Posts

A Battle Of “Uns” Between Clinton and Trump

“Unpredictable” versus “unqualified” could be the choice between what are likely to be the two most unfavorable presidential candidates in American history.

As Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are within a tiptoe step of becoming their respective party’s nominees, abstract outlines of the themes of the general election are beginning to take shape.

Clinton, in recent interviews, has hammered Trump for being a “loose cannon” and “provocative.” Trump has delighted in repeating remarks from Clinton’s current primary rival Bernie Sanders, arguing that Clinton’s “judgment is clearly lacking.” And both candidates are taking an increasing focus on terrorism and national security as it relates to both of these character qualities.

“I am the only person that says we will not be led down the tubes by an incompetent person like Hillary Clinton,” Trump said as a New Jersey fundraiser with Chris Christie on Thursday evening. “You look at what she has done. Her deal with Libya. Just take a look at Libya. It is a catastrophe.”

(Note: In a little noticed story published earlier this week, it was revealed that the former chief counsel of the House Select Committee on Benghazi said in January that “nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi.” Meaning, he felt that military could not have done anything differently to save American lives in Benghazi the night of the attacks. Of course, the decision to place Americans assets there in the first place remains within Clinton’s area of responsibility as Secretary of State.)

Clinton, for her part, previewed her initial lines of attack in a rare interview on Thursday with CNN, seeking to mark Trump’s hot talk as a barrier to making the nation safer.

The former Secretary of State unveiled her barrage of attacks in one answer to CNN’s Chris Cuomo that began by calling Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering the United States, “provocative and wrongheaded” that led to him “being used essentially as a recruiter for more people to join the cause of terrorism.”

Clinton also criticized Trump’s “unpredictable, dangerous rhetoric” and repeatedly stated his comments would have a negative effect on national security.

“Having watched presidents” she said, “having seen the incredibly difficult work that they do and the decisions that they have to make—the thinking that goes in sitting in the situation room, do we go after Bin Laden or not? I was part of that. Was it a clear, easy choice? Of course not. did it have to be carefully parsed and analyzed and then we gave our opinions and up to the president to decide.”

But Trump is certain to do all he can to turn Clinton’s experience in the Obama Administration into a negative. That’s why he’s not shying away from the “unqualified” label for her, first publicly raised by Sanders against Clinton.

It’s usually the very first thing Trump and his advisors bring up when it comes to Clinton.

On cue, Trump senior advisor Stephen Miller responded to Clinton’s interview in a dueling appearance on CNN thusly, “We obviously agree with Bernie Sanders that Hillary Clinton isn’t qualified to be president.”

“The Democratic party is on the verge of nominating the most pro-war, pro-wall street lawmaker in the modern history of the Democratic party,” he said. “That’s amazing. Think about it. You have a candidate in Hillary running on a pro-war platform about what she did in Libya, doing in Syria, about the toppling of the Egyptian regime and the military took back control, who’s running on a pro-wall street, pro-war agenda. That’s not the right fit.” (For more from the author of “A Battle Of “Uns” Between Clinton and Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Stacey Dash Shares Picture of Herself and Trump That Is Generating Buzz

Actress and Fox News contributor Stacey Dash posted a picture of herself with Donald Trump on Friday, and it is generating a lot of interest online.

The picture–posted to Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram–appears to have been taken at the National Rifle Association’s annual convention, which is taking place in Louisville, Ky., Friday through Sunday.

In the post, Dash announces her endorsement of Trump, as did the NRA on Friday.

Dash has had complimentary things to say about Trump during various appearances as a co-host on Fox News’ Outnumbered during the campaign season.

She also defended him in a blog post in March after violent protesters caused the candidate to cancel a Chicago campaign rally. “There’s a lot of talk about Donald Trump being violent, condoning it, or at least inciting it,” Dash wrote. But, she said, “he’s not violent, he’s just ‘street.’”

“But there is something about growing up in New York, a certain toughness instilled, a certain level of ‘street’ that can’t be ignored,” she added. “That’s why Americans LOVE him. They are tired of being pushed around. They want someone who will not put up with non-sense.”

Dash has a book coming out June 6 chronicling her political journey, entitled, There Goes My Social Life: From Clueless to Conservative. (Her breakthrough film role was in the 1995 comedy “Clueless.”)

She told Western Journalism that she hopes her book will be a vehicle to help people discover that they are conservatives too. She believes there are many currently disenfranchised people who, when presented with the facts, will have that epiphany.

“They are for the Second Amendment, they just don’t know it. They are constitutionalists, they just don’t know it. They are capitalists, they just don’t know it. Those are all conservative principles, they just don’t know it,” Dash said. (For more from the author of “Stacey Dash Shares Picture of Herself and Trump That Is Generating Buzz” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Duck Dynasty Star Offers to Take Important Role to Help Trump

Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson had never planned to support presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, but now he will do whatever it takes to help Trump defeat likely Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

“I was forced onto the Trump train, but I am happily volunteering my services for Mr. Trump, mainly because the Republican Party has spoken,” said Robertson, who supported Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in the Republican primaries. “The people have said we want Mr. Trump. So Mr. Cruz goes down — I love him — but now I’m on the Trump train and I’ll do everything I can to help him.”

During his appearance Wednesday on Fox & Friends, Robertson had a very clear idea of how he could assist Trump.

Robertson has said that he will remain loyal to the Republican Party.

“I’ll go with the platform that I discovered when I was 28. I looked at the Democrats and the Republicans, and at least the Republicans aren’t for killing their children or for perversion, so I’m a Republican. So I’ll back old Donald,” he told The Hollywood Reporter recently.

As for Clinton, “Her record is long, and she’s already proven herself,” he said then.

“I know which way we’ll go with her, but I’m not sure with Donald. And remember, I’m a hunter. We shoot squirrels and ducks and eat ’em, and she says she’ll take our guns. All we’re doing is shooting targets, and alligators and cottonmouth snakes, and she wants to take that away from us,” he said.

Robertson consistently calls for political leaders to turn to God.

“Why don’t we vet our thinking through the word of God, love God and love each other?” he said on Fox & Friends Wednesday. “Why don’t we try that for a while? That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.”

He explained to the Hollywood Reporter why following God’s teaching is important to America.

“When you remove the God of the Bible and suppress the truth and allow men and women to determine right and wrong, historically speaking, it always ends in carnage and murder — Hitler, the Caesars of Rome, the French Revolution, ISIS. Man, there has been a slaughterhouse on planet Earth, and the common denominator is the removal of God,” he said. (For more from the author of “Duck Dynasty Star Offers to Take Important Role to Help Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Donald Trump Releases List of Judges He Will Choose From to Put on Supreme Court

Donald Trump on Wednesday released a list of 11 judges he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court, a step intended to reassure Republicans of his conservative bona fides.

The list includes several judges often found on conservative wish lists, including Diane Sykes, William Pryor and Joan Larsen. Several of the judges were appointed by President George W. Bush, and many serve on state supreme courts.

In what some interpreted as a snub, the list does not include Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Trump’s bitter foe during the presidential primary race, or Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who endorsed Cruz. Both lawmakers had been floated in Washington as potential nominees . . .

Appellate judges Sykes and Pryor, two names previously floated by Trump as model jurists, are both on the list. So is Utah Supreme Court Judge Thomas Lee, the brother of Sen. Mike Lee and the son of Rex Lee, a former U.S. solicitor general during the Reagan administration.

Other judges mentioned include Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, David Stras of Minnesota, Steven Colloton of Iowa, Allison Eid of Colorado and Raymond Gruender of Missouri. (Read more from “Donald Trump Releases List of Judges He Will Choose From to Put on Supreme Court” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Seven Reasons Cruz’s Tough Call on Trump Really Isn’t a Tough Call at All

Now that the crowded 2016 field of mostly GOP beta males is tripping all over themselves to genuflect to their vanquisher Donald Trump – and what an embarrassment to the cause of manhood they are – all eyes are on Ted Cruz.

Will he, too, bend at the knee to Trump’s chocolate bunny?

Or will Cruz continue on the righteously ornery path that has taken him from political nobody to conservative superstar in only four years?

For now, Cruz is playing it smart. There’s no point in showing your hand if you’re Cruz, because right now there is no pressure on you. You’re no longer a candidate, and it is always the candidate’s obligation to woo the voters, not the voters’ task to contort their souls into pretzels on behalf of the candidate. That means the onus is on Trump, not Cruz, to unify.

If you’re gonna play the game, boy, you gotta learn to play it right. You gotta know when to hold em and know when to fold em.

But at some point in the coming weeks and months there will be a cash call, and I hope the man I’m proud to call a friend, and whose courage of conviction I admire, has the political savvy to realize that what may seem like a tough call for him really isn’t a tough call at all. Once you remove the peer pressure and group think, which Cruz has already made a career out of defying, and plan out the long-term consequences.

If I was in Cruz’s inner circle at this moment, here are the seven things I’d be telling him:

1. There is more at stake for you in this decision than anyone else.

With the possible exception of Scott Walker, who will rightfully be given a chance to resurrect himself because of his record in Wisconsin, none of the 16 GOP candidates not named Trump have a guaranteed political future except Cruz and Fiorina. For they are the only two non-Trump candidates who definitely ended the race with more political capital than what they started with.

Furthermore, this election cycle painfully revealed the paucity of principled conservative leaders to rally and inspire us. Therefore, Cruz owes it to both the people who gave him his political capital, as well as conservatism, to not be pennywise and pound foolish here. The list of people waiting in the wings should he sell his birthright tomorrow for a pot of stew today isn’t long or credible, thus Cruz blowing his political capital has far-reaching implications for millions of patriots in desperate need of leadership.

2. This is not 1976, and you’re not Reagan.

As a first-born son of the Reagan Revolution, Cruz was fond of comparing 2016 to 1980. Clearly that’s not the case—2016 turned out to be 1789 instead. Now he should resist the temptation to cast this as 1976 and himself in the Reagan role. See that as giving an impassioned speech at the convention that sets him up for the future, all the while claiming to be the loyal soldier for the good of the party in the meantime.

The reality is the only people who care about the good of the party are the folks Trump conquered, and don’t forget that before Trump arrived they hated Cruz the most. Once Trump is gone, Cruz will return as public enemy number one to these people. Cruz should learn from what happened with Trump in this campaign: you don’t endear yourself to foes you’ll have to destroy later. Besides, anyone who would consider voting for Cruz four years from now is more interested in a fighter than a unifier anyway.

3. Remember one of the 10 Commandments of Political Warfare: Don’t ever betray your base.

The only Republican with a future, whose base is likely to be disappointed if he kneels before Zod, is Cruz, for obvious reasons. Many of those people consider themselves “principle before party voters,” and they took Trump’s dirt bag attacks on Cruz’s family almost as personally as Cruz did. Cruz voters will be among the last to hold the line on #NeverTrump, and a chunk of them will never give up the ship. If Cruz endorses Trump he risks splitting his future base like no one else does. The dumbest thing to do when you have the biggest base heading into the future is to split it.

4. This is a rare opportunity in politics when the morally righteous thing to do is also the most politically expedient.

It’s rare in politics to be politically rewarded for doing the most principled thing, but that is the case here for Cruz. And it will be much easier for him to win over people mad at him for not “unifying” later than it would be to reunify his base if he were to endorse. Look at all the voters who don’t care Trump is a progressive and a Hillary donor. Look at all the other candidates groveling before the same Trump they once insulted. These are soulless people that will come to your beck and call in the future if you’re winning. But Cruz’s odds of winning diminish if he splits his base.

5. You will tarnish your brand, at least to some degree, because all the reasons to endorse Trump tarnish it.

How do you credibly endorse someone you called a “pathological liar” for the highest office in all the land after writing a book called “A Time for Truth”? How do you endorse a guy for president who dishonored your wife, called you a whoremonger, and claimed your dad was a presidential assassin? That’s pretty much the most beta thing ever. I’m going to point this out now as a friend, in the hopes that our enemies in the D.C. Cartel and media may not have to do it later.

6. You will open the door to being out-flanked as the insurgent once again in your next presidential run, as you were in this one.

The biggest reason Cruz could not beat Trump is that Trump out-flanked him as the insurgent candidate (and yes, the media had a lot to do with that but not everything). If Cruz endorses Trump, he risks this happening to him again in the future. Except in 2020 it won’t be another megalomaniac celebrity candidacy if Trump loses, but a new hotness like fellow Senator Ben Sasse.

Sasse has been AWOL near as I can tell on pretty much every major fight since he got to the Senate, but he clearly sees an opportunity with #NeverTrump and is wisely exploiting it. By the way, that’s not a criticism but a compliment. The GOP needs more politicians who see morally righteous causes as political opportunities, not fewer. Sasse also comes from a neighboring state to first-in-the-nation Iowa, and has already given a major political speech here in my backyard, so you can see him working.

In 2020, Sasse will have even more Senate experience than Cruz ran with in 2016, and he won’t have the stench of Trump on him. Freeing him up to go after a sizable bloc of primary voters that should be Cruz’s, unless he opens the door for a Sasse type later by endorsing Trump now. If Cruz does, someone like a Sasse could turn around and do to Cruz in Iowa four years from now what Cruz did to past caucus champions Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum in 2016.

7. You literally gain nothing from this politically and it’s a one-sided waste of political capital.

Look at all the others who have assumed the position for Trump, and what have they gained politically for it? Answer: zilch. And at the cost of their integrities to boot. They now owe all their futures to Trump winning in November, and won’t have one if he loses.

Don’t be that guy.

Whatever you may think Trump will promise or hint at now, you know he won’t deliver later, but just mount Cruz’s scalp on the wall as another trophy. Like President Trump is going to spend one day fighting tooth-and-nail to confirm “Lyin Ted” to the U.S. Supreme Court. Come on, man.

On the other hand, the fertile political ground is the yet politically untapped #NeverTrump real estate. Cruz can have that all too himself, and it’s got long-term prospects. If Trump loses in November, Cruz becomes the immediate frontrunner in 2020. And if Trump wins, Cruz becomes the face of the principled opposition to what would likely be the most feckless presidency in the history of the republic.

Cruz learned early on there is hefty ROI potential on remaining principled in an era of cowards and charlatans. Now is the time for him to stay that course. (For more from the author of “Seven Reasons Cruz’s Tough Call on Trump Really Isn’t a Tough Call at All” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Inside the GOP Effort to Draft an Independent Candidate to Derail Trump

A band of exasperated Republicans — including 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney, a handful of veteran consultants and members of the conservative intelligentsia — is actively plotting to draft an independent presidential candidate who could keep Donald Trump from the White House.

These GOP figures are commissioning private polling, lining up major funding sources and courting potential contenders, according to interviews with more than a dozen Republicans involved in the discussions. The effort has been sporadic all spring but has intensified significantly in the 10 days since Trump effectively locked up the Republican nomination.

Those involved concede that an independent campaign at this late stage is probably futile, and they think they have only a couple of weeks to launch a credible bid. But these Republicans — including commentators William Kristol and Erick Erickson and strategists Mike Murphy, Stuart Stevens and Rick Wilson — are so repulsed by the prospect of Trump as commander in chief that they are desperate to take action.

(Listen to Erick Erickson discuss with Joe Miller Romney’s prospects back in 2012:)

Their top recruiting prospects are freshman Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), a conservative who has become one of Trump’s sharpest critics, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who withdrew from the Republican presidential race May 4. Romney is among those who have made personal overtures to both men in recent days, according to several people with knowledge of the former Massachusetts governor’s activities. (Read more from “Inside the GOP Effort to Draft an Independent Candidate to Derail Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

9 Powerful House Members Unite and Endorse Trump

Nine chairmen from the U.S. House of Representatives have endorsed Donald Trump for president.

The chairmen are Steve Chabot (Small Business), Michael Conaway (Agriculture), Jeb Hensarling (Financial Services), Candice Miller (House Administration), Jeff Miller (Veterans’ Affairs), Tom Price (Budget), Pete Sessions (Rules), Bill Shuster (Transportation and Infrastructure), and Lamar Smith (Science, Space and Technology).

Trump posted the news to his Facebook page.

In a statement the chairmen wrote, “We stand on the precipice of one of the most important elections of our lifetime,” highlighting the importance of the election.

Warning of the dangers of electing Hillary Clinton as president to continue President Obama’s progressive policies the representatives contend, “This great nation cannot endure eight more years of Democrat-control of the White House. It cannot afford to put Democrats in charge of Congress. It is paramount that we coalesce around the Republican nominee, Mr. Donald J. Trump, and maintain control of both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.”

Fearing more economic uncertainty, they added, “Any other outcome is a danger to economic growth,” adding electing a Democrat, “puts our national security in peril, enshrines ObamaCare as the law of the land, entraps Americans in a cycle of poverty and dependence, and undermines our constitutional republic.”

Just as Speaker of the House Paul Ryan stated earlier in the week, the representatives call on the Republican Party to unify. “There is a path to winning in November, and it comes through unity,” the statement said. “To solidify this partnership, we endorse Mr. Trump as the Republican nominee for President and call upon all Americans to support him.”

Trump responded to the endorsement by stating, “It is tremendous to be working with these leaders and their colleagues on winning solutions that will really move us forward. A strong House Republican Majority is imperative to fixing the problems facing America and making our country better and stronger than ever before.”

If the endorsement is any indicator of a movement of unity within the party, it appears establishment leaders are rallying around the presumptive Republican candidate. The chairmen join a long list of politicians who’ve recently vocalized their support for Trump, the desire to appoint a conservative to the Supreme Court and to undo many of the policies seen as executive overreach by Obama. (For more from the author of “9 Powerful House Members Unite and Endorse Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Report: GOP Mega-Donor to Give Trump up to $100 Million

Billionaire Republican donor Sheldon Adelson is reportedly willing to give Donald Trump as much as $100 million for his presidential campaign — a purported record-setting amount for the wealth casino magnate.

Adelson pledged the amount to Trump, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, during a meeting last week in New York, two GOP sources told The New York Times, which first reported the story.

Trump will indeed need the support. Much of the billionaire businessman’s success in the primary race came from his ability to fund his own campaign and tell voters that he is not beholden to corporate, Wall Street or lobbyists’ interests.

However, his own wealth and small-donor contributions would be no match for those of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic machine behind her if the front-running Clinton becomes Trump’s general election opponent.

Trump has since being declared the presumptive nominee on May 3 met with Washington Republicans to begin coordinating fundraising efforts for his general election bid and those of other Republican candidates on November ballots. (Read more from “Report: GOP Mega-Donor to Give Trump up to $100 Million” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Just Delivered a Bombshell About Rubio’s Future

Donald Trump is denying the information about his VP search that Ben Carson reportedly gave the Washington Post, saying specifically that Marco Rubio is not being considered . . .

In his response to the article on social media, Trump didn’t mention any of the other potential VP contenders by name, saying only that Rubio and “most others mentioned” are not being vetted for the position. (Read more from “Trump Just Delivered a Bombshell About Rubio’s Future” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump or No Trump, the Judiciary Has Already Hit Rock Bottom and Must Be Overhauled

The contemporary federal court system is a raging dumpster fire that poses the biggest threat to our representative democracy, society, and sovereignty since our nation’s founding. Yet, we lack a political party that is willing to finally strip the judiciary down to its original function — interpreting the law, not reinterpreting the Constitution and even remaking marriage and gender from the bench. By understanding the true and irreversible threat of the courts to our personal liberty, popular sovereignty, and society, it will become clear that the question of whether to vote for Trump or Hillary is really irrelevant and a non-sequitur in the battle we must fight.

The Left has transformed our society and system of governance, particularly through the courts, in a way not even our grandparents’ generation could have ever envisioned. Yet, like frogs in slow boiling water, we become desensitized to the radically pernicious transformation around us. The more it succeeds and is unchallenged by a genuine alternative party, the more it becomes legitimized and is viewed as the default position in our society.

Nowhere is this more evident than with the nexus of judicial tyranny, marriage, religious liberty and transgenderism. It’s time we wake up and smell the stench of judicial tyranny and finally become inspired to act, even as we lack a political party that cares about the destruction of the civil society, federalism, and representative democracy.

Worse than Redefining Marriage, Gender, and Criminalizing Religion?

Over the weekend, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore was “suspended” for opposing Anthony Kennedy’s royal edict redefining the building block of all civilization from the bench. Sadly, even most conservatives will continue to legitimize the lawless federal courts and mindlessly chant, “You must obey the court’s decision.” As I lay out in chapter three of my upcoming book, the gay marriage decision flips every word of the Constitution on its head and wields not one iota of legal legitimacy. This has nothing to do with one’s personal view on the underlying policy of marriage licenses. If federal courts now have jurisdiction over something that has been a state institution since the time the Constitution was adopted in 1789 and the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, that means there is no limit to their power. It also means that the state and Congress mean nothing and we must submit to a judicial oligarchy.

I was inspired to write my book, “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America,” because of the events of September 3, 2015. On that day, for the first time in history, a GOP-appointed judge threw a Christian in jail for upholding Kentucky law and peacefully abstaining from signing a gay marriage license. On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated the deportation of a dangerous criminal alien by applying international law and asserting that the individual was transgender, all the while berating ICE officials for not using the proper pronoun.

We have hit rock bottom, indeed.

At some point, it just doesn’t matter anymore. Fifty years of built up anti-constitutional jurisprudence and hopelessly corrupt contorting of the Fourteenth Amendment have made the judiciary unsalvageable. We are now incurring a worse degree of social transformation than any of us imagined when we were warned of the need to keep electing Republicans a decade ago. We elected Republicans and are now at the point when not only has marriage been redefined but the Fourth Circuit has redefined gender itself.

The threat leveled at conservatives — that we must support the GOP nominee in order to “save” the courts — is laughable. It can’t get much worse. In fact, it’s better Hillary appoint three more justices so that the dumpster fire of the judiciary becomes self-evident enough to rally us all around the systemic judicial reforms that must take place.

The Republican Party at every level refuses to stand up to the judiciary and fight for religious liberty — the civil right of our time. This was true long before the rise of Donald Trump. It’s just that Trump is no better than the rest of them, given his support of Obama’s transgender agenda, the broader corporate homo-fascism, and the judicial role of marriage and religious liberty in our society. He fully supported Judge Bunning’s vile and lawless order to imprison Kim Davis for following Kentucky’s plenary power to define marriage.

What if Hillary Remakes the Court?

Whether one ultimately votes for Trump or not is less important than the realization that either way we have lost our society to the courts and the recognition that the courts are broken and must be stripped down to size. As I will demonstrate in my book, this is true for a number of reasons. Here are just a couple:

The lower courts are even worse. Obama has filled 30% of the appellate bench and 40% of the district judgeships. The anti-constitutionalists pretty much control all the appeals courts except for the Fifth Circuit. Even a conservative president will not change that balance due to the likely vacancies being in circuits that are already long gone. Remember, 99% of cases never make it to the Supreme Court anyway, and as we saw with the marriage case, the almost unanimous support for redefining it at the lower court level had a tremendous influence on the Supreme Court’s final decision.

Even among the “conservative” judges, very few of them are like Clarence Thomas in that they’d be willing to overturn the one-directional stare decisis (precedent) and Fourteenth Amendment “jurisprudence” constructed from years’ worth of corruption in the legal profession. As Justice Alito said in the marriage case, echoing comments Robert Bork made two decades ago, “decades of attempts to restrain this Court’s abuse of its authority have failed” as evidenced by “the deep and perhaps irremediable corruption of our legal culture’s conception of constitutional interpretation.” Read Robert Bork’s article from 1996 on “The End of Democracy”– long before transgenderism was codified and Christians were being jailed and fined, and you will understand the folly of trying to “fix the judiciary” by appointing “good” judges.

It’s not just the judges. The entire legal profession, as noted by Alito, is irremediably corrupt, especially as it relates to constitutional interpretation, statutory construction, and the entire premise of the role of the federal judiciary. There is an army of tens of thousands of lawyers who are skilled at using decades of corrupt case law to contort the concept of fundamental rights and successfully grant super rights to protected classes and citizen rights to illegal aliens. Having a Republican appoint a few judges instead of a Democrat filling the vacancies will never roll back the jurisprudential velocity respected by the entire profession. Which is why almost all GOP-appointed judges drift to the left over time. The judicial game is rigged and it’s time we stop playing it.

Even the few tantalizing 5-4 victories we still enjoy are fleeting, narrow, and dwarfed by the magnitude of the liberal courts victories. Democrats have a perpetual first and goal at our one-yard line. Even if the court fails to “go there” now, they usually will adapt to the culture of the legal profession within a few years. Even the Heller decision has already been severely limited by the reluctance of Kennedy and Roberts to defend it, allowing blue states to get away with banning guns and the right to carry. If Hillary succeeded to tipping the balance on gun rights, red states can still do what they want, while blue states are already succeeding in pushing anti-gun laws.

Vote for Trump to “stop Hillary” if your heart so desires, but just remember that things will have to get worse before they get better. And at some point, we need to begin working on long-term reforms — starting a new party, pushing civil rights for religious liberty, stripping the court’s stolen jurisdiction, convening Conventions of the States to safeguard liberty. With every single RINO winning down the ballot for state and federal positions, together with Trump as the party’s nominee, nothing will change to stop the inexorable march towards a pagan theocracy, which legislates immorality and violation of property rights from the bench.

“But what if the Democrat wins?” is no longer a hypothetical question. We are already living through those consequences precisely because we’ve been too scared to act boldly and focus on long-term reforms, lest we risk defeat of the fake opposition party. And if we continue to fear the prospect of Democrat victory in the short run more than the lack of a conservative party, or even conservative movement, to combat the tyranny in the long-run, we will perpetuate this failed cycle and will have nobody to blame but ourselves. (For more from the author of “Trump or No Trump, the Judiciary Has Already Hit Rock Bottom and Must Be Overhauled” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.