The Front Page Cover
The Events of the Week -- Featuring:
Thank God for Harry dinky-Reid
by Charles Krauthammer
.
Canada’s Surrender toIslamic Blasphemy Laws?
by Truth Revolt
{truthrevolt.org} ~ This new special edition of The Glazov Gang was joined by Christine Williams, an award-winning journalist and a columnist at JihadWatch.org... Christine discussed Canada’s Surrender to Islamic Blasphemy Laws?, and she asks: Why exactly is the Canadian Parliament moving Canada toward Sharia? http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/glazov-gang-canadas-surrender-islamic-blasphemy-laws
.
Texas Governor Abbott Drops Hammer
On Sanctuary Sheriff, Cities
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ Texas Governor Gregg Abbott is doing more than putting his foot down on sanctuary cities in the State of Texas, he says, “I’m putting the hammer down. This is offensive, what’s going on in Austin, Texas, it’s actually the county, which is Travis County, which is the county seat of Austin, Texas... Travis County has declared what I call sanctuary city policies.” Abbott elaborates on just what sanctuary policies in Austin will be, saying, “They are no longer going to hold for ICE detainers certain criminals who are, in fact criminals, they’ve been arrested before for very serious crimes. They could have been arrested before for armed robbery or working with drug cartels or all kinds of very dangerous crimes. And the sheriff is going to let them back out onto the street without letting ICE know anything about it. That is breaching her oath of office, it is breaching the rule of law, Texas is not going to stand for it.” “What I’ve done,” says Abbott, “is withheld $1.5 million dollars in governor grants to Travis County and I’m seeking legislation we’re working on it, passed out of the Senate committee yesterday, that is going to really put the hammer down on any sanctuary city policy... http://rickwells.us/texas-governor-abbott-drops-hammer-sanctuary-sheriff-cities/
.
liar-nObama Loyalists, Elites
Working From Within Against President Trump
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ Lou Dobbs has a few thoughts on “the forces at work against President Trump, his administration and his anti-establishment populist agenda. President Trump won the presidency with his populist campaign against the establishment, against the elites... While he was underestimated as a candidate, however, the establishment is lashing out now against President Trump from every quarter almost daily.” Dobbs says, “The President accuses holdover “liar-nObama people” of being responsible for leaks to the press about his White House calls with foreign leaders, saying, ‘It’s a disgrace they leak because it’s very much against our country. It’s a very dangerous thing for this country.’ The sources of those leaks may indeed be former officials, perhaps someone else, but they are clearly pro-establishment and anti-Trump.” Sarcastically, Dobbs points out, “That narrows the suspects down to just government or business or political or academia suspects, all the establishment forces that are arrayed against our populist President and the tens of millions of Americans who voted for him. Lugubrious leftists including John hanoi-Kerry, Susan Rice, Janet Napolitano adding their names to a joint declaration with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal against the President’s extreme vetting order.”... http://rickwells.us/dobbs-obama-loyalists-elites-working-within-against-president-trump/
.
Chuck Schumer’s Hypocrisy
on Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee
by Curt Levey
{dailysignal.com} ~ This weekend, President Donald Trump criticized U.S. District Judge James Robart for his halt of the president’s immigration order—a ruling issued without any accompanying legal analysis... Now, key Senate Democrats are threatening to use the remark against Judge Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wants to use Trump’s remark to raise the bar “even higher” for Gorsuch’s confirmation. Both Schumer and Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., now promise to question Gorsuch’s “ability to be an independent check” on the executive branch... http://dailysignal.com/2017/02/06/chuck-schumers-hypocrisy-on-trumps-supreme-court-nominee/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTnpJNE5EUmlZemxtT1RZeCIsInQiOiJubGlRV1V4czgzWnRUV1d3V0pxRFNyWThSMkp5YUxNUnd6eVJPY3NmM1pKMTAwUmsyODlGWnlUVjFjV2pnZ3F5MGhGTmVxcnI2cndTMzdvOTRVTlB4R1BnaTlyNmJwYU9BOThQVnZNV0lWeGVUM0I1ajVmXC9FYk0yWGU1YkRINWkifQ%3D%3D
.
Demented Liar Pulosi – Trump Hasn’t Done Jobs...
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ Chuck Todd knows that the travel ban is a travel ban and not a Muslim ban, he’s had plenty of time to become informed, and he’s not stupid... His guest, House Minority Leader Nancy Pulosi also is fully aware that the Executive order was a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. We’ll each have to make our own determinations as to her stupidity but she’s not making a strong case against it. Todd even phrases his question referring to it as a travel ban, yet he allows Pulosi to mischaracterize it as something it isn’t, his job as a mainstream propagandist. He asks her a question as to whether or not she’d be willing to work with the Trump administration, if they asked, on a temporary suspension or some new vetting. Of course that is exactly what the executive order they’re orchestrating the uprising over did, so, with them opposed to it now and making hay and fundraising off of it, it’s not likely they’d walk away and leave all of that money and resentment by the uninformed libtards on the table. Dishonest Pulosi just heard about a new document she’s planning to read one day soon called the Constitution, claiming that she uses it as a guide to her legislative activity. That’s why we have to pay for other people’s health care and Congress had to vote on Obamacare and TPP before they could know what was inside. It’s also why our borders were left unattended in violation of federal law and liar-nObama decided not to enforce federal immigration laws. That’s apparently the way it’s described in the Constitution – Democrat Revised Edition... http://rickwells.us/demented-liar-pelosi-trump-jobs-travel-ban/
VIDEO: http://www.mrctv.org/videos/pelosi-trumps-executive-order-immigration-unconstitutional-immoral
.
.
Thank God for Harry dinky-Reid
by Charles Krauthammer
{freedomsback.com} ~ There are many people to thank for the coming accession of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Donald Trump for winning the election. liar-Hillary Clinton for losing it. Mitch McConnell for holding open the high court seat through 2016, resolute and immovable against furious (and hypocritical) opposition from Democrats and media. And, of course, Harry dinky-Reid.
God bless Harry dinky-Reid. It’s because of him that Gorsuch is guaranteed elevation to the court. In 2013, as Senate majority leader, dinky-Reid blew up the joint. He abolished the filibuster for federal appointments both executive (such as Cabinet) and judicial, for all district and circuit court judgeships (excluding only the Supreme Court). Thus unencumbered, the Democratic-controlled Senate packed the lower courts with liar-nObama nominees.
dinky-Reid was warned that the day would come when Republicans would be in the majority and would exploit the new rules to equal and opposite effect. That day is here.
The result is striking. Trump’s Cabinet appointments are essentially unstoppable because Republicans need only 51 votes and they have 52. They have no need to reach 60, the number required to overcome a filibuster. Democrats are powerless to stop anyone on their own.
And equally powerless to stop Gorsuch. But isn’t the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees still standing? Yes, but if the Democrats dare try it, everyone knows that Majority Leader McConnell will do exactly what dinky-Reid did and invoke the nuclear option — filibuster abolition — for the Supreme Court, too.
dinky-Reid never fully appreciated the magnitude of his crime against the Senate. As I wrote at the time, the offense was not abolishing the filibuster — you can argue that issue either way — but that he did it by simple majority. In a serious body, a serious rule change requires a serious supermajority. (Amending the U.S. Constitution, for example, requires two-thirds of both houses plus three-quarters of all the states.) Otherwise you have rendered the place lawless. If in any given session you can summon up the day’s majority to change the institution’s fundamental rules, there are no rules.
McConnell can at any moment finish dinky-Reid’s work by extending filibuster abolition to the Supreme Court. But he hasn’t. He has neither invoked the nuclear option nor even threatened to. And he’s been asked often enough. His simple and unwavering response is that Gorsuch will be confirmed. Translation: If necessary, he will drop the big one.
It’s obvious that he prefers not to. No one wants to again devalue and destabilize the Senate by changing a major norm by simple majority vote. But dinky-Reid set the precedent.
Note that the issue is not the filibuster itself. There’s nothing sacred about it. Its routine use is a modern development — with effects both contradictory and unpredictable. The need for 60 votes can contribute to moderation and compromise because to achieve a supermajority you need to get a buy-in from at least some of the opposition. On the other hand, in a hyper-partisan atmosphere (like today’s), a 60-vote threshold can ensure that everything gets stopped and nothing gets done.
Filibuster abolition is good for conservatives today. It will be good for liberals tomorrow when they have regained power. There’s no great principle at stake, though as a practical matter, in this era of widespread frustration with congressional gridlock, the new norm may be salutary.
What is not salutary is the dinky-Reid precedent of changing the old norm using something so transient and capricious as the majority of the day. As I argued in 2015, eventually the two parties will need to work out a permanent arrangement under which major rule changes will require a supermajority (say, of two-thirds) to ensure substantial bipartisan support.
There are conflicting schools of thought as to whether even such a grand bargain could not itself be overturned by some future Congress — by simple majority led by the next Harry dinky-Reid. Nonetheless, even a problematic entente is better than the free-for-all that governs today.
The operative word, however, is “eventually.” Such an agreement is for the future. Not yet, not today. Republicans are no fools. They are not about to forfeit the advantage bequeathed to them by Harry dinky-Reid’s shortsighted willfulness. They will zealously retain the nuclear option for Supreme Court nominees through the current Republican tenure of Congress and the presidency.
After which they should be ready to parlay and press the reset button. But only then. As the young Augustine famously beseeched the Lord, “Give me chastity and continency, only not yet.”
God bless Harry dinky-Reid. It’s because of him that Gorsuch is guaranteed elevation to the court. In 2013, as Senate majority leader, dinky-Reid blew up the joint. He abolished the filibuster for federal appointments both executive (such as Cabinet) and judicial, for all district and circuit court judgeships (excluding only the Supreme Court). Thus unencumbered, the Democratic-controlled Senate packed the lower courts with liar-nObama nominees.
dinky-Reid was warned that the day would come when Republicans would be in the majority and would exploit the new rules to equal and opposite effect. That day is here.
The result is striking. Trump’s Cabinet appointments are essentially unstoppable because Republicans need only 51 votes and they have 52. They have no need to reach 60, the number required to overcome a filibuster. Democrats are powerless to stop anyone on their own.
And equally powerless to stop Gorsuch. But isn’t the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees still standing? Yes, but if the Democrats dare try it, everyone knows that Majority Leader McConnell will do exactly what dinky-Reid did and invoke the nuclear option — filibuster abolition — for the Supreme Court, too.
dinky-Reid never fully appreciated the magnitude of his crime against the Senate. As I wrote at the time, the offense was not abolishing the filibuster — you can argue that issue either way — but that he did it by simple majority. In a serious body, a serious rule change requires a serious supermajority. (Amending the U.S. Constitution, for example, requires two-thirds of both houses plus three-quarters of all the states.) Otherwise you have rendered the place lawless. If in any given session you can summon up the day’s majority to change the institution’s fundamental rules, there are no rules.
McConnell can at any moment finish dinky-Reid’s work by extending filibuster abolition to the Supreme Court. But he hasn’t. He has neither invoked the nuclear option nor even threatened to. And he’s been asked often enough. His simple and unwavering response is that Gorsuch will be confirmed. Translation: If necessary, he will drop the big one.
It’s obvious that he prefers not to. No one wants to again devalue and destabilize the Senate by changing a major norm by simple majority vote. But dinky-Reid set the precedent.
Note that the issue is not the filibuster itself. There’s nothing sacred about it. Its routine use is a modern development — with effects both contradictory and unpredictable. The need for 60 votes can contribute to moderation and compromise because to achieve a supermajority you need to get a buy-in from at least some of the opposition. On the other hand, in a hyper-partisan atmosphere (like today’s), a 60-vote threshold can ensure that everything gets stopped and nothing gets done.
Filibuster abolition is good for conservatives today. It will be good for liberals tomorrow when they have regained power. There’s no great principle at stake, though as a practical matter, in this era of widespread frustration with congressional gridlock, the new norm may be salutary.
What is not salutary is the dinky-Reid precedent of changing the old norm using something so transient and capricious as the majority of the day. As I argued in 2015, eventually the two parties will need to work out a permanent arrangement under which major rule changes will require a supermajority (say, of two-thirds) to ensure substantial bipartisan support.
There are conflicting schools of thought as to whether even such a grand bargain could not itself be overturned by some future Congress — by simple majority led by the next Harry dinky-Reid. Nonetheless, even a problematic entente is better than the free-for-all that governs today.
The operative word, however, is “eventually.” Such an agreement is for the future. Not yet, not today. Republicans are no fools. They are not about to forfeit the advantage bequeathed to them by Harry dinky-Reid’s shortsighted willfulness. They will zealously retain the nuclear option for Supreme Court nominees through the current Republican tenure of Congress and the presidency.
After which they should be ready to parlay and press the reset button. But only then. As the young Augustine famously beseeched the Lord, “Give me chastity and continency, only not yet.”
http://www.freedomsback.com/charles-krauthammer/thank-god-for-harry-reid/
Comments