A CAT 5 Crisis
Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen discussed the border crisis with Tucker Carlson last night. She did not mince words.
Referring to the fact that there are at least 10 million people in the country illegally about whom we know virtually nothing, Nielsen said this:
"In my opinion right now, this is one of -- if not the biggest -- crisis the country has faced in a decade. Truly. I mean the security aspects of this, the humanitarian aspects of this have got to be addressed. This is at the very top of our list at DHS. We announced today that we are treating this like a massive CAT 5 hurricane disaster. . ."
Having repeatedly made the case that border security is national security, I appreciated her firm statement.
Nielsen also made it clear that the Trump Administration was looking at "all options" to increase border security, including deploying even more troops to the border. Again, if the American military exists to do anything, it is to defend America's borders first.
Underscoring the administration's sense of urgency, Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Trump, told The Daily Caller, "There's going to be an aggressive effort to utilize every existing authority in statute" to crack down on illegal immigration and "the abuse of the legal immigration system."
Given the current crisis at the border, Miller vowed that the White House was taking its efforts "to the next level," hoping to force Congress to change many of the bad laws that created this chaos.
Don't hold your breath, Stephen. Progressive politicians are all in on open borders and won't lift a finger to help this president get control of the situation.
Here's proof: House liberals aren't talking about ways they can cooperate with the president. Instead, they are talking about voting on a resolution condemning President Trump for threatening to seal the border.
Keep in mind that this is coming on the heels of two recent House votes against President Trump's border emergency declaration. Think about the message the left is sending with yet another vote against the president's border security efforts.
They are telling the migrants now marching toward our border that they have nothing to worry about, that progressives are resisting every effort by Trump to stop them from pouring across the border.
How will that message do anything to end this crisis?
The Intolerant Left
Fired FBI Director James Comey was interviewed yesterday by CNN's Christiane Amanpour. At one point, Amanpour asked Comey if he and the FBI should have "shut down" chants of "Lock her up" at Trump rallies. Amanpour said such rhetoric was "dangerous," "could've created violence" and was "hate speech."
By the way, I checked the transcript just to see how "fair and balanced" she was. And in case you're wondering, she did not ask whether the FBI should have shut down Hillary's rhetoric about Trump supporters being "deplorable and irredeemable."
To his credit, Comey defended the First Amendment, saying, "That's not a role for government to play. The beauty of this country is people can say what they want."
But don't be fooled by Comey's magnanimous defense of limited government.
Comey played an even bigger role than just shutting down enthusiastic crowds. He was a key leader in the deep state's effort to shut down Trump's presidency by attempting to reverse the election results.
My friends, I know we tend to laugh at the latest left-wing outrages on university campuses. Frankly, I find the idea of "safe spaces" and "free speech zones" laughable.
But here's the problem with that: The left has a deep impulse toward tyranny. Amanpour's profession depends on the First Amendment, yet this so-called "journalist" didn't think twice about using government to "shut down" what she considered "hate speech."
Left-wing commentators regularly suggest that "Build That Wall" is a racist chant. They insist that MAGA hats are "hate speech." How many times were we told that restricting immigration from nations known to be hotbeds of Islamic terrorism was hateful and Islamophobia?
The left is all in on using the power of big government to restrict the expression of normal conservative ideas. We may be tempted to laugh at Amanpour, but she was only doing what comes naturally to the left.
During their interview, Comey also opened up about what keeps him awake at night. He's afraid of possible counter investigations that President Trump and many conservatives, including yours truly, are demanding now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has determined the Russian collusion delusion was a hoax and fake news.
"I don't fear it personally. I fear it as a citizen," Comey told Amanpour. "Investigate what? Investigate that investigations were conducted? What would be the crime you'd be investigating?"
For the past two years, many conservatives were asking exactly what crime you were investigating when your FBI launched a counterintelligence investigation of the president of the United States. We now know there was very little evidence and no good reason for all the McCarthyite hysteria.
So what was the real reason the investigation was launched in the first place? Who ordered it?
Who took the Clinton campaign's opposition research to the secret FISA courts? Who ordered the unmasking of Gen. Flynn?
And exactly why did the DNC refuse to allow the FBI to examine its server?
As a citizen, I fear an abusive deep state spying on its political opposition!
So, yes, I think we need an investigation of the investigation.
"A Breathtakingly Terrible Idea"
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is jumping on the "soak the rich" bandwagon. His contribution to the debate is a plan to annually tax unrealized stock gains and at higher individual tax rates, rather than the lower capital gains rate.
Currently, stocks are taxed only when they are sold. But Wyden wants multiple bites at the apple. This would be a nightmare guaranteed to tank the stock market.
Wyden would require people at the end of the year to figure out how much their stocks went up in value and then pay a potentially 37% capital gains tax on that value.
Can you see the trouble here?
You don't actually have the money to pay the tax because you didn't sell the stock. But Wyden's plan would likely force many people to prematurely sell shares just to pay their taxes on the gains.
What if the stocks go down next year? Will the government give you back the money you paid because now you've paid taxes on a gain you never got?
And why tax only gains? This plan could easily turn into an annual "property tax" on stocks. Just tax the value of the asset every year no matter what it is!
As Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) put it, the Wyden plan is a "breathtakingly terrible idea." But it is yet another example of just how creative progressives can be when it comes to taking more of your hard-earned money.
A CAT 5 Crisis