Jeb Bush: Cruz Naming Fiorina Early as Running Mate Is a ‘Smart Move’

Jeb_Bush_(8570145056)In his first interview since dropping out of the 2016 race for the White House, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Thursday that Republican candidate Ted Cruz’s unconventional decision to name Carly Fiorina as his running mate was a “smart move.”

“I’m impressed with her,” he said. “[I] thought it was a smart move.”

Bush, who has endorsed Cruz, told CNN reporter Jamie Gangel that choosing Fiorina, who suspended her bid for the GOP nomination in February, will prove helpful when going after Republican rival Donald Trump and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

“Picking a candidate that is talented, tough — she takes on Trump really well, I think, and she takes on Hillary Clinton very well, as well,” Bush said. “[She’s] someone who’s got a proven record, who’s been vetted by a candidate, I thought it was a smart move.”

Though the invincibility of a Trump nomination continues to build, Bush seemed confident it is still possible to block the billionaire businessman from becoming the GOP nominee. (Read more from “Jeb Bush: Cruz Naming Fiorina Early as Running Mate Is a ‘Smart Move'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Three Relatives of San Bernardino Shooter Arrested

San_Bernardino_shooting_suspect_vehicleThree relatives of the San Bernardino terrorists who killed 14 people in December at a Southern California social services building were arrested Thursday on federal conspiracy, marriage fraud and false statement charges, the FBI announced.

The arrests don’t appear to bear a direct connection to the terror attack, but center on a 2014 marriage-for-citizenship scam allegedly carried out by Enrique Marquez and Mariya Chernykh.

“While investigating the terrorist attack, federal agents obtained official records showing that Marquez, a former neighbor of Syed Rizwan Farook’s, is married to Chernykh,” the U.S. attorney’s office said in a statement. “The investigation determined that Marquez agreed to marry Chernykh so she could obtain immigration benefits that were not available to her because she is a Russian citizen and did not have legal status in the United States” . . .

Marquez is already in jail and awaiting trial for conspiring with one of the San Bernardino attackers, Syed Rizwan Farook, in terror plots that never materialized.

Federal court documents obtained by FoxNews.com tied to Marquez’s case show both he and Farook abruptly halted plans for a dual terror attack in 2012. In that assault, Marquez and Farook allegedly planned to use pipe bombs and two AR-15 rifles “to maximize the number of casualties” at Riverside City College, a nearby institution they attended, and on state Route 91, a busy freeway with few exits where motorists are frequently stuck in heavy gridlock. (Read more from “Three Relatives of San Bernardino Shooter Arrested” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Frank Murkowski on Lisa: “Pay Tribute to Caesar”

Frank Murkowski on Lisa: “Pay Tribute to Caesar”:

And for your reading enjoyment, a few other articles on why Lisa Murkowski should embarrass any self-respecting Republican who supports her 2016 reelection bid:

Planned Parenthood’s Poster Child

The RINO-Traitors

RINO Waffling on Scalia’s Replacement

Murkowsky, Bringing Home the Bacon?

Joe Miller on Obama: “Bad for America”

Army Retains Decorated Green Beret It Planned to Kick out Over Confronting Afghan Child Rapist

Enduring FreedomIn a stunning reversal, the U.S. Army decided late Thursday to retain a decorated Green Beret it had planned to kick out after he physically confronted a local Afghan commander accused of raping a boy over the course of many days.

Sgt 1st Class Charles Martland, confirmed the Army’s decision to retain him when reached by Fox News, who has been covering the story in depth for the past eight months and first broke the story of the Army’s decision in August to kick out Martland over the incident, which occurred in northern Afghanistan in 2011.

“I am real thankful for being able to continue to serve,” said Martland when reached on the telephone by Fox News. “I appreciate everything Congressman Duncan Hunter and his Chief of Staff, Joe Kasper did for me.”

As first reported by Fox News, while deployed to Kunduz Province, Afghanistan, Martland and his team leader confronted a local police commander in 2011 accused of raping an Afghan boy and beating his mother. When the man laughed off the incident, they shoved him to the ground.

Martland and his team leader were later removed from the base, and eventually sent home from Afghanistan. The U.S. Army has not confirmed the specifics of Martland’s separation from service citing privacy reasons, but a “memorandum of reprimand” from October 2011 obtained by Fox News makes clear that Martland was criticized by the brass for his intervention after the alleged rape. Asked for comment in September 2015, an Army spokesman reiterated, “the U.S. Army is unable to confirm the specifics of his separation due to the Privacy Act.” (Read more from “Army Retains Decorated Green Beret It Planned to Kick out Over Confronting Afghan Child Rapist” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Do Pro-Choice Catholics Even Exist?

When a large group of highly educated people who have dedicated themselves to an organization with firm doctrines, strict rules, and stern demands — such as the Catholic Church — lose their faith in those doctrines, rules and demands, what do they do with themselves instead? Shrug and join the Unitarians? Leave their rectories or convents and go find apartments, maybe jobs as high school guidance counselors?

What do families like the Pelosis, the Kennedys or the Bidens — and millions of non-famous Irish and Italian-American clans with strong ethnic and historical connections to the Church — do with themselves when they reject its teaching authority?

The history of the Catholic left gives us the answer: Such people focused on the parts of the Church’s mission that still appealed to them, such as looking out for the poor and rebuking unjust discrimination. And of course the Church has an almost 2,000 year tradition of offering the needy education, health care, and a voice in the face of genuine oppression. Many Catholics had joined the Civil Rights movement and marched for integration.

In the 1960s, there were fresh, exciting causes available for Catholics to join which modeled themselves on the Civil Rights movement’s tactics and rhetoric, whose agendas were not so compatible with traditional Christian teaching as the noble fight against institutionalized racism had been. Feminists, homosexuals, and anti-war activists began to throng the streets and demand radical changes in American law and policy, and many Catholics with left-wing sympathies and deep roots in the Democratic Party began to exert their energies on behalf of these new movements — assuring themselves that they were acting as Jesus had when he denounced the scribes and Pharisees.

Many grandchildren of Catholic immigrants to our overwhelmingly Protestant country still clung to the pretense that they were outsiders — excluded and marginalized victims of the existing American establishment. So they felt bound to make common cause with every other “outside” group, regardless of the justice of its claims. This outsider illusion made it easy for them to be right about Civil Rights … and then poisonously wrong about feminism, gay liberation, and socialist economics.

So Catholics who’d once taken part in Freedom Rides for black Americans got swept up in a “Women’s Liberation” movement that sought to dismantle legal definitions of marriage, laws restricting abortion, and finally the traditional family itself. That movement’s greatest success was Roe v. Wade, which gave the U.S. the laxest abortion laws on earth — outside of Communist countries — and resulted in the deaths of more than a million American unborn children every year since 1973. What most people don’t know is that the Kennedy family had helped lay the groundwork for that decision a decade before. As Philip Lawler reports in The Faithful Departed:

In July 1964, several liberal theologians received invitations to the Kennedy family compound in Hyannisport, Massachusetts, for a discussion of how a Catholic politician should handle the abortion issue. Notice now that abortion was not a major political issue in 1964. …

The participants in that Hyannisport meeting composed a Who’s Who of liberal theologians, most of them Jesuits… Father Robert Drinan … Father Charles Curran … Father Joseph Fuchs, a Jesuit professor at Rome’s Gregorian… Jesuits Richard McCormack, Albert Jensen, and Giles Milhaven.

For two days the theologians huddled in the Cape Cod resort town as guests of the Kennedys. Eventually they reached a consensus, which they passed along to their political patrons. Abortion, they agreed, could sometimes be morally acceptable as the lesser of two evils. Lawmakers should certainly not encourage abortion, but a blanket prohibition might be more harmful to the common good… (81).

Nine years before the fact, the financial and intellectual elite of American Catholicism were, in Lawler’s words, “waiting for Roe v. Wade.”

Similar Catholics joined Marxist-organized antiwar marches and demanded an end to the U.S. intervention in Vietnam, which had been launched in part to protect millions of South Vietnamese Christians from Communist oppression. Some Catholics even joined “gay liberation” movements, which began with attempts to stop police harassment, but quickly evolved into demands that the law make no distinction between heterosexual marriage and homosexual relationships. We have seen that movement culminate in 2015 with the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges, which has endangered the religious freedom of millions of American Christians.

The Left Wouldn’t Leave the Church, So the People Did

As the Catholic left developed, it became increasingly hard to distinguish from secular progressive movements, except in its use of biblical metaphors and cherry-picked quotes from Church documents to further its agenda. Instead of leaving the priesthood, convent, or bishop’s palace, far too many church leaders instead chose to hollow out the theological core of the Church’s mission, and transform it into an activist social welfare agency. Since the dissidents wouldn’t leave, many of the people did: Mass attendance plummeted, the Catholic Church began bleeding believers to outright secularism, and vibrantly doctrinal evangelical Protestant churches.

The reigns of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI saw the rise of a devoted faithful Catholic resistance to these toxic trends in the Church. Orthodox Catholic colleges were founded, home-schooling spread through Catholic circles as a means of passing along the integral faith, and the overwhelming majority of new priests and nuns were those who joined conservative orders or dioceses. Those two popes made a conscious effort to choose more reliable bishops, and the Church saw a mini-renaissance.

However, the impact of that resistance was limited in its scope to a self-selecting subculture, as progressives clung to institutional power and retained control over many dioceses and most Catholic colleges. Now with the advent of Pope Francis, that counterrevolution’s future is in question, and previous trends are reasserting themselves.

In 2015, the Pew Study reported that a shocking 41 percent of adult American Catholics leave the church at some point, most never to return:

Both the mainline and historically black Protestant traditions have lost more members than they have gained through religious switching, but within Christianity the greatest net losses, by far, have been experienced by Catholics. Nearly one-third of American adults (31.7%) say they were raised Catholic. Among that group, fully 41% no longer identify with Catholicism. This means that 12.9% of American adults are former Catholics, while just 2% of U.S. adults have converted to Catholicism from another religious tradition. No other religious group in the survey has such a lopsided ratio of losses to gains.

In other words, the American church is shrinking, and would be diminishing quickly as a share of the U.S. population, were it not for a constant influx of Catholic immigrants. According to a subsequent report by Pew:

[M]ore than a quarter of U.S. Catholic adults (27%) were born outside the country, compared with 15% of U.S. adults overall; most of these Catholic immigrants (22% of all U.S. Catholics) are from elsewhere in the Americas.

As of 2014, an additional 15% of Catholic Americans have at least one foreign-born parent. That leaves 57% of Catholics who were born in the U.S. to two native-born parents. By comparison, nearly three-quarters (74%) of American adults overall were born in the country to two U.S.-born parents….

The median age of Catholic adults in the U.S. is 49 years old – four years older than it was in 2007. Catholics are significantly older than members of non-Christian faiths (40) and people who are not affiliated with any religion (36).

Just 17% of Catholic adults are under the age of 30, compared with 22% of U.S. adults, 35% of religious “nones” and 44% of U.S. Muslims.

Without the mass influx of new Catholics who have not yet been subjected to the acid of our secular culture and the tepidness in many of our local church institutions, the Catholic Church in America would look much more like the Episcopal or Methodist church: a shrinking, aging organization with diminishing influence — and a small but dedicated orthodox protest movement.

Nor are newly imported Catholics by any means certain to continue warming our parish pews. First Things has reported (citing Pew statistics):

Roughly one-third of Catholic adults in the U.S. are Latino, but just over half (55 percent) of Latino adults here are Catholics. As recently as 2010, that figure stood at two-thirds.

Close to one in four Latinos were raised Catholic but have since become (for the most part) Protestant or unaffiliated. Among Hispanics ages eighteen to twenty-nine, just 45 percent are Catholic, and that number could keep dropping as they age: Almost four in ten of these young adults say they “could imagine leaving the Catholic Church someday.”

All these outcomes, you might think, would alarm the Vatican that the Church is shrinking and fading in the world’s most influential nation. Key papal appointments of “social justice” prelates such as Blaise Cupich to the crucial archdiocese of Chicago, and invitations to Rome for the likes of Bernie Sanders and Joseph Biden, suggest that Pope Francis has not gotten the message. (For more from the author of “Why Do Pro-Choice Catholics Even Exist?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Despicable Congress Moves to Require Female Draft, Force Our Daughters Into Combat

Female_Signal_officer_speaks_to_the_future_roles_of_women_in_combat_130313-A-ER359-359By Carlo Munoz. House lawmakers took a large step toward putting female soldiers on the front lines on Wednesday, approving legislation requiring women to register for the draft.

Members of the House Armed Services committee passed the measure as part of the panel’s version of the defense spending bill for fiscal year 2017, according to the Associated Press.

After a lengthy, and at times heated debate, the legislation only passed by a slim two vote margin with the bill’s main sponsor California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter actually voting against the measure during the House defense spending bill markup on Wednesday.

Hunter, along with former SEAL and Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, initially proposed the plan to require women to register for the draft in Feburary, shortly after the Pentagon lifted its ban on female service members from serving in combat infantry units and special operations forces.

“It’s wrong and irresponsible to make wholesale changes to the way America fights its wars without the American people having a say on whether their daughters and sisters will be on the front lines of combat,” Hunter said at the time. (Read more from “Despicable Congress Moves to Require Female Draft, Force Our Daughters Into Combat” HERE)

___________________________________________

House Committee Votes to Draft Women Into Selective Service

By Daniel Horowitz. We have officially lost it as a civil society. All the gender-bending has taken its toll on our political leaders, forcing them to come full circle and endorse a mandatory draft for all young women in this country.

Yesterday, during a marathon markup of the $610 billion annual defense bill (NDAA), the House Armed Services Committee added an amendment including women in the requirement for all young adults to register for the Selective Service. The amendment was originally sponsored by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), an opponent of social engineering in the military, in order to jumpstart a discussion of how the ‘women in combat agenda’ has gone too far. You might call it a case study of acting absurd in order to illustrate absurdity. But as it turns out, there is no floor to the politically correct insanity of our political class. Republicans Joe Heck, Martha McSally, and Chris Gibson joined the Democrats in passing this amendment and attaching it to the NDAA. The vote tally was 32-30.

To be clear, this entire exercise was pointless and will not become law. Moreover, the Selective Service is gratuitous and will likely go by the wayside one of these days. But the point is we’ve reached rock bottom in our culture when every Democrat and even some Republicans now believe women should be forcibly drafted into the military. Remember, several months ago during the New Hampshire primary debate when every candidate except for Ted Cruz expressed support for women in combat and women registering for the draft. Last year, Trump said he would absolutely support women in combat.

Add this to the endless list of bedrock principles many Republicans are willing to toss overboard. As John Kasich likes to say, we just need to get over it. (For more from the author of “House Committee Votes to Draft Women Into Selective Service” please click HERE)

___________________________________________

Three Republicans Split Ranks, Allow Measure to Pass

By Scott Maucione. The amendment, which narrowly passed 32-30, made for one of the more drastic votes of the 16 1/2 hour marathon, with the author (Rep. Duncan Hunter) voting against his own provision.

The amendment legally requires women to sign up for the selective service when they become adults. In the case of a draft, those women will be called up to military duty just as men are now. . .

The voting on the amendment was split largely along party lines, however a few Republicans broke rank.

Reps. Joe Heck (R-Nev.) Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.) and Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) voted to add women to the selective services. (Read more from “Three Republicans Split Ranks, Allow Measure to Pass” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Boehner Ally Plans to Spend $1 Million to Torpedo Conservative Rep. Bridenstine

Jim_Bridenstine_113th_CongressEarlier today, John Boehner revealed what’s on his mind and the minds of the entire Chamber of Commerce/K Street/Fox News axis who are committed to the cause of #NeverCruz. They will target anyone who adheres to the Republican platform and upholds their campaigns promise to those who elected them. The same players who detest Ted Cruz have now recruited a straw man RINO to run against Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK), one of the most intrepid conservatives in the House of Representatives.

Jim Bridenstine is running for his third and final term to represent Oklahoma’s First Congressional District, as he has pledged to serve no longer than six years. But the Boehner, K Street-types cannot afford even one more term of a man who listens to the people of Tulsa instead of the special interests. Tom Atkinson, a wealthy owner of an oil company, has been recruited to run against Jim and has publicly promised to spend up to $1 million in this very cheap media market.

Just to illustrate the contrast between grassroots primary challenges that begin with a groundswell but not much money, Atkinson has no support from the people but is already up on radio and TV with plasticated ads ahead of the June 28 primary. He has not made a single public appearance, held a single press conference or engaged in electioneering, yet he is already up on the air. Atkinson hasn’t shown up to the district convention or any other party event. His strategy is to hide behind his money and hope nobody finds out his true identity.

Well, who is Tom Atkinson? He is the quintessential wealthy trans-ideological Republican. He donated to a liberal Democrat, Kathy Taylor, who ran against the Republican mayor of Tulsa. That Republican mayor, Dewey Bartlett, is Tom Atkinson’s own brother-in-law! Atkinson has tapped Shane Saunders, a former aid to John Sullivan, the RINO Bridenstine defeated in 2012 who was known to be close with Boehner as well.

On Atkinson’s campaign website and in his ads, he sells himself as a conservative and not a politician. But how could a conservative donate to a prominent Democrat who funded Emily’s List and held fundraisers for Joe Biden? More importantly, how can a conservative “non-politician” challenge the only member of the state’s delegation who is indeed a conservative and not a politician? Atkinson feigns outrage over illegal immigration on his website, but he is challenging the one man in the delegation who stood up to Obama’s amnesty, the very impetus for Boehner’s recruitment against him!

Let’s examine the Liberty Scores® of each member from the Oklahoma delegation:

Jim Bridenstine (CD-1) – 96%

Markwayne Mullin (CD-2)- 59%**

Frank Lucas (CD-3) – 39%

Tom Cole (CD-4) – 40%

Steve Russell (CD-5)– 50%

Does anything stand out here?

Clearly, Tom Atkinson, his rich local friends who are best buddies with John Boehner, and his K Street backers in D.C. want the first district to be like the rest of the delegation, not vice-versa. They don’t want a citizen legislator in CD-1; they want a career politician in the mold of those serving in the other districts so that the Tulsa representative doesn’t embarrass the K Street/Paul Ryan bootlickers in the rest of the state. Tom Atkinson is merely the drive-by conduit for them to strip Oklahoma of any conservative representation. Tom Atkinson would fit in perfectly with the politically bisexual Washington Cartel.

In March 2015, the American Action Network, a RINO group closely aligned with Boehner and K Street, spent hundreds of thousands on ads targeting Bridenstine and other House conservatives who opposed funding amnesty. You heard that right. Boehner’s allies were targeting Republicans for upholding their promise to block one of the most pernicious and unconstitutional policies in recent years. American Action Network, which is rapidly pro-amnesty, had previously run ads in support of the Gang of Eight. Now they are promoting jailbreak.

At the time, there was so much backlash in Bridenstine’s district against the K Street amnesty PAC that they were forced to pull the ads.

It’s not hard to see that similar groups, if not AAN itself, are behind the random filing of this drive-by candidacy. Activists on the ground told me they received calls from D.C. push-polling against Bridenstine in March, but they were clearly not from Atkinson because the pollster was testing other potential opponents. Boehner’s allies were gunning for Jim for a while, but now they have their man.

This race is about a lot more than Jim Bridenstine. It’s about deterring any potential citizen legislator from doing the right thing and continuing the pale-pastel scam that is the modern Republican Party.

**Mullin has already drawn a challenger. Jarrin Jackson, a combat veteran, is a very strong candidate and I’ll be focusing on this race in the coming days. (For more from the author of “Boehner Ally Plans to Spend $1 Million to Torpedo Conservative Rep. Bridenstine” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pastor’s ‘Massive’ Prediction About What Will Happen If Trump Isn’t the GOP Nominee

hqdefaultPastor Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas, has sparked both praise and controversy over his support for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, and now he’s predicting that Trump supporters will sit out of the election if the businessman is prevented from becoming the nominee.

“I’m going to predict that, if the establishment somehow wrestles this nomination away from Trump — even though the rules allow for it — I think you’re going to see a massive boycott of Trump supporters in the general election,” Jeffress said during an appearance on Fox Business Network earlier this week. “I’m not saying it should be that way, but I predict that’s what’s going to happen.”

He went on to argue that many of the people who Trump has energized are outside of the “Republican system.”

While Jeffress believes that the brash businessman has motivated these people to no longer sit on the sidelines, he believes that it’s quite possible that they will bow out of the political process if another GOP candidate nabs the nomination . . .

As TheBlaze previously reported, Jeffress — who isn’t endorsing a candidate in the 2016 election cycle, but who told the Christian Post that he doesn’t believe that a Christian “has to sell his soul to the devil to vote for Donald Trump” — has offered frequent support to Trump in recent months. (Read more from “Pastor’s ‘Massive’ Prediction About What Will Happen If Trump Isn’t the GOP Nominee” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

President Hillary Clinton

hqdefaultOnly Republicans can make President Hillary Clinton a reality.

On January, 20, 2017, President Hillary Clinton might just become a reality. With her face set in the tight unpleasant grimace that is the closest she can come to smiling, she will take the oath of office on a bible, her Alinsky thesis or an Eleanor Roosevelt Ouija board vowing to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

If the bible doesn’t burst into flames on the spot, she will take office with one more lie on her stained conscience after a long career of them.

And the United States will enter the longest period of uninterrupted Democrat rule since FDR. It will be the single greatest opportunity for the left to transform America since the days of the New Deal.

Think of America before the New Deal. And then think of how much America changed after it.

It might behoove Republicans to stop accusing each other of having short fingers or 600 mistresses and start making the case against Hillary Clinton if they want to win anything worth winning. In the midst of all the exciting debates about establishment conspiracies and shoving video forensics, too many have forgotten what is really at stake here and what they ought to really be talking about.

The national debt will go up. So will your taxes. Hillary Clinton is promising a trillion dollar tax hike. And that’s during her campaign. Imagine how much she will really raise taxes once she’s actually in office.

Two Supreme Court justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony Kennedy will likely leave office on her watch. That’s in addition to Scalia’s empty seat which she will fill resulting in an ideological switch for the court. Additionally, Kennedy, for all his flaws, was a swing vote. Hillary’s appointee won’t be swinging anywhere. The Supreme Court will once again become a reliable left-wing bastion.

Even if the Democrats never manage to retake Congress, they will control two out of three branches of government. And with an activist Supreme Court and the White House, the left will have near absolute power to redefine every aspect of society on their own terms without facing any real challenges.

And they will use it. Your life changed fundamentally under Obama. The process will only accelerate.

You will have less free speech. You will pay more for everything. Your children and grandchildren will be taught to hate you twice as hard. Local democracy will continue being eroded. Your community, your school, your town, your city and your state will be run out of D.C. You will live under the shadow of being arrested for violating some regulation that you never even heard of before.

Every day you will notice basic aspects of life that you took for granted just vanishing while a carefully selected multicultural audience cheers on television.

Hillary Clinton had a man sent to jail for uploading a video about Mohammed. What do you think she’ll do to even more vocal critics of Islam? How long will it be until a new Supreme Court decides that a Mohammed cartoon is “shouting fire in a crowded theater” and not protected by the Constitution?

On gun control, Hillary Clinton managed to combine an attack on both of the first two amendments of the Bill of Rights by insisting, “We cannot let a minority of people… hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.” What would she do to prevent them from holding that viewpoint? Or any other viewpoints that she doesn’t think people should be allowed to hold?

If you thought that conservatives were targeted under Obama, imagine what will happen under the woman who blamed all her problems, including her husband’s infidelity, on a “vast right-wing conspiracy”. Barack Obama is surrounded by radical leftists. Hillary Clinton’s circle however is filled with political thugs like David Brock and Sidney Blumenthal who channel her worst paranoid tendencies.

President Hillary Clinton will seek to root out that vast right-wing conspiracy which prevented Bill Clinton from keeping his pants on and made ordinary people dislike her. The orbit of ClintonWorld is huge and her White House will be able to command the loyalties of key figures across government. If you thought the IRS was bad under Obama, just wait. If you thought that the EPA was actively trying to destroy businesses that donate to Republicans, watch what happens when the FDA and every other government agency get in on the act.

And all of this will be implemented by an organization that engages in preemptive cover-ups overseen by a politician who had become notorious as a compulsive liar incapable of telling the truth decades ago. The American people will be lied to on a constant basis by a captive press whose strings are being pulled out of the White House. And the lies and abuses will be backed by an endless conveyor belt of new lies.

Obama’s greatest weakness was his impatience. Sooner or later he gets bored of everything. He grew bored of trying to be electable. He grew bored of backing the Muslim Brotherhood and switched to Iran. He grew bored of giving speeches, of regime change, of the entire Middle East and of his own talking points. Hillary Clinton however never gets bored. She never forgives or forgets. Whatever her flaws are, she thinks in the long term and she has the patience to creep slowly toward her ultimate objectives.

Hillary Clinton has not given up any of her objectives. She hasn’t grown bored of backing the Muslim Brotherhood. She doesn’t think that the Arab Spring was a bad idea. She won’t get tired of pushing each and every single one of her agendas, abroad and at home, until her very last day in office.

If you liked the Arab Spring, wait for Arab Spring II as Hillary Clinton goes after Egypt, Tunisia and any other country not controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood all over again. And when it comes to Israel, Hillary Clinton was more radically opposed to the Jewish State than her husband. She calls herself the “designated yeller” for her interactions with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Hillary Clinton’s Middle East foreign policy will be Obama’s disastrous policy on steroids.

The military is already crumbling under Obama. Anyone who thinks Hillary will offer some relief has forgotten the impact that her husband’s policies had on military readiness when he was in office. American soldiers will be expected to do more with less while receiving as little support from the White House when they come under fire as the fallen of Benghazi did from Hillary Clinton.

These are just a few selected excerpts from 2017, 2018, 2019 and onward if Republicans don’t start focusing on the welfare of the country instead of on settling personal scores within the party.

Today many Republicans hate each other more than they do Hillary Clinton. But no matter how ugly the Democratic race becomes, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters will never hate each more than they hate Republicans. The bitterly divided Republican field would do well to remember that fact.

Democrats have tried and failed to make Hillary Clinton president before. They are having trouble carrying her over the finish line now despite her huge lead in money, organization and publicity.

Only Republicans can make President Hillary Clinton a reality. (For more from the author of “President Hillary Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cruz Rolls Dice With Fiorina

24762599925_5365de5bed_bFacing a must-win situation in next week’s primary in Indiana, Ted Cruz sought to shake up the GOP presidential campaign by naming Carly Fiorina as his vice presidential candidate.

The dramatic move was teased as a big announcement Wednesday morning and dominated the news cycle a day after Donald Trump swept five Northeastern primaries and reasserted his dominance of the GOP race.

Cruz desperately needed something to change the race’s momentum, and he turned to a failed Republican presidential candidate best known for her fiery attacks on Trump and Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic presidential nominee.

“Carly is brilliant and capable, and yet she experienced the hardscrabble world of being a female professional,” Cruz said in announcing his pick at a rally in Indianapolis, where his supporters held red, white and blue “Cruz/Fiorina ’16” signs that were handed out as Cruz spoke . . .

Fiorina took the stage in a red dress that matched Cruz’s tie and immediately showed her potential to be a strong GOP vice presidential candidate against a ticket topped by Clinton, by laying into the former secretary of State. (Read more from “Cruz Rolls Dice With Fiorina” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.