SCOTUS: Here’s a License to Discriminate… on Behalf of the RIGHT People

/0 Comments/in , /by

If a state has a law defining marriage as between a man and woman — as has been the case since the dawn of civilization — apparently it is discriminatory and in violation of the 14th Amendment. Yet, a state CAN pass a law blatantly discriminating against whites in order to admit lower performing minorities in pursuit of diversity. That is the outcome of today’s 4-3 decision (Justice Kagan recused herself) in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the same author of the gay marriage decision.

We live in a society where the 14th Amendment has been flipped on its head to violate natural law and mandate even on private individuals and employees accommodation for gay marriage and transgenderism, ideals that never existed when the Constitution was written or the 14th Amendment was adopted. Anything short of that is deemed as discriminatory in the eyes of the legal profession. The most basic common sense policies are deemed in violation of the Equal Protection Clause if they don’t favor a particular class of individuals that are in vogue with the legal profession. Yet, when it came time to call a strike on a true case of state-sanctioned racial discrimination, the same justices had no problem ignoring the 14th Amendment.

The case deals with an admissions policy at the University of Texas (UT) system’s flagship school in Austin. From 1997 to 2004, the University attempted to boost its diversity statistics through a quantitative “Top Ten Percent” system, which meant that every student in Texas in the top ten percent of their graduating high school class was granted automatic admission. This meant that even students at underperforming schools would be admitted, even if they wouldn’t have made the cut previously, so long as they did better than 90 percent of their own graduating class. They were admitted even if they performed below those in the lower tier of better performing schools. Abigail Fisher, a white woman who was denied admission to the school even though she would have met the qualifications under the true color-blind fair system, sued the university for violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

After being sent back from the Supreme Court to the lower courts in 2013 to analyze the law under a standard of strict scrutiny, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld UT’s policy. Today, Justices Kennedy, Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Breyer affirmed the 5th Circuit. Thus, even with Scalia on the Court, a 4-4 split would have resulted in a win for the Left, but it would not have created a precedent (to the extent one believes courts have such power over social issues) emboldening state race-conscious affirmative action policies. Alas, this is the first major case where Scalia’s absence is felt.

Writing for the dissenting members, which also included Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito cut through the clutter:

What is at stake is whether university administrators may justify systematic racial discrimination simply by asserting that such discrimination is necessary to achieve “the educational benefits of diversity,” without explaining — much less proving — why the discrimination is needed or how the discriminatory plan is well crafted to serve its objectives. Even though UT has never provided any coherent explanation for its asserted need to discriminate on the basis of race, and even though UT’s position relies on a series of unsupported and noxious racial assumptions, the majority concludes that UT has met its heavy burden. This conclusion is remarkable—and remarkably wrong.

And as always, Justice Thomas sums up the originalist truth in one paragraph in a separate dissent:

I write separately to reaffirm that “a State’s use of race in higher education admissions decisions is categorically prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause.” Fisher v. University of Tex. at Austin, 570 U. S. ___, ___ (2013) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (slip op., at 1). “The Constitution abhors classifications based on race because every time the government places citizens on racial registers and makes race relevant to the provision of burdens or benefits, it demeans us all.” Id., at ___ (slip op., at 2) (internal quotation marks omitted). That constitutional imperative does not change in the face of a “faddish theor[y]” that racial discrimination may produce “educational benefits.” Id., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 5, 13). The Court was wrong to hold otherwise in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306, 343 (2003). I would overrule Grutter and reverse the Fifth Circuit’s judgment.

The Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed to grant existing liberties and property rights to freed slaves, and in the words of its drafters established “no new right” and declared no new principle,[1] has been used as a garbage can to trash the Constitution by creating super rights and privileges for favored classes under the guise of equality. Yet, when a state actually flagrantly violates the true ideals of equality based on race, the court has no problem upholding it.

Raise your hand if you believe these four liberal justices would have upheld a state university’s admission scheme to collegiate basketball if they allowed lower performing students in high school basketball programs form predominantly white schools to take slots away from higher-performing black students in predominantly African American schools? This is all outcomes-based jurisprudence.

As I warn in my upcoming book, the courts have contorted fundamental rights in the most grotesque ways imaginable. What’s in the Constitution is taken out of it and what’s absent is enshrined as a fundamental liberty interest. With each decision, they create a precedent from which to build further deviations from the Constitution. If we fail to strip the courts of their power as the sole and final arbiter of all social and political questions, this precedent will metastasize to encourage discrimination in all ways imaginable, so long as the “right” people benefit from the policy. (For more from the author of “SCOTUS: Here’s a License to Discriminate… on Behalf of the RIGHT People” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FULL TRANSCRIPT: Trump Unleashes a Rain of Ruin on Hillary and the Clinton Crime Family

/0 Comments/in , /by

People have asked me why I am running for President.

I have built an amazing business that I love and I get to work side-by-side with my children every day.

We come to work together and turn visions into reality.

We think big, and then we make it happen.

I love what I do, and I am grateful beyond words to the nation that has allowed me to do it.

So when people ask me why I am running, I quickly answer: I am running to give back to this country which has been so good to me.

When I see the crumbling roads and bridges, or the dilapidated airports, or the factories moving overseas to Mexico, or to other countries, I know these problems can all be fixed, but not by Hillary Clinton – only by me.

The fact is, we can come back bigger and better and stronger than ever before –Jobs, jobs, jobs!

Everywhere I look, I see the possibilities of what our country could be. But we can’t solve any of these problems by relying on the politicians who created them.

We will never be able to fix a rigged system by counting on the same people who rigged it in the first place.

The insiders wrote the rules of the game to keep themselves in power and in the money.
That’s why we’re asking Bernie Sanders’ voters to join our movement: so together we can fix the system for ALL Americans. Importantly, this includes fixing all of our many disastrous trade deals.

Because it’s not just the political system that’s rigged. It’s the whole economy.

It’s rigged by big donors who want to keep down wages.

It’s rigged by big businesses who want to leave our country, fire our workers, and sell their products back into the U.S. with absolutely no consequences for them.

It’s rigged by bureaucrats who are trapping kids in failing schools.

It’s rigged against you, the American people.

Hillary Clinton who, as most people know, is a world class liar.

Just look at her pathetic email and server statements, or her phony landing in Bosnia where she said she was under attack but the attack turned out to be young girls handing her flowers, a total self-serving lie.

Brian Williams’ career was destroyed for saying far less.

Yesterday, she even tried to attack me and my many businesses. But here is the bottom line: I started off in Brooklyn New York, not so long ago, with a small loan and built a business worth over 10 billion dollars. I have always had a talent for building businesses and, importantly, creating jobs. That is a talent our country desperately needs.

I am running for President to end the unfairness and to put you, the American worker, first.

We are going to put America First, and we are going to Make America Great again.

This election will decide whether we are ruled by the people, or by the politicians.

Here is my promise to the American voter:

If I am elected President, I will end the special interest monopoly in Washington, D.C.

The other candidate in this race has spent her entire life making money for special interests – and taking money from special interests.

Hillary Clinton has perfected the politics of personal profit and theft.

She ran the State Department like her own personal hedge fund – doing favors for oppressive regimes, and many others, in exchange for cash.

Then, when she left, she made $21.6 million giving speeches to Wall Street banks and other special interests – in less than 2 years – secret speeches that she does not want to reveal to the public.

Together, she and Bill made $153 million giving speeches to lobbyists, CEOs, and foreign governments in the years since 2001.

They totally own her, and that will never change.

The choice in this election is a choice between taking our government back from the special interests, or surrendering our last scrap of independence to their total and complete control.

Those are the stakes.

Hillary Clinton wants to be President. But she doesn’t have the temperament, or, as Bernie Sanders’ said, the judgement, to be president.

She believes she is entitled to the office.

Her campaign slogan is “I’m with her.”

You know what my response to that is? I’m with you: the American people.

She thinks it’s all about her.

I know it’s all about you – I know it’s all about making America Great Again for All Americans.

Our country lost its way when we stopped putting the American people first.

We got here because we switched from a policy of Americanism – focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class – to a policy of globalism, focusing on how to make money for large corporations who can move their wealth and workers to foreign countries all to the detriment of the American worker and the American economy.

We reward companies for offshoring, and we punish companies for doing business in America and keeping our workers employed.

This is not a rising tide that lifts all boats.

This is a wave of globalization that wipes out our middle class and our jobs.

We need to reform our economic system so that, once again, we can all succeed together, and America can become rich again.

That’s what we mean by America First.

Our country will be better off when we start making our own products again, bringing our once great manufacturing capabilities back to our shores.

Our Founders understood this.

One of the first major bills signed by George Washington called for “the encouragement and protection of manufactur[ing]” in America.

Our first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, warned us by saying:

“The abandonment of the protective policy by the American government will produce want and ruin among our people.”

I have visited the cities and towns across America and seen the devastation caused by the trade policies of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton supported Bill Clinton’s disastrous NAFTA, just like she supported China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization.

We’ve lost nearly one-third of our manufacturing jobs since these two Hillary-backed agreements were signed.

Our trade deficit with China soared 40% during Hillary Clinton’s time as Secretary of State — a disgraceful performance for which she should not be congratulated, but rather scorned.

Then she let China steal hundreds of billions of dollars in our intellectual property – a crime which is continuing to this day.

Hillary Clinton gave China millions of our best jobs, and effectively let China completely rebuild itself.

In return, Hillary Clinton got rich!

The book Clinton Cash, by Peter Schweitzer, documents how Bill and Hillary used the State Department to enrich their family at America’s expense.

She gets rich making you poor.

Here is a quote from the book: “At the center of US policy toward China was Hillary Clinton…at this critical time for US-china relations, Bill Clinton gave a number of speeches that were underwritten by the Chinese government and its supporters.”

These funds were paid to the Clinton bank account while Hillary was negotiating with China on behalf of the United States.

She sold out our workers, and our country, for Beijing.

Hillary Clinton has also been the biggest promoter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which will ship millions more of our jobs overseas – and give up Congressional power to an international foreign commission.

Now, because I have pointed out why it would be such a disastrous deal, she is pretending that she is against it. She has even deleted this record of total support from her book – deletion is something she is very good at — (at least 30,000 emails are missing.)

But this latest Clinton cover-up doesn’t change anything: if she is elected president, she will adopt the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and we will lose millions of jobs and our economic independence for good. She will do this, just as she has betrayed the American worker on trade at every single stage of her career – and it will be even worse than the Clintons’ NAFTA deal.

I want trade deals, but they have to be great for the United States and our workers.

We don’t make great deals anymore, but we will once I become president.

It’s not just our economy that’s been corrupted, but our foreign policy too.

The Hillary Clinton foreign policy has cost America thousands of lives and trillions of dollars – and unleashed ISIS across the world.

No Secretary of State has been more wrong, more often, and in more places than Hillary Clinton.

Her decisions spread death, destruction and terrorism everywhere she touched.

Among the victims is our late Ambassador, Chris Stevens. He was left helpless to die as Hillary Clinton soundly slept in her bed — that’s right, when the phone rang at

3 o’clock in the morning, she was sleeping.

Ambassador Stevens and his staff in Libya made hundreds of requests for security.

Hillary Clinton’s State Department refused them all.

She started the war that put him in Libya, denied him the security he asked for, then left him there to die.

To cover her tracks, Hillary lied about a video being the cause of his death.

Here is what one of the victim’s mothers had to say:

“I want the whole world to know it: she lied to my face, and you don’t want this person to be president.”

In 2009, before Hillary Clinton was sworn in, it was a different world.

Libya was cooperating.

Iraq was seeing a reduction in violence.

Syria was under control.

Iran was being choked by sanctions.

Egypt was governed by a friendly regime that honored its peace treaty with Israel.

ISIS wasn’t even on the map.

Fast forward to 2013: In just four years, Secretary Clinton managed

to almost single-handedly destabilize the entire Middle East.

Her invasion of Libya handed the country over to the ISIS barbarians.

Thanks to Hillary Clinton, Iran is now the dominant Islamic power in the Middle East, and on the road to nuclear weapons.

Hillary Clinton’s support for violent regime change in Syria has thrown the country into one of the bloodiest civil wars anyone has ever seen – while giving ISIS a launching pad for terrorism against the West.

She helped force out a friendly regime in Egypt and replace it with the radical Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptian military has retaken control, but Clinton has opened the Pandora’s box of radical Islam.

Then, there was the disastrous strategy of announcing our departure date from Iraq, handing large parts of the country over to ISIS killers.

ISIS threatens us today because of the decisions Hillary Clinton has made.

ISIS also threatens peaceful Muslims across the Middle East, and peaceful Muslims across the world, who have been terribly victimized by horrible brutality – and who only want to raise their kids in peace and safety.

In short, Hillary Clinton’s tryout for the presidency has produced one deadly foreign policy disaster after another.

It all started with her bad judgment in supporting the War in Iraq in the first place.

Though I was not in government service, I was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war, and yes, even before the war ever started.

But Hillary Clinton learned nothing from Iraq, because when she got into power,

she couldn’t wait to rush us off to war in Libya.

She lacks the temperament, the judgment and the competence to lead.

In the words of a Secret Service agent posted outside the Oval Office:

“She simply lacks the integrity and temperament to serve

in the office…from the bottom of my soul, I know this to be true…Her leadership style – volcanic, impulsive…disdainful of the rules set for everyone else – hasn’t changed a bit.”

Perhaps the most terrifying thing about Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy is that she refuses to acknowledge the threat posed by Radical Islam.

In fact, Hillary Clinton supports a radical 550% increase in Syrian refugees coming into the United States, and that’s an increase over President Obama’s already very high number.

Under her plan, we would admit hundreds of thousands of refugees from the most dangerous countries on Earth – with no way to screen who they are or what they believe.

Already, hundreds of recent immigrants and their children have been convicted of terrorist activity inside the U.S.

The father of the Orlando shooter was a Taliban supporter from Afghanistan, one of the

most repressive anti-gay and anti-women regimes on Earth.

I only want to admit people who share our values and love our people.

Hillary Clinton wants to bring in people who believe women should be enslaved

and gays put to death.

Maybe her motivation lies among the more than 1,000 foreign donations Hillary failed to disclose while at the State Department.

Hillary Clinton may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency.

Here is some more of what we learned from the book Clinton Cash:

A foreign telecom giant faced possible State Department sanctions for providing technology to Iran, and other oppressive regimes. So what did this company do? For the first time ever, they decided to pay Bill Clinton $750,000 for a single speech. The Clintons got their cash, the telecom company escaped sanctions.

Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20% of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while 9 investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton appointed a top donor to a national security board with top secret access – even though he had no national security credentials.

Hillary Clinton accepted $58,000 in jewelry from the government of Brunei when she was Secretary of State – plus millions more for her foundation. The Sultan of Brunei has pushed oppressive Sharia law, including the punishment of death by stoning for being gay. The government of Brunei also stands to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of Hillary’s Trans-Pacific Partnership, which she would absolutely approve if given the chance.

Hillary Clinton took up to $25 million from Saudi Arabia, where being gay is also punishable by death.

Hillary took millions from Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and many other countries that horribly abuse women and LGBT citizens.

To cover-up her corrupt dealings, Hillary Clinton illegally stashed her State Department emails on a private server.

Her server was easily hacked by foreign governments – perhaps even by her financial backers in Communist China – putting all of America in danger.

Then there are the 33,000 emails she deleted.

While we may not know what is in those deleted emails, our enemies probably do.

So they probably now have a blackmail file over someone who wants to be President of the United States.

This fact alone disqualifies her from the Presidency.

We can’t hand over our government to someone whose deepest, darkest secrets may be in the hands of our enemies.

National security is also immigration security –

and Hillary wants neither.

Hillary Clinton has put forward the most radical immigration platform in the history of the United States.

She has pledged to grant mass amnesty and in her first 100 days, end virtually all immigration enforcement, and thus create totally open borders in the United States

The first victims of her radical policies will be poor African-American and Hispanic workers who need jobs. They are the ones she will hurt the most.

Let me share with you a letter our campaign received from Mary Ann Mendoza.

She lost her amazing son, Police Sergeant Brandon Mendoza, after he was killed by an illegal immigrant because of the open borders policies supported by Hillary Clinton.

Sadly, the Mendoza family is just one of thousands who have suffered the same fate.

Here is an excerpt from Mrs. Mendoza’s letter:

“Hillary Clinton, who already has the blood of so many on her hands, is now announcing that she is willing to put each and every one of our lives in harms’ way – an open door policy to criminals and terrorists to enter our country. Hillary is not concerned about you or I, she is only concerned about the power the presidency would bring to her. She needs to go to prison to pay for the crimes she has already committed against this country.”

Hillary also wants to spend hundreds of billions to resettle Middle Eastern refugees in the United States, on top of the current record level of immigration.

For the amount of money Hillary Clinton would like to spend on refugees, we could rebuild every inner city in America.

Hillary’s Wall Street immigration agenda will keep immigrant communities poor, and unemployed Americans out of work. She can’t claim to care about African-American and Hispanic workers when she wants to bring in millions of new low-wage workers

to compete against them.

Here are a few things a Trump Administration will do for America in the first 100 days:

Appoint judges who will uphold the Constitution. Hillary Clinton’s radical judges will virtually abolish the 2nd amendment.

Change immigration rules to give unemployed Americans an opportunity to fill good-paying jobs

Stand up to countries that cheat on trade, of which there are many

Cancel rules and regulations that send jobs overseas

Lift restrictions on energy production

Repeal and replace job-killing Obamacare — it is a disaster.

Pass massive tax reform to create millions of new jobs.

Impose tough new ethics rules to restore dignity to the Office of Secretary of State.

There is one common theme in all of these reforms.

It’s going to be America First.

This is why the stakes in November are so great.

On election day, the politicians stand trial before the people.

The voters are the jury. Their ballots are the verdict. We don’t need or want another Clinton or Obama.

Come November, the American people will have a chance to issue a verdict on the politicians that have sacrificed their security, betrayed their prosperity, and sold out

their country.

They will have a chance to vote for a new agenda with big dreams, bold ideas and enormous possibilities for the American people.

Hillary Clinton’s message is old and tired. Her message is that can’t change.

My message is that things have to change – and this is our one chance do it. This is our last chance to do it.

Americans are the people that tamed the West, that dug out the Panama Canal, that sent satellites across the solar system, that built the great dams, and so much more.

Then we started thinking small.

We stopped believing in what America could do, and became reliant on other countries, other people, and other institutions.

We lost our sense of purpose, and daring.

But that’s not who we are.

Come this November, we can bring America back – bigger and better, and stronger than ever.

We will build the greatest infrastructure on the planet earth – the roads and railways and airports of tomorrow.

Our military will have the best technology and finest equipment – we will bring it back all the way.

Massive new factories will come roaring into our country – breathing life and hope into our communities.

Inner cities, which have been horribly abused by Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party, will finally be rebuilt.

Construction is what I know — nobody knows it better.

The real wages for our workers have not been raised for 18 years — but these wages will start going up, along with the new jobs. Hillary’s massive taxation, regulation and open borders will destroy jobs and drive down wages for everyone.

We are also going to be supporting our police and law enforcement — we can never forget the great job they do.

I am also going to appoint great Supreme Court Justices.

Our country is going to start working again.

People are going to start working again.

Parents are going to start dreaming big for their children again – including parents in our inner cities.

Americans are going to start believing in the future or our country.

We are going to make America rich again.

We are going to make America safe again.

We are going to make America Great Again – and Great Again For EVERYONE.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

HILLARY AND OBAMA: The Hidden Forces Behind the Orlando ISIS Massacre

/0 Comments/in , /by

The media has desperately tried to blame anything and everything for the Orlando Muslim massacre. The bloodshed by a Muslim terrorist has been attributed to guns, homophobia, family problems and mental illness. By next week, the media may be blaming global warming and UFOs.

But Omar Mateen told his Facebook friends and a 911 operator exactly why he was doing it. Omar killed 49 people as part of the Islamic State’s war against America.

The motive is there in black and white. This was one of a number of ISIS attacks. The roots of the Orlando attack lie in Iraq forcing us to dig down into Obama’s disastrous mishandling of ISIS. Without understanding what went wrong in Iraq, we cannot understand what happened in Orlando.

Under Bush, Al Qaeda in Iraq had been on the run. Under Obama, it began overrunning the region.

In 2009, Obama vowed a “responsible” end to the Iraq War. He claimed that the “starting point for our policies must always be the safety of the American people”. But the safety of the American people was the first casualty of his foreign policy. In 2011, he hung up his own “Mission Accomplished” sign and boasted that “The long war in Iraq will come to an end by the end of this year.” It did not and would not.

Obama claimed that his withdrawal from Iraq and his invasion of Libya were both examples of successful policies. Both countries are now ISIS playgrounds. The “sovereign, stable and self-reliant” Iraq he told the country we were leaving behind was a myth. The new Libya was an equally imaginary and unreal place. ISIS gained power and influence as a result of that chaos. And it used that influence to kill Americans.

Today the battle for Fallujah is raging. When ISIS first took the city, Obama breezily dismissed them as a JayVee team. He specifically insisted that ISIS posed no serious threat to America. “There is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.”

“Fallujah is a profoundly conservative Sunni city… And how we think about terrorism has to be defined and specific enough that it doesn’t lead us to think that any horrible actions that take place around the world that are motivated in part by an extremist Islamic ideology are a direct threat to us,” he said.

It is now blatantly and indisputably obvious that ISIS is a direct threat to us. Orlando is yet another reminder of how deeply wrong Obama was about ISIS. Instead of taking action, Obama chose to ignore the expansion of ISIS until it had become a major threat. As a result of its victories, Al Qaeda in Iraq went from an Al Qaeda affiliate to declaring the Islamic State while commanding the allegiance of Muslims around the world. Omar Mateen was one of those Muslims.

If Obama had not dismissed ISIS early on, it would never have gained the level of support that it did. And the Orlando massacre might never have happened.

But Obama was not the only proudly neglectful parent of ISIS. The two key elements in the rise of ISIS were the withdrawal from Iraq and the Arab Spring. The withdrawal gave ISIS freedom of action in Iraq allowing it and its Shiite frenemies in Baghdad to roll back the stability of the Surge. The Arab Spring however destabilized the region so badly that ISIS was able to expand into countries like Syria and Libya. The migration of Jihadists into the region swelled its ranks enormously and turned it from a local problem into a global one.

And the Arab Spring was a project of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama created space for ISIS in Iraq, but Hillary Clinton opened the door for the rise of ISIS in Libya and Syria. Together they helped make ISIS into a regional and then a global player.

Hillary Clinton tried to blame the “internet” for the Orlando attack. But Al Gore’s magical internet did not shoot 49 people in Orlando. For that matter it did not “radicalize” Omar Mateen.

Omar, like many other Muslims, was impressed by the ISIS victories that Hillary’s Islamic regime change project had made possible. He viewed these triumphs not as the result of a disastrous State Department and White House policy, but as proof of the religious authority of ISIS. Omar wanted to join the fight.

Muslim terrorism existed before ISIS. It will exist after ISIS. But there is no doubt that the Islamic State’s claim to having revived the Caliphate and its impressive string of victories against the Iraqi military convinced many Muslims that they were religiously obligated to follow its orders.

And these orders were quite explicit.

ISIS had called for attacks in America during Ramadan. “Hurt the Crusaders day and night without sleeping, and terrorize them so that the neighbor fears his neighbor,” ISIS had told Muslims in the US,

Omar answered the call in Orlando.

Attempting to blame fellow Americans for the actions of ISIS, as Obama has done by emphasizing gun control, only plays into the hands of the Muslim terror group behind the attack. The NRA did not carry out this attack. ISIS did. And ISIS benefited from Obama and Hillary’s foreign policy which allowed it to expand its reach and its popularity until its network of Muslim supporters could strike anywhere.

Obama and Hillary do not want to discuss the role that they played in creating the global conditions that led to the Orlando attack. It’s more convenient for them to blame it on Republicans by emphasizing gun control or homophobia, but discussing an ISIS attack without mentioning ISIS is like talking about WW2 without mentioning Nazi Germany. It’s intellectually dishonest and strategically senseless.

The Orlando massacre was not a local event, but a global one. It must be viewed within the context of a series of ISIS attacks in Europe and America. And ISIS became a global threat on Obama’s watch.

During these pivotal years, Hillary Clinton was the highest ranking foreign policy figure in the country. It is absurd for her to argue that she bears no responsibility for the rise of ISIS. And Hillary Clinton has even defended Obama over his “JayVee” dismissal of ISIS as a direct threat to America.

The Orlando massacre is yet another example of the consequences of Obama and Hillary’s foreign policy. It is not the first such consequence and it will not, by any means, be the last. (For more from the author of “HILLARY AND OBAMA: The Hidden Forces Behind the Orlando ISIS Massacre” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Paul Ryan’s Treason

/0 Comments/in , /by

In an awkward interview with the Huffington Post, House Speaker Paul Ryan threatened to sue Donald Trump if he were to ban Muslim immigration or build a border wall with Mexico. Considering the current track record of suing Obama over abuses of power, this is little more than a confession of impotence.

And yet it’s deeply troubling that a top Republican is willing to go to such lengths to fight for Muslim migration or for that matter illegal immigration in general.

Paul Ryan insists that he will continue to “speak up in defense of our principles, in defense of not just our party’s principles, but our country’s principles”, but it’s telling that these principles seem to involve illegal immigration and Muslim migration.

Since when are either of these representative of our party’s principles or our country’s principles?
And yet they are indeed core principles for Paul Ryan.

Paul Ryan had complained that a Muslim ban was, “not reflective of our principles not just as a party but as a country.” Like Obama, Ryan speaks of “our principles” without actually referencing specifics. While a constitutional conservative, speaks in terms of the Constitution, Ryan uses the “values” language of the left which references no laws, only general sentiments attributed to no specific law or document.

Though Paul Ryan claims that he wants to maintain the traditional separation of powers, and quotes the exact basis for it, he seems reluctant to do so when he claims that a Muslim ban would be wrong. Ryan knows quite well that his opposition to a Muslim migration ban is not based on the law. Like his support for illegal alien amnesty, it is based on the values construct of the left and not on the Constitution.

Paul Ryan was a longtime supporter of illegal alien amnesty. Back when amnesty was still being disguised as “immigration reform”, Ryan was a key player in pushing it forward. Ryan was so notorious for his support for illegal alien amnesty that he had to promise not to move forward on it under Obama in order to gain enough support to become Speaker. And yet despite this Ryan continues to sound amnesty notes.

Like most of the left, Paul Ryan describes illegal aliens as “undocumented immigrants.” Last year, he once again endorsed some measure of legalization for illegal aliens. Even now his website’s top 5 issues includes a call for “immigration reform” which remains a euphemism for illegal alien amnesty.

As is typical of stealth amnesty bids, up front are a raft of security measures and at the very back is a plan for more guest workers and finally a call to “give people a chance to get right with the law”.

That is yet another amnesty euphemism.

Paul Ryan’s amnesty pledge expires when Obama leaves office. That means that, if we take his website at its word, he would like to push amnesty measures under the next administration. A few years ago he was anticipating a move on “immigration reform” in 2017. And so it is not surprising that he remains less than fond of any calls to crack down on illegal immigration.

While Paul Ryan has currently been fairly quiet about amnesty, there was a time when he was one of the more vocal national legislators throwing out amnesty talking points about a “broken immigration system” and “de facto amnesty”. Ryan was certainly not the only prominent Republican to climb on board the amnesty express, but he remained aboard it long after it was leaving the station.

Despite the general shift in the GOP, there is no sign that Ryan has abandoned it. Instead he views Obama’s divisive tone as having poisoned the wall on amnesty. He’s still the same politician who complained two years ago, “People say, ‘amnesty!’ No, it’s taking a problem that’s intractable, that’s been around forever, and trying to fix it in a way that as best guarantees as you can that we’re not going to be in the same [situation] ten years from now.”

Trump’s victory has made it quite clear that Ryan’s view of amnesty, once mainstream in the GOP, is now on the outs. If Trump were to win a national election, then the country would have ratified a rejection of amnesty. The thing that Ryan once fought so hard for, turning illegal aliens into guest workers, was thoroughly rejected by Republican voters.

But there is no sign that Ryan is willing to give up or give in. And that is the problem.

Paul Ryan insists that a ban on Muslim migration would be wrong because, “Muslims are our partners.” That would come as news to all the Americans killed at home and abroad by “our partners” from Saudi Arabia to Muslim refugees and terrorists operating in the United States. And yet even after the latest Muslim terrorist attack in Orlando, Paul Ryan shows no sign of being willing to reconsider his position.

And that’s not surprising.

Paul Ryan doesn’t represent any kind of national Republican consensus. Instead he is a vocal and effective spokesman for the point of view of his backers and sponsors. That is why Ryan not only supports illegal alien amnesty, but also backs “sentencing reform”, a euphemism for freeing criminals.

Despite the anti-establishment election, Paul Ryan continues to represent a particular strain of elitist establishment politics which is concerned with the advocacy of very specific and specifically destructive policies without regard to their consequences, whether it involves criminals, illegal aliens or Muslim terrorists. These principles are often put forward as conservative, but in fact they are a particular species of libertarianism that has very little regard for national interests and none for their victims.

Ryan’s support for illegal immigration and Muslim migration is treasonous. And yet the deeper treason is his treason to the ordinary Republicans whose views and interests he simply does not seem to care about. This is a problem that did not begin with this election and is not likely to end with it.

And yet it is a problem that must be confronted.

The GOP came dangerously close to endorsing amnesty because special interest agendas mattered more than national interests and community interests. And we are not out of the woods yet.

Paul Ryan represents everything wrong with allowing a handful of special interests to set the agenda for the GOP. The agenda has been repudiated at the polls, but it will take far more work to repudiate it in the GOP. (For more from the author of “Paul Ryan’s Treason” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Could the GOP Convention Put Democracy at Risk?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Our nation is based on the idea of “consent of the governed.” When the people vote, they expect those votes will be respected and counted, not ignored.

There is an effort today to toss aside the will of the millions of voters in the Republican primaries to stop Donald Trump from becoming the Republican nominee for president. This effort is truly offensive to those who treasure democracy. If successful, it would guarantee that Hillary Clinton will be sworn into office next January. Even though some very smart people are leading the anti-Trump movement, this idea is very dumb.

Voters showed up in unprecedented numbers to vote for Donald Trump to be the Republican nominee. He received over 13 million votes – the most ever for a Republican candidate. He ended up with 1,542 delegates, almost one thousand delegates more than his closest competitor. Trump drew in scores of new voters to the party, resulting in about two million more people voting in the Republican primaries than the Democratic.

Yet, some in the Republican Party toss aside those numbers because they wet the bed every time a head to head poll has Hillary ahead of Trump. These nervous Republicans need to chill and take a look at the calendar: it is June. The only metrics that matter are what people do on Election Day and Trump’s record during the Republican primaries was one for the books.

Sedition by some lifelong Republicans is afoot. The Washington Post reported on June 17, 2016 that a handful of trouble-making delegates are plotting to sabotage the Republican nominee at the convention next month:

Dozens of Republican convention delegates are hatching a new plan to block Donald Trump at this summer’s party meetings, in what has become the most organized effort so far to stop the businessman from becoming the GOP presidential nominee.

The plan is to secure a vote of “no confidence” in the expected Republican nominee Donald Trump, then to push for another candidate to take the nomination.

David French at National Review Online and Amanda Carpenter at Conservative Review have made the public case for a vote of “no confidence”—for delegates to ignore the will of Republican voters at the convention. I have great respect for Carpenter, but I do have to disagree with her analysis.

Carpenter argues at CR:

The convention’s Rules Committee should allow for a vote of “no confidence” in the GOP nominee. Should Trump not receive a supermajority vote then the delegates should be officially “unbound” and free to vote for the nominee of their choice, ideally a list limited only to those persons who ran for president in 2016.

Carpenter is arguing that after the delegates reach a vote of “no confidence,” they should move to a fight over which failed nominee should replace Trump. The problem is that this will completely destroy any chances Republicans have of winning this fall. The 13 plus million voters who cast a vote for Trump would feel like they have been ignored and disrespected.

David French argues at NRO that not one delegate is legally bound to vote for the candidate they are being sent to Cleveland to vote for:

As a matter of law and history, there is not a single “bound” delegate to the Republican National Convention. Not one delegate is required to vote for Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, or any other individual who “won” votes in the primary process. Each delegate will have to make his or her own choice. They — and they alone — will choose the Republican nominee.

Really? So the delegates are an elite team that can overturn the will of Republican voters? As a political argument, this is folly because all of the Trump voters would be so angry that they would do everything possible to secure defeat for the illegitimate nominee the elites put up. As a legal argument, this is of questionable analysis, because French is saying that the state laws binding delegates are somehow unconstitutional because of the First Amendment. This is one of those legal arguments that will probably never be resolved, because the French wing of the Republican Party will probably lose that fight and the argument will be rendered moot.

But if French is correct, the same can be said of the presidential election. The Electoral College was set up as an indirect way to elect a president. How would French feel if John McCain had won the 2008 election, yet the Electoral College decided that Barack Obama would make a better president? I bet he would have had a different opinion of the faithless delegate/elector had that happened.

Donald Trump won fair and square. Delegates need to suck it up and vote for him. It would be immoral and an undemocratic power grab by the elites if they were to overturn the will of 13 million plus Republican primary voters so they can get revenge against Donald Trump. And it would lead to the three words that should instill fear in any self-respecting Republican: President Hillary Clinton. (For more from the author of “Could the GOP Convention Put Democracy at Risk?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Get out of the Bunker, Conservatives! 8 Ways to Go on Offense Post-Orlando

/0 Comments/in , /by

How is it that Democrats have succeeded, following a series of terror attacks here and in Europe, in focusing the discussion on the inanimate objects used by the Islamic terrorists instead of the Islamic terrorists themselves? How could they get away with such absurdity, especially given the fact that Europe has an even worse terrorist problem, despite having even stricter gun laws than what Democrats are promoting?

The answer, of course, is the same as with every policy and media narrative: Republicans not only let them get away with it, they help validate, legitimize, and consummate their narratives and premises. This week Republicans in the Senate plan to focus solely on gun policy, thereby solidifying the veracity of the Democratic narrative that the problem and solution of terrorism revolves around gun policy. Meanwhile, Republicans are squandering the opportunity to go on offense and cut to the source of our security problems. They have agreed to conduct votes today on two Democratic gun control measures and will respond with two gun amendments of their own. With the federal government preventing law enforcement from identifying Islamic terrorists in our communities, are Republicans not capable of ensuring that the legislative agenda reflects a truthful narrative?

Here are the top eight initiatives Republicans can push that either speak directly to the specific terror attacks that have occurred in recent years or address the long-term systemic security concerns:

1. Defund CVE: The responsibility for not catching the Orlando terrorist, as well as several of the most recent high profile Islamic terrorists, is rooted in the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Agenda. Just before the terror attack, the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC), which is run by Muslim Brotherhood officials, posted a CVE memo directing agents to overlook any terrorist ties to Islam. It went so far as to direct law enforcement to “reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.” Preventing Islamic terror attacks begins with identifying the enemy. That cannot be done as long as there is a fifth column within our own government committed to erasing all connections to the trail of terror. It is this agenda that is ensuring that local law enforcement is not only kept in the dark concerning homegrown Islamic terror threats, they are strong-armed into ignoring those threats with their own resources.

2. Ban the Muslim Brotherhood: Following up on number one, banning the Muslim Brotherhood would change the entire discussion and redirect the national focus from the weapons to the actual terrorists. By designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror group, Congress would be able to audit every member of these counterterrorism councils at DHS, DOJ, and State and root out anyone with ties to their umbrella organizations. In addition to parsing out the firefighters from the arsonists within our government, banishing the Muslim Brotherhood would help stem the tide of Islamic violent extremism in our communities. ISIS has only been around for three years, yet thousands of Muslims have been radicalized in our communities for several decades. The Muslim Brotherhood is the source for much of that radicalization. They control the mosques, write the textbooks for Muslim schools, and serve as chaplains in the prisons. A complete ban of this group would go a long way towards empowering those Muslims who want to assimilate without fear of intimidation.

3. Pause Refugee Resettlement: With Obama stepping on the gas pedal of refugee resettlement, Republicans could easily change the narrative from gun control to protecting our sovereignty and security. Americans do not want more Islamic refugees from the most volatile parts of the world when there is no way to engage in short-term or long-term vetting of these families. In addition, with record numbers of migrants from the Middle East, the only way to properly assimilate those already here into patriotic assimilation is to pause, or at least reduce, immigration from those countries for at least several years.

4. Allow States to Block Refugees: As we’ve noted, Obama has not followed the legal requirement to consult with states before resettling refugees within their respective jurisdictions. Nonetheless, the broken court system has allowed Obama to get away with this violation of federal law. Imagine if Republicans would submit an amendment empowering states to veto refugee resettlement within their borders? A number of Democrats would be placed on defense, as the people always like to decide questions that pertain to the character of their localities on a local level.

5. Strip ISIS Fighters of Citizenship: Isn’t it amazing how Democrats, such as Sen. Joe Manchin (WV), decry due process for Americans when it comes to gun rights, yet every one of them have opposed Ted Cruz’s effort to strip citizenship from ISIS fighters AFTER being convicted through full due process? There are roughly 250 known Americans who have attempted to join up with foreign terror groups. The fact that they have not been tried for treason is unconscionable. Why Mitch McConnell won’t bring Cruz’s bill (S. 247) to the floor is beyond comprehension.

6. Build the Border Fence: The southern border is not only open to Central Americans seeking jobs and welfare, it is potentially open to those fleeing the Middle East and obtaining asylum. As I’ve noted before, the asylum loophole is perhaps a bigger problem than our refugee policy. There are signs of Middle Easterners making the trip to South America for the purpose of declaring asylum at our southern border. Just last week, Judicial Watch reported that one such asylum-seeker was caught at the border carrying documents detailing the region’s gas pipelines. Isn’t it time we finally complete the 800-mile double-layered fence? Democrats would be hard pressed to oppose such an amendment at a time like this.

7. Enact Visa-Tracking: Even Democrats say they support the implementation of an Exit-Entry visa tracking system at our ports, yet they have dragged their feet on implementation since 1996. In 2015 alone, 527,000 foreign nationals overstayed their visas. A number of them are from Middle Eastern countries. We know this because in 2014, ABC News reported that DHS lost track of 58,000 foreign students (just one of the many visa categories) who have overstayed their visas, of which 6,000 presented a “heightened concern.” America admits a tremendous amount of foreign students from the Middle East. This has remained one of the most glaring holes in our security apparatus. Why won’t Republicans make Democrats go back on their word and oppose a consensus amendment to implement the first half of a visa tracking system by October?

8. Concealed Carry: Finally, if Republicans are committed to playing follow-the-leader with Democrats and focusing on guns, why not go on offense and propose concealed carry reciprocity? As witnessed by surging gun sales, Americans are embracing guns now more than ever. We need to show the American people that we are not going to disarm them in the face of global jihad. We are going to protect and promote their right to defend themselves by passing legislation that will allow them to carry their legally-owned firearms not just in their states of residence, but in whatever state or territory they may travel to. And while they are debating gun policy, what better way to embarrass Democrats than by blocking Obama’s continuous release of gun felons from prison?

It is unfathomable for Republicans to allow Democrats to bring in record numbers of dangerous terrorists, ignore their activity domestically, allow their leaders to craft our counter-terrorism policies… and then focus on the weapons used by those individuals? They should be conducting vote after vote on this week’s spending bill highlighting the pro-terrorist agenda of this administration.

For goodness sakes, this is the Justice Department spending bill we are dealing with this week. Republicans should have one hundred amendments prepared dealing with the malfeasances of Obama’s [In]Justice Department, over and beyond terrorism related amendments. They should be shutting down Obama’s war on cops, his assault on North Carolina, the rationally motivated law suits, and much more. But all they want to focus on is playing defense on gun control?

Republicans will also have an epic opportunity to provide Americans with a bold contrast during this week’s House markup of the annual funding bill for Homeland Security. Republicans can shut down Obama’s amnesty agenda, implement requisite security reforms, and ban CVE and the Muslim Brotherhood from the department. But will they?

Bunkers are the final redoubt of the defeated. They stink like fear, death, and cowardice. Real men leave the relative security of fortified walls, march through the gates and engage the enemy on the plains in decisive battle. Unfortunately, the Senate GOP is led by cowards. (For more from the author of “Get out of the Bunker, Conservatives! 8 Ways to Go on Offense Post-Orlando” please click HERE)

Listen to a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Week Proves, Again, That Progressivism Is a Cult

/0 Comments/in , /by

I’ve always enjoyed revisiting the works of Greek philosophy. In no small part because though they were pagans, they were also critical thinkers.

There they were at the dawn of Western Civilization, drinking a runaway train of reality through a firehose with no intellectual roadmap to speak of, and nothing but their wits and a firm resolve to follow the truth wherever it leads. That takes courage. Casting aside the comfort of routine and intellectual malaise is no easy thing, and the Greeks, no doubt, had a penchant for wallowing in sloth and decadence just as much as we Americans do.

But they persisted. They stumbled. Sometimes they even drank poison and died. Sometimes they were wrong, other times they were excellent, but they were almost always serious about knowing how the world really works and why.

Which makes them the exact opposite of today’s progressives.

This last week, following the horror of Orlando, has been a greatest hits tribute to a disordered tribe jacked up on intellectual witchcraft. To claim progressives believe in unicorns would be flattering, compared to the actual buffoonery and obfuscation they have pushed on us from every progressive street corner like a bunch of meth dealers.

For example, a murderous rampage committed by a gay Democrat Muslim, through some godless and insane application of the transverse property, has been of course used to hang responsibility around the necks of Christians and conservatives.

Point of order: The most absurd thing about the progressive’s ‘Stop the Hate’ pleas are that nobody, and I mean nobody, does hate better than progressives. We are talking Sith-level hate. When they say ‘love is love,’ they mean ‘get to the back of the bus, you bigot.’ When they say ‘tolerance’ they mean ‘safe space for me, but not for thee.’

CNN’s Anderson Cooper, an open homosexual, thinks your tears for 49 dead people aren’t real if you’ve never tweeted about gay pride, and he will tell you so on the air. Because… journalism or something. I guess that means Cooper can’t really grieve for the Christians being crucified by ISIS because he rejects Jesus Christ as his Savior.

But wait, Sham Wow, there’s more.

A writer for the website Vox said he wants the president to “unilaterally ban people” from buying guns. And not to be outdone, Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, said that “due process” is the main obstacle to stopping evil.

Yep, there goes that pesky Bill of Rights again. The Founding Fathers may as well have raised their hand and sworn an oath on a Koran the way they keep terrorizing us with their Sharia-like rules. I just knew something didn’t seem right about those dead old white men and all that “give me liberty or give me death” crap.

The New York Times thinks the Book of Romans in the New Testament calls for executing homosexuals. Because nothing says “homophobic” like the following prose (taken from — gasp! — the Book of Romans):

For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Lest you think these are just the excusable rantings of sad and frustrated people in the wake of a senseless disaster, think again and think hard. This is the era of bold-faced lies such as “how is my gay marriage going to affect you” and “if you like your doctor, you can keep him.” If progressives have proven anything in recent years it’s that they are accomplished liars.

They are coming for everything including the kitchen sink, and are doing so with all the intellectual rigor of that toddler you saw throwing a temper tantrum at the mall the other day. A gay Muslim Democrat may have done the killing here, but a Christian Republican NRA member is sure as hell going to pay for it.

In all fairness, though, the progressive bug has also infected some corners of Christianity itself with a sort of self-loathing and doctrinal delinquency. Catholic Bishop Robert Lynch of St. Petersburg, Florida, wrote in a national editorial following what happened in Orlando that “sadly it is religion, including our own, which targets, mostly verbally, and also often breeds contempt for gays, lesbians and transgender people. Attacks today on LGBT men and women often plant the seed of contempt, then hatred, which can ultimately lead to violence.”

These are the words of an idiot drunk on red herrings and false equivalencies. He should be ashamed, if not excommunicated. And as his penance, perhaps he should familiarize himself with a story out of Iraq that occurred last month.

A 12-year-old Christian girl was burnt to death in her home by members of ISIS, because her family failed to pay a religious tax on time. Yet what were the girl’s dying words to her mother?

“Forgive them.”

Cast the progressive devil out of your house, bishop. And the same to you, America. For if this little girl had the courage to follow the truth wherever it leads, even to her martyrdom, why on earth don’t you? (For more from the author of “This Week Proves, Again, That Progressivism Is a Cult” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What the New York Times Got Devastatingly Wrong About the Orlando Massacre

/0 Comments/in , /by

In an editorial, The New York Times viewed the massacre in Orlando as an example of hate against the LGBT community. The liberal newspaper blamed Republican efforts such as the North Carolina law that requires individuals to use the bathroom that corresponds to their sex at birth and “more than 200 anti-L.G.B.T. bills have been introduced in 34 states,” as factors that contributed to an atmosphere of bigotry conducive for violent reactions to gays and transgender people.

Nowhere in its 630 words did the article mention the fact that Omar Mateen was a Muslim and pledged his allegiance to ISIS – the terrorist group that executes homosexuals.

Instead, the editorial stated, “the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear…”

Sadly, it’s not just the New York Times that is jumping on the chance to blame anyone and anything BUT the real enemy. Democratic politicians, the media and progressive organizations avoided blaming the ISIS-inspired mass shooting on radical Islam. Instead, they point fingers at guns and supposed bias against the LGBT community by Republicans and Christian conservatives.

Speaking from the Oval Office about the shooting, President Obama emphasized the attack was not “part of a larger plot,” and added that the motivation behind the shooting was unknown.

And as usual, Obama then pivoted to guns saying, “We are also going to have to think about the risks we are willing to take by being so lax in how we make very powerful firearms available to the people in this country.”

Reacting to the shooting, and acting as Obama’s puppets, Senate Democrats pushed for gun control measures following the attack. Democrats launched a filibuster to force votes on preventing gun sales to individuals on a terrorist watch list and measures to tighten background checks.

In a tweet, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) proudly announced his filibuster accomplishment.

Democrat’s intense focus on guns and refusal to address ISIS drew criticism from Carl Higbie, former Navy SEAL and author of Enemies Foreign and Domestic: A SEAL’s Story. According to Higbie, Democrats are exploiting the terrorist attack to advance their progressive political agenda on guns and to protect Obama and Hillary Clinton from their foreign policy failure to defeat ISIS.

“Many on the left are jumping on this tragedy as a chance to push the same agenda they have been pushing for years. They also do not want to admit that their failed foreign policy could have in any way contributed to this,” said Higbie in an interview with Conservative Review. He added, “This is a scapegoat to not link Hillary Clinton to the influence of ISIS.”

Higbie believes the focus needs to be on the radical ideology and not the objects used in attacks noting, “No one blamed Boeing for the planes hitting the towers. We must not blame the objects, we must blame the ideology that possesses people to use them for evil.”

Amanda Marcotte, writing for Salon, criticized conservatives for citing radical Islam as the cause for the violent attack and added there isn’t a difference between Christianity and Islam regarding violence.

In tweets, ACLU attorneys added to the liberal view that avoided linking the terrorist attack to ISIS and went further by directly blaming the “Christian Right” for the attack citing the 200 anti-LGBT bills that were introduced this year.

Think Progress, a progressive policy group, said Christian views toward the LGBT community are as violent as radical Islam. Yes, you read that right.

Abraham Hamilton III, a public policy analyst for the American Family Association, a Christian and family values organization, was dismayed over the blame being assigned to Christians and believes it’s dangerous to not identify ISIS as the true cause of the attack.

“The speed with which some have turned their ire onto Christianity, as a result of this tragedy, [is] appalling and astounding. It’s sickening how quickly some are willing to politicize the death of some many,” Hamilton said in an interview with Conservative Review.

Hamilton believes there is no ambiguity regarding Mateen’s motivation since the murderer called 911 and pledged his allegiance to ISIS and its leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, and reportedly yelled “Allahu Akbar” during the shooting.

Additionally, Hamilton noted that disagreement over an issue does not equate animus against others. He pointed out that Chick-Fil-A, the restaurant founded by Christians and normally closed on Sundays, opened last Sunday to serve food and drinks for the people waiting in line in Orlando to donate blood for the victims of the attack.

Finally, Hamilton is concerned about the failure of Obama and The New York Times to identify ISIS as an organization responsible for the attack especially science ISIS claimed responsibility for the shootings at the Pulse nightclub.

Hamilton concluded, “Failure or unwillingness to identify those who seek to destroy us puts our citizens more at risk of danger.”

Unlike the 911 attack by Al Qaeda that unified the nation against a common enemy, the response to the terrorist attack in Orlando is split between ideological lines. (For more from the author of “What the New York Times Got Devastatingly Wrong About the Orlando Massacre” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Thinks the Muslim Brotherhood Is ‘Moderate’

/0 Comments/in , /by

Conservative Review Senior Editor Daniel Horowitz went on the Mark Shiver radio program Thursday and gave an informative interview on the national security disaster facing the United States because of the Obama administration’s softness on terror.

Horowitz describes the network of terrorist fundraisers and Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers working for the government and sending money back to groups like Hamas, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups. All enabled by an administration that views the Muslim Brotherhood as “moderate.” Horowitz described the Muslim Brotherhood as a “bigger threat than ISIS.”

Listen:

Horowitz said that infringing on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens is not the way to defend ourselves from terrorist attacks. What we must do is remove the Muslim Brotherhood and other terrorist sympathizers from our government. Then we need to secure our borders and defeat ISIS and other Islamic extremist groups. (For more from the author of “Obama Thinks the Muslim Brotherhood Is ‘Moderate'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

7 Ways US Can Prevent Another Orlando Attack

/0 Comments/in , /by

In the wake of the Orlando terrorist attack, the Obama administration has been quick to blame gun control laws. This is because the administration refuses to admit its policies to defeat the Islamic State have failed.

Islamist terror attacks within the U.S. have dramatically increased within the past year—with Orlando being the 22nd instance of Islamist terrorism in the U.S. since 2015. This is out of 86 plots since 2001.

150613_terror-plots_fb1-1-1024x1024

Gun control will not stop this rise in Islamist terror attacks, and the president is wrong to suggest so. To stop these attacks and defeat radical Islamism, the U.S. needs to defend the U.S. homeland and combat terrorism abroad.

We must maintain essential counterterrorism tools to help law enforcement and intelligence agencies find and stop terrorists before they attack.

Here are seven policies that will help prevent another Orlando:

1. Combat Terrorism Abroad and Deny ISIS Territorial Gains

So long as the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, maintains territory in Afghanistan and Iraq, it will be a persistent terror threat.

Rolling back—and defeating—ISIS requires a global approach in which the U.S. leads a multipronged, multination effort that seeks to deny ISIS the ability to hold territory. This will disrupt its recruitment of foreign fighters, and will counter its destructive ideology.

One part of the solution must be military. ISIS derives much of its cachet and legitimacy from its success. Driving ISIS from its conquered territories will undermine the group’s legitimacy in the eyes of aspiring jihadists, thereby hurting its ability to recruit.

2. Shut Down the Foreign Fighter Pipeline

In order to defeat terrorism abroad, the U.S. must lead an international effort to deny ISIS territorial gains and shut down the foreign fighter pipeline. While military victory would undermine ISIS’ legitimacy, the U.S. must also improve intelligence capabilities to identify potential recruits and preempt Islamist violence.

This requires hard intelligence work and even closer coordination between countries to identify suspicious travel. This includes pushing allies to take greater intelligence and security measures that reflect the global nature of the threat.

The U.S. should make greater use of state and local law enforcement, both as intelligence sources and as intelligence users.

3. Ensure That the FBI Regularly Shares Information

The FBI must share information with state and local law enforcement—treating state and local partners as critical actors in the fight against terrorism.

State, local, and private sector partners must send and receive timely information from the FBI. Despite the lessons of 9/11 and other terrorist plots, the culture of the FBI continues to resist sharing information with state and local law enforcement.

4. Expand Active Shooter Threat Training Across the Country

Mass shootings in busy areas will always be a threat given America’s free society. Since state and local law enforcement officers will be the first to respond, training for active shooter events should be expanded through existing programs such as the Active Shooter Threat Training Program and corresponding instructor training program.

5. Community Outreach Remains a Vital Tool

The U.S. should facilitate strong community outreach and policing. Such capabilities are key to building trust in local communities, especially in high risk areas. If the U.S. is to thwart Islamist terrorist attacks successfully, it must do so by putting effective community outreach operations at the tip of the spear.

6. Maintain Essential Counterterrorism Tools

Support for important investigative tools is essential to maintaining the security of the U.S. and combating terrorist threats. Legitimate government surveillance programs are also a vital component of U.S. national security and should be allowed to continue.

7. Counter Islamist Ideology

The U.S. needs a strong, proactive counterterrorism policy in order to prevent future terrorist attacks like Orlando. We cannot afford to play politics when national security is at stake. The U.S. must do more both at home and abroad in order to uproot and defeat Islamist terrorism. (For more from the author of “7 Ways US Can Prevent Another Orlando Attack” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.