FISA Explained and How the Left Is Trying to Mislead on the Trump “Wiretaps”

On Saturday, President Donald Trump threw the equivalent of rhetorical megaton nuclear bomb into the nation’s political discourse. In a series of tweets, Trump accused former President Barack Obama of “wire-tapping” his Trump Tower office. While it is unknown if Obama himself ordered a wire-tap of equipment in the Manhattan skyscraper, it has been reported that a FISA warrant was requested over the course of the campaign for equipment in the building.

Since Trump’s series of tweets, there has been a lot of misinformation about the FISA court, and the threshold that is necessary to obtain a warrant from the court. Here’s what we know about Trump’s claims, and how that relates to the FISA courts.

On November 7, 2016, the day before the 2016 general election, HeatStreet released a bombshell report that a FISA warrant was issued for a server in Trump Tower.

Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia.

In January National Review picked up on the story with former U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy offering his take. McCarthy explained that as a terrorist prosecutor he often argued against the “wall” separating the FBI’s Counter-Intelligence division, and the criminal investigative division. McCarthy leads with, “the idea that FISA could be used against political enemies always seemed far-fetched. Now it might not be.”

That leads to the question, what is the FISA court and how is it different than a regular criminal court.

Unlike the misconception proffered by Howard Dean, the FISA court was not, “set up after 9/11 by Bush.” According to the Department of Justice, The Foreign Intelligence Service Court was established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. Here is how the DOJ describes it.

Like Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (the “Wiretap Act”), the FISA legislation was the result of congressional investigations into Federal surveillance activities conducted in the name of national security. Through FISA, Congress sought to provide judicial and congressional oversight of foreign intelligence surveillance activities while maintaining the secrecy necessary to effectively monitor national security threats. FISA was initially enacted in 1978 and sets out procedures for physical and electronic surveillance and collection of foreign intelligence information. Initially, FISA addressed only electronic surveillance but has been significantly amended to address the use of pen registers and trap and trace devices, physical searches, and business records.

FISA also established the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), a special U.S. Federal court that holds nonpublic sessions to consider issuing search warrants under FISA. Proceedings before the FISC are ex parte, meaning the government is the only party present.

There are currently eleven members of the court. They are appointed for set terms, and also hold judgeships in other Federal Courts. Judges were appointed to their district courts by both Republican and Democratic presidents, and FISC judges are appointed to the court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

The narrative from the Left has quickly morphed from denial that the Obama administration wiretapped Trump Tower to an admonishment that if a wiretap did happen is was after a FISA court warrant. The Left has further stated that if a warrant was issued, then it must have been because probable cause was found to give the warrant. Here’s David Axelrod, a high level Obama confidant, making that assertion.

If there were the wiretap @realDonaldTrump loudly alleges, such an extraordinary warrant would only have been OKed by a court for a reason.

— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) March 4, 2017

That’s not how FISA warrants are given. Here’s how the DOJ describes the warrant process in a FISC [emphasis added].

Electronic Surveillance Procedures – Subchapter I of FISA established procedures for the conduct of foreign intelligence surveillance and created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). The Department of Justice must apply to the FISC to obtain a warrant authorizing electronic surveillance of foreign agents. For targets that are U.S. persons (U.S. citizens, permanent resident aliens, and U.S. corporations), FISA requires heightened requirements in some instances.

Unlike domestic criminal surveillance warrants issued under Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (the “Wiretap Act”), agents need to demonstrate probable cause to believe that the “target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power,” that “a significant purpose” of the surveillance is to obtain “foreign intelligence information,” and that appropriate “minimization procedures” are in place. 50 U.S.C. § 1804.

Agents do not need to demonstrate that commission of a crime is imminent.

For purposes of FISA, agents of foreign powers include agents of foreign political organizations and groups engaged in international terrorism, as well as agents of foreign nations. 50 U.S.C. § 1801

There you have it, the “agents do not need to demonstrate that commission of a crime is imminent.” This low bar results in almost all warrant requests being granted by the FISC. In 2013, Mother Jones reported that the FISC had rejected just 0.03 percent of all requests.

McCarthy explained further in his January, 2017 piece how a FISA warrant differs from a criminal warrant.

The theory of the Clinton DOJ brass in imposing the Wall was the potential that a rogue criminal investigator, lacking sufficient evidence to obtain a traditional wiretap, would manufacture a national-security angle in order to get a wiretap under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). A traditional wiretap requires evidence amounting to probable cause of commission of a crime. A FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power. (A foreign power can be another country or a foreign terrorist organization.) The reason the Wall theory was absurd was that a rogue agent would surely manufacture evidence of a crime before he’d manufacture a national-security angle. The process of getting a traditional wiretap is straightforward: FBI crim-div agents and a district assistant U.S. attorney (AUSA) write the supporting affidavit; it gets approved by the AUSA’s supervisors; then it is submitted to the Justice Department’s electronic-surveillance unit; after that unit’s approval, the attorney general’s designee signs off; then the AUSA and the FBI present the application to a district judge. FISA wiretaps, by contrast, go through a completely different, more difficult and remote chain of command. In it, the district AUSA and FBI crim-div agents who started the investigation get cut out of the process, which is taken over by Main Justice’s National Security Division and the FBI’s national-security agents. In other words, if we assume an agent is inclined to be a rogue, it would be far easier (and less likely of detection) to trump up evidence of a crime in order to satisfy the probable-cause standard for a traditional wiretap than to manufacture a national-security threat in order to get a FISA wiretap. No rational rogue would do it.

What McCarthy describes is that a FISA warrant is much easier to obtain, and that the Clinton DOJ set up a wall between counter intelligence officers and the criminal division to ensure that a rogue FBI agent, unable to demonstrate probable cause, would be unable to obtain a FISA warrant to circumvent the criminal courts. If the Obama administration went to the FISC for a FISA warrant, that is exactly what seemingly happened.

While we will not definitively know that if there was or was not a FISA warrant until it is released to the public, it is important to know the facts surrounding the court to parse the statements being made by the Left. (For more from the author of “FISA Explained and How the Left Is Trying to Mislead on the Trump “Wiretaps”” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pence’s AOL Account Is Not the Same as Hillary’s Emails – Here’s Why

Democrats are seizing on a new report that Vice President Mike Pence used an AOL account to conduct state business while he was governor of Indiana . . .

The hashtag #PenceEmails is trending on social media this morning, with critics calling out Pence’s own “Email-Gate.”

The critics argue Pence did the same thing as Hillary Clinton after he and President Trump strongly criticized her last year for using a private email server while she was secretary of state.

But as Ed Henry pointed out today, the two situations are not the same.

Henry pointed out that the scandal involving Clinton was over her mishandling of classified information on the server, which is not the case with Pence. (Read more from “Pence’s AOL Account Is Not the Same as Hillary’s Emails – Here’s Why” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Iraqi Forces Near Government Buildings in Mosul as Fight Against ISIS Continues

US-backed Iraqi forces are set to reach the main government complex in Mosul, their next target in the battle to retake the city from Islamic State.

The site should be taken on Monday, Lieutenant Colonel Abdel Amir al-Mohammadawi told the Reuters news agency.

Meanwhile, Colonel John L Dorrian, spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve, the American-led coalition against ISIS, told Sky News the Iraqi forces were “imposing their will on the enemy” in the city.

“They’re not going to be pushed out of Mosul – they’re going to surrender or they’re going to be killed there,” he vowed.

A senior commander said earlier Iraqi troops had been involved in the “heaviest” clashes yet with ISIS fighters in the west of the city since the start of their offensive. (Read more from “Iraqi Forces Near Government Buildings in Mosul as Fight Against ISIS Continues” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Revolutionary 3D-Printed House Takes Less Than a Day to Build and Only Costs $10,000

A groundbreaking potential solution to homelessness and poverty is now a reality thanks to a company called Apis Cor. The company, based in Russia and San Francisco, has developed the capability to 3D-print an entire house in just 24-hours.

As the Telegraph reports, Nikita Chen-yun-tai, the inventor of the mobile printer and founder of Apis Cor, explained his desire is “to automate everything.”

“When I first thought about creating my machine the world has already knew about the construction 3D printing,” he explained, “But all printers created before shared one thing in common – they were portal type. I am sure that such a design doesn’t have a future due to its bulkiness. So I took care of this limitation and decided to upgrade a construction crane design.”

What sets Apis Cor’s product apart from the rest is that its mobile printing technology can print everything right on site. Prior to this method, portions of the house had to be made off-site and then transported. However, thanks to Apis Cor, that costly process is now a thing of the past.

“Printing of self-bearing walls, partitions and building envelope were done in less than a day: pure machine time of printing amounted to 24 hours,” the company said.

Once the printer finishes the house, it is removed with a crane and the roof is then added, followed by interior fixtures, fittings, and paint.

As ZeroHedge points out, the initial house consists of a hallway, bathroom, living room and kitchen and is located in one of Apis Cor’s facilities in Russia. The company has claimed that the house can last up to 175 years.

For now the technology is in its infancy, however in a few years, the deflationary pressures unleashed by Apis-Cor and its competitors could results in a huge deflationary wave across the construction space, and would mean that a house that recently cost in the hundreds of thousands, or millions, could be built for a fraction of the cost, providing cheap, accessible housing to millions, perhaps in the process revolutionizing and upending the multi trillion-dollar mortgage business that is the bedrock of the US banking industry.

This incredibly cheap and efficient home only costs $10,134.

Below is a brief video of this amazing process. The 400-square-foot home is breathing new life into the industry of 3D printing. Imagine the capabilities this technology when applied to poverty-stricken areas throughout the globe. The implications are nothing short of revolutionary.

(For more from the author of “Revolutionary 3D-Printed House Takes Less Than a Day to Build and Only Costs $10,000” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Senator: US Is ‘in the Midst of a Civilization-Warping Crisis of Public Trust’

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., on Saturday said the country is “in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis of public trust” following President Trump’s alleging the Obama administration wire-tapped the campaign headquarters last October.

“The President today made some very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires deserve more information,” Sasse said in a statement released Saturday afternoon. “[T]he President’s allegations today demand the thorough and dispassionate attention of serious patriots. A quest for the full truth, rather than knee-jerk partisanship, must be our guide if we are going to rebuild civic trust and health.”

The Tea Party-affiliated senator then laid out an explanation of what may have transpired.

“If there were wiretaps of then-candidate Trump’s organization or campaign, then it was either with FISA Court authorization or without such authorization. If without, the President should explain what sort of wiretap it was and how he knows this. It is possible that he was illegally tapped,” Sasse said.

“On the other hand, if it was with a legal FISA Court order, then an application for surveillance exists that the Court found credible,” Sasse added. “The President should ask that this full application regarding surveillance of foreign operatives or operations be made available, ideally to the full public, and at a bare minimum to the U.S. Senate.” (Read more from “Senator: US Is ‘in the Midst of a Civilization-Warping Crisis of Public Trust'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Gay ‘Marriage’ Has Not Cured Gay Loneliness

In 2014, a gay activist in England addressed the disproportionately high rate of drug abuse in LGB circles, asking, “Why is drug use higher in the gay community?” His answer: There are negative aspects to the LGB lifestyle that contribute to it. Now, in 2017, a gay writer has addressed “The Epidemic of Gay Loneliness,” asking why gay “marriage” has not cured gay loneliness (among other problems in the gay community), especially among gay men. His answer: “minority stress.”

Strikingly, the 2014 article in the UK’s Pink News did not mention “homophobia” once, while the 2017 article in the Huffington Post, amounting to nearly 7,000 words (and worth reading in full), mentioned it only twice. In other words, neither writer blamed these gay-related behavioral problems or social issues on “homophobia.” Rather, the fault lay with certain realities within the LGB community itself — to which my biblically-grounded, conservative friends would say, “But of course!”

Michael Hobbes and the “Epidemic of Gay Loneliness”

Michael Hobbes, the author of the article on “The Epidemic of Gay Loneliness,” writes with complete candor, noting that, “I’m not going to pretend to be objective about any of this. I’m a perpetually single gay guy who was raised in a bright blue city by PFLAG parents. I’ve never known anyone who died of AIDS, I’ve never experienced direct discrimination and I came out of the closet into a world where marriage, a picket fence and a golden retriever were not just feasible, but expected. I’ve also been in and out of therapy more times than I’ve downloaded and deleted Grindr.”

But his experience, he claims, is hardly unique, noting that, “For years I’ve noticed the divergence between my straight friends and my gay friends. While one half of my social circle has disappeared into relationships, kids and suburbs, the other has struggled through isolation and anxiety, hard drugs and risky sex.” And this has continued, Hobbes observed, even though “the gay community has made more progress on legal and social acceptance than any other demographic group in history.”

Yet, he laments, “even as we celebrate the scale and speed of this change, the rates of depression, loneliness and substance abuse in the gay community remain stuck in the same place they’ve been for decades. Gay people are now, depending on the study, between 2 and 10 times more likely than straight people to take their own lives. We’re twice as likely to have a major depressive episode. And just like the last epidemic we lived through, the trauma appears to be concentrated among men. In a survey of gay men who recently arrived in New York City, three-quarters suffered from anxiety or depression, abused drugs or alcohol or were having risky sex — or some combination of the three.”

Can this be blamed primarily on “homophobia”? Hardly.

Hobbes cites Christopher Stults, “a researcher at New York University who studies the differences in mental health between gay and straight men.” Stults stated that, “Marriage equality and the changes in legal status were an improvement for some gay men. But for a lot of other people, it was a letdown. Like, we have this legal status, and yet there’s still something unfulfilled.”

Relationships Intrinsically Unfulfilling

Could it be that, generally speaking, there’s something intrinsically unfulfilling about homosexual relationships? Could it be that, by divine intent, ultimate relational fulfillment for human beings can be found only in heterosexual marriage?

I’m sure many gay readers will say to me, “Obviously, you don’t know me or the relationship I have with my spouse. How dare you make such a generalization!”

But I’m merely asking questions based on: 1) the data being presented here; 2) biblical reasoning; and 3) testimonies from ex-gays, who have spoken to me about the qualitative differences between their old, homosexual relationships and their current heterosexual marriage.

Interestingly enough (and sadly enough), Hobbes explains that, “This feeling of emptiness, it turns out, is not just an American phenomenon. In the Netherlands, where gay marriage has been legal since 2001, gay men remain three times more likely to suffer from a mood disorder than straight men, and 10 times more likely to engage in ‘suicidal self-harm.’ In Sweden, which has had civil unions since 1995 and full marriage since 2009, men married to men have triple the suicide rate of men married to women.”

Of course, Christian conservatives (and others of like moral values) have pointed to such studies for years, arguing that it is homosexuality itself which is problematic, simply because God didn’t design men to be with men or women with women — and that holds true biologically as well as socially and emotionally. Why should this surprise us?

This is not to deny, however, that there are well-adjusted gay couples and poorly-adjusted straight couples, nor is it to deny that there are gay couples who are deeply in love and straight couples who commit serial adultery, nor is it to deny that many LGB’s have suffered painful rejection by family and friends, contributing to their depression and substance abuse. And certainly, I do not write any of this in a gloating way, since as a follower of Jesus, my goal is not to say, “You see! I told you so,” but rather, “There really is a better way!”

Looking back to the mid-20th-century, Hobbes notes that initially, researchers in the ’50’s and ’60’s attributed the mental and emotional problems experienced by a large percentage of gay men to “homosexuality itself, just one of many manifestations of what was, at the time, known as ‘sexual inversion.’” But, he continues, “As the gay rights movement gained steam … homosexuality disappeared from the DSM and the explanation shifted to trauma.”

In short, gay suicides and gay depression and other emotional (and physical and social) problems were believed to be the fault of a homophobic society. But as Canadian researcher Travis Salway reviewed the data, he realized that, “The problem wasn’t just suicide, it wasn’t just afflicting teenagers and it wasn’t just happening in areas stained by homophobia. He found that gay men everywhere, at every age, have higher rates of cardiovascular disease, cancer, incontinence, erectile dysfunction,⁠ allergies and asthma—you name it, we got it. In Canada, Salway eventually discovered, more gay men were dying from suicide than from AIDS, and had been for years.”

Indeed, says Alex Keuroghlian, a psychiatrist at the Fenway Institute’s Center for Population Research in LGBT Health, “We see gay men who have never been sexually or physically assaulted with similar post-traumatic stress symptoms to people who have been in combat situations or who have been raped.”

“Minority Stress” and the Better Way

These researchers describe this phenomenon as “minority stress.” As Hobbes explains, “In its most direct form, it’s pretty simple: Being a member of a marginalized group requires extra effort.”

Hobbes points to clinical trials where gay men who are taught how to deal with “minority stress” are showing improvement in many categories, yet I’m not going out on a limb when I say: Don’t expect to see dramatic, large-scale, positive change in LGB circles in the days to come (I’m speaking in terms of relationship satisfaction, substance abuse, and physical and emotional problems.)

Gay sex will always have more health risks than straight sex (speaking in general terms, since there is obviously overlap in some of the practices and habits), gay couples will never have as many children as straight couples (which has many other social implications), and two men or two women cannot possibly experience the fullness found in a healthy male-female relationship. It simply the way God made us, and it makes perfect sense.

And why is it that there are other sub-groups in our society that would seemingly experience high levels of minority stress due to their numbers, their isolation, and their social status, and yet experience few of the emotional or physical traumas experienced in the LGB community?

Hobbes closes his article with these words: “I keep thinking of something Paul, the software developer, told me: ‘For gay people, we’ve always told ourselves that when the AIDS epidemic was over we’d be fine. Then it was, when we can get married we’ll be fine. Now it’s, when the bullying stops we’ll be fine. We keep waiting for the moment when we feel like we’re not different from other people. But the fact is, we are different. It’s about time we accept that and work with it.’”

With compassion for Paul and for Hobbes and for every LGB person reading this article, I say again: God does have a better way, and your ultimate help will not come from the society around you (or even from within yourself) but rather from above (from the heavenly Father) and then, with the Lord’s help, in your own life, from the inside out. (For more form the author of “Why Gay ‘Marriage’ Has Not Cured Gay Loneliness” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Prosecutors: NY Man Hoping to Become Suicide Bomber for Jihad

A New York man was being held without bail on terrorism charges after federal authorities said he was prepared to strap on a bomb and sacrifice himself for jihad and persistently tried to join the Islamic State or another extremist group in Syria.

Elvis Redzepagic, 26, was charged Saturday with attempting to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization. Police on suburban Long Island arrested Redzepagic on Feb. 2 on a minor, unrelated charge, and he told them: “I’m going to leave this country, and I’m going to come back with an Army — Islam is coming,” according to a federal court complaint . . .

Redzepagic “was persistent in his efforts” to join Islamic militants in civil-war-ravaged Syria, making it to Turkey in 2015 and Jordan last year and even getting to the Syrian border, said William F. Sweeney, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s New York field office. (Read more from “Prosecutors: NY Man Hoping to Become Suicide Bomber for Jihad” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Gangland Tactics Obama Learned From Saul Alinksy Corrupted Our Government

An old saying goes that a typical idealistic movement “starts out as a crusade, turn into a business, then degenerates into a racket.” In the case of the modern Left, that’s far too generous. It’s clear that the most successful technique in the Left’s playbook, “community organizing,” started out as a racket. In fact, its inventor, Saul Alinsky, developed it based on the “protection rackets” practiced by the organized crime syndicates whose leaders he befriended in the 1940s. Check out the chilling documentary A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing to learn more about Alinsky.

He is the modern Machiavelli who figured out how to exploit the ethnic and social divides inside a community, manufacture outrage, and bully large institutions into funding the very groups that attacked them.

Of course, it was in an Alinsky training school that Barack Obama got his start in politics. And now we learn from news reports that the shakedown methods of community organizing were applied by Obama’s White House, on a massive scale that corrupted our judicial system. As we reported here at The Stream a few days ago:

Department of Justice officials diverted millions of dollars slated for victims of the 2008 housing meltdown to politically favored third parties, including “left-wing radical groups,” according to the chairman of a House of Representatives oversight subcommittee….

Rep. Sean Duffy, a Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the House Financial Services oversight and investigations subcommittee, said Friday the officials “skimmed” off three percent from mortgage-related bank settlements. This created what he called a $500 million “slush fund” that could be steered toward favored groups….

Among the political activist groups favored favored by the settlements is La Raza, the nation’s largest Hispanic activist organization that routinely supports Democratic candidates and causes. Cecilia Munoz, a La Raza senior vice president, was appointed by Obama in 2012 to head the White House Domestic Policy Council….

The Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA) is also slated to receive $50,000 from the Bank of America settlement, according to Cause of Action…. A February 2016 independent monitor report about a Bank of America settlement, obtained by TheDCNF, showed that $125 million had been “donated” by the bank in 2014 to 147 “community” groups and “housing counseling agencies.”

Leftist Groups That Helped Cause Housing Crisis Profit from Payouts

La Raza (“The Race”) and MEChA are radical Mexican nationalist organizations, which have long been accused of being the Latino equivalent of white supremacists. As Mark Kirkorian of National Review has pointed out, La Raza took its very name from the writings of a Mexican radical who claimed that the blend of Spanish and Indian blood that took place in Mexico had produced a superior race.

The Obama administration arranged that instead of paying out money to homeowners whom they had harmed, or to taxpayers who bailed out investors, banks accused of wrongdoing would sluice money into the coffers of leftist activists like La Raza, which oppose the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws.

The irony becomes even richer when you remember that part of the reason for the 2008 crisis was that banks had lowered their standards for giving out mortgages, under pressure from leftist groups like La Raza to offer more home loans to members of minority groups regardless of their credit scores. So leftists help to gin up a national economic crisis, then profit from the collapse. Nice work if you can get it.

Sending Taxpayer Money to George Soros

Obama’s Alinskyite methods have gone global. As The Stream reported, in the small post-Communist Republic of Macedonia, Obama’s diplomatic appointees have been funneling U.S. tax-funded foreign aid through the aggressively leftist, pro-abortion Open Society Foundation created by international banker George Soros:

The Obama-appointed U.S. ambassador in Skopje, Jess Baily, has come under congressional scrutiny over accusations that he has shown a political bias against the Macedonian conservative party, VMRO, and that he facilitated coalition negotiations between the main leftist party and ethnic Albanian parties.

In a letter sent to Baily on Jan. 17, Republican members of the House and the Senate also asked him to explain reports that his embassy had selected Soros’ Open Society Foundations as the main implementer of U.S. Agency for International Development projects in Macedonia….

Feb. 27 USAID announcement of a $2.54 million contract with the foundation revealed that the project included paying for training in “civic activism,” “mobilization,” and “civic engagement.”

Far from strengthening the rule of law or regional security, these are activities associated with the redefinition of civics as 1960s-style progressive political activism. They are all strategies straight out of Saul Alinsky’s subversion manual, Rules for Radicals, whose translation into Macedonian, incidentally, was funded by Soros’ foundation in 2014.

One of the world’s richest men, Soros has a long history of intervening politically around the globe in the pursuit of his dream of open borders, global governance, and the erosion of regional particularism — what he calls the “open society.”

Barack Obama may not have personally engaged in the kind of shameless pay-for-play that seem to have characterized the Clinton Foundation, as it monetized access to the U.S. State Department. But he did aggressively corrupt the use of public money taken from taxpayers or owed to them, in service of overtly partisan goals.

Donald Trump has promised to “drain the swamp.” Let’s hope he starts by investigating the Chicago gangland methods Obama learned from Alinsky and brought to the highest reaches of government. Given his years in the building trade, Trump has doubtless seen more than his share of this kind of corruption. Who better to root it out? (For more from the author of “How Gangland Tactics Obama Learned From Saul Alinksy Corrupted Our Government” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Godly Strategy in Response to Disney’s ‘Gay Moment’

Wow. Disney’s “gay moment” in the film Beauty and the Beast sure has stirred up feelings among Christians. Calls for boycotts. Closed doors. Angry urgings to quit being “nice.”

That last came from comments on my Stream article last week, The Beastly Beauty of Disney’s ‘Gay Moment’ — And How We Should Respond. Apparently some readers thought I was suggesting we back out of the conflict. I’m not. I’m talking about our strategy as followers of Christ.

Another comment on that article asked for more specific thoughts on what to do at a time like this. Jesus told His disciples to “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” (Matt. 10:16) Our forays into pro-gay culture must likewise be marked with both strategic savvy and godly action.

So I’m going to make some observations here on what gay activists want, what God wants, and the strategic lay of the land. Based on that, I’m going to suggest several conclusions.

1. What Gay Activists Want

What do gay activists want from us? That’s easy. The most useful thing we can do for them is play into their picture of hateful Christian conservatism. They’re painting us as intolerant haters, because that image helps them win. I can’t prove it, but I suspect it serves their purposes even more than if we were to lay down our arms and slink quietly away.

2. What God Wants

Not surprisingly, God wants exactly the opposite of what gay activists want. He wants us to:

Stand firm. He doesn’t want us to slink quietly away. Over and over again, Christians have changed history by standing for righteousness in culture.

Fight God’s way. The “weapons of our warfare are not worldly,” but have power over strongholds, arguments and every proud obstacle. (2 Cor. 10:3-5)

Be quick to speak, slow to anger. The anger of man does not accomplish the righteousness of God. (James 1:20)

Be human. Sean McDowell wisely urges us to avoid an us-versus-them mentality. We’re all created in God’s image, so we dare not treat others inhumanely; we dare not dehumanize them.

Be persuasive. Christianity is a religion of persuasion through love, and through preaching, teaching and explanation. Some misguided believers have tried to advance the faith through power; they have gained only corrupted ground. True Christianity has covered the globe through persuasively speaking the truth in love. (Acts 17:1-3, Eph. 4:15)

Be relational. God is a God of relationship from even before creation: the three Persons of the Trinity have always related to in perfect love. He created us to love Him, our neighbor and even our enemies.

3. The Lay of the Land

To be wise in battle requires knowing the terrain. We have to recognize that the pro-gay forces control most of the persuasive power centers in our culture. They’ve got Disney Studios and so much more: education, music, the major news media … I could go on, but you already know it. They own the heavy artillery.

What do we have on our side? We have the Church and we have prayer.

From a strictly social/cultural perspective the Church is huge: it’s the ground organization to beat all ground organizations. Obviously it’s hugely under-equipped and under-deployed, but more on that in a moment.

Meanwhile prayer is the spiritual analogue to “air power” in relation to the ground game we’re all engaged in. Prayer flies even higher than our opponents’ artillery.

How Not To Fight

So yes, we fight, but not by the world’s methods, and not without being wise to the strategic realities. Here’s what won’t work.

We’re not going to win this in the media. We don’t control enough of it. We can win some persuasive battles here and there; certainly enough to be worthwhile — let’s do all we can! — but realistically, not enough to turn the tide. (The more crucial role played by The Stream and similar media is to equip and encourage our own.)

The same goes in spades for “not being nice.” Even if being not-nice were a godly idea — which it isn’t — we’re outgunned anyway. The other side is (thank God!) way better at it than we are. For us it’s a failed, hopeless and wrong tactic.

Persuasion, Action, Deeds and Prayer

Instead we must stand for truth by persuasive speech, righteous action, loving deeds and prayer.

Persuasion means knowing the reasons for our position. Do you know where to find the five key Bible passages on homosexuality? Can you state several reasons man-woman marriage is healthier for society than gay marriage? Have you listened to opponents’ objections thoughtfully, and are you prepared with answers?

I almost hate to introduce this word into polite conversation, but getting ready for this battle means doing some homework.

Righteous action could certainly include boycotting a film like Beauty and the Beast. It also includes speaking up. It also includes loving our enemies.

Loving deeds are the real challenge, because it’s impossible to love from arm’s length. Gays and gay-affirming people can continue to believe Christians are haters only as long as we let them. We can’t argue them out of it; the way to stop them thinking it is by loving them. We certainly don’t need to agree with their views, but if they’ll let us, we can be friends anyway. Not all of them will welcome our friendship, but many are actually hoping for it.

This is the ground game we are uniquely positioned to engage in; for which our huge, under-deployed ground organization, the Church, must become equipped, and in which each believer must become active.

Finally, Prayer. We have the privilege and the obligation to pray for ourselves. We must pray fervently for the Church. We must pray for Disney and all others who may be arrayed against God’s truth.

The battle is the Lord’s. He isn’t on our side (don’t ever be mistaken about that!) but we can be on His, if we fight for His goals in His way. (For more from the author of “Godly Strategy in Response to Disney’s ‘Gay Moment'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Don’t Blame the Trade Deficit for America’s Economic Problems

A new report from the United States trade representative links America’s trade deficit with other countries to trade deals entered into going back to the Reagan administration.

Those deal include the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Uruguay Round Agreements that created the World Trade Organization, China’s 2001 Protocol of Accession to the World Trade Organization, and a series of others.

The report notes that in 2000, the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods was $317 billion, but by 2016 this had grown to $648 billion. It says that “[o]ur trade deficit in goods and services with China soared from $81.9 billion in 2000 [the last full year before China joined the World Trade Organization] to almost $334 billion in 2015.”

The report further states that “the largest trade deal implemented during the Obama administration—our free trade agreement with South Korea—has coincided with a dramatic increase in our trade deficit with that country.”

The report then implies that the trade deficit caused the typical American household’s economic situation to get worse since 2000, and that in reducing the trade deficit we would be improving the plight of the typical American household.

The problem with this analysis is that the trade deficit did not make things worse for the typical American household.

A trade deficit should not be used as a reason to legislatively prohibit everyone in the U.S. from buying low-priced goods. In fact, Americans are better off when we have the freedom to pay lower prices at Wal-Mart, or when buying a new automobile containing parts from around the world, for instance.

It is true that some workers are displaced by low-priced imports. While this is sad, other workers—like those employed in the retail sector or in industries using imported intermediate goods to make their products—actually need those low-priced imports to stay employed.

In reality, many of the problems listed in the report were caused by decades of high and complicated taxes, ever-increasing regulations on businesses, and growing uncertainty by business owners about how the rule of law will apply to their businesses.

Before blaming the trade deficit as the scapegoat, it would be wise to review the words of President Ronald Reagan in discussing trade deficits toward the end of his successful presidency:

We hear talk about the trade deficit, but we must beware of single-entry bookkeeping. The other side of the ledger shows that the growing, dynamic United States economy has attracted $159 billion in foreign capital into the United States. Trade deficits and inflows of foreign capital are not necessarily a sign of an economy’s weakness. During the first 100 years of our nation’s history, while we were developing from an agricultural colony to the industrial leader of the world, the United States ran a trade deficit. And now, as we’re leading a global movement from the industrial age to the information age, we continue to attract investment from around the world.

Now, some people call this debt. By that way of thinking, every time a company sold stock it would be a sign of weakness, and it would be much better to be a company nobody wanted to invest in rather than one everybody wanted to invest in. Take the case of high-tech, high-growth California. Milton Friedman argues that California’s external debt—to other states and other countries—almost certainly dwarfs the external debt of the United States. Does this augur bad days ahead for California? On the contrary, one might argue it’s a sign of strength.

Historically, fast-growing economies often run deficits in the trade of goods and services, experiencing net capital investment from abroad. This predictable and, up to a point, desirable process has been accentuated by slow growth in parts of Europe and the need for debt-ridden third world nations to generate trade surpluses to service their debt. Germany, which has actually lost half-a-million jobs in the last 10 years, has a trade surplus in goods. Mexico has a trade surplus in goods. The United States, which has been the engine keeping the world economy moving forward, has a trade deficit because our growing economy enables us to buy their goods.

Over time, however, these imbalances should be reduced, and there are two ways to do it: We can become more like them, or they can become more like us. We can raise taxes, reregulate our economy, and adopt protectionist legislation of the kind now being considered in Congress. That will effectively slow growth in this nation and stifle international trade. We won’t be able to buy their goods and, certainly, no one will want to invest in the United States. The world can all shrink together, and we can all look forward to hearing the experts once again pontificating about convergence and the limits to growth.

The other solution is for them to become more like us: to adopt low-tax, pro-growth policies; to encourage trade, not discourage it—to make it freer and fairer and more plentiful; to join with the other nations in a cooperative, upward cycle of growth in which all participate; to embrace the possibilities of the new world economy. In fact, we’re beginning to see this happen. Several major industrialized countries have followed the U.S. lead in cutting high marginal tax rates to spur growth. These changes and other market forces are already causing the volume of U.S. exports to boom, with continued growth expected.

-President Ronald Reagan
Partial remarks at the City Club of Cleveland, Ohio — Jan. 11, 1988

(For more from the author of “Don’t Blame the Trade Deficit for America’s Economic Problems” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.