WATCH: Lawmaker Offers to Pay $100 to Anyone Who Can Help Him Dox Pro-Life Teens

Pennsylvania State Representative Brian Sims spends his free time harassing elderly women and teenagers who try and help women who are wanting to go through with an abortion. Instead of allowing these pro-life advocates to stand outside Planned Parenthood and talk with women entering the facility, Sims decided to film himself harassing and shaming them.

Even though it appears things couldn’t get any worse than when he follows an elderly woman and encourages viewers to donate a $100 to Planned Parenthood for every hour she stood out there, he turned the notch up a bit. He was despicable and decided to offer $100 to anyone who could provide the names and addresses of the three teenagers who were outside the Planned Parenthood facility.

Conservative writer Matt Walsh asked other pro-lifers to organize a giant rally at this location:

(Read more from “Lawmaker Offers to Pay $100 to Anyone Who Can Help Him Dox Pro-Life Teens” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Here Are the Messages From Anti-Trump FBI Agent That Prompted Call for New Investigation

Newly unearthed messages sent by former FBI agent Peter Strzok have prompted a call for an additional investigation into the bureau’s handling of the Russia probe, particularly the FBI’s “apparent awareness of leaks by other agencies or entities to the media.”

In a letter sent to Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Monday, Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) highlighted two newly unearthed messages from Strozk — who headed up the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails and was removed from the Russia probe after his biased messages against Donald Trump came to light. The messages raise more questions about the intelligence community’s role in leaking information about the Russia investigation. . .

They then point to a new pair of messages from Strzok which appear to relate to “the FBI’s apparent awareness of leaks by other agencies or entities to the media.” The first is a text sent by Strzok to Page in December 2016:

Think our sisters have begun leaking like mad. Scorned and worried and political, they’re kicking in to overdrive.

. . .

“These texts and emails raise a number of serious questions and concerns,” write Johnson and Grassley. “For example, who are the ‘sisters’ and what does it mean to say that the ‘sisters have [been] leaking like mad’? What are they worried about, and what are they kicking into ‘overdrive’? Which ‘agency’ is he referring to and why does Strzok believe the referenced news article highlights that ‘agency as [a] source of some of the leaks’?” (Read more from “Here Are the Messages From Anti-Trump FBI Agent That Prompted Call for New Investigation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Kamala Harris Has a Really Deep-State View of the Department of Justice

As attorney general of the United States, William Barr serves at the pleasure of Donald J. Trump and takes direction from him as president of the United States. 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., seems to have a problem with that.

On a recent MSNBC appearance, Harris told host Rachel Maddow, “The attorney general is supposed to act on behalf of the people and not act as the president’s henchman.”

Harris made the statement after Maddow asked whether or not Barr had been given direction from the White House on his current probe into what led to his agency’s Russia election investigation.

Harris also sent a letter Friday asking DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to look into whether the White House directed Barr to investigate anyone, saying, “There must be no doubt that the Department of Justice and its leadership stand apart from partisan politics, and resist improper attempts to use the power of federal law enforcement to settle personal scores.”

That talking point sounds great to Trump-haters and those looking to undermine AG Barr’s investigations. But it just doesn’t stand up to a simple understanding of the Constitution. Like it or not, President Trump is William Barr’s boss, and the attorney general serves at the president’s choice.

Executive appointees pursue the agenda of the president who nominated them. That’s what they do. They act on behalf of the people by pursuing the agenda of the guy the people elected.

And if the agenda is to find out what happened in some very shady-looking stuff at the DOJ and FBI during a previous administration, well, that job goes to the AG, folks.

It may sound like a great thing to have government officials and agencies that are completely independent from political considerations. But in the real, imperfect world that we inhabit, “independent” government is usually just fancy marketing for unaccountable government, and political considerations are what keep government actors in check.

But indeed, Americans should make sure that the people who enforce our laws “resist improper attempts to use the power of federal law enforcement to settle personal scores.”

After all, law enforcement officials could do some pretty bad stuff if they felt themselves too independent from political oversight and public backlash. They could, for example, target political candidates and their campaigns for clandestine investigation via dubious intelligence warrants based on specious political research documents. Some could even leak information about said investigations to a hungry, biased media, thereby giving fuel to their political opponents to bog them down with partisan investigations for years at a time.

And that’s the sort of thing that belongs in a corrupt banana republic or a totalitarian police state, not the United States of America. And that just happens to be the sort of thing Barr is investigating right now.

After all the high-flown language about serving the American people, law enforcement agencies and their heads have to be accountable to someone. And that someone has to be accountable to the voting public. That plus legislative oversight and legal checks from the judicial branch are how the AG remains accountable to the Constitution and the people.

Since she used to be California’s attorney general herself, Harris should be familiar with the concept.

Harris’ MSNBC appearance can be found here:

(For more from the author of “Kamala Harris Has a Really Deep-State View of the Department of Justice” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Flashback Reveals Truth About Bernie – 2020 Dem Wanted to Send Children to Soviet Union

Back in the 1980s, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., wanted to send children to the Soviet Union and other communist regimes to learn about communism and socialism.

His statement was made on “Bernie Speaks with the Community” — a local television show show that Sanders starred in back when he was mayor of Burlington, Vermont. A recent story at Politico magazine points out some other highlights of Bernie’s time as a local TV star.

Sanders served as the mayor of Burlington for eight years, from 1981-1989. And at that time, while President Ronald Reagan and other leaders of the free world were working to bring down the Iron Curtain, Bernie wanted to send regular Americans families and children behind it.

“You know what I would love to see?” he asked a group of school children. “I would like to see families — your mothers and dads and yourselves maybe — go to the Soviet Union and learn about that country, and people from there come to here.”

He continued: “If you actually had kids here who were from Nicaragua or from the Soviet Union, and they could tell you what’s going on in their own country, boy, you could learn a whole lot. And then if kids from Vermont or Burlington were in those countries, they could tell those people what was going on in their hometown.”

Perhaps those people could have told the kiddos about the hunger during food shortages in a centrally planned economy. Maybe they would have talked to children whose uncle or father had disappeared into the gulag system. Perhaps they would even have met some lucky survivors of Stalin’s mass killings or the relatives of the Jewish intellectuals he murdered. They might have traveled south and visited some Holodomor survivors.

Perhaps some of them could have gone to the People’s Republic of China instead and learned firsthand about the horrors of Chairman Mao’s “Great Leap Forward.” And, hey, since it didn’t happen until Bernie’s last year in office, they could have even witnessed the Tiananmen Square massacre firsthand!

On second thought, in all seriousness, there actually may have been a lot for those kids to learn in an exchange program, but only as long as the necessary post-traumatic therapy was included with the total cost of the program.

In case that sounds a little too out there, even for a man who honeymooned in the U.S.S.R., here’s the video to prove it. His idea for an exchange program starts at the 4:30 mark:

(For more from the author of “Flashback Reveals Truth About Bernie – 2020 Dem Wanted to Send Children to Learn About Communism” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Survey: One-Third of Guatemala’s Population Would Like to Come to the U.S.

How much is too much when it comes to illegal immigration, or even legal immigration? At what point do we finally return to the universal principle expressed by Calvin Coolidge in 1925 that “our Government owes its first duty to our own people”? Well, unless the DHS finally slams the door shut, it appears that Central America is a bottomless well waiting to be emptied out into our country, primarily through dangerous smuggling over our land border.

According to a recent survey of Guatemalans conducted by the Association for Research and Social Studies and Barometro de las Americas, 39.2 percent of Guatemalans would like to migrate, 85 percent of them to the United States. Which means that roughly 5.6 million Guatemalans would like to come here, not including the close to one million who already came here in recent years. The survey was reported in a local Guatemala City paper, Prensa Libre, and was picked up by the Daily Caller.

According to the survey, taken of 1,596 Guatemalans and published last Thursday, 58 percent of respondents said they had relatives in the United States. As the Prensa Libre article notes, family reunification and “lack of employment and poverty” are why they desire to come here. It’s self-evident that this has nothing to do with asylum and everything to do with economic reasons. Liberals and many faux conservative supporters of amnesty defend illegal immigration as a natural consequence of a “broken” legal immigration system, where it is impossible to come here legally. The problem with that assertion is that the period of illegal immigration has overlapped with the most protracted period of legal immigration expansion and has originated from the countries that have had a monopoly on our legal immigration. According to Pew, 50 percent of all immigrants since 1965 have come from Latin America, the primary source of illegal immigration. Specific to Central America, before the recent surge, “the number of immigrants from Central America) has grown 28-fold since 1970, from 118,000 to nearly 3.3 million in 2018 — six times faster than the overall immigrant population,” according to the Center for Immigration Studies. In fact, 18 percent of El Salvador’s population is already here, if you add the immigrant population in America to those remaining in their home country.

If anything, it is clear that the liberal premise is contrary to the reality – that the more we hand over the keys to immigration to a particular area, the more people will come through all available channels – both legal and illegal – to join their friends, families, and communities.

Now, in addition to legal immigrant chain migration, we are incurring illegal immigrant chain migration from Central America, whereby illegal aliens who are already here are “sponsoring” Central American teens in their families to be smuggled here by the cartels and resettled as “unaccompanied” refugees to live with families who themselves are supposed to be deported.

The bottom line is that unless the administration begins shutting off all migration requests at the border, the record numbers we are seeing every month with take years to abate. If the same percentage of people who would like to come here from Guatemala hold that view in El Salvador and Honduras, that would be roughly 10.7 million people ready to march north under the right circumstances.

Has anyone given any consideration to the cost of such a migration, much less the cultural, social, and security problems inherent with it? At a $140,000-$150,000 price-tag per migrant, using the input and methodology of the Center for Immigration Studies’ Steven Camarota to calculate the cost of illegal aliens to the American taxpayer, that would work out to be $1.5 trillion for the net fiscal cost of such a flow.

And those are just the top three countries of origin of those coming here illegally today. Migration from Nicaragua is already picking up. Is that the next shoe to drop? A number of people are coming from Cuba and Haiti in the organized caravans. Then there are numerous individuals from African countries and even the Middle East as well.

The question for the open-borders crowd is, if we have an obligation to accept any economic migrant at our border, our laws notwithstanding, shouldn’t we have a moral obligation to land boats in 100 or so countries and bring in anyone who desires to come? At least in that case, we’d cut out the cartels and smugglers and deny them the revenue to propagate evil.

Or, of course, we can preserve America as a beacon of light with responsible levels of lawful immigration that work, first and foremost, for those already here. (For more from the author of “Survey: One-Third of Guatemala’s Population Would Like to Come to the U.S.” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Why Is There Medicine?

When I was out of the country about 40 years ago, I received the sad news that an uncle had died back home. He was a lifelong forklift driver at Whirlpool in his late 40s.

There was no email, no Internet, and overseas telephone was insanely expensive back then, so I didn’t get many details. He had enjoyed his life, denied himself very little, and had a lot of abdominal fat to show for it.

From Cheeseburgers to Paradise

A couple of years later, when I asked his son about the cause of death, he replied “cheeseburgers.” In other words, he clogged his cardiac arteries with cholesterol and died of a heart attack.

Despite a lot fewer cheeseburgers, my grandmother had died suddenly of the same problem a few years earlier. She was in her own yard, in the middle of some do-it-yourself projects, about this time of year. And then she was gone.

She wasn’t the only one in my lineage who died of blocked arteries. And so when I got my own diagnosis 20 years ago and they wheeled me across a Las Vegas parking lot to Sunrise Hospital, you might have expected me to ride that gurney with a sense of doom.

But the medical science had advanced so far that my main concern was whether my car would be towed from the clinic lot before I went home the next morning. I knew I was going home after my angioplasty, the operation that would have saved my uncle and my grandma.

And it wasn’t just a slick new operation under the hood that bought me these past 20 years. It was statin drugs, paired with periodic liver function testing. And a symphony of pharmaceuticals that have tamed my high blood pressure and diabetes, without insulin injections.

I lift weights and swim laps at the YMCA now. I walk miles across town because I feel like it. In the summer, I jump off diving boards with grandkids, or swim off West Coast beaches. I hike in the woods if the insects aren’t too fierce.

And so I am unable to pile on when others denounce Big Pharma or the medical industry. I am deeply grateful to them, not just for saving my bacon, but for the sacrifices they had to make before they ever made a nickel off us.

The Making of a Greedy Lifesaver

Nobody was born a surgeon or pharmacist. They were born with two arms and two legs, and they only got 24 hours in each day, just like us. But when high school friends were patrolling the mall, the future medical professionals were home cramming for Saturday morning AP tests. When we came back to the dorm from Kirkwood Avenue, they were still bent over organic chemistry homework.

I am grateful, also, to the impersonal corporations that developed my medications. There is great legal and financial risk in pharmaceutical research and development. Most new medicines are money losers. Research and regulatory compliance are incredibly expensive, without any guarantee of a payoff in the end.

Nothing Noble About Envy

When the pharmaceutical company finally does produce a winner, it is begrudged high profits that it needs to cover all the losers, all the medicines that crashed and burned, and to finance the next promising idea. Critics suddenly materialize to denounce the company’s greed. It costs nothing to claim other people’s stuff, of course, or to claim other people’s innovation and diligence as your own “human right.”

But it also discourages further innovation and diligence. Investment and risk-taking can and will cease if we swoop in to dispossess innovators just as their efforts are about to pay off. And therefore such class warfare victimizes all of us, not just the pharmaceutical companies.

In some ways, the pharmaceutical industry is a victim of its own public successes. We don’t hear about a miraculous drug until it’s marketed on television or recommended by a physician. We rarely hear anything about the ideas that didn’t work out, unless we’re investors.

But you can be sure that investors are alert to the failures, and to the attempts to confiscate the profits that flow from the successes. Your retirement fund’s money manager would be negligent if he failed to pay attention to the companies’ profits.

Honoring the Leach Above the Ox

If that American investment dries up, who will develop medicines and medical technology in the future? Canada? We can buy medicine much cheaper there than in our own country. Why not just outsource the pharmaceutical industry, including all investment, innovation, regulatory compliance and risk-taking to Canada? That ought to make the AARP happy.

The truth, of course, is that Canada is a parasite on American investment and innovation. Most, if not all the cheap medicine that you can buy in Canada or Mexico is produced in the U.S. and would never exist if not for American investment, which in turn would not exist without American profits.

It’s annoying that foreign countries can piggyback on our pharmaceutical industry, not only on American producers but on American consumers who pay the prices that sustain the research and development, including regulatory compliance, by the American industry. But make no mistake: parasites can’t replace the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. And why would they want to?

Investment is Voluntary

If you think it’s far-fetched that U.S. pharmaceutical companies would walk away from the market, consider what’s happening in antibiotics. There’s been very little antibiotic research by the major drug companies in recent years, not because they’re discouraged by the science, but because it’s almost impossible to make money on antibiotics once you develop them.

There are 42 antibiotics in human trials now, according to Businessweek magazine, but “only four come from the largest 50 drug companies.” Yet the smaller firms are financially ill equipped to survive the regulatory approval process, which can stretch nearly 20 years into the future. We are presiding over the death of U.S. antibiotic research and development precisely when we need it most urgently.

Chickens are coming home to roost after decades of casual, promiscuous misuse of common antibiotics. Pathogens have developed resistance to entire classes of antibiotics.

The consequences are grim, according to the Centers for Disease Control. It undermines “our ability to fight infectious diseases and manage the infectious complications common in vulnerable patients undergoing chemotherapy for cancer, dialysis for renal failure, and surgery.”

We Must Harness Greed

Pharmaceutical corporations are not funded by Santa Claus. They eventually make money from consumers, if all goes well. But initial investment comes from shareholders who can pick up the phone at any time to move their money into General Motors or Budweiser. Shares for antibiotic manufacturer Melinta Therapeutics have fallen 94 percent since early 2018. Achaogen filed for bankruptcy last month.

Achaogen, you may recall, is the company that developed an antibiotic that kills deadly carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in the test tube. The company got part-way through the regulatory gauntlet. Despite its feats of scientific research, the corporation couldn’t hang on until profitability. Its assets will be auctioned off next month. Corporations are not indestructible.

I have no human right to antibiotics, or to any other pharmaceuticals, or to anybody’s involuntary medical services. But my right to freely contract for antibiotics and medical expertise has been lifesaving, as recently as last year. I am hoping for more greed, not less, in the pharmaceutical industry.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Did You Notice Anything Odd About the Washington Post’s Headline About Louis Farrakhan’s Ban From Facebook?

The Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is banned from Facebook. He’s done. Finished. And if we’re going by the rules of these social media empires, it was about time. The man has shared more than his fair share of bigoted views. He recently said that Jewish people were termites. Twitter did not suspend him, but you tweet “learn to code” to liberals—you could get yourself banned by the social media company, another example of there being two rules between liberal and conservative users. That’s a tale for another time. Farrakhan wasn’t the only one, Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos are also banned (via NBC News):

Facebook announced Thursday that it plans to ban a group of far-right media personalities, as well as Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, from its social network and Instagram.

The ban affects Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos, and other far-right figures and the conspiracy and far-right politics website Infowars.

(Read more from “Did You Notice Anything Odd About the Washington Post’s Headline About Louis Farrakhan’s Ban From Facebook?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ilhan Omar, Tlaib Attack Israel Shamelessly, Defend Palestinian Terror Attacks

Far-left Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) attacked Israel on Sunday and defended the Palestinian terrorist attacks that targeted Israel over the weekend. . .

“Terror groups Hamas and Islamic jihad in Gaza have fired over 700 rockets at Israel since Friday, killing four Israelis and wounding dozens,” The Jerusalem Post reported, adding: “Defiant Hamas and Islamic Jihad officials said on Sunday that they don’t rule out the possibility that the current round of fighting in the Gaza Strip could lead to an all-out war with Israel.” . . .

Omar and Tlaib, who are both well-documented anti-Semites, rushed to attack Israel and defended the terrorism that was being carried out against Israel.

In response to a New York Times headline that stated that Palestinian terrorists had fired hundreds of rockets into Israel, Tlaib wrote on Twitter: “When will the world stop dehumanizing our Palestinian people who just want to be free? Headlines like this & framing it in this way just feeds into the continued lack of responsibility on Israel who unjustly oppress & target Palestinian children and families. #FreePalestine”

Omar took a more aggressive stance defending the terrorists, writing: “How many more protesters must be shot, rockets must be fired, and little kids must be killed until the endless cycle of violence ends? The status quo of occupation and humanitarian crisis in Gaza is unsustainable. Only real justice can bring about security and lasting peace.”

(Read more from “Ilhan Omar, Tlaib Attack Israel Shamelessly, Defend Palestinian Terror Attacks” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

TERRIFYING: New Yorkers More Likely to Die From Late-Term Abortion Than Homicide

More babies died from abortion at 21 weeks’ gestation or over in 2015 than there were people killed by homicide in New York City, new figures reveal. . .

Data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and published by the New York Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), reveal that the number of abortions at or after 21 weeks was 1,485 while the number of homicides was 352.

CNS News observed that while there were approximately 0.96 people per day victimised by “murder and non-negligent manslaughter” in New York City in 2015, there were approximately 4.1 babies at 21 weeks’ gestational age or older who were aborted per day in the same city. . .

And these numbers are only likely to get higher, as New York recently passed some of the most extreme abortion legislation in the world, removing abortion from the penal lawand allowing it up to birth in some cases. The legislation also removes babies over 24 weeks from the state’s definition of homicide. . .

The figures come in the context of fierce debate and media controversy around late-term abortion and infanticide in the last few months. Days after New York politicians cheered the passing of the extreme abortion bill, a video went viral of a Virginia House Delegate defending proposed legislation that would allow abortions up until the moment of birth. (Read more from “TERRIFYING: New Yorkers More Likely to Die From Late-Term Abortion Than Homicide” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Times Square Billboard Owners Refuse Space for Pro-Life Event

On Saturday, May 4, Focus on the Family [held] an event it’s calling “Alive from New York,” featuring speakers, live music, and a “live 4D ultrasound of a baby in the third trimester of pregnancy and broadcast on the jumbotrons in the middle of Manhattan.” New York became a focal point of the abortion debate in January, when the state enacted a law effectively permitting abortion-on-demand up until birth, to the cheers of Democrat lawmakers and left-wing activists.

“Nearly 60 million babies have been aborted since 1973,” the group explained. “In fact, just three miles from where we’ll be gathering on May 4th, sits Planned Parenthood’s largest clinic. Over 11,000 babies are aborted there each year, an unfathomable fact for anyone who loves and cherishes life. So, our goal is to fill Times Square with joy-filled people who are committed to protecting pre-born life.”

On Wednesday, Focus on the Family president Jim Daly announced that three of the companies who own Times Square billboards – Silvercast, Clear Channel Outdoor, and ABC Supersign – have refused to lease space for the pro-life event.

“In many ways, this blockade only confirms what we’ve long known,” Daly wrote. “There are many people who don’t want the world to see these images of preborn life, because the abortion industry is predicated on a lie – namely that a baby is just a blob of tissue inside the womb.” . . .

Pro-lifers support and abortion activists oppose ultrasound requirements for their ability to convey the humanity of preborn babies and dissuade women from abortion. Pro-life groups Save the Storks says that four out of five pregnant women who see one of their free ultrasounds ultimately choose life. (Read more from “Times Square Billboard Owners Refuse Space for Pro-Life Event” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE