Pathetic Atheists Attack ‘Secretive’ White House Bible Studies

The weekly Bible study attended by members of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet is once again under attack, this time from an atheist group.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is suing the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), led by Secretary Ben Carson.

The group has issued Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to agencies led by Cabinet secretaries who attend the Bible study to see if government resources are being used or if agency staffers feel “coerced into organizing or even participating in the religious event,” according to a press release.

No staff members attend the Bible studies, it’s for cabinet secretaries only.

FFRF and CREW sued HUD when it failed to waive fees for its FOIA requests. (Read more from “Pathetic Atheists Attack ‘Secretive’ White House Bible Studies” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Releasing Own Legislative Framework on Immigration

By WND. With the clock ticking on the reprieve from a government shutdown, President Trump is entering the fray on immigration with his own “legislative framework” for Congress to consider and adopt before the Feb. 8 deadline.

The White House says Trump’s proposal will be released Monday.

In a statement, the White House said: “Last fall, the White House sent Congress a list of the core reforms necessary to fix our immigration system. These reforms were assembled in coordination with frontline law enforcement officers and career public servants who know what is necessary to keep America safe. Since that time, President Donald J. Trump and his administration have hosted dozens of meetings with Republican and Democrat leadership and rank-and-file members of the House and Senate to discuss these reforms and find a bipartisan path forward. Based on these negotiations, the White House will release a legislative framework on Monday that represents a compromise that members of both parties can support.”

Republicans and Democrats in the Senate failed to come to agreement on a continuing resolution to fund the government last week, primarily over the issue of DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, leading to a three-day government shutdown. A temporary agreement was made to continue funding the government until Feb. 8, with Republicans pledging to bring a proposal on immigration to a vote by the deadline. (Read more from “Trump Releasing Own Legislative Framework on Immigration” HERE)

____________________________________________

Trump Puts Path to Citizenship for Some ‘Dreamers’ on the Table in Immigration Deal

By The Washington Post. President Trump said for the first time Wednesday that he is open to a path to citizenship for some younger undocumented immigrants known as “dreamers” in an immigration deal being negotiated by Congress, a potential breakthrough in the stalled talks.

In an impromptu discussion with reporters, Trump emphasized that his support of a citizenship path for about 690,000 immigrants would be contingent on securing $25 billion for a wall on the southwest border with Mexico and $5 billion for additional border upgrades. The president also is expected to continue his push to curb legal immigration as part of a deal.

But his remarks signaled what could prove to be a major shift for a president who ran a campaign with a hard line on immigration and last week rejected a bipartisan Senate proposal that included citizenship.

White House aides said the president would release a complete “framework” on Monday. The aides said that plan probably would grant immediate provisional legal status to those immigrants covered by the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that he terminated in the fall. That group would then be eligible to pursue full citizenship over 10 to 12 years. (Read more from “Trump Puts Path to Citizenship for Some ‘Dreamers’ on the Table in Immigration Deal” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Teacher Sued for Teaching Islam as ‘the True Faith’

A lawsuit has been filed against social-studies teacher Christine Jakowski and others in the Chatham School District in New Jersey for teaching public school students that Islam is “the true faith.”

Jakowski’s lesson included an explanation on how to become a Muslim and ended with a plea: “May god help us all find the true faith, Islam. Ameen.”

The Thomas More Law Center said its complaint was filed on behalf of Libby Hilsenrath and her son, a minor, after seventh-grade students at the school “were forced to endure Islamic propaganda and an explicit call to convert to Islam.”

It came during the World Cultures and Geography class.

Richard Thompson, president of Thomas More, explained: “What would people say if our public schools taught Christianity as the true faith? After watching this video, I can’t imagine any reasonable person saying this is not Islamic indoctrination. Chatham Middle School made a mockery of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.” (Read more from “Teacher Sued for Teaching Islam as ‘the True Faith'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

#Metoo Mom Does Something Unthinkable with Refugee Lover

A middle-age Swedish woman who took an 18-year-old Afghan refugee into her home as her lover refused to report the young man to police when he sexually assaulted her daughter, 12, reported the Swedish news site, FriaTider.

“I was afraid he would be sent back to Afghanistan,” said the unidentified woman, who works in a residential-care home for children and teens.

Ironically, the woman is active in Sweden’s #MeToo movement against sexual assault, reports FriaTider.

The #MeToo movement has been particularly active in Sweden. In the fall of 2017, tens of thousands in different industries signed petitions through their unions against sexual abuse and harassment. Thousands of women have published testimonials, exposing their alleged perpetrators . . .

The woman, 45, reportedly started a relationship with the young man while working at the home in Sölvesborg. When he “became official” and no longer qualified for HVB housing, she allowed him to move into her home that she shared with her daughter. He is identified as Abdul Dostmohammadi by the Daily Mail. (Read more from “#Metoo Mom Does Something Unthinkable with Refugee Lover” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

“Explosive” FISA Memo Said to Expose Obama-Deep State Op Against Trump

In Wednesday’s online edition of the New York Post, columnist Michael Goodwin wrote that for all the world, it sure does appear as though a massive scandal is engulfing the FBI (and, to another extent, the Department of Justice).

Specifically, based on weeks of reporting from just about everyone but the “mainstream media,” it appears as though the Obama administration, using Deep State operatives within both agencies and throughout the Executive Branch, improperly and illegally spied on the campaign of President Donald J. Trump.

Comparing what we’re seeing with the 2007-2009 Great Recession, when lawmakers bailed out banks after declaring them “too big to fail,” Goodwin sees the burgeoning scandal involving the nation’s — and the world’s — premier law enforcement agency as “too big to believe.”

“Yet each day brings credible reports suggesting there is a massive scandal involving the top ranks of America’s premier law enforcement agency,” Goodwin writes.

“The reports, which feature talk among agents of a ‘secret society‘ and suddenly missing text messages, point to the existence both of a cabal dedicated to defeating Donald Trump in 2016 and of a plan to let Hillary Clinton skate free in the classified email probe,” he said. “If either one is true — and I believe both probably are — it would mean FBI leaders betrayed the nation by abusing their powers in a bid to pick the president.”

The columnist noted that it also seems likely, based on reporting and some credible evidence, that the Clinton-financed “Trump dossier” — which was supposed to be political opposition research — was used by the FBI to obtain a FISA court warrant so it could spy on a political campaign.

Goodwin (and others) also believe that the FBI got approval for a counterintelligence surveillance warrant to spy on Team Trump by representing the dossier as real intelligence — without telling the court it was opposition research and that none of it had been substantiated.

Fox News, The Gateway Pundit, and a smattering of other news websites including The National Sentinel have been all over this developing story. Circa News investigative reporter and Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter, along with the network’s top host Sean Hannity, have also done yeoman’s work in getting out detail after detail of this story, beginning way back when it was first learned that the infamous “Trump dossier” was paid for by Clinton’s campaign.

Who hasn’t done any work on this story? Fake news outlets like CNN, The New York Times, the Washington Post (where, apparently, democracy is dying in darkness), and other establishment media outlets.

Now, who has tried to block efforts to inform the American people (of all political persuasions) about this massive corruption?

That would be Democrats — members of the same party whose president no doubt directed this scandal from top to bottom, along with hand-picked sycophants within his administration. (Related: Bongino: ‘SH*T is about to HIT THE FAN’ for Dems, OBAMA, over ‘devastating’ FISA memo from House Intel Committee.)

This is a conspiracy like no other. This is a scandal like no other. The abuses of our intelligence apparatus and judicial system is mind-boggling. Think about it and let it sink in real good: A sitting president and his administration politicized two of our most important institutions — our legal system and our intelligence-gathering institutions — to not only exonerate a Democratic presidential candidate who was so obviously guilty of violating national security statutes she should have been put away for decades, but also to spy on a rival campaign.

The Democrats have done this, not the Republicans. This is the textbook definition of “Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States,” at a minimum. There should be arrests. There should be convictions. There should be examples made.

Yet, many Americans are clueless about it because of a dearth of reporting by the “responsible media.”

These abuses are all believed to be detailed in a four-page “FISA memo” authored by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., for the House Intelligence Committee and fellow lawmakers. They are at present trying to get it out to the public, but it’s classified.

It can be instantly declassified by the president of the United States.

Not only should Trump do that, he should read it during the upcoming State of the Union Address, so that every American has an opportunity to learn just how corrupted their most cherished institutions have become, and who attempted to use that corruption to their advantage: Democrats.

If this corruption doesn’t stop here, now, it will only fester and metastasize even further, spreading throughout Big Government. We elected Trump to “drain the swamp.” This would be a huge step toward that objective. (For more from the author of “Explosive” FISA Memo Said to Expose Obama-Deep State Op Against Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Poll: Majority of Voters Want Less Than Half Our Current Immigration

“So, if we have people who were brought here ‘through no fault of their own,’ are amazingly smart and industrious, and all serve in the military and kill Al Qaeda terrorists with their bare hands, should they be deported?”

“No? Great! Now it’s time for completely open borders.”

That essentially describes the attitude of the political class at this point.

It’s one thing to put out BS polling as a propaganda tool; it’s quite another to actually believe it yourself and implement political strategy accordingly. That is the mistake Democrats have made by obsessing over superficial polling suggesting that Americans, including conservative Republicans, are clamoring for amnesty.

The reality of the polling tells quite a different story.

The immigration polling dynamic is very similar to the dynamic of the gun issue. Democrats have touted polls showing support for expanded background checks as high as 90 percent. “Do you want criminals to get guns or not?” a pollster would ask.

But even honest Democrat strategists will admit that the reality of the gun issue is just the opposite — the issue as a whole, especially when you weigh the intensity of the sides, is a major loser for Democrats. In general, people want more pro-gun legislation, not less. Just ask Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

The same dynamic applies to immigration. Isolating a largely abstract and mythical population of illegals and encapsulating it into a poll doesn’t reflect where people’s hearts and priorities are on this issue. But the answers to very straightforward polling questions of whether we have too much or too little immigration, whether immigrants should assimilate, whether immigrants should get welfare, whether immigrants should learn English, and whether immigration should be merit-based as opposed to family-based, are indeed very reflective of where the national mood is on immigration. And deep down, Democrats know this.

A very thorough and comprehensive poll from Harvard-Harris shows that Americans want a dramatic cut in legal immigration and a transition to merit-based immigration. Here is a list of some of the questions and results:

Question: “Do you think immigration priority for those coming to the U.S. should be based on a person’s ability to contribute to America as measured by their education and skills or based on a person having relatives in the U.S.?”

Results: The merit side won by a margin of 79 percent to 21 percent. Support for merit-based priorities was 72 percent among Hispanics and 85 percent among blacks. Seventy-two percent of self-described Democrats and 65 percent of self-described liberals agreed. Yet you will never see news stories or even Republican politicians touting the fact that even liberal Democrats support merit-based over chain migration.

Question: In your opinion, about how many legal immigrants should be admitted to the U.S. each year?

This is as non-leading and non-push-polling as a polling question can get. No preconceived notions of “no fault of their own” or “brought to America by parents.” This is a straight-up question of numbers. Only 19 percent chose options ranging from 1 million to over 1 million. Our official level of immigration every year is about 1.1 million, but between other de facto permanent programs, as many as 1.8 million immigrants were likely admitted in 2016. The American people clearly reject it and would never support it if the numbers were advertised. Eighteen percent chose the 500,000-1 million option, 19 percent chose 250,000-499,999, and 35 percent (including 48 percent of blacks) – by far the largest share – chose 100,000-250,000.

This means that a clear majority want less than half the current intake, if not one third of the current intake, a result that would not even be achieved through passage of the RAISE Act. In total, 81 percent desire less immigration than our average recent intake, and less than 12 percent want the level of immigration from our most recent year. That is not much more than the 9 percent on the other extreme who said they want absolutely no immigration whatsoever.

Talk about the silent majority! Most of the numbers were pretty uniform across all demographics, too.

Other findings of the poll: 61 percent feel that border security is inadequate; 68 percent (including 62 percent of Democrats) oppose the diversity visa lottery; and only 22 percent want open-border policies.

Yet the media will just latch onto the one question about giving work permits or a path to citizenship to “those brought here by their parents,” to which 78 percent answered in the affirmative. The problem with this question is that it gives no context as to who these people are, which priorities should come first, and whether they should get welfare.

What if voters were told that most people in this group have only a high school diploma, don’t know English very well (unlike the ones the media puts on camera), and would likely be on welfare and rely heavily on refundable tax credits?

What if voters were told that young illegal immigrants were even more likely to commit crimes, particularly gruesome ones, than older ones and that in Arizona they were 884 times more likely to be convicted of a crime?

What if they were told that 535 DACA recipients who were ordered deported for serious crimes are still roaming our communities and that this is not even a discussion in the negotiations?

What if they were told that DACA is what spawned the Central American wave of border crossings, as confirmed by the El Paso Intelligence Center, the Congressional Research Service, the Washington Post, and the Migration Policy Institute, that the new promise to ratify DACA is rejuvenating the border surge, and that up to 30 percent of unaccompanied minors (or purported minors) detained by immigration authorities as a result of DACA have ties to MS-13 gangs?

What if voters were asked whether we should grant amnesty before fixing immigration and security for Americans and risk more illegal immigration or if we should first prioritize security and legal reforms?

What if they were told that as soon as these people have children, they will immediately be eligible for welfare and already get refundable tax credits?

Clearly, the electorate is a lot more outraged at our stolen sovereignty and at America becoming a dumping ground for the world’s criminals than they are about the urgency for a limited amnesty for the “best and the brightest.”

So what does this all mean?

If Republicans would embrace sovereignty and security and run on lowering immigration, making it merit-based, deporting all criminal aliens, ending welfare for immigrants, and stopping automatic citizenship for future children of illegal aliens, they would be leading this election season in a heartbeat. And even if one believes there is a clamor and intensity for amnesty, the Goodlatte bill incorporates both elements – so they can have their cake and eat it too.

When will Republicans stop listening to their phony consultants, who have done them a disservice on this issue for decades? Common sense is the best poll of all. (For more from the author of “Poll: Majority of Voters Want Less Than Half Our Current Immigration” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Florida Proposal on Ex-Felon Voting Rights Could Have National Impact — Here’s How

Convicted felons in Florida could have their voting rights restored automatically upon completion of their sentences if a proposal passes this November . . .

“Dems want to restore the felon vote because they think they will benefit; Republicans want to restrict felon voting because they believe they will be harmed,” said former University of South Florida professor Darryl Paulson, who is a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Most felons are nonviolent and deserve to have their rights restored. Most felons in Florida are white, not black. If conservatives want to end recidivism and reintegrate felons into society, the restoration of voting rights is essential.” . . .

Concerns on both sides about the political impact of restoring the vote to convicted felons explains why this has remained a contentious issue for decades.

The 2000 presidential election serves as a useful example of the potential significance of 1.5 million Floridians suddenly being allowed to vote. A 2002 study estimates that if Florida’s former felons had been allowed to vote in 2000 and turned out at a 13 percent rate, 31,000 additional votes would have been cast. Former president George W. Bush won by 537 votes.

Florida is just one of four states that still permanently bans ex-felons from voting. (Read more from “This Florida Proposal on Ex-Felon Voting Rights Could Have National Impact — Here’s How” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

CIA Boss in Discussion with Trump About Preemptive Strike Attack on North Korea

As tensions remain high between North Korea and the U.S., the director of the CIA indicated that President Donald Trump is being briefed by the agency on the risks and opportunities that would result from a limited attack against the hostile regime.

Mike Pompeo revealed this information during a Tuesday speech at the American Enterprise Institute, and though he would not discuss the “wisdom of a preemptive strike,” he admitted the regime’s nuclear program is an urgent priority for the agency, according to The Daily Beast.

“We’re working to prepare a series of options to make sure that we can deliver a range of things so the president will have the full suite of possibilities,” Pompeo said. “The president is intent on delivering this solution through diplomatic means.”

“We are equally at the same time ensuring that if we conclude that is not possible, that we present the president a range of options to achieve what is his stated intention,” he added.

Pompeo described these “options” as a means to “denuclearize permanently” North Korea, noting that “we’re going foreclose this risk.”

The director spoke on behalf of the information he claims the CIA assessed. He believes North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to be a rational man but is unsure as to how serious the dictator considers the prospect of a U.S. attack.

Pompeo didn’t say whether or not options exist for Trump to attack North Korea without sparking a nuclear war, though analysts have warned that even a limited strike could eventually lead to a nuclear conflict.

The CIA director indicated that the administration is developing numerous options, spanning from diplomacy to war, in order to avoid having to choose between inaction against the regime and a possible nuclear catastrophe.

But in the past months, some analysts have expressed concern with the CIA’s current analysis and statements made by the president.

In October, Trump said Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was “wasting his time” in trying to negotiate with Kim. In August, meanwhile, Trump stated that any provocation from North Korea would be “met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”

According to a former North Korean spy it’s not possible to denuclearize the regime with diplomacy.

“North Korea won’t give up its nuclear weapons,” said Kim Hyon-hui. “They’re its lifeline.”

Just before Christmas, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis echoed those same fears by stating that “storm clouds are gathering” in the wake of the growing threat.

Many within the CIA believe the missile program in North Korea is aimed at coercion, rather than self-defense.

The next logical step, they suggest, would be for the regime to develop an arsenal of weapons with the capability to fire multiple missiles toward the U.S. in an effort to achieve maximum destruction.

And the possibility of destruction may only get worse, Pompeo said, adding that he spoke last week about North Korea being only a “handful of months” away from a successful nuclear attack.

“I said the same thing several months before that,” Pompeo said. “I want everybody to understand that we are working diligently to make sure that a year from now I can still tell you they are several months away from having that capacity.” (For more from the author of “CIA Boss in Discussion with Trump About Preemptive Strike Attack on North Korea” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Muslim Land’: Woman Sets Catholic University Ablaze in Series of Revenge Attacks

A 19-year-old former student is being accused of lighting eight fires around a Catholic university’s campus in Minnesota.

Prosecutors say Tnuza J. Hassan, of Minneapolis, set the fires on the campus of St. Catherine’s University in retaliation against U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Star Tribune reported.

Hassan, who used to attend the school, has been charged with one count of felony first-degree arson. She allegedly told police “she wanted the school to burn to the ground and that her intent was to hurt people,” according to a complaint filed in Ramsey County District Court.

Hassan reportedly claimed that similar incidents happened on “Muslim land,” but in those cases, no one cared if any Muslims were hurt.

“You guys are lucky that I don’t know how to build a bomb because I would have done that,” she told police and fire investigators.

An earlier report from the Tribune indicated that no one was injured during the incidents, which started late Wednesday morning.

Objects such as books, toilet paper and sanitary napkins were among the items to be set on fire across St. Catherine’s campus.

Trash cans were used to start all but one of the eight fires, officials said.

The fires didn’t cause any major damage, with a chair being the largest item that was burned.

A sprinkler system in the residence hall was responsible for putting out that blaze.

Meanwhile, firefighters put out other fires by either stomping on them or using fire extinguishers.

“All of the fires were quite small and contained quite easily,” said university spokeswoman Sara Berhow.

Hassan was caught after authorities found surveillance footage of her going into a building before one of the fires broke out. She was later arrested at a residence hall.

Moreover, she reportedly told police she had written a letter to her roommate that included “radical ideas about supporting Muslims and bringing back the caliphate,” according to the complaint. Her roommates were scared by the letter, and gave it to campus security.

Hassan appeared in court on Friday. She had to surrender her passport, and bond was set at $100,000.

The former student arrived dressed in an orange jumpsuit, and what the Tribune described as a “makeshift hijab,” as she used some sort of black face covering and a white sheet wrapped around her head, leaving only her eyes exposed.

Patrick Nwaneri, an attorney representing Hassan, asked for $5,000 bail. His request was rejected by Ramsey County District Judge Sophia Vuelo, who said the accused was a threat to public safety.

Hassan is due back in court on Feb. 28 for an omnibus hearing. (For more from the author of “‘Muslim Land’: Woman Sets Catholic University Ablaze in Series of Revenge Attacks” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hollywood Star: ‘Abortion Is the Definition of Evil’

Not all Hollywood actors speak social justice nonsense while hypocritically wearing Planned Parenthood buttons on their multi-thousand dollar dresses at awards shows. Actor Kevin Sorbo (“Hercules”, “God’s Not Dead”) has his values in the right order.

In an editorial for CNS News, Kevin Sorbo and his wife, Sam, unequivocally denounced abortion as an “evil” that spreads through fake buzzwords like “empowerment.” . . .

“In some cases, disturbing the nest of a sea turtle and stealing its eggs is a crime punishable by years in prison and tremendous fines, but we have an entire industry in this nation devoted to the murder of unborn human beings,” says the piece . . .

“This is the new civil rights cause for our country,” the piece continues. “Barely a century after our grave and costly war against slavery, against depriving some human beings of their dignity and based solely on their skin color, we codified into law the right of the citizen to kill her progeny, based solely on its size and location, while unwittingly depriving herself of love that is pure and enduring.” . . .

“This is the definition of evil, pure and simple,” the piece concludes. (Read more from “Hollywood Star: ‘Abortion Is the Definition of Evil'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.