Time To Remove RINO Grassley From Chairman of Senate Judiciary

There is ubiquitous sense of betrayal among Republican voters. They went to the polls in 2014 to elect a Republican Senate and out popped a Senate controlled by Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer. Nowhere is this identity crisis more evident than within the Senate Judiciary Committee under the stewardship of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA).

Grassley is, by all accounts, an incredibly nice man. People in Washington and his home state of Iowa speak very highly of him.

Grassley was a fresh-faced conservative in 1980. But he has served 36 years in the Senate, and is seeking a seventh term (which, if he were to complete it, would mean he would serve in the Senate for 42 years). It’s possible that Grassley is still the same conservative warrior he was in 1980 in his heart, but his “leadership” of the Senate Judiciary Committee raises serious questions about whether he is the right person to lead that all-too-important committee.

As we note in his profile, Grassley is “perhaps one of the most ideologically complex members of the Senate.” Coupled with his weak grasp of judicial issues, Grassley’s inconsistent foundation has proven a disaster as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. After being term limited as Chairman of the Finance Committee, Grassley, who has no formal legal training, shoved Jeff Sessions aside for the lead spot on Judiciary in 2011, even though Sessions was eminently more qualified.

Beyond these general concerns, there are recent, more specific reasons why Grassley might not be the right standard-bearer for Republicans on this committee.

Jail Break

Grassley has spent the first half of this allegedly Republican-led Congress catering to a laundry list of leftist legislative items and policy preferences. But one example predominates: A longtime and vocal opponent of the Smarter Sentencing Act and other misguided bills aiming to release dangerous drug traffickers and drug dealers, he is now the leader of a bipartisan effort to release not only drug traffickers and drug dealers, but traffickers and dealers who possessed firearms while committing their crimes.

This bill was a horrific idea a year ago, but as police blotters across the nation reveal the new crimes being committed each and every day by federal drug felons who were released from prison early, the legislation is becoming downright insane. And of course, we have not heard a peep from Grassley in terms of oversight of the DOJ’s war on police and its role in rising crime rates.

Judges

On judges, Grassley’s record is equally disappointing. Notwithstanding the fact that President Obama has appointed roughly 31% of all federal circuit court judges and 37% of all district court judges in the United States, Grassley seems to be tripping over himself to help Obama fill every last remaining judicial seat before Obama walks out the door on January 20, 2017. The actions are akin to a senator that actively wants Obama’s Constitution-mangling judges on the bench, since such judges make it easier for his fellow senators to avoid leadership by shirking decision-making to a leftist bench.

Raw numbers aside, Grassley has also let more than a few radical judges move through the committee to confirmation, forgetting that his role is to prevent the names of such radical judges from ever making it onto the Senate floor. The most recent (but certainly not the only) example is new federal district court judge Wilhelmina Wright, who helped publish an article in law school where she openly discussed the “whiteness” of private property and the belief that people living in poor neighborhoods might have a substantive right to move into wealthy neighborhoods. Grassley was asleep at the switch with this nominee. Wright was unfortunately confirmed, but many Republican senators woke up at the last minute to prevent her confirmation from being unanimous. Grassley failed in his constitutionally required gatekeeping role.

And of course, as the power of the judiciary continues to grow beyond even the worst nightmares of the Warren era, Grassley has not used the committee to hold hearings on judicial tyranny or propose judicial reform ideas.

Hearings

What about hearings? Surely, Grassley has thrown some punches on hearings? Planned Parenthood harvesting of fetal tissue, rampant IRS targeting and abuses, the war on immigration enforcement, a broken and racist Department of Justice, the administration’s blind eye toward domestic terrorism threats, Hillary Clinton’s private server, which exposed intelligence assets and collection methods… there is almost no end to the significant damage done to this Republic by the administration or to how its actions have breached the public trust. Surely, Grassley has looked into each of these with an aggressive desire to find the truth?

The reality will disappoint. Check out the lineup of hearings that Grassley has conducted at the full committee level. In the final days of what is perhaps the most corrupt administration this nation has ever seen, the Senate Judiciary Committee it tackling weak-sauce topics like the transparency of asbestos trusts and ensuring a right to counsel for federal misdemeanor offenders. It is almost like they made a deal with the administration to avoid any and all topics that would even remotely make the president uncomfortable. This is a failure of the committee’s function and a disservice to the American people.

In fairness to Grassley, he has held some important hearings this Congress, including one examining the life-and-death nature of the sanctuary cities that are violating federal law, and another on the job-killing qualities of the H-1B visa program. But even in these instances, good legislation that was written in the wake of these hearings has stagnated, including sanctuary city defunding legislation and H-1B reform legislation. One might almost get the impression that these hearings and their resultant bills were done for show, to create the illusion of listening to the American people.

Grassley spends lot of his time during committee hearings and business meetings (seemingly, most of his time) talking about his “good friend from Vermont.” His good friend from Vermont, in case you didn’t know, is the extreme leftist senator and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). Based on the contours of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s actions this Congress, it is arguable that Grassley’s “good friend from Vermont” is dictating the agenda of the committee. Americans did not turn out to the polls in record numbers in 2014 to allow Patrick Leahy to finish Obama’s legislative agenda and push through as many radical leftist judges as time would allow.

Moreover, the committee hearings are often full of Democrat witnesses, including the former Iowa state Supreme Court justice who struck down the state’s marriage law, with the entire tenor and direction of the meetings rooted in far-left, anti-law enforcement premises. How about having a hearing with victims of anti-religious bigotry, such as the Kline family in Oregon?

The Judiciary Committee is not a JV panel. The Republican Party cannot afford to have a Senate Judiciary Committee that is happy just “being there.” Those days are gone, if they were ever here. Grassley’s dedication to the people of the state of Iowa is admirable, but the time has come for a more forceful, leftist-opposing chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. No one can be sure what the future holds for the Republican Party, especially in its current dynamic, but the one thing that probably is a guarantee is that continued weak leadership by Grassley on the Senate Judiciary Committee will give Democrats back the Senate starting in 2017. Based on how the Senate Judiciary Committee is currently being run, we might not even notice when the changeover happens. (For more from the author of “Time to Remove RINO Grassley From Chairman of Senate Judiciary” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad

Pro-aborts lost their minds yesterday after Doritos aired a commercial that…*gasp*…showed an ultrasound of an unborn baby . . .

The humorous commercial showed a dad eating a bag of Doritos while his wife gets an ultrasound, and the baby tries to grab at the Doritos in his hands . . .

Since last night there hasn’t been any shortage of responses to NARAL’s bizarre anti-scientific, anti-baby, and anti-human extremism.

But one of the best responses I’ve read comes from Dr. Robert George, a pro-life professor at Princeton University, who posted this on Facebook:

I gather that the really big news, as always, had to do with a commercial advertisement that was broadcast in the course of the game. Evidently, a potato chip manufacurer, or some such profit-driven purveyor of packaged foodstuffs, showed a video image of an unborn baby. This shocked and appalled the folks at NARAL, the big abortion lobby, who promptly accused the company responsible for the ad of “humanizing the fetus.” Since, however, the fetus in the video was, by all accounts, a human fetus, the offspring of human parents, and not a bovine, canine, or feline fetus, it’s less than clear how it is that the potato chip company (or whatever it was) is to blame for the humanization. Surely NARAL’s complaint would be more fairly lodged against God, or nature, or plain old biological reality.

(Read more from “The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Watch: Radical Revival Falls on China’s State-Controlled Churches

You’re about to hear first-hand testimony and see video of an unprecedented Christian revival happening in parts of China. What is unique about this story is how God is moving among communist-controlled government churches.

CBN News traveled to southern China and obtained exclusive, never-before-seen images, from inside these churches . . .

Pastor Duan says what is happening today in Beijing and in other parts of China as it relates to the powerful move of God amongst the Three-Self Churches is quite remarkable considering where the church has been in the last 30 years.

“Every sermon that the pastor preached back then had to be vetted by the government authorities. Young people were never allowed to attend these churches so you’d only see old people, mostly women,” Duan said. “Preaching about the power of the Holy Spirit was forbidden. You couldn’t talk about end times or preach repentance.” (Read more from “Radical Revival Falls on China’s State-Controlled Churches” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Was Just Revealed About Iowa Caucus Goers’ Phones – They’re Not Going to Like It

Who needs exit polls when you can track caucusgoers’ phones?

That’s what one company did. Dstillery, which has been called “Picasso in the dark art of digital advertising,” turned its intelligence-collection capabilities to the Iowa caucuses last week.

The company used location data to identify more than 16,000 devices at caucus locations across the state.

“We can take a population in a discrete location — in this case a polling, a caucus site — and sample that population and go and then look at characteristics of that population that no one’s been able to discern before, because we have this incredibly rich behavioral view of American consumers based on all the digital behaviors we observe,” Dstillery CEO Tom Phillips said in an interview.

The results are interesting, if scientifically inexact. The company could not tell how individual caucusgoers came down by candidate but could determine, in counties decisively won by certain candidates, the dominant online behaviors of attendees. (Read more from “This Was Just Revealed About Iowa Caucus Goers’ Phones – They’re Not Going to Like It” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Franklin Graham Just Released a Scathing Statement on What Gay Marriage, Transgenders Are Doing to America [+video]

Rev. Franklin Graham urged evangelical Christians to get involved in the electioral process and “make their vote count,” adding that the 2016 race is vitally important because homosexual marriage, abortion, and now transgender laws are on the table, marking “just the beginning of a moral onslaught on the nation.”

“[T]his is ridiculous,” said Rev. Graham,” for a person to be able to wake up in the morning and say, ‘You know, I feel like I’m a woman today,’ For a man to say, ‘I feel like a woman, I’m going to go into a woman’s bathroom.’ … This is ridiculous.”

Reverend Graham also said he has faith neither in the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party, but has faith in God and is urging people to live their faith, to pray, and to vote.

“What’s happened is the evangelical vote has not been heard, and I want them to get out and at least make their vote count,” said Rev. Graham in a Feb. 7 interview with Scott Slade on WSB Radio in Atlanta, Ga. “Now, I don’t have any faith in the Republican Party, and I don’t have any faith in the Democratic Party. I believe the only hope, really, is God.”

“And if we turn out as evangelical Christians — both for men and women who have godly principles and who are willing to follow what I would say is God’s leading in their lives — those are the men and women we need to vote for,” he said. (Read more from “Franklin Graham Just Released a Scathing Statement on What Gay Marriage, Transgenders Are Doing to America” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

18 Things Only Left-Handed People Understand

Did you know that lefties typically have better hearing than righties? Or that presidents are more likely to be left-handed? Both true. But chances are you’re more familiar with the less exciting side effects of being a southpaw. Case in point: the nickname southpaw. Here, 18 things only left-handed people understand.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Fruit May Help Detect, Cure Skin Cancer

The black spots on old banana peels may unlock a faster, easier diagnosis of human skin cancer, boosting survival chances, scientists said Monday.

When bananas ripen, their skin is covered in small, round black spots caused by an enzyme known as tyrosinase.

The same enzyme is present in human skin, and in greater quantities in people suffering from melanoma — a potentially deadly form of skin cancer.

A team of scientists used this observed commonality to build a cancer scanner, which they then refined and tested at length on banana peels before moving on to human tissue.

First, researchers at the Laboratory of Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry in Switzerland concluded that the enzyme is a reliable marker of melanoma growth. (Read more from “This Fruit May Help Detect, Cure Skin Cancer” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Senior Senate Staffer Reveals the Marco Rubio Story You’ve Never Heard [+video]

By Julia Hahn. On today’s program of Breitbart News Daily, Donald Trump’s Senior Policy Adviser, Stephen Miller, shared his never-before publicly discussed insights into Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)79%’s duplicitous conduct during his push to get the Gang of Eight bill through the Senate . . .

For the first time ever, Stephen Miller explained exactly what Rubio did to Chris Crane and how he had deceived the nation’s ICE officers.

During the Gang of Eight press conference to introduce the bill, Crane had attempted to ask a question. Miller explains that Rubio watched as Chuck Schumer repeatedly refused to allow Crane to ask his question, and Rubio eventually oversaw Crane being removed from the press conference by Capitol Hill security. Miller said that Rubio:

… refused to meet with ICE officers throughout the process [of crafting the bill], even as he was meeting with open border special interests. At the very end, he [Rubio] had an optics-only meeting with [Chris Crane] the representative for ICE officers, in which he made a series of promises, every single one of which he broke and violated directly … When that same ICE officer and Marine went to a press conference to ask a question, Rubio — through his silence — was complicit in Schumer blocking [Crane] from asking a question and allowing him to suffer the indignity of being forced out of a press conference room — a man who had served his country in uniform, as a U.S. Marine — all to spare Rubio from the discomfort of being publicly questioned about why he had broken his promises.

Rubio saw them [Capitol Hill security] take Chris Crane and remove him from the room and said nothing. When he [Rubio] had a chance to show an iota of independence, one scrap of independence from Chuck Schumer, and side with an American Marine and ICE officer — Rubio chose to stand shoulder-to-shoulder, hand-in-hand, arm-in-arm with Chuck Schumer, as an American Marine was forced to suffer the indignity of being removed from Marco Rubio’s Gang of Eight press conference. That’s the story I want to tell today.

(Read more from “Senior Senate Staffer Reveals the Marco Rubio Story You’ve Never Heard” HERE)

______________________________

Rubio Contradicts Himself – Repeatedly

By Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie. During the GOP debate on Saturday, Rubio repeated the same line FOUR times: Barack Obama knows what he’s doing.

Rubio was asked if he was too inexperienced — and attacked by others with the comparison that Obama was a one-term senator . . .

But Rubio’s line used to be different! It used to be that Obama has no idea what he’s doing.

“This is a choice between a guy that has no idea what he’s doing, and a guy that does,” Rubio said of Obama during the 2012 election, contrasting him with Obama.

On his Facebook, Rubio shared the same sentiment looking to a video of the comments at the time saying, “This isn’t a choice between two bad guys or one bad guy and one good guy, this is a choice between a guy that has no idea what he’s doing, and a guy that does.” (Read more from “Rubio Contradicts Himself – Repeatedly” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Disgusting: Abortion Activists Attack Doritos Super Bowl Ad for ‘Humanizing Fetuses’ [+video]

By Kit Daniels. A pro-abortion group is attacking a Doritos Super Bowl ad for humanizing an unborn baby.

In the ad, a pregnant woman is getting an ultrasound while her man beside her realizes the unborn baby will move in the direction of the Doritos he’s snacking on.

The baby attempts in vain to reach the chips he’s eating from the womb until the mother throws the Doritos across the room, which prompts the child to launch itself outside mom and towards the chips.

In response, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League said the ad used an “anti-choice tactic of humanizing fetuses.” (Read more from “Disgusting: Abortion Activists Attack Doritos Superbowl Ad for ‘Humanizing Fetuses'” HERE)

__________________________________

Puppymonkeybaby, Chip-Craving Baby Stand out in Super Bowl Ad Lineup

By Anjali Athavaley and Lisa Richwine. Mountain Dew rolled out a creature made from a puppy, a monkey and a baby while Doritos had a fetus on ultrasound reaching for a chip, in two of the most unusual spots.

The commercial which drew the most tweets was shown by Allstate Corp’s Esurance unit before the game, promising viewers a chance to win $250,000 if they tweeted. More than 2 million had done so as of late Sunday night.

The low-risk approach may have been a reaction to last year, when Nationwide Mutual Insurance drew heat for featuring a dead boy speaking to viewers in an ad about child safety.

“Brands played it safe, using a lot of levity and humor,” said Derek Rucker, professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. “We didn’t see too many emotional or too many deep ads. Most of them played it really safe, really light-hearted,” he said, noting the contrast to Nationwide’s 2015 spot. (Read more from “Puppymonkeybaby, Chip-Craving Baby Stand out in Super Bowl Ad Lineup” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Iowans Claim Instances When Sanders Was Shorted Delegates

By Jennifer Jacobs. Keane Schwarz is certain he knows the outcome of the vote in his precinct: He was the lone caucusgoer in Woodbury County No. 43.

But the Iowa Democratic Party’s final results state that Hillary Clinton won one county delegate and Bernie Sanders received zero.

“I voted for Bernie,” Schwarz, 36, of Oto, told The Des Moines Register. “It was really suspicious … I’m actually pretty irate about it.”

Some complaints that Iowa Democrats have shared with the Register about discrepancies in caucus results appear to be valid. Others stem from confusion over how the math-heavy delegate-awarding system works in the Democrats’ caucus process . . .

Sanders’ backers are more likely than Clinton’s to think the political system is rigged, polling has found. So it might not come as a surprise, especially since he lost by a hairsbreadth, that some think the Democratic caucus system is rigged. It also doesn’t help the optics that the state party chairwoman drove around for years in a car with “HRC2016” license plates. (Read more from “Iowans Claim Instances When Sanders Was Shorted Delegates” HERE)

_______________________________

Female Sanders Backers Slam ‘Insulting’ Clinton Supporters Who Say They’re Betraying Their Gender

By Hunter Walker. Many women who showed up at a presidential campaign rally for Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., at Great Bay Community College on Sunday said they were insulted and “offended” by supporters of Hillary Clinton who have suggested it is somehow anti-feminist to back Sanders instead of Clinton’s quest to become the first female president.

Jane Sanders, the senator’s wife, had a succinct response when Yahoo News asked her opinion of those who suggest it’s sexist to support Sanders instead of Clinton . . .

Cokie Giles, a registered nurse from Bangor, Maine, who traveled to neighboring New Hampshire for the rally, said she does not appreciate being “herded along just because I’m a woman.”

“Well, I don’t want to think that I have to vote for a woman, being a woman, because there’s a woman running. They have to be who I would look at as … my best choice,” Giles said. “I’m not trashing Hillary. I’m just saying Bernie is the better of the choices. And I will get a chance to vote for a female president. I would like to see a female president, and there’s plenty out there that I would be very happy to do.” (Read more from “Female Sanders Backers Slam ‘Insulting’ Clinton Supporters Who Say They’re Betraying Their Gender” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.