Sep 132017
 

So far, the Trump administration has repealed regulations at the rate of 16-1 (versus new ones introduced).

The Supreme Court is hearing the Travel Ban case, and the dirty little secret that the leftist media is concealing is the lower court decisions are all based on President Trump’s campaign rhetoric and the Judge’s opinion of it. In the meantime, the flow of “refugees” in to the US has abated mightily. Under the obama administration the refugees were overwhelmingly Muslim, suggesting a deliberate effort of Obama to introduce Islam in to America. The demographics of the countries of origin never supported the extremely unbalanced number of Muslims being forced in to the US.

This article was welcome news about how few Refugees are coming in to the US.

Nine hundred and thirteen refugees were admitted to the United States during August, the first time the monthly intake has dropped below one thousand in 15 years, and the smallest number of monthly admissions since October 2002.

August’s arrivals followed a pattern evident since the start of the Trump administration – a declining proportion of Muslims in comparison to Christians and adherents of other faiths.

Of the 913 refugees admitted during the month, 551 (60.3 percent) were Christians, with the biggest groups including 185 Pentecostalists from Ukraine and 53 Baptists, also from Ukraine.

A significantly smaller group, 220 (24.1 percent) were Muslims, including 48 Sunnis from Iraq and 47 from Syria.

The remaining 142 (15.5 percent) were unaffiliated or from other religions, and included 43 Buddhists and 36 Hindus, mostly from Bhutan.

When you have homeless veterans, there should be no illegal immigration or refugees. We need to feed and employ our own people before bringing in more welfare recipients from other countries. Legal immigration based on real metrics (job, etc), fine.

The Consumer Federal Protection Bureau just got slammed for going rogue by the Trump Administration. Under Obama, they were enabled to process student loan complaints, mostly related to private universities and avoid congressional oversight.

The Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos also dealt with another grotesque overreach by the obama admin. The abuse of Title IX which put a male accused of Rape in a vice-grip without due process was gutted as well.

The “Dear Colleague” letter substantially lowered the burden of proof required for college administrators to determine whether an alleged rapist or sexual assaulter committed a heinous act. The preponderance of evidence is the standard of proof required for civil offenses to show that evidence is at least 50% more likely to have shown responsibility for an act.

One of the most fundamental aspects of criminal law is that prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an alleged criminal both acted in an immoral manner and possessed the requisite mental intent to commit the crime. Both sexual assault and rape are considered serious criminal offenses and the criminal justice system requires that such a burden of proof is reached before determining whether he or she gets convicted of the crime. The “Dear Colleague” letter deliberately defies that fundamental requirement in the case of alleged sexual assault or rape.

DeVos’ decision to end the ability for college administrators to use preponderance of the evidence demonstrates a return to the evidentiary proof necessary in the real world to convict someone of sexual assault or rape.

Universities and Colleges will no longer be able to set up Kangaroo courts controlled by activists. Naturally the left went insane over this. I will not re-post some of the vile attacks against DeVos.

Finally, President Trump just restored another law that Obama gutted with executive edict. The requirement to work while on welfare has been restored.

The Obama administration effectively gutted the law’s requirements in July 2012 when it released a policy directive through the Department of Health and Human Services that allowed states to waive the TANF program’s work requirements.

To do this, the Obama administration claimed waiver authority that was illegal and antithetical to the purpose. President Barack Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services produced no historical evidence that Congress intended to grant waiver authority for the TANF work requirements.

Even if it had tried to do so, it would have come up empty.

The summary of the welfare reform law prepared by Congress shortly after its enactment was clear: “Waivers granted after the date of enactment may not override provisions of the TANF law that concern mandatory work requirements.”

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service was even more clear in 2001 when it stated that “there are no TANF waivers” for work requirements.

This will also have the effect of reducing the welfare rolls significantly.

As President Ronald Reagan eloquently put it:

Welfare needs a purpose: to provide for the needy, of course, but more than that, to salvage these, our fellow citizens, to make them self-sustaining and, as quickly as possible, independent of welfare.

We should measure welfare’s success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added.

Sep 132017
 

President Trump had been on a roadshow to promote tax reform, including visiting the home states of vulnerable democrat senators. The democrats predictably tried to close ranks.

Consistent with his immigration policies, his tax policies are also polling well:

Seventy-two percent of voters say the tax code is archaic and another 71 percent say they want lower taxes for middle-class American families, according to a survey from America First Policies.

These individuals said they thought the tax code should be streamlined to make navigating taxes easier to understand. Voters who said they wanted lower taxes believe the middle class can get ahead more when they can save for things they need like clothing, medicine, and school supplies instead of paying more to the federal government.

Sixty-one percent of voters are dissatisfied with the current system and 68 percent of voters said they wished the tax code were simplified so much that they could file on a single piece of paper.

This leads us to the Trump tweets embedded in both of these posts. He has been lighting up the US Senate leadership as nearly 300 bills are stalled and stagnated in the Senate awaiting consideration.

Then President Trump did the unthinkable. He cut a deal with the democrats on the budget debt limit.

Then former Speaker Newt Gingrich weighed in on the deal that President Trump cut:

Sure. I think you set up two good questions. Would I feel a bit irritated if I was Speaker Ryan? Yes. Would I cut the deal if I were President Trump? Yes. Both are true.

I think Trump saw a situation with everything he just saw in Houston, now looking at what’s coming in Florida, and I think his feeling was, we’ve gotta get some movement in Washington. “We spent eight months and we didn’t get big things done. I’m gonna cut a deal with somebody, I’m gonna get something done this week. I’m gonna get the money to Houston, and to do that I’ve got to get the debt ceiling taken care of,” and he cut a 90-day deal. … I don’t think this is some gigantic earthquake. …

So what should we look forward to on legislation? Since Republican Leaders can not deliver the votes to pass bills, there is this:

President Trump’s breathtaking deal struck with Democratic leaders to fund the government through early December, increase government borrowing and speed relief money to the victims of Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma has upended the narrative in Washington.

His own party was left reeling, while Democrats face a new world where they have been enticed to work with the man they spent the past eight months vowing to resist, labeled a racist and introduced articles of impeachment against.

The White House says it expects more such deals going forward, including a possible agreement on immigration. Mr. Trump said he is eager to legalize Dreamers and is working with “Chuck and Nancy” — Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat.

“This is where the Trump presidency begins,” said Michael McKenna, a Republican Party strategist. “We’re going to see this again on health care, on tax reform, on infrastructure, on anything you want to name. Trump is now going to go to Schumer.”

I do also take note that two of the biggest losers in Congress (on the R side) Charlie Dent and Dave Reichert, both of whom opposed the Obamacare repeal, and de-funding planned parenthood, are retiring rather than face re-election and the wrath of the Trump movement. It is clear that the President is having to deal with both political parties in order to advance his agenda.

Sep 122017
 

Many of you remember when Senator McCain joined with Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins to thwart a repeal of Obamacare. While McCain is currently involved in an effort to do just this after he got eviscerated in his home state (remember the 40% rate increase last year?), the President has had to apply himself against a feckless Republican leadership.

In the wake of the Democrats Unanimous opposition to the repeal, the bad news accelerated. It turns out that in New Hampshire, their welfare recipients are younger than the national average yet cost 26% more to provide health care for.

Despite the loss in Congress, the President has moved forward with gutting Obamacare. They cut 90% of the advertising budget from the department of Health and Human Services.

The Trump Administration also cut off a huge slush fund for Obamacare Navigators, actually requiring them to produce results versus taking checks for doing nothing.

In 2016, $62.5 million was spent on the program, which resulted in 81,426 individuals signing up for coverage, which was only 0.7 percent of total enrollees. Data finds that there were 17 navigators that only signed up 100 people, which means each enrollee cost about $5,000. There was one Navigator that only signed up one enrollee but received a grant of $200,000.

Anthem left Kentucky, leaving most of the state with only one coverage option.

This is the sixth state the health insurer has announced it will be either exiting or scaling back coverage in. Anthem has already made these announcements in regards to Indiana, Wisconsin, Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio.

Another disaster – 24.8 Million Americans are enrolled in High-Deductible Health Plans. This means most that have insurance now have inferior coverage.

Some states have seen deductibles rise at a faster rate than others. For example, average deductibles in Hawaii were only $988 compared with New Hampshire where average deductibles were $2,434. While 14 states saw significant hikes in average deductibles, only two states saw a decline.

“High-deductible health plans are increasingly becoming the norm in commercial insurance, and there is every reason to expect this trend to continue,” said Katherine Hempstead, senior advisor at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. “Deductibles rose considerably faster than premiums, and the share of health care spending made directly by consumers will continue to grow.”

On the heels of President Trump cutting a stunning, surprise deal with the Democrats on the “Debt Ceiling” (More on that in another post), we are starting to see signs of a crack in Congress related to Obamacare. The rapidity of the collapse after the failure of the first repeal attempt has to be weighing on Congress as well:

State officials sounded the alarm Wednesday on Capitol Hill about skyrocketing ObamaCare premiums as insurers across the country propose double-digit rate hikes – renewing pressure on Congress to act. Insurance commissioners and officials from Alaska, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma and Washington state all testified before a Senate committee on the 2018 premium hikes, which are being finalized over the next few weeks. In Alaska, premiums have increased 203 percent since 2013, according to Lori Wing-Heier, the state’s director of the Division of Insurance. “On average, the increase means that an Alaskan in the individual market who was paying a monthly premium of $344 per month in 2013 is paying $1,041 per month in 2017,” Wing-Heier told the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions committee.

Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak told the panel he has been warning about “spiking rates” for too long and those warnings “have been ignored at the federal level.” “Oklahoma is facing the collapse of our individual health insurance market,” Doak said, adding that the state has seen a rise in premiums of 130 percent over the last four years. And in Tennessee, proposed 2018 premium increases are between 21 and 42 percent, according to Julie Mix McPeak, the commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance. “Tennessee consumers will have at least one option for coverage, but only one,” McPeak said, noting that “a single choice” did not represent the state’s “ideal marketplace competition.”  “Our consumers have seen premium prices skyrocket while their choices dropped substantially.” McPeak added: “The current Affordable Care Act trajectory is not sustainable.”

Got all that? State Insurance commissioners went to Washington DC pleading for help.

More than sixty thousand ObamaCare enrollees in Virginia could be without an insurer next year after Optima Health announced it was leaving many of the state’s markets, according to officials in the state. Optima said it plans to exit many of the counties that it served in 2017, after previously planning to cover nearly the entire state next year. The move would leave 63 of Virginia’s 95 counties without an insurance option for 2018…Optima also said it would be raising premiums by 81 percent for any customer who doesn’t qualify for subsidies from the federal government…Optima said some of the premium increase was due to uncertainty surrounding federal funding for ObamaCare’s cost-sharing reduction payments. It also said some of the increase was due to other national carriers leaving the state. Anthem, Aetna and UnitedHealth have already announced plans to exit Virginia’s ObamaCare markets entirely next year.

President Trump never stopped hammering Congress even after the first attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare failed. See the embedded tweets that led to a watershed moment in politics that occurred recently as we pick this up in our next post.

Sep 122017
 

First off, let’s talk strategy. Given that the left has been screaming Racism against the President since the beginning of his candidacy, that attack rings hollow. Given that corporate CEO’s who begged for DACA to be retained, just the week prior ran away from the President’s advisory committees over the false Charlottesville Canard. Finally, given the behavior of immigrant’s rights activists and their willing lackeys in the media echoing the racism charge… they all combined to make the decision easy as the President lost nothing from undoing DACA

Even at that, the final decision by the President to put DACA on a 6 month timeline to expire was merciful and reasonable. The President put the onus on Congress to do the job. The original DACA was unconstitutional as it was an executive action by the President that was designed to be an end-around congress. The President himself laid out an extremely strong case for his decision:

“As President, my highest duty is to defend the American people and the Constitution of the United States of America,” the statement begins. “At the same time, I do not favor punishing children, most of whom are now adults, for the actions of their parents. But we must also recognize that we are nation of opportunity because we are a nation of laws.”

The fundamental problem with Obama’s DACA order is that it is simply an executive order. Far-reaching decisions about who is and isn’t a citizen must be determined by the legislative branch.

“The legislative branch, not the executive branch, writes these laws — this is the bedrock of our Constitutional system, which I took a solemn oath to preserve, protect, and defend,” Trump continues. “In June of 2012, President Obama bypassed Congress to give work permits, social security numbers, and federal benefits to approximately 800,000 illegal immigrants currently between the ages of 15 and 36. The typical recipients of this executive amnesty, known as DACA, are in their twenties. Legislation offering these same benefits had been introduced in Congress on numerous occasions and rejected each time.”

So there you have it.

Back to DACA, it was a program rife with fraud.

O’Brien said that the vast majority of the 800,000 illegal immigrants now in DACA have never been interviewed by any representative of the U.S. government, either in person on over the phone.

Then there is this:

Vaughan pointed out that 5,000 illegal immigrants who were being held in detention centers and who were on track for deportation at the time DACA took effect were released and granted DACA status.

“They were considered a public safety threat,” she said. “Even under the Obama administration, they were being detained.”

Said O’Brien: “I personally witnessed an alarming number of people who had gang affiliations applying for this program.”

Most of them, he said, were approved.

Now that groups like MS-13 are being hunted, it puts this in stark relief.

There is more – a bizarre quirk in the law was covered up by Obama, and exposed by the Trump Administration:

The House and Senate Judiciary Committees revealed that more than 45,000 DACA recipients were approved for “advance parole,” which is permission to leave and reenter the U.S. despite not being in permanent legal status here.

The loophole is known among immigration activists, and public colleges in California were urged to use it to help their illegal immigrant students here under the DACA program to gain legal status.

The California-Mexico Studies Center actually advertises just such a program, charging thousands of dollars to give Dreamers a chance to travel south to Mexico to qualify for advance parole. Part of the fees the program collects help pay for “legal advice and filing assistance” in obtaining advance parole.

Predictably, democrats sued to reinstate the unconstitutional executive order, citing… you guessed it…

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Brooklyn, New York and other states said DACA has provided important humanitarian protection for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants.

The states said that since 78 percent of DACA recipients are Mexican, revoking the policy is proof of the president’s antipathy toward Mexico, which they trace back to his campaign statements.

Got it? Trump said mean things, therefore you have to side with us. That rationale was used in the travel ban court cases. While people are being distracted by the race card, note that if the Judges set a legal precedent that campaign speech can be used to invalidate laws, then imagine the rationale that can be used to muzzle the Church or Conservatives in general.

Once again, President Trump was willing to take the savaging from the left media and the democrats to provide leadership. This caused the Speaker of the House to make bold statements about how Congress will fix DACA but any fix would be tied to border security:

P(aul)R(yan): That’s exactly my position. Look, here’s the point I keep making on this, is this DACA dilemma that we are experiencing here, why do we have it? It is a symptom of a bigger problem. And the bigger problem is we do not have control of our borders. And because we do not have control of our borders, we have this problem. So it’s just reasonable and natural that we should address the root cause of this problem, lack of control of our borders, and get border security, interior enforcement, the things that you need to do to secure your borders so that you don’t have a DACA problem 10 years from now. So we want to address the cause and the effect, the symptom and the root cause of the problem. And that is only reasonable. And that is what our point is. And so there is a compromise to be had here, and that’s what this compromise looks like, in my mind.

GB: And so there will not be a stand-alone Dream Act coming out of the House?

PR: That’s right…We cannot — because we — because we won’t fix the problem. If we just rubber-stamp a standalone Dream Act, then we’re going to have another Dream Act that we’re going to need in 10 years from now.

President Trump’s leadership is forcing Republican Leadership to plant their flag in the ground. Polls, even biased media polls show 60-70% support for various border / immigration measures. Nothing the President is doing is unpopular. This is why the left smear machine has to go in to overdrive in an attempt to stop him.

Sep 122017
 

Broward County Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes is defending her office against a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Rights Union, a conservative legal group that contends there are more voters registered on Broward’s rolls than there are eligible voters in the county.

Those rolls are said to be inflated with not only noncitizens and felons, but also other ineligible people who have voted illegally.

On July 31, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel newspaper reported that, in court, “Snipes acknowledged the processes her office [has] been using aren’t perfect and that some noncitizens and felons have voted despite not being eligible—especially right before major elections, when groups are actively registering new voters.”

The Daily Signal covered this little gem ignored by the national media. Broward County is a key county to the democrats and is also critical to their hopes of winning the state of Florida.

Broward County’s problems reportedly included voter registration lists with 130-year-old voters (or would-be voters, if they were living), felons, duplicate registrations, and commercial addresses listed as residential addresses.

Stories have been trickling out of documented irregularities in registrations and voting. This is only happening because President Trump is the President. The odds that Mr. Trump beat in order to get elected included overcoming this as well.

I saw this article about Hillary Clinton’s Lawyer fighting a lawsuit challenging New Hampshire’s Voter ID Law. Despite the fact that 65-70% of Americans support Voter ID as a measure to ensure election integrity, there have been a slew of lawsuits from the left trying to forestall those laws.

Previous efforts launched against voter ID laws were backed by millions from liberal billionaire George Soros, who has a personal goal of enlarging the electorate by 10 million people by 2018, as documents leaked last year show.

The League of Woman Voters and three individuals are suing the state of New Hampshire in an attempt to block a law on voter registration that includes requirements such as providing a driver’s license to prove an individual’s primary residence is in the state and will be living in the state for a substantial time.

The lawsuit is supported by Priorities USA, the largest liberal super political action committee that backed Clinton’s campaign. Priorities received $9.5 million from Soros throughout the 2016 election cycle.

Marc Elias, a partner at the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Perkins Coie and Clinton’s former top campaign lawyer, is listed as an attorney on the New Hampshire lawsuit. Elias joined the board of Priorities earlier this year when the group absorbed Every Vote Counts, a nonprofit created by Clinton allies to mobilize African American and Latino voters. The group is in the process of building a “one-stop inventory” on voting measures that will be shared with other liberal groups.

Note that Wisconsin implemented a voter ID Law that stood up in court and it went Republican for the first time since 1988. I’ve read the stories of people being bussed in from Illinois to same day register, which brings us to New Hampshire.

On election day, I spoke to someone in Trump’s operation back east. They told me that they had numerous reports of people with Massachusetts license plates same-day registering and voting in New Hampshire. It appears that the stories were real.

⦁ 6,540 people registered and voted on Nov. 8, based on presenting out-of-state licenses.

⦁ As of Aug. 30, about 15 percent (1,014 of the voters) had been issued New Hampshire driver’s licenses.

⦁ Οf the remaining 5,526, barely more than 200 (3.3 percent) had registered a motor vehicle in New Hampshire.

New Hampshire law gives drivers 60 days upon establishing residence to obtain a state license.

But more than 80 percent of voters who registered on Nov. 8 using out-of-state driver’s licenses, or 5,313 of them, neither had a state license nor registered a motor vehicle almost 10 months later.

Double voting is illegal, and 196 people are being investigated for casting ballots in New Hampshire and in other states.

In the presidential race, Democrat Hillary Clinton defeated Republican Donald Trump in New Hampshire by 2,736 votes. In an even tighter race, for the Granite State’s U.S. Senate seat, Democratic challenger Maggie Hassan defeated incumbent Republican Kelly Ayotte by 1,017 votes.

President Trump alluded in February that he lost New Hampshire and former GOP Senator Kelly Ayotte lost due to voter fraud.

You tell me what happened?