice vote to affirm the constitutional importance of religious liberty. Then they passed the Byrne Amendments to reaffirm that RFRA is still in place and the government cannot discriminate against religious individuals. Well, as we all know, the Constitution and RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) have been in place for the entire Obama administration, yet he is still able to get away with anti-religious bigotry edicts by claiming they don’t interfere with religious beliefs. Enshrining Obama’s specific edict into law and then passing vanity language reaffirming the general importance of religious liberty is like doing CPR on a dead body.

To begin with, this entire spending bill was something that should never have come to the floor. It increased spending and retained a number of green energy programs for a department that shouldn’t even exist. The sad reality is that Republicans will wind up passing a continuing resolution or an omnibus in September and will jettison even the few good provisions they secured in these individual spending bills. As such, the only remaining purpose of spending weeks passing these bills [that will go in the garbage anyway] is to draw a sharp contrast with Democrats on important issues in the news and drive a wedge between the Left and the voters. Now that they are using this process for just the opposite purpose – to codify the most pernicious agenda of the left – why not abort this wasteful process anyway? Why not focus on slam dunk winning legislation if they are not going to use the power of the purse?

Now that leadership has loaded this already sub-par spending bill with transgenderism, conservatives should vote against final passage on Thursday. It’s bad enough that a Republican House cannot be used as a tool to go on offense against cultural Marxism and anti-religious-liberty initiatives. To pass a bill placing an exclamation mark on that agenda is unforgivable.

Obama Admin: U.S. Stopped Sanctioning Iranian Human Rights Abusers After Nuke Deal

The Obama administration has not designated a single Iranian as a human rights abuser since finalizing last summer’s comprehensive nuclear agreement, despite rising abuse in the Islamic Republic, including state-sanctioned killings and the imprisonment of opposition figures.

The administration’s hesitance to use sanctions as a tool to confront Iranian human rights abuses, despite past promises made to Congress, has prompted outrage on Capitol Hill among lawmakers who were given assurances the administration would act.

A senior administration official admitted during questioning on Capitol Hill Wednesday that the U.S. has not sanctioned a single Iranian human rights abuser since the deal was finalized. The disclosure calls into question further administration promises to continue using sanctions as a tool to pressure Iran . . .

Republicans and Democrats alike are now accusing the administration of misleading Congress about its commitment to sanctions and saying that it has avoided such designations in order to prevent the Iranian regime from walking away from the deal.

“We were told during this process that getting the nuclear issue off the table was so critical and we could actually expect Iran to engage in additional destabilizing activity,” Rep. David Cicilline (D., R.I.) said during a House Foreign Affairs Committee examining the administration’s promises regarding Iran. (Read more from “Obama Admin: U.S. Stopped Sanctioning Iranian Human Rights Abusers After Nuke Deal” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

A Former Transgender Person’s Take on Obama’s Bathroom Directive

President Barack Obama, the titular head of the LGBT movement, has added to the firestorm of confusion, misunderstanding, and fury surrounding the transgender bathroom debate by threatening schools with loss of federal funding unless they allow students to join the sex-segregated restroom, locker room, and sports teams of their chosen gender, without regard to biological reality.

His action comes after weeks of protests against the state of North Carolina for its so-called anti-LGBT bathroom bill.

As someone who underwent surgery from male to female and lived as a female for eight years before returning to living as a man, I know firsthand what it’s like to be a transgender person—and how misguided it is to think one can change gender through hormones and surgery.

And I know that theNorth Carolina bill and others like it are not anti-LGBT.

L” is for lesbian. The bill is not anti-lesbian because lesbians have no desire to enter a stinky men’s restroom. Lesbians will use the women’s room without a second thought. So the law is not anti-L.

G” is for gay. Gay men have no interest in using women’s bathrooms. So the law is not anti-G.

B” is for bi-sexual. The “B” in the LGBT have never been confused about their gender. Theirs is also a sexual preference only that doesn’t affect choice of restroom or locker room.

T” is for transgender. The “T” identifies a person who has undergone hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery, and legally changes the gender marker on his or her birth certificate.

The North Carolina law is not anti-T because the law clearly states that the appropriate restroom is the one that corresponds to the gender stated on the birth certificate. Therefore, a transgender person with a birth certificate that reads “female” uses the female restroom, even if the gender noted at birth was male.

So, you see, the law is not anti-LGBT. What then is all the uproar about?

What has arisen is a new breed emerging among young people that falls outside the purview of the LGBT: the gender nonconformists.

Gender nonconformists, who constitute a miniscule fraction of society, want to be allowed to designate gender on a fluid basis, based on their feelings at the moment.

I call this group “gender defiant” because they protest against the definition of fixed gender identities of male and female. The gender defiant individuals are not like traditional transgender or transsexual persons who struggle with gender dysphoria and want hormone therapy, hormone blockers, and eventually, reassignment surgery. The gender defiant group doesn’t want to conform, comply, or identify with traditional gender norms of male and female. They want to have gender fluidity, flowing freely from one gender to another, by the hour or day, as they feel like it.

Under the cover of the LGBT, the anti-gender faction and its supporters are using the North Carolina bathroom bill to light a fuse to blow up factual gender definitions.

Obama is championing the insanity of eliminating the traditional definition of gender. He does not grasp the biological fact that genders are not fluid, but fixed: male and female.

Using the power of his position to influence the elimination of gender, overruling science, genetics, and biblical beliefs, is Obama’s display of political power.

One fact will remain, no matter how deep in the tank Obama goes for the gender nonconformists, genetics and God’s design of male and female, no matter how repugnant that is to some, cannot be changed. Biological gender remains fixed no matter how many cross-gender hormones are taken or cosmetic surgeries are performed. No law can change the genetic and biblical truth of God’s design. Using financial blackmail to achieve the elimination of gender will become Obama’s ugly legacy. (For more from the author of “A Former Transgender Person’s Take on Obama’s Bathroom Directive” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Women Confront Hillary: ‘It’s About Rape, Stupid’

By Jerome R. Corsi. Katherine Prudhomme O’Brien, the New Hampshire state legislator who confronted Hillary Clinton in a town-hall rally in Derry, New Hampshire, during the state primary on Jan. 3, explained to WND in an exclusive telephone interview why she was so upset at reporters who defend Mrs. Clinton by suggesting she should not be blamed for her husband’s infidelity.

“This is about rape, not infidelity,” O’Brien insisted, explaining that at the Derry rally her goal was to confront Hillary about Juanita Broaddrick, a woman who went public in an interview with Dateline NBC that broadcast on Feb. 24, 1999, that Clinton had raped her decades earlier, in 1978, while Clinton was yet Arkansas attorney general.

The YouTube video of O’Brien’s encounter with Hillary at the Derry town-hall rally on Jan. 3 shows O’Brien standing to shout her question at Hillary as Hillary at first ignores her and then declares that she does not intend to call on O’Brien for a question, charging that O’Brien was being “very rude.”

“I asked myself what kind of a wife stays with a man who raped Juanita Broaddrick?” O’Brien asked.

In the YouTube clip, the CNN reporter interviewing O’Brien was clearly antagonistic, agreeing with Hillary that suggesting O’Brien was a Republican operative who only heckled Hillary to embarrass her politically. (Read more from “Women Confront Hillary: ‘It’s About Rape, Stupid'” HERE)


Bill’s Sex-Assault Victim Lashes out Over Hillary’s Terrorizing

By Jerome R. Corsi. CNN reporter Chris Cuomo recently turned antagonistic in an interview with GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump for branding Hillary Clinton the “enabler” of her husband’s sexual crimes, prompting Kathleen Willey, a Clinton assault victim, to write an open letter to Cuomo.

The interview, broadcast Monday when Donald Trump phoned in to CNN’s “New Day” show, allowed Cuomo to confront Trump over his statements that Hillary Clinton enabled her husband’s sexual crimes by concealing the details, intimidating or harassing the other party, and more.

“[People see this] as potential proof that you don’t have anything to offer as president. What is your thinking on this line of attack?” he asked.

“Well, this is a nice way to start off the interview,” Trump responded, turning the table on Cuomo. “You should congratulate me for having won the race. I thought, you know, there’d at least be some small congratulations. But I’m not surprised with CNN because that’s the way they treat Trump. They call it ‘The Clinton Network.’” (Read more from “Bill’s Sex-Assault Victim Lashes out Over Hillary’s Terrorizing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.