Some extremely important provisions are outlined in this short post.

 

If Trump sympathizes with some illegal aliens out there...

By Earick Ward www.americanthinker.com

It was just reported that President Trump may have softened his stance on deportations, particularly as it relates to farm workers and hotel workers. In a Truth Social post seen on X, Trump wrote: 

Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace.

President Trump — no!

I’m sympathetic to the plight of some employers in some industries, but I am also intimately familiar with Ronald Reagan’s bargain, as it related to granting amnesty to the 3 million illegal aliens who were in America in the 1980s.  As Ed Meese recounts, Ronald Reagan considered his Amnesty Bill (the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986) his administration’s greatest mistake.

I’ve proposed before, and I will here again: I believe that there is a middle ground that can be staked out.  First off, amnesty of illegal invaders is off the table, but many industries in our economy are heavily dependent on the workers whom President Trump alluded to in his post.  Although the American people are wholly onboard with rounding up and deporting “criminal” illegal aliens, many would like to see some accommodation made for those who, though they came here illegally, are hardworking, have stayed out of trouble, and provide the country a net economic benefit.

Here’s the proposal: a new non-citizen legal status.  Create a legal carve-out for (some of) those who have come here illegally, or overstayed their visas, if they register, are vetted, and are immediately processed for legal non-citizen status.

Non-citizen legal status would grant said immigrants the ability to work in America, but they would not be able to vote or receive federal aid or matching funds for social safety net programs.  If a state wants to cover their education, housing, and health care (Medicaid) costs, that should be the prerogative of the individual state (and its taxpayers).  Federal funds should not be provided to pay for these state-provided services.  Voter ID would need to be adopted nationally as part of this accommodation in order to ensure that only citizens are voting in state and federal elections.

Citizenship would never be offered for this classification of people; however, as the Trump administration has laid out, any illegal alien currently residing in America can register, self-deport, and be considered for citizenship at a later date.

Any illegal alien not registered in this program would be immediately arrested, detained, and deported.  Funding and enforcement would need to be ramped up (at the front end) to effect these deportations and to prohibit future invasion.  

This proposal would immediately disabuse the premise that Democrats care for these people beyond their vote.

 

Same old 'trouble-makers' guarantee a fatal outcome!

 

In California, with Pelosi and Newsom, it’s déjà vu all over again

By Andrea Widburg www.americanthinker.com

Up until a few years ago, I’d spent most of my life in California. I miss fog and good Chinese food but, otherwise, I’m grateful not to be there anymore. Still, California lives in my memory, which is why I’ve had a strong “déjà vu all over again” feeling listening to Nancy Pelosi speak and watching Gavin Newsom work his career. Democrats aren’t breaking new ground here; it’s the same old, same old.

First, Nancy Pelosi joined the choir of Democrats downplaying the violence in Los Angeles. As far as she was concerned, there was nothing sinister about mobs of people attacking ICE agents and police in the performance of their duties. Instead, she said, it is just a bunch of wholesome people responding to the “exuberance of the moment.”

Wow! Instant flashback to 1992, the last time mobs went on a major rampage in Los Angeles. During that riot, Reginald Denny, a construction worker, while delivering a load of sand, innocently made what proved to be a disastrous decision.

He got off the rush-hour-choked freeway and went onto a city road. A rampaging mob forced him to stop, dragged him out of his car, and four members of the mob proceeded to beat the living daylights out of him, leaving him with serious and permanent injuries. The entire thing was caught on camera by a local news helicopter circling overhead.

The four men caught on camera were identified as Damian Williams, Henry Watson, Antoine Miller, and Gary Williams, suspected gang members. The charges against Miller and Gary Williams were swiftly handled, resulting in fairly minimal prison sentences.

Meanwhile, Damian Williams and Henry Watson had a full, well-publicized trial. Watson was convicted of a single misdemeanor assault, while Williams was convicted of four misdemeanors and simple mayhem. However, because Denny wasn’t the only person Damian Williams assaulted, he was sentenced to ten years in prison. He got out just five years later, ending up in prison for life when he was convicted of murdering a drug dealer.

The general tenor of the defense is that Williams really could not be held responsible for what he was doing, a notion Williams himself summed up in an interview quoted in a 1993 New York Times article:

In an interview with the Wave Newspaper Group, a newspaper chain that mainly serves a black readership, Mr. Williams said of the riots, “People were just out of control like a pack of rats running after cheese.” He added, “I was just caught up in the rapture.”

Rapture. Exuberance. You say to-may-to and I say to-mah-to. At least Williams, unlike Pelosi, went on to add, “What I did was wrong... It was unjustified...” Pelosi doesn’t seem to see things that way.

Meanwhile, Gavin Newsom is also taking a page out of an old playbook to elevate his political profile. This time around, he’s obviously positioning himself to be the Democrats’ chosen candidate in 2028. Last time, when he was the lowly mayor of San Francisco, he had his sights on the governor’s mansion.

In 2004, he used the same technique he’s using now: Flouting the law to set himself up as a hero of the leftist resistance. Then, the resistance was framed as gay marriage, not fighting for illegal immigration. So it was that Newsom directed the clerk for the City and County of San Francisco to issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples.

That was Gavin’s moment. As Wikipedia says, although the Supreme Court swiftly nullified all those licenses, “Newsom's unexpected move brought national attention to the issue of same-sex marriage, solidifying political support for him in San Francisco and in the LGBTQ+ community.” Seven years later, Newsom was California’s lieutenant governor, and in 2019, he was governor of the most populous state in America. His plan worked, and he’s working the plan again.

The Bible tells us that there is nothing new under the sun, and popular wisdom often reminds us that there is no need to reinvent the wheel. No wonder, then, that Democrats are turning to tried and true tropes and tactics. It’s to be hoped, though, that this time around, the facts on the ground and the president in the White House are sufficiently different that these tropes and tactics yield (for Democrats) unpleasant outcomes.

 

California elected officials have literally ruined and bankrupted the 'once golden State'!

 

Karen Bass says if ICE raids persist, there will be ‘nobody’ left to nanny the children and mow the lawns

By Olivia Murray www.americanthinker.com

Everyone probably remembers during Donald Trump’s first presidency when Kelly Osbourne completely jammed her foot in her mouth during a segment on The View when she got a little carried away talking like a tough guy, delivering what she no doubt thought was a zinger: “If you kick every Latino out of this country, then who is going to be cleaning your toilet, Donald Trump?”

It was such a monumental jack** moment, even the other View women gasped and cringed, and Osbourne quickly backpeddled.

That was only the beginning. Since then, Democrat after Democrat has warned what enforcing immigration law means (but only when Republicans do it), and that is the disappearance of slave labor. (I swear, if in 50 years the Democrats demand reparations for the illegals who were underpaid and treated like property, the very policies they support now, I’m gonna lose it.)

As we’re all acutely aware, Los Angeles is indistinguishable from a third world riot scene. If you didn’t know better, you’d think you were in Mogadishu in July 1989, or Tripoli in 2011—but nope, it’s just a Golden State city after decades of Democrat control.

And, offering her two cents about the events, mayor Karen Bass says that if the ICE raids persist, there will be “nobody” left to nanny LA’s children or mow the lawns.

Her comments are below, from a report at Fox News:

‘My biggest fear is the impact that all Angelenos will begin to feel when the labor of immigrants is absent,’ Bass said. ‘We’ll feel it in the construction industry. We’ll feel it in hospitality. We’ll feel it at grocery stores. People will begin to notice.’

She continued, ‘You think about the mothers who have nannies and housekeepers. They will feel it when there's nobody to do childcare and there’s nobody to take their kids to school. You know, you will feel it when your gardener goes away, and you don’t know where he or she is. So Angelenos will feel the absence of immigrant labor.’

There will be “nobody” left to undercut American wages and steal American jobs? Sounds like a win-win to me. Oh the horror that a parent would have to care for their own child, or tend the garden without the help!

But she is right, rooting out illegals would be felt in the job market—because they’re taking a ton of our jobs. One study presented a very, very conservative estimate, that 11% of the workforce in LA is made up of illegal workers. The Las Vegas Sun reports that immigrant labor makes up a whopping 55% of the job market in California—how many of those are illegals?—and then there’s this, from a search engine AI:

In California, around 40% of the construction workforce is composed of immigrants, with about half of them potentially lacking documentation. An estimated 45% of agricultural workers are undocumented.

However… you know who we wouldn’t miss if they didn’t show up for “work”? Government parasites, like Bass. Can we loose ICE on California’s elected officials, so they too stop showing their faces in public?

 

The LA Riots are all about 'control of the narrative' - this insanity will eventually destroy our once great Republic - unless the current Administration takes control.

 

No One’s Illegal on Stolen Land—And Other Nonsense Shouted Between Acts of Arson

By Charlton Allen www.americanthinker.com

Welcome to Los Angeles, where all manner of laws are optional, the slogans are preposterous, and the politicians behave like extras in their own Netflix docudrama.

This week’s moral hallucination? “No one’s illegal on stolen land.”

Yes, that’s now a standard feature of the protest scene in the City of Angels—where civic disorder is a form of self-expression, and slogans are a substitute for intelligent discourse.

A powerful statement—if you’re high on hashtags and low on history. Or just plain high.

Which, judging by the last few decades of California ballot returns, seems to be both a pastime and a prerequisite for public office.

The flashpoint came after ICE agents—cast by the left as medieval villains in a morality play no one asked for—executed a series of lawful immigration enforcement actions, and in response, activists, anarchists, and Antifa cosplayers erupted in protest—chanting absurd incantations to the protest demigods, and offering the usual tribute to that most sacred of rituals: political violence.

By sundown, downtown L.A. looked like a sequel to Escape from—well—L.A., with better lighting and a worse casting director.

Looters liberated iPhones and vape pens from bourgeois retailers. Protesters blocked highways and set dumpsters ablaze—hopefully with no homeless injured in this particular civil disobedience exercise.

The city burned, the slogans echoed, and once again, the Democrat establishment found itself struggling to tell the difference between civil disobedience and felony arson.

President Trump, unimpressed with California’s usual cocktail of shilly-shallying and moral preening, invoked Title 10 and deployed 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles.

In any event, the federal government acted while California’s leadership issued statements telling America to ignore its lying eyes.

No Los Angeles riot scene is complete without a cameo from Congresswoman Maxine Waters, the perennial flame-thrower who long ago confused volume with virtue.

Waters first denied that there was any violence. “No one was shot. No one was killed,” she declared, as flaming barricades lit up the skyline and journalists staggered away from tear gas with bleeding faces—live on cable news.

Then again, Maxine Waters has been in politics so long that she may no longer recognize a riot—especially when it fits the narrative. When you’ve cheered enough mayhem, it stops looking like mayhem. It just looks like Tuesday.

Not satisfied with gaslighting the country, she then attempted to storm a federal detention facility—at least as much as her 86-year-old legs would allow—unauthorized—and reportedly taunted National Guard members stationed outside. “You better shoot straight,” she told them.

Let that sink in. An elected member of Congress, standing in front of uniformed soldiers, demanding they “shoot straight.”

Never one to shoot straight herself, today’s Maxine sounds less like a hero and more like Private Slovik—oblivious, derelict, and unfit for duty.

The Department of Homeland Security promptly condemned her behavior, calling it “dangerous” and the congresswoman was “spewing lies” about the violence.

But not, somehow, surprising.

Now, back to this bit about “No one’s illegal on stolen land.”

I learned a long time ago there’s little to gain from interpreting—with reason—the mind-droppings of the irrational.

But do these mental giants realize that, at some point in time, every piece of land on earth was taken from someone, somewhere, somehow?

I’ll start taking this argument seriously the day every Ben & Jerry’s location shuts down and gifts deeds to the nearest government-recognized tribe. Until then, it’s just bumper-sticker theology for the mass-transit wing of the progressive movement—meaning, they don’t even own a bumper to slap the sticker on.

This might explain why they’re so quick to burn cars during “peaceful” protests.

The irony of torching Teslas in the name of environmental justice and this week’s cause du jour is lost on them—along with the carbon plume from flaming lithium batteries and polymer interiors.

Native Americans have suffered enough at the hands of sanctimonious white people through the years—reservation agents, bootleggers, land speculators, and social reformers alike. They’ve been displaced, patronized, and exploited for generations.

So the idea that they must now suffer the additional indignity of having their historic trauma appropriated for the sloganeering of progressive rabble—most of whom wouldn’t last five minutes on a reservation without Wi-Fi or a can of Olipop—is beyond tone-deaf.

It’s insulting. And it reveals what much of this movement is: not solidarity, but self-indulgence dressed in someone else’s suffering.

Something tells me that, given the context, at least some of the rabble believe the land was “stolen from Mexico”—as if Alta California were some utopian patchwork of ranchos and pueblos before the Mexican-American War.

Conveniently forgotten, of course, are the Chumash, Tongva, and other indigenous tribes whose land was seized by the Centralist Mexican Republic—née First Mexican Republic, née Mexican Provisional Government, née First Mexican Empire, née Spanish Empire—long before the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ever made it to print.

And lest we forget, the Russian Empire had outposts in California too. One wonders if Adam Schiff knows about Fort Ross—though since it’s not mentioned in the Steele Dossier, he probably assumes it’s Kamala’s favorite vineyard in Sonoma.

But that only proves the point: this isn’t about justice—it’s about narrative control. History is selectively edited to fit a chant, a hashtag, or a Soros-funded placard that arrived fresher than the protesters did.

Colonialism is condemned—but only the correct kind, which more often than not isn’t colonialism at all. If it doesn’t serve the message, it didn’t happen.

Also worth noting: there’s a reason so many of these migrants crossed the border into the United States—many illegally—and want to stay.

And it’s not because Tijuana is the Second Rome—or even a Second Trebizond.

They came because the American system—for all its imperfections—offers opportunity, safety, and structure: things in short supply in the very countries these activists now romanticize.

And, lamentably, in short supply in Los Angeles these days.

Now, if an illegal alien is waving a Mexican flag over a smoldering American street, it looks and smells—(looking at you, Gwen Walz)—like an invasion.

And how does one defeat an invasion?

I’ll leave that for your consideration.

The left’s narrative, predictably, is that this entire episode is Trump’s fault—because how dare the president enforce the law.

But let’s pause for a moment and remember first principles. Enforcement of our nation's laws is a constitutional duty of the presidency.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

It is not contingent on whether state officials approve. It is not contingent on how much those violating the law throw rocks or torch motor vehicles. It is an affirmative obligation—embedded at the core of presidential responsibility.

Sadly, the last administration lacked the wherewithal to have President Autopen take care to execute much of anything. And it’s hard to pen—oops, pin—the blame when no one can say for sure who was in charge while Joe Biden sat in the corner thinking he was a bird about to fly to Baskin-Robbins.

What the Democrats still can’t seem to grasp is that Trump has a gift for putting them on the wrong side of what you might call the 80–20 issues—the fights where four out of five Americans land squarely against them.

This is one of those fights.

As Brit Hume recently put it, the Democrats’ positioning here is beyond politically unsustainable—it’s political insanity. Truth.

Americans overwhelmingly support law and order. They don’t want to see their cities in flames, their police officers under siege, or their neighborhoods turned into staging grounds for riot-themed performance art. 

And they certainly don’t appreciate being told it’s all “mostly peaceful” while a flaming hellscape flickers in the background.

Ultimately, if there is a unifying leitmotif in modern American progressivism—beyond its Pavlovian opposition to Trump—it is the embrace of a narcissistic nihilism: a worldview that destroys institutions it cannot control, deconstructs history it cannot comprehend, and desecrates values it never believed in to begin with—all with a messianic zeal bordering on mania.

If the Democrat party does not cast off the yoke of madness and bind itself once more to law and order, then it shall reap the whirlwind.

For those who sup with anarchy do not inherit a nation—they inherit the void. And the void, as always, smells of sulfur, melted asphalt, broken glass—and broken dreams.