Why this man is still at the IRS?
Gateway Pundit reports that 50 Republicans (only 50?!!) have signed a letter asking President Donald J. Trump to fire IRS head John Koskinen, the apologist for illegal targeting of conservative groups by the IRS. Koskinen’s mendacity is legendary. While testifying before Congress, he prevaricated (at best) and may have committed perjury and obstructed Congress (at perhaps worst. Who knows the level of criminality engaged in by the weaponized, politicized Obama IRS?)
By firing Koskinen, does the Trump administration lose the opportunity to hold him accountable? If not, then explain, please, how this man can still be on our payroll.
Another question: Why are we still apparently catching and releasing into the population so-called unaccompanied minors and their mothers who have illegally entered our country from Central America?
Less than 24 hours after Donald Trump said that he would have Mexico reimburse the United States for a new border wall, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto canceled his trip to Washington D.C.
Although President Pena Nieto is not coming to the U.S., many undocumented families from Central America are still arriving.
A Department of Homeland Security bus dropped off yet another round of Central Americans at the McAllen, Texas bus station on Thursday. This time it’s a total of 28 people, including children, who turned themselves into immigration authorities after being smuggled across the border.
Like thousands before them, they are given a court date to appear and are released, allowing them to buy a ticket to be reunited with loved ones across the country. …
Jaqueline Lopez says that she will be visiting her father in California after four years apart. She says that she left Guatemala because of job scarcity and to give her 8-month-old son Miguel a better life. … Jaqueline says that she was told by immigration officials not to speak to the media …
This story was published January 26, 2017–a Thursday. It’s entirely possible, although not clear from the story, which Thursday it was that these illegal aliens were released. Could it have been Thursday, January 19, the day before President Trump’s inauguration? Unclear. Which administration allowed immigration officials to advise a media blackout? Unclear. Also unclear is why the reporter does not refer to President Trump by his title, while he carefully makes sure to use President Nieto’s title. Hmm.
It’s imperative for President Trump to STOP this “catch and release” policy immediately, if it is continuing. Illegal immigrants, above all, should not be released into the population. This Obama-era policy has many adverse effects on our country. For example, these particular illegal immigrants carry and propagate communicable diseases to which our population is not immune. They cost us precious tax dollars. They flout our laws and our sovereignty. Their home countries surely do not catch and then release illegal interlopers, so why should we?
On this same topic of illegal immigration, President Trump announced that he will withhold federal monies from cities that refuse to cooperate with the federal government by helping to enforce immigration laws. As might be expected, progressives and their supporters who encourage “sanctuary cities” are apoplectic:
President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to take away funding from self-proclaimed sanctuary cities had one big exemption for one of his favorite constituencies: the police, who would be protected from cuts.
But Trump’s opponents say that very exemption makes it much more likely that a judge could strike down that section of the order as unconstitutional.
It is just one example of the legal arguments that cities, immigration groups and other opponents are readying as they prepare to fight an executive order signed by Trump on Wednesday that would cut federal aid to “sanctuary” jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Suddenly the left is concerned about “illegal” or “unconstitutional” executive orders.
Ironic, isn’t it? Trump’s opponents plan to make “legal arguments” in order to fight Trump’s attempt to make cities enforce the law because they prefer to protect illegal aliens from punishment or deportation, as required by the law.
The “law” matters to the left when it’s useful to them as a weapon to twist or misinterpret in an attempt to impose their policies on the rest of us. The law does not matter in the least to them or to the illegal aliens who so blithely break our laws, when the law is an impediment to the imposition of their socialist/progressive policies on the USA.
If laws don’t matter, then it makes little sense for progressives to turn to the law for relief, does it?
We either are a nation of laws or we are not. We either have a sovereign nation or we do not.
We the People elected President Trump because we want our sovereign nation back. It’s as simple as that. It’s about time that the progressives among us realize that we won and they lost.