Thursday, March 29, 2018

A Common Sense Look at Law Enforcement




2/15/2018 - Derek Hunter Townhall.com

There are few things in Washington that everyone agrees on – ask a Democrat and a Republican what the weather is like and you’re likely to get complete different answers. But there is one thing they all agree on: the current immigration system is messed up.

I don’t use the popular word “broken” because something isn’t really broken when so many people simply ignore it. 

That’s the biggest problem with the immigration system, cities and states (and for decades the federal government) have ignored the law and are implementing their will instead. A major part of the appeal of Donald Trump as a candidate was that he promised to enforce existing law, which sadly has become a novel idea when it comes to immigration.

Since the system isn’t really “broken,” but is going to be “fixed” anyway, things are likely to change. In that change there is a chance, slim as it is, to make things better. But how?

President Trump has proposed some good ideas, though at a high cost – amnesty and, eventually, citizenship for 1.8 million illegal aliens. Those ideas include an end to the visa diversity lottery, a stupid idea that is the equivalent of pulling names out of a hat to increase the “diversity” of people moving to the country. If there’s a more insignificant factor in picking who should be allowed legal status in the country than what they look like it would have to be nose size. 

But such is the stupid state of our immigration system. Again, not broken, just dumb.

Another good proposal from the White House is to end chain migration.

Chain migration is when someone moves to the country legally, then is allowed to bring in family members. It’s understandable if someone who moved here wants to bring their kids and their spouse, but anyone beyond that should be off limits. If you can’t live without your siblings, parents, etc., you probably shouldn’t leave where you’re from. Moving to the United States is not a right, it is a privilege, and it needs to be treated as such. Prioritizing anyone simply because they’re related to someone else lucky enough to be granted that privilege, and not based on what they can offer the country, is insane and needs to be ended.

And that’s the main question we should be asking when it comes to everything related to immigration: what do we get out of it?

Priority should be given to people who have skills, have educations, have something to offer and add to the country to make it a better place. And that’s the one question liberals want to avoid like the plague. To them, immigration is an opportunity to import more voters and replace the ones their policies are costing them. 

Among the groups of immigrants liberals hate, and ones any immigration deal should include an increase of, are EB-5 visas.

Unlike the H1B visa program, which was supposed to bring in high-skilled workers and has been bastardized and exploited by tech companies for cheap labor, the EB-5 visa requires recipients to actually bring something to the table. 

In order to get an EB-5 visa an immigrant must have money to invest in a business, between half a million and a million dollars, minimum, depending upon where they want to move to. And that investment must be in a business that employs people, a minimum of 10 people. Unlike pulling names out of a hat, the country actually gains when an EB-5 visa recipient moves here. 

Since there is a benefit to the country, and our politicians are, well, our politicians, the EB-5 visas are capped at 10,000 per year. Yes, we have a strict limit on the number of immigrants with money to invest that we’ll allow into the country that is well short of the number of immigrants we’ll accept by drawing names out of a hat based on their country of origin.

Maybe the system is broken? No, the system would work if it were enforced and some adjustments were made based, again, on what should be the only criteria that matters: what does the country get out of it?

So, yes, build the wall, and end chain migration. I think it’s a mistake to grant amnesty that leads to citizenship to anyone, I’d much prefer some kind of permanent residency with no chance of citizenship for the so-called DREAMers, especially 1.8 million of them when only about one-third of them could even be bothered to sign up for it. And kill the “diversity lottery.”

But any immigration deal should include an increase in the EB-5 visa program. It’s the one program about which there is no question whether or not there is a benefit to the country. Which, sadly, appears to be the one thing the debate over immigration reform is not about. 

Saturday, March 24, 2018

A Small Victory - A Giant Leap For Constitutional Governmet




3/21/2018 - Arthur Schaper Townhall.com

When all seemed lost, a little city made the move to help Make California Great Again. Los Alamitos, the second smallest city in Orange County, just passed a huge ordinance asserting the city’s compliance with the United States Constitution. Specifically, in an unprecedented yet necessary state, the council voted to opt out of the immoral, unconstitutional mandates of SB 54, aka the California “Values” Act or Sanctuary State law.

For the last three years, California’s Democratic dominance has voted to disregard federal immigration laws. Now they are seeing their deep blue bubble burst. Whether they like it or not, California remains a part of the United States. The Founding Charter of our country, the United States Constitution, is still the Supreme Law of the Land.  Yet even with Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ latest series of lawsuits, plus ICE’s ramped-up operations, California citizens need relief from Sacramento’s legislative lawlessness. One of the smallest enclaves in Orange County, Los Alamitos displays its rich, diverse heritage in its coat of arms, and they took the first major step to undermine SB 54 outright. 

Small cities have quiet, small chambers, and Los Alamitos was no exception. I arrived nearly two hours early to get a seat. Within 30 minutes, riotous pro-illegal groups throughout Southern California swarmed the plaza, along with left-wing religious figures, college students and members of the ACLU. The Los Alamitos Police Department showed up in full force, probably the first time in the city’s history.

After moving through other city business, the ordinance sponsor, Councilman Kusumoto, explained the reason for this proposal. First, he had hoped that SB 54 would not pass, but such hopes seem hopelessly naïve now, especially since power-hungry Democrats want to run for statewide or federal office based on defying President Trump. He pointed out to the public that SB 54 places law enforcement in a precariously tight position. Business owners are damned either way. If they comply with ICE for a business audit, State Attorney General Becerra has promised to fine and prosecute those business owners.  Mayor Pro Tem Warren Kusumoto, himself a descendant of Japanese immigrants who moved to Hawaii then California, wanted to resolve the intractable conflict between federal and state laws and had  worked for five months on his proposed ordinance with the help of his colleagues.

Proponents emphasized the rule of law and public safety. Genevieve Peters of Sherman Oaks talked about the American Revolution, in which our forefathers fought against a government undermining our rights. Elsa Aldequer of Winnetka, a legal immigrant from El Salvador, talked about how illegal aliens are making her communities less safe as well as depriving Americans of jobs. The opponents slammed the “racist, anti-immigrant Trump Administration” for suing the state of California. One Los Alamitos resident shared that she feared for her and her daughter’s safety walking down the street if the city rejected SB 54. If she was legal, what does she have to worry about?

Another resident pointed to the three flags on the city seal as a reminder of where the city comes from. Of course, enforcement of immigration laws does not signal anti-immigrant sentiment--quite the contrary. Two other hostile elements erupted on the scene opposing the ordinance, including a troubled young woman called “RG. Wong.”  Twice she shrieked at the audience “Shut the hell up!” while decrying the proposed ordinance. She then flipped off detractors as she stormed out of the room. Then notable irritant Naui Huitzilopochtli, a radical who believes that the American Southwest is “stolen land,” spent more time attacking members of the audience than speaking to the ordinance itself, Other high school and college students gave emotional pleas about separating families and targeting otherwise law-abiding immigrants. The Left loves to lump together legal immigrants and illegal aliens into one group, “immigrant.” That is really offensive, and one member of the audience blasted that abuse of the English Language. For the first time in recent memory for me as an activist, a comparable number of people in the audience were pro-immigration enforcement and pro-Trump. 

Finally, the city councilmembers offered their views on the ordinance. Two were concerned about the potential cost and effectiveness of a city ordinance. Councilwoman Hasselbrink applauded everyone, including the children, for speaking out. She then pivoted to the fundamental premise of the discussion, as simple as high school civics. If there is a conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be followed, as per Article VI, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. She disparaged opponents for ignoring the distinction between legal and illegal, just as “there is a difference between driving and drunk driving.”

Finally, Councilman Kusumoto signaled his continued support to clear up the confusion wrought by SB 54. He asserted that this issue goes beyond immigration to the rule of law itself. Then Mayor Troy Edgar explained his stance. City councilmembers face a hard task. They have to reconcile differences among their colleagues and within the community. “This is activism,” he pointed to the audience, and it’s not always easy or nice. He then disparaged the argument from opponents who claimed that the city of Los Alamitos is too small a locale to take on this issue. “We lead in safety and schools. We should lead on this issue, too.” With that, the city voted 4-1 to opt out of SB 54 and follow federal immigration law. The audience burst into applause. I leapt for joy, along with fellow Trump supporters. We hugged each other to celebrate this small victory—which we hope will lead to more cities siding with the United States Constitution.

Ann Coulter joked that Trump should build a wall and keep California out. Sorry Ann, but there are 4.5 million Trump supporters in the once-Golden State, and we are starting a second American Revolution, a restoration of the rule of law and the United States Constitution within our own state.


Thursday, March 22, 2018

Dreamers - Really! What an Oxymoron




3/21/2018 - Ann Coulter Townhall.com

Does anyone know why President Trump loves "Dreamers" -- i.e.: illegal aliens allegedly brought here before the age of 12 (which no federal judge will ever check) by their parents (which no federal judge will ever check), "through no fault of their own" (which no federal judge will ever check)?

We've been lectured by Mark Zuckerberg about how much better "Dreamers" are than you lazy Americans -- especially African-Americans, whose jobs are disproportionately taken by illegals. (As former Mexican President Vicente Fox once charmingly put it, illegal immigrants "are doing jobs that not even blacks want to do there in the United States.")

So why aren't we being bombarded with television interviews and profiles of these amazing human beings?

Liberals can't make an argument without producing a victim. Attack the media -- they bleat about journalists getting shot in the face while reporting abroad. Complain about FBI corruption -- they choke up over G-men putting their lives on the line EVERY DAY! Denounce the Deep State -- they moan that CIA officers have been killed in the line of duty.

Isn't this the moment for our hearts to be breaking over the millions of wonderful "Dreamers" who will suffer unless we amnesty them immediately?

Let's see 'em! Surely they've got a few Einsteins! After all, the media are capable of turning a gang-admiring thug who forcibly robbed a convenience store and assaulted a cop into "Gentle giant, Mike Brown." They turned jewelry-stealing juvenile delinquent Trayvon Martin into an altar boy.

But even MSNBC dare not show us Trump's beloved "Dreamers." The snarling Muslim showcased by the Democrats at their 2016 convention has gotten more airtime than any "Dreamer."

There are plenty of vague descriptions of "Dreamers," all of whom seem to be valedictorians. But can anyone identify precisely what they have contributed to our country -- other than lots of police work, welfare and protests?


The best "Dreamers" always sound like the "honor student" in Tom Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities: "somebody who attends class, isn't disruptive, tries to learn, and does all right at reading and arithmetic."

How about MSNBC interview five new "Dreamers" every night? Five non-hateful ones are probably the most they could get.

As long as Trump is going to keep babbling about these "absolutely incredible kids" -- "I love these kids!" -- and obstinately refuse to deport them, he must have met thousands of them. He plans to amnesty millions.

Why doesn't Trump showcase his favorite two dozen "Dreamers"? Let the rest of us decide how “incredible” they are.

But no Glamour magazine profiles, please! We want to know everything, e.g.: How much have they cost the taxpayers in free school lunches and medical care? How many anchor babies have they had? What percentage have been convicted of a felony or killed someone in a drunk driving accident? How many have been admitted to college by taking affirmative action spots intended for the descendants of American slaves?

In 2009, The New York Times' Lawrence Downes gushed over illegal alien Benita Veliz. Three years later, liberals still hadn't come up with a better one: In 2012, she was the featured illegal alien at the Democratic National Convention. (It only seems like the Democrats have an illegal alien speak at all their conventions. Veliz was the first.)

Downes ticked off Veliz's "impressive" accomplishments: "She was valedictorian at Jefferson High School" -- naturally! -- "graduating at age 16. She went to St. Mary's University in San Antonio on a full scholarship." (A scholarship, I note, that otherwise might have gone to a yucky American.)

I gather Veliz is the left's designated baby seal of "Dreamers."

Veliz is probably a nice lady, but she was valedictorian at a school that Downes would never send his kids to. Jefferson High School is 98 percent minority, less than half the students are "English proficient," and only 16 percent are ready for college.

HOW DID AMERICA EVER GET BY WITHOUT HER?

Or to use Downes' more-relaxed standard: "How will this country be a better place once we force Benita Veliz to leave it?"

Off the top of my head: There would be less strain on education budgets, hospital emergency rooms, roads and bridges, and that college scholarship Veliz got would be open to an American kid.

This is a country built by Western Europeans. Immigrants arrived after it was already set up and running well. The idea that any immigrant who hasn't committed a felony is someone we can't live without is absurd.

If you're a yuppie in a rich white area and don't like cleaning your toilets, the Trump administration has been great for you. But if you're a Trump voter, you're scratching your head wondering what happened to those campaign promises that set him apart from every other Republican. 

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

As Califorinia Goes - So Goes The Nation - Heaven Forbid!




2/27/2018 - Arthur Schaper Townhall.com

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has promised everything she can for the young illegal aliens and her increasingly restive left-leaning caucus. The House members are grousing privately about how their leader is ruining their brand across the country. As for the illegal aliens and their activist enablers, they overwhelmed one of her press conferences in San Francisco. They badgered her US Senate colleagues, including Chuck Schumer by protesting outside of his home in New York State. Two weeks ago, Pelosi stood for 8 hours to demand that a clean DREAM Act be attached to the latest budget-spending bill.

Nothing happened.

Meanwhile, since 2016 the Democratic Party has moved further left than anyone would have anticipated since 2016. They will embrace every letter in the LGBTQAI etc. list, they want to repeal the Second Amendment, abolish the First, get rid of the United States Constitution. They pretty much want to resurrect Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin and have them both run for President/Vice-President in 2020. Unless they can get Che Guevara and Mao Ze-Dong for diversity’s sake, then they will go for that tag team.

Dan Lipinski, a pro-life Democratic Congressman from Illinois, has not gotten an endorsement from the National Party. He also faces a stiff primary challenge from the Left. Republicans might have another pick-up opportunity in Illinois.

There is no better battleground state for the complete Communist-ization of the Democratic Party than California, where regressive leftists are stuck between overrunning the Democratic Party apparatus, or starting their own Berniecrat revolution to counter the corporatist Hillary Clinton wing of the party. They want free college for anyone. The Berniecrats are pushing Medicare for all (and who will pay for it? Mexico?!). They want to divest from oil, they want everyone driving in soybean-powered vehicles, living in greenhouse enclaves. And let’s not forget the perennial stream of foreign nationals pouring across the border, treated better than our veterans and vetted far less than …

Last year’s California Democratic Party convention was a hate-fest of corruption charges and curse words. Retired chairman John Burton resorted to repeated F-bombs and middle fingers. The election for next California Democratic Party chairman came down to a 60-vote margin between progressive populist outsider Kimberly Ellis and corporate establishmentarian Eric Bauman.

Bauman won the battle, but the war for the California Democratic Party’s heart and soul has only deepened. Bernie-crats are crying foul louder than ever. Their precious push for single-payer healthcare, full-on sanctuary state status is running smack-dab into big business interests and lobbying firms who play both sides of the aisle for wealth. The only thing that unifies California Democrats right now is their vicious hatred of Trump, and even on that point they are disagreeing! To impeach or not impeach? Should they invest efforts to secede from the union? How about breaking up the state of California?

The 2018 California Democratic Party convention was deeply chaotic, as well, opening in San Diego with multiple candidates contesting, vying for the much-coveted Democratic Party endorsements for different offices. The first major shock: US Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Grande Dame of California liberal politics, not only failed to capture the party delegation’s support, but actually lost to State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Leon, and neither one of them hit the 60% threshold, which means no endorsement. De Leon needed the party nod more than Feinstein. Still, her woman card and length of experience, plus hatred of firearms, couldn’t push her over the top. This is disturbing. DiFi is not left wing enough! Scary thought.

The other contested statewide races offered shocking results (and refreshing hope for Republicans) going forward. Incumbent Attorney General Xavier Becerra is facing termed-out insurance commissioner Dave Jones. He received more delegate support than Becerra, yet neither one got the endorsement, either. Incredible. The anti-establishment strain in the California Democratic Party is flexing muscle, much to its own hurt. The delegates’ vote for Governor was even more intriguing, showing an incredible four-way divide. Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom won the most delegates at 39%, followed by State Treasurer John Chiang with 30%, former Superintendent of Schools Delaine Eastin with 20%, and then finally former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa with 9%. Tony Villar was scraping the bottom of the barrel, most likely because he has tried the hardest to hue a consistent, more centrist message, much as Loretta Sanchez attempted in the US Senate race against Kamala Harris. It’s not working with Democratic operatives, however.

In fact, this stifling of the official party endorsement happened for all contested statewide races and a number of Congressional seats targeted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The Democratic path to retaking the House runs through California’s Central Valley and Southern California region. Most of the targeted House Seats are in Southern California, and some of the Republican incumbents (Royce, Issa) have announced their retirements, mostly from a combination of term limits as committee chairmen as well as increasingly menacing odds from Democratic challenges targeting their seats.

There are so many Democrats jumping in, however, that liberal operatives fear that two Republicans could slide into the Top Two, denying Democrats their coveted chances at a House majority. Delegates could not unify and grant a 60% delegate threshold for one candidate running in those seats. It will be certainly interesting to see what happens June 5th, 2018.

All eyes are on California, that’s for sure. A continued determination of progressive-leftist Democratic dominance will signal more divisive politicking between the Left Coast and the White House. If Republicans manage to push statewide contenders into the general election contest, and then hold onto key House Seats, then Democratic hopes of stifling the President’s agenda will hit another wall, and we can expect not just a resurgence of MAGA energy across the country, but a massive realignment of national party politics, with the Democratic Party turning into a defunct, regionalized rump of its former self.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Lawlessness Prevails in California




3/18/2018 - Donna Carol Voss Townhall.com

Who needs E-Verify when you can appoint an illegal alien to a statewide post? As with a host of other looney, infuriating, and/or illegal things, California is the first state to have done exactly that. The California State Senate has appointed an illegal alien who is both an attorney—legally permitted to practice law in the Golden State—and an immigrants rights activist (read illegal immigrants rights activist) as a financial aid advisor. 

Lizbeth Mateo, 33, has been appointed to serve on the California Student Opportunity and Access Program Project Grant Advisory Committee. She was brought to the US by her parents when she was 14, graduated from Santa Clara University Law School in 2016, and passed the California bar last year. The committee needs her to advise them on how California taxpayers can spend more money on illegal immigrants’ higher education. Technically, her mission is to advise the commission on efforts to increase college access for students from low-income or “underserved” communities, but we all know what that means.

You don’t need to wonder if “underserved communities” is code for “illegal alien communities” because Ms. Mateo herself tells us it is. “While undocumented students have become more visible in our state, they remain underrepresented in places where decisions that affect them are being made." Translation: There are no shadows left in which illegal aliens are forced to live in California, and it is now time for them to take control of the increasingly generous benefits that accrue from their illegal status. In other words, illegal aliens will now be making decisions that affect the rest of us in the form of tax dollars spent on their higher education; reduced college access for American citizens because illegals are in those spots; and fewer low-wage jobs available to working class Americans in college towns that attract illegal aliens by dint of all the education benefits. 

A citizen advisor to the committee who would otherwise be making decisions that affect illegal aliens is being replaced by an illegal alien advisor making decisions that affect California citizens. To top it all off, tax dollars will be used to reimburse Ms. Mateo for her expenses, a violation of federal law about which California cares not one whit. The illegal tail is wagging the citizen dog. 

California makes no bones about its near fanatical mission to elevate illegal immigrants’ rights above California citizens’ rights. Phase one, essentially complete, is having no distinction—no advantage, no protection, no rights—of citizenship over non-citizenship. Our beloved Constitution, ironically, goes a long way toward making California’s mission easier. The Supreme Court has ruled that illegal aliens on American soil have due process rights thanks to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. When the ACLU sued the Trump administration to block the removal of DACA recipients, it was based on this reading of the amendment. 

Phase two, revving its engine, is promoting illegal alien “rights” at the cost of both public safety and California citizens’ control over how their tax dollars are spent. California already allows illegals to practice law, get a driver’s license, receive in-state tuition, and receive some welfare benefits. If an illegal alien is arrested, the state will even pay his or her legal fees, presumably to the aforementioned illegal alien attorneys. 

Sanctuary cities—states, in the case of California—are the biggest threat to public safety in the illegal immigrant world. When Oakland’s mayor warns illegal immigrants of impending ICE raids, and they scatter, ICE doesn’t stop looking for them. The harder they hide, the harder ICE has to look, which puts ICE agents and the public in greater danger as the risk of a standoff in the community increases. It also puts additional illegal aliens at risk for deportation if they are discovered incident to ICE searching the community for the designated illegal aliens. Talk about the law of unintended consequences.

California Senate Pro Tempore Kevin de León signaled a triumph of phase two when he announced Ms. Mateo’s appointment. “Ms. Mateo is a courageous, determined and intelligent young woman who at great personal risk has dedicated herself to fight for those seeking their rightful place in this country." Their rightful place? Let’s look at Ms. Mateo’s fight for her “rightful” place. 

In 2013, Ms. Mateo was central in helping a group of illegal aliens called the “Dream 9” cross the US border illegally after deportation, a felony. While it is a misdemeanor to cross the border illegally, it is a felony to cross illegally after having been deported. She assisted these aliens in the commission of a felony, yet she practices law today. She also advocates abolishing ICE, the agency whose mission is to protect American citizens from illegal immigration. For Ms. Mateo, ICE is an inconvenient reminder that she is, in fact, an illegal alien who has been denied DACA twice thanks to her trip to Mexico for the Dream 9. Her rightful place my eye!

California is so hell-bent on defying federal authorities, it looks like secession in the making. Maybe we should help them along. Let’s give them back to Mexico before they have the chance to secede. In about two seconds they’ll be trying to cross the border into Texas, but Texas, God love them, takes the rule of law seriously. Too bad so sad California elites. You wanted Mexico in California? You get California in Mexico. Enjoy!


Thursday, March 15, 2018

Lessons Learned - Soon Forgotten




3/15/2018 - Victor Davis Hanson Townhall.com

One hundred years ago this month, all hell broke loose in France. On March 21, 1918, the German army on the Western Front unleashed a series of massive attacks on the exhausted British and French armies.

German General Erich Ludendorff thought he could win World War I with one final blow. He planned to punch holes between the French and British armies. Then he would drive through their trenches to the English Channel, isolating and destroying the British army.

The Germans thought they had no choice but to gamble.

The British naval blockade of Germany after three years had reduced Germany to near famine. More than 200,000 American reinforcement troops were arriving each month in France. (Nearly 2 million would land altogether.) American farms and factories were sending over huge shipments of food and munitions to the Allies.

Yet for a brief moment, the war had suddenly swung in Germany's favor by March 1918. The German army had just knocked Russia and its new Bolshevik government out of the war. The victory on the Eastern Front freed up nearly 1 million German and Austrian soldiers, who were transferred west.

Germany had refined new rolling artillery barrages. Its dreaded "Stormtroopers" had mastered dispersed advances. The result was a brief window of advantage before the American juggernaut changed the war's arithmetic.

The Spring Offensive almost worked. Within days, the British army had suffered some 50,000 casualties. Altogether, about a half-million French, British and American troops were killed or wounded during the entire offensive.

But within a month, the Germans were sputtering. They could get neither supplies nor reinforcements to the English Channel. Germany had greedily left 1 million soldiers behind in the east to occupy and annex huge sections of conquered Eastern Europe and western Russia.

The British and French had learned new ways of strategic retreat. By summer of 2018, the Germans were exhausted. In August, the Allies began their own (even bigger) offensive and finally crushed the retreating Germans, ending the war in November 1918.

What were the lessons of the failed German offensive?

The fortunes of war can change in days. In late March 1918, the Germans thought the war was won. Three months later, they knew it was lost. Often, the worst moments of war come right before the end, as the last-gasp battles of Waterloo, the Bulge and Okinawa remind us.

In 2016, an ascendant Islamic State bragged that it had formed a vast new Islamic caliphate. By the end of 2017, ISIS had been bombed to smithereens and routed.

Long-term strategy matters. Without a strategic vision, short-term tactical success means nothing. The advancing Germans had no real idea of what to do next -- even if they reached the English Channel. There was never any chance that the British would quit. The British had survived worse at the earlier battles of the Somme and Passchendaele.

In our time, America has never quite determined its strategic aims in the nearly 17-year-old Afghan war. Is it to crush the Taliban? To build a democracy in Afghanistan? To rid the country of terrorist havens? To stop the opium trade? To make Afghanistan economically and militarily self-sufficient? To simply not lose? All that and more have been mentioned as American goals.

Alliances are critical. What did it matter that Germany had finally defeated Russia if at nearly the same time it had provoked an even stronger new enemy in America? The key to denuclearizing North Korea is creating a frontline partnership of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the U.S. -- and to flip either China or Russia to our side to ensure that sanctions strangle Pyongyang.

War is decided as much by economics as by soldiers. Germany unleashed a lethal army against the Allies, but its soldiers did not even have enough food or munitions to sustain the offensive after a few weeks. Germany had neither the food nor the factory capacity to conduct war against the combined might of Britain, France and the United States. In many ways, 1918 Germany was like today's Russia -- formidable on the battlefield, but only for a short duration and without the economic ability to finish what it starts.

Leaders usually ignore history. A little more than 20 years after the Spring Offensive, Hitler's Third Reich fought America, Britain, France and Russia; unleashed its armies in a two-front war in Europe; was blockaded; and lost another world war.

The final battles of World War I will have their 100 anniversaries this year. But the lessons of how Germany almost won and then suddenly lost are ageless.


Monday, March 12, 2018

Wake Up America - We Are Becoming Ancient Rome



3/3/2018 - John Hawkins Townhall.com
The Romans spent almost 500 years as a republic before Julius Caesar’s adopted son Augustus became the first Roman emperor. The Romans moved on from having kings to becoming the first republic, to sliding backward into monarchy and tyranny and it’s not impossible that America will follow a similar trajectory.  In fact, if you study Roman history, it’s not hard to see the parallels. 


1) It’s Extremely Dangerous To Introduce Violence Into The Political Process:  Tiberius Gracchus was an arrogant Roman Populist who cared little for the niceties of tradition and even less for the opinions of his opponents. He proposed confiscating land from the rich to give to soldiers and poor Romans. This was a terrible policy which helped lead to the fall of the Roman Republic, but unsurprisingly it was quite popular. However, there was quite a bit of resistance to the policy in the Senate and passing legislation of this sort without the approval of the Senate simply wasn’t done in ancient Rome. That is until Tiberius Gracchus found a loophole and did it anyway, earning him the outright hatred of the Senate. Later, a misunderstanding made the members of the Senate believe that their hated enemy was going to overthrow the government and make himself king.

They responded to this misunderstanding by surrounding him, ripping the legs off benches and beating him to death. This was the start of a long, violent, slippery slope in Rome as political violence became ever more common. In time, politicians had their own gangs that fought in the street. Senators were knifed on the floor of the Senate and eventually, the leadership of the nation was determined by who could bring the biggest army to Rome. Here in America, we are now starting to see politically-motivated violence. Riots at Berkeley to keep conservatives from speaking. A white supremacist driving his car into the crowd. A Bernie Sanders supporter shooting up a Republican softball game. Protests where the protesters and counter-protesters bring weapons. This goes nowhere good and we would be wise to clamp down hard on this sort of violence before it gets out of hand. 

2) When Governance Becomes A Means Of Personal Enrichment First, Good Governance Comes Last:  As the Roman Empire declined, something called the Crisis of the Third Century occurred. For the most part, it followed a pattern like so: the current emperor would be assassinated, usually by his own troops. Then, the strongest governors for the outer provinces of the Roman Empire would marshal their forces and march on Rome. After a bloody struggle, one of them would become the Roman emperor.

Unfortunately, while the troops who manned the edges of the empire were fighting in Rome, barbarians would storm across the borders to pillage, loot and rape everything in their path. Soon thereafter, perhaps frustrated by the incompetence that allowed this to occur, some of the soldiers who put the emperor in power would then murder him and the cycle would start again. This led to Rome having something like 20 emperors during a 50 year period as the Empire fell into further disrepair.

Thank God that John McCain and Dianne Feinstein don’t have their own personal armies, but are they – and the rest of the members of Congress – really putting the country first anymore? Is good governance a bigger concern than pleasing special interest groups and getting TV time? Do our leaders make anything more than a grandstanding surface attempt to tackle the tough issues that confront America? Are our politicians the best among us? Are they men like Washington, Jefferson and Adams who were determined to make this a better country for future generations or just top-of-the-line con artists smart enough to think bigger than bilking old ladies out of their pension checks?

Good governance doesn’t just happen. It takes the right kind of people in office to make it happen and for the most part, those are no longer the sort of men and women we have in charge.

3) If You Stop Doing What Makes You Successful, The Success Won’t Continue Forever:   In the early days of the Roman Republic, the soldiers tended to be the WEALTHIER people in society. That was because they needed a certain amount of money to buy the equipment needed to fight. Back then, being a Roman citizen meant something. No politician dared mistreat a citizen of the empire for fear of retaliation from Rome. For most of the Roman Republic, there was no welfare and people were expected to take care of themselves.

The republic was certainly challenged during these years, but it stayed free and strong and it was the driving force of the civilized world. Eventually, things changed for the worse as the Roman elite became more interested in using the government to become rich and powerful instead of using it for the good of the people. Later on, the rich seldom fought unless it was at the head of an army, which was a money-making venture in those days. Roman emperors had citizens put to death solely because they wanted to repossess their lands and money to give to their supporters.

Free grain along with extravagant games in the Colosseum were given to the mob, which became increasingly demanding, irrational and violent. As many of the traditions, practices and character traits that made Rome successful disappeared, Rome became weaker. It moved toward decadence, weakness and tyranny. Eventually the Western half of the Empire fell in 476 A.D. If you had to pick a period of Roman history that today’s post-constitutional America is reminiscent of, it would be that last stage of the Roman Republic when freedom was slowly, but surely slipping away from the Romans while corrupt men fought to control the spoils that running the government could bring. Don’t take the freedom we have for granted because we could lose it one day just as easily as the Romans did. 

4) When People Can’t Get Justice Under The Law, They Will Go Outside The Law:   Many people have heard of Julius Caesar’s famous decision to “cross the Rubicon” and begin a Roman civil war, but the devil is in the details. You see at this point in Roman history, the Republic was hanging on by a thread. Appearances were largely kept up, but Caesar and his former partner-turned-rival Pompey were the two most powerful men in the country and each feared the other intended to take over. Yet and still, Caesar had not committed to that course of action.

So when Caesar returned from Gaul, he made a simple offer. He would be willing to disband his armies before crossing the Rubicon and entering Rome if Pompey did the same thing. Although the Senate voted in favor of this proposal, a number of prominent senators undermined it and encouraged Pompey not to disarm. Had Caesar returned to Rome while his rival had an army at his back, he likely would have been killed. So instead, he crossed the Rubicon with his own troops and that was the beginning of the end for the Roman Republic.

As we have become ever more tribal in America, we have started to simply not care about being fair to our political adversaries. The “free press” is hopelessly hostile and biased toward conservatives. The IRS and FBI have been used for political purposes. The EPA has put draconian restrictions on what people can do with their own land. Liberals openly advocate using the court system to implement laws that can’t make it through Congress.

The federal government has become ever more powerful and its reach has become ever longer and more restricting. As we saw with Hillary Clinton and with illegal aliens, if you are politically powerful enough or part of a catered-to group, the laws don’t apply to you. This is all extremely dangerous because it undercuts the rule of law, respect for law and the compassionate and fair application of the law.  When people conclude that only outlaws can get justice, people will become outlaws. 

5) Immigration Only Works As Long As There Is Assimilation: Like the United States, the Romans were great believers in bringing other people under the banners. Instead of subjugating and enslaving the foreign nations they captured, the Romans usually made them part of their alliance. In some cases they gave them full citizenship, but even a lesser form of citizenship was no small thing given the power of the Romans and how they could have behaved given their strength. This was a big part of why the Romans became so successful.

However, as time went on, things began to change. The Romans had at times allowed conquered tribes to enter their territory, but they always split them up so they’d have no choice other than to live surrounded by Romans and learn their ways. As the Empire became more decadent, they allowed tribes of barbarians to move into Roman territory as a group under their old rulers. Under those circumstances, the barbarians kept their old culture. Eventually, the Romans started bringing these foreigners into their military.

The Western half of the Roman Empire was especially guilty of this. In time, the foot soldiers in the military were largely German Goths who ironically were primarily needed to fight other German Goths who surged across the borders.  This was problematic for a number of reasons, but just to name one, it sometimes led to Roman cities being besieged and sacked by their own unassimilated German troops. Eventually, the Western half of the Roman Empire fell as the foreign troops decided they’d rather be ruled by a barbarian king named Odoacer.

Here in America, not only do we have surging immigration, we no longer encourage immigrants to assimilate to our culture. It has gotten so bad that we’d rather tell people to press 2 for Spanish instead of insisting that they learn English. Immigration has gotten so out-of-control that even suggesting that we should limit immigration or only allowing immigrants who obey our laws to come here is called “racist.” The Romans eventually lost their nation over that sort of attitude and one day, the same thing may happen to us if we’re not careful.  


Saturday, March 10, 2018

California an Economic & Cultural Disaster




3/10/2018- Jeff Crouere Townhall.com

At one time, California was the envy of America, attracting people from around the nation to move to a state offering opportunity and the chance to pursue ambitious dreams. With scenic beauty, the Pacific Ocean coastline, the major cities of San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco, California recruited entrepreneurs looking for economic growth. As the home of Hollywood and multitudes of celebrities, California presented an enticing potential to enjoy“lifestyles of the rich and famous.”

Today, California has become an economic and cultural disaster. The state is home to over 114,000 homeless people, one quarter of the total in the nation. In San Francisco, a health crisis has developed as the homeless have created a mess in the downtown area, littering it with fecal matter, spent needles and piles of trash.

The droughts have led to misguided water regulations imposed by environmentalists and liberal government bureaucrats. These officials also love to burden state residents and corporations with higher taxes. As a result, people and businesses are fleeing a state beset with too many regulations, tax rates that are not competitive with neighboring states and an array of other insufferable liberal policies. Even a sizable portion of the film industry has moved from Hollywood to other states offering tax incentives and a better business climate.

California officials have implemented high tax rates to fund an array of expensive services for an ever-growing population of illegal aliens. Their statewide elected politicians, such as Governor Jerry Brown, support open borders and sanctuary status for illegal aliens. In fact, the entire state has become a sanctuary for those who break our immigration laws.

Americans should never forget Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal alien who had been deported five times to Mexico, who shot 32-year-old Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier and ran away from the scene as she died in the arms of her father. Several months before the July 1, 2015 incident, Lopez-Sanchez was in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after serving a federal prison sentence. However, San Francisco Police wanted him on a drug related warrant, so he was transferred to their control. Unfortunately, the San Francisco Police subsequently released him and did not bother to notify federal authorities. This is due to their refusal to honor “immigration detainers” that San Francisco officials believe is a violation of the Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

As a result of their desire to protect the rights of non-citizens, San Francisco officials allowed an illegal alien back onto the streets. Sadly, that decision ultimately cost one young woman her life. The tragic death produced a national outcry, but it did not lead to any changes in California policies. The Steinle killing was not an isolated incident as throughout California, local and state officials refuse to work with federal authorities to combat the out-of-control problem of illegal immigration. These misguided policies prevent the Trump administration from taking effective action.

Over the last week, California was in the news again for the wrong reasons. The liberal Democrat Mayor of Oakland, Libby Schaaf, issued a warning to illegal aliens that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents were conducting raids in the city. She asked residents to “protect” these illegal aliens, who she called the “most vulnerable” residents of Oakland.

As a result, 800 illegal aliens evaded capture and the ICE agents were only able to apprehend 232 lawbreakers. These individuals were not Boy Scouts, in fact, 180 of them had criminal records and 115 of them had convictions for serious offenses such as child sex crimes, weapons charges or assault.

ICE was doing the community a favor by removing criminal threats and protecting innocent citizens. Regrettably, the Oakland Mayor decided to give support to illegal aliens and violent criminals instead of law abiding taxpayers.

At a press availabilityon Thursday, President Trump denounced her actions and called it “a disgrace” that she undercut the ability of ICE agents to conduct raids.The acting Director of ICE, Tom Homan, labeled her comments “a whole new low, to intentionally warn criminals that law enforcement is coming.”

Fortunately, the Trump administration acted in federal court against the rogue state of California. On Tuesday night, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit which claimed that three state laws are illegal and are pre-empted by federal law. The laws prevent employers and state officials from cooperating with federal officials on cases involving illegal immigrants.

In his speech announcing the lawsuit, Attorney General Jeff Sessions called the California laws “unjust, unfair and unconstitutional.” He also condemned the actions of the Mayor of Oakland by asking “How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical open borders agenda?”

These are good first steps by the Department of Justice, but they are not enough. The Attorney General should also file charges against the Mayor of Oakland personally. It is time that these California elected officials face legal consequences for their despicable behavior and their arrogant flouting of federal law.


Friday, March 9, 2018

Progressivism=Lawlessness=Nihilism & Chaos




3/8/2018 - Victor Davis Hanson Townhall.com

Not long ago I waited for a flight to board. The plane took off 45 minutes late. There were only two attendants to accommodate 11 passengers who had requested wheelchair assistance.

Such growing efforts to ensure that the physically challenged can easily fly are certainly welcome. But when our plane landed -- late and in danger of causing many passengers to miss their connecting flights -- most of the 11 wheelchair-bound passengers left their seats unassisted and hurried out. It was almost as if newfound concerns about making connections had somehow improved their health during the flight.

Two passengers had boarded with two dogs each. No doubt the airlines' policy of allowing an occasional dog on a flight is understandable. But now planes are starting to sound and smell like kennels.

Special blue parking placards were initially a long-overdue effort to help the disabled. But these days, the definition of "disabled" has so expanded that a large percentage of the population can qualify for special parking privileges -- or cheat in order to qualify.

In California, 26,000 disabled parking placards are currently issued to people over 100 years of age, even though state records list only about 8,000 living centenarians.

Current crises such as homelessness and illegal immigration did not start out as much of a public concern.

Originally, progressive politicians felt that cities should bend their vagrancy laws a bit to allow some of the poor to camp on the sidewalks. Bathroom and public health issues were considered minor, given the relatively small pool of so-called "street people."

Few objected to illegal immigration in the 1960s and 1970s. Foreign nationals came unlawfully across the border in relatively small numbers -- thousands, not millions. Fifty years ago, America was eager to assimilate even the few arrivals who arrived illegally. Not now. The melting pot gave way to the identity politics of the tribe that asks little integration of the newcomers.

Whether out of guilt or out of fear of being perceived as exclusionary by harder leftists, progressives cannot, or will not, draw realistic limits to illegal immigration or homelessness. Yet both cost the law-abiding public billions of dollars in social services, often at the expense of American poor.

This rapid spread of progressivism leads to an endless race for absolute equality and an erosion of prior rules. It also makes once-liberal positions seem passe, recasting those positions as dangerously reactionary.

In 2008, Barack Obama ran for president on a number of Bill Clinton's centrist Democratic policies. Obama opposed gay marriage as contrary to his own Christian beliefs.

Obama supported increased security along the border with Mexico. As a senator, he had voted for a 2006 measure to create 700 miles of new fencing along the Mexican border.

But by the time Obama sought re-election in 2012, progressives were routinely labeling Obama's positions on gay marriage and immigration as homophobic and nativist, respectively.

Twenty years ago, there was honest debate over global warming. Ten years ago, there was still honest debate over the effects of human-induced climate change. Five years ago, there was still honest debate over the cost-benefit analysis of dealing with the problem.

Not now. Anyone who doubts that there is an existential man-caused threat to the planet -- requiring the radical and costly reconstruction of the global economy and society -- is considered a "denier," deserving of professional ostracism or worse.

In the eternal search for perfect justice and equality, what starts out as liberal can quickly end up as progressively absurd. The logic of equality of result, rather than equality of opportunity, demands that there is always one more group, one more grievance, one more complaint against the shrinking and overwhelmed majority.

The conservative ancient Athenian philosopher Plato once made his megaphone Socrates lament that in ancient Athens' nonstop search for perfect equality, soon even the horses would have to be accorded the same privileges as humans.

Socrates' fantasy was an exaggeration intended as a reminder about the craziness of always-creeping mandated equality. Now it seems not far from the mainstream positions of animal-rights groups.

If we insist that the human experience is not tragic and cyclical, but instead must always bend on some predetermined arc to absolute equality and fairness, then unfortunate results must follow.

One, what is welcomed as progressive on Monday is derided as intolerable on Tuesday. The French and Russian revolutions went through several such cycles. After reformers had removed absolute rulers, the reformers were soon derided as too timid. Then came far more radical revolutionaries, who were in turn beheaded or shot as dangerous counter-revolutionaries.

Second, when rules and regulations are always watered down as too exclusionary, the descent to no rules is quite short. The ultimate destination is nihilism and chaos. We see that now in Venezuela and Cuba -- and increasingly in California as well.


Monday, March 5, 2018

Judicial Tyranny Thrives With Impunity!




3/5/2018 - Arthur Schaper Townhall.com

I was thrilled September 5th 2017 when President Trump announced, through Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Even though illegal aliens and the enabling political class assembled in front of the Edward Roybal Federal Building to denounce this decision. The building name is telling. That Roybal moniker has controlled East Los Angeles-LA County politics for decades. Daddy Roybal passed on his House seat to daughter Lucille, and she still pushes mass immigration at the expense of American citizens.

That legacy is coming to an end.

The small gathering of progressives and hostile liberals cried and bellowed at the sky. DACA is over. One guy got in my face and called me an “a—hole” repeatedly. A few other left-wing agitators rolled up to me and badgered me because I was happy that “little children” were going to be deported. First of all, the vast majority of the DACA recipients are not children. Many of them are in their late 20’s, and there are some even in their upper 30’s! The media have been pushing this false narrative for decades, inducing Americans to feel sorry for the young illegals whose parents brought them into our country without our permission. We have laws, you know!

In fact, I pressured a few of the younger agitators with some simple questions: “Do you have a door? Do you lock it at night?” Then I asked if they still have walls around their homes. They had to concede that they live in secure buildings. Why can’t we as a country demand that the federal government lock the nation’s door and finish the wall along our border?

Because people on the left living in feelings and not facts, one woman jeered at me: “Why are you so into the law?” Why are they not into the law? Fed up with the circular reasoning, I reached to grab the bike away from her, and she lit up immediately: “Don’t touch my sh-t!” Her hypocrisy on border security and the rule of law was exposed immediately. She didn’t want a wall along our southern border, she doesn’t care about the rule of law, but the moment she thinks someone wants to take her bicycle, she screams and yells. These liberals are such hypocrites. (warning: graphic language)

Truly, though, it was brilliant and welcome that President Trump handed over the DACA issue to Congress, regardless of what the lawmakers wanted to do. The situation should have been resolved by law, not executive fiat with a pen and phone. And that’s when I really got busy. Six months is a long time, and yet not much time to promote or prevent legislation. I am committed to seeing more enforcement, not more amnesty. This country has been generous enough. It’s time to address our manifold domestic concerns. A sharp reduction in legal immigration along with a full stop to illegal immigration must be the call of the day.

I was in Washington, D.C. for five days last year, and I whipped through every Congressional office I could. I showed staffers the many videos my fellow conservative activists and I had taken of the DACA brats and their violent supporters. They harassed Congressmen all over Southern California, too. Did these arrogant, entitled “kids” really think that Christmas trees, loud chants, and nasty pictures haranguing Republicans were going to win over public support?

Nope.

Back home, it was a lot of fun watching Congress punts from one spending bill to the next, and Democrats could get nothing close to an amnesty or any form of legal status for illegal aliens. Despite President Trump’s simplistic lip-service to offer a pathway to citizenship for three times the population of DACA recipients, I believed Trump was playing the Democrats like a harp from hell the whole time.

The Schumer Shutdown shut down Democrats’ moral superiority on immigration. They made illegal aliens more important than Americans, particularly our military. The second budget battle gave way to massive spending (bad), but no immigration deals (good). The open floor process collapsed before our very eyes. Even though I was a little spooked to see eight Republicans push for more immigration and a mass amnesty, every bad bill died.

And we won. March 5th, 2018 is upon us, and the left-wing, anti-social injustice warriors have nothing to show for their screaming, yelling, cursing, swearing, and en masse spending from George Soros. Life is good, and the Republic will endure.

Now, some critics and concerned voices have reminded me of the judicial policy misconduct from two federal district courts. Yes, they have blocked the full repeal of DACA, but new applicants can no longer apply. Ultimately, this juridical problem is another issue, beyond immigration. It’s time for Congress to crack down on judicial tyranny. How about a nice repeal of Marbury vs. Madison for starters? Then maybe Congress could get back to working within the framework of its enumerated powers while restoring all other rights to the states and the people.

Even though the United States Supreme Court refused a fast-track review of the issue, the truth is that the DOJ’s request was extraordinary to begin with. This program is on even more shaky ground, and ICE is rounding up illegals like never before. For me, the March 5th deadline for Congress to come up with a “solution” to DACA is what matters. There is no solution, because this utter lawlessness, and the decades of inaction and enabling from our federal government, didn’t need another legislative band-aid.

With that, let me leave you with now-deceased Terry Anderson, another conservative sage from South Central who testified twice before Congress: “We don’t need any new laws. Enforce the ones we got.” The laws are being enforced, finally. And we don’t have to feel guilty anymore. In a sense, the illegal aliens’ dreams have been deferred, but the expectation of Americans seeking law and order—that dream is finally being realized. This is a happy day for me.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

Democrat Mayor Break Laws With Impunity!




3/4/2018 - Ron Hosko Townhall.com

In a development that’s reflective of the widening chasm of viewpoints on the treatment of illegal aliens in America, a big city mayor, Oakland’s Libby Schaaf, issued a public warning of impending Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immigration sweeps.The arrests went forward anyway, netting more than 150, including several wanted for serious and violent crimes.

Acting ICE boss Tom Homan wasted no time in calling the mayor the equivalent of a gang lookout and pointing to the difficulties ICE faces in “sanctuary” jurisdictions like Oakland and San Francisco, saying, “Because these jurisdictions prevent ICE from arresting criminal aliens in the secure confines of a jail, they also force ICE officers to make more arrests out in the community, which poses increased risks for law enforcement and the public.”  

Homan is right.  Liberal mayors like Schaaf, ever-willing to see illegal immigrants only as victims, are working harder than ever to poke Washington, D.C., and its law enforcers in the eye.  Today, Schaaf is at the epicenter, prodding and testing, claiming moral high ground while ignoring the basic expectations of a sovereign nation and recklessly dismissing the increased risk to ICE agents trying to do a difficult job.

Just across the bay, a dark reality of illegal immigration is entering its next phase.

There, on the touristy Embarcadero three years ago, a beautiful American dreamer named Kate Steinle strolled with her father.  Without warning, she was on the ground bleeding to death and begging him for help – an experience no child or parent should ever have to suffer.

The man responsible for Kate’s death, at the age of 32, was Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, a Mexican man illegally, yet consistently, on U.S. streets despite seven felony convictions and five prior deportations.

Garcia Zarate was lined up for yet another removal in early 2015 when transferred by federal authorities to San Francisco to face a local 20-year-old marijuana charge. When that charge was dropped, San Francisco authorities opted to release him pursuant to their sanctuary city policies rather than return him to ICE custody.  Within weeks, Kate Steinle was cut down by a bullet, fired from a gun he was handling, on that San Francisco pier.  

Garcia Zarate’s is a case study in the failure of sanctuary policies that have overspread the country and whose most vocal proponents seem to reside in California.  The Mexican career criminal has more experience with the American criminal justice system than any graduating law school student could hope for.  The cost of investigating his acts; of charging, prosecuting and defending him; and the cost of detaining and imprisoning him if even for all-too-brief periods, has undoubtedly rolled into seven figures, all borne by the taxpayer.His is the face of border insecurity, the face of massive taxpayer expense, and, for innocent Kate Steinle, the face of a grim reaper.

This killer has had all the benefits of the American courts and will get even more in the months ahead.

Rightly hedging the federal government’s bet on whether a San Francisco jury would convict Garcia Zarate of the most serious charges in Kate’s death, the Feds indicted him late last year for being a felon in possession of a firearm.  They guessed right.  In December, the jury acquitted Garcia Zarate of murder and manslaughter charges which, even in California, might have imprisoned him for a long time.  Instead, the criminal illegal was found guilty only of illegal weapon possession and in January, Garcia Zarate, facing a maximum sentence of three years in prison, was sentenced to time served.  

It’s now the Feds’ turn, where a conviction could bring 10-year sentences for each of two counts.  This time, Garcia Zarate will have the federal taxpayer-funded free ride while having his actions defended by talkative attorney J. Tony Serra, who plans to put the president on trial instead of his client.  Serra is already on record saying, “A vote for guilty in the federal case is a vote for Trump,” adding, his client is “being made a martyr to the racist perspective of Trump.”

Serra is wrong.  A vote for guilty could well be a vote for restoration of the rule of law, a vote for justice, a vote to hold a repeat criminal alien accountable for his own actions.  

Regardless of the federal outcome, mouthy Tony Serra and Libby Schaaf will succeed on one front – their twisted views are being heard and are helping push the divide over America’s illegal alien management issues wider.  

Liberal politicians like Schaaf and those in San Francisco who’ve wrapped themselves in the sanctuary policies that put Jose Ines Garcia Zarate back on the street to steal Kate Steinle’s promising life have themselves evaded criminal charges despite their complicity.  They wantonly ignore the potential harm to their own citizens, claiming greater concern about the separation of family members who are unlawfully in the country.For many, that noble notion crumbles with the realization that Kate Steinle’s separation from her family is permanent.  Garcia Zarate will come back; Kate can’t.  

Meanwhile, the attention-seeking Oakland mayor is hard at work widening the illegal immigration divide as she puts federal immigration agents at increased risk.  

Ron Hosko is president of the Law Enforcement Action Network and a former FBI assistant director.