Archive for the ‘Dan Crenshaw’ Category

It’s disgusting to see the Speaker of the US House of Representatives make disgusting statements about the officers of the Portland Police Department, aka PPD. She’s a vile and disgusting woman who should be thrown out of the People’s House. This week, Ms. Pelosi made an intentionally misleading statement in one of her tweets when she said “Unidentified stormtroopers. Unmarked cars. Kidnapping protesters and causing severe injuries in response to graffiti. These are not the actions of a democratic republic. @DHSgov’s actions in Portland undermine its mission. Trump & his stormtroopers must be stopped.”

The most powerful Democrat in the House then added more intentional deception, saying “First Amendment speech should never be met with one-sided violence from federal agents acting as Trump’s secret police, especially when unidentified. This is disgraceful behavior we would expect from a banana republic — not the government of the United States.”

The First Amendment doesn’t protect unpeaceful protests. This Portland Police Department tells a different story than the fiction that Ms. Pelosi told:


Here’s the text of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

People throwing projectiles at police isn’t the portrait of people peaceably assembling. Ms. Pelosi knows that but she doesn’t care about details like that. Thank God for Ted Cruz’s response to Ms. Pelosi’s intentionally weaponized, deceptive statements:


Dan Crenshaw and Andy Ngo added this information:


This is what PPD reported about the arrests:

17 people charged with “interfering with a police officer
1 person charged with “Assaulting a Public Safety Officer”
31 year old Timothy Swales: Interfering with a Peace Officer, Reckless Endangering, Elude (Vehicle), Elude (Foot), Reckless Driving, Hit and Run

Ms. Pelosi omitted more than a few important details. That’s typical of her. She has an occasional relationship with the truth. Robby Starbuck captures things perfectly with this tweet:

Matt Vespa’s article is the worst news Bernie Sanders has received in quite some time. Inside his article is this tidbit of information:

Nevada’s powerful Culinary Workers Union will not endorse in the presidential primary, while criticizing Bernie Sanders’ signature Medicare for All proposal, according to three sources with knowledge of the decision. In declining to pick a candidate, but sharply criticizing Sen. Bernie Sanders’ signature policy position, Medicare for All, the union created an opening for Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, two moderate Democrats with little demonstrated support in the state.

That’s truly throwing Bernie under the bus. Taking direct aim at Bernie’s signature issue isn’t what he’d like to hear. The question is whether this issue will sink him in other states. This suggests it will:

In Pennsylvania, some top union leaders were also adamant that they would tell their people to stay home or vote for Trump should Sanders or Warren become the 2020 Democratic nominee. In the Keystone State, Sanders’ commitment to a universal ban on fracking, which will kill hundreds of thousands of jobs in the must-win state, is just a bridge too far.

LFR has frequently said that the Democrats’ opposition to fracking and fossil fuels is their Achilles heel. That’s the thing that puts Democrats in God’s little acre: just east of the rock, just west of the hard place. Some issues have multiple solutions. Energy is a binary choice. If you oppose fossil fuels, you’re the enemy. Period.

This is predictable. Bernie truly believes in Medicare-for-All. What he can’t do anything about is the fact that unions have often negotiated for Cadillac plans, which aren’t taxed, while settling for lower wages. Meanwhile, Bernie is on the wrong side of the fossil fuels issue. Dan Crenshaw and Kevin McCarthy are offering a better way forward:

Congressmen including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, of California, and Dan Crenshaw, of Texas, are pitching the legislation as a common sense alternative to Democrats’ calls for limiting the use of fossil fuels. “There’s this false choice between doing nothing and over regulating,” Crenshaw said. “That would do nothing, because the United States is only 15 percent of emissions.”

International corporations like Exxon-Mobil and Chevron favor a carbon tax, likely because that’s a competition-killer. That doesn’t do anything to fix what’s wrong. Expect union rank-and-file to agree with Republicans on this issue.

Saying that Dan Crenshaw had had enough with the Democrats’ talking points is understatement. Crenshaw’s speech utterly demolished the Democrats’ chanting points. Pete Buttigieg blamed the US for the loss of life onboard Ukraine Flight 752:


What a total loser. Then there’s Elizabeth Warren:

“When President Trump first announced that he had Soleimani killed, I thought, Why now? We’ve know about Soleimani for years. What’s the reason it’s not last month? What’s the reason it’s not next month? And does this have to do with the fact that we’re right here on the eve of impeachment,” Warren said.

Rep. Crenshaw had a reply:

“Ok, Elizabeth Warren, I’ve got an answer for you. The reason why now is because Soleimani just orchestrated an attack on our embassy, killed an American citizen and we have very good intel from the CIA, the DNI, from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They said was some of the best intel they’d ever seen, that there was an imminent attack coming within days. So, Elizabeth Warren, that is why.”

In other words, President Trump ordered the killing of Gen. Soleimani to prevent a war. Further, President Trump ordered that killing based on strong intelligence. He didn’t approve the killing because he’s facing impeachment. He’s already been impeached. He isn’t getting convicted. What’s there to worry about impeachment? Meanwhile, here’s Rep. Crenshaw unloading both barrels, first on Buttigieg, then Warren:

Notice what Crenshaw did that permitted him to effectively decimate Democrats. Rep. Crenshaw’s command of the facts was superb. Then he explained why President Trump did what he did. Further, he was under control while he made his case against the Democrats. That’s how you blow the Democrats’ talking points out of the water.

The important thing to understand is that few Democrats are able to sound coherent if they aren’t regurgitating Democrat talking points. Elizabeth Warren doesn’t sound the least bit coherent when she’s confronted about foreign policy. Her stump speech about Iran essentially is ‘President Trump killed Gen. Soleimani to distract from the impeachment trial that he isn’t worried about.’ There’s nothing substantive about Sen. Warren’s foreign policy.

Anytime that the matchup is Rep. Dan Crenshaw vs. AOC, it’s bound to be a mismatch. Crenshaw is a rising star in the GOP. Part of that status is earned by his willingness to subject Democrats to harsh truths about the Democrats’ policies. Rep. Crenshaw unloaded on AOC and other Democrats because he’s tired of Democrats offering nothing except complaints.

AOC has now proposed a commission to study the border crisis. What genius! The house is burning to the ground. The neighbors are worried that their home is the next to go and AOC thinks that a commission that will take 3 months minimum to staff will fix anything? It isn’t as stupid as some of her other proposals but it isn’t that bright, either. A commission is the right option if you’ve got the time. It’s the worst option in a crisis.

One of the things that Republicans should run on is the do-nothing Democrat House majority. If Pelosi rattles off some partisan bills that got passed in the House but went nowhere beyond that, the people should be reminded that it only matters if the President signs the bills into laws and they actually fix things. If they don’t meet that criteria, then Democrats will have failed.

“Notice that they never come up with a solution,” Crenshaw told “Fox & Friends” Monday morning. “They talk about the over-crowded facilities. They never have a solution. They don’t have a solution for our immigration system. They say it shouldn’t be defined by the administration — well, we do have laws right now…that says you can’t illegally cross the border. That’s immigration policy set by Congress. It’s a law in place. We need to enforce it.”

Democrats like passing laws, then not enforcing those laws. Don’t pay attention to the Democrats’ words. Pay attention to their actions. Pay attention to their shifting priorities, too. What is a priority one week isn’t a priority the next, often for no good reason. Rep. Crenshaw wasn’t finished unloading both barrels. Here’s more:

“I’m worried that the Democrats like this crisis too much,” Crenshaw added. “I’m worried as I’ve seen them fight against every single, even the smallest measures to help fix our immigration problem, they fight against. They don’t want walls. They don’t want a fix to the asylum loopholes. They’re talking about decriminalizing illegal border crossings.”

Where are the Democrats’ solutions? Do the Democrats think in those terms? Thus far, I’ve seen Democrats only proposing fixing symptoms. I haven’t seen them fix the underlying problem on anything.

Rep. Crenshaw vs. AOC is a mismatch. It isn’t pretty. Then again, AOC is a dipstick.

Is immigration another issue where Democrats think they have a winning issue but they really have a losing issue? Apparently, Democrats are certain it’s a winning issue. If I had a $100 bill for each time Democrats thought they had a winning issue, I’d be a 1-percenter. If I had to pay Democrats $250 each time they were certain they had a winning issue and they were right, I’d still be a 1-percenter.

The simple truth is that the Democrats’ political instincts are pretty worthless. Right now, Democrats think they’re riding a winning issue with immigration thanks to the drowning of the father and daughter, the DHS IG report and also the Facebook outrage. Once the truth about these issues comes out, they’ll be losing issues for Democrats.

Last week, Democrats passed a supplemental appropriations bill to pay DHS workers back pay and restock the shelves at the detention centers at the border. The DHS IG report characterized conditions at these facilities as being harsh. That’s a fair assessment. What that IG report didn’t do, though, is affix blame for why the conditions are terrible.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw is doing a fantastic job explaining what’s happening and what’s happened with his videos. This video explains things beautifully:

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D-NY), issued a 4-point plan to address the crisis. The plan starts with:

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Wednesday released a plan to address the increasing numbers of migrants crossing the southern border, calling among other things for decriminalizing illegal border crossings.

That’s part of AOC’s solution? Seriously? Right. Let’s solve the problem by giving illegal aliens a greater incentive to cross the border illegally. Telling illegal aliens that they’ll get to stay if they pay a light fine is putting up a big green light at the northern end of Guatemala and another green light at the US-Mexico border. In other words, that part of AOC’s ‘plan’ will make things worse, not better.

Secondly, the progressive congresswoman tied in her signature issue, climate change, saying that the refugee crisis is partly due to natural disasters.

What’s frightening is that this stupidity passes as serious policymaking with Democrats. The problem started this winter when Nancy Pelosi’s solution to the government shutdown was to give illegal aliens the right to stay if they came with a child. It didn’t have to be their child. It just had to be a child. Prior to that, most people caught illegally entering were from Mexico and male. Today, 60% of apprehensions are families from the Northern Triangle.

Here’s the third point of AOC’s ‘plan’:

Third, Ocasio-Cortez called for repealing the laws criminalizing crossing into the U.S. without proper documentation, saying the Trump administration is using the statutes to “mindlessly throw people in cages.”

Why doesn’t AOC understand that rewriting the law will cause more illegal aliens to come across the border, not less? Apparently, AOC thinks that letting illegal aliens pay minimal fines will slow illegal alien traffic. Jeh Johnson, President Obama’s final secretary of DHS, thinks otherwise:

Jeh Johnson, former DHS secretary in Barack Obama’s administration, called presidential candidate Julian Castro’s proposal to decriminalize illegal border crossing essentially advocacy for “open borders.”

“That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders,” Johnson told the Washington Post. “That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that.”

Stupidity of that magnitude should earn her a termination notice, not a re-election certificate of re-election. Finally, there’s this:

Finally, the congresswoman proposed “large-scale public investment to spur job creation for citizens & immigrants alike.” She mentioned climate change again, expressing her hope that the “investment transitions us to a sustainable economy (climate & income-wise).”

We’ve seen before how AOC drives the debate amongst Democrats. There’s little doubt in my mind that Democrats will adopt AOC’s initiative. That sounds like a loser for Democrats.