The struggle for the future of this
country is being fought in the hearts and minds of its citizens. The media is
the enemy and Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the warrior who takes them on day after
The huge media sector easily
outnumbers the Ouachita Baptist University grad taking them on.
CNN alone has 4,000 employees.
The New York Times has nearly as many. And when she singlehandedly
faces off against 49 people in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room and the
less than 30 people on her staff take on a mainstream media machine of tens of
thousands, it’s a true underdog story.
For a year and a half, Sanders has
been reporting for duty as the White House Press Secretary. She’s been shouted
at, called names, had her appearance demeaned, and was kicked out of a
restaurant. Mainstream media White House correspondents, invariably male,
try to talk over her and shout her down. But she’s been so effective that there
have been calls by the media to boycott her press briefings.
With Sarah’s success has come a
high price. Leftist harassment of Sanders has become so severe that she has
become the first press secretary to require secret service protection,
including at her home.
. . .
Her stolid dignity and unmovable
insistence on telling the truth embarrass the media. Every time Sanders takes
on the press corps, they come away looking like deranged, egotistical activists
throwing a tantrum. The media, which is built on spinning reality, has smeared
her, but it’s never been able to change her. That’s why it’s pondering the idea
of just giving up and running away from a 5’6 woman.
And that’s why Sarah Huckabee
Sanders is FrontPage Magazine’s Warrior Person of the Year.
Great choice! Read the full report here. She is an amazing woman!
the fight over funding for the wall
has become a proxy battle between establishment Republicans who have no
intention of helping the president, and the more conservative members who want
to deliver on their campaign promises.
Establishment Washington has
believed for years that it can run on platform issues like repealing Obamacare,
defunding Planned Parenthood, and reforming the immigration system, but then
provide dozens of excuses as to why these objectives can’t be met.
First, Republicans said, they
needed the House. Then the Senate. Then the White House. But of course, once
all of those were delivered, it still wasn’t enough. Now they need 60 votes in
the Senate or nothing can happen! They believe that voters are, in fact, dumb
enough to keep buying what they’re selling.
. . .
Trump gets his wall funding or not, this shutdown will have the effect of
making it very clear who the president’s obstructionists are in both parties.
And, to paraphrase the ancient strategist Sun Tzu, it’s always preferable to
begin a battle first by clearly identifying your enemy.
Paul Ryan (Uniparty-R) will be gone shortly, but Mitch
McConnell (Uniparty-R) was re-elected in 2014. And as Sundance put it:
Nothing will change until Mitch
McConnell is defeated. Nothing.
Assuming he runs again in 2020, McConnell is likely to be
the No. 1 race to target.
H/T Free Republic: A campaign aimed
at raising money for a border wall on the crowdfunding website GoFundMe has
raised more than $5 million of its $1 billion goal in under four days.
The page, called "We The
People Will Fund The Wall," was started by Brian Kolfage, a Purple Heart
recipient and triple amputee who lost his legs and an arm during a rocket
attack in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The campaign was launched earlier
this week with a goal of raising $1 billion to donate to the construction of a
wall along the southern border of the U.S. Funding for the wall, a major
campaign promise of President Donald Trump, has come under questioning in
recent weeks as Trump first hard-lined funding negotiations, then retreated.
Trump threatened a partial
government shutdown if Congress couldn't pass a budget that included funding
for the wall, which Democrats staunchly opposed. He later backed down from the
threat, saying he'd find funding another way and allowing for the passage of a
funding bill that'd avert a shutdown.
Kolfage said it's now "our
duty as citizens" to raise money for a border wall. In three days, the
campaign has raised more than $4 million from nearly 70,000 donors.
"Like a majority of those
American citizens who voted to elect President Donald J Trump, we voted for him
to Make America Great Again," Kolfage wrote in the campaign.
"President Trump's main campaign promise was to BUILD THE WALL. And as he's
followed through on just about every promise so far, this wall project needs to
be completed still."
Kolfage said the cap is set at $1
billion because that is all GoFundMe allows. He said he is trying to get them
to raise the limit.
"If the 63 million people who
voted for Trump each pledge $80, we can build the wall," he wrote.
"That equates to roughly $5 billion, even if we get half, that's half the
wall. We can do this."
In some of the reader comments, several potential donors
were waiting to learn how the funds would be managed, how long the project
would last, and so forth. Most of these questions and issues are already
addressed on the GoFundMe page at the link below. At the time I posted this
blog, the total contributed stood at over $5,500,000. And counting.
For the most recent total on the GoFundMe page itself, click
Angry at Trump if he signs the Continuing Resolution? Sundance puts the latest headlines in perspective:
President Trump said he wouldn’t
sign another CR that didn’t fund the border wall. Right now Mitch and
Chuck are writing a CR that doesn’t fully fund the border wall. Why would
Mitch McConnell do that? Because he wants to, that’s why. UniParty !
Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer,
Nancy Pelosi and Paul Ryan are working to put a take it or leave it bill in
front of the President and force him to accept it. Republicans currently
control the House and Senate. Why would McConnell and Ryan put President
Trump into that position? Because they want to, that’s why.
. . .
it’s not President Trump who is the
issue here; it’s the people who oppose him. Anger toward President Trump
is misplaced; but directing all fire against their enemy is what these
Machiavellian sorts are professionals at doing. That’s exactly what this
plan is designed to do. This is politics.
Who opposes Trump? The people
who write the laws. Mitch, Paul, Nancy and Chuck are the professional
political team who do the bidding of the lobbyists and special interests.
It’s a big club, and we, along with President Trump, ain’t in it.
you mad at President Trump is in the DC interests. The UniParty knows how
to play you.
President Trump represents a second
party in Washington DC. The people who write the laws (lobbyists), and
the people who sell the laws (politicians), cannot allow that. They need
to get back to UniParty political business. They need to get rid of
If the ruling holds up on appeal,
Obamacare is dead. As a doorknob. Not just the mandate or some other particular
provisions. He killed the WHOLE THING.
. . .
the short version. Texas and other states sued to declare the individual
mandate unconstitutional because in the recent tax reform the penalty for
failing to pay the mandate was removed. (2nd
Amended Complaint here) With the removal of the mandate penalty, the
mandate no longer was a function of Congress’ taxing power, which was the basis
upon which John Roberts and the liberal Justices on the Supreme Court upheld
the constitutionality of the mandate in 2012. The
Court conservative and Roberts had ruled the mandate violated the Commerce
Clause, but Roberts broke with the conservatives on the tax power issue.
Essentially, without the mandate --
Obamacare cannot stand.
Architects of the program,
including the guy [Jonathan Gruber} who called Americans "stupid," aren't happy about
it. Despite arguing for years the mandate was essential to the success of
Obamacare, they're now backtracking in an attempt to save what's left.
Rick McKee cartoon credit: teapartyamerica.blogspot.com
Cleveland Tea Party often links to reports concerning
illegal immigration issues. Failure to enforce border security and immigration
laws have a profound impact on so many fronts, but Cleveland Tea Party points
to the enormous costs, whether of welfare, healthcare and problems that
accompany illegal drugs, all of which come under one of the three Tea Party
platform plans, i.e., fiscal responsibility.
Cleveland Tea Party also regularly links to reports on media
malpractice and the 24/7 propaganda we see on television and in the mainstream
media. Today, Amalric de
Droevig addresses both topics in an article at American Thinker
titled “What a child's death on the border says about our country”. De Droevig
begins his essay:
The mainstream media's treatment of
a young girl's death while in the custody of the Border Patrol is a case study
in how the mainstream media control the national narrative and manipulate
public opinion to advance their leftist agenda.
The purpose of flooding the
internet and the airwaves with propaganda about the death and life of Jakelin
Maquin isn't to edify or inform the public; it is to make Americans feel bad
about enforcing any immigration laws at all. The real crime here
isn't any wrongdoing on the part of the Border Patrol. The real
crime, according to our Cultural Marxist overlords, is that the Border Patrol
exists in the first place.
He further elaborates on the media’s dishonesty and moves on
to the grim consequences of opposing border control and law enforcement:
Defending our borders is arguably
the most essential duty of government. Moreover, the enforcement of
every single law brings with it certain minor, highly attenuated risks to human
life. If the mere detention of criminals is considered too harsh a
measure for our nation to stomach any longer, there is no hope for the rule of
law or for the Republic's continued survival. If our government is
permanently unwilling or somehow unable to defend our borders, we should not
shut the government down temporarily, as Trump is threatening. We should
shut it down permanently.
Time Magazine has announced its Person of the Year, actually
several Persons of the Year, including “journalist” Jamal Khashoggi who was
murdered in Turkey last October.
Who was Jamal Khashoggi? Well, he was not a journalist. He was not a U.S.
citizen. He was not even a Green Card holder. Khashoggi was a Saudi national and a political operative for the Muslim Brotherwood. From Daniel
Greenfield at FrontPage:
The Khashoggi case demands context.
Before the media and the
politicians who listen to it drag the United States into a conflict with Saudi
Arabia over a Muslim Brotherhood activist based on the word of an enemy country
still holding Americans hostage, we deserve the context.
And we deserve the truth.
The media wants the Saudis to
answer questions about Jamal Khashoggi. But maybe the media should be forced to
answer why the Washington Post was working with a Muslim Brotherhood
Since Khashoggi's October 2 murder
at the Saudi Arabian consulate in Turkey, media across the United States has
claimed he was a U.S. green card holder. As a result, reporters and editors
urged the White House to change long standing policies and partnerships with
But according to a report in Business Insider, Khashoggi wasn't
actually a green card holder and simply visited the U.S. on a visa.
Mohamad Soltan, an
Egyptian-American activist who sees Khashoggi regularly in Washington, told
Reuters that Khashoggi was in the United States on an O-visa. . . .
The media is bestowing on Khashoggi increased visibility and now, “credibility”
as a martyr for journalism, honored by Time magazine in the company of other journalists who risked their lives to report the news. As I see it, Time is cynically using those other journalists to provide cover for Khashoggi as ajournalist. So now the media
can continue to use him as a cudgel to whack away at President Trump’s Middle
East policies as part of their anti-Trump agenda.
Alexander Downer at the Financial
Review published an excellent summary of the story that the media won’t
report, click here. The mainstream media’s dishonesty and bias is on full display 24/7, but it’s
not always this blatant. Or self-serving.
Sundance has must-read history lesson starting with the Tea
Party movement in 2009, its metamorphosis into the MAGA movement, and why the
GOP continues to break its promises and obstruct President Trump’s initiatives.
A few extracts from Sundance’s history lesson at Conservative Treehouse:
An interesting pattern of seemingly
disconnected political stories is beginning to show signs of a common
continuity. In the bigger of the big pictures seven words continue to set
the baseline: “There are trillions of dollars at stake”.
When the common sense Tea Party
movement formed in 2009 and 2010 it contained a monumentally frustrated
grassroots electorate, and the scale of the movement caught the professional
republican party off-guard. When Donald Trump ran for the office of the
presidency he essentially did the same thing; he disrupted the apparatus of the
professional republican party.
The difference between those two
examples is one was from the bottom up, and the second was from the top
down. However, the commonality in the two forces resulted in the 2016
. . .
A few years pass and the issues
that spurred the Tea Party movement remained unresolved. In 2015 Donald
Trump taps in to that exact same Tea Party frustration toward the control
authority within one-half of the DC UniParty; again, the professional
republican apparatus was disrupted. The movement re-branded and now the
MAGA movement wins the presidency.
So it should not come as a surprise
to see an eerily similar response from within the GOP toward the new threat; the
Trump presidency. After all, there are two constants in an ever changing
universe: (1) “NeverTrump” didn’t go away; and (2) the Bush-clan, or GOP old
guard, will never accept losing power.
The professional republicans and
the professional democrats, ie. “the uniparty”, have a common enemy in
President Trump. The vulgarian leader of the deplorable coalition never
asked for permission; never paid the indulgency fees; never attended the
necessary cloistered club meetings paying homage; and never offered the
indulgent team of political elites terms for his takeover.
Thus Donald Trump, just like the
Tea Party, would never be accepted.
. . .
There are no MAGA lobbying groups
in Washington DC advocating for policies that benefit economic
nationalism. On this objective President Donald Trump stands alone.
We don’t need a third party in
Washington DC, we actually need a second one.
I no longer think of the GOP as the “party of Stupid.” I think of the GOP insteadas the “Party of Bought” -- that would be the (R) half of the “Uniparty.”
Today we remember those who were caught by
surprise when the Japanese attacked the naval base at Pearl Harbor. 2,403 Americans died in the attack. Above
is footage of our flag flying over the Arizona memorial, taken by Cleveland Tea Party roving
photographer Pat J Dooley.
Americans witnessed Donald J. Trump’s transition from
private citizen to candidate for the highest office in the land.
DC Whispers ran this at their blog:
So much of what the Establishment
Media says about the Trump presidency is a lie. As an incredibly successful
private citizen Donald Trump swapped a life of luxury for a life of service and
in doing so some estimate he’s lost a billion dollars or more in personal
wealth to do so. Not since the days of the Founding Fathers has a president
sacrificed so much for the betterment of so many. It is a stunning contrast to
the Obamas who had almost no private life experience but instead have been
feeding from the public monies trough since they were attending college on the
people’s’ dime. There are givers and there are takers. In this case it’s very
clear who is who…
determine where Americans can feel most secure — in more than one sense —
WalletHub compared more than 180 cities across 39 key indicators of safety. Our
data set ranges from assaults per capita to unemployment rate to road quality. Read on for our findings, a
detailed description of our methodology and a Q&A with safety experts for
In the overall rating, Cleveland is #169. Ugh. Full report and listings are here.
I deactivated my Twitter account
about a week ago. I was partly acting on impulse, because the social media
site had just, for no obvious reason, “permanently
banned” someone I follow, something that seems to be happening more and
But I was also acting on my growing belief that Twitter is, well,
All social media have their issues.
The “walled garden” character they create is the antithesis of the traditional
Internet philosophy of openness. They are actually consciously designed to
be addictive to their users — one company that consults on such issues is
actually called Dopamine
Labs — and they tend to soak up a huge amount of time in largely
profitless strivings for likes and shares. They promote bad feelings and bad
behavior: I saw a cartoon listing social
media by deadly sins, with Facebook promoting envy, Instagram promoting
pride, Twitter promoting wrath, Tinder promoting lust and so on. It seemed
But as someone who spends a lot of
time on the internet and whose social media experience goes all the way back to
the original Orkut and Friendster, I think that Twitter is the worst.
In fact, if you set out to design a
platform that would poison America’s discourse and its politics, you’d be hard
pressed to come up with something more destructive than Twitter. Twitter has
the flaws of the old Usenet newsgroups, but on a much bigger scale.
This blog has posted several links concerning the FIRST STEP
legislation on criminal justice reform. In particular, I noted that two conservative
columnists who are both strong supporters of legal immigration and law enforcement
nevertheless disagree on the merits of this bill. Michelle Malkin supports it.
Ann Coulter opposes it.
A Republican U.S. Senate document
circulating among GOP offices opposed to the so-called FIRST STEP Act, a
criminal justice reform bill making its way through Capitol Hill, lists 20
violent crimes that would be eligible for early release under the legislation.
. . .
The letter goes on to list the 20
violent crimes that would be eligible for early release under the bill:
Trafficking cocaine or
methamphetamines, even if convicted as a kingpin (18 U.S.C § 841(b)
Strangling a spouse or an intimate
partner (18 U.S.C. §113(a)(8)
Trafficking fentanyl, except in
rare cases (18 U.S.C. § 841(b))
Providing or possessing contraband,
including firearms, in prison (18 U.S.C. § 1791)
Felonies committed while in a
criminal street gang (18 U.S.C. § 521)
Escape of prisoners (18 U.S.C. §
Rioting in a correctional facility
(18 U.S.C. § 1792)
Importing aliens for prostitution
(18 U.S.C. § 1328)
Assault with intent to commit rape
or sexual abuse (18 U.S.C. § 3559(c)(2)(F))
Threatening to murder a
congressman, senator, or government official (18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1)
Drug-related robberies involving
assault with a dangerous weapon (18 U.S.C. § 2118(c)(1)
Stealing immigration documents for
the purpose of keeping an immigrant in slavery (18 U.S.C. § 1592)
Attempt or conspiracy to engage in
human smuggling (18 U.S.C. § 1592)
Failing to register as a sex
offender (18 U.S.C. § 2250)
Arson (18 U.S.C. § 81)
Blackmail (18 U.S.C. § 873)
Domestic assault by an habitual
offender (18 U.S.C. § 117)
Hate crimes (18 U.S.C. § 249)
Assaulting a law enforcement
officer with a deadly weapon (18 U.S.C. § 111(b))
At that point, the GOP senate
document lists a series of questions for proponents of the bill:
Would you consider these low-level
or non-violent crimes?
How can we trust the BOP to
correctly categorize who is high vs. low risk?
If the reasons these are not on the
list is because they are obscure crimes, why is drug trafficking – the single
most common offense – missing?
Why are obscure violations of the
Atomic Energy Code on the exclusion list but not these crimes?
If you added provisions to the bill
that Senator Booker and Democrats wanted, why won’t you add more violent crimes
to the ‘exclusion from early release’ list that Republicans want?
Why have an exclusion list in the
first place if these crimes are missing from it?
Can you promise that no offender
who commits these crimes will ever be released early?
How many offenders are in prison
for each of these crimes and how many will be eligible to be released into my
The full report is here. There are questions about the
source of the document, but if it’s reliable, it’s a frightening prospect. If
you go to the Breitbart page, take a look at some of the reader comments.
Oh my goodness. Here is John Kasich
over the weekend saying he is “very seriously” considering running for
President in 2020.
Kasich only won one state – his
home state of Ohio – during the 2016 GOP Presidential Primaries against Donald
He then refused to support Trump in
the General Election against Hillary Clinton and would not even attend the
Republican National Convention held in his own state of Ohio. Totally
despicable. But Trump won Ohio anyway!
Kasich here floats the possibility
of running as a Third Party Candidate – essentially to be a spoiler, just to
keep Trump from winning. He is a NeverTrumper and he would clearly rather see a
radical Leftist Democrat win that see Trump get re-elected. What a buffoon.
This had been building for some
time for two primary reasons. First, Twitter, like Facebook (which I had given
up a few months ago), is
a hate machine. Second, Twitter’s ever-changing terms of service and curiouslyselective
enforcement of said terms via shadow and outrightbans made
it increasingly obvious that Twitter is less interested in real conversation
than it is in kabuki theater conversation—censored one-sided
shadow-boxing—replacing freedom of speech with speech at the pleasure of one’s
As such, Twitter has became a
platform I can no longer support with my participation.
From my perspective, participation
on a platform that actively censors political speech, even when that
participation consists of criticism the platform, is a tacit approval. Remember
how you felt when you saw those “Occupy Wall Street” folks using iPhones to
bemoan capitalism? That’s how I began seeing giving Twitter my voice, a voice
that they could choose to either allow or silence if it became pesky or popular
Why should I provide free content
to people I don’t like, who hate me? I’m currently working on a book on social
media, and I keep coming back to the point that Twitter is far and away the
most socially destructive of the various platforms. So I decided to suspend
them, as they are suspending others. At least I’m giving my reasons, which is
more than they’ve done usually.
He may have beaten the digital
bouncers to the door by only a little. The Thought Police are rushing to ensure
that everyone toes the line.
I found several supposed alternatives to Facebook here, but
I had not heard of any of them. Any Tea Party people identifying any good
The Lady of the House at Bookworm Room has a lengthy review
essay of a book by Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
(out in paperback in 2012), which considers the default conditions of human
nature, development of Western civilization, and how those behaviors and developments
are reflected in today’s political stand-offs. It’s a long but worthwhile read;
click here. Lady Bookworm concludes:
It’s time for me to summarize what
Pinker argues took humankind from a time of tremendous cruelty and violence to
the world in which we live now. These factors were:
The development of the
nation-state, which quashed local warfare, whether it was the warfare of Stone
Age tribesman or medieval warlords.
The development of manners aimed at
raising mankind above its animal nature.
The development of commerce, which
forced empathy upon those who wished to be successful.
The rule of law, not in the form of
the random tyranny of a police state, but in the form a stable judicial system
that allows people to calculate in advance the cost of their actions, whether
in the civil or the criminal context.
And two more Bookworm additions:
The decrease in alcohol consumption, because excessive alcohol intake brings
people closer to their animal natures, and the premium placed upon electing
mature, experienced people to positions of power.
Today’s Leftists seek to destroy
every single one of those civilizing influences:
Leftists want to destroy borders,
which ends the nation-state. Their optimistic ideal is one-world government
under the U.N.’s aegis. The reality will be a retreat into the tribalism that
was normative for most of human history and that is defined by almost unholy
levels of violence and torture against perceived enemies.
Leftists are breaking down all
normative behavior (once called “manners”). Whether it’s screaming at
conservatives in restaurants, attacking politicians in their homes, being obsessed with poop, destroying sexual norms
(including have a lesbian smooch at the Thanksgiving Day parade, a venue in
which no one previously smooched), chronic public nudity, or anything else that
once held together civilized Western society, the Left is against it. (And
please feel free to add to that list.)
Leftists are irredeemably hostile
to commerce. The Leftist dream is a tightly controlled socialist economy,
although one in which the rich Blue Leftists, including Barack “at some point
you’ve made enough money” Obama, will retain their wealth. Place Alexandria
Occasional-Cortex and her ilk in charge of the American economy, and we will go
backwards to a medieval time in which profit is evil, innovation is
discouraged, lending money is impossible, and the empathy and cooperation that
trade brought are gone. (By the way, the Koran makes usury illegal, which is
one of the reasons Muslim majority countries are economically stagnant unless
they have oil wealth.)
Leftists are hostile to the rule of
law. As we see in everything from the Title IX travesties on college campuses
to Justice Kavanaugh’s travails to the Obama judge’s attacks on Trump’s
executive power, Leftists don’t believe in the equal application of the rule of
law. To them, law is an instrument of power to be used, not to create reliability
in both civil and criminal matters in order to guide people’s actions, but as a
cudgel to enforce their power. In other words, their “law” is the law of
tyranny, not of freedom. This hostility to the rule of law also shows itself in
the whole “sanctuary city/state” notion and the tolerance for criminal
homelessness, both of which have reduced large parts of California, once
America’s most prosperous state, to Third World status.
And finally, the Left has long been
in the vanguard of two other trends: (1) Urging the middle class to use drugs
that interfere with civilized behavior and functionality. Starting with the
Hippies and their tuning in and dropping out and continuing with the binge
drinking on Leftist-controlled college campuses and the push for recreational
(as opposed to medicinal) pot, Leftists encourage behavior that decreases
mankind’s connection to its human nature and brings it closer to its animal
nature. (2) Turning political power over to young people, whether by decreasing
the voting age or by championing practically prepubescent people in
politics. Again, a perfect example is Occasional-Cortex, a woman with a dismal
education and no life experience, who’s seen as the Great Hope for the Left.
Yesterday, this blog linked to some
information on the First Step Act, with support coming from Ken Blackwell and
Pastor Darrell Scott, among others. On the other hand, Ann Coulter criticized
the Act in pretty sharp terms. Then I came across Michelle Malkin’s analysis of the First Step Act; like Coulter, Malkin is tough on crime, immigration, and drug dealing, so
I was interested to see that she supports the Act:
The package of criminal justice
reform proposals endorsed by President Donald Trump is not “soft” on crime.
It’s tough on injustice. And it’s about time.
Known as the “First Step Act,” the
legislation confronts the Titanic failure of the federal government’s
trillion-dollar war on drugs by reforming mandatory minimum sentences,
rectifying unscientifically grounded disparities in criminal penalties for
crack vs. powder cocaine users, and tackling recidivism among federal inmates
through risk assessment, earned-time credit incentive structures, re-entry
programs and transitional housing.
There’s nothing radical about
giving law-breakers who served their time an opportunity to turn their lives
around and avoid ending up back behind bars. More than 30 red and blue states
have enacted measures to reduce incarceration, control costs and improve public
safety. Texas — no bleeding-heart liberal mecca — spearheaded alternatives to
the endless prison-building boom a decade ago by redirecting tax dollars to
rehab, treatment and mental health services. The Lone Star state saved an
estimated $3 billion in new public construction costs while stemming the prison
. . .
Despite staunch support from
conservative Republican governors, prosecutors and law enforcement closest to
the ground on this issue, the same hyperbolic talking points used by some
immovable “law and order” opponents at the state level are now being used
against First Step: Cops will be endangered, critics balk. Violent monsters
will go free. Child predators and drug kingpins will flood our neighborhoods.
Scary, but deceptive. The plain
language of the bill makes clear that its “early release” provisions must be
earned. Moreover, as Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee points out: “At all times the
Bureau of Prisons retains all authority over who does and does not qualify for
early release.” Former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman, a veteran of the criminal
justice system for 20 years, notes that inmates convicted of crimes of violence
(including assaults on police), drug trafficking (including hardcore fentanyl
and heroin dealing) and child pornography would not qualify for credits.
Period. The list of ineligible prisoners is a mile long.
. . .
Critic Dan Cadman of the Center for
Immigration Studies is not satisfied and argues that “the simplest way to make
it a clean bill where immigration enforcement is concerned is to say at the
beginning of the bill that ‘none of the sections that follow in this bill apply
to incarcerated aliens.'” That should be a simple fix and is no reason to
prevent First Step from moving to the Senate floor for vigorous debate.
The Trump administration is proposing reform to the federal criminal justice system that is
running along parallel lines to Issue #1. Ken Blackwell reports:
The FIRST STEP Act is the
beginning of a transformation of America’s federal criminal-justice system into
what it should have always been: a system that makes America safer. This
legislation unites conservatives, police and civil rights advocates, civil
libertarians, business leaders and supporters of social justice. Supporting
this legislation means supporting ideas that all Americans want - from police
to Democrats to Republicans - an America that is fair, an America that puts
Americans first, and that makes America safe.
Blackwell concludes that “This is a law and order President
who believes in justice and the First Step Act will get us closer to true
justice.” Among those standing with President Trump at his press conference
were Sen. Tim Scott and Pastor Darrell Scott. But Ann Coulter vigorously disagrees, and she is not one to pull her punches:
In the systematic dismantling of
common sense in America, Jared Kushner's "sentencing reform" bill is
the coup de grace -- a Mack Truck hurtling down the highway about to take out
thousands of Americans. The Idiot Army is already in place to fight and win
Jared and the hip-hop artists
currently advising him have decided that too many people are in prison. If you
think you've heard this before, you have: Genius insights of this sort have
preceded nearly every major crime wave this country has experienced, from
Philadelphia to California to a bloody period known as "the Warren
. . .
incessantly told that sentences will be cut only for "nonviolent drug
If you are even passingly familiar
with our justice system, you know that virtually everyone in prison is there as
the result of a plea bargain -- "97 percent of federal cases and 94
percent of state cases," according to The New York Times.
You don't strike a deal with the
prosecutor to plea to the worst crime you've committed. You plea to the least
Coulter hammers both the facts and stats concerning
previous crime waves, and she also directs her outrage at President Trump and his
son-in-law. Whether she is correct in attributing a motive to Trump’s support of this initiative, her analysis of past efforts at criminal system reform is worth
considering, and some of her arguments will resonate with those against Ohio’s
Issue #1. (Full column by Ms. Coulter is here.)