Media Hand-Wringing Over Trump’s Lack of Appointments Lacks Credibility

/0 Comments/in , /by

For days, the press has been expressing serious concern about the difficulties of the Trump transition team. The transition was “stalled,” according to The Hill, there’s “turmoil” and “splintering” reported by NBC, “infighting” reported by CNN and “discord” from The New York Times. CNBC highlighted the “settling” of an alleged “score” by President-elect Donald Trump’s son-in-law against New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

Yet for all of the hand-wringing over alleged delays in naming Cabinet members and other positions, a look at history makes it clear that the media is simply continuing its anti-Trump narrative into the post-election season . . .

Bret Baier notes that it took President-elect Barack Obama nearly three weeks to name his first Cabinet member. Every President-elect going back to Jimmy Carter has taken longer, with the exception of George H.W. Bush. Yet nine days after Trump’s election, the press is trying to say that we must be really worried because he hasn’t appointed anyone yet!

A few other outlets haven’t fully fallen into the trap. A Hollywood Reporter journalist told CNN’s Brian Stelter that the Times’ story was wrong. CBS has an article comparing different transition teams (though a video report at the same link says the transition isn’t smooth), and Politico has a succinct comparison to the Obama transition efforts.

But even Politico is going along with the narrative. An article published Thursday says Vice President-elect and Indiana Governor Mike Pence fulfilled a ban on lobbyists. According to Politico, the ban has “hobbled” the transition team. (On December 4, 2009, Politico published an article highlighting the “5 best jobs” left in the then-upcoming administration, though it has been one of the top media groups reporting on lobbyist ban violations and loopholes by the Obama administration.)

It may be that Trump’s team is in shambles, and that the reports are accurate. But without evidence of such, this reporting simply makes the mainstream press look desperately out of touch with what Americans care about, as well as full of self-indulgent naval-gazing. (For more from the author of “Media Hand-Wringing Over Trump’s Lack of Appointments Lacks Credibility” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Have Evangelicals Lost Their Credibility by Voting for Trump?

/0 Comments/in , /by

I find it ironic that the same people who have mocked us for years as hypocrites, bigots, haters, homophobes, transphobes, and worse now tell us that we have lost our moral credibility by voting for Trump.

It is true that there are Christian leaders in other nations who feel that we (meaning, in particular, white evangelicals) have compromised our moral witness by voting for Trump in such overwhelming numbers (81 percent of white evangelicals voted for him). And it is true that it is difficult to reconcile our historic mantra of “character matters” with a vote for Trump, unless we are counting on his imminent moral transformation, which is certainly a risky way to vote.

Considering, then, that Trump would have been the last person on a list of candidates that evangelicals would have drawn up — actually, he would not have made the list at all — it’s easy to see how the world could think that we have sold our souls to the devil in some kind of desperate effort to regain power.

But for people to chastise us and say that we have forfeited our moral credibility in the eyes of our critics is to forget that, in the eyes of those critics, we had no moral credibility to lose.

Some of this, no doubt, was our own fault, since much of the evangelical church has, indeed, been hypocritical, with rampant no-fault divorce in our midst, with a plague of pornography in our pews, and with more leadership scandals (both financial and sexual) than we can count. Why should the world take our moral witness seriously?

But that is not the only reason we have been despised. To the contrary, a major reason that the world hates us is because of our moral stands and our refusal to capitulate to the culture, as a result of which we are likened to Hitler and the Nazis, to ISIS and the Taliban, to the KKK and other hate groups. This is all because we refuse to celebrate the redefinition of marriage or affirm the latest gender identity fad. (And should I mention what pro-abortion feminists think of evangelicals, especially male evangelicals?)

So, when I hear our critics call us hypocrites for voting for Trump (and again, I speak here primarily of white evangelicals), I have to laugh and say, “I thought we already were hypocrites!”

And I can only wonder what these same critics would have said if we had elected Ted Cruz, a staunch, once-married, Bible-quoting evangelical, as our candidate? They would probably be accusing us of setting up secret internment camps for all non-church attending Americans as we stealthily planned to take over the society. Can you even imagine what their accusations would be?

Some Did Lose Credibility

All that being said, as I have stated before, I do believe that some of us did lose credibility by the way in which we backed Trump, giving him a free pass for the very infractions for which we were ready to condemn Bill Clinton, overlooking his ugly attacks on others, and forgetting that the president and first lady are, in many ways, exemplars for the population.

Writing in 1998, Bill Bennett explained the danger of embracing the pro-Bill Clinton arguments that his private conduct was of no concern to the nation:

These arguments define us down; they assume a lower common denominator of behavior and leadership than we Americans ought to accept. And if we do accept it, we will have committed an unthinking act of moral and intellectual disarmament. In the realm of American ideals and the great tradition of public debate, the high ground will have been lost. And when we need to rely again on this high ground — as surely we will need to — we will find it drained of its compelling moral power. In that sense, then, the arguments invoked by Bill Clinton and his defenders represent an assault on American ideals, even if you assume the president did nothing improper. So the arguments need to be challenged. (The Death of Outrage: Bill Clinton and the Assault on American Ideals)

Character, then, does matter, and if we evangelicals did sacrifice character on the altar of political expediency, then we have further damaged our witness in the eyes of a watching world, some of which still expects moral goodness from the church.

That being said, it is clear that a large number of evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump did so for highly moral reasons, including protecting the unborn and standing up for religious freedoms. Are these not moral, Christian causes?

The High Moral Reasons for a Trump Vote

As explained by Jonathan Van Maren, “Many of my non-Christian and liberal friends find it bewildering that both evangelicals and Catholics voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, a thrice-married casino operator infamous for his vulgar trash talk. I want to take a moment to explain to them directly why most Christians voted for him anyways. It’s simple, really: Christians voted for Donald Trump because they felt that the threat a de facto third Obama term posed to Christian communities was an existential one.”

He continued, “The attacks on Christians from the highest levels of government have been relentless now for nearly a decade. Obama wants to force Christian churches and schools to accept the most radical and most recent version of gender ideology, and he is willing to issue executive decrees on the issue to force the less enlightened to get in line. Christian concerns are dismissed out of hand as ‘transphobia.’” And note that Van Maren had not yet mentioned Hillary Clinton, of whom he had much to say.

Where then do we stand today? With regard to our most hostile critics, as long as we uphold our biblical values, we will be reviled and condemned. That it is to expected. With regard to those outside the church who still think that Christians should live moral lives and care for the needy, let us step higher and demonstrate the life-changing power of the gospel.

With regard to our relationship with the president, we must conduct ourselves with integrity and honor, serving as a moral compass to our president rather than his tool. In that way, we will serve both God and the society. (For more from the author of “Have Evangelicals Lost Their Credibility by Voting for Trump?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mother Sues as County Gives Teen ‘Sex Change’ Treatment

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Minnesota mother is suing local school and county officials for allegedly attempting to facilitate her teenage son’s “sex change” and usurping her parental rights.

In a lawsuit filed on Wednesday morning, Anmarie Calgaro accused Child Services and education officials in St. Louis County of denying her the right to raise her 17-year old son. The lawsuit also names multiple non-profits that have assisted the minor, identified as only “J.D.K.” in the suit, in claiming legal “emancipation” from his mother.

Calgaro is asking a federal court to revoke the county’s ability to deny her rights as a parent until she has her day in court. She is also demanding access to all records related to J.D.K., as well as attorney fees.

Erick Kaardal, a Thomas More Society Special Counsel and Calgaro’s attorney, told The Stream that J.D.K.’s claim of “emancipation” — that is, providing “a minor child … the same legal rights and obligations as an eighteen year-old adult,” according to Kaardal — is invalid because neither the teen nor state officials have proven Calgaro to be a deficient parent.

“There are no set standards” in the state, explained Kaardal. Emancipation “would be determined case-to-case; if there were a court hearing, the minor would have to prove that the conduct of a parent or parents is such that they have given up control and custody of the minor.” However, “under Minnesota Statute § 144.341, it appears that a minor who is living separate from his parents or guardian — with or without consent — and is managing his personal financial affairs ‘may give effective consent’ to medical services.”

The Stream was unable to reach County Child Services officials or state judicial officials about the state’s view of emancipation.

Kaardal said that “the minor child was simply rebellious at the time” when he claimed emancipation, but that things have improved. “Presently, they are communicating with each other and have visited each other in person. Ms. Calgaro has and continues to encourage J.D.K. to maintain their relationship. Ms. Calgaro has welcomed him home.”

Meanwhile, county taxpayers are on the hook for J.D.K.’s treatment. “Medical services are being paid or approved or both by St. Louis County through related agencies and entities providing the services to J.D.K.,” said Kaardal.

The State Law

The legal basis for the county to facilitate J.D.K.’s “sex change”can be traced back to Minnesota’s Minor’s Consent to Health Service Act passed in 1971. [Minnesota Statutes – Chapter 144, Sections 144.341 – 144.347] Kaardal quoted a March 2006 Minnesota Public Health Association publication as explaining the law was meant to address “the critical and unmet health needs of minors during a time of enormous social change.”

Kaardal further quoted the document:

Changes in family structures and the broadening of the individual rights of minorities, women and children showed that minors were particularly vulnerable if they needed to seek health services. While Minnesota law was silent on the ability of minors to access health services, practitioners declined to see or treat minors without parental consent, fearing potential liabilities. Minors, apprehensive of parental reactions, embarrassment or disrupting family harmony, were not receiving needed health services, often jeopardizing their health and future lives.

(For more from the author of “Mother Sues as County Gives Teen ‘Sex Change’ Treatment” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Conservatives Hopeful Pence Will Play Big Role in New Administration

/0 Comments/in , /by

Vice President-elect Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana, asked nearly two dozen fellow GOP governors gathered in Orlando to directly reach out to him on policy matters in the course of the coming Donald Trump administration.

During the Republican Governors Association meeting Tuesday in Orlando, Pence reiterated Trump’s plan to repeal Obamacare, improve infrastructure, and provide more flexibility on education.

Before serving a term as the Indiana governor, Pence served a decade in the U.S. House of Representatives, prompting his former colleagues to hope he’ll play a paramount role in Trump’s administration.

On Thursday, Pence was back on Capitol Hill where he met with the House Republican Conference as well as Senate Democratic Charles Schumer of New York and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California.

Speaking to the Republican conference Thursday, Pence said the Trump administration would pursue tax reform, repealing Obamacare and strengthening border security, according to a news release from the presidential transition team.

“The biggest role Mike Pence could play is going to be good for America,” Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, who sat next to Pence on the House Judiciary Committee, told The Daily Signal.

Pence’s experience on Capitol Hill and working with governors across the country would have duel value for the political outsider Trump, who has already indicated Pence could be a prominent vice president after putting him in charge of the presidential transition team last week.

Pence replaced New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who remains on the transition committee as vice chairman.

Pence was also involved with Trump in speaking to 29 other world leaders, according to the transition team’s news release Wednesday.

Beyond Pence’s political connections, he has served as a bridge to conservative voters. Some conservatives didn’t trust Trump in the Republican presidential primary, and backed his leading opponent Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas—whom Pence endorsed ahead of the Indiana primary.

“Mike [Pence] is a constitutionalist. He’s a fiscal conservative. He’s for a balanced budget,” King told The Daily Signal in an interview on Capitol Hill. “He’s a social conservative. He’s pro-life. He defends natural marriage. You add that all up. His foreign policy credentials are good. He sat on the Foreign Affairs Committee for about eight years.”

Trump should be aware that Pence is likely responsible for a good share of votes from wary conservatives, said author and presidential historian Craig Shirley.

“Pence reassured a lot of conservatives about Trump,” Shirley said.

Pence was likely the wisest choice Trump could have made for a vice president, said Lee Edwards, distinguished fellow in conservative thought at The Heritage Foundation.

“He has checked all the boxes for conservatives,” Edwards told The Daily Signal. “He’s been in talk radio, was a House conservative and a governor. He will be important for implementing Trump’s agenda with Congress. He knows these guys, certainly in the House, and will be a point man.”

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, asserted during The Heritage Foundation’s Conversation With Conservatives event Wednesday that the House would continue to serve as a check on executive power during the Trump administration.

Jordan had kind words about the incoming vice president, though he declined to speculate how powerful Pence might be in a Trump administration.

“That’s between him and Donald Trump,” Jordan told The Daily Signal in an interview on Capitol Hill. “Mike [Pence] is a wonderful guy. He was a friend when he worked here. He was a mentor when he was here, a very talented guy.”

Vice presidents have played historically different roles, Shirley said.

For example, Vice President Thomas Marshall was in office for more than a year before getting an appointment to meet with President Woodrow Wilson, Shirley said. President Dwight Eisenhower didn’t give a lot of responsibility to Vice President Richard Nixon, and President John F. Kennedy did not include Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson in many of his administration’s decisions.

“I would expect Mike Pence will have a big role as evidenced by the fact that he has taken over the transition team, that is the biggest job facing a Trump administration now,” Shirley told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “Trump, because he’s a newcomer, will need Pence, someone experienced in government.” (For more from the author of “Conservatives Hopeful Pence Will Play Big Role in New Administration” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Cabinet Timing in Line With Past Presidents

/0 Comments/in , /by

An article in Time called President-elect Donald Trump’s transition “chaotic,” while The New York Times asserted that Trump’s transition team is plagued by “discord” and “disarray.”

Politico quoted an anonymous insider saying the transition team was having a “knife fight” when it comes to filling Cabinet posts.

If very recent history is a guide, it might be too early to tell whether the Trump transition is any more or less organized than that of other president-elects, since nearly all recent presidents going back to at least Jimmy Carter made Cabinet announcements in December, with a handful of exceptions.

During a conference call with reporters Thursday, Trump transition team spokesman Jason Miller said the incoming administration isn’t rushing the Cabinet decisions.

“The president-elect will be announcing specific Cabinet positions, as well as key administration staff, when those decisions are made,” Miller said. “The focus of the administration is putting together the best team. It is not an arbitrary time table. It is about getting it right.”

In response to some of the media coverage, Trump tweeted the transition was a “Very organized process taking place as I decide on Cabinet and many other positions. I am the only one who knows who the finalists are!”

The Associated Press reported late Thursday that Trump had offered retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn the job of national security adviser. The position is not a cabinet post, but has traditionally been one of the highest ranking jobs in any administration.

Among names to being considered for the Cabinet are either former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Trump loyalist, and Trump critic former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney are being considered for secretary of state, while Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Trump’s chief GOP primary opponent, is reportedly under consideration for attorney general.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, a former Alabama state attorney general and U.S. attorney, met with Trump on Thursday, and a transition team press release said Trump is “unbelievably impressed” with his record.

Richard Nixon was the last president to name his entire Cabinet during the first six weeks after being elected, according to Fox News.

Winning an election amid a financial crisis in 2008, President-elect Barack Obama made his first cabinet announcement, Timothy Geithner for secretary of treasury, on Nov. 24.

Aside from that, Obama’s earliest announcements came on Dec. 1, with Hillary Clinton as secretary of state pick, Janet Napolitano as his selection secretary of homeland security, and Eric Holder as his choice for attorney general. Obama also announced that same day he would keep Bush Defense Secretary Robert Gates on board.

Obama abandoned later December announcements, such as plans to name Tom Daschle to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, and making Bill Richardson commerce secretary. Announcements for those jobs came in early 2009 after controversies—demonstrating a less than smooth transition.

Former Obama adviser David Axelrod tweeted, “Lots of reasons to be concerned about @realDonaldTrump transition but the pace of announcements isn’t one of them. That’s not fair.” After some reaction, Axelrod later tweeted Thursday, “We hadn’t made any major appointments at this point in 2008. I don’t remember being criticized for it.”

December announcements for president-elects have been the general rule for Cabinet announcements for all recent presidents going back to at least Carter, according to the U.S. Senate.

There were other rare exceptions.

President-elect George H.W. Bush, having been vice president for eight years, announced Nov. 9, 1988, that his longtime confidante James Baker would be secretary of state.

Later that month, Bush also announced that Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, Reagan Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, and Reagan Education Secretary Lauro Cavazos Jr. would remain in their posts. This made for an easier transition than most.

“All changes and all transitions are in disarray,” Craig Shirley, a presidential historian and bestselling author, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “This is a big job to change governments. Ronald Reagan had a rocky transition. Bill Clinton had a very rough transition. John F. Kennedy’s transition was very controversial after he announced his brother would be attorney general.”

Nevertheless, CBS News noted, “The White House is still waiting to receive a list of relevant names from Mr. Trump’s transition office so that individuals can begin interfacing with relevant agencies between now and January 20.”

While another New York Times piece remarked, “He may not yet have nominated a single Cabinet member, or sent emissaries to the federal agencies, or held a news conference as president-elect, but Mr. Trump does have a presidential inaugural committee lined up.”

The Trump campaign planned less before the election than 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney, whose preemptively transition plotting didn’t work out, Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, told reporters Wednesday.

During a Conversation With Conservatives gathering sponsored by The Heritage Foundation, Labrador said:

Donald Trump wanted to win the election rather than spend all his time talking about the transition. In fact, I was with him when one of his team members started talking about the transition and he said, ‘I don’t want to talk about this, I don’t want to jinx this. I want to move forward and talk about how we’re going to win this election.’ I appreciate that. It does mean it delays the transition by a little bit. But it does make me laugh at all the stories you guys are writing about, ‘Oh, the transition team is in disarray. Blah, blah, blah.’ It’s a difficult job to transition from a campaign to being the chief executive of the United States. Let’s give him an opportunity to be successful.

President George W. Bush announced his first Cabinet secretary nominations on Dec. 16, 2000, somewhat later than previous presidents because of the prolonged post-election that year, with the news that Colin Powell was his choice for secretary of state.

On Dec. 20, 2000, Bush made four more announcements, including Paul O’Neil as his pick to be treasury secretary, and others before the end of the year. Bush finished with three more announcements on Jan. 2, 2001.

President-elect Bill Clinton announced his first Cabinet pick, Lloyd Bentsen as treasury secretary, on Dec. 10, 1992. A day later, he announced Donna Shalala as his pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services and Robert Reich to be labor secretary.

On Dec. 11, 1980, Reagan announced his choices of William French Smith to be attorney general, Caspar Weinberger as defense secretary, Richard Schweiker as secretary of health and human services, Malcolm Baldridge to be commerce secretary, Andrew Lewis as transportation secretary, and Donald Regan as treasury secretary.

On the same day, Reagan also announced his choice of William Casey to lead the CIA and David Stockman to be the director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Carter announced that Cyrus Vance was his choice for secretary of state on Dec. 3, 1976, and made subsequent announcements later in the month. (For more from the author of “Trump Cabinet Timing in Line With Past Presidents” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

House Passes Bill Blocking Sale of Aircraft to Iran

/0 Comments/in , /by

House Republicans voted Thursday to block the sale of aircraft to Iran, a move GOP lawmakers and some Democrats said would protect taxpayer dollars from being used to finance the export of airplanes to Tehran.

The House voted 243 to 174 to pass legislation sponsored by Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., prohibiting the secretary of the Treasury from authorizing a transaction from a U.S. bank or financial institution related to the export of aircraft to Iran.

The White House said it would veto the bill, as it could be viewed as a violation of the Iran nuclear deal.

In September, the Treasury issued licenses to aviation giants Airbus and Boeing that permitted the sale of planes to Iran Air, the country’s state-owned airline. The agency also allowed U.S. banks to finance the sale of those aircraft to Tehran.

“This bill would keep Americans’ deposits away from a country that the president’s own State Department calls ‘the foremost state sponsor of terrorism,’ and which Treasury has designed as a ‘jurisdiction of primary money laundering concern,’” Huizenga said today on the House floor.

The legislation also prohibits the Export-Import Bank, or Ex-Im, from providing any assistance either directly or indirectly to Iran and associated entities, including its state-run airline.

Ex-Im provides taxpayer-backed loans and loan guarantees to foreign countries and companies for the purchase of U.S. products.

“We need to make sure that the American financial system is not complicit in this [Iran nuclear] deal,” Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., said on the House floor Thursday. “We need to make sure American taxpayers are not subsidizing this deal.”

Over the last year, Roskam has been an ardent opponent of the Iran deal and has pushed to prohibit Iran and its state-run entities from benefiting from U.S.-backed financing.

Though Ex-Im’s charter prohibits the agency from extending taxpayer-backed financing to Iran, Roskam and GOP lawmakers cautioned a loophole could allow Tehran to purchase U.S. products or services from third-party intermediaries that received funding from the 82-year-old bank.

It’s now possible for U.S. corporations to do business with Iran following the Obama administration’s historic nuclear deal with the Islamic regime. The pact, which the U.S. and five other world powers secured last year, was designed to ensure Iran doesn’t obtain a nuclear weapon in the near future.

Nearly a year after negotiations with Iran concluded, lawmakers learned that Boeing, one of Ex-Im’s biggest beneficiaries, had been engaging in ongoing discussions with government-run entities in Iran over the possible sale of aircraft to the country.

In May, Roskam and fellow Illinois Republican Reps. Robert Dold and Randy Hultgren sent the Chicago-based aerospace giant a letter urging it not to do business with Iran.

One month later, Boeing confirmed it signed a deal to sell $25 billion worth of planes to Iran Air. According to initial reports, Boeing planned to sell approximately 80 commercial airliners to Iran Air and secure the sale of another 29 planes to a third party, which would then lease the aircraft to Tehran.

The company’s deal marked the first time since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 that American aircraft were sold to Tehran.

The Obama administration previously sanctioned Iran Air after the airline used passenger and cargo planes to fly rockets and missiles to Syria and other nations. The weapons were sometimes disguised as medicine or spare parts, according to past reports.

Under the Iran nuclear deal, the Obama administration dropped economic sanctions against Tehran.

“We now have American companies who are saying, ‘You know what? Let’s do business with a terrorist regime. How’s that? Let’s just go make a buck,’” Roskam said of Boeing during his floor speech Thursday. “That’s the scandal of this. The scandal is there are American companies, international companies, Boeing, Airbus, that are now making their own names linked with terror forevermore.”

In addition to Boeing, Airbus also signed an agreement with Iran to sell the regime aircraft.

Though Boeing didn’t previously disclose whether it would seek Ex-Im financing to help fund the sale of the jets to the third party, lawmakers worried the company would attempt to secure taxpayer-backed loans and loans guarantees for the transaction.

Ex-Im, however, can’t currently approve transactions of more than $10 million because of vacant seats on its board of directors.

The five-member panel currently lacks a quorum of three members, and all transactions topping $10 million, which primarily benefit Ex-Im’s biggest beneficiaries like Boeing, have been stalled. (For more from the author of “House Passes Bill Blocking Sale of Aircraft to Iran” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Who’s Who in Trump’s Cabinet and Leadership Possibilities

/0 Comments/in , , /by

As expected, many of the people being considered for top positions in the Trump administration are Republicans who supported him in the presidential campaign. The list excludes many of the big-name Republicans who shunned him, while it includes some of the smaller players — particularly Christian conservatives — who stuck with Trump. (For a description of the transition team helping Trump make the appointments, see the end of the article.)

Trump has already made some controversial choices, though they’re controversial to different groups. He selected Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus, part of the transition team, as his White House chief of staff. He also chose Steve Bannon, former editor of Breitbart who became Trump’s campaign CEO, as his chief strategist and senior adviser.

As RNC chairman, Priebus is part of the Republican establishment many Trump supporters want kept away from influence. However, he avoided any behind the scenes maneuvers at the Republican National Convention in order to keep Trump from winning. Bannon has been accused of being “alt right” and particularly of being racist and anti-Semitic, but one prominent Jewish writer has laid out the case that he isn’t. Neither position requires Senate confirmation.

Secretary of State

Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani is considered the top choice for this position. Another strong contender is former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. The hawkish John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, is also in the running. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a member of the Senate foreign relations committee which would vote first on the nominee, said he will do everything he can to block Bolton from getting the position, and also strongly opposed Guiliani.

Trump is also considering two Republican Clinton supporters: Richard Armitage, a former Republican State Department official and Henry Paulson, former Treasury Secretary under George W. Bush. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has a lifetime score of 80 from the American Conservative Union, is one more possibility.

Secretary of Defense

Stephen Hadley, who served as a former national security adviser under both Bush administrations, is considered a leading contender for this position. Unlike several of his former defense colleagues from those administrations, he did not cross parties and endorse Hillary Clinton for president.

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, is also in the running for this and the National Security Advisor position. Famous for saying Hillary Clinton should be put in prison, Flynn would need a waiver from Congress to serve, since due to his military service he is ineligible to serve in such an office for five more years. Former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), who was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and has an ACU lifetime rating of 78, is said to be considered for the position, as well as for CIA chief. He was removed from his position as national security senior adviser to the transition team.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is also considered a front-runner, though he’s also being considered for National Security Advisor. He has a 95 percent rating from the ACU, in contrast to Rogers’ 78. Rep. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), who lost her re-election bid this year, is also on the short list. She has a lifetime rating from the ACU of 68. Former Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, whose lifetime ACU rating is 96, is another possibility, as is Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr. (R-Calif.), a Marine combat veteran with an ACU lifetime score of 92.

National Security Adviser

Both Sen. Sessions and retired Lt. Gen. Flynn are top contenders for this post.

Attorney General

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — one of 3 senators with a lifetime ACU rating of 100 — is reportedly being considered for Attorney General. Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi is a good friend of Trump’s and may be offered the position, as is Sen. Sessions. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who is serving as an immigration adviser to Trump’s transition team, is another possibility. He has a strong conservative record, particularly on immigration, and once served as a Baptist missionary to Uganda.

White House Press Secretary

It is rumored that Kellyanne Conway is being considered for this position, since she performed so well representing the campaign. Another top contender is conservative radio talk show host Laura Ingraham, who vocally supported Trump.

Homeland Security Secretary

Two conservative sheriffs are being looked at for this post, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who just lost re-election. Rep. Sessions is being considered for this position, due to his tough position on illegal immigration. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Former Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.), whose lifetime ACU rating is 92, are also possibilities. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas, who has an 89 rating from the ACU, is another contender.

Treasury Secretary

Steven Mnuchin of Goldman Sachs is considered the top choice, recommended by the transition team. He served as the campaign’s national finance chairman. The transition team is also reportedly considering investor Wilbur Ross Jr., Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, and JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon. Hensarling, whose ACU lifetime score is 97, proposed a bill to overhaul the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.

Health and Human Services Secretary

Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) is considered a top pick for Secretary of Health and Human Services. He has an excellent record in Congress, with a lifetime score of 96 from the ACU. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal are also under consideration. Florida Gov. Rick Scott is another possibility.

Former presidential contender Ben Carson, who had strongly supported Trump after he dropped out of the race, turned down an offer to serve in the administration as Secretary of Health and Human Services or other agency head, saying he did not have the background qualifications.

Housing and Urban Development Secretary

Pamela Patenaude’s name is being circulated for this position. She was an assistant HUD secretary under George W. Bush.

Army Secretary

Van D. Hipp, Jr., a former deputy assistant Army secretary for the elder Bush, is considered a strong contender for Army Secretary.

Education Secretary

Eva Moskowitz, known for championing charter schools, is under consideration, as well as former Washington D.C. public schools chancellor Michelle Rhee, who advocates school vouchers and charter schools. Betsy DeVos, a billionaire GOP donor who actively promotes school choice has also been named. She originally supported Common Core but changed her mind once it was federalized. William Evers, who worked at the younger Bush’s Education Department, is also in the running.

Labor Secretary

Victoria Lipnic, who worked at the Labor Department under George W. Bush, is being vetted for this position.

Secretary of the Interior

Two former governors are under consideration for Secretary of the Interior, Sarah Palin of Alaska and Jan Brewer of Arizona. Governor Mary Fallin of Oklahoma is as well. Cynthia Lummis, who is ending her term as Wyoming representative with a 94 lifetime rating from the ACU, is on the short list. Robert Grady, who served the elder Bush, is also being considered.

Environmental Protection Agency Secretary

Carol Comer, the commissioner of Indiana’s Department of Environmental Management and appointed by Pence, is under consideration for this position. She is an attorney who defended clients against EPA enforcement actions. Leslie Rutledge, the attorney general of Arkansas, is also being looked at. As AG, she took on the EPA’s Clean Power Plan and rules on emissions.

Commerce Secretary

Trump’s first choice for Commerce Secretary is 78-year-old billionaire investor Wilbur Ross. Linda McMahon, a former World Wresting Entertainment executive and friend of the Trump family, is high on the list for this position.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Richard Grenell previously served as U.S. spokesman at the U.N. under President George W. Bush. He would be the first openly gay person to fill a Cabinet-level foreign policy post.

Other Positions

Several other names are being considered for less controversial foreign policy, defense and nuclear related positions. There will also be people appointed to head Energy and the Office of Management and Budget.

RNC Chair

While not technically a position in the administration, Trump has significant say over who becomes the next RNC chair. Michigan GOP chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel, niece of Mitt Romney, is considered the front-runner.

The Transition Team

The transition team helping Trump make the appointments is headed by vice-president-elect Mike Pence. It includes what the Wall Street Journal calls “a mix of GOP traditionalists and outsiders … members of Trump’s family (all on the executive committee), Republican politicians, conservative thinkers and activists, and major Republican donors.” His campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, who served as his campaign manager, is a senior adviser. It originally included several lobbyists, though there are now reports that Mike Pence has removed them.

Among the politicians, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) has a lifetime score of 96 from the American Conservative Union, but the other members of Congress on the team have moderate records. The donors include Paypal co-founder and venture capitalist Peter Thiel, who spoke at the party’s convention; GOP mega-donor Rebekah Mercer, a large donor to Ted Cruz’s primary campaign; and Dune Capital Management CEO Steven Mnuchin, who had been the campaign’s national finance chairman. Among the thinkers are many from the conservative Heritage Foundation, including its founder, Ed Feulner, and former Reagan attorney general Edwin Meese.

Many of the GOP “bicoastal elite” — including financial elites and social liberals — who might have dominated the transition either bowed out ahead of time or have been removed. One, New Jersey governor Chris Christie, was demoted from chairman to vice chairman.

Part of the transition team is an Agency Action Team assisting with the process of filling positions in the administration. Ken Blackwell is in charge of Domestic Issues. He is a leading Christian conservative, and Stream contributor, who has served in multiple elected positions in Ohio.

Others from the Heritage Foundation besides Feulner and Meese are Paul Winfree, who is overseeing issues related to the Office of Management and Budget. Kay Coles James, a Heritage trustee, is overseeing management and budget issues along with Meese, who served as president of the conservative Council for National Policy. William L. Walton, a Heritage trustee affiliated with CNP, has been tasked with overseeing Economic Issues. James Carafano, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the Heritage Foundation, is heading up oversight of the State Department. (For more from the author of “Who’s Who in Trump’s Cabinet and Leadership Possibilities” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Levin: ‘Why Isn’t This National News?!’

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Democratic Party leadership has announced their overwhelming support for Rep Keith Ellison, D-Minn. (F, 28%) to become the new DNC chair. The left-wing congressman has past ties to the Nation of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood, and holds very dangerous policy positions.

Yet, the mainstream media are pretending as if none of that is the least bit controversial.

“Why isn’t this national news?!” shouted Mark Levin Wednesday night on his radio program, before explaining who Ellison really is.

Listen to the full clip below:

“That’s the future of the Democrat Party,” Levin went on to say. “Backed by Schumer … who’s getting ready to sabotage [the Trump] administration even before they are sworn in.”

It’s becoming readily apparent that when the Democrats are backed into a corner they get radical — fast. (For more from the author of “Levin: ‘Why Isn’t This National News?!'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

McConnell to Lead Senate GOP, Schumer New Democratic Leader

/0 Comments/in , /by

Senate Republicans re-elected Mitch McConnell on Wednesday to be majority leader next year while Democrats picked Chuck Schumer to lead them, setting the chief actors as the chamber prepares for an agenda that will be dominated by Donald Trump and the GOP.

McConnell, 74, is a discreet but deadly master of the Senate’s legislative chess game. His role will be to steer GOP bills to the desk of a president whose name he barely spoke during a tumultuous campaign in which many Republicans viewed Trump and his incendiary comments on Muslims, veterans and others as political poison.

“It’s time to accept the results of the election, to lower the tone and to see what we can do together to make progress for the country,” McConnell, from Kentucky, told reporters Wednesday.

As Senate minority leader, Schumer will assume his weakened party’s most powerful remaining post as it struggles to define its role in a Republican-dominated government. (Read more from “McConnell to Lead Senate GOP, Schumer New Democratic Leader” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FUNNY: LA Times Produces List Of “Fake New Sites” That Includes a Bunch O’ Sites More Accurate Than It Is

/0 Comments/in , /by

Kemberlee Kaye at Legal Insurrection points us to another example of hysterical media at its finest.

Having blamed James Comey, Russia, John Podesta, Julian Assange, warmal colding, and screwed up computer algorithms for the failure of a screeching, unhealthy, and unpopular harridan to achieve the presidency, the latest culprit appears to be “fake news”.

You rednecks — of all races, religions and ethnic backgrounds who voted for Donald J. Trump — are too stupid to distinguish fact from fiction, got it?

To help you out, the Melissa Zimdars, Assistant Professor of Communication at Merrimack College in Massachusetts, created a list of, “false, misleading, clickbait-y and satirical ‘news’ sources.” The LA Times published the list.

You read that right.

The Los Angeles Times, one of the most biased news sources in the U.S. — which is still withholding the controversial videotape of Barack Obama toasting PLO terrorist Rashid Khalidi — claims to be the arbiter of fake news.

Among the sites that are more accurate and legitimate than the Times itself, which the nutty professor listed as “fake” include:

Bizpacreview.com
Breitbart.com
DailyWire.com
IJR.com
LibertyUnyielding.com
ProjectVeritas.com
RedState.com
TheBlaze.com
Twitchy.com
WorldNetDaily.com
ZeroHedge.com

Curiously, Zimdars failed to list CBS (home of Dan Rather), NBC (home of Brian Williams), and the innumerable other mainstream “news” sources have been outed as straight-up purveyors of Democrat propaganda. (For more from the author of “FUNNY: LA Times Produces List Of “Fake New Sites” That Includes a Bunch O’ Sites More Accurate Than It Is” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.