New Revelations About Jeffrey Epstein Raise Serious Questions

A new report about alleged child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein made revelations about items that Epstein shipped to his homes that many online and in the media viewed as suspicious, especially given the time when the items were shipped in relation to legal matters he faces.

“Jeffrey Epstein shipped a shredder from the U.S. Virgin Islands to his Palm Beach home in July 2008, shortly after reaching a non-prosecution agreement with then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, maritime records show,” The Intercept reported. “Then, in March of this year, shortly after a Florida federal judge invalidated that agreement, Epstein shipped a tile and carpet extractor from the Virgin Islands to his Manhattan townhouse, the records show.”

Intercept reporter Ryan Grim added on Twitter: “Items Jeffrey Epstein shipped from his island port that didn’t make it into my story about the carpet & tile extractor and the shredder. Not included in this list is a 550 lb ‘dental unit,’ which appears to be a dental chair. The dental chair came from Henan Meijiasheng Trading Co. Why does he need a dental chair?”

. . .

Insider points to an excerpt in an article published by the AP for context: “Epstein built a stone mansion with cream-colored walls and a bright turquoise roof surrounded by several other structures including the maids’ quarters and a massive, square-shaped white building on one end of the island. Workers told each other it was a music room fitted with a grand piano and acoustic walls. Its gold dome flew off during the deadly 2017 hurricane season.” (Read more from “New Revelations About Jeffrey Epstein Raise Serious Questions” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Twelve Years: Where Does the Current Path Lead?

Just when you think you’ve seen the worst year of government in Alaska, you find out you were wrong. The past four years were awful. We had a fiscal crisis but nothing was being done about it. There were attempts to raise revenue, but even if they had succeeded, it wouldn’t have come close to solving the problem.

Examine the attached graph, the most important one for the year, and you’ll see what every legislator knows. If you use the PFD to fund government, you lose it in two years. If you use the Earnings Reserve balance then you get about 10 more. If you then implement taxes you won’t get more than a few years (Walker’s attempt would have only raised $700 million). The natural increase of government (a conservative 4% in this graph) will outpace the increase in revenue. This is what Governor Dunleavy realized when he was looking at the budget issue. It’s impossible to fix our budget based on revenues alone. If you try, you’ll just bankrupt the State in about a dozen years. You’ll then lose the University, all the retirement plans and all of those other programs you might love.

This explains why more cuts have to be made because, to get to a sustainable budget, you have to make a lot of cuts over the next few years. Now the governor is making the hard decisions on how to get there and is taking a lot of heat for being laser-focused on his campaign promise to fix this fiscal situation. It may be enough to cost him a second term, but that shows the courage he has to face the problem.

Now comes the irony. The Legislature is split in two factions. There is the anti-governor faction who want to repeal all of the cuts and not pay anything close to the statutorily mandated PFD, and they are fighting the governor every step in a way that mirrors the national level politics. An example of this is their push for an unconstitutional forward funding of education, which left no real funding in the budget for education. Then there are those who want some to none of the vetoes repealed and want to work with the governor to solve the problem. They had tried to amend in funding for education but it was rejected by the other side.

The governor called the special session to deal with the undone PFD issue, and to give them a chance to repeal the line-item vetoes. The irony is because the anti-governor group has decided to break the law and meet somewhere else than the governor chose, they don’t have enough legislators in attendance to overturn the vetoes. After the cuts came out they should put their heads together and come up with a compromise to restore a bunch of the cuts and fund a full PFD. The governor made such large cuts that it made for an obvious compromise. What the anti-governor group has done is to “cut off their nose to spite their face”. Sometimes in politics you just have to compromise to get important stuff done.

So now we have all the vetoes in place, a capital budget that has no funding and no PFD. Legislators are talking about amending something into the capital budget, but that can also still be line-item vetoed, so they have to get ¾ of themselves to agree. Since a few members have been thrown out of the caucus because they stood for rule of law, it’s going to be pretty hard to get that agreement now.

One of the biggest mistakes of the last administration was cutting the PFD for 3 years. That took over $2 billion out of the economy in a recession, so this governor is pushing hard not to replicate that mistake. A deal will have to be made so when you’re writing all those emails and letters to the legislators, you might want to ask them to act more maturely and make some kind of deal that will work for everybody. Email the House Minority thanking them for standing for rule of law and letting them know that you are OK with some veto or partial-veto overrides, as long as they make the trade for a full PFD. We finally have a governor intent on solving the problem. We just need a legislature that acknowledges the issue and will rise above childish nose-thumbing to solve it.

_____________________________________________________

Lance Roberts is an engineer, born and raised in Fairbanks. He is a former member of the FNSB Assembly.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Another Investigation into Trump Appears to Go down in Flames

Federal prosecutors with the Southern District of New York are wrapping up their investigation into whether Trump organization executives broke campaign finance laws and are reportedly unlikely to file any charges.

“For months, federal prosecutors in New York have examined whether company officials broke the law, including in their effort to reimburse Michael Cohen for hush-money payments he made to women alleging affairs with his former boss, President Donald Trump,” CNN reported. “In recent weeks, however, their investigation has quieted, the people familiar with the inquiry said, and prosecutors now don’t appear poised to charge any Trump Organization executives in the probe that stemmed from the case against Cohen.”

The report notes that there are no indications that the case has been officially closed and former officials warned that new information could always reignite the case.

The investigation stemmed from the case involving President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, who pled “guilty to eight counts, including two counts of campaign-finance violations for orchestrating or making payments during the 2016 election to two women — adult-film actress Stormy Daniels and ex-Playboy model Karen McDougal — who alleged affairs with Trump.”

The investigation centered around whether a $130,000 payment that Cohen made to Daniels — and was later reimbursed for by the Trump organization — constituted a campaign finance violation. (Read more from “Another Investigation into Trump Appears to Go down in Flames” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Brawl Breaks Out in Rose Garden

By Breitbart. A brawl broke out in the Rose Garden Thursday after President Trump’s former deputy assistant Sebastian Gorka and other conservative media personalities got into a heated argument with Playboy reporter Brian Karem following the president’s press conference on the controversial census citizenship question.

Notable conservative media personalities who attended the White House Social Media Summit Thursday – including James O’Keefe, Mark Dice, and Joy Villa – were invited to the Rose Garden for the announcement. Karem, seemingly incensed by their presence, sparked a fight with Gorka after openly remarking that the group of conservatives were “eager for demonic possession,” triggering laughs from nearby counterparts. . .

“Hey– come on over here and talk to me brother. We can go outside and have a long conversation,” Karem said.

“You’re threatening me now in the White House – in the Rose Garden, threatening me in the Rose Garden,” Gorka said as he approached Karem.

“You’re a punk. You’re not a journalist. You’re a punk!” Gorka said to Karem’s face.

(Read more from “Brawl Breaks out in Rose Garden” HERE)

____________________________________________________

Trump social media summit attendees clash with reporters in Rose Garden

By The Hill. A handful of conservative personalities who attended President Trump’s social media summit on Thursday clashed with reporters in the Rose Garden after they were invited to sit in on an announcement about the census.

The scene played out as Trump stood between Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and a number of far-right social media personalities and attendees criticized for having promoted conspiracy theories sat in the audience. The mood quickly turned confrontational after the president returned inside.

Sebastian Gorka, a former White House adviser, stormed over to engage with Playboy correspondent Brian Karem at the conclusion of Trump’s remarks, where the president announced he would drop his bid to add a citizenship question to the census. . .

During Thursday’s social media summit, Trump complained of “terrible bias” and censorship in front of a crowd of roughly 200 conservative personalities.

The president spent much of the speech boasting about his own prolific social media following, while simultaneously alleging that Twitter has suppressed his following. Social media companies have insisted that political views do not play a role in the enforcement of their policies. (Read more from “Trump social media summit attendees clash with reporters in Rose Garden” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff Admits the True Goal of the Green New Deal

The chief of staff for firebrand freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) admitted what the true goal of the Green New Deal is, and it’s not to defeat global warming. . .

“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal,” Chakrabarti said, “is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.”

Chakrabarti was speaking with Sam Ricketts, the climate director for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination. . .

“Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti asked.

“Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” he concluded. (Read more from “Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff Admits the True Goal of the Green New Deal” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

China Billionaire Arrested for Child Molestation

China’s official Communist Party newspaper has revealed that one of two previously unidentified suspects allegedly involved in a molestation case is billionaire Wang Zhenhua.

Wang recently stepped down as chairman of Seazen Holdings, one of China’s foremost real estate developers, “for personal reasons.” This announcement immediately followed news that Wang and another suspect identified only as “Zhou” had been arrested for their alleged involvement in the molestation of an underage girl in a Shanghai hotel.

The victims’s mother claims that Zhou transported her daughter on June 30 from Jiangsu province to Shanghai, where she was sexually assaulted. Zhou surrendered to the police on July 2, a day after the Wang investigation was announced. . .

Child molestation in China carries a maximum penalty of only five years, though the sentence can be extended with further charges. A statement by China police asserted that they “adopt a ‘zero tolerance’ attitude toward crimes against minors and will severely crack down on such crimes in accordance with law.” (Read more from “China Billionaire Arrested for Child Molestation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

House Bucks Trump’s Transgender Troop Policy in Defense Spending Vote

A 242-187 majority of the House of Representatives voted Thurdsay to override the Trump adminsitration’s policy on transgender troops serving in the U.S. military.

The vote itself was on an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act — Congress’ big, annual military authorization bill.

A report on the bill and its amendments from the House Armed Services Committee explains that the amendment “requires that qualifications for eligibility to serve in an armed force account only for the ability of an individual to meet gender-neutral occupational standards and not include any criteria relating to the race, color, national origin, religion, or sex (including gender identity or sexual orientation) of an individual.”

The measure initially passed by a voice vote the day before, but Democrats requested a roll call, wanting to go on record against the president’s transgender policy.

“Over the last three years, 14,000 transgender service members have served openly and successfully,” amendment sponsor Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., said on the House floor Wednesday. “We know what transgender service members bring to the fight; let them bring it.”

Ten Republicans joined with Democrats in support of the amendment.

President Trump announced an end to transgender military service two years ago in June 2017, tweeting, “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.”

After studying the issue, the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security determined that “the accession or retention of individuals with a history of diagnosis of gender dysphoria – those who may require substantial medical treatment, including through medical drugs or surgery – presents considerable risk to military effectiveness and lethality.”

The Supreme Court ruled in January that the policy could go into effect as lawsuits work their way through lower courts on the issue. The policy went into effect earlier this year, though some state National Guards are openly defying the new policy.

The Senate passed its version of the NDAA last month with no such transgender language. The differences between the bills will have to be resolved before it can go to the president’s desk. (For more from the author of “House Bucks Trump’s Transgender Troop Policy in Defense Spending Vote” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Here’s How Far from Current Law Our Border Debate Has Shifted

In 2006, a super-majority of Congress passed the Secure Fence Act. It required that no less than 850 miles of double-layer fencing be constructed on our border. But it also codified a sense of purpose and a clearly defined mission for Border Patrol, to which everyone at the time agreed. It required the secretary of homeland security to “take all actions” necessary within 18 months of passage to “achieve and maintain operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States” (emphasis added). What has ever come of this requirement?

Section 2(b) of the bill defined “operational control” as “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.”

What is going on today, a long time after the law’s passage, is the opposite of operational control. The cartels have complete operational control over critical population areas around the Rio Grande River, and illegal immigration, more than ever before, is strategically being used by the cartels for smuggling in narcotics, contraband, and dangerous aliens.

The Secure Fence Act passed the Senate 80-19 on September 14, 2006, with support from Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and Dianne Feinstein, among other Democrat luminaries. Even while they were pushing for amnesty that very year for those here illegally who had resided in the country for a long time, everyone universally understood that the border had to be secured from new illegal immigration and cartel activities.

How is it that 13 years later, our border is worse than ever, and these very same politicians now believe our Border Patrol exists for the purpose of processing, caring for, and managing a border invasion rather than repelling it? And how is it that even Republicans are incapable of properly messaging the provisions of current law and the authority of any sovereign nation to deny entry and turn back illegal aliens, especially when they are used as weapons by dangerous cartels?

But this radical shift in mindset is not even 13 years old. When the first wave of Central American children began coming to Texas’ Rio Grande Valley in 2014, Obama shut it down within a few months, even though the magnitude of the problem was a fraction of the crisis today.

Here are the key numbers from the crisis in the spring to summer of 2014: The number of apprehensions spiked to over 57,000 in March and then peaked at 68,804 and 66,541 in May and June respectively. There was a big legislative fight and a lot of coverage over the unaccompanied teens being smuggled in over the summer, and by August, the numbers were below 40,000, where they remained more or less until the final months of Obama’s presidency.

Obama’s border supplemental request at the time called for more funding to “repatriate and reintegrate migrants to Central America” and for a media campaign in Central America to “deliver the message that unaccompanied children are not given a permit to stay in the U.S.” They didn’t just talk about more funding for humanitarian amnesty programs.

In a famous interview with George Stephanopoulos on June 26, Obama said very emphatically, “Do not send your children to the borders. If they do make it, they’ll get sent back. More importantly, they may not make it.”

Rather than virtue-signal over the deaths of migrants and blame them on Border Patrol and ICE, Obama very clearly recognized that their deaths, while tragic, of course, were the result of their own trip and that the way to prevent such tragedy is by not coming in the first place. “Our message absolutely is don’t send your children unaccompanied, on trains or through a bunch of smugglers,” said Obama. “We don’t even know how many of these kids don’t make it, and may have been waylaid into sex trafficking or killed because they fell off a train.”

Fast-forward five years, and we have 10 straight months of 50,000 or more apprehensions and four months of over 100,000, dwarfing the 2014 wave. But it’s worse than just the macro numbers. At the peak of the 2014 wave, the number of family unit apprehensions, which really places a greater strain on Border Patrol, exceeded 12,000 for just two months before being shut down. We have now been at over double that level for 10 consecutive months and, in recent months, over five times that level.

And yet, even Republicans refuse to discuss funding for repatriation. It’s all about the migrants and not concern for Americans, when even Obama had the moral clarity to understand that Americans come first and that to care for migrants, the best recourse is to dissuade them from making the trip. Republicans have no plans to fight for more detention space and deportation funding. They recently passed a bill fueling more catch-and-release, which will pull more agents off the line without a commensurate amount of enforcement funding. They also funded more legal aid for them to litigate their way into the country. And that was considered the conservative bill!

There seems to be a lawyer for every illegal alien desiring to nullify our immigration laws. Why is there nobody in government willing to finally enforce the mandate to “achieve and maintain operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States” and prevent “all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband”?

We were owed that outcome, the outcome any first world nation should expect, 13 years ago. It’s never too late to fulfil the promise. (For more from the author of “Here’s How Far from Current Law Our Border Debate Has Shifted” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Disabled Man Dies After 9 Days of Court-Ordered Forced Starvation

Following nine days of starvation, after French courts gave the green light to his slow, torturous means of death at the hands of French doctors, 42-year-old Vincent Lambert passed away Thursday.

The Catholic Herald reported that Lambert, a disabled French man and former nurse, died in Reims, France, after a years-long legal battle between his wife and his parents.

The Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life tweeted that Lambert’s death was a “defeat for our humanity.” In a separate statement, Pope Francis urged: “Let us not build a civilization that discards persons those whose lives we no longer consider to be worthy of living: every life is valuable, always.”

Lambert was left a quadriplegic after sustaining massive head injuries during a 2008 traffic accident. His wife wanted to take him off life support years ago; his parents didn’t. After years of legal battles that went all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Cassation in June overruled an order to maintain Lambert’s feeding and hydration support, a story at Aleteia explained.

On July 2, doctors informed the family that Lambert’s tube would be removed, effectively condemning the man to a slow death by starvation and dehydration.

Following the July decision, Lambert’s mother, Viviane, issued a final, desperate plea to save her son.

“I am launching a call for help today. Without your intervention, my son will be euthanized due to his brain handicap,” Viviane told a U.N. panel in Geneva, explaining that her son was “in a state of minimal [consciousness] but he is not a vegetable.”

“In May, when learning about his planned death, [Vincent] cried,” Viviane continued. “We are deeply upset this is why we have turned to the U.N. Committee of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities because the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities prohibits depriving a person of food and drink.”

“He sleeps at night, wakes up during the day, and looks at me when I talk,” Viviane said. “He only needs to be fed through a special device and his doctor wants to deprive him of this so that he can die, while legal experts have have shown that this is not necessary.”

“It’s murder in disguise,” Vincent’s 90-year-old father, Pierre Lambert, told reporters at the hospital earlier this week. “It’s euthanasia.” (For more from the author of “Disabled Man Dies After 9 Days of Court-Ordered Forced Starvation” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump to Announce Executive Action on Census Citizenship Question

President Trump will announce an executive action to add the citizenship question to the 2020 census, two senior administration officials have confirmed to CBS News. He tweeted that he’ll be making a statement on the topic Thursday afternoon.

The anticipated 5 p.m. announcement comes as the president exhibits frustration over the Supreme Court decision blocking the Trump administration from adding the question, ruling that his administration had failed to provide adequate justification for the question. Multiple legal battles over the question are still playing out in lower courts.

It isn’t yet clear exactly what kind of executive action the president will take. Mr. Trump initially described his announcement as a news conference, but the updated White House schedule only described the event as remarks — meaning reporters might not have an opportunity to ask questions. Attorney General William Barr is expected to be at the president’s announcement. . .

The House has set a date of July 16 to vote to hold Barr and Commerce Department Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress for refusing to respond to questions about the census.

“These documents could shed light on the real reason that the Trump Administration tried to add the citizenship question,” House Oversight and Reform Chairman Elijah Cummings said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the administration is stonewalling our investigation and obstructing our efforts to get the information we need to do our jobs. We should not be forced to take these extreme actions to get the documents and information we need to conduct a thorough investigation. I urge Attorney General Barr and Secretary Ross to change course and produce the documents we have subpoenaed on a bipartisan basis so the House is not forced to hold them in contempt of Congress.” (Read more from “Trump to Announce Executive Action on Census Citizenship Question” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE