Daily Archives: March 16, 2017

Let the Budget Battle Begin

The president will reveal his budget today. Much of what he is proposing is already known. The democrat objections are pre-written and Kermit and Big Bird are ready to go on TV and whine about having their funding cut. From all quarters of the liberal world will come a hue and cry not heard by anybody who has not thrown boiling water on a cat or been in close proximity to a slaughterhouse. It is predictable as the sunrise.

Trump budget expected to seek historic contraction of federal workforce
President Trump’s budget proposal this week would shake the federal government to its core if enacted, culling back numerous programs and expediting a historic contraction of the federal workforce.
This would be the first time the government has executed cuts of this magnitude — and all at once — since the drawdown following World War II, economists and budget analysts said.


The America First budget: Trump wants $1.5 BILLION for the wall and cash for the military but will slash foreign aid and eliminate funding for PBS and NPR
Trump will release a budget blueprint today that makes cuts to discretionary spending to fund his border wall and the military build-up he’s been promising
State Department is cut deepest with a 28% reduction to its foreign aid division
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Housing and Urban Development Department are also expected to suffer
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides support to NPR and PBS, will see its funding phased out
Trump’s budget may not make it past the House and Senate – a top Republican has said it’s ‘dead on arrival’
Dramatic cuts make way room for $1.5B for his wall with Mexico in 2018 and $54 billion for defense without adding to the federal deficit


VICTIMS ON PARADE

Trump’s First Budget Promises To Beef Up National Security, Dramatically Cut Domestic Spending
If you find a $54 billion addition, you will find a $54 billion reduction,” he said. “We have simply not added to the deficit in order to accomplish these policies. You’ll see reductions in the State Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, and in many agencies, as he tries to shrink the role of the federal government.”

The way this works is Trump proposes his budget to actually bring some sanity to federal spending.This,of course,will never fly.Taxpayer giveaways are the mothers’ milk of politics,especially in the democrat party.There will be argument over cuts,the left will threaten to shut down the government and with the help of the media whores republicans will be blamed.It’s happened before and the GOP has always backed down.it will be interesting to see how this president handles it.

Advertisements

17 Comments

Filed under Armed Forces, Budget, Donald Trump, National Security, Obamacare

The Enemy of Transparency

It seems that taxpayers paid a bundle to prevent taxpayers from seeing Hillary’s SecState emails.

Obama transparency NOT

The “transparent” Obama administration also broke the previous record for number of times federal employees told FOIA applicants they couldn’t find a single page of the files that had been requested.

Source:

Comments Off on The Enemy of Transparency

Filed under Barack Obama, Government Corruption

Hillary’s Sour Soundbite

Hillary sound bite - Trump tax

Comments Off on Hillary’s Sour Soundbite

Filed under Hillary Clinton

Study: Voter ID isn’t RAAACIST

Voter ID R v D logic

Once upon a time, a major study claimed to have found evidence that voter ID laws have a negative impact on minority voter turnout.  

Leftist news outlets like WaPo gleefully trumpeted this finding, because you know … this was the ONLY STUDY that managed to come to that Leftist-friendly conclusion.

Enter researchers at Stanford, Yale, and the University of Pennsylvania who apparently know how to use calculators, instead of counting on their fingers and toes.

They redid the math and found the study actually showed that … wait for it … voter ID laws have no statistically significant impact on minority voter turnout.

Source:

2 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Race Relations, Republicans, Voter ID

Unprecedented Judicial Overreach

This is an elaboration on the post by Chrissy the Swift.

MEET U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE DERRICK WATSON:
He is a democrat activist who was appointed by Barack Obama in 2012. He has taken it upon himself to usurp the exclusive authority to act on matters of national security. His ruling prevents the executive order from going into effect Thursday.

More than half a dozen states are trying to stop the ban, and federal courts in Maryland, Washington state and Hawaii heard arguments Wednesday about whether it should be put into practice.

Hawaii argued that the ban discriminates on the basis of nationality and would prevent Hawaii residents from receiving visits from relatives in the six mostly Muslim countries covered by the ban.

STANDARD DEMOCRAT PRACTICE IS TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA THROUGH THE JUDICIARY WHEN THEY CAN’T GET IT DONE LEGISLATIVELY.

Legal Insurrection explains it far better than I can.

Hawaii TRO and 9th Circuit En Banc Denial effectively strip Trump of Executive Powers
The federal district court in Hawaii issued a TRO and the 9th Circuit denied en banc hearing of the first appeal. Both Orders are embedded in full at the bottom of this post.
The net result is that Trump has been stripped of his constitutional and statutory powers to protect the nation through control of who is permitted to enter the country.
I warned about this, and the danger of Trump not seeking Supreme Court review in the first case, President Trump must not back down on immigration Executive Order:
The decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to leave in place a broad Temporary Restraining Order freezing President Trump’s Executive Order on visas and refugees presents a serious threat to the constitutional and statutory authority of the presidency.
The short version of the decision is that Trump said bad things on the campaign trail, so anything he does that disproportionately affects Muslims seeking to enter the country must be motivated by religious bias. The district court wrote:
The Court turns to whether Plaintiffs sufficiently establish a likelihood of success on the merits of their Count I claim that the Executive Order violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Because a reasonable, objective observer—enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance—would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously-neutral purpose, the Court finds that Plaintiffs, and Dr. Elshikh in particular, are likely to succeed on the merits of their Establishment Clause claim.

Judge’s ruling to block second travel ban is ‘unprecedented judicial overreach’
The president then said the first executive order, which was blocked by a federal judge’s order that was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, “should have never been blocked to start with.”

TRUMP WATERED DOWN THE ORIGINAL TRAVEL BAN IN AN EFFORT TO PLEASE THE BLOATED GASBAGS ON THE 9TH CIRCUS. NOTHING HE CAN DO WILL EVER SATISFY THEM EXCEPT RESIGN FROM OFFICE.

The new order, he said, “was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuit in my opinion, flawed, ruling. This is the opinion of many, and “unprecedented judicial overreach.”

Trump: Ruling is an “unprecedented judicial overreach”

Robert Barnes: Hawaii Obama Judge Rules Muslim Imam Has Special Constitutional Rights to Bring Anyone from Terror Countries into America
In a ruling issued on Wednesday afternoon, a federal judge, and Obama appointee, prevented the President of the United States from enforcing his own executive order to protect the nation from migrants from terror-riddled countries.
The judge then prevented every other judge and every other state from following the President’s order, the judge making himself a one-man Supreme Court and substitute President.
The judge then held that American universities and immigrants living here can prohibit America from ever limiting immigration from Muslim-heavy countries, claiming the First Amendment gives Muslim-dominant nations a right of immigration to America.
The judge’s ruling is completely lawless, mirroring Obama’s deep state allies in his shadow government’s attempt to sabotage the Trump presidency. There is no precedent for the court’s order. In fact, every precedent is against the court’s order; just read the detailed logic and scholastic citation of proper governing legal authorities from the decision of a moderately liberal Boston judge who upheld every part of Trump’s prior order.

Judges Inventing New Reasons to Obstruct Donald Trump’s Popular Immigration Reforms
Three California judges and a judge in Washington State say the President’s sole right and solemn duty to guard the borders ends when a state suffers financial harm because its universities can’t import more fee-paying customers from restricted countries.
These left-wing judges are competing with each other to throw invented legalistic roadblocks in front of Trump’s legal and proper defense of the nation’s borders, said Hans Von Spakovsky, a former lawyer at the Department of Justice who is now working for the Heritage Foundation.
The judge in Washington State, James Robart, declared Feb. 3 that “the [president’s] executive order adversely effects the State’s residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel. These harms extend to the States by virtue of their roles as parens patriae of the residents living within their borders.”
ROBART WAS SUPPOSED TO ISSUE A RULING ON THE SAME ACTION TODAY. HE’LL PROBABLY PUT HIS DECISION ON HOLD UNTIL HE NEEDS TO JUMP IN AND SCREW THE PRESIDENT AGAIN.

HEY, RACHEL… WHAT’S FOR DINNER?

1 Comment

Filed under Donald Trump, Immigration, Islam

Color Me Unsurprised

An Obama-appointed judge in Hawaii has placed a nationwide block on President Trump’s revised travel order.

The judge accepted Hawaii’s argument that some of Trump’s campaign rhetoric showed that the intent behind the executive order is to institute a “Muslim ban” which would be a form of religious discrimination.

2017_03 Temp travel ban toon

During a rally in Tennessee just after the ruling was issued, Trump vowed to fight the decision.

We’re going to take our case as far as it needs to go, including all the way up to the Supreme Court. We’re going to win. The danger is clear. The law is clear. The need for my executive order is clear.”

2017_03 15 Judge using campaign rhetoric tweet

If extralegal statements are going to be used for legal decisions such as this one, then it is definitely time to revisit some other executive orders and legislation.

Tweeters helpfully suggested:

  • Like when Obama said he didn’t have the power to do what he eventually did with DACA.
  • Like when Obama and Obamacare’s authors declared the individual mandate was not a tax.
  • Don’t forget LBJ’s social safety programs, which in his own words were about targeting a race of people for political ends.
  • We should challenge every gun control law passed before about 1970.

2017_03 15 Who do I sue

Sources:

Comments Off on Color Me Unsurprised

Filed under Donald Trump