Black Conservatives List the Issues Football Players Should Actually Be Protesting Against

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Daily Caller News Foundation talked to three prominent black conservatives, Christopher Harris of Un-Hyphenated America, Antonia Okafor of the EmPOWERed movement, and singer Joy Villa, about the most serious issues in the black community football players should be shedding light on and what effect the protests have on the country.

“If they really want to protest something in the black community, they need to protest black on black crime. They need to protest the lack of education within their community. They need to protest single moms who are stuck on welfare for generations and keep having kids,” Villa told TheDCNF. “They need to protest that they can be sitting watching TV in their homes and stray bullets from gang violence can come into their home and murder them.”

Okafor also agreed that football players should be addressing issues like poverty in the black community and poor schools that don’t teach students the necessary skills to thrive in college or in the workforce.

“I think there are issues when it comes to the black community, like criminal justice reform. I’m a huge proponent of that. I think that it comes down to over-regulation and government,” Okafor said to TheDCNF, noting that groups like Black Lives Matter advocate for reform but tout people who call for more government. “The protests should be focused on that there is more poverty in the African American community, that a bigger percentage of us are in poverty. I’m living in Baltimore, and I see it everyday. Our schools are failing, and they don’t even know that they’re failing.” (Read more from “Black Conservatives List the Issues Football Players Should Actually Be Protesting Against” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Fellow Puerto Rico Mayor Rips San Juan Mayor — ‘She’s Not Participating in Any Meetings’

/0 Comments/in , /by

The mayor of Guaynabo, Puerto Rico cast serious doubt Saturday on the claims made by San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, who has repeatedly attacked President Trump and accused him of abandoning Puerto Rico in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.

Guaynabo’s mayor, Angel Perez, said in an interview with The Daily Caller that his experience with the federal government has been different from Cruz’s, in part because — unlike Cruz — he has been participating in meetings with officials from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other federal agencies.

Cruz has repeatedly accused Trump and the federal government of abandoning Puerto Rico. She demanded in a press conference on Friday that Trump do more to help the island, adding that “we are going to see is something close to a genocide” if more is not done.

Mayor Perez told TheDC that the story Cruz is telling the media doesn’t mesh with what he has seen from the federal government.

“My experience is different. I have been participating in different meetings at the headquarters of FEMA and our government and the help is coming in and right now my experience is different from hers. I’m receiving help from the government, we are receiving assistance from FEMA, I got people over here helping us with applications for the people that have damage in their houses. And we have here in Guaynabo, we have thousands of people that lost partially or totally their houses,” said Perez, who is a member of Puerto Rico’s New Progressive Party. (Read more from “Fellow Puerto Rico Mayor Rips San Juan Mayor — ‘She’s Not Participating in Any Meetings'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ex-Bodyguard Eviscerates Hillary as ‘Rude, Obnoxious Fraud’

/0 Comments/in , /by

In a week full of political frustration, former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino is blasting Hillary Clinton for blaming racism and uninformed women for her defeat, NFL players for not standing for our national anthem, and the latest failure of Republicans to address Obamacare . . .

As Clinton makes the rounds promoting her new book on the 2016 campaign, Bongino says he is infuriated by Clinton’s attitudes towards those who did not support her. As an unsuccessful candidate in a very close race, Bongino says he knows how tough it is to lose, but he says Hillary is taking her frustration to a different level.

“Now it’s not that she lost and she’s blaming people. It’s that she lost because we’re all racists and women who voted for Trump are all unacceptable examples of females. It’s so personally condescending that I felt the need to tell people who Hillary really is,” said Bongino.

On Monday, Bongino tweeted, “I worked with Hillary. Hillary is an obnoxious, rude, condescending, fraud who cares about ONE thing-herself.” (Read more from “Ex-Bodyguard Eviscerates Hillary as ‘Rude, Obnoxious Fraud'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Allahu Akbar’ Attacker Slits Woman’s Throat in France

/1 Comment/in , /by

ISIS have claimed responsibility for a terror attack which saw a man shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ stab two women to death with a butcher’s knife in Marseille.

The victims, aged 17 and 20, suffered horrific injuries during the ‘frenzied’ attack, with one slashed in the throat and the other stabbed in the chest and stomach.

Eyewitnesses told how a man ‘dressed in black’ launched himself at the two women, who screamed for their lives as others ran for safety.

The assailant was gunned down by soldiers who were on patrol inside Saint Charles train station at the time as part of France’s ongoing state of emergency.

The suspect, thought to be aged 25 to 30, was known to authorities for common law crimes while analysis of his fingerprints came up with several aliases. (Read more from “‘Allahu Akbar’ Attacker Slits Woman’s Throat in France” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Antifa’ Preps Mass Uprising to Remove ‘Fascist’ Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

On Nov. 4, the group Refuse Fascism is calling for gatherings around America to demand “the Trump/Pence regime must go.”

The group claims the Trump administration is “fascist” and must be resisted, channeling the rhetoric of the antifa, or “anti-fascists,” which have been active across the country.

Yet the group has a larger agenda than simply resisting “fascism.”

Refuse Fascism is a front group for the Revolutionary Communist Party, a fiercely anti-American leftist group noted for its overt call to abolish the United States. WND reported in July the group protested the United States and burned American flags outside the Republican National Convention.

The party has even drafted a “Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America” as a template for the post-American order. (Read more from “‘Antifa’ Preps Mass Uprising to Remove ‘Fascist’ Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why I Am Voting Against Marijuana Commercialization in Fairbanks

/0 Comments/in , /by

Have you wondered how we got to this point, where just recently the Planning Commission approved a grow operation in a residential neighborhood, with most of the neighborhood coming out, and hundreds of pages of documentation on the problems with this facility including falsehoods in the application itself?

I realized recently where the disconnect came from. A few years ago, the assembly set up the zoning regulations for marijuana businesses. The mayor at the time had come in with pretty strict buffer zones like we had done before with strip clubs. The assembly decimated those buffer distances and how they were measured (and since then has made the method even more tilted in the marijuana businesses’ favor). One thing the assembly did do, though, is recognize that they didn’t have a good defense for residential neighborhoods, so they amended the ordinance to add a conditional use process for those operations in general use zoning areas that were adjacent to a lot with a residence on it.

A conditional use process notifies everyone in a certain radius of a public hearing before the Planning Commission (with regular zoning permits there is no zoning notification to the neighbors). The intent of putting this amendment in there was so that the Planning Commission would look carefully at the neighborhood, and if they determined it was residential in character, they could deny the permit. There have been conditional use permits denied in the past for other reasons. The disconnect seemed to occur because that intent didn’t get communicated to the Planning Commission. At the time, there was a lot of turnover on the commission and a lot of training going on, and what came out is that many of the members now believe that if something meets the code otherwise, then it should be given that permit.

Think about that, if we only had to determine if something met the regular permit part of the zoning code, then why would we have a conditional use hearing at all. The Planning Department could just take care of that, as they do with regular permits.

So now we’re at this point where extremely weak zoning regulations combined with inadequate decisions from the Planning Commission have resulted in all conditional use permits for marijuana businesses in residential neighborhoods being approved. The problem now is that even if the assembly fixed that, which it hasn’t shown any interest in doing, then those places would still be grandfathered in and degrading those residential neighborhoods, their property values, and their desire for a peaceful life.

After that approval has happened, the assembly still has the full discretion to protest a license based on the fact that it doesn’t fit the residential character of the neighborhood. While the assembly has been notified when those establishments are in residential neighborhoods, they have yet to exercise that discretion and protect any of them.

So the propositions on the ballot are completely about the overreach of government allowing these places to be put in residential neighborhoods and next to schools, churches, day cares, youth centers, drug treatment facilities, and other sensitive uses. The opposition has tried to raise the specter of businesses being put out of business, but I hope everybody realizes that those business owners all knew this was coming and chose to take the risk anyway. It’s also been seen that not only do the taxes not cover the cost of regulation but also that we have loopholes in the law, like Colorado, that will enable many to get around the taxes.

State law protects an initiative for two years from being modified by the assembly, but after that they can change it as they like. So, if you vote “yes” on borough Proposition 1 or city of Fairbanks Proposition A, then it’ll effectively be like hitting the reset button. They can come back in two years with much better zoning laws protecting residential neighborhoods and re-implement the businesses.

If you’re still on the fence, please consider that the industry-controlled state Marijuana Control Board is about to allow on-site consumption, which was not legally allowed by the 2014 voter initiative that legalized marijuana. That will allow people to drive into or next to your neighborhood and smoke pot right there. They are allowed to stay open until 5 a.m. and can open at 8 a.m. This will add a level of misery to what your neighborhood will already be experiencing beyond what you’ve already read about in the recent letters to the editor.

We get one chance to protect our neighborhoods. Please vote “yes” on Proposition 1 or Proposition A.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

It Begins: Feds Demand Facebook Hand Over Info on Political Activists

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Through a trio of search warrants, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is demanding Facebook hand over the personal information of potentially 6,000 of its users, it was revealed Thursday.

According to CNN, which obtained court documents pertaining to the case, the DoJ warrants target the accounts of three “anti-administration activists who have spoken out at organized events, and who are generally very critical of this administration’s policies.”

That description comes from the three users’ attorneys, CNN reports. It all stems from arrests made in Washington, D.C. on the day of Donald Trump’s inauguration back in January, following what the government claims were riots.

The warrants were served to Facebook in February, but a gag order prevented the social media giant from alerting the three users to the government’s intentions until the order was lifted in mid-September.

Once alerted, the users contacted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which now represents them.

“What is particularly chilling about these warrants is that anti-administration political activists are going to have their political associations and views scrutinized by the very administration they are protesting,” the ACLU’s Scott Michelman told CNN.

One of the warrants is for Emmelia Talarico, who ran the disruptj20 page where much of the anti-Trump protesting was organized. The other two are for Facebook users Lacy MacAuley and Legba Carrefour.

If Facebook complies with the DoJ’s request, it will mean the federal government will have access to the personal data — including private messages — of the nearly 6,000 users who simply “liked” the disruptj20 page.

In the ACLU’s motion to quash the warrants, filed with the D.C. Superior Court on Thursday, Michelman notes the type of data the government is seeking to obtain. From one of the warrants:

All profile information; News Feed information; status updates; links to videos, photographs, or other web content; Notes; Wall postings; Comments; Friend lists, including the friends’ Facebook user ID numbers; goups and networks joined by the Account, including the Facebook group ID numbers; event postings; and pending and rejected ‘Friend’ requests.

He sums it all up as such:

In short, the warrants sought a complete record of anything the three users communicated or received from a third party via Facebook, everyone with whom the users associated via Facebook, and everything the users searched for on Facebook, during the specified time period.

That time period is from November of 2016, just before the presidential election, and February 9 of this year, when the warrants were served to Facebook.

In addition to what the ACLU sees as a clear violation of their clients’ First Amendment protections, Michelman warns in the motion of the precedent that would be set:

Additionally, the enforcement of the warrants would chill future online communications of political activists and anyone who communicates with them, as they will learn from these searches that no Facebook privacy setting can protect them from government snooping on political and personal materials far removed from any proper law enforcement interest.

The ACLU also argues that there are no safeguards in the warrants to protect the privacy of those who ultimately had nothing to do with those “riots” back in January. They assert that the DoJ’s action violates Fourth Amendment protections against illegal search and seizure.

Facebook has yet to say whether it will comply with the government’s order, and the DoJ, as CNN writes, “is not commenting on these search warrants. (For more from the author of “It Begins: Feds Demand Facebook Hand Over Info on Anti-Trump Users” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Steelers Player Announces Plan for National Anthem at Next Game

/0 Comments/in , /by

Three days after the Pittsburgh Steelers unintentionally entangled themselves in the ongoing national anthem controversy by remaining in the stadium tunnel during the anthem at a game in Chicago, center Maurkice Pouncey announced the team intends to “make it right” next time.

“I promise you one thing this week: We’ll all be standing out there for the national anthem,” he said after practice Wednesday. “Trust me. We respect our flag and we respect the military.”

Regarding what happened Sunday, he claimed it was just a “big misunderstanding.”

“Trust me, I’m very sorry to anyone who feels the way they do,” he said. “I care about the flag dearly. Trust me, this team will be out there standing Sunday.”

The team’s decision Sunday to remain in the tunnel came in response to an ongoing controversy surrounding statements made by President Donald Trump at a rally in Alabama last Friday.

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects the flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a b—h off the field right now. Out. He’s fired. He’s fired!’” Trump had said, referencing protests by certain NFL players upset by what they perceive to be racial injustice in America’s criminal justice system.

This remark wound up triggering widespread backlash, with numerous players and team owners across the NFL mounting a joint effort to rebuke the president by joining the protests against the national anthem.

In a bid to avoid becoming involved in this controversy, all members of the Pittsburgh Steelers except one decided to skip taking part in the anthem ceremony Sunday. Only offensive tackle Alejandro Villanueva, a former Army Ranger, appeared on the field.

Villanueva later apologized for taking a lone stand, expressing remorse for having thrown his teammates “under the bus.”

Likewise, quarterback Ben Roethlisberger released his own statement expressing regret over what happened.

“The idea was to be unified as a team when so much attention is paid to things dividing our country, but I wish we approached it differently,” he said. “We did not want to appear divided on the sideline with some standing and some kneeling or sitting.”

In his own statement Wednesday, Pouncey made it clear that when his team stands up for the national anthem at its next game, he expects “100 percent participation” from all players. (For more from the author of “Steelers Player Announces Plan for National Anthem at Next Game” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Judge Strikes Down Bill That Protects Babies With Down Syndrome

/0 Comments/in , /by

A federal judge has struck down an Indiana law that would ban abortions sought because of fetal genetic abnormalities, protecting unborn babies from discrimination based on their sex, race or abilities.

According to The Indy Channel, U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt found the law to be “unconstitutional” and granted an order that that would block it from being enforced.

The order stems from a suit filed in April 2016, when Judge Pratt halted the law at the request of Planned Parenthood.

The law itself made Indiana the second state in the U.S. to effectively ban abortions of babies with Down syndrome or another genetic disorder, and also had other “requirements” regarding the abortion process.

House Bill 1337 included in its non-discrimination ban the requirement to have aborted or miscarried bodies “cremated or buried and another requirement that abortionists who have hospital admitting privileges renew them annually.”

However, Pratt argues this law, particularly the inability to abort due to a genetic abnormality, goes against a woman’s right to her body.

“The lack of authority supporting the state’s position likely stems from the fact that it is contrary to the core legal rights on which a woman’s right to choose to terminate her pregnancy prior to viability are predicated,” Pratt wrote.

According to Courthouse News, she also “struck down another provision dictating how the remains of a fetus are to be handled” on the grounds that they should “be treated the same way under law as the remains of a deceased person.”

Abortion is one of the most common medical procedures performed in America every year. Elective abortions allow that procedure to dictate whether a baby with a disability will, or will not be, welcomed into this world.

As Good Housekeeping suggests, “two-thirds of pregnancies undergo prenatal testing as early as 11 weeks,” so women have more of a choice as to whether they will end the pregnancy. It further adds, in the specific case of disabilities, “most choose to terminate.”

It also acknowledges that from 1995 to 2011, “roughly 67 to 85 percent of pregnancies with a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome were aborted.”

“As a result, elective pregnancy terminations have meant 30 percent fewer babies were born with Down syndrome in the U.S.,” according to a 2015 study.

Yet life expectancy of people with Down Syndrome has increased — quite dramatically — from 1960 when, on average, they would live to be only about 10 years old.

By 2007, persons with Down syndrome lived (on average) to be about 47 years old.

Yet, Pratt, who has a history of siding with the abortion lobby, insists this law violates a woman’s right to free choice, and many others agree with her.

“Every person deserves the right to make their own personal decisions about abortion. There is no medical basis for these restrictions,” said Christie Gillespie, President and CEO of PPINK.

Pro-lifers strongly disagree.

“We are deeply disappointed that Planned Parenthood can discriminate against unborn children and target them for abortion,” said Mike Fichter, President and CEO of Indiana Right to Life and one of the many voices against Pratt’s decision.

“It’s a shame that Planned Parenthood cares more about their bottom line than recognizing the worth of children with Down syndrome,” he said.

“We urge Attorney General Curtis Hill to appeal.”

It is not clear yet if the state will, in fact, appeal Pratt’s ruling. (For more from the author of “Obama Judge Strikes Down Bill That Protects Babies With Down Syndrome” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Trump’s Appeals Court Nominees Are Backed up in the Senate

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump’s nominations for judgeships on federal courts have been excellent so far, and his just-announced nominees to fill four appeals court vacancies in Texas and Louisiana are no exception.

The four are among a slate of new judicial nominations rolled out Thursday by the president as he makes steady progress toward filling more than 160 current and future vacancies on the federal courts.

While Trump announces more and more outstanding nominees, they are, unfortunately, piling up in the Senate. The chamber has confirmed only seven judges (including Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch) this year.

Part of the problem is the Senate Judiciary Committee’s policy, known as “blue slips,” which asks the two senators from a nominee’s home state for their opinion before the committee holds a hearing or further evaluates the nominee.

Senators select “I approve” or “I object” on a blue slip of paper. The president has the power to appoint judges—with the advice and consent of the Senate—but under this 100-year-old tradition, a single senator may be able to bring a confirmation to a crashing halt.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, should not let this obstruction continue. Instead, he should ditch the blue-slip practice for appellate nominees.

Before specifying earlier judicial nominees who are yet to be confirmed, often because of blue slips, let’s look at Trump’s four new nominees to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

1. Kyle Duncan is a seasoned attorney in private practice in Washington, D.C. He served as Louisiana’s first solicitor general and general counsel for Becket Law when the firm represented Hobby Lobby in its challenge to Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate. Duncan has argued cases in more than 30 federal and state appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Duncan, who also was a professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law, is the president’s pick for a Louisiana seat on the 5th Circuit. Louisiana’s two senators are Republicans Bill Cassidy and John Kennedy.

2. Kurt Engelhardt, chief judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana, has served as a district court judge since his nomination by President George W. Bush in 2001. Prior to that, he was in private practice. Engelhardt made headlines for taking the Obama Justice Department to task for leaking grand jury information while prosecuting police officers who shot six unarmed individuals in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Trump nominated him to fill another Louisiana seat.

3. Don Willett is a justice on the Texas Supreme Court who is known as the “Tweeter Laureate of Texas” for his entertaining social media presence. Despite this playful side, Willett is a thoughtful jurist with more than a decade of experience on the bench. Willett was included on Trump’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees—and he earned a spot on The Heritage Foundation’s list as well. He is the president’s choice for a vacancy in Texas, which has two Republican senators, John Cornyn and Ted Cruz.

4. James Ho, a partner at the Dallas office of Gibson Dunn, previously served as solicitor general of Texas. In that post, he received two Best Brief Awards from the National Association of Attorneys General. Ho also served in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel during the George W. Bush administration, and clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas. He is slated to fill another Texas seat.

While we don’t expect these four nominees to the Texas and Louisiana seats on the 5th Circuit to face blue-slip problems, the same cannot be said of all the other nominees announced earlier this year.

Here’s a look at 10 nominees for federal judgeships who are waiting for a Senate hearing or vote:

1. Stephanos Bibas, a professor of law and criminology at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, was nominated to the 3rd Circuit in June. Bibas is one of our nation’s leading criminal law experts, and runs a clinic at U Penn for students to participate in Supreme Court cases. Pennsylvania has one Democrat senator, Bob Casey Jr., and one Republican, Pat Toomey. Bibas’ hearing before the Judiciary Committee is scheduled for Oct. 4, so he has cleared potential blue-slip hurdles.

2. Joan Larsen is a Michigan Supreme Court justice nominated to the 6th Circuit. After some delay, likely influenced by the fact that she is on Trump’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees, Michigan’s two Democrat senators, Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters, returned their blue slips. Larsen, a former clerk to the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, appeared before the Judiciary Committee for a Sept. 6 confirmation hearing and awaits a committee vote.

3. Michael Brennan, an attorney in private practice in Milwaukee, was nominated in August for the 7th Circuit. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat, announced that she is “extremely troubled” by Trump’s “partisan approach” in not deferring to Wisconsin’s judicial selection committee. Ron Johnson, a Republican, is Wisconsin’s other senator.

4. Amy Coney Barrett, a law professor at Notre Dame, also was named to the 7th Circuit. While Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., dragged his feet over the summer, he eventually joined Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., in returning the blue slip. You may recall that at Barrett’s confirmation hearing in September, Democrats asked inappropriate questions about her Catholic faith. She awaits a committee vote.

5. David Stras, a Minnesota Supreme Court justice, was nominated in May to the 8th Circuit. Sen. Amy Klobuchar issued a statement calling for a hearing for Stras (though she wouldn’t have picked him), but her fellow Minnesota Democrat, Sen. Al Franken, announced he would not return his blue slip. Franken said Stras “would be a deeply conservative jurist in the mold of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.” Stras is also on Trump’s short list for the Supreme Court.

6. Steve Grasz, a lawyer in private practice in Omaha, Nebraska, previously served in the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office, where his cases included defending the state’s partial-birth abortion ban before the Supreme Court. Grasz was nominated to the 8th Circuit in August. The state’s senators, Ben Sasse and Deb Fischer, are both Republicans.

7. Ryan Bounds, a federal prosecutor in Oregon, is a nominee for the 9th Circuit. He worked in George W. Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel and clerked for a conservative powerhouse, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain. Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, both Democrats, had another individual in mind for the vacancy, so they informed the White House they intended to block Bounds’ confirmation.

8. Allison Eid is a Colorado Supreme Court justice and nominee to the 10th Circuit seat vacated by Gorsuch. Also on Trump’s Supreme Court list, she previously served as Colorado’s solicitor general and is a former clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas. Her confirmation hearing was in September, and she awaits a committee vote.

9. Lisa Branch, a Georgia state court judge, was nominated to the 11th Circuit in September. She is another Bush administration alum, having served in both the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Management and Budget. Georgia’s senators, David Perdue and Johnny Isakson, are both Republicans.

10. Greg Katsas, deputy White House counsel, was nominated for the D.C. Circuit. Formerly a partner at the D.C.-based law firm Jones Day, Katsas has argued cases before the Supreme Court, including the first Obamacare challenge, NFIB v. Sebelius. He held several posts in the Justice Department during the Bush administration and also clerked for Thomas. Since no senators represent the District of Columbia, he doesn’t need to worry about blue slips.

We applaud the president’s selection of these tremendous individuals for vacancies on the federal appeals courts.

But they are just the tip of the iceberg. With more than 160 vacancies to fill, senators need to stop stonewalling and get to work confirming these highly qualified, conservative nominees. (For more from the author of “Why Trump’s Appeals Court Nominees Are Backed up in the Senate” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.