House Debates Protections for Babies Born Alive After Attempted Abortions

/0 Comments/in , /by

An abortion survivor urged Americans to “wake up” to the reality that some babies born alive after an attempted abortion are left to die, the survivor testified at a hearing on Capitol Hill last week.

“Many Americans have no idea that babies can even live through abortions and are often left to die, but this does happen,” Gianna Jessen, 39, said at the hearing. “I know this, because I was born alive in an abortion clinic after being burned in my mother’s womb for 18 hours.”

Jessen, who has cerebral palsy due to her attempted abortion, added at a House Judiciary Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee hearing on Sept. 23:

My medical records clearly state the following: Born during saline abortion … Apart from Jesus himself, the only reason I am alive is the fact that the abortionist had not yet arrived at work that morning. Had he been there, he would have ended my life by strangulation, suffocation, or simply leaving me there to die.

“Often when I’m in the midst of abortion advocates, they never can answer this one question and it is this: If abortion is merely about women’s rights, then what were mine?” Jessen said.

In 2002, President George W. Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, making it illegal to kill any babies born alive.

“Unfortunately, incidents involving born-alive children being killed after an attempted abortion have continued after this law [was passed] and into the present,” Arina Grossu, director for the Center of Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, testified at the hearing. Grossu’s written testimony says:

Abortionist Kermit Gosnell operated his dirty and dangerous Philadelphia abortion business and committed horrendous crimes in Philadelphia for over three decades. … His heinous and murderous practices of snipping the spines of born-alive children were only discovered by accident when federal and state authorities raided his facility in 2010, not because he was illegally killing born-alive infants, but because of his illegal prescription drug activity.

Grossu says Gosnell is “not an outlier.”

“Not one person to date has been charged or convicted under the current federal [Born-Alive Infants Protection Act] law,” Grossu testified.

The House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, introduced by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., in September 2015. An identical bill in the Senate, introduced by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., was referred to the Judiciary Committee.

“The abortion industry has labored for all of these decades to convince the world that unborn children and born children should be completely separated in our minds, that while born children are persons worthy of protection, unborn children are not persons and are not worthy of protection,” Franks, chairman of the subcommittee, said at the hearing.

Franks’ legislation would protect the rights of infants born alive after an abortion and leave criminal consequences for health care professionals who violate the law. The legislation would also require proper medical care be given by the health care practitioner present when an infant is born alive.

The legislation “explicitly requires health care practitioners to treat born-alive abortion survivors with the same care they would treat any other born-alive baby and admit such babies immediately to a hospital.” The law would also hold abortionists accountable for killing born-alive infants, Grossu testified.

President Barack Obama’s administration “strongly opposes” the passage of this bill, according to a statement from September 2015.

“The White House has promised that it would veto the born-alive legislation, citing it would have a ‘chilling’ effect,” Grossu testified. “I cannot think of a more chilling effect than continuing to let U.S. abortionists commit infanticide.”

Grossu urged support for the legislation to stop infanticide, or intentionally killing an infant child, in the United States.

The Hyde Amendment, also under examination at the hearing, prohibits the use of certain taxpayer dollars in abortion cases, except in rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life.

“Today we will hear testimony on existing statutory language prohibiting taxpayer funding from paying for the taking of the lives of preborn children through abortion,” Franks said. “There is concern that the Obama administration or a potential Clinton administration may intend to reinterpret the plain and longstanding meaning of the Hyde Amendment.”

The Hyde Amendment, an appropriations policy rider that has been passed each year since 1976, has its 40th anniversary this week.

“As a black woman, I am outraged that the morally bankrupt Hyde Amendment has been permitted to persist for so long,” Kierra Johnson, executive director of Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity, testified. “It is a source of pain for many women and should be a source of shame for those who support it.”

“The Hyde Amendment prevents women from even being able to make a decision about their health care,” Johnson said.

While Genevieve Plaster, a senior policy analyst at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a pro-life nonprofit organization, testified that the Hyde Amendment has saved over 2 million lives since 1976, or approximately 60,000 lives per year.

“America was founded on the concept that our rights come from God,” Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said at the hearing. “When our rights come from God, how would it be possible that those rights would confer a right to kill a baby?” (For more from the author of “House Debates Protections for Babies Born Alive After Attempted Abortions” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hey, Hollywood, Want Better Emmy Ratings? Start by Cutting the Liberal Crap

/0 Comments/in , /by

The 2016 Emmy Awards, hosted by Jimmy Kimmel, brought in the lowest ratings of all time. People thought the disaster last year — hosted by Andy Samberg — was bad, but this year was far worse. The Emmys drew in 11.9 million viewers. Last year, it was 15.6 million. This year was lower than 1990, when the Emmys made its first appearance on Fox and attracted 12.3 million viewers.

Award shows, for the most part, have become a cesspool of left-wing propaganda that it’s no wonder so many people are tuning out. Would you want to watch a show where your political ideology was routinely ridiculed and mocked for the sake of stroking the political feelings of other performers in the audience?

The producers of the Emmys may want to take a look at the possibility of letting presenters and recipients know that politics should be left at home. There is a strong likelihood some of the celebrities would object to the point of threatening not to attend, but so what? Would the producers rather have seven to eight million more people watching the telecast or spend time assuaging the feelings of a handful of celebrities who think awards shows are their own personal political platforms?

It starts with the host, and while Jimmy Kimmel was happy to poke fun at Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton went unscathed. Jokes made at the expense of politicians are nothing new but when all the jokes focus on only one side, people will notice.

Julia Louis-Dreyfus in accepting her Emmy award brought everybody tears with a touching tribute to her father who had died only days before. However, she couldn’t resist taking a shot at Trump when she said, “Our show started out as a political satire, but it now feels more like a sobering documentary. So I certainly do promise to rebuild that wall and make Mexico pay for it.”

Jill Soloway, creator of “Transparent,” won the award for Best Directing in a Comedy Series. She finished off her speech by shouting, “Down with the patriarchy!” and then launched into anti-Trump tirade backstage where she said,

He needs to be called out at every chance he gets for being one of the most dangerous monsters to ever approach our lifetimes. He’s a complete dangerous monster, and any moment that I have to call Trump out for being an inheritor to Hitler, I will.

That’s a tad melodramatic. People certainly have differing opinions on Trump, but the idea he is anywhere akin to a man who set in motion events that resulted in the extermination of six million people is asinine.

If the commentary from performers wasn’t anti-Trump, they were certainly happy to express their fondness for Hillary Clinton. Courtney B. Vance, who won for his portrayal of Johnny Cochrane in “The People v. O.J. Simpson,” ended his acceptance speech saying, “Obama out! Hillary in!”

Kate McKinnon, who has done a masterful job portraying Hillary Clinton on “Saturday Night Live,” won the award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series. She accepted her award and thanked Hillary Clinton personally. Despite her spot-on portrayal, she is a Clinton supporter. Hillary Clinton congratulated McKinnon on Twitter.

A lot of viewers simply aren’t going to tolerate this kind of blatant politicking on an awards show when it is so one-sided. The producers need to be aware of that. They need to stop operating under the assumption that conservatives don’t watch any of these shows and therefore aren’t going to tune in, regardless. It’s not true.

People, including conservatives, like to see their favorite television shows, movies, and musical performers win awards for their work. It’s the blatant left-wing politics they can do without. If producers put an end to that, they’d likely see their ratings increase substantially. (For more from the author of “Hey, Hollywood, Want Better Emmy Ratings? Start by Cutting the Liberal Crap” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Concerns Over Hillary’s Health Increasing as Parkinson’s Rumors Surface

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The American presidency may be the world’s most demanding job, aging presidents twice as fast as the general population, and there are increasing concerns that Hillary Clinton may not be up to it. Clinton, 68, has had several medical issues in recent years.

During one such incident, while being interviewed by reporters, her head started shaking violently for several seconds. At other times, she has lapsed into blank stares and lost her focus. She admits she has fallen or passed out more than once. Even this week, questions were raised by The Hill about abnormal eye movements during a speech last week in Philadelphia.

Clinton’s Health

Clinton’s health is negatively affecting her campaigning. She recently canceled trips to California, sending her husband Bill Clinton in her place to headline Hollywood fundraisers. She went 257 days without holding a single press conference over the past year, only resuming them a few weeks ago. She has missed events that presidential candidates would normally participate in, such as visiting the flood-ravaged areas of Louisiana in August.

Some suspect Clinton and her staff are covering up the seriousness of her health problems. After she collapsed near Ground Zero after leaving a ceremony for the 15th anniversary of 9-11, her doctor, Lisa Bardack, released a letter assuring the public that Clinton was in good health and had merely suffered the effects of pneumonia. Bardack, chair of internal medicine at CareMount Medical in Mount Kisco, New York, asserted that Clinton was fit to serve as president. She said a CAT scan of Clinton’s brain in March revealed no abnormalities.

However, not all doctors agree with the clean bill of health. The pro-Clinton New York Times reported that “doctors not connected with the candidate’s care say that the letters omit basic information like height and weight, and that a more detailed history of her blood clots and a 2012 concussion should be disclosed.”

In the article, a clinical professor of medicine at New York University, Lawrence K. Altman, explained that Clinton has “had serious medical problems in recent years.” His review of her health issues covered her recent pneumonia, her history of blood clots, the medications she’s taking, recovery from the 2012 concussion and her cardiac health. It revealed areas for concern, including her not having public neuropsychological exams, but no serious medical problems.

But the problems Altman highlighted are not the only concerns about Clinton’s health.

A Neurological Disorder?

An increasing number of doctors are suggesting that Clinton’s symptoms appear to indicate a neurological disorder, most likely Parkinson’s Disease. Dr. Lee Hieb, an orthopaedic surgeon specializing in spinal surgery, explained to WND that people who faint from the usual causes, like low blood pressure and heat stress, “slump limply,” but Clinton “is rigid and in spinal extension.”

Further, “Any doctor who has treated pneumonia can affirm that if you are sick enough to pass out, you are not going to recover in an hour to become a smiling, waving Hillary exiting her daughter’s condo.” The bobbing of her head and the exaggerated eye and facial movement are both seen in late Parkinson’s patients, he continued.

Parkinson’s patients are notorious for falling during “freeze” episodes because they cannot initiate movement to catch their balance. … People with Parkinson’s very frequently have dementia, cognitive deficits (reasoning problems), mood alterations and can have anger issues.

Dr. Erika Schwartz, who treats women’s health, similarly noted on KABC’s Midday Live how strange it was that Clinton was seen a few hours after her September 11 fall waving and talking to people outside her daughter Chelsea’s apartment. “You don’t tend to see the kind of recovery [after a fall due to pneumonia] that Mrs. Clinton seemed to exhibit that day,” Schwartz remarked.

Dr. Ted Noel, former director of the NovaMed Surgery Center in Orlando, writes on his website, “Hillary Clinton has had Parkinson’s Disease for at least ten years. She has known it for all of that time. Her campaign shows a complete disregard for America in the pursuit of personal graft.” He says during a short news video he created, “Everything … fits the theory,” he said. “Video evidence is solid. [There’s] strong evidence of having advanced Parkinson’s disease.”

Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, who treats women’s health, also echoed this concern. Orient told Breitbart that Clinton’s neurocognitive functioning is the biggest concern when it comes to Clinton’s health. In the same article, Vliet noted that Altman’s summary of Clinton’s medical issues in the Times didn’t even go far enough. He “doesn’t address the abnormal movements we have seen on multiple public videos of events where she is speaking.”

What else do we know about the Democratic nominee’s health? Something, if we accept everything in her doctor’s letter, but there’s also a lot we don’t know.

Concussion

Clinton suffered a concussion in 2012. She apparently contracted a stomach virus after foreign travel which dehydrated her, causing her to faint. She fell down in her bathroom and hit her head on the toilet. After she was treated, a blood clot (her third, see below for the history of the first two) was discovered in one of the main veins connected to her brain.

Bill Clinton said her concussion “required six months of very serious work to get over,” but — as Altman points out — Clinton’s doctor said she recovered in only two months. Bardack also said the concussion and clots were completely resolved by 2013.

Similarly, Dr. Jamie Wells, MD, FAAP, a Board-Certified physician and Director of Medicine at the American Council on Science and Health, notes, “As we have seen with football players and other people with head injuries, traumatic brain injury does not always just ‘go away.’” Orient noted how Clinton telling the FBI she forgot several things may be evidence of lingering damage.

Altman noted that head injuries may hasten dementia. They are also considered a possible risk factor for Parkinson’s.

Blood Clots and Phlebitis

Clinton suffered her first blood clot in 1998 while First Lady. It developed in her calf, which is known as phlebitis. Her second blood clot, in 2009, also afflicted her calf, causing it to swell. She refused to be hospitalized as doctors recommended, citing the rigors of campaigning.

In 2012, a third blood clot, known as a transverse sinus venous thrombosis since it developed in her brain, forced her to spend a few days in the hospital and take a month off work. She takes Coumadin, a powerful blood thinner, for the clots. Also known as warfarin or Jantoven, it comes with its own additional set of risks. If a patient gets a cut or takes the medication improperly, it can cause heavy bleeding. Some of the possible side effects are so serious they require immediate medical attention. In addition to heavy bleeding, they include dizziness or weakness, bruising without a cut, and red or brown urine, among others.

Pneumonia

An anonymous board certified internist writing at Powerline thinks it’s more likely that Clinton has aspiration pneumonia, where food or liquid gets into the lungs, than a neurological condition. He says this “raises profoundly troubling implications for her possible election as president.” Unlike regular pneumonia, “This is especially worrisome because it is likely to recur given the underlying, usually incurable disease process and because it can be a life-threatening event.”

Sinus and Ear Infection

Clinton developed a sinus and ear infection last winter. As a result of progressive pain in her left ear, a myringotomy tube was placed in her left ear. Myringotomy is considered minor surgery, but it requires general anesthesia.

Lingering Cough

Last year, Clinton started coughing frequently during debates and interviews. Her doctor asserts it is allergy related, but it could also be a symptom of Parkinson’s Disease, since those afflicted sometimes have difficulty clearing their throat due to lack of motor control.

Lingering Concerns

Clinton has a sluggish thyroid, known as hypothroidism, for which she takes medication. In 2009, she slipped inside a government garage and fractured her elbow — another fall.

She still has not released her medical records from her White House years, which could reveal even more serious issues.

While she has released more medical records than Donald Trump, he hasn’t shown any signs of serious health problems. Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein, issued a letter stating that the presidential candidate is in “excellent physical health.”

Clinton’s defenders are trying to discredit questions about her health as “conspiracy theories.” She can continue denying she has serious health problems, but if she really does have them, she will not be able to hide them forever. Dr. Wells observes, “Dr. Bardack is ethically bound not to violate the expressed privacy wishes of her patient but she is also responsible for not making false claims.”

Since early ballots are already being mailed in parts of the country, it is unlikely the Democrats will replace Clinton with another presidential candidate. If she does have Parkinson’s, the disease will progress. At stage three of Parkinson’s, falling becomes more frequent, and the disease “significantly affects daily tasks at this stage.”

Stage four may require a walker. According to Healthline, “Many people are unable to live alone at this stage of Parkinson’s because of significant decreases in movement and reaction times. Living alone at stage 4 or later may make many daily tasks impossible, and can be extremely dangerous.” If Clinton does have this debilitating disease, there is a very good chance if elected president she will not be able to complete her term, requiring her vice-presidential pick Tim Kaine to relieve her as president.

On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton was asked by reporter Sarin Fazan of ABC News’ Tampa affiliate WFTS whether she would, as some doctors have suggested, take neurocognitive tests. She laughed off the suggestion.

Regardless of what may be ailing Secretary Clinton we pray for her health, that she receives the proper treatment and that she will trust the American people enough to share with them the truth. (For more from the author of “Concerns Over Hillary’s Health Increasing as Parkinson’s Rumors Surface” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

A GOP Congress Should Not Give Planned Parenthood Another Dime of Taxpayer Money

/0 Comments/in , /by

Planned Parenthood has once again proven it does two things exceedingly well—ending innocent human lives in the womb for a fee, and getting American taxpayers to subsidize its operations.

How else to explain Congress making America’s No. 1 abortion provider eligible for new funding when it already gets over a half-billion dollars (yes, billion) in taxpayer money per year?

The House version of the continuing resolution, a short-term government spending measure, provided $95 million in health care funds to address the Zika emergency. But it effectively limited grant recipients to Medicaid providers in Florida and Puerto Rico.

This meant that Planned Parenthood clinics in Florida would have been guaranteed funding, but its Puerto Rico partner, Profamilia, would not because it did not qualify under Medicaid rules.

This was unacceptable to congressional Democrats who threatened a shutdown fight over this one abortion provider that runs six clinics. The subsequent Senate version of the continuing resolution dropped the Medicaid requirement and allows Profamilia access to Zika funds, but seems to leave the question of who ultimately gets funding in the hands of Florida and Puerto Rico health authorities.

Because Florida cut off Planned Parenthood funding under Medicaid this year (only to be overturned by a liberal judge), there is at least some hope that it will direct all Zika funds to life-affirming health centers instead of abortion clinics.

But Puerto Rico? The place that once boasted of the highest female sterilization rate in the world because of the coercive teamwork between Planned Parenthood and the Puerto Rican government? We already know Planned Parenthood and its allies are willing to hold emergency Zika funding hostage over a handful of clinics, so it would be the height of naïveté to think that the master of working the system would not find a way to get its typical cut of the money if given the chance.

Instead of allowing Planned Parenthood access to new federal funding streams, Congress should be closing the spigot entirely. For example, when videos of alleged corruption and illegal voter fraud surfaced around the notorious left-wing group known as ACORN, Congress promptly defunded it. The same logic applies to Planned Parenthood, especially after undercover videos raised serious questions over whether its affiliates were illegally profiting from selling organs of unborn babies.

Thankfully, we still have landmark laws like the Hyde Amendment that prevent direct taxpayer funding of abortion. But while Planned Parenthood fights for Hyde’s repeal, it has used every trick in the book to get federal money by trying to pretend that its core business is anything but industrial-scale abortion.

Congress should not make Planned Parenthood eligible for a raise. Rather, it should bar Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers from health care funding up front and redirect it to more comprehensive and life-affirming health care providers. Such a move would reflect the simple fact the Planned Parenthood has long since disqualified itself from taxpayer money because of its callous disregard for innocent human life. (For more from the author of “A GOP Congress Should Not Give Planned Parenthood Another Dime of Taxpayer Money” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Congressional Panel Recommends the House Hold StemExpress in Contempt

/0 Comments/in , /by

Former Planned Parenthood fetal harvesting partner StemExpress should be held in contempt of Congress, according to Republicans on a panel investigating the fetal harvesting industry.

The House Select Panel on Infant Lives’ vote was based upon a report Republicans say outlines cause to hold StemExpress and its CEO Cate Dyer in contempt for not responding to the Panel’s subpoenas and other requests and demands for information, including accounting records. The recommendation for contempt was successful, 8-0, after the Panel’s six Democrats staged a walk-out.

“Nearly one year ago our Panel was established and given the important task of investigating very disturbing allegations that some abortion clinics and middleman procurement organizations, including StemExpresss, were violating federal law by profiting from the sale of human fetal tissue,” said Panel Chair Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) in a statement after the vote. “In order to determine if these entities were in violation of federal law or if the relevant statute needs to be updated, our Panel must review all accounting and banking records.”

The Panel issued requests, then subpoenas, to StemExpress, starting in December 2015. Subpoenas were issued starting in early 2016, according to a timeline provided to the press by the Panel. A final attempt to contact StemExpress’ lawyer was made in early September.

“Nine months is enough time for an entity to produce accounting documents,” said Blackburn. “A subpoena is not a suggestion. It is a lawful order that must be complied with. If StemExpress continues to obstruct, then we will work with House leadership to determine the necessary next steps.”

For its part, StemExpress said in a statement that it has complied with the Panel’s investigation. “StemExpress offered to testify before the Select Panel, but this offer was ignored. Several House and Senate Committees have reviewed our accounting records and closed their investigations. We have provided hundreds of documents to the Select Panel, including accounting records, both voluntarily and in response to subpoenas.”

A spokesperson for StemExpress did not answer The Stream’s follow-up question about whether the company had explicitly provided the accounting information demanded by the Panel. The harvesting company’s former bank, Five Star Bancorp, likewise did not respond to a request for comment.

Press staff for the House Panel did not answer The Stream’s follow-up question about StemExpress’ claim about testifying before the Panel.

StemExpress has been in Republicans’ sights since the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover videos showed the company possibly engaging in illegal harvesting of fetal organs and other body parts. While Planned Parenthood and StemExpress parted ways shortly after the videos were made public, the Panel’s investigations show that StemExpress was providing Planned Parenthood clinics with profit in exchange for fetal parts.

It is the profit that concerns the Panel, since it violates a 1993 federal law authored by former Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman of Massachusetts. However, StemExpress said it could not cooperate with the Panel, claiming it was “gravely concerned about the safety and security risks of identifying StemExpress personnel involved in the procurement of fetal tissue.”

Blackburn and Panel staff say StemExpress’ concerns are unnecessary. “The Panel staff and the Chairman have represented publicly and to StemExpress counsel that the Panel’s policy was to keep the names of lower-level staff and researchers redacted from any public documents or reports. Indeed, the directions to such subpoena recipients provide a methodology to protect the identities of persons in functional positions.”

All of the Panel’s Democrats walked out before yesterday’s vote. In a press release, top Panel Democrat Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) said, “Chair Blackburn has manufactured a controversy over information that she does not need,” accusing Blackburn of making a “McCarthyesque threat. …” (For more from the author of “Congressional Panel Recommends the House Hold StemExpress in Contempt” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

As Trump Offers Cleveland New Hope, Pastors Pray to Protect Him From ‘Satanic Attack’

/0 Comments/in , /by

Evangelical Christians of multiple races mixed their faith in God with their faith that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump can heal the nation on Wednesday.

On Wednesday, Trump appeared at the Midwest Vision and Values Pastors Leadership Conference in Cleveland.

“I want to thank the African-American community because, I don’t know if you’ve been watching, but the poll numbers are going like a rocket ship,” Trump said. “I fully understand the African-American community has suffered from discrimination.”

Trump said America’s cities must be rebuilt.

“It breaks my heart to see any American left behind or to see a city like Cleveland that has had so many struggles, and that there are many wrongs that still must be made right,” the GOP nominee said.

After Trump spoke to the assembled crowd, Pastor Darrell Scott, a co-host of the event, spoke to Trump.

Scott said a “nationally known” pastor, whom he did not identify, had warned Trump “that if you choose to run for president, there’s going to be a concentrated Satanic attack against you.”

“He said there’s going to be a demon, principalities and powers, that are going to war against you on a level that you’ve never seen before, and I’m watching it every day,” Scott said, referring to the opposition Trump’s candidacy has spawned.

Scott’s wife, Belinda, then led the group in prayer as they gathered around Trump.

“Now God, I ask that you would touch this man, Donald J. Trump. Give him the anointing to lead this nation,” she prayed.

The meeting was open to clergy or all faiths and political ideologies.

“I think it’s good he’s open to hearing from clergy,” said Pastor Mike Wingerd of Emmanuel Assembly of God. “I’m very glad he’s concerned about religious freedom.”

Scott, who led the session, had spoken for Trump at the Republican National Convention.

“America is a melting pot, a country of diversity. We stand poised to make history, by standing together as Americans, as one. We are here as Americans regardless of race, creed or color. We are here as those who hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” he said.

“The truth is the Democratic Party has failed us,” Scott said. “At home, our debt has grown, we are spiritually empty and we are more divided now than we have ever been before. Abroad, we are neither respected, we’re not feared by our adversaries, and our friends cannot count on us either. This is their legacy, and we need to make a sharp turn. We need to put into practice the great ideas and principles that our country was founded on, and which, after God, are the source of strength that has made this nation great.” (For more from the author of “As Trump Offers Cleveland New Hope, Pastors Pray to Protect Him From ‘Satanic Attack'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Amid Fetal Tissue Investigation, Republicans Seek Legal Action Against StemExpress

/0 Comments/in , /by

Republicans on a special House panel are recommending that StemExpress and its CEO be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over accounting records. The company came under scrutiny after last year’s undercover videos of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s top abortion provider.

Republicans on the panel, which is investigating the market for tissue from aborted babies, see the accounting records as crucial for the investigation.

“To date, the panel has never received a single accounting record from StemExpress,” Republicans on the Select Investigative Panel said in a new staff report. “No names of key personnel have been provided by [StemExpress CEO] Ms. Dyer so that the panel might conduct interviews, and the cost estimates have been ambiguous and inadequate.”

StemExpress is a for-profit biotechnology company that procures tissue from abortion clinics such as Planned Parenthood. StemExpress then transfers that tissue to medical researchers.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn, chairman of the Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, will hold a procedural vote on Wednesday to hold the biotechnology company in contempt of Congress. Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee, is aiming to force StemExpress and its CEO Catherine Dyer to comply with congressional subpoenas by using the force of the U.S. Justice Department in order to make the company release its full accounting records.

Before the Justice Department would take action against StemExpress, several more steps would need to occur after Wednesday’s vote. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will also need to hold a procedural vote before it can advance to the full U.S. House of Representatives. It is unclear when Republicans would schedule those votes with the House planning to recess at the end of September or earlier.

The Daily Signal reached out to StemExpress, which claimed it has already complied with congressional records requests.

“StemExpress offered to testify before the select panel, but this offer was ignored,” a spokesman for the company said. “Several House and Senate committees have reviewed our accounting records and closed their investigations. We have provided hundreds of documents to the select panel, including accounting records, both voluntarily and in response to subpoenas. All Americans should be concerned that a congressional panel can use the threat of contempt proceedings to support a narrative that flies in the face of the facts.”

Republicans claim that StemExpress has failed to provide investigators complete copies of accounting records in an attempt to slow walk or stonewall their efforts.

Instead, as they outlined in their latest staff report, StemExpress has provided investigators summary documents of the company’s financial records that “fell far short of actual accounting documents.” Throughout the investigation, StemExpress has maintained that releasing documents with personal information could put individuals at risk.

Questions about whether middleman companies such as StemExpress profit off the sale of fetal tissue were raised in a series of undercover videos produced by the pro-life group Center for Medical Progress. The videos featured employees at StemExpress and Planned Parenthood discussing the sale of fetal tissue. Both companies have denied illegal activity, and Planned Parenthood has since stopped taking reimbursements for fetal tissue donations.

Accounting documents, Republicans say, are needed to determine whether StemExpress profited from the sale of fetal tissue, which the 1993 National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act prohibits. However, it is legal to provide and accept payment to cover reasonable costs for “transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.”

The panel’s ranking member Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat from Illinois, blasted Blackburn and the select panel for attempting to hold StemExpress in criminal contempt of Congress.

“Chair Blackburn has manufactured a controversy over information that she does not need,” Schakowsky said in a press release. “Her threat to punish a small biotechnology company and its owner is particularly outrageous given the company’s compliance with her unilateral subpoena demands. The McCarthyesque threat that StemExpress ‘name names’ of all employees or face congressional contempt is disgraceful.”

Republicans sent StemExpress multiple document requests—including subpoenas—since the panel was established on Oct. 7, 2015. On Sept. 8, 2016, Blackburn “provided one last offer to Stem Express and Ms. Dyer to comply with the subpoenas.”

“Having exhausted its efforts to obtain compliance from the subpoena recipients,” the majority’s staff report reads, “Chairman Blackburn recommends that StemExpress, LLC, and Catherine Spears Dyer be held in contempt for their willful failure to fully comply with the panel’s subpoenas issued to them.” (For more from the author of “Amid Fetal Tissue Investigation, Republicans Seek Legal Action Against StemExpress” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Appeals Court Reverses Ruling Banning NC County’s Prayers

/0 Comments/in , /by

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit yesterday reversed and remanded a lower court’s decision that Rowan County, North Carolina, commissioners’ prayers before public meetings violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

In a 2-1 ruling written by Judge Steven Agee, with Judge Dennis Shedd concurring, the court determined that Rowan County’s practice of an invocation before meetings was not unconstitutional, as plaintiffs, who were represented by the ACLU, had charged. Judge Wilkinson dissented.

In February of 2012, the ACLU sent a letter to the Rowan County Board of Commissioners objecting to the pre-meeting prayers. Although the Board didn’t respond formally, several commissioners stated their intent to continue to express their Christian faith through prayers. According to the majority opinion, one then-commissioner stated, “I will continue to pray in Jesus’ name. I am not perfect so I need all the help I can get, and asking for guidance for my decisions from Jesus is the best I, and Rowan County, can ever hope for.”

Plaintiffs “alleged that the prayer practice unconstitutionally affiliated the Board with one particular faith and caused them to feel excluded as ‘outsiders.’” Plaintiffs sought an injunction preventing any future prayers, and moved for a preliminary injunction on the basis that “sectarian legislative prayer was a constitutional violation.”

Judge James A. Beaty, Jr., Senior District Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, ruled in May of 2015 that the Rowan County commissioners violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since almost all of the prayers offered before public meetings invoked the Christian faith.

Yesterday’s majority opinion recalled, citing an earlier case as support, that the Founders appointed official chaplains to open sessions in prayer and it is a tradition continued today:

Observing that legislative invocations containing explicitly religious themes were accepted at the time of the first Congress and remain vibrant today, the Court concluded, “[a]n insistence on nonsectarian or ecumenical prayer as a single, fixed standard is not consistent with [our accepted] tradition of legislative prayer.”

The Court reversed and remanded the earlier ruling, stating that:

The Board’s legislative prayer practice falls within our recognized tradition and does not coerce participation by nonadherents. It is therefore constitutional. The district court erred in concluding to the contrary.

Chris Brook, Legal Director for the ACLU of North Carolina, was disappointed with the ruling and pledged to ask the Fourth Circuit to review the decision en banc, or by all 15 judges. “Today’s ruling is out of step with the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberty for all, and we will ask the full appellate court to review this decision,” he said, adding that, “Rowan County residents should be able to attend local government meetings without being coerced to participate in a sectarian prayer or worry that the commissioners may discriminate against them if they do not.”

Brett Harvey, Senior Counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom and co-counsel for Defendants, stated that “All Americans, including public servants, should have the freedom to pray without being censored … the First Amendment affirms the liberty of Americans to pray according to their consciences before public meetings. For that reason, the 4th Circuit rightly upheld Rowan County’s prayer policy, which is clearly constitutional.”

Rowan County Commission Chairman Greg Edds said the Board was very pleased with the court’s decision, adding that, “Our attorneys are currently working through the decision and we will know more about it in the coming days.”

Monday’s decision overrules the injunction on prayer imposed by Judge Beaty. (For more from the author of “Appeals Court Reverses Ruling Banning NC County’s Prayers” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Study: Graphic Abortion Victim Images Swayed Pro-Abortion Views

/0 Comments/in , /by

Will seeing the dismembered body of an aborted child cause people to oppose abortion? According to a new study in Canada, showing people graphic images of abortion victims convinced some to be more pro-life. And while many claim that the use of what is called “abortion victim photography” makes people react against the pro-life movement, the study found that it had the opposite effect.

Seeing pictures of the unborn victims of abortion was linked to an increase in both the pro-life worldview and pro-life political views, and made many feel more negatively about abortion and thus favor less permissive abortion laws, according to the study. This was true of everyone from those who identified themselves a completely pro-life to those who were completely pro-abortion.

Pro-abortion sentiment dropped by about seven percent, according to the study’s executive report, which also claims that the use of such images is now “scientifically established as an effective tool.”

The study, commissioned by the group Created Equal and analyzed by Jacqueline Harvey, an associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, was sponsored by the Canadian Center for Bioethical Reform. Both the institute and the center are openly pro-life. Harvey also teaches political science at Tarleton State University in Texas.

A Split Movement

The study was conducted using postcards with graphic images of abortion victims distributed at mailboxes across an entire zip code and before and after phone surveys. “Most of the items were statistically significant,” Harvey told The Stream, explaining that term means that the study “rules out the possibility that the random sample interviewed the second time just ‘happened’ to be more pro-life.”

Harvey noted that the pro-life movement has long been split on whether graphic images of abortion victims sway minds in a positive way. The respondents “indicated that the change they reported was due to the images,”she said, adding that “this confirms that the images were responsible for the change.”

“The graphic images are powerful and effective,” Human Life Review’s Ifeoma Anunkor told The Stream. “I attended the National Sidewalk Counseling Symposium in August. During a training session, a leading sidewalk counselor shared that in order to make the ideal pamphlet for abortion-minded women, she asked the abortion-minded women themselves, what pictures made them change their minds about abortion. The majority of the women said the picture of an aborted fetus.”

Former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, however, was more critical. “This study does not look at the effectiveness of graphic imagery in front of abortion facilities, which is where I do not support their use,” she explained in an e-mail to The Stream.

In my experience, and the experiences of almost 300 former abortion workers, we find them to be counterproductive in front of abortion facilities. They appear threatening and only present the abortion facility as a safe haven from the protestors outside. The majority of women who have abortions have already had children. They aren’t having an abortion because they think it’s a “mass of cells.” They are having an abortion because they lack resources or support.

Graphic images have been effectively used in other human rights campaigns, such as when fighting to end slavery in the United States. However, some pro-life advocates say showing images to children is inappropriate, and that post-abortive women could face PTSD and other issues when seeing the images.

According to Johnson, “I believe we should obtain consent before ever showing any graphic material. I do not oppose people using graphic imagery in some situations, but only where the person using the images has gained consent to show them.”

Though the debate within the pro-life movement over the wisdom of using such images will continue, the study establishes that they do move people to become more pro-life and less supportive of abortion. Indeed, the study found that people who identified as “liberal” shifted more in favor of life than conservatives. (For more from the author of “Study: Graphic Abortion Victim Images Swayed Pro-Abortion Views” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Tides Are Turning in North Carolina Bathroom Fight

/0 Comments/in , /by

The tides of North Carolina’s bathroom battle are starting to turn in favor Governor Pat McCrory’s administration, if statements made by various business owners and associations in the state are any indication.

According to a story at The Charlotte Observer, hospitality and tourism leaders, as well as the Charlotte Chamber, are urging state and local leaders to repeal the various ordinances and statutes that led to the current controversy in the first place.

“This is not about politics. This is not about who’s right and who’s wrong,” stated Vinay Patel, CEO of SREE Hotels and a board member of the North Carolina Restaurant & Lodging Association. “We’ve been caught in a crossfire. … We’re in a crisis, and this is the time to take action.”

While the effort from liberal organizations, individuals, and corporations from both within and outside the state has focused on pressuring McCrory and the Republican legislature to repeal HB2, what N.C. business leaders are calling for in this situation would actually be on the governor’s terms.

A McCrory spokesman said last week that state lawmakers would consider repealing HB2 if the Charlotte City Council — who originally started the controversy — would drop the ordinance that provoked it in the first place.

“For the last nine months, the governor has consistently said state legislation is only needed if the Charlotte ordinance remains in place,” spokesman Josh Ellis said last week, per the Observer.

“If the Charlotte City Council totally repeals the ordinance and then we can confirm there is support to repeal among the majority of state lawmakers … the governor will call a special session,” he continued. “It is the governor’s understanding that legislative leaders … agree with that assessment.”

The idea is, of course, not a popular one with the LGBT lobby, members of which still believe that McCrory should be the one to flinch — rather than have the state return to the status quo pre bellum.

“Repealing Charlotte’s ordinance would be a step backward for equality, inclusion and fairness,” stated Simone Bell, southern regional director for the gay rights group Lambda Legal.

“Nondiscrimination policies like Charlotte’s are good and necessary measures that protect the LGBT community,” Bell said in a statement, issued Sunday.

It’s unclear whether or not Monday’s meeting of the Charlotte City Council will yield any developments toward returning North Carolina to a state of pre-transgender bathroom normalcy, but McCrory’s example presents a big, fat, teachable moment for conservative lawmakers who end up besieged by cultural cronyism.

Several concerts, business projects and sports tournaments have been pulled from North Carolina, with concerns like “equality” frequently cited. However, the NBA’s supposed human rights concerns don’t stop it from playing in China; Paypal still does business in countries that execute gays; and the NCAA doesn’t believe in the traditional sexes, but still hasn’t merged its male and female leagues. But I digress.

Pat McCrory wasn’t the first governor to fall victim to these tactics over a common-sense provision in state law. Just look at what happened in Arizona, Indiana, and Georgia when those states tried to pass basic religious freedom laws. The LGBT lobby and their big business cronies swarmed the states in an Alinsky-esque effort to get the laws repealed. And in each situation, it worked.

Jan Brewer (R) of Arizona and Nathan Deal of Georgia (R) both vetoed their respective laws, while Indiana’s governor-turned-Trump-running-mate Mike Pence eventually signed into law a “compromise” that has drawn repeated criticism and serious concern from First Amendment advocates.

McCrory and GOP legislators in Raleigh have broken this mold so far, it would seem. Despite every single boycott effort imaginable, they’ve refused to cave to the Left’s public pressure and misinformation campaign. Now voices outside the administration — the very kind of people the cronies were trying to turn against the administration — are now calling for exactly the kind of situation the governor et al. wanted in the first place.

True to his state’s nickname from the start, McCrory has provided an example of what conservative leaders are capable of accomplishing if they’re simply willing to prudently expend political capital, ignore the demonizing, and stand up to those who prefer to push their agendas with lies and mafia-like tactics.

Now it’s on the Charlotte City Council to decide whether or not they want to call off what they started, or continue to blame Pat McCrory for taking a stand for safety and common sense in response. (For more from the author of “The Tides Are Turning in North Carolina Bathroom Fight” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.