Dead People Voting in Colorado

/0 Comments/in , /by

Local officials in Colorado acknowledged “very serious” voter fraud after learning of votes cast in multiple elections under the named of recently-deceased residents.

A local media outlet uncovered the fraud by comparing voting history databases in the state with federal government death records. “Somebody was able to cast a vote that was not theirs to cast,” El Paso County Clerk and Recorder Chuck Broerman told CBS4 while discussing what he called a “very serious” pattern of people mailing in ballots on behalf of the dead.

It’s not clear how many fraudulent ballots have been submitted in recent years. CBS4 reported that it “found multiple cases” of dead people voting around the state, revelations that have provoked state criminal investigations.

“We do believe there were several instances of potential vote fraud that occurred,” said Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams. “It shows there is the potential for fraud.”

Colorado is a perennial battleground state in presidential battleground states. President Obama beat Republican nominee Mitt Romney by 51-46 in 2012. Clinton leads Trump by 2.5 points in the RealClearPolitics polling average, although there is wide variance in the three most recent surveys. One shows Trump leading by four, another shows them tied, and the third shows Clinton up nine points. (Read more from “Dead People Voting in Colorado” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Harbinger of Baal Appears in U.S. City!

/0 Comments/in , /by

Another harbinger has appeared in the land – and this one in New York City.

In the last days of ancient Israel, warnings, prophetic signs and harbingers appeared in the land, foreshadowing the judgment to come. The nation ignored these harbingers and headed to destruction.

In “The Harbinger,” the mystery is revealed that those same harbingers and warnings of national judgment have now appeared on American soil. But in the ancient case, Israel ignored the warnings and plunged even deeper into apostasy, immorality, ungodliness and brazen defiance of God. America is following the exact same template of judgment, the same course and the same progression.

But Israel’s defiance of God was linked to a specific entity – the god Baal. Baal was the god to whom they sacrificed their children, before whom they practiced sexual immorality and called good “evil” and evil “good.” Baal was the god in whose name Israel persecuted the prophets and the righteous of their day.

Baal was their anti-god, their substitute for the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the god of their apostasy and the god of their destruction. Baal was their devil god. In fact the name for satan, Beelzebul and Beelzebub, is derived from Baal – meaning “Baal of the flies” and “Baal of dung.” (Read more from “The Harbinger of Baal Appears in U.S. City!” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Former Bill Clinton Paramour Accepts Ringside Seat for Monday Night’s Presidential Debate

/0 Comments/in , /by

Whether Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump uses Monday night’s presidential debate to talk about the extramarital affairs of former President Bill Clinton remains uncertain in the days leading up to the Monday night debate.

However, the millions of viewers watching will be reminded of them, even if Trump never says a word.

Gennifer Flowers, with whom Bill Clinton had an affair he admitted to under oath, on Saturday tweeted that she will be accepting an invitation Trump issued her earlier in the day to have a front-row seat when Trump debates Democratic presidential nominee and former first lady Hillary Clinton.

“Hi Donald. You know I’m in your corner and will definitely be at the debate!,” read a tweet from what appears to be Flowers’s account.

The tweet came in the wake of a comment from Judy Stell, Flowers’s assistant, who told Buzzfeed that Flowers would attend.

“Ms. Flowers has agreed to join Donald at the debate,” she said.

Clinton, in fact, had started the ball rolling by inviting billionaire Mark Cuban to have a front-row seat for the debate. Cuban has relentlessly needled Trump throughout the general election campaign and derided Trump’s business success with a series of caustic interviews.

Cuban announced Thursday he has accepted the invitation.

Trump, a premier political counter-puncher trained in the art of one-upmanship by decades spent in the New York City corporate wars, responded on Saturday by mentioning Flowers.

In an October interview, Flowers spoke candidly about the past.

“You know, people criticize me for talking about her because I had an affair with her husband. And I don’t blame them for that,” she said.

But Hillary Clinton “never accepted her responsibility at being an enabler. She’s been an enabler that has encouraged him to go out and do whatever he does with women,” Flowers said.

“Women’s rights, ha”, she added. (For more from the author of “Former Bill Clinton Paramour Accepts Ringside Seat for Monday Night’s Presidential Debate” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Are Polls Underestimating Trump’s True Support?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The press in 1980 did their best to scupper Ronald Reagan. They said he was an “extremist” and that he would “would divide America along racial, religious, and regional lines”. They said Reagan was a “dangerous cowboy” with his finger on the nuclear button. They seethed, raged, insinuated.

The Republican establishment joined in the calumnies. The strain on party brotherhood was so bad that after the primaries, one-time Republican candidate John Anderson split from the party and ran as a NeverReagan.

It was thus unfashionable to admit liking Reagan, and so not a few kept their mouths shut.

Presidential polls might have reflected this Reagan shyness. In the month before the election, polls had Carter up an average 44% to Reagan’s 40%. Anderson hovered around 9%, which left about 7% of voters unaccounted for. Were some of these 7% shy Reagan voters?

The final averages right before the election gave Reagan the edge, 47% to Carter’s 44% and Anderson’s 8%. That left only 1% unaccounted for.

The final tallies gave Reagan 51% of the popular vote, Carter 41%, and Anderson 7%, with the remaining 1% spread over novelty candidates.

There is a huge discrepancy here. Polls showed Reagan with 4% less support than he actually had, and Carter with 3% more and Anderson 1% more. These errors could have been caused by Reagan supporters unwilling to tell pollsters their true preference, but they also could have been because of built-in biases of the polls themselves. These biases should not surprise given that many polls are conducted or commissioned by mainstream media outlets, whose sins and biases do not need recounting.

Shy Trump Voters?

At this writing most polls show Hillary nearly tied with Trump, yet there is a suspicion that, like in 1980, some voters are shy about admitting that they like Trump. If this is so, the polls exaggerate Hillary’s true support.

Is anybody who is for Trump coy? If so, how many secret supporters are there? Or are the polls biased?

It’s easy to imagine scenarios where a pollster queries a citizen who is reluctant to say he’s voting for Trump. The college professor or student called on campus, an employee polled at any company in San Francisco or Los Angeles, a canvasser knocking at the door at a certain address in Chappaqua, New York when the lady of the house is in residence, and so on.

Hillary said half of Trump’s supporters are a “basket of deplorable.” Many on the left agree with these harsh words; deviation from leftist ideology is not countenanced.

So rather than trigger a social justice warrior by announcing their Trump preference, some surely keep their mouths shut.

On the other hand, as the election nears and, for instance, the NeverTrump camp realize how horrible the alternative is, and adding in the common knowledge that Americans like a winner, liking Trump grows easier. The polls, as in 1980, are tightening. Even so, there is still a sense polls under-count Trump’s true base.

Shy Brexit Voters

Disentangling voter shyness from poll biases is not easy. Modern polls over emotionally contentious questions suggest shyness is not negligible. Journalist Michael Tracey reminds us that six weeks before the Brexit vote, which the media and majority of the establishment hysterically disfavored, “Remain” led by 4% with “Undecideds” at 14%. But the final tally was 52% for “Leave,” a huge discrepancy and 8-point swing.

In the Brexit case, poll bias is not a likely explanation because Brexit polls were not sampled in the complex way presidential polls are. The results of the Brexit polls were also simple, in the sense that the numbers released were close to the actual numbers received in the polling process. By these comments I mean that the numbers released to the public in presidential polls are not in their raw form; they have been manipulated by various statistical models (this article explains how).

Scientific Polls? Nah

Now, despite what you might have heard, there is no such thing as a “scientific poll.” Or, rather, all polls are equally scientific. But not all polls are equally good. That public poll numbers are actually the result of statistical models means there is plenty of opportunity for bias and error to creep in.

This is well illustrated by no less than the New York Times, which recently gave four polling groups the same raw data. If polling were a rigid science, the answers should have been the same. But they weren’t. Results ran from Hillary +3 to Trump +1, a 4-point swing, a discrepancy more than large enough to change the outcome of the election (especially considering details about the Electoral College which needn’t detain us here).

There is also the possibility that some biases are intentional, as in so-called push polls, or because the samples are finagled in a preferred direction. Unscrupulous pollsters know that simply showing a candidate is ahead causes some people to favor that candidate (Americans like a winner). And if that candidate is shown to be well ahead of her true support, others will be discouraged from voting (why bother?). But surely the mainstream media would never lie to us, right?

Whatever the polls show, there is no certain way to say anything about their performance until after the election. See you on the other side. (For more from the author of “Are Polls Underestimating Trump’s True Support?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here’s What Mark Levin Thinks of Ted Cruz Endorsing Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

Friday evening, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin commented on the big news of the day, Senator Ted Cruz’s endorsement of Donald Trump.

Levin read Cruz’s statement on the air along with the statement in response released by the Trump campaign.

Listen:

Levin offered a few comments, noting that he himself is voting for Donald Trump because he is the only candidate who can defeat the Democrat.

“I have no illusions about Donald Trump,” Levin said. “In many respects he’s a liberal, but he has some conservative positions. Some important conservative positions.”

Hilary Clinton, on the other hand, “she was Obama before Obama was Obama,” Levin remarked. “The only way to stop her, is with [Donald Trump].” (For more from the author of “Here’s What Mark Levin Thinks of Ted Cruz Endorsing Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

House Conservatives Resort to Spending Plan B to Avoid Government Shutdown

/0 Comments/in , /by

When Congress returns to Capitol Hill on Monday to hammer out a stopgap spending measure, House conservatives plan to introduce a spending safety valve that would eliminate the possibility of a government shutdown.

Congress has struggled for months to reach a spending agreement.

As the end of the fiscal year approaches and government’s spending authority expires Oct. 1, lawmakers have opted to pass a temporary funding extension. Known as a continuing resolution, that measure will extend spending authority into December and requires Congress to revisit the issue shortly before Christmas.

Now, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., a founding member of the caucus, say they will introduce an amendment to that short-term spending bill.

The amendment would trigger an automatic, 40-day extension of government funding if Congress fails to pass a long-term spending bill in December, during a lame-duck session between the Nov. 8 election and the beginning of the new Congress in January.

“I’m trying to give as much flexibility [as possible] to our leadership and appropriators, while at the same time realizing that a potential [government] shutdown should not be the focus of any conversation,” Meadows told The Daily Signal.

“This 40-day extension amendment would allow us to negotiate in good faith,” he said.

The Freedom Caucus considers itself a group of the House’s most conservative members. The new proposal is part of conservatives’ effort to be part of a process that already is moving quickly in the Senate.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., introduced the Senate version of that legislation Thursday, over complaints from some in his party that it doesn’t include conservative policy proposals.

“There have been broad requests for a clean continuing resolution,” McConnell said, referring to the fact that the measure has no policy riders tacked on to draw votes. “So that’s what I’ve just offered. It’s the result of many, many hours of bipartisan work across the aisle.”

McConnell’s unwillingness to fight in the Senate puts conservatives at an early disadvantage in the House, Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas, told The Daily Signal on Friday:

Unfortunately, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is caving in to this irresponsible behavior by surrendering important conservative policies while allowing liberal interest riders to be attached to government funding.

The view of Flores, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, the House’s largest GOP caucus, carries weight. Some of his fellow House Republicans complain that they didn’t have a say in negotiations.

Earlier in September, before the party reached a unified agreement on spending levels, McConnell announced he was working with the White House and Senate Democrats to reach a deal.

A temporary fix, the Senate measure extends federal funding at the current $1.07 trillion level until Dec. 9. That timetable sets up another fight over spending during the lame-duck session after the election.

The Senate’s legislation also includes relief funds for victims of the flooding that battered Louisiana in August and money to combat the Zika virus that has spread in the South all summer.

It does not contain a provision that would keep money meant to fight the Zika virus from flowing to the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood. Democrats torpedoed three earlier Zika bills that contained the prohibition.

But Democrats still weren’t satisfied.

Democrats want Republicans to include funds to address the Flint water crisis in the stopgap spending bill. Their request comes months after President Barack Obama publicly drank a glass of water in May to reassure residents of the Michigan town that the public health crisis was over.

Raising the possibility of a government shutdown for lack of a budget deal to fund the government, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, called on her colleagues “to vote against” the legislation because it didn’t contain money for Flint.

Conservatives weren’t pleased either.

The Senate’s continuing resolution doesn’t contain any language barring the White House from relinquishing U.S. control of ICANN, the nonprofit that functions as the directory of the internet by curating website domain names.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said he was “profoundly disappointed” in McConnell’s final spending bill. The Texas senator had quarterbacked an effort to stop the transfer of ICANN to an international body for more than a month.

The Senate recessed after introduction of the spending measure and it’s not clear when, or if, it will pass.

That could be to the benefit of Democrats. If the process drags on, Republican senators considered vulnerable on Election Day are kept on Capitol Hill and off the campaign trail.

“I would’ve thought we’d be done by now,” a senior GOP aide told The Daily Signal. “But the Senate has just stalled and stalled. From my perspective in the House, it looks like [the Democrats] are trying to shut down the government.”

By law spending bills must originate in the House, but House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., appears to be waiting on the Senate to send over its version of the continuing resolution. After months of infighting among House members, Ryan predicted a vote on the Senate measure would be “low drama.”

House factions have clashed all year over how to fund the government, with conservatives conceding on every point.

They originally opposed any bill that exceeded the $1.04 trillion spending limits established in the 2011 Budget Control Act and allowed lawmakers to move major legislation during the lame-duck session.

Conservatives fear the lame duck because it provides an opportunity for outgoing—and thus unaccountable—members of Congress to legislate.

Recently, however, Flores and several members of the House Freedom Caucus told GOP leadership that they could concede on both points in exchange for additional screening for Syrian refugees and a stop to the ICANN transition.

Though conservatives said those “sweeteners” would be enough to help them swallow a spending bill they loathe, Democrats decried both as “poison pills.” Neither made the cut in the Senate bill.

“That doesn’t really give conservatives hope for anything,” a second GOP aide told The Daily Signal. “And if we’re not getting anything now, how are we going to get anything better in the lame duck?”

Unable to add anything to the legislation so far, conservatives remain dissatisfied. If that doesn’t change, Republican leadership likely will have to seek Democrat votes to pass the short-term spending measure out of the House. (For more from the author of “House Conservatives Resort to Spending Plan B to Avoid Government Shutdown” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here’s Why Ted Cruz Will Vote for Donald Trump

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Sen. Ted Cruz announced Friday that he intends to vote for Republican candidate for president Donald Trump.

“This election is unlike any other in our nation’s history,” Cruz wrote in a post to Facebook. “Like many other voters, I have struggled to determine the right course of action in this general election.”

“After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.”

Cruz cited two reasons for this decision. One, that last year he promised to support the Republican nominee, “and I intend to keep my word.” Two, “Hillary Clinton is wholly unacceptable—that’s why I have always been #NeverHillary.”

Sen. Cruz then laid out several specific areas of policy that “inform” his decision. He lists the Supreme Court, repealing Obamacare, the Obama/Clinton war on coal, immigration, national security, and internet freedom among the policy issues that make Mr. Trump a preferable choice for the presidency.

On the Supreme Court, Cruz said that he secured an “explicit commitment” from Donald Trump “to nominate only from that list” of justices the Trump campaign has released.

Read Cruz’s full statement below:

(For more from the author of “Here’s Why Ted Cruz Will Vote for Donald Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Top Clinton Aide Granted Immunity Deal in FBI Probe

/0 Comments/in , /by

Top Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills received an immunity deal during the FBI’s investigation into the former secretary of State’s private email server, lawmakers familiar with the agreement said Friday.

“This is beyond explanation. The FBI was handing out immunity agreements like candy,” House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said in a statement.

“I’ve lost confidence in this investigation and I question the genuine effort in which it was carried out. Immunity deals should not be a requirement for cooperating with the FBI.”

The Associated Press first reported the deal.

Democrats quickly pushed back on what they termed “inaccurate Republican leaks” on the deal. (Read more from “Top Clinton Aide Granted Immunity Deal in FBI Probe” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

After Cruz’s About-Face, Trump Follows Suit, Graciously Accepts Endorsement

/0 Comments/in , /by

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who finished second to Donald Trump in the GOP presidential primaries, has done an about-face since his speech at the Republican National Convention in July.

Instead of endorsing Trump as nominee, Cruz said, “To those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. If you love our country … stand and speak and vote your conscience. Vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.”

The senator was booed by the audience and received a lot of criticism for his decision.

Trump responded to Cruz’s lack of support at the time by saying, “He’ll come and endorse in the next little while because he has no choice. … I don’t want his endorsement. Ted, stay home, relax, enjoy yourself.”

Cruz announced his reversal in a Facebook post Friday.

“After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump,” the senator said.

While Cruz changed his mind about the endorsement, Trump changed his mind about accepting it.

After learning of the endorsement, the GOP nominee said, “I am greatly honored by the endorsement of Senator Cruz. We have fought the battle and he was a tough and brilliant opponent. I look forward to working with him for many years to come in order to make America great again.”

Cruz explained the reason for his change of heart in his Facebook post.

He cited first his earlier promise to endorse the party’s nominee. Second was his belief that supporting Democrat Hillary Clinton is “wholly unacceptable.”

The senator went on to praise Trump for his commitment to appoint Supreme Court justices “in the mold of [Antonin] Scalia.”

During the primaries, Trump and Cruz often bumped heads.

At one point, Trump, quick to assign a nickname to an opponent, started referring to Cruz as “Lyin’ Ted.” He also mocked the appearance of Cruz’s wife and suggested the senator’s father was involved with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Before ending his campaign, Cruz called Trump a “serial philanderer,” “utterly amoral” and “a narcissist at a level I don’t think this country’s ever seen.”

Vice presidential nominee Mike Pence is credited by some with having a major role in easing the tensions between the two men.

Cruz and Trump have communicated by message and phone as well as meeting in person once. (For more from the author of “After Cruz’s About-Face, Trump Follows Suit, Graciously Accepts Endorsement” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FBI Report: Obama Used Phony Name to Email Clinton on Her Private Server

/0 Comments/in , /by

Communications from President Barack Obama have been discovered among those in the cache of emails recovered from Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

The emails show that during the time Clinton, now the Democratic presidential candidate, was secretary of state in Obama’s first term, Obama used a phony name when he was emailing Clinton and other officials.

The latest disclosure came in 189 pages of documents released Friday by the FBI.

The FBI has been investigating Clinton’s use of a private server while she was secretary of state. Although the FBI said Clinton has been careless in handling classified information, she was not charged with breaking any laws. The FBI has been issuing reports from its investigation.

The FBI report includes an interview with Clinton aide Huma Abedin in which she was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama. However, Abedin did not recognize the sender’s name.

The report explained what happened next.

“Once informed that the sender’s name is believed to be pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed, ‘How is this not classified?’” the report says. “Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email.”

The contents of the emails between Obama and Clinton have not been made public by the State Department, which has cited “presidential communications privilege,” to hide the communications from the Freedom of Information Act.

The FBI report does not provide details about the emails between Clinton and Obama.

The report is the first clear evidence that Obama used Clinton’s unsecured email server to communicate with his secretary of state.

The FBI earlier revealed Clinton had relied on others’ judgment to not send her classified material during email correspondences.

“Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system,” the FBI said in its Sept. 2 report. “She relied on State officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address.”

The information revealed Friday includes the FBI interviews with a number of individuals, including Clinton aides Abedin and Cheryl Mills; senior State Department officials; and Marcel Lazar, better known as the Romanian hacker “Guccifer.”

Friday’s reports also covered interviews with Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s policy director; Bryan Pagliano, a former Clinton technology aide; Monica Hanley, a Clinton aide; and Sidney Blumenthal, a Clinton confidante.

Interviews were also released from FBI sessions with former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former CIA acting director Mike Morell, State Department official Patrick Kennedy, and other officials. (For more from the author of “FBI Report: Obama Used Phony Name to Email Clinton on Her Private Server” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.