Hawaii’s Big Island Declares Emergency Over Dengue Fever Infections

The mayor of Hawaii’s Big Island declared a state of emergency on Monday to deal with a growing outbreak of dengue fever, spread by infected mosquitoes, with 250 cases confirmed over the past four months.

As a result of Hawaii County Mayor Billy Kenoi’s order people on the Big Island will be allowed to resume disposing of old tires in landfills, since tires which are left lying around are a known breeding spot for mosquitoes.

There have been 250 confirmed cases of dengue fever on the island since Oct. 29, making it the largest outbreak in the state since the 1940s, according to the mayor’s declaration and Hawaii health officials . . .

Hawaii Governor David Ige said in a statement he supported the efforts on the Big Island but would not issue a statewide emergency declaration unless the outbreak spread to other islands or expanded to include other diseases, such as the Zika virus. (Read more from “Hawaii’s Big Island Declares Emergency Over Dengue Fever Infections” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Huge: FBI Makes It Official, Hillary Is Under Investigation

By Pete Williams. In a letter disclosed Monday in a federal court filing, the FBI confirms one of the world’s worst-kept secrets: It is looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Why say this at all, since it was widely known to be true? Because in August in response to a judge’s direction, the State Department asked the FBI for information about what it was up to. Sorry, the FBI said at the time, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation.

Now, in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.” (Read more from “Huge: FBI Makes It Official, Hillary Is Under Investigation” HERE)

____________________________________

FBI Confirms Its ‘Ongoing’ Investigation Into Hillary Clinton’s Previous Use of a Private Email Server

By Associated Press. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is reaffirming that the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state is free of outside political influence.

She told The Associated Press on Monday that the FBI investigation is independent and is being conducted by career lawyers looking at the facts and evidence.

Republicans have been critical of Clinton’s use of personal email during her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. (Read more from “FBI Confirms Its ‘Ongoing’ Investigation Into Hillary Clinton’s Previous Use of a Private Email Server” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Watch: Debate Crowd Viciously Turns Against Trump, Then He Drops a Bombshell

By Gerry Urbanek. During the eighth Republican debate, a question directed to Donald Trump regarding his support for eminent domain turned into a nasty argument with Jeb Bush and resulted in the audience booing.

“A lot of the big conservatives that tell me how conservative they are, I think I’m more [conservative] than they are, they all want the Keystone Pipeline. The Keystone Pipeline, without eminent domain, it wouldn’t go ten feet. You need eminent domain. It’s a good thing, not a bad thing,” said Trump . . .

After a back and forth,Trump was given an opportunity to respond, and that’s when things got heated.

“He wants to be a tough guy… and it doesn’t work very well,” Trump began. “How tough is it to take property from an elderly woman?” Jeb interjected. “Let me talk, quiet,” Trump said raising his finger to his mouth.

At this the audience erupted into booing of Trump as he was trying to make his point.

“That’s all of his donors and special interests out there,” Trump said, visibly irritated. “That’s what it is, and by the way, let me just tell you, we needed tickets, you can’t get them. You know who has the tickets to the television audience? Donors, special interests, the people that are putting up the money. That’s who it is,” Trump said, shrugging as he continued to be booed. (Read more from “Watch: Debate Crowd Viciously Turns Against Trump, Then He Drops a Bombshell” HERE)

_________________________________

Poll: Trump, Sanders Lead Ahead of New Hampshire’s Vote

By Jennifer Agiesta. Donald Trump continues to lead the Republican race in New Hampshire on the eve of the vote, the final CNN/WMUR tracking poll finds.

On the Democratic side of the race, it remains Bernie Sanders’ primary to lose, with the Vermont senator holding a 26-point lead over Hillary Clinton.

The field of candidates vying for a second place finish behind him is finally beginning to separate, according to the survey.

Trump holds 31%, down two points from the February 3-6 release, but within the poll’s margin of sampling error. (Read more from “Poll: Trump, Sanders Lead Ahead of New Hampshire’s Vote” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The First Votes of the New Hampshire Primary Have Been Cast – Here’s Who Won in Midnight Voting

The first votes of the 2016 race have officially been cast.

Three small towns in New Hampshire — Dixville Notch, Millsfield and Hart’s Location — voted at midnight to kick off Tuesday’s primary.

Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and John Kasich were the early winners on the Republican side, each receiving a total of nine votes across the three towns. On the other side of the aisle, Bernie Sanders won handily, defeating Hillary Clinton with a vote count of 17 to nine . . .

In Dixville Notch, a town of 12, according to the 2010 census, three votes were cast for Kasich and two for Trump.

Sanders received all four on the Democratic side, with Clinton failing to earn one vote. (Read more from “The First Votes of the New Hampshire Primary Have Been Cast – Here’s Who Won in Midnight Voting” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Did Rubio Push Gang of Eight If He Was Aware of Security Risks?

Feeling the heat that his only accomplishment in the Senate was promoting Obama’s immigration policy, Rubio told a group of New Hampshire voters that his experience as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee qualifies him to be president.

Here is the relevant quote from the New York Times:

As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I have access to the most classified information in this government — equal basically to what the president sees except not at the same time. No one else in the race has access to that. I’ve had it for four or five years.

This declaration from Rubio begs a more discerning question. If Rubio sat on the Intel Committee during his Senate tenure and was privy to information on the national security threats we face, how could he have simultaneously pushed the Gang of Eight immigration bill?

During the January 14 Fox Business debate, Rubio defended his support of open borders in 2013 by asserting that, “[T]wenty-four months ago, 36 months ago, you did not have a group of radical crazies named ISIS who were burning people in cages and recruiting people to enter our country legally.” He concluded that “the entire system of legal immigration must now be reexamined for security first and foremost, with an eye on ISIS.”

This is part of the general McCain/Rubio/neo-conservative philosophy to limit the threat of Islamic supremacism to ISIS and ignore the broader subversive threat of Islamic immigration and the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s as if Islamic terror never existed before 2014. As Cruz retorted, “[R]adical Islamic terrorism was not invented 24 months ago; 24 months ago, we had Al Qaida. We had Boko Haram. We had Hamas. We had Hezbollah. We had Iran putting operatives in South America and Central America.”

In fact, it was the attacks on the CIA building and the World Trade Center in 1993, both perpetrated by Islamic immigrants connected with Muslim Brotherhood mosques, that prompted Harry Reid to introduce his famous immigration enforcement bill. Harry Reid had more common sense on this issue 20 years before the more severe threat we already faced in 2013. Certainly, Senator Rubio could have seen the harm of his bill to our national security from his perch on the much-vaunted Senate intel panel. Senators Cruz and Sessions have identified over 72 suspected terrorists with questionable immigration histories dating back two decades.

Yet, Rubio relentlessly promoted his bill, which would have invited back a number of illegal aliens who were already deported, granted executive officials broad waiver authority, massively expanded legal immigration and refugee/asylum loopholes, and accelerated immigration from the Middle East. Also, millions would have been granted immediate provisional legal status without interviews with DHS officials. And even among future legal immigrants, the bill would have given John Kerry authority to waive the requirement for in-person visas [p. 881, S.744]! We already see how Kerry has waived the requirement for in-person interviews for Iranian nationals living in Europe, even though Congress tried to stop it. Had Rubio succeeded in seeing is signature accomplishment become law, could you imagine how many additional security risks the Obama administration would have admitted?

It’s quite evident that either Marco Rubio was not very attentive during those intel briefings or if he was, he exhibited bad judgment, overlooking the national security concerns many of us voiced about his bill at the time.

This is one of those examples when no experience is better than bad judgement. (For more from the author of “Why Did Rubio Push Gang of Eight If He Was Aware of Security Risks?” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Rush Limbaugh Just Nailed What the REAL Problem With the Super Bowl Halftime Show Was

For conservative talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh, a political discussion can often dovetail with his passion for professional football. Following a controversial halftime show during Sunday’s Super Bowl, Limbaugh had the opportunity to merge the two subjects for a segment of his program on Monday.

“I’ll tell you, the observation is this,” Limbaugh said. “You have in the Super Bowl, you have the pregame, which features the anthem with a giant American flag spread out over the entire field. You have the military, uniformed military all over the place. You have an Air Force or Navy, not sure which, fly by after the anthem” . . .

In stark contrast to that opening program, he argued, was a halftime performance by Beyonce that some critics found to be politically charged and anti-police. This dichotomy, however, has been present in Super Bowls past, according to Limbaugh’s theory on the matter.

“So you have the traditional pro-America, patriotic, out-of-this world pregame show,” he said, “and then you get to the halftime of the Super Bowl. And what the halftime show of the Super Bowl is, to me anyway, is representative of the cultural decay and the political decay and the social rot that is befalling our country.” (Read more from “Rush Limbaugh Just Nailed What the REAL Problem With the Super Bowl Halftime Show Was” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Shipment of ‘Guillotines’ Bound for ISIS Seized

Iranian authorities have seized a cargo shipment bound for Islamic State-held territory containing multiple guillotines, the semi-official Iranian news agency FARS reported Feb. 7.

Vahid Dashtbani, director-general of Iran’s Customs Office for Transit Affairs, told an Iranian daily newspaper Sunday that the devices were “designed for efficiently carrying out executions by beheading.”

The tools, however, were likely not guillotines in the traditional sense (such as those used during the French Revolution), but instead industrial-strength paper cutters capable of removing heads and arms swiftly and with surgical precision.

A recently published video (edited to remove the most graphic content) showed ISIS pronouncing sentence over a thief before a crowd of townspeople. The thief then had has hand sliced off with the paper cutter, referred to in the ISIS video as a “guillotine.”

In another video (not linked here because it is too graphic), the heavy blade of the instrument was shown detached from the paper cutter and wielded like a sword to behead six captives with a single stroke for qisas or retaliation. The men were reportedly Syrian soldiers linked to a car bombing which killed “innocent” ISIS soldiers and supporters. (Read more from “Shipment of ‘Guillotines’ Bound for ISIS Seized” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Time To Remove RINO Grassley From Chairman of Senate Judiciary

There is ubiquitous sense of betrayal among Republican voters. They went to the polls in 2014 to elect a Republican Senate and out popped a Senate controlled by Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer. Nowhere is this identity crisis more evident than within the Senate Judiciary Committee under the stewardship of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA).

Grassley is, by all accounts, an incredibly nice man. People in Washington and his home state of Iowa speak very highly of him.

Grassley was a fresh-faced conservative in 1980. But he has served 36 years in the Senate, and is seeking a seventh term (which, if he were to complete it, would mean he would serve in the Senate for 42 years). It’s possible that Grassley is still the same conservative warrior he was in 1980 in his heart, but his “leadership” of the Senate Judiciary Committee raises serious questions about whether he is the right person to lead that all-too-important committee.

As we note in his profile, Grassley is “perhaps one of the most ideologically complex members of the Senate.” Coupled with his weak grasp of judicial issues, Grassley’s inconsistent foundation has proven a disaster as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. After being term limited as Chairman of the Finance Committee, Grassley, who has no formal legal training, shoved Jeff Sessions aside for the lead spot on Judiciary in 2011, even though Sessions was eminently more qualified.

Beyond these general concerns, there are recent, more specific reasons why Grassley might not be the right standard-bearer for Republicans on this committee.

Jail Break

Grassley has spent the first half of this allegedly Republican-led Congress catering to a laundry list of leftist legislative items and policy preferences. But one example predominates: A longtime and vocal opponent of the Smarter Sentencing Act and other misguided bills aiming to release dangerous drug traffickers and drug dealers, he is now the leader of a bipartisan effort to release not only drug traffickers and drug dealers, but traffickers and dealers who possessed firearms while committing their crimes.

This bill was a horrific idea a year ago, but as police blotters across the nation reveal the new crimes being committed each and every day by federal drug felons who were released from prison early, the legislation is becoming downright insane. And of course, we have not heard a peep from Grassley in terms of oversight of the DOJ’s war on police and its role in rising crime rates.

Judges

On judges, Grassley’s record is equally disappointing. Notwithstanding the fact that President Obama has appointed roughly 31% of all federal circuit court judges and 37% of all district court judges in the United States, Grassley seems to be tripping over himself to help Obama fill every last remaining judicial seat before Obama walks out the door on January 20, 2017. The actions are akin to a senator that actively wants Obama’s Constitution-mangling judges on the bench, since such judges make it easier for his fellow senators to avoid leadership by shirking decision-making to a leftist bench.

Raw numbers aside, Grassley has also let more than a few radical judges move through the committee to confirmation, forgetting that his role is to prevent the names of such radical judges from ever making it onto the Senate floor. The most recent (but certainly not the only) example is new federal district court judge Wilhelmina Wright, who helped publish an article in law school where she openly discussed the “whiteness” of private property and the belief that people living in poor neighborhoods might have a substantive right to move into wealthy neighborhoods. Grassley was asleep at the switch with this nominee. Wright was unfortunately confirmed, but many Republican senators woke up at the last minute to prevent her confirmation from being unanimous. Grassley failed in his constitutionally required gatekeeping role.

And of course, as the power of the judiciary continues to grow beyond even the worst nightmares of the Warren era, Grassley has not used the committee to hold hearings on judicial tyranny or propose judicial reform ideas.

Hearings

What about hearings? Surely, Grassley has thrown some punches on hearings? Planned Parenthood harvesting of fetal tissue, rampant IRS targeting and abuses, the war on immigration enforcement, a broken and racist Department of Justice, the administration’s blind eye toward domestic terrorism threats, Hillary Clinton’s private server, which exposed intelligence assets and collection methods… there is almost no end to the significant damage done to this Republic by the administration or to how its actions have breached the public trust. Surely, Grassley has looked into each of these with an aggressive desire to find the truth?

The reality will disappoint. Check out the lineup of hearings that Grassley has conducted at the full committee level. In the final days of what is perhaps the most corrupt administration this nation has ever seen, the Senate Judiciary Committee it tackling weak-sauce topics like the transparency of asbestos trusts and ensuring a right to counsel for federal misdemeanor offenders. It is almost like they made a deal with the administration to avoid any and all topics that would even remotely make the president uncomfortable. This is a failure of the committee’s function and a disservice to the American people.

In fairness to Grassley, he has held some important hearings this Congress, including one examining the life-and-death nature of the sanctuary cities that are violating federal law, and another on the job-killing qualities of the H-1B visa program. But even in these instances, good legislation that was written in the wake of these hearings has stagnated, including sanctuary city defunding legislation and H-1B reform legislation. One might almost get the impression that these hearings and their resultant bills were done for show, to create the illusion of listening to the American people.

Grassley spends lot of his time during committee hearings and business meetings (seemingly, most of his time) talking about his “good friend from Vermont.” His good friend from Vermont, in case you didn’t know, is the extreme leftist senator and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). Based on the contours of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s actions this Congress, it is arguable that Grassley’s “good friend from Vermont” is dictating the agenda of the committee. Americans did not turn out to the polls in record numbers in 2014 to allow Patrick Leahy to finish Obama’s legislative agenda and push through as many radical leftist judges as time would allow.

Moreover, the committee hearings are often full of Democrat witnesses, including the former Iowa state Supreme Court justice who struck down the state’s marriage law, with the entire tenor and direction of the meetings rooted in far-left, anti-law enforcement premises. How about having a hearing with victims of anti-religious bigotry, such as the Kline family in Oregon?

The Judiciary Committee is not a JV panel. The Republican Party cannot afford to have a Senate Judiciary Committee that is happy just “being there.” Those days are gone, if they were ever here. Grassley’s dedication to the people of the state of Iowa is admirable, but the time has come for a more forceful, leftist-opposing chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. No one can be sure what the future holds for the Republican Party, especially in its current dynamic, but the one thing that probably is a guarantee is that continued weak leadership by Grassley on the Senate Judiciary Committee will give Democrats back the Senate starting in 2017. Based on how the Senate Judiciary Committee is currently being run, we might not even notice when the changeover happens. (For more from the author of “Time to Remove RINO Grassley From Chairman of Senate Judiciary” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad

Pro-aborts lost their minds yesterday after Doritos aired a commercial that…*gasp*…showed an ultrasound of an unborn baby . . .

The humorous commercial showed a dad eating a bag of Doritos while his wife gets an ultrasound, and the baby tries to grab at the Doritos in his hands . . .

Since last night there hasn’t been any shortage of responses to NARAL’s bizarre anti-scientific, anti-baby, and anti-human extremism.

But one of the best responses I’ve read comes from Dr. Robert George, a pro-life professor at Princeton University, who posted this on Facebook:

I gather that the really big news, as always, had to do with a commercial advertisement that was broadcast in the course of the game. Evidently, a potato chip manufacurer, or some such profit-driven purveyor of packaged foodstuffs, showed a video image of an unborn baby. This shocked and appalled the folks at NARAL, the big abortion lobby, who promptly accused the company responsible for the ad of “humanizing the fetus.” Since, however, the fetus in the video was, by all accounts, a human fetus, the offspring of human parents, and not a bovine, canine, or feline fetus, it’s less than clear how it is that the potato chip company (or whatever it was) is to blame for the humanization. Surely NARAL’s complaint would be more fairly lodged against God, or nature, or plain old biological reality.

(Read more from “The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Watch: Radical Revival Falls on China’s State-Controlled Churches

You’re about to hear first-hand testimony and see video of an unprecedented Christian revival happening in parts of China. What is unique about this story is how God is moving among communist-controlled government churches.

CBN News traveled to southern China and obtained exclusive, never-before-seen images, from inside these churches . . .

Pastor Duan says what is happening today in Beijing and in other parts of China as it relates to the powerful move of God amongst the Three-Self Churches is quite remarkable considering where the church has been in the last 30 years.

“Every sermon that the pastor preached back then had to be vetted by the government authorities. Young people were never allowed to attend these churches so you’d only see old people, mostly women,” Duan said. “Preaching about the power of the Holy Spirit was forbidden. You couldn’t talk about end times or preach repentance.” (Read more from “Radical Revival Falls on China’s State-Controlled Churches” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.