Leaked Documents Reveal Democratic Campaign Donors

/0 Comments/in , /by

Hillary Clinton was once asked which of her enemies she was most proud to call her enemies. She responded, “Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians … probably the Republicans.”

But according to recently hacked Democratic National Committee documents, while the Democrats, like Clinton, have harsh things to say about their enemies, in private they often reach out their hands to those same entities for campaign donations.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, those documents reveal the DNC has asked coal companies, insurance companies, and even corporations like Walmart for donations to the presidential campaign.

Here’s a list of the companies the DNC has targeted for solicitation, solicited, or from which campaign contributions have already been received: Tobacco company Altria, genetically modified agricultural firm Monsanto, Walmart, McDonald’s, and a gaggle of fossil fuel companies.

Democrats, historically, have lambasted McDonald’s and Walmart for their resistance to minimum wage hikes.

Health insurers Cigna, Aetna, Humana, and UnitedHealth Group have also been courted. Bernie Sanders often attacked Clinton during the primaries for her close ties to Wall Street, so it may come as a surprise to Sanders’ supporters the very same DNC which sponsored Sanders’ presidential run has solicited the financial giants to support Clinton.

While Clinton considered drug companies her enemies, she seems to have no problem allowing the DNC to solicit funds from those same companies on behalf of her campaign bid for president. Drug companies such as Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, and Eli Lilly were all allegedly targeted by the DNC for campaign contributions.

Wall Street targets included Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Credit Suisse, UBS, and the American Bankers Association, supposedly marked as a “high priority” potential donor. (For more from the author of “Leaked Documents Reveal Democratic Campaign Donors” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

GOP Billionaire: Trump Worthy of Christian Support

/0 Comments/in , /by

Foster Friess, a billionaire who donates generously to the Republican Party, said in a letter to supporters that Donald Trump deserves the backing of the evangelical community because God, throughout biblical history, has always tapped the imperfect to work his perfect will.

“[A]ll throughout history,” he wrote, “God has harnessed imperfect people to fulfill his perfect will. King David sent Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, off to the front lines in hopes he would be killed so David could play cozy with the guy’s wife.”

He went on, saying he thought even the most “principled evangelical Christian woman” ought to support Trump, even if she had concerns about his morals and past indiscretions, the Washington Examiner reported. And, he reminded, “You and I are changing and so is Donald Trump,” the newspaper reported. (Read more from “GOP Billionaire: Trump Worthy of Christian Support” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘NeverTrump’ Delegate Seeks Court OK to Break Election Law

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Republican leader in Virginia is heading to court to see if he can receive protection from prosecution if the vote he casts at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, is not for the presumptive presidential nominee, Donald Trump, but rather for someone else.

Virginia election law states that party delegates have to vote for the winner of the primary, or else they face a fine of $2,500 and up to a year in jail.

But Carroll Boston “Beau” Correll Jr., a Republican Party delegate who dislikes Trump for president, wants a judge to save him from that law, and has filed a federal lawsuit set to be heard on July 7, NBC 12 reported.

His argument?

Correll says his First Amendment rights, as played through his right to select the candidate of personal choice, trumps Virginia’s election law. (Read more from “‘NeverTrump’ Delegate Seeks Court OK to Break Election Law” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WE DEMAND A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: Secret Clinton-Lynch Meeting Highlights Democrat Corruption

/0 Comments/in , /by

Hillary Clinton is currently under a criminal investigation by the FBI. The FBI reports to the Department of Justice run by Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Knowing these facts, you’d expect that Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton would avoid meeting secretly aboard private jets. Yet that’s exactly what happened in Phoenix this week:

“Amid an ongoing investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of email and hours before the public release of the Benghazi report, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch met privately with former President Bill Clinton. The private meeting took place on the west side of Sky Harbor International Airport on board a parked private plane… Sources tell ABC15, Clinton was notified Lynch would be arriving at the airport soon and waited for her arrival.”

The meeting lasted “around 30 minutes,” yet Lynch expects the American people to believe that Hillary Clinton’s criminal investigation never came up. Since the story broke of Lynch and Bill Clinton’s clandestine meeting, the reaction has been swift, harsh, and bi-partisanly negative.

President Obama’s former chief strategist David Axelrod took to Twitter, calling the Lynch-Clinton meeting “foolish”:

Screen-Shot-2016-06-30-at-9.24.53-AM (1)

Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) also had harsh words concerning the Lynch and Clinton’s secret meeting. (I’m not saying, I’m just saying.) Speaking with CNN, the Delaware senator strongly condemned the Attorney General’s judgment:

“A Democratic senator said Thursday that Attorney General Loretta Lynch should not have held a private meeting with former President Bill Clinton this week. ‘I don’t think it sends the right signal. I think she should have steered clear even of a brief, casual, social meeting with the former president,’ Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said on CNN’s ‘New Day.’”

The Morning Joe panel was equally unsparing of Lynch’s decision to meet secretly with the husband of someone currently under FBI investigation:

At the very least, Clinton and Lynch’s surreptitious meeting is awful, embarrassing optics for the Justice Department and its claims of objectivity; while at worst, this is a former president pressuring a former employee of his to not indict his wife. This incident calls into question whether the FBI will be allowed by the Department of Justice to follow the evidence in the Clinton criminal investigation. The only solution to this crisis is the appointment of a special prosecutor for the Clinton case. If Attorney General Lynch has any respect for the rule of law, she must act immediately. (For more from the author of “WE DEMAND A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: Secret Clinton-Lynch Meeting Highlights Democrat Corruption” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

IT AIN’T ABOUT GUNS: Democrats Super-Excited About Killing off Your Due Process Rights

/0 Comments/in , /by

The latest efforts to enact gun-control by Democrats in congress are either strictly symbolic, since they would not have stopped the San Bernadino or the Orlando Islamic extremists, or a Trojan horse to abolish the 2nd Amendment. Their proposal is to deny 2nd Amendment rights to anyone on the Transportation Safety Administration’s (TSA) “no-fly list.”

The murderers in San Bernadino and Orlando were not on the no-fly list, so even if such a law were in place, those acts of domestic terrorism would not have been prevented. So from that standpoint, such legislation would be mostly symbolic, and solve little to nothing.

It is much more likely, however, that the legislation is a Trojan horse to literally abolish 2nd Amendment rights of all, or more likely, select citizens.

The no-fly list is created by bureaucrats of the Executive Branch, and is so secretive that people don’t even know their names are on it until they attempt to board a flight. We have no idea exactly how many people are on the no-fly list, but an FBI factsheet uncovered by PolitiFact in 2013 indicated there were 47,000 names on the list at that time.

Not only do citizens not know if they’ve been added to the list, they have no way of preventing themselves from being added, since the government maintains it in secrecy, and has provided no clear criteria or rationale for names being added to it. As Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU Nation Security Project has said, “The government puts people on the no-fly list using vague and overbroad standards, and it is wrongly blacklisting innocents without giving them a fair process to correct government error.”

The ACLU has filed suit against the government over their seemingly arbitrary and spurious addition of names. As Shamsi explains, “Our no-fly list lawsuit seeks to establish a meaningful opportunity for our clients to challenge their placement on the list, which is error-prone and has had a devastating impact on their lives.”
And since the list is maintained by the Executive branch, and in secrecy, the potential for abuse is massive. Just look at how the IRS, which is also administered by the Executive branch, has politically targeted purported enemies of the Obama administration, and conservative political activist groups. Such abuse has tyranny and fascism written all over it!

Especially in light of what the Obama administration did just after it came to power in 2009. In an Agency Assessment from Obama’s Department of Homeland Security, titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” the “enemies of the state” were clearly identified, and it was entirely based on ideology.

According to the, communiqué the issues qualifying citizens for “enemies of the state” status include opposition to gun control, government infringement on civil liberties, abortion, hate crime legislation, anti-illegal immigration, and opposition to same-sex marriage. In a footnote, the document states, “[Rightwing extremism] may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.” In other words, everyone who is not a left-wing radical was identified officially an enemy to the Obama Administration and accused of being a potential domestic terrorist! By their own admission, however, they had no evidence of potential threats, so the assessment was nothing but a political hatchet-job against those who don’t agree with them.

After passage of the Democrat’s bill denying 2nd Amendment rights to those on the no-fly list, all that would need to be done by an unscrupulous and tyrannical president, is put all citizens with political leanings identified by the 2009 Agency Assessment on the no-fly list. From the Democrat’s perspective, problem solved. But for the nation, nothing solved, since leftists perpetrate most mass killings.

Once on the no-fly list, it’s nearly impossible to get off of it. The ACLU has declared, “The government denies watchlisted individuals any meaningful way to correct errors and clear their names.” Eleven term congressman John Lewis (D-GA), has been trying to get his name off of the list for five years.

There is no process by which a citizen can be prevented from being added to the no-fly list, or the FBI’s Terrorist Watch List. Which means, if a citizen were added to one of them, they would be deprived of their constitutional rights without due process, which is guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments. This would be just one step away from the government denying 1st Amendment (freedom of speech, etc.) rights by placement on a government watch list, or “no speak” list, again denying due process, and violating rights assured by our most foundational document. This would be tyrannical and fascistic, and as antithetical to American values as one could get!

This argument was brilliantly illustrated in a House Government Oversight Committee hearing exchange between chairman Trey Gowdy and DHS Deputy Director Kelli Burriesci in December. That two minute video should be watched by every American, and can be seen at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wrxmaMLXLE.

And while we’re on this subject, why is it that the ire of the anti-gun left is invariably targeted against the National Rifle Association? Founded in 1871, the NRA is the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the country. Their objectives are protecting our 2nd Amendment rights and teaching responsible and proper gun use. Blaming them for abuse of those rights is like blaming the ACLU for 1st Amendment abuses, like hate speech! Can’t get much more illogical and inane than that!

Gun control is a key issue for the left, since it can be so easily fomented emotionally. But it does nothing to address the underlying social and cultural issues which are the cause of violence and domestic terrorism. And using vague government controlled lists as the basis to deny fundamental rights is a violation of our constitutional rights, which define what it means to be an American citizen. (For more from the author of “IT AIN’T ABOUT GUNS: Democrats Super-Excited About Killing off Your Due Process Rights” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Just-Released Poll Shows Dems’ Preferred Choice for President and It’s Not Hillary

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Hill reported Friday that, according to a recent poll, most Democrats would choose a third term for President Obama over presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

According to a WPA research survey, 67 percent of the Democrats surveyed would abandon the current presidential election if there was a way for Obama to serve a third term.

The poll shows only 28 percent are ready for a changing of the guard, while 6 percent remain undecided.

A memo from WPA read, “The results should give pause to the Hillary Clinton campaign as Democratic respondents clearly prefer the status quo to a Clinton presidency.”

With the Obama administration winding down, the president’s approval rating seems to be increasing.

Earlier this week the Washington Post released the findings of a Washington Post/ABC News poll which reveals 56 percent of those polled approve of Obama’s performance. The poll also shows that 56 percent feel the time has come to take the nation in a different direction.

Obama’s net approval, as indicated by the poll figures, is nearly 80, compared to former President Clinton’s approval of almost 60.

While President Obama is enjoying an increase in his approval rating, Hillary Clinton’s rating has decreased.

A Gallup poll from April shows Clinton’s favorability rating to be 36 points. That is down drastically from the 63 points she received in November.

The Clinton campaign is striving to garner additional support from voters who had supported Sen. Bernie Sanders.

On a positive note for Clinton, the survey suggests that Sanders’ supporters are rallying behind her rather than Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. (For more from the author of “Just-Released Poll Shows Dems’ Preferred Choice for President” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Makes Clear It’s Better to Be America’s Adversary Than Ally

/0 Comments/in , /by

Rarely has the stark contrast between being an adversary of America and being an American friend been more in evidence than in the news this week from the western Pacific.

With the inauguration of Tsai Ing-wen, Taiwan saw the fourth democratic transition in the island’s leadership since the end of martial law in the 1990s. Tsai, head of the Democratic Progressive Party, had scored a major victory over the Kuomintang’s Eric Chu in elections this past January. As important, the Democratic Progressive Party won enough votes to also secure control of the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s legislature, reflecting broad public support.

While the Democratic Progressive Party has generally stood for Taiwan independence, Tsai has been very careful in her comments and remarks not to push for separation. Indeed, during the campaign, as well as prior visits to the United States, she has avoided raising the subject.

Nonetheless, Beijing has insisted that she must acknowledge the “one-China” principle, in effect rejecting the idea of Taiwan independence.

This would include accepting the “1992 Consensus,” a framework reportedly reached by semi-official representatives from the two sides, whereby both sides agreed that there was only one China, but held different unstated interpretations of what that meant, i.e. Republic of China (on Taiwan), including the mainland or People’s Republic of China, including Taiwan.

Tsai very prominently referenced her respect for the 1992 Consensus in her inaugural address. She did not, however, formulate it as explicitly as Beijing would prefer, and of course, she did not directly reference the “one-China” principle. Given both the centrality of Taiwan identity and independence in the nature of the Democratic Progressive Party, as well as the overwhelming victory it had scored, it is remarkable that she went as far as she did.

For Beijing, however, it is “all or nothing.” Failure to meet its formulation would lead to the suspension of cross-Straits dialogue, a threat that Beijing has now fulfilled. Chinese officials tied the ending of talks directly to Tsai’s failure to acknowledge that Taiwan is part of China or otherwise formally reject any move toward independence.

Normally, this would draw an American response. Under the Taiwan Relations Act, the U.S. has made clear that it supports stability in the Taiwan Straits; any effort at reunification must be peaceful and be supported by the population on both sides.

It is Beijing, not Taipei, that has refused to commit to a peaceful resolution. The People’s Republic of China has always reserved the right to forcibly reunify the two sides; the People’s Liberation Army is constantly preparing for a Taiwan contingency.

Instead, the U.S. has invited that same People’s Liberation Army Navy to attend the Rim of the Pacific, or RIMPAC, 2016 exercises this year. This will be the second time the People’s Liberation Army Navy participates in the exercises, having also attended the previous Rim of the Pacific 2014.

While the U.S. Navy dispatched only one ship to join the four People’s Liberation Army Navy ships attending the 2014 exercises, this time the U.S. Navy dispatched an entire carrier battlegroup, centered around the USS John Stennis. The battlegroup is apparently conducting joint maneuvering and training with the five Chinese ships Beijing is sending to Rim of the Pacific 2016. It is unknown whether the Chinese have also dispatched a spy ship, as they did to Rim of the Pacific 2014.

Meanwhile, the Taiwan navy remains on the sidelines. Unlike Beijing, Taipei has received no invitation from the Obama administration to attend Rim of the Pacific.

It’s getting harder to tell who is an adversary and who is a friend, based on how the U.S. government treats them. (For more from the author of “Obama Makes Clear It’s Better to Be America’s Adversary Than Ally” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Administration Refuses to Enforce ‘Right of Conscience,’ Legal Group Says

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration refuses to enforce federal law that protects Americans’ freedom of conscience, a Christian legal aid group says.

In 2014, California began mandating that employee health plans cover elective abortions. A state agency is refusing to exempt churches from the mandate, said Casey Mattox, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom.

“Churches should never be forced to cover elective abortion in their insurance plans, and for 10 years the Weldon Amendment has protected the right to have plans that do not include coverage for abortion on demand,” Mattox said in a statement.

The federal Weldon Amendment prohibits states receiving taxpayer funds under federal law from discriminating against health insurance plans that don’t cover abortion, Mattox has argued.

“The administration’s refusal to enforce [the Weldon Amendment] continues its pattern of enforcing laws it wants to enforce, refusing to enforce others, and inventing new interpretations of others out of whole cloth,” Mattox said in a formal statement.

“California has outlawed the licensing of any health care plan in the state that does not cover elective abortion. It is perfectly clear that California is violating the law and the Obama administration has frequently been refusing to enforce the law,” Mattox told The Daily Signal.

Alliance Defending Freedom filed two lawsuits in California challenging the rule.

Since the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, requires employers to provide health insurance coverage, California churches have been left without a way to opt out of paying for abortions, Alliance Defending Freedom says.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Mattox said, “is obligated to go enforce this law itself, and it has decided that it is not going to enforce the law.”

“The administration’s refusal to enforce [the Weldon Amendment] continues its pattern of enforcing laws it wants to enforce, refusing to enforce others, and inventing new interpretations of others out of whole cloth,” Mattox said in a statement.

The Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services sent a response letter to several formal complaints filed by Life Legal Defense Foundation and Alliance Defending Freedom over the California Department of Managed Health Care’s decision to force all employers to cover elective abortions.

In the letter, the Obama administration dismissed the “right of conscience” complaints after concluding that California’s law does not violate federal law, the Los Angeles Times reported.

The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Jocelyn Samuels, director of the federal agency’s Office for Civil Rights, wrote in the response letter: “A finding that [California Department of Managed Health Care] has violated the Weldon Amendment might require the government to rescind all funds appropriated under the Appropriations Act to the state of California.”

Rescinding the taxpayer money, Samuels added, “would raise substantial questions about the constitutionality of the Weldon Amendment.”

Addressing that position, Alliance Defending Freedom’s Mattox said:

The Obama administration says enforcing the Weldon Amendment against California would violate the Constitution because you would be withholding all of these funds from the state. Which is very interesting because at the exact same time, you have the administration telling North Carolina that it’s going to withhold funds under the exact same appropriations bill.

The Justice Department sent North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican, a letter in May saying the state’s “bathroom bill” violated federal law. The measure, which McCrory signed in March, made bathrooms in government buildings accessible based on a person’s biological sex, not his or her gender identity.

This is a “blatant contradiction,” Mattox said.

“Basically, the administration is speaking out of both sides of its mouth,” he said. (For more from the author of “Obama Administration Refuses to Enforce ‘Right of Conscience,’ Legal Group Says” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Administration Seeks to Delay Release of Clinton Aides’ Emails Until Late 2018

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration filed a motion in federal court on Thursday seeking a 27-month delay in producing emails between Hillary Clinton and her former State Department aides.

If granted, the documents would not be due until October 2018, over a year-and-half into a potential first term of a Clinton presidency.

U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras had ordered the State Department to produce the emails sought in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by Citizens United by July 21.

“The group Citizens United sued the State Department last year, seeking access to emails sent by four former Clinton aides: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, Melanee Verveer and Michael Fuchs. The suit seeks access to emails regarding the Clinton Foundation and a firm with close ties to the Clintons, Teneo Consulting,” United Press International reported.

Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate and former secretary of state, is reportedly under investigation by the FBI for “public corruption” in relation to allegedly using her office to financially benefit the Clinton Foundation.

Citing “errors” in its reviewing process, the State Department told the court in its filing that it originally estimated the number of emails responsive to Citizens United’s request at 6,000, but later discovered there are more than 34,000 documents it must review. The department claims that with its current resources, it can review only 500 documents per month, the Daily Caller reported.

Despite the spike in FOIA requests at the State Department in recent years, the Obama administration had not requested an increase in the budget for the office that reviews documents for public release.

“This is totally unacceptable; the State Department is using taxpayer dollars to protect their candidate Hillary Clinton,” Citizens United President David Bossie told Politico. “The American people have a right to see these emails before the election. If transparency is truly important to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, they will order the production of all of these records as ordered by the court by July 21, 2016. The conflicts of interest that were made possible by the activities of Hillary Clinton’s State Department in tandem with the Clinton Foundation are of significant importance to the public and the law enforcement community.” (For more from the author of “Obama Administration Seeks to Delay Release of Clinton Aides’ Emails Until Late 2018” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

HUMA ABEDIN: Say, It Looks Like the State Department Totally Ignores FOIA Requests From the Peons

/0 Comments/in , /by

Earlier this week, Clinton “body woman” Huma Abedin was deposed by Judicial Watch.

Her testimony was reminiscent of other Clinton aides and cronies, who have either pled the Fifth or simply stated that they have no recollection of any criminal or improper behavior on the part of the Clintons.

With that said, Abedin’s testimony — probably inadvertently — revealed a major issues with the State Department’s responses to Freedom of Information Act requests.

Put simply, it looks like they simply ignored them.

Abedin’s deposition also raised questions about the State Department’s practices responding to government records requests under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. Abedin, a senior aide during Clinton’s entire tenure there, testified under oath that she never searched or was asked to search for documents in her State Department or her private Clinton email accounts in response to requests or lawsuits under the open records law.

But a review of all requests to the State Department during that period found several asking specifically for copies of Abedin’s emails on a variety of subjects, including her husband, one-time disgraced Rep. Anthony Weiner.

“Did you ever search, were you ever asked to search your state.gov e-mail account in response to a FOIA request or FOIA litigation?” lawyer Ramona Cocta asked.

“I believe I said ‘no,'” Abedin answered.

“Were you ever asked to search your Clinton email.com account during your tenure at the State Department in response to a FOIA request or FOIA litigation?” Cocta asked.

“No, I was not,” Abedin said.

It was not immediately clear how the State Department could have complied with such legal requests for Abedin’s emails without asking Abedin to search her messages. Some federal agencies permit full-time FOIA staffers to search the inboxes of senior government officials, but many agencies expect officials to search their own accounts and no U.S. employee presumably would have had access to Abedin’s personal account on Clinton’s private server. Abedin said she was not aware that anyone else searched her accounts, either.

Considering this is only the Obama administration’s 840th major scandal, don’t look for any stories on this topic by ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR or CNN.

And, once the fascistic Democrats serving on the FEC finally succeed in killing off Fox News, there really won’t be any avenue for broadcasting the truth on television. (For more from the author of “HUMA ABEDIN: Say, It Looks Like the State Department Totally Ignores FOIA Requests From the Peons” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.