Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Election 2016 category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Election 2016’ Category

Crisis: a dramatic emotional or circumstantial upheaval in a person’s life.

Saying that Democrats have too many drama queens is understatement. This afternoon, Judith Miller employed the Democrats’ favorite phrase while talking about President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency when she said this created a “constitutional crisis.” Judith Miller is a Pulitzer-prize-winning journalist so she should know the definition of the word crisis.

Honestly, Ms. Miller should know that a crisis only happens when there’s a life-or history-changing event. Even if the Supreme Court rules against President Trump’s declaration, it’s difficult to picture how their ruling changes the course of history.

My definition of a constitutional crisis is when the Supreme Court makes a ruling but the president refuses to obey the ruling. Pushing the envelope over a policy difference isn’t a constitutional crisis. That’s what I’d define as a constitutional question.

Democrats love throwing the constitutional crisis term around because it makes President Trump sound like a certifiable villain. When President Trump is re-elected, the American people will send the verdict that they’re tired of the Democrats’ drama queen antics.

PS- The Democrats’ other ‘drama queens are Mazie Hirono, Chuck Schumer, AOC and Speaker Pelosi.

After President Trump announced that he was declaring a national emergency, CNN and MSNBC went into full spin mode. Virtually immediately, we were told by pundits that most drugs came through ports of entry. Ditto with teenage girls that eventually get sold into child pornography, though they don’t talk much about that. The ‘pundit experts’ (I’m using that term very sarcastically) insist that the coyotes and cartels go through well-equipped ports of entry rather than through unprotected areas that aren’t fenced.

That’s insulting to our intelligence. Why should people think that these cartels and coyotes try smuggling drugs through well-protected ports of entry rather than through the porous parts of the border? Do these reporters think that the cartels want to get caught and their drugs confiscated?

These are the stories of some of the people whose lives have been forever changed by illegal aliens:

MaryAnn Mendoza tried meeting with Speaker Pelosi just a couple weeks ago. Pelosi’s staffer told Mrs. Mendoza that she wasn’t in the office. In fact, Ms. Pelosi consistently refuses to meet with Angel families. Suffice it to say that Ms. Pelosi is one of the coldest hearted bitches ever to serve in Congress. Even Jim Acosta met with Angel moms after yesterday’s presidential press conference:

The woman that Jim Acosta interviewed is Agnes Gibboney. I’ve interviewed her, too. She’s a legal immigrant who came here from Europe via South America. Acosta’s interview didn’t last long but at least he didn’t entirely avoid her like Ms. Pelosi always does.

What’s most aggravating is the fact that Ms. Pelosi totally ignores these Angel moms and that Democrats and their allies in the Agenda Media insist that there isn’t a crisis. (Yesterday, Ms. Pelosi called it a “challenge.”)

What I’m predicting is that President Trump will prevail. I’m basing that mostly off of this information:

Since this is my first time on the computer since the SOTU Address, here’s my take on what happened. The biggest thing I took from it is that President Trump looked big by using history effectively. This was one of those moments:

Here’s another:

By using history, President Trump made Democrats look petty. He looked strong, too. When Democrats play legislative small-ball, he’ll look like the man with the plan. Democrats won’t have a defense.

Another thing I took from the speech was how petulant Democrats looked. One particular moment that struck me was when Democrats looked indecisive on whether to stand or whether to sit after President Trump rattled off an impressive list of economic successes. Real Americans don’t hesitate in that moment — they stand and applaud.

Finally, when President Trump talked about Alice Johnson, he brought the house down:

And just weeks ago, both parties united for groundbreaking criminal justice reform. Last year, I heard through friends the story of Alice Johnson. I was deeply moved. In 1997, Alice was sentenced to life in prison as a first-time non-violent drug offender. Over the next two decades, she became a prison minister, inspiring others to choose a better path. She had a big impact on that prison population — and far beyond.
Alice’s story underscores the disparities and unfairness that can exist in criminal sentencing — and the need to remedy this injustice. She served almost 22 years and had expected to be in prison for the rest of her life.
In June, I commuted Alice’s sentence — and she is here with us tonight. Alice, thank you for reminding us that we always have the power to shape our own destiny.
When I saw Alice’s beautiful family greet her at the prison gates, hugging and kissing and crying and laughing, I knew I did the right thing.

This brought tears to my eyes:

Joining Melania in the gallery this evening is a very brave 10-year-old girl, Grace Eline. Every birthday since she was 4, Grace asked her friends to donate to St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. She did not know that one day she might be a patient herself. Last year, Grace was diagnosed with brain cancer. Immediately, she began radiation treatment. At the same time, she rallied her community and raised more than $40,000 for the fight against cancer. When Grace completed treatment last fall, her doctors and nurses cheered with tears in their eyes as she hung up a poster that read: “Last Day of Chemo.” Grace — you are an inspiration to us all.

All in all, I’d say that President Trump changed minds, even if it’s just for a little while.

During the partial government shutdown, we were told that the economy was getting hurt. It’s possible that might still be the case but this morning’s jobs report didn’t provide proof of that:

Job growth in January shattered expectations, with nonfarm payrolls surging by 304,000 despite a partial government shutdown that was the longest in history, the Labor Department reported Friday.

The unemployment rate ticked higher to 4 percent, a level where it had last been in June, a likely effect of the shutdown, according to the department. However, officials said federal workers generally were counted as employed during the period because they received pay during the survey week of Jan. 12. On balance, federal government employment actually rose by 1,000. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had expected payrolls to rise by 170,000 and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 3.9 percent.

Simply put, the doom and gloom that was forecast by Democrats didn’t materialize. Instead, Larry Kudlow’s prediction that the economy would remain strong proved true.

This is why politicians shouldn’t talk about the economy:


Now Sen. Schumer will be able to dine on a major helping of crow at next Tuesday’s SOTU Address. Earlier this week, Sen. Schumer told President Trump to stay out of the negotiations and leave the governing to the Senate. After this jobs report, which blew away the expectations by 140,000 jobs (304,000 actual vs. 165,000 forecast), Sen. Schumer should stick to what he does best — whining while wearing bad-fitting glasses.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi issued this statement:

The January jobs report holds some encouraging news, but it belies the lasting financial damage that the Trump Shutdown has inflicted on hundreds of thousands of Americans across the nation. Federal workers, many of them veterans, saw their financial security shaken, their credit ratings harmed, and their lives upended by the longest shutdown in history. And now, with families still hurting, President Trump refuses to take a second senseless shutdown off the table.

Meanwhile, House Republicans overwhelmingly voted against a pay raise for federal civilian workers, refusing to respect the perseverance and patriotism of the men and women who were just furloughed or forced to work without pay. This consistently callous GOP attitude disrespects workers, dishonors our values and damages our economy.

House Democrats are working For The People, moving forward with our bold agenda to lower health costs, raise workers’ wages, and restore integrity to government. We must keep government open, and keep working to deliver an economy that works for every American, not just the wealthy and well-connected few.

What financial damage? I don’t see it. Next, getting told that Democrats “are working For The People” is a little like being told that arsonists are assisting firefighters. There just isn’t a ring of truth to it. Finally, saying that the “GOP attitude” is damaging the economy is BS. The economy isn’t damaged.

After reading this article, the obvious question is whether Nancy Pelosi will accept this offer or if she’ll simple ignore these women. I’m betting that she’ll ignore them, even if they appear in the First Lady’s box during the SOTU Address.

A group of women whose husbands work as Border Patrol officers are inviting Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to come to McAllen, Texas, to see what’s taking place at the U.S.-Mexico border. “We would like to show you around!” Jill Demanski wrote in a Facebook post to Pelosi last Thursday, which marked the 34th day of the government shutdown. “You don’t need to bring any security detail. Our husbands/boyfriends/fiancés/wives/significant others are actually very good at their jobs, thank goodness! And since you see no threat here, I’m sure you can just make a quick flight down here alone.”

During the shutdown, I wrote President Trump with the suggestion that he include some of the Angel families in the FLOTUS box, as well as border patrol agents. I also suggested that President Trump blister Ms. Pelosi in the opening of his speech. With her sitting right behind him, its a golden opportunity to highlight the fact that she flew to Hawaii for Christmas while President Trump cancelled his Christmas plans. If he thinks that’s too harsh, he can dial it back a notch or 2.

Democrats might want to consider this:

The government shutdown is over — for now — but the political ramifications are still being sorted out. The media has been chortling that Donald Trump “caved,” and he may well have lost this battle with congressional Democrats. Their “victory,” such as it is, is to notify American voters that they are so opposed to a wall and a secure border that they were willing to keep the government shut down for four weeks to ensure it doesn’t happen.

Trump has thus exposed the Pelosi-Schumer Democrats as being hopelessly soft on illegal immigration. Some Democrats are starting to wonder whether they have dug their own political grave for 2020. This is why in recent days congressional Democrats are screaming from the rafters that they are for border security — just not the way Trump wants to do it.

The reality is far from this spin. At the start of the shutdown, the Pelosi crowd was saying that “there is no border crisis” and that “a wall is immoral.” But actions speak louder than words, and every response to illegal immigration over the past decade proves they don’t want it stopped. Democrats have instead openly encouraged illegal immigration.

There’s only one vote that matters on this or any other issue. That vote belongs to Nancy Pelosi. Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, don’t matter. That’s why I agree with President Trump that a deal won’t get reached. Pelosi is too dug in to let President Trump get credit for an important victory.

I have a few suggestions for President Trump’s SOTU address. First, I’d wait until after the Feb. 15 funding deadline to give it. If Congress does what it’s supposed to do and funds the wall, I’d give a different speech than I’d give if Democrats obstruct again. That being said, I’d be surprised if Democrats didn’t continue with their open borders agenda. In that case, I’d prefer that President Trump open his SOTU Address like this:

As I traveled across the nation, I saw cities getting rebuilt, communities coming together and great unity. Across that nation, the state of our union is as strong as it’s ever been.

Unfortunately, when I’ve tried working with Congress, especially Democrats under Nancy Pelosi’s leadership, what I’ve seen is a dysfunctional union, a union that refuses to protect our southern border and the people living in the Southwest. Democrats haven’t paid much attention to Angel families. In fact, I’ve spoken with Angel families who visited Speaker Pelosi’s office, only to be told she wasn’t in.

I canceled my Christmas vacation so I could stay available to negotiate with Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Schumer. Rather than work on re-opening government, Speaker Pelosi left for a Hawaiian Christmas vacation. After the new congress was sworn in, Speaker Pelosi tried leaving on a week-long trip paid for by taxpayers. Senate Democrats took a different path. Thirty Senate Democrats accepted a lobbyist-funded vacation in Puerto Rico rather than negotiating in good faith with me.

While they were making these extravagant trips, Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Schumer talked about hold the American people hostage. How are their travels not holding the American people hostage? How were the Democrats’ trips not proof that they didn’t negotiate in good faith.

Speaker Pelosi, you started with no funding for border security. Your next bid was literally $1 of border security funding. Drugs are pouring across our southern border. Human trafficking is as awful as it’s ever been. That’s why, after attempts to negotiate multiple times in good faith with Democrats, I’m declaring a national emergency. Later tonight, I will sign an executive order to build 150 miles of border wall in Texas to stop the drug cartels, illegal aliens and human traffickers from crossing the border in those sections.

I specifically want President Trump to focus on building the barrier in Texas because that isn’t in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:

As long as the Democrats can’t file their lawsuit in the 9th Circuit, which is a virtually guaranteed victory, President Trump holds the upper hand. Democrats were ecstatic last week when President Trump “caved”. If Democrats don’t negotiate in good faith, they’ll regret it because President Trump still has, metaphorically speaking, another card to play, namely the National Emergencies Act. Once that gets into the courts, the president wins.

I’m betting that Democrats will overplay their hand because that’s what they typically do. Right now, I’m betting that Speaker Pelosi thinks she’s won the final battle. I’m betting that because she knows that she can manhandle the moderates in her caucus.

President Trump has put Speaker Pelosi into what I call God’s little acre — east of the rock, west of the hard place. He did that by accepting her half-hearted invitation to deliver the State of the Union address from the House chamber.

In a letter sent from President Trump to Speaker Pelosi, President Trump “rejected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s request to delay his State of the Union speech until after the government shutdown ends, intensifying the brinkmanship between the two leaders.” He then wrote “It would be so very sad for our Country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!”

If Speaker Pelosi allows President Trump to deliver the speech, President Trump will gain a tremendous opportunity to address the nation unfiltered. That’s something Mrs. Pelosi didn’t want to give him. On the other hand, if she prevents him from speaking, she’ll look incredibly petty. Then again, at this point, that might not be a major consideration.

I guess we didn’t have to wait long. Mrs. Pelosi decided to act like the petty person that she is. She just sent this letter saying that she won’t let President Trump to deliver the SOTU in the House chamber:

House Minority Leader McCarthy has submitted a resolution to invite President Trump to the House on January 29. I don’t see a way of this ending gracefully because, putting it bluntly, Nancy Pelosi is a bitch. She’s determined to play tit-for-tat. The question is whether anyone is willing to legitimately stand up to her from her side. I’m betting they aren’t. They’re only willing to make half-hearted meaningless gestures. Doing something that requires real courage isn’t in the Democrats’ playbook.

After reading this Our View editorial, there’s no doubt that the SC Times is as far left as CNN. In talking about the shutdown, the Times’ editorial says “Republicans in Congress, especially the Senate, have the most clout in this political game — aside, of course, from the White House. While Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell remains entrenched in Trump’s camp, national political pundits generally agree it would take only about a half-dozen Republican senators to talk up Democratic proposals (or speak against Trump’s demand) and there would be progress toward a solution.”

I don’t even slightly agree. The Times should be ashamed of themselves for suggesting such stupidity. Since when have drones and sensors alone stopped caravans? The Democrats’ plan, as enunciated by Nancy Pelosi, calls for a high tech barrier. That’s worthless. Period. While that would end the government shutdown, it wouldn’t stop illegal immigration. That’s the gospel according to experts like Brandon Judd, Bryan Dean Wright and Thomas Homan. Homan is the former acting director of ICE, Judd is the former president of the Border Patrol Union while Wright is a former CIA operations officer and a Democrat. Here’s what he said in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson:

“between 1,000 and 3,000 people who cross the southern border every day. Now that should be a starting point to say ‘what we’re doing now isn’t working.’ Now the Democrats are proposing spending $1.3 billion, just like they did last year and years prior. What that tells me is that my party is saying ‘look, let’s keep doing business-as-usual’ even though business-as-usual is getting us 1,000-3,000 people across the border every day. Now that’s just crazy. Everybody watching this program, the most reasonable people, will say ‘why are we doubling down on stupid? Why are we doubling down on broken.’ That doesn’t make any sense.

Here’s the interview:

Nothing in the Democrats’ plan is a solution. Period. That means that nothing in the Times’ editorial provides a solution, either. The Democrats’ goal is to re-open the government while letting tons of illegal aliens into the country. That isn’t a solution. That’s the opposite of a solution.

Democrats in Congress need to keep pushing proposals that end the shutdown and seek to bolster border security. They started down the right track upon taking power in the House by approving (with some Republican support) measures partially reopened government and put $1.3 billion toward border security. Now up those antes by allowing some money to pay for new or improved walls where security experts say they make sense.

Until Sunday, Democrats hadn’t proposed anything substantive. Pelosi started by saying she wouldn’t spend a penny on Trump’s wall. The next time they met, she said she’d offer Trump $1. That isn’t a typo. She didn’t offer $1,000,000,000. Pelosi offered a dollar.

The upside to the Times’ plan is that it’ll remove the gavel from Ms. Pelosi’s hand. The downside is that it’ll take 2 years to happen.

This SCTimes Our View editorial would be right at home on CNN’s Reliable Sources.

A couple paragraphs in, the editorial states “America’s voters have a couple of options. They certainly can directly engage their members of Congress. Demand to know their positions not about the border wall, but about what it would take to reach a deal that reopens government and crafts a more effective border-security solution than a wall many security experts say would be ineffective.”

I’ve read dozens of articles about border security. I’ve heard tons of quotes saying that ‘security experts say the wall would be ineffective.’ None of those articles name the security experts. Here’s my question to the SC Times: do these security experts exist? Here’s another question I might ask: are they real or are they as fictional as the ‘sources’ in Buzzfeed’s article claiming that President Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress?

If the Times’ editorial was sold in a bookstore, it’d be best placed with fantasies. Here’s why:

President Trump and the White House are best positioned to end the impasse quickly. Of course, that would mean the president would have to compromise — something he’s seldom done since being elected, especially with Democrats.

Democrats in Congress need to keep pushing proposals that end the shutdown and seek to bolster border security.

What planet are these idiots living on? What proposals have Democrats proposed that contained anything faintly resembling a compromise? To the best of my knowledge, the Democrats’ next proposal that includes a compromise will be their first compromise.

Further, President Trump has offered 2 compromise proposals, including this one yesterday:

Then there’s this:

Common-sense congressional Republicans can publicly embrace them, which just might be enough of an opening to allow this president to claim a symbolic victory — one not worth even close to $5.7 billion but certainly money well spent to reopen the government.

How about the Times actually doing its research? Better yet, how about the Democrats doing the right thing for once? Who am I kidding? That’s as likely to happen as Cormier’s and Leopold’s anonymous sources coming forward.

This morning, Chris Wallace interviewed Vice President Pence, then House Majority Whip James Clyburn. Wallace noted, as I did in this post, that Democrats rejected President Trump’s offer literally before he officially made it. This morning, Wallace asked Clyburn why they rejected it instead of sitting down at a negotiating table.

Clyburn replied “What we’re trying to do here is get the government open. What we’ve said to the President is ‘let’s open the government. We could do that, as you said, tomorrow morning. He has bills that he could sign and open up the government right away.”

First, that isn’t the truth. None of the bills that Pelosi passed have been even been debated by the Senate. There aren’t any bills for President Trump to sign. Next, the Democrats aren’t dealing with a rookie negotiator. They’re dealing with Donald Trump. He knows that the minute he signs those bills is the minute Democrats insist on a take-it-or-leave-it deal on the wall. They will have gotten everything they wanted.

Democrats are experts at making promises, then virtually reneging on those promises. There’s nothing honorable about Democrats at the negotiating table.

There’s no reason to trust Democrats. Their record of reneging is lengthy. If Democrats filibuster President Trump’s bill this week, as I’m certain they will, President Trump should immediately announce he’s invoking the National Emergencies Act and that he’s intending to use his authorities to deal with the national emergency crisis hitting our southern border.

Democrats will file a lawsuit in the 9th Circuit, which they’ll win. President Trump should immediately ask the Supreme Court to hear the lawsuit. The sooner the lawsuit reaches the Supreme Court, the sooner Democrats will lose.