3 Things America Can Learn From a Likely Jihadist Assassination in Jordan

The assassination of a Jordanian writer who was under investigation for allegedly sharing a cartoon mocking the Islamic State has some very real lessons for American policy makers and the fight against global jihadism.

According to a report at CNN:

A prominent Jordanian writer facing charges for sharing a “blasphemous” anti-ISIS cartoon that outraged Muslim groups was fatally shot in Amman on Sunday, state news agency Petra reported.

Nahed Hattar, a member of the country’s Christian minority, was shot three times outside a courthouse in the capital where charges against him were being heard.

Public Security Department personnel, who were near the scene of the attack, rushed Hattar to a nearby hospital, but he died from his injuries, Petra reported.

Hattar was brought up on charges for sharing a cartoon that depicted a jihadist in bed with two naked women demanding that God bring him refreshments (thereby mocking ISIS members’ view of heaven). Hattar was charged with “inciting sectarian strife” for having shared an image that was “abusive to the divine entity,” according to state media reports.

Local authorities have arrested the attacker and an investigation is underway, but the attack would appear to be motivated by the high-profile case against Hattar.

The assassination itself is a tragedy — one that evokes painful memories of other extrajudicial Islamist killings in other Mideast regimes (which will be discussed later). But it also offers three very important lessons for those of us in the West.

1. Our allies still have Islamism problems, and that’s a problem for us

First, the fact that this happened in Jordan shows us that even our allies in the Middle East exhibit the same root problems that lead to the formation of jihadist terror organizations.

“Our challenge in the Middle East is that sharia supremacism fills all vacuums. It was this ideology that created ISIS long before President Obama came along,” writes Andy McCarthy at National Review. “And if ISIS were to disappear tomorrow, sharia supremacism would still be our challenge.”

Jordan has been one of the anti-ISIS coalition’s most visible and important players, but the weekend’s courthouse murder suggests that even the Hashemite monarchy run by King Abdullah II (and the beloved Queen Rania) isn’t free from the societal trends that feed the problem of Islamist supremacism.

“America needs to finally wake up,” says Dr. Zhudi Jasser, the founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

Dr. Jasser is a prominent Muslim reformist, former U.S. religious freedom commissioner, and author of “A Battle for the Soul of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot’s Fight to Save His Faith.” The Muslim Reform movement, which he co-founded, names the “separation of Mosque and state” as a core tenet of its beliefs.

“Hattar was assassinated only after he was formally charged with the same kind of crime for which ISIS executes people on a daily basis,” said Jasser in an interview with Conservative Review Monday. “The only difference between countries like Jordan and Saudi Arabia and ISIS is that the former two are corporate Sharia states … but they’re all drinking from the same ideology.”

When the United States refuses to acknowledge these trends in its foreign policy, it has the effect of “treating arsonists like firefighters,” he added.

That cases like Nahed Hattar’s persistently happen outside ISIS lines and beyond the control of the Iranian mullahs ought to show Americans that real peace in the Middle East won’t be achieved by balancing the region out with America-friendly, Sharia-based regimes, says Jasser. Rather, it’s going to take a much more stringent litmus test.

“When we realized that the Soviet Union has ideological, imperialist goals that involved spreading communism to every corner of the globe, we didn’t try to work with ‘moderate’ communists elsewhere in the world” to moderate the threat, Jasser explains, saying that American foreign policy should exhibit a similar commitment to only ally itself with regimes that do not function as Sharia states.

“This problem is not going to go away until we raise the bar for our allies,” he said. “It may seem far-fetched or quixotic, but there is no other alternative.”

2. This is bigger than one assassination

Second, Hattar was also a victim of one of one of the most widespread human rights violations in the world right now: blasphemy laws. The simple fact that Hattar was even facing charges for something as simple as a Facebook post speaks to a global attack on free speech that goes by several names. In several Muslim-majority nations, this trend takes the form of blasphemy laws, which carry heavy penalties — in many cases, death.

“The reason Nahed’s death is more shocking than others who have been executed under Draconian blasphemy laws is because Nahed simply shared the drawing — he didn’t even draw it himself. It shows us the depth of intolerance in regressive Muslim communities, even if that community is Jordan — a country hailed as being one of the few beacons of the Muslim world,” reads an emailed statement from CounterJihad.com’s Shireen Qudosi, who testified before congress last week.

“However,” she adds, “no society is truly progressive, stable, or capable of taking on the tide of Radical Islam unless it can champion free speech.”

Elsewhere in the world, Asia Bibi, a Christian mother of five, has marked her seventh year on death row in Pakistan for having the audacity to drink water from the same glass as her Muslim co-workers, then subsequently refusing to convert to Islam in front of her co-workers. While Asia Bibi may be the world’s most visible symbol of the tyranny of blasphemy laws, she’s far from alone, as her case has also claimed the lives of Shahbaz Bhatti and Salman Taseer, Pakistani politicians who were assassinated for daring to speak out on her behalf.

3. America isn’t that different from Jordan or Pakistan when it comes to free speech

Thirdly, sadly, as I have pointed out before, this is a problem outside the Muslim-majority world. In multiculturalist — or what R.R. Reno would more aptly call “non-judgementalist” — Europe, the anti-free speech phenomenon takes the form of so-called “hate speech” laws, where people have even been subjected to jail time for such offenses as giving a sermon about sexuality and marriage, or drunkenly speculating on the sexuality of a policeman’s horse.

Yes, an Oxford student was actually arrested for “hate speech” against a horse.

Meanwhile, the trend in the United States’ is to enact“non-discrimination” laws that prohibit any form of public dissent against the newest government-imposed view of marriage or human biology are taking root from coast to coast. Additionally, Qudosi tells CR, “countless critical thinkers in Islam — including Muslim Reformers like myself — are shamed, harassed, and threatened for the Constitutional values we espouse.”

The trends and laws that led to Nahed Hattar’s death in Jordan represent an egregious violence against basic human freedom. But those in a society dominated by political correctness need to remember that the only difference between these laws and the ones gaining ground in the West are the prevailing ideology and the degree of punishment — for now, at least.

“As long as America allows speech to be censored under a manipulation of the First Amendment and under the illusion of tolerance, America is not that different from Jordan in the challenges it faces,” CounterJihad’s Shireen Qudosi concludes. “American can no longer rally the Muslim world toward liberty and democracy, and not identify the cracks within its own walls.”

Hattar died a martyr to free speech, but he need not have died in vain, so long as freedom-loving countries and policy makers take heed of the lessons his death offered. (For more from the author of “3 Things America Can Learn From a Likely Jihadist Assassination in Jordan” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Hammers Clinton Over Racial Comments

Shifting the focus of the first presidential debate toward law enforcement, race relations and Second Amendment gun rights, Republican nominee Donald Trump took a moment Monday night to discuss an element of Democrat Hillary Clinton’s past she likely wish could have stayed buried.

“I do want to bring up the fact that you were the one that brought up the word ‘super-predator’ about young black youth,” Trump stated.

“That’s a term that I think … it’s been horribly met — as you know — I think you’ve apologized for it, but I think it was a terrible thing to say,” he continued.

The comment Trump was referring to dates back to 1996, when then first lady Hillary Clinton expressed her perceptions of young black men and their role in burgeoning crime statistics.

“They’re not just gangs of kids anymore,” she began. “They are often the kinds of kids that are called super-predators. No conscience, no empathy.”

Clinton’s remarks were made all the worse when she offered her solution to dealing with these “super-predators.”

“We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel,” she stated emphatically.

As part of her agenda to bring young black men in line, Clinton proposed harsher sentencing laws, which resulted in mass incarcerations, including severe sentencing for children as young as 13.

Although Clinton has apologized for these comments since beginning her political career, the racial overtones and the imagery evoked of bringing young black men “to heel” has stuck with many in the African-American community.

For this reason and others, enthusiasm for Clinton among black voters has been lower than many expected.

Although she still maintains a healthy lead over Trump, his support has continued to grow. A tracking poll earlier this month showed Trump with a 16.5 percent increase in support from black voters. (For more from the author of “Trump Hammers Clinton Over Racial Comments” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Debate Audience Members Cheer Trump’s Terms for Releasing Tax Returns

Though moderator Lester Holt began Monday night’s presidential debate by asking the audience to remain quiet during the 90-minute event, one answer by Republican nominee Donald Trump prompted many in attendance to break that rule.

When Holt brought up Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns, the brash billionaire announced one condition under which he would defy his attorneys’ advice and hand over the financial documents.

“We have a situation in this country that has to be taken care of,” he said.

“I will release my tax returns against my lawyers’ wishes when [Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton] releases her 33,000 emails she deleted,” Trump added.

Trump’s reference to an ongoing scandal regarding the then-secretary of state’s use of a private email server to send and receive classified information prompted many in the audience to cheer loudly.

Before turning to Clinton for a rebuttal, Holt “admonished” those responsible for the interruption.

For her part, Trump’s rival floated a few theories she said would explain why the real estate mogul has kept his tax returns private.

“Maybe he’s not as rich as he says he is” or “as charitable as he claims to be,” Clinton speculated.

She also suggested Trump might also be trying to hide the fact that he does not pay federal taxes.

“He’s not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are,” she concluded, “because it must be something really important — even terrible — he’s trying to hide.” (For more from the author of “Debate Audience Members Cheer Trump’s Terms for Releasing Tax Returns” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trial Begins for Man Who Helped Ex-Lesbian Christian Mother Escape Country With Her Daughter

Trial began last week for Philip Zodhiates, the second man being tried for conspiracy and international parental kidnapping in the case of a former lesbian turned Christian who fled the country to shield her daughter from what she felt was a dangerous homosexual lifestyle at the hands of her former lesbian partner. Zodhiates and others allegedly helped the woman and her daughter leave the country.

The Case

The case of The United States vs. Lisa Miller, et al. began years ago, even before the child, the subject of the lawsuit, was born. In December 2000, Lisa Miller and her lesbian partner Janet Jenkins were joined in a civil union in Vermont, as their home state of Virginia did not recognize same-sex marriages at the time. In 2001, they decided to have Lisa undergo fertility treatments to conceive a child.

Isabella Miller-Jenkins was born on April 16, 2002, and within a few months Lisa, Janet and Isabella moved to Vermont to be in a same-sex union-friendly state. The next year however, the couple decided to part ways. Lisa filed documents to dissolve the union, and she and Isabella moved back to Virginia.

It was at this time that Lisa became a Christian and renounced homosexuality as a sin. “It wasn’t a struggle,” Lisa told The Washington Post in 2007, “I felt peace.” She began attending a local Baptist church with Isabella and eventually enrolled Isabella in a Christian school where she taught.

Vermont Court

Initially, the court awarded custody to Lisa and visitation rights to Janet; however, in subsequent court proceedings, Lisa testified that Janet had been physically and emotionally abusive as a partner and sexually abusive with Isabella.

According to Lisa, Isabella began wetting the bed, having nightmares, touching herself inappropriately and threatening suicide following her visitations with Janet. Lisa also claimed that Janet had behaved improperly with Isabella by taking baths with the child during the visitations.

The court still ordered Lisa to produce the child for visitation and when she refused, the judge slapped her with a steep fine of $25 per day, retroactively, until she allowed Isabella to see Janet. The custody case went all the way to the Vermont Supreme Court, which ruled that Janet was Isabella’s legal parent and entitled to her visitation.

Virginia Court

Lisa then appealed to Virginia for help, filing for exclusive custody of her daughter. “I don’t see Janet as a parent, first and foremost,” Lisa said. “I don’t want to expose Isabella to Janet’s lifestyle. It goes against all my beliefs. I am raising Isabella to pattern herself after Christ. That’s my job as a Christian mom. Homosexuality is a sin.”

The lower court sided with her, awarding her sole custody. The Virginia Court of Appeals, however, ruled that Vermont had jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving the court of appeals’ ruling standing.

On November 20, 2009, Lisa was found to be in contempt of court and custody was awarded to Janet, who was scheduled to take custody on January 1, 2010.

The Escape

By the end of September, Lisa and Isabella were gone.

Lisa, with the help of several Mennonite Christians, fled the country with her daughter to Nicaragua, crossing the Rainbow Bridge from Niagara Falls, New York, to Canada, according to court documents, around September 22, 2009.

The Defendants

Timothy David “Timo” Miller (no relation to Lisa) was arrested in April 2011 for aiding and abetting the “kidnapping” of Isabella. Timothy Miller was a Mennonite missionary to Nicaragua who, authorities believed, helped Lisa travel to a “safe house” in Managua, the capital city of Nicaragua.

In December of that year, the prosecution dropped the charges against him in exchange for his testimony and cooperation in their investigation against Mennonite pastor Kenneth Miller. The latest reports, however, claim that Timothy was once again arrested in Nicaragua.

Kenneth Miller (also no relation to Lisa or Timothy) was convicted for “aiding international parental kidnapping” in December 2011 and sentenced 27 months in prison, reported The Charley Project. The pastor of an Amish-Mennonite community, he helped Lisa and Isabelle by getting fellow Amish-Mennonites to purchase plane tickets for a flight from Canada to Nicaragua through Mexico and El Salvador. He also purchased the typical Mennonite dresses, which Lisa and Isabelle wore to conceal their identities.

Before he reported to prison in March of this year, Kenneth wrote on his blog about why he did what he did. “I’m going to prison today because a woman’s faith and modern society collided,” he said. “About 12 years ago Lisa Miller discovered that Jesus of Nazareth was powerful enough to take away her sins. He transformed her life and her lifestyle. In the long, winding journey since then, Lisa has sought to remain true to her Savior and her conscience.”

“I am greatly privileged to stand with Lisa in her quest for truth and freedom,” he added. “Some things can never be locked up inside prison walls. Truth. Conscience. Moral righteousness. And the saving Gospel of Jesus.”

Philip Zodhiates, the man on trial for his part in helping Lisa and Isabelle flee to Nicaragua, was indicted in October 2014. Authorities believe he drove Lisa and Isabelle to Buffalo, New York and crossed the Rainbow Bridge into Canada. For that act, he faces five years behind bars if convicted.

RICO Lawsuit

On August 14, 2012, Janet filed a RICO suit (Violation of the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act) against not only the individuals who helped Lisa and Isabelle escape, but also multiple churches, ministries and even Lisa’s lawyers’ place of employment, Liberty University School of Law.

In the suit, Janet alleges that these organizations and individuals had a “pattern of racketeering” and “are liable for conspiring with Lisa Miller and with each other to kidnap Isabella Miller-Jenkins … [d]efendants are also liable for conspiring to violate Janet Jenkins’ and Isabella Miller-Jenkins’ rights to a parent-child relationship.”

Life on the Run

In Nicaragua, Lisa homeschooled Isabelle on an Amish-Mennonite farm in the “coffee-growing hills” of Jinotega, where they lived for two months until Lisa found an apartment in Managua, reported the New York Times. Isabelle learned Spanish and people called her “Lydia.” Lisa and Isabelle spent time with Timothy Miller and his family, reading the American Girl books and Little House on the Prairie.

Although Isabelle thrived in Managua, Lisa suffered from depression and isolation. She eventually moved Isabelle back to Jinotega. Life was full of friends, birthday parties and sleepovers for a little girl with bouncing blond hair who drew the attention of the locals.

It was around this time that Timothy was arrested at Dulles Airport as he returned for a vacation in the U.S. with his family, and was charged with aiding an international parental kidnapping in Lisa Miller’s case. Lisa and Isabella left the town of Jinotega and haven’t been seen since. According to the Times, federal agents believe the two are still in Nicaragua. Isabella is now 14 years old.

Liberty Counsel’s Rena M. Lindevaldsen, co-counsel with Mathew Staver on Lisa’s case, said that she knew Lisa could go to prison if caught and that would hurt Isabella, but she doesn’t blame Lisa. “It’s sad that in America a woman was faced with this choice,” she said. “The court overstepped its bounds, calling someone a parent who is not a parent and turning a child over to a person who lives contrary to biblical truths.” (For more from the author of “Trial Begins for Man Who Helped Ex-Lesbian Christian Mother Escape Country With Her Daughter” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Eight Months After Abortion Flap, Lands’ End CEO Out

Almost eight months after angering activists on both sides of the abortion fight and losing at least two religious schools as customers, Lands’ End CEO Federica Marchionni is stepping down.

In a press release, the clothing retailer’s Board Chairman Josephine Linden said that Marchionni’s “creative vision has helped Lands’ End begin its transformation as a global lifestyle brand with a broader merchandise offering that is more relevant in today’s marketplace. Federica is stepping down at this time, leaving Lands’ End well positioned to continue its evolution and capture the growth opportunities that exist for our iconic brand in this dynamic retail environment.”

According to Marchionni, “I am honored to have led this extraordinary company and proud to have succeeded in providing a vision to expand its positioning in the industry with a multi-dimensional strategy.”

Marchionni was hired in early 2015 to revamp Lands’ End’s struggling brand; the company’s valuation dropped from $1.9 billion in 2002 to $780 million last year. Market Watch shows that the company’s stock has dropped precipitously in the last two years, from over $55 per share in late 2014 to less than $16 per share today, and as low as $14.03 in the last year.

This spring Lands’ End ignited an uproar in the pro-life community when it promoted abortion feminist icon Gloria Steinem in its Easter catalog. The decision cost the company business from at least two schools, and pro-life outrage convinced its executives to apologize and pull Marchionni’s interview with Steinem off of its website.

The reversal made things worse, from the company’s perspective — abortion supporters slammed Lands’ End on social media and traditional news outlets, leading several branding and public relations experts to call the controversy an unforced error.

The stock price dropped in late April, and hasn’t recovered. Over the summer, Marchionni told the abortion-backing fashion magazine Marie Claire that she didn’t regret bringing “women’s equality” into the public eye, though she did say abortion promotion was not intended with the Easter catalog. (For more from the author of “Eight Months After Abortion Flap, Lands’ End CEO Out” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How One Police Department Is Trying to Prevent Violence Between Officers and Citizens

Last week, tensions between police and citizens again rose to the surface after fatal officer-involved shootings in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Charlotte, North Carolina.

The shootings, like others before them in the past few years, raised questions over how officers decide to use force during interactions with people they encounter, and seek to arrest.

In the video above, The Daily Signal profiles the Fairfax County Police Department, which serves Virginia’s largest county, to see how officers there try to prevent violent encounters with citizens.

In 2016, a Fairfax County police officer was sentenced to prison for fatally shooting an unarmed man. The incident helped spark the department to reform its training, and become more transparent about the circumstances in which officers use force. (For more from the author of “How One Police Department Is Trying to Prevent Violence Between Officers and Citizens” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hundreds of Noncitizens on Voting Rolls in Swing State of Virginia

The 2012 presidential race in Virginia was decided by just 3 percentage points, as was the next year’s race for governor. In both 2005 and 2013, fewer than 1,000 votes decided contests for Virginia attorney general.

Against this backdrop, watchdog groups have pushed local election officials in seven Virginia jurisdictions to reveal hundreds of noncitizens who are registered to vote. So far, they have found more than 550.

Potentially more could be found on the voters rolls, as the Public Interest Legal Foundation pursues a total of 20 counties and cities in the Old Dominion—a sampling of its 95 counties and 38 independent cities.

However, leaders of the group say the Virginia State Board of Elections has resisted release of information on ineligible voters.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation represents the Virginia Voters Alliance in a lawsuit filed earlier this year against the city of Alexandria. The city prompted its suspicion after the alliance determined that more people were registered to vote in the city than eligible voters who lived there, said Noel Johnson, litigation counsel for the legal foundation.

“These records that we are trying to get should all be available through the National Voter Registration Act,” Johnson told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “Every ineligible voter on the rolls could end up being an eligible vote that cancels out the vote of other, eligible voters. So these are high stakes.”

In most cases, Johnson said, counties respond by saying the Virginia State Board of Elections informed them not to provide information about noncitizens who are registered to vote.

Alexandria General Registrar Anna Leider, who is in charge of elections and voter registration there, said the city’s reading of Census Bureau information showed the number of voting-age adults surpassed the number of registered voters. So, city officials disagreed with the Virginia Voters Alliance on that point, she said.

“We provided them with all of the information they have requested,” Leider told The Daily Signal in a phone interview, referring to the alliance.

In Alexandria, election officials have removed 70 noncitizens from the voter rolls since January 2012, Leider said.

Separate from the Alexandria lawsuit, the legal foundation obtained voter information from seven of the 20 counties it is investigating.

Of the data available, the largest number of noncitizens registered to vote was in Prince William County, about 400 since 2011, before officials removed them from the rolls, Johnson said.

Other jurisdictions providing information to the Public Interest Legal Foundation were the city of Fairfax and the counties of Bedford, Hanover, Roanoke, and Stafford, which combined had about 150 noncitizens registered to vote.

Virginia has moved from being a reliably Republican state in presidential elections to twice voting for President Barack Obama. This shift has prompted Democrats and Republicans to contest it as a swing state.

In June, U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia, who was appointed by resident Bill Clinton, dismissed the Virginia Voters Alliance lawsuit against Alexandria.

The lawsuit argued that Leider, the registrar, violated the National Voter Registration Act by not releasing records about city procedures for maintaining voter rolls, which the group said should be available for public inspection under the federal voter registration law. The alliance also asked that the rolls be cleaned up, in compliance with that law.

Martin Mash, spokesman for the Virginia Department of Elections, the agency supervised by the Board of Elections, at first told The Daily Signal that the department wouldn’t comment on pending litigation.

When The Daily Signal noted that the lawsuit had been dismissed, Mash again declined to comment. He referred questions on the matter to the office of Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, which did not respond to phone and email inquiries. Herring is a Democrat.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation also has sought to know if these noncitizens voted in past elections, but said local governments haven’t provided the information.

“That is not done for any canceled voter registration, not for deceased [voters], not for people who have moved out of the state,” Leider said. “Past activity is not something we routinely check.”

It is a federal crime and a violation of Virginia law for noncitizens to vote.

The federal penalty for an ineligible voter found to have cast a vote could be a fine or imprisonment for no more than one year. Under Virginia law, it is a Class 6 felony for an ineligible voter to vote, punishable by not less than one year of imprisonment and not more than five years

“We have had conversations with the [Alexandria] commonwealth’s attorney, but those conversations are between us and the commonwealth’s attorney,” Leider said.

In Virginia, a commonwealth’s attorney is equivalent to a district attorney or local prosecutor.

The federal voter registration law requires state and local election officials to “make available for public inspection and, where available, photocopying at a reasonable cost, all records concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters.”

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow with The Heritage Foundation, is a former member of both the election board in Fairfax County, Virginia, and the Federal Election Commission.

“Not a single one of those noncitizens, who committed a felony under federal law, has been prosecuted,” von Spakovsky said at a forum on voter fraud at The Heritage Foundation, referring to the findings of the legal foundation. “In fact, there is no indication that any of this information was ever turned over to law enforcement officials for investigation or prosecution.”

Von Spakovsky recently wrote that the Virginia State Board of Elections was engaged in a “cover-up”:

Numerous other Virginia counties have refused to provide this information to the Public Interest Legal Foundation, apparently based on instructions from the State Board of Elections and individuals working for the state Department of Elections, which the board supervises. This is what a cover-up directed by state election officials looks like. They are trying to hide hundreds, if not thousands, of instances of voter fraud that occurred on their watch.

If thousands of aliens are registered or actually voting, it would obviously undermine the national narrative that voter fraud is a myth. This would be particularly disturbing in a state like Virginia, in which statewide elections for attorney general have been decided by fewer than 1,000 votes in the last decade.

(For more from the author of “Hundreds of Noncitizens on Voting Rolls in Swing State of Virginia” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

House Debates Protections for Babies Born Alive After Attempted Abortions

An abortion survivor urged Americans to “wake up” to the reality that some babies born alive after an attempted abortion are left to die, the survivor testified at a hearing on Capitol Hill last week.

“Many Americans have no idea that babies can even live through abortions and are often left to die, but this does happen,” Gianna Jessen, 39, said at the hearing. “I know this, because I was born alive in an abortion clinic after being burned in my mother’s womb for 18 hours.”

Jessen, who has cerebral palsy due to her attempted abortion, added at a House Judiciary Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee hearing on Sept. 23:

My medical records clearly state the following: Born during saline abortion … Apart from Jesus himself, the only reason I am alive is the fact that the abortionist had not yet arrived at work that morning. Had he been there, he would have ended my life by strangulation, suffocation, or simply leaving me there to die.

“Often when I’m in the midst of abortion advocates, they never can answer this one question and it is this: If abortion is merely about women’s rights, then what were mine?” Jessen said.

In 2002, President George W. Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, making it illegal to kill any babies born alive.

“Unfortunately, incidents involving born-alive children being killed after an attempted abortion have continued after this law [was passed] and into the present,” Arina Grossu, director for the Center of Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, testified at the hearing. Grossu’s written testimony says:

Abortionist Kermit Gosnell operated his dirty and dangerous Philadelphia abortion business and committed horrendous crimes in Philadelphia for over three decades. … His heinous and murderous practices of snipping the spines of born-alive children were only discovered by accident when federal and state authorities raided his facility in 2010, not because he was illegally killing born-alive infants, but because of his illegal prescription drug activity.

Grossu says Gosnell is “not an outlier.”

“Not one person to date has been charged or convicted under the current federal [Born-Alive Infants Protection Act] law,” Grossu testified.

The House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, introduced by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., in September 2015. An identical bill in the Senate, introduced by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., was referred to the Judiciary Committee.

“The abortion industry has labored for all of these decades to convince the world that unborn children and born children should be completely separated in our minds, that while born children are persons worthy of protection, unborn children are not persons and are not worthy of protection,” Franks, chairman of the subcommittee, said at the hearing.

Franks’ legislation would protect the rights of infants born alive after an abortion and leave criminal consequences for health care professionals who violate the law. The legislation would also require proper medical care be given by the health care practitioner present when an infant is born alive.

The legislation “explicitly requires health care practitioners to treat born-alive abortion survivors with the same care they would treat any other born-alive baby and admit such babies immediately to a hospital.” The law would also hold abortionists accountable for killing born-alive infants, Grossu testified.

President Barack Obama’s administration “strongly opposes” the passage of this bill, according to a statement from September 2015.

“The White House has promised that it would veto the born-alive legislation, citing it would have a ‘chilling’ effect,” Grossu testified. “I cannot think of a more chilling effect than continuing to let U.S. abortionists commit infanticide.”

Grossu urged support for the legislation to stop infanticide, or intentionally killing an infant child, in the United States.

The Hyde Amendment, also under examination at the hearing, prohibits the use of certain taxpayer dollars in abortion cases, except in rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life.

“Today we will hear testimony on existing statutory language prohibiting taxpayer funding from paying for the taking of the lives of preborn children through abortion,” Franks said. “There is concern that the Obama administration or a potential Clinton administration may intend to reinterpret the plain and longstanding meaning of the Hyde Amendment.”

The Hyde Amendment, an appropriations policy rider that has been passed each year since 1976, has its 40th anniversary this week.

“As a black woman, I am outraged that the morally bankrupt Hyde Amendment has been permitted to persist for so long,” Kierra Johnson, executive director of Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity, testified. “It is a source of pain for many women and should be a source of shame for those who support it.”

“The Hyde Amendment prevents women from even being able to make a decision about their health care,” Johnson said.

While Genevieve Plaster, a senior policy analyst at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a pro-life nonprofit organization, testified that the Hyde Amendment has saved over 2 million lives since 1976, or approximately 60,000 lives per year.

“America was founded on the concept that our rights come from God,” Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said at the hearing. “When our rights come from God, how would it be possible that those rights would confer a right to kill a baby?” (For more from the author of “House Debates Protections for Babies Born Alive After Attempted Abortions” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Miller: Murkowski Trying To Rig Debate Schedule

Anchorage, Alaska. September 26, 2016 — U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller called out Lisa Murkowski on Monday following the release of her “debate” schedule, saying she is hiding from the people of Alaska and the media.

Murkowski stated that she plans to participate in four debates in the lead up to the election: Oct. 12 – Senate Fisheries Debate, hosted by Kodiak Chamber of Commerce; Oct. 21 – Alaska Federation of Natives’ Candidate Forum in Fairbanks; Oct. 26 – Senate Debate on the Arctic, hosted by Iñuit Arctic Business Alliance (IABA) in Barrow; Nov. 3 – Debate for the State, hosted by Alaska Public Media in Anchorage.

Only one of those debates will be televised statewide, the Public Television debate, which takes place just five days before the election, well after early voting and absentee ballot voting are underway.

“There she goes again, trying to rig the game,” said Miller. “Senator Murkowski’s objective is clear: avoid answering tough questions and deprive Alaskan voters of an informed choice.”

During the general election of 2010, Miller appeared in multiple debates with Murkowski, though her name did not even appear on the ballot, including on the state’s most watched news station, the NBC affiliate KTUU.

KTUU, which garners over 80 percent of the news viewing audience in Alaska, wants to host a debate this time, even offering to pre-record it, but Murkowski apparently stonewalled the station.

It also should be noted the commercial fishing industry, the Alaska Federation of Natives, and the Iñuit Arctic Business Alliance all backed Murkowski strongly in 2010, both directly and indirectly.

“The debate schedule Murkowski is offering is not fair to Alaskan voters, who are trying to make an informed decision about who will best represent their views in the next Congress,” said Miller. “I am calling on Lisa Murkowski to do the right thing and participate in televised, open and fair debates.”

Joe Miller is a limited government Constitutionalist who believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them away. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the Constitutional right to life, the 2nd Amendment, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.

Mark Levin Endorses Joe Miller For U.S. Senate

Anchorage, Alaska. September 26, 2016 — Conservative radio talk show host Mark Levin endorsed Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller on his program Friday evening against incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

Levin described himself as a “big fan” of Miller, while observing, “Murkowski is a leftist” and the “right-hand person” of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The talk show host also pointed out that Murkowski earned an “F” on the Conservative Review scorecard, based on her voting record.

Despite being from the Last Frontier, “Murkowski acts like a Republican from New Jersey,” said Levin.

Miller agreed, noting that her votes are “Not at all representative of Alaska values.” He highlighted that the senator voted with President Obama 72 percent of the time during the last Congress, and his other rivals for the seat are left of center, as well.

“So we have a clear path to victory, and the grassroots are excited as can be that I’m in,” said Miller.

Levin wondered if Miller’s entry created the possibility for a Democrat to take the seat.

“No risk at all,” the candidate replied. “We have a Democrat who will probably get less votes than the Democrat-leaning Independent who has raised over a half a million dollars and has the Democratic Party’s support.”

Though no public polling exists following Miller’s entry, the Murkowski campaign released a poll in early September, which showed the Democrat and independent candidates taking a combined 17 percent. Therefore, it seems very likely Murkowski and Miller will be vying for the top spot in the race, once again.

“This is a beautiful race where a true conservative has the opportunity to win, as long as everybody activates,” said Miller.

Despite entering the race in mid-September, Miller has already garnered the endorsements of Gun Owners of America, Alaska Right to Life, and the support of the Alaska Republican Assembly. Additionally, five members of the Alaska GOP’s Central Committee stepped down to back Miller and one was voted out for doing so.

Miller also has the support of the co-chair of Donald Trump’s campaign in Alaska and the former co-chair of Sen. Ted Cruz’s campaign. Cruz won the state’s presidential primary with 36 percent of the vote to Trump’s 33.5. In total, non-establishment candidates took over 80 percent of that vote.

Joe Miller is a limited government Constitutionalist who believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them away. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the Constitutional right to life, the Second Amendment, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.