House Republicans will soon take the next steps necessary in their bid to impeach IRS Commissioner John Koskinen.
On Tuesday, the House Judiciary Committee plans to hear testimony and examine charges that Koskinen obstructed a congressional investigation into the agency’s treatment of conservative groups.
While Koskinen is willing to appear at a second hearing in June, the Internal Revenue Service told Politico that the 76-year old commissioner was not able to prepare adequately for the Tuesday hearing. So the nation’s top taxman won’t show.
In a written statement to the Judiciary Committee, Koskinen described the allegations and impeachment resolution as “without merit” and “unwarranted.”
“Under my direction,” Koskinen wrote, “the IRS has responded comprehensively and in good faith to the various subpoenas and document requests from the investigating entities.”
Nevertheless, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told The Daily Signal “that the second hearing is more important.” The Freedom Caucus Chairman, who helped spearhead the impeachment effort, explained that the first hearing “is just sort of to get the facts out there.”
Republicans, like Jordan, say there’s plenty to cover at Tuesday’s hearing without Koskinen.
Conservatives argue that Koskinen is unfit to be tax chief because he flouted congressional authority, allowed subpoenaed emails to be destroyed, and misled the public during his testimony.
“Never lose site of the underlying offense though,” Jordan said, “an agency, with the power the IRS has over American lives, systematically targeted people for their political beliefs. That is as fundamentally wrong you can be.”
In 2010, the agency began flagging applications from conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status. Tax agents targeted applications for further review that contained terms such as tea party, patriot, and government spending.
Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., described the agency’s subsequent conduct as “a total obstruction of justice,” in an April interview with The Daily Signal. “And the question is, will Congress do anything when an agency like that walks all over us? Or are we just going to let is happen?”
The Florida prosecutor, who sits on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is slated to testify Tuesday and he’s had plenty of time to prepare: the effort began last October in that committee under chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.
Since then, the GOP brass have been hesitant to continue the impeachment process. House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said that the IRS “needs to be cleaned up” but said that’s a task best suited for after the November election.
To place pressure on leadership, members of the Freedom Caucus went to the floor on April 14 to deliver speeches calling on Ryan and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., to end their opposition to proceeding with impeachment.
Later, behind closed doors, conservatives threatened to go it alone. The Freedom Caucus threatened to use a mechanism known as a “privileged resolution” to force a floor vote on impeachment if leadership declined.
Jordan said he believes that Koskinen’s record combined with “members of the Freedom Caucus pushing our leadership to do it, that’s what finally caused us actually to get a hearing.”
After going through the Judiciary Committee, the impeachment effort would still require a majority of the House before going to the Senate for further consideration.
But Jordan wouldn’t comment on what the Freedom Caucus might do if the impeachment effort again got bogged down in committee. The Ohio chairman would only say that “we’re committed to impeaching Mr. Koskinen.”
Historically, this would be a rare move: Congress has only deployed its impeachment power 19 times since the nation’s founding. Koskinen would be just the 20th federal official to be put on congressional trial, and could become only the ninth convicted.
Though the IRS provided Koskinen’s written testimony to The Daily Signal, they did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for additional comment. (For more from the author of “Congress Takes Next Step to Impeach IRS Chief” please click HERE)
According to new reports, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) is the subject of an ongoing investigation brought by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors from the public integrity unit.
The investigation dates back at least a year and seeks to determine whether donations made to his gubernatorial campaign violated the law.
As part of the probe, investigators are looking into his time spent as a board member on the Clinton Global Initiative, a branch of the Clinton Foundation established by former President Bill Clinton.
No allegations suggest the foundation did anything improper, but rather the investigation is strictly focused on campaign contributions.
One such contribution in question came from a Chinese businessman, Wang Wenliang, who donated $120,000 to McAuliffe through his U.S. business. Wang served as a delegate to China’s ceremonial legislature, the National People’s Congress.
Wang has also donated a staggering $2 million to the Clinton Foundation and has donated to various other causes and organizations, including New York University and Harvard.
While U.S. election law forbids foreign nationals from donating to federal, state, and local elections, Wang holds a legal permanent resident status in the U.S., which makes him eligible to donate.
So far, neither Wang nor his company have been contacted by U.S. investigators.
McAuliffe wasn’t made aware of the investigation until it was publicly announced, however, his attorney has claimed that McAuliffe will cooperate with investigators on the matter.
“The Governor will certainly cooperate with the government if he is contacted about it,” said attorney for the McAuliffe campaign Marc Elias.
“Neither the Governor nor his former campaign has knowledge of this matter, but as reported, contributions to the campaign from Mr. Wang were completely lawful,” Elias said.
McAuliffe is the second consecutive Virginia governor, following former Gov. Bob McDonnell, to come under investigation by the Justice Department.
In 2014, McDonnell was convicted of corruption charges related to gifts and loans he received from a friend, however, he has appealed this decision to the Supreme Court. (For more from the author of “Democrat Virginia Governor and Clinton Ally Under FBI Investigation” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-58.jpg10801920Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 22:37:442016-05-23 22:37:44Democrat Virginia Governor and Clinton Ally Under FBI Investigation
By Sarah Westwood. Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert McDonald on Monday compared the length of time veterans wait to receive health care at the VA to the length of time people wait for rides at Disneyland, and said his agency shouldn’t use wait times as a measure of success because Disney doesn’t either.
“When you got to Disney, do they measure the number of hours you wait in line? Or what’s important? What’s important is, what’s your satisfaction with the experience?” McDonald said Monday during a Christian Science Monitor breakfast with reporters. “And what I would like to move to, eventually, is that kind of measure.”
McDonald’s comments angered House Speaker Paul Ryan, who tweeted out Monday afternoon, “This is not make-believe, Mr. Secretary. Veterans have died waiting in those lines.”
This is not make-believe, Mr. Secretary. Veterans have died waiting in those lines. https://t.co/OxfT3AYzTi
McDonald faced questions at the breakfast about the VA’s lack of transparency surrounding how long veterans must wait to receive care at VA facilities around the country. The agency has weathered controversy over the past several years due to its struggle to provide timely care for many patients. (Read more from “VA Secretary: Disney Doesn’t Measure Wait Times, so Why Should VA?” HERE)
________________________________________
Dying Vietnam Vet Asks for Final Meeting With Beloved Horses Outside Hospital
By Fox News. Vietnam veteran Roberto Gonzalez’s final wish was granted Saturday when he was reunited with his beloved horses — Ringo and Sugar — outside of a Texas VA hospital.
Gonzalez, of Premont, Texas, who was shot and paralyzed during the war, was wheeled outside the front doors of Audie Murphy Veterans Hospital in San Antonio where he was greeted by the horses he had raised for decades, mySA.com reported.
Gonzalez, who was one of the hospital’s first patients when it opened in 1974, had asked his family to see his horses one last time. The family passed along the request to hospital staff who gladly obliged. Ringo and Sugar then made the 150-mile trip to the hospital to see him.
“Horses are his life,” his wife, Rosario Gonzalez, told KABB. “We’ve been training and raising horses for 30, 40 years.”
The South Texas Veterans Health Care System posted a photo of the meeting on its Facebook page on Sunday, calling Gonzalez a great American and identifying him as one of the first patients at the hospital. (Read more from “Dying Vietnam Vet Asks for Final Meeting With Beloved Horses Outside Hospital” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/SmallWorldTokyo.jpg8451126Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 22:27:372016-05-24 01:26:35VA Secretary: Disney Doesn’t Measure Wait Times, so Why Should VA?
Reps. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.) and Bobby Scott (D-Va.) introduced the Do No Harm Act Wednesday, which would amend the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to specify that religious exceptions should not apply to “protections against discrimination or the promotion of equal opportunity” and “access to, information about, referrals for, provision of, or coverage for, any health care item or service.”
The legislation is intended to “clarify that no one can seek religious exemption from laws guaranteeing fundamental civil and legal rights.”
The bill emphasizes that RFRA should not be interpreted to “authorize an exemption from generally applicable law that imposes the religious views, habits, or practices of one party upon another” or authorize “an exemption from generally applicable law that imposes meaningful harm, including dignitary harm, on a third party.”
Kennedy claimed in announcing the bill that “the Religious Freedom Restoration Act has become a vehicle for those seeking to impose their beliefs on others or claim that the tenants of their faith justify discrimination.”
“The Do No Harm Act will restore the balance between our right to religious freedom and our promise of equal protection under law,” he argued. (Read more from “‘Do No Harm Act’ Would Forbid Christian Doctors Objections to ‘Any Healthcare’ Service” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/pexels-photo.jpg36665500Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 22:17:242016-05-24 01:04:07‘Do No Harm Act’ Will Force Christian Doctors To Perform Sex Change Operations
The following essay by Matthew Bracken was prompted by a cell-phone video from Germany of a culture-enricher assaulting a German teenaged boy. I won’t embed the video; I find it almost too unbearable to watch. To see a young man so unable to defend himself, so unwilling to stand up and be a man, is disheartening and dismaying.
This is heartbreaking to see, but very important.
This is how a dhimmi is created in a gun-free country, where armed self-defense is an alien concept. This is prison yard rules, and the young German is just fresh meat. This German kid will probably convert to Islam just to stop the pain and “gain the respect” of his new masters.
Note how the bully threatens to beat him every day just to harden him up and make him a man. A similar psychological process occurs in military boot camp with new recruits. He doesn’t know it yet, but his mother and sisters are now Moslem chattel property. He won’t lift a finger to defend German women; he is a dhimmi at best. Most likely he will just convert as a matter of bare survival, but he will always be a “second-class Muslim”, even if he submits. These IslamoNazi bullies will have him reciting the Shahada in less than a month, and after that, his sister is toast. Just fresh meat for the hijra jihadis.
This is how Islam has spread for 1,400 years: brute force, threats, intimidation, and using terror as an example of how far they are willing to go to force the spread.
Smug Americans who own firearms might laugh at the current plight of the Europeans, but they should not. The Europeans have been brainwashed by the “multi-kulti-uber-alles” Left to simply submit when the planned hijra invasion happened, which is happening now. The ordinary Euros were betrayed by Quisling traitors in high offices. From the Muslim point of view, the hijra invasion is moving from the dawah (preaching) phase to the jihad phase, using violence and threats of even greater violence to force a complete Muslim takeover. That German boy now understands who are the alpha males, and who are not: The Moslems are, and he isn’t.
But there is the long-term danger in this process even to America. If Islam wins in Europe, a well-known social/genetic dynamic will kick in. All of the German girls and women (even the man-hating radical feminists and lesbians) will be raped, enslaved, or “married” by force, but one way or the other, there will be a rising generation of Muslims in Europe who are half-German.
People should understand a genetic process called “hybrid vigor.” There is a reason the Ottoman Turks collected European boys to be raised as Janissaries. The Arab desert Muslims have terrible DNA after 1,400 years of first-cousin inbreeding, but when they impregnate their German conquest victims they will create generations of 100% full Muslims who are half German. Of course, this will happen in every European country, not only Germany.
Americans should not be smug about the collapse and Muslim conquest of Europe. Half-German “Super Muslims” will be a tough adversary. Remember the Ottoman Janissaries from history. They were fearsome fanatics, but also big, strong and smart.
Another crop of “Super Muslims” were the Berbers of Morocco, who provided most of the brains and muscle used for the invasion of Spain in 711 AD. The “desert Arabs” were a scrawny and pitiful bunch. Man for man, they were weaklings compared to the hearty Berber mountain folk. But the Berbers were divided, tribe against tribe, from one Atlas Mountains valley to another. The invading Arab armies picked off one tribe at a time, and forced them all to convert. These newly united Berber Super Muslims were imbued with ”convert zeal,” and ready to invade new worlds to spread the banner of Islam.
United for the first time in history, the Muslim Berbers of Morocco (under mostly Arab leadership) turned their natural war-lust against the Christians of Spain. Like the pre-Muslim Berber tribes had been before them, each Spanish Christian principality was divided from the others across the mountains of Spain. The united and newly converted Muslim Berber armies swept over the separate Spanish fiefdoms one after the other.
The point is that Muslim invasions have often succeeded against divided foes who were, man for man, much stronger and even smarter. A generation later, this invigorated hybrid population can be very dangerous, because after the consolidation phase where the invaded region is brought under united Islamic control, they will be straining to burst their borders and conquer new worlds, like the Super Muslim Berbers did in Spain. Think also of Iran in this context. United Arab Muslim armies conquered Persia, creating another brand of hybridized “Super Muslims.”
I shudder to think of what German Super Muslims will be capable of in thirty years, if Islam is triumphant in Europe. They would make the Earth shake.
_____________________________________
Matthew Bracken was born in Baltimore, Maryland in 1957, and attended the University of Virginia, where he received a BA in Russian Studies and was commissioned as a naval officer in 1979. Later in that year he graduated from Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, and in 1983 he led a Naval Special Warfare detachment to Beirut, Lebanon. Since then he’s been a welder, boat builder, charter captain, ocean sailor, essayist and novelist. He lives in Florida. Links to his short stories and essays may be found at EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com. For his previous essays, see the Matthew Bracken Archives. (For more from the author of “The Coming European Islamic Super-State” please click HERE)
Donald Trump’s impressive list of potential Supreme Court nominees was a very smart move at a pivotal time. It came amid news of the Little Sisters’ ongoing battle not to be compelled by Caesar to fund abortion drugs, and amid Barack Obama’s bathroom edict thrust upon every school in America—as our President of Fundamental Transformation stoically promises to slay the world’s new great scourge: “transphobia.” Our fearless commander-in-chief knows he cannot wage this just war alone. The crusade must be carried forth by left-wing nature-redefiners poised throughout the courts. A President Hillary Clinton would duly pick up the torch, inserting still more morally insane judicial activists to advance the cultural revolution. Trump’s list came the week following his meeting with Paul Ryan, which surely was an impetus.
So, kudos to Team Trump. But the judges list needs to be merely the start. I here suggest that The Donald go further. I recommend that he and his team create a literal Contract with Conservatives, taking a page from Newt Gingrich’s brilliant Contract with America in 1994. Then, Newt pledged a list of popular common-sense conservative initiatives that he vowed a Republican Congress would vote on during Bill Clinton’s presidency. My thinking of Newt right now is partly precipitated by suggestions—including by The Donald’s top male cheerleader, Sean Hannity—that the former House speaker join Trump as a running mate. Newt might want to talk with Trump about the potency of the contract concept. The idea should resonate with Trump, being a businessman whose business is contracts, and as the namesake of the Art of the Deal.
What would this contract include? It needs to underscore 10 or 12 defining issues by which conservatives need reassurance before doing the unpalatable if not unthinkable in pulling the lever for Donald Trump.
Topping the list must be the guarantee to nominate only conservative judges, which is the paramount concern to conservatives holding their nose to vote less for Donald Trump than against Hillary Clinton. I talk to these conservatives constantly. For many, the only reason they will vote for Trump is to try to save America from unchecked activists inventing Constitutional rights and redefining the country and culture from the bench.
Really, liberals, you have helped enable Donald Trump with eight awful years of Barack Obama and the prospect of eight more with Hillary Clinton. Barack’s bathroom edict, endorsed by longtime abortion-fanatic and newfound “LGBTQ” warrior-queen Hillary Clinton, merely serves to advance Trump’s presidential prospects. My word to Obama and gang: You people are not only ideologically ridiculous but politically oblivious. Barack’s public bathroom obsession repulses the electorate about as much as Donald Trump’s public behavior does. Obama’s toilet fiat is so politically idiotic that it makes me wonder if the current Democratic president is secretly working with The Donald to defeat Madame Hillary. Nice job, liberals. You don’t like the Trump monster you’ve helped build, but every day you enliven it more.
One “NeverTrump” conservative emailed me yesterday saying he might now vote for The Donald. What changed his mind? The left’s bathroom follies combined with Trump’s list of conservative judges.
I digress. My point is that point one of a Trump Contract with Conservatives needs to be about restoring sanity to a nation-culture gone mad by restoring rationally thinking human beings to the federal courts.
Beyond judges, we could easily come up with a dozen other issues for a Trump Contract with Conservatives, ranging from a direct pledge to repeal Obamacare to promises to cut federal income taxes (Trump is already reneging on this one), to defund Planned Parenthood, to eliminate the Department of Education and Common Core, to abolish the IRS, to increase military funding. Trump must also somehow vow not to aid and abet the left’s fanatical efforts to redefine human nature, from marriage to gender. This is key, because Donald Trump, despite all the hype about him being politically incorrect, has long been a cultural liberal of New York values, whose only “political incorrectness” is actually mere brashness and rudeness and crudeness. The New York cultural liberal needs to promise to resist the bathroom battlers and left’s lieutenants of gender madness. His comments on the North Carolina situation a few weeks ago were not reassuring.
The Contract with Conservatives might even go so far as to include actual names of people that a President Trump would place in crucial posts from the Department of Defense and State Department to the National Security Council and Treasury. That hasn’t been done before, but neither has (in my recollection) a pre-presidential list of potential Supreme Court nominees. It would be unprecedented, but The Donald himself is unprecedented.
Team Trump should start now behind the scenes quietly working with leading conservatives to devise a list to announce at the Cleveland convention. Tap Newt Gingrich. Newt does know conservatism, which is vital to a Republican presidential nominee who can’t spell conservatism. The value of releasing such a list in Cleveland would be immense. It would also give The Donald coherent talking points to corral him, rather than him bloviating with his usual litany of platitudes from a podium.
Key caveat: Would a President Donald Trump abide by this contract? That’s not certain. Trump is a man of (at best) new principles and (at worst) no principles. He boasts of how he can change on a dime. His ability to flip-flop could be unsurpassed in the annals of presidential history. Nonetheless, he is a businessman and deal-maker who has some devotion to the weight of contracts. Maybe a contract, done with great fanfare, could hold him accountable to a degree (it’s better than nothing).
To be sure, such a Contract with Conservatives will not mollify all conservatives. Many of us remain convinced that Donald Trump is fundamentally unfit and unsuited for the most significant office in the world — temperamentally, emotionally, intellectually, ideologically, even morally. I have seen enough over the past year. Watching Donald Trump’s astonishing antics and policy ignorance has told me everything I need to know. He has exhibited enormous character instability and psychological flaws. His childish behavior on the campaign trail does not merit the votes of serious adults. Whatever coaching he gets now on how to behave, and in devising whatever deals to better pretend to look conservative, none of it should convince us he’s something he’s not. Nonetheless, if Trump is looking for a way to appeal to a larger swath of conservatives who dread the radical left’s (i.e., today’s Democratic Party) further transformation of America into a cultural hellhole where nuns and bakers and photographers and florists and marriage clerks and wedding caterers and churches and companies and schools are forced, sued, fined, closed, threatened, picketed, boycotted, jailed, debased, demonized, dehumanized, and destroyed often simply for asking for conscience exemptions in a country that has a 220-year-old First Amendment enshrining religious freedom, then Trump should seek ways to attract them. To be sure, I still find it highly unlikely to impossible that Donald Trump can win in November. A man of such overwhelmingly historical negatives with vast segments of voters really doesn’t stand much of a chance, even as polls tighten and even as Barack Obama does his surest to have adult men share restrooms with our daughters. I am sympathetic to George Will’s plea that conservatives should work to defeat Donald Trump rather than help him because of the enormous brand damage he could cause to the party of Lincoln and Reagan. However, if Trump is looking for a way to try to reassure conservative voters in his bid to stop another post-modern Democrat from further torching our civil liberties, a Contract with Conservatives might be a good option. For the good of my country and culture, I would like some guarantee from Trump of some semblance of conservatism and resistance to the left-wing juggernaut should he seize the Oval Office for the next four years.
Now is the time, when The Donald needs conservatives because his goal is to win, win, win (i.e., when the goal is himself), for conservatives to try to hold him accountable to their movement that he’s hijacking for his own purposes. (For more from the author of “Trump Needs a Contract With Conservatives” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/8567826396_7804f0256c_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 01:28:542016-05-23 01:28:54Trump Needs a Contract With Conservatives
Article 27 of the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade pact could be the beginnings of a Pacific Union — a governing body for implementing the trade agreement styled after the European Commission.
Entitled, “Administrative and Institutional Provisions,” it establishes the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission that will have the power to promulgate rules pursuant to the agreement, implement those rules, and interpret those rules.
That is, legislative, executive, and judicial powers all wrapped into one unaccountable, multinational commission — with no separation of powers whatsoever.
Think that’s insane?
The commission will be implementing the largest trade agreement in world history regulating about 40 percent of the global economy.
When it comes to amending the agreement or allowing other countries such as China to opt into the agreement, it is not very clear whether that will require votes of Congress.
As noted by Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning in a statement last November, “While the U.S. Trade Representative provided a chapter summary on its final provisions that it would take votes of Congress to amend the agreement and to allow other countries to dock into the agreement, the text of the agreement is not nearly so explicit, leaving significant concerns about how the trade agreement will function and whether U.S. representative democracy will be meaningful in its wake.”
Manning added, “A chapter summary is not the agreement itself. The danger of a runaway commission is too great for this to be ignored.”
President Barack Obama has not yet signed the TPP, even though Congress approved consideration of it under Trade Act of 2015. The law requires that Obama notify Congress at least 90 days prior to signing it, which he has indicated he will.
Meaning, Obama could be signing the agreement any day now.
After Obama signs the agreement, then he has 60 days to provide Congress with a list of required changes to U.S. law to implement the agreement. And, then Congress must consider the agreement on and up or down basis.
But the fact that it has not been signed yet, this late into Obama’s last year of office, could mean that Obama does not want the 60-day window to begin until we’re well into September — meaning Congress would not get to vote on the trade agreement until after the election.
The largest trade deal in world history may end up being approved by a lame duck Congress, composed of defeated and retiring members who are no longer accountable to voters.
In the meantime, both presumptive nominees of the major political parties, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, say they’re against TPP. Opposition to big trade deals that outsource Americans jobs and fail to address currency manipulation overseas has been a major theme in this election campaign.
A poll by Pat Caddell commissioned by Americans for Limited Government found that after being told what was in the agreement, Republicans opposed it 66 percent to 15 percent, Democrats oppose it 44 percent to 30 percent and Independents oppose it 52 percent to 19 percent.
In a cynical sense, then, it makes sense that Obama would seek to insulate members of Congress from the political fallout of an unpopular trade deal by scheduling the vote after the election.
But Obama also must consider the political consequences of signing the TPP on the eve of the election. If both candidates remain opposed, what is the political basis for proceeding? Especially a trade agreement that will create an unelected, transnational commission regulating the world economy without any votes in Congress.
Democrats including Clinton might pay a heavy price in November if Obama tries to sneak TPP across the finish line in a lame duck session of Congress — all to the benefit of Trump. Something to consider as we inch closer to the election. (For more from the author of “Pacific Union Threat to Sovereignty in 12-Nation Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/16534118120_0d18452074_b.jpg7521024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 01:20:322016-05-23 01:20:32Pacific Union Threat to Sovereignty in 12-Nation Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal
Chinese and Russian warplanes have been increasingly aggressive intercepting U.S. military aircraft and patrolling near America’s West Coast, prompting the Air Force’s top combat officer to label their provocations one of his top worries.
Air Force Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, who leads Air Combat Command, said in an interview with USA TODAY that meeting the challenge from the Russian and Chinese to flights in international airspace is essential but dangerous . . .
Both countries are intent on expanding their spheres of influence — Russia in eastern Europe and the Pacific with China focusing much of its effort over the disputed South China Sea.
“Their intent is to get us not to be there,” Carlisle said. “So that the influence in those international spaces is controlled only by them. My belief is that we cannot allow that to happen. We have to continue to operate legally in international airspace and international waterways. We have to continue to call them out when they are being aggressive and unsafe.”
The stakes are high. Aggressive intercepts of U.S. patrol planes run the risk of mid-air collisions that would escalate tensions among nuclear powers. (Read more from “Threat From Russian and Chinese Warplanes Mounts” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Planes_in_Russian_Parad_2010_p9.jpg25923888Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-23 01:15:072016-05-23 01:15:07Threat From Russian and Chinese Warplanes Mounts
The Republican mobilization against the White House’s transgender bathroom directive has started. A bill introduced by Rep. Luke Messer, R-Ind., would block the Obama administration’s guidance pushing public schools to allow students to use the restrooms of their choice.
The bill, Messer told The Daily Signal, would return control of the issue to the state and municipal level while also prohibiting the administration from cutting off taxpayer funds to public schools that disregard the directive.
The Obama administration, Messer said, is “bullying local schools.”
Although Messer is a junior member of Indiana’s GOP delegation to the House, he is the fifth-ranking Republican in House leadership as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee. His bill, introduced Wednesday, represents the highest profile and only legislative rebuke of the administration on the transgender policy issue to date.
“I think parents across America are looking for a congressional response,” Messer said, “and so far our response hasn’t been strong enough.”
Earlier in the week, 73 House Republicans, including Messer, wrote an open letter to the administration demanding answers.
The guidelines, announced May 13 by the departments of Justice and Education, instruct local public schools to extend Title IX protections, which prohibit sex-based discrimination, to transgender students.
And though the directive doesn’t carry the force of law, it contains an implicit threat: Comply or lose federal funding.
That’s “the modus operandi of this administration,” Messer, 47, said, adding that the directive “will change the equation for schools across the country.”
As a standalone piece of legislation, Messer’s bill faces an uphill battle out of the House, and another obstacle in a veto by President Barack Obama.
But, the Indiana Republican told The Daily Signal, he plans to attach the bill to a piece of must-pass legislation such as an appropriations package.
In a Wednesday interview with Buzzfeed, Obama described his directive as “part of our obligation as a society to make sure everybody is treated fairly and our kids are all loved and protected.”
Messer, first elected in 2012, criticized that premise as unfounded, arguing that Obama was overstepping his own bounds.
“I think it’s ironic that the president says he brought forward this regulation to combat bullying,” Messer said, “when the truth is that this action is the administration bullying local schools.” (For more from the author of “House Policy Leader Seeks to Block Obama’s School Bathroom Directive” please click HERE)
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has apparently given up on another battle front: Stopping America’s young women from being forced into military combat.
That isn’t exactly what he said this week when asked his views on whether women should be made to register for the draft, but it’s the logical outcome of his position. The question arose because the National Defense Authorization Act, likely to come to the Senate floor next week, contains language to draft women.
Here is what McConnell said, according to the New York Times:
First of all, I don’t anticipate going back to the draft. The professional voluntary Army has been very successful. We’re talking here about registration for Selective Service, should we ever go back to a draft. And given where we are today, with women in the military performing virtually all kinds of functions, I personally think it would be appropriate for them to register just like men do.
That is a very good example of a politician trying to have it both ways—kind of a “I’m for something because it won’t happen but if it does happen I support it.”
Welcome to what leadership looks like in Washington in the year 2016.
In reality, the debate over the draft is an outcome of a larger debate we never had—whether America’s daughters should be forced into military combat.
As McConnell himself admitted, it’s because all roles in the military, including combat, are now open to women that it only seems fair to force women to be part of any future draft.
The debate over whether women in combat is good for them, for the military, or for society at large never occurred because that would have meant taking on the Obama administration. And as anyone who has followed past political skirmishes between GOP congressional leadership and the Obama White House might predict, this was another hill the GOP just wasn’t willing to charge.
Late last year, the Obama administration handed down another “we know better than anyone else, including experts” mandate declaring all military combat positions must be open to women.
This was done despite studies conducted by branches of our own military that raised serious red flags about the performance of co-ed units. And oh, the American people had had no say, either.
Yet it was done with little to no objection by Republicans in Congress.
This is what happens when social experiments, political agendas, and being scared of your own shadow becomes more important than standing up and doing what is best for the country.
The mission of our armed forces must be the standard for determining who plays what roles in them.
And evidence evaluating the effectiveness of putting women in direct combat should not be ignored. A study conducted over 9 months in 2013 by the Marine Corps’ Gender Integration Force evaluated 134 ground combat tasks. The results? All-male units outperformed co-ed units in 69 percent of the tasks. Female training course completion rates lagged well behind men and the injury rate among women was much higher.
These realities drive up casualties and costs and they reduce our military’s effectiveness. That is not only a threat to women and men wearing our country’s uniform, but also a threat to all of us they are sworn to protect.
Congress should prohibit any measure that would force women to register for the draft and be forced into combat roles. You can’t be for one and not be for the other and lawmakers such as McConnell shouldn’t pretend otherwise. If you’re for women being drafted, you’re for women in combat. (For more from the author of “What McConnell’s Surrender on Women’s Draft Shows About GOP Leadership” please click HERE)
