53percenter's Blog

President Donald Trump may be up to his neck in political drama and legal concerns, but it looks like he hasn’t forgotten his role as commander in chief.

On Sunday morning, the president used Twitter to reveal that he intends to personally review the case of an Army officer who is facing serious jail time and possibly even the death penalty for an incident that happened in Afghanistan.

That man is Maj. Matt Golsteyn, a former U.S. Army Green Beret who is accused of murdering a Taliban bomb maker.

At the request of many, I will be reviewing the case of a “U.S. Military hero,” Major Matt Golsteyn, who is charged with murder. He could face the death penalty from our own government after he admitted to killing a Terrorist bomb maker while overseas. @PeteHegseth @FoxNews

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 16, 2018

TRENDING: Trump Bulldozes Lisa Page and Peter Strozk After Establishment Media Ignores Damning New Evidence

“At the request of many, I will be reviewing the case of a ‘U.S. Military hero,’ Major Matt Golsteyn, who is charged with murder,” Trump posted.

“He could face the death penalty from our own government after he admitted to killing a Terrorist bomb maker while overseas.”

Golsteyn’s case is somewhat bizarre, and has ignited a firestorm of controversy. The former Silver Star recipient and Green Beret was previously investigated by the Pentagon for a 2010 incident, but prosecutors declined to bring charges. The Army did revoke Golstey’s Silver Star, however.

Then, an interview Golsteyn gave Fox News in 2016 brought the incident back into the light and pushed the military to re-open the case.

“The service is again scrutinizing former Maj. Mathew L. Golsteyn after he appeared in a Fox News television interview in October and acknowledged that he had killed a Taliban bombmaker who had been held as a detainee during the bloody battle of Marja in February 2010,” reported The Washington Post in December 2016.

“The suspected bombmaker was not on a list of targets that U.S. forces had been cleared to kill, according to Army documents; Golsteyn said that letting go of the insurgent meant the Taliban member could later target Afghans who are helping U.S. troops,” the newspaper reported.

Before Golsteyn killed the man, two young Marines whose unit was deployed under Golsteyn’s command were killed by an explosive booby trap.

“Army documents show that Golsteyn’s unit launched a search for bombmaking supplies in the area after the deaths of [Marines] Johnson and McQueary, and detained the man Golsteyn confessed to killing,” The Post stated.

“During Golsteyn’s interview with the CIA, according to Army investigators, he described taking the bombmaker off the base, shooting him and burying his remains in a shallow grave,” the newspaper added. However, the officer’s attorney has disputed that version of what happened.

RELATED: Trump’s Afghanistan Bombing Campaign Breaks Records, Still 2 Months Left to Go

Observers are now asking a key question: Was the chain of events all in the line of duty, or did the decorated Special Forces operative wrongfully execute an enemy combatant as revenge for his men?

Many veterans and public officials have rallied to Golsteyn’s defense, and insisted that the incident was a legitimate — if unpleasant — part of war, especially a war against a ruthless guerilla enemy like the Taliban.

“Matt Golsteyn is an American hero. Matt Golsteyn does for the American people what we ask him to do, and the Army is screwing him again,” U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, an outspoken California Republican, told the Post for the 2016 account. “I’m embarrassed for the U.S. Army — and they ought to be embarrassed.”

“I think he’s been betrayed,” the former soldier’s attorney, Phillip Stackhouse, told Fox News last week.

“I think he’s been betrayed,” his attorney, Phillip Stackhouse, told Fox News on Friday when asked how the Army has treated Golsteyn. https://t.co/d2ncDBBHl2 #FoxNews

— MilitaryDefender (@MilitaryDefendr) December 14, 2018

Trump’s involvement may muddy the waters, but could also provide the pressure to ensure that justice — one way or the other — is served.

At the very least, the announcement that he is looking at the matter shows that the commander in chief is taking the fate of America’s men and women in uniform seriously … And no matter the outcome of this case, that’s something to be applauded.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

It is amazing how so many government officials under investigation conveniently lose or destroy things that would be helpful to determine guilt.

Robert Mueller’s office wiped information off Lisa Page’s and Peter Strzok’s phones when they obviously knew that Congress and others would like to see the messages.  I am sure that Mueller would be congenial if his targets wiped off stuff he wanted to see and said, Don’t worry!  There was nothing important to see.

Lois Lerner’s computer conveniently crashed when she was being looked at for violating first amendment rights of Obama opponents.

Hillary’s computer was completely wiped clean, but she didn’t have to worry because she knew that Comey was there and would forgive Hillary’s violations of the law by saying essentially that she wasn’t smart enough to follow the law so she didn’t have to.

The DNC claimed that the Russians hacked its computers and wouldn’t allow the government to see them.  They didn’t even have to wipe their computers clean to hide the information.  Government agencies and the media just repeated over and over again, with no questions asked, that the Russians hacked.  I believe that the next time a bank is robbed, the staff should not give access to investigators or regulators and tell them they should just take their word.  That should work.

A big story that has just come out is that federal prosecutors are now investigating Trump’s inaugural to see if donors got access.

One source familiar with the matter says the investigation is in the early stages and investigators are generally focused on whether any inauguration money was misspent. …

Citing conversations with people familiar with the investigation, which is being handled by the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan, the [Wall Street] Journal reported that prosecutors are also looking into whether the committee accepted donations from individuals looking to gain influence in or access to the new administration.

I don’t recall any investigation into either Obama inaugural to see if he sold access.  He obviously did.

Top Inauguration Donors, Grouped by Organization

(See All Organizations Giving $10,000 or more)

 

Organization	Total	# of Donations
Microsoft Corp	$254,000	10
Soros Fund Management	$250,000	5
Baron & Budd	$235,324	10
Small Ventures USA	$200,000	3
Fletcher Asset Management	$165,000	4
Capital Group Companies	$151,000	4
Henry Crown & Co	$135,000	4
Skadden, Arps et al	$132,852	18
Google Inc	$128,517	9
Sidley Austin LLP	$126,585	19

Obama rewarded big bandwidth-users and donors Google and Netflix not only with access, but with net neutrality, which saved them huge amounts of money, and the Obamas got a potential $50-million kickback when they got out of office. (Of course, there was a time in Illinois when Michelle got a $200,000 raise after Obama got a $1-million grant for her employer.)

Not only did Obama give access, but he handed out taxpayer money as if it were his own.  So far, I haven’t seen prosecutors investigating. 

It is well known that Hillary handed out access for money, but almost six years after she left office, I still haven’t see any prosecution.

Not only did Obama sell access and jobs for donations, but his administration had multiple slush funds for political purposes and to reward supporters. Where are the prosecutors and investigative reporters?

Meanwhile, Trump is being continuously investigated while Obama continues to say there were no scandals or prosecutions while he was in.  It helps to have a complicit Justice Department and media.

Maybe Trump should have set up a war room with campaign staffers and campaign money and hired private eyes to destroy the women who accused Bill Clinton, as Hillary did, instead of paying them off quietly with private funds, as Trump did.  Then the media, Democrats, and the Justice Department would say it’s OK and support him, as they did the Clintons for decades.  Is my assumption correct?

The Justice Department, journalists, and Democrats along with entertainers have continued to show blind loyalty and support to the Obamas, the Clintons, and other Democrats, no matter what dirty deeds they have committed.

It is amazing how so many government officials under investigation conveniently lose or destroy things that would be helpful to determine guilt.

Robert Mueller’s office wiped information off Lisa Page’s and Peter Strzok’s phones when they obviously knew that Congress and others would like to see the messages.  I am sure that Mueller would be congenial if his targets wiped off stuff he wanted to see and said, Don’t worry!  There was nothing important to see.

Lois Lerner’s computer conveniently crashed when she was being looked at for violating first amendment rights of Obama opponents.

Hillary’s computer was completely wiped clean, but she didn’t have to worry because she knew that Comey was there and would forgive Hillary’s violations of the law by saying essentially that she wasn’t smart enough to follow the law so she didn’t have to.

The DNC claimed that the Russians hacked its computers and wouldn’t allow the government to see them.  They didn’t even have to wipe their computers clean to hide the information.  Government agencies and the media just repeated over and over again, with no questions asked, that the Russians hacked.  I believe that the next time a bank is robbed, the staff should not give access to investigators or regulators and tell them they should just take their word.  That should work.

A big story that has just come out is that federal prosecutors are now investigating Trump’s inaugural to see if donors got access.

One source familiar with the matter says the investigation is in the early stages and investigators are generally focused on whether any inauguration money was misspent. …

Citing conversations with people familiar with the investigation, which is being handled by the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan, the [Wall Street] Journal reported that prosecutors are also looking into whether the committee accepted donations from individuals looking to gain influence in or access to the new administration.

I don’t recall any investigation into either Obama inaugural to see if he sold access.  He obviously did.

Top Inauguration Donors, Grouped by Organization

(See All Organizations Giving $10,000 or more)

 

Organization	Total	# of Donations
Microsoft Corp	$254,000	10
Soros Fund Management	$250,000	5
Baron & Budd	$235,324	10
Small Ventures USA	$200,000	3
Fletcher Asset Management	$165,000	4
Capital Group Companies	$151,000	4
Henry Crown & Co	$135,000	4
Skadden, Arps et al	$132,852	18
Google Inc	$128,517	9
Sidley Austin LLP	$126,585	19

Obama rewarded big bandwidth-users and donors Google and Netflix not only with access, but with net neutrality, which saved them huge amounts of money, and the Obamas got a potential $50-million kickback when they got out of office. (Of course, there was a time in Illinois when Michelle got a $200,000 raise after Obama got a $1-million grant for her employer.)

Not only did Obama give access, but he handed out taxpayer money as if it were his own.  So far, I haven’t seen prosecutors investigating. 

It is well known that Hillary handed out access for money, but almost six years after she left office, I still haven’t see any prosecution.

Not only did Obama sell access and jobs for donations, but his administration had multiple slush funds for political purposes and to reward supporters. Where are the prosecutors and investigative reporters?

Meanwhile, Trump is being continuously investigated while Obama continues to say there were no scandals or prosecutions while he was in.  It helps to have a complicit Justice Department and media.

Maybe Trump should have set up a war room with campaign staffers and campaign money and hired private eyes to destroy the women who accused Bill Clinton, as Hillary did, instead of paying them off quietly with private funds, as Trump did.  Then the media, Democrats, and the Justice Department would say it’s OK and support him, as they did the Clintons for decades.  Is my assumption correct?

The Justice Department, journalists, and Democrats along with entertainers have continued to show blind loyalty and support to the Obamas, the Clintons, and other Democrats, no matter what dirty deeds they have committed.

In the Illinois Capitol Rotunda this month, several traditions are being celebrated.  We find a nativity scene for Christmas; a menorah for Hanukkah; and, alongside these displays, an arm holding an apple, with a snake coiled around it.  This snake sculpture is a gift from the Chicago branch of The Satanic Temple.  Called “Snaketivity,” the work also has a sign that reads, “Knowledge Is The Greatest Gift.”

This revolting travesty is a result of decades of decisions pertaining to the non-establishment of religion asserted in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  If a group of people incorporates as a non-for-profit religious organization to worship Medusa with her head covered with snakes, would those people be allowed to have a sculpture of Medusa in the Illinois Capitol?  Looking at her would turn one to stone.  Looking at Snaketivity turns this writer to stone-faced silence and outrage.

Next to these displays is a statement to the effect that “[t]he State of Illinois is required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to allow temporary, public displays in the state capitol[.] … Because the first floor of the Capitol Rotunda is a public place, state officials cannot legally censor the content of speech or displays.  The United States Supreme Court has held that public officials may legally impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions regarding displays and speeches, but no regulation can be based on the content of the speech.”  So, we ask, why did they not impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions?

While speech must be allowed, speech must not necessarily be allowed wherever the speaker wants the speech.  There are rules where public events may be held, and said laws must be consistent with the public order and user-appropriate.  Lata Nott, an expert on free speech, has stated, “If you invite someone to speak on your campus and are a public university, you have to respect their First Amendment rights[.] … That doesn’t mean you can’t put regulations on a speech, like dictating the time, place, venue and suggestions for subject matter.  It just means you can’t do so in a way that discriminates against a certain point of view.”

With this point in mind, it seems strange that no Christian or Jewish organization challenged the State Government of Illinois for allowing this complete mockery of the First Amendment.  It seems certain that the American Center for Law and Justice or the Rutherford Institute or Liberty Counsel would have taken up this fight. 

Hanukkah and Christmas have been celebrated in December for many hundreds of years.  Other religions do not have December events that are this significant, and especially the Satanic Temple, which is not even celebrating an event lifted up in the tenets, practices, or texts of its beliefs.  Therefore, the requirement that its “snake” be displayed alongside a menorah or a creche is wholly bogus.

The word “religion” comes from the Latin word ligare: to join or link, classically understood to mean the linking of human and divine.  There is no linking of the human and divine for the Satanic Temple.  There is no divine or supernatural appeal for the Satanic Temple.  Instead, in its “Canon,” “Satan” is declared a “theological metaphor” for free inquiry.  When they say, “Hail Satan,” they state that they are in effect hailing a metaphor, not a supernatural person.  Ironically, born-again Christians would understand that they are hailing a supernatural being, albeit one defeated by Christ and eternally defeated.  We understand that they are denying the very one they are praising.

In Satanists’ “Seven Fundamental Tenets,” there is not one reference to any supernatural being or to the promulgation of evil.  Rather, true to the biblical definition of Satan as someone who comes (masquerades) as an “angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14), their tenets name their raison d’être as fighting for justice, having control over one’s body (a not so veiled support for abortion), compassion, empathy, reasonableness, conforming with science (climate change acceptance implied), and some tepid thoughts about doing one’s best even though we make mistakes.  Their tenets finish with a call to the Stoic ideal of “nobility in action and thought.”

These platitudes are pap from the lips of the Deceiver.  He is such a deceiver that he does not even claim to be ruler of “principalities and powers” (Ephesians 6:12), but takes a modest backseat as he proclaims himself just another secular humanist.

By failing to constrain the so-called “free speech” of the Satanists, the State of Illinois has increased the likelihood that the American Atheists will have displays alongside Christian and Jewish displays even though, as this article is suggesting, they do not have a legitimate claim to be a religious organization or to offer time-honored celebrations that are as historically significant as those of Christians and Jews.

The battle goes on and must go on.  It is a battle that must continue to be waged in courts and in the public arena.  It is a battle between the spirit of truth of Elijah and the wicked, impotent spirit of the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:20-40).  We must remain alert to areas where the fight has not been waged and follow up.

This writer will send a copy of this article to all three great legal organizations mentioned and encourages the reader to do likewise.

In the Illinois Capitol Rotunda this month, several traditions are being celebrated.  We find a nativity scene for Christmas; a menorah for Hanukkah; and, alongside these displays, an arm holding an apple, with a snake coiled around it.  This snake sculpture is a gift from the Chicago branch of The Satanic Temple.  Called “Snaketivity,” the work also has a sign that reads, “Knowledge Is The Greatest Gift.”

This revolting travesty is a result of decades of decisions pertaining to the non-establishment of religion asserted in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  If a group of people incorporates as a non-for-profit religious organization to worship Medusa with her head covered with snakes, would those people be allowed to have a sculpture of Medusa in the Illinois Capitol?  Looking at her would turn one to stone.  Looking at Snaketivity turns this writer to stone-faced silence and outrage.

Next to these displays is a statement to the effect that “[t]he State of Illinois is required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to allow temporary, public displays in the state capitol[.] … Because the first floor of the Capitol Rotunda is a public place, state officials cannot legally censor the content of speech or displays.  The United States Supreme Court has held that public officials may legally impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions regarding displays and speeches, but no regulation can be based on the content of the speech.”  So, we ask, why did they not impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions?

While speech must be allowed, speech must not necessarily be allowed wherever the speaker wants the speech.  There are rules where public events may be held, and said laws must be consistent with the public order and user-appropriate.  Lata Nott, an expert on free speech, has stated, “If you invite someone to speak on your campus and are a public university, you have to respect their First Amendment rights[.] … That doesn’t mean you can’t put regulations on a speech, like dictating the time, place, venue and suggestions for subject matter.  It just means you can’t do so in a way that discriminates against a certain point of view.”

With this point in mind, it seems strange that no Christian or Jewish organization challenged the State Government of Illinois for allowing this complete mockery of the First Amendment.  It seems certain that the American Center for Law and Justice or the Rutherford Institute or Liberty Counsel would have taken up this fight. 

Hanukkah and Christmas have been celebrated in December for many hundreds of years.  Other religions do not have December events that are this significant, and especially the Satanic Temple, which is not even celebrating an event lifted up in the tenets, practices, or texts of its beliefs.  Therefore, the requirement that its “snake” be displayed alongside a menorah or a creche is wholly bogus.

The word “religion” comes from the Latin word ligare: to join or link, classically understood to mean the linking of human and divine.  There is no linking of the human and divine for the Satanic Temple.  There is no divine or supernatural appeal for the Satanic Temple.  Instead, in its “Canon,” “Satan” is declared a “theological metaphor” for free inquiry.  When they say, “Hail Satan,” they state that they are in effect hailing a metaphor, not a supernatural person.  Ironically, born-again Christians would understand that they are hailing a supernatural being, albeit one defeated by Christ and eternally defeated.  We understand that they are denying the very one they are praising.

In Satanists’ “Seven Fundamental Tenets,” there is not one reference to any supernatural being or to the promulgation of evil.  Rather, true to the biblical definition of Satan as someone who comes (masquerades) as an “angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14), their tenets name their raison d’être as fighting for justice, having control over one’s body (a not so veiled support for abortion), compassion, empathy, reasonableness, conforming with science (climate change acceptance implied), and some tepid thoughts about doing one’s best even though we make mistakes.  Their tenets finish with a call to the Stoic ideal of “nobility in action and thought.”

These platitudes are pap from the lips of the Deceiver.  He is such a deceiver that he does not even claim to be ruler of “principalities and powers” (Ephesians 6:12), but takes a modest backseat as he proclaims himself just another secular humanist.

By failing to constrain the so-called “free speech” of the Satanists, the State of Illinois has increased the likelihood that the American Atheists will have displays alongside Christian and Jewish displays even though, as this article is suggesting, they do not have a legitimate claim to be a religious organization or to offer time-honored celebrations that are as historically significant as those of Christians and Jews.

The battle goes on and must go on.  It is a battle that must continue to be waged in courts and in the public arena.  It is a battle between the spirit of truth of Elijah and the wicked, impotent spirit of the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:20-40).  We must remain alert to areas where the fight has not been waged and follow up.

This writer will send a copy of this article to all three great legal organizations mentioned and encourages the reader to do likewise.

On Jan. 3, 2019, current House Speaker Paul Ryan gets to retire at the ripe old age of 48, but don’t worry – we won’t be done with him at that point. He has many years of lobbying for six or seven figure salaries ahead of him until he is inevitably recycled by the GOP establishment to do what he does best: undermine and sabotage the ‘America First’ agenda of President Donald Trump.

Ryan has done such a poor job that it has become impossible for even the paid sycophants of Conservativism Inc. to whitewash his record. As House Speaker, Ryan failed to fund the border wall, repeal or replace ObamaCare, defund Planned Parenthood, or even curb porous immigration policies. While Trump has used his bully pulpit and executive power unlike any Republican in history to advance his agenda, backup support from the House hasn’t been there. Ryan’s lack of will has even made Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell look meritorious by comparison.

Many of the Republican faith were dumbfounded after last month’s elections when Democrats performed so strongly despite engaging in unprecedented histrionics in the months prior. Republicans have alleged voter fraud, which may have happened in certain areas, but that does not explain the trend as a whole. The fact is that House Republicans underperformed due to the sorry leadership of Ryan. Trump supporters, many of whom hate Republicans and only switched over because of allegiance to the President, thought to themselves, “What difference does it make?” and stayed home despite their hero’s pleading to the otherwise. While Trump’s campaign rhetoric may have been exhilarating, the results have not quite matched up.

Before the crucial election, Trump was working overtime whipping voters into a frenzy, but what was Ryan doing? He was speaking meekly like an intern tasked to bring a legislator his daily cup of taxpayer-funded coffee instead of an true leader of men. When asked about border wall funding, he said: “We’ll figure out how to do it in December. I can’t speak to what the outcomes will be.” So, in other words, let’s put it off until after the election when we aren’t likely have the majority. It is no wonder why conservatives were not enthused to move mountains like they did in 2016 to keep GOP control over the House.

On other meat-and-potatoes issues for conservative voters, Ryan yet again fell way short. When it came time to defund Planned Parenthood, Ryan talked about it in 2017 as if it was a top priority, if not a foregone conclusion. “We think reconciliation is the tool, because that gets it in law,” Ryan said in March of that same year. Only a month later, he refused to defund Planned Parenthood in a deficit-crushing spending bill, supposedly because reconciliation was right around the corner, but it never came. Politico reported this week that supposedly pro-life legislators have given up on the fight during the lame duck session without so much as a peep from the House Speaker about it. These shameless politicians will still use the issue as a political football on the campaign trail next time they want your support though!

Ryan even failed to uphold the most basic of values that he alleges to hold dear. Marketing himself as a free-market conservative who handed out Ayn Rand books to his underlings during the Tea Party era, under his stewardship Congress posted massive deficits rivaling even the most profligate of Barack Obama’s spendthrift years in office. It is hard to believe that Ryan was an incompetent boob, as by every impression, he seems like an astute and capable operative. When it came to policy that the corporate elite favored, such as tax cuts, he jumped into action and achieved immediate results. He never failed to fund the government during the Obama years, despite token opposition. Ryan is likely a hostile actor sent to deceive pro-freedom Republican voters back into supporting the status quo. It would have worked too, zoinks, if not for that meddling Trump!

Conservatives like to say that Obama’s legacy is President Donald Trump, and while that is true to an extent, there is a much deeper truth to be found in that analysis. Trump is the legacy of the entire political class of our time. From the globalist-selected puppet Presidents all the way down to the brown-nosing social-climbing bureaucrats at the lowest of levels, Trump’s election was an indictment of their way of life and their reviled system. Paul Ryan was meant to be a Republican leader for decades — a ‘Young Gun‘ leading a new breed of soulless empty suits repeating corporatist propaganda while selling America to the highest bidder — but the programming did not go as planned. Ryan will leave office in disgrace, deservedly so, and we must remain vigilant to ensure he remains on the outside looking in.

On Jan. 3, 2019, current House Speaker Paul Ryan gets to retire at the ripe old age of 48, but don’t worry – we won’t be done with him at that point. He has many years of lobbying for six or seven figure salaries ahead of him until he is inevitably recycled by the GOP establishment to do what he does best: undermine and sabotage the ‘America First’ agenda of President Donald Trump.

Ryan has done such a poor job that it has become impossible for even the paid sycophants of Conservativism Inc. to whitewash his record. As House Speaker, Ryan failed to fund the border wall, repeal or replace ObamaCare, defund Planned Parenthood, or even curb porous immigration policies. While Trump has used his bully pulpit and executive power unlike any Republican in history to advance his agenda, backup support from the House hasn’t been there. Ryan’s lack of will has even made Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell look meritorious by comparison.

Many of the Republican faith were dumbfounded after last month’s elections when Democrats performed so strongly despite engaging in unprecedented histrionics in the months prior. Republicans have alleged voter fraud, which may have happened in certain areas, but that does not explain the trend as a whole. The fact is that House Republicans underperformed due to the sorry leadership of Ryan. Trump supporters, many of whom hate Republicans and only switched over because of allegiance to the President, thought to themselves, “What difference does it make?” and stayed home despite their hero’s pleading to the otherwise. While Trump’s campaign rhetoric may have been exhilarating, the results have not quite matched up.

Before the crucial election, Trump was working overtime whipping voters into a frenzy, but what was Ryan doing? He was speaking meekly like an intern tasked to bring a legislator his daily cup of taxpayer-funded coffee instead of an true leader of men. When asked about border wall funding, he said: “We’ll figure out how to do it in December. I can’t speak to what the outcomes will be.” So, in other words, let’s put it off until after the election when we aren’t likely have the majority. It is no wonder why conservatives were not enthused to move mountains like they did in 2016 to keep GOP control over the House.

On other meat-and-potatoes issues for conservative voters, Ryan yet again fell way short. When it came time to defund Planned Parenthood, Ryan talked about it in 2017 as if it was a top priority, if not a foregone conclusion. “We think reconciliation is the tool, because that gets it in law,” Ryan said in March of that same year. Only a month later, he refused to defund Planned Parenthood in a deficit-crushing spending bill, supposedly because reconciliation was right around the corner, but it never came. Politico reported this week that supposedly pro-life legislators have given up on the fight during the lame duck session without so much as a peep from the House Speaker about it. These shameless politicians will still use the issue as a political football on the campaign trail next time they want your support though!

Ryan even failed to uphold the most basic of values that he alleges to hold dear. Marketing himself as a free-market conservative who handed out Ayn Rand books to his underlings during the Tea Party era, under his stewardship Congress posted massive deficits rivaling even the most profligate of Barack Obama’s spendthrift years in office. It is hard to believe that Ryan was an incompetent boob, as by every impression, he seems like an astute and capable operative. When it came to policy that the corporate elite favored, such as tax cuts, he jumped into action and achieved immediate results. He never failed to fund the government during the Obama years, despite token opposition. Ryan is likely a hostile actor sent to deceive pro-freedom Republican voters back into supporting the status quo. It would have worked too, zoinks, if not for that meddling Trump!

Conservatives like to say that Obama’s legacy is President Donald Trump, and while that is true to an extent, there is a much deeper truth to be found in that analysis. Trump is the legacy of the entire political class of our time. From the globalist-selected puppet Presidents all the way down to the brown-nosing social-climbing bureaucrats at the lowest of levels, Trump’s election was an indictment of their way of life and their reviled system. Paul Ryan was meant to be a Republican leader for decades — a ‘Young Gun‘ leading a new breed of soulless empty suits repeating corporatist propaganda while selling America to the highest bidder — but the programming did not go as planned. Ryan will leave office in disgrace, deservedly so, and we must remain vigilant to ensure he remains on the outside looking in.

When Donald Trump was running for office, he raised the issue of fraudulent votes. As with everything else Trump has said, it was instantly attacked and ridiculed by the media. Since then, the idea has been dismissed by MSM journalists who have insisted that there have not been any cases of illegal voting.

Recently, though, the novel possibility of fraudulent votes in favor of a Republican candidate has made the MSM do a 180^o while reiterating that such things have never happened favoring Democratic candidates. As with many other topics, MSM journalists have blatantly lied. Here are a few recent instances of illegal voting:

• In 2014, NBC found dozens of illegal aliens voting in Florida.
• In Kansas, Victor David Garcia Bebek, a Peruvian national, voted in 2012 and 2014.
• In November 2016, there were 6,540 same-day registrants in New Hampshire who registered to vote in New Hampshire using out-of-state driver’s licenses to prove their identity.
• In Sacramento, California, two illegal aliens voted five times in 2016.
• The Public Interest Legal Foundation found over a thousand persons who voted illegally in Virginia.
• In Cincinnati, a poll worker found her dead neighbor’s name on an active voter registry.
• In Maryland, several Democratic city governments are allowing noncitizens to fraudulently vote in elections.
• In Ft. Worth, Leticia Sanchez formed a mail-in voter fraud ring, which included helping a blind voter. Just prior to being arrested, she warned her minions that a group of “malicious people” were investigating.
• Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes refused to turn over voting records on the counting and collection of ballots, despite the law saying she had to. There were many irregularities in that 2018 election, such as there being more voters on rolls than actual citizens. s Some 80,000 individuals filled out blank voting forms. Broward County has seen past instances of voter fraud, always in favor of Democrats, the key being absentee ballots. “Irregularities” also occurred in Santa Rosa, Citrus, and Okaloosa counties. To date, no one has been arrested.
• California turned solid blue in 2018, thanks partly to fraud through “ballot harvesting.”
• Nine Mexican-Americans were caught in Edinburg, Texas for engaging in voter fraud.
• Elsewhere in Texas, the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), alerted district attorneys in Starr and Hidalgo Counties about altered voter applications sent by the Texas Democratic Party to South Texas noncitizens.
• Again in Texas, Marcela Gutierrez, a noncitizen, was indicted by a Hidalgo County for marking a ballot without a voter’s consent in a 2016 election.
• More than 4,500 ballots were cast in Milwaukee than registered voters in the 2018 election.
• In North Carolina, 24 illegal aliens were caught voting in the 2016 elections. 19 foreign nationals were also charged.
• “The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a nonprofit specializing in election integrity, found that non-Americans are being added to voter rolls in states such as Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Virginia. The group says that a large portion of the non-citizens even managed to cast their ballots in elections as well. For instance, in 2017, the group found that nearly 5,600 people on the voter rolls in Virginia were deemed as non-citizens, with a third of them voting in previous elections.”
• This summer, 19 noncitizens were indicted for voting in the 2016 election.
• More than 3,000 foreign nationals were removed from voter rolls across 13 sanctuary jurisdictions from 2006 to 2018, most of them in Virginia.
• In 2016, North Carolina saw hundreds of instances of double voting, voter impersonation, and noncitizen voting.
• Bexar County in Texas, which contains San Antonio, concealed records of noncitizen voting.
• Meantime, nearby Harris County (Houston), refused to allow inspection of voter rolls.
• Charges of election fraud and fraudulent application for ballot by mail were leveled at Erika Lozano-Pelayo of Starr County is located west of McAllen, Texas. Starr County is one of 13 counties reporting more than 100% voter registration. At the same time, Ernestina Barron was arrested on three counts of election fraud, and three counts of a fraudulent application for ballot by mail.
• 5,500 noncitizens discovered on Virginia voter rolls.
• In 2015, 141 U.S. counties were found to have more registered voters than people.
• 7.2 million voters are registered in multiple states.
• In 2016, in Marion County, Indiana, 12 employees of a Democratic-linked voter recruitment organization were caught submitting fake voter registration applications.
•  Rhode Island was found to have 150,000 names in voter rolls which should not have been there.
• A 2017 report showed that at minimum, there were 45,000 duplicate voters in 2016.
• The Public Interest Legal Foundation reported that there are more than 100,000 non-U.S. citizens are registered voters in Pennsylvania.
• In 2018, California’s DMV admitted registering 1,500 foreigners to vote in U.S. elections.
• Habersham County, Georgia’s Mud Creek precinct had 276 registered voters, yet 670 votes were cast in a May 2018 primary.
• In 2018, a volunteer for the Beto campaign urged followers to transport undocumented aliens to the polls.
• Again in 2018 in California, there were 23,000 California DMV voter-registration failures.
• In 2018, a number of Democratic-controlled cities (San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, and others) opened up voting rights to illegal aliens. In fact, San Francisco spent $385,000 to help 61 noncitizens vote illegally.
• The gadfly Project Veritas filmed a Hispanic poll voter telling someone to bring in illegals to vote. The individual has not been arrested.
• And speaking of being filmed, Florida Democratic Party attorney Leonard Samuels, declared that destroying ballots is not fraud.
• In 2017, Jonathan Marks, commissioner for Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Commissions, Elections, and Legislation, confirmed that noncitizens had voted hundreds of times in elections.
• In 2010, two Democratic officials in Michigan, Jason Bauer and Mike McGuinness, conspired to defraud the election. They were given a slap on the wrist when caught.
• In California, 194 people voted more than once in the 2016 presidential primary. None were arrested.
• In Hialeah in 2012, Deisy Penton de Cabrera was found with numerous ballots that didn’t belong to her. The ballots she had belonged to elderly people, most of whom were blind, deaf, or had Alzheimer’s.
• In Arkansas, Former Democratic State Rep. Hudson Hallum, his father, and a few campaign workers altered ballots and were caught and arrested.
• The Los Angeles County Registrar dismissed accusations of ballot miscounting in the 2018 election.

Keep in mind also that these are just a tiny portion of detected transgressions. How many more illegal acts have occurred that have gone unnoticed? After all, voting illegally is child’s play, with no checks and balances and a minimum of negative repercussions. Since Republican voters are almost always the victim and the Republican Party is without doubt the Stupid Party, this stomach-churning travesty will continue.

When Donald Trump was running for office, he raised the issue of fraudulent votes. As with everything else Trump has said, it was instantly attacked and ridiculed by the media. Since then, the idea has been dismissed by MSM journalists who have insisted that there have not been any cases of illegal voting.

Recently, though, the novel possibility of fraudulent votes in favor of a Republican candidate has made the MSM do a 180^o while reiterating that such things have never happened favoring Democratic candidates. As with many other topics, MSM journalists have blatantly lied. Here are a few recent instances of illegal voting:

• In 2014, NBC found dozens of illegal aliens voting in Florida.
• In Kansas, Victor David Garcia Bebek, a Peruvian national, voted in 2012 and 2014.
• In November 2016, there were 6,540 same-day registrants in New Hampshire who registered to vote in New Hampshire using out-of-state driver’s licenses to prove their identity.
• In Sacramento, California, two illegal aliens voted five times in 2016.
• The Public Interest Legal Foundation found over a thousand persons who voted illegally in Virginia.
• In Cincinnati, a poll worker found her dead neighbor’s name on an active voter registry.
• In Maryland, several Democratic city governments are allowing noncitizens to fraudulently vote in elections.
• In Ft. Worth, Leticia Sanchez formed a mail-in voter fraud ring, which included helping a blind voter. Just prior to being arrested, she warned her minions that a group of “malicious people” were investigating.
• Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes refused to turn over voting records on the counting and collection of ballots, despite the law saying she had to. There were many irregularities in that 2018 election, such as there being more voters on rolls than actual citizens. s Some 80,000 individuals filled out blank voting forms. Broward County has seen past instances of voter fraud, always in favor of Democrats, the key being absentee ballots. “Irregularities” also occurred in Santa Rosa, Citrus, and Okaloosa counties. To date, no one has been arrested.
• California turned solid blue in 2018, thanks partly to fraud through “ballot harvesting.”
• Nine Mexican-Americans were caught in Edinburg, Texas for engaging in voter fraud.
• Elsewhere in Texas, the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), alerted district attorneys in Starr and Hidalgo Counties about altered voter applications sent by the Texas Democratic Party to South Texas noncitizens.
• Again in Texas, Marcela Gutierrez, a noncitizen, was indicted by a Hidalgo County for marking a ballot without a voter’s consent in a 2016 election.
• More than 4,500 ballots were cast in Milwaukee than registered voters in the 2018 election.
• In North Carolina, 24 illegal aliens were caught voting in the 2016 elections. 19 foreign nationals were also charged.
• “The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a nonprofit specializing in election integrity, found that non-Americans are being added to voter rolls in states such as Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Virginia. The group says that a large portion of the non-citizens even managed to cast their ballots in elections as well. For instance, in 2017, the group found that nearly 5,600 people on the voter rolls in Virginia were deemed as non-citizens, with a third of them voting in previous elections.”
• This summer, 19 noncitizens were indicted for voting in the 2016 election.
• More than 3,000 foreign nationals were removed from voter rolls across 13 sanctuary jurisdictions from 2006 to 2018, most of them in Virginia.
• In 2016, North Carolina saw hundreds of instances of double voting, voter impersonation, and noncitizen voting.
• Bexar County in Texas, which contains San Antonio, concealed records of noncitizen voting.
• Meantime, nearby Harris County (Houston), refused to allow inspection of voter rolls.
• Charges of election fraud and fraudulent application for ballot by mail were leveled at Erika Lozano-Pelayo of Starr County is located west of McAllen, Texas. Starr County is one of 13 counties reporting more than 100% voter registration. At the same time, Ernestina Barron was arrested on three counts of election fraud, and three counts of a fraudulent application for ballot by mail.
• 5,500 noncitizens discovered on Virginia voter rolls.
• In 2015, 141 U.S. counties were found to have more registered voters than people.
• 7.2 million voters are registered in multiple states.
• In 2016, in Marion County, Indiana, 12 employees of a Democratic-linked voter recruitment organization were caught submitting fake voter registration applications.
•  Rhode Island was found to have 150,000 names in voter rolls which should not have been there.
• A 2017 report showed that at minimum, there were 45,000 duplicate voters in 2016.
• The Public Interest Legal Foundation reported that there are more than 100,000 non-U.S. citizens are registered voters in Pennsylvania.
• In 2018, California’s DMV admitted registering 1,500 foreigners to vote in U.S. elections.
• Habersham County, Georgia’s Mud Creek precinct had 276 registered voters, yet 670 votes were cast in a May 2018 primary.
• In 2018, a volunteer for the Beto campaign urged followers to transport undocumented aliens to the polls.
• Again in 2018 in California, there were 23,000 California DMV voter-registration failures.
• In 2018, a number of Democratic-controlled cities (San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, and others) opened up voting rights to illegal aliens. In fact, San Francisco spent $385,000 to help 61 noncitizens vote illegally.
• The gadfly Project Veritas filmed a Hispanic poll voter telling someone to bring in illegals to vote. The individual has not been arrested.
• And speaking of being filmed, Florida Democratic Party attorney Leonard Samuels, declared that destroying ballots is not fraud.
• In 2017, Jonathan Marks, commissioner for Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Commissions, Elections, and Legislation, confirmed that noncitizens had voted hundreds of times in elections.
• In 2010, two Democratic officials in Michigan, Jason Bauer and Mike McGuinness, conspired to defraud the election. They were given a slap on the wrist when caught.
• In California, 194 people voted more than once in the 2016 presidential primary. None were arrested.
• In Hialeah in 2012, Deisy Penton de Cabrera was found with numerous ballots that didn’t belong to her. The ballots she had belonged to elderly people, most of whom were blind, deaf, or had Alzheimer’s.
• In Arkansas, Former Democratic State Rep. Hudson Hallum, his father, and a few campaign workers altered ballots and were caught and arrested.
• The Los Angeles County Registrar dismissed accusations of ballot miscounting in the 2018 election.

Keep in mind also that these are just a tiny portion of detected transgressions. How many more illegal acts have occurred that have gone unnoticed? After all, voting illegally is child’s play, with no checks and balances and a minimum of negative repercussions. Since Republican voters are almost always the victim and the Republican Party is without doubt the Stupid Party, this stomach-churning travesty will continue.

The press and its Deep State allies are all down in the weeds of high-school-style politics, their crocodile tears glistening as they lament President Trump’s supposed inability to get anyone to serve as his chief of staff. Here’s the flavor from Business Insider:

Following multiple rejections this week from candidates who were on his short list — including former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff Nick Ayers — Trump became agitated by the news reports that painted an unflattering picture of what was supposed to be a highly sought-after job, the senior White House official reportedly said.

Vice President Pence’s chief of staff, Nick Ayers, didn’t want the job. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie didn’t want the job. Like either of those guys would be the right man for the job, what with Ayers’ family obligations as the father of little kids, and Christie, well, because he is self-serving Chris Christie. I wouldn’t trust the latter with a barge pole in even the shallowest swamp.

Enter Mick Mulvaney, brightest star of the Trump administration, and up till now the chief of the Office of Management and Budget as well as the director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, a man of zero scandals, the competence to run two tough green-eyeshade federal agencies at once, a toughness that can stand up to Deep State, and most important, the fight in him to crush leftists. Mulvaney and Trump see eye to eye on the issues, and know that the economy is Trump’s hole in one.

Home run. Trump picking this guy is just plain winning.

Because here’s what we have seen of Mulvaney so far. I checked what I have written about him earlier and the man just stands out.

Here, he’s giving Senator and fake Indian Elizabeth Warren a taste of her own lefty whitebread cooking on consumer finance and politics.

Here, he’s positively barbecuing rabid leftwing economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on a spit over economics of all things, with this smackdown.

Here, he’s effectively shaking sense in to the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, which had rapidly descended into a shakedown racket under the Obama Nightmare.

Someone like this just plain rocks.

And of course, the left and its media echo chamber is scared.

Here’s the Daily Beast digging up old dead cats about something Mulvaney said in the heat of the election two years ago. As if something as ephemeral as that that would outweigh Mulvaney’s stellar performance, and President Trump’s delight at his success.

Grow up, bozos, Trump is an adult. And so is Mulvaney. The two know it and now they get along fine.

The remarks are triggering speculation that Mulvaney is only in the job for the short run because he supposedly hates Trump, which is nonsense. I think Mulvaney is keeping his tenure potentially short as acting director because he’s one of those green eyeshade guys who loves crunching the numbers more than anything at the Office of Management and Budget. Some people are like that, and Mulvaney has been exceptionally successful at it. Successful people always like to keep doing what they are good at. Mulvaney may be having doubts about whether he can be as effective at the extremely difficult task of serving as President Trump’s chief of staff, which will involved doing a lot of people work, including massaging egos and keeping peace, and keeping leaks at bay. And to be fair, Trump probably isn’t the easiest guy to work with, given his impulsiveness. But Trump likes and admires talent, he recognizes it well, and he’s all about results. That’s a bill Mulvaney can handle, given his record.

For us, the American people, it’s good that he’s not completely resigning his Budget job, given that we want someone hypercompetent in it as he is. We also want someone like him at CFPB, although that job has already been turned over, hopefully to someone competent. The only thing we worry about is that the talent might not be there in those offices if Mulvaney leaves.

That’s a small thing, given that chief of staff is a critical and visible position. We can count ourselves lucky that Mulvaney is doing that job now, serving all of us. Go, Mick!

The press and its Deep State allies are all down in the weeds of high-school-style politics, their crocodile tears glistening as they lament President Trump’s supposed inability to get anyone to serve as his chief of staff. Here’s the flavor from Business Insider:

Following multiple rejections this week from candidates who were on his short list — including former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff Nick Ayers — Trump became agitated by the news reports that painted an unflattering picture of what was supposed to be a highly sought-after job, the senior White House official reportedly said.

Vice President Pence’s chief of staff, Nick Ayers, didn’t want the job. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie didn’t want the job. Like either of those guys would be the right man for the job, what with Ayers’ family obligations as the father of little kids, and Christie, well, because he is self-serving Chris Christie. I wouldn’t trust the latter with a barge pole in even the shallowest swamp.

Enter Mick Mulvaney, brightest star of the Trump administration, and up till now the chief of the Office of Management and Budget as well as the director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, a man of zero scandals, the competence to run two tough green-eyeshade federal agencies at once, a toughness that can stand up to Deep State, and most important, the fight in him to crush leftists. Mulvaney and Trump see eye to eye on the issues, and know that the economy is Trump’s hole in one.

Home run. Trump picking this guy is just plain winning.

Because here’s what we have seen of Mulvaney so far. I checked what I have written about him earlier and the man just stands out.

Here, he’s giving Senator and fake Indian Elizabeth Warren a taste of her own lefty whitebread cooking on consumer finance and politics.

Here, he’s positively barbecuing rabid leftwing economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on a spit over economics of all things, with this smackdown.

Here, he’s effectively shaking sense in to the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, which had rapidly descended into a shakedown racket under the Obama Nightmare.

Someone like this just plain rocks.

And of course, the left and its media echo chamber is scared.

Here’s the Daily Beast digging up old dead cats about something Mulvaney said in the heat of the election two years ago. As if something as ephemeral as that that would outweigh Mulvaney’s stellar performance, and President Trump’s delight at his success.

Grow up, bozos, Trump is an adult. And so is Mulvaney. The two know it and now they get along fine.

The remarks are triggering speculation that Mulvaney is only in the job for the short run because he supposedly hates Trump, which is nonsense. I think Mulvaney is keeping his tenure potentially short as acting director because he’s one of those green eyeshade guys who loves crunching the numbers more than anything at the Office of Management and Budget. Some people are like that, and Mulvaney has been exceptionally successful at it. Successful people always like to keep doing what they are good at. Mulvaney may be having doubts about whether he can be as effective at the extremely difficult task of serving as President Trump’s chief of staff, which will involved doing a lot of people work, including massaging egos and keeping peace, and keeping leaks at bay. And to be fair, Trump probably isn’t the easiest guy to work with, given his impulsiveness. But Trump likes and admires talent, he recognizes it well, and he’s all about results. That’s a bill Mulvaney can handle, given his record.

For us, the American people, it’s good that he’s not completely resigning his Budget job, given that we want someone hypercompetent in it as he is. We also want someone like him at CFPB, although that job has already been turned over, hopefully to someone competent. The only thing we worry about is that the talent might not be there in those offices if Mulvaney leaves.

That’s a small thing, given that chief of staff is a critical and visible position. We can count ourselves lucky that Mulvaney is doing that job now, serving all of us. Go, Mick!

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that, due to changes in tax law last year that repealed the individual mandate to buy Obamacare insurance, the entire Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.

The bombshell ruling by Judge Reed O’Connor will be appealed and Obamacare will remain in effect during that process.

The Hill:

President Trump took to Twitter on Friday night to tout the judge’s ruling while calling on congressional leaders to work on a new law, despite the chances of Congress passing a replacement law that both parties can agree being essentially zero.

“Now Congress must pass a STRONG law that provides GREAT healthcare and protects pre-existing conditions. Mitch and Nancy, get it done!” Trump tweeted, referring to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and expected incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

O’Connor, an appointee of President George W. Bush, acknowledged in his ruling that health care is a “politically charged affair — inflaming emotions and testing civility.”

But he added courts “are not tasked with, nor are they suited to, policymaking.” Instead, he said they must determine what the Constitution requires. In this, case O’Connor said the Constitution does not allow the mandate to stand.

The 2012 Supreme Court ruling declared the mandate was a tax. But last year, Congress repealed the penalty for not buying insurance. The judge ruled that this means that the mandate is no longer a tax, and since the mandate cannot be separated from the entire ACA, the law itself is unconstitutional.

Legal experts in both parties have denounced that argument, saying it is obvious that Congress wanted the rest of the Affordable Care Act to remain when it repealed only the mandate penalty last year.

Democrats accused the judge of waiting until after the election to issue the ruling, saying he knew striking down the law before the election would harm Republicans.

The court case, brought by 20 GOP-led states, was at the center of this year’s campaign after Democrats attacked Republicans for supporting the lawsuit and seeking to overturn ObamaCare’s protections for pre-existing conditions.

The Trump administration, in a rare move, declined to defend the law in court and instead argued the pre-existing condition protections should be overturned.

Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, wrote on Twitter Friday night that he thinks the ruling does not prevent the Affordable Care Act from remaining in effect while the appeals process plays out, because there is no injunction from the court.

“Everyone should remain calm,” he wrote. 

The decision is an outlier, but gives Congress an opportunity to redraw the entire ACA – without the insurance mandate or mandatory coverages that make policies so expensive. There is bi-partisan sentiment to save the pre-existing conditions mandate, but beyond that, there is little the two sides agree upon.

From what we’ve seen over the years from the federal courts, this decision is likely to be reversed. But it is still an important statement that upholds constitutional principles – something that should have happened in 2012 when Chief Justice John Roberts inexplicably sided with liberal judges in upholding the mandate. 

I can’t think of a government program that has failed so spectacularly to live up to the promises made by its supporters in congress and the White House. But courts can’t overturn a law based on how many lies were told to get it passed in the first place. Despite the ruling yesterday, we are likely to see Democrats try to “fix” Obamacare when they take power in the House in January. They may very well attempt to pass some form of “Medicare for All,” which would cost $32 trillion over 10 years. Now, more than ever, the power grab by the federal government to take over private health insurance has to be stopped before the US healthcare industry is destroyed. 

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that, due to changes in tax law last year that repealed the individual mandate to buy Obamacare insurance, the entire Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.

The bombshell ruling by Judge Reed O’Connor will be appealed and Obamacare will remain in effect during that process.

The Hill:

President Trump took to Twitter on Friday night to tout the judge’s ruling while calling on congressional leaders to work on a new law, despite the chances of Congress passing a replacement law that both parties can agree being essentially zero.

“Now Congress must pass a STRONG law that provides GREAT healthcare and protects pre-existing conditions. Mitch and Nancy, get it done!” Trump tweeted, referring to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and expected incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

O’Connor, an appointee of President George W. Bush, acknowledged in his ruling that health care is a “politically charged affair — inflaming emotions and testing civility.”

But he added courts “are not tasked with, nor are they suited to, policymaking.” Instead, he said they must determine what the Constitution requires. In this, case O’Connor said the Constitution does not allow the mandate to stand.

The 2012 Supreme Court ruling declared the mandate was a tax. But last year, Congress repealed the penalty for not buying insurance. The judge ruled that this means that the mandate is no longer a tax, and since the mandate cannot be separated from the entire ACA, the law itself is unconstitutional.

Legal experts in both parties have denounced that argument, saying it is obvious that Congress wanted the rest of the Affordable Care Act to remain when it repealed only the mandate penalty last year.

Democrats accused the judge of waiting until after the election to issue the ruling, saying he knew striking down the law before the election would harm Republicans.

The court case, brought by 20 GOP-led states, was at the center of this year’s campaign after Democrats attacked Republicans for supporting the lawsuit and seeking to overturn ObamaCare’s protections for pre-existing conditions.

The Trump administration, in a rare move, declined to defend the law in court and instead argued the pre-existing condition protections should be overturned.

Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, wrote on Twitter Friday night that he thinks the ruling does not prevent the Affordable Care Act from remaining in effect while the appeals process plays out, because there is no injunction from the court.

“Everyone should remain calm,” he wrote. 

The decision is an outlier, but gives Congress an opportunity to redraw the entire ACA – without the insurance mandate or mandatory coverages that make policies so expensive. There is bi-partisan sentiment to save the pre-existing conditions mandate, but beyond that, there is little the two sides agree upon.

From what we’ve seen over the years from the federal courts, this decision is likely to be reversed. But it is still an important statement that upholds constitutional principles – something that should have happened in 2012 when Chief Justice John Roberts inexplicably sided with liberal judges in upholding the mandate. 

I can’t think of a government program that has failed so spectacularly to live up to the promises made by its supporters in congress and the White House. But courts can’t overturn a law based on how many lies were told to get it passed in the first place. Despite the ruling yesterday, we are likely to see Democrats try to “fix” Obamacare when they take power in the House in January. They may very well attempt to pass some form of “Medicare for All,” which would cost $32 trillion over 10 years. Now, more than ever, the power grab by the federal government to take over private health insurance has to be stopped before the US healthcare industry is destroyed. 

A seven-year-old migrant child died of shock and dehydration in Border Patrol custody last Dec. 6, and already the left is after them. The Washington Post (hat tip: Daily Caller) reports:

The child’s death is likely to intensify scrutiny of detention conditions at Border Patrol stations and CBP facilities that are increasingly overwhelmed by large numbers of families seeking asylum in the United States.

…and…

The ACLU blamed “lack of accountability, and a culture of cruelty within CBP” for the girl’s death. “The fact that it took a week for this to come to light shows the need for transparency for CBP. We call for a rigorous investigation into how this tragedy happened and serious reforms to prevent future deaths,” Cynthia Pompa, advocacy manager for the ACLU Border Rights Center, said in a statement.

Oh, what garbage. Next up, a $40 million lawsuit and some kind of taxpayer payout.

What’s obnoxious here is the left’s quickness to blame the Border Patrol for the actions of her father, dragging a seven-year-old through one of the world’s most hostile deserts like that, and using her as a human shield to avoid immigrant detention and to partake in ‘catch and release.’ The father was traveling with a group of 163 illegals and their human-smuggler escort who broke into the U.S. unvetted and without authorization and turned themselves into the lawmen in order to claim zero-fee asylum on the spot with them, playing the migrant game. Either they would get it or they wouldn’t get it, but the honorable-mention prize for the father if he didn’t would be to get several free years to work in the U.S. and send remittances back home before the likely deportation. And what did he bring here? Zero skills, no education, not even the Spanish language, let alone English, and an appetite for all that free stuff the gringos hand out.

With a prize like that on offer, yes, there are a certain number of people who would risk their children’s lives with human smugglers through one of the world’s most dangerous and remote deserts, which is what went down.

If an American did that, he would be charged with child abuse, and quite a few of them already have been. But break the law for entry and somehow, the Border Patrol is the bad guy.

That would be the same Border Patrol that tried to save the child, offering her food and water as she apparently seemed in decent health, with her father saying nothing to help them figure out what was going on. It’s quite possible he didn’t know what was going on, either, some of these people have amazingly weak parenting skills. Once, when I was in Los Angeles, a non-English-speaking group of likely illegal Salvadorans spilled hot chocolate all over one of their toddlers at a Starbucks and didn’t seem to understand that hielo was what she needed to avoid permanent burns. I saw that scalding hot chocolate go all over the child’s delicate skin and was horrified more by that than by the toddler’s screams of pain. And they just kept trying to shut her up as she screamed. I had to get up and tell them that hielo was muy necesario right now and went to the barista to insist that she give us some, and then had to show the Salvadoran dad how to put it on the screaming child until she was able to calm herself. I suspect the father of this now-deceased child didn’t know much about a seven-year-old’s need for basic hydration.

Over here, that would be child abuse, and some version of a child protective services agency would be all over any American who dragged his kid through a dangerous desert, ruling such a person an unfit parent and taking the child away.

But here the ‘narrative’ is to blame the lawmen, and probably sue for big bucks. One set of laws for them, one set for us, got it.

And it also highlights the need for a border wall, something Congress refuses to fund, even as kids with parents who game the system and use its incentives, put those incentives above the lives of their kids. What the left, of course, wants, is completely open borders with no enforcement whatsoever.

It highlights is that illegal immigrants are a sort of doll-toy for the left, easily manipulated in any direction by leftwingers, yet with nothing expected of them in return. Normal people expect normal parents to treat their children humanely. Nobody takes their seven-year-old into the dirty, dangerous, remote desert. Normal people alert lawmen that their children are in distress in order to get them some water or whatever it is they need. Normal people know where they are going and know the customs of the country where they are headed, particularly if they have kids. Yet according to this press and activist narrative, it’s always O.K. when the illegals do it. Had the father stayed in Mexico, the Mexicans would have provided for him – as they have shown they are willing to do with the caravan migrants of Tijuana. He ignored that just because he didn’t want to wait his turn in line. Which raises questions again about his decision to take his little one through the desert in the hands of human smuggling profiteers who just dumped them into the remote New Mexico panhandle to await the free care and treatment of the lawmen, who frankly, have another job to do.

Someone needs to be arrested for child abuse in this case and it’s not the Border Patrol.

A seven-year-old migrant child died of shock and dehydration in Border Patrol custody last Dec. 6, and already the left is after them. The Washington Post (hat tip: Daily Caller) reports:

The child’s death is likely to intensify scrutiny of detention conditions at Border Patrol stations and CBP facilities that are increasingly overwhelmed by large numbers of families seeking asylum in the United States.

…and…

The ACLU blamed “lack of accountability, and a culture of cruelty within CBP” for the girl’s death. “The fact that it took a week for this to come to light shows the need for transparency for CBP. We call for a rigorous investigation into how this tragedy happened and serious reforms to prevent future deaths,” Cynthia Pompa, advocacy manager for the ACLU Border Rights Center, said in a statement.

Oh, what garbage. Next up, a $40 million lawsuit and some kind of taxpayer payout.

What’s obnoxious here is the left’s quickness to blame the Border Patrol for the actions of her father, dragging a seven-year-old through one of the world’s most hostile deserts like that, and using her as a human shield to avoid immigrant detention and to partake in ‘catch and release.’ The father was traveling with a group of 163 illegals and their human-smuggler escort who broke into the U.S. unvetted and without authorization and turned themselves into the lawmen in order to claim zero-fee asylum on the spot with them, playing the migrant game. Either they would get it or they wouldn’t get it, but the honorable-mention prize for the father if he didn’t would be to get several free years to work in the U.S. and send remittances back home before the likely deportation. And what did he bring here? Zero skills, no education, not even the Spanish language, let alone English, and an appetite for all that free stuff the gringos hand out.

With a prize like that on offer, yes, there are a certain number of people who would risk their children’s lives with human smugglers through one of the world’s most dangerous and remote deserts, which is what went down.

If an American did that, he would be charged with child abuse, and quite a few of them already have been. But break the law for entry and somehow, the Border Patrol is the bad guy.

That would be the same Border Patrol that tried to save the child, offering her food and water as she apparently seemed in decent health, with her father saying nothing to help them figure out what was going on. It’s quite possible he didn’t know what was going on, either, some of these people have amazingly weak parenting skills. Once, when I was in Los Angeles, a non-English-speaking group of likely illegal Salvadorans spilled hot chocolate all over one of their toddlers at a Starbucks and didn’t seem to understand that hielo was what she needed to avoid permanent burns. I saw that scalding hot chocolate go all over the child’s delicate skin and was horrified more by that than by the toddler’s screams of pain. And they just kept trying to shut her up as she screamed. I had to get up and tell them that hielo was muy necesario right now and went to the barista to insist that she give us some, and then had to show the Salvadoran dad how to put it on the screaming child until she was able to calm herself. I suspect the father of this now-deceased child didn’t know much about a seven-year-old’s need for basic hydration.

Over here, that would be child abuse, and some version of a child protective services agency would be all over any American who dragged his kid through a dangerous desert, ruling such a person an unfit parent and taking the child away.

But here the ‘narrative’ is to blame the lawmen, and probably sue for big bucks. One set of laws for them, one set for us, got it.

And it also highlights the need for a border wall, something Congress refuses to fund, even as kids with parents who game the system and use its incentives, put those incentives above the lives of their kids. What the left, of course, wants, is completely open borders with no enforcement whatsoever.

It highlights is that illegal immigrants are a sort of doll-toy for the left, easily manipulated in any direction by leftwingers, yet with nothing expected of them in return. Normal people expect normal parents to treat their children humanely. Nobody takes their seven-year-old into the dirty, dangerous, remote desert. Normal people alert lawmen that their children are in distress in order to get them some water or whatever it is they need. Normal people know where they are going and know the customs of the country where they are headed, particularly if they have kids. Yet according to this press and activist narrative, it’s always O.K. when the illegals do it. Had the father stayed in Mexico, the Mexicans would have provided for him – as they have shown they are willing to do with the caravan migrants of Tijuana. He ignored that just because he didn’t want to wait his turn in line. Which raises questions again about his decision to take his little one through the desert in the hands of human smuggling profiteers who just dumped them into the remote New Mexico panhandle to await the free care and treatment of the lawmen, who frankly, have another job to do.

Someone needs to be arrested for child abuse in this case and it’s not the Border Patrol.