Now That Democrats Retook The House, They Aren’t Shy About Pushing Gun Control.

Any gun control effort will thankfully die in the GOP-control U.S. Senate and not be signed into law by President Trump.

Since winning the House of Representatives, Democrats have already pledged on proposing tough gun control laws — especially in wake of the tragic shooting in Thousand Oaks, CA.

 

When appearing on CNN with Chris Cuomo, Pelosi was quoted in saying the following about this “top-priority” come January:

 

“There is bipartisan legislation to have common sense background checks to prevent guns going into the wrong hands,” the California Democrat told CNN’s Chris Cuomo Thursday night.

That means concealed carry reciprocity and the Hearing Protection Act will be dead-on-arrival, per the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

 

During this past midterm election, two things should be noted.

 

First, several prominent A-rated NRA lawmakers were defeated by virulently anti-gun candidates, who flipped many Republican seats Democrat. This was especially seen with the defeat of Rep. Culbertson in Texas, Mike Coffman in Colorado, and Karen Handel in Georgia.

 

Second, gun control groups spent far more than pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment groups. Two gun control groups Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and Gabby Giffords’ Americans for Responsible Solutions cumulatively spent $37 million combined in the 2018 elections. Alternatively, gun rights groups spent only $20 million this past election cycle. Fortune Magazine has the figure at $11 million for gun control groups, $2 million more than pro-Second Amendment groups.

 

There is some good news, however. Democrats may flex their gun control muscle in the House but their efforts will die in the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by Republicans. You need both chambers of Congress to pass legislation which would then go on to be signed by President Trump. Trump has pledged and reiterated that he won’t support any gun control legislation or sign it into law.

 

There are so-called moderate Democrats who said they will support common sense gun control legislation. If our worst fears become true, these people must be held accountable and their votes and statements must be recorded.

 

We will keep a watchful eye on anti-gun extremists and those who pose as moderates here at The Resurgent.

The Fight For State Legislatures Begins

The drubbing Republicans took on Tuesday revealed more than just a window into the looming battle for control of the U.S. Senate and House chambers next year. The shocking losses endured by Republican members in the Virginia House of Delegates highlight an imminent battle for something many political talking heads have never paid much attention to, but a sector of American government that wields a remarkable amount of power: the control of state capitols.

Much has already been analyzed about Virginia’s gubernatorial and down-ballot races. Yes, it was a referendum on President Trump, and yes, it was a result of extreme Democratic voter enthusiasm. But there is much more going on here. Democrats did not just win the three statewide races at play in Virginia.

Heading into Election Day, Virginia Democrats only controlled 34 out of 100 House of Delegate seats — a size so small even the most conservative of forecasters predicted their numbers would grow at least by some numbers. However, the gains made by their party shocked Democrats themselves. As of this writing, Democrats have expanded their caucus to a total of 49 seats, with several races under a recount and could possibly lead to Republicans losing majority control altogether.

The major gains made by Virginia Democrats could be explained by the fact that Old Dominion has trended blue in recent years — voting for the Democratic candidate in three past presidential elections. However, Virginia wasn’t the only state on Tuesday where local Republicans took a shellacking.

Georgia — a ruby red state by any definition — witnessed three state legislative seats flip party control, two state House seats and a state Senate seat fell into Democratic hands. The two districts that flipped, previously occupied by GOP state Reps. Chuck Williams and Regina Quick, are so conservative, they weren’t even contested by Democrats last year.

Also on Tuesday night, Washington state Republicans lost their state Senate majority, and local Democrats won special elections in areas across the country.

This isn’t simply the result of Democratic voter enthusiasm generated by President Trump. Taking a close look at the money invested in these races, we see Democratic operatives and donors who have adopted a newfound interest in state legislatures.

An interesting observation made following the 14+ Democratic gains in the Virginia House of Delegates.

One more screen shot to drive home what we’re talking about here.

These tweets are completely accurate. A look into the Virginia Public Access Project reveals that Democratic candidates enjoyed monumental amounts of campaign donations over the Republicans they unseated.

For example, Republican Bob Marshall had occupied his Delegate seat for 26 years. It should certainly raise eyebrows that a 33-year-old transgender, who has never before run for elected office and holds no political experience whatsoever, can not only outspend Marshall, but outspend him by almost half a million dollars.

A look through campaign finance records and we see the same type of spending disparities across the board among down-ballot Virginia candidates. Democratic candidates — many of them novices who typically would never have the connections to amass such fundraising numbers — were able to far outspend Republicans in their quest to capture their districts. Campaign expenditures to this degree are not usually seen for such local races.

So what the heck happened?

Local Republicans flourished under the Obama years. GOP state legislators saw their numbers grow in the hundreds since the 2010 sweep and onward. Peaking after the 2016 elections, Republicans controlled both legislative chambers in 32 state capitols across the country. Democrats only enjoyed total control of state legislatures in 13 states.

Unlike the gridlock we see in Congress, partisan domination in a state capitol results in serious authority in policy agendas. Control of a state’s upper and lower chamber and gubernatorial seat (referred to as trifecta control) gives a sate party almost unchecked power in legislative priorities and has showcased states as microcosms of what partisan domination looks like. The laws passed in California make it look almost unrecognizable in comparison to states like Texas or Oklahoma.

Given Republican domination of down-ballot races, it’s the GOP that has enjoyed the spoils that come with state control. Not only are states across the country able to pass legislation that Republicans in Congress appear incapable of doing (despite their majorities in the U.S. Senate and House), but local Republicans are given one thing in particular that has proven to be a game changer in American politics: control of the redistricting process.

Every 10 years, the U.S. Census releases their updated numbers of the American population. With these new numbers bring changes in the number of congressional seats allotted to each state. The new numbers mean state governments are tasked with adjusting their congressional districts accordingly. And of course, control of this process means control of how the districts are created. State government control has awarded the Republican Party with an upper hand in the U.S. House of Representatives.

For a long time, national Democrats, marveling at their own advantages in the Electoral College, had turned a blind eye to local politics. However, in the face of Republican domination in state capitols and the U.S. House not seen in almost a century, progressives are redirecting their attention.

In September, a group of former Obama operatives formed a political action committee, named Forward Majority, with only one focus: winning state legislative races for Democratic candidates. Not much attention was paid to Forward Majority when it was founded only a few weeks ago and announced an ambitious goal of capturing 12 legislative bodies. Unfortunately, this local-focused PAC garnered enormous amounts of attention following the Virginia House of Delegates sweep.

The numerous seats won by Democrats were helped in part by a $1 million dollar investment in campaign advertisements by Forward Majority. The innovated strategies conducted by the group, co-founded by Obama campaign senior staffer David Cohen, resulted in the shocking election outcomes.

According to Forward Majority’s website, they are only just getting started. The group is very blunt in their stated purpose of gaining control of the redistricting process. They also tout on their homepage a desire to see restrictions placed on our Second Amendment rights and greater access to abortion.

The game has changed and Democrats are ready to go to war for the state legislatures we currently control.

How do we fight back?

We simply invest the same amount of interest — if not more. The Democrats have a built-in advantage when it comes to the Electoral College, but we hold the advantage at the local level. By simply matching progressives in resources into state legislative campaigns, we will undercut their attempts.

The major losses in Virginia seem terrible, right? But did you know that only one of the seats that flipped had been won by Trump the year prior, and only by one percentage point. The vast majority of the House of Delegate seats taken by Democrats were previously won by Hillary Clinton, and those seats were only captured after unmatched investments were made by progressive donors — many of them resulting in the thinnest margins of victory.

This alone showcases the GOP’s advantage at the local level.

The GOP is the party of the everyday man. Controlling power at the local and state levels is a testament to our image and the preservation of common sense legislation despite the nonsense coming out of Washington, D.C.

Let’s keep it that way.

Even When Jeff Flake Is Right, He’s Wrong

There was a lot to like about Arizona Republican Jeff Flake’s speech on the Senate floor yesterday.  It was an impassioned call for a decency that is sorely lacking in our politics today, and on substance I think he was largely correct.  The coarseness that has become the new normal in Washington is indeed lamentable, and–more dangerously–it has also obfuscated the debate over what should be far more important issues.  President Trump, who has an unfortunate habit of running his mouth when prudence would be a far better course of action, bears a great amount of responsibility for this sorry state of affairs, and Flake was justified in calling him out for it.

What Flake doesn’t realize is that he’s also dead wrong.

Here’s the passage that undermines his own argument:

Here today I stand to say that we would be better served — we would better serve the country — by better fulfilling our obligations under the Constitution by adhering to our Article 1 — “old normal,” Mr. Madison’s doctrine of separation of powers. This genius innovation which affirms Madison’s status as a true visionary — and for which Madison argued in Federalist 51 — held that the equal branches of our government would balance and counteract with each other, if necessary.

“Ambition counteracts ambition,” he wrote. But what happens if ambition fails to counteract ambition? What happens if stability fails to assert itself in the face of chaos and instability? If decency fails to call out indecency? Were the shoe on the other foot, we Republicans — would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats?

 The answer to that question is yes, the GOP has meekly accepted such behavior from dominant Democrats–and they’ve been doing it for a long time.  An ad featuring a Paul Ryan lookalike pushing granny over a cliff in her wheelchair?  Check.  How about another one accusing George W. Bush of going easy on the monsters who dragged a black man to death in Texas?  Got that too.  Let’s also not forget Harry “Red Eye” Reid calling Mitt Romney a tax cheat on the Senate floor.  Republicans grumbled about it, but ultimately Reid suffered no consequences for his slander.  Then there was 8 years of the Bush presidency, during which he was accused of everything from knowing about 9/11 in advance to blowing up the levees in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.  Bush never wanted to sully the dignity of his office by fighting back, which was noble–but it also allowed his enemies, including the media, to define him.

None of that happened in a vacuum.  GOP voters noticed, and started asking, “How come our guys don’t get as nasty with them as they get with us?”  In short, they got sick of Democrat bullies kicking sand in their faces on the beach and decided to send away for Donald Trump’s body building kit.

Flake goes on to say:

We were not made great as a country by indulging in or even exalting our worst impulses, turning against ourselves, glorifying in the things that divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake. And we did not become the beacon of freedom in the darkest corners of the world by flouting our institutions and failing to understand just how hard-won and vulnerable they are.

Again, he’s talking about Trump here–but couldn’t he just as easily be talking about the media?  What have they been doing, if not dividing us along the lines of man and woman, black and white, straight and gay, liberal and conservative?  With every issue, they try to drive a wedge between Americans and then peddle the outrage, turning it into clicks and views while pushing a simple, constant narrative:  Democrats Good, Republicans Bad!  That’s also the old normal–one in which conservatives reliably lose.  If those are the good old days Jeff Flake is pining for, he can have them.

Surprise, Surprise: Bernie Sanders To Remain An Independent In 2018

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders headlined a Democratic fundraiser on Sunday and delivered his same old spiel to a liberal audience.

During a speech at the Strafford County Democratic Committee fundraising dinner, Sanders was able to wow attendees with a wish list of amazing policy items such as: a $15 minimum wage, tuition-free college for everyone, his “Medicare for All” bill and other impractical goodies that sound great to people who don’t wonder how it gets paid for. The 45-minute speech was sprinkled with several standing ovations.

Sanders also made one other thing clear as he addressed the room full of Democrats: he won’t be running as a member of their party next year.

The Vermont senator, who identifies as a democratic socialist, serves the upper chamber as an Independent, although he has caucused with Democrats since his arrival to Congress. The admirer of Eugene Debs will run for a third term next year and many Democratic leaders were hoping he would finally make the official move to the Democrat Party.

Those people were left disappointed Sunday.

“I am an independent and I have always run in Vermont as an independent, while I caucus with the Democrats in the United States Senate. That’s what I’ve been doing for a long time and that’s what I’ll continue to do,” Sanders stated in an interview.

Sanders, of course, made a monumental splash into Democratic politics during the 2016 election. Giving Hillary Clinton a run for her money, the lover of the nanny state amassed a huge following of supporters while running for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Although he ultimately lost to Clinton, he walked away a superstar in a party he still refuses to call home.

The location of the event on Sunday was also telling. The Strafford County Democratic fundraiser is located in New Hampshire — his home state’s next door neighbor and the first-in-the-nation presidential primary state. It was his second visit to New Hampshire in under two months.

Despite being 76 years old, many are keeping an eye on Bernie’s next moves as Democrats are already maneuvering into 2020 campaign mode. Before he can even move to this phase, however, the Independent senator must first win re-election next year — which shouldn’t be hard given his popularity in the state.

Nearly dethroning Clinton during the presidential coronation nomination gave Bernie many friends, but he’s also amassed quite a few critics, as well. Many Party insiders blame him for Clinton’s eventual loss in the general election to Donald Trump. He’s subsequently faced mounting pressure to officially become a Democrat. Bob Mulholland, a Democratic National Committee member, went so far as to introduce a resolution at the Party’s fall meeting that would have called for Sanders and Sen. Angus King — an Independent from Maine that also caucuses with the Dems — to run as Democrats. Angus also faces re-election next year.

That particular resolution failed a simple majority vote, so Sanders and King don’t have to sweat over actually having to call themselves Democrats just yet.

As Sanders keeps the door open for another go at the White House, it’s amazing he still refuses to identify as a member of the party he’s caucused for years with.

He’s OK with getting the Democrat’s nomination for the presidency, but don’t you dare call him a Democrat.

Puerto Rico, Politics and Perspective

Defending Donald Trump can be a dirty job, but then politics is a dirty game.  Much like with the Bog of Eternal Stench, so much as dipping a toe in it puts the stink on a person forever–which is why it amazes me that so many seem so willing to politicize everything.  It’s as if the chattering class just stepped whole and sweating from a desert highway Port-o-let in the middle of July, took a big whiff and decided that they’d like the rest of the country to smell the same way.  Even more inexplicable is why guys like me feel the need to comment on it, but that’s a story for another day.  Suffice it to say that somebody’s gotta do it–so pardon me while I splash some Old Spice on a bandana, wrap it around my face and take my turn with the chum bucket.  Like Quint told Sheriff Brody in Jaws, this isn’t going to be pleasant.

Regarding Puerto Rico…

President Trump has been getting a lot of blowback for his tweets about San Juan mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz, which have–in true Trumpian style–basically called her an incompetent ingrate for her very public criticism of the aid and recovery efforts being coordinated by the federal government after Hurricane Maria.  Let me preface by saying that the blowback, as with many a Trump tweet, is not undeserved.  The president most certainly has a tendency to bring gasoline to a fire–but lest we forget, his enemies are often the pyromaniacs who strike the match in the first place.  And while it’s true, as my Resurgent bro Peter Heck suggests, that the crisis would be better handled with the kind of quiet, dignified leadership of a George W, Bush, Trump’s reactive tendencies serve at least one valuable purpose:  they disrupt the leftist narrative.

Intrigued?  Then follow me down the rabbit hole for a few moments and consider the following points:

  • Trump isn’t wrong about Mayor Yulín Cruz.  It’s no secret that the Democrats–and by extension, the media–have been itching to turn Hurricane Maria into Trump’s Katrina.  Never mind that most of what the media peddled as the federal government’s bungling of the Katrina response in New Orleans was a myth.  It was a very successful myth, which cemented George W.Bush as a callous man who–in the immortal blather of Kayne West–didn’t care about black people.  Since the federal response to Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma were largely successful, the media couldn’t make any political hay there.  But with Puerto Rico an unprecedented disaster, the Dems saw a chance and so they took it.  Kurt Schlicter summed it up neatly with this tweet:

In other words, this wasn’t political until Yulín Cruz made it political.  She fired the first shot.  The media, with their relentless coverage of Trump punching back, inadvertently made that crystal clear and undermined their own narrative.

As if to underscore the point, Yulín Cruz talked to CNN’s Anderson Cooper wearing–of all things–a shirt emblazoned with the words “HELP US, WE ARE DYING.”

Unless that’s the name of a punk band that opened up for the Ramones back in ’82, that shirt had to be custom made for the occasion–and, as Twitchy points out with its roundup of #Shirtgate, on an island where almost nobody has power it would be awfully hard to have that printed locally.  That can only mean that Yulín Cruz coordinated that particular stunt with partisans off-island in a deliberate attempt to make the administration look bad.  Nice to know that in the middle of a humanitarian crisis, she has her priorities straight.

Again, something that would have not gotten near the attention had Trump not raised a stink about it.

  • The aid is sitting on the docks in Puerto Rico.  Getting it out to the people–that’s another challenge.  From all accounts, the federal government–and this is probably the first time I’ve ever written this–has been Johnny-on-the-spot in getting its part of the job done.  The docks are filled with supplies.  Nuclear submarines are moored and using their reactors to generate electric power.  Trucks are standing by.  The problem?  Truck drivers aren’t showing up:

Speaking today exclusively and live from Puerto Rico, is Puerto Rican born and raised, Colonel Michael A. Valle (”Torch”), Commander, 101st Air and Space Operations Group, and Director of the Joint Air Component Coordination Element, 1st Air Force, responsible for Hurricane Maria relief efforts in the U.S. commonwealth with a population of more than 3 million. Since the ‘apocalyptic’ Cat 4 storm tore into the spine of Puerto Rico on September 20, Col. Valle has been both duty and blood bound to help.

Col. Valle is a firsthand witness of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) response supporting FEMA in Puerto Rico, and as a Puerto Rican himself with family members living in the devastation, his passion for the people is second to none. “It’s just not true,” Col. Valle says of the major disconnect today between the perception of a lack of response from Washington verses what is really going on on the ground. “I have family here. My parents’ home is here. My uncles, aunts, cousins, are all here. As a Puerto Rican, I can tell you that the problem has nothing to do with the U.S. military, FEMA, or the DoD.”

“The aid is getting to Puerto Rico. The problem is distribution. The federal government has sent us a lot of help; moving those supplies, in particular, fuel, is the issue right now,” says Col. Valle. Until power can be restored, generators are critical for hospitals and shelter facilities and more. But, and it’s a big but, they can’t get the fuel to run the generators.

They have the generators, water, food, medicine, and fuel on the ground, yet the supplies are not moving across the island as quickly as they’re needed.

“It’s a lack of drivers for the transport trucks, the 18 wheelers. Supplies we have. Trucks we have. There are ships full of supplies, backed up in the ports, waiting to have a vehicle to unload into. However, only 20% of the truck drivers show up to work. These are private citizens in Puerto Rico, paid by companies that are contracted by the government,” says Col. Valle.

Why are only 20% of drivers showing up?  I can think of a lot of good reasons.  The roads are heavily damaged.  Drivers can’t get to the ports.  Most people are staying close to their families.  And drivers may also fear being ambushed by thieves and killed for their cargo.  Then there’s this, which neither the Democrats nor Mayor Yulín Cruz care to mention:

Is any of that Trump’s fault?  No, but the media would prefer to ignore that and have people think Trump’s incompetence is to blame.  Again, something that could have turned into conventional wisdom had the narrative been allowed to take hold, as it did in Katrina.

Also left unmentioned is that in their quest to damage the Trump administration, the Dems and their willing servants in the media are besmirching the first responders, aid workers and military personnel who are all working around the clock trying to save lives–all for the purpose of scoring a few cheap political points.  Intemperate as Trump’s remarks were, his insults were directed at politicians, and nobody much cares about their feelings.

Bottom line, none of this is helpful—not to the people desperately in need of assistance, nor to those who are trying to provide it.  But if the Democrats want to point to this as a failure of Trump’s leadership, their cries would ring less hollow if they bothered to show some leadership of their own.

Democrats Are Searching Anywhere For An Election Victory

The Democratic Party is clearly looking anywhere and everywhere to find an election victory to point to… And things are looking desperate.

To recap the last few months: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton lost in an historic upset to political newcomer Donald Trump. The GOP retained their House majority and (surprisingly) held their Senate majority. The Democratic Party lost even more gubernatorial seats and state legislative chambers. Following the transition into the new Trump administration, Democrats went on to lose four-out-of-four special congressional races.

Maybe Trump was right — we’d eventually get tired of winning.

Democrats, on the other hand, are hopelessly scrambling for good news. They may have finally found that good news — not at the national level, nor the state, nor the congressional.

Liberal pundits are in utter glee over a recent string of state legislative victories.

In special elections last week, Democrats captured two state House seats in New Hampshire and Oklahoma. This puts their state House and Senate takeovers this year to a grand total of six seats. Six seats!

CNN’s Chris Cillizza proudly reported on the news, replete with a picture of the United States — as if these local elections had national implications. Huffpost suggested the outcomes could be a sign of a wave building. Daily Kos’ jubilation over the recent elections is almost sad to look at.

Why is it premature for the the Democratic Party to get excited over six state legislative seats?

The number just seems a tad minuscule when you consider that, over the course of Obama’s eight years in office, Democrats lost a grand total of 958 state legislative seats.

Does that not make six appear quite trivial?

Actually, forget about local seats for a second.

During that eight year period, Democratic gubernatorial seats dropped from 28 to 16, the Democratic Senate majority dropped from 55 to 46 and their House majority vanished from 256 seats to 194. Their chosen successor to Obama lost to perhaps the most beatable candidate in a century — ceding control of the White House to the GOP.

Believing momentum was finally behind them, national Democrats invested heavily in several special House races following the November election. They lost all four of those, too.

But Democrats really want you to focus on those six state legislative wins.

The Left Can’t Stomach ‘Normalizing’ Trump

A herd of leftists are reacting like spooked palominos that Democrats may be “normalizing” President Donald Trump.

Just a few weeks ago, uber-liberal Dianne Feinstein said the words “good president” and “Trump” in the same sentence, drawing boos. Then Sen. Chuck Schumer was overheard on a hot mic saying Trump likes him. And perhaps worst of all, former press secretary Sean Spicer was legitimately funny at the Emmy Awards.

When “Chuck & Nancy” are on a first-name cozy basis with Trump, that’s got many in the party of abortion and permanent victimhood running for cover like apocalypse cultists fleeing Planet X.

POLITICO reporter Elana Schor broke out the old-fashioned Rolodex and began calling.

Nothing Trump has done should change the fact that he’s pursuing a toxic agenda, that he has been and continues to be divisive and disastrous,” said Justin Krebs, campaign director at MoveOn.org. “The American people at large know that, and Democratic leaders should not forget that.”

And:

“Let’s not fool ourselves,” [Virginia Rep. Gerry] Connolly added. “He is this person we know, and I just think there must be both political and moral limitations with how far we’re willing to cooperate with that.”

Here’s the best one:

“Schumer and Pelosi often tend to be out of touch with the zeitgeist of the progressive movement,” said Murshed Zaheed, political director at the liberal group CREDO Action.

“The Zeitgeist of the progressive movement.” That must be black-clad Antifa thugs beating up reporters and trashing their cameras or something.

Like Republicans fighting Obama, Democrats would rather demonize Trump than “normalize” him. It’s a whole lot easier to raise cash to defeat an enemy than to talk about politics with someone who negotiates like Mr. Rogers Neighborhood.

Democratic pols are painting this collaboration with Trump as getting their way on immigration (no wall, keep DREAMers) and health care (single-payer). What they are beginning to learn is that Trump wants those things too–or is perfectly willing to trade for them because Trump likes Democratic ideas.

But they’re scared because they’ve built their whole case on hating Donald Trump because he’s Donald Trump. What do they do when he agrees with their legislative agenda? What do Democrats do when the Great Satan of their political life is no longer devilish?

All they can do is whistle past the graveyard and ignore the Republicans already hard at work digging their own graves.

Building the Wall Will Require Presidential Extortion

Multiple news outlets are reporting President Trump agreed to exclude demands to build the southern border wall from a deal on DACA legislation. (Wash Examiner)

The White House hailed a “constructive working dinner” Wednesday night between President Trump and top Democratic congressional leaders, who claimed afterward they agreed to exclude the border wall from a deal on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. “We had a very productive meeting at the White House with the President,” Schumer and Pelosi said in a joint statement. “The discussion focused on DACA. We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides.”

While this is the Democrat’s spin from dinner last night, the White House quickly denied it: (Wash Examiner)

“While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders shot back shortly afterward.

Whether the President includes a border wall funding demand in the upcoming DACA vote is uncertain, but if he doesn’t,  you can depend on conservatives screaming to high heaven, and never-Trumpers crowing “I told you so…”.  Yet, perhaps they should be focused on GOP leadership and the Chamber of Commerce.

The MSM and Democrats would have you believe the GOP wants to build a border wall, and only they stand in opposition. This is not true and they know it, however; it is great for fundraising. The plain and simple fact of the matter is the current congressional GOP leadership is virulently against a border wall and will not support passage of border wall funding legislation.  (Wash Times)

Speaker Paul Ryan reportedly said during a private dinner earlier this year that nobody but nobody in Congress wanted a border wall — well, nobody except “one member,” Breitbart reported, citing a one-on-one with the former congressman, Tom Tancredo. “Ryan told a group of Republicans he met with … that only one person wants a wall,” Tancredo  said, “You have to understand the level of fear that exists in the Republican establishment about this issue.”

GOP opposition to border wall funding is predicated upon fear of the media, fear their big business donors, and fear of not being re-elected (Breitbart)

“The Chamber of Commerce doesn’t want a wall … the pressure is greater from the Chamber of Commerce than it is from the members,” Tancredo, who for years in the House fought a mostly fruitless battle to get Congress to combat the flood of illegal immigration, added. “That’s the basic problem. It was then. It is now.”

As the Washington Times reports, the GOP has obstructed any funding legislation (Wash Times)

Republicans, through action — or more to truth, inaction — and most recently, through Ryan, have shown an utter reluctance to get the process going. It’s not only their business backers they fear. It’s public relations and media coverage. There’s been a growing trend from the left to set fires, break glass and toss rocks at police and citizens alike whenever a conservative idea seems to gather steam on Capitol Hill. It’s not just the Chamber that lurks; it’s antifa and its thuggish cohorts. Combine that with a media heck-bent on taking down this White House, and the final result, in the minds of campaigning Republicans, is this: Bad press leading to reelection loss.

It doesn’t seem to make sense to double down on border wall funding when your own party stands in opposition. This fact isn’t hidden from the Democrats, all they have to do is sit back and wait for the President to cave, and then make political hay over it. When all along, GOP leadership knew it was a non-starter.

That being the case, there is only one way the President and his bonder control conservative supporters will ever see the southern border wall built. It will be messy, require considerable spine, and take around 90 days. But it will work, threatening corporate cash flow and profits always works.

The President should instruct Attorney General Sessions to issue a new directive, announcing ICE will shift its focus from the southern border temporarily, instead concentrating on interior control for the next 90 day.  The focus would be conducting a crackdown on corporations that hire illegal aliens.

He should announce ICE will start at the southern border from California to Texas and sweep north. No company would be excluded. General Sessions should be very explicit in explaining ICE will hit agriculture, poultry farms, construction firms, road-building companies, etc; with the intent of arresting and deporting illegal immigrants, slapping fines, penalties and obtaining as many indictments as possible.

The White House should braced itself for the howls of protest. Initially the Democrats and MSM will be the loudest, followed by liberal open-borders devotees. But once the enforcement takes effect, they can expect the Chamber of Commerce and GOP establishment leadership is be fiercely and defiantly opposed.

However, if the White House has the will to see it through, it wouldn’t be long before those companies begin to see profits fall as well as announcements of not hitting their quarterly projection. This will surely trigger Wall Street. Nothing like falling stock to motivate those guys.

It is a stone cold lock those CEOs would begin storming the gates of the White House in their limos in such numbers, it would take a team of valets to sort them out.

Mr Trump should then sit them down and explain the facts of life. Interior enforcement until the wall is funded, it is their responsibility to convince Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. You can bet when Wall Street and big business money dries up, those four will cave so quick it would make your head spin.

The sad thing is interior border enforcement should be an given and be an on-going ICE effort. However in the case of funding of the southern border wall, it is just about the only chip on the table that has the power to bring all the players to the table.

It is a twofer win for Trump supporters, They get to see the wall built and watch Congress squirm. Win Win

Don’t miss out. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.