Mark Levin Roasts the 3-Ring Circus Known as the DNC Election

/0 Comments/in , /by

Members of the Democratic National Committee will gather today to select the next chairman of the Democrat Party. On Thursday, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin played clips from a candidate forum that demonstrated that these liberals are, in fact, running to be chief clown of the three-ring liberal circus known as the DNC.

The radical frontrunner, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. (F, 26%), is among those calling for the impeachment of President Trump under the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

“He’s not in violation of the Emoluments Clause – meaning being paid by a foreign government,” Levin explained. “He may have investments in other countries and the monies may flow into his trust. But he’s not being paid by foreign governments for the purpose of influencing his office.”

Keith Ellison isn’t the only kook running for chairman of the DNC. Jehmu Greene, a former Fox News contributor, said the president is “arrogantly marching us towards facism.” Another candidate, Obama Labor Secretary Tom Perez accused Trump of wanting to “turn the clock back.”

“Since when is supporting individual liberty turning the clock back?” Levin asked rhetorically. “Since when is supporting private property rights, and commerce, and trade, and capitalism turning the clock back? Since when is demanding the enforcement of the greatest Constitution man has ever developed turning the clock back? Since when is believing in faith, and family, and a moral order turning the clock back?”

“Turning the clock back to what? You jerk!” (For more from the author of “Mark Levin Roasts the 3-Ring Circus Known as the DNC Election” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Witches Seek Curse on President Trump; Christians Respond With Spiritual Warfare Prayer

/0 Comments/in , /by

Christians have traditionally followed the command that the Apostle Paul gave to Timothy:

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people — for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. (1 Timothy 2:1-2)

If the early Christians could pray even for Roman rulers who persecuted them, how much more should we pray for political leaders whom we have a hand in choosing. But the call to prayer is even more urgent now, when some occultists who oppose President Trump have started to gather to do him harm — calling for people to perform a ritual to curse President Trump, “bind” him and eventually remove him from office.

By the light of the waning crescent moon last night, self-described witches united to cast a spell on President Trump and his supporters with a ritualistic ceremony. It’s a ritual they plan to repeat every month, and they’ve encouraged others to join them. A Facebook event page, posted by a group that prefers to “remain anonymous,” states, “A Spell to Bind Donald Trump and All Those Who Abet Him: Every Waning Crescent Moon at Midnight Beginning February 24, 2017, Ending when he is driven from office.”

Currently, nearly 9,000 people are following the page. And the #bindtrump effort has clearly reached into the entertainment industry. Pop singer Lana Del Rey will said she would join the event as well, posting dates and times of the rituals on Twitter. The liberal music magazine Rolling Stone, tongue only part-way in its cheek, was also on board, saying so far nothing else has worked to stop Trump, “so maybe a little witchcraft isn’t such a bad idea, after all?”

While some may claim that magic — or at least tonight’s effort — is nonsense and powerless, the Bible is full of scriptures condemning the practice nonetheless. Galatians 5:19-21 is one example:

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God (My emphasis).

Deutoronomy 18:10-12 puts it plainly:

And do not let your people practice fortune-telling, or use sorcery, or interpret omens, or engage in witchcraft, or cast spells, or function as mediums or psychics, or call forth the spirits of the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord.

For those who practice the occult, Revelation promises that “their place will be in the lake the burns with fire and sulfur.”

Christians Fighting Back in the Spirit

As Rolling Stone reports, one group of Christians is performing spiritual warfare of its own to combat the spells — and calling all Christians to do the same. The Christian Nationalist Alliance, on their website, has declared a Day of Prayer for each of the spell-casting days.

This is a declaration of spiritual war and it requires a response. … We beseech all Christian soldiers to answer this call to action by reading from Psalm 23. We ask you to join us in praying for the strength of our nation, our elected representatives and for the souls of the lost who would take up Satanic arms against us.

Psalm 23 (RSV) says:

The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want;
he makes me lie down in green pastures.
He leads me beside still waters; he restores my soul.

He leads me in paths of righteousness
for his name’s sake.

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I fear no evil;
for thou art with me;
thy rod and thy staff,
they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me
in the presence of my enemies;
thou anointest my head with oil,
my cup overflows.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me
all the days of my life;
and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord
for ever.

Dave Kubal, President of Intercessors for America (IFA), told Charisma News, “Whether or not this call for spells pans out and people act on it, we feel compelled, as the Body of Christ and intercessors, to come against this evil with immediate and powerful prayer.” (For more from the author of “Witches Seek Curse on President Trump; Christians Respond With Spiritual Warfare Prayer” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Where Conservatives Are in the Trump Era: 15 Takeaways From Their Biggest Conference

/0 Comments/in , /by

Five weeks into President Donald Trump’s presidency, the first time in eight years a Republican has been in the White House, where do conservatives see the country going?

Here are highlights from The Daily Signal’s coverage of the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, the largest annual gathering of conservatives:

1. Trump talks policy objectives.

In his speech, Trump emphasized a variety of issues that conservatives care about, saying, “We will build the wall and we are going to start soon,” as well as promising “a substantial upgrade for the military.” He also took aim at regulations:

We are going to put the regulation industry out of work. By the way, I want regulations. I want to protect our environment. I want regulations for safety. I want all the regulations we need, and I want them to be so strong and so tough. But we don’t need 75 percent of the repetitive, horrible regulations that hurt companies, hurt jobs, make us noncompetitive overseas with companies from other countries.

2. The filmmakers behind the “Gosnell” movie discuss the real story.

Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell, whose clinic was dubbed a “house of horrors,” hasn’t received the attention his case deserves. Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney talk about this “serial killer.”

3. Gov. Scott Walker urges GOP lawmakers to keep their promises.

“It’s not only conservatives and Republicans who like that, but what we found in Wisconsin is that independents and, yes, even some discerning Democrats, like it when you do the things you say you were going to do,” said the Republican governor, no stranger to Democrat protests. “Commonsense conservative reforms work, they actually work, and people respond to them.”

4. British politician Nigel Farage calls 2016 “the beginning of a global political revolution.”

Farage, who campaigned with Trump during the election, said the message of sovereignty and nationalism that drove United Kingdom voters to choose Brexit last June mirrors the populist vision that has taken power in Washington,” wrote Josh Siegel in his report.

“When in years to come, the generations that follow us study the history of this period, there is one year that will stand out,” Farage said. “That year is the year of 2016. Because in 2016 we witnessed the beginning of a global political revolution, and it’s one that is not going to stop.”

5. Gov. Sam Brownback talks about refugees.

The Kansas Republican made the case that it isn’t about the number of refugees, but whether they are vetted sufficiently before coming to America. “You can’t bring people in the United States who want to kill us,” he told The Daily Signal.

6. Kellyanne Conway predicts the conference could become “TPAC.”

Trump’s winning campaign manager and adviser suggested Trump was having an impact on the conservative movement. “This will be TPAC,” Conway said. “He has brought this infusion of energy. He made people feel from the beginning they are part of a movement. People felt so energized as they had a seat at the table. … He replaced this fiction of electability with this revelation of electricity.”

7. Katie Pavlich highlights the myths about gun suppressors.

The author and Fox News contributor talked to The Daily Signal’s Kelsey Harkness about guns—and puppies.

8. Carly Fiorina says conservatives should work on “growing support.”

“Substantial change inspires substantial resistance, and boy, is there substantial resistance out there,” Fiorina said. “If change is not accompanied by growing support, the substantial change is never sustained.”

“We have to bring people along now, so that the changes we all believe in will be sustained,” the former Republican presidential candidate added.

9. Jim DeMint says conservatives must achieve the “impossible.”

“Our job as conservatives, and as the national conservative movement, is to make possible what the establishment says is impossible,” the former South Carolina Republican senator who is president of The Heritage Foundation said. He warned:

They’re saying you can’t build a wall and control our borders. You have to give amnesty and citizenship to the people who are here illegally. They’re saying you can’t repeal Obamacare. Tax reform is just too controversial. You can’t ever balance the budget. And of course, you must reopen the big, crony, corrupt Export-Import Bank. That’s what [Republicans] are hearing behind closed doors right now.

10. John Bolton thinks it’s time to end the Iran nuclear deal.

“With respect to Iran, and its support for international terrorism and its nuclear weapons program, candidate Trump described everything that was wrong with Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran,” the former United Nations ambassador said.

“He should abrogate that deal, end that deal as soon as possible,” Bolton added. “We need a clear statement of leadership by the United States that this was a strategic debacle for our country and we don’t intend to let it persist.”

11. Police chief Stephen Mills makes the case for civil asset forfeiture reform.

“President Trump, I want to thank your administration for your support of law enforcement,” Mills, whose story was told last year by The Daily Signal, said in his remarks. “I know you’re being told by other members of law enforcement and associated groups that asset forfeiture reform is a bad idea, that it’ll help the cartels and terrorists. I want you to know there are many of us out in the field who don’t agree with that sentiment.”

12. Conservatives call for Obamacare repeal.

“It’s going to happen,” said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, referring to repeal of the health care law.

“What [the 2015 repeal bill] demonstrated to me was that if you got the right president in the White House, you could send that bill back down to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, and you could repeal large pieces of the Affordable Care Act.”

13. Rep. Andy Biggs talks about illegal immigration.

Is this the year the wall on the border is actually going to happen? The Daily Signal’s Rob Bluey talked to the Arizona Republican about that and more.

14. Mike Pence discusses Obamacare replacement.

In his speech, the vice president talked about Obamacare repeal and replacement, saying he and Trump want all Americans to have “access to quality and affordable health care insurance, which is why we’re designing a better law that lowers the cost of health insurance without growing the size of government.”

Pence added:

We’re going to let Americans purchase health insurance across state lines, the way you buy your life insurance, the way you buy your car insurance.

We’re going to make sure that Americans with pre-existing conditions have access to health insurance and the security they need, and we’re going to give states the freedom and flexibility to take care of the least fortunate in the best way that will work in their state and in their community.

15. Ted Cruz pushes term limits.

From the report by The Daily Signal’s Rachel del Guidice:

“This election was the American people saying, ‘Enough already with the corruption in both parties, Democrats and Republicans who have been here too long,’” Cruz [R-Texas] said.

Cruz told attendees of CPAC that one significant way politicians could deliver on “draining the swamp” is by paving the way for term limits for Congress.

“President [Donald] Trump campaigned on draining the swamp,” Cruz said. “We have majorities in both houses. I think we ought to demonstrate that we have heard the voters; we bring up term limits, pass it, send it to the states for ratification.”

CPAC, the largest annual national gathering of conservative activists, ran from Wednesday to Saturday at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland, just outside Washington. (For more from the author of “Where Conservatives Are in the Trump Era: 15 Takeaways From Their Biggest Conference” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

DNC Transgender Spox Turns Into Stuttering Mess When Tucker Asks About Science

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

A transgender advocate struggled to answer simple questions about the science of gender identity in a discussion about former President Obama’s transgender bathroom decree Thursday on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

“Let’s move from the politics to the science,” Carlson said to Zac Petkanas, Democratic National Committee senior advisor, launching into a series of questions about the implications of allowing people to determine their sex.

“There’s no biological anchor to sex anymore. It’s all determined by the individual,” he said. “So my obvious question for you is, how do I know if a person’s male or female? Is there some absolute standard people have to meet to be male or female, other than what they say?”

“One’s gender identity is enough to show what gender they are,” Petkanas replied.

“There are massive implications of this that everyone is either too dumb or too embarrassed to explore, but let’s do so now,” Carlson added. “If your sex is what you say it is, then what prevents me from playing on a women’s field hockey team? What prevents me from getting convicted of a felony and demanding to go to a women’s prison? It’s a real question.” (Read more from “DNC Transgender Spox Turns Into Stuttering Mess When Tucker Asks About Science” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Lethal Judiciary: California Cop Killed by Known Criminal Released by Activist Supreme Court

/0 Comments/in , /by

Over the past few weeks, we have chronicled how the courts have bastardized fundamental rights, inverted state and federal powers, redefined marriage and sexuality, and erased our national sovereignty.

One of the old pastimes of the courts has been to interfere with state or federal criminal justice procedures that have been in place for years, resulting in colossal public safety concerns. Sadly, one of those chickens came home to roost this week in Los Angeles where a cop was killed by a known, violent criminal set free thanks to court-mandated legislation.

Michael Christopher Mejia is suspected of killing Whittier, California policeman Keith Boyer during a shootout in east Los Angeles on Monday. What is so tragic about this case is that Mejia was arrested five times over the past seven months during a probation program that was borne out of a 2011 court decision. He served only two years for a robbery conviction in 2014 and has been allowed to roam free despite five parole violations since 2016 because he had been deemed a “non-violent” offender. And who would want to fill up prisons with such peaceful denizens?

In Brown v. Plata (2011), Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a 5-4 decision asserting that his subjective view of overcrowding in California’s prison system (exacerbated by illegal aliens, by the way) violates the Eight Amendment. The court, therefore, required the state to engage in a massive jailbreak.

Needless to say, the liberal politicians in the state were eager to capitalize on this ruling. Much like Anthony Kennedy redefined marriage to comport with his personal views, he redefined the Eighth Amendment — as a living and breathing amendment — resulting in the release of at least 46,000 prisoners.

This is part of a growing trend whereby judges codify their political agenda for loosening crime statutes into the Constitution. Judges have already invalidated life in prison without parole for juvenile murderers, have invalidated a number of criminal statutes both at the state and federal level, and are now creating an arbitrary constitutional class of non-violent offenders, just like Mejia!

At the time, Justice Samuel Alito dissented due in part to public safety concerns, citing a prisoner release program carried out in Philadelphia in the 1990s:

Although efforts were made to release only those prisoners who were least likely to commit violent crimes, that attempt was spectacularly unsuccessful. During an 18-month period, the Philadelphia police rearrested thousands of these prisoners for committing 9,732 new crimes. Those defendants were charged with 79 murders, 90 rapes, 1,113 assaults, 959 robberies, 701 burglaries, and 2,748 thefts, not to mention thousands of drug offenses.

— Alito, J., dissenting, slip op. at 14

Justice Scalia lampooned Kennedy in a scathing dissent (joined by Justice Thomas), in which he spent nine minutes reading it from the bench and called Plata, “perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a court in our nation’s history.” (Although, that was before the injunction on marriage and national sovereignty that took place recently!)

Today the Court affirms what is perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a court in our Nation’s history: an order requiring California to release the staggering number of 46,000 convicted criminals.

There comes before us, now and then, a case whose proper outcome is so clearly indicated by tradition and common sense, that its decision ought to shape the law, rather than vice versa. One would think that, before allowing the decree of a federal district court to release 46,000 convicted felons, this Court would bend every effort to read the law in such a way as to avoid that outrageous result. Today, quite to the contrary, the Court disregards stringently drawn provisions of the governing statute, and traditional constitutional limitations upon the power of a federal judge, in order to uphold the absurd.

The proceedings that led to this result were a judicial travesty. I dissent because the institutional reform the District Court has undertaken violates the terms of the governing statute, ignores bedrock limitations on the power of Article III judges, and takes federal courts wildly beyond their institutional capacity.

Sadly, most legal eagles on the Right have been overcome by a strain of libertarianism that actually champions this sort of social transformation from the bench. Federal or state sovereignty, and national security be damned. Amazingly, they want to pass “criminal justice reform” to give the courts even more — not less— power over criminal law.

When reading Scalia’s writings, one is jolted by the degree of common sense, history, and tradition that he used to complement the original meaning of the Constitution and the role of the courts. All of that is lost in today’s judiciary, including much of the right-leaning legal profession. It would be nice to see if Neil Gorsuch shares this same character trait of Scalia, given the wide support for him among legal libertarians. We could add it to our long list of unanswered questions and unknowns about the next Supreme Court pick.

The growing trend of court involvement in criminal justice policy is one of the worst manifestations of social transformation without representation whereby they are violating state sovereignty, congressional statutes, and the underpinnings of the social compact. Even if Gorsuch turns out to be good on these issues, the Left already has an impervious five-seat firewall. And Roberts is also unreliable. Yesterday, the Supreme Court stayed an execution on ridiculous grounds and only Thomas and Alito dissented. They bulldozed settled law, criminal statutes, and state plenary procedures, as they did last year when staying executions in Georgia and Pennsylvania.

Sadly, there will probably be a lot more murders of cops and civilians at the hands of judicially mandated jailbreak before Congress protects state legislatures from the federal courts. (For more from the author of “Lethal Judiciary: California Cop Killed by Known Criminal Released by Activist Supreme Court” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Another Obamanation Undone: Trump and Sessions Take the Federal Government out of Your Kids’ Bathroom

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration’s edict on transgender bathrooms in public schools is no more. On Wednesday, President Trump revoked the rules granting transgender individuals access to the sex-segregated facilities of their choice.

“The Department of Justice has a duty to enforce the law,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement about withdrawing the guidance. “Congress, state legislatures, and local governments are in a position to adopt appropriate policies or laws addressing this issue.”

Sessions cited the legal ambiguity and confusion of Obama’s directive for the repeal.

“The prior guidance documents did not contain sufficient legal analysis or explain how the interpretation was consistent with the language of Title IX. The Department of Education and the Department of Justice therefore have withdrawn the guidance,” Sessions said.

“SHOCK!” “HORROR!” “FASCISM!” … countless will cry, as media outlets spin the story as an inhumane assault on transgender “rights.”

But the headline hysteria begs the question of what sort of “rights” we’re talking about here. What right does any human have, on a metaphysical level, to force an institution to accommodate their bathroom preferences, at the expense of everyone else?

What right, for that matter, does anyone have to force an institution to abandon its beliefs in basic human biology?

Even in the philosophically impoverished vision that disputed rights aren’t rights until the Supreme Court finds the stilted grounds on which to manufacture them (e.g. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s infamous “right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life”), the court has, to date, issued no such fiat.

Ergo, no such “right” exists, even on dubious grounds.

If anything is truly concerning about this development is that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos — who has, of course, been vilified as the most extreme arch-conservative by anti-Trumpers — reportedly disagreed with repealing the rules, and that the president’s siding with Attorney General Sessions was what tipped the scales in the decision.

If anything is truly concerning about this development, it is the news that Education Secretary does not bode well. This latest outrage is founded on the same lie that fuels some of the most prominent thinking behind school choice — that government-run schools, rather than parents, are the sole, rightful educators of children.

Even without the regulations masquerading as guidance, there is nothing prohibiting parents from pressuring their local school boards to ensure access to transgender bathrooms or transgender-based sexual education. Sessions’ directive simply removes the federal government from the issue altogether (as it should be).

The only purpose of such a rule from the federal Department of Education would be to force the parents of local public schools to accept the anti-scientific arguments that would normalize transgenderism at the institutions that teach their children [read: child abuse] in Manhattan, Dallas, and Salt Lake City, all the same. In short, some parents will not teach what their leftist counterparts want, and must subsequently be forced to comply.

This may come as a shock to many, but a child’s education is the duty of his or her parents — not the state — which acts simply as a subcontractor in the issue.

What children learn – either through curriculum or example – is best decided by those who brought them into this world. Our political institutions and/or governments should merely reflect those decisions.

The fact that parents disagree on this bathroom issue only serves to stress the point that these questions are best addressed at the local level, rather than by technocratic central planners in a faceless bureaucracy. (For more from the author of “Another Obamanation Undone: Trump and Sessions Take the Federal Government out of Your Kids’ Bathroom” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Project Veritas Undercover Audio Exposes CNN Bias

/0 Comments/in , /by

Now that the presidential election is over, James O’Keefe, the undercover videographer of Project Veritas, is turning his sights on the media. Thursday, he released 119 hours of audio secretly taped inside CNN’s headquarters. He will be releasing another 100 hours soon. A disgruntled CNN employee made the recordings in 2009. Employees — including management — are heard freely expressing their biases and how they affect news coverage.

A small portion of the 119 hours of material has been transcribed already. Nicki Robertson, a CNN assignment desk editor, says, “Fox News, I think Fox News is unbearable. It’s horrible.” She goes on in a disdainful voice, “It’s so American.”

Richard T. Griffiths, vice president and senior editorial director at CNN, is heard explaining that the fundamental role of a journalist is in part to “aid the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” He adds, “It’s actually one of the things I can be most proud of as a journalist.”

In another clip, Miss X — who apparently is the undercover journalist — can be heard questioning why an outdated poll was being used, regarding Americans’ opinions of (as yet unconfirmed) Supreme Court appointee Sonia Sotomayor. Arthur Brice answers her: “I don’t think we stand to change how people think of her.”

Arthur Brice is the executive editor of CNN. Joe Sterling was the news desk editor for CNN’s The Wire at the time. Sterling is also heard saying in regards to whether global warming is caused by man, “There’s no debate.” He compares it to “born-agains’” absolute belief in creationism and says, “I admit, I’m a little biased. The only spin I think is going on is by Republicans.”

The Scandal is Going to Get Bigger

O’Keefe is utilizing crowdsourcing, asking for help transcribing the audio since he lacks the manpower. He has been criticized in the past for selectively releasing only parts of his undercover videos, so the release of raw material should dispel those accusations. His organization compares its new strategy to that of Wikileaks.

“The media’s relationship with the establishment renders them incapable of challenging the normative order in our society, while the media systematically targets and shames any independent media organization or citizen which attempts to ferret out real information,” O’Keefe says. “So it’s time to turn their tactics and rules against them.”

While O’Keefe doesn’t think this will necessarily result in the demise of CNN, he told Gateway Pundit, “[E]very time we have previously released undercover audio/video someone does end up fired, someone does end up in jail.” He says he has operatives currently working at several media outlets. He is also offering $10,000 to people who can provide inside evidence of “corruption, malfeasance and wrongdoing” within the newsroom, and he promises to protect his sources’ identities.

The biased so-called mainstream media is already going on the defensive protecting one of their own primary outlets, claiming that most of the CNN employees caught recorded no longer work there. That is fake news. Most of them still work there and in fact at least one has been promoted.

(For more from the author of “Project Veritas Undercover Audio Exposes CNN Bias” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Bill Would Drag the Federal Government Into Disputes Over Pets

/0 Comments/in , /by

Congress has written some laudable policies into the Pet and Women Safety Act of 2017 (H.R.909) that are designed to protect domestic violence victims from “trauma caused by acts of violence or threats of violence against their pets.”

There is one provision of the bill, however, that takes a familiar step too far: It would create a federal crime to harass or intimidate any person’s pet in a way that causes “substantial emotional distress.”

Given the threats from cyber-attacks, interstate and international crime cartels, terrorist groups, drug trafficking, and the criminal aspects of immigration issues, the resource-constrained federal law enforcement community does not need to bear down on the distinctly local concern of crimes against Fido, too.

Make no mistake, we’re dog lovers. But the federal government has no business embroiling itself in such local conduct that is best addressed by the states.

The Pet and Women Safety Act of 2017 currently boasts 196 co-sponsors, and it is easy to see why. Individuals who commit domestic abuse (which is a federal crime) often engage in similar behaviors on their victims’ pets (which is a crime in many states).

There are reports describing how victims will stay in abusive relationships to safeguard their animals, and experts attribute that behavior to the fact that very few domestic violence shelters permit animal companions—one of the many policies that Congress now seeks to change through grant funding.

The most obvious trouble with the Pet and Women Safety Act, however, is the potentially broad criminal penalties that it seeks to extend.

It would extend these penalties by amending the interstate stalking statute (18 U.S.C. 2261(A)) to include any emotionally distressing intimidation of a “dog, cat, bird, rodent, fish, turtle, horse, or other animal that is kept for pleasure rather than for commercial purposes.”

It is also hard to see why this is necessary to effectuate the legislators’ broader goals expressed in this bill.

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump announced new federal criminal law enforcement priorities targeting more efficient investigation and prosecution of the kinds of activity that belong in the federal crime wheelhouse: international and interstate gangs, drug cartels, cybercriminals, and terrorists, for example.

While no one condones violence against any pet, common sense and principles of federalism in law enforcement suggest that the clear and compelling federal interests to pursue gangs, cartels, and the like do not as clearly apply to hunting down animal abusers.

That is not to say that animal abuse should go unpunished. In fact, it already is a crime in virtually every state, as one can quickly see from online resources such as the Animal Law Resource Center’s state law database.

In some places, depending on the manner of abuse, it can be a crime several times over. And harassing, injuring, or killing a pet is exactly the kind of crime that belongs within the purview of state and local police.

Congress has seized broad legislative power through the Commerce Clause in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution to regulate matters that were traditionally state and local concerns.

Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in United States v. Morrison (2000), however, that Congress’ interstate commerce power “‘must be considered in the light of our dual system of government.” It “may not be extended” to activities, like pet harassment or even killing pets, whose effects on interstate commerce “are so indirect and remote that to embrace them” through federal legislation “would effectually obliterate the distinction between what is national and what is local and create a completely centralized government.’”

In Morrison, the Court held that the Commerce Clause did not authorize Congress to provide federal civil remedies for domestic violence assaults under the Violence Against Women Act. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the majority that “under our federal system that remedy must be provided by the [states], and not by the United States.”

The same is true of stalking and harming pets.

This bill is clearly not the first time that Congress has carried a worthy goal too far and needlessly dragged federal criminal law enforcement down the proverbial rabbit hole.

Last year, for example, Congress dreamed up the “Flamethrowers? Really? Act” to criminalize flamethrowers in the same way that federal law treats machine guns.

Evidently, the bill’s supporters never stopped to think long enough to realize the obvious: that flamethrowers are rarely, if ever, used to commit crimes, and that whatever criminal conduct they might be used to perpetrate, such as murder or arson, are already punishable under multiple federal criminal laws as well as the criminal codes in every state.

They also failed to account for the fact that more people die annually from bees, vending machines, and champagne corks than flamethrowers. Fortunately for the farmers, roofers, and other workers who use these devices for lawful business purposes, that bill quickly went up in flames.

That is not always the case.

After a rash of carjackings and particularly heinous related crimes—like the carjacking and murder of Pamela Basu in Baltimore in 1992—Congress responded to the national media outcry by quickly passing a federal carjacking law. The point then, as it is now in the Violence Against Pets and Women Act, was to protect the victims.

But years later, federal prosecutors rarely focused on such crimes. Enforcement was left largely to the states, just as it was before the 1992 tragedy.

Edwin Meese III argued in 1998, federalizing crimes like carjacking “invites selective prosecution, and disparate enforcement, and punishment. Federal officials determine, usually on the basis of political factors, whether they will get involved in a case.”

The same would be true of pet abuse. “So really what we need in this country,” Meese continued, “is a much better and clearer balance and distribution of responsibility between federal and local law enforcement. What we really need are some statesmen who are willing to stand up and say, ‘Let’s not make a federal case out of this.’”

Indeed, not every problem needs a federal solution. Congress should not make a federal case out of intimidating or harassing pets. (For more from the author of “This Bill Would Drag the Federal Government Into Disputes Over Pets” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Radical DNC Chair Favorite Keith Ellison Calls for Trump Impeachment Investigations

/0 Comments/in , /by

Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. (F, 26%), the front-runner to be the next Democratic National Committee chairman (and who, in December, had been set to appear at a radical Islamist conference), has called for impeachment “investigations” into President Donald Trump.

During Wednesday’s CNN debate with seven other candidates for the DNC chairmanship, Ellison pushed the idea that Trump should be on the chopping block just one month into his presidency.

“I think that Donald Trump has already done a number of things which legitimately raise the question of impeachment,” Ellison said, agreeing with others on the stage on the issue.

“We need to begin investigations not to go after Donald Trump but protect the presidency of the United States to make sure nobody can monetize the presidency and make profit off it for his own game,” said the Minnesota congressman.

Such bombastic commentary is not unusual for Rep. Ellison, who used to write under the byline “Keith X Ellison” (in homage to Malcolm X). He once compared George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler and suspected 9/11 was a false-flag inside job.

In December, Ellison pulled out of a radical Islamic conference in Chicago. He was set to share a stage with a number of unmistakably extremist individuals, including an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, multiple supporters of terrorist organizations, and an advocate for suicide bombings against Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.

Keith Ellison has previously met with prominent Hamas fundraisers, has called for the U.S. to cut off funding to Israel, and has keynoted the annual Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) conference. CAIR has had many suspicious ties with Hamas through the years.

On Saturday, 447 DNC members will gather in Atlanta to vote for the next party chair. Keith Ellison, may soon bring his radicalism with him as the public face of the DNC. Ellison’s biggest challenge in the DNC race is Tom Perez, former labor secretary under President Obama. (For more from the author of “Radical DNC Chair Favorite Keith Ellison Calls for Trump Impeachment Investigations” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

RED ALERT: Fascist Google Begins PURGE of Pro-Trump Websites as Prelude to Massive False Flag or Coup Attempt

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In a Communist China-style crackdown on free speech, Google has launched a PURGE to take down sites supportive of President Trump.

Yesterday, the entire NaturalNews.com website was delisted by Google, removing 140,000+ pages of content covering disease prevention, nutritional therapies, scientific investigations into environmental contamination, dangers of prescription medications and more. The internet is in an uproar over the obvious assault on free speech, with Natural News coverage of the Google censorship going wildly viral on social media, radio interviews and article coverage across the independent media.

Natural News was targeted, we believe, because we not only publicly predicted President Trump’s victory well before it happened, we also openly support Trump’s policies to protect America, drain the swamp and restore the Republic. (We are also the publisher of Trump.news.)

Now, Natural News has learned that the take down of NaturalNews.com is just the opening salvo of a massive free speech purge from Google to silence pro-Trump voices across the ‘net. After my announcement yesterday that described Google’s outrageous censorship of Natural News, I have been contacted by several other site owners who say they were also taken offline at about the same time.

The following graphic from IsMyWebsitePenalized.com shows that 470 websites have been penalized or banned by Google in the last month:

Is-My-Site-Penalized-Natural-News-600

No doubt many of those 470 sites deserved to be taken down due to malicious code or malware infections, but as the following screen shot from the Google Search Console reveals, there are no security issues affecting the Natural News website:

Natural-News-No-Security-Issues-Google-600

Instead, Natural News has been banned via a “human decision” that has no justification whatsoever and was issued without warning or recourse. In effect, somebody at Google flat out decided they didn’t like Natural News content, and they flipped a switch to “memory hole” the entire website in an instant, much like detonating high explosives to take down building 7, come to think of it.

This is on top of the economic sabotage committed against InfoWars on Tuesday, where the Google-influenced advertising company AdRoll cut off InfoWars’ ads without warning, costing InfoWars a reported $3 million in annual revenues.

Two days before that, Breitbart News was targeted with a malicious take down of Milo Yiannopoulos, thanks to video leaks coordinated by George Soros-linked front groups.

A prelude to a massive false flag or coup attempt against President Trump?

Why would Google go to such great lengths to engage in outright censorship and economic sabotage against two of the largest independent media publishers in the world, in back-to-back censorship action that almost screams “urgency!”?

The answer is obvious. Something big is about to be initiated against Trump, and the largest pro-Trump voices are being systematically silenced, one by one, to make sure no independent media can counter the official narrative that will be pushed by the fake news media (CNN, WashPo, NYT, etc.)

This is fascism on display as corporations are now carrying out the bidding of the deep state that’s planning to cause mass mayhem or death in order to remove Trump from power before he can go public with the truth about the pedophilia links to prominent D.C. politicians.

Click here for my Health Ranger Report podcast that explains more, or watch below:

(For more from the author of “RED ALERT: Fascist Google Begins PURGE of Pro-Trump Websites as Prelude to Massive False Flag or Coup Attempt” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.