Stormy Daniels Finally Turns on Avenatti – Here’s What She Did

Stormy Daniels, the adult film worker who sued President Donald Trump over their extramarital affair, has turned on the lawyer who represented her in statement released Wednesday. . .

“For months I’ve asked Michael Avenatti to give me accounting information about the fund my supporters so generously donated to for my safety and legal defense,” she alleged. “He has repeatedly ignored those requests.

“Days ago I demanded again, repeatedly, that he tell me how the money was being spent and how much was left,” she added. “Instead of answering me, without my permission or even my knowledge Michael launched another crowdfunding campaign to raise money on my behalf.” . . .

In her statement, she praised Avenatti for some of his actions, but said in others he had not shown her the respect a client deserves from their attorney.

“He has spoken on my behalf without my approval,” she said. “He filed a defamation case against Donald Trump against my wishes. He repeatedly refused to tell me how my legal defense fund was being spent. Now he has launched a new crowdfunding campaign using my face and name without my permission and attributing words to me that I never wrote or said.”

(Read more from “Stormy Daniels Finally Turns on Avenatti – Here’s What She Did” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pelosi Nominated for Speaker

By National Review. Representative Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) was nominated Wednesday to serve as the next speaker of the House, despite strident opposition from a small subset of her Democratic caucus. Pelosi’s nomination was all but guaranteed as the House Democrats opposed to her nomination failed to present an alternative candidate.

With the nomination secured by a vote of 203-32, the California progressive must now win over a majority of the House in a floor vote in early January before she can claim the gavel. Since the entire Republican caucus will likely vote against her, Pelosi can only afford to lose the support of 17 Democrats if she hopes to win the speakership.

While Pelosi was running unopposed, the party modified the standard nomination ballot to include a “no” option, so that freshman Democrats who ran on opposing her could tell their constituents they followed through on their respective pledges. Pelosi reportedly supported those freshmen lawmakers, giving them the go ahead to vote “no” to preserve their political capital. (Read more from “Pelosi Nominated for Speaker” HERE)

_____________________________________________

Another Dem to Oppose Pelosi

By The Hill. The road to the Speakership grew a bit steeper for Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday when another Democrat announced his opposition to the longtime party leader.

Rep. Ron Kind (D), an 11-term Wisconsin lawmaker, noted that he voted against Pelosi’s leadership bid on the floor two years ago, and he’s planning to do the same in January.

“I’ve been consistent in saying we’re in desperate need of new leadership on both sides, as we move forward in the new Congress,” Kind told The Hill.

A senior Democratic aide fired back, noting that Kind has supported Pelosi’s top lieutenants — Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and James Clyburn (D-S.C.) — who have also been at the top of the party for more than a decade.

“This reasoning falls quite flat given Rep. Kind’s vote for Hoyer and Clyburn today,” the aide said, referring to Wednesday’s leadership votes on Capitol Hill. (Read more from “Another Dem to Oppose Pelosi” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Border Patrol Arrests MS-13 Member Who Traveled with Caravan

U.S. Border Patrol agents have arrested a member of the infamous Salvadoran MS-13 gang who admitted to authorities that he traveled with a caravan of Central American migrants who were hoping to qualify for asylum in America.

Agents arrested Jose Villalobos-Jobel, 29, shortly after 6 p.m. on Saturday east of the Calexico Port of Entry on the U.S. side of the border, Customs and Border Protection said in a statement Wednesday.

During questioning at the El Centro station, the Honduran citizen confessed that he is an active member of MS-13 and had intended to enter the country illegally after traveling to the U.S. with the caravan of thousands of other migrants. He is in custody pending his deportation back to Honduras. . .

In April, another MS-13 member, Herberth Geovani Argueta-Chavez, 18, was apprehended after illegally entering the U.S. with a group suspected to be part of the caravan that headed for the border last spring. He posed as an unaccompanied minor before police discovered his identity as an adult gang member.

(Read more from “Border Patrol Arrests MS-13 Member Who Traveled with Caravan” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Real-World Consequences of Submitting to the Transgender Zeitgeist

. . .As it turns out, there are indeed public-policy consequences to the question of transgender pronouns. Those public-policy questions all revolve around a central issue: Can subjective perception trump objective observation? If the answer is yes, tyranny of the individual becomes the order of the day. We all must bow before the subjective wants, needs, and desires of people who require special protection from life’s realities. We must reeducate generations of people to ignore science in favor of feelings. We must strong-arm individuals into abandoning central planks of their morality in the name of sensitivity. . .

Meanwhile, Twitter announced this week that it would seek to ban those who “misgender” or “deadname” transgender people. In other words, if you note that Chelsea Manning or Caitlyn Jenner is a man, or if you use the names “Bradley” or “Bruce” with regard to the aforementioned transgender people, Twitter could ban you for “repeated and/or non-consensual slurs.” So you will abide by subjective self-definition, or you will be censored. Twitter recently banned a leftist feminist for merely noting that sex is biological and that men cannot become women.

It doesn’t stop there. As Walt Heyer of The Federalist reports, a Texas divorce case now pits a mother who dresses her six-year-old male child, James, as a girl and calls him “Luna” against James’s father, whom she is accusing of child abuse for refusing to treat James as a girl. Heyer reports, “She is also seeking to require him to pay for the child’s visits to a transgender-affirming therapist and transgender medical alterations, which may include hormonal sterilization starting at age eight.” James, as it turns out, prefers being called James and being treated as a boy by his father. That’s not stopping Mom. Refusing to abide by the judgment of a six-year-old — or in this case, a six-year-old’s mom — could mean losing your child in a world where we treat sex as malleable.

There are real-world consequences to the deliberate rewriting of basic biology, and the substitution of subjectivity for objectivity. It means rewriting business operation, school curricula, medical treatment standards, censorship rules, and even parenting. Sympathy for those who suffer from gender dysphoria is obviously proper — no one wants transgender people harmed or targeted. But sympathy for a mental disorder should not trump either objective reality or competing priorities based on those objective realities. “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is not a story about the wonderful sensitivity of a population educated on the subjective desires of a ruler ensconced in sartorial self-definition. Falsehood crumbles in the light of day, no matter how sympathetic we are to those who wish to perpetuate it — unless force becomes the order of the day. (Read more from “The Real-World Consequences of Submitting to the Transgender Zeitgeist” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The American Taxpayer Is Always the Forgotten Man — Especially in the Immigration Fight

The president will never have as much leverage or a better impetus for a budget fight than he does now. Will he finally demand action and use his veto for leverage?

On December 8, the government will face its final budget deadline with Republicans in control of the trifecta of government. A budget, at its core, is an expression of our values. There is no greater value more relevant to this budget deadline than protecting the taxpayers from the high cost of illegal aliens invading our border, draining our schools and communities, and flooding us with the most deadly drugs and gangs that help fund international terrorism. It’s high time for Trump to finally take his case to the American people in dramatic fashion and threaten to veto any bill that fails to address the border crisis, not just from the standpoint of funding the border wall, but also ending the invasion permanently.

In her epic book on the Great Depression, “The Forgotten Man,” Amity Shlaes explains the progressive philosophy of using someone else’s money to make yourself feel good about another person’s plight using the following analogy from William Graham Sumner, the great 19th century Yale philosopher:

As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X or, in the better case, what A, B and C shall do for X. As for A and B, who get a law to make themselves do for X what they are willing to do for him, we have nothing to say except that they might better have done it without any law, but what I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man.

Shlaes applied this to government-sanctioned redistribution of wealth from one American to another by elite politicians who don’t use their money but other people’s money. Now, extrapolate the concept of the forgotten man to immigration and border policy, where politicians and judges are redistributing wealth to impoverished and often socially troubled people coming in by the millions from Central America without any regard for the taxpayer. And in this case, the laws say the exact opposite – whether they are our border laws, criminal alien statutes, or public charge protections.

We are subjected to endless debate over the border, judges, the purpose and nature of these migrants, etc. But who is talking about the American communities holding the bag of the crushing costs on their schools, welfare system, public services, and safety?

The Department of Health and Human Services just sent Congress a report showing how the virtue-signaling mission to “reunite” invading families who self-separate and break our laws cost taxpayers $80 million. We now know a number of them weren’t even real families. According to the Washington Times, HHS paid over $1.4 billion last year to care for nearly 41,000 Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) in its facilities, who stayed 41 days on average, costing taxpayers about $670 per day for each child.

We also know that these people aren’t fleeing violence. The homicide rate has been dropping in Honduras, the origin of this caravan, for a decade, even as the migration has surged. Honduras’ annual murder rate dropped by 26 percent in just one year preceeding this surge, from 5,150 in 2016 to 3,791 in 2017. And fleeing generic violence is not grounds for asylum anyway.

These people are all coming for economic reasons, as admitted by the now infamous mother depicted with her kid when the border agents were deploying tear gas. As such, even if we weed out the 600 known criminals and the countless others who are undocumented drug traffickers, why should the American people be on the hook for economic migration that will cost us billions? Yet it is being reported that despite Trump’s tough talk, the Department of Homeland Security is still processing 60 claims from the caravan per day. Why is it moral for the American people to shoulder this burden at all, when there is no asylum-qualifying persecution? And what about the persecution of the American people (as well as immigrants) by the gangs and drugs being brought in by some of these migrants?

Let’s not forget that our entire immigration system has become one giant government-sanctioned charity system with other people’s money. Less than seven percent of our immigrants come in based on any skill. Between chain migration, the diversity lottery, sundry quasi-amnesty programs, parole, refugees, and asylum, we already have numerous programs that don’t take into account the economic interests of taxpayers. It is perfectly fine for politicians to take their own money and open up missions in Central America to deal with the subpar social conditions. It’s quite another thing to do so on the backs of the American taxpayer. As Sumner said of the Forgotten Man, “He is the man who never is thought of. He is the victim of the reformer, social speculator and philanthropist.”

Under current law, deeply rooted in our social compact since colonial times, immigration must never be a charge on the taxpayers. Yet not only are we disregarding the law for legal immigrants, we are now disregarding it for blatantly illegal ones.

The Migration Policy Institute recently bemoaned the fact that a leaked draft of a proposal from the Trump administration to enforce our public charge laws would affect 47.2 percent of immigrants, including 58.4 percent of Hispanic citizens. But that is a direct admission that our immigration system is not working as it should, since so many immigrants have become a public charge to begin with?

Meanwhile, they are now using kids as human shields to break our laws. A classic case of A and B not only abusing C to help X, but actually harming X in the long run. It is so obvious to the cartels that we will just accept with open arms anyone who comes with a kid that they are now charging half price for those coming with kids, according to the Washington Post, because it makes the job easier. This is all the result of virtue-signaling over releasing family units:

As Judge Andrew Hanen warned in 2013 when Obama began dismantling our sovereignty, the promise of amnesty and catch-and-release for teenagers and family units “successfully complet[ed] the mission of the criminal conspiracy” of drug smugglers to smuggle people over the border on behalf of parents “at significant expense” to taxpayers, resulting in the “absurd and illogical” outcome of helping “fund the illegal drug cartels which are a very real danger for both citizens of this country and Mexico.”

Perforce, this is no longer a border security problem, but a self-destructive lawfare problem that is encouraging evil behavior.

Which brings us back to the budget bill and Trump’s opportunity. The problem we have now, as I’ve mentioned before, is not so much a border resource problem as a judicial problem. That’s why it is of more immediate importance for Trump to demand asylum clarity and judicial reform, cutting off magnets, and ending sanctuary cities in the bill than to demand the border wall. We need to stop the self-destruction of our lawless judiciary, which invites the illegals to climb over the fence and surrender themselves.

President Trump should give a televised address laying out the problem and demonstrating his power to close all immigration at our border, opting to route any “asylum” claims to a safe and stable environment in our Mexican consulates. Then he should give a speech before Congress and lay out a series of demands that are owed to the forgotten American people, from ending the asylum loophole and sanctuary cities to cutting off magnets, identity theft, and remittances. Trump should then commence a massive Spanish-language media campaign in Central America and Mexico announcing that nobody can ever come to our border to request status and that anyone caught challenging our border will be barred indefinitely from coming again. It’s all about magnets, incentives, and deterrents.

Then he should stare down Congress and challenge them on behalf of American taxpayers as Reagan did in 1985: “I have my veto pen drawn and ready for any tax increase that Congress might even think of sending up. And I have only one thing to say to the tax increasers. Go ahead — make my day.” This border tax on the American people costs over $100 billion a year, not to mention the cost to our security and the toll from the drug crisis. Trump might not have all the votes up front, but he does have a veto pen and a bully pulpit larger than anyone in this country. (For more from the author of “The American Taxpayer Is Always the Forgotten Man — Especially in the Immigration Fight” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Kentucky Man Who Shot Intruder Won’t Face Charges Due to State Castle Doctrine

A Kentucky man who shot and killed a home intruder this week will not face charges, police say.

The shooting happened early Tuesday morning. Police received a call about a burglary in process with shots fired around 1:30 a.m. When officers arrived at the scene, they found a man lying on the ground outside the home with a gunshot wound to the chest, River City News reports.

The wounded man was identified as 43-year-old Joshua Kersey. He was transported to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, where he died of his wounds. Police said that Kersey was armed with guns.

Kersey and two accomplices entered the home of 54-year-old Floyd Gillie Sr. armed, dressed in dark clothing, and wearing ski masks. They demanded to know the whereabouts of a person who hasn’t lived at the residence for years and threatened Gillie and his wife with their firearms.

Hearing the invasion, Gillie’s son Floyd Gillie Jr., 24, retrieved a handgun from an upstairs bedroom and shot Kersey as the intruders advanced towards his bedroom. All three suspects fled the house, but Kersey collapsed outside. Police are searching for the two other suspects.

Kenton County Commonwealth’s Attorney Rob Sanders said Gillie Jr. will not face charges, citing Kentucky’s “Castle Law Doctrine.”

“Mr. Gillie was justifiably in fear for his safety and the safety of his parents,” Sanders said. “So he was entitled to use deadly force in defense of their home.”

“This wasn’t a close call, it was clearly justified,” he added.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., tweeted the story, saying home invaders “should think twice.”

(For more from the author of “Kentucky Man Who Shot Intruder Won’t Face Charges Due to State Castle Doctrine” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ex-Police Chief Gets Three Years in Prison for Framing Black Men

A former Florida police chief who admitted to framing black men for crimes they did not commit was sentenced to three years in prison on Tuesday.

A federal judge in Miami imposed the sentence on ex-Biscayne Park police chief Raimundo Atesiano, who pleaded guilty earlier this year to directing his police officers to frame innocent black men for a series of unsolved burglaries.

He admitted he wanted to appease community leaders and polish the department’s property crimes records.

“When I took the job, I was not prepared,” the 54-year-old man told the judge on Tuesday, the Miami Herald reported. “I made some very, very bad decisions.”

Atesiano, who faced a maximum 10-year sentence, pleaded guilty in September to a conspiracy charge of depriving the three suspects of their civil rights because he and the officers charged them without a legal basis. (Read more from “Ex-Police Chief Gets Three Years in Prison for Framing Black Men” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WOW: Money Raised After Synagogue Shooting Went to an Islamic Center With Terror Ties

In late October, Robert Gregory Bowers, a vicious anti-Semite, walked into the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh and shot and killed 11 people. Several people were injured, four of which were police officers. It was tragic—but of course, everyone blamed President Trump for reasons only morons understand. There were protests when he visited the site. Everyone was creating controversy when there needed to be none. But now, we have another controversy that could be brewing that isn’t related to Trump. It centers on anti-Semite Linda Sarsour. The anti-Israel activist seems to have been exposed for cheating the Tree of Life synagogue from money fundraised after the tragic shooting.

Now, some money was given to Tree of Life, around $10,000, but that was part of an effort to repair Jewish cemetaries that were vandalized. Since the shooting, around $240,000 were raised, but it appears little, if any, has been sent to Tree of Life. Of that $240,000-figure, $155,000 went to the the Islamic Center of Pittsburgh.

Hen Mazzig of The Jerusalem Post initially said that $400,000 was raised for Tree of Life, but then offered a correction, noting that $160,000 was raised by Sarsour as part of an effort to fix Jewish cemeteries and $240,000 was raised after the shooting. The corrected tweet is in the thread above. (Read more from “Wow: Money Raised After Pittsburgh Shooting Went to an Islamic Center With Terror Ties” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

But the Children: Hispanic Babies Murdered in Abortion Far Outnumber Those Tear-Gassed in Migrant Caravan

Since border patrol agents fired the first can of tear gas onto the Central American migrant caravan at the Southern border, leftists have been howling about … “the children.” . . .

HuffPo even quoted several prominent doctors who all explained how tear gas could have long-lasting effects on migrant children for years to come. This came from the same publication that frequently claims the reversal of Roe v. Wade would send the United States into a dystopian apocalypse unlike anything seen in Hulu’s “The Handmaid’s Tale.” . . .

In contrast to the relatively few Hispanic children that were tear-gassed at the Southern border, in the United States, more than 72,0576 Hispanic children died in 2015 at the hands of abortion, according to CNS News. Here’s what the report said;

The number of Hispanic babies aborted in 2015 in the 31 states and the District of Columbia that report their abortion numbers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (72,056) outnumbered the migrants estimated to be in the current caravan from Central America (approximately 10,000) by about seven to one, according to new abortion data published by the CDC and estimates of the number in the caravan published by the New York Times and the Washington Post.

. . .

As noted by LifeNews, the “abortion industry has been known to target minority moms and their unborn babies as well.” A recent study found that “79% of Planned Parenthood surgical abortion facilities are within walking distance of black and Hispanic neighborhoods.” Black Americans make up 12% of the population; Hispanics 16%. Both minorities are disproportionately represented in the number of abortions. (Read more from “But the Children: Hispanic Babies Murdered in Abortion Far Outnumber Those Tear-Gassed in Migrant Caravan” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

State Department Continues Its Cruel War on Adoption Agencies

Americans are observing National Adoption Month in November, continuing a tradition that first began in 1995. “We celebrate the life-changing act of adoption,” President Trump said in this year’s official declaration. “[W]e must continue to assist families who are willing to adopt children in need of a permanent home.”

Sadly, it seems not everyone in the Trump administration got the memo. Just one day earlier, a federal judge in Tacoma, Washington, granted a preliminary injunction requested by three adoption agencies against the U.S. Department of State. In a clear rebuke of bureaucratic overreach, Judge Ronald Leighton overturned the State Department’s “arbitrary and capricious” action, which had forced the three agencies to suspend their adoption programs.

The case, Faith International Adoptions v. Pompeo, is just one salvo in an ongoing conflict between the State Department and adoption organizations. Two years ago, the State Department’s Office of Children’s Issues proposed onerous new regulations governing overseas adoption. Adoption advocates mobilized for a fight, but their real break came with the election of President Trump, whose deregulation agenda killed the plan. The State Department soon regrouped. Earlier this year, it began quietly implementing many of its desired regulations not through direct rule-making, but by hijacking the process by which agencies are accredited.

“[The State Department] had attempted to pass regulations which would have eliminated up to three-fourths of adoption agencies,” says John Meske, executive director of Faith International Adoptions, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. “When that failed, they decided to use the accreditation process instead, and get rid of agencies that way.” . . .

The suit’s three plaintiffs—Faith International Adoptions, Amazing Grace Adoptions, and Adopt Abroad, Inc.—lost their accreditation to perform adoptions under the Hague Adoption Convention this spring. This occurred not due to alleged agency misconduct, but to a sudden change in the way the State Department interpreted its own regulations. (Read more from “State Department Continues Its Cruel War on Adoption Agencies” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.