Ladies, Would You Rather Be Married to Mike Pence, or Anthony Weiner?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The latest batch of manufactured outrage on the left has been produced by the Mike and Karen Pence profile that revealed some tools Mike uses to live out his marital vow of faithfulness. As Anika Smith wrote here at The Stream:

Mike and Karen Pence abide by a version of the Billy Graham Rule. In a 2002 interview, then- congressman Pence said he doesn’t drink without his wife present, nor does he dine alone with other women.

This common-sense rule stands out in a town like DC, where many, many marriages have fallen apart because of affairs.

As Smith’s piece pointed out, feminists on social media looked for ways to cast the Pences’ mutually agreed upon rule for their marriage as dehumanizing for women. Or something.

It amazes me that the same secular relativists who will defend any sexual fetish will presume to remark on the details of a marriage. Aren’t both of the Pences “consenting adults”? If fidelity is their kink, who are we to judge?

And wasn’t it just five minutes ago that the same feminists were outraged that Donald Trump did not take steps to be faithful to his pre-Melania wives? That he acted and talked like a “player”? Morality changes so quickly on the left that it’s difficult to keep up.

Take the Survey, Girls

In fact, it’s really hard to believe that any woman who has ever been in love with a man genuinely objects to the Pence Plan. To test that out, I created a little Twitter poll, which appears below:

Women want men to be more like:

Mike Pence
Anthony Weiner
Bill Clinton
Bruce Jenner
— John Zmirak (@JZmirak) March 30, 2017

Any woman who actually felt “triggered” when she read about the Pences owes the rest of us her answer.

Of course, the response I expect instead is the typical feminist “audible eyeroll.” Then a lengthy and testy insistence that those aren’t the only options. Who am I to say that women need to pick among those four alternatives? “There you go again, limiting women’s options and depriving them of agency … just like you want to limit their reproductive health care options!”

The proper response to that, of course, is the line I’ve used before on college campuses: “Oh, I’m not really pro-life. I’m anti-choice. Life is cheap, and they’re only babies. I just want to restrict women’s reproductive health care options.” That ends the conversation, every time.

If I worked at a godless or a Jesuit college, or a big, timid corporation, I might expect to be summoned to Human Resources with a complaint from a nameless female co-worker that my Twitter poll made her feel “unsafe.”

There is No Fifth Option

The truth is that those four choices are exhaustive. You have to pick one. Just so, each man must pick which road he will travel down. In the moral life nothing is fixed. You are always in motion toward goodness and health or sin and sickness, till your last dying breath.

Mike Pence has clearly taken the measure of himself, and determined what he needs to do to keep his sexuality within the bonds of a loving marriage. For a handsome fellow in a position of power, his rules seem sane and sensible. They bespeak a man who knows the reality of temptation, who loves his wife and their marriage enough to take the simplest steps to protect them.

Male sexuality is a real thing, with a genuine shape that differs from the feminine variety. (Though both sexes clearly cheat, and women must stay on guard as well, as Chelen Vicari sagely notes.) The male sex drive is a force of nature, made strong for good biological reasons, and tainted (like everything else) by the Fall. Like anger, ambition, acquisitiveness, or any other drive it must be controlled. Or it controls us.

Or You Could Marry Bill Clinton

Which brings us to Option B, Bill Clinton. Are the women who mock the Pences for their marital plan ready to talk about Bill and Hillary’s arrangement? You know, where Bill cheats with weaker, poorer women, then bullies and blackmails them into silence with his wife’s sullen consent and active support?

I bring this up not solely to mock and humiliate the Clintons on a deeply personal issue. Bill Clinton could be the picture in the dictionary next to “Piggish Male Behavior.”

If a powerful man (like the governor of a state, or a vice president) wants to treat women this way, he will not be short of takers. But lesser men can get away with it too — as the tens of millions of single moms in America could testify. The generation of fatherless kids who are growing up today would back them up.

As grateful as they were that Bill was solidly pro-abortion, I don’t think most feminists would choose the Clinton option.

Carlos Danger Signals

Am I saying that if a man doesn’t take steps like Mike Pence, he will end up acting like Bill Clinton? No.

He could act like Anthony Weiner — humiliating a young and beautiful wife by dragging his sex drive through the bottomless online sewers of pornography and “sexting.”

There is plenty a man can get away with and get addicted to online without ever meeting a stranger in the flesh. I don’t think I need to spell this out, or to point out how damaging that can be to a healthy marriage. Skeptics can ask poor Huma.

So feminists won’t pick Weiner.

Pray for Bruce Jenner. Don’t Imitate Him, Even a Little

If they’re true to their theories, feminists would surely choose Bruce Jenner. Set aside the mental illness which drives the poor man to such gross extremes as dosing himself with dangerous drugs, humiliating his children and camping around in drag.

What feminists really claim to want from men is a milder version of Jenner: Someone who suppresses, beats down, and denies what it means to be a man. Who internalizes the guilt that feminism sprays men with like a firehose. And yet who (like Jenner) is somehow still attracted to women. A tame man, a damaged man, a man who is no threat at all.

At least that’s what feminists think they want. In fact, they’re probably secretly more attracted to Clinton. They’d be better off with Pence. What they’ll end up with is Weiner.

Who said that there’s no justice in the world? (For more from the author of “Ladies, Would You Rather Be Married to Mike Pence, or Anthony Weiner?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Congress Right to Affirm That States Can Defund Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

It isn’t often that Congress moves a heavy burden off the backs of the states and allows them the freedom to be actual “laboratories of democracy.” Yet the Senate did just that Thursday in voting 51-50 (with Vice President Mike Pence breaking the tie) to invoke the Congressional Review Act to rescind an Obama administration rule that prohibited the states from defunding Planned Parenthood.

The rule blocked states from redirecting public health funding to other health care providers that better serve women’s health. But now the Senate has joined the House of Representatives, which passed the resolution earlier this year, and the measure heads to President Donald Trump’s desk, where his signature is expected.

Fifteen states have acted to defund Planned Parenthood and others who perform elective abortions in the last couple of years, reasoning that America’s largest purveyor of abortions (the organization is responsible for over one-third of a million abortions annually in recent years) doesn’t need taxpayer dollars to offer an elective procedure that most people recognize as the destruction of human life.

Public opposition notwithstanding, the Obama administration passed a “midnight rule” in December 2016 through the Department of Health and Human Services that interpreted Title X, the federal family planning program, to prohibit states from redirecting health care dollars away from groups like Planned Parenthood and toward public health agencies that outnumber the abortion behemoth 20-to-1 and (unlike Planned Parenthood) offer a wide range of preventive and holistic health care services.

Alliance Defending Freedom, Susan B. Anthony List, and Charlotte Lozier Institute had filed comments with HHS urging it not to enact the rule. The midnight rule had stopped states that had passed these public health care funding laws—including Tennessee, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Ohio—from fully implementing them. Now, with the president’s approval, taxpayer dollars can again flow to where they are needed most.

The timing of the Senate vote comes a day after new undercover video evidence surfaced to remind us why Planned Parenthood doesn’t deserve public funding. In the new Center for Medical Progress video, Dr. DeShawn Taylor, former medical director of Planned Parenthood of Arizona and longtime abortionist at Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, describes how to deliver intact babies in late-term abortions to harvest high-quality body parts.

Taylor displays an eager willingness to ignore Arizona and federal law, which requires that babies who are born alive during an abortion receive medical care in an effort to keep them from dying. When undercover investigators asked Taylor what measures were in place to assess whether the baby was alive, she responded, “[Y]ou need to pay attention to who’s in the room, right?”

This callous and utter disregard for the value of human life is reason enough to ensure that Planned Parenthood never gets another dime of taxpayer funding. But the latest video is not alone, of course.

In addition to the numerous other videos that the Center for Medical Progress released previously (videos confirmed to be unmanipulated and authentic by a respected forensic analysis and cybersecurity company), federal and state audits have revealed waste, abuse, and potential fraud that add ample additional reasons for states to keep money away from Planned Parenthood.

The Obama administration never took any of that information seriously, but clearly both the House and Senate have. Trump can rest assured that his signature on the new measure that the Senate just passed will be more than justified. It’s simply common sense that states should be allowed to prioritize taxpayer money in ways that best serve women, and with the president’s signature, that’s exactly what states will once again be free to do. (For more from the author of “Congress Right to Affirm That States Can Defund Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Charges Against Pro-Life Investigators Show Government’s Double Standard on Investigative Journalists

/0 Comments/in , /by

The undercover Planned Parenthood videos published in 2015 made one thing abundantly clear: Big Abortion skirts the law for its own gain, going to great lengths to hide its illicit activities not only from the public, but even from its own employees.

After such revelations, it seems like common sense that the government would defund Planned Parenthood. After all, taxpayer money should not go to fund abortions or the illegal practices going on behind the organization’s closed doors.

But abortion cronies seem to be on a different page entirely: Punish the journalists and protect the abortion giant that is lining their pockets.

First, they tried—and failed—to convict Center for Medical Progress investigators David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt in Texas. But now, California wants a shot at it. This week, the state attorney general charged Daleiden and Merritt with 15 felonies.

Now Planned Parenthood said in a statement on the charges, “Planned Parenthood has done nothing wrong.” But if that’s true, the organization has nothing to fear from the Center for Medical Progress’ work.

In response to the charges, the Center for Medical Progress released a new undercover video featuring the former medical director of Planned Parenthood Arizona, DeShawn Taylor.

Taylor is shown on camera discussing what appears to be an illegal partial-birth abortion procedure and the illegal sale of baby body parts.

She also talks about intentionally avoiding an Arizona state law that requires abortionists to transport babies who show signs of life after an abortion to a hospital.

Then, she laughs.

“Well, the thing is, I mean the key is, you need to pay attention to who’s in the room,” she says.

Who is in the room also determines whether or not she can pull out intact “specimens” to sell to fetal tissue procurement agencies. She says she must be sensitive to her staff who might be uncomfortable if the aborted child comes out looking too much like a baby.

And by the way, don’t call it a “baby,” she says. “It’s creepy.”

It’s obvious that Planned Parenthood will stop at nothing to protect its abortion gold mine, even keeping secrets from their own employees. They wouldn’t want to make anyone in the room feel uncomfortable.

But what about the baby in the room?

Investigative journalists like Daleiden have been instrumental in casting light on deceptive practices in big government, big business, and now, big abortion.

In the past, investigative journalists have been lauded for their work.

They were applauded when they uncovered the Watergate scandal. No one has batted an eye at the many undercover investigations run by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

In fact, animal rights organizations in California have uncovered animal abuse by becoming employed and secretly filming conditions at farms and slaughterhouses.

But the state hasn’t charged them with 15 felonies.

Daleiden and Merritt’s investigative work, just like these other examples, brought to light illegal practices and abuse of power that would have otherwise remained hidden from the public.

Isn’t that the purpose of journalism—to reveal the truth? It should concern all Americans that California’s attorney general is trying to strip journalists of the freedom to do their jobs and report the truth.

Big abortion has effectively used its network of abortion cronies to attempt to bring swift punishment against Daleiden, but the reaction to Planned Parenthood’s illegal practices has come much slower.

A handful of states have rightly defunded the abortion giant. And while the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives released a report recommending that Planned Parenthood no longer receive federal funding and that those who have illegally profited off of the sale of baby body parts be prosecuted, little action has been taken thus far.

When our government acts more quickly to strip journalists of their freedoms than to act against an organization breaking state and federal law, then something is wrong. That is what’s truly “creepy.” (For more from the author of “Charges Against Pro-Life Investigators Show Government’s Double Standard on Investigative Journalists” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Murkowski Votes to Force States to Continue Planned Parenthood Funding, VP Pence Breaks Tie Vote

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Vice President Mike Pence voted to allow states to defund Planned Parenthood Thursday. His vote tipped a divided Senate.

Passed in the House last month, the bill overturns part of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Mandate. The former rule prevented states from defunding abortion clinics.

States are now free to opt out of funding services of Title X of the Public Health Service Act. Title X focuses only on family planning.

Republicans are using the Congressional Review Act to overturn the HHS rule. It allows a new Congress to overturn last-minute actions of the previous administration. The Obama administration passed the HHS rule in December 2016. As The Atlantic reported, it was a “last-ditch attempt to protect Planned Parenthood.”

The Senate needed Pence’s vote since two republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, voted to keep the rule. Two independents and every Democratic senator also voted to keep the rule.

The Associated Press reported that a final vote could happen later Thursday. Pence will likely have to break the tie again.

Editor’s Note: A second vote was held. An ailing Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) obtained permission from his doctor to return to Washington for one day. Isakson cast his vote to deny federal funding to abortion providers. The legislation was sent to President Trump, who is expected to sign it.

(For more from the author of “Pence Breaks Tie in Vote Allowing States to Defund Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Transgender Inmates Should Have Bras, Make-Up, Corrections Department Says

/0 Comments/in , /by

Transgender California prison inmates would be allowed to have bras, cosmetics and other personal items corresponding to their gender identities under proposed rules filed with state regulators on Tuesday . . .

Transgender female inmates housed in men’s facilities could have feminine undergarments, lip gloss and mascara, for instance, while transgender male inmates in women’s prisons could wear aftershave and boxers.

A federal magistrate previously ordered the state to provide some of the items. However, attorneys for transgender inmate Shiloh Quine are still sparring with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation over the details, with another court hearing set for April 27. (Read more from “Transgender Inmates Should Have Bras, Make-Up, Corrections Department Says” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Left and Right Unhappy With Repeal of North Carolina’s Bathroom Law

/0 Comments/in , /by

A legislative compromise watering down North Carolina’s “bathroom law” leaves access to public bathrooms muddier than ever, conservative opponents of the change say, and it removes the standard of privacy espoused last year by state officials.

“They’ve taken away that baseline of privacy that ensured that [use of] every multi-occupancy restroom, locker room, and shower in the state’s public buildings would be based on a person’s biological sex,” Kellie Fiedorek, counsel at the Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Thursday.

This means, Fiedorek said, that a man won’t be arrested for entering a women’s restroom, unless someone decides to press charges.

“If a male wanted to use the females’ restroom, there’s nothing to really prevent him from doing that, unless someone finds him in there and they want to file a trespass action,” she said.

The state Senate passed the bill Thursday by a vote of 32-16, and the House then passed it 70-48.

The deal, the work of Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, and the Republican leaders of the state Legislature, repeals the bathroom law, also known as House Bill 2.

That law, praised by some and assailed by others, required that individuals use restrooms and locker rooms in schools, public universities, and other government buildings that correspond with their biological sex.

The main provision of the bill reads:

State agencies, boards, offices, departments, institutions, branches of government including the University of North Carolina and the North Carolina Community College System, and political subdivisions of the state, including local boards of education, are preempted from regulation of access to multiple occupancy restrooms, showers, or changing facilities, except in accordance with an act of the General Assembly.

Advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans had labeled the law as hateful and encouraged businesses and tourists to boycott North Carolina as a result.

The state’s Republican governor, Pat McCrory, lost re-election to Cooper by a close margin in November, conceding four weeks later, after signing the bathroom bill into law in March 2016.

Cooper hailed the deal to repeal the law.

“l support the House Bill 2 repeal compromise,” Cooper said. “It’s not a perfect deal, but it repeals House Bill 2 and begins to repair our reputation.”

The bill prevents any local government from adopting or amending an existing law regulating employment practices and public accommodations until Dec. 1, 2020, Fiedorek noted.

Senate Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, and House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, helped craft the deal.

“Compromise requires give and take from all sides, and we are pleased this proposal fully protects bathroom safety and privacy,” Berger and Moore said in a joint statement.

U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he approved of the repeal. In a prepared statement, Tillis said:

North Carolina’s brand and continued economic prosperity should not be beholden to the loudest voices on either the far left or the far right who don’t have our state’s best interests in mind. I’m glad that state lawmakers were able to reach a commonsense compromise to repeal House Bill 2.

Democrat lawmakers opposing the measure for not going far enough to protect transgender individuals included state Sens. Jay Chaudhuri of Raleigh; Mike Woodard and Floyd McKissick of Durham; Valerie Foushee of Hillsborough; Jeff Jackson of Charlotte; and Don Davis of Greenville, The News & Observer reported.

But Ryan T. Anderson, a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal in an email that North Carolina lawmakers gave in to special interests.

“North Carolina’s political leaders caved to the demands of big business and special interests,” Ryan said, adding:

This is a prime example of what I have called ‘cultural cronyism‘—when the left can’t win on an issue through normal political persuasion, they get progressive big businesses to use their outsized market share to make economic threats to pressure the government to do their bidding—at the expense of the common good.

Jackson tweeted his reason for opposing the measure:

McKissick called the measure a “heartless compromise” and said he “couldn’t support it as a matter of philosophy and principle.”

The Human Rights Campaign, which advocates LGBT rights and calls itself “America’s largest civil rights organization,” called the legislative deal “dangerous”:

The organization also tweeted that lawmakers who supported the measure “betrayed” those who aren’t heterosexual:

(For more from the author of “Left and Right Unhappy With Repeal of North Carolina’s Bathroom Law” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New ‘Children’s’ Book Has Prince Charming Finding True Love With Farm Boy

/0 Comments/in , /by

Here is a short argument to keep in mind as you read about a new “children’s” book that promotes homosexual relationships.

If there is nothing morally wrong with same-sex relationships, then there is nothing wrong with exposing children to same-sex relationships. After all, kids will see same-sex relationships around them in our culture. And some kids will go on to form same-sex relationships. So, if there is nothing wrong with such relationships, why not show kids stories about men in love?

This was the implicit reasoning used by authors Adam Reynolds and Chaz Harris who wrote Promised Land. This is a picture-book about how “a young Prince and a farm boy meet in the forest and their newfound friendship blossoms into love.”

The Prince’s mother is divorced and has taken up living with an evil man. The evil man covets Farm Boy’s land. The land sits, as expected, in an Enchanted forest.

The book ends with a lovely picture of the Prince and Farm Boy smacking each other on the lips over the words, “They got married and started their own family.”

That is, of course, impossible. Two men cannot marry. And two men certainly cannot start a family. That is biologically impossible. These are not only theological truths. They are scientific realities as well.

Well, nobody expects Reality in a children’s fantasy. Magic isn’t real either, but that didn’t slow sales of, or enthusiasm for, Harry Potter. We shouldn’t therefore be critical of fantastical elements. But can we say anything against positive portrayals of homosexual love?

We cannot. Not if we cannot also say, out loud and in public, that homosexual love is immoral. Now love between two men, or two males, need not be immoral. A father loves his son. A man loves his friend. But if homosexual love is different than the love of two friends, what is that difference? It is sexual desire. Yet that desire is objectively disordered. The desire, if one indulges it, often leads to homosexual acts, which are immoral and sinful.

But if we cannot say that, then we cannot say that Promised Land should not be shown to children. And we cannot say that it should not be shown to children in schools. The only argument we can muster against it would be based on some bad effects of doing so. “We cannot show the book,” the utilitarian might argue, “because we do not want to pay for it.” What happens when a generous soul then donates copies?

We have reached a point in our culture where we could teach Promised Land in schools, but we could not teach about the Promised Land!

“And God almighty bless thee, and make thee to increase, and multiply thee: that thou mayst be a multitude of people. And give the blessings of Abraham to thee, and to thy seed after thee: that thou mayst possess the land of thy sojournment, which he promised to thy grandfather” (Genesis 28:3-4).

What an inversion.

The press is in love with Promised Land. Huffington Post says the book is about a place “where all people are equal no matter what they look like or who they love.” It’s obvious the author of that sentence has not thought through all its implications. Should men who love children be celebrated? Doesn’t Equality demand such a thing?

Harris told Huffington Post a truth: “The [kinds of media] we consume as kids and young adults form our attitudes towards those around us. … Most importantly, they influence our attitudes towards ourselves. … If we can be heroes in stories, we’re seen more positively in the real world.”

That homosexual relationships will be seen in a more positive light is just the effect Promised Land will have.

Teen Vogue calls Promised Land “required reading” and that says that the book “smashes any taboo around the subject” of homosexual relationships. It does, too.

The book has already set off a debate in New Zealand (home of the authors). Women’s Weekly asks, “Should children be taught about homosexuality in school?” The question was, as you might guess, mostly rhetorical.

What this book is doing is no different than what Disney did in Beauty and the Beast. That’s the new movie to made a point to show “an exclusively gay moment.” And they did it in a charming way. Kids who saw the movie would, as calculated, look with a kinder eye on homosexual relationships.

As they should, if there is nothing wrong with homosexual relationships.

Update: Santa Claus to be “Gay” Too

Just in is news that another picture-book will feature Santa Claus in a homosexual relationship with a black man. Time reports the book will be titled Santa’s Husband and will go on sale on 10 October. (For more from the author of “New ‘Children’s’ Book Has Prince Charming Finding True Love With Farm Boy” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Truth About the Economic Impact of North Carolina’s ‘Bathroom Bill’

/0 Comments/in , /by

When then-North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory signed H.B. 2, the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act (commonly known as the “bathroom bill”), into law on March 23, 2016, critics argued that corporate backlash against the measure would cost North Carolina dearly.

Now, more than a year later, the Associated Press has provided an updated estimate of the economic fallout:

The Associated Press used dozens of interviews and multiple public records requests to determine that North Carolina’s ‘bathroom bill’ will cost the state more than $3.76 billion in lost business over a dozen years.

The overwhelming majority of the reported impact, or $2.66 billion over 12 years, is attributable to PayPal’s cancellation of a planned 400-employee operations center less than two weeks after the bill was passed.

The effects of similar site location decisions by Deutsche Bank, CoStar, Voxpro, and Adidas total $912 million. The loss of sporting events, conventions, concerts, etc. totals $196 million.

The reported figures probably overstate the economic impact of each individual item. They are based on input-output models, which assume that dollars spent in initial transactions—such as by a business that decides to locate in a given area—will automatically cycle through the economy, creating a ripple effect and stimulating further economic growth.

But this ignores supply-side constraints, such as the number of available workers.

If North Carolina were still in the midst of a recession and had an unusually large number of people looking for work, this model would prove more accurate. But that is not the case.

North Carolina’s average unemployment rate fell from 5.8 percent to 5.1 percent between 2015 and 2016, when it was not significantly different from the national average.

In 2016, the national unemployment rate was only 0.2 percentage points above its underlying long-term rate, down from a gap of 4.7 percentage points in 2010. Those two rates are expected to be equal in 2017.

Across the nation, labor market slack—that is, the excess number of people out of work and available for hiring—is vanishing.

Input-output model results also depend heavily on the division of income between parties.

In the case of the PayPal expansion, the model shows that the 400 “nondepository credit intermediation and related services” jobs were expected to result in annual sales of $207 million, of which $30 million would go to employee compensation, $28 million would go to other business expenses, and the remaining $149 million would be proprietor’s income.

While the forecasted effects on the North Carolina economy result mostly from proprietor’s income, PayPal is a publicly traded company headquartered in California, so the bulk of these profits would most likely be distributed outside of North Carolina, with little further impact on the state.

Even if the reported estimates of the impact of H.B. 2 prove to be accurate, they should be considered in the context of North Carolina’s half trillion-dollar gross domestic product.

In that case, the estimated impact is actually quite modest, resulting in a loss of no more than 0.1 percent of the state’s GDP, or about $1 for every $1,000 of income earned in the state.

This cost of roughly a dollar a week for the median North Carolina household would be a small price to pay to protect the privacy and safety of women and girls. (For more from the author of “The Truth About the Economic Impact of North Carolina’s ‘Bathroom Bill'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mom Says TSA Agents Traumatized Son With ‘Horrifying’ Security Check

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A mother who asked TSA agents at DFW International Airport for alternative screening for her son with special needs said they were “treated like dogs” and forced to miss a flight during an extensive security check, according to her Facebook post that has since gone viral.

But the Transportation Security Administration said in a prepared statement that it followed approved procedures to “resolve an alarm of the passenger’s laptop.”

Jennifer Williamson wrote Sunday morning that her son has a sensory processing disorder and that she asked agents to “screen him in other ways per TSA rules.”

An accompanying video shows a TSA agent patting down her son. The agent pats down his backside before moving to his front. She writes in the post they were kept for more than hour in the “horrifying” incident.

TSA disputed Williamson’s account, noting in its statement that the passengers were at the checkpoint for about 45 minutes, including the time it took to discuss screening procedures with the teen’s mother and the inspection of three carry-on items. The pat-down took about two minutes, according to the agency. (Read more from “Mom Says TSA Agents Traumatized Son With ‘Horrifying’ Security Check” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Rockville Rape Defense: 14-Year-Old Girl Sent Explicit Pictures, Texted About Sex

/0 Comments/in , /by

Defense attorneys for one of the two male high school students accused of violently raping a 14-year-old girl are claiming the victim agreed to have sex with one of the suspects over text message and sent him explicit photos.

Both suspects — 17-year-old Jose Montano and 18-year-old Henry Sanchez — were in the country illegally after being detained and then released by federal officials . . .

According to police, they forced the girl into a bathroom stall at school and made her perform oral sex on them while they took turns raping and sodomizing her as she begged them to stop. Police found blood and DNA at the scene . . .

The rape drew attention from White House press secretary Sean Spicer, who last week pointed to the case as reason for President Trump’s immigration policies.

“Part of the reason the President has cracked-down on illegal immigration, and made it such a big deal is because of tragedies like this,” Spicer said. “Immigration pays its toll on our people if it’s not done legally.” (Read more from “Rockville Rape Defense: 14-Year-Old Girl Sent Explicit Pictures, Texted About Sex” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.