Syrian Refugees Have Not Been Vetted for National Security

20643299043_fbca1fb8e9_bRep. Dave Brat (R-Va.) says that “a gaping hole in our national security apparatus” means that Syrian refugees “have not been vetted” before they are resettled in the United States.

“Of course the major problem there is that they have not been vetted in terms of national security,” Brat told CNSNews.com. “We just want to [send a] message to the American people that the issue has not yet been resolved.”

“ISIS has made it very clear in their documents that their intent and their goal is to bring radicalized folks from around the world in through the southern border and to use the refugee program to do so,” Brat warned . . .

The first of the Syrian refugees have begun to make their way to the U.S. in what the Obama administration has described as a “surge operation” to speed up the refugee resettlement process from the usual 18-to-24 months to just three months.

CNSNews has reported that of the 1,075 Syrian refugees admitted to the U.S. since the Paris terror attack last November, 1,070 are Muslims and just four are Christians. (Read more from “Syrian Refugees Have Not Been Vetted for National Security” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

A Report Just Released Something Disturbing About Donald Trump

maxresdefault (88)Republican front-runner Donald Trump claims he’s given more than $100 million to charity over the last five years, but an analysis of more than 93 pages of charitable givings revealed that the billionaire did not actually once donate personal cash.

The analysis, which was conducted by the Washington Post, found that instead of actually donating personal cash, Trump cited free rounds of golf given away via auctions and raffles as his donations to charitable organizations.

However, the largest items cited were land-conservation agreements to forgo development rights on properties that were owned by Trump and his businesses.

In addition, the filings listed a piece of land that he gave to New York State in 2006 — years before the time period in which Trump claimed to donate in excess of $100 million — and donations from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, although the foundation never received a personal check from Trump between 2009 and 2014, according to the Post.

Trump’s foundation is largely funded by others, the Post said, but the New York mogul does decide where the money and gifts are donated. (Read more from “A Report Just Released Something Disturbing About Donald Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

If You Want to Fly a Political Flag, Don’t Do It in New Jersey

prison-553836_960_720Vexillologists beware! If you fly a flag in New Jersey, you might find yourself in a jail cell.

Joseph Hornick flew a “Trump – Make America Great Again!” flag on his property only to have the police show up at his door and instruct him to remove his flag. It turns out a local city ordinance makes it illegal to post political signs more than thirty days before an election, so if Hornick continues to let his Trump flag fly, he could end up with a $2,000 fine, a 90 day stint in jail or both.

Now, I’m no Trump fan, but I am a fan of free speech, and telling someone they cannot fly a flag or post a sign in favor of a certain political candidate makes a mockery of our fundamental American right to speak our mind.

Though a real problem, laws like this always make me roll my eyes for the regulations are so arbitrary. We are supposed to believe that flying a flag that supports Trump is a menace to society that must be stopped with the full force of law, and yet the same guy who is banned from flying a flag in his local neighborhood can go online and tell the entire world, “Trump will make America great again!” without consequence. We are told political signs are bad and must be stopped, but there’s no problem with people wearing T-shirts supporting Trump, so are we to believe that a stationary political message is somehow more threatening than a mobile political message? This local township is telling us that it’s a travesty of justice to post a political sign thirty-one days before an election but thirty days before an election, it’s all a wonderful part of the electoral process? What nonsense!

I think most people would agree that this law serves no purpose, and yet this is just a single example of nonsensical restrictions on the election process. There are many equally arbitrary laws which bizarrely win popular support. Why is it perfectly okay to give a political candidate $2,700 and yet completely illegal to give the candidate $2,700.01? I personally find it difficult to imagine how a single penny could pose that much of a threat to the nation. We are supposed to believe it’s totally wrong to give a dime over $2,700 to a political candidate, yet it’s perfectly okay to give an additional $5,000 to a political party or a PAC (Political Action Committee) that in turn will give a candidate that money. You can even give an unlimited amount of money to a Super PAC which will not give the money directly to the candidate but will spend every dime on ads and other political tools designed to get a single candidate elected. How does any of this make sense?

Why have so many Americans been convinced that attempts to influence the political system are a bad thing? Isn’t the entire point of a representative government encapsulated in the idea that citizens can influence the political landscape?

Here’s my crazy idea. People should be able to do what they choose with what is theirs. Is it your property? Then fly whatever flag you want to fly. Is it your money? Then give to whomever you darn well please.

How could a rational person come to any other conclusion? (For more from the author of “If You Want to Fly a Political Flag, Don’t Do It in New Jersey” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Alaska Airlines and the Jews of Yemen

maxresdefault (87)The story of the modern exodus of “Beta Israel” the Jews of Ethiopia during Operations Moses and Solomon, which together airlifted some 22,000 Ethiopian Jews to Israel, is well known. Less well known is the dramatic exodus of over 48,000 Jews from Yemen. Almost unknown is the role played by Alaska Airlines.

No one knows for certain when the first Jews came to Yemen. Local legend has them being sent as traders by King Solomon. In any event, Jews have lived in Yemen for many centuries. In that poverty-stricken country, the Jews were the poorest and lowest of citizens living in contempt and on sufferance as dhimmis. However, in their synagogues and schools, they taught their children to learn and write Hebrew. They never forgot their faith, protected the traditions, observed the Sabbath and passed the Torah and Talmud to each succeeding generation . . .

Alaska Airlines was founded in 1932 when Mac McGee purchased a used three passenger Stinson and started an air charter business in Alaska. With the arrival of James Wooten as president in 1947, the airline began to purchase surplus planes from the U.S. Government and within a year became the world’s largest charter airline.

The JDC approached Wooten and asked if Alaska Airlines would agree to accept the Yemen airlift. Wooten wanted Alaska Air to take on the mission of mercy but Ray Marshall, Chairman of the Board, was cool. Marshall felt the deal was a waste of the Airline’s time and money. It would take at least $50,000 to set up the charter, cash that the Airline did not have. Marshall insisted that Wooten front the funds himself.

Wooten raised the $50,000 by borrowing it from a travel agency associated with the JDC. The contract was signed and Operation On Wings of Eagles, more popularly known by its nickname, Operation Magic Carpet commenced. (Read more from “Alaska Airlines and the Jews of Yemen” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

University Reportedly Expels Student From Social Work Course Over Gay Marriage Comment — but He’s Not Backing Down

Gay Marriages NYCA Masters student who posted a Facebook comment earlier this year that was critical of gay marriage was purportedly expelled from a university course as a result — and has now lost a subsequent challenge to that decision.

Felix Ngole, 38, was reportedly kicked out of the University of Sheffield two months after publishing a message on his personal page that was supportive of Kentucky clerk Kim Davis — the local government official who was briefly jailed after refusing to issue gay marriage licenses . . .

He posted the comment, which purportedly quoted from Leviticus and was critical of homosexuality, on a Facebook thread that included arguments from both sides of the debate, but after a student complained, the school reportedly took action.

The University of Sheffield’s Fitness to Practice Committee reportedly decided that his message was problematic and that he had ”transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the Social Work profession,” so he was subsequently cut off from the class . . .

“The way I was treated made me feel that their duty of care to me immediately ended from the day they received that complaint,” he told the Telegraph before the appeal. ”I am not against people who are in same-sex relationships, that is their choice, but I am a Christian and if asked for my views I should be free to express that.” (Read more from “University Reportedly Expels Student From Social Work Course Over Gay Marriage Comment — but He’s Not Backing Down” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Abandoning Hillary? Claims His Biggest Mistake as President Was Something She Did

A failure to adequately plan for the aid and governing of Libya after the U.S.-led NATO attacks in 2011 “probably” was his biggest error in office, President Barack Obama said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”

Asked by host Chris Wallace about the “worst mistake” of his soon-to-end White House years, Obama listed the aftermath of the ouster and death of Moammar Qaddafi, even as he defended the intervention . . .

Democratic contender Hillary Clinton, as Obama’s secretary of state, strongly supported the intervention. In a 2011 interview with CBS News when still secretary, Clinton said of Qaddafi, “We came. We saw. He died.”

At a March 7 town hall meeting, Clinton said what has happened since then “is deeply regrettable. There have been forces coming from the outside, internal squabbles that have led to the instability that has given terrorist groups, including ISIS, a foothold in some parts of Libya” . . .

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Yahoo News in January that he thought Clinton’s “influence was pivotal in persuading the president to broaden the goal in Libya beyond just saving the people in Benghazi” from Qaddafi’s forces and “essentially focusing more on regime change. The president told me that it was one of the closest decisions he’d ever made, sort of 51-49, and I’m not sure that he would’ve made that decision if Secretary Clinton hadn’t supported it.” (Read more from “Obama Abandoning Hillary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

10 Questions That Will Destroy Hillary’s Campaign

Writing at, of all places, Salon, H.A. Goodman poses 10 questions that the FBI should ask Hillary that will, if answered at all, “end her White House dreams”. Here are all 10, interspersed with some additional color commentary and follow-ups from me, in case the feds happen to read my blog.

1. What was the political utility in owning a private server and never using a State.gov email address? There was no political utility, nor was it about “personal convenience”. It was about hiding. Hiding the co-mingling of Clinton Foundation business with that of the State Department. It was about preventing the public — and federal inspectors general — from ever learning the real story of one of the most corrupt officials in the history of the Republic.

2. Were all 31,830 deleted private emails about yoga? Of course not. Based upon her inability to even navigate a set of stairs unassisted, Hillary’s into yoga the way I’m into Pinterest. No, the deleted emails were about quid pro quo deals that traded donations and speaking fees for government favors. Everyone with even a modicum of sense — which excludes Democrats, liberals and other Marxists — knows that.

3. Why didn’t you know that intelligence could be retroactively classified? Oh, “the most qualified presidential candidate ever” certainly knew the dangers of handling classified documents, none of which had to be marked classified to fall into a category demanding special safeguards and handling. In fact, some of her recovered emails clearly show her instructing underlings to send sensitive data over insecure channels. And her bathroom server was almost certainly hacked by at least three foreign governments — and possibly many more.

4. Why did you use a Blackberry that wasn’t approved by the NSA? Because she didn’t give a s*** about national security.

5. What did you say to Bryan Pagliano? Let me say up front, that based upon what I’ve read about Pagliano, he’s about as qualified to set up a secure email server for the government as Hillary Clinton is to teach yoga. If I were tasked with setting up such a system, I’d be using virtual machines, a hardened OS like SE Linux, host intrusion prevention, honeypots over the VM’s network, etc. I can almost guarantee that Pagliano did none of that. Her instructions were probably as simple as “set me up an email server that the government can’t access.”

6. Why were 22 Top Secret emails on a private server? Because she didn’t give a s*** about national security.

7. Was any information about the Clinton Foundation mingled with State Department documents? Was this question added for comic relief? If so, cue the laugh-track.

8. Did President Obama or his staff express any reservations about your private server? If they’d known about it ahead of time, I would bet they’d have explicitly prohibited it. Who sets up their own private email server for official business? Wait, don’t answer that.

9. Did Bill Clinton send or receive any emails on your private network? Mr. Clinton once claimed that he never sent or received emails; only recently did he admit being more tech savvy. Nonetheless, my sense is Hillary Clinton is the central character in this entire affront to national security.

10. How was your private server guarded against hacking attempts? Hillary clearly has all of the computer skills of LBJ, so her answers will be both incoherent and idiotic. Like I said, I’m guessing Pagliano had no clue how to set up a military grade computer system. So all of Hill’s emails are probably in the hands of the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians and Anonymous.

(For more from the author of “10 Questions That Will Destroy Hillary’s Campaign” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Just Went on Fox News and Made a Vow Republicans Will Despise

For the first time since 2014, President Obama will be interviewed by Fox News, as the exclusive guest on Chris Wallace’s Fox News Sunday.

In the only preview clip available prior to the show’s airing, Obama makes his case for a confirmation hearing and vote for Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.

Wallace asked Obama, who is facing a Republican stall of his nominee in the Senate, “Have you made a commitment to Garland that you’re going to stick by him through the end of your term, or perhaps let’s say Hillary Clinton is the newly elected president, would you pull him and let her make the pick?”

“As more senators meet with him, I think they will recognize the qualities of this individual,” the president said.

“What I think we can’t have is a situation in which the Republican senate simply says, ‘because it’s a Democratic president, we are not going to do our job, have hearings and have a vote,’” Obama warned. “Because if that happens, Chris, it is almost impossible to expect that the Democrats, let’s say a Republican president won, that the Democrats wouldn’t say the exact same thing. ‘Let’s wait for four years and we’ll take our chances on the next president.’” (Read more from “Watch: Obama Just Went on Fox News and Made a Vow Republicans Will Despise” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Democrat Senator Unwittingly Sums up Why Obama SCOTUS Nominee Must Never Be Confirmed

U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin this week may have crystallized for conservatives why Senate Republicans are digging in their heels on President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nomination.

“One only has to look at the Court’s docket this year in particular to see the gravity of the issues that they are grappling with. We know that a Supreme Court justice who’s able to serve 10, 20, 30, 40 years is someone who’ll shape the interpretation of policy for a generation or more,” the Madison Democrat told Politico after leaving a protest on the steps of the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning.

No wonder conservatives want nothing to do with an Obama nominee, even a so-called “consensus candidate” in appeals court Judge Merrick B. Garland.

Twenty years of another liberal like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on a left-led court would be disastrous for core conservative and constitutional principles, conservatives assert.

Baldwin, an openly gay senator from one of the most liberal cities in the nation, was part of the Obama Supreme Court dog and pony show Thursday. It’s the highly politicized shame game to make intransigent GOP senators change their minds on a hearing for Garland. Republicans remain mostly united in their stance that the next president – be that chief executive a Republican or Democrat – nominate a replacement for conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February.

In short, no Obama nominees in this election year.

“We absolutely will not allow the Supreme Court to flip,” U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, Wisconsin’s senior senator, said last month at a political forum hosted by Milwaukee conservative talk-radio host Charlie Sykes. Johnson made his comments to thunderous applause, according to the New York Times.

That enthusiasm from the base shows why Obama and his left-wing, politically driven shame game may fail to move the Republican position.

While a CNN/ORC poll late last month showed a slight majority of respondents, 52 percent, said Garland should be confirmed, the conservative base has a profound distrust of this president and his ultra-liberal leanings.

“Yeah, I am hearing the drumbeat, ‘Do your job! Do your job!’ ” Johnson said, playing off the Dems’ meme in their pressure campaign to get Garland a hearing. “We’re doing our job,” Johnson declared, to shouts of “yes,” according to the Times.

“President Obama job is to nominate and he chose to do that,” the Oshkosh Republican told Wisconsin Watchdog last month. “Our job is to advise and consent.”

The Senate’s advice, Johnson said, was the same as Vice President Joe Biden‘s, who in 1992 as Senate Judiciary Committee chairman urged President George H.W. Bush not to send a Supreme Court nominee to the Senate during that election year.

Should there be a vacancy on the court, Biden said, Bush should “not name a nominee until after the general election is completed,” and if he did, the “Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.”

“Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself,” Biden said. “Where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.”

Funny how the times change. Biden was on the political PR trail this week explaining why the “full Supreme Court Matters to You.”

On Thursday, Johnson said he was open to meeting with anyone, including Garland. But his view has not changed.

“Wisconsinites’ Second Amendment right to bear arms and other fundamental liberties are at stake, so I will continue doing my job as a constitutional check on the president’s power, and we will continue to withhold our consent until the American people have a voice through their votes this fall,” the senator said.

Johnson’s Democrat opponent, former Sen. Russ Feingold, whom Johnson beat in 2010, has tried to fire up his troops with the Supreme Court issue. He says the incumbent and his Republican colleagues are “playing” to their base, failing to note the partisan impact from the left.

“They protect those at the very top, and they are not even willing to do their job when it comes to a clear issue on the Supreme Court because everything is about being partisan and keeping control on the Supreme Court,” Feingold told the New York Times. “So people smell a rat. They smell that something is not honest about this.”

Liberals see the issue as a big winner come November, with voters taking out their frustrations over the Supreme Court battle on Republicans at the polls – delivering the Senate back to Democrats and retaining control of the White House. Ultimately, the nominee will be the left’s anyway, and his confirmation will follow, or so the left-wing vision goes.

Feingold and his friends, however, fail to see that Johnson, his fellow Republican senators, and many millions of Americans see the fight on constitutional principles.

“The left wants the Supreme Court flipped. They want an activist court,” Johnson told Wisconsin Watchdog. “They want to have President Obama appoint another super legislator to join the liberal block and what would be put at risk are your Second Amendment rights to bear arms, your First Amendment rights to free speech and religious liberty. That’s what is at stake here.” (For more from the author of “Democrat Senator Unwittingly Sums up Why Obama SCOTUS Nominee Must Never Be Confirmed” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

North Korea Just Made Chilling Announcement That Might Have US Leaders Worried

North Korea now claims it has brought the United States within its nuclear reach.

The renegade nation, which has conducted four atomic weapons tests this year, said Saturday it has successfully tested a new engine for an intercontinental ballistic rocket that can reach the American mainland.

Critics note that North Korean claims have often far outstripped reality.

South Korean officials have said that despite some progress with its missile technology and nuclear program, North Korea does not yet have a fully functioning, reliable intercontinental ballistic missile and may not be able to arm what it has with a nuclear warhead.

However, analysts warned that the North cannot be disregarded.

“With all the missiles they’re building, the ranges are getting longer and they’re going to be able to throw more stuff further,” said Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia program at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, Calif. (Read more from “North Korea Just Made Chilling Announcement That Might Have US Leaders Worried” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.