Ex-CIA Chief’s Testimony Fails to Move Trump Russia Probe, Watchdog Groups Say

/0 Comments/in , /by

Former CIA Director John Brennan told Congress Tuesday he was aware of “intelligence that revealed contacts” between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russians, giving Democrats new momentum in alleging collusion.

Still, some government watchdog groups don’t see how the testimony advances a probe that so far has shown no public evidence of ties.

During a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., asked Brennan, “Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts [in meddling with the U.S. election]?”

The former CIA director who served during President Barack Obama’s second term, gave a broad answer.

I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. And it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.

I don’t know whether such collusion—that’s your term—existed. I don’t know. I know there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not U.S. persons were actively conspiring, colluding with Russian officials.

“I think this committee now has access to the type of information that I’m alluding to here. It’s classified, and I’m happy to talk about it in classified session,” he said.

Though Brennan is a prominent figure, his testimony changes very little, said Matthew Whitaker, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust.

“It put some color and context into things, but he didn’t know about collusion,” Whitaker told The Daily Signal.

However, Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, said FBI investigations don’t just start on a hunch.

“There is usually some smoke and it doesn’t just start on baseless news reports,” Whitaker said. “It could have been the intelligence that Brennan was talking about that he referred to the FBI. It’s one of the many things we could eventually find out.”

The FBI began an investigation last July into Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, which included potential ties to the Trump campaign, former FBI Director James Comey previously said. Last week, the Justice Department named Comey’s FBI predecessor, Robert Mueller, to be special counsel.

The White House did not respond to an inquiry from The Daily Signal specifically regarding Brennan’s comment on intelligence about contacts between Russians and associates of the Trump campaign.

Mueller has a sterling reputation, but it’s unclear whether a connection between a Trump campaign employee and Russians warrants a probe, said Peter Flaherty, president of the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group.

“In order to justify an investigation there needs to be an underlying crime,” Flaherty told The Daily Signal. “It’s not illegal for political consultants to drum up business with foreign entities, as long as they register. Could it be unseemly? Yes. Could it be unpatriotic? Yes. But it’s not illegal. Now, if a political consultant accepted foreign funds and turns around and promises a quid pro quo, that would be a criminal matter.”

While Democrats have pushed for getting to the bottom of any potential ties between Russia and Trump, several lawmakers conceded they don’t yet have evidence of coordination.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member of the Senate intelligence committee, “You have had access from the intelligence committee, from the Judiciary Committee, all of the access you have had to very sensitive information, so far you have not seen any evidence of collusion, is that right?”

Feinstein, a California Democrat, responded, “Well, evidence that would establish that there’s collusion. There are all kinds of rumors around, there are newspaper stories, but that’s not necessarily evidence.”

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., while talking about impeaching Trump, in an appearance on MSNBC, was asked, “But just to be clear, there has been no actual evidence [of collusion] yet?”

She responded, “No, it has not been.”

After the Brennan testimony, though, Democrats made another push.

Waters tweeted Tuesday:

After the hearing, the committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff of California tweeted:

Schiff, the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Brennan’s testimony clearly shows the need to continue the probe.

“Today’s testimony by former CIA Director Brennan that the Russians brazenly interfered in our election, and that he became aware of interaction between Trump campaign officials and Russians that warranted referral to the FBI further, underscores the importance of our investigation,” Schiff said in a statement. (For more from the author of “Ex-CIA Chief’s Testimony Fails to Move Trump Russia Probe, Watchdog Groups Say” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Congress Must Embrace These 5 Principles to Create a More Responsible Budget

/0 Comments/in , /by

With this week’s release of President Donald Trump’s fiscal year 2018 budget, the congressional appropriations season is officially underway.

Although discretionary appropriations only account for one-third of the federal budget, they are critical in reducing the size and role of the government and provide an opportunity to make a down payment towards the national debt.

Since it was mere weeks ago that fiscal year 2017 appropriations were finalized, it is hard to be optimistic about the prospects for 2018.

Nevertheless, Congress should look to the following principles as it begins its important work on the budget:

1. Stick to the Budget Control Act Caps

The Budget Control Act was passed in 2011 with the intention of reducing total spending by more than $2 trillion and controlling the growth of federal programs. To do so, it adopted discretionary caps for defense and nondefense categories, enforced by automatic cuts (called sequestration), as well as a mandatory spending sequestration.

While the law has been moderately successful in controlling discretionary spending, Congress has undermined its effectiveness by amending the spending caps each year of their existence.

In 2013, implementation of the sequester was delayed for several months as part of the fiscal cliff deal and for 2014-2017 the caps were raised again, first by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 and later by the Obama-Boehner budget deal.

With total discretionary funding set to decrease by $6 billion in 2018, there is likely to be a desire from some in Congress to pass another budget deal that raises the spending caps.

Congress must resist this urge to spend more and should pursue prudent cuts, or stick to the current levels, at the very least. The president’s budget proposes a total discretionary spending level of $1.1 billion, in line with the Budget Control Act caps. This is the maximum level of funding that Congress should support in 2018.

2. Break the Spending Firewall and Fully Fund Defense

As part of the Budget Control Act, discretionary spending was arbitrarily divided into defense and nondefense categories. Providing for national defense is the primary responsibility envisioned by the Founding Fathers when they established our government.

Trump’s budget calls for abandoning the defense and nondefense categories, instead raising defense spending by $54 billion and offsetting that increase with cuts to domestic programs. That’s the fiscally responsible way to properly prioritize among competing demands for taxpayer dollars.

The increase proposed by the resident is the minimum needed to begin rebuilding a stronger military. According to the Heritage Foundation director of the Center for National Defense, “This increase on its own is insufficient to begin the rebuilding. It simply represents an ‘on-ramp’ to rebuilding.”

The Budget Control Act cap on defense spending has been a detriment to our national security and must be abandoned. Congress should adopt the level of funding needed to fully equip our military against growing threats worldwide.

These increases should be offset by the reduction or elimination of inefficient domestic programs that limit individual and economic freedom and that have usurped functions that are better left to the private sector, and states and localities.

3. Return to Regular Order

The last time that Congress passed all 12 annual appropriations bills prior to the start of the fiscal year was 1996. Instead, lawmakers continue to rely on continuing resolutions and massive omnibus spending bills. This is not an effective way to govern and it does a disservice to taxpayers.

With the president’s budget delayed more than three months and Congress not expected to release its own budgets until at least mid-June, Congress is already way behind schedule.

Regardless of the late start, Congress should look to pass as many appropriations bills as possible, starting with Department of Defense appropriations, through regular order. Following the congressional budget process facilitates a higher level of debate and increased oversight and accountability over federal government programs and agencies.

4. Stop Providing Appropriations for Unauthorized Purposes

In fiscal year 2016, Congress provided more than $310 billion in appropriations to unauthorized agencies and programs. Authorizing programs is a key component of Congress’ oversight responsibility. It provides an opportunity to examine and prioritize the activities that receive taxpayer dollars carefully. Lack of oversight has contributed to increased spending and rising debt levels.

Congress should immediately stop providing unauthorized appropriations and return accountability to the budget process.

5. Seize the Opportunity for reform.

Congress must use the fiscal year 2018 appropriations process as an opportunity to reassert its commitment to control spending. Congress should reject any attempt to increase the overall discretionary spending level.

Defense should be the highest priority and needed increases should be fully offset with cuts to nondefense programs. With republicans in control of the White House and Congress, there is no better time than now to pursue a conservative budget.

The Heritage Foundation’s “Blueprint for Balance” lays out more than 100 discretionary policy options that could be implemented in 2018, saving taxpayers $87 billion in 2018 alone.

Continuing the failed policies and spending addiction of the past few years is not the answer. (For more from the author of “Congress Must Embrace These 5 Principles to Create a More Responsible Budget” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sources: Democratic Aide Suspected of Major Security Breach Under Government Protection in Pakistan

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A criminal suspect in an investigation into a major security breach on the House of Representatives computer network has abruptly left the country and gone to Pakistan, where her family has significant assets and VIP-level protection, a relative and others told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group.

Hina Alvi, her husband Imran Awan, and his brothers Abid and Jamal were highly paid shared IT administrators working for multiple House Democrats until their access to congressional IT systems was terminated Feb. 2 as a result of the investigation. Capitol Police confirmed the investigation is ongoing, but no arrests have been reported in the case.

The Awans are “accused of stealing equipment from members’ offices without their knowledge and committing serious, potentially illegal, violations on the House IT network,” according to Politico.

Many of the Democrats who employed the Awans are members of the House Committee on Homeland Security, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Their positions gave them access to members’ emails and confidential files. In addition, Imran was given the password for an iPad used by then-Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat. (Read more from “Sources: Democratic Aide Suspected of Major Security Breach Under Government Protection in Pakistan” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Moving On From Congressional Pedophiles: Now House IT Aides Suspected of Blackmailing Members With Their Own Data

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Congressional technology aides are baffled that data-theft allegations against four former House IT workers — who were banned from the congressional network — have largely been ignored, and they fear the integrity of sensitive high-level information.

Imran Awan and three relatives were colleagues until police banned them from computer networks at the House of Representatives after suspicion the brothers accessed congressional computers without permission.

Five Capitol Hill technology aides told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group that members of Congress have displayed an inexplicable and intense loyalty towards the suspects who police say victimized them. The baffled aides wonder if the suspects are blackmailing representatives based on the contents of their emails and files, to which they had full access.

“I don’t know what they have, but they have something on someone. It’s been months at this point” with no arrests, said Pat Sowers, who has managed IT for several House offices for 12 years. “Something is rotten in Denmark.”

A manager at a tech-services company that works with Democratic House offices said he approached congressional offices, offering their services at one-fourth the price of Awan and his Pakistani brothers, but the members declined. At the time, he couldn’t understand why his offers were rejected but now he suspects the Awans exerted some type of leverage over members. (Read more from “House IT Aides Fear Suspects in Hill Breach Are Blackmailing Members With Their Own Data” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Anti-Trump Leaks Are Against the Law. So Where’s the Investigation?

/0 Comments/in , /by

A lot of people even in the White House are leaking stories to hurt Donald Trump. Are they committing felonies? If the information they give to the media affects national security, then yes.

Disclosing classified information relating to U.S. or foreign communications intelligence activities is a felony. The leaker can go to prison for 10 years and be fined as well.

It May Still Be a Felony

But even if it doesn’t rise to that level, it may still be a felony. Federal employees can’t reveal confidential information to the press without permission. It’s considered theft to convey “any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof.” It carries the same stiff penalty. Additionally, federal employees are generally subject to nondisclosure agreements.

Every presidential administration leaks. Sometimes the leakers rightly expose wrongful behavior. Many are protected by whistleblower laws. Look at Watergate.

What’s different now is the scope. The Washington Post ran an article on President Trump firing FBI Director James Comey based on “the private accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House, the Justice Department, the FBI and on Capitol Hill, as well as Trump confidants and other senior Republicans.”

Conservative writer Jonah Goldberg talked to reporters who say the leaks are in part due to the lack of experience of many working at the White House.

That may explain a few of the leaks. But for the most part, they seem “coordinated and timed” to hurt Trump. That’s what the administration believes. The Trump campaign sent an email to supporters entitled “SABOTAGE,” condemning the leaks. And in a tweet, the president complained that he’d been asking the FBI and others to investigate the leaks, apparently without success.

Some of the leaks may not even be leaks, but made-up stories to make the president look bad. Making false statements in the course of a federal investigation is a felony. Trump has tweeted that he believes the leaks rise to the level of crimes.

The Most Important Leaks

What are the most important leaks? First, the leaks after Trump fired FBI director James Comey. Some aides told the media that Trump did it to stop the FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with the Russians to influence the presidential election.

As a result, Congress stepped up its own probe into Trump, and pressure mounted to appoint an independent investigator. Trump agreed to appoint former FBI Director Robert Mueller for this task last week.

The second example is the leaks saying Trump had provided highly classified information about ISIS to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador to the U.S. The leaker gave the story to The Washington Post. He said it put an intelligence source at risk.

Yet that is merely the leaker’s opinion. Besides, Trump’s national security adviser H.R. McMaster (quoted in the story) said that he was in the meeting and Trump said nothing that wasn’t already public. “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly,” he said.

Dina Powell, a deputy national security adviser, who was also at the meeting, said, “This story is false. The president only discussed the common threats that both countries faced.” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson explained, “During that exchange the nature of specific threats were discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods or military operations.”

Trump defended his conversation on Twitter, “As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety.”

So, do you trust the leaker — who probably dislikes Trump and has an agenda to make the president look bad. Or do you trust Trump and the top-level officials around him who were at the meeting?

The New York Times confirmed that Israel was the source of the information. That means that if the leaker was correct about the seriousness of the information, he (or she) may have put national security at risk by revealing it.

Leaks About Michael Flynn

Former acting Attorney General Sally Yates is suspected of leaking classified information to the press regarding former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn lying to Vice President Mike Pence about talking to the Russian ambassador.

Again, releasing this information could jeopardize U.S.-Russian relations. If Russia believes its private conversations are going to be made public, it may be less willing to cooperate with the U.S.

Lack of Outrage Over Leaks

There hasn’t been much outrage over the leaks. Instead, the mainstream media, Congress and the FBI are focusing on the substance of the leaks. Concern is directed at whether Trump did anything wrong. So far, there has been no evidence Trump has. The leaks are compared to Watergate — but no evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing has emerged. Each new leak accuses the president of a different type of crime but nothing sticks.

The mainstream media seems so intent on taking Trump down that they risk running information that may be classified and harmful. While the laws against leaking don’t generally apply to journalists, journalists can be prosecuted for failing to reveal the source of the leak. Judith Miller spent 85 days in jail for refusing to divulge the source of the Valerie Plame leak, Scooter Libby. “They shouldn’t be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody’s name,” Trump said during a speech in February. “Let their name be put out there.”

There are three separate probes of Trump — by Congress, the FBI and the newly appointed special investigator Mueller. Shouldn’t there be at least one probe into the likely criminal leaks? (For more from the author of “Anti-Trump Leaks Are Against the Law. So Where’s the Investigation?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Report: China Crippled CIA Operations, Killed Informants

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Chinese government “systematically dismantled” CIA spying operations in China starting in late 2010 and killed or imprisoned at least a dozen CIA sources over the next two years, The New York Times reported Saturday.

The newspaper cited 10 current and former U.S. officials, who described the intelligence breach as one of the worst in decades. They spoke on condition of anonymity.

The report said U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies scrambled to stem the damage, but were bitterly divided over the cause of the breach. Some investigators were convinced there was a mole within the CIA, while others believed the Chinese had hacked the covert system the CIA used to communicate with its foreign sources. The debate remains unresolved, the paper said. (Read more from “Report: China Crippled CIA Operations, Killed Informants” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Texas House Approves Amended Bathroom Bill

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Texas House approved an amended version of a proposed bathroom bill Sunday. Legislators had been threatened with a special session if the measure didn’t pass.

The Texas Privacy Act, or Senate Bill 6, passed the state Senate in March but faced House opposition. The act would have limited restroom use according to biological sex in public schools and government buildings. It also would have prevented city governments from passing opposing ordinances.

But the measure that passed the House 91-50 was narrowed down to address public schools exclusively. Language crafted by Republican Rep. Chris Paddie was tacked on to Senate Bill 2078, a measure dealing with schools’ emergency operations.

The amended language requires students use facilities according to their biological sex. Students who identify as members of the opposite sex may use single-occupancy facilities.

Final approval on the bill is expected Monday. It will then head back to the Senate for approval of the bathroom language changes. Abbott is expected to sign the bill. In April, he finally broke his long silence on the issue.

“I will work with the House and Senate to ensure we find a solution and ultimately get a bill to my desk that I will sign into law,” he said.

Hot Debate

Senate Bill 6 and its subsequent versions have seen heated opposition.

On Sunday, Democratic Rep. Senfronia Thompson compared the House’s version to Jim Crow laws. “White. Colored. I was living through that era … bathrooms divided us then, and it divides us now,” she said.

Paddie disagreed, claiming the bill did not discriminate. “It’s absolutely about child safety,” he said.

Supporters of a Texas bathroom bill have insisted their intent is not to discriminate. Lt. Governor Dan Patrick previously called SB 6 “a common sense, privacy and public safety policy for everyone.” The bill’s author, Sen. Lois Koklhorst, said it was an effort to “strike a balance to protect all of us when we find ourselves in the intimate spaces, vulnerable spaces.”

The original measure was also intended to provide additional guidance in light of move by President Donald Trump. In February Trump rescinded an Obama-era policy mandating schools allow students who identify as members of the opposite sex to use the bathroom of their choice. Schools that didn’t comply were threatened with loss of federal funding.

“This is an issue best solved at the state and local level,” Education Secretary Betsy Devos said at the time. Kolkhorst said that made guidance for Texas schools “even more important.”

House Speaker Republican Joe Straus previously voiced opposition to any kind of bathroom bill. He said he thought such a bill would hurt Texas business. News media widely reported negative repercussions to North Carolina’s economy after its government passed the controversial bathroom bill known as House Bill 2. But North Carolina Lt. Governor Dan Forest disputed those reports in a press conference supporting SB 6.

Nevertheless, Straus’ fears about the economy were allayed with the passing of SB 2078. According to The Texas Tribune, he didn’t think the measure would drastically change schools’ existing approach to accommodating students who identify as members of the opposite sex. It also “avoid[s] the severely negative impact of Senate Bill 6.” (For more from the author of “Texas House Approves Amended Bathroom Bill” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here’s What’s in Trump’s ‘Taxpayers First’ Federal Budget

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Trump administration will respect taxpayers, balance the budget, return the country to 3 percent economic growth, and push a parental leave requirement in its fiscal plan to be released Tuesday, said Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney.

Mulvaney called it a “taxpayers first budget.”

“This budget was written through the eyes of the people paying for the budget, not through the eyes of who is getting paid,” Mulvaney told reporters Monday during an off-camera briefing at the White House.

Mulavney elaborated that budget writers went line-by-line through the budget to see what programs had a success rate and what programs didn’t.

The White House released a general outline of the plan Monday, before the full plan is released on Tuesday. The budget includes $3.6 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years, which the White House says is the most proposed by any president.

The administration’s first budget is being released while President Donald Trump is out of the country, taking stops in the Middle East and Europe.

Much of the budget policies are tied to creating 3 percent growth, or are contingent on achieving that goal. A key example is balancing a budget in 10 years, which relies on the growth goal.

“It is not unprecedented, but is below the average since the founding of the country and since World War II,” Mulvaney said. “You will never balance the budget with 1.9 percent growth.”

The growth rate could be a very optimistic assumption for balancing the budget in 10 years, said Romina Boccia, deputy director of the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Last week, she said the budget numbers are worth comparing to other estimates, such as the Congressional Budget Office.

The fiscal plan presumes the passages of both the American Health Care Act—to replace Obamacare—and of Trump’s tax reform proposal. It also includes increases in defense and border security spending—including $2.6 billion for a border wall and other border infrastructure.

The administration projects that by 2027, when the budget balances, publicly held debt will drop to 60 percent of gross domestic product. This would be the lowest level since 2010, when the Obama administration’s first budget took effect. That’s down from 77 percent of GDP. The plan further projects the national debt to continue falling.

The Trump administration’s plan puts forth a new path for welfare reforms, which Mulvaney characterized as a method to encourage the “dignity of work,” and also another way to move people out of poverty and into the workforce.

“We believe social safety net programs will help us get to 3 percent growth, because people won’t be afraid that if they take a gamble and fail, they’ll be wiped out,” Mulvaney said.

He said the reforms are simply to determine if everyone in the social programs should be on the programs.

The 10-year plan will “tighten eligibility and encourage work” for recipients of food stamps. It will limit the earned income tax credit and child tax credit to only those legally eligible to work in the United States.

The food stamp reforms are projected to save $193 billion over the next decade. Reforms to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, are projected to save $21 billion over 10 years and EITC and child tax credit changes will save $40 billion over 10 years, according to the budget projection. The budget outline further proposes to reform Medicaid to give states more flexibility through federal block grants.

There is a reason to be skeptical of whether work requirements—such as in Medicaid, food stamps, or housing—will have a significant budgetary impact, said Michael Tanner, a senior fellow with the libertarian Cato Institute.

“I do not think it’s a terrible thing, but savings will be really incremental,” Tanner told The Daily Signal. “I also think all the wailing and gnashing of teeth we’ll hear on the other side is too much. This will affect few people.”

“Look at TANF, which has fairly strong work requirements,” Tanner said. “Only 42 percent [of recipients] are working, with a fairly generous definition of working—job training or college. There are so many exemptions.”

He added that welfare programs shouldn’t be reformed to save money, but because they are not working.

Mulvaney said this is the first time a presidential budget proposed a fully-paid-for paid family leave proposal through building on the unemployment insurance system as a base, and allowing states to establish paid parental leave programs.

“This goes to the matter of 3 percent growth,” Mulvaney said, because more parents will feel comfortable about going back to work without fear.

Tanner said not so fast, citing laws in California, and in Europe, where laws have had the opposite effect.

“There is no such thing as a free lunch,” Tanner said. “If a business has to pay for two workers to support one, it becomes more expensive to hire women. In Britain and other European countries that have these laws, it drove down the number of women in the workforce.” (For more from the author of “Here’s What’s in Trump’s ‘Taxpayers First’ Federal Budget” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Porngate’ Scandal Rocks State Government; Whistle Blower is Viciously Attacked

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Pennsylvania’s state government is reeling from a scandal involving the exchange of sexually explicit images and other offensive material among judges, prosecutors and other top state officials.

“Porngate” has already resulted in the early retirement of one state Supreme Court justice, the suspension of another, and ongoing attempts to impeach embattled state Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who exposed the misbehavior.

On Tuesday, Kane announced that she would not seek re-election as she faces criminal charges of leaking secret grand jury evidence to a Philadelphia newspaper and allegedly lying about it under oath.

The state Supreme Court suspended Kane’s law license last September. The Pennsylvania House Subcommittee on Courts has scheduled a hearing next Tuesday to determine whether she should be impeached after an attempt in the State Senate failed last week.

“If the legislature spent a fraction of the time investigating this content as it has on the one individual who exposed it, we could start to restore credibility to our judicial system and give Pennsylvanians a system of justice in which they can be proud,” a defiant Kane responded. (Read more from “‘Porngate’ Scandal Rocks Pennsylvania State Government” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Undeniable Proof That America Has Gone Mad

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In case you’ve been sleeping under a rock the last few years, here’s a newsflash: America has gone totally mad.

To be clear, I don’t mean that all Americans are off their rocker. I mean that right is now wrong, the abnormal is now normal, and what was once was unthinkable is now celebrated.

Head-scratching Headlines

Think I’m exaggerating? Then consider some recent headlines.

Time magazine, September 12, 2016: “My Brother’s Pregnancy and the Making of a New American Family.”

This article was written by a woman who was describing her brother’s pregnancy — in other words, her sister’s pregnancy. The twist being that her sister now identifies as her brother.

Pink News, September 4, 2016: “This photo of a trans dad breastfeeding his son tells a great story of love and acceptance.”

This refers to the same story and features the same, heartbreaking picture of what appears to be a man (with a scruffy beard and chest hair) nursing a baby. Somehow, this man has women’s breasts. This is not a “great story.” It’s a tragic story. It’s something to be mourned, not celebrated.

Lifesite News, May 19, 2017: “Breastfeeding organization welcomes transgender ‘nursing men’.”

As the article explains, “A venerable breastfeeding advocacy group is floating the notion that men can nurse children.

“Nursing is not just for moms anymore, reports a blog post from the National Catholic Register this week about a policy statement from La Leche League International (LLLI).

“‘As the cultural understanding of gender has expanded, it is now recognized that some men are able to breastfeed,’ the organization also stated.”

Note those words carefully once more: “nursing men” and “some men are able to breastfeed.”

The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 16, 2017: “Tampons in Men’s Rooms? It’s Just a Small Part of ‘Menstrual Equity,’ Campus Activists Say.”

Says the article, “Over the past year, several colleges have improved access to menstrual products on their campuses, including in some men’s and gender-neutral restrooms. That last detail has prompted some conservative websites to take note.

“The American Conservative mockingly headlined its report ‘Social Justice Washrooms,’ from ‘tomorrow’s generation of American elites.’ Commenters on Breitbart’s report on the trend called it ‘academic insanity,’ pointing out that ‘men do not menstruate.’”

But these campus ideologues are committed to their cause, which is part of the growing “free the tampon movement.” This is “an effort to make college more fair for students who menstruate, a concept for which Jennifer Weiss-Wolf coined the phrase ‘menstrual equity.’

According to Lance Floto, vice-president of the student association at the University of Rochester, “We have smaller baskets in men’s rest­rooms, but the reason we do that is because there are some men on the campus who menstruate and so it’s just the whole idea of inclusion and making sure that nobody’s left out — it’s a very easy thing.”

Let me remind you that these quotes are not from a satirical website and that the “menstrual equity, free the tampon” movement really exists.

Coupled with this on our campuses is the “pronoun of your choice” movement, which I’ve documented elsewhere. (For the record, these pronouns include: they/them/their/themselves; tey/tem/ter/temself ;ey/em/eir/emself; e/em/eir/emself; thon/thon/thons/thonself; fae/faer/faers/faerself; vae/vaer/vaers/vaerself; ae/aer/aers/aerself; ne/nym/nis/nymself; ne/nem/nir/nemself; xe/xem/xyr/xemself; xe/xim/xis/ximself; xie/xem/xyr/xemself; ze(or zie)/zir/zirs/zirself; zhe/zhir/zhirs/zhirself; ze/hir/hirs/hirself; sie/sier/siers/sierself; zed/zed/zeds/zedself; zed/zed/zeir/zedself; ce/cir/cirs/cirself; co/cos/cos/coself; ve/vis/vir/verself; jee/jem/jeir/jemself; lee/lim/lis/limself; kye/kyr/kyne/kyrself; per/per/pers/perself; hu/hum/hus/humself; bun/bun/buns/bunself; it/it/its/itself.)

And let’s not forget the Obama Justice Department policy. It threatened schools that would not allow boys who identified as girls to share the girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and shower stalls. What kind of social experiment is this?

Perhaps this one article from Everyday Feminism (with video) shows just how mad our nation has gone. (Thankfully, the responses to the video are mostly negative. That’s a glimmer of hope, at least for the moment.) The article is written by Riley J. Dennis, “a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary trans woman with a passion for fiction writing, feminism, and technology.” It’s titled, “Can Having Genital Preferences for Dating Mean You’re Anti-Trans?” In other words, if, as a man, you prefer to date or marry a woman who has female genitalia rather than male genitalia, does that mean you’re “anti-trans”?

The article asks: “Is it cissexist, or anti-trans, to say that you wouldn’t date a woman who has a penis?” The answer? Well, it’s “more complicated than you might think.”

Complicated? Really? We have lost our collective mind!

England is not far behind. This headline announces, “First British man to get pregnant has been bombarded with abuse and threats since revealing he is due to give birth.”

I’m truly sorry that this woman is suffering such abuse and getting ugly threats. I’m also sorry that she wants to be both the mother and father of her child.

Speaking of children, have you heard about the latest? It’s drag queens reading stories to little kids. Major media headlines celebrate it. “Drag Queen Story Hour Puts the Rainbow in Reading” says The New York Times. “Early reading just got a lot more glamorous” says the Smithsonian. And Circa tells us, “Drag Queens Are Reading Books to Help Fight Gender Stereotypes”

And who knows what’s coming next? Who can even imagine?

Three Possible Outcomes

As a God-fearing follower of Jesus, I can see three possible outcomes for the near future:

1. Jesus comes back before we completely self-destruct

2. We completely self-destruct.

3. We have a great (and rude) awakening that saves us from self-destruction.

While I long for the Lord’s return, I also work and pray for a great awakening. We should all pray that the Holy Spirit will transform the people I mention above. If not, it will be a rocky ride. (For more from the author of “Undeniable Proof That America Has Gone Mad” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.