Obama Campaign Manager Drops Bombshell on 2020 Bernie Run

Appearing on the Wednesday episode of ABC’s “Powerhouse Politics” podcast, former deputy chief of staff and 2012 campaign manager for President Obama, Jim Messina, stated that he doesn’t believe Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) can beat Trump in 2020.

Messina first noted that Sanders would likely be one of the “final two or three candidates” in the Democratic primaries due in part to his team, which, “over the last four years, in delegate meeting after delegate meeting, and DNC meeting after DNC meeting … got the rules changed in a way that really, really helps [Sanders].” . . .

He then pointed out, however, that “61% of Democrats say the most important issue in the Democratic primary for president is who can beat Donald Trump.” This, according to Messina, is a point of contrast between the politicians and the average Democratic voter, who simply wants to know who can best win the 2020 election. . .

This prompted [the host] Karl to ask: “Can Bernie Sanders beat Donald Trump?”

Messina swiftly replied: “No.” (Read more from “Obama Campaign Manager Drops Bombshell on 2020 Bernie Run” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

People Are Freaking out Because Barr Said the Mueller Report Was Done for Him. He’s Right

During his Thursday morning press conference once again summarizing the findings of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, when asked by a reporter why Mueller himself was not present, Attorney General William Barr explained that he wasn’t there because the report was written for the AG.

“It’s not [his report], it’s a report he did for me as the attorney general; he is required by the regulation to provide me with a confidential report,” Barr said. “I’m here to discuss my response to the report and my decision, entirely discretionary, to make it public.”

That response appeared to ruffle a few feathers:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz claimed that the report was really put together “for the American people.”

“So much for the idea of an independent Special Counsel,” lamented an MSNBC contributor.

Podcast host Fernand Amandi called it “ASTONISHING. UNAPOLOGETIC. AUTHORITARIANISM.”

Okay, let’s talk about the facts here.

Under the federal regulations that allow for Robert Mueller’s job as a special prosecutor to even exist, Barr made a clear statement of fact when he said that the report was done for him as the attorney general.

“At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel,” the regulation states.

Furthermore, the regulations also state that the AG will notify Congress after the investigation’s conclusion, but not that he has to release any portion whatsoever of that confidential report to the public or even to Congress.

Sure, anti-Trump America may have bet the organic, Green New Deal-compliant farm on the outcome of this investigation and the content of the report, but rules are rules, folks.

Also, it’s critical to understand that we have a special counsel, not an independent counsel. We used to have an independent counsel, and the statute that created that job led to one of the more controversial Supreme Court opinions of the last couple of decades (and one of Justice Scalia’s finest dissents).

In fact, the consensus that the old structure of the independent counsel’s job was so much of an unconstitutional chimera, that it was allowed to quietly lapse in 1999 and was replaced with the regulatory investigation structure.

And under that mechanism, the special counsel reports to the attorney general who is picked by a president and confirmed on advice and consent of the Senate.

To borrow a quote from the Attorney General’s statement, “That’s the bottom line.” (For more from the author of “People Are Freaking out Because Barr Said the Mueller Report Was Done for Him. He’s Right” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democratic Governor Vetoes Anti-Infanticide Legislation, Offers Misleading Excuses

North Carolina’s Democratic Governor Roy Cooper vetoed a state-level anti-infanticide bill Thursday morning.

Senate Bill 359 was passed out of the North Carolina House of Representatives and sent to Cooper earlier this week. Like similar federal legislation that is currently the subject of a discharge petition in the House of Representatives, it is titled the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.”

The North Carolina legislation would have required that children who survive botched abortion attempts be given the same degree of lifesaving medical care “as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.” Failure to do so would have been classified as a felony punishable with a fine of up to $250,000.

“Laws already protect newborn babies and this bill is an unnecessary interference between doctors and their patients,” reads a statement from Cooper’s office. “This needless legislation would criminalize doctors and other healthcare providers for a practice that simply does not exist.”

In reality, current federal law passed in 2002 declares that abortion survivors are legal persons, but impose no legal penalties for medical professionals who willfully deny them lifesaving care after the fact. Alexandra DeSanctis has more details on that at National Review.

“The day before Good Friday, Governor Cooper has chosen to stand with infanticide and extremist groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL over life,” reads a statement from North Carolina Republican Communications Director Jeff Hauser. “It is grotesque to think that Cooper believes providing care to infants born alive during an abortion procedure is ‘an unnecessary interference between doctors and their patients.’”

And contrary to the fear-mongering talking points about the bill’s supposed affects on abortion access, it would have imposed no restrictions on abortion procedures or time limits before a child is born. It literally only applied to newborns outside the womb.

“Caring for a living, breathing, newborn infant is too restrictive for Governor Cooper’s radical abortion agenda,” the legislation’s sponsors said in a press release. “We thought Democrats would agree that children born alive should be separate from the abortion debate, but it’s clear that they want the ‘right to choose’ to even extend past birth. This is a sad day for North Carolina.”

The measure passed by a vote of 65-46 in the state house and by a vote of 28-19 in the senate.

While many of Cooper’s vetoes have been overridden by the GOP-controlled legislature, this is the first he’s issued since Republicans lost a veto-proof supermajority in November. And while a handful of Democrats voted in favor of the legislation, it remains unclear whether pro-lifers will have enough bipartisan support to override the veto. (For more from the author of “Democratic Governor Vetoes Anti-Infanticide Legislation, Offers Misleading Excuses” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Washington Braces for Release of the Mueller Report

By Breitbart. Washington is bracing for the release of the Mueller Special Counsel report Thursday, with Republicans and Democrats posturing for what happens next.

The White House is planning to release a 35-page counter-report, according to Politico‘s Darren Samuelsohn. According to Samuelson, President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani texted him at 2:54 a.m. that the counter-report was “now at 34 or 35” pages. “The more concise the better. 400 pages is a novel.”

Some sources who did not want to speak on the record say they expect the president will not have much to fear, despite the report being nearly 400 pages long. Those who know Special Counsel Robert Mueller say that he is thorough and exhaustive and will likely detail all his investigative steps, and that some of it will be already public information, such as parts of previous sentencing memos stemming from earlier indictments.

Nor do they expect anything particularly explosive to come from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s reasoning on why he did not make a decision on whether the president obstructed justice. There was allegedly disagreement by at least one member on whether to exonerate the president of obstruction, leading Mueller to not take a decision either way.

In addition, Attorney General William Barr has suggested it would be clear from the report why he decided to clear the president of obstruction, based on Mueller’s findings, and has already agreed to testify after the report comes out about his decision. (Read more from “Washington Braces for Release of the Mueller Report” HERE)

_________________________________________________________

Report: Mueller Will Not Attend Barr Press Conference On Russia Probe Findings

By Townhall. Attorney General William Barr is scheduled to hold a joint press conference with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein before the full Mueller report is released on Thursday. The conference will take place at 9:30 a.m. EST.

According to The Hill, Special Counsel Robert Mueller will not be attending the press conference. In fact, no one from Mueller’s office will be attending the joint press conference, although they have not said why.

A Democratic aide told The Hill Barr refuses to send the report to Congress until after the press conference takes place. (Read more from “Report: Mueller Will Not Attend Barr Press Conference on Russia Probe Findings” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

AOC Touts a Green New Deal Victory in a Delusional New Video

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has made a name for herself for a number of reasons, but one of the biggest is for her “Green New Deal” proposal. She partnered with The Intercept to create a video showing what America would look like in 10 years if the Green New Deal is adopted. And, naturally, AOC was the hero in the video.

“It’s often said you can’t be what you can’t see. I think there was something similar with the Green New Deal. We knew that we need to save the planet and that we had all the technology to do it, but people were scared,” Ocasio-Cortez saids in the narration. “They said it was too big, too fast, not practical. I think that’s because they just couldn’t picture it yet.”

The narrative AOC drives home: the fossil fuel industry, large corporations and politicians are to blame for problem of climate change. She suggests that companies, like Exxon, knew about the fossil fuel epidemic but chose to get rich over doing what was best for the planet. . .

Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal is expected to cost $93 trillion dollars or $65,000 per household. And, naturally, she never discusses what these types of policies will cost, probably because it’s better to be ignorant and “worry about it later” than deal with it head on.

What about people who work in logging or coal mining? There are areas of the nation that rely on those very industries to thrive. I live in a major logging area, where working for the mill is a great blue collar, highly respected job. It’s tough work but people are willing to do it. Those in my area rely on the logs to keep their homes warm during winter, to cut down on the amount they spend on electricity.

(Read more from “AOC Touts a Green New Deal Victory in a Delusional New Video” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

DOJ: Nearly 60K Illegal Aliens, Legal Immigrants in Federal Prison

There are nearly 60,000 illegal aliens, legal immigrants, or suspected foreign-born inmates in the federal prison system, a report by the Department of Justice (DOJ) reveals.

In total, there are about 59,945 illegal aliens, legal immigrants, or suspected foreign-born inmates in federal custody by the Bureau of Prisons and United States Marshals Service, the DOJ report notes, as of 2018.

Of that total, about 41,138 were confirmed illegal aliens who have either been ordered deported from the U.S. once they are released from federal custody or who are under adjudication proceedings to be deported. Illegal aliens make up about 68 percent of the total foreign-born federal prison population.

There are 16,426 suspected foreign-born federal inmates who are under investigation to determine their immigration status, while there are nearly 1,300 legal immigrants in the federal prison system who have ongoing deportation proceedings, as of 2018. Legal immigrants account for about two percent of the total foreign-born federal prison population. . .

The federal foreign-born inmate population includes illegal aliens like MS-13 gang member Bryan Galicia Barillas, who was sentenced to 22 years in federal prison recently after he was involved with the killing of an innocent mother of three in Chelsea, Massachusetts. Barillas also pleaded guilty to his involvement in the 2014 stabbing murder of an individual in Chelsea, as well as an attempted stabbing and conspiracy to murder in 2015. (Read more from “DOJ: Nearly 60K Illegal Aliens, Legal Immigrants in Federal Prison” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Kim Jong Un Celebrates Testing of New Weapons

By The Blaze. North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un praised his administration after reports of a successful test firing of a “new tactical guided” weapons system.

Kim called the development of the weapon “an event of very weighty significance,” according to the Korean Central News Agency.

The KCNA reported that Un supervised the firing of the weapon.

“After watching the power of the new-type tactical guided weapon, [Kim] pointed out that our national defense scientists and workers in the field of the munitions industry performed another great work in increasing the country’s defense capabilities,” they said.

President Donald Trump has had two meetings with the North Korean leader but neither have produced a substantive agreement on the goal of “denuclearization” of the regime. (Read more from “Kim Jong Un Celebrates Testing of New Weapons” HERE)

______________________________________________

North Korean Leader Kim Supervises ‘New-Type Tactical Guided Weapon’ Test

By The Hill. “Saying that the completion of the development of the weapon system serves as an event of very weighty significance in increasing the combat power of the People’s Army, [Kim] noted that it is a very good thing that the field of national defense science has waged a dynamic struggle for attaining core research goals,” KCNA said, according to South Korean news agency Yonhap. . .

KCNA did not specify whether Wednesday’s test was of a missile, but it did not immediately appear to violate the moratorium, much like a North Korean test of an “ultramodern tactical weapon” in November.

The February summit in Hanoi, Vietnam, ended without an agreement between the two leaders amid an impasse over how much sanctions relief the United States was willing to give and how much North Korea was willing to give up to get it. . .

Last week, Kim said he would be open to a third summit with Trump, but gave the United States until the end of the year to be more flexible in negotiations. (Read more from “North Korean Leader Kim Supervises ‘New-Type Tactical Guided Weapon’ Test” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Shocking Video: Qatari Sociologist Films ‘How Islam Teaches You to Beat Your Wife’

Qatari sociologist Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khazra purportedly created a video demonstrating “how to beat one’s wife” in accordance with Islam, and posted it to YouTube on March 29. Thanks to an English translation of excerpts by The Middle East Media Research Institute, Al-Khazra’s teachings remain available for all to see (as of this writing), as they have been for weeks. . .

In the clips provided by MEMRI on April 3, Al-Khazra explains to viewers that it is not necessary for a man to beat his wife, but if he does, “he gives her a disciplinary beating out of love,” reiterating, “He loves her.”

“Now, let’s see how Islam teaches how to beat your wife,” the instructor says, and uses a young boy posing as “the wife” in his tutorial for proper technique.

“How should a husband beat his wife?” Al-Khazra asks, rhetorically. “First, he must ‘admonish her’ — in other words, he should advise her. Then, he should refrain from sharing a bed with her. If all of this doesn’t help, we start the beating as a last resort.” . . .

Then comes the physical part. Al-Khazra continues to berate his volunteer while showing the acceptable level of wife-beating by swatting the boy’s arms. “See how the beating is done?” he asks his audience, telling them, “The beating is light, brothers.”

(Read more from “Shocking Video: Qatari Sociologist Films ‘How Islam Teaches You to Beat Your Wife'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Petulant Espionage: An LGBT Right?

Around this time 42 years ago, I was in the home stretch of Army basic training. There had been weeks of schizophrenic weather in Missouri – wintry blasts alternating with warm fronts and storms. After an adolescence spent in the tropics and Alaska, I found heartland thunderstorms pretty scary.

But now the clime had turned glorious. It seemed that the omnipotent drill sergeants had ordered perfect weather for a triumphant graduation. The runs and push-ups that tormented us earlier that spring became faintly pleasant. I looked forward to rushing out of the barracks in the morning and feeling the gentle Ozark breeze in my face.

And then it was over. Hurried goodbyes to buddies, awkward congratulations from drill sergeants, and then we flew or bused to our Army schools to learn our jobs. Mine was the Military Police School in steamy Ft. McClellan, Alabama. When I got there, I only knew one guy from my basic training. We were quickly separated and I rarely saw him after that.

MP school went by quickly that summer. Some of it was self-paced material, and I graduated while it was still hot. But departing from MP school wasn’t as efficient as departure from basic training. I got stuck there after graduation, “painting rocks” as the cliche goes.

I’m not sure I ever actually painted a rock, but I mowed a lot of grass, ran a lot of errands, hid out, and provided some foul-tempered assistance to long lines of newly arrived privates who were picking up laundry and finding their bunks.

My first actual MP duty station was the Panama Canal Zone which, in those days, required a Secret security clearance. That’s the middle level of clearance, above a Confidential but below a Top Secret. They’d had about eight months to investigate my background since I filled out the application, but they weren’t finished.

The Security Clearance Application

There were questions about marijuana, seditious in-laws, and the big one: “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party USA or any other organization that seeks or advocates the overthrow of the United States government by violence or other unlawful means?” No.

Then came the question whether I had ever belonged to an organization on the Attorney General’s list of subversive organizations? Well, kind of. The Attorney General had abolished that list a few years earlier, but they were still asking us the question.

I was briefly a teenage member of the Industrial Workers of the World, which made the list. It was frequently smeared as a Communist union, and it was indisputably radical, but purists would observe that it was a bitter rival of Communists rather than an ally.

As you can imagine, that required extra sheets on the application for my security clearance, explaining the arcane doctrine of classical anarchists to unseen clerks who weren’t likely interested. Their eyes probably glazed over as quickly as my mom’s.

She was concerned about my extremism years earlier, but an uncle reassured her with the Churchill quote about young radicals and old conservatives. Apparently the Army was reassured as well, and in due time I got my security clearance “orders” and flew out to my Canal Zone duty.

Years later, when I became an interrogator, I had to start all over again and give an account of my life on a new clearance application. It was a nuisance, but I was glad somebody was minding the store, glad we were methodically checking people out before entrusting secrets to them.

But times have changed. You would expect the system to tighten up after the 9-11 terrorism. Guidelines issued by former President Barack Obama, though, now allow dual citizens – people who have two national loyalties – to obtain the highest security clearances. They’re not even required to surrender their foreign passports first. People with serious tax delinquencies are not banned from the highest security clearances, as long as they enter into a payment plan. And most astonishing of all, bad lie detector results no longer prevent a person from getting a high security clearance.

Edward Snowden

The system was already limping before President Obama’s order. Edward Snowden used his security clearance and his job with a government contractor to copy between 50,000 and 200,000 National Security Agency documents, and 900,000 Department of Defense files, and distribute his selections to journalists for publication.

Russian and Chinese intelligence services were able to use this document windfall as a sort of Rosetta Stone to break the codes of the U.S. and Great Britain, and their NATO allies. The British withdrew agents from the field as they were compromised by the Snowden disclosures. A New York Times article based on Snowden documents exposed and doomed intelligence operations against al-Qaeda.

Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before Congress in 2014 that Snowden’s stolen documents disclosed “our military capabilities, operations, tactics, techniques and procedures.” Like British double agent Kim Philby before him, Snowden has taken up residence in Moscow.

James Cartwright

President Obama sent mixed signals about this kind of behavior. He denounced Snowden, but he pardoned Gen. James Cartwright, former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, two weeks before he was to be sentenced for lying to investigators about leaking details of our attempts to prevent the Iranians from developing an atomic bomb. How typical was Cartwright of the politicized careerists who survived the Obama military purge a decade ago? We’ll probably never know.

Bradley “Chelsea” Manning

Over the objections of Defense Secretary Ash Carter, Obama commuted the sentence of intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, who had served seven years of a 35-year sentence for espionage. Manning, an enlisted Army man, was convicted of 21 charges at Court Martial, and confessed to 10 others.

Manning was able to betray his country because he had a Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance. I don’t know of any higher clearance. I am astounded that he was ever considered suitable for such a clearance.

Manning was on the verge of discharge from the Army during basic training for screaming defiantly at drill sergeants. In my day, that would have been the occasion for an “attitude adjustment.” But in the politically cautious 2007 environment, Manning was carried through graduation and sent along to MOS (job) training as an intelligence analyst.

During that training, Manning sent three YouTube messages to friends describing the inside of the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility. He was reprimanded, but not dropped from the course or re-assigned to less sensitive duties. The ensuing betrayal was surprising only in its scope. He stole and distributed 251,287 U.S. diplomatic cables and 482,832 Army reports, mostly through WikiLeaks.

When Manning compounded his treason with pathology and announced he wanted to take female hormones, this became a selling point to Obamists for commuting his sentence. For the Obama staff, Manning’s homosexuality was redemptive.

LGBT Indifference to Espionage

CNN reported that Obama “came under intense pressure from LGBT groups (that have been stalwart supporters throughout his political career) to show eleventh-hour compassion towards Manning” before Trump entered office.

These are the same Obamists who claim to be aghast that Trump shows minimal deference to their politicized inside-the-beltway intelligence establishment. This is the same Obama who was outraged by WikiLeaks’ disclosures of scandalous Democratic National Committee emails.

His clemency for Manning was a slap in the face to lunch-pail intelligence officers in the field and to allies who trusted us, whose security and strategic positions were harmed by Manning’s petulant espionage. And it was a cautionary tale about Sodomites.

By that term, I do not just mean active homosexuals, but also their allies and enablers, as in the historical Biblical account of Sodom. We cannot rely on their loyalty. They are a tribe unto themselves.

I acknowledge that homosexuals have served honorably, even heroically, in our armed forces. I feel compassion for those who are struggling with same-sex attractions, and for those who may believe that identifying with their urges is a neat antidote to guilt. But some things are too important to be entrusted to people who don’t share our consensus of values, who don’t agree [with] what’s most important. Top Secret security clearances should be out of the question.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump Approval Rating in the Wake of Mueller Report Revealed in Recent Poll

President Trump’s job approval stands at 45 percent, while 51 percent of voters disapprove, according to a new Fox News Poll. And that is almost exactly where it was last month, 46-51 percent, before Special Counsel Robert Mueller completed his Russia probe March 22.

That makes sense given two-thirds of voters (65 percent) say Mueller’s investigation has not changed how they feel about Trump. One in ten (10 percent) say they feel better about the president, while nearly two in ten (17 percent) feel worse.

The Justice Department will release a redacted version of Mueller’s report Thursday. Attorney General William Barr released his summary March 24. Congressional Democrats want the full report released, as do 80 percent of voters according to a Fox News Poll conducted March 17-20.

But don’t expect the release of Mueller’s report to put the issue to rest. The poll finds 35 percent of voters think the Russia investigation proves there was no collision, while 64 percent disagree or have no opinion.

In addition, 57 percent think it is at least somewhat likely U.S. intelligence agencies broke the law when they started investigating the Trump campaign in the first place: 22 percent think it is “extremely” likely, 12 percent “very” likely, 23 percent “somewhat” likely. A third, 35 percent, think it is “not at all” likely that there were illegalities in the investigation. (Read more from “Trump Approval Rating in the Wake of Mueller Report Revealed in Recent Poll” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE