Donald Trump Jr. Posts Moving Footage of ‘Angel Mom’ to Social Media, Asks Nancy Pelosi Vital Question

Donald Trump Jr. has been sounding the alarm on voices that have largely been silenced by the mainstream media and ignored by top Democrats like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): so-called “Angel Parents” — mothers, fathers and family members of those killed at the hands of illegal immigrants.

The oldest Trump son took to social media on Sunday to post a powerful clip of Angel Mother Mary Ann Mendoza, whose son was tragically killed by a drunk-driving illegal immigrant.

Appearing on Fox News’ “Hannity,” Mendoza was asked by host Sean Hannity if she was pleased with President Donald Trump “holding the line” during the partial government shutdown over wall funding for the southern border. . .

“I would love the opportunity to stand with Nancy Pelosi mother-to-mother and look her in the eye and say, ‘Which child of yours, or grandchild of yours would you give up to support this agenda?'” she said, adding, “It’s like a slap in our face and a kick to our loved one’s grave every time she does this.”

“And I want the public to know, and I want Nancy Pelosi to know: I called her office again today and requested another meeting next week when I’m in D.C. and it was dead silence from her staffer. I said, ‘This is Angel mother Mary Ann Mendoza. I’d like to request a meeting face-to-face, mother-to-mother with Nancy Pelosi about this situation.’ Dead silence, and the staffer said, ‘No. I’ll put you through and you could leave a voicemail.'”

(Read more from “Donald Trump Jr. Posts Moving Footage of ‘Angel Mom’ to Social Media, Asks Nancy Pelosi Vital Question” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The U.S. Should Always Be Ready to Deploy Military Strikes Against Iran

The focus on the partial government shutdown has left little room for other news. But Washington elites still managed to find another reason to complain about the Trump administration over the weekend––they were shocked by the report that National Security Advisor John Bolton requested the Pentagon to provide the National Security Council (NSC) with military options to strike Iran last year.

Bolton made the request after Iranian-supported militias in Iraq fired rockets against the U.S. consulate in Basra and at Baghdad’s green zone, where the U.S. embassy is located, on September 6, 2018. Although fortunately no one was injured, the United States still regarded the militias’ actions as “life-threatening attacks” against the United States.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders made it known that “the United States will hold the regime in Tehran accountable for any attack that results in injury to our personnel or damage to United States government facilities.” She further promised that “America will respond swiftly and decisively in defense of American lives.”

As national security advisor, Bolton’s request to the Pentagon for military options to strike Iran is reasonable. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Pentagon developed some military options upon Bolton’s request. However, unnamed sources (of course) told the Journal that the request raised alarm within the Defense and State Departments, saying “People were shocked. It was mind-boggling how cavalier they were about hitting Iran.”

In the end, other than public statements, the United States didn’t really do anything to Iran as a response. But over the past weekend, Washington elites were still shocked that Bolton even made such a request in the first place. Apparently there are many weak knees in Washington. (Read more from “The U.S. Should Always Be Ready to Deploy Military Strikes Against Iran” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

DOJ Is Considering Making a Drastic Change to Their Subpoena Policy Relating to Media Leaks

The Department of Justice is considering changing a long-standing rule that required the department to provide media outlets with advance notice of a subpoena relating to media leaks. As it currently stands, the DOJ is required to provide advance notice to third parties who make be involved in an investigation relating to a leak to the media, The Daily Caller reported. The reason for the change is simple: it takes too long to thoroughly conduct investigations into the leaks, especially when national security is at risk.

This is what the current statute, which was put in place in the 1970s, says:

When the Attorney General has authorized the use of a subpoena, court order issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(d) or 3123, or warrant to obtain from a third party communications records or business records of a member of the news media, the affected member of the news media shall be given reasonable and timely notice of the Attorney General’s determination before the use of the subpoena, court order, or warrant, unless the Attorney General determines that, for compelling reasons, such notice would pose a clear and substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation, risk grave harm to national security, or present an imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm.

(Read more from “DOJ Is Considering Making a Drastic Change to Their Subpoena Policy Relating to Media Leaks” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Conservative Activist Jumps Pelosi’s Fence With Illegal Aliens to Prove THIS Vital Point

By Townhall. Conservative activist Laura Loomer, who is known for going undercover with James O’Keefe, took alleged illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s home in California. There, the group jumped the fence and Loomer demanded the group be let into the home. The group set up a pop up tent with the word “morality” on it and hung the pictures of those who were killed by illegal aliens, The Daily Caller reported.

During the middle of the stunt, Loomer called into the Alex Jones Show on InfoWars, at which point he applauded her efforts and included her live streamed video on his show.

(Read more from “WATCH: Conservative Activist Jumps Pelosi’s Fence With Illegal Aliens to Prove THIS Vital Point” HERE)
_______________________________________________

WATCH: Laura Loomer Brings Illegal Aliens to Nancy Pelosi’s Home. Pelosi Has Police Remove Them.

By Daily Wire. Self-described investigative journalist Laura Loomer brought a handful of illegal immigrants to the home of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Monday.

Pelosi — who has been unwavering in her opposition to funding a wall along the southern border, which she’s classified as an “immorality” — reportedly had Loomer and the illegals removed from her property.

Loomer, accompanied by illegal immigrants from Guatemala and Mexico, lugged a tent onto Pelosi’s multimillion-dollar vineyard estate, freelance journalist Nick Monroe reported Monday. In large red letters, the word “immorality” was written across the tent; there were also photos of murder victims of illegal immigrants hanging from the front of the tent. . .

. . .

Earlier this month, Pelosi notably called Trump’s proposed southern wall an “immorality.”

“The fact is, a wall is an immorality. It’s not who we are as a nation,” Pelosi told reporters. “We are not doing a wall. Does anybody have any doubt? We are not doing a wall,” she added.

(Read more from “WATCH: Laura Loomer Brings Illegal Aliens to Nancy Pelosi’s Home. Pelosi Has Police Remove Them.” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

VIDEO: Reporter Attacked on Air While Livestreaming

In a harrowing moment captured on live video, a female reporter was attacked on air while livestreaming from the scene of what authorities say was a “mass overdose incident” on Saturday.

KRCR News Channel 7 of Chico, California was on the scene covering developments in an alleged mass fentanyl overdose that resulted in what authorities say were a dozen people ages 19 to 30 being rushed to the hospital Saturday. . .

In an alarming incident livestreamed on Facebook, KRCR’s Meaghan Mackey was reporting outside the home where the mass overdose took place, when things quickly got out of hand — as the video posted by CBS Sacramento shows.

In the video, someone can be heard saying, “This is disrespectful, do you understand that?” Suddenly, the news camera appears to be hit, then drops to the ground, while a female — presumably Mackey — begins to scream. “Get the [inaudible] out of here!” someone yells.

(Read more from “VIDEO: Reporter Attacked on Air While Livestreaming” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

NAIL IN THE COFFIN: Trump Finishes Off Acosta After Brutal Day

President Donald Trump humiliated CNN’s Jim Acosta on Thursday after the professional troll accidentally admitted that border walls work during the president’s visit to McAllen, Texas.

Acosta posted multiple videos to his Twitter account showing how safe the border was in an area where there were large steel slats separating the border. . .

The term “Dear Diary” is used to mock Acosta on social media because his posts often sound like he is writing his personal feelings in a diary.

(Read more from “NAIL IN THE COFFIN: Trump Finishes Off Acosta After Brutal Day” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

6 Things the Media Doesn’t Want You to Know About the Border Crisis

Let’s talk about the media and the border crisis. Media advocacy on behalf of bogus asylum has succeeded. It has spawned the most precipitous increase in family units ever crossing our border and has empowered the dangerous drug cartels beyond belief. Now, the media strategy is “see no evil, hear no evil.” They are seeking to deny that there even is any problem at our border.

One of the most common canards from these blowhards who refuse to educate themselves about this issue is that the border flow is not truly exceptional. They point to the fact that there were years in the 1990s and early 2000s when we experienced almost 1.5 million annual apprehensions. This myopic approach exposes how they are completely disregarding the nature of this particular migration and the dangers it poses.

Here are six interconnected points that explain why the problem is so imminent now more than ever before.

1) Trajectory

When assessing any sense of urgency in policy, a firm grasp of the trajectory is very important. While it’s true that there were years a long time ago when we experienced more border crossings, it’s the trajectory of this current surge that is concerning.

When Trump was elected, border crossings immediately slowed to a trickle. Border sheriffs with decades of experience tell me they never saw anything like it. The mere perception of deterrent dried up the flow because perception of amnesty is what drives the migration. But then the courts went into high gear and even Trump started talking about a “dream” amnesty later in 2017. That ratcheted up the flow again.

Then, in the summer of 2018, the media and the courts virtue-signaled on behalf of criminal aliens self-separating themselves from their kids, and we have now experienced the sharpest surge in such a short period of time. We are on pace for over 700,000 apprehensions this fiscal year (which could easily be 1.5 million in total coming over the border, counting non-interdicted). The number of family units apprehended between points of entry skyrocketed by almost 2,151 percent since the rock-bottom numbers of the Trump effect in the spring of 2017. Yes, that is an emergency and needs to be addressed. The numbers are climbing higher every single month. Do we need to wait until it reaches the peak of the last wave before we get permission to pre-empt the peak of a new wave that should never have happened?

2) We are not returning these illegal aliens back to their countries

One of the big reasons why this wave of migrants not of Mexican origin is even worse than the previous waves of migration from Mexico is because we are not repatriating them. While it is true that we had years of over one million apprehensions during the 1990s and early 2000s, we also returned 1-1.5 million of them every year to Mexico. And we usually did so within hours. Now those numbers are down to 100,000-200,000 a year (not including removals from the interior, which take forever) because most of them are from other countries and are wrongly considered by the courts to be eligible for various forms of status. According to the DHS, only 1.1 percent of non-Mexican family unit aliens had been repatriated and only 1.8 percent of non-Mexican unaccompanied alien minors had been repatriated. For example, of the 31,754 unaccompanied minors CBP apprehended from the Central America in fiscal year 2017, 98.2 percent remain in the country today. It takes about a year to return just the total of aliens that come from a mere few days of apprehensions! In that sense, this wave is much more devastating to American taxpayers than previous waves because it’s permanent.

Also, in general, the courts are more aggressive than ever in blocking removals or returns. We are facing death by a thousand lawsuits, being forced to litigate deportations for months that once took us hours.

3) Nature of the migrants

Whereas in previous decades the migration consisted mainly of single adults, the current migration is being driven by the magnets of catch-and-release for teenagers and family units. This has created a humanitarian crisis with children the likes of which we’ve never seen before, even at the peak of the Mexican migration of last decade. By the media’s own admission, during the July showdown over “family separation,” this was a huge crisis. Well, that very media outcry has now incentivized a gushing flow from Guatemala and doubled the number of family units coming over even relative to the emergency levels of last July.

4) Shutdown of our Border Patrol

Our Border Patrol is being tied up in a way we’ve never seen before. Because most of the migrants are coming for amnesty through their children, they are purposely surrendering themselves to the border agents, not trying to evade detection as they did in past decades. This is the wave of “I have a credible fear” migrants. The number of migrants asserting credible fear and surrendering themselves to border agents has increased 1,744 percent from 2009 through FY 2018, and the numbers are now surging even higher. That is an emergency of stolen sovereignty, especially when you consider that violence went down in those countries precisely as migration went up. We are being taken advantage of.

It would be bad enough if that did not enable the drug cartels, but it does. The cartels use the surrendering migrants as diversions so they can smuggle in their Special Interest Aliens, drugs, criminals, and gangsters. In the past, the flow was more uniform, so Border Patrol could spread out and deter the cartels and their more high-value clients with the fear of interdiction. Now there are record numbers of bogus asylees, often 100 at a time, running straight for Border Patrol at the command of the cartels. This is taking border agents out of the field and turning them, quite literally, into babysitters and hospitals. That is when the drug cartels bring in all of the criminals and drugs, which is why that crisis began around 2014 with the flow of Central Americans.

None other than Obama’s DHS secretary, Jeh Johnson, warned about the “the increased global movement of SIAs” in July 2016, asserting that it demanded the “immediate attention” of the nation’s most senior immigration and border security leaders to counter.

5) The drug and gang crisis

This iteration of the migration has empowered the drug cartels more than ever to spawn the worst drug and gang crisis in our history. Back during the great wave of Mexican migrants, the drug problem was bad, but the deaths were a fraction of what they are today. MS-13 was almost eradicated during Bush’s second term. Now the gangs and cartels are stronger than ever. Everyone seems to recognize the drug crisis as an imminent emergency, except as it relates to its primary source: the border.

6) Drug cartels are more powerful and dangerous than ever before

The sheer fact that anybody is comparing this border problem to that of previous decades demonstrates a core problem. They fail to understand that the cartels have adapted to new dimensions of criminality and have become a bigger problem than before.

The cartel violence at our border is through the roof and much worse than in previous decades. Why? Because now that the cartels control the lucrative migration trade engendered by the amnesty agenda (catch-and-release, UACs, asylum, DACA, sanctuary cities), they fight for control over the turf. To fully understand the gravity of the cartels and why things have changed so much for the worse, I had a long interview with Jaeson Jones, a veteran of the border war, on my podcast on Monday. Jones is a retired captain of the Texas Department of Public Safety, Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division, who commanded and developed the Texas Border Security Operations Center (BSOC) currently under the Texas Rangers. Here’s what he said about the evolving threat of the cartels:

Children and people are now a commodity to the cartels. They have to pay what is known as the Peso, or the tax to the cartels, as they transit from southern part of Mexico all the way up to our northern border. Once you’re in control of a plaza, everything that moves through is paid for. That’s why they battle. That’s why they battle for control of that space. That’s basically the way it works, and it’s also why you are not going to enter the United States without working and contracting with the Mexican cartels.

Jones lamented the amount of crime from criminal alien networks that is not being quantified in federal data:

Along our southwest border right now, the level of cartel infiltration at local, and state, and federal levels is unbelievable. Look at the kidnappings that are occurring. The extortion, drug trafficking. … To this day at a national level, the American people have no idea how much dope is actually seized in this country. Human trafficking, labor trafficking, money laundering, weapon seizures, cybercrime. I mean the list goes on.

What about those who believe blocking cartel infiltration is somehow not the purview of national defense?

When we see these individuals learning the tradecraft of how to utilize armored vehicles and military-grade weapons in two-man, four-man, 10-man tactics … our everyday law enforcement officers domestically are not capable of handling that. That’s not what they train for.

Indeed, this is a national emergency quintessentially grounded in our national security more than anything else we do. The problem is here, and the time to address it is now. (For more from the author of “6 Things the Media Doesn’t Want You to Know About the Border Crisis” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democratic Governor’s Anti-Gun Package Is Straight-Up Confiscation

Elections have consequences and all elections matter, especially at the state and local level. For nearly ten years, the Virginia Republican Party has yet to win another statewide race; the 2009 gubernatorial election was the last time they won. In 2017, Democratic Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam beat Ed Gillespie, and they virtually wiped out the GOP in the state. The GOP maintains two-seat majorities in both the House of Delegates and the state Senate. It’s not pretty, given that Republicans use to control over 60 seats. That sizable majority was the reason why former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, another Democrat, couldn’t push a far left agenda. He even signed into law a deal on the state’s concealed carry reciprocity laws, which were about to be shredded by state Attorney General Mark Herring, who is considering running for governor in 2021; Virginia bars consecutive terms for governors.

With the tide changing in the state, Northam is going all-out on this anti-gun blitz. He smells blood. And even if he isn’t successful this session, he’s laying the groundwork to pass this gun control package that includes a so-called assault weapons ban and universal background checks. The latter is a prelude to a national registry. The former is grounded in total confiscation. Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon has more:

The plan to ban the sale and possession of certain kinds of firearms proposed by Virginia governor Ralph Northam (D.) could affect millions of gun owners, an industry group said on Friday.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), which represents gun manufacturers and dealers, said the vague description of the legislation released by Northam on Jan. 4 would apply to most firearms currently on sale in the commonwealth.

(Read more from “Democratic Governor’s Anti-Gun Package Is Straight-Up Confiscation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

NYT Reveals FBI Retaliated Against Trump for Comey Firing

In a Friday night news dump, the New York Times revealed the FBI’s surprisingly flimsy justification for launching a retaliatory investigation into President Donald Trump, their chief adversary during their recent troubled era.

Admitting there is no actual evidence for their probe into whether Trump “worked for the Russians,” FBI officials instead cited their foreign policy differences with him, his lawful firing of bungling FBI Director James Comey, and alarm that he accurately revealed to the American public that he was told he wasn’t under investigation by the FBI, when they preferred to hide that fact.

The news was treated as a bombshell, and it was, but not for the reasons many thought. It wasn’t news that the FBI had launched the investigation. Just last month, CNN reported that top FBI officials opened an investigation into Trump after the lawful firing of Comey because Trump “needed to be reined in,” a shocking admission of abuse of power by our nation’s top law enforcement agency.

The Washington Post reported Mueller was looking into whether Trump obstructed the Russia investigation by insisting he was innocent of the outlandish charges selectively leaked by government officials to compliant media. Perhaps because such an obstruction investigation was immediately condemned as scandalous political overreach, that aspect was downplayed while Mueller engaged in a limitless “Russia” probe that has rung up countless Trump affiliates for process crimes unrelated to treasonous collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election, and spun off various investigations having nothing to do with Russia in any way.

The latest Times report does provide more detail than these earlier reports, however, and none of it makes the FBI look good. In fact, it provides evidence of a usurpation of constitutional authority to determine foreign policy that belongs not with a politically unaccountable FBI but with the citizens’ elected president. More on that in a bit. (Read more from “NYT Reveals FBI Retaliated Against Trump for Comey Firing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Why Is the Main Harm of a Long Shutdown the Pay of the Workers and Not the Actual Work?

The political and media elites are border deniers. They are also debt deniers. This partial government shutdown has finally forced a national dialogue over the most ignored national security problem of this generation at our border. But oddly, the fact that so many agencies and departments have shut down for three weeks and nobody cares has not spawned a national discussion over the purpose of having some of these jobs, other than to pay the employees.

On Friday, with almost no debate, House Democrats brought a bill to the floor, S. 24, that would permanently guarantee automatic back pay for federal employees, even the ones that were furloughed, in the event of a shutdown. Traditionally, Congress has always voted to pay back federal workers after a particular shutdown, given the radioactive nature of the politics behind it. But this bill is different. If it were to become law, it would essentially take all federal employees’ salaries, which are currently discretionary and subject to the appropriations process, and make them mandatory spending. Thus, irrespective of whether Congress passes appropriations bills, all federal employees – whether essential or not – would be guaranteed pay for not working during an appropriation lapse.

The amazing thing is that only seven Republicans had the courage to fight through the demagoguery and vote against this bill.

The bill was poorly crafted, even from a leftist perspective, because if the goal is to pre-emptively end government shutdowns, then why didn’t the bill also mandate that these same workers go to work? If you want to end the concept of government shutdowns, then just end them. This bill merely permanently guarantees pay and treats government salaries like Social Security and Medicare without even ending the furloughs when Congress can’t reach an agreement on spending bills. As Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., one of the seven brave conservatives who voted against the bill, told me today, by guaranteeing “retroactive pay for every possible future shutdown,” it will only make it “easier for politicians to cause future shutdowns,” which is the exact opposite of what proponents of this bill are touting.

Sadly, the political class is learning the exact opposite lesson they should from this stealth shutdown. Obviously, there are some important agencies, such as ICE, Border Patrol, and the Coast Guard, that are subject to this lapse in appropriations and are seeing their pay delayed. We should always ensure that the essential workers are paid. But because they are essential, they are still working. What about the 95.4 percent of HUD employees, 86 percent of Commerce, 83.3 percent of Treasury, 66.5 percent of Agriculture, and 76 percent of Interior, employees who are not working because they are deemed unessential? Education and Labor are already funded this time, but if they were subject to the shutdown, 95 percent and 81 percent of their respective employees would be deemed nonessential.

One can make a case that some nonessential workers are necessary in the long run and are just not indispensable at the moment. That is certainly the case at Justice and Homeland Security, where roughly 85 percent of employees are deemed essential, so naturally you will need a certain number of nonessential, yet necessary, employees to support their work. But if such a high percentage of a department is deemed nonessential, shouldn’t we have a discussion on whether those positions should exist or whether states, which actually have to balance their budgets, should take up the slack?

For some non-security-related agencies, the only collateral damage of this border fight is that the workers aren’t getting paid. But if that is the only substantial problem, why are we not having a debate over the purpose of these jobs to begin with? We don’t have government for the purpose of creating employment. Regardless of one’s ideology, federal agencies and programs should only exist if they are deemed indispensable to the public good.

Sure, the media is trying to conjure up problems resulting from the shutdown, but nobody could honestly suggest that we are seeing a crisis from the closure of the departments and agencies where the majority of the employees are nonessential, such as at HUD. We have thousands of local governments and 50 states governments for a reason, and housing is clearly a local function.

Which brings us to the 800-poound gorilla in the room – the debt. Any responsible American, even one who is not facing a debt crisis, would not pay for so many products and services that are so unessential that if they were terminated for a while, they wouldn’t feel it. Now consider someone who does face a debt crisis. The finances of an individual family who is in the same debt crisis as the federal government would look like this:

The family earns $100,000 per year but incurs $130,000 in annual expenses.

The cumulative debt of the family is greater than all its assets and is set to explode in a few years.

The family already throws away a lot of money every year paying interest to credit cards, but in a decade, $18,000 every year will be going towards that interest.

Any normal American family in this predicament would be forced to make painful long-term cuts and find a new path in life. Yet our government won’t have a discussion over the debt even now that it has become evident that we can go so long without many government positions.

Unfortunately, we already have two-thirds of federal spending deemed off limits and not subject the annual budget process. This is why it was so irresponsible for Congress to try to take the entire federal payroll out of the budget process and turn it into de facto mandatory spending. We will never have a discussion on the need for any part of the federal budget if this bill becomes law.

For that matter, Congress is not even doing anything about the $141 billion in annual “improper payments.” We are having a fight over $5.7 billion in funding for the most important job of the federal government, while Congress refuses to deal with pure waste and fraud that is 25 times that cost every year.

In the coming weeks, it’s incumbent upon people of all political persuasions to ask the following question: If we are facing such a deep debt crisis, can we still afford to reflexively keep every federal office currently in existence simply because it offers a paycheck? (For more from the author of “Why Is the Main Harm of a Long Shutdown the Pay of the Workers and Not the Actual Work?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE