Coulter Comes Clean on ‘Split’ With Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

Ann Coulter is not happy, but she is making it crystal clear in an exclusive interview with WND that she is not splitting with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump over his recent amnesty remarks, as several media outlets erroneously reported.

Coulter unleashed a series of tweets early Thursday morning that were critical of comments made the day before by Trump indicating he might flip-flop on his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

In an email to WND titled, “Exclusive on-the-record follow-up,” the influential columnist and best-selling author explained:

“Unlike crazed, cult-like Hillary supporters (and Cruz supporters, fyi), I’ve provided helpful criticism to Trump in the past, e.g., over the Heidi Cruz retweet, over the H-1B sellout, and other things.”

“THAT DOESN’T MEAN I’M ABANDONING HIM,” she wrote in all capital letters, to remove any doubt. (Read more from “Coulter Comes Clean on ‘Split’ With Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

HILLARY AND SOROS: Their Campaign of Global Chaos

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Major media outlets in the US have ignored the leak of thousands of emails from billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundation by the activist hacker group DCLeaks. The OSF is the vehicle through which Soros has funneled billions of dollars over the past two decades to non-profit organizations in the US and throughout the world.

According to the documents, Soros has given more than $30 million to groups working for Hillary Clinton’s election in November, making him her largest single donor. So it is likely the case that the media’s support for Clinton has played some role in the mainstream media’s bid to bury the story.

It is also likely however, that at least some news editors failed to understand why the leaked documents were worth covering. Most of the information was already public knowledge. Soros’s massive funding of far-left groups in the US and throughout the world has been documented for more than a decade.

But failing to see the significance of the wider story because many of the details were already known is a case of missing the forest for the trees. The DCLeaks document dump is a major story because it exposes the forest of Soros’s funding networks.

The first thing that we see is the megalomaniacal nature of Soros’s philanthropic project. No corner of the globe is unaffected by his efforts. No policy area is left untouched.

On the surface, the vast number of groups and people he supports seem unrelated. After all, what does climate change have to do with illegal African immigration to Israel? What does Occupy Wall Street have to do with Greek immigration policies? But the fact is that Soros-backed projects share basic common attributes.

They all work to weaken the ability of national and local authorities in Western democracies to uphold the laws and values of their nations and communities.

They all work to hinder free markets, whether those markets are financial, ideological, political or scientific. They do so in the name of democracy, human rights, economic, racial and sexual justice and other lofty terms.

In other words, their goal is to subvert Western democracies and make it impossible for governments to maintain order or for societies to retain their unique identities and values.

Black Lives Matter, which has received $650,000 from Soros-controlled groups over the past year, is a classic example of these efforts. Until recently, the police were universally admired in the US as the domestic equivalent of the military. BLM emerged as a social force bent on politicizing support for police.

Its central contention is that in the US, police are not a force for good, enabling society to function by maintaining law and order. Rather, police are a tool of white repression of blacks.

Law enforcement in predominantly African American communities is under assault as inherently racist.

BLM agitation, which has been accused of inspiring the murders of police in several US cities, has brought about two responses from rank and file police. First, they have been demoralized, as they find themselves criminalized for trying to keep their cities safe from criminals.

Second, their willingness to use force in situations that demand the use of force has diminished. Fear of criminal charges on the one hand, and public condemnation as “racists” on the other causes police to prefer inaction even when situations require that they act.

The demoralization and intimidation of police is very likely to cause a steep increase in violent crimes.

Then there are Soros’s actions on behalf of illegal immigration. From the US to Europe to Israel, Soros has implemented a worldwide push to use immigration to undermine the national identity and demographic composition of Western democracies. The leaked emails show that his groups have interfered in European elections to get politicians elected who support open border policies for immigrants from the Arab world and to financially and otherwise support journalists who report sympathetically on immigrants.

Soros’s groups are on the ground enabling illegal immigrants to enter the US and Europe. They have sought to influence US Supreme Court rulings on illegal immigration from Mexico. They have worked with Muslim and other groups to demonize Americans and Europeans who oppose open borders.

In Israel as well, Soros opposes government efforts to end the flow of illegal immigration from Africa through the border with Egypt.

The notion at the heart of the push for the legalization of unfettered immigration is that states should not be able to protect their national identities.

If it is racist for Greeks to protect their national identity by seeking to block the entrance of millions of Syrians to their territory, then it is racist for Greece – or France, Germany, Hungary, Sweden the US or Poland – to exist.

Parallel to these efforts are others geared toward rejecting the right of Western democracies to uphold long-held social norms. Soros-supported groups, for instance, stand behind the push not only for gay marriage but for unisex public bathrooms.

They support not only the right of women to serve in combat units, but efforts to force soldiers to live in unisex barracks. In other words, they support efforts aimed at denying citizens of Western democracies the right to maintain any distance between themselves and Soros’s rejection of their most intimate values – their sexual privacy and identity.

As far as Israel is concerned, Soros-backed groups work to delegitimize every aspect of Israeli society as racist and illegitimate. The Palestinians are focal point of his attacks. He uses them to claim that Israel is a racist state. Soros funds moderate leftist groups, radical leftist groups, Israeli Arab groups and Palestinian groups. In various, complementary ways, these groups tell their target audiences that Israel has no right to defend itself or enforce its laws toward its non-Jewish citizens.

In the US, Soros backed groups from BLM to J Street work to make it socially and politically acceptable to oppose Israel.

The thrust of Soros’s efforts from Ferguson to Berlin to Jerusalem is to induce mayhem and chaos as local authorities, paralyzed by his supported groups, are unable to secure their societies or even argue coherently that they deserve security.

In many ways, Donald Trump’s campaign is a direct response not to Clinton, but to Soros himself.

By calling for the erection of a border wall, supporting Britain’s exit from the EU, supporting Israel, supporting a temporary ban on Muslim immigration and supporting the police against BLM, Trump acts as a direct foil to Soros’s multi-billion dollar efforts.

The DCLeaks exposed the immensity of the Soros-funded Left’s campaign against the foundations of liberal democracies. The “direct democracy” movements that Soros support are nothing less than calls for mob rule.

The peoples of the West need to recognize the common foundations of all Soros’s actions. They need to realize as well that the only response to these premeditated campaigns of subversion is for the people of the West to stand up for their national rights and their individual right to security. They must stand with the national institutions that guarantee that security, in accordance with the rule of the law, and uphold and defend their national values and traditions. (For more from the author of “HILLARY AND SOROS: Their Campaign of Global Chaos” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Surge of Killer Earthquakes Worldwide in Last Few Days; Hundreds Dead

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Elisabetta Povoledo. A strong earthquake struck a mountainous stretch of central Italy early Wednesday, killing at least 247 people, trapping scores under debris and setting off tremors that awakened residents in Rome, nearly 100 miles to the southwest.

The earthquake, which had a preliminary magnitude of 6.2, struck at 3:36 a.m., about 6.5 miles southeast of the town of Norcia in the Umbria region, followed by about 200 aftershocks over the next several hours, including a 5.5-magnitude tremor at 4:33 a.m.

The authorities said the quake was comparable in intensity to one in 2009 in the Abruzzo region of central Italy that killed more than 300 people. (Read more from “Surge of Killer Earthquakes Worldwide in Last Few Days; Hundreds Dead” HERE)

___________________________________

Powerful Earthquake Rocks Myanmar; 4 Dead, Temples Damaged

By The Associated Press. At least four people are dead after a powerful earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 6.8 shook central Myanmar on Wednesday, knocking glasses off tables and sending people running out of buildings in the country’s largest city.

The U.S. Geological Survey said the quake was centered about 25 kilometers (15 miles) west of Chauk, an area west of the ancient capital of Bagan. It was located fairly far below the Earth’s surface at a depth of about 84 kilometers (52 miles), it said. Deep earthquakes generally cause less surface damage.

At least 185 brick pagodas in Bagan were damaged, the Ministry of Religious and Cultural Affairs said in a statement. Bagan, also known as Pagan, has more than 2,200 structures including pagodas and temples constructed from the 10th to the 14th centuries. Many are in disrepair while others have been restored in recent years, aided by the U.N. cultural agency UNESCO. (Read more from “Powerful Earthquake Rocks Myanmar; 4 Dead, Temples Damaged” HERE)

___________________________________

7.3 Magnitude Quake in South Atlantic Ocean, No Tsunami Alert

By Pranshu Rathee. A major earthquake with a magnitude of 7.3 on the Richter scale was reported in the Atlantic Ocean, to the south-east of Argentina on Friday. According to an observatory in Germany, it occurred about 1,500 miles east of the southern tip of Argentina.

The German Research Centre for Geosciences said that the earthquake struck early on Friday and the epicentre was near the British administered South Georgia Island region. No tsunami alert has been issued by authorities. (Read more from “7.3 Magnitude Quake in South Atlantic Ocean, No Tsunami Alert” HERE)

___________________________________

High Warning Alert for Vanuatu Volcano

By Ruby Taylor. Authorities have upgraded warnings around Ambae Volcano in northern Vanuatu, Radio New Zealand has just reported.

According to radionz, the country’s Geohazards Observatory has raised the alert to Level two on a scale of one to five which signifies the volcano is in a stage of major unrest.

“The observatory says volcanic activity could increase at any time over the next few days.” (Read more from “High Warning Alert for Vanuatu Volcano” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New Florida Poll Shows Trump Leading Clinton

/0 Comments/in , /by

Florida is a swing state during the general election, with both Republican and Democrats fighting hard to earn votes. Barack Obama won the state both in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections.

A new survey by the Florida Atlantic University Business and Economics Polling Initiative shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by two points in the state of Florida.

Trump received 43 percent support over Clinton’s 41 percent. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson garnered 8 percent and the remaining 5 percent were undecided.

Both candidates have struggled with their favorability ratings in Florida. Trump currently sits at 56 percent unfavorable rating, while Clinton holds 58 percent. However, Trump has a higher loyalty score with voters, earning a strong 94 percent.

Clinton leads Trump among female voters with 4 points, while Trump leads among men 46 percent to 36 percent.

Associate professor of political science at FAU and a research fellow of the Initiative Kevin Wagner believes Florida will remain a close race and only the most pressing issues will determine the winner.

“The fact that both Mr. Trump and Secretary Clinton are significantly upside down in their favorability ratings could make it difficult for either to move substantially ahead,” he said. “Clinton likely got a boost from the fact that Floridians chose experience as the top quality they are looking for in their presidential candidate. But, Floridians also chose dissatisfaction with government as their top issue, which likely favors Mr. Trump.”

When it comes to Florida’s minority voters, Trump is lagging behind. He trails Clinton with African-Americans 68 to 20 percent, and Hispanics 50 to 40 percent, but leads significantly with white voters 49 to 33 percent.

“The race between Clinton and Trump among Hispanics in Florida is closer than it is nationally,” said Monica Escaleras, Ph.D., director of the BEPI. “Some of that is probably the Cuban vote. Trump’s support among Latinos in Florida is helping him stay competitive.”

The GOP nominee and real estate mogul recently launched an Hispanic outreach program which would focus his campaign on winning the Latino vote. This advisory council met with him Saturday in order to determine the most effective ways to present his proposals to the Hispanic community.

Trump has also made an appeal to black voters in order to close the wide gap between himself and Clinton, arguing that blacks who have suffered under Democratic leadership have “nothing to lose,” by taking a chance and voting Republican. (For more from the author of “New Florida Poll Shows Trump Leading Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pro-Life Clinic Sues City to Get Next to Abortion Business

/0 Comments/in , /by

On July 5, pro-life pregnancy care center Hand of Hope was ready to become the pro-life neighbor of A Preferred Women’s Health Center in Raleigh, North Carolina — an abortion facility with thousands in regulatory fines under its belt.

Now, it’s suing the City Council for discrimination for not rezoning the lot next to the facility. The non-profit center paid $309,000 for the property, according to the lawsuit, and is suing on behalf of itself and the women and children its services would help.

“The City Council claimed that though it was the City’s plan to rezone the property just as Hand of Hope’s requested, it was premature to do so and that the City did not want to rezone their property,” Noel Sterett, an attorney for Hand of Hope, told The Stream.

“According to councilwoman Kay Crowder … the Council preferred to rezone Hand of Hope’s property at a later date as part of a larger commercial project rather than in a piecemeal fashion with small lots,” continued Sterett in an e-mail. “The City Council’s statement is belied by the fact that the City apparently and separately approved the rezoning of 4 one-to-two acre properties close by Hand of Hope’s property in a piecemeal fashion.”

Approved and Then Denied

Three city agencies approved Hand of Hope request for a rezoning that would allow it to be situated next to the abortion center, Sterett said — the Citizen Advisory Council, the city’s Zoning Staff and the city’s Planning Commission. The latter agency unanimously approved the rezoning after holding a hearing and finding that Hand of Hope’s use “was entirely consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan and the surrounding uses and fit into all of the City’s other land use policies or goals.”

The city’s attorney declined to comment to The Stream about the City Council’s decision, saying the city had not yet been served with the suit. But according to the minutes of the July 5, 2016 meeting where the Council’s decision was made, the council voted 7-0 against Hand of Hope because it did not want “lot by lot piecemeal nonresidential development.” The council wanted, in Crowder’s words, a “coordinated approach would produce a more efficient use of the land” producing higher tax value,” and the “Council believes that this dead-end street should be rezoned for such uses when all the properties along Woodsdale Road are rezoned.”

The city did not respond to The Stream’s question about why the abortion business was allowed on the street but Hand of Hope was not.

A Preferred Women’s Health Clinic is one of four facilities in a chain that has two locations in North Carolina and two in Georgia. According to Operation Rescue’s Cheryl Sullenger, “A Preferred Women’s Health Center has been cited by OSHA 13 times for violations categorized as ‘serious’ ones related to health. Fines levied were in excess of $12,000, indicating just how severe the violations actually were.” She told The Stream that the documents don’t give the details of the violations.

Sterett said that the abortion business “actively opposed Hand of Hope’s use,” and that “We are still investigating the relationships or known positions of the City Council members on the issue of abortion.” The abortion center did not respond to The Stream’s request for comment about its involvement in the debate over Hand of Hope’s request.

City Favoritism?

It appears a different city agency — the Raleigh Board of Adjustments — gave a different abortion facility a variance letting them put up a fence higher than the city regulations allowed. The center, according to pro-life testimony, asked for the variance after installing the fence at an illegal height.

According to the minutes of the Board’s May 9, 2016 meeting, approval was granted 4-1, thanks to employees and a volunteer for A Woman’s Choice of Raleigh Inc., who claimed the higher fence provided more privacy and other benefits for women getting abortions, as well as for employees. An opponent of the variance said the height would prevent him from recording legal violations at the facility, and another said he and his wife would be prevented from effectively offering adoption services to women going to and from it.

According to the Board of Adjustments, “The variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the ordinance such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.” The Board did say its “decision is subject to review for fraud, material misrepresentation, or other misconduct at the proceeding or for violations on the subject property,” and that “if such a determination is made by the Board, its prior decision may be reversed, modified, or affirmed.” (For more from the author of “Pro-Life Clinic Sues City to Get Next to Abortion Business” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Leaked: DNC Finance Director Freaks Over Hillary Staffer Noting Tribal Donations in Email

/0 Comments/in , , /by

As the media scoured through the close to 20,000 emails from the Democrat National Committee that Wikileaks hacked and then released, forcing DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign, they overlooked one of particular significance: the response from DNC finance director Jordan Kaplan to a Hillary Clinton campaign staffer, who had emailed him about contributions from Native American tribes.

Clinton staffer Justin Klein told Kaplan that he was sending the DNC a few checks from the tribes, which wanted most of the money directed to the Democrat National Convention. Kaplan responded, “Don’t send me an email like this again. You know Alex. Don’t be a d***” (asterisks not in the original).

Kaplan’s Reasons

Why did Kaplan respond that way? Was he concerned that they were breaking the law and didn’t want a paper trail?

The tribes make millions of dollars from operating casinos. Although they are exempt from many campaign finance laws, Clinton and the DNC are not. Even though the tribes can contribute exorbitant amounts of cash to political campaigns and committees, the recipients are limited as to how much money they can accept.

Tribes are not required to form political organizations, so they can contribute under multiple different names to get around contribution limits to politicians and PACs. According to The Washington Post, “One tribe has used more than 75 names” to get around these requirements.

Based on an analysis of campaign finance law, it appears the Clinton campaign was likely trying to circumvent contribution limits. According to Politico, Clinton benefited from joint fundraising with Democratic state parties — but after the money was distributed into the states’ coffers, 88 percent of it was then immediately funneled to the DNC, where the bulk of it was spent to help Clinton defeat the unexpectedly popular Bernie Sanders in the primaries.

By using this joint method of fundraising, it appears that once donors maxed out their giving to her campaign, she essentially directed the money to state parties or the DNC. According to Politico, some state Democratic party leaders griped that they were being used as pass-through organizations. This was not considered fair play since the state parties were apparently never told they wouldn’t get to keep a fair share as part of joint fundraising committees with the Clinton campaign, nor was it fair for the DNC to funnel money Clinton could not legally accept to the DNC, which used it on her instead of Sanders.

The Democratic line was that Clinton was raising money for everyone else, not funneling it all back to herself. Actor George Clooney went on television and asserted, “The overwhelming amount of money that we’re raising, and it is a lot, but the overwhelming amount of the money that we’re raising is not going to Hillary to run for president. It’s going to the down-ticket.”

The Clinton Story Downgraded

This hybrid “Hillary Victory Fund” that raised most of the money in question was a joint effort of her campaign, the DNC and state Democratic parties. The website Politifact, which verifies the accuracy of news in politics, downgraded its positive rating of honesty from mostly true to half true regarding the fundraising after discovering more information. The site noted one of the more egregious operations:

The Hillary Victory Fund sent $214,100 to Minnesota, for example, and that state party didn’t keep a dime. It was routed to the DNC, which otherwise wouldn’t have been able to accept the money “since it came from donors who mostly had already maxed out to the national party committee,” Politico reported.

In the context of current campaign laws, this funneling of money through groups that can’t legally use it comes close to money laundering. (In fact, Jack Abramoff served several years in prison for coordinating contributions from Indian tribes.) Politicians have gone to prison for money laundering. No wonder Kaplan was so upset with his young colleague for blabbing about the donations in an email.

Unsurprisingly, the leaked email has not yet affected Clinton’s political fortunes. Almost no one in the left-leaning mainstream media dares to tangle with her.

Lingering Questions

But the question remains: If Clinton and the DNC did nothing wrong in the way they allocated Indian tribe donations, why was Kaplan so upset about a staffer mentioning the arrangement in an email?

Campaign funding experts are divided over whether laws were broken. Larry Noble, the general counsel of the Campaign Legal Center, who served for 13 years as general counsel at the Federal Election Commission, told Politico, “It clearly goes against what was intended for the joint fundraising committees.”

While the tribes may not have broken the law — since the regulations they are subject to are much less stringent — Clinton and the DNC are at risk of jointly coordinating to subvert campaign finance laws, which would be considered a “criminal scheme” under federal law. (For more from the author of “Leaked: DNC Finance Director Freaks Over Hillary Staffer Noting Tribal Donations in Email” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Biden Takes Apology Tour to Turkish, Muslim Brotherhood-Loving Erdogan

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration’s years-long international apology tour continues with its latest stop in Turkey, where Vice President Joe Biden expressed regret to Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan that he couldn’t have come to the Islamist strongman’s aid sooner after the failed coup last month.

“The American people stand with you; we’ve stood with you from the beginning,” Biden said at a joint news conference the nation’s capital, Ankara. Barack Obama was one of the first people to call. But I do apologize, I wish I could have been here earlier.”

This is, of course, the same Islamist strongman who’s imprisoned tens of thousands of citizens during the country’s political unrest and has been accused of a laundry list of human rights violations, including torture, a crackdown on freedom of the press, and the subversion of the rule of law.

As expected, Biden avoided public criticism of the recent purge, in which The New York Times reported almost 9,000 police officers have been fired, a third of the country’s private school teachers have been suspended, and over 10,000 soldiers have been detained.

Rather, during his time in the Middle Eastern nation, “Biden [was] expected to emphasize to Turkish officials that the purge was damaging perceptions of Turkey within the U.S., Europe and the business community,” an unnamed U.S. official told Bloomberg News.

This meeting-and-apology move is obviously an attempt to keep a finally-engaged Turkey involved in regional efforts against ISIS, which did far more harm than good as the insurgency gained ground after its precipitous rise to power in 2014.

As I have previously written:

Erdogan’s tenure in control of the country began in 2003, when he became prime minister and has continued through his assumption of the office of president in 2014. During this time, he has gained a reputation as a strongman politician who is cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood, and bent on Islamizing Turkey. Additionally, he’s been roundly criticized for his compliance in the rise of ISIS, stemming from a willful blindness to the insurgent threat. In fact, it’s almost impossible to imagine a rise of ISIS without a poorly-managed Turkish border allowing both the influx of foreign fighters to enter the so-called caliphate, while allowing smuggled oil and antiquities to come out.

In fact, Biden’s last public apology to his “old friend” was in direct connection to Turkey’s complacency in regard to ISIS’ rise. In 2014, he called Erdogan and publicly apologized for implying that the Turkish president’s inactions were partially responsible for strengthening the jihadist organization’s presence in the region.

Nonetheless, the Obama administration is making sure that it’s on record propping up the Muslim Brotherhood-loving, ISIS-complicit strongman, who will be more than emboldened to continue turning his country into a Sunni version of Iran.

This, of course, all lines up with the Obama administration’s past. It offered outspoken support for former Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi (a former Muslim Brotherhood member) during the North African country’s 2013 revolution and other policies that abetted the growth of the jihadist presence in other areas of the continent. And all that is not to mention former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s abysmal China policy that signaled to the country’s communist government that its egregious religious freedom violations would go unchallenged.

But that’s the Obama Doctrine for you. (For more from the author of “Biden Takes Apology Tour to Turkish, Muslim Brotherhood-Loving Erdogan” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Just Officially Took the Jeb Bush/Gang of 8 Position on Amnesty

/0 Comments/in , /by

In part two of Republican candidate for president Donald Trump’s town hall with Sean Hannity, scheduled to air tonight on Fox News, it seems Mr. Trump will finally clarify his position on amnesty. For the worse.

Speaking on what to do with non-violent illegal aliens, Trump said that under his plan they will “pay back-taxes” and that it would be a “very hard thing” to “throw them and their family out.”

Having illegal immigrants pay a fine and back taxes to stay in the country was the policy proposed in the Gang of Eight amnesty bill!

Further, that is the position on amnesty once held by former candidate for the Republican nomination for president Jeb Bush.

“I think for the eleven or twelve million people here illegally, they should come out from the shadows, they should pay a fine, they should pay taxes, they should work,” Bush said in an interview back in October of 2015.

He famously, or infamously, drew fire from conservative critics for referring to illegal immigrants crossing the southern border illegally as an “act of love.”

“A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave,” he said, adding later that properly targeting people who overstay visas “would restore people’s confidence” in the nation’s immigration system.

“There are means by which we can control our border better than we have. And there should be penalties for breaking the law,” he added. “But the way I look at this — and I’m going to say this, and it’ll be on tape and so be it. The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their families — the dad who loved their children — was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table. And they wanted to make sure their family was intact, and they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family. Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony. It’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family. I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families.”

One of those Bush’s fiercest critics was … Mr. Trump himself.

Remember this Instagram ad?

This is no "act of love" as Jeb Bush said…

A video posted by Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on

Now that Trump himself has proposed non-violent illegal aliens be allowed to remain in the United States after paying fines in the form of “back taxes,” is Mr. Trump’s plan substantially different from Mr. Bush’s? Or the Gang of Eight bill’s?

(For more from the author of “Trump Just Officially Took the Jeb Bush/Gang of 8 Position on Amnesty” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pentagon Plays Hide and Seek With Trillions of Your Tax Dollars

/0 Comments/in , /by

After years of protesting that they were “too big to audit,” the Pentagon is finally under a congressionally-mandated review. Under a law passed in 2009, the Pentagon must provide their financials to Congressional overseers by September 30, 2017.

However, a new report published by the Pentagon’s Office of Inspector General (IG) highlights how problematic the Pentagon’s books truly are. The IG now believes there is “considerable risk” that the Pentagon will not be audit-ready by the date mandated by law.

And, really, it’s more than just a simple problem. To borrow a Trumpism, it’s a YUGE problem. In fact, according to the Pentagon, the U.S. Army has trillions of dollars in accounting errors in their books. Yes, trillions. These errors are based on missing receipts and invoices, or statements that literally just don’t add up.

Reuter’s Scot Paltrow found that the Pentagon didn’t simply misplace a few receipts, nor was it as simple as offering an Accounting 101-style refresher. Instead, Paltrow concludes, that the military was forced to “make trillions of dollars of improper accounting adjustments to create an illusion that it’s books are balanced.”

As the report highlights, we’re talking about insane bookkeeping flubs. In fact, the Pentagon fabricated nearly $2.8 trillion ledger entries in just the third quarter of 2015; overall, $6.5 trillion in fabricated entries for the year. The evidence is damning; such poor mishandling will put additional scrutiny on defense spending, the largest expenditure in the discretionary budget. As can be expected, it will be difficult for the military to justify needed resources when, in fact, the Pentagon admits:

[F]inancial statements were unreliable and lacked an adequate audit trail. In addition, DoD and Army could not rely on their accounting system data when making management and resource decisions.

How could this happen?

Part of the problem begins with the culture of military support in Washington. For years, military spending has been a sacrosanct topic. Politicians are often reluctant to question or challenge the ever greater need for military resources; it is a subject that can immediately make a politician look weak on national security.

Today, the military spends roughly as much as it did during the Cold War era, or at least, during the Reagan defense buildup. All told, including war funding, the military will cost the U.S. taxpayer roughly $586 billion this year.

To truly put the size of our defense budget into perspective, it is often helpful to compare it to, well, the resources of other nations – particularly those who may be foes. As you can see in the chart, we crush everyone in military might; or at least when it comes to buying military hardware.

The inability of the Department of Defense to manage their own budget is an affront to the American taxpayer, as well as to the troops the DoD oversees. Every few months a new story develops where the military has literally lost billions of dollars. For example, in April of 2015, the military was accused of losing $45 billion in Afghanistan.

That’s nearly as much as the federal government provides to build our nation’s roads, each year. Taking taxpayer funds for granted; squandering them, or losing them is a disservice to the American people. Yet, that is not even the most unfortunate aspect.

Most concerning is what this means for the fate of U.S. Military might in the future. The federal government is cash strapped, with $19.5 trillion in debt, and a social safety net that is consuming the federal budget. As a result, each dollar sent to the DoD will be under greater and greater scrutiny.

Even the Pentagon realizes that asking for additional funds to build up the military is unrealistic when they fail to account for the resources they currently have. In their Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) proposal, a five-year defense budget, the Pentagon has effectively asked for flat funding, or, on average, $534 billion per year through 2020.

In fact, instead of expanding the military, the Pentagon is already looking for new savings. Plans are in place to reduce the number of active duty troops, from 1.31 million to 1.27 million. The Pentagon also would like to reform military pay and initiate a new round of base realignments and closures.

The U.S. military is the best in the world. Men and women throughout our history have sacrificed their lives to protect the freedom we cherish, even as they seek to liberate other lands from tyranny and terror. However, the means to achieve these heights should not be abused. The sacred honor with which our troops commit themselves should not be disregarded and shamed by an organization that squanders the pledges of U.S. taxpayers. Each dollar committed to our national defense should be treated with respect, and with purpose. Anything less tarnishes the honor of our troops, and the costs which they have so bravely borne. (For more from the author of “Pentagon Plays Hide and Seek With Trillions of Your Tax Dollars” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What a School Letting Students Opt out of Pledge of Allegiance Says About Our Patriotism

/0 Comments/in , /by

Can America thrive as a post-patriotic society?

A Florida elementary school recently caused a stir on social media when a man posted an image of his niece’s waiver from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. The waiver form asked parents if they would like to opt their child out from “standing and placing his/her right hand over his/her heart” and reciting the pledge.

The infuriated uncle wrote on Facebook, “My niece brought this home from school today…What is happening to our country?!?”

Florida students have been able to opt out of the pledge since 2000.

The just over 30-word Pledge of Allegiance, written by Francis Bellamy in 1892, received an addendum of “under God” in the 1950s under President Dwight Eisenhower, but has remained a fairly constant and little-changed staple at schools and public gatherings for over half a century. While the specific merits of the pledge have elicited opposition on the left and right over the decades, the casual and increasingly dismissive treatment of even simple patriotic acts is a symptom of deeper trends in American society.

The decline of patriotism in American life will lead to profound crisis for the world’s youngest civilization—which has been fortunate enough to maintain one of the oldest, and certainly the greatest, of political systems.

A June Gallup poll indicated that only 53 percent of adults are “extremely proud” to be Americans, a 17 percent decline since 2003. The numbers were dragged down in particular by millennials; only 34 percent of adults under the age of 30 reported being “extremely proud” to be citizens of the United States. These steadily declining numbers, more than economic malaise or any other factor, demonstrate the current fragility unity of the world’s greatest superpower.

In spite of recessions, economic setbacks, and widespread government dependency, Americans remain a dynamic and entrepreneurial people at heart. But these factors alone aren’t alleviating the fact that most Americans believe the country is on the wrong track, fueling the current populist mood of the nation.

The great French observer of American life, Alexis de Tocqueville, warned that “ … epochs sometimes occur in the life of a nation when the old customs of a people are changed, public morality is destroyed, religious belief shaken, and the spell of tradition broken.”

Tocqueville ominously wrote that the country in such a state:

… assumes a dim and dubious shape in the eyes of the citizens; they no longer behold it in the soil which they inhabit, for that soil is to them an inanimate clod; nor in the usages of their forefathers, which they have learned to regard as a debasing yoke; nor in religion, for of that they doubt; nor in the laws, which do not originate in their own authority; nor in the legislator, whom they fear and despise. The country is lost to their senses; they can discover it neither under its own nor under borrowed features, and they retire into a narrow and unenlightened selfishness.

The decline in true or even symbolic patriotism is especially bad news for a country like the United States.

The blending of disparate races, ethnicities, and religions into a lasting national identity has been one of the greatest and historically rarest triumphs of this country. Americans have traditionally embraced displays of patriotism to a degree that astounds and occasionally disturbs citizens of other countries. But it has been necessary for a civilization that has brought together so many diverse peoples under one flag.

The long-term American cultural project of assimilation is fraying and its decline could open up the cleavages that exist under the country’s surface. For most of the world, “nationalism” has symbolized ethnic identity more than love of country—in the wake of quickly declining patriotism, this will likely become the norm in the U.S. as well.

When using the phrase “land of opportunity” is labeled a “micro-aggression” by universities, and most students fail a basic civic literacy test, it is no wonder young Americans have little attachment to their country. They may learn that their only true ties are to the subgroups their leftist professors imbue with such importance, rather than to all of their fellow Americans.

While the trendy notion of being a “citizen of the world” is popular in Western, cosmopolitan societies, in a globalized world in which communities have broken down, individuals fall back on tribe or look to radical mass movements to fulfill this sense of loss.

The flippant way in which patriotism is being cast aside in this country makes it vital that Americans attempt to restore patriotic sentiment and understanding of the nation’s traditions for current and future generations. Leaders capable of articulating what has made America unique are necessary, as is a public that has a keen understanding of what ideas are at the cornerstone of the republic.

South Carolina’s new law requiring students to study the founding documents is one of many ways civic and patriotic attachment to country can be restored—and similar laws could at least provide a baseline for responsible citizenship.

In an 1894 speech, Theodore Roosevelt spoke of the need for “true Americanism” for the U.S. to be a great country. He said:

We shall never be successful over the dangers that confront us; we shall never achieve true greatness, nor reach the lofty ideal which the founders and preservers of our mighty Federal Republic have set before us, unless we are Americans in heart and soul, in spirit and purpose, keenly alive to the responsibility implied in the very name of American, and proud beyond measure of the glorious privilege of bearing it.

If the trends continue and America proceeds down the path of being a post-patriotic society, no election or economic boom will put the country back on the right track or restore sagging confidence in the country’s political institutions.

Patriotism and pride in the U.S.’ unique institutions and founding principles has been the glue holding together a country diverse in ethnic backgrounds and creeds. Without allegiance to the American experiment, we may find that our citizens choose ethnic ties or “global citizenship” as more meaningful than their hollowed out and meaningless American identity. (For more from the author of “What a School Letting Students Opt out of Pledge of Allegiance Says About Our Patriotism” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.