Pope Gives Trump a Copy of His Global Warming Encyclical

Pope Francis gave President Donald Trump a copy of his encyclical that refers to Earth as an “immense pile of filth” and calls for phasing out fossil fuels to fight global warming.

Francis gifted Trump with his 2015 letter “Laudato Si” during their half-hour meeting Wednesday, Bloomberg reported. The Pope intended for his gift to bolster calls for Trump to not withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

Trump promised to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on the campaign trail, but European leaders — and some in his own White House — are urging the U.S. president to stick with it. Leaders of G7 countries are expected to lobby Trump on the issue when they meet him in Italy this week.

Francis says he would not “proselytize” during his meeting with Trump, but at least one Bishop believed that the pontiff could “convert” Trump on the issue of global warming.

“They will come to an agreement, since the president claims to be a Christian, and so he will listen to him,” Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, the chair of the Pontifical Academies of Science and Social Sciences, said ahead of the meeting. (Read more from “Pope Gives Trump a Copy of His Global Warming Encyclical” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Political and Economic Chaos in Brazil Highlights Need for Reforms

There is not much good news coming out of Brazil these days.

Political corruption scandals continue to rock the country, and the political instability has caused the nation’s stock market to crash.

Judge Sergio Moro, who presides over the biggest corruption scandal of them all (dubbed Operation Car Wash), has become something of a folk hero to the millions of Brazilians who are eager to see an end to the cronyism and corruption that has dogged the country for decades, both in the public and private sectors.

Brazil’s current center-right president, Michel Temer, who succeeded former President Dilma Rousseff after her impeachment and removal from office last year, is now facing calls for impeachment himself amid allegations of corruption.

But surely another big reason why Brazilian leftists are trying to remove Temer is that he is pushing two big efforts to reform their costly statist programs.

As the Financial Times reports, “Brazil has 17,000 unions compared with 168 in the U.K. and 100 in Argentina, a country known for its contentious labor relations.”

Brazil’s labor law, which dates from 1943, makes it too easy for workers to sue their employers. It increases the cost of doing business, hurting Brazil’s ranking in worldwide investment climate studies such as the World Bank’s “Doing Business” survey.

Temer is also pushing for reforms to change the country’s fiscally unsustainable pension system, which currently gives everyone the right to retire in their early to mid-50s and provides luxurious defined benefits packages for public sector retirees.

Temer’s proposed revisions will raise the minimum retirement age to 65 for men and 62 for women—much closer to the average in member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The U.S. retirement age, by comparison, is 67.

The fact that many politicians in Brazil across the spectrum have been touched by corruption allegations does not alter the fact that the country must reform its economy.

The sad news for Brazilians is that these corruption scandals could have been anticipated—maybe even avoided.

Brazil’s scores in the annual Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom deteriorated for years during the long rule of former leftist-populist Presidents Dilma Rousseff and “Lula” da Silva.

So, even if Temer is forced out, his successor will still have to confront these enormous problems—and somehow solve them. (For more from the author of “Political and Economic Chaos in Brazil Highlights Need for Reforms” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Washington Hates Trump’s Budget

The Trump administration is getting pushback on its 2018 federal budget, and it’s coming from elected officials on both sides of the aisle.

Why does Washington find the budget plan so distasteful? As our video explains, maybe it’s because President Donald Trump’s budget focuses more on what’s good for taxpayers as opposed to what’s good for special interests and the federal bureaucracy.

(For more from the author of “Why Washington Hates Trump’s Budget” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Key Takeaways From CBO Score of the Republican Health Care Bill

The Congressional Budget Office updated its score of the House-passed American Health Care Act this week, prior to its being sent over to the Senate.

This budgetary analysis projects that if passed into law, the bill would reduce the number of insured by 23 million, but would decrease the deficit by $119 billion while also reducing federal outlays by $1.1 trillion and federal revenue by $992 billion.

While the score is roughly similar to the score from the original version of the bill released on March 23, several modifications to the law occurred since then and were not reflected in earlier estimates.

The new CBO score addresses the effect of allowing states to waive the Affordable Care Act essential health benefit and community rating requirements on premiums in particular.

Effects on Coverage and Premiums

First, the CBO finds that 2 million fewer people in 2020 and about 1 million fewer in 2026 would become uninsured under the American Health Care Act.

It cites that this is due to “4 million more people with employment-based coverage, as employers in states making changes to market regulations would probably view the insurance products in the nongroup market as less desirable alternatives and decide to offer insurance to their employees, and 3 million fewer people with nongroup coverage, as some would enroll in employment-based coverage, and others would become uninsured.”

This is an interesting way to frame the effects of the bill, since reducing premium levels by rolling back regulations could actually have the effect of making plans more desirable for individuals looking to pay less.

The CBO lacks any real discussion of these positive effects.

As for premiums, the CBO finds the effects the same as previously estimated for roughly half the population, or for the people residing in states that did not pursue any waiver.

However, for the other half of the population, the CBO attempts to estimate the effects of different combinations of waiver decisions. It estimates that one-third of the population would be in states that make some changes to market regulations.

For these states, the CBO finds premiums to be 20 percent lower than under current law by 2026.

It also expects that these lower premiums would lead to more people having insurance, but fewer in the nongroup market—although “lower premiums could attract more enrollees to the nongroup market.”

About one-sixth of the population would reside in states that would substantially alter essential health benefits and waive community rating rules. For this population, the CBO projects “significantly lower premiums for those with low expected health care costs.”

However, it caveats that there is an issue of drastically raising premiums on higher-cost and older individuals in the market.

Ultimately, the CBO’s treatment of these effects could be more deeply analyzed. Most importantly, its methodology is relatively opaque, and ultimately includes an internal disagreement around whether or not lowering premiums leads to increased take-up in insurance coverage.

Regardless of these internal issues, the CBO still projects meaningful premium reductions by 2026 under the American Health Care Act, especially with moderate regulatory reforms.

Medicaid and State Exchanges

The largest projected savings in the bill come from reforms in Medicaid, along with the elimination of the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies in the individual market. The CBO’s score on Medicaid still reflects that it assumes more states would likely have expanded in the future under the Affordable Care Act.

Thus, its projection that 14 million fewer people would be insured due to not having Medicaid under the American Health Care Act might be overstated in all of its scores of the legislation.

Of that 14 million, 4 million will choose to be uninsured in 2018, which suggests the CBO’s methodology with regard to the effect of the individual mandate is unchanged from its original score of Obamacare.

In Medicaid, the CBO projects that these changes result in $834 billion savings from 2017-2026. There is little difference here between the past scores and the current.

Similar optimism from the CBO remains for the Affordable Care Act on the exchange side, as it is important to remember this number would be against a baseline that assumes the Affordable Care Act will enroll 7 to 8 million more people in the individual market, when in reality it does not appear this will be the case, as Avik Roy pointed out in response to the first score.

Nonetheless, savings from elimination of the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies is projected to amount to $665 billion in savings.

Key Takeaways

The CBO’s new score of the American Health Care Act has not changed much from the previous iteration besides incorporating views about how the states will respond to the available waivers, and incorporating the increased spending also included in the manager’s amendments.

While there might be disagreements about the coverage effects of state waivers, it is clear that there are meaningful premium reductions from allowing states to pursue them.

Given this, the CBO has still done nothing to address the inherent uncertainty involved in scoring large, complex pieces of health legislation by hiding large considerations behind opaque methodologies.

It also has still failed to walk back its overly optimistic views on the power of the individual mandate or the performance of Obamacare moving forward. (For more from the author of “Key Takeaways From CBO Score of the Republican Health Care Bill” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Students and Faculty Protesters Demand Punishment of College Republicans Group

Student and faculty protesters rushed a college administration building Monday calling for the school to punish its College Republicans group.

Orange Coast College faculty and students protested the school’s College Republicans chapter after the group published emails from OCC professor Jessica Alabi to Orange Coast College President Dennis Harkins. The emails revealed the professor said she would “stand up” to the group, if the president did not, according to Campus Reform.

The materials also showed that Alabi stopped members of the group from attending a campus event because they were perceived as a threat to the “safe space.” The College Repulicans want OCC to investigate the professor.

The protesters shouted, “No hate, no KKK, no fascist USA” and “Get that club out of our face.” Students held socialist flags and symbols or signs mocking the College Republicans.

“It makes no sense to me why the union and a vocal minority of students would protest against the OCC Republicans for simply asking for an investigation into the matter and protections for students from being discriminated against on the basis of their political affiliation,” said Joshua Recalde-Martinez, the OCC College Republicans’ former president. (Read more from “Students and Faculty Protesters Demand Punishment of College Republicans Group” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hannity Now Silent, Fox News Caves to Pressure, Retracts Seth Rich “Conspiracy” Story; But Rich Cousin Contends That He Was Assassinated Over WikiLeaks Emails

By The Hill. Fox News on Tuesday retracted a story regarding the 2016 killing of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich after massive outcry over sharing conspiracy theories about the murder.

“On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich,” the retraction reads. “The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting.”

“Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.” (Read more from “Fox News Bows to Pressure, Retracts Seth Rich “Conspiracy” Story While Cousin Contends That He Was Murdered Over WikiLeaks Emails” HERE)

_____________________________________

Seth Rich’s Cousin Suspects He Was Killed for Talking to Wikileaks

By Cassandra Fairbanks. Jonathan Rich, the cousin of slain Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, is speaking out — and he does not believe that the murder was a botched robbery as the DC police and media claim.

In a now-deleted tweet, Jonathan responded to Sean Hannity of Fox News who had posted an article about their findings that his cousin had contacted WikiLeaks and sent them the emails which were released shortly after his death.

“First thing I said when my Dad told me was he knew something and he was murdered. The rest of the family thought I was nuts. See last name,” Jonathan tweeted.

He was promptly told not to comment by Andy Rich, and the tweet was deleted.

“This is not the place & not a topic for you to comment on. I love you but filter bro. #family,” Andy Rich tweeted in response. (Read more from “Seth Rich’s Cousin Suspects He Was Killed for Talking to Wikileaks” HERE)

_____________________________________

Hannity: I’m Not Discussing Seth Rich

By The Hill. Fox’s Sean Hannity addressed the growing controversy around his continued coverage of the 2016 killing of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich following massive backlash for sharing conspiracy theories about his death. . .

“Out of respect for the family’s wishes for now, I am not discussing this matter at this time,” Hannity said near the top of his 10:00 a.m. ET program.

The host changed the subject, instead continuing his criticism of media outlets for covering the Trump-Russia investigation, calling it hypocritical since no evidence has linked the two.

Later in the opening monologue, Hannity appeared to indicate that he may visit Rich stories again “at the proper time.” (Read more from “Hannity Now Silent, Fox News Caves to Pressure, Retracts Seth Rich “Conspiracy” Story; But Rich Cousin Contends That He Was Assassinated Over WikiLeaks Emails” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Former CIA Agent: Deep State Targeting Trump Family Members to Damage President

A former CIA agent said the Trump family is undoubtedly being targeted by intelligence agencies and other actors looking to damage the Trump administration.

Bob Baer, a former CIA case officer, made the comments Friday during an appearance on “The Laura Ingraham Show.” Ingraham asked Baer if right-wing populist political activists should be concerned about being monitored by deep state actors.

“For you and me, no … we’re not that important to the equation,” Baer said. “But you can count on it that people are after the Trump family right now.”

“In the government they’re combing through intercepts, they’re combing through conversations. Nobody in that family is not being watched by the press, by foreign governments who have interests in this — and if you in any way were to become a public figure in politics, yeah, you’re vulnerable,” said Baer.

Baer also noted that the frequency of leaks and level of information they reveal is unprecedented. “I have never seen it this bad in terms of leaks,” said Baer. “It’s not often I agree with Trump, but the fact is, when the NSA intercepted Flynn … that got out and that’s not supposed to happen … that’s classified, top-secret codeword” information. (Read more from “Former CIA Agent: Deep State Targeting Trump Family Members to Damage President” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Jihad Playbook: Why Terrorists Attack Children

The attack in Manchester, England, that has so far killed at least 19 and wounded at least 50 is ghastly. That it targeted children is as unforgivable as it is consistent with the jihadist playbook.

Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel has the full story from Monday night, and details are still coming out at the time of this writing.

Among of the bigger observations that has been made about this attack, however, is that it was waged against young adults, teenagers, and children attending a pop concert.

“All acts of terrorism are cowardly attacks on innocent people,” Prime Minister Teresa May said in a statement, “but this attack stands out for its appalling, sickening cowardice, deliberately targeting innocent, defenceless children and young people who should have been enjoying one of the most memorable nights of their lives.”

One such victim – eight-year-old Saffie-Rose Roussos – was confirmed dead by the Telegraph Tuesday afternoon.

During a Facebook live broadcast this morning, a viewer asked why terrorists would do such a thing. This is a more detailed response to that question.

Targeting the innocent is common; sadly, perhaps even commonplace by now. Targeting innocent youth brings the horror of the attack to a whole new level. But horror is the whole point, and it goes back decades. One only has to understand the playbook.

ISIS, its followers, and its sympathizers are ideological adherents to the jihadist tactical theories of Abu Bakr Naji. If you want to understand most of the political Left in America, you should start by reading Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” If you want to understand how Islamist terrorist operate, you should start with Naji’s “The Mastery of Savagery.”

In his book, the 20th-century Islamist theorist says that societies and nations of infidels should be brought to submission to Allah by a three-phase plan of savagery

These phases, as explained by Trump advisor Dr. Sebastian Gorka in 2015, are:

Vexation.

Spread savagery.

Administer savagery.

A talk Gorka gave at the Heritage Foundation in 2015 further illuminates how this strategy works. Here’s a synopsis of the lecture from the Institute of World Politics:

Phase 1, “vexation,” is comprised of operations to distract and exhaust the infidel enemy and his allies. It puts emphasis on smaller dramatic operations (as opposed to dramatic transnational attacks) and is used to prepare fighting units for phase 2. Phase 2, as Dr. Gorka explained, is the “spread savagery” stage, which ISIS has already begun. In this phase, leaders of the insurgency coordinate unconventional warfare to “dislodge” nations from local control. Phase 3, “administer savagery/consolidate/expand,” is designed to out-govern the government. In this phase, the leaders stabilize held areas, unite the population as a fighting community, and implement sharia law and government as a means to establish a base-state. This base-state is a new type of hybrid caliphate used to attack and expand into neighboring countries.

This is the big picture that it is so important to keep in mind when it comes to these sorts of terror attacks. It’s vexing enough for people in the West to worry whether a small explosion will make their trip to the market a fatal one. It’s more vexing when those same kinds of attacks become a monthly occurrence. And it’s even more vexing when those attacks are focused on a society’s children.

The bloodier and more horrific, the better. If ISIS is indeed responsible for this attack, as it has claimed, this is completely consistent with its tactics.

In short, that the Manchester bombing was aimed at killing children is shocking and barbaric indeed, but barbaric – for jihadists – is just part of the playbook. (For more from the author of “The Jihad Playbook: Why Terrorists Attack Children” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Watch Steven Crowder’s Powerful Response to Manchester Terror

Though the point has been underscored ad nauseam on the Right, Monday’s terror attack in Manchester moved CRTV host Steven Crowder to once again stress the imperative need for truth with regard to religious terrorism that killed at least 22 people and injured dozens more.

According to CBS News, the suspected bomber is Salman Abedi, a 23-year-old that was known to authorities. ISIS has also claimed responsibility for the attack, which killed at least 22 people and injured dozens more.

“I think that whether it’s journalism, or outrage, or even comedy, it serves no purpose if there isn’t some kind of a seeking for truth,” Crowder said Monday night. “I don’t mean your truth … I don’t mean finding a truth — I mean the truth.”

The truth, Crowder says, as made clear once again in the U.K., is that political Islam has no place in the Western, civilized world.

“These values, the political prescription of Islam is, by its own definition, completely incompatible with Western culture because it seeks to eradicate Western culture,” Crowder said. “That’s its purpose.”

“Appeasement is completely futile. Trying to appease a group of people whose worldview requires the eradication of those who appease them is … so silly I can’t even wrap my mind around it.”

In a statement responding to the terror attack, President Donald Trump said that the United States stands “in absolute solidarity with the people of the United Kingdom.”

Trump is being criticized for referring to terrorists as “evil losers in life.” Crowder defended the president’s characterization of the terrorists, explaining that Trump is trying to shame Islamists – who view shame as worse than death.

“Could he find a better way to express himself? Sure,” Crowder said. “But starting by shaming them and belittling them – that’s one hell of a start. And that’s why you’re seeing a contrast between him and other leaders. I’m not the biggest fan of him on every issue. But today I certainly stand with the president of the United States and the sentiment of shaming these absolute losers at life in contrast with other world leaders — and as opposed to mincing words on social media.”

Finally, Crowder called for an alliance of people who value Western values against the forces of Islamic hatred that wish to destroy the West.

“Let’s be ultra-sensitive to the truth. Let’s take our sensitivity in a different direction; let’s try and be as sensitive and as open-minded as humanly possible to the truth. And the truth right now, and the truth that is becoming clearer and clearer by the day is that … the prescribed practicing of political Islam as outlined by Muhammad is completely incompatible with Western civilization. And it’s time for us to ally against it.” (For more from the author of “Watch Steven Crowder’s Powerful Response to Manchester Terror” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Judge Will Reconsider Ruling Blocking Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order

A federal judge Tuesday agreed to reconsider his ruling blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick accepted the administration’s request to reconsider his April ruling. He gave the two California counties that challenged the executive order — San Francisco and Santa Clara — two weeks to file any documents opposing the request.

The administration was facing a Tuesday deadline to file paperwork to seek a second review by Orrick. (Read more from “Judge Will Reconsider Ruling Blocking Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.