Federal Judge Took Democrats’ Russia Collusion Lawsuit Against the Trump Campaign to the Woodshed

/0 Comments/in , /by

. . .Back to the lawsuit, the judge was quite clear, there was no wrongdoing on behalf of the Trump campaign since they didn’t break any laws concerning obtaining the information from the Wikileaks dump. Those emails from John Podesta and the Clinton campaign aired out a lot of dirty laundry and made things quite awkward on the eve of their 2016 convention in Philadelphia. In short, the judge, a Clinton appointee, took a hatchet to the Democrats’ case, saying it was divorced from the facts (via Fox News):

A federal judge in frank terms Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) against key members of the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over hacked DNC documents, saying they “did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place” and therefore bore no legal liability for disseminating the information.

The ruling came as Democrats increasingly have sought to tie the Trump team to illegal activity in Russia, in spite of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings that the campaign in fact refused multiple offers by Russians to involve them in hacking and disinformation efforts.

The DNC asserted in court filings that the Trump team’s meetings “with persons connected to the Russian government during the time that the Russian GRU agents were stealing the DNC’s information” were “circumstantial evidence” that they were conspiring with the Russians to “steal and disseminate the DNC’s materials.”

(Read more from “Federal Judge Took Democrats’ Russia Collusion Lawsuit Against the Trump Campaign to the Woodshed” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

U.S. Soccer Releases ‘Fact Sheet’ Showing Women’s Team Actually Lost Millions yet Was Still Paid More Than Men’s Team

/0 Comments/in , /by

The President of the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) released a “fact sheet” Monday night alleging that, contrary to claims made as part of a lawsuit, the U.S. Women’s National Team (USWNT) actually lost the federation millions of dollars. Despite this, the president claimed, women soccer players still out-earned their male counterparts. . .

Now USSF President Carlos Cordeiro is pushing back. He wrote an open letter explaining that he directed U.S. Soccer staff to conduct “an extensive analysis of the pa st 10 years of U.S. Soccer’s financials.” He said the analysis was “reviewed by an independent accounting firm.” The analysis showed that the women’s team was paid more than the men’s team.

The fact sheet includes bulleted information about the different pay structures for the men’s and women’s teams. USSF claimed that it paid “women $34.1 million in salaries and game bonuses and we paid our men $26.4 million — not counting the significant additional value of various benefits that our women’s players receive but which our men do not.”

For example, the women’s team has a guaranteed salary thanks to their collective bargaining agreement with USSF. They receive a base salary of $100,000 each year and an additional salary of $67,500 to $72,500 for playing in the National Women’s Soccer League. Male soccer players do not have such an agreement.

That agreement means women soccer players earn a guaranteed salary of $167,500 to $172,500 each year. On top of that, they are paid bonuses. The men’s team only earns bonuses. Yes, those bonuses can be larger, but that’s because they don’t have the guaranteed base salary. The women’s team, according to USSF, also receives benefits including a 401(k) plan and health insurance, as well as maternity leave and injury protection. The men’s team does not receive any benefits. (Read more from “U.S. Soccer Releases ‘Fact Sheet’ Showing Women’s Team Actually Lost Millions yet Was Still Paid More Than Men’s Team” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Watch: Candidate Snubs National Anthem at Democrat Primary Debate

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Kicking off Tuesday’s Democratic primary debate hosted by CNN, presidential candidate Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) refused to hold his hand over his heart during the playing of our national anthem. He was the only candidate on stage to do so.

Democrats have largely supported national anthem protest by famous athletes, such as former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who claims he took a knee to protest rampant racism and police brutality. However, the ex-NFL’er recently worked to have Nike cancel a pair of Revolution Era, Betsy Ross-style American flag shoes, revealing that he actually has an issue with the flag.

(Read more from “Watch: Candidate Snubs National Anthem at Democrat Primary Debate” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Actor Mario Lopez: ‘Dangerous’ for Children to Choose Their Gender

/0 Comments/in , /by

This past April, actress Charlize Theron confessed that she began treating her seven-year-old adopted son like a girl at the age of three, when he allegedly told her: “I am not a boy.” Now, “Access Hollywood” host Mario Lopez is taking heat on social media for calling Theron’s decision “dangerous.”

According to Pop Culture, Mario Lopez made his comments during an appearance on “The Candace Owens Show” last month, where the two discussed the “weird trend” in Hollywood wherein celebrities are “transitioning” their children at young ages.

“My God, if you’re three years old, I just think it’s dangerous as a parent to make this determination then,” Lopez said on the show. “It’s sort of alarming and my gosh, I just think about the repercussions later on.”

Lopez said that parents need to “be the adult in the situation” when their children do what children usually do: Say confusing things about their own identity. . .

“I’m glad things are coming out into the open … so I know who to never eff with again — like [Mario Lopez] thinking he knows ANYTHING and going on a prejudiced show with an idiot host and criticizing another parent on their child transitioning. Gross. What gives you the right?” said one Twitter user. (Read more from “Actor Mario Lopez: ‘Dangerous’ for Children to Choose Their Gender” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Rio Grande Valley Passes 300K Apprehensions, Sets Annual Border Record

/0 Comments/in , /by

With two months still left in this fiscal year, the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) border sector has already set an all-time annual record for apprehensions at the border. According to a source in Border Patrol, this week, the total apprehensions in the RGV passed 301,000. That is an all-time record for this sector since Border Patrol began collecting records. The previous record was in 2014 during the first Central American migration, mainly of unaccompanied minors. 256K were apprehended in 2014 and 244k in 1997, the previous records for this sector.

Where is Congress? On vacation.

Earlier today, Rep. Chip Roy tweeted out this fact:

Why is Roy the only Texas official who actually feels a sense of urgency with record illegal immigration pouring into his state? Where are the state’s two senators? Why are they not holding up the budget deal for a better agreement on border wall funding and ICE detention and removal funding?

The RGV sector’s border comprises 320 miles of river bends and labyrinths that are hard to patrol yet has the fewest miles of fencing of any busy border sector. Republicans and the president agreed to a budget bill in February that barred construction of the border wall in the most important areas.

In June, roughly 1,500 illegal aliens were apprehended every day in this sector. However, because of the mandates being placed on the agents dealing with the sensitive job of caring for thousands of children, they are tied down and barely patrolling the line. There are only about 10 agents per 60 miles in parts of the RGV. So how many drug smugglers, gang members, and previously deported criminals are getting in as a result of this flow, which is more consuming than the waves during the 1990s and early 2000s?

There is more manpower and technology than ever before, but thanks to executive and judicial policies not to hold the line and turn people back but rather process and release them, the border funding is not going toward deterrent. The funding is all going toward caring for illegal aliens, which further drains resources away from patrolling.

I asked one veteran RGV agent what he thought of the 301K apprehensions and whether the numbers dropped at all in July. “What’s happening now is that we have no manpower dealing with the seams in the border while we are processing all the family units,” lamented the senior agent, who must remain anonymous because he is not authorized to speak to the media on this point. “So yes, the numbers have gone down since the peak in May, but we literally have minimal idea who is getting past us. That is likely a partial factor in the dropping numbers. As more perceive that they won’t be able to get asylum any more, more are likely resorting to running from us rather than surrendering. But because we still do have plenty of family units to process, we still have less manpower to deal with the runners.”

Every day, Border Patrol counts hundreds of “gotaways” just at one station in the RGV based on the sensors, cameras, and footprints.

The purpose of the Border Patrol was very clearly spelled out in the Labor Appropriation Act of 1924: “Preventing the unlawful entry” of mainly Chinese nationals and deporting anyone who was caught. The Department of Labor was given funding for “the operation of horse and motor vehicles.” It was all for deportation. Nothing more, nothing less. But our agents are being used for babysitting duty.

Despite the deal announced with Guatemala to send asylum-seekers back south, no new guidance appears to be in place on the ground. Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan said that the deal would be completed sometime in August. It remains to be seen whether migrants will actually be turned back at the border or whether the processing will continue. If it is the latter, the agents will continue to be stretched thin, and we won’t even know who comes into our country. (For more from the author of “Rio Grande Valley Passes 300K Apprehensions, Sets Annual Border Record” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

DC Judge Mandates a Right to Medicaid for Able-Bodied Adults Without Work Requirements

/0 Comments/in , /by

Republicans have failed to promote a single conservative fiscal reform to even tweak the growing welfare state, despite their promise to fight for welfare work requirements. But at least Republicans at a state level are promoting conservatism, right? Well, not if the courts are crowned king of the republic.

Courts have become the final arbiter of cultural issues and now even border and national security issues. Thus, it was only a matter of time before they ventured into fiscal/economic issues. Recently, several states have been conditioning Medicaid eligibility upon work requirements. Arkansas, Kentucky, and New Hampshire got a waiver from HHS to require that non-disabled beneficiaries under 65 show that they have completed a certain number of hours of work requirements or similar community engagement. The issue is popular with the public, but now, one man, Judge James Boasberg, has taken it upon himself to prevent every state throughout the country from enacting this commonsense reform.

Yesterday, D.C. District Court Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, followed up on his injunctions earlier this year on HHS’ approval of Arkansas’ and Kentucky’s plan for work requirements, doing the same to HHS approval for New Hampshire. Earlier this year, New Hampshire adopted Granite Advantage Community Engagement, a program to require able-bodied adults to document 100 hours of work, schooling, job training, or volunteer work in order to apply for Medicaid.

“On their face, these work requirements are more exacting than Kentucky’s and Arkansas’s,” Boasberg wrote in his smug injunction order. “Yet the agency has still not contended with the possibility that the project would cause a substantial number of persons to lose their health-care coverage.”

But who says it is the role of this one judge to ascertain the purpose of the Medicaid program? As lawyers for Arkansas said in response to his ruling on their state’s rule in March, the “ultimate conclusion that Medicaid’s ‘core purpose’ is the mere perpetuation of coverage with no specific goal in mind conflicts with commonsense, text, and precedent.”

Boasberg deems HHS Secretary Azar’s waiver to New Hampshire “arbitrary and capricious,” even though both HHS and the state offered a thorough analysis of why work requirements would better preserve the Medicaid program in the state. Section 1115 of Obamacare allows the secretary to “waive compliance with any of the requirements” in that section in terms of expanding Medicaid to adults when experimenting with such programs to test better outcomes. How can one judge overrule what is inherently political discretion and disagreement over policy, not law?

These judges continue to forget that the role of a court is a shield, not a sword. Courts have “neither force nor will,” meaning they can’t legislate and they can’t appropriate benefits. That is the job of the other branches. They can grant relief to a plaintiff – a shield from punitive action taken against the plaintiff, such as a fine or imprisonment. There is no right to Medicaid, however, and even if a court were correct in its reading of a law, the executive branch is not bound by its decision to award and appropriate funds.

As Clarence Thomas articulated in the gay marriage case, “In the American legal tradition, liberty has long been understood as individual freedom from governmental action, not as a right to a particular governmental entitlement.” Yet now that judges have created a right for foreigners to immigrate and sue us in court, it’s not a stretch at all for them to create a right for Americans to be entitled to welfare. Absent such an implied right, the judge has no power to simply make up the purpose of Medicaid and decide such fundamentally political questions.

Not only have judges now been “appropriating” taxpayer funding for welfare and also redefining human sexuality, they have been doing both together. Last July, U.S. District Judge William Conley ordered Wisconsin taxpayers to fund sex-change “surgeries” for two individuals who suffer from gender dysphoria. One of them asked that her breasts be removed in her attempt at manhood. The judge ruled that Medicaid must cover it. What happened to the Hippocratic Oath? How is it that homosexual conversion therapy is illegal in so many states, yet courts can mandate the most gruesome forms of mutilation? In Conley’s estimation, the state’s outrageous understanding of, you know, basic biology “feeds into sex stereotypes by requiring all transgender individuals receiving Wisconsin Medicaid to keep genitalia and other prominent sex characteristics consistent with their natal sex no matter how painful and disorienting it may prove for some.”

These are the same courts that are saying Planned Parenthood, a private abortion and baby harvesting group, has a right to Medicaid funds.

Is there a single political issue that is a bridge too far for judicial intervention, or will the other branches of government and the states allow single district judges to accomplish more fiscal, social, and border policy than any party could hope to pass in a generation?

For far too long, much of the right-leaning libertarian legal movement only cared about economic issues, but not civilization and social transformation from the courts. They have declined to fight judicial supremacy head-on. But now judicial tyranny is threatening to engulf any issue anyone in the right-of-center coalition cares about.

It’s also important to note that the federal court in D.C. is the most important federal regional court in the country because it hears all of the political cases. Liberals will maintain an insurmountable majority, even if Trump serves for two terms. Democrat appointees enjoy an 11-4 majority on the district court and a 7-4 majority on the appeals court among active judges.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia did grant HHS’ request for an expedited appeal in April on the Arkansas case, but given the orientation of the court, the odds are stacked against the state, and oral arguments don’t even begin until October.

Conservatives need to think long and hard about the purpose of fighting in politics if we are going to cede this much power to single district judges. What we fight for over the course of decades can be undone by the false notion of a judicial veto by a single judge at any moment, even when the issue does not touch a fundamental right in any way. (For more from the author of “DC Judge Mandates a Right to Medicaid for Able-Bodied Adults Without Work Requirements” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Bad News, Democrats: American Voters Aren’t Nearly as ‘Woke’ as Your Primary Field

/0 Comments/in , /by

There’s some new polling out, and it’s really bad news for the 2020 presidential field ahead of this week’s debates in Detroit.

On Monday, Heritage Action for America released the results of three different polls conducted by two different research firms in March and June. What do the numbers say? Nothing any Democrat charged with actually winning a general election after this far-left purity contest of a primary will want to hear.

The first poll, conducted among 1,200 likely voters in June with a margin of error of 2.83 percent, found:

70 percent of voters, including 65 percent of swing-state voters, oppose the creation of a government run health care system like Medicare for All.

Independent voters think skills are are more important factor for legal immigration than family ties.

A plurality of Democrats, Republicans, and independents think the overuse of social services is the biggest challenge associated with illegal immigration (which is really bad news for the people who raised their hands to pay for illegal aliens’ health care).

79 percent of respondents (including a majority of Democrats) said they believe that political correctness is a problem.

A 45 percent plurality of Democrats, Republicans, and independents think that abortion should be “illegal in most cases” with “some exceptions.”

76 percent of voters said that doctors should be required to provide health care to abortion survivors.

62 percent of respondents don’t think biological males should be allowed to identify as female to play on sports teams at school.

30 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents surveyed think that the Democratic party has become too extreme, with 57 percent of respondents overall agreeing.

A separate “swing state survey,” which was conducted among 1,800 likely voters across the battleground states of Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Maine, and Pennsylvania later in June with a margin of error of 2.31 percent, found:

63 percent of respondents said the border crisis is a national emergency.

65 percent of respondents oppose getting rid of private health insurance to create a government-run system, including 40 percent of Democrats.

65 percent of respondents in those states agree that “Socialism is a bad economic system that leads to bigger government, less freedom, worse economic conditions, and more welfare dependency.”

A majority of independents agreed that they “can no longer support the national Democratic Party because they have become too liberal in recent years by supporting radical ideas.”

Those numbers don’t bode well for 2020 Democrats. After all, one of their field’s top candidates is a self-described socialist, several of their presidential candidates are are fighting about different models of government-run health care, some candidates are being warned about pushing to decriminalize border crossings, and there’s a race to the bottom on the issue of killing unborn children and using taxpayer money to do it.

As Democrats take the stage in Detroit for the second round of presidential debates, one can only wonder — given numbers like these — what new and exciting ways they’ll find to further alienate themselves from the American electorate.

Perhaps by lining up to defend West Baltimore’s crime and rat problem or Al Sharpton’s anti-Semitic past? Who knows? (For more from the author of “Bad News, Democrats: American Voters Aren’t Nearly as ‘Woke’ as Your Primary Field” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

TPUSA Heads to Baltimore to See If the City Is Rat Infested. Here’s What They Found.

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Ever since President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Saturday to chide Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) about the state of Baltimore, which sits in the heart of his district, political pundits have debated just how bad the city truly is.

CNN’s Victor Blackwell got emotional when he heard Trump’s comments about his hometown. A current Baltimore resident, however, confirmed one thing: the city really is rodent infested and Cummings has done nothing to help residents out over the last 20+ years he’s been in office.

Turning Point USA’s Chief Content Creator, Benny Johnson, hit the streets of Baltimore to talk to residents about their experiences and to set the record straight.

“Rats are a community problem that must be addressed by all residents. When a rat infestation exists at one location it may easily spread to adjacent properties,” the website states. “To help alleviate this problem, Baltimore County has hired a licensed exterminator to treat areas affected by this issue. We will be treating homes with alley access. Notification signs of when treatment will begin will be placed at the main street entrances of your community.”

(Read more from “TPUSA Heads to Baltimore to See If the City Is Rat Infested. Here’s What They Found.” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Angel Moms to Alyssa Milano: Why Don’t You ‘Fight for American Children Raped by Illegal Aliens in Our Country’

/0 Comments/in , /by

Angel Moms Mary Ann Mendoza and Sabine Durden are calling out actress Alyssa Milano over her tearful rant in which she said Border Patrol agents are “destroying” children’s lives by enforcing immigration laws.

Last week, Alyssa Milano broke down on camera after watching footage of a child at the U.S.-Mexico border being reunited with the adult she came to the country with, as Breitbart News reported. . .

“We can’t let this be the new normal,” she continued. “Besides what this country was founded on — this is not innately who we are as human beings. We’ve gotta take inventory of this, of what’s happening, and the humanitarian crisis at the border. We gotta do something. We can’t ignore what’s happening. We can’t allow it to continue.”

Mendoza — who lost her son, 32-year-old police officer son Brandon Mendoza, when he was killed by a drunk illegal alien who was driving the wrong way down a highway in Mesa, Arizona in May 2014 — told Breitbart News in an exclusive statement that Milano has never shed a tear for the children trafficked across the southern border by human smugglers or the American children hurt by illegal immigration. . .

“You can’t be concerned for a handful being separated for a short time as things are sorted out and not be concerned for the sexually abused, recycled children flooding our borders arriving with men and women with ill intentions,” Mendoza continued. “Alyssa is a hypocrite and is doing this to further incite hate towards our President. If she is truly concerned about the children, fight for the American children being raped by illegal aliens in our country. Put your boots on and leave your home and go work at the borders with our Border Patrol agents for a week. (Read more from “Angel Moms to Alyssa Milano: Why Don’t You ‘Fight for American Children Raped by Illegal Aliens in Our Country’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Here’s How Many Delivery Drivers Admit to Nibbling Your Food Before They Hand It to You

/0 Comments/in , /by

Food delivery app services have grown tremendously in recent years as more and more Americans seek to order food via their phones, but a survey about the behavior of delivery drivers might give them pause.

The survey from US Foods about “habits and pain points” of delivery drivers found that more than one in four, or 28 percent, admitted to tasting a food order before delivering it to their customer.

The study was made of 1,518 American adults who had ordered food delivery apps, and also of 497 American adults who said they “identified as having worked as a deliverer for at least one food delivery app.” (Read more from “Here’s How Many Delivery Drivers Admit to Nibbling Your Food Before They Hand It to You” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE