Steven Miller, the outgoing IRS commissioner who headed the agency’s Services and Enforcement Division since 2009 until the end of last year, reassured Congress on Friday that the agency would never again target conservative groups.

But Americans have reason to be skeptical over his statement, which came as part of intense grilling by Republican lawmakers over an inspector’s general report that revealed the IRS targeted tea party and other conservative groups with inappropriate questions as part of their non-profit application.

In one case, the IRS responded to the Christian Voices for Life non-profit application by asking officials for the content of their prayers and activities around abortion facilities. The Coalition for Life of Iowa was told it would need to certify under penalty of law that members would not picket or protest Planned Parenthood and that their application would not be approved until they did.

Members of the administration and the IRS have attempted to spin the issue as simply being the work of two “rogue agents” who went “off the reservation.” However, WND has long reported on IRS abuses that involved targeting groups opposed to the president.

Many of the WND stories involve not Obama, but rather his Democratic predecessor, Bill Clinton. During Clinton’s term in office, a audits were conducted against individuals and groups who caused problems for the administration.

Miller was a part of at least one of these cases during the Clinton years. In a brief filed by Judicial Watch over its audit by the IRS during the administration, the group specifically named Miller.

An agent told representatives from Judicial Watch, “What do you expect when you sue the president?” Miller noted that the IRS’ failure to respond to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests “had created at least the appearance of a problem.”

The Judicial Watch audit was not an isolated incident. During Clinton’s term of office several prominent conservative groups found themselves facing IRS audits following their criticism of the president and his policies.

Among the conservative groups targeted for audits were the Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America, Citizens Against Government Waste, National Review, American Spectator, David Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture and the Western Journalism Center,

The Western Journalism Center was a nonprofit organization founded in 1991 by WND founder Joseph Farah, who was, at the time, editor in chief of the Sacramento Union. Its purpose was to encourage independent investigative reporting. After the New York Post pulled the plug on an investigation by Christopher Ruddy involving the death of former Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, Farah funded a major ad campaign to keep Ruddy’s work in the public eye. In doing so, Farah deeply offended the White House.

In order to raise funds for Ruddy’s investigation, Farah had taken out full-page advertisements, first in the Washington Times, then subsequently in the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. Farah’s ads laid out the evidence of a cover-up and appealed for donations to keep the probe going.

In April 1996, IRS Field Agent Thomas Cederquist submitted to Farah’s Center an IRS “Information Document Request” which demanded, among other things, “Copies of all documents relating to the selection of Christopher Ruddy as an investigative reporter and how the topic was selected. Who was on the review committee?” In July, 1996, Cederquist formally began auditing the WJC.

During the targeting of WJC, Cederquist admitted officials were targeting the organization for political reasons.

During a meeting with WJC accountant John Roux, Cederquist said, “Look, this is a political case and the decision is going to be made at the national level.”

Asked for clarification as to what was meant by the statement, Cederquist doubled down, repeating, “This is a political case, and the decision is going to be made at the national level.”

When Farah later retained the services of civil liberties attorney Larry Klayman in 1998, his organization, Judicial Watch was immediately audited.

“As someone whose organization was a victim of this kind of illegal harassment and intimidation and political retribution during the Clinton administration – and who blew the whistle on it – my question is, ‘Who is going to be fired and prosecuted as a result of this admission?’” Farah said, referencing the latest attacks by the IRS.

“Apologies are nice. But they don’t excuse people of crimes. When government officials abuse their power and break laws, they need to be punished as certainly and severely as ordinary citizens. In fact, to maintain trust in government, we need to ensure they are held to a higher standard. So what happens now? Who’s going to take the rap? Which law-enforcement agency is going to investigate? It would seem that an independent prosecutor is necessary unless the Congress is willing to take the lead.”

Farah was not the only journalist to incur the ire of the IRS under Clinton’s watch. The Wall Street Journal reported how other dissident journalists were targeted such as Fox News Bill O’Reilly, who found himself audited for three years in a row.

Earlier this week, following intense media coverage over the IRS’s targeting of tea party groups and criticism by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, it was announced that Miller would be resigning a few weeks early.

Even that bears a similarity to the Clinton years. During that time, news of the IRS targeting of conservative groups began to spill over to where even left of center journalists began to ask questions, Then, just as now, a similar resignation took place when IRS Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson, a friend of Hillary Clinton’s, quietly resigned in February 1997. However, despite her resignation the abuses continued.

While the targeting of conservative organizations was bad enough, the IRS also went after private citizens who had the misfortune of running afoul of the Clinton White House.

One of the first individuals to experience this was Billy Dale, a long-time White House Travel Office Director. Shortly after the Clintons assumed office, Dale was summarily fired by Hillary Clinton in favor of friends and relations from Arkansas. While the sacking was bad enough, Dale subsequently found himself the subject of an IRS audit.

While Clinton’s sexual indiscretions are well-known and have even been the subject of multiple jokes, for the women involved, the affairs were no laughing matter.

Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state employee said that in 1991 she was propositioned by then-Gov. Clinton in a Little Rock Hotel. In 1994, Jones came forward with the story, which subsequently led to a lawsuit against the president for sexual harassment.

Just five days after Jones rejected a settlement offer from Clinton attorneys over her sexual harassment claims, she found herself targeted for an audit by an IRS agent.

Another woman with ties to the Clinton administration, Elizabeth Ward Gracen also had the misfortune to receive an audit notice. Gracen had a fatal attraction to Bill Clinton prior to him becoming president. After she went public with news of her affair she received threats warning her not to talk about it before she too ended up receiving an audit notice.

Other citizens were targeted with notices from the IRS following their making statements that were critical of Clinton.

In 1997, California resident Margie Gray sent a simple e-mail to Clinton that politely lamented the moral example the president was setting for young children in America.

“It wasn’t “threatening,” she explained to WND, “I just told him how sad it was that parents today are not able to say to their children, ‘Maybe someday you can be president.’” Her reason for making the statement was “Because he was immoral, unethical and dishonest.” He had dishonored the office, she believed.

In just a few weeks, Gray was told in a letter by the IRS that she owed $3,500 in interest since 1991 due to a “mistake” made on her personal income tax return for that year. The letter was even more interesting when one considers that the Grays do not file separate returns.

Gray was also involved in contacting public officials, urging them to oppose Clinton policies, including stopping the giveaway of the Long Beach Naval Shipyard to China’s COSCO company.

A similar event happened to a couple who insulted Clinton during a campaign stop in Chicago, Patricia Mendoza and her husband were attending a food festival when the president arrived.

Mrs. Mendoza shouted, “You suck, and those boys died,” referring to the 1997 truck-bombing at a U.S. barracks in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 servicemen.

Mendoza and her husband were subsequently escorted away from the area by Secret Service agents and charges were filed against them for unruly behavior. A month after Mrs. Mendoza’s shout, her husband, Glenn Mendoza received an IRS notice stating they owed $200 in back taxes and if the amount was not paid immediately, their property would be seized.

Following a call by Mendoza’s attorney, the IRS quickly dropped the case claiming the issue was due to a “computer error.”

Attorney Kent Masterson Brown represented the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons in their lawsuit attempting to force the administration to open up records related to Hillary Clinton’s health care task force, the precursor to Obamacare.

Within a month of filing the suit, Brown received an audit notice from the IRS. Additionally, Brown charged that the White House pressured the National Park Service into refusing to reappoint him to a second term on the Gettysburg National Military Park Advisory Commission, an honorary post. Brown, a Civil War buff, was the commission’s first chairman.

It has been revealed that under the Obama administration that while conservative groups have been targeted with extra scrutiny, there are no reports of progressive groups such as Media Matters being singled out. A similar pattern occurred during the Clinton administration when there were no reports from that time of left wing groups such as Planned Parenthood of the Brookings Institute being singled out for audits.

“We did that deliberately,” David Kopel, an attorney with the Independence Institute, which is handling the case, said. “We wanted to catch our opponents who support gun control off guard.”

As recently as Wednesday, the Independence Institute was suggesting the filing was still a few weeks off. Appearing at a rally against another bill, Amy Oliver Cooke, wife of Weld County Sheriff John Cooke, said they were planning to file the suit in the next couple of weeks.

The suit, which was filed in federal district court, lists 54 out of the state’s 64 sheriffs as plaintiffs in the case.

Kopel says what is significant to note is that while not all sheriffs are party to the suit, not a single sheriff has come out in opposition to it.

Cooke had harsh words for critics in the media and others who questioned whether a government official should sue another government official.

“Some in the media … asked me if I think it’s a good idea or if it’s appropriate for [a] government official to sue another government official. My response is unequivocally yes. It is our duty and responsibility as sheriffs to protect the people who elected us and whom we serve.”

At a recent event in Fort Collins by the Independence Institute providing updates on the case, Cooke said he was proud that gun control supporters are nervous over the lawsuit.

“When we announced our opposition to these gun control laws, the Greeley Tribune ran a story titled, ’48 Sheriffs going Rogue on Guns,’” Cooke said. “They should be fearing us. What right does the state have dictating how many rounds of ammunition [a woman] can have to defend herself?”

The lawsuit isn’t just limited to law enforcement officials, but lists a variety of organizations including the Colorado Farm Bureau, which has expressed concerns about rural farmers and ranchers having to deal with predators, Women for Concealed Carry, and the Colorado Outfitters Association.

“We have a diverse number of plaintiffs in this case. We are celebrating diversity,” Kopel said. “The difference is we actually believe in genuine diversity.”

Cooke noted that the lawsuit was not a partisan issue, with Republican and Democratic sheriffs both taking part in the lawsuit.

“This is not about urban versus rural as the governor likes to portray it,” Cooke said. “We have rural and urban plaintiffs in this case. It is about the Constitution. It is about the 2nd and 14th amendments. The suit is about our way of life, our freedoms, our rights, our liberties which transcend political affiliation and place of residence.”

Within minutes following the announcement of the filing of the suit, Republican Atty. Gen. John Suthers, who will be defending the state in the lawsuit, finally issued a statement providing guidance to law enforcement on how they are supposed to enforce the new laws.

Under the existing laws, any magazine that holds greater than 15 rounds, or can be modified to hold greater than 15 rounds, is now illegal to purchase in the state. The problem is nearly all magazines are designed with features that make them readily expandable to hold more than 15 rounds. The law’s wording effectively bans all magazines in Colorado.

Suthers said in the guidelines that magazines “must be judged objectively” and that a magazine holding 15 rounds or fewer cannot be defined as “large capacity” just because it can be modified to hold more.

While those currently possessing magazines greater than 15 rounds, the law prevents the transfer of any of these magazines. The wording states the grandfather clause only applies as long as the holder “maintains continuous possession” of it. Cooke and other sheriffs have pointed out that based on this wording, anyone who gives their magazine to a gunsmith or asks for help on a shooting range with a jammed magazine is now violating the law.

Suthers said “an owner should not be considered to have transferred a large capacity magazine or lost continuous possession of it simply by handing it to a gunsmith, hunting partner, or an acquaintance at a shooting range.”

However, the problem is Suther’s statement is just what it says, guidance, and it does not hold the force of law. Any officer can choose to disregard Suther’s recommendations anytime he chooses in favor of the plain text of the law.

The lawsuit also claims the gun control measures violate the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as individual civil rights.

Dylan Harrell, one of the disabled plaintiffs in the case, said his disability, which confines him to a wheelchair often makes it more difficult for him to defend himself or his family. He also noted that as an outdoorsman, when exiting his vehicle he needs help.

“I often request the assistance for the safe handling of my firearms anytime I am transferring from a wheelchair to an ATV or another vehicle,” Harrell explained. “It is now against the law for me to even seek assistance anytime I am transferring my firearms for my wheelchair to another vehicle. I am filing this lawsuit on the half of all Coloradans with disabilities such as my own.”

The suit noted that disabled citizens often find it difficult to change magazines quickly, which could be a serious threat to their life if their weapon is needed for self-defense.

Colorado’s far left government this year is controlled by Democrats in the governor’s office, in the House and the Senate. They rammed through a number of gun restrictions and limits – at the behest of the White House.

During debate over the gun control measures, the vast majority of citizens testifying before the legislature were opposed to any new gun control laws. However, frequently their testimony was dismissed and treated with disdain by Democratic lawmakers who seemed to have already made up their minds about passing the laws.

State Sen. Evie Hudak, D-Westminster, scolded a witness opposing one of the gun restrictions.

Amanda Collins, 27, of Reno, Nev., was telling her story of being assaulted and explained that had she been carrying a concealed weapon, the incident might have ended differently.

“I just want to say that, actually statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun,” Hudak scolded. “And, chances are that if you would have had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you.”

Hudak continued, speaking over the committee witness, “The Colorado Coalition Against Gun Violence says that every one woman who used a handgun in self-defense, 83 here are killed by them.”

Finally able to resume her testimony, Collins said, “Senator, you weren’t there. I know without a doubt [the outcome would have been different with a gun].

“He already had a weapon,” she told the meeting of the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee. “He didn’t need mine.”

A similar attitude was displayed by state Rep. Joe Salazar.

He said that a woman who feels threatened by rape on a college campus doesn’t need to be armed because she can use a call box to get help.

Salazar’s statement came in a debate over a proposal to ban citizens possessing a concealed-carry permit from being armed on university campuses.

“It’s why we have call boxes,” said Salazar, “It’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at.

“And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around, or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody.”

Perhaps the most surprising statement came from U.S. Rep. Diane DeGette, a Denver Democrat who displayed her perspective on gun magazines.

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them; so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot, and there won’t be any more available,” she said.

The Denver Post said DeGette didn’t appear to understand that a firearm magazine can be reloaded with more bullets.

State officials admitted they were doing the bidding of the White House. In February, Vice President Joe Biden flew to the state to strong-arm Democratic lawmakers who were feeling pressure from their constituents to vote against the bills.

“He (Biden) said it would send a strong message to the rest of the country that a Western state had passed gun-control bills,” Tony Exhum, a Democratic lawmaker from Colorado Springs, told the Denver Post.

House Majority Leader Mark Ferrandino, an open homosexual who also pursued a “civil unions” agenda this year, admitted the gun-control bills introduced by fellow Democrats had national implications.

“I was shocked that he called. He said he thought the bills could help them on a national level,” Ferrandino said.

“Now my question isn’t about who is going to resign,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters. “My question is who’s going to jail over this scandal?”

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., told Fox News, “We’re not interested in retirements and forced ousters, we’re interested in people going to jail.”

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told the Salt Lake Tribune, “Whoever is responsible, whoever was complicit in the execution of this, those who participated in the cover-up, not only should they be fired, they should be prosecuted and thrown in jail. There is no way to defend this one. Using the IRS as a tool is just beyond reason.”

Twenty-nine House Republicans are co-sponsoring a bill by Rep. Michael Turner, R-Ohio, that would make it a crime punishable by jail for IRS agents to launch politically motivated investigations.

Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., called for incarceration as well.

“There is a tone of direction that the IRS has taken, which was reflected by the tone of this administration,” Gardner said. “This led these staffers to believe this is what was expected of them. This type of thuggish behavior is exactly what the administration wanted.”

On Friday, the IRS admitted it was singling out groups applying for tax-exempt status that used the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, but insisted that the reasoning had nothing to do with the politics or message of these groups. The IRS also claimed the incident was limited to a small cadre of low-level agents at a single location in Cincinnati, Ohio.

The IRS issued a rare apology, insisting that the agents made the decisions on their own initiative and that senior leaders had no idea this was going on.

However, the story quickly began to unravel as news reports indicated it was actually several offices that were involved in the targeting of conservative groups. It has been revealed that, contrary to initial claims, senior officials were apparently first advised of the efforts to single out groups critical of the president as early as 2011.

President Obama said he wasn’t made aware of the issue until Friday. At a Tuesday press conference, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said “categorically” no one in the White House had any idea the IRS was singling out these groups. When pressed for how he could know that, Carney admitted he could not know for sure, but based his statement on personal knowledge.

According to Fox News, an internal timeline by the inspector general’s office revealed the IRS began looking at tea party and “patriot” groups as early as 2010, shortly after Obamacare was passed.

However, in 2011 the organizations scrutinized were expanded to include groups focused on government debt and spending, taxes and education on “ways to make America a better place to live” as well as those who criticized “how the country is being run.”

In early 2012, the IRS expanded the list even further to include groups that were educating people on the Constitution and Bill of Rights and involved in limiting/expanding government.

Gardner told WND that among the multiple conservative groups targeted by the IRS was at least one group from Colorado.

The group, which is asking that its name be kept private for now, applied for 501(c)(4) status and had its application illegally released to the public during the application process, which is a clear violation of federal law.

“The information on their application was confidential and the IRS was required by law to treat it as such, yet that information was leaked to ProPublica,” Gardner said. “Who’s to say the IRS didn’t give out confidential donor information either? This confirms people’s worst beliefs about government overbearance.”

The organization lists itself as being a center-right organization providing research and information to the public on policy issues, government behavior, voting records and legislation. During their application process, the group was sent a letter by the IRS asking for detailed personal information regarding its activities. Gardner’s office released a copy of the letter, which revealed that among other things the IRS demanded to know, under penalty of perjury:

• Copies of all research and informational materials distributed to the public
• A list of who in the organization conducts these activities and how and where they distribute the findings.
• A list of all outside organizations and “partners” they work or contract with to conduct research activities.
• A list of the meetings, conventions, promotional tours, media interviews and similar events they have participated in and/or conducted.
• Provide copies of the material distributed at events
• Provide copies of transcripts when talking with the media
• Provide a list of all media interviews conducted by anybody regarding the organization as well as a description of the purpose of the interview.

In addition, the organization was told it would need to provide copies of all educational training materials as well as who they target during their training sessions and when they take place.

Gardner promises confidentiality to any group that contacts his office with allegations of being targeted by the IRS for political reasons, unless the group specifies otherwise.

“I am making my office available to any group that has been wrongly targeted by the IRS,” he said. ”We are here to help in any way that we can.”

Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., has said constituents in his district are also encouraged to contact his office if they feel they have been unfairly targeted by the IRS.

“It is important to understand how such a practice came about and who authorized its implementation,” Lamborn said. “Were you or your organization the victim of these inappropriate and illegal IRS activities? I encourage you to share your experience with my district staff. I appreciate your help in this matter and vow to hold those accountable within the government who acted inappropriately, or even illegally.”

While the revelations have evoked outcries from both the political left and right, some critics have attempted to temper the issue by saying that while the allegations are serious, no one was hurt by the requests and no conservative groups had their applications denied.

However, the argument fails to take into account groups that simply gave up because the detailed requests would require an overwhelming number of man hours and resources. The recently released inspector general report on the issue noted that while none of the nearly 300 applications were denied, some applicants stopped trying.

In a possible attempt to downplay the importance of the issue, CNN reported that acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said the entire event was the fault of two “rogue” employees who were “off the reservation.” Miller claimed the two individuals had already been disciplined for their actions.

However, Gardner said if Miller thinks his statement will put an end to the controversy, he is sadly mistaken.

“This is not a matter of whether people get fired or not. It’s a question of how long they spend in jail. I do believe you are looking at jail time and heads rolling as they should.”

He went on to say Congress will continue to aggressively investigate to find out why the IRS lied to lawmakers.

“The IRS lied to Congress,” Gardner said. “Somebody knew this was going on, yet they reassured us there was no targeting of conservative groups. Harry Truman had a sign on his desk that said, ‘The buck stops here.’ We need to find out where the hell the buck stops with this administration.”

While it might be easy to point to fingers solely at individual IRS agents, Gardner said another issue to look at is the part Congress may have played in putting pressure on the IRS to investigate conservative groups.

“We need to look into whether members of Congress encouraged this type of discrimination against people based on their philosophical thought,” he said. “I think this investigation will be the type where no stone is left unturned. This is a sickening episode where the government was  acting far beyond its constitutional authority.”

USA Today backed up Gardner’s concerns that the IRS may not be entirely to blame for the targeting of groups opposed to the Obama administration.

“The same Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee (Montana Sen. Max Baucus) who this week is calling for hearings into IRS activities, specifically called on the IRS to engage in that very conduct back in 2010. And he wasn’t the only one. Just last year, a group of seven Senate Democrats sent another letter to the IRS urging them to similarly investigate these outside political organizations.

“From Max Baucus to Chuck Schumer to Jeanne Shaheen, key Senate Democrats publicly pressured the IRS to target groups that held differing political views and who, in their view, had the temerity to engage in the political process. The IRS listened to them and acted. And other Democrat senators like Kay Hagan and Mark Pryor said and did nothing about it.”

Gardner said the whole episode proves Americans should not have any faith in government when it comes to their health care. Under Obamacare, the IRS will in charge of verifying individuals have obtained health-care coverage that is acceptable to the federal government.

“I think this is a clear indicator that we cannot trust the government, especially the IRS with information regarding our health care,” Gardner said. “You have an administration that thinks it can control guns and then gives us Fast & Furious. Then it believes it can administer and give us all health care, but now we find out the IRS cannot even manage nonprofit organizations.”

“The question is why is the military having meetings with [anti-Christian activist Mikey Weinstein] and how is it he appears to have easy access to individuals such as [former Ambassador Joe] Wilson.”

That’s from Brig. Gen. Doug Lee, now chairman of the executive committee for the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty.

WND has reported how the Pentagon’s recent vow to punish Christian evangelism among military members, along with Weinstein’s assertion that such behavior is treasonous, has prompted a legal team to offer to defend any member of the armed services persecuted for expressions of faith.

The Liberty Institute has announced the launch of its Armed Forces Religious Liberty hotline – (972) 941-4543 – along with a petition to support Christian members of the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force.

“The Pentagon released an appalling official statement that I didn’t believe at first, but unfortunately it’s true,” said Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO of the organization. “They are about to implement a new policy under which any members of the military ‘caught’ talking about their Christian faith will be subject to court martial or imprisonment!”

Shackelford said his group is establishing the emergency hotline “to protect our armed forces members, who can call and get free legal representation when they are persecuted for their Christian faith.”

Weinstein most recently has been criticizing others’ reporting on the dispute.

“Ever since the 4/26/13 Washington Post feature on [Military Religious Freedom Foundation] detailing our meeting with top-level Pentagon officials, a non-stop torrent of shamefully ridiculous coverage has been accusing Mikey and MRFF of being ‘Anti-Christian,’ ‘Extremist,’ ‘Atheist,’ and ‘Leftist,’” a fundraising email on his behalf said.

That, however, is nonsense, Lee said.

“It’s all hyperbole and exaggerations on the part of Mike Weinstein to get support for his worldview and his attempts to rid the military of what he calls an evangelical conspiracy,” Lee said.

The issue was unnoticed until Weinstein made the effort to bring attention to it.

On April 30, the MRFF sent out an email recommending a Washington Post article written by Sally Quinn. The organization encouraged recipients to read “this excellent Washington Post article.”

The recommended article claimed that Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Colin Powell, told Quinn that the biggest problems the military is currently facing are sexual assault and what he calls proselytizing by Christians who happen to share their faith with others.

Wilkerson’s comments were made to Quinn during an interview that also featured former ambassador Joe Wilson and Weinstein as they were on their way to a meeting at the Pentagon.

Wilson told Quinn that if a chaplain would proselytize, it would be a workplace violation. Weinstein went even further and said it was a national security threat and amounted to spiritual rape.  He said the chaplain’s role is to minister to spiritual needs.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines proselytizing as “to induce someone to convert to one’s faith; to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause.” This definition would include a Christian sharing their faith in any attempt to persuade them to become a Christian, no matter how benign the approach might be.

The article praised by the MRFF appears to have been intended to refer to this definition as it mentions an Air Force blue book which says, “Leaders at all levels must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion.” It even suggested that noncompliance could result in court-martial.

The result of Weinstein’s promotion was that the issue got attention.

In a followup, Weinstein told Fox News the military needed to begin prosecuting Christians who shared their faith.

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” he said. “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”

Pentagon officials issued a statement apparently backing up Weinstein, saying, “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense.”

Weinstein, according to Fox News’ Todd Starnes, told officials at the meeting that U.S. troops who evangelize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished, by the hundreds if necessary.

Lee said that’s not close to reality.

“The Washington Post article was one of the most awful, hateful, lying and spiteful articles I have ever read,” Lee said. “These types of stories are giving Weinstein exactly what he wants, which is attention and to question the patriotism of evangelical Christians who are faithfully serving in the military by making these outlandish statements.”

Following a public uproar and the filing of a Freedom of Information Act request by the Alliance Defending Freedom asking for records on the issue, the Pentagon quickly backtracked on its earlier statement.

A statement from Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen said the Department of Defense “never and will never single out a particular religious group for persecution or prosecution.”

Christensen’s statement went on to say the Department of Defense “makes reasonable accommodations for all religions and celebrates the religious diversity of our service members.”

“Service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one’s beliefs (proselytization),” he said.

The MRFF stayed on its fundraising focus.

“We’re under attack,” a May 3 fundraising email from the MRFF said. “Right-wing and fundamentalist blogs and news sites have begun ruthlessly attacking MRFF and shamelessly lying about the policies put in place to protect all servicemembers’ religious liberty.”

A few days later the organization sent out another fundraising email titled, “MRFF target of fundamentalist hysteria.”

Lee said contrary to what the MRFF is claiming, it was actually Weinstein who pushed for the situation to be a national incident.

“I have a copy of the Air Force document right here,” Lee said. “It’s not in hard copy yet, but everyone has been reading it since August. It is a fairly standard regulation that tries to cover all the bases.”

He went on to say the regulation has been around for years and on its face it is fairly harmless.

“It is actually a fairly good regulation,” Lee said. “All it says is a person in leadership cannot use their position to coerce a person into changing their religion. It has nothing to do with simply sharing their faith with someone.”

Lee explained that despite the Pentagon’s retreat on the issue, members in the military should still be concerned about recent trends against Christians.

“While this issue is a serious matter and we consider how we are increasingly seeing a culture in the military that is opposed to Christianity, this document does not do what has been claimed by Mike Weinstein. When the truth about it comes out he will be made to look like a fool.”

Lee also pressed the question of why the military is meeting with Weinstein.

“Weinstein is not a consultant for the military,” Lee said.

The Democrats are led by Senate President John Morse, majority caucus chair Jeanne Nicholson and House Speaker Mark Ferrandino. One opponent has come up with a striking name for House Bill 1154, which repeals certain state criminal statutes regarding the abortion procedure.

“Under guise of protecting pregnant women, this bill repeals the Colorado criminal abortion statutes, which in some respects, makes this the Kermit Gosnell Enabler Act,” Colorado Rep. Lori Saine, R-Dacono, told WND.

“In addition, HB 1154 repeals part of the statute that protects freedom of conscience – severing the rights of hospitals, doctors and medical staff to refuse [to participate] in abortions.”

Gosnell’s case attracted attention from even the generally pro-abortion establishment media with its horrific testimony of babies born alive, left on shelves breathing for 20 minutes then summarily killed with the spinal column snip.

The testimony of cat feces, filthy instruments, nonworking instruments and other circumstances revealed the inner workings of a U.S. abortion industry that revolted almost everyone who heard it.

“This bill is an open invitation for abortionists like Kermit Gosnell to come and open up shop here,” said Gualberto Garcia Jones, legal analyst for Personhood Colorado.

The bill, a slap at the voters in Colorado who repeatedly have voted pro-life, “repeals the criminal abortion statutes” in the state. Democrats were able to adopt legislation virtually at will this year because they control a majority in both the state Senate and House. Gov. John Hickenlooper is a Democrat in support of the legislature’s left-leaning agenda of civil unions, gun control and abortion protection.

The White House also lobbied the state legislature for restrictions on guns, according to Colorado lawmakers, seeking to establish a precedent in a Western state.

The bill claims its purpose is to create new criminal offenses for crimes against pregnant women that terminate their pregnancies. The aim is to prevent what happened to Brady Surovik, an unborn boy who was killed by a drunken driver in Longmont.

However, since Brady was in his mother’s womb, no state charges applied, and Brady had no rights.

The bill states if an individual causes an unborn child to die because of a “highly provoking act of the intended victim,” the perpetrator has only committed a Class 6 felony, which is punishable by only 12 to 18 months in prison and/or a $1,000 to $100,000 fine.

To receive the approval of Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups, the bill plainly specifies it does not consider the unborn child to be anything other than an inanimate object on a par with any other property that is destroyed by a criminal.

The bill states its rationale has nothing to do with the child but is the result of lawmakers “recognizing the woman as the victim of criminal conduct.”

To remove all doubt that the bill has nothing to do with the unborn child, it further states that “nothing in this act shall be construed to confer personhood, or any rights associated with that status, on a human being at any time prior to live birth.”

Cathy Alderman of Planned Parenthood told Denver’s  KDVR-TV that the organization is praising the bill because of its approach to ensure the unborn child does not have any rights.

“HB 1154 is a thoughtful and fair approach to a complex area of law that addresses crimes against pregnant women without restricting or infringing upon reproductive health care,” Alderman said.

However, some are concerned that the provisions prohibiting criminal prosecution of abortionists amounts to saying the state would welcome doctors such as Gosnell to come and set up their practices in Colorado without fear of consequences.

The bill states that “nothing in this article shall permit the prosecution of a person for any act of providing” medical, surgical or any other type of care. It also excludes from prosecution any abortion facility that provides abortions, whether it be at a clinic or using telemedicine procedures.

“Planned Parenthood’s backdoor attempt to repeal Colorado criminal laws has passed,” said Jennifer Mason, spokeswoman for Personhood Colorado. “No matter how negligent an abortionist may be, even if he is on par with Kermit Gosnell, he or she can no longer be criminally charged.

“Planned Parenthood has effectively created an abortion free-for-all in Colorado. Planned Parenthood’s deceptive new bill has created an infinitely more dangerous environment for pregnant women.”

At a recent fundraiser, Planned Parenthood Southeast Pennsylvania President and CEO Dayle Steinberg said when women came to the organization with concerns about what was happening, they decided to place the burden on the individual patients to report the incident.

“We would always encourage them to report it to the Department of Health,” Steinberg told noted feminist Gloria Steinem in an interview.

Commenting on the Gosnell trial, Steinem said: “It makes more clear why you need Planned Parenthood. There is nothing on Earth more important than what Planned Parenthood is doing.”

However, under the new Colorado law, if Gosnell had been operating his clinic in the state, there would be no trial.

Another danger in the bill is that abortionists cannot be held criminally liable if they perform an abortion against the will of an underage patient. If a minor is brought in by a parent or another adult and insists the child have an abortion against her will, the doctor cannot be charged for performing the abortion.

Saine said another troubling feature of the bill is how it creates different classifications of crime by allowing a person to face a lesser charge for killing a pregnant woman than any other person.

“The vague wording in this bill has many concerned, including district attorneys, that the language allows a murderer to face a lesser charge when killing pregnant women as opposed killing one that is not pregnant,” Saine explained. “The legislation also allows reduced charges for different circumstances: For example, if the victim caused irresistible passion that led an ‘unlawful termination of a pregnancy.’ However, this bill does not expressly include beatings or harm intended to induce abortions based on gender preference.”

She said the Democrat sponsors “twice refused an amendment to identify sex-selection abortion as a crime in the House and in the Senate. HB1154 dredges up the specter of the three-fifths compromise, promising not to confer upon unborn children the status and dignity of being qualified as human beings.”

Surovik has said the Democrats’ bill does nothing to ensure justice for her son because it refuses to acknowledge that he even has rights.

To ensure those like the drunken driver who killed Brady will face the proper consequences for killing a human life, Surovik has sponsored the Brady Amendment, which would enshrine fetal homicide in the Colorado constitution. The amendment, if approved by voters, would overturn the provisions in the Democrats’ bill exempting doctors from prosecution.

Surovik participated in making a video detailing the events surrounding Brady’s life and has launched A Voice For Brady to help pass the amendment. Supporters are currently gathering the required 86,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot.

“HB 1154 is a defining example of the lengths the abortion industry will go to garner more protection for abortionists like Kermit Gosnell than they will for pregnant women and the children they carry,” Saine said.

The Democrats propose simply not listing anyone as inactive and sending ballots to every person. Their plan also would allow people to register to vote as late as the polls are open.

With arm-twisting by Vice President Joe Biden, the Democrat majority in the state previously passed a long list of gun restrictions. They include limits on gun magazines that have prompted a couple of companies to move out of the state.

Now the Democrats are continuing to flex their political muscle with a plan to push through at the close of this year’s legislature an elections bill Secretary of State Scott Gessler, a Republican, warns will bring disaster.

It would send out mail-in ballots to every registered voter, whether it’s wanted or not, and allow registration on the day of the election. Democrats claim the bill is needed to help increase voter participation.

But Gessler pointed out that in the 2012 election, Colorado was one of the few states that increased its turnout. The state is currently rated third highest in voter turnout nationwide.

Colorado’s turnout rate surpasses even states that currently send ballots to every voter and outperforms six of the eight states that allow same-day registration.

Gessler says that with such strong participation, it makes no sense for Democrats to rush through a series of laws changing how the state does elections. He said the requirements in the bill may not be implemented in time for the 2014 election.

Currently, if a registered voter does not participate in an election, county clerks have the option of not sending the voter a mail-in ballot. However, prior to making the decision, clerks take a series of steps to avoid voter disenfranchisement.

Weld County Clerk and Recorder Steve Moreno explained the process his office takes prior to deciding whether or not to send out a mail-in ballot. First, inactive voters are mailed a card advising them of their status and outlining the steps to reactivate their status. If his office doesn’t hear back from the individual, several months later the name is run through the National Change of Address program to find out if the voter has moved.

After running the program, the department sends another letter out advising these voters of the current address the department has on file and again provides instructions on how to reactivate their status.

Prior to mail-in ballots being sent out, the department sends out still another card telling them the county is conducting a mail ballot election and advises them to sign and send the card back to reactivate their status. The county then sends out one final notification.

Moreno said if after all of this, a person still has not responded, he still has an opportunity to vote until 7 p.m. on Election Day.

A person also can re-register by going to the county or the Colorado secretary of state’s website. He can also call the elections department or go directly to the elections department to be placed back on the active list and the department will give them a ballot the same day.

Jenny Flannagan, executive director of Common Cause, said that regardless of how many mailings the county conducts, it should still send out ballots to all eligible voters. When asked about the voter’s responsibility, Flannagan said, “I think it’s a balance. In a mail ballot election voters who are eligible should receive a ballot.”

“Most Americans participate in their democracy. Not all of us are writing letters to the editor or going down to the statehouse to testify,” Flannagan said. “In Colorado, when you conduct a mail-in ballot, that right should be given to every eligible voter.”

The proposal would streamline the process, demanding that clerks send out ballots to the addresses on file for all voters, regardless of whether they have voted recently or not.

It would eliminate the concept of inactive voters entirely.

Gessler says that while the idea may sound noble, the system is ripe for abuse by groups wanting to pressure formerly inactive voters.

“During the last election, over 1 million Coloradans discarded their ballots, preferring instead to vote in person. Under the proposed law, voters will get a ballot even if they don’t want one or have any intention of voting.”

He suggested that policy would open the door to intimidation.

“Independent groups have access to voter information, and there is nothing stopping them from going to people’s homes and asking them to vote a certain way and fill out the ballot right then and there,” Gessler explained. “In the past the person could simply say they never requested a mail-in ballot and were going to vote in person. Now they cannot say that because the person knows they have gotten a ballot in the mail.”

Another Gessler concern is the provision for same-day registration, which can contribute to vote fraud.

“In Colorado simply producing a utility bill, which can be easily forged, is sufficient identification for a person to vote. This would easily enable a person to register in multiple areas around the state under different names,” he said.

“Even if we discovered the vote was fraudulently cast, we would have no way to locate and prosecute them if they used a fake address,” Gessler said.

“Suppose someone comes in and casts a ballot in another person’s name like what happened in Washington when a person came in and requested a ballot in Eric Holder’s name,” Gessler explained. “Then later, when it is closer to the day of the election the real voter comes in to cast his ballot. The system shows he has already cast a ballot, so he would not be allowed to vote. In effect he has been disenfranchised and prohibited from voting.”

If same-day registration is allowed, the requirements should be a minimum of a photo ID for verification, he said.

He notes there already is evidence of vote fraud activities.

“During the last election, El Paso County caught a person who registered five times using false information,” Gessler said. “While county officials caught him, it was only because they had 29 days before the election to investigate the registration fraud. Under an election-day registration scheme, this person would have been able to vote several times and it is unlikely he would be caught. Also in 2012, being a battleground state, Colorado saw instances of people from other states trying to illegally vote in the election.”

That even small numbers of vote fraud cases can have major impacts already is documented.

WND reported just days ago that two Democrats in Indiana have been found guilty of submitting unauthorized names on the petition that placed then-Sen. Barack Obama on the 2008 presidential election primary ballot, meaning he likely did not qualify.

Fox News reports the case in South Bend found guilty on all counts former longtime St. Joseph County Democratic Party chairman Butch Morgan Jr. and former county Board of Elections worker Dustin Blythe.

The two faced accusations of petition fraud and forgery, as well as falsely making a petition.

The verdicts raise anew questions about election fraud by Democrats, a subject that was analyzed after the 2012 election.

The report found vote fraud occurred in the 2012 presidential election and cumulatively was likely enough to decide the outcome.

“In reality, although no single instance or aspect of vote fraud was likely enough to tip the election for Obama, the aggregate of their [Democrats] corrupt activities – including illegal campaign donations, taking advantage of states without voter ID requirements, military ballots delivered too late … may well have been,” the analysis said.

Sign WND’s petition urging Congress to investigate fraud and abuse in America’s election system!

Fox News reported that two former Indiana elections board officials who pleaded guilty said Morgan told Democrat officials and workers to fake the names and signatures that Obama and Hillary Clinton needed to qualify for the presidential race.

Prosecutor Stan Levco told Fox News, “I think this helped uphold the integrity of the electoral system. Their verdict of guilt is not a verdict against Democrats, but for honest and fair elections.”

Affidavits citing the testimony of former Board of Registration worker Lucas Burkett said the scheme was created in January 2008. Burkett reportedly was aboard the plan at first but later dropped out. Fox News reported he waited three years to reveal the scheme.

Fox News notes that if revelations about any forgeries were raised during the election, the petitions could have been challenged at that time.

A candidate who did not qualify with enough legitimate signatures at the time could have been removed from the ballot.

State law in Indiana requires candidates to have 500 signatures from each of the nine congressional districts to qualify. But in St. Joseph County, Obama qualified with only 534.

Prosecutors alleged that nine of the Obama petition pages apparently were forged, and each contained up to 10 names, bringing doubt on up to 90 names.

“If faked, [they] could have brought the Obama total below the legal limit required to qualify,” Fox News reported.

Fox reported it was told by “numerous voters” they did not sign their names, nor did they authorize their names to be used.

WND’s extensive report on fraud in the 2012 race looked at claims that Obama, in some districts nationwide, got 100 percent of the vote, questions about absentee ballots and efforts by Democrats to prevent poll watchers from observing the election.

Some of the issues that were uncovered:

• Seventy-five GOP vote inspectors were ordered to leave Philadelphia poll locations by Democrat poll judges. One judge was caught on audio. A court order sent them back but it’s unknown what happened when they were gone. These poll locations were all within the 59 precincts where Romney received no votes.
• In Philadelphia, the Community Voters Project, an ACORN clone that employs some former ACORN workers, shredded Republican voter registrations. It’s not the first time they have been in trouble.
• The Florida AFL-CIO threatened True the Vote and Tampa Fair Vote with legal action for submitting voter registration challenges.
• Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings issued a highly publicized threat against True the Vote and Election Integrity Maryland just for checking voter rolls. EIM found 11,000 questionable registrations, including 1,566 dead voters. The Maryland Board of Elections took no action.
• Cummings also attacked the Ohio Voter Integrity Project with the same baseless claims.
• Think Progress falsely claimed True the Vote was “under investigation” by Rep. Cummings, when in fact he has no legal authority to do so.
• Despite overwhelming nonpartisan public support for voter ID laws, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department and liberal jurists have delayed, emasculated or defeated ID laws in Texas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Arizona and Pennsylvania.
• Holder has vowed to fight voter ID laws as restricting voters’ rights.
• The Obama administration “spiked investigations” of eight states that had major voter roll problems.
• The Holder Justice Department conspired with Project Vote on National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) enforcement lawsuits, which force state and local agencies to become, essentially, low income voter registration drives.
• In 2009 DOJ announced to its attorneys that it would not enforce voter roll maintenance laws because it wouldn’t increase voter turnout.

The report also found the election rolls nationwide in shambles. Pew Research Center published a report revealing election rolls in a shambles nationwide. It found:

• 24 million invalid or inaccurate voter registrations
• 1.8 million deceased voters
• 2.75 million registered in multiple states.

The WND report also focused on the mechanics of the election: voting machines.

There were a number of complaints about electronic voting machines that tallied votes for Democrats despite a Republican vote and a few instances of the opposite case.

• Voters in Pueblo County, Colo., complained that their votes were being changed to Obama, reported local NBC affiliate KOAA.
• Maryland congressional candidate and veteran investigative journalist Ken Timmerman reported many voters claiming this happened to them, lodging complaints with vote judges. Timmerman has requested to see voting machine records.
• Maryland Delegate Kathy Afzali and Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild have requested the FBI impound two electronic voting machines suspected of switching votes based on complaints from other voters, including a state official.
• Robert Ashcroft, a Republican poll watcher in Allentown, Pa., reported that about 5 to 10 percent of electronic votes would “change the selection back to default – to Obama.”
• EVM problems were also reported to have occurred in Ohio, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas.
• A 2008 Fox News report showed how electronic voting machines can be infected with a computer virus to change votes. A Princeton University study in 2006 found the same thing.

And the fraud didn’t go unnoticed. A few of the higher-profile cases:

• Patrick Moran, son of longtime U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, was caught on video by James O’Keefe’s Veritas Project, telling an undercover journalist how to commit vote fraud.
• Other Veritas videos showed Obama campaign officials in Texas, New Jersey and New York providing multiple forms to journalists posing as voters so that they could vote in two or more states.
• On Election Day, Veritas reporters recorded poll officials on camera telling voters not to vote for Romney.
• The Obama campaign continues to accept illegal donations from other countries. WND’s Aaron Klein proved it by donating to the Obama campaign twice under the name “Osama bin Laden” using a Pakistani web address.
• WND has filed a complaint with the FEC demanding an investigation of overseas donations to the Obama campaign.
• In 2008, the Obama campaign accepted almost $30,000 from Palestinian donors.
• A Korean interpreter in Flushing, N.Y., directed Korean voters to vote Democrat. He was expelled from the poll.
• Two cases of forged votes were reported in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., by Republicans who discovered their votes had already been made.
• Non-citizens were charged with voting illegally in Austin, Minn.
• Cases of double voting in Ohio are being investigated.
• Non-citizen allegedly voted in Iowa
• Double voting is being investigated in North Carolina
• NBC reported dead voters voting in California
• Mentally disabled were coaxed to vote for Obama in North Carolina
• Widespread absentee vote fraud is being investigated in South Texas
• A non-English-speaking, under-18 youth reported he was “told he can vote.”
• Many other cases

Sign WND’s petition urging Congress to investigate fraud and abuse in America’s election system!

“Education truly suffers when school administrators exhibit such poor judgment and common sense, especially when it comes to their zealous misapplication of misguided zero tolerance policies,” John Whitehead president of the Rutherford Institute said. “However, what makes this case stand out from the rest is that this latest victim of zero tolerance policies run amok happens to be a veteran school teacher.”

Doug Bartlett is a substitute teacher with 17 years of experience in the classroom. While teaching a second grade class, the curriculum required a “tool discussion.”

During the lesson, employing a common technique by educators, Bartlett used a visual aid which included several garden-variety tools that included wrenches, pliers and screwdrivers. These tools are found in virtually every home and toolbox in America.

Along with the other tools, Bartlett displayed a box cutter and pocket knife and showed the students the proper use of these tools. When not in use, the tools were kept in a toolbox on a high shelf, which required the use of a chair for even an adult to reach.

On Sept. 27, 2011, following an investigation made after an observer filed a complaint, Bartlett was informed he was being charged by the district for “possessing, carrying, storing, or using a weapon” and “negligently supervising children, inattention to duty and repeated vagrant acts.”

Bartlett was handed a four-day suspension without pay.

The charge specifically mentioned the pliers, wrench and screwdriver along with box cutters and a 2.25-inch pocket knife.

Whitehead said the Rutherford Institute now is filing a civil lawsuit against the district in an attempt to get the weapons charge expunged from his record.

“The outrageous weapons charge could damage and effectively end his teaching career because it is now part of his teaching record and we want to get it expunged,” Whitehead said.

“Despite his 17 years of exemplary service he’ll never get in the door of another school to teach again as long as this remains on his record. When any school pulls up his record they will see the weapons possession charge and it is unlikely they will take the time to read the explanation of the charge.”

In the brief submitted against the district, it says the weapons charge is the result of the overzealous application of political correctness.

Whitehead told WND while zero tolerance policies have been around for years, there is a new movement afoot to take it to a new level where people are being taught to be afraid of anything that remotely resembles a weapon.

“I talk to people today who tell me they cannot even look at a picture of a gun because it is too frightening,” Whitehead explained. “I always tell him to walk down the street and look at a police officer who has several weapons on his belt. As a society we are going to have to live with guns and things that could potentially be used as weapons. If you’re using it safely as Bartlett did then what does it accomplish to make this an issue unless it is to put the fear of the state in somebody.”

Recently a West Virginia student was arrested, jailed and suspended after he refused to remove an NRA T-shirt to school. The arrest occurred after Jared Marcum, an eighth grade student, got into an argument with a teacher who objected to the image of a gun on the shirt.

Whitehead explained that while students like Marcum have been suspended for drawing pictures of a gun or wearing a picture of a gun, zero tolerance policies often go even farther.

“We had a case where a Florida girl, who was an honor student was expelled for year and three months after she passed her nail clippers to another student because it has a little fingernail pick in it.”

The Chicago student handbook defines a weapon as “any object that is commonly used to inflict bodily harm… even though its normal use is not as a weapon.”

The brief says that since it is a student handbook, Bartlett reasonably assumed that the definition did not apply to teachers who were using household tools as part of their instructional material.

“What we’re seeing in the schools today with all of these things is the belief that students are considered threats for doing anything that is slightly out of the ordinary,” Whitehead warned. “What these policies are doing is teaching kids and teachers to be very compliant and conditioning them to live in a police state.“

He also warns there could be unintentional consequences from sending the message to young children that common household items such as screwdrivers and pliers are now considered weapons. For instance, what would happen if a child were to call the police and inform them their parents have a large amount of weapons in their homes, referencing their father’s toolbox.

“The SWAT team would be there in a heartbeat with guns drawn. That has the potential to be a deadly situation very quickly,” he said.

Whitefield said while often courts tend to not use common sense and instead defer to school districts in these types of cases, he hopes the judge will look at Bartlett’s spotless record and realize how foolish the idea of charging him with weapons possession is.

“This is ridiculous; we’re talking about a 17-year veteran with a good record who has experience working with second graders. He definitely knows what he is doing. With all the gun violence in Chicago, it is crazy that the administration is worried about a pair of pliers and a screwdriver.”

Now the piper has come calling for his pay.

It was following public hearings on a series of gun-control bills last month that Michael Bane, an independent executive producer for four programs, Shooting Gallery, The Best Defense, Rapid Fire, and Gun Stories, that are on the Outdoor Channel, sent an email to Republican state Sen. Steve King saying that after seeking the advice of legal counsel, his company was pulling all production out of Colorado.

“This morning I met with my three producers, and we made the decision that if these anti-gun bills become law, we will be moving all of our production OUT of Colorado,” the email said. “We have already canceled a scheduled filming session for late this month.”

He explained his commitment to the Second Amendment and noted his legal advisers were alarmed by the state’s actions.

“Obviously, part of this is due to our own commitment to the right to keep and bear arms, but it also reflects three lawyers’ opinions that these laws are so poorly drafted and so designed to trap otherwise legal citizens into a crime (one of our attorneys referred to them as ‘flypaper laws’) that it is simply too dangerous for us to film here,” he wrote.

“I can give you chapter and verse on the legal implications if you need, but suffice to say that the first legal opinion was so scary we went out and got two others. All three attorneys agreed.”

Among the measures signed into law are requirements for universal background checks for gun transfers and a ban on magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. Additionally, residents now wishing to exercise their Second Amendment right must pay a fee. The laws are among the toughest in the nation passed since the Sandy Hook massacre in December.

While the loss of tax revenue is expected to cost the state only $500,000 in 2013, Colorado can expect to lose even more revenue from other businesses who no longer will be doing business in the state as long as the restrictive gun control laws remain on the books.

WND previously reported management of the Boulder-based Magpul Industries warned Democrats the company would be closing its plant and moving out of the state if the laws, including the ban on all magazines capable of either holding or being modified to hold more than 15 rounds, were passed.

The company is in the process of following through on its promise to relocate and take several hundred jobs out of the state.

After Magpul’s announcement, Fort Collins-based HiViz Shooting systems announced it, too, would be moving to another state that respects the Second Amendment.

In announcing the move, HIvIZ President and CEO Philip Howe said the decision came down to maintaining a clear conscience regarding where it sends its tax revenue.

“I make this announcement with mixed emotions. Colorado is a beautiful state with great people, but we cannot in clear conscience support with our taxes a state that has proven through recent legislation a willingness to infringe upon the constitutional rights of our customer base,” Howe said.

Bane told King that his programs on the Outdoor Channel, although they have a relatively small viewing audience, do have influence in the small community of producers.

“Last week I had lunch with a major network producer who was looking to locate his new reality series in Colorado,” Bane explained. “That producer is also a shooter, and the new reality series will now be based out of Phoenix. That lunch cost Colorado over a million in economic impact.

“The message we will take to our viewers and listeners is that these proposed laws are so dangerous to hunters and any other person, be she a fisherman or a skier who brings a handgun into the state for self-defense, that we cannot recommend hunting, fishing or visiting Colorado. We reach millions of people, and, quite frankly, we have a credibility that Colorado government officials can no longer match.”

Media outlets have reported threats by sportsmen, including anglers and hunters, from other states who have said they intend to boycott the Colorado.

Hunting and fishing brings in an estimated $1.8 billion a year for Colorado, with $186 million coming from out-of-state residents. Consequently, if even a relatively small percentage of sportsmen chose to follow through on the boycott, it could result in serious revenue losses for the state.

Others have expressed fear about becoming a lawbreaker if someone loans them a gun for more than 72 hours. Additionally, the laws make it a crime to “transfer” a magazine that is capable of being modified or able to hold more than 15 rounds. The simple act of passing a magazine to another person constitutes an illegal transfer under the law.

Earlier this month, the International Defensive Pistol Association also announced it was planning on canceling a shooting event July 4-6 because of the new laws.

“With these new Colorado laws going into effect July 1, and based on the ambiguous way in which they were written, we have decided to cancel the Rocky Mountain Western States Regional IDPA Championship,” event organizer Walt Proulx said. “Due to the growing number of hunters and shooters choosing to boycott Colorado, and the risk that these laws as written will turn law-abiding citizens into criminals, we were left with no other choice but to cancel what was planned to be one of IDPA’s major regional championships, and one strongly supported by Montrose-area businesses.”

Chris Jurney, vice president of the Colorado Outfitters Association, told the Colorado Springs Gazette the group already is seeing cancellations because of the gun laws, which could be devastating for the state and business owners.

“There’s a united front of sportsmen that are tired of having their freedoms and liberties and fundamental rights taken away from them,” Jurney said. “That kind of unity among sportsmen is going to be big and unfortunately for those of us who live here, we’re going to suffer the consequences of this misguided legislation.”

The state has made nationwide news over the gun control laws, which were pushed through the Democrat-controlled legislature.

During debate over the gun control measures, the vast majority of citizens testifying before the legislature were opposed to any new gun control laws. However, frequently their testimony was dismissed and treated with disdain by Democratic lawmakers who seemed to have already made up their minds about passing the laws.

State Sen. Evie Hudak, D-Westminster, scolded a witness opposing one of the gun restrictions.

Amanda Collins, 27, of Reno, Nev., was telling her story of being assaulted and explained that had she been carrying a concealed weapon, the incident might have ended differently.

“I just want to say that, actually statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun,” Hudak scolded. “And, chances are that if you would have had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you.”

Hudak continued, speaking over the committee witness, “The Colorado Coalition Against Gun Violence says that every one woman who used a handgun in self-defense, 83 here are killed by them.”

Finally able to resume her testimony, Collins said, “Senator, you weren’t there. I know without a doubt [the outcome would have been different with a gun].

“He already had a weapon,” she told the meeting of the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee. “He didn’t need mine.”

A similar attitude was displayed by state Rep. Joe Salazar.

He said that a woman who feels threatened by rape on a college campus doesn’t need to be armed because she can use a call box to get help.

Salazar’s statement came in a debate over a proposal to ban citizens possessing a concealed-carry permit from being armed on university campuses.

“It’s why we have call boxes,” said Salazar, “It’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at.

“And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around, or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody.”

Perhaps the most surprising statement came from U.S. Rep. Diane DeGette, a Denver Democrat who displayed her perspective on gun magazines.

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them; so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot, and there won’t be any more available,” she said.

The Denver Post said DeGette didn’t appear to understand that a firearm magazine can be reloaded with more bullets.

Additionally, the gun control issue in Colorado has been featured on major media outlets after a majority of the state’s sheriffs have said that not only will they not enforce the new laws, but that they are actually suing the state over them.

“We have said these laws are unconstitutional and if we truly believe what we are saying then we need to put our money where our mouth is, so to speak,” Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said. “These laws are an infringement on people’s Second Amendment rights and we need to represent and stand up for the citizens who voted us into office.”

State officials admitted they were doing the bidding of the White House. In February, Vice President Joe Biden flew to the state to strong-arm Democratic lawmakers who were feeling pressure from their constituents to vote against the bills.

“He (Biden) said it would send a strong message to the rest of the country that a Western state had passed gun-control bills,” Tony Exhum, a Democratic lawmaker from Colorado Springs, told the Denver Post.

House Majority Leader Mark Ferrandino, an open homosexual who also pursued a “civil unions” agenda this year, admitted the gun-control bills introduced by fellow Democrats had national implications.

“I was shocked that he called. He said he thought the bills could help them on a national level,” Ferrandino said.

WND columnist Pastor Greg Laurie, now the honorary chairman of the National Day of Prayer, has issued an impassioned plea for pastors and churches around the country to actively participate in the 62nd annual day of prayer on May 2.

Earlier announced was a campaign to promote “A day of prayer and fasting” for 9/11/13. Already, thousands have registered their intent to participate.

Laurie, pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, Calif., and the founder of Harvest Crusades, said the issue really isn’t complicated..

“If we pray, God will hear,” Laurie said. “When He hears, who knows what He might do?”

Laurie said the nation needs much prayer, not just a single event.

“As this year’s honorary chairman of the National Day of Prayer I support WND’s 9/11/13 National Day of Prayer and Fasting. I agree with Joseph Farah that America faces a spiritual crisis and there is nothing more effective we can bring our requests to God,” Laurie said.

“In Scripture, God tells us ‘Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know.’ (Jer 33:3)”

Laurie notes that in times of crisis, the U.S. frequently has called on God. The Scripture chosen for this year’s event is Matthew 12:21, which says, “And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.”

Prior to the American Revolution, each year an annual “election sermon” was preached before the governor and House of Representatives in Massachusetts and distributed to the people.

In 1770, Rev. Samuel Cook chose as his text II Samuel 23:3, 4 which reads, “The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain.”

However, in 1774 the spiritual tone had become more ominous and restless. Several months after the Boston Tea Party, Rev. Gad Hitchcock preached out of Proverbs 29:2, “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”

See the stunning DVD documentary “The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment,” and the book on which it is based, “The Harbinger: The Ancient Mystery That Holds the Secret for America’s Future.”

This year’s event will be held from 9 a.m.-noon EDT May 2 at the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington. Afterwards, a prayer that was written by Laurie will be read at various sites across the country.

It reads in part, “… we see trouble in our culture today. We see the breakdown of the family, crippling addictions, and random acts of horrific violence. Lord, we need Your help in America. In recent days, we have done our best to remove Your Word and Your counsel from our courtrooms, classrooms and culture. It seems, as President Lincoln once said, that we have ‘forgotten God.’ But Lord, You have not forgotten us! You can bless and help and revive our country again.”

The September event was prompted by a column written by WND CEO Joseph Farah. His “A Day of prayer and fasting” calls for setting aside 9/11/2013 as a day to pray for the heart and soul of America.

In his column, Farah provided historical examples of how America’s founders, when faced with challenges frequently called for a national day of prayer and fasting.

“America is facing challenges today that, in many ways, rival anything we’ve seen since the start of World War II,” he wrote.

This week, similar to years past when America’s political leaders recognized the importance of prayer and repentance, Farah’s efforts received official endorsement by an elected official.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., entered a statement into the Congressional Record on Farah’s call for a 9/11 National Day of Prayer and Fasting.

“I join together with other Americans who have called for September 11, 2013, to be set aside as a day for personal prayer, reflection and fasting, for ourselves and for our nation,” Bachmann said in a statement.

“At this time of national mourning, as we search for comfort in the aftermath of this loss of innocent life, we would be wise to consider afresh 2 Chronicles 7:14: ‘If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land,’” she said.

In a subsequent column published this week, Farah went on to explain the events that led him to realize the importance of his idea.

• There’s a concerted effort to redefine marriage as any union between people, regardless of sex, possibly regardless even of the number of participants in that union and possibly even regardless of the status of blood relationship between them;
• America continues to abort unborn babies by the millions and has now moved further in the direction of euthanasia on both ends of the life spectrum – possibly even making it a matter of national, state-controlled health-care mandates;
• American foreign policy seems directionless, no longer with the primary concern being national security, but in fostering and fomenting change for the sake of change and breaking down the barriers of national sovereignty;
• Government seems determined to enforce a monopoly on force by making it more difficult for Americans to exercise their constitutionally protected right to procure and bear firearms;
• Government and cultural institutions are breaking down the pillars and principles upon which self-government has been built;
• Government is building up its authority and diminishing the role God plays as the supreme authority in the lives of free people.

“As we humble ourselves and pray and seek God’s face and turn from our wicked ways, we can take assurance from the Holy Scripture that God has promised to hear from heaven, will forgive our sin, and will heal our land,” Rep. Bachmann stated.

Farah’s action plan includes the following:

• Make a note on your calendar now to join in the commitment to participate;
• Help spread the word to the remnant of Americans who understand what we’re up against on Facebook and Twitter and by word of mouth;
• Talk to pastors and Bible study leaders and get them on board;
• Sign up to register your expression of support and your intention to participate.

Farah has set up a page at which people can register their support for the plan and be kept up to date on the latest developments.

Farah personally became convinced of the need for prayer and fasting more than a year ago when he began producing what became the most successful faith movie of 2012 and 2013 – “The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment.” Based on Jonathan Cahn’s teachings as revealed in his record-breaking bestseller “The Harbinger,” the movie had a profound impact on Farah.

As Farah, citing 2 Chronicles 7:14, put it: “We’ve got our instructions. God is waiting on us to act – His people. He’s not waiting on the whole world to act. He’s not waiting on a majority of Americans to act. He’s waiting on us – his children, his followers, his believers.”

In an email this week, the Council on American-Islamic Relations – an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist-finance case in U.S. history – linked to a story in Religion News Service titled, “U.S. Muslims mobilize to prevent Boston backlash.”

The article praised what it called Muslim activists for sending out statements via social media condemning the bombings.

The story then criticized anyone who would speculate on the possibility that Muslim terrorists could be behind the attack.

In the hours after the attack, several terrorism experts appearing on news shows noted the type of bombs were similar to what American soldiers faced from IED attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Islamist terror is rampant.

The techniques and tactics used in the bombing including the use of pressure cookers bear the earmarks of those advocated by al-Qaida. In fact, al-Qaida’s Inspire magazine featured an article in 2010 titled, “Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom,” which detailed how to make a pressure cooker bomb similar to what was used in the Boston Marathon attack.

That logical pathway of investigation notwithstanding, the Islamist community makes it clear just exactly who the victims are.

The RNS article cited what the author feels are unfair attempts to suggest there might be an Islamic connection to the attack.

See the documentary that reveals the threat that is right in front of us – but below the surface and hidden in plain sight, “Jihad in America: The Grand Deception.”

Among the examples provided are tweets by WND columnist by Erik Rush, who criticized U.S. policy of allowing Saudi nationals into the country without additional security screening. His comments were in reference to news reports that police were detaining a Saudi national as a “person or interest.” The identity of the individual was reported in multiple media outlets including CNN.

Naeem Baig, president of the Islamic Circle of North America, said it was problematic for American Muslims that people were speculating the bombing could be the work of Islamists.

“Obviously it’s a matter of concern,” Baig told RNS.

Baig also praised media outlets and President Obama, who were going out of their way to deflect attention from similarities to the bombing and other terrorist attacks by Islamists overseas.

“I see a very cautious and balanced approach from the media. It shows a lot of responsibility on their part, not jumping to conclusions,” he said. “And the president and his statements were very balanced and mature. Overall, politicians and the media have behaved responsibly.”

Other media outlets also jumped on the Muslims-as-victims bandwagon.

The Los Angeles Times wrote that many Muslims are hoping the bomber is not one of them because they have “dark memories about the pervasive suspicion” they received following the 9/11 attacks.

Those attacks were perpetrated by Islamists – 15 of the 19 attackers were from Saudi Arabia alone.

Salon.com went even further, saying in an article, “Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American.”

The facts, however, suggest that Islamic radicals cannot be excluded from the pool of suspects.

A 2011 report by the National Counterterrorism Center said that 70 percent of terrorism is committed by Muslim terrorist groups. Additionally, despite attempts by the Obama administration to downplay attacks such as the Fort Hood shooting as simply workplace violence similar to two employees getting into a fight, many Americans continue to view the attack as terrorism.

The website Religion of Peace has noted that in the past 30 days, Islamists worldwide have committed 205 acts of terrorism resulting in 1,008 killed and 2,027 wounded. Since the first of the year there have been 500 attacks which have killed 2,807 individuals and wounded 4,533 worldwide.

The media did report that a Saudi national was detained as a “person of interest,” and then followed that with a report that individual was not a suspect. But now officials apparently are trying to get the individual, 20-year-old Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, out of the country as fast as they can.

Steve Emerson, with the Investigative Project on Terrorism, dropped the bombshell that Alharbi, who has been portrayed in the mainstream media as a cooperating witness and simply an innocent bystander, is being deported for national security reasons.

“I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Emerson told Sean Hannity of Fox News Wednesday night.

The statement came after Reuters news agency reported Obama met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on Wednesday, noting, “the meeting was not on Obama’s public schedule.”

Emerson told Hannity he believed it was not just an oversight that caused the meeting to be unscheduled.

“That’s very interesting because this is the way things are done with Saudi Arabia. You don’t arrest their citizens. You deport them, because they don’t want them to be embarrassed and that’s the way we appease them.”

Additionally, on the previous day, Secretary of State John Kerry held a meeting with the Saudi foreign minister that was closed to press coverage.

Efforts by Muslims to describe themselves as victims are not new. Following an attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, CAIR implied Muslims were the real targets.

Then, CAIR said, “Sikh men who wear beards and turbans as part of their faith are often targeted by bigots who mistake them for Muslims.”

It went on to call on mosques to review security procedures.

A similar sentiment also came from Harris Zafar, a spokesman for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, who tweeted “crimes against Sikhs since 9/11 driven by hatred for Muslims.”

Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch, said it was appalling how Muslims frequently attempt to portray such tragedies as attacks against them, rather than against the true victims of the crime or terrorist act.

“CAIR was quick to suggest that this attack on the Sikhs was an anti-Muslim attack. In actuality Muslims have … persecuted Sikhs around the world,” Spencer said. “Zafar repeats the now-familiar claim that the Sikhs who were murdered … were actually mistaken for Muslims – a claim that has been substantiated by no evidence whatsoever, and is a spectacularly distasteful display of exploitation of the dead.”

Rush Limbaugh noted on his radio show Wednesday that the media was terrified of any suggestion that the bomber might be a Muslim.

“If some liberal finds out that it was not a white perp, will they withhold the information,” Limbaugh asked.

He noted a similar thing happened following the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, where the Obama administration took great pains to portray the attack as being the fault of a U.S. filmmaker.

Limbaugh commented on the foolishness of, on the one hand, authorities calling on the American people to help with tips, while on the other wanting to avoid offending Muslims.

“How are we supposed to find somebody if we can’t be told what he looks like? If we’re gonna be scared to death of what the perp looks like, how are we supposed to find these people,” Limbaugh said. “They’re out there. Look, I don’t want to mischaracterize what authorities tried to do, but they’re asking people for tips. They’re begging people for tips, and then the media is making it look like you gotta be very careful if a perp is dark-skinned.

“If it’s anything other than a white guy, we got a problem here. So while they’re begging for tips, they’re also frightening people against coming forward with information which might offend people. We’re not talking about profiling somebody who’s innocent here. We’re trying to catch a murderer.”

WND reported Wednesday morning that the Saudi student Alharbi shares the same last name as a major Saudi clan that includes scores of al-Qaida operatives.

Some in the clan are senior al-Qaida members while others are reportedly being held by the U.S. in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba.

Alharbi is reportedly studying in the U.S. on a student visa.

A large group of federal and state law enforcement agents reportedly raided Alharbi’s apartment in Revere, Mass.