This Is the Reason Russia Is Banning Children From Watching the New Power Rangers Movie

Russia has slapped an “18+” adults-only rating on the new Power Rangers movie after widespread Western media reports that it includes a female character questioning her sexuality. The film is rated PG-13 in the U.S.

Notably, Russia reportedly has not given a similar adult rating to Disney’s remake of Beauty and the Beast, despite its alteration of the original animated film to make one of its characters (Le Fou) homosexual, in what the director called an “exclusively gay moment.”

The Hollywood Reporter reported:

“On Friday, WDSSPR, the Russian distributor of Power Rangers, informed theaters that the age restriction for the movie has been changed from 16+ to 18+, meaning that only viewers over 18 will be admitted to the screenings.

“The distributor provided no explanation for assigning the stricter age restriction, but it followed harsh criticism from several [Russian] legislators over the movie’s LGBTQ content.”

(Read more from “This Is the Reason Russia Is Banning Children From Watching the New Power Rangers Movie” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mom Says TSA Agents Traumatized Son With ‘Horrifying’ Security Check

A mother who asked TSA agents at DFW International Airport for alternative screening for her son with special needs said they were “treated like dogs” and forced to miss a flight during an extensive security check, according to her Facebook post that has since gone viral.

But the Transportation Security Administration said in a prepared statement that it followed approved procedures to “resolve an alarm of the passenger’s laptop.”

Jennifer Williamson wrote Sunday morning that her son has a sensory processing disorder and that she asked agents to “screen him in other ways per TSA rules.”

An accompanying video shows a TSA agent patting down her son. The agent pats down his backside before moving to his front. She writes in the post they were kept for more than hour in the “horrifying” incident.

TSA disputed Williamson’s account, noting in its statement that the passengers were at the checkpoint for about 45 minutes, including the time it took to discuss screening procedures with the teen’s mother and the inspection of three carry-on items. The pat-down took about two minutes, according to the agency. (Read more from “Mom Says TSA Agents Traumatized Son With ‘Horrifying’ Security Check” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Homeowner’s Son Exchanges Words With Three Burglars, Then Guns Them Down

A 19-year-old man in Oklahoma gunned down three potential robbers Monday afternoon when they tried to break into his family’s home.

Wagoner County sheriff’s deputies went to the house and found one person dead in the driveway and two other people dead in the kitchen, reports the New York Post . . .

The group of suspects, wearing all black clothing, broke into the house by way of a glass door in the back of the home, according to the sheriff’s spokesman, Deputy Nick Mahoney.

The homeowner’s son maintained he woke up when heard “loud bangs” downstairs. He quickly jumped out of bed and grabbed his AR-15 to protect himself, he told police.

When he went downstairs he exchanged a few words with the would-be robbers before shooting them down. Two of them died in the kitchen, while another crawled to the driveway before dying as well. (Read more from “Homeowner’s Son Exchanges Words With Three Burglars, Then Guns Them Down” HERE)
_______________________________

Woman to Be Charged With Murder in Oklahoma Slayings

RODRIGUEZ, ELIZABETH MARIE_20170328015914679_7627643_ver1.0_640_360Elizabeth Marie Rodriguez [was just] arrested on three complaints of first-degree murder and three complaints of first-degree burglary. . .

In Oklahoma, those believed to be committing a felony that results in a death can face murder charges, even if they did not actually kill anyone.

Rodriguez reportedly knew of the home before the incident, but officials say she had no connection to Peters. A witness reportedly told investigators that Rodriguez had told the other three suspects to burglarize the home while she waited in the driveway. She reportedly drove away when she heard gunshots.

Officials have not named the witness or how that individual may have been involved in the incident. . .

[Rodriguez] reportedly admitted to planning the robbery and driving the vehicle. (Read more about how the deaths of three burglars lead to murder charges HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

They Thought She Was Crazy: Doctor Extracts RFID Chip From Sex Trafficking Victim

If someone walks into a hospital and claims that they’re being tracked, and that they need to have a tracking device removed, there’s a pretty good chance that they’re going to be sent to a mental institution instead. However, according to a doctor who wished to remain anonymous to protect his patient, that very situation occurred last October and it didn’t end how you might expect.

The patient in question was a 28-year-old woman who claimed that she had a GPS tracking device planted in her body. Normally a patient like that would be regarded as crazy, but this woman appeared totally sane, and she had an incision mark on her side. So the doctor decided to check her out anyway. The medical staff at the hospital were stunned when they finally gave her an X-ray.

Embedded in the right side of her flank is a small metallic object only a little bit larger than a grain of rice. But it’s there. It’s unequivocally there. She has a tracker in her. And no one was speaking for like five seconds — and in a busy ER that’s saying something.

It turns out that it wasn’t a GPS device, but an RFID chip. “It’s used to tag cats and dogs. And someone had tagged her like an animal, like she was somebody’s pet that they owned.”

In a way, that makes it even creepier than a GPS device. RFID chips have a very short range. To be useful for tracking someone’s position, they would have to be kept confined in an area where the right equipment is in place to send or receive signals from the chip. The doctor would later discover that this woman was a victim of sex trafficking.

Science fiction has been warning about the potential of tracking devices for years, but usually in reference to how the government might use this technology. It just goes to show that the way humans use technology in the real world is often stranger (and creepier) than fiction. (For more from the author of “They Thought She Was Crazy: Doctor Extracts RFID Chip From Sex Trafficking Victim” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hundreds of Washington, D.C. Children Missing Already in 2017, Officials Seek FBI Help, Fear Pedophile Network Growing

A total of 501 juveniles have been reported missing in D.C. since the beginning of the year. This startling number has forced the hands of several officials who’ve written a letter to call on special help from the Justice Department in investigating the matter.

The letter, obtained by the Associated Press, asked FBI Director James Comey and Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “devote the resources necessary to determine whether these developments are an anomaly or whether they are indicative of an underlying trend that must be addressed.” It was signed by Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Cedric Richmond (D-La) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents D.C. in Congress.

“Ten children of color went missing in our nation’s capital in a period of two weeks and at first garnered very little media attention. That’s deeply disturbing,” Richmond’s letter said.

As the AP reports, the District of Columbia logged 501 cases of missing juveniles, many of them black or Latino, in the first three months of this year, according to the Metropolitan Police Department, the city’s police force. Twenty-two were unsolved as of March 22, police said.

The Twitter profile for the DC police department is quite literally riddled with images of missing young black and latino girls. In spite of the officials’ concern and the posts on Twitter, police are assuring the public that there is nothing out of the ordinary. (Read more from “Hundreds of Washington, D.C. Children Missing Already in 2017, Officials Seek FBI Help, Fear Pedophile Network Growing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Will Trump Take Advantage of This New Lawsuit to Hold Hillary Clinton Accountable?

Several unanswered questions remain In the Hillary Clinton State Department email scandal. For instance, there was never an official government report detailing if and how her illegal email practices damaged national security.

Now, Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit to find an answer to that question.

“In the critical matter of Hillary Clinton’s illegal email practices, the Director of National Intelligence simply ignored a directive requiring a damage assessment and a report,” Judicial Watch said in a statement.

As such, they have filed a lawsuit in federal court to force the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of State to comply with the law.

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, cites the requirement in Intelligence Community Directive (“ICD”) 732, issued on June 27, 2014, that a damage assessment be conducted whenever there is “an actual or suspected unauthorized disclosure or compromise of classified national intelligence that may cause damage to U.S. national security” ICD 732(D)(2) (Judicial Watch v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence et al. (No. 1:17-cv-00508)).

Since the election is over, and because President Trump has declined to prosecute the case against Clinton’s mishandling of classified information, the story has fallen out of the news. It is important to remember that Clinton’s actions weren’t scandalous merely because she was a presidential candidate, but because her actions might have enabled America’s enemies to access classified State Department intelligence.

With all the suspicion over suspected Russian hacking, one would assume there would be bipartisan support for determining how Hillary Clinton may have compromised America’s security. If nothing else, there should be interest in preventing such gross negligence from happening again.

Judicial Watch says this new lawsuit presents the Trump administration with the opportunity to hold Clinton and others responsible for compromising national security to account. (For more from the author of “Will Trump Take Advantage of This New Lawsuit to Hold Hillary Clinton Accountable” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trial Against Multi-Billion Dollar Psychotropic Drug Giant Reveals Almost 900% Suicide Increase With Antidepressant Use

A trial is currently underway in Illinois as a widow seeks to hold pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline accountable for improper labeling and minimizing a potentially serious side effect of a well-known antidepressant.

Paroxetine is a widely prescribed antidepressant and anti-anxiety drug under the class of drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Paroxetine is most commonly known as the brand name of Paxil, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).

Since 2012, Wendy Dolin has been engaged in a legal battle against GSK following the suicide of her husband, Stewart Dolin. Wendy says that in the summer of 2010, Stewart was prescribed a generic version of Paxil for anxiety issues related to work. According to Wendy, Stewart Dolin complained of becoming increasingly anxious and restless and was unable to sleep while taking the drug. On July 15, 2010, less than one week after beginning this medication, Stewart committed suicide by walking in front of a train. . .

The lawsuit alleges that GSK whitewashed the suicide risks of Paxil in its data given to the FDA. The complaint explains that in 1989, GSK”s “Integrated Summary of Safety Information,” required to gain approval from the FDA, included a presentation identifying the number of suicide and suicide attempts during clinical trials. The suit alleges that GSK’s summary “skewed the statistical analysis of the data presented and obscured the true risk” by including suicide attempts “of placebo patients that had taken place in the placebo run-in (or wash-out) phase” before the clinical trials began. “Run-in” or “wash-out” refers to a time period of removing any other drugs in a trial participant’s system; any “adverse events” that take place during those periods are not appropriate or generally accepted for inclusion in calculations during clinical trials, the suit claims. . .

The trial against GSK is in progress and is expected to last a few weeks. Bob Fiddaman, a blogger and author who has written extensively about his own experiences with paroxetine, has been covering the developments of the trial. Fiddaman wrote that a “startling revelation” was unveiled on March 22nd: “Attorneys representing widow Wendy Dolin showed the ratio of Paxil-induced suicidality in adults is a staggering 8.9. It is not 6.7, as previously claimed and reported by Glaxo. The 6.7 figure is astoundingly high in itself, but the 8.9 ratio is flabbergasting! Plaintiff witness, Dr. David Ross, said this figure is ‘astounding.’ What you should remember here is that GSK’s 1989 drug application for Paxil said the suicidality odds ratio was 2.6.” (For more from the author of “Trial Against Multi-Billion Dollar Psychotropic Drug Giant Reveals Almost 900% Suicide Increase With Antidepressant Use” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Virginia Judge Says Trump Order Is Not a Muslim Ban, but Actually Protects Citizens From Terror

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Linda Sarsour, a militant Palestinian activist, have lost their lawsuit against President Donald Trump over his immigration moratorium stopping foreign nationals attempting to enter the United States from six terror-tied countries.

Judge Anthony Trenga, who sits on the U.S. Eastern District Court of Virginia, said the president does indeed have the authority to protect the country’s national security interests.

“The President has provided a detailed justification for the Order based on national security needs, and enjoining the operation of [executive order] would interfere with the President’s unique constitutional responsibilities to conduct international relations, provide for the national defense, and secure the nation,” Judge Trenga said in his opinion.

“The President has unqualified authority to bar physical entry to the United States at the border,” Trenga added.

Several officials from the Hamas-tied Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) sued Trump over what they called a “Muslim Exclusion Order.” Officials listed on the docket have in the past expressed support for U.S.-designated terrorist organizations, cheered terrorist attacks, and campaigned against cooperating with the FBI.

In his 32-page ruling, Judge Trenga rejected that the moratorium is a “Muslim ban.”

The order “clearly has a stated secular purpose — to protect U.S. citizens from terrorist attacks,” Tenga said.

The moratorium — which was recently struck down by federal courts in Hawaii and Maryland — imposes a temporary stop on citizens from six terror tied countries — Syria, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan — from entering the United States.

As Conservative Review’s Daniel Horowitz has explained, the courts do not have the plenary power to interfere with the president’s executive order, and other decisions concerning national security and immigration matters.

The Department of Justice said in a statement in reaction to the ruling: “As the Court correctly explains, the President’s Executive Order falls well within his authority to safeguard the nation’s security.”

CAIR, the radical group that brought the suit, will appeal the ruling, according to their lawyers from the far-left American Civil Liberties Union.

An additional lawsuit was filed against the Trump order in a D.C. federal court Friday. The Universal Muslim Association of America (UMMA) — an Islamic group funded in part by a foundation connected to the regime in Iran — says the president’s executive order is harmful to Muslims and inflicts “a damaging stigma upon them based on their religious affiliation.” (For more from the author of “Virginia Judge Says Trump Order Is Not a Muslim Ban, but Actually Protects Citizens From Terror” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Calif. Dem Just Gave the Dumbest, Most Ignorant Reason to Oppose Gorsuch … EVER

Freshman Senator Kamala Harris, D-Calif., might have one of the most disturbing – albeit increasingly common – arguments against Trump’s Supreme Court nominee yet: He’s not a judicial activist.

Friday morning, the former Golden State attorney general made known that she wouldn’t support Judge Neil Gorsuch to replace Justice Antonin Scalia because he “has consistently valued legalisms over real lives.”

Naturally, the idea that a judge ought not be more concerned with the application of the law, rather than its outcome, raised some eyebrows.

Harris links to her recent op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle, where the senator seeks to paint Trump’s nominee in the same league as the Tin Man from the Wizard of Oz, a creature desperately in search of a heart.

The implication? Our jurists should be more concerned with emotions and outcomes versus faithful application of the law, and Neil Gorsuch is a big meanie-head.

But that supposedly absent heart debuted on the judge’s sleeve during the hearings. Faced with such questions and accusations multiple times this hearing, the answer or implication thereof has been simple: He didn’t like the outcome, but that’s the law as written (i.e., his job). If legislators don’t like it, change the law or pass a new one.

In her defense, Senator Harris is quite new to her position and may not quite be used to the job of a federal legislator, but she and the 534 members of Congress have the power to change laws and outcomes they don’t like. It’s all lined out in Article I of the Constitution.

But rather than embrace her role as a legislator and Gorsuch’s as a judge, Harris opts to openly defend judicial activism and cite it as the definitive reason for fighting his confirmation, quoting Thurgood Marshall’s aphorism to “do what you think is right and let the law catch up.”

One only wonders what any of the founders would think of that statement from a member of the “weakest branch of government,” or the use of it to defend bench legislation by a U.S. Senator. Well, they wouldn’t like it.

As stated concisely by attorney T. Greg Doucette, “I’m sure there are intellectually honest reasons to oppose Gorsuch. ‘Legalisms over real lives – for a judge – is not one of them.”

(For more from the author of “This Calif. Dem Just Gave the Dumbest, Most Ignorant Reason to Oppose Gorsuch … EVER” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why the Deep State Is Gunning for President Trump

According to some, the “Deep State” is just another conspiracy theory. It’s hard to prove claims about unelected and unaccountable officials in government and intelligence agencies. They operate in secret. In another sense, however, the Deep State is an obvious — and troubling — fact.

The president and those whom he appoints and we elect are but the tip of a deep iceberg. Below them sits a huge pyramid of bureaucracies and civil servants. The federal government is the largest employer in America.

But whom does this army of civil servants serve? They’re supposed to serve the American people. Too often, it seems, they put party loyalty above that.

Deep State Functionaries Give 90 Percent to Democrats

What party is that? Here’s a clue: federal employees working in 14 agencies donated $2 million to the recent presidential campaign. Of that 95 percent went to Hilary Clinton. No surprise that 99 percent of donations from State Department employees went to Clinton. But Department of Agriculture employee donations also went 99 percent to Clinton. So did gifts from Department of Education employees (99.7 percent) and Department of Labor employees (99.4 percent). Department of Justice workers contributed 97 percent. IRS employees gave 94 percent.

The State Department winked at Clinton’s use of her private server to handle classified information. You don’t need a conspiracy theory to see why. When the Justice Department exonerates Clinton, there’s no mystery there. The people who make these decisions, and the lower-level people who back them up, are all Clintonites. That is to say, left-leaning Democrats. They don’t take their cues from the American people or from the Constitution. They do what the Democratic Party wants.

By any reading of the statute, Clinton clearly violated the Espionage Act. Not once, but thousands of times. Her actions clearly compromised national security. Foreign powers surely could access her communications. Nevertheless, for the Deep State Democrats, party loyalty trumped national security. So she wasn’t prosecuted.

Obama Stuffed the Pentagon with His Followers

But how about the security agencies themselves? If you believe what you see in the movies, military top brass are all rock-ribbed conservatives. Yet Defense Department employees contributed 84 percent to Clinton. Homeland Security workers donated 90 percent. The figures suggest that the people in charge of our nation’s security are mostly rock-ribbed Democrats.

This partisan edge may explain why President Trump is having a tough time with some of his security appointments. General H.R. McMaster, his National Security Advisor, subscribes to the Obama-era fantasy that terror has nothing to do with Islam. General James Mattis, Trump’s choice for Secretary of Defense, seems to be picking his own appointees from Hillary’s discarded wishlist.

Mattis’ choice of Anne Patterson for undersecretary of defense for policy is particularly disturbing. This is the fourth most powerful position in the Pentagon. During Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, Patterson was Ambassador to Egypt. She was also an ardent supporter of Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Even after General El-Sisi turned the Brotherhood out of power, she lobbied to have them reinstated. According to Raymond Ibrahim, she was widely known in Egypt as the “Brotherhood stooge.” She “was arguably one of the most hated individuals by the millions of Egyptians who took to the streets against Morsi and the Brotherhood.” One senior Republican foreign policy advisor told the Washington Free Beacon:

Anne Patterson is the embodiment of the Obama administration’s failed approach to the Middle East … it’s beyond irresponsible to put her in charge of the Pentagon’s policy apparatus.

Mattis has since withdrawn Patterson’s name under pressure from the White House. But why did he pick her in the first place? Some say that the choice of McMaster and Mattis was just poor judgment. Maybe. Or maybe there aren’t that many good people to choose from. Trump needs candidates who are competent and can be confirmed swiftly by the Senate. Mattis’s quick confirmation suggests that the Democrats weren’t too worried about his policy views.

Could Mattis have been steeped too long in the culture of Obama’s Pentagon? Was he surrounded by people who couldn’t see a problem with the Muslim Brotherhood? During his eight year tenure, Obama replaced several hundred generals and admirals. He put in people who would go along with his anti-win policy. While Obama was gutting the Pentagon’s budget, he was also busy weeding out all those rock-ribbed patriotic types.

Are Iran’s Stooges Setting Our Foreign Policy?

Too many government agencies are top-heavy with liberals. That will make it extremely hard for the new administration to make a fresh start. The Deep State is stuffed with holdovers from the Obama administration who are committed to his failed policies.

A prime example is Sahar Nowrouzzadeh. She formerly worked for the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC). That’s a lobbying group for the Islamic Republic of Iran. She also served as the Iran Director for President Obama’s National Security Council. Experts call her one of the architects of the suicidal Iran nuclear deal. You’d think that the new administration would want to cut her out of the loop.

Yet Nowrouzzadeh is now in charge of Iran policy for the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff. She got this position in 2016. Recently, a high-ranking official of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps boasted about a “guerrilla movement” of Iranian agents who work and live in the United States. But with people like Nowrouzzadeh working at State, they need hardly have bothered.

The Travel Ban Was Nixed by an Obama Crony

And then there are the courts. Federal judges might be expected to keep the Deep State in check. But some of them act more like partisan functionaries. A case in point is Judge Derrick Kahala Watson. He was appointed as a U.S district court judge in Honolulu by fellow Hawaiian and Harvard Law classmate Barack Obama. Judge Watson issued a restraining order against President Trump’s temporary travel ban. He didn’t cite legal grounds. So what was his argument? During the campaign, Trump had used heated rhetoric when speaking of Muslims.

The purpose of the travel ban is to protect Americans from radical Islam. The judiciary, in contrast, seems determined to put Americans at risk. The law itself is solidly on the side of the president. The president is empowered by 8 U.S. Code 1182 to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants” whose entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Alas, the lawyer left is not interested in the law. As former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy writes, “There is no way of crafting an order restricting immigration from Muslim countries that will satisfy them.” So what then? If the judges will not follow the law? If the bureaucratic holdovers from the Obama administration are more loyal to him than to the Constitution?

We Are Headed for an Ugly Showdown That Trump Might Lose

Then we are headed for a dangerous confrontation. It will be hard to resolve through courts. Will we end up with one law enforcement body following orders from a court, against another following orders from the President?

And then there’s the question of just how much power the President has over the Deep State. Columnist Daniel Greenfield suggests that Obama controls more of the government through his network of embedded loyalists than Trump does. As Mark Steyn puts it, “You don’t need a presidency for life, if you’ve got a bureaucracy for life.”

But why would leftist actors in Deep State risk such a dangerous encounter? Perhaps because they’re fairly confident they would win it. They have plenty of allies in the government and in the courts.

Add to that the support of universities and all those grads whom they’ve trained to believe that they can flout any laws they don’t like. In addition, they can count on a network of leftist nonprofits such as Obama’s Organizing for Action (OFA) which has 33,000 volunteers and 250 offices across the country.

Most of all, the Deep State can count on the “fourth estate” — the media — to cover for it by slanting the news. If, as some contend, we are in the midst of a “quiet coup” by a shadow government, you can be sure that the media will do its best to keep it quiet. Or even to justify it.

Those who think that Trump’s electoral victory will surely result in a safer and more secure America haven’t come to grips with the Deep State’s capacity to stir up deep trouble. (For more from the author of “Why the Deep State Is Gunning for President Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.