There isn’t an actual border deal in Washington yet but you wouldn’t know that‚ given the media’s collective caterwauling over former President Donald Trump’s comments on a prospective border deal‚ which the media then proceeded to frame as a killing of the deal.  How do we know there is no deal? Because NBC News told us as much as they closed out their coverage of the border kerfuffle:     LESTER HOLT: Ryan‚ let's turn back to those negotiations over the border and Ukraine aid‚ where do they stand tonight?  RYAN NOBLES: Well‚ Lester‚ late tonight‚ the former president issuing a statement warning Republicans that a border deal could potentially be what he called “a gift to Democrats”. Despite that‚ the lead negotiators believe they could release the details of their legislation early next week. They remain hopeful that a bipartisan deal can be struck.  NBC News were the only ones to admit there was no border deal actually in place‚ and had the crispest coverage overall‚ albeit weirdly bifurcated between coverage of Trump’s civil defamation trial in New York and the GOP primary. The deal was properly characterized as part of a broader aid package to Ukraine and Israel. ABC News‚ on the other hand‚ covered the “deal” as though it were a campaign stand-alone‚ with no mention of Ukraine until the end of Mary Bruce’s report‚ and no mention of Israel at all. Bruce‚ known around these parts as the Biden White House’s chief apple polisher‚ made it a pure Trump-adverse story focused on process and on the campaign. In fairness‚ though‚ Bruce accurately portrayed Trump’s opposition to this as of yet nonexistent deal: MARY BRUCE: But Trump‚ now gearing up for a general election rematch against Biden and hoping to deny the president a win on immigration‚ has been urging lawmakers not to make a deal with Democrats‚ posting‚ "I do not think we should do a border deal‚ at all‚ unless we get everything."  What is “everything”? Probably the 800-pound gorilla that no one mentions except for Bruce‚ when she said‚ “ it still faces an uphill battle over in the House”. Speaker Mike Johnson has made clear that any deal for Ukraine money MUST include the House-passed H.R. 2‚ as a minimum border enforcement component. Whatever the Senate and White House are negotiating on‚ it isn’t H.R. 2. That somehow‚ goes unmentioned here. Why bother with facts and context when it’s easier to pound out easy “Orange Man Bad” content all day‚ every day? To CBS’s credit‚ The NFL Today host and guest anchor James Brown included Ukraine in the story’s introduction‚ and correspondent Scott MacFarlane peppered his report with Ukraine mentions. However‚ no mentions of Israel or of the House of Representatives. This report‚ too‚ was also a Trump-adverse process story. The three major networks mischaracterized Trump’s opposition to this imaginary border deal‚ which is not H.R. 2 and is therefore unlikely to pass the House of Representatives. No substance‚ just plenty of negotiation with the wind and Orange Man Bad. To view ABC’s transcript click HERE To view CBS’s transcript click HERE To view NBC’s transcript click HERE  

It’s nice to be validated once in a while‚ especially when you know something is obviously true and yet it feels like nobody else is saying it. And the clip I’m about to show you satisfies that need to a great extent. You’ll see it in just a moment. But before we get there‚ a moment of clarity and‚ not quite optimism‚ but at least the meager appearance of a green shoot in the otherwise burned-out forest of our Obama Redux politics. Namely‚ the results Tuesday night in New Hampshire‚ in which some 70 percent of the vote going to Nikki Haley as she lost a double-digits contest to Donald Trump did not come from Republican voters‚ tells you a lot of what you need to know about where we are. There is a faction inside the Republican Party. It’s a remnant. It’s the “warmed-over corporatism” adherents‚ as Ron DeSantis described Haley. I call them Bush Republicans. They’re defined by a number of things‚ and perhaps most prominent among them are a willingness to sell out our future to China‚ an abject submissiveness to Democrats on domestic policy and politics‚ an utter contempt for the GOP’s own voting base‚ and a pathological need to involve our military in conflicts (1) that aren’t in our national interests and (2) where there is no clear path to victory. That’s how you get things like George H. W. Bush demanding in 1988 that America be a “kinder‚ gentler nation‚” the zenith of our cultural hegemony and charitable spirit. Or his son George W. Bush bragging that he was a “compassionate” conservative‚ as though conservatism isn’t compassionate. Or Mitt Romney bragging that he was a “severe” conservative. Or John McCain pandering to his constituents about “building the damn wall” when he sabotaged efforts to do just that. Or Mitch McConnell trashing the GOP’s Senate nominees as an excuse for their underperformance in 2022 — while poll after poll identified McConnell as the least popular politician in Washington‚ which would necessarily make him an albatross around the neck of every Republican Senate candidate. Or any number of things Haley has said and done that have insulted the GOP’s voting base. Bush Republicanism took over the GOP in 1988 and had utterly run the party into the ground by the time Donald Trump came along to apply the defibrillation paddles in 2016. It had embraced corporatism over capitalism (Republicans bristled when lefty Democrats would yell “Fascist!” at Bush‚ but they weren’t altogether wrong)‚ utterly surrendered on cultural issues‚ was badly out of touch on foreign policy‚ and couldn’t stop playing Washington Generals to the Democrats’ Harlem Globetrotters on every major political issue. It was a party even its most loyal supporters were struggling to support. Trump rerouted the party and has given it life‚ mostly by making what I call the revivalist coalition‚ the people who were Reaganites‚ then were Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America people‚ then the Tea Party‚ and are now MAGA/America First folks‚ the active ingredient in the GOP. He’s done to the Republicans what Barack Obama did to the Democrats (and if you haven’t picked up your copy of Racism‚ Revenge and Ruin and read all about exactly what that was‚ then what on earth are you waiting for?)‚ in that the GOP actually stands for something now. The problem is that unlike the Obama Democrats‚ the Trump Republicans have not fully consolidated control over the GOP. They’ve not become the party’s establishment despite clearly boasting support from more than two-thirds of the party’s base. Obama managed to turn a lot of old liberals into mouth-breathing leftists. Today’s Democrat Party is an Obamunist party; its ideology is strongly Marxist and maybe even Maoist. Its focus on culture and insistence on radical cultural aggressions without respite or limiting principle is right out of Mao’s Cultural Revolution of the 1960s. But if the pre-Trump Bush Republicans ever similarly changed their spots‚ it sure didn’t take. Lindsey Graham‚ for example‚ enjoyed a brief and interesting moment as a based conservative‚ but it didn’t take long for him to stab the revivalists right in the spine. Graham couldn’t wait to bring an abjectly unpassable national 15-week abortion ban bill as soon as the Dobbs case was decided‚ something that would very obviously juice the pro-abortion crowd and lend Democrats a boost. Because underperformance in Senate elections is the best way to ensure that Graham’s buddy McConnell remains the leader of the caucus. If there were a big blowout cycle that gave Republicans 55 Senate seats or more‚ why‚ there might just be enough new people that an appetite for fresh faces and fresh approaches might develop. Can’t have that. So here were are‚ and the polling is now continuously showing Trump in a fairly comfortable lead over Joe Biden despite everything that has been thrown at him. The RealClearPolitics average has Trump up on Joe Deadhorse by a 47.3 percent to 43.5 percent margin in the swing state polls‚ and the RCP average on Biden’s approval is mired below 40 percent. There are lots of reasons why those numbers should look as catastrophic as they do. The most prominent of them is the horror at our border and Team Biden/Team Obama’s utter refusal to address it in any positive way. And what does the Bush Republican crowd running the Senate GOP caucus do? Find a way to rehabilitate Biden on the issue by trying to do a grand bargain on the border and immigration as part of a deal that throws another $60 billion into the killing fields of Ukraine. It would be unfathomable‚ except for the running pattern of this kind of timid political stupidity that the McConnell Gang has continued for going on two decades now. And Ted Cruz has had enough. 1. Call This the Texas Flamethrower This clip runs just under 10 minutes‚ but it’s worth every second. It’s Cruz going all Tsar Bomba on Mitch McConnell and the Senate GOP leadership team over the idiotic border deal they’re trying to cut with Chuck Schumer‚ and what emerges is a nuclear holocaust of brutal truth: Lion Ted Cruz grabs mic in the US Capitol and singe-handely dismantles Joe Biden Administration over Border Crisis‚ BLASTS weak Republicans for working on Uniparty border deal: "A STINKING PILE OF CRAP!" pic.twitter.com/JbfQLnoAf6 — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 25‚ 2024 Look‚ I get it. Cruz is a little caustic but not in the fun‚ theatrical way Trump is‚ and so there’s a bit of a charisma deficit with him like there is with Ron DeSantis. So he’s more like your lawyer than your president. But as your lawyer‚ he’s damn good. And that performance was pure gold. Maybe now we can start to have a conversation about why this party has to put up with the Mitch McConnell Sabotage And Surrender Gang running its efforts in the Senate. It’s nice to finally see some real‚ spirited‚ public resistance to the discredited old guard. It’s not enough‚ but it’s a necessary precursor to the change we need. 2. Texas Resists; Red States Rally to the Cause Good for Greg Abbott. The Supreme Court’s ruling lifting a lower court injunction that prevented Border Patrol from cutting the razor wire down at Eagle Pass that makes it more difficult and dangerous for illegals to invade the country there doesn’t stop Texas from putting up new razor wire. But it does create a situation in which Texas is supposed to back down and let the Biden administration escort the migrants into the country and then process them for their journey into the welfare rolls‚ American citizenship‚ and Democrat voter registration. But Abbott‚ Texas’ governor‚ isn’t backing down. He can’t‚ because the people who elected him don’t give a red hot damn about what the Supreme Court says. Texas has declared an invasion‚ and by constitutional right‚ it can repel invaders. So it seems we’re going to have a big fight about this because every red-state governor looks to be standing with Texas. Here’s Louisiana’s newly inaugurated governor‚ Jeff Landry: Louisiana stands with Texas. Enough is enough. pic.twitter.com/MqC5x3RlOt — GovJeffLandry (@LAGovJeffLandry) January 25‚ 2024 The smart play‚ if you’re Biden‚ is to read the room and back down from this. The public is not on his side. A telltale sign will be if he continues pushing to hold that border open to all comers — if he does‚ it’s a good indication that the people actually making decisions in that administration don’t care about Biden’s political future. Either that or they don’t think the future will be decided by elections. Which is scary‚ and it means those red-state governors need to make preparations for a whole lot more than just a hard stand on the border. 3. Vive La France! The globalist/socialist project is a lot further along in Europe than it is in America‚ so much so that they’re attempting to destroy their own agricultural sectors in service to the dystopian Eat Ze Bugz climate change narrative that the ruling class on that continent is pushing. Well‚ it’s a dead end for them. It’s already produced Geert Wilders as the Dutch prime minister after the attempts to put Holland’s farmers out of business‚ and here’s what it’s producing in France: French Farmers have announced they’ll be blocking major highways to and around Paris tomorrow. Citizens are asked to join the protest. If the roadblocks are successful‚ Paris will run out of food in ± 3 days. Talking about a good reminder where your food comes from. https://t.co/f2mxGtN8vq — Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) January 25‚ 2024 That’ll get their attention. Although my guess is that the French government will come down a lot harder on the farmers than they ever did on the Muslim rioters burning cars in the banlieues. I hope I’m wrong about that. 4. The Venezuela–Guyana Thing We’ll check in on this periodically‚ for reasons that will become more obvious next week. The latest is that Venezuelan and Guyanan diplomats met Thursday in Brazil to discuss Venezuela’s claims on two-thirds of Guyana’s territory. You can imagine how that might go. “Give us all the land or we’ll take it.” “How about no?” “How about a knuckle sandwich?” The fact that this is even a possibility is a testament to the weakness of the Biden administration — who gave life to Venezuela’s claim on oil-rich Essequibo when it lifted its embargo on Venezuelan oil last year. And while we’re no closer to a hot war in South America‚ it doesn’t sound like we’re any closer to resolving this mess‚ either. How come we don’t have anybody at those negotiations? It’s quite possibly our soldiers‚ sailors‚ airmen‚ and Marines who’ll have to go down there and protect the Guyanans if things get kinetic. Naturally‚ you’ll hear absolutely nothing about this from the thoroughly uncurious legacy corporate media. Which also by the way has not bothered to inform the average American at all about the fact that a little closer to home the Dominican Republic is now building a wall across the island of Hispaniola to seal off its border with Haiti. What a bunch of racists‚ right? Well‚ er‚ ummm… For a full explainer on the history‚ economics‚ and geography of the potential war between Venezuela and Guyana‚ I can recommend this:   5. The Novel Begins Soon I mention the Venezuela–Guyana thing because I’m about halfway through the first draft of King of the Jungle‚ the new novel we’re going to serialize here at The American Spectator starting in a week or so. We’ll begin dropping a chapter or two each week‚ and‚ by the end of April‚ our readers will have access to the whole thing. And if you’ve seen references to King of the Jungle in previous 5QT installments‚ you’ll know that the Venezuela–Guyana conflict‚ and the main characters getting enmeshed in it‚ is the backdrop to the story the novel tells. The book makes a few assumptions of facts not quite in evidence‚ but having discussed this with a few folks in the national security business‚ it’s not implausible at all that something could happen down there. Of course‚ the main character of the story‚ a red-pilled billionaire who finds himself in an inconvenient position vis-á-vis a rather tyrannical and incompetent presidential administration here in the States‚ is maybe less plausible. Or is it? We’ll start to unravel this in a week or so. READ MORE: The Spectacle Ep. 63: Nikki Haley’s Throwback Politics Won’t Work in 2024 Gov. Abbott‚ Send Every Illegal to Washington‚ D.C.‚ From Now On Five Quick Things: The End-Of-Days Vibe The post Five Quick Things: Ted Cruz Is Spot-On and Precisely‚ Exactly Right appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

On Monday in Washington‚ D.C.‚ Charles E. Littlejohn faces the music. Whether he hears “Marche Funèbre” or The Benny Hill Show’s theme song erupt in the courtroom‚ we find out shortly after 10 a.m. Littlejohn‚ a Booz Allen Hamilton employee contracted to perform work for the IRS‚ surreptitiously obtained Donald Trump’s tax returns and leaked them to press outlets‚ including the New York Times. “After applying to work as an IRS consultant with the intention of accessing and disclosing tax returns‚” prosecutors alleged‚ “Defendant weaponized his access to unmasked taxpayer data to further his own personal‚ political agenda‚ believing that he was above the law.” If the story ended there‚ one might regard the plea deal as appropriate. It posits that Littlejohn committed a single offense of unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information and should go to prison for eight to 14 months. But it also details other offenses that surely look like crimes that merit prosecution beyond a solitary charge. “In or about July and August 2020‚ Defendant accessed unmasked IRS data associated with thousands of the nation’s wealthiest people‚ including returns and return information dating back over 15 years‚” the plea agreement states. “He uploaded the information and then provided it to ProPublica‚ which published 50 articles on what it called a “massive trove of tax information …  covering thousands of America’s wealthiest individuals.” Those whose privacy Littlejohn invaded include Jeff Bezos‚ Elon Musk‚ Warren Buffett‚ Carl Icahn‚ George Soros‚ Bill Gates‚ Rupert Murdoch‚ and Mark Zuckerberg. Much of the public may find it hard to view the ultrawealthy as victims. But they retain privacy rights like the rest of us do. Their business is none of ours‚ and the principle of equal justice under law applies to them as victims as it does to them as perpetrators. The plea agreement notes that Littlejohn deleted almost all of the files on his IRS laptop and did the same with the “virtual machines” he employed in his criminal scheme. “After uploading the taxpayer returns and return information to the private website he had recently created‚” the plea agreement notes‚ “Defendant promptly contacted the domain registration service to cancel the private website’s domain registration.” Is there some charge associated with destroying evidence of the commission of a crime or does this fall under the BleachBit precedent of offenders who do not offend D.C. sensibilities — 5 percent of them voted for Donald Trump in 2020 — retaining an invisible get-out-of-jail-free card? The Justice Department’s treating the publication of Trump’s private tax returns as a scofflaw offense joins its surveillance on his 2016 campaign using Hillary Clinton’s opposition research as the pretext for a warrant and trampling over attorney-client privilege in forcing his personal lawyer to act as a witness against him in undermining the public’s trust in federal law enforcement. Trump faces 717.5 years in prison for doing what Stacey Abrams did in Georgia (question the legitimacy of election results); what Joe Biden did with classified documents not as president but as senator and vice president; and what rarely gets charged in New York‚ what rarer still results in conviction‚ and which never amounts to a case with no complainant victim — to note a few of the legal handicaps interfering with the 2024 election. This criminal use of law threatens a basic principle of the American republic — that the people rather than the beautiful people determine election results. It also explains why Donald Trump can behave in sundry uncouth ways — he swore and questioned whether the governor of New Hampshire was “on something” during his victory speech this week — with his support not only intact but hardened. The Trump voter is trauma-bonded to his or her candidate and grants an understandable pass for bad behavior given the unprecedented weaponization of the state to derail — and destroy really — the presumptive Republican nominee. The man is under an awful lot of stress‚ after all. The political activist who allegedly bored into the IRS to wage politics by other means numbers as one of many — the Resistance — who imagine it as appropriate to politicize tax-funded jobs. This is so very Peru. From Nebraska‚ Michigan‚ Arkansas‚ and points beyond‚ voters‚ who favor Trump over Biden‚ clearly see the injustice of it all. Far from the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse‚ one can even now faintly hear the sounds of “Yakety Sax.” READ MORE: Trump’s Primary Win Exposes General Election Vulnerability The post Another Phony Justice Department Yakety Sax Case Concludes Monday appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

It’s easy to underestimate Vice President Kamala Harris. Other than her truly awful pantsuits and her tendency to use 30 unintelligible words when three would suffice‚ Harris has little to offer by way of legitimate political talent. She is the diversity hire par excellence — the first female‚ first Asian‚ and first Black vice president picked to balance the ticket and appease radical Democrats. Yet‚ she’s so incompetent and unlikeable that even Democrats have expressed concern that President Joe Biden’s old age might require a passing of the torch during his second term.  But even with her track record of mind-numbing word-salad sound bites‚ Harris has been set loose to speak at “reproductive rights” rallies across the nation. Her “Fight for Reproductive Freedoms” tour started this week on Monday‚ the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade. And as Biden looks to make abortion a central issue in the upcoming election‚ Harris isn’t doing as poorly as Republicans might expect her to.  Harris Sticks to the Script When it comes to public speaking‚ Harris embarrasses herself just as often as Biden does — but without the excuse of old age. But Harris seems to be sticking to the script with her abortion rallies — and it’s a pretty good script‚ as far as political rallies go. Harris is no rhetorical genius‚ but she’s doubling down on major pro-choice arguments with plenty of emotional appeal.  Harris began her Wisconsin rally by invoking freedom as the “fundamental promise of America.” She continued: “In America‚ freedom is not to be given. It is not to be bestowed. It is ours by right … And that includes the freedom to make decisions about one’s own body — not the government telling you what to do.” (RELATED: Eleven States to Vote on Abortion in 2024) Harris went on to acknowledge the would-be 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade‚ lamenting “extremists” who want to “criminalize doctors and punish women‚” “threaten doctors and nurses with prison time‚” and “make no exception‚ even for rape and incest.” She claimed that one in three women of reproductive age currently live in a state with an abortion ban‚ and she made the classic argument that conservatives — sorry‚ extremists — don’t care about maternal mortality.  Democrats Rely on Emotional Manipulation  Harris doubled down on emotional appeal by sharing the story of a Wisconsin woman named Meagan‚ who was pregnant with a child diagnosed with a severe genetic disorder. Doctors pronounced her pregnancy to be “life-threatening‚” and Meagan ended up traveling to Minnesota to obtain the abortion she couldn’t undergo in Wisconsin.  “The reality of what is happening in real time across our country is that‚ for every story we hear‚ there are so many that we do not hear about‚” Harris said. “Today‚ an untold number of women are silently suffering — women who are being subjected to profound judgment; women who are being made to feel as though they did something wrong‚ as though they should be embarrassed‚ being made to feel as though they are alone.” It’s powerful stuff. With stories like Meagan’s‚ Democrats can disguise their abortion extremism as compassion — in this case‚ abortion is cast as “healthcare‚” and pro-life voters are cast as villains who want to see them suffer. It’s a tactic detached from rational consideration‚ and that’s why it’s so convincing. Many Republican voters would find themselves convinced by Harris’s words. When abortion is spun as personal freedom and a medical necessity rather than the intentional killing of a child‚ pathos lures listeners leftward.  Harris Uses Roe as a Rhetorical Trojan Horse Though Harris casts abortion as a private choice that should be left to a woman and her doctor‚ her actual agenda is far more progressive: abortion for anyone‚ at any time‚ and at any stage of pregnancy. The only problem is that this isn’t exactly what she’s telling voters.  “The bottom line is‚” she said on Monday‚ “To truly protect reproductive freedoms‚ we must restore the protections of Roe.” But does Harris really want to restore the trimester framework of Roe — the framework discarded and recast in 1992 by the Supreme Court’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision — or does she want something more radical?  Under Roe‚ states would be able to regulate abortion in the second trimester and fully ban it in the third trimester. According to Harris’s rhetoric‚ only extremists would support a judicial decision that allows states to prohibit late-term abortions.  Biden‚ too‚ has embraced the mantle of Roe‚ claiming on Tuesday that he “believe[s] Roe v. Wade got it right‚” and that he would love to see a Democratic majority in Congress “pass a new law restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade.” If abortion is going to be a central issue for the Biden-Harris campaign‚ why not just address it head-on? Why bother with the window dressing of “restoring Roe” at all? Perhaps because only 34 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be legal under any circumstances‚ according to a Gallup poll from last summer. Abortion restrictions might not be popular in an all-or-nothing contest‚ but Biden and Harris outflank most Americans with their abortion radicalism.  With 284 days until Election Day this November‚ Republicans have limited time to polish their pro-life talking points‚ but they should certainly get ready to attack the Left’s abortion rhetoric. Harris may have emotion on her side‚ but she and Biden have plenty of weaknesses. Going on the offensive and demanding that they clarify exactly what abortion policies they support might not sway many votes‚ but it would certainly make the moral stakes of this election clearer. Mary Frances Myler is a writer from Northern Michigan now living in Washington‚ D.C. She graduated from the University of Notre Dame in 2022.  READ MORE by Mary Frances Myler:  The Ghost of Roe v. Wade New EPA Regulations Are a Death Sentence for Small Oil and Gas Producers  Kellyanne Conway’s Contraception Gambit The post Kamala Harris Stumps for Abortion Ahead of Election appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Over there at Newsmax (where‚ full disclosure‚ I am a contributor) is this interesting — and telling — headline coming out of New Hampshire. It reads:  Trump Sets Record for Most Votes in N.H. Primary The story reports that Trump’s Tuesday victory “set a record for most votes received in the state’s presidential primary.”  Trump’s total was 163‚713 votes. The previous record-holder was on the Democrat side‚ with Vermont’s favorite socialist senator‚ Bernie Sanders‚ getting 152‚000 in his 2016 race against Hillary Clinton.  The rest of the field on this score on the GOP side is as follows‚ going all the way back to Dwight Eisenhower’s two runs in 1952 and 1956:  2016: Donald Trump: 100‚406 2012: Mitt Romney: 95‚669 2008: John McCain: 88‚713 2004: George Bush: 53‚962 2000: John McCain: 115‚490 1996: Pat Buchanan: 56‚874 1992: George H. W. Bush: 92‚271 1988: George H. W. Bush: 59‚290 1984: Ronald Reagan: 65‚033 1980: Ronald Reagan: 72‚886 1976: Gerald Ford: 55‚156 1972: Richard Nixon: 79‚239 1968: Richard Nixon: 80‚666 1964: Henry Cabot Lodge: 33‚007 1960: Ricard Nixon: 65‚204 1956 Dwight Eisenhower: 56‚464 1952 Dwight Eisenhower: 46‚661 All of which is to say‚ there’s a message in this particular Trump victory. That being that the Trump popularity on visible display at all those rallies‚ not to mention at election day voting sites in both New Hampshire and Iowa before that‚ mean something. That “something” is that the enthusiasm for his remaining opponent‚ ex-South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley — and before that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — simply isn’t there. Haley can stay in the race as long as she wants and is able‚ but winning is clearly not going to be coming in her direction. The question at this point is: why? Why has Haley‚ and DeSantis and others before her‚ failed utterly to overtake the former president? The answer‚ it would seem to be clear‚ is that Haley and the others are simply — merely — candidates. Former President Trump‚ it should be clear by now to all‚ is not just a candidate. Trump is a movement. Only a serious‚ energized political movement could produce Trump’s New Hampshire numbers or his blowout‚ 30-point victory over DeSantis in Iowa. When Trump came down that Trump Tower escalator in 2015‚ few if any could see that the New York celebrity billionaire builder was going to lead a decidedly serious movement that would upend the way the American political Swamp did business. Clearly — and she is not alone — Nikki Haley still doesn’t get it. Here is this typical Haley approach to Trump‚ as reported by the Associated Press:  BLUFFTON‚ S.C. (AP) — Nikki Haley argued Monday former President Donald Trump causes too much chaos to be successful in a second White House term‚ reiterating her argument about the GOP front-runner at a large town hall in her home state of South Carolina. Got that? Cleaning the Washington Swamp and its good ole boy and girl way of doing business is just too important to be disrupted and cleaned up. And any attempt to clean it up is guilty of bringing “chaos.” In short‚ Haley is making it plain that‚ if elected‚ she intends to be one more Swamp creature‚ going along to get along to just be a good ole girl in the Club that is the Washington Swamp. No draining the Swamp for her‚ because that brings chaos. Back there in the Reagan era‚ the president nominated Judge Robert Bork for a Supreme Court seat. Bork was a decided conservative‚ seriously well qualified for the job. He was‚ to say the least‚ not a fan — much less a member of — the Swamp. And within hours of his nomination‚ all hell broke loose as the Washington Swamp turned on him in a blink. Why? Because Bork had a long record of taking on the Swamp Establishment.  In his book The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law‚ written after the uproar surrounding the defeat of his nomination‚ Bork wrote this:  The public campaign (to defeat his nomination)‚ designed to influence senators through public opinion polls‚ consisted of systematic distortion of my academic writings and my judicial record and‚ it must be said‚ employed racial and gender politics of a most pernicious variety. The ferocity of the attack‚ the ideological stance of the assailants‚ and the tactics they used all showed that the opposition knew they were fighting over more than one judge. They were fighting for control of the legal culture…. My nomination was…merely one battleground in a long-running war for control of our legal culture‚ which‚ in turn‚ was part of a larger war for control of our general culture. Bingo. And all these years later‚ that war has only gotten worse. (Ask Justice Brett Kavanaugh.) Which is exactly why the war on Donald Trump — in the legal and media establishments to name but two — is so intense. And as was true with Bork‚ anyone who is capable of taking on the Swamp will be targeted. Thus it is that Trump’s determined focus on draining the Swamp results in what Swamp dwellers see‚ as Nikki Haley calls it — “chaos” — refusing to do business as usual in the Swamp. The thinking here is that Trump’s decidedly evident movement is not going to let Haley win. They will turn out en masse to elect their champion. And‚ as seen in the Iowa and now New Hampshire results‚ they mean business. READ MORE: The Other New Hampshire Primary: No Debates‚ No Drama‚ No Biden The post Trump’s New Hampshire Triumph Breaks Records appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The adjective “Orwellian” can be overused in our political discourse. But how else to describe a situation in which the federal government abdicates its responsibility to secure the nation’s wide-open border and then‚ when a state steps up to help stanch the bleeding‚ is told by that same federal government to stop — and‚ for good measure‚ that its efforts to help secure the border via a new razor wire barrier will be undone? There really is only one apt word: “Orwellian.” On Monday‚ the Supreme Court voted 5-4 — with moderate Chief Justice John Roberts and center-right Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining their liberal colleagues — in favor of the Biden administration‚ which had requested that the court permit its Border Patrol agents to cut or remove protective razor wire fencing installed by Texas officials along the besieged Rio Grande. The court’s ruling is simply astonishing. In America’s federalist constitutional order‚ both the federal government and the states act as fully sovereign actors operating within their delineated spheres of legitimate governing authority. The federal government — which was itself initially created in the late 1780s by the then-preexisting states — is in no position whatsoever to demand that states deliberately undermine their own sovereignty. That is especially true when the federal government itself obstinately refuses to secure the nation’s territorial integrity‚ as has been the case throughout Joe Biden’s disastrous presidency. That both the federal government and the states may wield power as fully sovereign entities within our constitutional order is constitutional law 101. As the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the 2012 Supreme Court case Arizona v. United States‚ “As a sovereign‚ Arizona has the inherent power to exclude persons from its territory‚ subject only to those limitations expressed in the Constitution or constitutionally imposed by Congress.” (In Texas’ current case‚ there is no relevant constitutional limitation or congressional imposition.) Later in his separate Arizona writing‚ Scalia continued: “[A]fter the adoption of the Constitution there was some doubt about the power of the federal government to control immigration‚ but no doubt about the power of the states to do so.” (Emphasis added.) Toward the end‚ Scalia approached his denouement: “But there has come to pass‚ and is with us today‚ the specter that Arizona and the states that support it predicted: A federal government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written‚ and leaves the states’ borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude. So the issue is a stark one. Are the sovereign states at the mercy of the federal executive’s refusal to enforce the nation’s immigration laws?” It seems‚ sadly‚ that the answer is “yes.” Substitute “Arizona” for “Texas‚” and nothing else has changed today. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s reaction was swift and defiant. On Wednesday‚ Abbott released a statement in which‚ citing Scalia in Arizona‚ he lamented how the federal government “has broken the compact” that exists between it and the several states. He formally declared an “inva[sion]” under Article I‚ Section 10‚ Clause 3 of the Constitution. Such an express constitutional provision‚ which reflects the sovereign states’ inalienable right to self-defense‚ is necessarily supreme to any single order of the Supreme Court. Texas is therefore constructing new razor wire fencing. Texas is correct to stand its ground. First‚ the Supreme Court’s order more narrowly permitted Border Patrol agents to remove wire; it said nothing whatsoever about Texas officials’ ability to construct new wire. Second‚ even if there were a direct clash between Texas and the Court‚ Texas’s reliance on an express constitutional provision to declare an “inva[sion]” — and thus assert its unequivocal right to secure its borders — takes precedence over a Supreme Court edict. Finally‚ unless one erroneously accepts the illogical (and frankly un-American) premise of judicial supremacy‚ under which Supreme Court rulings represent the definitive and all-encompassing “law of the land‚” then one should support the state of Texas’ ability to independently interpret the Constitution for itself. To act as Texas has done is not to invoke the antebellum debate over “nullification” and resuscitate the ghost of John C. Calhoun. Texas’ action here is closer to “interposition‚” a legitimate constitutional concept explained by James Madison in The Federalist No. 46: “Were it admitted‚ however‚ that the federal government may feel an equal disposition with the state governments to extend its power beyond the due limits‚ the latter would still have the advantage in the means of defeating such encroachments.” The mass invasion now transpiring at the U.S. southern border is illegal‚ immoral‚ and unsustainable. Its scope is truly unprecedented in our history‚ posing a mortal threat to the nation. God bless Greg Abbott and the great state of Texas‚ who rightfully cherish their sovereignty and righteously refuse to bend the knee to the most lawless presidential administration in American history. To find out more about Josh Hammer and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists‚ visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM READ MORE: After Iowa‚ It’s Time for Republicans to Rally to Trump Claudine Gay Is Not a Martyr A 2024 Wish List: Sanity at Home and Stability Abroad The post Texas Is Correct to Defend Its Sovereignty From the Border Invasion appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.