Posts

White House Pushes Trump Priorities Before Congressional Recess

/0 Comments/in , /by

As some Republicans in Congress are calling on leadership to allow the legislative branch to work through the August recess, the White House touted President Donald Trump’s priorities that Congress should move on.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer deferred to congressional leadership on scheduling, in response to a question from The Daily Signal about scrapping or shortening the August recess.

“That’s going to be up to the House and the Senate to determine their recess,” Spicer told The Daily Signal during a press briefing Tuesday. “Generally, we don’t get involved in their schedule. I’ll let Speaker [Paul] Ryan and Leader [Mitch] McConnell decide what’s appropriate.”

The Daily Signal followed by asking Spicer if Trump is satisfied with the pace of Congress on issues such as repealing Obamacare and tax reform.

“If we continue to move forward with health care, the way we’ve been told we’re going to, I think we’re great,” Spicer said. “We’ve got our priorities. We want to get health care done. We want to get tax reform done. And obviously, the president has spoken very extensively about infrastructure. If we can get those done, I think we feel really good.”

Pressed further on a timeline, Spicer said, “We’ll go as quick as Congress wants.”

“That’s a little out of our hands. But it’s—as soon as Congress can do it, we’ll do what we can,” Spicer said. “When the House had its bill up, the president worked feverishly to make sure that he did everything he could to get it over the finish line. I think we’ll do the same for all those other scenarios as well.”

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and the caucus support working through the August recess.

Also, Republican Sens. David Perdue of Georgia, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, and Steve Daines of Montana have called on McConnell to keep the Senate in session, The Hill reported. (For more from the author of “White House Pushes Trump Priorities Before Congressional Recess” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

White House: ‘There Is Still No Evidence of Any Russia-Trump Campaign Collusion’

/0 Comments/in , /by

The White House said testimonies from former C.I.A. Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats back up the administration’s claim that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

“This morning’s hearings back up what we’ve been saying all along,” a White House spokesman said in a statement Tuesday. “That despite a year of investigation, there is still no evidence of any Russia-Trump campaign collusion, that the president never jeopardized intelligence sources or sharing, and that even Obama’s CIA Director believes the leaks of classified information are ‘appalling’ and the culprits must be ‘tracked down.’”

As he testified before the House Intelligence Committee, Brennan said he was “aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign.” They concerned him “because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals.”

Though he said “seeing these types of contacts during the same period of time raised my concern,” Brennan noted that the “contacts might’ve been totally, totally innocent and benign as well as those that might have succumbed somehow to those Russian efforts.”

Meanwhile, Coats dodged when he was asked about a report that claimed Donald Trump asked both he and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers to publicly state that he was not under investigation for colluding with the Russian government. (Read more from “White House: ‘There Is Still No Evidence of Any Russia-Trump Campaign Collusion'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

White House Staff Around Trump STILL Don’t Get Islamic Threat

/0 Comments/in , /by

Well, it appears that another campaign promise bit the dust. The Jerusalem embassy move went the way of repealing Obamacare, rescinding Obama’s amnesty, building the wall, undoing the Paris climate accord and Iran nuclear deal, and protecting religious liberty. All for the purpose of preserving the PLO peace process — because nothing says “drain the swamp,” understanding Islam, and “America-first” like the Oslo peace process.

The collapse of this White House administration’s foreign policy under the leadership of National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster stems from one source: the refusal to recognize the insufferable nature of unreformed Islam.

Throughout the presidential election, both President Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, consistently hit Obama and Hillary for refusing to even name the enemy and recognize its threat doctrine. After all, if you refuse to identify who the enemy is, how can you place our soldiers in harm’s way, craft diplomatic relationships, and strategize any outcome in the Middle East?

Donald Trump clearly recognized this point in a seminal foreign policy speech he delivered on Sept. 7, 2016, when he declared, “We now have an administration, and a former secretary of state, who refuse to say ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism.’”

Promising a realist approach recognizing the Middle East and Islam as it exists — and not as we want it to exist — Trump delivered somewhat of a doctrine that night in Philadelphia, which clearly resonated with many of the voters that propelled him to the Oval Office: “In a Trump administration, our actions in the Middle East will be tempered by realism. The current strategy of toppling regimes, with no plan for what to do the day after, only produces power vacuums that are filled by terrorists.”

Trump further promised that a new moral clarity will help us “make new friends, rebuild old alliances, and bring new allies into the fold.”

The recognition that radical Islamists are the source of the problem is what dictates immigration policy, decisions over military action, the so-called “Israeli-Palestinian” conflicts, and our views toward Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The expectation of many supporters of this president were that he’d move us in the opposite direction of the Obama administration on all aforementioned fronts.

In comes H.R. McMaster, who refuses to even recognize the enemy by adamantly declining to even talk about radical Islamic terrorism, which in itself, “terrorism” is somewhat of a euphemism for the problems endemic in sharia-adherence. Everything else has gone downhill from there, and it was on full display Tuesday.

The consequences of willful blindness on the Islamic threat is the source of McMaster’s desire to get us further entrenched in Syria and Afghanistan, bring in more refugees, kowtow to the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey, and throw Israel under the bus. After all, if we are walking on eggshells in the Arab world with our troops strung out precariously throughout the various theaters refereeing Islamic civil wars, we wouldn’t want our support for Israel to harm them.

Consider the following observations:

Throwing Israel under the bus: Both McMaster and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer refused to affirm that even the Western Wall is part of Israel. This echoes Obama’s policies and comes on the heels of the White House refusing to allow Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu to appear with the president at the Western Wall. It further accentuates the growing push within the administration to embrace the PLO. It doesn’t help that the intel Trump leaked to Russian officials was reportedly from Israeli intelligence services.

Embracing Erdogan: In another throwback to Obama’s policies – embracing enemies and alienating allies – Trump hosted Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. This man is an Islamo-fascist and the Sunni equivalent of the Iranian Mullahs. He stands at the nexus of Sunni Islamic supremacism and is an enemy of the American people. Yet, he has been allowed to fund the construction of the largest Islamic Center in the country just outside Washington, D.C. Rep. David Brat, R-Va., has a bill (H.R. 5824) that would prohibit a foreign national of a country that limits the free exercise of religion in that country from making any expenditure in the U.S. promoting a religion. Yet, I doubt Trump’s meeting was about that.

Meanwhile, Erdogan’s bodyguards beat anti-Erdogan protesters outside of the ambassador’s D.C. home … on American soil!

Further involvement in Afghanistan: There is growing momentum within the administration for McMaster’s plan to further entrench us in the Afghanistan quagmire by sending more troops. The 15 years of utter failure in Afghanistan is not President Trump’s fault. But if he doubles down on the failed strategy without either forging a new path or getting out, he will own it just as much. McMaster is continuing the strategy of “placing our brave soldiers into an Islamic civil war first, ask questions about national security interests and strategy later.”

The question is how can we get our soldiers further involved when we don’t even understand the threat doctrine of the enemy?We have nothing to show for our efforts but over 1,800 military deaths, 20,000 wounded, and the Taliban controlling more territory than ever before – all to establish a sharia-compliant government with a constitution (set up by U.S. officials) which fosters the type of Islamic supremacism we are at war with. If this White House administration is going to saddle up to Erdogan and the PLO, why exactly would we send our troops into another Islamic theater to fight for … what?

According to the recent “Worldwide Threat Assessment” presented to the Senate by Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, the “situation in Afghanistan will very likely continue to deteriorate, even if international support is sustained.” The report further notes that “Kabul’spolitical dysfunction and ineffectiveness will almost certainly be the greatest vulnerability to stability in 2017.” Thus, even if we temporarily beat back the Taliban, for whom will we hold the ground without the need for a substantial troops presence forever?

This Trump administration’s Middle East policy will never succeed until it speaks with one clear voice and identifies the nature of our enemy. That will not happen until H.R. McMaster, Dina Powell, Jared and Ivanka Trump are kept out of the decision-making process. (For more from the author of “White House Staff Around Trump STILL Don’t Get Islamic Threat” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

White House Vows Funding for Border Wall, Just Not Now

/0 Comments/in , /by

Congress plans to pass a final spending bill to keep the government running beyond the next week, but without funding for a border wall. The White House, however, says it will demand money for President Donald Trump’s signature campaign issue in next year’s budget plan.

“The president is committed to having a physical border wall. That is not to be doubted,” Helen Aguirre Ferré, White House media affairs director, told The Daily Signal in an interview Friday, adding:

The funding didn’t have to be at this particular point in time, when we need a continuing resolution when it comes to the budget, but it’s definitely going to be presented by September, when we have to have the budget going forward. I don’t think anybody should doubt that this is something that is going to be pressed on.

The current fiscal year runs through Sept. 30. Congress has not added any funds for that budget year specifically for a wall along the Mexico-U.S. border.

Trump’s proposal for fiscal year 2018, which begins Oct. 1, includes a $1.5 billion down payment on the wall. Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said in March that another $2.8 billion likely would go into funding the wall the next fiscal year.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., had threatened a government shutdown if any funding in the spending bill for the current fiscal year goes toward construction of a border wall.

On Friday, the House and Senate passed a measure that keeps the government running for another week while it works on a $1 trillion package to keep the government running through September. Otherwise, the money would have run out at midnight.

The House passed the measure by a vote of 382-30, while the Senate followed with a voice vote. The White House previously had dropped Trump’s demand that some funds for the wall be included in the final spending bill.

“Our biggest concern at this point in time is to do the No. 1 thing that the American public has put on our shoulders—and we signed up for the job, quite frankly—which is to govern. And that means that the government must remain open,” Ferré said.

When asked if the president was willing to risk a government shutdown with Schumer when talks resume in September, Ferré said:

We hope that everybody comes together to the table to really work to resolve our nation’s problems. That includes border security. The president is committed to the border wall. There will be funding for the border wall.

(For more from the author of “White House Vows Funding for Border Wall, Just Not Now” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

White House Survey Asks Public: Should the Presidency Be Eliminated

/0 Comments/in , /by

While some survey options fall in line with the traditional Republican agenda, such as cutting the Department of Energy and the National Endowment for the Arts, others appear to flout the power of the Washington D.C., establishment. The CIA, FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Pentagon, and National Security Council are also options.

The survey allows users to select entire departments or bureaucracies within each department. It also features a question regarding which agencies survey participants would like to reform rather than eliminate.

Most surprisingly, however, is the option to eliminate the “Executive Office of the President” altogether. Users can also select smaller branches of the executive office and other agencies. Even U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement are options under the larger umbrella of Homeland Security.

Users can select as many options as they like and are also provided write-in boxes where they can list their suggestions and ideas in more detail.

The survey is an apparent result of an executive order President Trump issued on March 13. According to the website:

On March 13th, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order that will make the Federal government more efficient, effective, and accountable to you, the American people. This Executive Order directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to present the President with a plan that recommends ways to reorganize the executive branch and eliminate unnecessary agencies.

It claims the president is seeking Americans’ input to achieve this goal. “President Trump wants to hear your ideas and suggestions on how the government can be better organized to work for the American people,” the website’s statement reads. The survey will remain online until June 12 of this year.

It is unclear whether or not the president, like any other politician, is actually eager to hear the ideas of his constituency and Americans in general. While that could be the case, the website appears to be a useful tool, at the very least, for creating the appearance of accountability and concern with what voters actually want.

As TIME pointed out, “As an online poll that can be easily gamed, the survey is hardly scientific, but it could be a useful tool for the White House to push its own ideas down the road.”

For now, the results of the survey are hidden, and the site does not specify whether the final results will be made public. Notably, however, a disclaimer at the bottom of the page warns users that the White House “may not respond to every comment that is submitted and submissions do not bind the Office of Management and Budget or the Administration to further action.” (For more from the author of “White House Survey Asks Public: Should the Presidency Be Eliminated” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Rao Tapped to Taper Red Tape

/0 Comments/in , /by

Just hours after Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation as the newest member of the Supreme Court, the White House announced the appointment of George Mason Law Professor Neomi Rao to be the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or OIRA.

The appointment won’t be accompanied by the intense media coverage that Gorsuch received. Nevertheless, it could be one of the most important offices filled by President Donald Trump. If confirmed by the Senate, Rao will lead the new administration’s war on the red tape burdening Americans and the U.S. economy.

Buried within the Office of Management and Budget, which itself is part of the Executive Office of the President, OIRA is easy to miss on an organization chart. Yet, it is one of the most important offices in Washington. Established in 1981 under President Ronald Reagan, it is charged with regulating the nation’s regulators and reviewing the costs and benefits of federal rules to ensure that they are justified and consistent with the president’s agenda.

This is no easy task: OIRA’s staff of about 50 full-time professionals is responsible for keeping watch over an army of more than 279,000 regulators, a ratio of 5,600 to one.

OIRA has historically punched well above its weight in bureaucratic battles, especially when it enjoys White House support. It’s a nearly unique institution in Washington, being one of the very few government agencies for which success is defined in terms of how much it has limited the growth of government, not how much it has expanded government power.

OIRA’s role–and that of its administrator–promises to be particularly important in the months ahead as the Trump administration focuses on rolling back regulation.

The objective is set out by the president’s January 30 executive order on regulation, which sets a cap of zero on the net cost of new regulation. That is a daunting task: the last time in which the burden of federal regulation did not increase was 35 years ago, in 1982. Nevertheless, it is well within the bounds of possibility.

Rao will find a sizeable to-do list on her desk when she arrives. Among the items: the semi-annual regulatory agenda, which will outline what each agency will regulate–and deregulate–in the near future. Rao will also be tasked with making the new “2 for 1” rule (requiring two rules to be rolled back for every new one imposed), and implementing the regulatory cost cap called for by Trump.

There is little question that Rao, who comes to OIRA with broad experience in government, is well qualified to lead the effort to cut red tape. However, even though there is no reason to doubt her commitment to reform, she will need continued support from the president and other leaders in the administration.

While support for a regulatory rollback is plentiful now, such support tends to diminish as other issues and priorities intrude. But if that support is maintained, a historic reduction in regulatory burdens may be within reach. (For more from the author of “Rao Tapped to Taper Red Tape” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

When Asked About Latest Wiretapping Claims, Spicer Drops a Big League Bombshell

/0 Comments/in , /by

Sean Spicer revealed during Wednesday’s press briefing that they were caught off guard by Congressman Devin Nunes’ Wednesday press conference, in which he stated President Trump’s personal communications may actually have been collected by the Obama administration during the 2016 election.

Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters that significant development in the committee’s investigation revealed “that on numerous occasions the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

Reporters asked Spicer if the White House was “concerned” about the optics of Nunes’ meeting with the president on the findings, a meeting which might be construed as White House interference in an ongoing investigation.

Spicer responded in the negative — clarifying that it was Nunes not President Trump who requested the meeting — before blasting a double standard in the media.

“Let me get this straight,” Spicer continued. “Number one, two weeks ago, we said this is the appropriate venue. Number two, you have asked over and over again why aren’t we meeting with certain individuals.” (Read more from “When Asked About Latest Wiretapping Claims, Spicer Drops a Big League Bombshell” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Oh the Outrage! Liberal Racists Are Upset the Trump White House Is Honoring Black History Month

/0 Comments/in , , /by

February 1 marks the start of Black History Month, and Tuesday night, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer announced a series of sponsored events in celebration and recognition of the month.

The events kicked off with a special U.S. Postal Service dedication of a “Forever” stamp featuring Dorothy Height, a leader of the National Council of Negro Women and an architect of the August 1963 March on Washington. Spicer called Height “a true pioneer in the civil rights movement.”

As always, though, that wasn’t enough for the GOP-bashing, race-baiting Left.

Following the White House press briefing Tuesday, the Daily Intelligencer published a satirical piece titled, “Imagining the White House’s Black History Month Schedule.” The imaginary agenda included events like “Postal Service Unveils Its New Steve Harvey Stamp,” “‘So About That Harriet Tubman $20 Bill Rumor …’: A Conversation with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin,” “Keynote Address: ‘Blacks Can Be Racist, Too,’ by Charles Barkley,” “Stacey Dash Meet-and-Greet,” and “If You’re a Christian Black, You Have to Love Donald Trump or You Will Go To Hell.”

The satirical schedule concludes with President Trump announcing “his plan to build ships that will take you back to Africa if you are a Black and your Social Security number is nine digits” and an “announcement of March, May, August and November as White History Months.”

Trump-hating liberals on Twitter followed suit, making it clear that Trump’s White House will always be the sworn enemy of “progress.”

Of course, this is all in good fun … or is it? Underlying all of these jokes is the liberal narrative that Trump and anyone who doesn’t hate Trump is a white supremacist (or an Uncle Tom).

To liberals, Donald Trump will always be a racist, anti-gay xenophobe with a hidden agenda to expunge non-Republican “others” from the face of the Earth. (For more from the author of “Oh the Outrage! Liberal Racists Are Upset the Trump White House Is Honoring Black History Month” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WHEN A PICTURE IS WORTH A MILLION WORDS: Faces of White House Staffers Priceless as President Trump Arrives

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

So sad:

On Wednesday, however, the White House staff, along with the rest of America, listened as Obama discussed the election results in a televised address… And their faces said it all.

161110-white-house

After President Trump’s inauguration, I would like to ask that any former member of Valerie Jarrett’s Secret Service detail (why she warranted such a force is worthy of its own investigation) contact me. I have a case of beer I would like to send each and every one of you. (For more from the author of “WHEN A PICTURE IS WORTH A MILLION WORDS: Faces of White House Staffers Priceless as President Trump Arrives” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Most Dangerous Period in Washington Could Be About to Happen

/0 Comments/in , /by

The lame-duck session is the most dangerous period in the nation’s capital that you’ve never heard of.

There are nearly two months in between Election Day in November and the swearing-in of the newly elected Congress in January. This period is known as the lame-duck session, because many of the voting members won’t be returning due to defeat or retirement (hence, they’re “lame ducks”).

Why is it dangerous? Because those lame ducks have no oversight or accountability, and the members who are returning have just won re-election—and won’t have to face the voters for two or six more years.

It wasn’t always this way. Lame-duck sessions used to be a quirk of history, only employed to address pressing issues or unexpected emergencies. However, they are now routinely used by both parties to schedule difficult or controversial votes after the election.

In the minds of congressional and party leadership, this delay tactic accomplishes two valuable things. First, it pushes meaningful votes until after the time when voters can hold the members accountable. This allows party leadership to protect their vulnerable members at the ballot box. Are you a voter who wants to know where your member of Congress stands on critical issues? Too bad! You have to vote them into office to find out what they really think.

Second, it means that all votes become “must-pass,” because the end of the year is suddenly approaching. Deliberation on major legislation—the sort that could have been (and should have been) considered earlier in the year—is now crammed into a few short days because Congress is up against a cliff of its own making.

The existence of the modern lame-duck session is troubling for several obvious reasons. During a lame-duck session, the accountability normally assigned to weighty legislative matters goes out the window. The “representative” part of “representative democracy” matters little to departing members who will vote on new laws and confirm judges for lifetime appointments—all before the door hits them on the way out.

But the damage doesn’t stop there. For returning members, the lame duck acts as a shield against behaviors that would seem unconscionable during the rest of the year. The opaqueness of a lame duck helps accomplish this. Votes are jammed into a short time frame with little clarity on who is voting on what, leaving voters with limited information. Not to mention that these members have just been re-elected, and the length of time before they stand for re-election renders any action they take now basically moot, since voters will likely not recall it with ease.

Instead of recognizing the dangerously twisted incentives provided in a lame duck, House and Senate leadership take full advantage of them. Rather than dealing with the hard issues up front, congressional leadership waits for a lame duck to handle controversial measures. Lame ducks are coming to be known as the period when the real work is done.

2016 has been a perfect example of this calculating behavior. This year, Congress could potentially set up a lame-duck session that will consider major policies, all of which carry more weight than any other measure the members will have considered before the election.

Consider just a few policies that may be voted on during the lame duck: funding authorization for the Defense Department, a new internet tax, and a $5.6 billion bailout of coal miner pensions, just to name a few. Together, these policies represent the most significant—and controversial—work that Congress will have done all year. And it’ll be doing so in the period of very little accountability to the voters.

The ability to clearly assign responsibility to elected officials is central to representative democracy, and a fundamental tenet on which the American government was founded. To deliberately push the consideration of major policy issues until after an election is as much an intentional deception as it is a blow to the health of our representative government.

Voters should demand that Congress complete its must-pass work before the November elections, and leave more controversial issues to the next president, and the new Congress. (For more from the author of “The Most Dangerous Period in Washington Could Be About to Happen” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.