Fox News Anchor Comes out of Closet as ‘Gay’

After years of broadcasting on the most popular cable-news channel in the nation, Shepard Smith of the Fox News Channel is now reportedly revealing that he is homosexual, joining the likes of other “gay” journalists who have come out of the closet, including Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon of CNN as well as Rachel Maddow of MSNBC.

In an interview with the Huffington Post, Smith went public with his homosexuality and defended former network CEO Roger Ailes’ treatment of him, saying Ailes never made homophobic remarks in his presence.

“He treated me with respect, just respect,” Smith said. “I wasn’t new in the business when I came here – I’d been doing reporting for 12 years – but I wasn’t old in it either, and he gave me every opportunity in the world and he never asked anything of me but that we get it right, try to get it right every day. It was a very warm and loving and comfortable place.”

Ailes himself stepped down from Fox News in July in the wake of sexual harassment claims against him by former host Gretchen Carlson.

Smith defended Ailes from claims the news boss had stopped him from coming out publicly during his tenure at Fox. (Read more from “Fox News Anchor Comes out of Closet as ‘Gay'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New FBI Docs: FBI Official ‘Pressured’ to Change Classification of Hillary’s Email

Documents released by the FBI Monday morning reveal that in 2015 Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy, a top aide to Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State, asked an FBI senior official to mark one of Clinton’s emails as unclassified before it was made public. In exchange, Kennedy allegedly offered a “quid pro quo” — agreeing to a long-standing FBI request for more agents at foreign posts.

The documents are the fourth set released by the FBI in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Congress. They contain interview summaries from the agency’s investigation of Democratic presidential nominee Clinton and her handling of classified information on a private email server.

Patrick Kennedy Barters With FBI Over Email Classification

According to one interview summary released by the FBI Monday morning, a senior FBI official stated that the State Department requested a classification review of five of Clinton’s emails sent on her private server. The emails were set to be released to the public in response to a FOIA request.

The official submitted one of the emails, marked classified, to the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division (CTD), which declined to change the classification since “the email was classified properly and accurately.”

But the official was contacted again, this time by the International Operations Division of the FBI, which “pressured” him to change the email’s classification, even though the CTD had already said no. He also claims that Kennedy contacted him personally, asking him to change the email’s classification. In exchange for marking the email unclassified, Kennedy said the State Department “would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more Agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.”

Kennedy later presided over an agency-wide meeting to discuss the classification review of Clinton’s emails that would be released in response to the FOIA request. The interview summary reports that “during the conversation, a participant specifically asked whether any of the emails in question were classified. Making eye contact with [the senior FBI official, name redacted], KENNEDY remarked, ‘Well, we’ll see.’”

The interview summary says that Kennedy continued to pressure the FBI to change the email’s classification, but to no avail. The official claims that shortly after a conversation between Kennedy and the Assistant Director of the CTD, who refused once more to change the classification, Clinton appeared before the press “to deny having sent classified emails on her private email server.”

According to the interview summary, the senior FBI official “believes STATE has an agenda which involves minimizing the classified nature of the CLINTON emails in order to protect STATE interests and those of CLINTON.”

Congress and the FBI Respond to ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Allegations

Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Devin Nunes (R-CA), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a joint statement calling Kennedy’s actions “extremely disturbing.” “Those who receive classified intelligence should not barter in it — that is reckless behavior with our nation’s secrets.” Chaffetz and Nunes also compiled a summary of key findings from the FBI documents.

In their joint statement, Chaffetz and Nunes call for Kennedy’s removal.

Someone who would try to get classified markings doctored should not continue serving in the State Department or retain access to classified information. Therefore, President Obama and Secretary Kerry should immediately remove Under Secretary Kennedy pending full investigation.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said that “a senior State Department official’s attempt to pressure the FBI to hide the extent of this mishandling bears all the signs of a cover-up.” Ryan criticized Clinton’s “complete disregard for properly handling classified information” evidenced in the documents, promising that the House’s “aggressive oversight work” would continue.

In a statement, the FBI claimed there “was never a quid pro quo:”

Prior to the initiation of the FBI’s investigation of former Secretary Clinton’s personal email server, the FBI was asked to review and make classification determinations on FBI emails and information which were being produced by the State Department pursuant to FOIA. The FBI determined that one such email was classified at the Secret level. A senior State Department official requested the FBI re-review that email to determine whether it was in fact classified or whether it might be protected from release under a different FOIA exemption. A now-retired FBI official, who was not part of the subsequent Clinton investigation, told the State Department official that they would look into the matter. Having been previously unsuccessful in attempts to speak with the senior State official, during the same conversation, the FBI official asked the State Department official if they would address a pending, unaddressed FBI request for space for additional FBI employees assigned abroad. Following the call, the FBI official consulted with a senior FBI executive responsible for determining the classification of the material and determined the email was in fact appropriately classified at the Secret level. The FBI official subsequently told the senior State official that the email was appropriately classified at the Secret level and that the FBI would not change the classification of the email. The classification of the email was not changed, and it remains classified today. Although there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review.

FOIA Requests Overseen by ‘Shadow Government’

The 100-page FBI document release includes interview summaries from people who claim that Clinton was “unwilling to abide by rules” regarding the security of electronic equipment containing sensitive and classified information.

Another interview summary states that FOIA requests regarding Clinton were screened by a “shadow government” — a “powerful group of very high-ranking STATE officials.”

In an off-record interview with The Weekly Standard prior to the release of the interview summaries, intelligence and congressional officials said that the new revelations would “bolster Donald Trump’s criticism of corruption at Clinton’s State Department, the FBI and Washington, D.C., with just more than three weeks until the 2016 presidential election.”

Trump is harshly critical of Clinton’s actions as secretary of state, asserting during the second presidential debate that she would be in jail if he were president.

The FBI’s investigation of Clinton and her email practices ended in July 2016 when FBI Director James Comey recommended that no charges be brought against the former secretary of state — a decision condemned by Republicans. (For more from the author of “New FBI Docs: FBI Official ‘Pressured’ to Change Classification of Hillary’s Email” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Wikileaks’ Assange Loses Internet in Midst of Podesta Email Dump, Blames a ‘State Party’

Wikileaks claims its founder, Julian Assange, has lost Internet service thanks to “a state party.”

No updates had been provided by the controversial group’s Twitter account at the time of this writing, and Russia-owned publication RT noted that Wikileaks’ claim is “unverified.” Wikileaks has been releasing e-mails damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for months, though the releases have been increasing in recent weeks. The latest e-mails show, among many other things, that Clinton’s senior advisers wanted to undermine and subvert the U.S. Catholic Church, that Clinton thought Wall Street received too much blame after the 2008 financial crash and that the Democratic nominee holds different positions privately than those she claims to voters.

Clinton’s campaign has also been show colluding with various high-ranking public officials at the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. State Department in regards to her own email scandal.

A release by Wikileaks over the summer led to the resignation of former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), after it was shown that she had colluded with the Clinton campaign against the insurgent candidacy of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Wasserman-Schultz’s replacement, former CNN commentator Donna Brazile, was caught in a more recent release allegedly providing a question to Clinton in advance of a debate against Sanders. Brazile has denied the accusation.

Assange has been living at the Ecuadorian embassy for four years to avoid extradition on a rape charge in Sweden that he claims is false and is an effort by the U.S. to extradite him on charges related to his years of leaking government documents and emails.

Clinton surrogates have for the most part ignored the most recent e-mail controversy, claiming the leaks’ validity is questionable because Wikileaks may be working with the Russian government to interfere with the U.S. presidential election. (For more from the author of “Wikileaks’ Assange Loses Internet in Midst of Podesta Email Dump, Blames a ‘State Party'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

In 3 Years, His Insurance Premiums Double as Options Decline Under Obamacare

For the past 15 years, Warren Jones has had the same health insurance plan with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City.

But over the years, Jones, of Kansas City, Missouri, has watched the coverage offered in his policy “erode” over time.

First, the company got rid of the dental and vision coverage he had.

Then, Jones’ deductible increased—to $2,500—for his plan alone.

But perhaps the most significant change for Jones, a veterinarian, has been the rising cost of his monthly premiums.

In 2014, the year Obamacare took effect, Jones paid $318 in monthly premiums. In 2015, the price went up to $394 per month, then to $491 for 2016.

For 2017, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas estimates that Jones will pay $716 each month for his premiums—a 45.8 percent increase—according to a letter the insurer sent him.

“You can’t keep doing this because people’s wages don’t increase by that amount,” Jones told The Daily Signal. “Nobody’s wages are increasing, so it’s taking a bigger chunk of the budget.”

“That’s the scariest part,” he continued. “It takes a bigger chunk of the budget, and there’s no relief in sight.”

Like millions of other Americans nationwide, Jones, 55, doesn’t buy his insurance on Obamacare’s state and federal exchanges.

And even if he did, he wouldn’t qualify for the subsidies that lessened the cost of health insurance for 7.3 million Americans who received the tax credits last year, according to regulatory filings.

Instead, the veterinarian falls into an overlooked subset of consumers who pay full price for their health insurance in a time of skyrocketing premiums and deductibles.

They don’t qualify for the tax credits offered under the health care law, and they don’t receive their coverage from employers, since many are self-employed.

“I have seen so many people, self-employed people, many started their own little business and make whatever they do, they have a small business, and they buy their individual policy or buy for their family, and what are their options?” said Beverly Gossage, a broker who has worked in the Kansas City area for 14 years.

“Do they no longer be self-employed? Maneuver taxes to make less than the income threshold to get subsidies?” Gossage continued. “They don’t want to do that, but they’re being pushed to do that. I get this question every day—‘What am I supposed to do?’”

Gossage ran as a Republican for Kansas insurance commissioner in 2014.

Hooked

Over the past few months, insurers have been submitting rates to state regulators for the 2017 benefit year.

In most states, companies are requesting double-digit rate hikes for those selecting plans sold in the individual market both on and off the Obamacare exchanges.

Experts say insurers are playing catch-up after setting rates too low in the early years of the health care law and enrolling a sicker—and costlier—population than anticipated.

“A lot of insurers didn’t understand that the market was going to be skewed in terms of income and health status as severely as it was,” Ed Haislmaier, a senior research fellow in health policy studies at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “Generally, the pool was much worse than anybody expected because of things the administration did that made it worse.”

In response to questions about the growing cost of health insurance for consumers who buy plans sold in the individual market, the Obama administration has said that many Americans are shielded from premium hikes since they buy coverage on the exchanges and receive a subsidy from the government.

Many of the exchange enrollees who qualify for a subsidy may end up paying as little as $75 per month in premiums, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell said earlier this month.

But that’s not the case for people like Jones and the 10 million others paying full price for their coverage.

“The traditional individual market, which consisted largely of middle-class people who are self-employed, those people are hooked onto this,” Haislmaier said. “It’s kind of a situation where you have an anchor that’s too big, and it’s pulling the boat under.”

Jones is considering selecting a new health insurance plan altogether, but because Missouri hasn’t yet approved rates for 2017, he’s unsure if he’ll even be able to find a cheaper alternative.

“The big thing is the unknown still,” Jones said. “But we know we’re getting inundated with increases in premiums.”

The Missouri man said he is familiar with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, and switching to another carrier may leave him with even less coverage.

“You get a comfort level, and at least you know what you’re getting,” Jones said. “If I had to change insurance, you miss the changes that occur. You don’t know what you’re signing up for.”

‘50-50’

While Missouri residents like Jones are confronting a spike in rates, consumers across the state’s western border also are facing fewer insurers to choose from.

Among the insurers that will continue to sell coverage in Kansas, the number of plans they’re offering both on and off the Obamacare exchange is decreasing.

Many insurers, large and small, have decided to leave the exchanges after losing millions of dollars last year; they either withdrew from states altogether or decreased the number of policies offered.

According to an August study from the Kaiser Family Foundation, six in 10 counties may have a maximum of two insurers on the exchanges next year. Additionally, five states will have one insurer selling coverage on an exchange.

In Kansas, 17 carriers sold policies in the state before Obamacare’s implementation, Gossage said.

This year, the majority of consumers in Kansas will have only two insurers to choose from on the exchange, according to the Kansas Department of Insurance.

Those buying plans sold in the individual market off the exchange have five insurers, according to the state.

It’s a similar landscape in Missouri, where four insurance companies are selling coverage on the exchange, according to regulatory filings.

Off the exchange, consumers can choose from at least seven different companies.

Gossage said that over the last few years, she has seen insurers significantly lessen the number of policies they’re offering.

“What we did is we went from a very vibrant, competitive marketplace with extremely low rates and lots of different plans to pick from to over-overregulation with the type of plan you have and to mandates placed on insurance companies which led to high premiums and fewer carriers in the marketplace,” Gossage said.

While much of the focus has been on the declining number of choices for consumers selecting coverage on Obamacare’s exchanges, those with plans sold in the individual market off the exchanges are hurting, too.

Rochelle Bird, who is self-employed and lives in Overland Park, Kansas, has had a policy through Coventry, a subsidiary of Aetna, for two years.

In that time, her monthly premiums have risen from $335 to $487, and her deductible went from $1,200 to $6,200.

Late last month, Bird received a letter from Coventry notifying her that her policy will cease to exist at the end of the year.

“We may still offer coverage in your area, but most of the options available today will not be available for 2017,” the letter stated.

Bird said she wasn’t surprised to learn her policy was being canceled. Rather, she expected it.

“I know that this act has created chaos,” she said of Obamacare, formally the Affordable Care Act. “When I get a thing [in the mail] saying that my rate has changed, I know it’s 50-50 when I open it. It’s either a letter saying this is what you’re going to pay starting Jan. 1, or we’re no longer offering that plan anymore. It wasn’t a total shock to me.”

Bird said she has started researching other policies with different insurance companies, but because officials in Kansas only recently finalized rates, she hasn’t yet made a final decision on her coverage for next year.

She has, however, set expectations for the terms of her next plan.

“I am now faced with the fact that unless something changes, there will be one health care provider presumably with two different health plans that I will have a choice of [while] living in the state of Kansas,” Bird said. “That’s absurd. How is that helpful?”

“I’m expecting (a) I’ll pay more, (b) I’ll have less, and (c) I may or may not have the same doctors,” she said. “Those are always the moving parts.”

Backward

Bird herself didn’t purchase her plan on the Obamacare exchange, and she wouldn’t qualify for a subsidy if she did.

While going without insurance and paying the fine—$695 per adult or 2.5 percent of household income for 2016—isn’t an option for her, it is for other Kansas and Missouri residents.

Jessica Huayaban of Olathe, Kansas, and her husband, Joel, each purchased plans in the individual market off the exchange in 2014.

Jessica, 36, bought a plan through Humana, and her husband, 35, through Coventry.

The couple, who own a painting and remodeling company, previously were uninsured and saving money each month to pay for a costly knee surgery Joe needed.

Jessica and Joel had insurance before, but when the recession hit in 2009, coverage was too expensive so they decided to go without.

“It was way cheaper to cash pay,” she said of the years they needed medical services but didn’t have insurance.

In 2014, when Obamacare was implemented, the couple purchased their own coverage, but only because the law required it.

“I wasn’t getting [insurance] for even the coverage part,” Jessica told The Daily Signal. “I was getting it for the compliance.”

Over the past two years, the monthly premiums Jessica pays for her Humana plan have gone up minimally, but her plan has a high deductible.

Then, last month, the 36-year-old mother received a letter from her insurer notifying her they’re canceling her policy.

“This is just something that continues to happen, and I don’t have a choice in it,” Jessica said.

She said she isn’t sure whether she and her husband will purchase plans on Obamacare’s exchange when the open enrollment period opens in November.

And although she may qualify for a subsidy, the young mother fears she’ll be stuck with an expensive tax bill when she files with the IRS for 2017, since her income—she is self-employed—fluctuates drastically from month to month.

“All of it is so backward,” she said of the health insurance system. (For more from the author of “In 3 Years, His Insurance Premiums Double as Options Decline Under Obamacare” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Find out What Immigration Growth Looks Like in Your State

There are more immigrants living in the United States than ever before. The foreign-born are more likely to come from China and India—often equipped with skills and a higher education—than Mexico.

Many of the immigrants who live here have called the U.S. home for a while—an average of nearly 21 years—and their economic and social progress improves over time.

Immigrants continue to flock to places where there are others like them. California has nearly one-fourth of the nation’s immigrants living there, while New York and Texas remain popular places for non-natives to call home.

But states outside of traditional immigrant settlements—like Georgia, North Carolina, Minnesota, Colorado, Washington, and Nevada—have also seen significant increases in their foreign-born populations.

161014_immigration_table-1_v2

This is the profile of the nearly 43 million immigrants residing in the U.S. today, as told from 2014 and 2015 Census Bureau data presented by the Center for Immigration Studies in a recent report.

The study, which includes figures for both legal and illegal immigrants, comes at a time when the question of what to do about immigration is a defining political issue. It’s a debate that promises to continue into a future where the foreign-born occupy a larger and larger percentage of many states’ populations, and the makeup of the nation’s immigrants is proving to reflect the rich-poor divide in America, from wealthy technology innovators, to poor agricultural workers.

“We are kind of heading into uncharted territory when it comes to immigration,” said Steven A. Camarota, the author of the report who is the director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for less immigration.

“From a policy perspective, I would expect efforts to further increase the level of immigrants to the U.S. of all kinds, including family-based and skill-based. I think you will see constituencies trying to satisfy sectors as varied as the hotel and restaurant industries, Silicon Valley, and ethnic advocacy groups that are more about family immigration,” Camarota told The Daily Signal in an interview.

161014_immigration_table-2_v2

The portrait of U.S. immigrants presented in the study will likely be interpreted depending on how an individual values immigration.

Just take education, a measurable where the picture of immigrants is nuanced.

In 2014, 30 percent of immigrants lacked a high school diploma or General Educational Development (GED) certificate, compared to 10 percent of their native-born counterparts.

Yet, that same year, 29 percent of the 36.7 million immigrants ages 25 and older had a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to 30 percent of native-born adults.

Interestingly, the share of college-educated immigrants is higher—44 percent—among those who entered the country since 2010. That trend is not an accident, experts say.

India was the leading country of origin for new immigrants in 2014, with 147,500 arriving to the U.S. out of 1.3 million total foreign-born individuals who moved to America that year.

About 40 percent of Indian immigrants hold a graduate degree. Fewer than 12 percent of native-born Americans do.

China had the second-largest amount of new entrants to the U.S., with 131,800. And though Mexico ranked third on this list in 2014—130,000 came from there that year—the net number of Mexican immigrants living in the U.S. has not increased since 2010, and even illegal immigration by Mexicans has decreased drastically since the recession.

Illegal immigration is increasingly coming from Central America, where women and children fleeing violence and poverty in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras seek asylum in the U.S.

“Since the recession, the number of Mexican immigrants coming to the U.S. has not grown—that’s an under-told story in the data here,” said Randy Capps, the director of research for U.S. programs at the Migration Policy Institute, which is nonpartisan.

“Contrast that with the rapid growth in the number of Chinese and Indian immigrants—which in total is still a quarter of the number of U.S. residents from Mexico. The numbers of Chinese and Indians are the biggest source of growth now and going forward. People who come from those two countries have increasingly strong economic ties to the U.S., have strong middle-class backgrounds with the ability to get more education as needed, and have more resources and relatives already in the U.S. That’s the future of immigration in America.”

Despite these positive trends, Camarota is quick to point to other indicators that he argues show costs to immigration.

Once they come here, immigrants are more likely to not have health insurance coverage than the native-born. In 2014, 27 percent of the foreign-born were uninsured, compared to 9 percent of natives.

Also that year, 27.1 percent of immigrants and their U.S.-born children under 18 were on Medicaid, compared to 17.9 percent of natives and their children.

More immigrants were in poverty in 2014 (18.5 percent of them), in contrast to 13.5 percent of natives.

While the foreign-born and natives make equal use of cash assistance programs, more immigrant households use food assistance programs.

Most concerning to Camarota, he says, is a downward trend in the number of native-born young adults without a college degree who are not working, a marker that he considers related to competition with immigrants for low-wage jobs.

In 2000, 66 percent of natives 18 to 29 years old with only a high school education were employed. That compares to 53 percent of such U.S.-born young people who were working in 2015.

“This is a point that we should be giving a lot of thought: the drastic deterioration in work among native-born young people,” Camarota said. “And if you don’t work when you are 18, the chance you will work at 27 is a whole lot less. This shows the argument that we have a shortage of workers and need to bring people to the U.S. to be nannies, maids, and busboys is absurd.”

Capps acknowledges Camarota’s concerns over less educated young people not working, but he argues there are many factors that contribute to that. He points to the data showing that gaps are closing between immigrants and natives in skills, education, and wages, and that the foreign-born improve on those indicators the longer they reside in the U.S.

All together, immigrants and natives have virtually identical rates of employment and labor force participation, according to the Center for Immigration Studies report.

“On the legal immigration side, it’s just the reality that we still have a very generous system, with 1 million coming to the U.S. every year,” Capps said. “It’s correct to note there are some costs to that. There are always costs associated to a group as big as 1 million people coming here, with job competition and public benefit use being some of them. But these are relatively small costs compared to the broader economic benefits of so many people immigrating here, many of them now coming with high skills.” (For more from the author of “Find out What Immigration Growth Looks Like in Your State” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

18 Reasons (So Far) Leaked Podesta Emails Reveal Dishonest Side of Clinton, Her Campaign and Media Collusion

Julian Assange, founder and owner of WikiLeaks, has released, so far, over 5,000 (of a promised 50,000) emails hacked from Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta, who was also the former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton. Most are incoming emails to Podesta’s account, and contain everything from campaign planning emails to spammy emails from other political campaigns.

While Clinton has neither confirmed nor denied the authenticity of the hacked emails, during Sunday’s presidential debate she clarified some comments reportedly made by her in one of the emails. Podesta has said there could have been some changes made to the emails, but has not identified any.

The Clinton campaign and Podesta claim Russia is behind the emails being hacked from Hillary’s inner circle and the Democrat National Committee, but since Donald Trump has also talked tough in regards to U.S.-Russian relations, some are skeptical that Putin is behind the hacking. As for Assange’s motives, while he says he does not like either Clinton or Trump, he has said he is a big supporter of libertarian Republicans Ron Paul and his son Rand Paul, and believes the libertarian wing of the GOP is the “only hope” for real reform.

Early voting has already started in places around the country, but some of the emails are extremely damaging and may influence undecided voters. The following represent some of the worst emails in the first 5,000. Imagine ten times this many.

1. Clinton “Often” Says False Things

Brett Budowsky, a public affairs consultant with an extensive background in top levels of government, sent an email to Podesta expressing his concern over Clinton telling lies about Bernie Sanders. “Hillary should stop attacking Bernie, especially when she says things that are untrue, which candidly she often does. I am one of the people with credibility to suggest Bernie people support her in November, and she and Benenson and others have no idea of the damage she does to herself with these attacks, which she does not gain by making.”

He went on just as candidly, “Right now I am petrified that Hillary is almost totally dependent on Republicans nominating Trump. … she has huge endemic political weaknesses that she would be wise to rectify… even a clown like Ted Cruz would be an even money bet to beat and this scares the hell of out me. …”

2. Clinton Hates “Everyday Americans”

In an email dated April 19, 2015, Podesta wrote to Clinton’s Director of Communications, Jennifer Palmieri, “I know she has begun to hate everyday Americans, but I think we should use it once the first time she says I’m running for president because you and everyday Americans need a champion.” He convinces Palmieri to use the phrase “everyday Americans” in a speech Clinton is about to give in Iowa.

3. Clinton Foundation COO Almost Driven to Suicide Dealing With Bill, Chelsea Clinton

Doug Band, a former aide to the Clintons, emailed Podesta in 2011 expressing his alarm that the COO of the Clinton Foundation was about to commit suicide, in part due to Bill Clinton and Chelsea: “She called me to tell me the stress of all of this office crap with wjc and cvc as well as that of her family had driven her to the edge and she couldn’t take it anymore. I spent a while on the phone with her preventing her from doing that, as I have a few times in the past few months, and was able to reach roger and her shrink.”

Band also wrote about Chelsea, “She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she’s doing because she, as she has said, hasn’t found her way and has a lack of focus in her life. I realize she will be off of this soon but if it doesn’t come soon enough. …”

4. Collusion With ABC’s George Stephanopolous to Ambush ‘Clinton Cash’ Author Peter Schweizer

Clinton staffers congratulated themselves over helping ABC’s George Stephanopolous, a longtime Clinton crony, prepare in advance so he could ambush “Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer during a TV interview. Jesse Ferguson wrote, “Great work everyone. this interview is perfect. he lands nothing and everything is refuted (mostly based on our work).” Three other staffers gloated about how enjoyable it was to watch.

5. New York Times Reporter Patrick Healy Runs His Thoughts on His Next Clinton/Trump Article Past Clinton Team First

In an email entitled “Hi Angel and Tina — running stuff by you re Clinton/Trump,” New York Times reporter Patrick Healy suggests some ideas for an election-related article to Angel Urena and Tina Flournoy, two Clinton campaign staffers. He provides the two with a lot of helpful information he’s heard from the Clinton campaign, including what Bill Clinton recommends. “President Clinton, like others, thinks that Trump has his finger on the pulse of the electorate’s mood and that only a well-financed, concerted campaign portrayed him as dangerous and bigoted will win what both Clintons believe will be a close November election.”

6. Anti-Catholicism

John Halpin at the Center for American Progress sent an email to Podesta and Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, expressing his bewilderment how Catholics could be conservative, “It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith.” Palmieri agreed in response. “I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals.” Halperin wrote back, “Excellent point. They can throw around ‘Thomistic’ thought and ‘subsidiarity’ and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they’re talking about.”

7 Bill Clinton: Someone Making $110,000 Annually Would Struggle Financially

Staffer Josh Schwerin emailed his concern about a statement Bill Clinton made in New Hampshire, “WJC just told an anecdote about somebody making $110k per year with student loans as an example of someone who would struggle. Could see that being used to say he’s out of touch.” Staffer Tina Flournoy helpfully agreed, “Or it’s so bad that even if you make $110k you struggle. – imagine how it is for those making less.”

8. The AP is “Helpful”

Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress triumphantly emailed Podesta and Palmieri last summer, “Tide does seem to be shifting a bit on this, great work by the press shop. Cummings is helpful as is AP.” (“Cummings” may be a reference to Elijah Cummings, a member of the House Oversight Committee who has treated Clinton favorably.)

9. Saudi Arabia Providing Aid to ISIS

Podesta engaged in an email exchange over the Middle East with Clinton. Clinton emailed him a 9-point plan, which appears to have been written by her, although this not clear. It acknowledges the suspicion that Saudi Arabia is propping up ISIS: “While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”

10. Clinton’s Affiliated SuperPAC ‘Correct the Record’ Placed 132 Op-Eds, Killed Negative Stories

According to an email from Mary Pat Bonner to Podesta, the Clinton affiliated SuperPAC “Correct The Record” has placed 132 op-eds nationally and in strategic local markets. Since May 15, CTR has helped write and place 36 op-eds across the country in a number of publications including Politico, Times Union, Huffington Post, CNN, Washington Blade, and New Jersey’s Bergen Record.” Additionally, “Correct The Record staff members have conducted over 900 on-the-record and off-the-record media interviews” and “kill negative stories before they are even published.”

11. Clinton Campaign Aware Obama Campaign Committed Massive Voter Fraud in 2008

On May 14, 2015, Podesta sent an email indicating he was aware of voter fraud by the Obama campaign in Colorado during the 2008 presidential election, and was concerned the Sanders campaign might engage in it.

High importance. I met with Jim and Mike in Denver. They are both old friends of the Clintons and have lots of experience. Mike hosted our Boulder Road Show event. They are reliving the 08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters. They want to organize lawyers for caucus protection, election protection and to raise hard $. They are not just Colorado focused and have good contacts in the region.

12. Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches

Clinton has refused to release her private, paid speeches to Wall Street, but excerpts from some of them are in the leaked emails. In one, she discusses the necessity of having “both a public and a private position” on controversial political issues. She admits that her wealth leaves her “kind of far removed” from the middle class. In fact, she complains about how tough it is being wealthy in politics, “There is such a bias against people who have led successful and/or complicated lives.”

Clinton prefers to have Wall Street write its own financial regulations, “The people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry.” In a speech to a Brazilian bank, she expressed her desire for open borders: “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open borders, sometime in the future.”

13. CNBC’s John Harwood, a Republican Presidential Debate Moderator, Congratulated Podesta on Clinton Campaign Success

After Clinton won all five state primaries on March 15 last year — Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Illinois, and North Carolina — CNBC’s John Harwood, who moderated one of the Republican presidential debates, emailed Podesta: “Congrats – pretty strong.” Podesta chummily replied, “Yup. Feeling good.”

14. Staffers Brazenly Refer to the Democratic Base as “The Red Army”

While discussing support for a $15/minimum wage, Jake Sullivan writes, “John Podesta (and the Red Army) want to support $15!” Neera Tanden, with the left-wing public policy organization Center for American Progress, writes back to clarify that he’s essentially calling hardcore Democrats as communists, “And when you say Red Army, you mean the base of the Democratic party, right?”

15. Carelessly Discussing Sanctions Against Iran Over Unsecured Email

Sullivan sent an email on March 3, 2015 to Podesta, Huma Abedin and others, responding to a speech that Stuart Eizenstat, a former American diplomat, had sent him that he’d given to AIPAC, “Thanks Stu,” Sullivan wrote. “What would those sanctions look like? If Iran actually tried to break out at the end of the period, ostensibly we’d be talking about military action?” Stu helpfully responded, ” We need to keep the military option on the table, but it would be the additional sanctions in the new congressional bill, which would give the future President the right to impose them upon a finding of a violation. But it would als [sic] include current sanctions–SWIFT, CBI, etc.”

16. Racism

Someone with the email address [email protected] sent an email entitled “What’s the difference between a German and a shopping cart? A shopping cart has got a mind of its own,” to Podesta, a fellow professor of Podesta’s at Georgetown University named Charles Abernathy, several staffers at Politico and Huffington Post, and a staffer at Media Matters. The email contains statements like this:

The main reason behind successful immigration should be painfully obvious to even the most dimwitted of observers: Some groups of people are almost always highly successful given only half a chance (Jews*, Hindus/Sikhs and Chinese people, for example), while others (Muslims, blacks** and Roma***, for instance) fare badly almost irrespective of circumstances. The biggest group of humanity can be found somewhere between those two extremes — the perennial overachievers and the professional never-do-wells.

17. Wall Street Banker Included in Top Staffer Email Discussions

As I’ve written previously, it’s no secret that Clinton is the Wall Street candidate for president. Former Deputy Secretary of State Tom Nides, who is now vice-chairman at Wall Street bank Morgan Stanley, is included in several emails between Clinton’s top staffers, including at least one with his work email account. He responds to a few of them. Good thing the bank doesn’t care about his extracurricular political work!

18. Plot to Smear Bernie Sanders and His Supporters as Sexist

Clinton staffer Mandy Grunwald provided some helpful points last year on how to portray Bernie Sanders as sexist. “Bernie Sanders says he supports women’s rights, but has a pattern of expressing and tolerating extreme views on women.” She also lays out how his supporters allegedly harass women with profanity on the internet (too offensive to repeat here). (For more from the author of “18 Reasons (So Far) Leaked Podesta Emails Reveal Dishonest Side of Clinton, Her Campaign and Media Collusion” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Names Named: Real Reason Media Protect Hillary

The blizzard of WikiLeaks revelations of collusion between the “mainstream media” and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign – working hand-in-hand behind the scenes to destroy Donald Trump and return the Clintons to the White House – are highly disturbing, but not at all surprising. Here’s why.

Rush Limbaugh’s frequent characterization of the establishment press as “an extension of the Democratic Party” is neither a metaphor nor an exaggeration. It is literally true. As the Media Research Center has long documented, not only is there a virtual “revolving door” between Democratic Party administrations and the “mainstream media” – but to a great extent, the two institutions are made up of the same people!

Many Americans have suspected this, especially when seeing high-profile examples like George Stephanopoulos, the fiercely loyal Clinton partisan who served as White House communications director and senior policy for adviser for Bill Clinton, but who later magically morphed into a top “mainstream” journalist as chief anchor and chief political correspondent for ABC News, co-anchor of “Good Morning America,” host of ABC’s “Sunday Morning This Week” and regular substitute anchor for “ABC World News Tonight.” One of the thousands of just-leaked Clinton campaign emails strongly suggests Hillary’s campaign colluded with Stephanopoulos before his interview with “Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer last year (an interview for which Stephanopoulos was later criticized for not disclosing he’d personally donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation).

Even more egregious, another WikiLeaks email dump reveals that Donna Brazile, while at CNN, was literally Clinton’s mole – feeding her intel about Bernie Sanders attacks during the primary season, and reportedly tipping off Clinton as to questions that would be asked at upcoming town hall meetings. After Debbie Wasserman Schultz (thanks to revelations from an earlier WikiLeaks data-dump) was fired as chair of the Democratic National Committee for sabotaging Bernie Sanders’ primary run, she was replaced as DNC chair by Brazile. (Read more from “Names Named: Real Reason Media Protect Hillary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FISCAL SUICIDE: Is Obama Opening up the Federal Spending Floodgates to Get Hillary Elected?

During the last year of his reign of error, our beloved Nobel Peace Prize winner, Obama ran out of government accounting gimmicks to falsely proclaim Federal deficits have been falling. His legacy of debt accumulation will go down in history as the last dying gasps of a crumbling empire built upon Keynesian delusions, political corruption, and a Deep State establishment hellbent upon retaining power at the cost of global war and financial collapse.

The entirely fabricated government propaganda data point known as the Federal deficit skyrocketed by 34% in fiscal 2016 (Federal year is Oct. 1 to Sept. 30). The reported deficit in FY15 was a mere $438 billion. Obama and his brain dead minions had boasted about such a small deficit. The country has been in existence for 227 years and Obama had the balls to boast about “achieving” the 8th highest deficit in our history. Just for some context, the savior also led the country to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th highest deficits in the country’s history. Bumbling Bush achieved the 7th highest in the glorious year of 2008.

The $149 billion surge in the reported deficit to $587 billion is a national disgrace and happened during a year in which we supposedly aren’t waging any real wars. Even with artificially suppressed interest rates, interest on the national debt went up by $30 billion. The Obamacare abortion has caused healthcare spending to soar, blowing a hole in the Federal budget. Remember Obama bloviating about Obamacare not adding one dime to the national debt? He was right. It’s adding trillions of dimes to the national debt. But, at least every family in America has gotten that promised $2,500 savings in their annual premiums. Right?

Another reason for the surge in the reported deficit is the little accounting trick the Obama administration has been playing for years. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are insolvent zombie Federal Agencies. With the suspension of mark to market accounting in March 2009, Wall Street banks and these bloated pig agencies were free to fraudulently value the mortgages on their balance sheets.

Poof!!! Wall Street bank profits miraculously recovered. Fannie and Freddie began reporting tens of billions in fake profits. They then pretended to pay these fake accounting profits to the Treasury, thereby “reducing” the reported deficits. Last year Fannie and Freddie ran out of fake profits and are now losing money again. And the establishment wonders why the peasants are revolting. (Read more from “FISCAL SUICIDE: Is Obama Opening up the Federal Spending Floodgates to Get Hillary Elected?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Republican HQ Firebombed in North Carolina

Gov. Pat McCrory Sunday called the weekend firebombing of a North Carolina Republican headquarters “an attack on our democracy,” while one GOP official called it an act of “political terrorism.”

In a tweet, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump blamed “Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina.”

Hillsborough police said somebody threw a bottle of flammable liquid through the window of Orange County’s GOP headquarters, setting campaign signs, supplies and furniture ablaze before burning itself out.

A swastika and “Nazi Republicans get out of town or else” were spray painted on the side of an adjacent building. No damage estimates were available.

“The firebombing of a local political headquarters in Orange County is clearly an attack on our democracy,” McCrory said in a statement. “Violence has no place in our society – but especially in our elections. … I will use every resource as governor to assist local authorities in this investigation.” (Read more from “Republican HQ Firebombed in North Carolina” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WikiLeaks: Podesta Lamented That a Muslim, Not a White Man, Named as Killer in 2015 Massacre

Top Hillary Clinton aides were upset a Muslim man was publicly named as the shooter in a 2015 massacre that left 14 people dead, and a longtime Clinton confidant even expressed regret that the terrorist wasn’t a white man, according to purported emails released by WikiLeaks on Sunday.

The emails were part of a trove of messages stolen from the gmail account of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, who has had a long association with the Democratic presidential nominee and her husband, former President Bill Clinton. The email chain began on Dec. 2, when digital operative Matt Ortega forwarded a tweet from MSNBC host Christopher Hayes that named one of the shooters in the San Bernardino, Calif., attack as Sayeed Farook. Consultant Karen Finney forwarded the email to Podesta, commenting, “Damn.”

Podesta responded: “Better if a guy named Sayeed Farouk [sic] was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter.”

Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, gunned down 14 people and injured 22 in a terror attack during a holiday party at the Inland Regional Center on Dec. 2. The attackers pledged their allegiance to ISIS before dying in a shootout with police later in the day.

But Podesta’s written lament of the shooter’s ethnicity underscores a long-running aversion in the Clinton campaign – and many in the Democratic party at large – to associating terrorist acts with any aspect of the Islamic religion. (Read more from “WikiLeaks: Podesta Lamented That a Muslim, Not a White Man, Named as Killer in 2015 Massacre” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.