The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Is Trump Going to Fall for Schumer's One Old Trick and Dump His Wall?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Fox News:

Schumer, Pelosi say they have deal with Trump to protect ‘Dreamers’
Published September 13, 2017 Fox News

Democratic congressional leaders emerged from a meeting with President Donald Trump Wednesday vowing to pursue an agreement protecting immigrants who were brought illegally into the U.S. as children from deportation.

In a joint statement, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said they and Trump had “agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides.”

An estimated 800,000 young immigrants are currently covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, which was formed by former President Barack Obama in 2012. Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced it was winding down the program over the next six months, putting pressure on Congress to pass a legislative solution.

A source briefed on the meeting confirmed to Fox News that Trump and the leaders agreed to pair the DREAM Act, which provides for giving young illegal immigrants eventual citizenship, with some measures enhancing border security. The source said that those measures do not include Trump’s long-promised wall across the U.S.-Mexico border.

No Wall and Trump is toast in 2020.

Back in 2011, Ann Coulter pointed out how Schumer cost George H.W. Bush re-election in 1992 by getting Bush to break his “Read my lips: No new taxes” pledge.

Why Republicans don’t want to raise taxes as part of ‘deal’ with Dems

ANN COULTER

6:13 PM 11/23/2011

… The Democrats didn’t care: All that mattered was that they had tricked Bush into breaking his tax pledge, which they celebrated all the way to Bush’s defeat in the next election.

On CNN’s “Crossfire,” then-Congressman Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., gloated: “All the spin control in the world can’t undo the fact that the president is moving away from [no new] taxes.”

Here’s video of the elder Bush announcing new taxes:

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/george-bush-taxes-cold-opening/n9930?snl=1

An article on the front page of The New York Times proclaimed that “with his three words (‘tax revenue increases’) Mr. Bush had broken the central promise of his 1988 campaign.”

… Democrats had effectively taken away the Republican Party’s central defining issue — low taxes — and the Republicans got nothing in return. …

On the campaign trail, Bill Clinton taunted Bush for breaking his tax pledge, saying, “He promised 15 million new jobs, no new taxes, the environmental president, an education presidency. It was a wonderful speech. But now we don’t have to read his lips; we can read his record.”

If Trump falls for the same guy, Chuck Schumer, pulling the same trick a quarter of a century later …

Trump at least ought to be able to remember Chuck Schumer ruining Marco Rubio’s political career in 2013 with “comprehensive immigration reform.”

I know Schumer likes to call himself “Four 800s” for high scores on College Board tests, but he’s really not that smart. He was just the kid who ran the mimeograph machine for Stanley Kaplan’s SAT-gaming service. He’s got just one go-to move: getting Republicans to sell out on their most important issue in the name of bipartisanship.

 
Hide 260 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    How dumb is this gal to pushback against this alleged deal?

    And how she can she be verified by Twitter without documents?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/is-trump-going-to-dump-his-wall/#comment-2005750
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. wren says:

    Surely this is just another case of 11 dimensional chess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. –Immigration moratorium
    –End birthright citizenship
    –eVerify
    –Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion

    –Immigration moratorium
    –End birthright citizenship
    –eVerify
    –Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance
     
    Exactly.
    , @Lot
    We are not getting ANY of those.

    Trump looks like he is now adopted the Rubio position: amnesty now plus promises about "border security" and "tough penalties" and "learn English" that are lies from the beginning, just like none of the enforcement in Reagan's amnesty in 1986 happened.
    , @AndrewR
    IMHO ending BRC is more important than all of the other three combined, especially if it can be revoked retroactively for "citizens" who have dual citizenship or who can easily get it (aka every Mexican bebé ancla). Also, everyone involved in birth tourism needs to be RICO'd and stripped of all assets.
    , @Kevin C.

    –End birthright citizenship
     
    That would require a Constitutional amendment. So, not happening.
    , @MBlanc46
    And of the four, we shall get zero. Zip. Zilch. Nothing. No thing.
    , @AnotherDad

    –Immigration moratorium
    –End birthright citizenship
    –eVerify
    –Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.
     
    The dystopian irony, we're getting this collapse from the guy that wrote "The Art of the Deal"--who thinks he's a savvy negotiator! Isn't pretty much the first rule of negotiation to not give away the good stuff you've got that the other guy wants, until you get what you really want?

    There's a pretty obvious path where Trump strikes a deal that includes, the Wall, mandatory E-verify, exit-tracking and sharply curtailed immigration including Muslim ban, refugee clampdown, H1-B reign in, "family-reunification" reign in, for DACA. Easy pitch on TV--secure borders, American jobs, America's future ... then and only then we can be generous to "those who through no fault of their own" ... blah, blah, blah. Let the Democrats, globalists argue against it. "Do you actually care about the 'Dreamers' or just want open immigration?" Trivial stuff.


    Bigger--needs better quality Trump--this is actually an opportune time to launch an immigration moratorium. Pretty easy speech to write:
    -- "Recent events have shown that we're no longer one nation ..."
    -- "Diversity creates conflict"
    -- "When people hate and want to tear down the founders of the nation ..."
    -- "Who don't believe in--and often just hate--the right of the people to govern themselves, to make policies in their interests; representative government--decisions by elected leaders not judges or bureaucrats; federalism; freedom of speech; ..."
    -- "Loyalty -- so called Americans who are not loyal to their fellow Americans and their interests"
    -- "Some simply hate native Americans and want them replaced."
    -- "Americans who are not American"

    Then "We need to pause. Allow assimilation to work and see if we can become one nation again." "Otherwise we need to separate. Allow those of us proud of the American nation, our ancestors, our heroes, our traditions, our culture, our laws to keep our nation. And those who hold it and us in such contempt to build their own universal nation."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Tiny Duck says:

    Beahahahaha

    It’s OVER

    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn’t just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I’m going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place

    Read More
    • Troll: IHTG
    • Replies: @fish

    Well you'n make sure to work on your spelling and sentence structure while'n you be away Tiny


    - Leonard Pitts
     
    , @MEH 0910
    Tiny Duck, over at the Chanda Chisala Scrabble/IQ piece you left this comment:

    Don’t bother.

    This place is for failed middle aged white men looking to blow off steam.

    I just come here to have fun at their expense. Always entertaining.
     
    Tiny, Tiny, Tiny. For shame. For shame.
    , @Steve in Greensboro
    One of the indicia of an IQ lower than room temperature is that you believe ANYTHING that Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi say. Another is reading Leonard Pitts.
    , @SteveRogers42
    If Trump fails us, you won't like what comes next.
    , @Anon
    Adiis racists

    https://www.scm.com/news/adiis-implemented-adf/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Trump has done fuck all to actually get out there and lead and educate the American people on immigration issues. He wins if he would do this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.
    , @Kevin C.
    "He wins if he would do this."

    "Would" implies (and requires) "could". Namely, have you considered that Trump isn't doing this, not because he's unwilling, but that he's unable? That whatever it says on mere pieces of paper, in the real world the President no longer has the power to do such things, that these decisions are all dictated by the "Deep State", whose rule is unchanged no matter who we elect to the figurehead offices of President and Congress?
    , @A guy
    Why do you think this is so ,?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. I’d much rather have no wall but no DREAM act than vice versa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RonaldB
    Where's the deal? A deal is supposed to give both sides something. This gives the Democrats and never-Trumpers everything they want for the pocket change on the dresser.

    A real deal might involve supporting a Dream amnesty, along with the wall, the end to chain migration entailed in the RAISE act, taking citizenship for the DREAM parents off the table forever, and no welfare ever for DREAMERS or future immigrants.

    That's a real deal: pain on both sides but substantive progress. Trump is not making a deal; he's surrendering.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Trump campaign = Reverse the decline of USA

    Trump presidency = Manage the decline, speed it up

    BIGGEST POLITICAL SELLOUT EVER

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    You speak as if it could be otherwise. This was inevitable no matter who we elected. Because our elected officials are figureheads and all real power belongs to the unelected "Deep State", who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there's nothing we can do about it because they have all the power.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    How would you characterize those who didn't see the sellout coming?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Maj. Kong says:

    Chuck Schumer: Unregulated Israeli nukes
    Also Chuck Schumer: Tyrannical gun confiscation for average Americans (crypto-Nazis)

    GOP: The 1% can dodge taxes and can have an unlimited supply of cheap labor
    Also GOP: The traditional America can’t dodge mass immigration and must drink Cultural Marxism.

    Donald Trump: America First! Build the Wall! End DACA! Putin is an ally!
    Also Donald Trump: Jared and Ivanka First! Enrich cronies! Now I’m a Neocon!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Chuck Schumer: Unregulated Israeli nukes
    Also Chuck Schumer: Tyrannical gun confiscation for average Americans (crypto-Nazis)
     
    After Israel's fighting force, ISIS/AQ/AN, began to be routed by the Syrian Army, Israel began to pin its hopes on an independent Kurdish state within Syria to divide and weaken Syria (and Iraq, Iran, etc). And then just yesterday we learn that our U.S. government has laid out $2.2 billion to arm the SDF (Kurds) with the goal of them establishing an independent Kurdish state in Syria.

    But it's all about Iran. Weakening Iran. Iran, which hasn't been involved in any terrorism for over four decades is called, "the number one government sponsor of terrorism". Just watch Fox News for two minutes and see what I mean.

    So why the Israel/Jewish obessession with Iran? IDF Maj. Gen. Yair Golan explains:


    “Because the Iranians are sophisticated, they are a higher form of civilization, they have a nice academic infrastructure, nice industry, good scientists, many talented young people. They are very similar to us. And because they are similar to us, they are much, much more dangerous."
     
    Hmm, I wonder if the flood of non-whites and non-Christians into Europe and North America is related to this sentiment? Or the foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria in both the U.S. and Europe over a country of white Christians with a history of mathematics, science, literature, etc??
    , @Dmitry134564
    Because the far-right people never paid attention in the first place, or never wanted to (they are not known for their powers of concentration). Trump was always the most left-leaning of the 2016 Republican candidates - he was a Democrat most of his life, and half the people he appointed have been Democrats.

    The most right-leaning candidates in the Republican primaries were Ted Cruz or Rand Paul.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Kaz says:

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.

    DACA is a big bargaining chip for Trump, he shouldn’t trade it away so easily.

    Afghanistan was a little bit disappointing, but he’s not really this lost without Bannon is he?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The Wall isn't a silly idea. For starters, it would dramatically reduce illegal crossings. Plus, it can't be gamed like immigration law and enforcement can be. And it would also send a powerful signal to would be illicit migrants.

    The Dems know this, which is why they oppose it so adamantly.

    , @Thomas
    Stephen Miller is the last nationalist in the Administration. I'd start the death watch on his job now if you haven't already.

    The word over the last few weeks is that (Chief of Staff) Kelly has had to essentially cloister Trump and cherry pick his meetings and news briefings (which is a sign at how mentally undisciplined Trump is). He's edged out anyone who might have been able to tell Trump how bad an idea this is, if it's what it appears to be, possibly not out of malice but just because it's the only way he'd be able to run a tight ship with Trump. Somebody (I think maybe Cernovich) said he was hearing in the last week that Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it "makes the KKK stuff go away" after Charlottesville. (4chan is throwing out humorous theories that they have him drugged.)

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he's just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician. Plus, he probably has some asinine idea that making a good "deal" with Chuck Schumer will somehow translate into capital down the road, that his new buddy will give him the wall "later." A relationship like that might be par for the course for a real estate developer but not for a President in the unavoidably oppositional world of politics.
    , @AnotherDad

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.
     
    Kaz, you're missing the realities here.

    Trump can't snap his fingers and make all the apparatchiks behave. He can do basic management--hire people, give them direction, fire non-performers. Trump should absolutely positively be jacking up enforcement and making illegals and their employers fears. But it's a grind. And any "enforcement" and "codifying" and some such is easily reversible by the next Democrat (or Bush type) administratively. (And it's clear from Obama that even black letter law is no impediment.)

    However an actual wall ... just sits there and does it's job. And if the next Democrat is so lax that Mexicans (and others) are scaling it, it's much, much easier to point out that dereliction of duty and make a political issue out of it.

    The Wall is critical. It's specifically a permanent and unmoveable statement of our border and our right to have a border. It's nationalism written in cement and steel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. wren says:
    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon

    [M]isidentifying a suspected criminal is no laughing matter, nor is breaching civil liberties.
     
    This is why, of course, we must never mention the sigle most salient, first, and most quickly recognised characteristic about any person when a criminal or suspected criminal is at large: his race.

    Ha. Ha.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Time to wake the hell up and smell the deception. Trump’s whitehouse is filled with Dems. He’s been running the whole show but leaves plausible deniability i.e. people like McMaster or Kelly are firing Trump loyalists.

    Wake up.

    TRUMP DOESN’T WANT TRUMP LOYALISTS IN THE WHITEHOUSE.

    Trump himself is not a Trump loyalist. Obviously.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Felix... says:

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Literally all his closest advisers are globalist Jews or military cucks. Every single MAGA nationalist has been purged by Trump’s globalist aides or in the case of Bannon, Trump himself. Miller is still around but I suspect it’s almost as an inside joke between Cohen & Kushner and company: Miller is a chosen one so he’s got the right to an opinion on important questions like demographics, unlike those subhuman goys who should know that their place does not include the determination of their own destiny.

    Purging the entire MAGA crew means one of two things: either Trump no longer cares about implementing the MAGA agenda, or he still cares but is in the early stages of senility and is being played for a fool by the globalist faction that started out with a piece of the White House and now controls all of it. I suspect it’s the former. Trump has decided he’s not up for battling to make MAGA a reality and has made a deal with establishment forces. He’s going to massively cuck for the remaining years of his first term, and in exchange the globalist establishment is not going to destroy his family when he steps down in 2020.

    If that’s the case, expect massive, unprecedented cucking going forward. By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want. If this is Trump’s tentative opening salvo of cucking I hate to think what we’ll see once he warms up the heavy guns of cucktillery later on in his term.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.
     
    Thank you Felix! That is the key point. I think it's pretty obvious, knowing who this man is, that he is not in this thing to stay in power 8 years. Donald Trump has said for years what he thinks is wrong with this country, and he went through this whole process to try to fix things (it helped that this was good for his already-big ego also).

    The "we will stay home in 2020, so you better ...." thing will not affect anything that the President does or does not do. I don't believe he cares a bit about that.

    That Trump is fucking up royally just shows that he does not have enough trust in his own political views (the ones that match the views of American patriots). Because of this, he hires on these globalists and neocons, as he thinks they are very smart, having been globalists and neocons for, like, forever, while Trump was "just" a businessman.

    The whole thing is sickening, and the Charlie Brown place-kicking meme fits perfectly to how patriotic Americans feel. You probably can't win this politically, so take the ball, go home, and devise a different game.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Great rest of the comment too, Felix.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Trump/Bannon had a credible plan for saving Redstate America: reverse the immigration trend.

    Instead Trump is going to amnesty 4 million (daca plus chain migration).

    So now the incoherent jackass has set the stage for Arizona, Texas, Georgia and Florida to go blue in 2020.

    Trump is the worst negotiator we had as POTUS since Jimmy Carter. It’s really not negotiating at all it’s just a giveaway. Same as he did on Afghanistan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    Trump is a phoney from the get go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Trump didn’t get this far by being an idiot. This news story is a huge middle finger to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Maybe he even gives the Dems DACA cheap – but it’s going to be *very* expensive for the do-nothing Republican cucks in Congress. They have a choice now. They can work with Trump. Or they can lose in 2018. Maybe primaried out. Or maybe beat by a Dem.

    Trump has given the Republican cucks 6 months to prove that all their talk of repealing Obama care and tax cuts and immigration hard-line is just that – talk. He’s now going to make their cuck leadership irrelevant and take their best people over to his side. He’s remaking the party. If that means trading away DACA cheap – well, still better than what Paul Ryan was offering.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix...
    This doesn't make any sense, whatsoever.
    , @Thomas
    Uh, really? Whose peace pipe are you smoking there, Chief? Ryan and McConnell like DACA. There's no daylight between them and the Dems on that one (especially not for Ryan).

    And trading DACA for tax cuts... yeah just imagine Trump trying to sell that at his next rally (if he ever has another one).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Achilles says:

    getting Republicans to sell out on their most important issue in the name of bipartisanship

    Which Republicans? The Ryan-McConnell GOPe leadership in both houses favors amnesty. They are not selling out their base (donors), they are delivering for them. Indeed, the House and Senate could probably pass ‘Dreamer’ amnesty with a veto-proof majority.

    By doing a deal with the Democrats on amnesty instead of with the GOPe, Trump is giving both the Dems and the GOPe what they want, but he is shielding the GOPe. Some GOPe members in anti-amnesty districts may be able to vote against it knowing it has enough other votes to pass.

    What does Trump get in return? Perhaps an agreement by the Establishment that Mueller will wrap it up in December with no impeachment recommendation and no indictments of the inner circle? After all, the Mueller fishing expedition was always about trying to find dirt on Trump to use as leverage against him. And, perhaps the Establishment will grant Trump funding for a face-saving portion of the Wall in the December funding bill.

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Mueller
     
    And also, Trump blames Sessions for Mueller (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/us/politics/jeff-sessions-trump.html) which probably in itself dampens the Sessions agenda.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Felix... says:
    @Chief Seattle
    Trump didn't get this far by being an idiot. This news story is a huge middle finger to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Maybe he even gives the Dems DACA cheap - but it's going to be *very* expensive for the do-nothing Republican cucks in Congress. They have a choice now. They can work with Trump. Or they can lose in 2018. Maybe primaried out. Or maybe beat by a Dem.

    Trump has given the Republican cucks 6 months to prove that all their talk of repealing Obama care and tax cuts and immigration hard-line is just that - talk. He's now going to make their cuck leadership irrelevant and take their best people over to his side. He's remaking the party. If that means trading away DACA cheap - well, still better than what Paul Ryan was offering.

    This doesn’t make any sense, whatsoever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. fish says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Beahahahaha


    It's OVER


    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn't just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I'm going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place

    Well you’n make sure to work on your spelling and sentence structure while’n you be away Tiny

    - Leonard Pitts

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Dan Hayes says:

    Steve,

    All is lost on the immigration front with Trump’s abject abrogation of his campaign promises.

    If and when a Supreme Court vacancy occurs and Trump fails to appoint a Gorsuch clone, then his administration will be rightfully and unequivocally consigned to the dustbin of political history! Unfortunately, I’m afraid that this will occur. The influence of his daughter and son-in-law will prove all too powerful in successfully channeling the President’s liberal proclivities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Thomas says:
    @Chief Seattle
    Trump didn't get this far by being an idiot. This news story is a huge middle finger to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Maybe he even gives the Dems DACA cheap - but it's going to be *very* expensive for the do-nothing Republican cucks in Congress. They have a choice now. They can work with Trump. Or they can lose in 2018. Maybe primaried out. Or maybe beat by a Dem.

    Trump has given the Republican cucks 6 months to prove that all their talk of repealing Obama care and tax cuts and immigration hard-line is just that - talk. He's now going to make their cuck leadership irrelevant and take their best people over to his side. He's remaking the party. If that means trading away DACA cheap - well, still better than what Paul Ryan was offering.

    Uh, really? Whose peace pipe are you smoking there, Chief? Ryan and McConnell like DACA. There’s no daylight between them and the Dems on that one (especially not for Ryan).

    And trading DACA for tax cuts… yeah just imagine Trump trying to sell that at his next rally (if he ever has another one).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chief Seattle
    It's going to be a lot easier to negotiate with the Repubs once they're not the only game in town. Anyone who's honest with themselves knows that 2/3 of them are exactly the same as democrats and are owned by the same people. The only thing they are interested in is staying in power. They talk conservative but in reality are quite content to be the do-nothing opposition party. Talking tough, scaring their constituents about the "liberals", but in reality playing voting games so that nothing conservative, nothing that would offend the chamber of commerce, or the lobbyists ever actually passes. So Trump calls their bluff, makes some deals with the Dems on marginal issues that were going to pass anyway (debt ceiling, DACA) and splits off the 1/3 of their membership that is actually conservative. And in this way, by showing them they're not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If you listen to everything the media claims then you'll get whiplash. Three weeks ago he was a White Nationalist Neo Nazi supporter. Last week he was a evil dictator that wants to deport promising college students. Today he's going to give it all away to Chuck Shumer? Let's keep some perspective.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. MEH 0910 says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Beahahahaha


    It's OVER


    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn't just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I'm going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place

    Tiny Duck, over at the Chanda Chisala Scrabble/IQ piece you left this comment:

    Don’t bother.

    This place is for failed middle aged white men looking to blow off steam.

    I just come here to have fun at their expense. Always entertaining.

    Tiny, Tiny, Tiny. For shame. For shame.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johnny Smoggins
    And yet time and time and time again, so many of you give Tiny Duck the attention that keeps him coming back every day.

    I've come to the conclusion that TD is one of the smartest posters here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Trump lets NSC, IRS, CIA, FBI, Justice, State all remain controlled by liberals.

    Then he says he’s not filling openings because he wants to shrink government!

    Total scumbag lying sack.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Jeff Sessions is a liberal!?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Kaz
    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc... would be much more productive than a physical wall.

    DACA is a big bargaining chip for Trump, he shouldn't trade it away so easily.

    Afghanistan was a little bit disappointing, but he's not really this lost without Bannon is he?

    The Wall isn’t a silly idea. For starters, it would dramatically reduce illegal crossings. Plus, it can’t be gamed like immigration law and enforcement can be. And it would also send a powerful signal to would be illicit migrants.

    The Dems know this, which is why they oppose it so adamantly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    The Wall is a physical impediment to vehicular transport of drugs. Waterborne smuggling, and using human mules is considerably less efficient and costlier.

    Legalization of cannabis, a fiscal necessity to patch up Medicaid, should be pursued at the state and federal level. The President can order the DEA to re-schedule. Sessions is dead wrong about this, I share his contempt for potheads, but better that cannabis be legal funding our coffers rather than the cartels. Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a "gateway theory in reverse".
    , @ChrisZ
    I agree with all of Dave's points, of course, and find contemptible the dismissive "counter-arguments" put forward on the left and right about the alleged ineffectiveness or impossibility of the Wall.

    I would add that the Wall is exactly the kind of practical, tangible, finite public project that government can actually execute. If it doesn't do so--or worse, refuses to do so--the government will in effect have demonstrated that it is has no intention of honoring the will of the electorate, and that it's only good for "symbolic" action.

    As for Trump's commitment to the Wall, I don't see how he can reneg on it without ruining his name and place in history. On the other hand, a Great Wall of Trump visible from space should be precisely the kind of world-historic landmark that would appeal to his ego.
    , @VivaLaMigra
    Correct. If The Wall had no chance of slowing down the growth of the Libtards' voter base, they wouldn't object to it. After all, it would then be just another Big Government boondoggle and when has a Demon-Rat ever said "No" to that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Moshe says:

    Yes, because Trump has no agency.

    Whatever he does is the fault of others

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. DB says:

    The Wall has symbolic value, and may be necessary if Trump wants to be reelected.

    But if his primary goal is protecting the US’s future (to the extent that’s under his control), it’s actually fine to bargain away the Wall as long as it leads to an enforced Canada/Australia-style skills-based immigration policy (note that mandatory E-Verify is a lot more valuable than a wall here). Even a “watered down” RAISE Act which didn’t lower the overall immigration level would be enough to cement him as the best president in a generation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    It's fine for Canada and Australia to not have walls. Australia has a moat around its country instead, and Canada has the United States as a land buffer between it and the third world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The Uniparty’s change agent is the Dems. The Reps are controlled opposition.

    But the Dems have totally imploded. So the Uniparty has ordered the implosion of the Reps to make the Dems competitive again.

    Trump is Uniparty and his mission is to crash the GOP down to parity with the Donks. Amnesty will do it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Maj. Kong says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    The Wall isn't a silly idea. For starters, it would dramatically reduce illegal crossings. Plus, it can't be gamed like immigration law and enforcement can be. And it would also send a powerful signal to would be illicit migrants.

    The Dems know this, which is why they oppose it so adamantly.

    The Wall is a physical impediment to vehicular transport of drugs. Waterborne smuggling, and using human mules is considerably less efficient and costlier.

    Legalization of cannabis, a fiscal necessity to patch up Medicaid, should be pursued at the state and federal level. The President can order the DEA to re-schedule. Sessions is dead wrong about this, I share his contempt for potheads, but better that cannabis be legal funding our coffers rather than the cartels. Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a “gateway theory in reverse”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wulf

    Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a “gateway theory in reverse”
     
    lol

    Are you that deluded? sounds like the same moronic theory envisioning how cheap and legal quality heroin, cocaine and meth will reduce OD rates and also lower the chance of people using and abusing crack, benzos, methadone and meth?

    Get a grip muppet.

    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    What do you have against potheads?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Thomas says:
    @Kaz
    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc... would be much more productive than a physical wall.

    DACA is a big bargaining chip for Trump, he shouldn't trade it away so easily.

    Afghanistan was a little bit disappointing, but he's not really this lost without Bannon is he?

    Stephen Miller is the last nationalist in the Administration. I’d start the death watch on his job now if you haven’t already.

    The word over the last few weeks is that (Chief of Staff) Kelly has had to essentially cloister Trump and cherry pick his meetings and news briefings (which is a sign at how mentally undisciplined Trump is). He’s edged out anyone who might have been able to tell Trump how bad an idea this is, if it’s what it appears to be, possibly not out of malice but just because it’s the only way he’d be able to run a tight ship with Trump. Somebody (I think maybe Cernovich) said he was hearing in the last week that Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it “makes the KKK stuff go away” after Charlottesville. (4chan is throwing out humorous theories that they have him drugged.)

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he’s just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician. Plus, he probably has some asinine idea that making a good “deal” with Chuck Schumer will somehow translate into capital down the road, that his new buddy will give him the wall “later.” A relationship like that might be par for the course for a real estate developer but not for a President in the unavoidably oppositional world of politics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it “makes the KKK stuff go away” after Charlottesville.
     
    Chuck may have been doing it for a quarter century, but the real old pros are the Comintern. They've been running this same con for a century.

    Still works.
    , @AnotherDad

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he’s just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician.
     
    The big problem is that Trump is just not a deep-thinker, not much of a thinker at all. We don't need an intellectual as President, but we do need someone who basically understands the world. And in the West today that means someone who understands, at some level, HBD--that the blank slate is crap, that humans are not all interchangeable--the reigning hostile "minoritarian" ideology of the "cosmopolitan" left, and enough basic math (exponential growth, differential fertility) to understand that the threat here is national and civilizational genocide. Sometimes Trump gives some tiny signal that he has some tiny inkling of this ... but mostly he's just not that sort of thinker.

    But another negative aspect is that Trump really does seem to have a fragile ego and need people to like him. One of the things that popped for me early in the campaign was that for an alpha, Trump seemed to pick these little hissys with nobodies--like Megyn Kelly. Real alphas ... don't need to carp and settle scores with all the little people, because they are *above* all the little people. They wave off the carping of their inferiors as so much useless noise and just roll on, doing what they are doing with full alpha confidence. The key alpha attribute is actually "don't care".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Felix... says:

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Literally all his closest advisers are globalists or military neocon cucks. Every single MAGA nationalist has been purged by Trump’s globalist aides or in the case of Bannon, Trump himself. Miller is still around but I suspect it’s almost as an inside joke between Cohen & Kushner and company.

    Purging the entire MAGA crew means one of two things: either Trump no longer cares about implementing the MAGA agenda, or he still cares but is in the early stages of senility and is being played for a fool by the globalist faction that started out with a piece of the White House and now controls all of it. I suspect it’s the former. Trump has decided he’s not up for battling to make MAGA a reality and has made a deal with establishment forces. He’s going to massively cuck for the remaining years of his first term, and in exchange the globalist establishment is not going to destroy his family when he steps down in 2020.

    If that’s the case, expect massive, unprecedented cucking going forward. By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want. We make the best deals, don’t we folks? If this is Trump’s tentative opening salvo of cucking I hate to think what we’ll see once he warms up the heavy guns of cucktillery later on in his term.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now.
     
    Trump has good genes. If his stamina on the campaign trail wasn't evidence of that, consider his parents, who lived to ages 93 and 88, respectively. And his mother, who died at 88, might have lived longer had she not been beaten within an inch of her life during a mugging at age 79.
    , @Wilkey
    "By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want."

    This I think is a real possibility. It may be no mistake that DACA is on the table at the very same time as tax cuts. The alleged deal is DACA in exchange for tiny (and temporary) increases in enforcement. The real deal is Democrats get DACA and Republicans get tax cuts. But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wren
    I have wondered about this.

    There may be real photos, but nowadays it seems there could fake ones too that no one would be able to disprove until after the damage were done.
    , @jackmcg
    No, not likely. If they had blackmail on Trump, they would have used it back in 2015.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    They'd have come out during the campaign, I'd have thought. Maybe two days before the vote.
    , @Dmitry134564
    Again you weren't paying attention during the campaign. Trump always said when asked about it, that he was going to 'work something out' to look after the children of illegals. That is his true view - the guy is naturally quite liberal, and has been so all his life. He wasn't a life-long supporter of the Democrats for nothing. Nobody is holding him hostage - he just doing what he wants.
    , @Jack D
    These are kept in a vault right next to the bodies of the space aliens in Area 51.
    , @Dissident

    There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.
     
    Any theory, then, on why such material never surfaced at any point during the campaign? Surely, there are at least a few immensely wealthy individuals out there, including and especially one H. Rodham-Clinton, who would have been ready to pay quite dearly for such material.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. If Trump falls for the same guy, Chuck Schumer, pulling the same trick a quarter of a century later …

    Trump mostly seems to remember random tidbits from television and Twitter, so I would not be surprised at all to see him fall for this.

    I know Schumer likes to call himself “Four 800s” for high scores on College Board tests, but he’s really not that smart.

    Well, I guess it’s like that old joke about the two guys running from a bear:

    “Why are you stopping to put on running shoes? You aren’t fast enough to outrun a bear!”

    “Sure, but I don’t need to outrun a bear…”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. @Thomas
    Uh, really? Whose peace pipe are you smoking there, Chief? Ryan and McConnell like DACA. There's no daylight between them and the Dems on that one (especially not for Ryan).

    And trading DACA for tax cuts... yeah just imagine Trump trying to sell that at his next rally (if he ever has another one).

    It’s going to be a lot easier to negotiate with the Repubs once they’re not the only game in town. Anyone who’s honest with themselves knows that 2/3 of them are exactly the same as democrats and are owned by the same people. The only thing they are interested in is staying in power. They talk conservative but in reality are quite content to be the do-nothing opposition party. Talking tough, scaring their constituents about the “liberals”, but in reality playing voting games so that nothing conservative, nothing that would offend the chamber of commerce, or the lobbyists ever actually passes. So Trump calls their bluff, makes some deals with the Dems on marginal issues that were going to pass anyway (debt ceiling, DACA) and splits off the 1/3 of their membership that is actually conservative. And in this way, by showing them they’re not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If you listen to everything the media claims then you’ll get whiplash. Three weeks ago he was a White Nationalist Neo Nazi supporter. Last week he was a evil dictator that wants to deport promising college students. Today he’s going to give it all away to Chuck Shumer? Let’s keep some perspective.

    Read More
    • Agree: European-American
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Much of the reaction has been from Cruzbots claiming "I told you Trump has no principles and can't be trusted". They still don't get it, tilting at windmills while the left is playing for keeps.
    , @Thomas

    And in this way, by showing them they’re not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.
     
    If he gives away DACA for nothing, the only cuck he'll be unveiling is himself. Literally, what neither Bush nor Obama managed (legalized amnesty), he'll be giving away. And we will never get anything for it, not the wall, not the RAISE Act, nothing.
    , @European-American
    People who are against immigration have nowhere else to go. Trump knows this.

    The biggest danger is that they won’t come out and vote for him next time, but it’s not that big a danger. Imagine who will run against the crazy Russian Nazi demon. The biggest danger is that somehow a reasonable Macron savior figure seductively unites the establishment and collects all the wishy-washy votes in the center. But it’s more likely we’ll get a Democratic Party apparatchik whom Trump can easily beat with his patented brand of media-savvy outrageous common sense.

    Trump is a political aberration. I am grateful whenever he bravely, recklessly, flamboyantly, and oh so reasonably goes against the pieties of our age. But he is one man. Who else do you turn to if he fails you? There is no one else, for now.

    So suck it up and hope for the best with the lousy set of cards you have been dealt. It does no good to scream like a shocked virgin, “he’s doing A when he promised us B!”.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @DB
    The Wall has symbolic value, and may be necessary if Trump wants to be reelected.

    But if his primary goal is protecting the US's future (to the extent that's under his control), it's actually fine to bargain away the Wall as long as it leads to an enforced Canada/Australia-style skills-based immigration policy (note that mandatory E-Verify is a lot more valuable than a wall here). Even a "watered down" RAISE Act which didn't lower the overall immigration level would be enough to cement him as the best president in a generation.

    It’s fine for Canada and Australia to not have walls. Australia has a moat around its country instead, and Canada has the United States as a land buffer between it and the third world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DB
    Not saying a wall is useless, but it isn't the terminal goal. A modern skills-based immigration policy, with the absolute immigration level negotiable, is the win condition here, at least if one wants America to remain preeminent for a long time to come.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Maj. Kong says:
    @Chief Seattle
    It's going to be a lot easier to negotiate with the Repubs once they're not the only game in town. Anyone who's honest with themselves knows that 2/3 of them are exactly the same as democrats and are owned by the same people. The only thing they are interested in is staying in power. They talk conservative but in reality are quite content to be the do-nothing opposition party. Talking tough, scaring their constituents about the "liberals", but in reality playing voting games so that nothing conservative, nothing that would offend the chamber of commerce, or the lobbyists ever actually passes. So Trump calls their bluff, makes some deals with the Dems on marginal issues that were going to pass anyway (debt ceiling, DACA) and splits off the 1/3 of their membership that is actually conservative. And in this way, by showing them they're not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If you listen to everything the media claims then you'll get whiplash. Three weeks ago he was a White Nationalist Neo Nazi supporter. Last week he was a evil dictator that wants to deport promising college students. Today he's going to give it all away to Chuck Shumer? Let's keep some perspective.

    Much of the reaction has been from Cruzbots claiming “I told you Trump has no principles and can’t be trusted”. They still don’t get it, tilting at windmills while the left is playing for keeps.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    "Cruzbots" my ass. I could see through and behind Ted Cruz' BS way back during the primaries. I can't tell what the hell is up with Trump. Read my reply to Felix, who I completely agree with. It's not a matter of trusting that he is honest. I have a lack of trust in his abilities at this point.

    The 2nd paragraph by Thomas #28 is also right on the money and should be in GOLD or some shade close to that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Like with the Syria strikes, I’m not surprised by this change of direction from Trump. I think many people on the alt/dissident/new-right saw Trump as a paleoconservative champion, cleverly discarding establishment conservative positions on trade, immigration and foreign policy. (And in some ways many neoliberal/neoconservative analysts had the same view.) The un-thinking man’s Pat Buchanan, if you will.

    But I think that, from the beginning, Trump hasn’t really been that deep of a thinker. His big theory isn’t ethnic nationalism or America First foreign policy, it’s that the people running the American government were personally incompetent and that Trump’s personal competence as a business leader would suffice to fix everything. He’s a little more serious about protectionism, but it remains to be seen how far he’ll be able to go on that front.

    So if you try to predict Trump’s actions with a model like “what would a principled ethno-nationalist do in this situation?” I think you’ll fall short frequently.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Amnesty = Impeachment?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FactsAreImportant
    Ann Colter tweets her support for Amnesty = Impeachment:

    https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/908311419761971202

    , @Bubba
    After caving on amnesty and giving a huge F.U. to his base, Trump will be eaten alive by the liberals. Trump didn't have any allies in the swamp, but now his base is totally gone and no one will defend him. I'd bet that a Kushner scandal will bring this presidency down within a year or two. Similar thing happened to Nixon after his '72 landslide when he told his conservative base to go pound sand.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Felix...
    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Literally all his closest advisers are globalists or military neocon cucks. Every single MAGA nationalist has been purged by Trump’s globalist aides or in the case of Bannon, Trump himself. Miller is still around but I suspect it’s almost as an inside joke between Cohen & Kushner and company.

    Purging the entire MAGA crew means one of two things: either Trump no longer cares about implementing the MAGA agenda, or he still cares but is in the early stages of senility and is being played for a fool by the globalist faction that started out with a piece of the White House and now controls all of it. I suspect it’s the former. Trump has decided he’s not up for battling to make MAGA a reality and has made a deal with establishment forces. He’s going to massively cuck for the remaining years of his first term, and in exchange the globalist establishment is not going to destroy his family when he steps down in 2020.

    If that’s the case, expect massive, unprecedented cucking going forward. By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want. We make the best deals, don't we folks? If this is Trump’s tentative opening salvo of cucking I hate to think what we’ll see once he warms up the heavy guns of cucktillery later on in his term.

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now.

    Trump has good genes. If his stamina on the campaign trail wasn’t evidence of that, consider his parents, who lived to ages 93 and 88, respectively. And his mother, who died at 88, might have lived longer had she not been beaten within an inch of her life during a mugging at age 79.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. MEH 0910 says:

    If Trump falls for the same guy, Chuck Schumer, pulling the same trick a quarter of a century later …

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Trump’s press secretary disputes the claim that Trump caved on the wall:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    Watch her "evolve" starting tomorrow. Per usual, everyone but apparently Chuck and Nancy is last to know the latest Amnesty Don is up to.
    , @Felix...

    While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to.
     
    Those are empty, weasel words by the White House that try to obfuscate the situation but do not actually deny what is being alleged. Here is a translation to simple English:

    We gave them amnesty and didn't get the Wall in return, this time! However, we didn't promise to never bring up the Wall again, so after the DACA amnesty passes expect us to use the Wall as justification for many more future "deals" that always result in letting in more immigrants and never yield the actual Wall.

    You'll get tired of winning.
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Thomas says:
    @Chief Seattle
    It's going to be a lot easier to negotiate with the Repubs once they're not the only game in town. Anyone who's honest with themselves knows that 2/3 of them are exactly the same as democrats and are owned by the same people. The only thing they are interested in is staying in power. They talk conservative but in reality are quite content to be the do-nothing opposition party. Talking tough, scaring their constituents about the "liberals", but in reality playing voting games so that nothing conservative, nothing that would offend the chamber of commerce, or the lobbyists ever actually passes. So Trump calls their bluff, makes some deals with the Dems on marginal issues that were going to pass anyway (debt ceiling, DACA) and splits off the 1/3 of their membership that is actually conservative. And in this way, by showing them they're not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If you listen to everything the media claims then you'll get whiplash. Three weeks ago he was a White Nationalist Neo Nazi supporter. Last week he was a evil dictator that wants to deport promising college students. Today he's going to give it all away to Chuck Shumer? Let's keep some perspective.

    And in this way, by showing them they’re not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If he gives away DACA for nothing, the only cuck he’ll be unveiling is himself. Literally, what neither Bush nor Obama managed (legalized amnesty), he’ll be giving away. And we will never get anything for it, not the wall, not the RAISE Act, nothing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Weimar Germany had the "stab in the back myth"

    Amnesty Don would be the "stab in the back truth"

    Nothing else would put more wind in the sails of Richard "Fed" Spencer...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. “Trump didn’t get this far by being an idiot.”

    True. The idiot here is you.

    I find it hard to believe Trump doesn’t understand that this is suicidal. It could be the Dems trolling. I hope so. But if it is real, then the media will be forced to admit that immigration was a HUGE factor in Trump’s win, when they’ve been trying to deny it all this time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry134564
    If you watched Trump's speeches and interviews during the election, he said a lot of times that he was going to 'look after' the children of illegal immigrants, or that he was 'going to work something out'. His main motivation is to be a kind of godfather figure, which was also the main motivation for his voters - who wanted this kind of figure to look after them. If you think the majority of voters are paying attention to policy, then you are not paying attention (but Trump certainly is paying attention).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Thomas says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Trump's press secretary disputes the claim that Trump caved on the wall:

    https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/908153680259686400

    Watch her “evolve” starting tomorrow. Per usual, everyone but apparently Chuck and Nancy is last to know the latest Amnesty Don is up to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Maj. Kong says:
    @Thomas

    And in this way, by showing them they’re not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.
     
    If he gives away DACA for nothing, the only cuck he'll be unveiling is himself. Literally, what neither Bush nor Obama managed (legalized amnesty), he'll be giving away. And we will never get anything for it, not the wall, not the RAISE Act, nothing.

    Weimar Germany had the “stab in the back myth”

    Amnesty Don would be the “stab in the back truth”

    Nothing else would put more wind in the sails of Richard “Fed” Spencer…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    I'd give props to Steve for pointing out a likely trajectory for Trump could have been seen in Arnold Schwarzenegger's governorship: a neophyte celebrity politician who has no clear principles ultimately getting rolled to the left. We were warned, though I accepted this risk for the metapolitical benefit of demonstrating how dominant an electoral issue immigration could be. Robert Conquest's second law of politics ("any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing," frequently cited by John Derbyshire) could be applied to individual politicians as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. DB says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    It's fine for Canada and Australia to not have walls. Australia has a moat around its country instead, and Canada has the United States as a land buffer between it and the third world.

    Not saying a wall is useless, but it isn’t the terminal goal. A modern skills-based immigration policy, with the absolute immigration level negotiable, is the win condition here, at least if one wants America to remain preeminent for a long time to come.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Not saying a wall is useless, but it isn’t the terminal goal. A modern skills-based immigration policy, with the absolute immigration level negotiable, is the win condition here, at least if one wants America to remain preeminent for a long time to come.
     
    Perhaps you just missed that we have an estimated 11 million--possible much higher--people in the country *illegally*. You can have a skills based legal immigration policy, but if you can't keep the illegals out then your net immigration policy is ... crap.

    ~~

    FYI -- the reasonable immigration number is zero. That's the natural human norm. Societies don't go around letting people in for the heck of it--it's selling off your children's birthright.

    The Americas and Aus/NZ because "immigration" was essentially the conquest of those places by Europeans. Immigration has made no sense since the frontier closed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @MEH 0910

    If Trump falls for the same guy, Chuck Schumer, pulling the same trick a quarter of a century later …
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddmXM-96-no

    Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. wren says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    I have wondered about this.

    There may be real photos, but nowadays it seems there could fake ones too that no one would be able to disprove until after the damage were done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    Who needs photos? The establishment has a special prosecutor leading a legal hit squad that's doing everything it can to threaten and bankrupt everyone around Trump — on grounds that have nothing to do with Trump, Russia or the election — in order to "flip" them into testifying against him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    So now why doesn’t clown Trump come out and support Jeff Flake in AZ senate election?

    Don’t stop to think about this and 10000 other awkward ramifications of totally reversing yourself on your major campaign issue.

    Sheesh don’t think about all the victims of illegal alien crime he dragged onstage at his rallies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. Thomas says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Weimar Germany had the "stab in the back myth"

    Amnesty Don would be the "stab in the back truth"

    Nothing else would put more wind in the sails of Richard "Fed" Spencer...

    I’d give props to Steve for pointing out a likely trajectory for Trump could have been seen in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s governorship: a neophyte celebrity politician who has no clear principles ultimately getting rolled to the left. We were warned, though I accepted this risk for the metapolitical benefit of demonstrating how dominant an electoral issue immigration could be. Robert Conquest’s second law of politics (“any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing,” frequently cited by John Derbyshire) could be applied to individual politicians as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Arnold's then-wife was a Kennedy, and he got into position thanks to backroom dealing that forced out Darrel Issa from running. (not sure if Governor Issa would have done anything different).

    Partition is the only logical reaction to an amnesty bill being passed, the franchise isn't something you can just "repeal" like Obamacare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Thomas says:
    @wren
    I have wondered about this.

    There may be real photos, but nowadays it seems there could fake ones too that no one would be able to disprove until after the damage were done.

    Who needs photos? The establishment has a special prosecutor leading a legal hit squad that’s doing everything it can to threaten and bankrupt everyone around Trump — on grounds that have nothing to do with Trump, Russia or the election — in order to “flip” them into testifying against him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Maj. Kong says:
    @Thomas
    I'd give props to Steve for pointing out a likely trajectory for Trump could have been seen in Arnold Schwarzenegger's governorship: a neophyte celebrity politician who has no clear principles ultimately getting rolled to the left. We were warned, though I accepted this risk for the metapolitical benefit of demonstrating how dominant an electoral issue immigration could be. Robert Conquest's second law of politics ("any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing," frequently cited by John Derbyshire) could be applied to individual politicians as well.

    Arnold’s then-wife was a Kennedy, and he got into position thanks to backroom dealing that forced out Darrel Issa from running. (not sure if Governor Issa would have done anything different).

    Partition is the only logical reaction to an amnesty bill being passed, the franchise isn’t something you can just “repeal” like Obamacare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    "Partition" has also been ruled absolutely illegal for all time; "settled at Appomattox" and all that. Try reading some of the majority opinion in Texas v. White. The Union has been officially proclamed "indissoluble" and "indivisible", so that not one scrap shall be allowed to depart the Rule of DC without a fight to match the one last time anyone tried to "partition" the many states. Never going to happen, since any second fight is likely to go even worse than the first one for those trying "to go their own way."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    There’s zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything. He’s a high energy nut case. Doing amnesty to make the KKK smear go away is another negotiation FAIL.

    Trump blusters, bluffs, and then he folds.

    Amnesty will make him look even weaker to our enemies around the world. Why should anyone respect a country that refuses to enforce its borders? What right do we have to export our insane civic values to the rest of the world?

    What’s next? Mass Mexican immigration into Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? To boost their economies?

    I’m sure the state dept is pumping transsexual culturekampf to every foreign office.

    Nothing says USA! like a giant surveillance grid. How about putting one of the Utah megastorage snoop bases in every country?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    There’s zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything.
     
    There's a theory that Trump's entire campaign was a negotiating ploy that got out of hand.
    https://twitter.com/edwest/status/827432344453791745
    , @Lot
    "Nothing says USA! like a giant surveillance grid. How about putting one of the Utah megastorage snoop bases in every country?"

    We already have a bunch of them in other countries. I think our biggest one abroad is in the Australian desert.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Felix... says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Trump's press secretary disputes the claim that Trump caved on the wall:

    https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/908153680259686400

    While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to.

    Those are empty, weasel words by the White House that try to obfuscate the situation but do not actually deny what is being alleged. Here is a translation to simple English:

    We gave them amnesty and didn’t get the Wall in return, this time! However, we didn’t promise to never bring up the Wall again, so after the DACA amnesty passes expect us to use the Wall as justification for many more future “deals” that always result in letting in more immigrants and never yield the actual Wall.

    You’ll get tired of winning.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Sid says:

    Stephen Miller, if you’re reading this, get this article around General Kelly and share it with Trump!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    If only the Tsar knew!
    , @Ed
    Before the meeting Miller was telling folks the DREAM Act will never pass.

    https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/908171352837894149
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The revelation that Trump met with Nikki Haley right after the election and begged her to be SoS says it all. The guy was never who he pretended to be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EdwardM
    If that were true, then why would she turn it down? The only reason I can think of is that she thought she wasn't ready, and could use the seasoning at the UN first with a good chance that whoever Trump appointed at State wouldn't last two years, let alone four.

    But that would be awfully humble for a politician. And, notwithstanding the calculation I mentioned, it's pretty hard to turn down SoS knowing that it may never come around again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Maj. Kong says:

    Does it repeat, or does it just rhyme?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. O'Really says:

    I’m going to wait and see this play out before getting hysterical.

    I’m not a believer in the 4D-chess theory rationalizing all of Trump’s moves, but he has proven to be a savvier politician than most of his critics and opponents.

    Perhaps he is wanting to clear DACA off the decks, so as to take the Dems’ strongest card away from them, before proceeding to push on his immigration restriction goals, which are popular when not pitted against “innocent children.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Will 2020 be early enough to form a tentative conclusion, or will you be waiting until 2024?
    , @lavoisier
    Trump is not what we wanted him to be.

    He is just another traitorous bastard in over his head.

    An empty suit.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Tyrion says:
    @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    –Immigration moratorium
    –End birthright citizenship
    –eVerify
    –Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance

    Exactly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Wilkey says:

    At minimum a DACA bill will grant amnesty to 690,000 people. Of course Flake, Graham, Schumer & Company are pushing a bill that will end up giving amnesty – and by amnesty they mean citizenship – to probably 3x that many. They can claim it will only be given to X number of illegals, but those numerical limits will be absolutely nowhere in the final bill.

    What does that all mean? It means amnesty for enough illegals (1-2 million) to populate a major city. It means citizenship for enough new voters to change the outcomes in dozens of elections, up to and including presidential elections. The 2016 presidential election was decided by less than 80,000 votes.

    That is to say that if Republicans vote for the bill and Trump signs it that it better include a helluva lot more than a few hundred million in new border security funding that will be easily revoked in some budget compromise 2-3 years hence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    The current Dreamer bill that already has multiple people in both parties pushing it is significantly worse than Obama's DACA by gutting its "one felony or three misdemeanor" exclusion and expanding the qualification dates.

    So, in his first year in office, it looks like Trump will both expand and make permanent Obama's illegal executive amnesty.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Wilkey says:
    @Felix...
    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Literally all his closest advisers are globalists or military neocon cucks. Every single MAGA nationalist has been purged by Trump’s globalist aides or in the case of Bannon, Trump himself. Miller is still around but I suspect it’s almost as an inside joke between Cohen & Kushner and company.

    Purging the entire MAGA crew means one of two things: either Trump no longer cares about implementing the MAGA agenda, or he still cares but is in the early stages of senility and is being played for a fool by the globalist faction that started out with a piece of the White House and now controls all of it. I suspect it’s the former. Trump has decided he’s not up for battling to make MAGA a reality and has made a deal with establishment forces. He’s going to massively cuck for the remaining years of his first term, and in exchange the globalist establishment is not going to destroy his family when he steps down in 2020.

    If that’s the case, expect massive, unprecedented cucking going forward. By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want. We make the best deals, don't we folks? If this is Trump’s tentative opening salvo of cucking I hate to think what we’ll see once he warms up the heavy guns of cucktillery later on in his term.

    “By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want.”

    This I think is a real possibility. It may be no mistake that DACA is on the table at the very same time as tax cuts. The alleged deal is DACA in exchange for tiny (and temporary) increases in enforcement. The real deal is Democrats get DACA and Republicans get tax cuts. But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for eliminating sanctuary cities in a most ruthless, decisive fashion, instituting mandatory E-Verify and inquiry into immigration status for access to any public services, harsh jail terms for employers and business figures who create the economic conditions for illegals, and giving ICE expanded power on the border is something I can get behind. We're never going to deport all 11 million. That's not the point. The point is to force politicians to stop using that as an excuse for deporting none and stop adding fuel to the fire that is automation's effect on the American working and downwardly mobile middle class. If the leftists whine, point out that we are doing nothing more extreme than what Mexico does on its own southern border. Economics? No problem-ICE and an enhanced border will create more jobs for out of work young men in the Rust Belt, as well as in our inner cities, that will probably be a lot more appealing than working at WalMart.

    (And unless we build an actual wall and give the guards sanction to shoot to kill, we are definitely behind what India-world's largest democracy and the historical fetish object for many American liberals-does with Pakistan and Bangladesh. That's probably a better comparison than Israel for size reasons. But you've got to crawl before you can walk, no?)

    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for tax breaks for Zuckerberg, the Koch Brothers, Bezos, Goldman Sachs, and the rest pretty much epitomizes everything that is wrong with the Republican Party. The sheer level of mental escapism causes one to gape in awe. They've learned absolutely nothing from why they lost in 2012 and won in 2016.

    , @Kevin C.

    But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.
     
    Iron Law of Oligarchy: every society is ruled by a small elite, with the masses powerless pawns. Always has been, always will be. "Government of, by, and for the people" has always been more sham and myth than reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Schumers idea of a “deal”: i get everything i want, now.
    Later at some date tbd, we’ll see if we can get you some part of what you want. Maybe.

    If Trump cuts a “deal” with slick chucks used car sales, he is a sap and ill be disappointed.

    No “deals” on immigration! Just enforce the damned laws.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. @Tiny Duck
    Beahahahaha


    It's OVER


    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn't just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I'm going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place

    One of the indicia of an IQ lower than room temperature is that you believe ANYTHING that Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi say. Another is reading Leonard Pitts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Here is the “deal” i want:

    We enforce our immigration laws. So all dreamers get deported.

    Trump said either we have laws, or we dont. Are we a nation of laws? Or “deals”? Where does the word “deal” appear in the Constitution?

    Wall
    Moratorium on all immigration

    So do we have a deal chuck? If not were done talking and you go back to the used car lot.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Maj. Kong says:

    We’ll see if Don Jr is actually worth a salt, or if he’s just as useless as his leftist sister/brother-in-law.

    We might as well start looking into charging them with criminal violations. The state AGs that filed the DACA lawsuit are a good place start.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. @Thomas
    Stephen Miller is the last nationalist in the Administration. I'd start the death watch on his job now if you haven't already.

    The word over the last few weeks is that (Chief of Staff) Kelly has had to essentially cloister Trump and cherry pick his meetings and news briefings (which is a sign at how mentally undisciplined Trump is). He's edged out anyone who might have been able to tell Trump how bad an idea this is, if it's what it appears to be, possibly not out of malice but just because it's the only way he'd be able to run a tight ship with Trump. Somebody (I think maybe Cernovich) said he was hearing in the last week that Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it "makes the KKK stuff go away" after Charlottesville. (4chan is throwing out humorous theories that they have him drugged.)

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he's just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician. Plus, he probably has some asinine idea that making a good "deal" with Chuck Schumer will somehow translate into capital down the road, that his new buddy will give him the wall "later." A relationship like that might be par for the course for a real estate developer but not for a President in the unavoidably oppositional world of politics.

    Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it “makes the KKK stuff go away” after Charlottesville.

    Chuck may have been doing it for a quarter century, but the real old pros are the Comintern. They’ve been running this same con for a century.

    Still works.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Sid
    Stephen Miller, if you're reading this, get this article around General Kelly and share it with Trump!

    If only the Tsar knew!

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    There's zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything. He's a high energy nut case. Doing amnesty to make the KKK smear go away is another negotiation FAIL.

    Trump blusters, bluffs, and then he folds.

    Amnesty will make him look even weaker to our enemies around the world. Why should anyone respect a country that refuses to enforce its borders? What right do we have to export our insane civic values to the rest of the world?

    What's next? Mass Mexican immigration into Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? To boost their economies?

    I'm sure the state dept is pumping transsexual culturekampf to every foreign office.

    Nothing says USA! like a giant surveillance grid. How about putting one of the Utah megastorage snoop bases in every country?

    There’s zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything.

    There’s a theory that Trump’s entire campaign was a negotiating ploy that got out of hand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Nah. We all (including you) covered this territory back during the campaign. Trump has been interested in politics for a long time and has an ego too big to golf with Bill Clinton and not want to be president.
    , @SteveRogers42
    Howard Stern is not exactly an unimpeachable source.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. George says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. I know Schumer likes to call himself “Four 800s” for high scores on College Board tests, but he’s really not that smart.

    Pumpkin Person disagrees:

    Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the smartest politicians in the world with a reported score of 1600 on the older, much harder version of the SAT (equivalent to an IQ of about 170). And while this score might have been exaggerated, he shows several statistical signs of extremely high IQ (large head, large height, extremely powerful job, Ashkenazi ancestry, Ivy League law degree etc).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the smartest politicians in the world with a reported score of 1600 on the older, much harder version of the SAT (equivalent to an IQ of about 170).
     
    That's nothing. Bibi Netanyahu has an IQ over 200, is a decorated war hero, and has bedded hundreds of women.
    He is also extremely tall and his head is listed in the Guinness World Records as worlds biggest. Ever.
    Chuck Schumer wishes he was half the man Bibi is.
    , @James Kabala
    At some point Steve and his commenters convinced themselves that any type of study for the SATs is a form of cheating and that truly honest young people are duty-bound to take the test completely cold. For some commenters (not Steve), all they needed to see was the surname Kaplan, and that was enough to convince them it must be wicked.

    Now apparently just being a low-level Kaplan employee is considered a way to cheat yourself into a high score. It would not surprise me if the claims about Schumer's scores are exaggerated, but if they are true, it is ridiculous to imply that they are somehow illegitimate.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Mr. Blank says:

    I’m not saying I’d vote against Trump if he folds on immigration. I’m not even saying I’d stay home and not vote at all.

    All I’m saying is that if Trump folds on this, the Democratic candidate in 2020 will have to be a potential disaster of Biblical proportions for Trump to get my vote. Otherwise, I’m going over to the blackpilled, accelerationist camp: The worse things get, and the faster it happens, the better. I won’t pull the lever for Satan himself, but I’m fine with the Four Horsemen.

    Read More
    • Agree: fish
    • Replies: @VivaLaMigra
    Gee, Mr. Blank," the worse things get, and the faster it happens, the better" for the long-term good? Isn't that what we all said about the eight years that Barry Hussein Soetoro illegally sat in the White House? And, didn't things get pretty darn crappy, leading not just to a defeat of the Demon-Rats, but to the stinkin' RINO's in the RNC and their hand-picked guy, Jebito Boosh? And, after that outstanding inaugural address, didn't you think THIS would be the administration in which finally, the ordinary American citizen would 'not be forgotten,' in Trump's own words?

    Well, I'll tell you what's going to happen, starting immediately after the amnesty is signed. The RINO's won't have anything to fear. The Rubio's, McCain's, Graham's, Ryan's, all of them will know Trump is a liar and a phony - just like them! Now, they MAY have to fear all the new Democratic voters who have been amnestied. They won't have CITIZENSHIP yet, but when has that ever stopped aliens from voting? And, they'll all be out in force to vote for Up-Chuck Schumer's party. Meanwhile, GOP fundraisers will be calling in 2019. You'll be hanging up on them, b/c it won't matter; the battle is already lost.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Lot says:
    @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    We are not getting ANY of those.

    Trump looks like he is now adopted the Rubio position: amnesty now plus promises about “border security” and “tough penalties” and “learn English” that are lies from the beginning, just like none of the enforcement in Reagan’s amnesty in 1986 happened.

    Read More
    • Agree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Exactly. It doesn't matter who we elect to the White House or Congress, the ruling elites still get their way.
    , @MarkinLA
    The Russians are right, Trump is a weak man who craves adulation any way he can get it. If it means crapping on his base, that is a small price to pay to get good publicity.
    , @Moses
    Deal-making rule #1: NEVER give away anything of value now in exchange for a promise of something in the future. The other party pockets the concession then finds reasons not to deliver. The 1986 amnesty "deal" showed that clearly.

    If Trump delivers amnesty after all his tough talk I'm done with him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Lot says:
    @Anonymous
    There's zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything. He's a high energy nut case. Doing amnesty to make the KKK smear go away is another negotiation FAIL.

    Trump blusters, bluffs, and then he folds.

    Amnesty will make him look even weaker to our enemies around the world. Why should anyone respect a country that refuses to enforce its borders? What right do we have to export our insane civic values to the rest of the world?

    What's next? Mass Mexican immigration into Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? To boost their economies?

    I'm sure the state dept is pumping transsexual culturekampf to every foreign office.

    Nothing says USA! like a giant surveillance grid. How about putting one of the Utah megastorage snoop bases in every country?

    “Nothing says USA! like a giant surveillance grid. How about putting one of the Utah megastorage snoop bases in every country?”

    We already have a bunch of them in other countries. I think our biggest one abroad is in the Australian desert.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Realist says:

    “Is Trump Going to Fall for Schumer’s One Old Trick and Dump His Wall?”

    Of course. Stupid is as stupid does.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. Kauf Buch says:

    It hasn’t happened yet. Wait and see.
    REMEMBER *WHO* is reporting this: Dems and MSM.

    If Trump *were* to do this, it would be political suicide.
    I don’t see it happening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    This is like the fourth "omg Trump gonna pass amnesty cause breitbart said so we doomed" kerfluffle I can remember, and right on cue the legion of anon spamming blackpill and the eeyores brigade show up, ignoring how wrong they have been and THIS TIME they're totally right.

    Of course, in true Talmudic fashion when this turns out to be Pelosi/Schumer overplaying their hand or engaging in fabulism they'll pretend it never happened.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Realist says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump/Bannon had a credible plan for saving Redstate America: reverse the immigration trend.

    Instead Trump is going to amnesty 4 million (daca plus chain migration).

    So now the incoherent jackass has set the stage for Arizona, Texas, Georgia and Florida to go blue in 2020.

    Trump is the worst negotiator we had as POTUS since Jimmy Carter. It's really not negotiating at all it's just a giveaway. Same as he did on Afghanistan.

    Trump is a phoney from the get go.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Lot says:
    @Wilkey
    At minimum a DACA bill will grant amnesty to 690,000 people. Of course Flake, Graham, Schumer & Company are pushing a bill that will end up giving amnesty - and by amnesty they mean citizenship - to probably 3x that many. They can claim it will only be given to X number of illegals, but those numerical limits will be absolutely nowhere in the final bill.

    What does that all mean? It means amnesty for enough illegals (1-2 million) to populate a major city. It means citizenship for enough new voters to change the outcomes in dozens of elections, up to and including presidential elections. The 2016 presidential election was decided by less than 80,000 votes.

    That is to say that if Republicans vote for the bill and Trump signs it that it better include a helluva lot more than a few hundred million in new border security funding that will be easily revoked in some budget compromise 2-3 years hence.

    The current Dreamer bill that already has multiple people in both parties pushing it is significantly worse than Obama’s DACA by gutting its “one felony or three misdemeanor” exclusion and expanding the qualification dates.

    So, in his first year in office, it looks like Trump will both expand and make permanent Obama’s illegal executive amnesty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    So, in his first year in office, it looks like Trump will both expand and make permanent Obama’s illegal executive amnesty.
     
    Exactly. The joke is on those who thought elections could matter; the Establishment always wins.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. LondonBob says:

    A lot of folks, the non trolls, certainly have been fooled by Schumer, Trump won’t be. Still amazed all he has done he still gets criticised. Wish we had Trump in this country, instead we have had Cameron and May who have presided over increased immigration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. @wren
    OT:

    The top news at Wired right now:

    https://www.wired.com/story/can-apples-iphone-x-beat-facial-recognitions-bias-problem/

    [M]isidentifying a suspected criminal is no laughing matter, nor is breaching civil liberties.

    This is why, of course, we must never mention the sigle most salient, first, and most quickly recognised characteristic about any person when a criminal or suspected criminal is at large: his race.

    Ha. Ha.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I know Schumer likes to call himself “Four 800s” for high scores on College Board tests, but he’s really not that smart.
     
    Pumpkin Person disagrees:

    Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the smartest politicians in the world with a reported score of 1600 on the older, much harder version of the SAT (equivalent to an IQ of about 170). And while this score might have been exaggerated, he shows several statistical signs of extremely high IQ (large head, large height, extremely powerful job, Ashkenazi ancestry, Ivy League law degree etc).
     

    Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the smartest politicians in the world with a reported score of 1600 on the older, much harder version of the SAT (equivalent to an IQ of about 170).

    That’s nothing. Bibi Netanyahu has an IQ over 200, is a decorated war hero, and has bedded hundreds of women.
    He is also extremely tall and his head is listed in the Guinness World Records as worlds biggest. Ever.
    Chuck Schumer wishes he was half the man Bibi is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @Anonymous
    Trump lets NSC, IRS, CIA, FBI, Justice, State all remain controlled by liberals.

    Then he says he's not filling openings because he wants to shrink government!

    Total scumbag lying sack.

    Jeff Sessions is a liberal!?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Jay Fink says:

    Trump’s campaign was very exciting to me…the issues and the anti-establishment theme. The Trump Presidency itself is really disappointing. I have been in denial for awhile about this but I’m finally waking up. We need a Steve Bannon type figure, someone with firm convictions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    My guess is that it is an experience/management problem. The system was too strong for Trump's approach. The travel ban was a mistake that made him look weak. He should have asserted his authority immediately by doing things that couldn't held up by courts and foot-dragging. E.g., ending DACA on day one with the stroke of a pen and bringing troops home from somewhere. He needed to establish his control over the political and military professionals. Instead, they are running the show.
    , @VivaLaMigra
    Did The Swamp suck Trump down, or was it those idiots, Jared and Ivanka?
    , @gda
    You don't turn an aircraft carrier around like you can a speedboat. This just just his 8th month for heavens sakes.

    Did you think the swamp was just going to fold up their tent and sneak away?

    A change like this takes a generation, maybe more. Trump is just the first of many change agents. He can't do it all. But he can get many things going in the right direction, if he gets through the full 8 years.

    Those who think Trump will waver on his signature issue are just dumb.

    Besides, all these bi-partisan "deals" are just boosting his popularity. And they are just a set up for the ultimate deal - tax reform. The fact that top Democrats are now making deals with the racist white supremacist perhaps means that other Dems, in vulnerable states, can be peeled away into the deal on tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. BB753 says:

    This Schumer guy is the devil, literally.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. Ed says:

    Obama deported DREAMers in his first term, there’s no reason Trump can’t. There should be a tough negotiating stance from the restrictionist side. Evidently Trump was upset by the media freak out when he signed DACA. It also didn’t help that once again GOPe types rushed to the media to undercut him.

    Only a partial amnesty should even be on the table work authorization but no citizenship. In exchange, we get manatory everify and as many elements of RAISE. Trump can have his wall too. The notion that the Dems can even think to dictate terms during these negotiations is ridiculous. Deportion of DREAMers must be seen as the end result of failing to deal in 6 months not revisiting it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @VivaLaMigra
    Well, Ed, I don't think Trump "signed DACA" or signed anything. BUT, he did state that he'd effectively CONTINUE that unconstitutional abomination, for AT LEAST another six months. So, there may be various memoranda sent to agencies like Homeland Security, where there is a very CONSPICUOUS vacancy at the cabinet level right now. Not that super-cuck Kelly was doing any kind of bang-up job over there. Illegal aliens and their enablers were laughing at this so-called 'tough-guy general." But, Trump hasn't even nominated ANYONE to replace Kelly at DHS, at that has to tell you something about how he regards the department. It's pretty pathetic, really.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Ed says:
    @Sid
    Stephen Miller, if you're reading this, get this article around General Kelly and share it with Trump!

    Before the meeting Miller was telling folks the DREAM Act will never pass.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Other than the hair, I don't see much difference between Miller and Kushner. Both are low-T, frail ivrim that are arguably too young to have such a strong influence on the president of the US.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. dr kill says:
    @Opinionator
    Trump has done fuck all to actually get out there and lead and educate the American people on immigration issues. He wins if he would do this.

    I hate to say it, but if he’s smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    Yep, this is all about the Rs and keeping them in line, they can't vote amnesty and he needs to takeaway the cover of voting for a wall etc that might enable them to do so. Trump is learning the game in DC,
    , @Clark Westwood

    I hate to say it, but if he’s smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.
     
    We have no choice but to wait and see.
    , @VivaLaMigra
    Trump's already had several chances to push for The Wall, and has CAVED each and every time. Just like in 1986, there WILL be amnesty. Not just for 'dreamers' - EVERYONE will get amnesty because any immigration enforcement will be effectively shut down! How TF are you going to DEPORT anyone while you're processing tens of millions of amnesty applications? You won't have the manpower for it, and besides the courts will say that deportees have the 'right' to apply for amnesty and appeal. So, there will be NO BORDER SECURITY.
    , @VivaLaMigra
    ..by 2020 it'll be too late.
    , @Opinionator
    He can build a wall without congressional support?

    And how can he achieve the other immigration agenda items without congressional support?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Dave Pinsen

    There’s zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything.
     
    There's a theory that Trump's entire campaign was a negotiating ploy that got out of hand.
    https://twitter.com/edwest/status/827432344453791745

    Nah. We all (including you) covered this territory back during the campaign. Trump has been interested in politics for a long time and has an ego too big to golf with Bill Clinton and not want to be president.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Jay Fink
    Trump's campaign was very exciting to me...the issues and the anti-establishment theme. The Trump Presidency itself is really disappointing. I have been in denial for awhile about this but I'm finally waking up. We need a Steve Bannon type figure, someone with firm convictions.

    My guess is that it is an experience/management problem. The system was too strong for Trump’s approach. The travel ban was a mistake that made him look weak. He should have asserted his authority immediately by doing things that couldn’t held up by courts and foot-dragging. E.g., ending DACA on day one with the stroke of a pen and bringing troops home from somewhere. He needed to establish his control over the political and military professionals. Instead, they are running the show.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Chief Seattle
    It's going to be a lot easier to negotiate with the Repubs once they're not the only game in town. Anyone who's honest with themselves knows that 2/3 of them are exactly the same as democrats and are owned by the same people. The only thing they are interested in is staying in power. They talk conservative but in reality are quite content to be the do-nothing opposition party. Talking tough, scaring their constituents about the "liberals", but in reality playing voting games so that nothing conservative, nothing that would offend the chamber of commerce, or the lobbyists ever actually passes. So Trump calls their bluff, makes some deals with the Dems on marginal issues that were going to pass anyway (debt ceiling, DACA) and splits off the 1/3 of their membership that is actually conservative. And in this way, by showing them they're not the only game in town, he begins to call the shots, while he unveils the cucks, so that the party can become more Trump in 2018.

    If you listen to everything the media claims then you'll get whiplash. Three weeks ago he was a White Nationalist Neo Nazi supporter. Last week he was a evil dictator that wants to deport promising college students. Today he's going to give it all away to Chuck Shumer? Let's keep some perspective.

    People who are against immigration have nowhere else to go. Trump knows this.

    The biggest danger is that they won’t come out and vote for him next time, but it’s not that big a danger. Imagine who will run against the crazy Russian Nazi demon. The biggest danger is that somehow a reasonable Macron savior figure seductively unites the establishment and collects all the wishy-washy votes in the center. But it’s more likely we’ll get a Democratic Party apparatchik whom Trump can easily beat with his patented brand of media-savvy outrageous common sense.

    Trump is a political aberration. I am grateful whenever he bravely, recklessly, flamboyantly, and oh so reasonably goes against the pieties of our age. But he is one man. Who else do you turn to if he fails you? There is no one else, for now.

    So suck it up and hope for the best with the lousy set of cards you have been dealt. It does no good to scream like a shocked virgin, “he’s doing A when he promised us B!”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Kauf Buch
    It hasn't happened yet. Wait and see.
    REMEMBER *WHO* is reporting this: Dems and MSM.

    If Trump *were* to do this, it would be political suicide.
    I don't see it happening.

    This is like the fourth “omg Trump gonna pass amnesty cause breitbart said so we doomed” kerfluffle I can remember, and right on cue the legion of anon spamming blackpill and the eeyores brigade show up, ignoring how wrong they have been and THIS TIME they’re totally right.

    Of course, in true Talmudic fashion when this turns out to be Pelosi/Schumer overplaying their hand or engaging in fabulism they’ll pretend it never happened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Correct.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. LondonBob says:
    @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    Yep, this is all about the Rs and keeping them in line, they can’t vote amnesty and he needs to takeaway the cover of voting for a wall etc that might enable them to do so. Trump is learning the game in DC,

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. KenH says:

    We don’t need any enforcement provisions. We already have enforcement provisions on the books that are being ignored so one more bill won’t change that and is merely optics for us flyover country rubes.

    If Trump goes along with this gang of eight light version then he’ll be holding his future rallies in a grade school classroom. He’s now on course to become as hated and despised by rank and file Republicans as George W. Bush was from 2006 onward coinciding with his push for mass amnesty .

    I always thought Trump was too good to be true given that most of his personal entourage is ultra liberal and Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. ChrisZ says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    The Wall isn't a silly idea. For starters, it would dramatically reduce illegal crossings. Plus, it can't be gamed like immigration law and enforcement can be. And it would also send a powerful signal to would be illicit migrants.

    The Dems know this, which is why they oppose it so adamantly.

    I agree with all of Dave’s points, of course, and find contemptible the dismissive “counter-arguments” put forward on the left and right about the alleged ineffectiveness or impossibility of the Wall.

    I would add that the Wall is exactly the kind of practical, tangible, finite public project that government can actually execute. If it doesn’t do so–or worse, refuses to do so–the government will in effect have demonstrated that it is has no intention of honoring the will of the electorate, and that it’s only good for “symbolic” action.

    As for Trump’s commitment to the Wall, I don’t see how he can reneg on it without ruining his name and place in history. On the other hand, a Great Wall of Trump visible from space should be precisely the kind of world-historic landmark that would appeal to his ego.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Maj. Kong
    Chuck Schumer: Unregulated Israeli nukes
    Also Chuck Schumer: Tyrannical gun confiscation for average Americans (crypto-Nazis)

    GOP: The 1% can dodge taxes and can have an unlimited supply of cheap labor
    Also GOP: The traditional America can't dodge mass immigration and must drink Cultural Marxism.

    Donald Trump: America First! Build the Wall! End DACA! Putin is an ally!
    Also Donald Trump: Jared and Ivanka First! Enrich cronies! Now I'm a Neocon!

    Chuck Schumer: Unregulated Israeli nukes
    Also Chuck Schumer: Tyrannical gun confiscation for average Americans (crypto-Nazis)

    After Israel’s fighting force, ISIS/AQ/AN, began to be routed by the Syrian Army, Israel began to pin its hopes on an independent Kurdish state within Syria to divide and weaken Syria (and Iraq, Iran, etc). And then just yesterday we learn that our U.S. government has laid out $2.2 billion to arm the SDF (Kurds) with the goal of them establishing an independent Kurdish state in Syria.

    But it’s all about Iran. Weakening Iran. Iran, which hasn’t been involved in any terrorism for over four decades is called, “the number one government sponsor of terrorism”. Just watch Fox News for two minutes and see what I mean.

    So why the Israel/Jewish obessession with Iran? IDF Maj. Gen. Yair Golan explains:

    “Because the Iranians are sophisticated, they are a higher form of civilization, they have a nice academic infrastructure, nice industry, good scientists, many talented young people. They are very similar to us. And because they are similar to us, they are much, much more dangerous.”

    Hmm, I wonder if the flood of non-whites and non-Christians into Europe and North America is related to this sentiment? Or the foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria in both the U.S. and Europe over a country of white Christians with a history of mathematics, science, literature, etc??

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. jackmcg says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    No, not likely. If they had blackmail on Trump, they would have used it back in 2015.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Here is the link from my previous post. I couldn’t edit it in because it was deemed spam.

    https://southfront.org/israeli-general-pkk-not-terrorist-organization/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  95. @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    They’d have come out during the campaign, I’d have thought. Maybe two days before the vote.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why would you waste such a powerful tool? It's much more powerful and useful to have as leverage over the highest office in the land. If you use it to keep him out of office, it's next to useless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Wulf says:
    @Maj. Kong
    The Wall is a physical impediment to vehicular transport of drugs. Waterborne smuggling, and using human mules is considerably less efficient and costlier.

    Legalization of cannabis, a fiscal necessity to patch up Medicaid, should be pursued at the state and federal level. The President can order the DEA to re-schedule. Sessions is dead wrong about this, I share his contempt for potheads, but better that cannabis be legal funding our coffers rather than the cartels. Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a "gateway theory in reverse".

    Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a “gateway theory in reverse”

    lol

    Are you that deluded? sounds like the same moronic theory envisioning how cheap and legal quality heroin, cocaine and meth will reduce OD rates and also lower the chance of people using and abusing crack, benzos, methadone and meth?

    Get a grip muppet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @MEH 0910
    Tiny Duck, over at the Chanda Chisala Scrabble/IQ piece you left this comment:

    Don’t bother.

    This place is for failed middle aged white men looking to blow off steam.

    I just come here to have fun at their expense. Always entertaining.
     
    Tiny, Tiny, Tiny. For shame. For shame.

    And yet time and time and time again, so many of you give Tiny Duck the attention that keeps him coming back every day.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that TD is one of the smartest posters here.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @MEH 0910

    And yet time and time and time again, so many of you give Tiny Duck the attention that keeps him coming back every day.
     
    How do you think Trump got elected? Tiny Duck baiting, goading, and infuriating Trump's base was the linchpin to getting out the vote. That, and Hillary embracing Black Lives Matter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @FactsAreImportant
    Amnesty = Impeachment?

    Ann Colter tweets her support for Amnesty = Impeachment:

    Read More
    • Agree: MEH 0910
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    I hate to say it, but if he’s smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    We have no choice but to wait and see.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. AndrewR says:
    @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    IMHO ending BRC is more important than all of the other three combined, especially if it can be revoked retroactively for “citizens” who have dual citizenship or who can easily get it (aka every Mexican bebé ancla). Also, everyone involved in birth tourism needs to be RICO’d and stripped of all assets.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Mr. Anon says:

    Trump is a fool for going soft on DACA. Ending DACA-status is the easiest thing he could do. It isn’t a law. Ending it requires no action on anyone’s part but his. Moreover it is the result of an unconstitutional exercise of power – rule by edict – by his predecessor. He could do so on sound principle.

    But people will say “but what about the children?”. To hell with them. By ending DACA he would be indicating that he is willing to be tough on illegal immigration. It is analogous to Reagan’s mass firing of air traffic controllers. It sends a signal: I’m not screwing around.

    The much-remarked-upon “Trump Effect” of decreased border crossing is already starting to wane, as people begin to sense that the Trump administration is going to be just business as usual.

    Trump is getting schumered.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. AndrewR says:
    @Ed
    Before the meeting Miller was telling folks the DREAM Act will never pass.

    https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/908171352837894149

    Other than the hair, I don’t see much difference between Miller and Kushner. Both are low-T, frail ivrim that are arguably too young to have such a strong influence on the president of the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Other than the hair, I don’t see much difference between Miller and Kushner.
     
    How about the fact that Miller is on our side?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Anatoly Karlin

    I know Schumer likes to call himself “Four 800s” for high scores on College Board tests, but he’s really not that smart.
     
    Pumpkin Person disagrees:

    Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the smartest politicians in the world with a reported score of 1600 on the older, much harder version of the SAT (equivalent to an IQ of about 170). And while this score might have been exaggerated, he shows several statistical signs of extremely high IQ (large head, large height, extremely powerful job, Ashkenazi ancestry, Ivy League law degree etc).
     

    At some point Steve and his commenters convinced themselves that any type of study for the SATs is a form of cheating and that truly honest young people are duty-bound to take the test completely cold. For some commenters (not Steve), all they needed to see was the surname Kaplan, and that was enough to convince them it must be wicked.

    Now apparently just being a low-level Kaplan employee is considered a way to cheat yourself into a high score. It would not surprise me if the claims about Schumer’s scores are exaggerated, but if they are true, it is ridiculous to imply that they are somehow illegitimate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hosswire
    As I understand it, at the time that Schumer was working for Kaplan, the SAT administrators had not adjusted their practices to counter test preppers.
    So they still used the same questions over & over for all test takers. Questions that Kaplan had acquired through means both fair & foul.
    So a young employee mimeographing copies of the exact same questions that he would later be tested on had a large advantage indeed.
    Maybe Schumer is a super genius. But given the circumstances of his perfect SAT score I need to see additional evidence of that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Well, What TF can we do now? You could call your nearest “Republican” member of Congress, and tell him that if this AMNESTY is signed into law, you’ll never vote GOP again. But, odds are that congresscritter has RINO stink all over him and is actually PUSHING amnesty. Check out their websites; many of them aren’t even hiding it. Trump has decided to Make the Democratic Party Great Again!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    Trump’s already had several chances to push for The Wall, and has CAVED each and every time. Just like in 1986, there WILL be amnesty. Not just for ‘dreamers’ – EVERYONE will get amnesty because any immigration enforcement will be effectively shut down! How TF are you going to DEPORT anyone while you’re processing tens of millions of amnesty applications? You won’t have the manpower for it, and besides the courts will say that deportees have the ‘right’ to apply for amnesty and appeal. So, there will be NO BORDER SECURITY.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Ed
    Obama deported DREAMers in his first term, there's no reason Trump can't. There should be a tough negotiating stance from the restrictionist side. Evidently Trump was upset by the media freak out when he signed DACA. It also didn't help that once again GOPe types rushed to the media to undercut him.

    Only a partial amnesty should even be on the table work authorization but no citizenship. In exchange, we get manatory everify and as many elements of RAISE. Trump can have his wall too. The notion that the Dems can even think to dictate terms during these negotiations is ridiculous. Deportion of DREAMers must be seen as the end result of failing to deal in 6 months not revisiting it.

    Well, Ed, I don’t think Trump “signed DACA” or signed anything. BUT, he did state that he’d effectively CONTINUE that unconstitutional abomination, for AT LEAST another six months. So, there may be various memoranda sent to agencies like Homeland Security, where there is a very CONSPICUOUS vacancy at the cabinet level right now. Not that super-cuck Kelly was doing any kind of bang-up job over there. Illegal aliens and their enablers were laughing at this so-called ‘tough-guy general.” But, Trump hasn’t even nominated ANYONE to replace Kelly at DHS, at that has to tell you something about how he regards the department. It’s pretty pathetic, really.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. 1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what’s the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying ‘tourists’ would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    Read More
    • Replies: @VivaLaMigra
    OK, then, smart guy, if The Wall is a 'stupid idea' please give us some better ones. I'd certainly like to see massively stepped up raids of employers who have their workplaces like meatpacking plants and construction sites crammed with illegals, and those people processed and tossed back over the border. Have Trump's hand-picked guys over at DHS or DOL done this? Nope.

    And, when it comes to the DACA/Dream illegals, is ANYONE going to be held accountable for the admitted human smuggling? Again, a big fat Nope. EVERYONE gets amnesty.
    , @VivaLaMigra
    No, I can't 'blame' Up-Chuck Schumer, just as you can't blame a rat for chewing its way into your house and crapping all over it. It's what they do. And, Up-Chuck never made any secrets about pushing the interestes of ILLEGAL ALIENS over those of the American citizenry.

    Trump, now that's a different story.
    , @Chrisnonymous

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

     

    If a djinni gave me a choice of either undoing 9/11 or undoing Mexican illegal migration, I'd let the towers fall again.
    , @MEH 0910
    So antibiotics are stupid because they don't stop viruses. Gotcha!
    , @Polichinello
    A wall was no panacea, but it would have taken care of a large percentage of the problem. It's a necessary, but not a sufficient measure to solving the problem.

    I'll wait and see the final legislation before judging, but it doesn't look good right now.
    , @Opinionator
    There is consensus that walls have been effective along the southern border at several places where they have been erected.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Mr. Blank
    I'm not saying I'd vote against Trump if he folds on immigration. I'm not even saying I'd stay home and not vote at all.

    All I'm saying is that if Trump folds on this, the Democratic candidate in 2020 will have to be a potential disaster of Biblical proportions for Trump to get my vote. Otherwise, I'm going over to the blackpilled, accelerationist camp: The worse things get, and the faster it happens, the better. I won't pull the lever for Satan himself, but I'm fine with the Four Horsemen.

    Gee, Mr. Blank,” the worse things get, and the faster it happens, the better” for the long-term good? Isn’t that what we all said about the eight years that Barry Hussein Soetoro illegally sat in the White House? And, didn’t things get pretty darn crappy, leading not just to a defeat of the Demon-Rats, but to the stinkin’ RINO’s in the RNC and their hand-picked guy, Jebito Boosh? And, after that outstanding inaugural address, didn’t you think THIS would be the administration in which finally, the ordinary American citizen would ‘not be forgotten,’ in Trump’s own words?

    Well, I’ll tell you what’s going to happen, starting immediately after the amnesty is signed. The RINO’s won’t have anything to fear. The Rubio’s, McCain’s, Graham’s, Ryan’s, all of them will know Trump is a liar and a phony – just like them! Now, they MAY have to fear all the new Democratic voters who have been amnestied. They won’t have CITIZENSHIP yet, but when has that ever stopped aliens from voting? And, they’ll all be out in force to vote for Up-Chuck Schumer’s party. Meanwhile, GOP fundraisers will be calling in 2019. You’ll be hanging up on them, b/c it won’t matter; the battle is already lost.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    OK, then, smart guy, if The Wall is a ‘stupid idea’ please give us some better ones. I’d certainly like to see massively stepped up raids of employers who have their workplaces like meatpacking plants and construction sites crammed with illegals, and those people processed and tossed back over the border. Have Trump’s hand-picked guys over at DHS or DOL done this? Nope.

    And, when it comes to the DACA/Dream illegals, is ANYONE going to be held accountable for the admitted human smuggling? Again, a big fat Nope. EVERYONE gets amnesty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Jay Fink
    Trump's campaign was very exciting to me...the issues and the anti-establishment theme. The Trump Presidency itself is really disappointing. I have been in denial for awhile about this but I'm finally waking up. We need a Steve Bannon type figure, someone with firm convictions.

    Did The Swamp suck Trump down, or was it those idiots, Jared and Ivanka?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    No, I can’t ‘blame’ Up-Chuck Schumer, just as you can’t blame a rat for chewing its way into your house and crapping all over it. It’s what they do. And, Up-Chuck never made any secrets about pushing the interestes of ILLEGAL ALIENS over those of the American citizenry.

    Trump, now that’s a different story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @Dave Pinsen
    The Wall isn't a silly idea. For starters, it would dramatically reduce illegal crossings. Plus, it can't be gamed like immigration law and enforcement can be. And it would also send a powerful signal to would be illicit migrants.

    The Dems know this, which is why they oppose it so adamantly.

    Correct. If The Wall had no chance of slowing down the growth of the Libtards’ voter base, they wouldn’t object to it. After all, it would then be just another Big Government boondoggle and when has a Demon-Rat ever said “No” to that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    ..by 2020 it’ll be too late.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    by 2020 it’ll be too late.
     
    Try, it's already too late.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Felix...
    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he's not going to be alive 6 years from now. It's likely he doesn't even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he's probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He's an old orange blowhard and he's had his "fun" with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Literally all his closest advisers are globalist Jews or military cucks. Every single MAGA nationalist has been purged by Trump's globalist aides or in the case of Bannon, Trump himself. Miller is still around but I suspect it's almost as an inside joke between Cohen & Kushner and company: Miller is a chosen one so he's got the right to an opinion on important questions like demographics, unlike those subhuman goys who should know that their place does not include the determination of their own destiny.

    Purging the entire MAGA crew means one of two things: either Trump no longer cares about implementing the MAGA agenda, or he still cares but is in the early stages of senility and is being played for a fool by the globalist faction that started out with a piece of the White House and now controls all of it. I suspect it's the former. Trump has decided he's not up for battling to make MAGA a reality and has made a deal with establishment forces. He's going to massively cuck for the remaining years of his first term, and in exchange the globalist establishment is not going to destroy his family when he steps down in 2020.

    If that's the case, expect massive, unprecedented cucking going forward. By all accounts, the DACA "deal" that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want. If this is Trump's tentative opening salvo of cucking I hate to think what we'll see once he warms up the heavy guns of cucktillery later on in his term.

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.

    Thank you Felix! That is the key point. I think it’s pretty obvious, knowing who this man is, that he is not in this thing to stay in power 8 years. Donald Trump has said for years what he thinks is wrong with this country, and he went through this whole process to try to fix things (it helped that this was good for his already-big ego also).

    The “we will stay home in 2020, so you better ….” thing will not affect anything that the President does or does not do. I don’t believe he cares a bit about that.

    That Trump is fucking up royally just shows that he does not have enough trust in his own political views (the ones that match the views of American patriots). Because of this, he hires on these globalists and neocons, as he thinks they are very smart, having been globalists and neocons for, like, forever, while Trump was “just” a businessman.

    The whole thing is sickening, and the Charlie Brown place-kicking meme fits perfectly to how patriotic Americans feel. You probably can’t win this politically, so take the ball, go home, and devise a different game.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Great rest of the comment too, Felix.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    You probably can’t win this politically, so take the ball, go home, and devise a different game.
     
    But it's not like we can win this non-politically, either. There's no avenue of attack where they don't have us overpowered and outmatched.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @dr kill
    I hate to say it, but if he's smart, he lets the RINO GOP congressman twist in the wind in 18 and gets the wall really going just in time for the 2020 presidential race. Is he that smart? Intelligent people may disagree.

    He can build a wall without congressional support?

    And how can he achieve the other immigration agenda items without congressional support?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    If a djinni gave me a choice of either undoing 9/11 or undoing Mexican illegal migration, I’d let the towers fall again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. MEH 0910 says:
    @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    So antibiotics are stupid because they don’t stop viruses. Gotcha!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. JimB says:

    To hell with compassion. Today’s Dreamer is tomorrow’s Antifa member. Send them all back to wherever, like Rudy in “Born in East L.A.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  119. Frankly, I think that the Democrats and the media are playing this all wrong to get what they want.

    They have gone fully public with a story that makes Trump look like a credulous fool, well before any deal is done. They are even celebrating their triumph in making him look like a fool.

    Does anybody really think that that’s generally a good negotiating strategy — especially with someone as volatile and narcissistic as Donald Trump?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    A wall was no panacea, but it would have taken care of a large percentage of the problem. It’s a necessary, but not a sufficient measure to solving the problem.

    I’ll wait and see the final legislation before judging, but it doesn’t look good right now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Trump’s likely to win in 2020, regardless of what he achieves or not (so long as the Democrats don’t put forward an unusually charismatic candidate, or the economy doesn’t crash). The incumbent has a huge advantage, and other than that most people vote for personalities, not for policies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @prusmc
    George H. W. Bush 1992. February 85 percent approval, November out on his ear. Was Ross Perot the only deciding factor? Many of the Perot voters would have stayed home if he wasn't in the race. Split the others 55 percent 45 percent Bush-Clinton still a Clinton blowout. Don't get caught flately making false promises on the key issue to the American public.
    , @Bubba
    I highly doubt it as that is not a reliable rule of thumb for Republican presidents lately. Bush the 1st lost as an incumbent in '92 after he was hammered for reneging on his "No New Taxes" pledge. Then Bush the 2nd barely, I mean barely, won re-election in '04 when as an incumbent he should have had a landslide win. A few counties in Ohio made the difference for Bush the 2nd to win in '04.
    , @Opinionator
    Scott Adams thinks Trump won't run again in 2020.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Maj. Kong
    Much of the reaction has been from Cruzbots claiming "I told you Trump has no principles and can't be trusted". They still don't get it, tilting at windmills while the left is playing for keeps.

    “Cruzbots” my ass. I could see through and behind Ted Cruz’ BS way back during the primaries. I can’t tell what the hell is up with Trump. Read my reply to Felix, who I completely agree with. It’s not a matter of trusting that he is honest. I have a lack of trust in his abilities at this point.

    The 2nd paragraph by Thomas #28 is also right on the money and should be in GOLD or some shade close to that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @Maj. Kong
    Chuck Schumer: Unregulated Israeli nukes
    Also Chuck Schumer: Tyrannical gun confiscation for average Americans (crypto-Nazis)

    GOP: The 1% can dodge taxes and can have an unlimited supply of cheap labor
    Also GOP: The traditional America can't dodge mass immigration and must drink Cultural Marxism.

    Donald Trump: America First! Build the Wall! End DACA! Putin is an ally!
    Also Donald Trump: Jared and Ivanka First! Enrich cronies! Now I'm a Neocon!

    Because the far-right people never paid attention in the first place, or never wanted to (they are not known for their powers of concentration). Trump was always the most left-leaning of the 2016 Republican candidates – he was a Democrat most of his life, and half the people he appointed have been Democrats.

    The most right-leaning candidates in the Republican primaries were Ted Cruz or Rand Paul.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bb
    But no conservative even brought up immigration other than "reform" which is code for amnesty and more immigrants
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. nebulafox says:
    @Wilkey
    "By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want."

    This I think is a real possibility. It may be no mistake that DACA is on the table at the very same time as tax cuts. The alleged deal is DACA in exchange for tiny (and temporary) increases in enforcement. The real deal is Democrats get DACA and Republicans get tax cuts. But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.

    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for eliminating sanctuary cities in a most ruthless, decisive fashion, instituting mandatory E-Verify and inquiry into immigration status for access to any public services, harsh jail terms for employers and business figures who create the economic conditions for illegals, and giving ICE expanded power on the border is something I can get behind. We’re never going to deport all 11 million. That’s not the point. The point is to force politicians to stop using that as an excuse for deporting none and stop adding fuel to the fire that is automation’s effect on the American working and downwardly mobile middle class. If the leftists whine, point out that we are doing nothing more extreme than what Mexico does on its own southern border. Economics? No problem-ICE and an enhanced border will create more jobs for out of work young men in the Rust Belt, as well as in our inner cities, that will probably be a lot more appealing than working at WalMart.

    (And unless we build an actual wall and give the guards sanction to shoot to kill, we are definitely behind what India-world’s largest democracy and the historical fetish object for many American liberals-does with Pakistan and Bangladesh. That’s probably a better comparison than Israel for size reasons. But you’ve got to crawl before you can walk, no?)

    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for tax breaks for Zuckerberg, the Koch Brothers, Bezos, Goldman Sachs, and the rest pretty much epitomizes everything that is wrong with the Republican Party. The sheer level of mental escapism causes one to gape in awe. They’ve learned absolutely nothing from why they lost in 2012 and won in 2016.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    They can't even wake up to the fact that most of the plutocrats don't even support the Republican Party, anyway. For the love of Christ, they are supporting tax breaks on a guy like Zuckerberg who might end up *running* for the Democratic nomination!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. RonaldB says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    I'd much rather have no wall but no DREAM act than vice versa.

    Where’s the deal? A deal is supposed to give both sides something. This gives the Democrats and never-Trumpers everything they want for the pocket change on the dresser.

    A real deal might involve supporting a Dream amnesty, along with the wall, the end to chain migration entailed in the RAISE act, taking citizenship for the DREAM parents off the table forever, and no welfare ever for DREAMERS or future immigrants.

    That’s a real deal: pain on both sides but substantive progress. Trump is not making a deal; he’s surrendering.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. nebulafox says:
    @nebulafox
    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for eliminating sanctuary cities in a most ruthless, decisive fashion, instituting mandatory E-Verify and inquiry into immigration status for access to any public services, harsh jail terms for employers and business figures who create the economic conditions for illegals, and giving ICE expanded power on the border is something I can get behind. We're never going to deport all 11 million. That's not the point. The point is to force politicians to stop using that as an excuse for deporting none and stop adding fuel to the fire that is automation's effect on the American working and downwardly mobile middle class. If the leftists whine, point out that we are doing nothing more extreme than what Mexico does on its own southern border. Economics? No problem-ICE and an enhanced border will create more jobs for out of work young men in the Rust Belt, as well as in our inner cities, that will probably be a lot more appealing than working at WalMart.

    (And unless we build an actual wall and give the guards sanction to shoot to kill, we are definitely behind what India-world's largest democracy and the historical fetish object for many American liberals-does with Pakistan and Bangladesh. That's probably a better comparison than Israel for size reasons. But you've got to crawl before you can walk, no?)

    Using DACA as a bargaining chip in exchange for tax breaks for Zuckerberg, the Koch Brothers, Bezos, Goldman Sachs, and the rest pretty much epitomizes everything that is wrong with the Republican Party. The sheer level of mental escapism causes one to gape in awe. They've learned absolutely nothing from why they lost in 2012 and won in 2016.

    They can’t even wake up to the fact that most of the plutocrats don’t even support the Republican Party, anyway. For the love of Christ, they are supporting tax breaks on a guy like Zuckerberg who might end up *running* for the Democratic nomination!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @education realist
    "Trump didn’t get this far by being an idiot."

    True. The idiot here is you.

    I find it hard to believe Trump doesn't understand that this is suicidal. It could be the Dems trolling. I hope so. But if it is real, then the media will be forced to admit that immigration was a HUGE factor in Trump's win, when they've been trying to deny it all this time.

    If you watched Trump’s speeches and interviews during the election, he said a lot of times that he was going to ‘look after’ the children of illegal immigrants, or that he was ‘going to work something out’. His main motivation is to be a kind of godfather figure, which was also the main motivation for his voters – who wanted this kind of figure to look after them. If you think the majority of voters are paying attention to policy, then you are not paying attention (but Trump certainly is paying attention).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. CHUCK SCHUMER IS A FRIGGING SHYSTER SCHMUCK!

    This is like some horror movie where our beloved Trumpy has been taken over by a pod person who, while physically similar to our pal Trumpy, is now some kind of wobbly sap making deals with that sack of shit Schumer. It’s a disgusting freak show, dammit!

    President Trump should stick with his voters on the question of immigration, and eschew the immigration deal scam offered by the grinning shyster boy Schumer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  129. @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    Again you weren’t paying attention during the campaign. Trump always said when asked about it, that he was going to ‘work something out’ to look after the children of illegals. That is his true view – the guy is naturally quite liberal, and has been so all his life. He wasn’t a life-long supporter of the Democrats for nothing. Nobody is holding him hostage – he just doing what he wants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Ann Coulter is administering some tough love to our pal President Trump. President Trump is a man full of love, he loves his family and he loves the United States. But President Trump has made himself unlovable with his weakness and his betrayal on the immigration question. Mass legal immigration and illegal immigration are destroying the United States, and President Trump is not doing what he promised he would do on immigration when he was a candidate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. fnn says:

    Alex Jones says the ratfink Generals are drugging or poisoning him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  133. Hosswire says:
    @James Kabala
    At some point Steve and his commenters convinced themselves that any type of study for the SATs is a form of cheating and that truly honest young people are duty-bound to take the test completely cold. For some commenters (not Steve), all they needed to see was the surname Kaplan, and that was enough to convince them it must be wicked.

    Now apparently just being a low-level Kaplan employee is considered a way to cheat yourself into a high score. It would not surprise me if the claims about Schumer's scores are exaggerated, but if they are true, it is ridiculous to imply that they are somehow illegitimate.

    As I understand it, at the time that Schumer was working for Kaplan, the SAT administrators had not adjusted their practices to counter test preppers.
    So they still used the same questions over & over for all test takers. Questions that Kaplan had acquired through means both fair & foul.
    So a young employee mimeographing copies of the exact same questions that he would later be tested on had a large advantage indeed.
    Maybe Schumer is a super genius. But given the circumstances of his perfect SAT score I need to see additional evidence of that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Kabala
    You mean the questions were the same every year? Interesting.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    Do you think Trump could ace the SAT, no matter how much prep he had?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. prusmc says:
    @Dmitry134564
    Trump's likely to win in 2020, regardless of what he achieves or not (so long as the Democrats don't put forward an unusually charismatic candidate, or the economy doesn't crash). The incumbent has a huge advantage, and other than that most people vote for personalities, not for policies.

    George H. W. Bush 1992. February 85 percent approval, November out on his ear. Was Ross Perot the only deciding factor? Many of the Perot voters would have stayed home if he wasn’t in the race. Split the others 55 percent 45 percent Bush-Clinton still a Clinton blowout. Don’t get caught flately making false promises on the key issue to the American public.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    I disagree. The economy sucked, Watts was in flames, the Republicans had been in office for 12 years, the Weinberger incident flared up, Clinton was hammering domestic issues (and a moralistic yet hawkish foreign policy that attracted people when contrasted to the explicit Nixonian Realpolitik of Bush and his men-for example, favoring intervention in the former Balkans) that voters cared about more, and above all, Bush Senior was an absolutely hapless campaigner without Lee Atwater around. That, and Clinton was a compelling, homey personality. Bush Senior wasn't. He had the Jeb problem, which George avoided.

    "Bush would have won in 1992 if Perot didn't enter" is the Republican version of "RFK would have won in 1968 if he weren't shot." In reality, Baby Boomer fantasies aside, if RFK had lived in 1968 with no other changes to the timeline, he likely wouldn't have gotten the nomination, let alone the Presidency. Same here. To get Bush reelected in 1992 would have taken some more fundamental changes than Perot not running. And I'm saying this as a guy who really does wish Bush got reelected in '92.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Bubba says:
    @FactsAreImportant
    Amnesty = Impeachment?

    After caving on amnesty and giving a huge F.U. to his base, Trump will be eaten alive by the liberals. Trump didn’t have any allies in the swamp, but now his base is totally gone and no one will defend him. I’d bet that a Kushner scandal will bring this presidency down within a year or two. Similar thing happened to Nixon after his ’72 landslide when he told his conservative base to go pound sand.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. I know, right? And Charlie never does seem to ever kick the ball.

    At least GHWBush waited until his second yr, in 1990, before getting played. This isn’t even nine months. Now if Bannon were still at the WH, this wouldn’t be going on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  137. gda says:
    @Jay Fink
    Trump's campaign was very exciting to me...the issues and the anti-establishment theme. The Trump Presidency itself is really disappointing. I have been in denial for awhile about this but I'm finally waking up. We need a Steve Bannon type figure, someone with firm convictions.

    You don’t turn an aircraft carrier around like you can a speedboat. This just just his 8th month for heavens sakes.

    Did you think the swamp was just going to fold up their tent and sneak away?

    A change like this takes a generation, maybe more. Trump is just the first of many change agents. He can’t do it all. But he can get many things going in the right direction, if he gets through the full 8 years.

    Those who think Trump will waver on his signature issue are just dumb.

    Besides, all these bi-partisan “deals” are just boosting his popularity. And they are just a set up for the ultimate deal – tax reform. The fact that top Democrats are now making deals with the racist white supremacist perhaps means that other Dems, in vulnerable states, can be peeled away into the deal on tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.
     
    Nothing is more important than to destroy the GOP.
    , @Jay Fink
    Nothing is more important than to pass tax reform? Really? That is more of a traditional GOPe issue that I rarely heard in the campaign. I'm not so crazy for tax reform for two reasons. It expands the EITC, child tax credits etc which is basically welfare written into the tax code.

    The main reason I'm against tax reform is there are no spending cuts to accompany the tax cuts. Spending into oblivion while cutting tax revenue will lead to fiscal disaster. The printing press will have to work into overdrive just to pay the bills. That will not end well.
    , @MarkinLA
    "Tax reform" = lower the tax rates on corporations and the wealthy but remove some deductions so that they can be put back in over the next 15 years. Wash rinse repeat until the tax rate for corporations and the wealthy are 0% with all the deductions generating tax credits.

    Immigration, economic nationalism, and ending stupid foreign adventures are the real issues to the people that voted for Trump.

    Great, cut my taxes by 200 dollars so we can cut GE's by 1 billion and Zuckerber's by 300 million and borrow it all.

    You don't command by vacillating back and forth. If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don't come to the table they are going to get nothing. Trump can, right now, deport the parents of the Dreamers. That would light a fire under the Democrats butts. Do you really think the average American cares if some illegal gets deported. Those polls are meaningless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Bubba says:
    @Dmitry134564
    Trump's likely to win in 2020, regardless of what he achieves or not (so long as the Democrats don't put forward an unusually charismatic candidate, or the economy doesn't crash). The incumbent has a huge advantage, and other than that most people vote for personalities, not for policies.

    I highly doubt it as that is not a reliable rule of thumb for Republican presidents lately. Bush the 1st lost as an incumbent in ’92 after he was hammered for reneging on his “No New Taxes” pledge. Then Bush the 2nd barely, I mean barely, won re-election in ’04 when as an incumbent he should have had a landslide win. A few counties in Ohio made the difference for Bush the 2nd to win in ’04.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Kevin C. says:
    @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    –End birthright citizenship

    That would require a Constitutional amendment. So, not happening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    No, it would not. Only an act of Congress.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Kevin C. says:
    @Opinionator
    Trump has done fuck all to actually get out there and lead and educate the American people on immigration issues. He wins if he would do this.

    “He wins if he would do this.”

    “Would” implies (and requires) “could”. Namely, have you considered that Trump isn’t doing this, not because he’s unwilling, but that he’s unable? That whatever it says on mere pieces of paper, in the real world the President no longer has the power to do such things, that these decisions are all dictated by the “Deep State”, whose rule is unchanged no matter who we elect to the figurehead offices of President and Congress?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Wrong. He's out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    Then isn't Trump an utterly unprincipled fraud for promising to do what was actually impossible? (Or is he just stupid for not knowing about the deep state.)
    , @lavoisier
    Bullshit.

    Trump is selling out the country.

    He could be a real leader and stand by principles--instead he is a fraud.

    Bannon made that clear in his exit statements.

    Trump, for all we might have hoped otherwise, is not a profile in courage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Doesn’t this so-called agreement still have to be passed by both house of Congress? Can’t wait to see the debate on that. It will never pass. You guys are crying over nothing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    Do you trust the Republicans in Congress that much not to pass an agreement? Most of them want full blown amnesty to please the Chamber of Commerce. The only chance we have is if they fear they will lose re-election over it.
    , @Bill
    As long as Trump is not actively opposed to it, it will pass easily.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Kevin C. says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump campaign = Reverse the decline of USA

    Trump presidency = Manage the decline, speed it up

    BIGGEST POLITICAL SELLOUT EVER

    You speak as if it could be otherwise. This was inevitable no matter who we elected. Because our elected officials are figureheads and all real power belongs to the unelected “Deep State”, who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there’s nothing we can do about it because they have all the power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    Right. This has been Nick Land's point all along. Don't fight the inevitable. That prolongs the pain and makes you look stupid. Much better to let society bleed out; more dignified, quicker route to something new.

    Or, to quote that other great philosopher of the 21st century: Band-aids don't fix bullet holes.
    , @Corvinus
    "and all real power belongs to the unelected “Deep State”, who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there’s nothing we can do about it because they have all the power."

    Right, we can't do anything about the Deep State. We are all under their control. We are mere tools for their machinations.

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game? Don't you have any pride and self-respect?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @anony-mouse
    1/ Love the people here who are blaming Schumer for this. His voters wanted him to do this, so what's the problem with that?

    2/ The wall was a stupid idea in the first place:

    Had it been around over the past 30 years the number of Cubans and Haitians it would have stopped=0.

    How many foreigners who committed terrorist acts on US soil would it have stopped? 0

    How many staying 'tourists' would it have stopped? 0

    Would Central Americans who would have been blocked by the wall sailed to many islands? Yes (eg PR, USVI, Keys)

    There is consensus that walls have been effective along the southern border at several places where they have been erected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Bill says:
    @O'Really
    I'm going to wait and see this play out before getting hysterical.

    I'm not a believer in the 4D-chess theory rationalizing all of Trump's moves, but he has proven to be a savvier politician than most of his critics and opponents.

    Perhaps he is wanting to clear DACA off the decks, so as to take the Dems' strongest card away from them, before proceeding to push on his immigration restriction goals, which are popular when not pitted against "innocent children."

    Will 2020 be early enough to form a tentative conclusion, or will you be waiting until 2024?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Kevin C. says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Arnold's then-wife was a Kennedy, and he got into position thanks to backroom dealing that forced out Darrel Issa from running. (not sure if Governor Issa would have done anything different).

    Partition is the only logical reaction to an amnesty bill being passed, the franchise isn't something you can just "repeal" like Obamacare.

    “Partition” has also been ruled absolutely illegal for all time; “settled at Appomattox” and all that. Try reading some of the majority opinion in Texas v. White. The Union has been officially proclamed “indissoluble” and “indivisible”, so that not one scrap shall be allowed to depart the Rule of DC without a fight to match the one last time anyone tried to “partition” the many states. Never going to happen, since any second fight is likely to go even worse than the first one for those trying “to go their own way.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    That was written in the pre-nuclear, pre-air travel age. If Russia and China find partition in their interests, it will happen regardless of anything that a leftist government in Washington says. The constitutional government here has seen the last of the death rattles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Kevin C. says:
    @Wilkey
    "By all accounts, the DACA “deal” that was struck is basically the globalists getting amnesty, which they want, in exchange for tax cuts for the rich, which they also want."

    This I think is a real possibility. It may be no mistake that DACA is on the table at the very same time as tax cuts. The alleged deal is DACA in exchange for tiny (and temporary) increases in enforcement. The real deal is Democrats get DACA and Republicans get tax cuts. But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.

    But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.

    Iron Law of Oligarchy: every society is ruled by a small elite, with the masses powerless pawns. Always has been, always will be. “Government of, by, and for the people” has always been more sham and myth than reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Right. The interesting questions are who these elites are and which political institution chooses the best ones. Liberal democracy chooses elites who are lying sociopaths.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    We are not getting ANY of those.

    Trump looks like he is now adopted the Rubio position: amnesty now plus promises about "border security" and "tough penalties" and "learn English" that are lies from the beginning, just like none of the enforcement in Reagan's amnesty in 1986 happened.

    Exactly. It doesn’t matter who we elect to the White House or Congress, the ruling elites still get their way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump. We had no such choice in 2016. In 2020 we could have Kobach or Bannon. Or maybe DJT dies, resigns, gets impeached and we get Pence.

    DACA will be 3 million more non whites compared to our core of 150 million non elderly whites. Bad, but not the end of the game.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Jack D says:

    Of course Schumer is trying to trick Trump (and not only that but to get him to “trade” DACA for illusory budget “compromises” that don’t amount to anything.

    But, Trump has been doing real estate deals in NY for his entire life – I don’t think he is easily tricked.

    Trump has his own thing going on. He is not getting the cooperation he needs from his “fellow” Republicans so he has to remind them that he is capable of going around them – if they won’t play ball with him, he will find someone who will. It might even be worth a few “wrong” moves (NOT DACA but say the debt ceiling) to put the Republican leadership in its place.

    This is Trump’s fundamental problem as President – not only was he elected without the support of the Democrats, but the mainstream Republican Party didn’t support him either and is ready to stab him in the back whenever they think they can get away with it. The only people who supported Trump were the voters.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob, Seneca
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Trump is the first Third-Party President in modern history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    The current Dreamer bill that already has multiple people in both parties pushing it is significantly worse than Obama's DACA by gutting its "one felony or three misdemeanor" exclusion and expanding the qualification dates.

    So, in his first year in office, it looks like Trump will both expand and make permanent Obama's illegal executive amnesty.

    So, in his first year in office, it looks like Trump will both expand and make permanent Obama’s illegal executive amnesty.

    Exactly. The joke is on those who thought elections could matter; the Establishment always wins.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Kevin C. says:
    @VivaLaMigra
    ..by 2020 it'll be too late.

    by 2020 it’ll be too late.

    Try, it’s already too late.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Was it over when Napoleon bombed the Germans at Pearl Harbor?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Bb says:
    @Dmitry134564
    Because the far-right people never paid attention in the first place, or never wanted to (they are not known for their powers of concentration). Trump was always the most left-leaning of the 2016 Republican candidates - he was a Democrat most of his life, and half the people he appointed have been Democrats.

    The most right-leaning candidates in the Republican primaries were Ted Cruz or Rand Paul.

    But no conservative even brought up immigration other than “reform” which is code for amnesty and more immigrants

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. @Kevin C.
    "He wins if he would do this."

    "Would" implies (and requires) "could". Namely, have you considered that Trump isn't doing this, not because he's unwilling, but that he's unable? That whatever it says on mere pieces of paper, in the real world the President no longer has the power to do such things, that these decisions are all dictated by the "Deep State", whose rule is unchanged no matter who we elect to the figurehead offices of President and Congress?

    Wrong. He’s out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    Wrong. He’s out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.
     
    You assume Trump has a choice about what he's "out there" promoting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. A guy says:
    @Opinionator
    Trump has done fuck all to actually get out there and lead and educate the American people on immigration issues. He wins if he would do this.

    Why do you think this is so ,?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Good question. Because it doesn't come naturally to him, because making sustained and somewhat detailed arguments like that bores him, because he suffers from a degree of indiscipline in this respect, and because people around him haven't had the comfort in their positions or the strategic foresight to push him to do so.
    , @Opinionator
    I would add to the comment about "people around him", that true nationalists are few and far between in the government. So it is not just a question of his advisers and contacts having confidence or ability, it is also a question of desire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Kevin C. says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Trump is 70 years old and a fat with a very poor diet and habits. For all we (or he) know, he’s not going to be alive 6 years from now. It’s likely he doesn’t even want to run again in 2020, and if he does run, he’s probably not that concerned about whether he wins or not. He’s an old orange blowhard and he’s had his “fun” with the presidency now and decided the juice is not worth the squeeze.
     
    Thank you Felix! That is the key point. I think it's pretty obvious, knowing who this man is, that he is not in this thing to stay in power 8 years. Donald Trump has said for years what he thinks is wrong with this country, and he went through this whole process to try to fix things (it helped that this was good for his already-big ego also).

    The "we will stay home in 2020, so you better ...." thing will not affect anything that the President does or does not do. I don't believe he cares a bit about that.

    That Trump is fucking up royally just shows that he does not have enough trust in his own political views (the ones that match the views of American patriots). Because of this, he hires on these globalists and neocons, as he thinks they are very smart, having been globalists and neocons for, like, forever, while Trump was "just" a businessman.

    The whole thing is sickening, and the Charlie Brown place-kicking meme fits perfectly to how patriotic Americans feel. You probably can't win this politically, so take the ball, go home, and devise a different game.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Great rest of the comment too, Felix.

    You probably can’t win this politically, so take the ball, go home, and devise a different game.

    But it’s not like we can win this non-politically, either. There’s no avenue of attack where they don’t have us overpowered and outmatched.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Bill says:
    @gda
    You don't turn an aircraft carrier around like you can a speedboat. This just just his 8th month for heavens sakes.

    Did you think the swamp was just going to fold up their tent and sneak away?

    A change like this takes a generation, maybe more. Trump is just the first of many change agents. He can't do it all. But he can get many things going in the right direction, if he gets through the full 8 years.

    Those who think Trump will waver on his signature issue are just dumb.

    Besides, all these bi-partisan "deals" are just boosting his popularity. And they are just a set up for the ultimate deal - tax reform. The fact that top Democrats are now making deals with the racist white supremacist perhaps means that other Dems, in vulnerable states, can be peeled away into the deal on tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.

    Nothing is more important than to destroy the GOP.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Jay Fink says:
    @gda
    You don't turn an aircraft carrier around like you can a speedboat. This just just his 8th month for heavens sakes.

    Did you think the swamp was just going to fold up their tent and sneak away?

    A change like this takes a generation, maybe more. Trump is just the first of many change agents. He can't do it all. But he can get many things going in the right direction, if he gets through the full 8 years.

    Those who think Trump will waver on his signature issue are just dumb.

    Besides, all these bi-partisan "deals" are just boosting his popularity. And they are just a set up for the ultimate deal - tax reform. The fact that top Democrats are now making deals with the racist white supremacist perhaps means that other Dems, in vulnerable states, can be peeled away into the deal on tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.

    Nothing is more important than to pass tax reform? Really? That is more of a traditional GOPe issue that I rarely heard in the campaign. I’m not so crazy for tax reform for two reasons. It expands the EITC, child tax credits etc which is basically welfare written into the tax code.

    The main reason I’m against tax reform is there are no spending cuts to accompany the tax cuts. Spending into oblivion while cutting tax revenue will lead to fiscal disaster. The printing press will have to work into overdrive just to pay the bills. That will not end well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gda
    Why is tax reform so important?

    Tax reform leads to economic growth > 3%

    Economic growth > 3% leads to more, better paying jobs

    More, better paying jobs leads to More Senate/House seats in 2018

    More Senate/House seats in 2018 leads to more signature legislation

    More signature legislation ( + more jobs) leads to re-election in 2020

    Re-election in 2020 leads to a big, beautiful Wall

    and so on....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Kevin C. says:
    @Opinionator
    Wrong. He's out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.

    Wrong. He’s out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.

    You assume Trump has a choice about what he’s “out there” promoting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    He obviously does. Witness his Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Jay Fink says:
    @GamecockJerry
    Doesn't this so-called agreement still have to be passed by both house of Congress? Can't wait to see the debate on that. It will never pass. You guys are crying over nothing.

    Do you trust the Republicans in Congress that much not to pass an agreement? Most of them want full blown amnesty to please the Chamber of Commerce. The only chance we have is if they fear they will lose re-election over it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @GamecockJerry
    Yes, I do trust those idiots to fail. They've failed on every other issue.

    And,... Trump just said no wall, no deal. We shall see what happens.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. MBlanc46 says:
    @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    And of the four, we shall get zero. Zip. Zilch. Nothing. No thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @Hosswire
    As I understand it, at the time that Schumer was working for Kaplan, the SAT administrators had not adjusted their practices to counter test preppers.
    So they still used the same questions over & over for all test takers. Questions that Kaplan had acquired through means both fair & foul.
    So a young employee mimeographing copies of the exact same questions that he would later be tested on had a large advantage indeed.
    Maybe Schumer is a super genius. But given the circumstances of his perfect SAT score I need to see additional evidence of that.

    You mean the questions were the same every year? Interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Opinionator
    --Immigration moratorium
    --End birthright citizenship
    --eVerify
    --Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    –Immigration moratorium
    –End birthright citizenship
    –eVerify
    –Wall

    All should be nonnegotiable, although they are probably listed in order of importance.

    The dystopian irony, we’re getting this collapse from the guy that wrote “The Art of the Deal”–who thinks he’s a savvy negotiator! Isn’t pretty much the first rule of negotiation to not give away the good stuff you’ve got that the other guy wants, until you get what you really want?

    There’s a pretty obvious path where Trump strikes a deal that includes, the Wall, mandatory E-verify, exit-tracking and sharply curtailed immigration including Muslim ban, refugee clampdown, H1-B reign in, “family-reunification” reign in, for DACA. Easy pitch on TV–secure borders, American jobs, America’s future … then and only then we can be generous to “those who through no fault of their own” … blah, blah, blah. Let the Democrats, globalists argue against it. “Do you actually care about the ‘Dreamers’ or just want open immigration?” Trivial stuff.

    Bigger–needs better quality Trump–this is actually an opportune time to launch an immigration moratorium. Pretty easy speech to write:
    – “Recent events have shown that we’re no longer one nation …”
    – “Diversity creates conflict”
    – “When people hate and want to tear down the founders of the nation …”
    – “Who don’t believe in–and often just hate–the right of the people to govern themselves, to make policies in their interests; representative government–decisions by elected leaders not judges or bureaucrats; federalism; freedom of speech; …”
    – “Loyalty — so called Americans who are not loyal to their fellow Americans and their interests”
    – “Some simply hate native Americans and want them replaced.”
    – “Americans who are not American”

    Then “We need to pause. Allow assimilation to work and see if we can become one nation again.” “Otherwise we need to separate. Allow those of us proud of the American nation, our ancestors, our heroes, our traditions, our culture, our laws to keep our nation. And those who hold it and us in such contempt to build their own universal nation.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Lot says:
    @Kevin C.

    –End birthright citizenship
     
    That would require a Constitutional amendment. So, not happening.

    No, it would not. Only an act of Congress.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Yes, it would, because birthright citizenship is written into the Constitution. Specifically, the Citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
     
    Right there in plain text: if you're born in the US, you're a US citizen, and no mere act of Congress can change that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @A guy
    Why do you think this is so ,?

    Good question. Because it doesn’t come naturally to him, because making sustained and somewhat detailed arguments like that bores him, because he suffers from a degree of indiscipline in this respect, and because people around him haven’t had the comfort in their positions or the strategic foresight to push him to do so.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Kaz
    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc... would be much more productive than a physical wall.

    DACA is a big bargaining chip for Trump, he shouldn't trade it away so easily.

    Afghanistan was a little bit disappointing, but he's not really this lost without Bannon is he?

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.

    Kaz, you’re missing the realities here.

    Trump can’t snap his fingers and make all the apparatchiks behave. He can do basic management–hire people, give them direction, fire non-performers. Trump should absolutely positively be jacking up enforcement and making illegals and their employers fears. But it’s a grind. And any “enforcement” and “codifying” and some such is easily reversible by the next Democrat (or Bush type) administratively. (And it’s clear from Obama that even black letter law is no impediment.)

    However an actual wall … just sits there and does it’s job. And if the next Democrat is so lax that Mexicans (and others) are scaling it, it’s much, much easier to point out that dereliction of duty and make a political issue out of it.

    The Wall is critical. It’s specifically a permanent and unmoveable statement of our border and our right to have a border. It’s nationalism written in cement and steel.

    Read More
    • Agree: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    However an actual wall … just sits there and does it’s job.
     
    Until the Mexicans drill or blast a hole through it, or tunnel under it, possibly with help by the same American lefties who give us "sanctuary cities". Because preventing that takes guards, and fixing that takes workers and supplies, and both require funding and government approval. So if lefties pull all guards off the wall, and refuse funds for any repairs, how long will that wall really last as an effective barrier?
    , @Lot
    A wall is also cost effective. I mean, do private citizens and companies use smart virtual fences, drones, well paid guards etc BEFORE they just build a strong fence? Maybe they have both, but a strong fence or wall is step 1.

    Israel especially but also with the newer border walls in central and se europe show they simply work.
    , @SteveRogers42
    He could have snapped his fingers on Day One and sent the Army and Navy down to the border to start building the type of ditch-and-earth-berm barriers they've been erecting for the last 15 years in the Sandbox. Free building materials, all equipment and wages are sunk costs. Patrol it with National Guard from the affected states, and you've got yourself a big, beautiful wall, simply by exercising the Constitutional powers of the CINC.

    Because you're right: The Wall is absolutely critical.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Dmitry134564
    Trump's likely to win in 2020, regardless of what he achieves or not (so long as the Democrats don't put forward an unusually charismatic candidate, or the economy doesn't crash). The incumbent has a huge advantage, and other than that most people vote for personalities, not for policies.

    Scott Adams thinks Trump won’t run again in 2020.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Richard Spencer has effectively taken down the Trump presidency.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  167. @Kevin C.

    Wrong. He’s out there today promoting DACA. He could be out there promoting everify, RAISE Act, wall, anchor baby issue.
     
    You assume Trump has a choice about what he's "out there" promoting.

    He obviously does. Witness his Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    And you don't think his handlers, sorry, "advisors", didn't tighten up their monitoring and "intervention" in the wake of that bit of wandering off-script?

    In fact, didn't I see somewhere here on iSteve people arguing that Trump was sold on this DREAM/DACA/amnesty thing as a way to distract from/defuse the "kerfuffle" and "blowback" from his Charlottesville remarks.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. nebulafox says:
    @prusmc
    George H. W. Bush 1992. February 85 percent approval, November out on his ear. Was Ross Perot the only deciding factor? Many of the Perot voters would have stayed home if he wasn't in the race. Split the others 55 percent 45 percent Bush-Clinton still a Clinton blowout. Don't get caught flately making false promises on the key issue to the American public.

    I disagree. The economy sucked, Watts was in flames, the Republicans had been in office for 12 years, the Weinberger incident flared up, Clinton was hammering domestic issues (and a moralistic yet hawkish foreign policy that attracted people when contrasted to the explicit Nixonian Realpolitik of Bush and his men-for example, favoring intervention in the former Balkans) that voters cared about more, and above all, Bush Senior was an absolutely hapless campaigner without Lee Atwater around. That, and Clinton was a compelling, homey personality. Bush Senior wasn’t. He had the Jeb problem, which George avoided.

    “Bush would have won in 1992 if Perot didn’t enter” is the Republican version of “RFK would have won in 1968 if he weren’t shot.” In reality, Baby Boomer fantasies aside, if RFK had lived in 1968 with no other changes to the timeline, he likely wouldn’t have gotten the nomination, let alone the Presidency. Same here. To get Bush reelected in 1992 would have taken some more fundamental changes than Perot not running. And I’m saying this as a guy who really does wish Bush got reelected in ’92.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Thomas
    Stephen Miller is the last nationalist in the Administration. I'd start the death watch on his job now if you haven't already.

    The word over the last few weeks is that (Chief of Staff) Kelly has had to essentially cloister Trump and cherry pick his meetings and news briefings (which is a sign at how mentally undisciplined Trump is). He's edged out anyone who might have been able to tell Trump how bad an idea this is, if it's what it appears to be, possibly not out of malice but just because it's the only way he'd be able to run a tight ship with Trump. Somebody (I think maybe Cernovich) said he was hearing in the last week that Kelly and others in the White House are pushing Trump on the DREAM Act because it "makes the KKK stuff go away" after Charlottesville. (4chan is throwing out humorous theories that they have him drugged.)

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he's just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician. Plus, he probably has some asinine idea that making a good "deal" with Chuck Schumer will somehow translate into capital down the road, that his new buddy will give him the wall "later." A relationship like that might be par for the course for a real estate developer but not for a President in the unavoidably oppositional world of politics.

    I think Trump may just be exhausted from all the hatred towards him from the press, Democrats, basically voices he hears much more loudly without any counterbalance now, that he’s just desperate to do anything to be liked. This is a thin-skinned man with a great need for validation, even for a politician.

    The big problem is that Trump is just not a deep-thinker, not much of a thinker at all. We don’t need an intellectual as President, but we do need someone who basically understands the world. And in the West today that means someone who understands, at some level, HBD–that the blank slate is crap, that humans are not all interchangeable–the reigning hostile “minoritarian” ideology of the “cosmopolitan” left, and enough basic math (exponential growth, differential fertility) to understand that the threat here is national and civilizational genocide. Sometimes Trump gives some tiny signal that he has some tiny inkling of this … but mostly he’s just not that sort of thinker.

    But another negative aspect is that Trump really does seem to have a fragile ego and need people to like him. One of the things that popped for me early in the campaign was that for an alpha, Trump seemed to pick these little hissys with nobodies–like Megyn Kelly. Real alphas … don’t need to carp and settle scores with all the little people, because they are *above* all the little people. They wave off the carping of their inferiors as so much useless noise and just roll on, doing what they are doing with full alpha confidence. The key alpha attribute is actually “don’t care”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The biggest betrayal in the history of politics. He just made all the people who voted for him (incl. me) feel utterly stupid. I have a hunch he made a deal to save Jared Kushner, DACA for Robert Mueller not going after Kushner.

    Trump’s biggest problem is he has no principles. Everything he’s done since taking office has been the complete opposite of what he campaigned against, from foreign policy to healthcare to immigration. “No more wars” has become “endless wars”. The “muslim ban” was a total joke, a token gesture, and now the “cancellation” of DACA is yet another joke on all those who voted for him. Trump’s only loyalty lies with his daughter, not his base. And Ivanka’s loyalty lies with Kushner, whose only loyalty is to himself and his pocketbook.

    He could’ve at least used DACA as a bargaining chip to pass the RAISE act and the wall, he couldn’t even do that. I don’t even care anymore if he gets impeached, or assassinated. I’m so done with him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  171. @DB
    Not saying a wall is useless, but it isn't the terminal goal. A modern skills-based immigration policy, with the absolute immigration level negotiable, is the win condition here, at least if one wants America to remain preeminent for a long time to come.

    Not saying a wall is useless, but it isn’t the terminal goal. A modern skills-based immigration policy, with the absolute immigration level negotiable, is the win condition here, at least if one wants America to remain preeminent for a long time to come.

    Perhaps you just missed that we have an estimated 11 million–possible much higher–people in the country *illegally*. You can have a skills based legal immigration policy, but if you can’t keep the illegals out then your net immigration policy is … crap.

    ~~

    FYI — the reasonable immigration number is zero. That’s the natural human norm. Societies don’t go around letting people in for the heck of it–it’s selling off your children’s birthright.

    The Americas and Aus/NZ because “immigration” was essentially the conquest of those places by Europeans. Immigration has made no sense since the frontier closed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Jay Fink
    Do you trust the Republicans in Congress that much not to pass an agreement? Most of them want full blown amnesty to please the Chamber of Commerce. The only chance we have is if they fear they will lose re-election over it.

    Yes, I do trust those idiots to fail. They’ve failed on every other issue.

    And,… Trump just said no wall, no deal. We shall see what happens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Kevin C.
    You speak as if it could be otherwise. This was inevitable no matter who we elected. Because our elected officials are figureheads and all real power belongs to the unelected "Deep State", who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there's nothing we can do about it because they have all the power.

    Right. This has been Nick Land’s point all along. Don’t fight the inevitable. That prolongs the pain and makes you look stupid. Much better to let society bleed out; more dignified, quicker route to something new.

    Or, to quote that other great philosopher of the 21st century: Band-aids don’t fix bullet holes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Thomas says:

    Right on cue, a story drops that Jeff Sessions actually did send his resignation after being humiliated by Trump. If it’s true that Trump is selling out to the Democrats on amnesty, what reason does Sessions have for staying on? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/us/politics/jeff-sessions-trump.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  175. Lot says:
    @Kevin C.
    Exactly. It doesn't matter who we elect to the White House or Congress, the ruling elites still get their way.

    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump. We had no such choice in 2016. In 2020 we could have Kobach or Bannon. Or maybe DJT dies, resigns, gets impeached and we get Pence.

    DACA will be 3 million more non whites compared to our core of 150 million non elderly whites. Bad, but not the end of the game.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump.
     
    Sorry, but such a person would be little more effective than Trump. Because the President can order whatever he likes, but it's down to the permanent, unelected bureaucracy to actually enforce those orders. And if they don't like those orders, then they delay, obstruct, foot-drag, conduct "feasability studies", "bother by the book", and otherwise effectively refuse to obey. And they're pretty much impossible to fire: for example, civil service protections for Federal bureaucrats are so strong, it took three years to remove a guy from his EPA job for spending all day at work looking at internet porn (and that's before the courts get involved with wrongful dismissal suits and appeals). Plus, any replacement with the appropriate "credentials" to be "qualified" for the job will have gone through the same Academia leftist indoctrination. Sure, the way it's supposed to work, on paper, is the president is the Chief Executive, in charge of the executive branch, and the bureaucracy all answers to him. But is it not clear that the reality, the facts on the ground, are quite different? That the unelected bureaucracy no longer answers to the President, but rules as it will no matter who is in office? It doesn't matter if Trump, or your "real patriot" alternative orders immigration enforcement increased, the permanent leftist bureaucrats in DHS will quietly countermand that, and come down like a ton of bricks on any of the rank-and-file who listen to the president instead of them, because which one has immediate power over said rank-and-file-nobody's job and pension?

    Our democracy is a sham, elections don't accomplish anything no matter who we elect.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    No, it would not. Only an act of Congress.

    Yes, it would, because birthright citizenship is written into the Constitution. Specifically, the Citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

    Right there in plain text: if you’re born in the US, you’re a US citizen, and no mere act of Congress can change that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If they were truly subject to our jurisdiction, they wouldn't be here.

    I'm not interested in splitting hairs about the Constituion. It has been twisted like taffy by now, completely out of any semblance to what it originally meant. We might as well start doing the same - it is what we say it is, as long as we have the power to enforce our view.
    , @Jack D
    The authors of the Constitution were not idiots. They didn't just say "born here - you're a citizen". Read it again . All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens ...

    What does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean? It must mean something or they wouldn't have added those words.

    Here's a hint, from the US Attorney General in 1873, shortly after the adoption of the Amendment:

    "The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens.... are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."

    In other words, citizenship is a 2 way street - if you a citizen who is bound to fight and die for the United States, we will give citizenship to your kids. If you are an alien just stopping by to exploit what you think is a loophole in American law, no way. Do you think we are that stupid?

    Think about the converse. You are a pregnant American tourist and you happen to give birth while you are visiting Bermuda. Does that mean that your kid is NOT an American citizen? Likewise, if the Canadian tourist is visiting Plattsburgh and happens to go into premature labor, that doesn't make her kid American and not Canadian under any reasonable reading of the Amendment and international law. The next day, when she tries to go home with her kid, do they stop him at the border and reject him because he is not a Canadian citizen?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Kevin C. says:
    @AnotherDad

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.
     
    Kaz, you're missing the realities here.

    Trump can't snap his fingers and make all the apparatchiks behave. He can do basic management--hire people, give them direction, fire non-performers. Trump should absolutely positively be jacking up enforcement and making illegals and their employers fears. But it's a grind. And any "enforcement" and "codifying" and some such is easily reversible by the next Democrat (or Bush type) administratively. (And it's clear from Obama that even black letter law is no impediment.)

    However an actual wall ... just sits there and does it's job. And if the next Democrat is so lax that Mexicans (and others) are scaling it, it's much, much easier to point out that dereliction of duty and make a political issue out of it.

    The Wall is critical. It's specifically a permanent and unmoveable statement of our border and our right to have a border. It's nationalism written in cement and steel.

    However an actual wall … just sits there and does it’s job.

    Until the Mexicans drill or blast a hole through it, or tunnel under it, possibly with help by the same American lefties who give us “sanctuary cities”. Because preventing that takes guards, and fixing that takes workers and supplies, and both require funding and government approval. So if lefties pull all guards off the wall, and refuse funds for any repairs, how long will that wall really last as an effective barrier?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. gda says:
    @Jay Fink
    Nothing is more important than to pass tax reform? Really? That is more of a traditional GOPe issue that I rarely heard in the campaign. I'm not so crazy for tax reform for two reasons. It expands the EITC, child tax credits etc which is basically welfare written into the tax code.

    The main reason I'm against tax reform is there are no spending cuts to accompany the tax cuts. Spending into oblivion while cutting tax revenue will lead to fiscal disaster. The printing press will have to work into overdrive just to pay the bills. That will not end well.

    Why is tax reform so important?

    Tax reform leads to economic growth > 3%

    Economic growth > 3% leads to more, better paying jobs

    More, better paying jobs leads to More Senate/House seats in 2018

    More Senate/House seats in 2018 leads to more signature legislation

    More signature legislation ( + more jobs) leads to re-election in 2020

    Re-election in 2020 leads to a big, beautiful Wall

    and so on….

    Read More
    • Troll: Bill
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @A guy
    Why do you think this is so ,?

    I would add to the comment about “people around him”, that true nationalists are few and far between in the government. So it is not just a question of his advisers and contacts having confidence or ability, it is also a question of desire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Lot says:

    Let me offer a little bit of bright side. Right now the Amnesty Brigade has about 68 votes in the Senate. 2018 could be a very big change in this. We could pick up 3 amnesty Dem seats and primary another 2 amnesty Republicans. That would grow our numbers from about 32 to 37.

    Not enough to sustain a filibuster, but enough to sustain a veto. Also, a big gain like this could scare a few other votes our way and encourage patriots to run in future elections.

    Also looks like Sen Strange in Alabama is a goner. He is a amnesty Republican, predictably supported by Trump.

    Judge Moore, who is going to win that senate seat, vacated by St Jeff, is not my ideal senator, but I am still excited about him winning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    primary another 2 amnesty Republicans
     
    Except that those replacements, whoever they are, will inevitably, as sure as sunrise, become just as much "amnesty Republicans" they replace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. MEH 0910 says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    And yet time and time and time again, so many of you give Tiny Duck the attention that keeps him coming back every day.

    I've come to the conclusion that TD is one of the smartest posters here.

    And yet time and time and time again, so many of you give Tiny Duck the attention that keeps him coming back every day.

    How do you think Trump got elected? Tiny Duck baiting, goading, and infuriating Trump’s base was the linchpin to getting out the vote. That, and Hillary embracing Black Lives Matter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. gda says:

    “Trump seemed to pick these little hissys with nobodies–like Megyn Kelly.”

    That was a deliberately engineered paid takedown by Kelly on orders from on high, and as such needed to be dealt with (as it was) severely by DJT. That was no “hissy”.

    If you do a little research into what actually happened behind the scenes there you’ll understand better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  183. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump. We had no such choice in 2016. In 2020 we could have Kobach or Bannon. Or maybe DJT dies, resigns, gets impeached and we get Pence.

    DACA will be 3 million more non whites compared to our core of 150 million non elderly whites. Bad, but not the end of the game.

    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump.

    Sorry, but such a person would be little more effective than Trump. Because the President can order whatever he likes, but it’s down to the permanent, unelected bureaucracy to actually enforce those orders. And if they don’t like those orders, then they delay, obstruct, foot-drag, conduct “feasability studies”, “bother by the book”, and otherwise effectively refuse to obey. And they’re pretty much impossible to fire: for example, civil service protections for Federal bureaucrats are so strong, it took three years to remove a guy from his EPA job for spending all day at work looking at internet porn (and that’s before the courts get involved with wrongful dismissal suits and appeals). Plus, any replacement with the appropriate “credentials” to be “qualified” for the job will have gone through the same Academia leftist indoctrination. Sure, the way it’s supposed to work, on paper, is the president is the Chief Executive, in charge of the executive branch, and the bureaucracy all answers to him. But is it not clear that the reality, the facts on the ground, are quite different? That the unelected bureaucracy no longer answers to the President, but rules as it will no matter who is in office? It doesn’t matter if Trump, or your “real patriot” alternative orders immigration enforcement increased, the permanent leftist bureaucrats in DHS will quietly countermand that, and come down like a ton of bricks on any of the rank-and-file who listen to the president instead of them, because which one has immediate power over said rank-and-file-nobody’s job and pension?

    Our democracy is a sham, elections don’t accomplish anything no matter who we elect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    I am pessimistic about us getting an actual patriot elected president. But I don't share your pessimism about what a patriotic president could do.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order. Basically what Sheriff Joe did, but not taking it quite so far.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge's order while actually not is California's third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We've been evading those federal judges' orders for about 20 years now.

    I think there is a good chance we win the travel ban case when it fully reaches the Supreme Court. After that we will have a well defined area of executive authority on complete country bans on entry to the USA.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    Let me offer a little bit of bright side. Right now the Amnesty Brigade has about 68 votes in the Senate. 2018 could be a very big change in this. We could pick up 3 amnesty Dem seats and primary another 2 amnesty Republicans. That would grow our numbers from about 32 to 37.

    Not enough to sustain a filibuster, but enough to sustain a veto. Also, a big gain like this could scare a few other votes our way and encourage patriots to run in future elections.

    Also looks like Sen Strange in Alabama is a goner. He is a amnesty Republican, predictably supported by Trump.

    Judge Moore, who is going to win that senate seat, vacated by St Jeff, is not my ideal senator, but I am still excited about him winning.

    primary another 2 amnesty Republicans

    Except that those replacements, whoever they are, will inevitably, as sure as sunrise, become just as much “amnesty Republicans” they replace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    Sure this sometimes happens. Trump has proved himself a liar, Rubio was another transformer. But for the most you can figure out how a senator will vote before elected. And with Sen. Cotton, he has turned out to be better than I expected.

    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Lot says:
    @AnotherDad

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.
     
    Kaz, you're missing the realities here.

    Trump can't snap his fingers and make all the apparatchiks behave. He can do basic management--hire people, give them direction, fire non-performers. Trump should absolutely positively be jacking up enforcement and making illegals and their employers fears. But it's a grind. And any "enforcement" and "codifying" and some such is easily reversible by the next Democrat (or Bush type) administratively. (And it's clear from Obama that even black letter law is no impediment.)

    However an actual wall ... just sits there and does it's job. And if the next Democrat is so lax that Mexicans (and others) are scaling it, it's much, much easier to point out that dereliction of duty and make a political issue out of it.

    The Wall is critical. It's specifically a permanent and unmoveable statement of our border and our right to have a border. It's nationalism written in cement and steel.

    A wall is also cost effective. I mean, do private citizens and companies use smart virtual fences, drones, well paid guards etc BEFORE they just build a strong fence? Maybe they have both, but a strong fence or wall is step 1.

    Israel especially but also with the newer border walls in central and se europe show they simply work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @Kevin C.
    "He wins if he would do this."

    "Would" implies (and requires) "could". Namely, have you considered that Trump isn't doing this, not because he's unwilling, but that he's unable? That whatever it says on mere pieces of paper, in the real world the President no longer has the power to do such things, that these decisions are all dictated by the "Deep State", whose rule is unchanged no matter who we elect to the figurehead offices of President and Congress?

    Then isn’t Trump an utterly unprincipled fraud for promising to do what was actually impossible? (Or is he just stupid for not knowing about the deep state.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @Maj. Kong
    The Wall is a physical impediment to vehicular transport of drugs. Waterborne smuggling, and using human mules is considerably less efficient and costlier.

    Legalization of cannabis, a fiscal necessity to patch up Medicaid, should be pursued at the state and federal level. The President can order the DEA to re-schedule. Sessions is dead wrong about this, I share his contempt for potheads, but better that cannabis be legal funding our coffers rather than the cartels. Cheap, legal cannabis might also reduce the chance of people using opioids, a "gateway theory in reverse".

    What do you have against potheads?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @Anonymous
    Trump campaign = Reverse the decline of USA

    Trump presidency = Manage the decline, speed it up

    BIGGEST POLITICAL SELLOUT EVER

    How would you characterize those who didn’t see the sellout coming?

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier
    Fools.

    We believed the man meant what he said.

    It turns out that Bannon was his brain and when Bannon left, Trump became Trump--a worthless man without any convictions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. 3g4me says:

    @159 AnotherDad: “But another negative aspect is that Trump really does seem to have a fragile ego and need people to like him.”

    Noted. Even if one dotes on one’s children, to be so solicitous of a daughter’s political concerns when the father is 70 and the princess daughter is 35? I commented once before (and said comment was banned by Steve, so I’ll attempt to word it more delicately here) that the “racial” angle aside (i.e. Jews are/are not White), Trump was apparently not bothered that his daughter was willing to publicly renounce any semblance of a Christian faith or belief in Jesus in order to marry Jared Kushner. Her choice, obviously, but that says more to me about the lengths Trump’s willing to go to keep his daughter “happy” even than it does about his own religious faith or lack thereof. Put more simply, her choice of mate was more important to both her and her father than any explicitly Christian belief in a Savior. So if happiness – of a daughter or a group of purported “children” – conflicts with principle, the happiness dominates.

    I’d like to think I was never a blind true believer in Trump or anyone else, but I did allow myself to hope that his apparent willingness to forgo official approval was real and solid. I could accept a certain amount of a political moderate if, on the whole, he just didn’t give a f&#k about third rails and holy totems. Instead it appears the need for approval is front and center – and not even approval from his voters, but the self-appointed intelligentsia and cosmopolitan elites.

    Well, merely reaffirms what I knew but tried to believe might be averted: there’s absolutely no way we’re voting our way out of this. I’d hate to see the European race and culture go out without at least a massive bang, but all I’m hearing are whimpers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  190. @Hosswire
    As I understand it, at the time that Schumer was working for Kaplan, the SAT administrators had not adjusted their practices to counter test preppers.
    So they still used the same questions over & over for all test takers. Questions that Kaplan had acquired through means both fair & foul.
    So a young employee mimeographing copies of the exact same questions that he would later be tested on had a large advantage indeed.
    Maybe Schumer is a super genius. But given the circumstances of his perfect SAT score I need to see additional evidence of that.

    Do you think Trump could ace the SAT, no matter how much prep he had?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I dunno about ace it, but Trump did get into Wharton which would have required fairly high SATs. Trump is clearly not academically inclined but he also has a lot of other strengths that many bookish people lack.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. Kevin C. says:
    @Opinionator
    He obviously does. Witness his Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    And you don’t think his handlers, sorry, “advisors”, didn’t tighten up their monitoring and “intervention” in the wake of that bit of wandering off-script?

    In fact, didn’t I see somewhere here on iSteve people arguing that Trump was sold on this DREAM/DACA/amnesty thing as a way to distract from/defuse the “kerfuffle” and “blowback” from his Charlottesville remarks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. Jack D says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond
    Do you think Trump could ace the SAT, no matter how much prep he had?

    I dunno about ace it, but Trump did get into Wharton which would have required fairly high SATs. Trump is clearly not academically inclined but he also has a lot of other strengths that many bookish people lack.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Trump transferred there:

    http://www.salon.com/2011/05/03/donald_trump_wharton/

    Gwenda Blair’s book on the Trump family reports that he gained admission as a transfer student only because of “an interview with a friendly Wharton admissions officer who was one of Freddy’s old high school classmates.” (Freddy is Donald’s older brother.) Trump was also the son of one of the wealthiest New York businessmen of the era, the developer Fred Trump. That certainly couldn’t have hurt his admission chances.

    Blair also reports in her Trump biography that his grades at Fordham were merely “respectable.”
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    I dunno about ace it, but Trump did get into Wharton which would have required fairly high SATs. Trump is clearly not academically inclined but he also has a lot of other strengths that many bookish people lack.

    Trump transferred there:

    http://www.salon.com/2011/05/03/donald_trump_wharton/

    Gwenda Blair’s book on the Trump family reports that he gained admission as a transfer student only because of “an interview with a friendly Wharton admissions officer who was one of Freddy’s old high school classmates.” (Freddy is Donald’s older brother.) Trump was also the son of one of the wealthiest New York businessmen of the era, the developer Fred Trump. That certainly couldn’t have hurt his admission chances.

    Blair also reports in her Trump biography that his grades at Fordham were merely “respectable.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Jack D says:

    I think that Trump should pull a “Sophie’s Choice” on the DREAMERS. You get to say, but only if your parents and other illegal immediate family who don’t qualify self deport and promise never to come back. If any of them are caught on this side of the border again, you lose your Dreamer status and get deported too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    That’s real silly, Jack. :) There could be a dramatic cat-and-mouse reality show where ICE rounds up tranches of familias in piecemeal operations, the opening theme being “Yakety Sax.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8mUMSi5M8g
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @YetAnotherAnon
    They'd have come out during the campaign, I'd have thought. Maybe two days before the vote.

    Why would you waste such a powerful tool? It’s much more powerful and useful to have as leverage over the highest office in the land. If you use it to keep him out of office, it’s next to useless.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Corvinus says:

    “No Wall and Trump is toast in 2020.”

    Trump could be burnt well before 2020. Mr. Sailor, why no “insight” about the investigations surrounding him and his administration? Certainly you have noticed a thing or two…

    “Back in 2011, Ann Coulter pointed out how Schumer cost George H.W. Bush re-election in 1992 by getting Bush to break his “Read my lips: No new taxes” pledge.”

    [Laughs] Bush wasn’t “tricked” or “dupe”. That’s pure Coulter-Sailor spin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. ANon
    You've been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can't even spell "Sailer" correctly?

    Well, I suppose it isn't surprising, given how stupid you are.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Corvinus says:
    @Kevin C.
    You speak as if it could be otherwise. This was inevitable no matter who we elected. Because our elected officials are figureheads and all real power belongs to the unelected "Deep State", who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there's nothing we can do about it because they have all the power.

    “and all real power belongs to the unelected “Deep State”, who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there’s nothing we can do about it because they have all the power.”

    Right, we can’t do anything about the Deep State. We are all under their control. We are mere tools for their machinations.

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game? Don’t you have any pride and self-respect?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game?
     
    What's the alternative? If a medieval peasant decided not to "play their game" with regards to the ruling lords, what would that entail, exactly?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Kevin C. says:
    @Corvinus
    "and all real power belongs to the unelected “Deep State”, who rule us as they will, no matter the opinions of We the People to the contrary, and there’s nothing we can do about it because they have all the power."

    Right, we can't do anything about the Deep State. We are all under their control. We are mere tools for their machinations.

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game? Don't you have any pride and self-respect?

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game?

    What’s the alternative? If a medieval peasant decided not to “play their game” with regards to the ruling lords, what would that entail, exactly?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Since you literally asked.

    Of course, a Medieval English uprising of serfs doesn’t mean much beyond being a simplistic metaphor as applied to present day America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    These are kept in a vault right next to the bodies of the space aliens in Area 51.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Jack D
    I think that Trump should pull a "Sophie's Choice" on the DREAMERS. You get to say, but only if your parents and other illegal immediate family who don't qualify self deport and promise never to come back. If any of them are caught on this side of the border again, you lose your Dreamer status and get deported too.

    That’s real silly, Jack. :) There could be a dramatic cat-and-mouse reality show where ICE rounds up tranches of familias in piecemeal operations, the opening theme being “Yakety Sax.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. @Kevin C.

    Assuming that you are dominated by them, why on earth would you play their game?
     
    What's the alternative? If a medieval peasant decided not to "play their game" with regards to the ruling lords, what would that entail, exactly?

    Since you literally asked.

    Of course, a Medieval English uprising of serfs doesn’t mean much beyond being a simplistic metaphor as applied to present day America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Man From K Street
    And the "Peasants" Revolt of 1381 was not a peasants revolt at all: that's all propaganda retconning. It was led and driven by the middle classes in the same six-county belt that is even today the base of UKIP's support, and it had a definite anti-immigrant element-then the Flemish merchants that were muscling in on the wool trade.
    , @Kevin C.
    First, you need to work on your reading skills. If you'd read your link, you'd note that in the English "Peasants' Revolt", the peasants lost, and a lot of them killed. Sure, they killed a few nobles; "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

    In fact, it might be instructive to examine Wikipedia's list of peasant revolts. Note that most of the "successful revolts" are all in East Asia. For the West, it's mostly just "Suppression of the rebellion" after "Suppression of the rebellion". And the status of the exceptions as true peasant rebellions is questionable. Let's examine them:
    •The Samogitian uprisings (1401–1404, 1409): the Teutonic Knights against whom the Samogitians uprose were, per Wikipedia "soundly defeated by the joint Polish–Lithuanian forces" (see also the Polish–Lithuanian–Teutonic War), and so "suceeded" only by it turning into a regional war between multiple powers.
    •The Rebellion of the Remences (1462–1472, 1485–1486): this was in many way a king-versus-nobles conflict. Quoth the wiki:

    In the mid-15th century, Alfonso V of Aragon, "the Magnanimous", allowed the peasants to form a sindicat remença, a peasants' guild or primitive trade union, granted them their liberty and intervened in several other ways against the abuses. However, the Bishop of Girona sided with the nobility; along with the Generalitat, controlled by the nobles, their opposition led Alfonso to reverse himself.
    Alfonso's successor, John II, sought the peasants' help against the nobility. By May 1461, the peasantry had declared themselves in favor of the king against the nobles.
     
    So the "revolting" peasants were merely the foot soldiers in an intra-elite conflict.
    •The "Galician slaughter" (1846): in this case, the Austrian ruling class of the Habsburg Empire dealt with a bunch of Polish nationalist nobles planning to revolt against their rule by fomenting and uprising by said nobles' Galician peasants. After said peasants killed about a thousand of those nobles, solving the problem, those same Austrian elites switched from supporting the rebellion to suppressing it, and crushed the peasants. Again, tools in an inter-elite conflict.
    And the next "success" listed after that is the October Revolution in Russia, and the Soviets taking over.

    All the real peasant uprisings ended up more like the German Peasants' War (1524-1525), where over 300,000 peasants rose up… and failed to accomplish any of their goals, with a third of them killed.

    And this is all much more relevant to the modern world than you think. Because how much elites listen to the masses correlates strongly with the usefulness of those masses in warfare. Societies with small, well-trained and expensively-equipped warrior elites are always more "aristocratic" (and rebellions in them far less successful) than societies with broader "citizen armies". Compare the war chariots of the Hittite Empire to the early Greek phalanges. Or Sparta, with it's elite Spartiate warrior class, to more "democratic" Athens and it's citizen rowers. Or England with it's yeoman archers to French knights. Or Swiss pikemen to French or German knights.

    The period around the American Revolution, and through the Civil War, was an age when masses of quickly-trained conscripts or citizen militias armed with rifles that ordinary civilians could afford to own could make a significant difference on the battlefield; I've seen it called "the Age of the Gun" or "the Age of the Rifle". But that is over now; it was already mostly ended by the First World War. We are no longer in an age of labor-intensive warfare where "citizen armies" are a serious threat, but a return to capital-intensive warfare with an expensively-equipped, highly trained professional warrior class that is a tiny fraction of the population. Modern warfare puts us closer to those peasants, who stood no chance against armored, mounted knights no matter how many pitchforks and torches they hoarded, than to the Founding Fathers. I seem to recall Steve Sailer actually making a similar point years ago back on his previous blog, about how our elite's increasingly distain for those they rule might come at least partially due to them no longer needing most of us to fight their wars.

    So, no, there's little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Lot says:
    @Kevin C.

    primary another 2 amnesty Republicans
     
    Except that those replacements, whoever they are, will inevitably, as sure as sunrise, become just as much "amnesty Republicans" they replace.

    Sure this sometimes happens. Trump has proved himself a liar, Rubio was another transformer. But for the most you can figure out how a senator will vote before elected. And with Sen. Cotton, he has turned out to be better than I expected.

    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.

    Sincere or sarcasm?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. MarkinLA says:
    @Lot
    We are not getting ANY of those.

    Trump looks like he is now adopted the Rubio position: amnesty now plus promises about "border security" and "tough penalties" and "learn English" that are lies from the beginning, just like none of the enforcement in Reagan's amnesty in 1986 happened.

    The Russians are right, Trump is a weak man who craves adulation any way he can get it. If it means crapping on his base, that is a small price to pay to get good publicity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Lot says:
    @Kevin C.

    No, we just need someone with a real history of patriotism unlike Trump.
     
    Sorry, but such a person would be little more effective than Trump. Because the President can order whatever he likes, but it's down to the permanent, unelected bureaucracy to actually enforce those orders. And if they don't like those orders, then they delay, obstruct, foot-drag, conduct "feasability studies", "bother by the book", and otherwise effectively refuse to obey. And they're pretty much impossible to fire: for example, civil service protections for Federal bureaucrats are so strong, it took three years to remove a guy from his EPA job for spending all day at work looking at internet porn (and that's before the courts get involved with wrongful dismissal suits and appeals). Plus, any replacement with the appropriate "credentials" to be "qualified" for the job will have gone through the same Academia leftist indoctrination. Sure, the way it's supposed to work, on paper, is the president is the Chief Executive, in charge of the executive branch, and the bureaucracy all answers to him. But is it not clear that the reality, the facts on the ground, are quite different? That the unelected bureaucracy no longer answers to the President, but rules as it will no matter who is in office? It doesn't matter if Trump, or your "real patriot" alternative orders immigration enforcement increased, the permanent leftist bureaucrats in DHS will quietly countermand that, and come down like a ton of bricks on any of the rank-and-file who listen to the president instead of them, because which one has immediate power over said rank-and-file-nobody's job and pension?

    Our democracy is a sham, elections don't accomplish anything no matter who we elect.

    I am pessimistic about us getting an actual patriot elected president. But I don’t share your pessimism about what a patriotic president could do.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order. Basically what Sheriff Joe did, but not taking it quite so far.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge’s order while actually not is California’s third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We’ve been evading those federal judges’ orders for about 20 years now.

    I think there is a good chance we win the travel ban case when it fully reaches the Supreme Court. After that we will have a well defined area of executive authority on complete country bans on entry to the USA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge’s order while actually not is California’s third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We’ve been evading those federal judges’ orders for about 20 years now.
     
    There is always the option of malicious compliance. For example, to use the case that you mentioned, free those prisoners right into the federal judges neighborhoods - on their door-steps even, so that they can properly thank their benefactors.
    , @SteveRogers42
    Or force a Constitutional crisis. "The judge has made his ruling, now let's see him enforce it." Direct the US Marshals to physically enforce the travel ban and don't vacillate.
    , @Kevin C.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order.
     
    How? By personally going down to airports and blocking immigrants from entering? The president is just one man; any power he has is contingent on people obeying his orders. So when the liberal judge makes his order, and the president engages in "soft defiance", by which you mean he orders those enforcing entry into our country to engage in "soft defiance", you can count on DHS, under direction from its top bureaucrats and middle management, to order the rank and file to obey the court order, not the president. And if some ICE nobody actually follows the "commander-in-chief", the guy supposedly at the top, he'll end up arrested by the US Marshalls (who are part of the Judiciary branch, answer to the courts, and enforce Federal court orders) for violating the court order.

    A president can order whatever, but it only matters if his nominal subordinates actually obey the order, and our permanent, unfireable, 90% liberal Federal bureaucracy only obeys the orders they want to obey, and have countless tricks to delay, obstruct, and otherwise effectively defy any presidential order they don't want to follow.

    What happens when your "actual patriot elected president" orders ICE to engage in your "soft defiance" of the court order, and instead they keep on letting in Muslims as the leftist court has ordered, what then?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. MarkinLA says:
    @gda
    You don't turn an aircraft carrier around like you can a speedboat. This just just his 8th month for heavens sakes.

    Did you think the swamp was just going to fold up their tent and sneak away?

    A change like this takes a generation, maybe more. Trump is just the first of many change agents. He can't do it all. But he can get many things going in the right direction, if he gets through the full 8 years.

    Those who think Trump will waver on his signature issue are just dumb.

    Besides, all these bi-partisan "deals" are just boosting his popularity. And they are just a set up for the ultimate deal - tax reform. The fact that top Democrats are now making deals with the racist white supremacist perhaps means that other Dems, in vulnerable states, can be peeled away into the deal on tax reform.

    And nothing is more important than to pass tax reform.

    “Tax reform” = lower the tax rates on corporations and the wealthy but remove some deductions so that they can be put back in over the next 15 years. Wash rinse repeat until the tax rate for corporations and the wealthy are 0% with all the deductions generating tax credits.

    Immigration, economic nationalism, and ending stupid foreign adventures are the real issues to the people that voted for Trump.

    Great, cut my taxes by 200 dollars so we can cut GE’s by 1 billion and Zuckerber’s by 300 million and borrow it all.

    You don’t command by vacillating back and forth. If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don’t come to the table they are going to get nothing. Trump can, right now, deport the parents of the Dreamers. That would light a fire under the Democrats butts. Do you really think the average American cares if some illegal gets deported. Those polls are meaningless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    No wing of the U.S. ruling class wants to end mass migration. Claims to the contrary are part ruse to deceive followers and part device to create a two-tiered U.S. population. Sailer once noted that no billionaire opposes immigration. Trump really was never a plausible exception, and the rule is exceptionless.

    [To me the "dreamers" are the least sympathetic of the migrant groups. They're young, they can adapt, and Mexico is ready to help them if they're deported - which makes sense, since their plight was created by Mexican nationals.]
    , @Kevin C.

    If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don’t come to the table they are going to get nothing
     
    But "ALL the force of the Presidency", in reality, isn't enough to do that. He can bring to bear "ALL the force of the Presidency", and still the Democrats will get much more than "nothing." The presidency is more "powerless figurehead" than "guy in charge", and his supposed subordinates aren't actually answerable to him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Kevin C.
    "He wins if he would do this."

    "Would" implies (and requires) "could". Namely, have you considered that Trump isn't doing this, not because he's unwilling, but that he's unable? That whatever it says on mere pieces of paper, in the real world the President no longer has the power to do such things, that these decisions are all dictated by the "Deep State", whose rule is unchanged no matter who we elect to the figurehead offices of President and Congress?

    Bullshit.

    Trump is selling out the country.

    He could be a real leader and stand by principles–instead he is a fraud.

    Bannon made that clear in his exit statements.

    Trump, for all we might have hoped otherwise, is not a profile in courage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Bannon said Trump was a good man and that Bannon would continue to be his wingman on the outside.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Stephen R. Diamond
    How would you characterize those who didn't see the sellout coming?

    Fools.

    We believed the man meant what he said.

    It turns out that Bannon was his brain and when Bannon left, Trump became Trump–a worthless man without any convictions.

    Read More
    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. lavoisier says: • Website
    @O'Really
    I'm going to wait and see this play out before getting hysterical.

    I'm not a believer in the 4D-chess theory rationalizing all of Trump's moves, but he has proven to be a savvier politician than most of his critics and opponents.

    Perhaps he is wanting to clear DACA off the decks, so as to take the Dems' strongest card away from them, before proceeding to push on his immigration restriction goals, which are popular when not pitted against "innocent children."

    Trump is not what we wanted him to be.

    He is just another traitorous bastard in over his head.

    An empty suit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Since you literally asked.

    Of course, a Medieval English uprising of serfs doesn’t mean much beyond being a simplistic metaphor as applied to present day America.

    And the “Peasants” Revolt of 1381 was not a peasants revolt at all: that’s all propaganda retconning. It was led and driven by the middle classes in the same six-county belt that is even today the base of UKIP’s support, and it had a definite anti-immigrant element-then the Flemish merchants that were muscling in on the wool trade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. @MarkinLA
    "Tax reform" = lower the tax rates on corporations and the wealthy but remove some deductions so that they can be put back in over the next 15 years. Wash rinse repeat until the tax rate for corporations and the wealthy are 0% with all the deductions generating tax credits.

    Immigration, economic nationalism, and ending stupid foreign adventures are the real issues to the people that voted for Trump.

    Great, cut my taxes by 200 dollars so we can cut GE's by 1 billion and Zuckerber's by 300 million and borrow it all.

    You don't command by vacillating back and forth. If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don't come to the table they are going to get nothing. Trump can, right now, deport the parents of the Dreamers. That would light a fire under the Democrats butts. Do you really think the average American cares if some illegal gets deported. Those polls are meaningless.

    No wing of the U.S. ruling class wants to end mass migration. Claims to the contrary are part ruse to deceive followers and part device to create a two-tiered U.S. population. Sailer once noted that no billionaire opposes immigration. Trump really was never a plausible exception, and the rule is exceptionless.

    [To me the "dreamers" are the least sympathetic of the migrant groups. They're young, they can adapt, and Mexico is ready to help them if they're deported - which makes sense, since their plight was created by Mexican nationals.]

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Of course the Dreamers that they put on TV are your model exemplary Dreamers and most are not as good, but we have wasted a lot of $ educating the Dreamers and might as well get some of our investment back for the ones who can show that they will not be a burden on the social welfare or criminal justice system.

    The real problem I have with the dreamers is that they are just a foot in the door for chain migration. How can a dreamer be expected to live in America without his beloved Abuela and his cousin Pedro, etc?

    As I mentioned before, if the DACA replacement was accompanied by strict deportation of all the rest (specifically, the immediate family of all Dreamers), then it would be OK, but that is not what is contemplated by the Dems. What is contemplated is death by a 1,000 cuts. First we regularize the Dreamers without sending anyone else back, then we regularize the Strivers and then we regularize the Achievers, etc. , etc. - the Dems will never run out of high sounding euphemisms for "illegal aliens deserving of amnesty". They are ALL deserving of amnesty (and the right to vote Democrat unto the 7th generation) in their book.

    And once you do that, the country is primed for another wave because those who have not yet come see that there is light at the end of the tunnel for them too. There is an extremely effective grapevine - the people back in the old country know exactly what is going on here on a real time basis. Legalizing the Dreamers without doing anything else will be seen as a giant green light for more to come.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @Lot
    Sure this sometimes happens. Trump has proved himself a liar, Rubio was another transformer. But for the most you can figure out how a senator will vote before elected. And with Sen. Cotton, he has turned out to be better than I expected.

    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.

    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.

    Sincere or sarcasm?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    Sincere. See my other comment, we realistically could replace 5 pro amnesty Senators with antis in 2018. But we need to win the primaries, the Chamber and Kochs will fund a pro amnesty Republican in every single competitive seat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. Maj. Kong says:
    @Kevin C.
    "Partition" has also been ruled absolutely illegal for all time; "settled at Appomattox" and all that. Try reading some of the majority opinion in Texas v. White. The Union has been officially proclamed "indissoluble" and "indivisible", so that not one scrap shall be allowed to depart the Rule of DC without a fight to match the one last time anyone tried to "partition" the many states. Never going to happen, since any second fight is likely to go even worse than the first one for those trying "to go their own way."

    That was written in the pre-nuclear, pre-air travel age. If Russia and China find partition in their interests, it will happen regardless of anything that a leftist government in Washington says. The constitutional government here has seen the last of the death rattles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @lavoisier
    Bullshit.

    Trump is selling out the country.

    He could be a real leader and stand by principles--instead he is a fraud.

    Bannon made that clear in his exit statements.

    Trump, for all we might have hoped otherwise, is not a profile in courage.

    Bannon said Trump was a good man and that Bannon would continue to be his wingman on the outside.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. Jack D says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond
    No wing of the U.S. ruling class wants to end mass migration. Claims to the contrary are part ruse to deceive followers and part device to create a two-tiered U.S. population. Sailer once noted that no billionaire opposes immigration. Trump really was never a plausible exception, and the rule is exceptionless.

    [To me the "dreamers" are the least sympathetic of the migrant groups. They're young, they can adapt, and Mexico is ready to help them if they're deported - which makes sense, since their plight was created by Mexican nationals.]

    Of course the Dreamers that they put on TV are your model exemplary Dreamers and most are not as good, but we have wasted a lot of $ educating the Dreamers and might as well get some of our investment back for the ones who can show that they will not be a burden on the social welfare or criminal justice system.

    The real problem I have with the dreamers is that they are just a foot in the door for chain migration. How can a dreamer be expected to live in America without his beloved Abuela and his cousin Pedro, etc?

    As I mentioned before, if the DACA replacement was accompanied by strict deportation of all the rest (specifically, the immediate family of all Dreamers), then it would be OK, but that is not what is contemplated by the Dems. What is contemplated is death by a 1,000 cuts. First we regularize the Dreamers without sending anyone else back, then we regularize the Strivers and then we regularize the Achievers, etc. , etc. – the Dems will never run out of high sounding euphemisms for “illegal aliens deserving of amnesty”. They are ALL deserving of amnesty (and the right to vote Democrat unto the 7th generation) in their book.

    And once you do that, the country is primed for another wave because those who have not yet come see that there is light at the end of the tunnel for them too. There is an extremely effective grapevine – the people back in the old country know exactly what is going on here on a real time basis. Legalizing the Dreamers without doing anything else will be seen as a giant green light for more to come.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Legalizing the Dreamers without doing anything else will be seen as a giant green light for more to come.
     
    Anything else that might be done could be reversed. One thing that is practially certain not to be reversed? A grant of citizenship.

    Any amnesty, under any conditions, serves as an incentive for more to come. That is why it is imperative that no amnesties be granted to anyone. Including the (laughably named) "dreamers".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Tiny Duck
    Beahahahaha


    It's OVER


    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn't just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I'm going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place

    If Trump fails us, you won’t like what comes next.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Spyder says:

    If he does this trump can go to hell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  217. @Dave Pinsen

    There’s zero evidence that Trump knows how to negotiate anything.
     
    There's a theory that Trump's entire campaign was a negotiating ploy that got out of hand.
    https://twitter.com/edwest/status/827432344453791745

    Howard Stern is not exactly an unimpeachable source.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. @Jack Hanson
    This is like the fourth "omg Trump gonna pass amnesty cause breitbart said so we doomed" kerfluffle I can remember, and right on cue the legion of anon spamming blackpill and the eeyores brigade show up, ignoring how wrong they have been and THIS TIME they're totally right.

    Of course, in true Talmudic fashion when this turns out to be Pelosi/Schumer overplaying their hand or engaging in fabulism they'll pretend it never happened.

    Correct.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. @Jack D
    Of course Schumer is trying to trick Trump (and not only that but to get him to "trade" DACA for illusory budget "compromises" that don't amount to anything.

    But, Trump has been doing real estate deals in NY for his entire life - I don't think he is easily tricked.

    Trump has his own thing going on. He is not getting the cooperation he needs from his "fellow" Republicans so he has to remind them that he is capable of going around them - if they won't play ball with him, he will find someone who will. It might even be worth a few "wrong" moves (NOT DACA but say the debt ceiling) to put the Republican leadership in its place.

    This is Trump's fundamental problem as President - not only was he elected without the support of the Democrats, but the mainstream Republican Party didn't support him either and is ready to stab him in the back whenever they think they can get away with it. The only people who supported Trump were the voters.

    Trump is the first Third-Party President in modern history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. @Kevin C.

    by 2020 it’ll be too late.
     
    Try, it's already too late.

    Was it over when Napoleon bombed the Germans at Pearl Harbor?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. @AnotherDad

    Wall is a silly idea.. A metaphorical wall, i.e. better enforcement, stronger immigration law, codifying restrictions, etc… would be much more productive than a physical wall.
     
    Kaz, you're missing the realities here.

    Trump can't snap his fingers and make all the apparatchiks behave. He can do basic management--hire people, give them direction, fire non-performers. Trump should absolutely positively be jacking up enforcement and making illegals and their employers fears. But it's a grind. And any "enforcement" and "codifying" and some such is easily reversible by the next Democrat (or Bush type) administratively. (And it's clear from Obama that even black letter law is no impediment.)

    However an actual wall ... just sits there and does it's job. And if the next Democrat is so lax that Mexicans (and others) are scaling it, it's much, much easier to point out that dereliction of duty and make a political issue out of it.

    The Wall is critical. It's specifically a permanent and unmoveable statement of our border and our right to have a border. It's nationalism written in cement and steel.

    He could have snapped his fingers on Day One and sent the Army and Navy down to the border to start building the type of ditch-and-earth-berm barriers they’ve been erecting for the last 15 years in the Sandbox. Free building materials, all equipment and wages are sunk costs. Patrol it with National Guard from the affected states, and you’ve got yourself a big, beautiful wall, simply by exercising the Constitutional powers of the CINC.

    Because you’re right: The Wall is absolutely critical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Kevin C. says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Since you literally asked.

    Of course, a Medieval English uprising of serfs doesn’t mean much beyond being a simplistic metaphor as applied to present day America.

    First, you need to work on your reading skills. If you’d read your link, you’d note that in the English “Peasants’ Revolt”, the peasants lost, and a lot of them killed. Sure, they killed a few nobles; “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.

    In fact, it might be instructive to examine Wikipedia’s list of peasant revolts. Note that most of the “successful revolts” are all in East Asia. For the West, it’s mostly just “Suppression of the rebellion” after “Suppression of the rebellion”. And the status of the exceptions as true peasant rebellions is questionable. Let’s examine them:
    •The Samogitian uprisings (1401–1404, 1409): the Teutonic Knights against whom the Samogitians uprose were, per Wikipedia “soundly defeated by the joint Polish–Lithuanian forces” (see also the Polish–Lithuanian–Teutonic War), and so “suceeded” only by it turning into a regional war between multiple powers.
    •The Rebellion of the Remences (1462–1472, 1485–1486): this was in many way a king-versus-nobles conflict. Quoth the wiki:

    In the mid-15th century, Alfonso V of Aragon, “the Magnanimous”, allowed the peasants to form a sindicat remença, a peasants’ guild or primitive trade union, granted them their liberty and intervened in several other ways against the abuses. However, the Bishop of Girona sided with the nobility; along with the Generalitat, controlled by the nobles, their opposition led Alfonso to reverse himself.
    Alfonso’s successor, John II, sought the peasants’ help against the nobility. By May 1461, the peasantry had declared themselves in favor of the king against the nobles.

    So the “revolting” peasants were merely the foot soldiers in an intra-elite conflict.
    •The “Galician slaughter” (1846): in this case, the Austrian ruling class of the Habsburg Empire dealt with a bunch of Polish nationalist nobles planning to revolt against their rule by fomenting and uprising by said nobles’ Galician peasants. After said peasants killed about a thousand of those nobles, solving the problem, those same Austrian elites switched from supporting the rebellion to suppressing it, and crushed the peasants. Again, tools in an inter-elite conflict.
    And the next “success” listed after that is the October Revolution in Russia, and the Soviets taking over.

    All the real peasant uprisings ended up more like the German Peasants’ War (1524-1525), where over 300,000 peasants rose up… and failed to accomplish any of their goals, with a third of them killed.

    And this is all much more relevant to the modern world than you think. Because how much elites listen to the masses correlates strongly with the usefulness of those masses in warfare. Societies with small, well-trained and expensively-equipped warrior elites are always more “aristocratic” (and rebellions in them far less successful) than societies with broader “citizen armies”. Compare the war chariots of the Hittite Empire to the early Greek phalanges. Or Sparta, with it’s elite Spartiate warrior class, to more “democratic” Athens and it’s citizen rowers. Or England with it’s yeoman archers to French knights. Or Swiss pikemen to French or German knights.

    The period around the American Revolution, and through the Civil War, was an age when masses of quickly-trained conscripts or citizen militias armed with rifles that ordinary civilians could afford to own could make a significant difference on the battlefield; I’ve seen it called “the Age of the Gun” or “the Age of the Rifle”. But that is over now; it was already mostly ended by the First World War. We are no longer in an age of labor-intensive warfare where “citizen armies” are a serious threat, but a return to capital-intensive warfare with an expensively-equipped, highly trained professional warrior class that is a tiny fraction of the population. Modern warfare puts us closer to those peasants, who stood no chance against armored, mounted knights no matter how many pitchforks and torches they hoarded, than to the Founding Fathers. I seem to recall Steve Sailer actually making a similar point years ago back on his previous blog, about how our elite’s increasingly distain for those they rule might come at least partially due to them no longer needing most of us to fight their wars.

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753, Autochthon
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    You’ve actually heard about peasants’ revolts and knew how to find the articles on Wikipedia? Why ask Corvinus “what would that entail, exactly?” You silly goose. :o

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.
     
    There are scenarios that to you may appear to be at “Black Swan” or rarer levels of improbability, but unless you’re telling me you’ve seen the future, and can prove it, your End-of-History declarations are jejune at best.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.
     
    Interesting post, Kevin (no sarcasm), but right now warfare is run with/by electronics.

    I've got one word for your future Kevin C.: Plastics, I mean Hackers

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR
    Other than the hair, I don't see much difference between Miller and Kushner. Both are low-T, frail ivrim that are arguably too young to have such a strong influence on the president of the US.

    Other than the hair, I don’t see much difference between Miller and Kushner.

    How about the fact that Miller is on our side?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR

    When, during the presidential campaign, the relationship between [Richard] Spencer and Miller from their days together at Duke became public, Miller quickly disavowed knowing Spencer. “I have absolutely no relationship with Mr. Spencer,” Miller e-mailed Mother Jones last October. “I completely repudiate his views, and his claims are 100 percent false.”
     
    Our side? The side of lying, anti-white cowards?

    Miller is definitely not on my side. I have nothing but contempt for him

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Moses says:
    @Lot
    We are not getting ANY of those.

    Trump looks like he is now adopted the Rubio position: amnesty now plus promises about "border security" and "tough penalties" and "learn English" that are lies from the beginning, just like none of the enforcement in Reagan's amnesty in 1986 happened.

    Deal-making rule #1: NEVER give away anything of value now in exchange for a promise of something in the future. The other party pockets the concession then finds reasons not to deliver. The 1986 amnesty “deal” showed that clearly.

    If Trump delivers amnesty after all his tough talk I’m done with him.

    Read More
    • Agree: MEH 0910
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jack D
    Of course the Dreamers that they put on TV are your model exemplary Dreamers and most are not as good, but we have wasted a lot of $ educating the Dreamers and might as well get some of our investment back for the ones who can show that they will not be a burden on the social welfare or criminal justice system.

    The real problem I have with the dreamers is that they are just a foot in the door for chain migration. How can a dreamer be expected to live in America without his beloved Abuela and his cousin Pedro, etc?

    As I mentioned before, if the DACA replacement was accompanied by strict deportation of all the rest (specifically, the immediate family of all Dreamers), then it would be OK, but that is not what is contemplated by the Dems. What is contemplated is death by a 1,000 cuts. First we regularize the Dreamers without sending anyone else back, then we regularize the Strivers and then we regularize the Achievers, etc. , etc. - the Dems will never run out of high sounding euphemisms for "illegal aliens deserving of amnesty". They are ALL deserving of amnesty (and the right to vote Democrat unto the 7th generation) in their book.

    And once you do that, the country is primed for another wave because those who have not yet come see that there is light at the end of the tunnel for them too. There is an extremely effective grapevine - the people back in the old country know exactly what is going on here on a real time basis. Legalizing the Dreamers without doing anything else will be seen as a giant green light for more to come.

    Legalizing the Dreamers without doing anything else will be seen as a giant green light for more to come.

    Anything else that might be done could be reversed. One thing that is practially certain not to be reversed? A grant of citizenship.

    Any amnesty, under any conditions, serves as an incentive for more to come. That is why it is imperative that no amnesties be granted to anyone. Including the (laughably named) “dreamers”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. Mr. Anon says:
    @Lot
    I am pessimistic about us getting an actual patriot elected president. But I don't share your pessimism about what a patriotic president could do.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order. Basically what Sheriff Joe did, but not taking it quite so far.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge's order while actually not is California's third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We've been evading those federal judges' orders for about 20 years now.

    I think there is a good chance we win the travel ban case when it fully reaches the Supreme Court. After that we will have a well defined area of executive authority on complete country bans on entry to the USA.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge’s order while actually not is California’s third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We’ve been evading those federal judges’ orders for about 20 years now.

    There is always the option of malicious compliance. For example, to use the case that you mentioned, free those prisoners right into the federal judges neighborhoods – on their door-steps even, so that they can properly thank their benefactors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. @Lot
    I am pessimistic about us getting an actual patriot elected president. But I don't share your pessimism about what a patriotic president could do.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order. Basically what Sheriff Joe did, but not taking it quite so far.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge's order while actually not is California's third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We've been evading those federal judges' orders for about 20 years now.

    I think there is a good chance we win the travel ban case when it fully reaches the Supreme Court. After that we will have a well defined area of executive authority on complete country bans on entry to the USA.

    Or force a Constitutional crisis. “The judge has made his ruling, now let’s see him enforce it.” Direct the US Marshals to physically enforce the travel ban and don’t vacillate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. Mr. ANon says:
    @Corvinus
    "No Wall and Trump is toast in 2020."

    Trump could be burnt well before 2020. Mr. Sailor, why no "insight" about the investigations surrounding him and his administration? Certainly you have noticed a thing or two...

    "Back in 2011, Ann Coulter pointed out how Schumer cost George H.W. Bush re-election in 1992 by getting Bush to break his “Read my lips: No new taxes” pledge."

    [Laughs] Bush wasn't "tricked" or "dupe". That's pure Coulter-Sailor spin.

    You’ve been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can’t even spell “Sailer” correctly?

    Well, I suppose it isn’t surprising, given how stupid you are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You’ve been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can’t even spell “Sailer” correctly?"

    It's called tongue and cheek. A sailer notices things on their journeys. They see the world that other people don't see. Then again, you're just not that bright.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Kevin C. says:
    @Lot
    I am pessimistic about us getting an actual patriot elected president. But I don't share your pessimism about what a patriotic president could do.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order. Basically what Sheriff Joe did, but not taking it quite so far.

    A good example of how to pretend to comply with a judge's order while actually not is California's third world quality prisons. Federal judges keep threatening that if the conditions they have found intolerable are not fixed, they still start randomly freeing prisoners. We've been evading those federal judges' orders for about 20 years now.

    I think there is a good chance we win the travel ban case when it fully reaches the Supreme Court. After that we will have a well defined area of executive authority on complete country bans on entry to the USA.

    He could, for instance, do something far broader than the Muslim travel ban executive order, and when the inevitable liberal district judge tries to stop him, engage in a soft defiance of the order.

    How? By personally going down to airports and blocking immigrants from entering? The president is just one man; any power he has is contingent on people obeying his orders. So when the liberal judge makes his order, and the president engages in “soft defiance”, by which you mean he orders those enforcing entry into our country to engage in “soft defiance”, you can count on DHS, under direction from its top bureaucrats and middle management, to order the rank and file to obey the court order, not the president. And if some ICE nobody actually follows the “commander-in-chief”, the guy supposedly at the top, he’ll end up arrested by the US Marshalls (who are part of the Judiciary branch, answer to the courts, and enforce Federal court orders) for violating the court order.

    A president can order whatever, but it only matters if his nominal subordinates actually obey the order, and our permanent, unfireable, 90% liberal Federal bureaucracy only obeys the orders they want to obey, and have countless tricks to delay, obstruct, and otherwise effectively defy any presidential order they don’t want to follow.

    What happens when your “actual patriot elected president” orders ICE to engage in your “soft defiance” of the court order, and instead they keep on letting in Muslims as the leftist court has ordered, what then?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. Kevin C. says:
    @MarkinLA
    "Tax reform" = lower the tax rates on corporations and the wealthy but remove some deductions so that they can be put back in over the next 15 years. Wash rinse repeat until the tax rate for corporations and the wealthy are 0% with all the deductions generating tax credits.

    Immigration, economic nationalism, and ending stupid foreign adventures are the real issues to the people that voted for Trump.

    Great, cut my taxes by 200 dollars so we can cut GE's by 1 billion and Zuckerber's by 300 million and borrow it all.

    You don't command by vacillating back and forth. If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don't come to the table they are going to get nothing. Trump can, right now, deport the parents of the Dreamers. That would light a fire under the Democrats butts. Do you really think the average American cares if some illegal gets deported. Those polls are meaningless.

    If he wants the Democrats to cave he has to use ALL the force of the Presidency to make them realize that if they don’t come to the table they are going to get nothing

    But “ALL the force of the Presidency”, in reality, isn’t enough to do that. He can bring to bear “ALL the force of the Presidency”, and still the Democrats will get much more than “nothing.” The presidency is more “powerless figurehead” than “guy in charge”, and his supposed subordinates aren’t actually answerable to him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Mr. Anon says:
    @Kevin C.
    Yes, it would, because birthright citizenship is written into the Constitution. Specifically, the Citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
     
    Right there in plain text: if you're born in the US, you're a US citizen, and no mere act of Congress can change that.

    Illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If they were truly subject to our jurisdiction, they wouldn’t be here.

    I’m not interested in splitting hairs about the Constituion. It has been twisted like taffy by now, completely out of any semblance to what it originally meant. We might as well start doing the same – it is what we say it is, as long as we have the power to enforce our view.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "If they were truly subject to our jurisdiction, they wouldn't be here"

    That makes no sense. It's like saying a murderer is beyond the law simply because he hasn't been caught yet.

    In fact, there are illegal aliens in U.S. prisons serving sentences without being deported. How could they possibly be considered not under the jurisdiction of U.S. law? Riddle me that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Achilles

    getting Republicans to sell out on their most important issue in the name of bipartisanship
     
    Which Republicans? The Ryan-McConnell GOPe leadership in both houses favors amnesty. They are not selling out their base (donors), they are delivering for them. Indeed, the House and Senate could probably pass 'Dreamer' amnesty with a veto-proof majority.

    By doing a deal with the Democrats on amnesty instead of with the GOPe, Trump is giving both the Dems and the GOPe what they want, but he is shielding the GOPe. Some GOPe members in anti-amnesty districts may be able to vote against it knowing it has enough other votes to pass.

    What does Trump get in return? Perhaps an agreement by the Establishment that Mueller will wrap it up in December with no impeachment recommendation and no indictments of the inner circle? After all, the Mueller fishing expedition was always about trying to find dirt on Trump to use as leverage against him. And, perhaps the Establishment will grant Trump funding for a face-saving portion of the Wall in the December funding bill.

    Mueller

    And also, Trump blames Sessions for Mueller (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/us/politics/jeff-sessions-trump.html) which probably in itself dampens the Sessions agenda.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. guest says:
    @Mr. Anon
    Illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If they were truly subject to our jurisdiction, they wouldn't be here.

    I'm not interested in splitting hairs about the Constituion. It has been twisted like taffy by now, completely out of any semblance to what it originally meant. We might as well start doing the same - it is what we say it is, as long as we have the power to enforce our view.

    “If they were truly subject to our jurisdiction, they wouldn’t be here”

    That makes no sense. It’s like saying a murderer is beyond the law simply because he hasn’t been caught yet.

    In fact, there are illegal aliens in U.S. prisons serving sentences without being deported. How could they possibly be considered not under the jurisdiction of U.S. law? Riddle me that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. @Kevin C.
    First, you need to work on your reading skills. If you'd read your link, you'd note that in the English "Peasants' Revolt", the peasants lost, and a lot of them killed. Sure, they killed a few nobles; "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

    In fact, it might be instructive to examine Wikipedia's list of peasant revolts. Note that most of the "successful revolts" are all in East Asia. For the West, it's mostly just "Suppression of the rebellion" after "Suppression of the rebellion". And the status of the exceptions as true peasant rebellions is questionable. Let's examine them:
    •The Samogitian uprisings (1401–1404, 1409): the Teutonic Knights against whom the Samogitians uprose were, per Wikipedia "soundly defeated by the joint Polish–Lithuanian forces" (see also the Polish–Lithuanian–Teutonic War), and so "suceeded" only by it turning into a regional war between multiple powers.
    •The Rebellion of the Remences (1462–1472, 1485–1486): this was in many way a king-versus-nobles conflict. Quoth the wiki:

    In the mid-15th century, Alfonso V of Aragon, "the Magnanimous", allowed the peasants to form a sindicat remença, a peasants' guild or primitive trade union, granted them their liberty and intervened in several other ways against the abuses. However, the Bishop of Girona sided with the nobility; along with the Generalitat, controlled by the nobles, their opposition led Alfonso to reverse himself.
    Alfonso's successor, John II, sought the peasants' help against the nobility. By May 1461, the peasantry had declared themselves in favor of the king against the nobles.
     
    So the "revolting" peasants were merely the foot soldiers in an intra-elite conflict.
    •The "Galician slaughter" (1846): in this case, the Austrian ruling class of the Habsburg Empire dealt with a bunch of Polish nationalist nobles planning to revolt against their rule by fomenting and uprising by said nobles' Galician peasants. After said peasants killed about a thousand of those nobles, solving the problem, those same Austrian elites switched from supporting the rebellion to suppressing it, and crushed the peasants. Again, tools in an inter-elite conflict.
    And the next "success" listed after that is the October Revolution in Russia, and the Soviets taking over.

    All the real peasant uprisings ended up more like the German Peasants' War (1524-1525), where over 300,000 peasants rose up… and failed to accomplish any of their goals, with a third of them killed.

    And this is all much more relevant to the modern world than you think. Because how much elites listen to the masses correlates strongly with the usefulness of those masses in warfare. Societies with small, well-trained and expensively-equipped warrior elites are always more "aristocratic" (and rebellions in them far less successful) than societies with broader "citizen armies". Compare the war chariots of the Hittite Empire to the early Greek phalanges. Or Sparta, with it's elite Spartiate warrior class, to more "democratic" Athens and it's citizen rowers. Or England with it's yeoman archers to French knights. Or Swiss pikemen to French or German knights.

    The period around the American Revolution, and through the Civil War, was an age when masses of quickly-trained conscripts or citizen militias armed with rifles that ordinary civilians could afford to own could make a significant difference on the battlefield; I've seen it called "the Age of the Gun" or "the Age of the Rifle". But that is over now; it was already mostly ended by the First World War. We are no longer in an age of labor-intensive warfare where "citizen armies" are a serious threat, but a return to capital-intensive warfare with an expensively-equipped, highly trained professional warrior class that is a tiny fraction of the population. Modern warfare puts us closer to those peasants, who stood no chance against armored, mounted knights no matter how many pitchforks and torches they hoarded, than to the Founding Fathers. I seem to recall Steve Sailer actually making a similar point years ago back on his previous blog, about how our elite's increasingly distain for those they rule might come at least partially due to them no longer needing most of us to fight their wars.

    So, no, there's little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.

    You’ve actually heard about peasants’ revolts and knew how to find the articles on Wikipedia? Why ask Corvinus “what would that entail, exactly?” You silly goose. :o

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.

    There are scenarios that to you may appear to be at “Black Swan” or rarer levels of improbability, but unless you’re telling me you’ve seen the future, and can prove it, your End-of-History declarations are jejune at best.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. AndrewR says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Other than the hair, I don’t see much difference between Miller and Kushner.
     
    How about the fact that Miller is on our side?

    When, during the presidential campaign, the relationship between [Richard] Spencer and Miller from their days together at Duke became public, Miller quickly disavowed knowing Spencer. “I have absolutely no relationship with Mr. Spencer,” Miller e-mailed Mother Jones last October. “I completely repudiate his views, and his claims are 100 percent false.”

    Our side? The side of lying, anti-white cowards?

    Miller is definitely not on my side. I have nothing but contempt for him

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Spencer should keep his personal relationships--real, imagined, or concocted--private. He certainly shouldn't be discussing them with hostile media. Someone who is so careless and inconsiderate cannot be a trusted member of one's side.

    There is also no room on the American side for someone who advocates "ethnic cleansing."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. Corvinus says:
    @Mr. ANon
    You've been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can't even spell "Sailer" correctly?

    Well, I suppose it isn't surprising, given how stupid you are.

    “You’ve been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can’t even spell “Sailer” correctly?”

    It’s called tongue and cheek. A sailer notices things on their journeys. They see the world that other people don’t see. Then again, you’re just not that bright.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Just admit that you made a spelling mistake and move on instead of resorting to sophistry and calling other people stupid. You and Hillary should get together.

    A sailOR notices things on journeys. A sailER is that which sails - i.e. a boat. "She's the best sailer in the fleet."

    So why is Steve a Sailer and not a Sailor? I dunno, spelling variation back in the day when English spelling rules were less rigid? Originally the Germanic Seiler and Anglicized when they got to America? A secret anagram for Israel?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. Bill says:
    @Kevin C.

    But the reality is that the billionaire globalists get two things they want and the rest of America gets screwed.

    This is government of, by, and for the people in 2017.
     
    Iron Law of Oligarchy: every society is ruled by a small elite, with the masses powerless pawns. Always has been, always will be. "Government of, by, and for the people" has always been more sham and myth than reality.

    Right. The interesting questions are who these elites are and which political institution chooses the best ones. Liberal democracy chooses elites who are lying sociopaths.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. Bill says:
    @GamecockJerry
    Doesn't this so-called agreement still have to be passed by both house of Congress? Can't wait to see the debate on that. It will never pass. You guys are crying over nothing.

    As long as Trump is not actively opposed to it, it will pass easily.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. Jack D says:
    @Corvinus
    "You’ve been sh**ting all over this site for how long now, and you still can’t even spell “Sailer” correctly?"

    It's called tongue and cheek. A sailer notices things on their journeys. They see the world that other people don't see. Then again, you're just not that bright.

    Just admit that you made a spelling mistake and move on instead of resorting to sophistry and calling other people stupid. You and Hillary should get together.

    A sailOR notices things on journeys. A sailER is that which sails – i.e. a boat. “She’s the best sailer in the fleet.”

    So why is Steve a Sailer and not a Sailor? I dunno, spelling variation back in the day when English spelling rules were less rigid? Originally the Germanic Seiler and Anglicized when they got to America? A secret anagram for Israel?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Just admit that you made a spelling mistake and move on instead of resorting to sophistry and calling other people stupid."

    Why? Sophistry and calling people stupid are staples here on this blog. It's par for the course. But, I'll be mindful of your suggestion, Mr. Blog Police.

    "You and Hillary should get together."

    You mean Hillary and Trump. Two peas in a pod.

    "A sailOR notices things on journeys. A sailER is that which sails – i.e. a boat. “She’s the best sailer in the fleet.”

    Educate yourself about sailors, please.

    https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/jimmybuffett/sonofasonofasailor.html

    "Originally the Germanic Seiler and Anglicized when they got to America? A secret anagram for Israel?"

    Always relating things back to the Jews, huh.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. Jack D says:
    @Kevin C.
    Yes, it would, because birthright citizenship is written into the Constitution. Specifically, the Citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
     
    Right there in plain text: if you're born in the US, you're a US citizen, and no mere act of Congress can change that.

    The authors of the Constitution were not idiots. They didn’t just say “born here – you’re a citizen”. Read it again . All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens …

    What does “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” mean? It must mean something or they wouldn’t have added those words.

    Here’s a hint, from the US Attorney General in 1873, shortly after the adoption of the Amendment:

    “The word ‘jurisdiction’ must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens…. are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them.”

    In other words, citizenship is a 2 way street – if you a citizen who is bound to fight and die for the United States, we will give citizenship to your kids. If you are an alien just stopping by to exploit what you think is a loophole in American law, no way. Do you think we are that stupid?

    Think about the converse. You are a pregnant American tourist and you happen to give birth while you are visiting Bermuda. Does that mean that your kid is NOT an American citizen? Likewise, if the Canadian tourist is visiting Plattsburgh and happens to go into premature labor, that doesn’t make her kid American and not Canadian under any reasonable reading of the Amendment and international law. The next day, when she tries to go home with her kid, do they stop him at the border and reject him because he is not a Canadian citizen?

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    The authors of the federal constutution – mostly the work of James Madison – were indeed not idiots. However, the authors of this particular language in an amendment to that constitution were in fact not terribly bright: they did not even understand the document they amended well enough to realise it created a federal government of enumerated powers, reserving all other powers to the several states and the people – despite that explicit admonition within the document itself. Indeed, the amendment's authors were so dim they fought a bloody war based upon their misunderstanding (whether willful or ignorant) which it turns out wound up destroying the U.S.A. for all time, adding this amendment precisely to doubly assure that destruction via invasion.

    A concession: these authors may not hve been stupid after all. They may have been inconceivably evil.

    , @Chrisnonymous
    Plattsburgh--stopping Canadians since 1814!! By the way, that battle was on 9/11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. @Jack D
    The authors of the Constitution were not idiots. They didn't just say "born here - you're a citizen". Read it again . All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens ...

    What does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean? It must mean something or they wouldn't have added those words.

    Here's a hint, from the US Attorney General in 1873, shortly after the adoption of the Amendment:

    "The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens.... are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."

    In other words, citizenship is a 2 way street - if you a citizen who is bound to fight and die for the United States, we will give citizenship to your kids. If you are an alien just stopping by to exploit what you think is a loophole in American law, no way. Do you think we are that stupid?

    Think about the converse. You are a pregnant American tourist and you happen to give birth while you are visiting Bermuda. Does that mean that your kid is NOT an American citizen? Likewise, if the Canadian tourist is visiting Plattsburgh and happens to go into premature labor, that doesn't make her kid American and not Canadian under any reasonable reading of the Amendment and international law. The next day, when she tries to go home with her kid, do they stop him at the border and reject him because he is not a Canadian citizen?

    The authors of the federal constutution – mostly the work of James Madison – were indeed not idiots. However, the authors of this particular language in an amendment to that constitution were in fact not terribly bright: they did not even understand the document they amended well enough to realise it created a federal government of enumerated powers, reserving all other powers to the several states and the people – despite that explicit admonition within the document itself. Indeed, the amendment’s authors were so dim they fought a bloody war based upon their misunderstanding (whether willful or ignorant) which it turns out wound up destroying the U.S.A. for all time, adding this amendment precisely to doubly assure that destruction via invasion.

    A concession: these authors may not hve been stupid after all. They may have been inconceivably evil.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. Corvinus says:
    @Jack D
    Just admit that you made a spelling mistake and move on instead of resorting to sophistry and calling other people stupid. You and Hillary should get together.

    A sailOR notices things on journeys. A sailER is that which sails - i.e. a boat. "She's the best sailer in the fleet."

    So why is Steve a Sailer and not a Sailor? I dunno, spelling variation back in the day when English spelling rules were less rigid? Originally the Germanic Seiler and Anglicized when they got to America? A secret anagram for Israel?

    “Just admit that you made a spelling mistake and move on instead of resorting to sophistry and calling other people stupid.”

    Why? Sophistry and calling people stupid are staples here on this blog. It’s par for the course. But, I’ll be mindful of your suggestion, Mr. Blog Police.

    “You and Hillary should get together.”

    You mean Hillary and Trump. Two peas in a pod.

    “A sailOR notices things on journeys. A sailER is that which sails – i.e. a boat. “She’s the best sailer in the fleet.”

    Educate yourself about sailors, please.

    https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/jimmybuffett/sonofasonofasailor.html

    “Originally the Germanic Seiler and Anglicized when they got to America? A secret anagram for Israel?”

    Always relating things back to the Jews, huh.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. @Kevin C.
    First, you need to work on your reading skills. If you'd read your link, you'd note that in the English "Peasants' Revolt", the peasants lost, and a lot of them killed. Sure, they killed a few nobles; "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

    In fact, it might be instructive to examine Wikipedia's list of peasant revolts. Note that most of the "successful revolts" are all in East Asia. For the West, it's mostly just "Suppression of the rebellion" after "Suppression of the rebellion". And the status of the exceptions as true peasant rebellions is questionable. Let's examine them:
    •The Samogitian uprisings (1401–1404, 1409): the Teutonic Knights against whom the Samogitians uprose were, per Wikipedia "soundly defeated by the joint Polish–Lithuanian forces" (see also the Polish–Lithuanian–Teutonic War), and so "suceeded" only by it turning into a regional war between multiple powers.
    •The Rebellion of the Remences (1462–1472, 1485–1486): this was in many way a king-versus-nobles conflict. Quoth the wiki:

    In the mid-15th century, Alfonso V of Aragon, "the Magnanimous", allowed the peasants to form a sindicat remença, a peasants' guild or primitive trade union, granted them their liberty and intervened in several other ways against the abuses. However, the Bishop of Girona sided with the nobility; along with the Generalitat, controlled by the nobles, their opposition led Alfonso to reverse himself.
    Alfonso's successor, John II, sought the peasants' help against the nobility. By May 1461, the peasantry had declared themselves in favor of the king against the nobles.
     
    So the "revolting" peasants were merely the foot soldiers in an intra-elite conflict.
    •The "Galician slaughter" (1846): in this case, the Austrian ruling class of the Habsburg Empire dealt with a bunch of Polish nationalist nobles planning to revolt against their rule by fomenting and uprising by said nobles' Galician peasants. After said peasants killed about a thousand of those nobles, solving the problem, those same Austrian elites switched from supporting the rebellion to suppressing it, and crushed the peasants. Again, tools in an inter-elite conflict.
    And the next "success" listed after that is the October Revolution in Russia, and the Soviets taking over.

    All the real peasant uprisings ended up more like the German Peasants' War (1524-1525), where over 300,000 peasants rose up… and failed to accomplish any of their goals, with a third of them killed.

    And this is all much more relevant to the modern world than you think. Because how much elites listen to the masses correlates strongly with the usefulness of those masses in warfare. Societies with small, well-trained and expensively-equipped warrior elites are always more "aristocratic" (and rebellions in them far less successful) than societies with broader "citizen armies". Compare the war chariots of the Hittite Empire to the early Greek phalanges. Or Sparta, with it's elite Spartiate warrior class, to more "democratic" Athens and it's citizen rowers. Or England with it's yeoman archers to French knights. Or Swiss pikemen to French or German knights.

    The period around the American Revolution, and through the Civil War, was an age when masses of quickly-trained conscripts or citizen militias armed with rifles that ordinary civilians could afford to own could make a significant difference on the battlefield; I've seen it called "the Age of the Gun" or "the Age of the Rifle". But that is over now; it was already mostly ended by the First World War. We are no longer in an age of labor-intensive warfare where "citizen armies" are a serious threat, but a return to capital-intensive warfare with an expensively-equipped, highly trained professional warrior class that is a tiny fraction of the population. Modern warfare puts us closer to those peasants, who stood no chance against armored, mounted knights no matter how many pitchforks and torches they hoarded, than to the Founding Fathers. I seem to recall Steve Sailer actually making a similar point years ago back on his previous blog, about how our elite's increasingly distain for those they rule might come at least partially due to them no longer needing most of us to fight their wars.

    So, no, there's little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.

    Interesting post, Kevin (no sarcasm), but right now warfare is run with/by electronics.

    I’ve got one word for your future Kevin C.: Plastics, I mean Hackers

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    I’ve got one word for your future Kevin C.: Plastics, I mean Hackers
     
    First, three letters in reply: NSA.

    Second, not everything that is "run with/by electronics" is "hackable", at least not without immediate physical access. No keyboard jockey, however skilled, is going to, say, hack and take remote control of a tank or stealth bomber, no matter how many electronics go into its functioning.

    We all still live and die it meatspace, and bombs and bullets are as yet more lethal than electrons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. @Jack D
    The authors of the Constitution were not idiots. They didn't just say "born here - you're a citizen". Read it again . All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens ...

    What does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean? It must mean something or they wouldn't have added those words.

    Here's a hint, from the US Attorney General in 1873, shortly after the adoption of the Amendment:

    "The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens.... are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."

    In other words, citizenship is a 2 way street - if you a citizen who is bound to fight and die for the United States, we will give citizenship to your kids. If you are an alien just stopping by to exploit what you think is a loophole in American law, no way. Do you think we are that stupid?

    Think about the converse. You are a pregnant American tourist and you happen to give birth while you are visiting Bermuda. Does that mean that your kid is NOT an American citizen? Likewise, if the Canadian tourist is visiting Plattsburgh and happens to go into premature labor, that doesn't make her kid American and not Canadian under any reasonable reading of the Amendment and international law. The next day, when she tries to go home with her kid, do they stop him at the border and reject him because he is not a Canadian citizen?

    Plattsburgh–stopping Canadians since 1814!! By the way, that battle was on 9/11.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. Lot says:
    @Opinionator
    Bannon is supposedly going to do a GOP senate primary fund, that sounds like a great use of his talents.

    Sincere or sarcasm?

    Sincere. See my other comment, we realistically could replace 5 pro amnesty Senators with antis in 2018. But we need to win the primaries, the Chamber and Kochs will fund a pro amnesty Republican in every single competitive seat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. 3g4me says:

    @241 Jack D: “The authors of the Constitution were not idiots. They didn’t just say “born here – you’re a citizen”.

    Back when I took my Consular course, we discussed this. Turns out the same objections as voiced today were made to the amendment’s authors – that it would render any foreigner popped out on our magic dirt an instant American. The authors insisted this was pure sophistry and hair-splitting, and insisted the meaning and intent were perfectly clear. Nevertheless, grudgingly, they clarified it by noting an Ambassador’s children are (obviously) not American citizens by birth.

    So now, courtesy of our inestimable judges, lawyers, and bureaucrats, the English Ambassador’s American-born children do not acquire citizenship at birth – but those of his Pakistani gardener do.
    Or those of a Chinese tourist, or an African giving birth on board a plane in American airspace. Because “not an Ambassador.” “Clear” and “obvious” intent be damned.

    The more conscientious of the consular officers – myself of course included – made it a private policy to avoid whenever possible granting a tourist visa to any visibly pregnant women. This was actually unofficial policy endorsed by the head of the non-immigrant visa section at the time (she knew the score). The fact that birth tourism even exists as an industry today is a clear testament to the sort of consular officers who’ve been hired for the past few decades. Lots of womyn, Negroes, Jews, and the variously gendered. All not Americans – by choice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  247. Dissident says:
    @Anonymous
    Trump used to hang out with Jeffrey Epstein. There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    There are powerful people out there with Polaroids and video of Trump involved in extremely obscene sexual acts with minors.

    Any theory, then, on why such material never surfaced at any point during the campaign? Surely, there are at least a few immensely wealthy individuals out there, including and especially one H. Rodham-Clinton, who would have been ready to pay quite dearly for such material.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. @AndrewR

    When, during the presidential campaign, the relationship between [Richard] Spencer and Miller from their days together at Duke became public, Miller quickly disavowed knowing Spencer. “I have absolutely no relationship with Mr. Spencer,” Miller e-mailed Mother Jones last October. “I completely repudiate his views, and his claims are 100 percent false.”
     
    Our side? The side of lying, anti-white cowards?

    Miller is definitely not on my side. I have nothing but contempt for him

    Spencer should keep his personal relationships–real, imagined, or concocted–private. He certainly shouldn’t be discussing them with hostile media. Someone who is so careless and inconsiderate cannot be a trusted member of one’s side.

    There is also no room on the American side for someone who advocates “ethnic cleansing.”

    Read More
    • Troll: AndrewR
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    All Miller had to say was:

    "Richard Spencer and I shared a productive working relationship at Duke. I never knew him to hold the views he now publicly holds, with which I disagree (and always would have disagreed) to a significant degree. I have not spoken to him since our time at Duke, but I hope one day he repudiates his racialist thinking which is nothing but a pro-white mirror image of mainstream leftist anti-white thinking. All racialist ideology is fundamentally at odds with the world as I understand it."

    Non-cucked, "respectable" and not overtly dishonest. Instead, he shamelessly lied and he cucked hard.

    Miller is a disgrace.

    , @Charles Pewitt
    Wealthy and powerful Jews in Chicago and New York are using various surreptitious means to ethnically cleanse Blacks from their respective cities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. AndrewR says:
    @Opinionator
    Spencer should keep his personal relationships--real, imagined, or concocted--private. He certainly shouldn't be discussing them with hostile media. Someone who is so careless and inconsiderate cannot be a trusted member of one's side.

    There is also no room on the American side for someone who advocates "ethnic cleansing."

    All Miller had to say was:

    “Richard Spencer and I shared a productive working relationship at Duke. I never knew him to hold the views he now publicly holds, with which I disagree (and always would have disagreed) to a significant degree. I have not spoken to him since our time at Duke, but I hope one day he repudiates his racialist thinking which is nothing but a pro-white mirror image of mainstream leftist anti-white thinking. All racialist ideology is fundamentally at odds with the world as I understand it.”

    Non-cucked, “respectable” and not overtly dishonest. Instead, he shamelessly lied and he cucked hard.

    Miller is a disgrace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Same difference. And Miller's statement was more pithy.

    In any case, Miller shouldn't have to be the one to bail Spencer out of the foreseeable messes Spencer has made for himself, due in part to his hubris.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. Kevin C. says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    So, no, there’s little we can do, in terms of violence and warfare, except throw our lives away in futility like those German peasants.
     
    Interesting post, Kevin (no sarcasm), but right now warfare is run with/by electronics.

    I've got one word for your future Kevin C.: Plastics, I mean Hackers

    I’ve got one word for your future Kevin C.: Plastics, I mean Hackers

    First, three letters in reply: NSA.

    Second, not everything that is “run with/by electronics” is “hackable”, at least not without immediate physical access. No keyboard jockey, however skilled, is going to, say, hack and take remote control of a tank or stealth bomber, no matter how many electronics go into its functioning.

    We all still live and die it meatspace, and bombs and bullets are as yet more lethal than electrons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  251. @Opinionator
    Spencer should keep his personal relationships--real, imagined, or concocted--private. He certainly shouldn't be discussing them with hostile media. Someone who is so careless and inconsiderate cannot be a trusted member of one's side.

    There is also no room on the American side for someone who advocates "ethnic cleansing."

    Wealthy and powerful Jews in Chicago and New York are using various surreptitious means to ethnically cleanse Blacks from their respective cities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    And?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  252. @Charles Pewitt
    Wealthy and powerful Jews in Chicago and New York are using various surreptitious means to ethnically cleanse Blacks from their respective cities.

    And?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  253. @AndrewR
    All Miller had to say was:

    "Richard Spencer and I shared a productive working relationship at Duke. I never knew him to hold the views he now publicly holds, with which I disagree (and always would have disagreed) to a significant degree. I have not spoken to him since our time at Duke, but I hope one day he repudiates his racialist thinking which is nothing but a pro-white mirror image of mainstream leftist anti-white thinking. All racialist ideology is fundamentally at odds with the world as I understand it."

    Non-cucked, "respectable" and not overtly dishonest. Instead, he shamelessly lied and he cucked hard.

    Miller is a disgrace.

    Same difference. And Miller’s statement was more pithy.

    In any case, Miller shouldn’t have to be the one to bail Spencer out of the foreseeable messes Spencer has made for himself, due in part to his hubris.

    Read More
    • Troll: AndrewR
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  254. EdwardM says:
    @Anonymous
    The revelation that Trump met with Nikki Haley right after the election and begged her to be SoS says it all. The guy was never who he pretended to be.

    If that were true, then why would she turn it down? The only reason I can think of is that she thought she wasn’t ready, and could use the seasoning at the UN first with a good chance that whoever Trump appointed at State wouldn’t last two years, let alone four.

    But that would be awfully humble for a politician. And, notwithstanding the calculation I mentioned, it’s pretty hard to turn down SoS knowing that it may never come around again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  255. EdwardM says:

    The comments on this site seem to be an excellent focus group of Trump’s base. It’s notable, and reasonable, that this is really the first time that he seems to have lost us.

    I am still trying to contemplate why he made this deal/announcement. To summarize many of the views here, with my opinions of course:

    1. Far-out reasons:
    – Secret deal with the deep state to get Mueller off of his or Kushner’s back
    – Secret or tacit deal with the establishment to not permanently blackball his family once he leaves office

    2. Slightly less far-out reasons:
    – Trade-off with Democrats on tax cuts or lord-knows-what-else
    – Take attention away from Charlottesville
    – He’s just tired of being battered or maybe tired of the job in general and wants a cumbaya moment on what he sees as not a core issue
    – He’s naive and believed it when Schumer looked into his eyes after a candle-lit dinner at the White House and said, “Mr. President, thank you for this good will, I see this as the first step in achieving common ground that can help us both get some of what we want”
    – Completely ham-fisted discussions with Schumer and Pelosi that they have successfully spun to box him in

    3. More plausible possibilities that would represent gross miscalculation on his part:
    – Somehow triangulate to stick it to Republicans or force them to come to him on other issues
    – Thinking that this would earn him praise from the media and Democrats to build political capital, maybe even after the positive response to the hurricanes and an approval rating that is now back into the mid-40s
    – This is part of an explicit negotiation to get more immigration-related priorities in “the future” (e.g., the wall, e-verify, reduction of other forms of legal immigration), which Schumer and Pelosi implied would be on the table (see above)

    4. More plausible possibilities that don’t make it seem like all is lost:
    – Taking the DACA card away from the Democrats permanently. . .
    – . . . especially if he thinks that he has no choice, as he could never muster a majority, or even enough to sustain a veto, against making DACA permanent due to Republicans’ fecklessness,which Democrats know full well and thus render amnesty for dreamers as a bargaining chip not very valuable
    – . . . especially if he thinks, as others have mentioned in referring to his comments during the campaign, that this is simply the right thing to do for “dreamers” as this is, we must admit, a tough issue with no good practical solutions
    – Maybe this whole thing is a trial balloon — letting Democrats overplay their hand by misrepresenting what he supposedly agreed to, scaring Republicans a bit, rousing the base, testing to see whether this is really the absolute key issue for us — and we will see in a week or a month that the whole claim that he agreed to anything is phony. E.g., not quite 4-dimensional chess, but trolling

    None of these possibilities is very satisfying, given how easy it would be to end DACA by executive action or let the courts strike it down. I am trying to remain optimistic but agreeing with the majority here who are finding it difficult.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Nothing is set in stone yet. And Trump is already course correcting, as he has done so many times before.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  256. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Porter on Trump and DACA:

    Who is innocent and obligated in DACA. And who will wear white if Trump and Schumer wed.

    https://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/15/innocence-and-obligation/amp/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  257. @EdwardM
    The comments on this site seem to be an excellent focus group of Trump's base. It's notable, and reasonable, that this is really the first time that he seems to have lost us.

    I am still trying to contemplate why he made this deal/announcement. To summarize many of the views here, with my opinions of course:

    1. Far-out reasons:
    -- Secret deal with the deep state to get Mueller off of his or Kushner's back
    -- Secret or tacit deal with the establishment to not permanently blackball his family once he leaves office

    2. Slightly less far-out reasons:
    -- Trade-off with Democrats on tax cuts or lord-knows-what-else
    -- Take attention away from Charlottesville
    -- He's just tired of being battered or maybe tired of the job in general and wants a cumbaya moment on what he sees as not a core issue
    -- He's naive and believed it when Schumer looked into his eyes after a candle-lit dinner at the White House and said, "Mr. President, thank you for this good will, I see this as the first step in achieving common ground that can help us both get some of what we want"
    -- Completely ham-fisted discussions with Schumer and Pelosi that they have successfully spun to box him in

    3. More plausible possibilities that would represent gross miscalculation on his part:
    -- Somehow triangulate to stick it to Republicans or force them to come to him on other issues
    -- Thinking that this would earn him praise from the media and Democrats to build political capital, maybe even after the positive response to the hurricanes and an approval rating that is now back into the mid-40s
    -- This is part of an explicit negotiation to get more immigration-related priorities in "the future" (e.g., the wall, e-verify, reduction of other forms of legal immigration), which Schumer and Pelosi implied would be on the table (see above)

    4. More plausible possibilities that don't make it seem like all is lost:
    -- Taking the DACA card away from the Democrats permanently. . .
    -- . . . especially if he thinks that he has no choice, as he could never muster a majority, or even enough to sustain a veto, against making DACA permanent due to Republicans' fecklessness,which Democrats know full well and thus render amnesty for dreamers as a bargaining chip not very valuable
    -- . . . especially if he thinks, as others have mentioned in referring to his comments during the campaign, that this is simply the right thing to do for "dreamers" as this is, we must admit, a tough issue with no good practical solutions
    -- Maybe this whole thing is a trial balloon -- letting Democrats overplay their hand by misrepresenting what he supposedly agreed to, scaring Republicans a bit, rousing the base, testing to see whether this is really the absolute key issue for us -- and we will see in a week or a month that the whole claim that he agreed to anything is phony. E.g., not quite 4-dimensional chess, but trolling

    None of these possibilities is very satisfying, given how easy it would be to end DACA by executive action or let the courts strike it down. I am trying to remain optimistic but agreeing with the majority here who are finding it difficult.

    Nothing is set in stone yet. And Trump is already course correcting, as he has done so many times before.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  258. MEH 0910 says:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  259. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Tiny Duck
    Beahahahaha


    It's OVER


    This was the last gasp of white American. Adiis racists

    As Leonard Pitts says we can finally have a good country. One that doesn't just give wealth to white male Christians. You guys will have to stand on your own two feet without the system working for you. We can finally restructure society and resourc scinan equitable way

    I'm going to take a break from this place foe awhile because I caanit stand the suicides that will be taking place
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation