Report Reveals Hillary Is Really Considering 2020

/0 Comments/in , /by

Failed 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is reportedly telling close advisers and friends that she hasn’t fully “shut the door” on a 2020 presidential campaign. . .

“Clinton is telling people that she’s not closing the doors to the idea of running in 2020,” CNN reported Jeff Zeleny told the network Sunday morning on “Inside Politics.” “I’m told by three people that as recently as this week, she was telling people that look, given all this news from the indictments, particularly the Roger Stone indictment, she talked to several people, saying ‘look, I’m not closing the doors to this.'”

Although, Zeleny added, he does not believe “that there’s a campaign-in-waiting, or a plan in the works,” or that Clinton is likely to throw her hat into the ring for 2020 unless there’s truly a dearth of qualified Democratic candidates.

That said, according to Zeleny, the rumor is a strong one. “I think we have to at least leave our mind open to the possibility that she is still talking about it. She wants to take on Trump. Could she win a Democratic primary to do it? I don’t know the answer to that.”

The answer to that is likely, “no.” Unlike in the two previous contests Clinton entered, she would be competing against a strong field of Democratic contenders in 2020, each hell-bent on being the Democratic choice to dethrone President Donald Trump. And while the party may still be finding its footing, deciding where on the spectrum from progressive to moderate it wants to be while up against the Republican populist President, one thing is for certain: they’re looking for fresh blood. (Read more from “Report Reveals Hillary Is Really Considering 2020” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Police Officer Killed During Alleged Russian Roulette-Style Game

/0 Comments/in , /by

A St. Louis police officer has been charged with involuntary manslaughter after he allegedly shot and killed another officer while playing a Russian Roulette-style game shortly after midnight on Thursday morning.

Officer Nathaniel Hendren and his partner were on-duty Wednesday evening when, according to a probable cause statement, Officer Katlyn Alix, who was off-duty, met Hendren and his partner at Hendren’s residence.

While Alix and Hendren were “playing with firearms,” Hendren “produced a revolver,” the statement reads. The officer removed all the bullets from the revolver, then loaded a single bullet back in, and spun the chamber. . .

Hendren’s partner claims to have felt uneasy about what was happening, according to the statement. He allegedly told Alix and Hendren “that they shouldn’t be playing with guns,” and exited the room with the intention of leaving the residence.

Hendren reportedly took back the gun, pointed it at Alix, and once more pulled the trigger. This time, a bullet was discharged, hitting Alix in the chest. As Hendren’s partner was leaving, he heard the fatal shot, and returned to the scene.

(Read more from “Police Officer Killed During Alleged Russian Roulette-Style Game” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump Announces Short-Term Deal to Reopen Government With No Wall Funding. What’s His Plan?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

On Friday afternoon, President Donald Trump announced an agreement between Republicans and Democrats in Congress to temporarily reopen the government without funding for a border wall.

Trump said he would sign a continuing resolution to fund the government at current levels for a few weeks without the additional $5.7 billion he’s requested as a down payment to construct parts of the border wall. He alluded to the legal authority to declare a national emergency to build the wall without new appropriations from Congress but indicated that he will not take that action today.

“I am very proud to announce today that we have reached a deal to end the shutdown and reopen the federal government,” Trump said. “I have a very powerful alternative, but I didn’t want to use it at this time. Hopefully, it will be unnecessary.”

“In a short while, I will sign a bill to reopen our government for three weeks until February 15,” he announced. The president said he’s asked Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to bring this legislation to the floor of the Senate immediately.

The president also said lawmakers have agreed to form a bipartisan conference committee to review requests from the Department of Homeland Security and law enforcement agencies for additional border security, including physical barriers on the border.

“We can show all Americans and people all around the world that both political parties are united when it comes to protecting our country and protecting our people,” Trump said.

Why would Democrats listen to a committee report on border security after they’ve already shown they won’t listen to President Trump, the DHS, and the Border Patrol agents who say a wall is necessary to secure the border? Trump is reopening the government without a win on border security or any sort of leverage to hold over the Democrats to force compromise on a wall.

What reopening the government does do is remove Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s excuse for disinviting Trump from delivering the State of the Union address, giving the president an opportunity to make his case for the wall next week. But Donald Trump is the president of the United States. If he wanted to give a big speech to make the case for border security, he didn’t need to give in to Pelosi’s sniping. Trump should have taken the initiative and delivered a speech elsewhere, highlighting that Pelosi and the Democrats were keeping the government shut down to oppose policies they’ve already voted for. But he didn’t do that.

Instead, Trump will reopen the government without a clear plan to get Pelosi to fund the wall. What’s going to change in three weeks? There’s no pressure on Congress to compromise if federal workers are getting paid, and given that we just survived a monthlong shutdown and Trump’s poll numbers tanked, what do Pelosi and Schumer care if the government closes again? And don’t forget about Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and the Senate Republicans, several of whom opposed shutting down the government in the first place. Does anyone trust McConnell go along with another government shutdown after the first one failed to get wall funding?

President Trump concluded his remarks by referring to the border crisis as an “emergency.” So this all seems to be setting up a national emergency declaration. But suppose he does that and federal courts declare such a move to be illegal. Is President Trump prepared to defy the courts to build a wall in the absence of action from Congress? And if he cannot build the wall in his first term as president, when he started with full Republican control of government, what does that say about his ability to lead? (For more from the author of “Trump Announces Short-Term Deal to Reopen Government With No Wall Funding. What’s His Plan?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Sarah Sanders: So Hillary Will Be Arrested Now Right?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Longtime Trump associate Roger Stone was arrested Thursday night for one count of obstruction, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering as part of the larger special counsel Russia investigation. The FBI raided his home and “terrorized” his family, Stone said outside a Florida courthouse Friday. He told a crowd of hecklers he plans to plead not guilty to the alleged crimes.

Of course, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders expected the press pool to ask her for her reaction to Stone’s arrest. But she wasn’t a fan of how some reporters framed their inquires, particularly the individual who suggested that President Trump encouraged Stone to lie to Congress.

(Read more from “Sarah Sanders: So Hillary Will Be Arrested Now Right?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Pentagon Flew as Many Domestic Drone Missions in 2018 as It Did in the Last 7 Years Combined

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Pentagon’s drones are an iconic symbol of war abroad, plane-sized matchsticks with wings lurking over cities and countrysides waiting for the moment routine patrol becomes un-routine. For the most part, the missions of those drones have remained abroad, but over the years the Department of Defense has flown drones a handful of times over the United States in support of civil authorities here. From 2011 to 2017, the Pentagon reports just 11 total domestic drone missions.

But in 2018, that total doubled, with 11 domestic missions flown by military drones.

On Jan. 11, the Department of Defense published its 2018 statistics. The drones involved include everything from MQ-9 Reapers down to DJI Phantoms, and involvement in missions ranging from training exercises to border security and emergency response. (Notably, drones operations by the Department of Homeland Security are excluded from these statistics). These numbers are helpfully collected and contrasted with domestic drone use by by the military from 2011 to 2017 by Center for the Study of the Drone at Bard University.

In 2018, military MQ-9 Reapers flew five missions over the United States, four of which were in support of forest firefighting in California and Oregon. One Reaper mission, flown from May 7 to May 10, was described as incident and awareness exercise in the state of New York. RQ-11B Ravens flew two missions, one a base installation in Bangor, Kitsap, Washington, and the other was a Defense Support of Civil Authorities mission in response to Hurricane Florence and requested by the South Carolina National Guard. (Read more from “The Pentagon Flew as Many Domestic Drone Missions in 2018 as It Did in the Last 7 Years Combined” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

58,000 Noncitizens Illegally Voted in Texas

/0 Comments/in , /by

A yearlong investigation of Texas voter rolls has indicated that about 95,000 non-U.S. citizens might have improperly registered to vote, including about 58,000 who cast a ballot “in one or more Texas elections” since 1996, state officials announced Friday.

In an advisory to county voting officials, Texas Secretary of State David Whitley said his office used newly available data from the Texas Department of Public Safety to identify registered voters who might not be U.S. citizens.

The names were provided to the office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who promised to investigate and prosecute illegal voting activity. . .

Texas law requires registered voters to show one of seven forms of photo ID before casting a ballot: a Texas driver’s license or handgun license, a U.S. passport, U.S. military ID card, U.S. citizenship certificate or a DPS-issued personal ID card or election identification certificate.

Voters without a photo ID can show documents that include their name and address, such as a utility bill or paycheck, and sign a “reasonable impediment declaration” stating that they could not obtain a photo ID because of a lack of transportation, disability, illness, work schedule, family responsibilities, lost or stolen ID or other reasons. (Read more from “58,000 Noncitizens Illegally Voted in Texas” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Roger Stone’s Dishonesty Might Save Him

/0 Comments/in , /by

Early this morning, a group of 29 heavily armed FBI officers carried out a pre-dawn raid to apprehend the foppish 66-year-old Republican political consultant Roger Stone at the request of special counsel Robert Mueller. At last our streets are safe, or at least they were before Stone was immediately released on $250,000 bond. CNN, apparently tipped off to the raid, lurked outside Stone’s Florida home to capture video of the arrest.

Perhaps Roger Stone appreciated the FBI’s cheap political stunt. No operative in recent memory has earned and encouraged a greater reputation for political dark arts than Stone. A longtime friend and political advisor to President Trump, Stone played his first dirty trick in grade school and boasts that he hasn’t stopped since. Here are just a handful of Roger Stone’s greatest hits:

Third Graders For Kennedy: Though he currently sports a tattoo of Richard Nixon on his back, in 1960 eight-year-old Roger Stone supported John F. Kennedy for president. When his Connecticut grade school asked students to choose the next president, Stone recalls that he stood at the end of the cafeteria line and told every student that Richard Nixon wanted school on Saturdays. Kennedy won in a landslide. . .

Now Roger Stone stands accused of obstructing a congressional inquiry and of witness tampering. Mueller’s indictment alleges that Stone informed senior Trump campaign aides as early as June or July of 2016 that he knew WikiLeaks had obtained documents damaging to Hillary Clinton. By then, however, the hacked emails had already been released to the public. In August, Stone claimed to have been in contact with WikiLeaks; in September of 2017, he denied any direct contact with the organization.

WikiLeaks agrees with this latter characterization. “Stone is playing slovenly Democrat-aligned journalists like a fiddle, brilliantly inserting himself, as is his habit to raise his public profile and market his books,” according to a Wikileaks spokesman, who observed that Stone “was pushed out of the Trump team a long time ago for just this time of opportunism.” The most convincing evidence that Stone did not collude on behalf of the Trump campaign with any foreign actors is that he bragged about having done so. Roger Stone’s dishonesty may save him—perhaps his dirtiest trick yet. (Read more from “Roger Stone’s Dishonesty Might Save Him” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Even Congress’ Research Arm Vouches for Trump’s Border Funding Authority

/0 Comments/in , /by

The political class, including many conservative insiders, will look at you with wild eyes if you suggest that president has the authority to either declare an emergency at our border or use defense funds for an operation that should be the highest priority of national defense. But Congress’ own research arm makes it clear that such delegated authority to the president has been the norm since our Founding.

While many have complained that the 1976 National Emergencies Act (NEA) is too broad, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) memo, which was first posted by the Daily Caller, makes it clear that that this act actually limited the president’s authority relative to what it was before:

By 1973, Congress had enacted over 470 statutes granting the President special authorities upon the declaration of a “national emergency,” but had imposed no substantive or procedural limitations on either the President’s discretion to declare an emergency or the duration of such emergencies. After a Special Committee of the Senate concluded in a 1973 report that the President’s crisis powers “confer[red] enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional process,” Congress enacted the NEA in 1976 to pare back the President’s emergency authorities.

But if you look at the text of the NEA, the only substantive burdens it placed on the president during such a declaration are to articulate which statue he is using, publish the proclamation in the federal register, and transmit to Congress all relevant regulations and expenditures under such declaration. It also forces the president to renew the declaration every year and authorizes Congress to disapprove of the declaration with a two-thirds vote in both houses. In other words, it mandated more transparency on the president relative to our prior history, but never imposed upon him legally enforceable conditions for determining whether the problem rises to the level of a national emergency.

To give a sense of how common the use of this power is, the CRS notes that “31 national emergencies declared pursuant to the NEA are in effect, with Presidents having renewed certain emergencies for decades.” They also cite an analysis from the Brennan Center for Justice that confirms “136 statutes provide the President with emergency authorities that he can invoke pursuant to the NEA.”

One of those authorities in effect today is the president’s power of blocking assets and prohibiting transactions with significant narcotics traffickers, which was put into effect in 1995 when the drug problem was a fraction of what it is today. Nobody can deny that the drug crisis is a national emergency, with tens of thousands of people dying every year from the drugs brought in by the cartels at our border.

I’ve already explained that upon a declaration of emergency, the president has the power to use unobligated defense funds to construct infrastructure when he deploys soldiers at our border and when that construction, in this case the wall, is “necessary to support such use of the armed forces.” It is very hard to read the statute as placing justiciable limits on this determination, and as such, any question of whether the wall is needed for a military operation is a political one to be debated in Congress and not a legal one to be debated in court. The CRS notes that it would be unprecedented for a court to second-guess the president’s determination of what is needed to support a military operation. But of course, we live in unprecedented times of judicial power.

But as the CRS makes clear, the president’s authority to construct fencing to counteract transnational organized crime and drug trafficking is unlimited and does not even require the declaration of a national emergency.

Another statute that authorizes the Secretary of Defense to assist civilian law enforcement with counterdrug activities may provide some authority for the construction of barriers along the border. 10 U.S.C. § 284 (Section 284) provides that the Secretary of Defense “may provide support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime” of any law enforcement agency, including through the “construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.” Use of Section 284 would not require a declaration of a national emergency under the NEA. However, the DOD’s Section 284 authority to construct fences appears to extend only to “drug smuggling corridors,” a condition that may limit where DOD could deploy fencing.

The drugs and the other criminal activity coming over the border are likely the most urgent aspect of this crisis, and the president would be well within his rights to declare an emergency over it. The president has already declared a public health emergency. Nonetheless, he doesn’t even need to declare a new crisis, which is why I believe he should go the § 284 route. There are other negative political implications about declaring a national emergency, which would be needed to trigger § 2808 of the NEA, that would elicit a lot of demagoguery from the media (such as the potential to use martial law). By focusing on his authority to use the Department of Defense to counter drugs and organized crime without a formal declaration of emergency, Trump will be taking the cleanest avenue, which is also the path that most accurately fits the reality at the border.

As I’ve noted before, I’m skeptical of the efficacy of a wall to stop lawfare-driven migration when the migrants don’t mind being apprehended and in fact want to meet a border agent and declare asylum. However, it is undeniable that border walls help to block out criminal activity and drug smuggling. Those with something to hide are certainly not going hang off a wall for 20 minutes when they are almost certain to get apprehended. They try to enter through the rural areas without fencing.

By plugging those holes, Trump will be fulfilling the quintessential intent of this statute. It is exactly in those “drug smuggling corridors” where we don’t have fencing and where cartels are moving in drugs while our agents are tied down with hundreds of bogus asylees surrendering themselves to them. Nobody can deny that the level of family members and drugs crossing, the latter enabled by the former, is worse than ever. As one border agent told CBS, “I’ve seen 6 different presidents in the time that I’ve been with the Border Patrol and this is the worst crisis that I’ve seen” and, “Operationally I can tell that you without a physical barrier at border patrol we have a very tough time succeeding.”

Last October, the DOJ designated MS-13, Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (CJNG), Sinaloa Cartel, and Clan del Golfo as transnational crime organizations (TCOs). Now, those cartels are pouring meth into areas in Texas and Arizona.

It’s time for Trump to actually treat this like the emergency it is and at least begin with the authority he has under a non-emergency statute. Threatening to get what he wants without Pelosi is a great leverage point. As Trump said in “The Art of the Deal,” “The worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it. That makes the other guy smell blood, and then you’re dead.” (For more from the author of “Even Congress’ Research Arm Vouches for Trump’s Border Funding Authority” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Anti-Trump American Media Is Achieving Russia’s Goal

/0 Comments/in , /by

Where Russia failed in dividing America, the anti-Trump media are succeeding.

Last month, an analysis of the social media posts by Russia-based Internet Research Agency concluded the primary goal of the influence operation was “dividing Americans.” According to the report, which was conducted by New Knowledge and commissioned by the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Russian effort “was designed to exploit societal fractures, blur the lines between reality and fiction, erode our trust in media entities and the information environment, in government, in each other, and in democracy itself.”

In a perverse twist, the anti-Trump media’s relentless attacks on President Trump and his supporters are accomplishing the Russian goal of dividing Americans and eroding faith in government while destroying their own credibility.

The news coverage of the encounter between a Native American man and high school students at the Lincoln Memorial and the reporting on the border crisis are recent examples where the anti-Trump media are doing more to harm to the U.S. than the Russia-based Internet Research Agency ever could.

A short video of a Catholic high school student wearing a Make America Great Again hat staring at a Native American man beating his drum went viral and triggered a series of erroneous news stories about the encounter. The anti-Trump media jumped at the opportunity to connect the Trump-supporting Catholic high school boys with racism against Native Americans.

In its initial story, the New York Times portrayed the high school students as the agitators, “a throng of cheering and jeering high school boys, predominantly white and wearing ‘Make America Great Again’ gear, surrounding a Native American elder.”

The story intjected race into its analysis, describing the incident as “the latest touchpoint for racial tensions in American, particularly under Mr. Trump.” The story also boosted the racism angle by adding the president “painted immigrants in broad strokes as rapists and drug dealers” and his criticism of Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and her claim of Native American background to complete the picture.

A day later, the New York Times updated the story. Analysis of longer videos of the encounter at the Lincoln Memorial painted an entirely different picture. The Native American approached the high school boys; they were not aggressors. But the update by the New York Times and other news outlets was too little, too late. The anti-Trump media inflamed the social media mob instead of extinguishing the fire.

The attacks against the students and their school, Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky, were unrelenting.

Both Covington Catholic High School and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Covington threw the students under the bus, condemning the students’ actions and issuing an apology to the Native American man who confronted the children. The high school students were also roundly criticized from all political sides, including some calling for violence.

On twitter, CNN political analyst Bakari Sellers zeroed in on the student featured in the video and said, “He is a deplorable. Some ppl can also be punched in the face.” Sellers deleted his tweet after the news reported on additional video evidence.

Hollywood elites also couldn’t restrain themselves. Disney film producer Jack Morrissey said on twitter, “MAGAkids go screaming, hats first, into the woodchipper.” He later apologized and deleted the horrific tweet.

Actress Alyssa Milano targeted the MAGA hats worn by some of the high school boys, saying they are “the new white hood,” essentially equating children to Klansmen. The Covington Catholic Schools and the Diocese of Covington are being targeted by activists and threats of violence.

The anti-Trump media is also eroding the faith of Americans in the president by its news coverage that minimizes the threat of illegal aliens to the safety and security of U.S. citizens. As pointed out in the Washington Examiner and Fox News, the media wrote stories about a crisis at the border under former President Obama, but suddenly, under President Trump, it’s considered a manufactured crisis.

Recently, over 700 pounds of cocaine were seized by Border Patrol agents between ports of entry, and hundreds of migrants were caught after digging under an old section of border fence in Arizona.

The facts show there is a crisis at the southern border. The Catholic student’s actions were not threatening or racist. But the anti-Trump media’s zeal to undermine the president and his credibility supersedes the truth.

Russia is getting the divided America it sought, not by its agents feeding social media, but from the anti-Trump media that fuels outrage against the president and his supporters — even children. (For more from the author of “The Anti-Trump American Media Is Achieving Russia’s Goal” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

After Sealed Court Records Mysteriously Leaked, Senator Ernst Denies Affair With Soldier Under Her Command

/0 Comments/in , /by

By AP. Sen. Joni Ernst on Wednesday denied allegations leveled by her ex-husband that she had an affair with a subordinate while she served in the military. . .

Joni Ernst said Wednesday at the event that she believed the court documents would be sealed from the public and was caught off guard by news reports on the allegations.

“I would love to point the finger and say, ‘Somebody screwed up. Somebody leaked.’ But they’re out there and so now I will deal with that,” she said. “But what I want people to understand is that I am the same person as I was last week. You just know more about what’s inside of me now.” (Read more from “After Sealed Court Records Mysteriously Leaked, Senator Ernst Denies Affair With Soldier Under Her Command” HERE)

_________________________________________________

Divorce Filing: U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst Says Her Husband Physically Attacked Her

By Des Moines Register. Years before her divorce, U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst was assaulted by her husband after she confronted him about his relationship with their daughter’s babysitter, she wrote in court filings.

Ernst, a Republican who represents Iowa, said that during her 26-year marriage with Gail Ernst, she was the victim of verbal and mental abuse and a physical assault after which a victim’s advocate wanted to take her to a hospital, she wrote in public records connected to their divorce. . .

In an affidavit in October, Joni Ernst described a history of emotional abuse that included her husband belittling her and becoming angry when she achieved her goals. She was interviewed by then-candidate Donald Trump to run for vice president, but she turned him down, describing the move as not the right thing for her or her family, she said.

Ernst, 48, a military veteran from Red Oak, was the first woman in Iowa elected to either chamber of Congress. She defeated Democrat Bruce Braley in 2014 to win a six-year term in the Senate after emerging victorious from a five-way Republican primary for the nomination. She has said she will seek a second term in the Senate in 2020. (Read more from “Divorce Filing: U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst Says Her Husband Physically Attacked Her” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE