Amidst all the chaos of this past weekend, President Trump found time to escape the Nazi catcalls to suggest a pardon for someone I feel was railroaded by an activist judge.
President Trump may soon issue a pardon for Joe Arpaio, the colorful former Arizona sheriff who was found guilty two weeks ago of criminal contempt for defying a state judge’s order to stop traffic patrols targeting suspected undocumented immigrants.
Trump said the pardon could happen in the next few days, should he decide to do so.
Arpaio, 85, was convicted by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton of misdemeanor contempt of court for willfully disregarding an Arizona judge’s order in 2011 to stop the anti-immigrant traffic patrols. Arpaio had maintained the law enforcement patrols for 17 months thereafter.
So this judge not only decides to ignore the immigration laws, but also demands a border sheriff to do the same? To be brutally honest, I doubt I would follow that order, either. Activist judges are granted entirely too much power, and congress needs to start reining these people in; the sooner, the better.
For what it’s worth, I realize many people see Arpaio as an arrogant blowhard, but I would fully support a pardon for the man.
Despite all the doom and gloom the mainstream media is foisting upon us, there was some good news announced this week, and you don’t need to press two for English.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said on Tuesday it would waive environmental and related laws in order to expedite building security-related barriers and roads along the nation’s border with Mexico near San Diego.
The projects would focus on about 15 miles (24 km) of the frontier extending eastward from the Pacific Ocean as part of President Donald Trump’s planned wall between the United States and Mexico, the DHS said in a statement. It said the area is one of the busiest U.S. border sections.
“The sector remains an area of high illegal entry for which there is an immediate need to improve current infrastructure and construct additional border barriers and roads,” the DHS said.
The department will oversee the installation of extra barriers, roads, lights, cameras and sensors on the border under the authority of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996.
As far as I’m concerned, the builders can club baby seals and run over polar bears to make this happen. Environment be damned!
Remember when New York City mayor Rudy Guiliani cleaned up the cesspool which was Times Square and removed the undesirables from its streets? It only took two subsequent mayors – a Democrat and a Communist – to undo Guiliani’s work.
Foul-mouthed desnudas, grabby Hulks and tourist-terrorizing gangs of Minnie Mice are still brazenly holding the Crossroads of the World hostage even amid a heavy presence of NYPD cops, who act oblivious to their disturbing antics.
Only half of the two-dozen tip-mooching characters stayed behind the lines of Times Square’s “Designated Activity Zones,” the areas created last year as their boundary for posing for photos and asking for tips.
Yet none of those who illegally strayed outside the zones were issued summonses by the half-dozen police patrolling the pedestrian plaza. A law-enforcement source shrugged that the officers’ hands were tied since most of the costumed panhandlers are illegal — and under the de Blasio administration, it’s a no-no to go after them.
The law-enforcement source added that past proposals to license the creatures went nowhere because most of the panhandlers are illegal immigrants and they wouldn’t register anyway. Besides, the administration at City Hall isn’t interested in going after illegals in this capacity.
New York City is Patient Zero of American sanctuary cities, and as long as the DeBlasio regime is in power, the city will continue to swirl the toilet.
While the president is envisioning himself punching a cable-news network logo into submission, take a look at what The Failing New York Times™ reports from Choloma, Honduras:
While some of Mr. Trump’s most ambitious plans to tighten the border are still a long way off, particularly his campaign pledge to build a massive wall, his hard-line approach to immigration already seems to have led to sharp declines in the flow of migrants from Central America bound for the United States.
From February through May, the number of undocumented immigrants stopped or caught along the southwest border of the United States fell 60 percent from the same period last year — evidence that far fewer migrants are heading north, officials on both sides of the border say.
Arrests of immigrants living illegally in the United States have soared, with the biggest increase coming among those migrants with no criminal records. The shift has sown a new sense of fear among undocumented immigrants in the United States. In turn, they have sent a warning back to relatives and friends in their homelands: Don’t come.
Absolutely beautiful. If Cankles won the election, we would already be speaking Spanish.
Believe it or not, there are still plenty of jurists who rule on the facts and not by their emotions. One such judge in the Eastern District of Virginia believes the former is more important than the latter.
Judge Anthony Trenga of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found that Trump was within his legal rights to impose the travel ban and that it was not discriminatory toward Muslims. The injunction had been brought forward by Palestinian activist Linda Sarsour, who was represented by an attorney from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Trenga, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in his opinion that “the President has unqualified authority to bar physical entry to the United States at the border.” He said that the executive order makes no mention of religion and has a “state secular purpose” of protecting U.S. citizens from terrorist attacks.
The primary duty of an American president is to protect the citizens. This travel ban goes a long way toward doing that, and is another protection against European/Britain-style terror attacks.
Despite Prime Minister Hipster’s warm embrace of immigrants and “refugees,” nearly half of all Canadian citizens believe illegal immigrants should be deported. Gee Canada, when did you become so racist?
Nearly half of Canadians want to deport people who are illegally crossing into Canada from the United States, and a similar number disapprove of how Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is handling the influx, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Monday.
A significant minority, four out of 10 respondents, said the border crossers could make Canada “less safe,” underlining the potential political risk for Trudeau’s Liberal government.
The increasing flow of asylum-seekers of African and Middle Eastern origin from the United States in recent months has become a contentious issue in Canada.
Unlike leftist politicians, most people see what has happened to Germany, Sweden, and France and they’re scared witless. They should be. The European Muslim invasion has changed those countries forever, and the same can easily happen here.
Illegal immigration across the southwest border plummeted in January, compared to December, as the flow of both illegal immigrant families and children traveling alone dried up, according to numbers released by Customs and Border Protection.
The numbers are still high compared to past years — indeed, it’s the worst January in records dating back to 2012.
But total apprehensions of migrants trying to sneak across the border fell 27 percent on a month-to-month basis, to 31,575. And the number of inadmissible migrants who showed up at the southwest’s ports of entry fell 28 percent, to 10,899.
Fear is a tremendous motivator, and illegals are scared at the prospect of the rule of law returning to the United States of America.
Still regrouping from a federal appeals court’s refusal to reinstate President Trump’s controversial ban of nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries, White House lawyers are working on a rewrite of his executive order that could pass legal muster.
The work began several days before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals shot down the White House’s bid to lift a temporary restraining order on Trump’s plan to bar nationals from Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Iraq and Yemen from entering the country for 90 days, a senior administration official told NBC.
Several sources close to President Trump told MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough that White House lawyers and working on language for the executive order that would be able to find favor with the federal courts.
The sad truth is while Trump’s executive order is perfectly constitutional – visa holders have no constitutional rights – activist judges are doing their level best to block Trump at every turn, because politics.
Meet acting Attorney General Sally Yates. Yates was appointed by the worst president in American history, and is biding her time before Jeff Sessions is confirmed.
During her one minute of fame, Yates has ordered the already lawless DoJ to put up no defense of President Trump’s immigration ban. Because, reasons.
Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, a hold over from the Obama administration, has ordered the DOJ not to offer any defense of Trump’s executive order on immigration.
Yates does not claim that she cannot defend the executive order because it is unconstitutional or because the Justice Department would be unable to offer good-faith arguments in defense of its legality. To the contrary, Yates claims she is ordering the Justice Department not to defend the executive order because it is not “wise or just.” I am not aware of any instance in which the Justice Department has refused to defend a presumptively lawful executive action on this basis.
Do not make the assumption these leftist hacks will discontinue their activism simply because Obama has left office. If anything, these people will become more strident and continue to disregard their oath to defend the constitution.
Oh, and President Trump fired this broad last night. I guess the only decisions she’ll be making from now on will concern dinner.
President Donald Trump announced the construction of a southern border wall would begin in months, and the planning for the barrier will begin at once.
In his first one-on-one television interview since being sworn in as the 45th president of the United States, President Donald Trump told ABC News anchor David Muir that Mexico would be paying for the proposed border wall and that negotiations between the two nations would begin “relatively soon.”
When asked about the start of construction, Trump said it would happen in “months.”
“As soon as we can, as soon as we can physically do it,” he said. “I would say in months, yeah. I would say in months — certainly planning is starting immediately.”
In the hours after the ABC News interview took place, Trump issued two executive orders, one of which is about the commission of the border wall. The order calls for the secretary of homeland security to “take all appropriate steps to immediately plan, design, and construct a physical wall along the southern border.”
So let’s recap: the president announced the plans for the wall, infuriated the media, and made millions of leftists’ heads explode in one simple interview? #Winning.
My immediate reaction to the news is below the fold.