Month: January 2019

They plotted it carefully, for several days, with precise tactics, calling it off the first time in order to get the timing just right: an invasion plan to charge the border in the dead of night, on a holiday, estimating that the U.S. Border Patrol would probably be asleep at its posts and too surprised to react.  They got a few kids ready to throw into the concertina wire for the strategically invited television cameras, in a secondary bid to maximize the propaganda value, because for them, the war front is multi-faceted.  Then they charged:

A “violent mob” of illegal immigrants [sic] tried to ring in the new year by rushing the border in California, and Border Patrol agents fired tear gas at them to repel the incursion, Homeland Security officials said Tuesday.

About 150 people were involved in the attempt to climb over and burrow under a section of border fence in San Diego on New Year’s Eve night.  After they were blocked, one group grew more combative, firing rocks over the border to try to hit agents.

The Border Patrol fired tear gas, smoke and pepper spray rounds at the group of rock-throwers, said Customs and Border Protection.

The migrants said they were part of the caravan of people from Central America who arrived at the border over the last couple of months, escalating what had already been a strained border security regime.

That’s the Washington Times report of what went down.  Here is the San Diego Union-Tribune’s.

A group of about 150 migrants attempted to breach a San Diego border fence on New Year’s, and some began throwing rocks at responding U.S. border agents who deployed pepper spray and tear gas on the crowd, authorities said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said the group was attempting to climb over and under the San Diego border fence. When agents and officers responded, about 45 migrants turned back to Mexico, according to the agency.

The strategic planning here was positively military, because for the caravan dead-enders doing it, this is war, an invasion, and there are vast spoils to be had on the other side.  They were charging and invading the flimsy gates of America in a bid to reach the vast benefit packages.

The sense of entitlement is pretty amazing.  Recall this firsthand account from the Daily Signal about the organization and attitude of the caravan:

MEXICO CITY – The migrant caravan has its own de facto government, and on this night the travelers from Central America gathered at the behest of a few leaders to discuss issues of the day as well as the big picture – such as what route to take to the U.S. border.

“It’s your right to go to the U.S.,” Milton Benitez, a political analyst and sociologist who hosts the Honduran TV show “El Perro Amarillo,” implored the impassioned crowd.

In a scene not unlike when a coach rallies his players before a big game, the Honduran media figure pressed the encircling migrants on the night of Nov. 7 not to give up on their “mission” to achieve the U.S. border.

With that bugle call to join the caravan, it’s hardly surprising that it’s now descending into a military-like invasion.  The idea of waiting in line, as normal people who immigrate legally do, is simply absent.  The U-T has more details:

“The thing about it is, you don’t want to be illegal but you are already illegal,” [caravan migrant] Sierra said.  ”So they tell you to take a number.  You ask for a number and wait in line for an opportunity.  But there’s so many people in line, you aren’t getting through.  If you walk up and ask for asylum, they say you are in the wrong place.  You tell me what are we supposed to do?”

Hear that?  He’s quite convinced he’s entitled to instant customer service, the way first-class passengers are on flights, getting to board first.  Lines are for suckers, and he doesn’t do lines.

With that the attitude, you can bet there are going to be more border charges, just as one of the uneducated young men who was repelled in the New Year’s attack said would happen.  With all of these organized invasions now coming, what we are seeing is a repeat of the European migrant invasions with all of the social blight, sex harassment and political ruin of Europe’s leaders that followed.  More border charges are on the way, so how can it be that “walls don’t work,” as the left claims, and how can it be that a more secure wall, one with no need of razor wire upon which to toss the kids for the photos, isn’t needed?  Democrats are now insisting that America doesn’t need a border wall, even as the flimsy fences America does have are being breached in organized attacks.  This charge is proof positive that President Trump’s border wall is needed and Democratic opposition to it is nothing more than a desire to see the gates to the U.S. knocked over to all comers.  Team Trump must drive this home as negotiations to end the government shutdown head for a climax.

Image credit: Camera photo from a San Diego ABC News10 television broadcast.

They plotted it carefully, for several days, with precise tactics, calling it off the first time in order to get the timing just right: an invasion plan to charge the border in the dead of night, on a holiday, estimating that the U.S. Border Patrol would probably be asleep at its posts and too surprised to react.  They got a few kids ready to throw into the concertina wire for the strategically invited television cameras, in a secondary bid to maximize the propaganda value, because for them, the war front is multi-faceted.  Then they charged:

A “violent mob” of illegal immigrants [sic] tried to ring in the new year by rushing the border in California, and Border Patrol agents fired tear gas at them to repel the incursion, Homeland Security officials said Tuesday.

About 150 people were involved in the attempt to climb over and burrow under a section of border fence in San Diego on New Year’s Eve night.  After they were blocked, one group grew more combative, firing rocks over the border to try to hit agents.

The Border Patrol fired tear gas, smoke and pepper spray rounds at the group of rock-throwers, said Customs and Border Protection.

The migrants said they were part of the caravan of people from Central America who arrived at the border over the last couple of months, escalating what had already been a strained border security regime.

That’s the Washington Times report of what went down.  Here is the San Diego Union-Tribune’s.

A group of about 150 migrants attempted to breach a San Diego border fence on New Year’s, and some began throwing rocks at responding U.S. border agents who deployed pepper spray and tear gas on the crowd, authorities said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said the group was attempting to climb over and under the San Diego border fence. When agents and officers responded, about 45 migrants turned back to Mexico, according to the agency.

The strategic planning here was positively military, because for the caravan dead-enders doing it, this is war, an invasion, and there are vast spoils to be had on the other side.  They were charging and invading the flimsy gates of America in a bid to reach the vast benefit packages.

The sense of entitlement is pretty amazing.  Recall this firsthand account from the Daily Signal about the organization and attitude of the caravan:

MEXICO CITY – The migrant caravan has its own de facto government, and on this night the travelers from Central America gathered at the behest of a few leaders to discuss issues of the day as well as the big picture – such as what route to take to the U.S. border.

“It’s your right to go to the U.S.,” Milton Benitez, a political analyst and sociologist who hosts the Honduran TV show “El Perro Amarillo,” implored the impassioned crowd.

In a scene not unlike when a coach rallies his players before a big game, the Honduran media figure pressed the encircling migrants on the night of Nov. 7 not to give up on their “mission” to achieve the U.S. border.

With that bugle call to join the caravan, it’s hardly surprising that it’s now descending into a military-like invasion.  The idea of waiting in line, as normal people who immigrate legally do, is simply absent.  The U-T has more details:

“The thing about it is, you don’t want to be illegal but you are already illegal,” [caravan migrant] Sierra said.  ”So they tell you to take a number.  You ask for a number and wait in line for an opportunity.  But there’s so many people in line, you aren’t getting through.  If you walk up and ask for asylum, they say you are in the wrong place.  You tell me what are we supposed to do?”

Hear that?  He’s quite convinced he’s entitled to instant customer service, the way first-class passengers are on flights, getting to board first.  Lines are for suckers, and he doesn’t do lines.

With that the attitude, you can bet there are going to be more border charges, just as one of the uneducated young men who was repelled in the New Year’s attack said would happen.  With all of these organized invasions now coming, what we are seeing is a repeat of the European migrant invasions with all of the social blight, sex harassment and political ruin of Europe’s leaders that followed.  More border charges are on the way, so how can it be that “walls don’t work,” as the left claims, and how can it be that a more secure wall, one with no need of razor wire upon which to toss the kids for the photos, isn’t needed?  Democrats are now insisting that America doesn’t need a border wall, even as the flimsy fences America does have are being breached in organized attacks.  This charge is proof positive that President Trump’s border wall is needed and Democratic opposition to it is nothing more than a desire to see the gates to the U.S. knocked over to all comers.  Team Trump must drive this home as negotiations to end the government shutdown head for a climax.

Image credit: Camera photo from a San Diego ABC News10 television broadcast.

As Congress gears up for the new term, the House of Representatives is preparing a vote this week on rules to govern the 116th Congress.

A few notable provisions are grabbing the headlines, such as allowing the speaker to “intervene” in challenges to Obamacare, establishing a new select committee on climate change, and making it harder to call for a mid-session vote for speaker. But several provisions impact the federal budget, and not for the better.

Rather than promoting fiscal restraint, the House is considering rules changes that would move in the opposite direction. The results could mean more deficit spending and higher taxes for many Americans.

Here are four proposed rules changes the House should reconsider.

1. Adoption of a “Gephardt rule,” which would allow the House to avoid a direct vote on the debt limit.

Under this rule, a vote on a House budget resolution would double as a vote to raise the debt limit in the House. In early 2019, we are likely to hit a debt of $22 trillion. Americans deserve a true stand-alone vote on the debt limit in both chambers of Congress.

The debt limit is an important moment for forcing action to confront our nation’s highly unsustainable and worsening fiscal path, and an opportunity to correct course with spending and entitlement reforms. The Gephardt rule would reverse course by allowing the House to avoid taking an important vote on the debt limit, thus reducing congressional accountability.

The version considered by the new House in its rules package would send a debt limit suspension through the end of the fiscal year (Sept. 30) to the Senate upon passage of a concurrent resolution on the budget in the House.

Congress should enact fiscal controls to reform and control spending, and should do so before increasing the debt limit again.

2. Eliminating dynamic scoring.

The proposed rules package would eliminate a requirement that major legislation take into account the economic impact of the policy changes it contains. The official score of how tax legislation affects revenue would no longer take into account how policy changes affect the way people, businesses, investors, and entrepreneurs alter their behavior in response.

This would deny the widely accepted reality that government policy can and does change people’s behavior and affect the economy. In essence, it would allow Congress to ignore the negative effects of its own policies.

Getting rid of dynamic scoring would make it easier for Congress to raise taxes on all Americans. Lawmakers would be able to pretend that higher tax rates will bring in lots of new revenue, while denying the negative effects of a slower economy.

Raising income tax rates would bring in more revenue, but it would also cause people to work less, save less, and invest less. When people work less, the government collects less revenue and the economy as a whole is smaller than without the tax hike.

Top marginal income tax rates have been as high as 91 percent and as low as 28 percent over the past 50 years, but the resulting revenue hasn’t changed that much.

(Photo: Federal Budget in Pictures)

3. Removing super-majority protection against tax increases.

The proposed House rules would strike the requirement that a supermajority of three-fifths of Congress vote to increase taxes on the American people. Without this protection, the House would be able to more easily increase income taxes, endangering the tax cuts passed a year ago.

4. Allowing amendments to appropriations bills that increase net spending.

Under current House rules, an amendment to a spending bill cannot cause a net increase in budget authority. In other words, any proposed amendments that would increase or create new spending must be fully paid for.

The new rules package would abandon that requirement, and it couldn’t come at a worse time. The Budget Control Act spending caps, one of the few tools to restrain spending, are on life-support. Absent these caps, Congress may pass billions of dollars in unpaid spending.

The deficits is already likely to top $1 trillion this year. Now is not the time to make it easier for Congress to heap on more spending.

Rules changes are an opportunity for Congress to take on more budget restraint and transparency. Here are three alternative rules changes that would further those goals.

1. Account for interest costs when considering legislation.

Under current scoring conventions, Congress does not require the Congressional Budget Office to include the additional interest costs of changes to spending and tax levels. This creates an incomplete view of the costs of legislation and distorts congressional decision making in favor of more spending and debt accumulation.

Congress should direct the Congressional Budget Office to produce interest cost estimates to accompany every score of proposed legislation. This would improve accuracy in scorekeeping and help Congress make more informed decisions.

2. End unauthorized appropriations.

Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that Congress appropriated over $300 billion to programs with lapsed or “zombie” appropriations. The authorization process is an oversight tool that provides a chance for members of authorizing committees to closely examine federal activities and determine whether or not they are worthy purposes.

Yet Congress has only weak rules to limit zombie appropriations and they are ignored.

Congress should pass a stronger rule that ends unauthorized appropriations. Oversight is one of the major duties of members of Congress, and by failing to take action for or against authorizations, they are doing a disservice to taxpayers. With the national debt quickly approaching $22 trillion, the country cannot afford to waste any more money on zombie appropriations.

3. Reinstate the Holman rule.

The Holman rule gives Congress a more inclusive process for allocating funds as it intends. It allows Congress to cut specific funds from an appropriations bill, to reduce the number of federal workers in a particular agency or program, or to cut the pay of a particular federal worker.

Although critics of the rule wrongly claim that it would upend the civil service system and lead to all sorts of targeted job and pay cuts, that is neither the purpose of the rule nor how it has been used when in place. Instead, the Holman rule allows legislators to eliminate programs they do not intend to fund; to eliminate positions or reassign workers based on government priorities; and to cut the pay of workers in particularly egregious cases.

Today, federal employees’ unions make it nearly impossible to fire a federal worker—even in cases when the worker has confessed to a crime. Federal employees’ jobs should not be immune from an act of Congress signed by the president. The Holman rule ensures that if a federal employee performs so severely that both Congress and the president call for action, the employee can effectively be forced to resign by reducing his pay to $1.

More importantly, the Holman rule allows lawmakers to key in on their intended spending priorities and protect taxpayer resources by cutting funding for unnecessary or problematic programs.

Each new session of Congress provides an opportunity for the House to reevaluate its rules and set the agenda for the next two years. If the rules set forth for the 116th Congress are any indication, it could be a costly two years for taxpayers.

Instead of adopting rules biased toward higher spending and taxes, the House should adopt a package promoting fiscal responsibility and transparency, paving the way for overdue spending reforms.

(CNSNews.com) – When Democrats take control of the House this week, they plan to pass legislation funding six government agencies, which would reopen most of the government.

A second bill, a short-term continuing resolution, would extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 8, thereby “isolating” the wall funding disagreement. 

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) explained the strategy on New Year’s Day, during an appearance on CNN:

Well, I think what we hope will happen is, look, there’s broad consensus on the six funding bills. They’re bipartisan. The Senate already approved that spending 100-0.

So those departments, we ought to just fund them to the end of the fiscal year, which is what one package will be. Let’s isolate the disagreement, the Department of Homeland Security. We will propose and we will pass a piece of legislation that will provide current funding of $1.3 billion for border security until February 8.

That will give us an opportunity to engage in additional discussions with the Republicans, but let’s isolate the problem. The other six departments, let’s open those up, let’s act like adults, as Leader Pelosi, Speaker-Designee Pelosi said. We will do that right away. We will reopen the government.

Those six bills hopefully will pass both the House and the Senate. The president should sign them. There’s no dispute on those issues. Then the remaining Department of Homeland Security where there’s a disagreement, let’s keep the current level and engage in real discussions to see if we can reach agreement.

It is a perfectly sensible way to approach it that will reopen the government and ensure over 800,000 employees that are being affected by this can have their lives back, and the president can engage with the Democrats and the Republicans in the Senate and try to come up with a solution.

Also on New Year’s Day, President Trump indicated he is open to some kind of a deal, tweeting:

Border Security and the Wall “thing” and Shutdown is not where Nancy Pelosi wanted to start her tenure as Speaker! Let’s make a deal?

(Fox News reported that President Trump has invited congressional leaders to the White House on Wednesday afternoon to attend a DHS briefing on the border wall.)

Both Cicilline and Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) insist that Democrats do support border security, as long as it doesn’t include a wall.

“Democrats supported almost $1.7 billion over the last two years in border security,” Cicilline said. “We support securing our borders. We think it should be done in a smart way, using technology, drones, satellites, cargo inspections, things that will actually work — more personnel.

“We don’t think a concrete wall, which is a 19th century solution for a 21st century problem, makes sense. And I think, again, the suggestion that Democrats somehow don’t support border security is just not true.”

Dingell, also appearing on CNN Tuesday, said she wants a border security package “that’s going to work.”

“We had hundreds of studies. So why aren’t we increasing the number of border patrol, the amount of officers at the border? What about looking at drones and other technology to actually keep the border safe?

“And people are already talking about problems with the walls, tunneling underneath. Let’s sit down, get the experts at the table, and agree to something. This wall has become a symbol of total breakdown in Washington, which we have to stop.”

Dingell said she doesn’t think compromise is a “dirty word,” and she indicated that she might go along with some wall funding (she refused to specify a number) in exchange for comprehensive immigration reform and a DACA solution.

“You know, I don’t think compromise is a dirty word. That’s one thing that I have always said. I don’t put hard lines down in the sand the way a lot of other people do…Let’s get in a room and talk about it and figure it out by February 8th, but let’s reopen the government, which is what I think we need to be doing.”

Dingell supports the Democrat plan to fund six government agencies in one piece of legislation, then do a short-term continuing resolution for the Department of Homeland Security, which would mean no new wall funding.

“I want to see us reopen this government,” Dingell said. “I think everybody looks bad. This is — we need to — but I’m not so desperate that I’ll agree to something that doesn’t make sense.

“But the fact of the matter is, we need to get back to Washington on January 3rd. We’re all coming back. Most of us will be back there tomorrow. And we need to work together. And that’s my New Year’s resolution. I’m going to work with everybody because I think Americans are tired of partisan bickering.”

The federal government has been partially shut down since Dec. 22, as Democrats resist President Trump’s demand for $5 billion in wall funding.

On Jan. 1, Trump tweeted: “The Democrats, much as I suspected, have allocated no money for a new Wall. So imaginative! The problem is, without a Wall there can be no real Border Security – and our Country must finally have a Strong and Secure Southern Border!”

 

A prominent internet billionaire and Microsoft board member spent $100,000 funding a campaign to manipulate the 2017 Alabama Senate special election. That race pitted candidate Republican Roy Moore and Democrat Doug Jones against one another. Moore eventually lost.

Microsoft board member Reid Hoffman apologized for his involvement in the disinformation campaign on Dec. 26. Microsoft has refused to respond to a request for comment and a spokesperson said merely the company has “nothing to share at this time.”

However, Hoffman’s involvement may have violated Microsoft’s own “Standards of Business Conduct.” One of the standards listed includes a mandate to “Communicate Accurately to the Public.” Statements should be “honest and not misleading.”  

On December 24, Facebook suspended five users linked to the operation, saying, “We take a strong stand against people or organizations that create networks of accounts to mislead others about who they are or what they’re doing.” Hoffman had funded this project, which had cost him $100,000.

The Washington Post called Hoffman’s project “highly disturbing.” The group used Facebook and Twitter to spread disinformation about Moore and to boost Jones, who won the election by a narrow margin. Hoffman acknowledged his involvement, saying, “I am embarrassed by my failure to track AET — the organization I did support — more diligently.”

The project, called Project Birmingham, cast Moore as a candidate backed by Russian hackers. In one attempt, the group fabricated a story that Moore had been supported by a network of Russian bots. Hoffman denied any knowledge of this.

However, he continues to fund propaganda projects, such as News for Democracy, which created Facebook pages that buy ads criticizing Republican congressional candidates, according to the Washington Post.

Hoffman, according to his LinkedIn bio, has been a member of Microsoft’s board since March of 2017. The organization he donated to that ran the project, American Engagement Technologies, (AET), is headed by Google engineer and former Obama administration official Mikey Dickerson. Dickerson is also the executive director of the New Data Project, funded by ActBlue, an organization that builds fundraising technology for the left. It is considered a “major fundraising mechanism for the Democratic party.”

In a statement to the Media Research Center, Microsoft refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing by its board member. A spokesperson said that Microsoft “had nothing to share at this time.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) slammed incoming “Big Government” Sen. Mitt Romney’s op-ed Wednesday while praising President Donald Trump’s “actual conservative reform agenda.”

“Like other Big Government Republicans who never liked Reagan, Mitt Romney wants to signal how virtuous he is in comparison to the President,” wrote Sen. Paul who cited an article on Republicans supporting former President Ronald Reagan. “Well, I’m most concerned and pleased with the actual conservative reform agenda @realDonaldTrump has achieved”:

Like other Big Government Republicans who never liked Reagan, Mitt Romney wants to signal how virtuous he is in comparison to the President. Well, I’m most concerned and pleased with the actual conservative reform agenda @realDonaldTrump has achieved.
https://t.co/vNvp2ZwyK7

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 2, 2019

Failed 2012 presidential nominee and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is scheduled to be sworn in on Thursday as the next U.S. senator from Utah, but on Tuesday, he was already condemning President Trump in the Washington Post. 

Romney pursued Trump’s endorsement in 2012, then bashed him mercilessly during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. After Trump was elected president, Romney returned to seeking Trump for a position as secretary of state but did not win the post. In the 2018 midterm elections, Romney again sought Trump’s endorsement and received it. As he prepared to take the oath of office as a senator this week, Romney again took to bashing the president.

President Trump hit back at Romney on Wednesday, suggesting he might be just another anti-Trump senator like outgoing Sen. Jeff Flake. “Here we go with Mitt Romney, but so fast! Question will be, is he a Flake? I hope not,” wrote the president. “Would much prefer that Mitt focus on Border Security and so many other things where he can be helpful. I won big, and he didn’t. He should be happy for all Republicans. Be a TEAM player & WIN!”

Republican National Committee (RNC) chairwoman and Romney niece Ronna Romney-McDaniel slammed her uncle, throwing him in a basket with the president-attacking mainstream media and Democrats.

Michelle Moons is a White House Correspondent for Breitbart News — follow on Twitter @MichelleDiana and Facebook.