SF Pays Illegal To Stay

A threatened lawsuit from illegal Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno, 33, for “wrongful arrest” has compelled local officials to pay him $190,000! This appalling decision gives the words of acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Thomas D. Homan, deeper resonance:

“Sanctuary cities, in my opinion, are un-American. … They're a sanctuary city, they're proud of it.”

Ah, San Francisco, represented by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Recall, her stomping grounds were made infamous by the July 1, 2015 slaying of 32-year-old Kate Steinle. Walking along Pier 14 with her father, Ms. Steinle was struck in the back by a ricocheting bullet from a stolen gun in the hands of an illegal, Juan Francisco López-Sánchez: a felon with 7 convictions and 5 deportations. López-Sánchez had been in the custody of the San Francisco Sheriff on drug charges when ICE issued a detainer for him. Instead of turning him over as federal law demanded, this convicted criminal was set free—and an innocent lost her life.

Over two years later, things have evolved from the tragic to the farcical.

Today, San Francisco is apparently so “proud” of their ongoing sanctuary status, they're paying Señor Figueroa-Zarceno six figures for not living up to their federal law-violating “principles”! For context, back in December 2015, Figueroa-Zarceno informed police about his stolen vehicle. That caused them to become aware of his DUI conviction and an order for deportation to his home country of El Salvador. Reporting the theft of his vehicle ironically led to his arrest and two month incarceration. Yet, given San Francisco’s sanctuary policies, this outcome was illegal. Per the 1989 “City and County of Refuge” Ordinance (also known as the Sanctuary Ordinance):

“City employees [are prohibited] from using City funds or resources to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the enforcement of Federal immigration law.”

Hence, for complying with federal law—that importantly supersedes local statutes—San Francisco obliged itself to pay Figueroa-Zarceno from the taxpayer till. What's more absurd: that this two-faced “victim” claims “what happened to [him] was very unfair and it was an injustice,” or cutting him a large government check for his “inconvenience”? Indeed, this outrageous settlement illustrates the schizophrenic nature of sanctuary policies for law enforcement. Which do they honor? The conflicting city policy or the federal mandate? Siding with the former means releasing often violent offenders or risking similar payouts.

Hypocritical Democrats falsely justify sanctuary cities by advocating the straw man argument of “tolerance and multiculturalism”. In truth, Democrats promote these lawless enclaves—populated by illegals and criminals—precisely because these same illegitimate groups overwhelmingly support them politically! As a case and point, is California Political Review's “Poll: 13% of Illegal Aliens ADMIT They Vote”. Tellingly, 80% of noncitizens back Democrats. Therefore, progressives shield these lawbreaking foreigners because their political prospects are tied to them.

For this safely ensconced ruling elite, what do they care about perpetuating a dangerous environment? Another Democratic-run urban jungle—like America's murder capital, Chicago—leaps to mind. Former Obama flunky Rahm Emanuel parrots, “We want you to come to Chicago if you believe in the American dream.” What of the unrealized dreams of the 423 fatalities—recorded there in 2017, so far—Mister Mayor? What of this unending nightmare Democrats universally condone, and encourage? Undocumented aliens hide in plain sight while citizens cower from shadowy, un-American threats to life and limb.

This discrepancy is most clearly seen in San Francisco's disbursement of money to “injured” parties. While illegal Figueroa-Zarceno will be quickly paid for his trouble, last January U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero dismissed the wrongful death suit filed against San Francisco, and then-Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, by Kate Steinle's family. (The lawsuit against the Bureau of Land Management—the source of the López-Sánchez's stolen firearm from an agent's car—is proceeding.) In essence, city leaders have negated a citizen's constitutional rights, Kate's, while championing the “rights” of a foreign squatter? What an Orwellian result! In the final analysis, which group demonstrates more contempt for America? Liberals who run San Francisco or illegals who inhabit it?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

“Winning” In D.C.'s Swamp?

“[T]his was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.” – Democratic nominee Barack Obama's victory speech on June 3, 2008

Thankfully, the 2016 presidential election “shattered” heir apparent Hillary Clinton's White House prospects; perhaps forever. Mercifully, that means no Clinton promised “Obama third term”. America has finally been liberated from these twin progressive scourges. His was an utterly failed record: defined by divisive rhetoric—an almost Messianic cult of personality—and delusions of grandeur. (Specifically, Obama desired to dismantle the goodness embodied by “apple pie” Americanism.) On the other hand, her's is endless lies and scandals (strongly suggesting lawbreaking and corruption). Today, America is in far better hands, but only in relation to the grizzly alternative. Clearly, shifting from a dogmatic leftist ideologue to a populist outsider is an improvement. Yet, what remains is the unyielding quagmire of beltway elites (of both parties) coupled with Trump's surface narrative of “winning”.

For Mr. Trump's showiness, let us not be reminded of smirking selfie-obsessed Barack Obama. A superficial politician of illusory “accomplishments” (and hard leftist transformation who Bill Clinton pegged correctly as “an amateur”). Obama—the worst president of the modern age—was defined by a fatiguing number of inauthentic, self-congratulatory victory laps (between 333 rounds of golf per CBS reporter Mark Knoller). What's more egregious, his exchange of likely traitor Bowe Bergdahl for five high-level terrorists, his U.S. Iran payoff of 1.7 billion or his U.S.-Iran nuclear “deal” that wasn't? In every case, geopolitical adversaries were coddled and emboldened. Meanwhile, Obama claimed legacy-defining “successes” while America suffered domestically and receded further from relevancy on the international stage.

One hopes that the election of a real winner—a billionaire capitalist epitomizing the American Dream—will not follow suit. Indeed, doesn't such a person know the difference between Obama's show business tenure—and brick and mortar substance? Unfortunately, thus far, that remains to be seen. Specifically, the ObamaCare Lite “Republican” health-care bill, such as it is, finally squeaked by the House of Representatives. As it still faces the daunting and uncertain hurtle of passage in the Senate, it's hardly a done deal. Therefore, why did President Trump recently declare victory in the rose garden flanked by a phalanx of clapping, smiling GOP flunkeys? Obviously, pro-American deal making is necessary. Yet, isn't the devil in the details? Why are they being glossed over by this president in the same careless manner as the disastrous last one?

In fairness, Donald Trump has quickly discovered that confronting the status quo (read: “draining the swamp”) of the beltway bubble is a Herculean task worthy of that demigod's twelve punishing labors. This progressive/RINO “new budget compromise” funding the government through September is a measure precisely antithetical to the new president's priorities. Why then do they bankroll America's primary abortion provider Planned Parenthood? (For context, this organization was founded by Hillary Clinton's hero Margaret Sanger: an unapologetic racist and eugenicist. Thus, the reason it's overwhelmingly found in minority neighborhoods is no mystery.) Likewise, the GOP supposedly opposes sanctuary cities. Yet, those lawless enclaves—that regularly endanger local citizens' lives (read: San Francisco's Kate Steinle killed by a repeatedly deported illegal alien)—are fully funded too. Aren't Congressional Republicans supposed to be pro-life in all its guises?

Related to criminal border jumpers and the unnecessary cost of lives, what of Trump's pledge to build a U.S.-Mexican wall? Of the Republican response, Breitbart astonishingly reports:

“The fine print in the bipartisan 2017 budget plan includes several paragraphs designed to prevent Donald Trump's deputies from building a border wall with the reserve cash routinely stored in agency saving accounts.”

So, there's zero allotted to the meaningful construction of a long overdue physical barrier? By comparison, contrast that to the $295.9 million funneled to bail out Puerto Rico's bankrupt Medicare system. How is giving more money to island wastrels a good idea? Isn't that the definition of flushing good money after bad? What does this two-faced Republican majority actually stand for—besides themselves?

How else does one explain their intentional disregard of President Trump's election-winning agenda? Hence, a long-standing political pattern emerges from the murky bowels of the political swamp. In practice, Nancy Pelosi's priorities are indistinguishable from Paul Ryan's. Put simply, they're all entrenched Washington “swamp creatures”! Remember when this newly minted House Speaker promised a “fresh start”? Right out of the gate, what did he deliver? He rubber-stamped the progressives' 2 trillion dollar budget! Today's budgetary expenditures are just more of the same.

Paul Ryan and his weak-willed ilk habitually capitulate to Democrats despite their “leadership” position. Then, amazingly, victory is universally declared. Both sides crow about something “good sounding” at first blush. Yet, ultimately, their shortsighted choices are unmistakably detrimental in the well being of future generations. You know, those yet unborn left to pay the tab of their irresponsible largesse. In truth, what are these out of touch elitists really doing—besides rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic (read: the iceberg that's America's escalating 19.9 trillion dollar debt)?

Speaking of the massive, what's a bigger ego-trip then being a U.S. president? Still, Mr. Trump must resist Washington's insulated grandiosity. (A temptation so vulgarly indulged by his preening predecessor.) As a lesson, Ronald Reagan never engaged in such self-glorifying impulses. In this regard, he should consider William L. Jenkins's words as a template:

“President Reagan always gave the credit to the American people and American ideals. He treated his job as a valuable temporary loan from the American people, a loan that should be respected and returned with dutiful appreciation.”

Thanks to the ballast of the intractable D.C. swamp, the country remains in economic dire straits. That fragile state is equally due to spineless establishment Republicans and obstructionist, spendthrift progressives. For lasting success, Mr. Trump needs to continue to champion sensible, conservative policies. That means bringing needed doses of main street reality to heedless establishment power. Specifically, Congress should be held accountable with the veto, the bully pulpit and at the ballot box. Echoing Obama's absurdist practice of premature—or completely unwarranted self-serving “wins”—is a worthless photo-op. As valid as the ex-president's campaign hype that he could “heal” the planet, or “control” the rise of the oceans. That's the stuff of patients typically found in mental wards. Or is it the decision-makers in Congress? By their results and popularity, who can tell a difference?

Average citizens have had enough of swamp creatures: especially their hollow claims of “victory”. That much is clear. Despite our elected officials' rosy proclamations, rank and file Americans aren't close to experiencing legitimate wins. That's a vital distinction President Trump must make for his—and America's—enduring success. It's the only standard that means anything—and the only way to secure the future of our teetering nation.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Audiences Abandon Hateful Hollywood

“I sincerely apologize for my lapse of judgment, ... for causing such dismay and heartbreak to my fans. … Regretfully, I did not take into consideration that my performing for the [Trump inaugural] concert would actually instead be taken as a political act against my own personal beliefs and be mistaken for support of Donald Trump and Mike Pence.” – cowed Broadway songbird Jennifer Holliday

To coin a new phrase, intolerant Hollywood is “Streeped” (rather than steeped) in liberal fascism. Tony Award-winner Jennifer Holliday had participated in presidential inauguration festivities since Ronald Reagan. That included four presidents, Democrats and Republicans alike. Why then the firestorm of criticism and n-word profanity for her agreeing to perform at last Thursday's “Make America Great Again! Welcome Celebration”? In 2017, how is singing at a pro-American event suddenly “offensive”? Yet, Ms. Holliday's dogmatic Hollywood overlords misconstrued her authentic patriotism as a public act of defiance. Their marching orders to her (and others) were unequivocal: perform for Trump and you'll never work in this town again. So, she didn't: Sieg Heil!

Hitting a crescendo in the polarizing Obama years, Hollywood—in absolute lockstep with the propagandist MSM—has been politically weaponized. Therefore, is it any wonder that an article last June in Vanity Fair reported: “2016 is on track to be Hollywood’s worst year for ticket sales in a century”? Hollywood's overt, anti-patriotism has made it radioactive to its middle America movie-skipping audience. You know, the salt of the earth folks populating the vast spaces outside of Democrats' cosmopolitan urban centers. This Silent Majority elected President Donald Trump. Those sick of being demonized by failed Democratic politicians as “deplorables”—and lectured to by Hollywood limousine liberals who “know better” than the rest of us.

To be fair, the underlying economics of this steady decline are complex. They include high ticket prices, a preponderance of sequels and reboots (read: a lack of original material) and a host of fingertip entertainment options including satellite TV, and paid streaming services like Netflix. However, the vital element not factored into any of these calculations is the widening left-right cultural divide.

A-list Hollywood actors are the best at playing make-believe. Essentially, these surrogates function as attractive movie props. Thus, they parrot the ideas of off-screen, invisible others. In cinema classic “Sunset Boulevard” (1950) character Joe Gillis (played by William Holden) admitted:

“Audiences don't know somebody sits down and writes a picture; they think the actors make it up as they go along.”

He's right. Actors convey the writer's words, feelings—and most importantly, message. That's why Hollywood types—when speaking for themselves—come off as condescending, entitled and phony. Even someone as exalted as Meryl Streep. Indeed, her Golden Globe anti-Trump rant disrespected and alienated millions of American voters. Further, her unwarranted criticism of the then President-elect showed a fundamental lack of fairness. And given her lack of good faith, what loyal American will spend hard earned dollars to watch her future films?

These Hollywood elites are very well paid visual placeholders in a story. Nothing more. Their power depends on their ability to fill increasingly empty chairs in entertainment venues. What has-been “Sunset” actress Norma Desmond (played by Gloria Swanson) called, “Those wonderful people out there in the dark!” Our modern-day equivalent to this character is the deluded, self-important Meryl Streep.

Her ilk will quickly discover that Trump's America is a new paradigm. Unfortunately, for regurgitating imaginary grievances, Ms. Streep is not the most atrocious example. That title goes to washed up actress and singer Madonna. At Saturday's misguided Women's March on Washington, the Material Girl provocateur publicly proclaimed she had “thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.” In true Orwellian fashion—after understandable blowback—she clarified she had actually intended a 'revolution of love'. What two-faced Clinton style 'is'-word gobbledygook! Madonna's un-American totalitarianism is crystal clear.

Expressed anarchy is not free speech. It's a call to violence—inciting potential criminal acts—and advocating sedition. Consequently, the superficial shine is rapidly fading from loud-mouthed celebrity egotists. And only time will tell if anti-American know-nothings—exemplified by Streep and 'Madge'—will suffer forgotten Norma Desmond's fate. The new sunset is “Streeped” Hollywood: those marginalized for imposing themselves as ideologues instead of simply entertaining. These left-wing poseurs should stick to their prepared scripts (or sheet music). They need not play politics too, by spewing Hitlerian hate from the nearest MSM microphone.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Between Contempt and Trump's Fist

“The shortest honeymoon on record is officially over. Normally, newly elected presidents enjoy a wave of goodwill that allows them to fly high at least through their first 100 days. Donald Trump has not yet been sworn in and the honeymoon has already come and gone.” – Charles Krauthammer, author and syndicated columnist, on January 12, 2017

Trump's honeymoon hasn't “come and gone”. For the MSM, it never existed in the first place. The Donald's victory has rightfully exposed them as fools. Yet, who's really to blame for their own inexcusably wrongheaded political predictions? They made mistakes then—and their current misbehavior only amplifies their public disgrace. Rather than reform and accept journalistic responsibility, they have engaged in petulant antics worthy of a sideshow farce. What else explains Jim Acosta's clownish aggression at Mr. Trump's latest press conference? Is it not unprofessional to repeatedly interrupt, and attempt to shout over, the President-elect? Does Mr. Acosta work for CNN—or the Jerry Springer Show?

The American press is now populated by many “accosting” Acostas. Their knee-jerk Republican-bashing is the primary reason for their systemic failures. For decades, the journalistic credo of objective, fact-based reporting has been completely abandoned. Even worse, the Fourth Estate has metastasized into the propagandist arm of the Democratic Party. To this end, they have been radicalized by progressive ideology. Therefore, they are incapable of performing their original watchdog function: to hold political leaders of every stripe accountable to the American people. It's no wonder why our democracy is so dysfunctional!

Rather than counterbalance a faceless big government bureaucracy—and insulated ruling class elite—the MSM has become the Democrats' 21^st century “Uncle Tom”. For proof, contrast the tone—and treatment—of Barack Obama versus that of President-elect Donald Trump. Dispositions of the two men notwithstanding, any neutral observer would acknowledge a profound difference. For eight years, Mr. Obama has been virtually deified by a fawning, servile media. However, Mr. Trump—not even in office yet—has had more harsh questions and rough treatment in his last press conference than Obama had in his entire presidency! In retrospect, has any reporter made such a public nuisance of himself at an Obama chinwag? Has anyone in the press corps held two-faced Obama to account for his lies and misrepresentations? Has anyone interrupted him, or shouted him down, for his failed domestic and international record? If reporters had actually done their job, America would be in a far better state than it is today.

Moreover, with their shrinking audience and waning influence, what little remains is now further eroded by the emergence of “fake news”. Seriously, does anyone in their right mind believe BuzzFeed's fantasy of Trump golden showers on prostitutes in a Russian hotel suite? As CNN promoted this nonsense, only the deluded safely locked away in metal institutions are likely to believe them going forward. Further, as Mr. Trump is a self-described germaphobe, did NBC (a major BuzzFeed investor) or CNN take that little fact into account? When two major media outfits won't differentiate between reality and fiction, the waters are only muddied to that whole industry's increasing detriment.

That's why Mr. Trump is not afforded a honeymoon: something every new president richly deserves. This utter lack of fair play makes The New York Times's current financial problems—or CNN's low ratings—no mystery. Americans are tired of being falsely labeled as deplorables by progressives. This holds true for Hillary Clinton style politicians and their contemptible attack dog news organizations.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Obama's Long Goodbye Kiss-Off

On January 10^th, Mr. Obama will make his “farewell address” in Chicago. Like January 20^th—when Donald Trump will become the 45^th President of the United States—Obama's exit, stage left, cannot come soon enough. Of course, one can safely assume Mr. Obama will not stray far from the spotlight. After all, he and his “no hope” missus have chosen to dwell in D.C. Indeed, the geography of current events is telling on many levels. For starters, their lavish mansion is a stone's throw from a mosque. So, given his Indonesian childhood, Mr. Obama can daily hear the sound that's prettiest to him: the Islamic call to prayer. Meanwhile, simultaneously, remaining a vocal—and visible—critic of Mr. Trump. An unwelcome thorn in the new president's side.

For aloof Obama, he (and similarly coddled Michelle) exists in a Great Gatsby fantasy of the carelessly rich and famous. Like playboy Gatsby, golfer Obama has repeatedly ignored glaring facts and distasteful realities. Why should he accept the true meaning of a Trump presidency now? It's far easier to pretend this crushing political repudiation is anything else but that. And who would blame him? Cocooned for eight years in the beltway bubble, this “pen and phone emperor” is used to having things his way. He was foolishly elected twice—despite the worst record of any U.S. president in the modern era. (No doubt future historians will shake their heads in universal disbelief at his reelection, and his inexplicable personal popularity today.)

So what to Obama that his party, the Democrats, is a smoking ruin? So is the country he has grossly mismanaged! Unfortunately, experience has taught insulated Obama that results, and consequences, don't matter. Therefore, he knows: everyone will always give him a pass. In our age, the superficial symbolism of skin has been a bewitching potion. In retrospect, the well-meaning, but wrongheaded embrace of this anti-American ideologue very nearly cost America its soul. A fascist in politics is the same as a scorpion in nature: both sting their host to death. Hence, the two-faced Obama phenomenon is explained.

The ultimate absurdity is Obama's “triumphant” return to the nation's shameful murder capital. (That's 2008 and 2012-16: five of the last eight years of his presidency). This third largest American city—appropriately nicknamed Chiraq—remains a war zone (including 762 homicides last year). What other domestic locale has suffered more under his inept ministrations? On average, he's only made one “policy” trip per year. Most visits, like this final one, are for a political speech. Otherwise, he avoids the subject of Chicago entirely. Isn't Barack Obama most personally responsible for the deplorable state of his home city? Ground zero of glaring problems he did nothing as president to solve?

Witness Obama's longstanding pattern: an empty, self-aggrandizing victory lap against a backdrop of obvious disaster. This circumstance encapsulates Obama's utter lack of character (as defined by MLK). Likewise, Chicago's dilapidated state remains a lasting testament to his blatant failure as president. Fate, like history, will make its unflattering judgment. Therefore, all of his lies and face-saving words will come to naught. Likewise, his “farewell” platitudes and baseless claims of success are meaningless.

Yet, unlike every former president before him, Mr. Obama isn't really going anywhere. Does anyone seriously believe citizen Obama will go quietly into night? Not this rule breaking, law disregarding, soon-to-be ex-president. Solely for pettiness and spite, he's tweaked an adversary (read: Russia) and an ally (read: Israel) on his way out the door. So much for honoring the presidential tradition of a smooth transition of power! To come full circle, this latest underhandedness reminds one of Obama's bait-and-switch campaign pledge of “hope and change”. Good riddance to this snake oil salesman.

Not that this phony is wise enough to shut his trap and skulk away. He won't. How does one know this? Well, Mr. Obama is both a deluded egotist and a faithful subscriber to anti-American pipe dreams. And beyond Inauguration Day, he'll rapidly discover that all future things can't be “transformed” to his unquenchable authoritarian desire.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Clarence Thomas: Ignored Conservative Icon

“The persistent efforts to undermine Justice Thomas and his compelling body of jurisprudence, and to ignore the spectacular Horatio Alger [read: rags to riches] story of his life, are part of a deliberate strategy to silence a conservative voice from someone who might serve as a transformative role model in the African-American community in particular, and the American community more broadly. Sad, really, that the taxpayer-financed institutions of our own government would join in such efforts.” – John Eastman, founding director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence

Disgraced accused serial rapist Bill Cosby is favorably mentioned. So is philandering adulterer, golfer Tiger Woods. One imagines a whole wing of the new Smithsonian African American museum is dedicated to Barack Obama: the worst, most polarizing president ever to hold the office. Why then in our “post-racial” age, is a black Supreme Court Justice—one of the two ever to serve on the nation's highest court—treated like a modern-day Ralph Ellison “Invisible Man”?

Since the Supreme Court's inception on September 26, 1789, a grand total of 112 justices have had the distinct honor to serve. (By comparison, for context, Donald Trump will become America's 45^th U.S. president on January 20, 2017.) To add further insult to injury, the only tangential reference to Justice Thomas is a political smear: a pin-back button reading “I Believe Anita Hill.” (Now ironically a race and gender anti-discrimination professor at Brandeis University, Ms. Hill famously accused the jurist of unsubstantiated sexual harassment at his 1991 Senate confirmation hearing.)

So, between references to Ms. Hill, Mr. Cosby and Mr. Woods, a rogue's gallery of the morally dubious are well-represented. (In fact, at the casual glance this ultramodern structure of sterile glass and oppressively ornate bronze mesh could easily be mistaken for a three tiered prison, an inverse step pyramid or a cubist slave ship.) Opened on the Washington mall on September 24, 2016, this 19^th Smithsonian housing 37,000 objects is a 379,000 square foot eyesore. Within, ample space has been lovingly dedicated to violent quasi-terrorist anarchist organizations like the Black Panthers and Black Lives Matter. Yet, among 12 exhibitions, a person most central to both American history—and specifically the black experience—is wrongly marginalized and negated.

Liberal fascists running a museum cannot render Clarence Thomas invisible. As one of the country's finest legal minds, he's overcome numerous barriers—poverty, oppression and unbelievable odds—to epitomize the American Dream. Solely for his conservative voice, Mr. Thomas's glaring omission from the National Museum of African American History and Culture is a travesty. This heartless institution advocates acceptance and inclusion while exposing to the world their blatant two-faced hypocrisy.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“Santa” Trump Toys with Romney

“The degree of difficulty in Romney's dive last night was greater than a reverse 4½ somersault in tuck position. Stunning flipflop” - November 30^th tweet by ABC News analyst Matthew Dowd on Mitt Romney's complete Donald Trump attitude reversal

When you're a President-elect billionaire—and the world literally is your oyster—what's wrong with a little payback as political sport? Perhaps some subtle score settling for a willing dupe with a history of being manipulated by Democrats? Therefore, what's more fitting than to have this outspoken naysayer publicly humiliate himself with his smirking flip-flopping?

A delicious fate for Mitt Romney: a modern-day GOP Benedict Arnold. In retrospect, was his blistering rant criticizing Mr. Trump last March actually Shakespearean jealousy for a man who ultimately accomplished what he failed to achieve in 2012? To this end, Mitt acknowledged:

“By the way, it’s not easy winning. I know that myself. He did something I tried to do and was unsuccessful in. He won the general election and he continues with a message of inclusion and bringing people together, and his vision is something which obviously connected with the American people in a very powerful way.”

Actually, anyone familiar with winning knows it's easy. It's the losing part—holding grievances—that's tough (ask Hillary!). In this light, publicly condemning Mr. Trump as a “phony,” a “con man” and a “fake” sounds like self-serving sour grapes. Without a shred of proof, how is Mr. Romney disloyalty to the person who became the voters' choice not character assassination?

Ah, the difference eight months and an election make. Today, this brown-noser finds Mr. Trump's dining company to be “enlightening and interesting and engaging.” This dynamic proves that red meat at dinner (in the come-on chance to become Secretary of State) has attracted from the woodwork Mr. Trump's most pesky political housefly. Now, it's sweet revenge to hear Mr. Romney buzzing a radically different tune: that of The Donald's praises.

Out of touch, two-faced Romney epitomizes establishment Republicans: the polished, weak willed status quo. He's another creature of Washington: precisely what Mr. Trump ran against. Therefore, it's sheer folly for anyone to believe Mitt's in serious contention for anything besides further disappointment. In fact, on the campaign trail, Mr. Trump declared:

“I said the guy is a stone cold loser, he choked and when you're a choker, you can never give a choker a second chance. It's too important. A choker is a choker.”

With such a pressing need for a new beginning for the country, why would Mr. Trump hamstring himself with someone he views in this way? Mr. Romney's failed track record in 2008—as well as his unsubstantiated Trump criticisms in 2016—cannot be disregarded. It's obvious Donald Trump doesn't suffer losers or fools—beyond perhaps toying with them a bit. Therefore, logically, this holiday season sycophants like Romney top Santa's naughty list. That roster doesn't include the next Secretary of State.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Trump's Thanksgiving Cooks MSM's Goose

“I think the media is on thin ice with the American people, very thin ice, and they ought to just … dial it [their obvious attacks on Trump] back.” – Hugh Hewett, conservative radio host on Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Now the election is over the MSM happily assumed their relationship with President-elect Donald Trump would be business-as-usual. Last Monday like turkeys to the Thanksgiving table, the elitist news executives and their figurehead anchors filed into Trump Tower with the expectation of what they hoped to get: continued unfettered access. What they got was taken to Trump's woodshed: a barrage of pointed words for a roomful of unrepentant liars, what The New York Post called a “f***ing firing squad.” Of course, the fact that this meeting was off-the-record did not dissuade these media titans from spilling their guts; probably as soon as they got out of The Donald's earshot. (This instance is yet another example of their constant underhanded dealing with Republicans.)

During the lecture Mr. Trump singled out CNN as the worst offender, but he was generally critical of the press for their widespread hatchet job reporting. Purveyors of liberal doctrine like The Washington Post's Dana Milbank called the meeting “part tongue-lashing, part perp walk.” And why not, given their habitual yellow journalism lacking even the semblance of objectivity?

While everyone is entitled to private opinions, journalism is supposed to be neutral and fact-based. Yet, leaf through any major metropolitan paper: at a rate of 93%, these “journalists” are nothing more than progressive ideologues spouting Democratic Party talking points. Despite eight years of Barack Obama's epic economic and international failures, they have nary a critical word for him. Likewise, they endorsed and defended Hillary Clinton's lawbreaking criminality—even going so far as to fundraise for her! Who but them did everything in their power to promote her (failed) candidacy?

Indeed, Donald Trump bested Crooked Hillary—and her Democratic sycophants and surrogates in the press. In a begrudging moment of clarity The Washington Post's Margaret Sullivan acknowledged:

“He has masterfully manipulated the media for the past 18 months—bullying reporters, garnering billions in free publicity and portraying journalists as part of the corporate structure that must be brought down so that the people can triumph.”

For decades, truer words have not been printed in the Post. Yet, despite her admission Ms. Sullivan's perspective is still way off the mark. This cog of the legacy press laughably believes her profession—as it currently stands—is nonpartisan:

“In fact, U.S. citizens need an independent press more than ever.”

Ah, if only that was so! In reality, the corporate media is corrupted by Democratic collaborators—“unbiased journalist” pretenders—like herself and Dana Milbank. These liberal scribblers misperceive Donald Trump—a truly independent voice for mainstream America—as the “problem” rather than themselves. Therefore, their petulant affect and defiant tone deafness are completely out of sync with our nation's character. As that is the case, how honest or valuable can their reporting be? The answer is not at all.

The reality remains that the journalistic neutrality of their ilk is nowhere present. Ms. Sullivan and her fellow travelers populating the MSM share responsibility and blame for this—not the president-elect. Theirs is classic psychological projection: unrecognized self-reproach. Recall, the Fourth Estate was intended to be generally adversarial to both political parties and government; keeping them theoretically accountable to the people by accurately reporting on their activities. Yet, this function is impossible due to the MSM's fundamental flaw: naked political bias. Even worse, the MSM only attempts to “watchdog” Republicans, but never their Democratic counterparts.

For them, the jaded editorial has become every newspaper story under the guise of “legitimate” news. And although unlikely to reform, they richly deserve Trump's Thanksgiving comeuppance. It's the gander's after election gravy: exposing two-faced media elites as squawking, progressive birdbrains. With only 9% of America trusting them, Trump has rightfully pigeonholed their whole worthless industry. After all, going forward who needs a divisive, anti-American propaganda machine lacking the merest shred of journalistic integrity?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Obama Agenda, Legacy On Life Support

“Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” – President Obama to former House Republican Whip Eric Cantor on January 23, 2009

Fast forward to the 2016 election: how the arrogantly smug have tumbled from Mount Olympus. The final firewall to preserve our republic from Mr. Obama's big government socialism—and his would-be successor Crooked Hillary—held with the surprise election of billionaire capitalist Donald Trump. Now, Mr. Obama's signature law—as well as most of his anti-American legacy—is headed to the trash bin of history.

Washington Times journalist Kelly Riddell's insightful historical analysis of Democrats' identity politics and voting patterns undone by their radical policies—and widespread economic failures—was marred by a seriously erroneous assertion. Regarding ObamaCare, she mistakenly wrote “virtually” no Republicans supported the March 2010 government takeover of 1/6 of the U.S. economy. The truth is that none—that's zero—of the 178 Republicans voted for the legislation. Ms. Riddell implied “some” making her otherwise excellent column murky.

It's easy to see why even a seasoned pro like Ms. Riddell gets confused. With gutless Republicans—cowed like sheep during the disastrous Obama years—it's often tough to tell the difference between them and progressives. In 2015 under RINO House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), the GOP capitulated to Democrats with the passage of a two-pronged 2,242 page debt-busting 1.8 trillion spending behemoth. Like liberals, Mr. Ryan traitorously pushed America to the brink of economic ruin: nearly a $20 trillion debt (almost half accumulated solely during Barack Obama's presidency). Even worse, the expenditures funded rabble-rouser Obama's dystopian priorities. The highlights include:

• Division F: Allows work permits, entitlements, tax credits and federal benefits for 700,000 illegal aliens; and does not prohibit funding of Barack Obama's unconstitutional executive action (his 2012 de facto executive amnesty for “DREAMers” known as Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals (DACA))
• Revives and expands a controversial provision of the H-2B visa program (quadrupling visas for unskilled guest workers to more than 250,000 while in effect denying Americans employment). In the Senate this failed legislation was promoted by Marco Rubio's Gang of Eight (bankrolled by fascist billionaire George Soros who also finances Black Lives Matter anarchy)
• Division B Title II: Funding sanctuary cities like San Francisco (where Kate Steinle was killed by a criminal illegal alien), and killing zone Chicago (where former Obama flunky Mayor Rahm Emanuel recently pledged to ignore federal law, and publicly thumbed his nose at president-elect Donald Trump)
• Division H Title II (Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)) and Division K (Department of State) contain unrestricted appropriations which oversee domestic refugee admissions (including border jumpers, and resettled migrants from Jihadist regions of the world)
• Ryan’s bill does not penalize foreign countries that refuse to repatriate criminal aliens, or counteract Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson's policy of freely releasing criminal aliens back into society and shielding entire categories of them from immigration laws
• Ryan's Omnibus eliminates hard-fought GOP spending caps funding his predecessor Boehner's budget deal with Obama—raised the debt ceiling through March of 2017—and increases spending by $112 billion over two years
• Ryan's bill fails to provide funds to complete the 700-mile double-layer border fence that Congress promised the American people

Despite Paul Ryan's often lofty rhetoric—and the little “R” by his name—this renominated House Speaker is a spineless sell-out. Beyond a lip service pledge of a “fresh start,” Ryan misused the House's vital power of the purse to perpetuate more of the same: Mr. Obama's anti-American “transformation.” Yet, thanks to the pro-America electorate on Election Day all is not lost. Soon there will be a new big dog in town (in the form of president-elect Donald Trump) and one confidently anticipates an instantaneous about-face from 'not ready yet' two-faced Paulie.

Therefore, what's now crystal clear is that overreaching Barack Obama's “pen and phone achievements”—and progressive agenda—are finally on the chopping block. They hang precariously not from Damocles' sword, but from the tip of “45's” Montblanc and a Mike Pence corralled godsend of a Republican Congress.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Hillary Clinton: Democrats' Worst “Nixon”

Two-faced Hillary Clinton is a Washington insider, a coddled elitist who has always ignored “the rules.” Whether it's law, ethics, morality and truth, nothing is an impediment to her own interests and presidential ambitions. History has repeated demonstrated that this habitual liar will say, do and promise anything—and pathologically deny everything—to return to the White House. On the eve of the 2016 presidential election, the fix is in in ways Richard “Watergate” Nixon could not imagine.

There's never been proof that Mr. Nixon was behind the DNC break in or burglary, but there is no doubt that Hillary Clinton ordered various unsecured “Clintonmail.com” private computer servers. Her corrupt purpose: to hide her pay for play influence peddling at the State Department in exchange for donations to the 2 billion dollar slush fund that is her and Bill's “charitable” Clinton Family Foundation. That self-serving corruption violates Title 18 U.S. Code Section 201 that carries with it a measly two years in prison.

Indeed, now exonerated former governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) and his wife were prosecuted for receiving “gifts from political friends.” Even though there was no evidence of Clintonesque favors granted, when it comes to Republicans even a whiff of wrongdoing is ruinous. Yet, blatant lawbreaking (read: Server-gate) and quid pro quo politics (read: Charity-gate) are standard operating procedures for the Clintons. Who else has gotten away with making a 153 million in six figure “speeches” for campaign contributors? Is it not wrong that more than half of non-government people who met with Mrs. Clinton at the State Department were Foundation donors? One could fill the Encyclopaedia Britannica with the Clintons' evasions and lies.

Naturally, money-grubbing Hillary didn't want her soft “extortion” exposed to government oversight (or the American electorate). Yet, unauthorized storing and transmitting classified American secrets—which Mrs. Clinton did for personal convenience—is treason. Her crimes make Mr. Nixon's wrongdoing laughably quaint by comparison. Specifically, Mrs. Clinton has violated Title 18 U.S. Code Section 793. As 110 emails were found, that's ten years for each separate offense or 1,100 years in the slammer. That's over a millennium in the big house—not more years in the White House.

The peak of this Mount Everest of Clintonian corruption is the reality the Hillary's been hacked at least five times by bad actors (technically “unknown parties”). This reality was leaked to Bret Baier of Fox News by patriotic underlings in the FBI disgusted with their wishy-washy weasel of a Director James Comey. From the FBI to the DOJ to Obama's White House, all have repeatedly ignored—and abetted—clear criminality: every political calculation is designed to keep corrupt Democrats in power at grave detriment to the country.

At least Richard Nixon had the decency to resign rather than do further damage. He's small potatoes compared to Hillary Clinton. With her, America gets a shameless 21^st century Benedict Arnold: a person absolutely unfit for local dogcatcher let alone the next U.S. president.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976