Joe Biden’s New Insane Claim: Coronavirus Claimed Lives of ‘Millions of People’ (VIDEO)

By Breitbart. Joe Biden marred his facts on Thursday during a virtual roundtable with three governors supporting his campaign.

While speaking with Govs. Ned Lamont (D-CT), Phil Murphy (D-NJ), and Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI), Biden said, “We’re in the middle of a pandemic that has cost us more than 85,000 jobs as of today. Lives of millions of people, millions of people, millions of jobs.”

To date, there have been 85,066 deaths in American blamed on COVID-19, and over 1.4 million cases in the U.S., according to Reuters. There have been 300,798 deaths globally, arcgis.com reported. . .

The event kicked off awkwardly when Biden was introduced but wasn’t notified he was on camera and was supposed to begin.

(Read more from “Joe Biden’s New Insane Claim: Coronavirus Claimed Lives of ‘Millions of People'” HERE)

_________________________________________________

New Biden Ad Claims ‘Trump Doesn’t Understand’ That His Coronavirus Missteps ‘Destroyed’ the Economy

By Yahoo News. . .Biden’s campaign released an ad Monday night pummeling Trump on all these points, and also rebutting the Trump campaign’s efforts to attack Biden on China. The long ad, “Timeline,” curates some key moments from Trump’s handling of the new coronavirus.

“April turns into May,” the narrator intones over dramatic strings. “The virus doesn’t disappear. There is no miracle. The cases mount, the death toll grows, more than 33 million Americans lose their jobs to the pandemic. Unemployment reaches Great Depression–era levels. Donald Trump doesn’t understand. We have an economic crisis because we have a public health crisis. And we have a public health crisis because he refused to act. Donald Trump didn’t build a great economy. His failure to lead destroyed one.”

(Read more from “New Biden Ad Claims ‘Trump Doesn’t Understand’ That His Coronavirus Missteps ‘Destroyed’ the Economy” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Faith Leaders Ask Congress to Grant Legal Immunity to Religious Organizations Reopening Amid Pandemic

A long list of religious leaders signed onto a letter sent Tuesday requesting that Congress’ next coronavirus relief package include legal immunity for religious organizations reopening amid an onslaught of new regulations surrounding the pandemic.

“[I]n the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a proliferation of complex and often contradictory orders and guidelines at the state, county, and local levels, each purporting to govern when and how to reopen,” read the letter, signed by pastor Franklin Graham, actor Kirk Cameron, and dozens of pastors. In total, the letter has 300 signatories.

“Unfortunately, no religious organization—or any organization—can follow every guideline or order that has been issued around the country. We are concerned that some people—and their lawyers—will cherry pick certain guidelines from around the nation in order to assign liability to religious organizations. They might claim that a religious organization or a house of worship was negligent because it did not follow a single recommendation buried deep within a set of guidelines.”

Spearheaded by the legal non-profit First Liberty Institute, the appeal underscores national uncertainty as businesses and organizations return to normal after the economic shutdown.

“Churches, synagogues, and America’s houses of worship have provided critical care, comfort, and calm in the midst of the uncertainty caused by a worldwide pandemic,” said Kelly Shackelford, President, CEO, and Chief Counsel for First Liberty Institute. “Providing this reasonable measure of protection to religious organizations and houses of worship in America will ensure that they can continue performing their vital functions of serving Americans and ministering to all of our spiritual and physical needs. (Read more from “Faith Leaders Ask Congress to Grant Legal Immunity to Religious Organizations Reopening Amid Pandemic” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Devin Nunes Discusses Unmasking: “It’s Much Worse Than This” – the Entire Trump Transition Was Under Surveillance…

First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE. ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t under a FISA (Title-1) HERE …. that’s the background.

Devin Nunes appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the recent list of Obama-era officials who unmasked NSA intercepts of Michael Flynn talking to foreign government officials. Rep. Nunes reminds the audience that Flynn is only one person within a much larger group of Trump transition team members who were under surveillance by Team Obama.

March 27, 2017, then House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, held a brief press conference and stated he was provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources including ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.

These reports included unmaskings of President Trump campaign officials; and included Donald Trump himself…. You know what that means:

1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”

3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”

4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities, or of the Trump team.

“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”

“Who was aware of it?”

“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”

“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”

“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”

“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”

“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”

(For more from the author of “Devin Nunes Discusses Unmasking: “It’s Much Worse Than This” – the Entire Trump Transition Was Under Surveillance…” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

This Is the Most Blatant Example of Inflated COVID-19 Death Stats Yet

I have spectacular news to share with you. Amid all the death, doom, and gloom resulting from the coronavirus, we can now celebrate the fact that the virus has cured all other forms of death. Nobody dies from other causes of death anymore. At least that is what we are seeing in some states that are so eager to use the virus as a pretext to crush our liberties.

This week, Colorado recorded Montezuma County as having suffered its third coronavirus death. The implication of being tagged with more deaths for many Democrat-controlled states is that even small rural counties like Montezuma will not be allowed to resume regular life because they will fail to meet arbitrary and impossible benchmarks established unilaterally by the Governor Kings. The problem in this case is that the county coroner is disputing the cause of the death. This now appears to be a widespread problem.

“COVID was not listed on the death certificate as the cause of death. I disagree with the state for listing it as a COVID death, and will be discussing it with them this week,” said County Coroner George Deavers on Tuesday.

It turns out that even though the decedent tested positive for the virus, he died of alcohol poisoning because toxicology showed his blood-alcohol level was 0.55, way past the lethal level of 0.3.

“The person who died did not die from COVID-19, but they did test positive for the virus,” said county public information officer Vicki Shaffer. “The state is reporting that death as a COVID death, but our health department wanted to let people know that even though the person did have the virus, they did not die from it.”

According to local news, the decedent, Sebastian Yellow, 35, was found dead in a park in Cortez on May 4. Think about that for a moment: a 35-year-old just drops dead in a park (the virus takes a long time to kill), and yet they test his body for coronavirus and find it to be positive, and now the state rules it a coronavirus death instead of the obvious alcohol poisoning!

This is not the first time the state government has been caught inflating the numbers. On April 30, CBS4 reported that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment reclassified three deaths in a nursing home as COVID-19, overruling the decision of the attending physician who said they died of other ailments while in hospice care. The state officials blamed it on the CDC guidance forcing them to tag anyone who tests positive as a COVID-19 death, irrespective of the circumstances. Recently, Dr. Deborah Birx has reportedly called into question the policy and how it’s inflating the number of coronavirus deaths.

We are seeing disputes between state health departments and local coroners over how to determine cause of death play out in other states as well.

As we’ve reported, most estimates show the infection fatality rate for people in their 30s is roughly 0.007%. A typical 35-year-old has a 0.17% chance of dying in any given year … of anything. Thus, the normal mortality rate is 24 times higher than that of coronavirus for people that age. Now that the virus is so ubiquitous and so rarely lethal in young people, it makes no sense to assume someone died from it unless the autopsy showed the degradation of the lungs or other similar symptoms. They are literally coding every death in this country of anyone who has the virus (which is likely in the tens of millions) as a COVID-19 death.

Approximately 2.8 million people die every year, which means roughly 470,000 will die over a 2-month period. Given that it’s very likely 5%-10% of the country have the virus, but very few die from it as a percentage of those infected – nearly zero among younger people – how many of those typical deaths are now being coded as COVID? This is particularly concerning when we see states report a few random deaths among younger people. While anomalous death from the coronavirus is certainly possible in younger people, this raises serious questions about the accuracy of any existing recorded deaths for those particularly young.

We saw this play out in April when Ventura County, California, coded the death of a 37-year-old who overdosed on fentanyl as a COVID-19 death. Nearly 70,000 are dying every year from drug overdoses, particularly young adults. How many of these respiratory deaths will easily be coded as the coronavirus so long as they test positive?

There was much commotion when Georgia officials announced that death of a 22-year-old in Columbus, but the local coroner absolutely disputes that assertions. The 22-year-old new mother tragically died four days after giving birth, but Muscogee County Coroner Buddy Bryan believes she died from a complication stemming from the C-section. “The E.M.S. personnel and myself pretty much came to the same conclusion,” Bryan said. “I personally don’t believe she died from the virus.”

We all see how this virus has become more political than anything in our lifetime. When places like Los Angeles, with so few deaths per capita, are preemptively announcing a lockdown for another three months, there is no longer any denying that liberal politicians will use this as a pretext to push generation-changing social transformation and will stop at nothing in the misinformation war to justify their actions. At least 60,000 people die in L.A. in any given year. In a county of 10 million people, there are officially only 1,659 coronavirus deaths (including the likely inflation). Are we really to believe that coding of deaths going forward will not be politicized and easily conflated with typical deaths?

Nowhere is this more of a concern than in nursing homes where we are seeing more than 50% of the recorded deaths and where many of them are being added retroactively. Naturally, roughly 25% of the annual 2.8 million national fatalities occur in senior care facilities and so many have already tested positive for the virus, but didn’t necessarily die from it. But per CDC guidance, it must be counted as a COVID-19 death.

Last week, my colleague Steve Deace received an email from a listener who just lost her father in a nursing home in Ohio. She noted that he had advanced Alzheimer’s and tested positive for COVID-19, along with 75% of the residents. However, 90% were asymptomatic and her father had recovered from the virus. None of the staff believed he died from the virus, but it was listed as the cause of the death on his death certificate. “Covid-19 is listed as cause of death. Absolute lie. Hopefully our firsthand experience can be added to your research,” she wrote.

Indeed, we are the ones who will have to do this research because the media and government won’t do it for us. (For more from the author of “This Is the Most Blatant Example of Inflated COVID-19 Death Stats Yet” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

What We Know About the Link Between COVID-19 and a Rare Children’s Disease

One of the biggest unknowns of the COVID-19 pandemic is how it affects children.

Children have managed to avoid most of the severe manifestations of the disease caused by the new coronavirus, making up a small percentage of hospitalizations and almost none of the deaths. Conversely, Americans older than 65 have made up 45% of hospitalizations and 80% of deaths.

Thus, targeted mitigation efforts rightly would focus on nursing homes, which have suffered disproportionately from the COVID-19. Fixing policies that put older Americans at great risk likely will have the greatest effect on driving down national mortality, as opposed to blanket policies that include children.

However, just as we begin to think we have a handle on it, this virus continues to befuddle. A concerning link may exist between COVID-19 and a rare childhood autoimmune disorder called Kawasaki disease.

Out of 73 recent cases of Kawasaki disease in New York, three children have died and all three also tested positive for COVID-19. We don’t have evidence that this is necessarily a causal relationship, but some of the signs may make sense.

Kawasaki disease is an inflammatory autoimmune disorder of childhood that is thought to result from a previous viral infection. Some part of a virus, or the immune system’s response to it, causes the inflammatory pathway to hyperactivate suddenly and cause damage to the body.

A somewhat similar inflammatory phenomenon is known to occur with adults, and possibly is the main driver of mortality among COVID-19 patients. It stands to reason that Kawasaki disease, as an autoimmune disease of childhood often triggered by a previous viral infection, may be one of the effects of the coronavirus, also known as SARS-CoV-2.

But this is conjecture at this point. We simply don’t have sufficient data to draw any connection. The incidence of Kawasaki disease is estimated to be between nine to 19 cases per 100,000 children under age 5 per year.

And not all cases of Kawasaki disease occur in the context of a coronavirus infection.

For instance, in this report of 15 cases in New York, 10 tested positive either for an active or previous infection by SARS-CoV-2. This raises suspicion of the link, but with so few cases of Kawasaki disease, the correlation may be wholly spurious. After all, finding a case of COVID-19 in New York City would be entirely unremarkable.

The good news is that doctors have treated Kawasaki disease successfully for years with intravenous immunoglobulin. It is possible that Kawasaki disease may appear more severe lately because families have been reluctant to go to the emergency department for fear of COVID-19.

Families must seek treatment for Kawasaki disease, which is characterized by several days of a high fever, red and swollen eyes, rash, redness of the hands and feet, and inflammation of the lips and mouth.

Fear of the hospital has become a much larger problem for both the hospitals and their patients. But based on the data regarding children and SARS-CoV-2 transmission, it is likely safe for them and those around them to seek treatment.

Although children are not invulnerable to the coronavirus, they are less susceptible to severe disease.

A recent literature review of numerous pediatric studies found that children not only are much less likely to develop severe disease from the new coronavirus, but also unlikely to transmit the virus to others.

The review was conducted when there were 150,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the United States. Of those, only 1.7% were children, more than half of whom were infants (62%) and nearly a quarter had underlying conditions (23%).

Among all confirmed pediatric cases of COVID-19, 5.7% required hospitalization. Of them, only 2% were admitted to an intensive care unit. This dataset included three confirmed deaths out of 2,572 cases.

Clearly, children neither are at great risk nor are they completely invincible to the effects of the virus. But statistically, nearly all confirmed COVID-19 cases among children were relatively benign.

Data showing less severe disease in children is easy to find, but data tracing disease transmission from children to adults is difficult to gather. However, one study of multiple pediatric research articles suggests that children are unlikely to be the primary source for infection in a household.

Of the 31 households identified with intrafamilial transmission of COVID-19, only three began with a child. That is, only 9.7% of these household cases began with children. Using similar data in comparison, 54% of H5N1 influenza cases within households began with children.

A similar dynamic exists in the school setting. An Australian study of 10 high schools and five primary schools from March to April found little transmission of the coronavirus from one person to the next. Twelve high school students and four members of the faculty were identified as confirmed cases of COVID-19 who had attended classes while infectious.

Nearly 600 other students were exposed to these COVID-19 cases but none of them tested positive. One student tested positive by antibody testing, which indicated a previous infection from which the student already had recovered.

The primary schools had a similar result, with one student and five faculty members identified as COVID-19 cases and only one student later found to be positive for antibodies.

Although more data is needed to draw a definitive conclusion about the role, if any, that children play in transmitting COVID-19, these findings all suggest that children are at the least risk themselves and pose the lowest risk to others.

Children seem to be mercifully spared the more severe manifestations of this pandemic. Not only do they seem less susceptible to infection, they seem not to spread the disease to others.

That being the case, it is likely that activities for children, such as school or summer camp, should be relatively safe to resume.

But as it has been throughout this ordeal, the new coronavirus easily can surprise us in the worst ways. It is likely we can safely allow our children to return to some semblance of normal life, but with caution and vigilance. (For more from the author of “What We Know About the Link Between COVID-19 and a Rare Children’s Disease” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn; List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released

By CNN. Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan on Wednesday asked whether President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn could be held in contempt of court for perjury.

Sullivan also appointed a retired judge to look into Flynn’s case and argue against the Department of Justice’s request to dismiss it. . .

Sullivan signaled on Tuesday he would open the door to third parties to weigh in on the case, but it wasn’t clear whom he would allow. Others have argued to him that the judge could sentence Flynn, essentially ignoring the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss his charge.

Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, [to present] arguments to the judge “in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss” and on “whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury,” the judge wrote.

Gleeson is a former Clinton appointee to the federal trial bench in the Eastern District of New York. (Read more from “Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking

By Fox News. Sean Hannity opened his show Wednesday by reacting to the newly released list of Obama administration officials who requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn in intelligence reports during the Trump transition.

“Why in the hell did the Obama administration’s unmasking requests jump threefold from 9,500 in 2013 to 30,355 in 2016?” Hannity asked.

“Now, we know one part of the massive increase was targeted at Donald Trump campaign adviser, an incoming national security adviser, a man who has served this country honorably for 33 years in combat zones, and that’s General Michael Flynn,” the host added. “We now know he was unmasked a whopping 48 times by roughly two dozen Obama officials between Election Day, November 8, 2016 and the president’s inauguration, January 20, 2017.”

The host explained that the term ‘unmasking’ refers largely to the process of identifying an American citizen whose communications have been picked up by U.S. intelligence officials during surveillance on a foreign government, person or other entity.

In Flynn’s case, he was unmasked over his calls with then-Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak, which were picked up on wiretaps. That information was then leaked to The Washington Post in early 2017. (Read more from “Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them

By Fox News. Top Obama administration officials purportedly requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn during the presidential transition period, according to a list of names from that controversial process made public on Wednesday.

The list was declassified in recent days by Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell and then sent to GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, who made the documents public. The roster features top-ranking figures including then-Vice President Joe Biden — a detail already being raised by the Trump campaign in the bare-knuckle 2020 presidential race where Biden is now the Democrats’ presumptive nominee.

The list also includes then-FBI Director James Comey, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Obama’s then-chief of staff Denis McDonough. (Read more from “List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

FBI Serves Warrant on Richard Burr in Investigation Into Stock Sales Tied to Pandemic

The FBI has seized a cellphone belonging to Sen. Richard Burr as it investigates stock trades he made at start of the coronavirus pandemic.

The North Carolina Republican gave his cellphone up to the agents while they served a search on Burr at his residence, an official confirmed to the Los Angeles Times. Authorities are looking into whether Barr purposely dumped stocks on Feb. 13 as part of an insider trading investigation. . .

Burr took bipartisan condemnation after news of the sales was revealed. He is accused of using information he received from daily intelligence community briefings as the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman to inform his trading decisions. After he offloaded as much as $1.72 million of his holdings, Burr reportedly compared the growing health crisis to the 1918 flu pandemic at an exclusive Feb. 27 luncheon.

The Republican senator has maintained that he did nothing wrong and asked for the Senate Ethics Committee to conduct a full investigation into the allegations. He said in a statement after the controversy began that he “relied solely on public news reports” in his decision to sell a large percentage of his portfolio in 33 separate transactions. (Read more from “FBI Serves Warrant on Richard Burr in Investigation Into Stock Sales Tied to Pandemic” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

I’m an ER Physician. Here’s Why Abortion Isn’t an ‘Essential Health Service.’

Although we appear to be “flattening the curve” of the COVID-19 pandemic, with governors slowly lifting stay-at-home orders and hospitals beginning to schedule surgeries again, infection spikes in certain regions remain a possibility.

Throughout the coming months, we need to focus as a society on medical care that will not only help us survive but thrive.

Working in emergency rooms as an emergency medicine physician of more than 20 years, I’m particularly concerned that abortion activists have been promoting and advocating abortion as an “essential health service.”

An essential health service is a health care action or medical procedure that is essential to protecting the life of a human. But the truth is that rather than helping women through this pandemic, abortion is more likely to worsen the toll of illness.

Any decision about a medical procedure as serious as terminating a pregnancy must be made with facts and an assessment of risks. When medical equipment is scarce and many resources must be directed toward treating victims of COVID-19, continuing to perform abortions is medically irresponsible.

Here are three key facts:

1. The stress of COVID-19 adds to abortion’s emotional toll.

Abortion is known to result in mental health issues, and COVID-19 is likely to exacerbate those negative effects. Anxiety and fear have exploded during this time as many Americans suffer from prolonged isolation and economic challenges.

Calls to the federal mental health crisis hotline are nearly 900% greater than this time last year. According to Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly half (45%) of adults in the United States reported that their mental health has been affected negatively due to worry and stress over the coronavirus.

Combined with the emotional toll of abortion, the impact of this stress is amplified. Abortion long has been associated with serious, adverse mental health outcomes such as depression, grief, persistent sadness, and elevated stress—many of the same mental health challenges we are seeing from COVID-19.

Losing a baby, whether from abortion or a spontaneous miscarriage, causes emotional pain. Women who have abortions face higher rates of depression.

Data shows an increase in the number of suicide attempts by women who previously had an abortion. In fact, women who get abortions are at a 154% increased risk of suicide, according to the Southern Medical Journal.

What’s more, we know that women sometimes are coerced into abortion as a result of domestic abuse. Claiming that abortion is an “essential health service” only will minimize the emotional risks, fueling this cycle of violence and pressure.

At a time when domestic abuse afflicts more women than ever before, we need to respect and support women, not encourage them to get abortions.

2. Complications from abortion are more dangerous during a pandemic.

Complications from an abortion are a significant risk—even more so during a pandemic with an over-stressed health care system. I’ve seen firsthand the life-threatening medical complications that stem from an abortion procedure.

This type of crisis is often the result of abortion clinics not being equipped to provide the necessary emergency care. Instead, they send women to the ER.

Abortion itself carries risks of infection and increases the likelihood of women needing additional medical supervision and treatment. Also, blood loss, inflammatory stress, and other adverse outcomes from abortion can compromise a woman’s health and immune system, which makes her more susceptible to contracting a virus.

Chemical abortions, such as by the brand-name drug Mifeprex, are no safer. Typically 5% to 7% of women who undergo a chemical abortion require surgical follow-up procedures. Experimenting with an abortion at home—especially right now—is very dangerous.

3. COVID-19 doesn’t affect pregnancies.

I have heard from pregnant women who are worried that continuing a pregnancy during COVID-19 could be harmful. I understand their concerns, but the available data suggests that pregnant women do not suffer from coronavirus infections.

And as yet there is no evidence of vertical transmission of the coronavirus from mother to baby; the virus hasn’t been found in breast milk or amniotic fluid after birth. To date, the research shows that women infected with the coronavirus during pregnancy don’t have a higher incidence of compromised health or unhealthy babies.

Some women may be considering abortion because they fear that increased doctor visits and a hospital birth might expose them and their family at home to COVID-19. In actuality, abortion puts women at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 than their pregnancy does.

Abortion has long-term detrimental effects on a woman, the data shows. Our nation desperately needs more love and hope, and less death and despair.

The reality is that if women who face unplanned pregnancies view abortion as the “healthy” option, we know that it is in fact a fatal deception.

As a physician who deals with death daily in the ER, I can say that death of any kind is horrific. I believe we can and must protect the lives of both the young and the old, and this includes protecting preborn human life. (For more from the author of “I’m an ER Physician. Here’s Why Abortion Isn’t an ‘Essential Health Service.’” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Don’t Count on Republicans Opposing Pelosi’s Panic Bill. Make SURE of It

There’s no way Republicans would agree to the new $3 trillion Pelosi bill, right? A $900 billion bailout for the states, $75 billion for mortgage bailout, $100 billion for a renter bailout, $25 billion for the U.S. Postal Service, a $100 billion bailout for schools that didn’t lose any money and actually saved on overhead, and another round of $1,200 checks for adults making up to $75,000 along with the same amount per child, even if they never lost any income during the shutdown. There’s no way Republicans will support this, right? Wrong.

Republicans already passed a bill pretty similar to this one, and the same man who negotiated that bill for Trump doesn’t appear to have a problem with new spending. CNBC reports that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin was “unfazed” by the staggering debt we are amassing because of our strategy to deal with coronavirus. “One of the reasons I do feel comfortable with us spending all this money is because interest rates are very low. And we’re taking advantage of long-term rates,” Mnuchin said on CNBC’s Squawk on the Street earlier this week.

Doesn’t he sound like a used car salesman?

What Mnuchin won’t tell you is that one of the reasons we have failed to grow our economy at 3% any year since 2005 and 4% since the late 1990s is precisely because the existing debt already weakened our ability to use peak employment for efficient economic growth. We cannot possibly comprehend how the bills they already passed will alter our economy for years to come.

But the broader implication of Mnuchin’s comments is that Republicans and the White House, absent early and vigorous opposition from conservatives, will likely go along with some form of this new bill. That is what they have done every time.

Unlike the White House, Democrats actually practice one of the dictates of “Art of the Deal,” which is always to ask for more than you think you will get. This is why they ask for slightly more money than they want and also stick in extraneous provisions dealing with other political priorities. For example, they originally only asked for a $500 billion state bailout and have now upped it to $900 billion.

Then Republicans, rather than militating against the entire premise of the lockdown and the faulty law and science behind it, as well as the premise of subsidizing unemployment and encouraging lockdown, agree to the entire strategy. However, they spend 100% of their time focusing on extraneous provisions of the bill or the exact dollar amount or structure of the socialist programs that they ultimately agree to.

Remember the GOP obsession with the Kennedy Center funding last time around? You would have thought that was the subject of the bill, judging by the rhetoric of Republicans during that debate. In fact, any sane person would have traded the Democrats a gold-plated Kennedy Center in return for not fueling and incentivizing a lockdown, bankrupting our nation, and creating monopolies for large conglomerates in every industry that we cannot even begin to imagine in the coming years. Republicans agreed to all of this before, and there is no reason they won’t agree again. In fact, Trump is already promising a state bailout to reward the states for destroying the country.

The first step for Republicans to properly fight the next legislative battle is to admit they were wrong to go along with it the first time. They must admit that the first $3 trillion bill they passed, along with the Federal Reserve shenanigans, will destroy small business in this country by creating artificial monopolies for large companies hooked into the orbit of the government – the same way Obamacare destroyed private practice and small insurers in health care, the bank bailouts destroyed community banks, and the recent farm bills destroyed family farms. Now, every industry will look like those three industries, where you can count the number of players on one hand. The bill passed by Congress will create more artificial inequality than anything a free market could have done in a thousand years.

According to researchers at the University of Illinois, Harvard Business School, Harvard University, and the University of Chicago, at least 100,000 small businesses will permanently close. What about the pathetic “stimulus” bills and Mnuchin’s promise of virtually free debt? Yeah, those market distortions actually hurt small businesses. As the Washington Post explained:

The result is likely to further shift the balance of power — and jobs — toward big businesses that have a better chance of surviving the uncertain year ahead by borrowing money or drawing on large cash reserves. Emergency actions by the Federal Reserve, backed by the Treasury, have made borrowing money almost free for large companies. In the 1980s and 1990s, small businesses employed over half of American workers, but that dynamic has shifted over time. By 2017, only 47 percent of private-sector employees were at small businesses, and the pandemic appears to be reducing that again.

Then there are the indiscriminate checks being mailed out to people who never lost their jobs. So much money was wasted that divorced families are now getting duplicate checks for the same child. Dead people are getting checks in the mail, as well as foreign nationals. $1 billion intended for small business wound up being mailed to public companies. Even nonprofits, including Muslim Brotherhood mosques, received funding. Has any Republican who supported the bill recognized the mistakes?

Once they recognize their errant ways, then we can trust them to actually fight the meat and potatoes (not just the gravy) of the Pelosi pander bill, conditioning funding on ending lockdowns permanently, targeting the money for reparations, not crony stimulus programs, and creating a true stimulus built on tax and regulatory cuts, not welfare. We need a paycheck bill, not a welfare and socialist monopoly bill.

However, that would require Trump to fire Mnuchin and actually appoint a negotiator who is somewhat different from what we would see under a Biden administration. Mnuchin is to fiscal policy what Fauci is to the lockdown policy – indistinguishable from the Democrats.

So yes, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republicans might promise that this bill is “dead on arrival” in the Senate, but it’s only dead in this exact form. The more they focus on fighting the cranberry sauce and pecan pie of the bill, the more we will see them acquiesce to the turkey itself. Like Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football, this happens every time. (For more from the author of “Don’t Count on Republicans Opposing Pelosi’s Panic Bill. Make Sure of It” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Devin Nunes Vows Criminal Referrals for Robert Mueller’s Team in Latest Russia Probe Reckoning

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, vowed to pursue multiple new criminal referrals amid the ongoing fallout of bombshell revelations in the Justice Department’s handling of the Russia probe.

Referring to former special counsel Robert Mueller, Nunes said: “We’re looking at doing criminal referrals on the Mueller team, the Mueller dossier team, the Mueller witch hunt, whatever you want to call it. That’s where we are now in our investigation.” Nunes made his remarks in a special new episode of Fox Nation’s “Witch Hunt,” hosted by Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett.

Last year, Nunes sent eight criminal referrals to U.S. Attorney General William Barr alleging several “potential violations” of the law in the course the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling and contacts with Trump advisers during the 2016 campaign.

Now in the wake of the Justice Department’s decision to drop charges against former Trump National Security Adviser General Michael Flynn, Nunes is turning his attention to the conduct of the special counsel, who was appointed after President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey.

“We’re doing a large criminal referral on the Mueller dossier team that put together a fraudulent report — that knew there was no collusion the day that Mueller walked in the door,” said Nunes. “They set an obstruction of justice trap. There’s no doubt in my mind that we will make a conspiracy referral there.” (Read more from “Devin Nunes Vows Criminal Referrals for Robert Mueller’s Team in Latest Russia Probe Reckoning” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE