Narrative-Busting Data: Every Income Group Got a Tax Cut in 2018…Except Millionaires

/0 Comments/in , /by

As data continues to pour in, the facts are once again affirming what many of us have known for quite some time: The GOP-passed tax reform law, which was opposed by every single Democrat in Congress, has reduced taxes for a lopsided supermajority of Americans. Despite a torrent of disinformation and false messaging from the collective Left, the overwhelming majority of US taxpayers saw their federal tax burden reduced in 2018. Even the New York Times fact-checked this claim and found the Democratic mantra to be inaccurate. Now, based on the latest available numbers from the IRS, the nonpartisan Tax Foundation confirms that the Left’s deceitful talking points aren’t just misleading — they’re actually the opposite of the truth:

Critics of the TCJA have claimed that the law’s tax cuts only benefit high-income individuals and businesses. However, the visual below shows that total tax liability fell for all income groups except those earning over $1 million in 2018…The initial data shows that the TCJA expanded the use of several credits and deductions, made the standard deduction more favorable than itemizing, reduced tax refunds, and lowered taxes for most Americans.

In every single group, the green bar is lower than the blue bar, including for working and middle-class Americans. Only the super rich, those making more than $1 million annually, have seen a very slight increase, on average. Compare that to the rhetoric surrounding the law. The gap between the political spin and the actual results is staggering. As many supporters of the law pointed out during the public debate, the reason this law would benefit so many Americans was that it doubles the standard deduction, which was already being used by a large majority of filers. As expected, the number of people choosing to take advantage of the increased standard deduction (as opposed to itemizing) has increased dramatically:

One of the most significant changes introduced by the TCJA was the expansion of the standard deduction. The standard deduction increased from $6,500 to $12,000 for single filers, and from $13,000 to $24,000 for those married filing jointly, in 2018. This change had a significant impact on the ease of filing for many taxpayers, as taking the standard deduction simplifies the tax filing process. As shown below, the percent of taxpayers who itemized went down at all income levels. Overall, the percentage of the population that itemizes decreased from 30 percent to 10 percent.

(Read more from “Narrative-Busting Data: Every Income Group Got a Tax Cut in 2018…Except Millionaires” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

State Department Hosts World’s Largest Religious Freedom Event

/0 Comments/in , /by

Lead by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the State Department kicked off the world’s largest religious freedom event in Washington D.C. Tuesday morning at the second annual Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom. Hundreds of activists and diplomats from all over the globe will be in attendance this week.

“We’ve invited more than 100 foreign delegations, more than 1,000 representatives here. And I want to just be here as we kick this off today for a moment to say my personal welcome,” Pompeo said during his opening remarks. “We’ve got folks from civil society and from Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Falun Gong, and other secular backgrounds. We welcome you all. You all traveled from far corners, distant places around the world.”

The ministerial will take place over the course of three days and conclude on Thursday with a visit from Vice President Mike Pence.

“We all agree that fighting so that each person is free to believe, free to assemble, and to teach the tenets of his or her own faith is not optional – indeed, it is a moral imperative that this be permitted. All people from every place on the globe must be permitted to practice their faith openly – in their homes, in their places of worship, in the public square – and believe what they want to believe,” Pompeo continued. “This week, we need input from all of you on how we can best advance that religious freedom…I want you to know that America’s commitment to religious freedom will never waver. We stand with you and for you in each stage of this fight.” (Read more from “State Department Hosts World’s Largest Religious Freedom Event” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump Goes OFF on Freshman Congresswomen: Go and Fix Your Home Countries; Twitter Feud Causes Libs to go CRAZY

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By Fox News. President Trump squared off with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and progressive freshman congresswomen Sunday on Twitter, telling the new lawmakers to “go back” to their countries of origin to fix the corruption plaguing those nations before they lecture the United States.

In the tweet, Trump referred to them as “‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen” whose home countries have been collapsing from corruption and said they should return home to aid those who are suffering. . .

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez flipped the script on Trump in her Twitter reply and blamed him for the corruption and lawlessness at the southern border, accusing him of purposely instilling fear while being driven by anger.

Meanwhile, Tlaib tweeted out a call for impeachment in response to Trump’s comments and said he represented the real crisis, not the immigration issues on the southern border.

Ocasio-Cortez, who is Puerto Rican, was born in the Bronx, N.Y., and raised in suburban Westchester County. Tlaib, who along with Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., became one of the first two Muslim women ever elected to Congress, was born in Detroit. (Read more from “Trump Goes After Freshman Congresswomen, Tells Them to Go Back and Fix Their ‘Home Countries'” HERE)

________________________________________________

AOC Unloads on Trump After He Tells Progressive Congresswomen to ‘Go Back’ to Home Countries

By Fox News. . .Ocasio-Cortez’s fiery Twitter return barrage could be the call to action that unifies a party currently divided along establishment and progressive lines, observers said, even as some analysts blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for laying the groundwork for Trump’s remarks.

“Mr. President, the country I ‘come from,’ & the country we all swear to, is the United States,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote. “But given how you’ve destroyed our border with inhumane camps, all at a benefit to you & the corps who profit off them, you are absolutely right about the corruption laid at your feet.” . . .

Omar accused Trump of “stoking white nationalism” and added, “As Members of Congress, the only country we swear an oath to is the United States. Which is why we are fighting to protect it from the worst, most corrupt and inept president we have ever seen.”

Pressley wrote: “THIS is what racism looks like. WE are what democracy looks like. And we’re not going anywhere. Except back to DC to fight for the families you marginalize and vilify everyday.” (Read more from “AOC Unloads on Trump After He Tells Progressive Congresswomen to ‘Go Back’ to Home Countries” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

President Trump: We Will NEVER Be a Socialist or Communist Country; Trump Comments Cause Profanity-Laced Attack From Left

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By Breitbart. President Donald Trump repeated his attack on left-wing Democrats on Monday afternoon, announcing: We will never be a Socialist or Communist Country. IF YOU ARE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE!”

Trump tweeted ahead of a press conference by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MN), and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), which was meant to respond to Trump’s earlier tweets on Sunday.

Trump’s message repeated the major themes of his remarks to the press following a “Made in America” manufacturing summit at the White House earlier Monday.

(Read more from “Trump Strikes Again: We Will Never Be a Socialist or Communist Country” HERE)

_________________________________________________________

Ilhan Omar Uses President’s Words to Deliver Heated, Profanity-Laced Attack on Trump

By Fox News. Rep. Ilhan Omar fired a heated broadside at President Trump — even making use of his own words — in the wake of his recent inflammatory tweets about the Minnesota Democrat and other progressive congresswomen.

Speaking during a news conference alongside Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., Omar forcefully went after Trump.

“This is a president who has ultimately violated the very value our country aspires to uphold,” she said in the stunning attack.

“To distract from that, he is launching a blatantly racist attack on four duly-elected members of the United States House of Representatives, all of whom are women of color. . .

“This is a president who has said ‘grab women by the p—-,'” she said. “This is a president who has called black athletes ‘sons of b—-es.’ This is a president who has called people who come from black and brown countries ‘sh–holes.’ This is a president who has equated neo-Nazis with those who protest against them in Charlottesville.” (Read more from “Ilhan Omar Uses President’s Words to Deliver Heated, Profanity-Laced Attack on Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Trump Admin Is Making It a Lot Harder for Border-Crossers to Game America’s Asylum System

/0 Comments/in , /by

A new regulation posted by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security Monday morning seeks to address the ongoing crisis at the southern border by making stricter the eligibility requirements for seeking asylum in the United States.

The rule, which was posted for review on Monday morning and goes into effect Tuesday, specifically deals with the asylum eligibility of “aliens who enter or attempt to enter the United States across the southern land border after failing to apply for protection from persecution or torture while in a third country through which they transited en route to the United States.”

The concept is simple: Where an applicant seeks asylum should be based on where an applicant first finds safety from whatever they’re fleeing, rather than on personal preference of country.

“In sum, this rule provides that, with limited exceptions, an alien who enters or arrives in the United States across the southern land border is ineligible for the discretionary benefit of asylum unless he or she applied for and received a final judgment denying protection in at least one third country through which he or she transited en route to the United States,” the rule reads.

If migrants leave a country in Central America and come to the United States, the new rule says they wouldn’t be eligible for asylum here unless they first went through the asylum application process somewhere along the way and were denied.

The authority for making the rule can be found in section 208 0f the Immigration and Nationality Act, which deals with asylum and refugee status. That section of the INA also gives the attorney general and secretary of homeland security to “the authority to promulgate regulations establishing additional bars on eligibility to the extent consistent with the asylum statute, as well as the authority to establish ‘any other conditions or limitations on the consideration of an application for asylum’ that are consistent with the INA,” according to the new rule.

There are exceptions to these new regulations about eligibility. For example, aliens can apply for deferral of removal under the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.” The rule also makes exceptions for victims of human trafficking because they “do not volitionally transit through a third country to reach the United States,” and it also makes exceptions for people who transit through countries that do not recognize international treaties dealing with torture and the proper treatment of refugees.

The rule seeks to cut down on frivolous “credible fear” claims that keep aliens in the United States until their claims for asylum can be heard and ruled on.

“This rule does not change the credible-fear standard for asylum claims,” the document explains, “although the regulation would expand the scope of the inquiry in the process. An alien who is subject to the third-country-transit bar and nonetheless has entered the United States along the southern land border after the effective date of this rule creating the bar would be ineligible for asylum and would thus not be able to establish a ‘significant possibility . . . [of] eligibility for asylum’” under federal law.

Raising the regulatory bar for asylum claims would also help the administration cut down on the total processing time for the claims while sending a message to the rest of the world that America’s asylum policies are not a “get out of jail free” card for otherwise illegal immigration.

“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum. The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border,” Attorney General William Barr said in a statement. “This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”

The rule is what’s known as an interim final rule and will go into effect quicker than a normal federal regulation, which typically takes 60 days after first publication. The rule will go into effect immediately on Tuesday morning. (For more from the author of “The Trump Admin Is Making It a Lot Harder for Border-Crossers to Game America’s Asylum System” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The First Person to Stand for Our Sovereignty and Laws Against Sanctuary Policies Is… a Democrat?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

We have laws in this country making it illegal for illegal aliens to remain in this country. It’s that simple. They cannot remain here, they cannot work here, and nobody is allowed to induce, encourage, harbor, transport, or shield from detection any illegal immigrant in the act of coming to or remaining in the country. How is it, then, that states, which are often stripped of their rightful powers over marriage and abortion, suddenly become so powerful that they can not only shield aliens from the feds but invite them to work and get benefits? What ever happened to that mighty Supremacy Clause of the Constitution?

That is essentially the question one county clerk in New York is asking following the state’s decision to issue driver’s licenses to those here illegally.

For years, state and federal officials have been openly violating immigration laws to help promote the cause of illegal immigration. It has taken a Democrat official willing to stand up for the rule of law to finally bring this issue to a head. Erie County Clerk Michael Kearns immediately called foul on the decision of the state government by noting that because he is an official charged with issuing driver’s licenses, the new state law would place him at odds with federal law.

Kearns argues that issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens would force him to violate federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1324), which makes a felon of anyone who “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place.” That statute also makes a criminal anyone who “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law” or anyone who “engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts.”

This law has been on the books in some form since 1891. Section 3 of the 1891 Immigration Act made it a felony to “assist or encourage the importation or migration of any alien by promise of employment” through advertisements. Any alien who came in due to such advertisements was deemed inadmissible, and that law was designed to prevent people from encouraging them.

Clearly, these laws are never followed, as members of Congress transport illegal aliens to the capital and states offer them all sorts of benefits and safe harbor. In this specific case of New York driver’s licenses, Kearns is arguing in a lawsuit before the Western District of New York that “by providing driver’s licenses to individuals illegally in the United States and by prohibiting the disclosure of their records, the Green Light Law shields these individuals from detection and substantially facilities their effort to remain in the United States.”

The Fifth Circuit has ruled that Congress intended for §1324 to “broadly proscribe any knowing or willful conduct fairly within any of these terms that tends to substantially facilitate an alien’s remaining in the U.S. illegally.

What can be more squarely within the statute than offering driver’s licenses and barring disclosure of immigration status? This is what New York’s Green Light Law, which was signed into state law last month, does.

Kearns also noted in the formal complaint that one of the rationales given for the Green Light Law was to “get to and from work” and “ensure that our industries have the labor they need to keep our economy moving.”

There’s just one little problem with that. The entire purpose of the infamous 1986 amnesty bill, Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), was “to combat the employment of illegal aliens. The law specifically makes it “illegal for employers to knowingly hire, recruit, refer, or continue to employ unauthorized workers.”

The American people and the Reagan administration reluctantly went along with the first amnesty based on the promise that the ban on illegal aliens working would prevent the next wave. Now we’ve had wave after wave of illegal immigration because those laws are not enforced, and states are even bragging about facilitating their violation of the law.

Chris Hajec, director of litigation for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, told me that this case is a no-brainer. “A stated purpose of the Green Light law is to help illegal aliens get to and from work. That flies in the face of the purpose that Congress had in making it illegal to hire illegal aliens – to reduce illegal alien employment and shut off the jobs magnet for further illegal entry. When state and federal law are in conflict, federal law wins under the Supremacy Clause.”

What ever happened to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution – that “the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”?

These are not just any federal laws placing regulations on Americans. These are foundational sovereignty laws governing the entry of foreigners into the country. Immigration is not only explicitly given over to the federal government, but according to James Madison, it was one of the leading reasons why the Articles of Confederation needed to be swapped out for the new federal union.

An illegal alien first has to violate federal sovereignty – the sovereignty of the whole of the union – before he violates state sovereignty. A state, while definitely reserving the right to protect its own sovereignty, as Justice Scalia strongly asserted, has no power to go in the other direction and violate the federal sovereignty in order to allow illegal aliens to remain in the country, where they are then free to live in any state.

As Mr. Kearns fights a lonely battle on behalf of federal powers, one has to wonder why the Department of Justice is not leading the way. (For more from the author of “The First Person to Stand for Our Sovereignty and Laws Against Sanctuary Policies Is… a Democrat?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Kamala’s Peak Hypocrisy Centers Around Jeffrey Epstein

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Townhall. California Sen. Kamala Harris (D) chided Kirkland and Ellis, a Chicago-based law firm, that represented Jeffrey Epstein when he was accused of sexual abuse.

Here’s the kicker: the same day Harris went after the law firm, her husband, Douglas Emhoff, headlined a fundraiser in Chicago for his wife’s campaign. And guess who the main hosts were? That’s right. The six partners of Kirkland and Ellis.

“In our democracy, no one—no matter how powerful or well-connected—is above the law,” Harris said in a statement. “Yet Epstein’s deal, secured by his lawyers at Kirkland and Ellis, calls into question the integrity of our legal system and undermines the public’s confidence that justice will be served.” (Read more from “Kamala’s Peak Hypocrisy Centers Around Jeffrey Epstein” HERE)

______________________________________________________

Harris Blasts, and Takes Money From, Epstein’s Law Firm

By AP. . .Harris, a California senator and Democratic presidential candidate, was one of several White House hopefuls to blast the handling of Epstein’s case in Florida a decade ago, when his lawyers negotiated a deal with federal prosecutors that allowed him to avoid the possibility of years in prison. But her decision to move ahead with the fundraiser hosted by Kirkland and Ellis partners while criticizing the firm underscores the tension that can arise when a politician’s rhetoric collides with his or her need to raise money to sustain a presidential campaign.

“If any connection with Kirkland and Ellis is a stain on (senior Justice Department officials), why isn’t a connection with the law firm for the receipt of campaign contributions a stain on her own campaign?” said Paul S. Ryan, an attorney for the good-government group Common Cause. (Read more from “Harris Blasts, and Takes Money From, Epstein’s Law Firm” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Homicide Detectives Investigating Clinton Mega-Donor

/0 Comments/in , /by

Homicide detectives have presented a case against high-profile Democratic donor Ed Buck to prosecutors for review and possible criminal charges, according to a Los Angeles television station.

CBS2 News reports that the office of L.A. County District Attorney Jackie Lacey is “now deciding” whether it has enough evidence to prosecute Buck in connection with the death of Timothy Dean, 55, who was found dead in the political benefactor’s West Hollywood apartment on January 7. Sources told an investigative reporter with the outlet that prosecutors received the case weeks ago and have requested additional information, “including forensic analysis and medical records,” according to the report.

Dean, who worked at Saks Fifth Avenue in Beverly Hills, was also a former adult film performer. He was the second gay black man to fatally overdose on crystal methamphetamine inside Buck’s home within a span of 18 months. An advocacy group with strong ties to Black Lives Matter has accused Buck, 64, who is gay and white, of administering the lethal doses that killed both men.

Prosecutors announced last summer that they lacked sufficient evidence to charge Buck in the death of Gemmel Moore, the 26-year old sex worker who died at his residence on July 27, 2017. However, the glare of publicity that followed the second death sparked a renewed investigation into the circumstances of Moore’s fatal overdose. . .

Jasmyne Cannick, an L.A.-based political strategist who launched the ‘Justice 4 Gemmel + All Of Ed Buck’s Victims’ drive, has demanded Lacey prosecute Buck for murder. She explained to NBC News that black, gay “lives are seen as expendable,” adding, “it’s very easy to write off someone who dies of a drug overdose who was working as a sex worker.” (Read more from “Homicide Detectives Investigating Clinton Mega-Donor” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Doctor Loses Medical License After Attempting to Force Patient to Have Abortion

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Life Site News. A Mississippi medical board suspended an OB/GYN’s license Wednesday after he was accused of trying to force a patient to abort her unborn baby.

WKYT News reports the Mississippi State Board of Medical Licensure deemed Dr. Walter Ray Wolfe to be an “immediate danger to the public” based on the accusations against him. Wolfe works at the Magnolia Women’s Clinic in Canton, Mississippi.

Wolfe is accused of sexual assault, attempted forced abortion and other misconduct against several patients, according to the report. In two of the cases, he was the father of the patients’ unborn babies, the complaint against him states. (Read more from “Doctor Loses Medical License After Attempting to Force Patient to Have Abortion” HERE)

_________________________________________________________

Miss. OB/GYN accused of sexual assault, misconduct after fathering children with patients

By WKYT. . .According to the complaint, the Board was contacted in November by a healthcare practitioner in Jackson who had concerns of such misconduct between Dr. Wolfe and several patients.

That same month, a Physician Assistant student, who worked with Dr. Wolfe during the OB/GYN portion of her clinicals, witnessed Dr. Wolfe kissing one of his pregnant patients on the lips just before an ultrasound was performed on her. The P.A. student also told the Board that Dr. Wolfe was the father of the patient’s unborn child.

The certified birth certificate was obtained from the Mississippi State Department of Health Vital Records Office, revealing that the child was born at the home of Dr. Wolfe, who was also listed as the father.

The complaint states that two years prior, in 2016, the former husband of another patient filed a lawsuit stating that in 2015, Dr. Wolfe employed the patient and encouraged her to enter into a sexual affair with him. Dr. Wolfe responded to the lawsuit, admitting to the relationship with the patient.

According to the complaint, while this patient was pregnant with his child, during sex he tried to insert 4 Misoprostol (Cytotec) tablets into the patient’s vagina, without her consent, in an attempt to induce an abortion but was unsuccessful. The patient later gave birth to his child in 2016. (Read more from “Miss. Ob/Gyn Accused of Sexual Assault, Misconduct After Fathering Children with Patients” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Pelosi Uses the Bible to Condemn Trump’s Immigration Policies

/0 Comments/in , /by

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi used a parable of Jesus to condemn President Trump’s immigration policy, in a Sunday tweet that also offered illegal immigrants advice if Immigration and Customs Enforcement shows up at their door. . .

The Christian parable of the Good Samaritan, found in the Gospel of Luke, was a sermon by Jesus in which he depicted a Jewish man who had been robbed, beaten, and left on the side of the road. Though ignored by several people, the man at last was rescued by a Samaritan, with whom the Jews of that time were enemies. The story is considered by scholars and theologians to be an example of love transcending personal prejudice.

The speaker’s tweet draws upon the same story shared Sunday by Pope Francis, who tweeted, “In today’s Gospel, Jesus proposes the Samaritan as a model. By loving his neighbor as himself, he demonstrates how to love God with one’s whole heart, while at the same time expressing true religiosity and full humanity.”

(Read more from “Pelosi Uses the Bible to Condemn Trump’s Immigration Policies” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE