Trump’s Campaign Begins Selling LGBT Apparel on Website

/0 Comments/in , /by

Only in the 2016 campaign, in a race full of both irony and the unexpected, could you ever hope to see a Republican candidate selling merchandise uniquely targeted to the LGBTQ community — and Donald Trump’s campaign is doing just that.

The GOP presidential nominee recently has tried to reach out to African-American voters.

“Tonight, I’m asking for the vote of every single African-American … who wants to see a better future,” Trump said Aug. 19 during a rally in Michigan. “Look how much African-American communities have suffered under Democratic rule. To those I say the following: What do you have to lose by trying something new like Trump? What do you have to lose?”

Now it seems that he is also looking to gain votes with the gay, lesbian and transgender communities.

The Trump campaign recently began selling “LGBTQ for Trump” shirts on its website.

LGBT Republicans appreciated the gesture. Some took to Twitter to express their approval.

The real estate mogul has said on numerous occasions that he is the best candidate for the LGBT community.

However, not everyone is convinced that Trump’s statements are anything more than empty words.

One of Trump’s biggest critics in the gay community is Michelangelo Signorile, The Huffington Post’s “queer voices editor-at-large.”

In a recent story, Signorile wrote that “there is absolutely no evidence anywhere of Donald Trump promoting gay ‘rights’ or talking openly about them — except to take them away.”

Trump, however, did make an effort to reach out to LGBT voters at the Republican National Convention.

The GOP nominee invited Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel, who is gay, to speak in Cleveland.

“I am proud to be gay. I am proud to be a Republican. But most of all I am proud to be an American,” Thiel said.

In his own speech, Trump said, “As your president I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from a hateful foreign ideology … believe me.”

When his remark was met with applause, he said, “And I have to say, as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said. Thank you.” (For more from the author of “Trump’s Campaign Begins Selling LGBT Apparel on Website” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

DOJ Releases Video That Teaches Cops How to Interact With Transgender People

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Department of Justice released a new police training video Thursday that demonstrates how to have “respectful, professional, and safe” interactions with members of the transgender community.

The 12-minute video was created with the goal of improving relations between law enforcement and the LGBT community in the hope of reducing cases of alleged discrimination. It presents a range of scenarios that show how officers should respond when they encounter an individual who identifies as transgender.

“When someone’s name or gender on a license is different than what you expect, how do you react? Is this person committing identify theft? Are they a fugitive? Possibly they are just transgender,” Cpl. Evan Baxter of Prince George’s County Sheriff’s Department explains in the clip.

In such instances, police are encouraged to ask the individual, “Do you prefer if I call you ma’am or sir?”

“Hey, I don’t have to be in the room to know what just happened. Someone snickered, laughed or made a joke,” the narrator addresses viewers after “Scenario 1” in the video. “Trust me, I know; I’m a cop, too. As police officers, we use humor to deal with things that make us feel uncomfortable or afraid […] To outsiders, it’s perceived as unprofessional and disrespectful.”

A subsequent scenario in the video demonstrates what an officer should do in cases involving a transgender person using a restroom that corresponds to the opposite sex. In the video, a mother with a baby calls 911 after encountering a man in the woman’s restroom.

“I was in the restroom but I’m a woman,” the man tells the officer. The officer then apologizes and leaves with no further questions asked.

The clip stresses the importance of remaining courteous and keeping questions relevant to the situation in question.

“Transgender Americans, like all Americans, deserve to be treated with courtesy and respect by law enforcement officers,” Paul Monteiro, acting director of the Justice Department’s Community Relations Service said in a press release. “The information provided in this video will help strengthen the relationship between police and the transgender community, allowing for more effective investigations and safer encounters for officers and citizens alike.”

Watch:

(For more from the author of “DOJ Releases Video That Teaches Cops How to Interact With Transgender People” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What Are Republicans Planning to Make Their End-Of-The-Year Focus? Fulfilling Obama’s Jailbreak Agenda

/0 Comments/in , /by

Republicans are often dubbed “the stupid party” because they excel at self-immolation. However, there comes a point when their ability to self-immolate at the perfect time in the most precise fashion is so devastatingly consistent that it’s hard to believe they are not geniuses.

The September congressional session is the final opportunity for Republicans to harness the platform given to them in the 2014 elections – control of both houses of Congress – and utilize it as the closing argument against Obama and Hillary headed into November. With a bleak outlook in the presidential and Senate races, Republicans must use September to change the narrative away from Donald Trump’s personality to a focus on critical issues people care about. They have the FY 2017 budget bill as the perfect vehicle to challenge Obama on his outrageous and dangerous policies, which are opposed by the vast majority of voters.

The opportunities are endless. Republicans could use legislation, floor speeches, committee hearings, and the “must-pass” budget bill to focus attention on Obama’s treasonous alliance with Iran, his plan to increase refugee-intake in October, the collapse of Obamacare, or stopping Obama’s giveaway of internet domains to an international tribunal controlled by Russia, China, and Iran.

Sadly, there are no plans to focus on those issues. What do they plan to focus on instead? Jailbreak legislation. Because, why focus on 80-20 winning issues that are critical to our national security when…you could further cement Obama’s jailbreak legacy?

You heard that right. The closing argument for Republicans this election will be to end the congressional session by consummating Obama’s #1 remaining legacy item of mass jailbreak – all at a time when crime is rising in many major cities for the first time in over two decades and most swing voters in the suburbs are generally concerned about safety and security more than ever before. Haven’t Republicans watched the disaster of California’s Prop 47, which implemented a similar scheme on a state level, and has led to record low arrests and rising crime?

Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. (F, 53%) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La. (D, 64%) have spent the entire recess scoring points for Obama by ginning up support on their side for a jailbreak effort in September. Yesterday, Scalise held a meeting with dozens of congressional staffers to plot a strategy and messaging on legislation to cut sentencing for federal prisoners and grant the extremely liberal federal judges more latitude to free prisoners, a prerogative the courts have already grabbed for themselves.

According to my congressional sources familiar with the meeting, leadership aids discussed how to message jailbreak as a conservative initiative, much like they did with the Gang of Eight immigration bill. Although the details are still in flux, staff at the meeting discussed packaging a bunch of “prison reform” bills into one giant bill. Much like the Gang of Eight legislation, they plan to dangle a few conservative talking points embodied in some notional provisions conservatives might like in order to sell the broader pro-criminal tenor of the package as an all-or-nothing proposition. Using the same Orwellian approach of Mark Zuckerberg to allure conservatives into backing amnesty, leadership staff showed a power point presentation selling the effort as being pro law enforcement, enhancing public safety, and supporting victims of crime.

[Several months ago, I published a report debunking all of the “conservative” talking points in support of this effort, which can be viewed here. Also, my analysis about the details of the original Senate bill can be viewed here.]

As always, the political barometer of these people was as uncalibrated as Dick Morris’s political predictions. They evidently feel that suburban voters are about to march on Washington and demand: “give us looser sentencing and prison reform or give us death!” One of the staffers at the meeting fantasized how election-year politics—particularly the impact that passing criminal justice ‘reform’ will have on “independents and folks like that”—will somehow benefit Republicans in the election.

At one point the staff indicated that the Chairman’s bill is actually a step in the right direction for fighting drug trafficking because of the heroin/fentanyl provisions—regardless of the fact that the bill reduces penalties for all heroin traffickers across the board and makes them retroactive. Also, according to my sources, there was no discussion of the fact that their legislation reduces sentences for illegal alien drug traffickers, lets them out early and does nothing to ensure they’re deported.

During a discussion about the number of federal felons who would be released, staffers conceded that “we don’t know exactly how many offenders are eligible” under the House Judiciary Committee bill. This, at a time when Obama is already commuting a record number of sentences and the U.S. Sentencing Commission is already planning early release for up to 46,000 drug traffickers. To begin with, there are only 165,000 prisoners actually housed in federal prisons (roughly 40,000 more are federal inmates in other facilities), and only about half of those were convicted for drug offenses. Further, a large percentage of them are illegal aliens and should be deported. For Congress to exacerbate this with further legislation at this time in history defies common sense.

So where is this emergency coming from? What happened to the emergency over America’s sovereignty, security, refugees, Obamacare, and Iran?

Follow the money. When George Soros and the Koch brothers both want the same thing, you better believe the liberal politicians in both parties will move heaven and earth to get it done. According to recently leaked documents by WikiLeaks, Soros’s Open Society Foundation “remains among the largest contributors of philanthropic dollars to reform strategies specifically targeted to reducing incarceration.” The documents reveal that Soros was concerned the story about Wendell Callahan, who twice benefited from changes in federal sentencing guidelines and upon his release murdered three people in Columbus, would hurt their PR effort.

They also named the Koch brothers as a big backer of the effort. The Koch brothers have gone full-throated Obama for the pro-criminal agenda.

This is just one more example of why the Republican Party is broken on such a systemic level that there is no way to fix it through conventional means. Instead of using all of their political capital to fight the other side’s agenda with equal and opposing force, they use their resources to give voice and cover for some of the worst and most unpopular policies of the Left…in the middle of a big election. Heck, with the party nominee now backing amnesty, they should just spend September passing the Gang of Eight bill.

Once the dust has settled from this election on November 9, it will become abundantly clear that conservatives must look beyond the Republican Party once and for all. (For more from the author of “What Are Republicans Planning to Make Their End-Of-The-Year Focus? Fulfilling Obama’s Jailbreak Agenda” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

American Hostage Kayla Mueller Remembered for Defending Her Faith Before ISIS

/0 Comments/in , /by

An American hostage held by ISIS for 18 months who died in captivity is being remembered as a woman of courage and compassion who even defended her Christian faith to the executioner known as “Jihadi John” . . .

“My name is Kayla Mueller. I need your help,” an exhausted Mueller said in a “proof of life” video. “I’ve been here too long, and I’ve been very sick, and it’s very terrifying here.”

The 25-year-old endured torture, rape, verbal abuse, and slave labor at the hands of ISIS, but her fellow hostages tell ABC News she never gave up hope and put the needs of other hostages above her own . . .

A former hostage from Denmark, Daniel Rye, told ABC News how Mueller stood up to one of her captors.

“One of the Beatles started to say, ‘Oh, this is Kayla and she has been held all by herself. And she is much stronger than you guys. And she’s much smarter. She converted to Islam.’ And then she was like, ‘No, I didn’t,'” Rye said. (Read more from “American Hostage Kayla Mueller Remembered for Defending Her Faith Before ISIS” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Clinton Foundation Witness Removal Vehicle

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Biff Spackle offers this exclusive (to you, at least) photograph of the Clinton Foundation’s Witness Removal Vehicle:

160826-witness-protection

Backstory: here. (For more from the author of “Clinton Foundation Witness Removal Vehicle” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

HEY, DEMOCRATS: Capitalism Works, If Government Lets It

/0 Comments/in , /by

A seemingly accelerating trend with many Americans is to look with skepticism and a jaundiced perspective at business, capitalism, and the profit motive. In spite of efforts by some to rewrite history, those of us who are students of history recognize that capitalism made America the economic superpower that it is. And the more we allow government to interfere in our economy, the more we move toward a fascistic system where government controls the means of production.

Business and the profit motive have turned us from an agrarian to a high-tech producing and consuming nation. All of us are dependent upon business and the profit motive for everything we do every day. From the manufacturer of the bed we arise from and the alarm clock we wake up to, to the toothpaste, shampoo, and comb we use in the morning. The beverage we imbibe to give us a kick-start in the morning and the vehicle we drive to work are products of once small businesses that have grown sometimes to global proportions. If any of those products or services we depend on get too expensive, we start shopping for cheaper alternatives. That’s capitalism in a nutshell.

Most of us even work for a small business driven by the profit motive. Those firms, created and managed by entrepreneurs, market and sell products, provide advice and services, and fill the needs of people from all walks of life. They pay us to fill a specific function within the company to help them service their customers more efficiently and cost-effectively. And most of them pay another 30% of our salaries or wages in the form of benefits to help retain quality employees. And according to Arthur Brooks of Syracuse University an amazing 89 percent of us are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with our jobs.As a matter of fact, according to the Small Business Administration, small businesses represent 99% of all employer firms, employ half of all private sector employees, pay 45% of total U.S. private payroll, generate 80% of new jobs annually, create more than 50% of nonfarm private GDP, comprise 97% of all identified exporters, and produce 26% of the known export value to our GDP.

Yet every time new governmental regulation is imposed on businesses, the costs increase. Whenever the government increases taxes on companies, the costs increase again. In order to stay in business, they must pass those costs on to their customers, or find other ways to reduce costs like eliminating jobs. That’s why it makes no sense to tax companies since we all end up individually paying their taxes via increased prices for their products and services.

And it’s not just small business that makes our quality of life what it is, but the brother of small business; BIG business. It’s not an evil concept, to sell things that people want and need at prices that most people can afford, so they can sell as much or as many as possible, applying the economies of scale. And they do so with a profit motive in order to share their success with those who ponied-up the capital, (investors, silent partners, share-holders) facilitating their business ventures. Remember, if they over-price their widgets, they price themselves out of the market. If they underprice their widgets, they’re not going to remain viable, and will have to lay off employees and won’t be able to pay all those taxes the government is requiring of them. Then their employees will have to hope they can find another widget company to replace the job they lost.

The media, Hollywood, and even some of our fellow citizens bash “big pharma,” big oil, or big retailers like Wal-Mart. But in reality what do those “big” evil companies do? They provide needed products and services at reasonable prices, and jobs, enabling our national economic engine, and our quality of life, to keep chugging along. They have limited control over much of their expenses, but to be able to continue doing what they do, they achieve a modest profit to ensure their viability in future years, and allow us to have a job.

When politicians promise “free stuff” at the expense of taxpayers, they’re doing nothing more than attempting bribery – they promise free stuff for our votes. And it’s not their free stuff. It’s stuff they promise to use governmental coercion to forcibly take from others, in order to redistribute to those they’re bribing.

It’s no wonder that Bernie Sanders, who nearly captured the Democrat nomination, (and would have if the DNC had not colluded with the Clinton campaign) garnered the support he did as the self-avowed socialist peddled collectivist promises for populist electoral support.

And Hillary Clinton is no less ideologically aligned with socialistic solutions. A disciple of Saul Alinsky, and the first architect of a socialized healthcare system for the U.S., she has made some brash statements over the years that reveal her ideological convictions. Among her many anti-capitalist statements are these nuggets. “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good,” (6/29/04). “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity,” (5/29/07). “(We) … can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people,” (6/4/07). “I certainly think the free-market has failed,” (6/4/07).

The brilliant economist, Thomas Sowell, has philosophically put the failed socialist ideology into proper perspective. “I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you’ve earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.” “Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.” And for academics who are smitten with the failed ideology, “Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant than only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”

Too many of us rely on fallacious populist typecasts of what business and the profit motive do, rather than relying on our empirical observations of their contributions to our quality of life and economic viability. We allow the media, Hollywood, or anti-business kvetching to taint our perceptions with a failed, yet idyllically appealing narrative of “equality” or “social justice.”

PragerU has produced an insightful clip that explains this perfectly. It can be seen here.

The profit motive, capitalism, and free enterprise, are the backbone to our economic system, and as such, are the key to future growth and prosperity, individually and collectively. Government encroachment and increased regulation stymie future potential growth, our quality of life, and our job security. It’s time for Americans to quit buying (with their votes), what self-serving politicians promise for them. Less regulation, less taxation, less government spending, and less government control is the solution for future economic growth and security. (For more from the author of “HEY, DEMOCRATS: Capitalism Works, If Government Lets It” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Amid Voter ID Battles, Here Are 7 Things the Government Requires IDs For

/0 Comments/in , /by

As federal courts wrestle with voter ID laws in several states just months before a national election, there is considerably less attention being brought to other constitutional rights that require ID.

Proponents of voter ID have argued that retailers require ID to buy liquor, M-rated video games, prescriptions, or even nail polish.

But these arguments aren’t really applicable to voter ID, said J. Christian Adams, general counsel for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, and a former Justice Department attorney, who supports voter ID and other election integrity laws.

“Tell me where in the Constitution does it talk about the right to buy liquor or rent a car?” Adams told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “The Constitution does guarantee the right to use firearms, and ID is always required to purchase a firearm. If you talk about buying liquor, the left will shred that argument. If you talk about ID when buying a gun, it boxes them in.”

Here are seven common situations that require an ID.

1. Welfare Benefits

While there is no constitutional right to welfare benefits, the Supreme Court held in the case of Goldberg v. Kelly that welfare recipients are entitled to due process with a hearing before benefits can be terminated.

Nevertheless, several states require some type of proof of identity to collect welfare. The states of Massachusetts and Missouri require a photo ID on the electronic benefit cards used for purchases under food stamps or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families expenditures. The EBT cards in Kansas include a photo if a participant agrees, but isn’t required, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

New York City has a municipal ID program. The city’s website says residents will need an ID to “get a job,” “cash a check,” “open a bank account,” “enter a government building,” and, further, says, “To be eligible for some public benefits you need to prove your identity, age and residence.”

2. Registration for Buying Guns

Laws vary by state and even by municipality on buying a firearm.

The District of Columbia, the point of dispute in the landmark Heller Supreme Court decision that determined every American has the right to bear arms, still has very strict gun control laws.

It requires residents to register those guns. Gun owners must also obtain a gun license for any shotgun, rifle, or handgun. The District of Columbia city government prohibits the sale of handguns, but allows restricted sales on rifles and shotguns.

In another example, New York City allows the selling of handguns, but with stricter rules than New York state. To buy a gun in the city, an individual must appear in person to fill out a 17-page handgun purchase authorization form to qualify for a purchase license. The form costs $340 and $89.75 for fingerprinting. The New York Times wrote that applicants “must provide an original Social Security card, birth certificate, two recent color photographs and other documents.”

The application also requires individuals to explain employment dismissal and health history in addition to the background check that all gun buyers go through.

3. Petition Your Government

It isn’t just the Second Amendment that is subject to ID scrutiny. First Amendment freedoms sometimes require some identification, said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and a former Justice Department attorney.

“The First Amendment guarantees the right to petition your government, but anyone who wants to meet with a Department of Justice official has to show a government-issued photo ID to get into the Department of Justice building for the meeting,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal.

The right to peacefully petition on Capitol Hill—beyond writing or calling a congressional office—generally requires becoming a registered lobbyist. States have various requirements for registered lobbyists as well.

4. Right of Assembly

Further, many municipalities require permits to hold protests or rallies in a public space under certain circumstances. This process varies based on the city, but requires some paperwork by the organizers.

5. Right to Marry

Official ID for obtaining a marriage license is nearly universal across states, said von Spakovsky. He noted that under the 1967 Loving v. Virginia ruling by the Supreme Court, marriage is a fundamental right.

Today, the state at the center of that case requires photo ID. Fairfax County, Virginia, near the District of Columbia, states that requirements to get a marriage license include a “valid photo identification (a valid driver’s license with picture, passport, or military identification).”

And, New York City’s website states, “You and your prospective spouse must have one form of proper identification in order to apply for a Marriage License.” The options include a driver’s license, active military ID card, passport, or permanent resident card.

6. Freedom of Movement

While the right to board an airplane isn’t spelled out in the Constitution, von Spakovsky said the right to travel could be broadly considered a basic public accommodation and a freedom of movement issue, even though the Transportation Security Administration requires photo ID for everyone boarding a plane.

Freedom of movement is recognized under the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution. The Supreme Court held in 1869 that this protected the rights of citizens, the “right of free ingress into other states, and egress from them.”

“The 1960s civil rights movement was in part about the fundamental right to travel on trains and public buses,” von Spakovsky said.

7. Public Accommodations

Opponents of voter ID laws contend that it’s difficult for minorities to obtain ID for voting. This could reasonably extend to public accommodations, von Spakovsky said.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits businesses such as restaurants and hotels from denying service on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin.

“I can’t remember when I checked into a hotel and they didn’t ask me for photo ID,” von Spakovsky said.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is involved in current litigation against voter ID laws in states such as North Carolina, Kansas, and Texas, told The Daily Signal Wednesday that no one is available to comment regarding these other civil liberties that require some type of ID. (For more from the author of “Amid Voter ID Battles, Here Are 7 Things the Government Requires IDs For” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Companies Are Raising Wages Without a Government Mandate

/0 Comments/in , /by

According to recent reports, companies are giving wide swaths of their workforces raises without the government dictating it. Some of the companies that have done this in recent weeks include McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, Gap Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Starbucks.

Starbucks announced its workers would get at least a 5 percent raise this year. JPMorgan Chase is increasing the wages of its lowest-paid workers to $12 per hour.

One factor that may be causing companies to raise wages is the reduction in the number of unemployed persons per job opening. That ratio, now hovering near 15-year lows, and declining since 2009, is only 1.4 unemployed persons per job opening.

With such a small pool of unemployed workers to draw from, companies have to make it more desirable for workers to accept positions, and not jump ship to another company offering higher wages. In other words, the smaller the ratio of unemployed persons per job opening, the more competition there is among employers to retain workers and the higher wages will be.

With companies raising wages on their own in response to market forces, it might be useful to rethink the current craze to raise the minimum wage. California, New York, and the District of Columbia have recently passed bills to raise their minimum wages to $15 per hour. A bill has been introduced in Congress by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 per hour.

Heritage Foundation research fellow James Sherk noted in a recent issue brief, “Researchers have paid little attention to the state-by-state impact of a $15-per-hour minimum wage. Such a measure was so far from the policy mainstream that few economists bothered considering it.”

Sherk conducted a state-by-state analysis and found that a $15 per hour minimum wage requirement nationwide would cost approximately 9 million jobs. Other reports finding minimum wage increases harm workers—especially the low-skilled workers they are designed to protect—exist here, and here.

Sustainable employment occurs when workers are compensated fairly for their productivity compared to others in the workforce. The recently reported pay increases show this process at work. Government interference, in the form of minimum wage laws or other restrictions, just gets in the way and may, as recent studies are confirming, actually hurt those it is intended to help. (For more from the author of “Companies Are Raising Wages Without a Government Mandate” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama’s Transgender Student Bathroom Policy Blocked by Judge

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration was barred by a judge from enforcing a directive that U.S. public schools allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms according to their gender identity.

A federal judge in Fort Worth, Texas, on Sunday sided with Texas and 12 other states that argued the administration’s policy usurps local control and threatens students’ safety and privacy.

The use of public bathrooms and locker rooms by transgender people has become the latest front in civil rights struggles between social conservatives and the administration following battles over same-sex marriage and military service by openly gay members of the armed forces in which President Barack Obama has sided with gay-rights advocates.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor came after the U.S. Supreme Court on Aug. 3 temporarily blocked an order that would let a transgender student use the boys’ bathrooms during his senior year at a Virginia high school.

In that case, the justices granted a request from the Gloucester County school board, which said the lower court order would have caused “severe disruption” when school started in September and likely prompted parents to transfer their children to other institutions. The district said boys’ restrooms were reserved for students who were “biological” males. (Read more from “Obama’s Transgender Student Bathroom Policy Blocked by Judge” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WIKILEAKS CHIEF: We Have a Little October Surprise for Miss Hillary

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Last night Fox News aired part 1 of a 2-part interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Assange noted that they are currently reviewing “thousands of pages of material” related to the Hillary campaign which he described as “significant.” When asked whether the new material will be leaked before the November 8th election, Assange responded “yes, absolutely.”

“We have a lot of material, thousands of pages of material. There’s a variety of different types of documents and different types of institutions that are associated with the election campaign, some quite unexpected angles that are, you know, quite interesting, some even entertaining.”

We now know that Assange planned the timing of the previous leaks to correspond with the Democratic National Convention which has since resulted in the dismissal of 5 DNC officials, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz. We assume this leak will also be timed to maximize it’s effectiveness with speculation swirling that it could be released before one of the scheduled debates in October.

When asked whether the next release could be a “game-changer” in the November Presidential election, Assange replied:

“I think it’s significant. You know, it depends on how it catches fire in the public and in the media.”

(Read more from “WIKILEAKS CHIEF: We Have a Little October Surprise for Miss Hillary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.