Displaying posts published in

October 2019

Breaking the Administrative State Ned Ryun

https://amgreatness.com/2019/10/18/breaking-the-administrative-state/

There can only be one winner in the struggle between the president and the permanent bureaucracy if America has any hope of the republic surviving.

Everyone who knows American history understands that what we are experiencing today was almost inevitable. The Russia-collusion hoax, Ukraine-gate, Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation circus, all of the non-stop, relentless attacks on Donald Trump and his administration from the day he was sworn in were bound to happen.

The political moment we are living through is not the usual one. This is more than the corporate leftist media and Democratic attacks to which we’ve become accustomed against any Republican, including the usual tripe about how Bush or (pick a name) is a Nazi and the election of said Republican signals the end of days. This with Trump is about so much more.

James Piereson described it best this week at a conference co-sponsored by American Greatness and The New Criterion: we’re used to domestic politics, where the discussions are over the size of tax cuts, etc. What we are seeing today is vicious regime politics and a struggle over who is really in charge of this country’s governmental agencies. The duly elected president of the United States? Or players inside of that administrative state, along with their mouthpieces in the media?

None of these absurd fairytales of collusion were ever really about actual suspicions that Trump was somehow tied to Putin. (Though certainly many Americans bought the story.) The breathless nonstop reporting by the corporate leftist media can be explained by one of two possible causes either they are too stupid to understand what is actually taking place (a perfectly reasonable argument) or they are part and parcel of the attempted regime change from the start.

This is all about who truly decides.

Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Witness Tampering Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2019/10/18/adam-schiffs-impeachment-witness-tampering/

The House Intelligence Committee chairman has lied with impunity to the American public and to Congress. Now he’s running a secret inquiry, withholding evidence from colleagues, and may have coached the “whistleblower” behind Ukraine-gate.

House Republicans on Monday will attempt to force a vote to censure Representative Adam Schiff (D.-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The resolution, authored by Rep. Andy Biggs (R.-Ariz.), has 170 Republican co-sponsors. (It’s unclear why the remaining 27 GOP congressmen have not signed on.)

The motion condemns Schiff for actions that “misled the American people, bring disrepute upon the House of Representatives, and make a mockery of the impeachment process, one of this chamber’s most solemn constitutional duties.” It lists several specific offenses, including Schiff’s repeated claims that he possessed solid evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, and his intentional misrepresentation of the July phone call between Trump and Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

If Schiff were a Republican, his own colleagues would have dispatched him long ago. Compare the way Schiff’s caucus is condoning his misdeeds with the way House Republicans in 2017 signed on to a bogus House ethics inquiry into Rep. Devin Nunes (R.-Calif.), sidelining his nascent investigation into the corrupt origins of the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe for eight crucial months. (He was cleared of any wrongdoing.)

Schiff has lied with impunity to the American public and to Congress. He is suspected of leaking nonpublic, and in some instances, classified material to the press.

At the same time, Schiff is denying access to his secret impeachment proceedings and withholding information from House members. Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee sent a letter to Schiff on Friday, accusing him of failing to furnish documents related to his “impeachment inquiry,” a clear violation of House rules. Yet Schiff remains a media darling and a hero of #TheResistance.

The Defenestration of Domingo written by Heather Mac Donald

https://quillette.com/2019/10/18/the-defenestration-of-domingo/

The #MeToo movement has ended the U.S. career of legendary 78-year-old Spanish tenor Placido Domingo, one of classical music’s greatest ambassadors and impresarios. For nearly half a century, his intense stage presence and warm, soaring voice captivated opera audiences; during the 1990s, he reached millions of new listeners as a member of the itinerant Three Tenors. In recent years, long after most singers have retired from the stage, he has continued a grueling international performance schedule, now singing baritone roles with remarkable pitch control and legato.

Domingo’s entrepreneurial drive has been as untiring as his stage career. He was pivotal in creating Los Angeles’s first full-time opera company, LA Opera, the culmination of two decades of artistic diplomacy in Southern California. As LA Opera’s general director, he wooed philanthropic support from philistine Hollywood and the city’s political class. In 1993, he founded the international opera competition, Operalia, one of several institutions he has established to promote young singers. He led the Washington National Opera as general director from 1996 to 2011, and his conducting career has spanned opera pits and concert stages around the world.

He has championed the unjustly neglected Spanish opera form, Zarzuela, which he sang growing up in Mexico City, and his charitable endeavors have extended beyond classical music; he led fundraising for Mexico City following its catastrophic earthquake in 1985. Testimonials to his kindness, generosity, and bottomless work ethic abound. Helga Rabl-Stadler, the president of the Salzburg Festival, the most important classical music gathering in the world, recently praised Domingo’s “appreciative treatment” of festival employees: “He knows every name, from the concierge to the secretary; he never fails to thank anyone performing even the smallest service for him.”

On August 13, 2019, however, the AP announced that nine females, all but one anonymous, were accusing Domingo of making unwanted sexual advances decades ago. The accusers—chorus singers, a few small-time soloists, and one ballet dancer—alleged wet kisses, solicitations to rehearse at his apartment, whispered blandishments while on stage, a hand down a shirt or up a skirt in cabs, and persistent phone calls.

Mark Steyn on Canada

https://www.steynonline.com/9791/the-banana-vote-song-tallying-time

The Prime Minister of Canada is a pathological narcissist weirdo. Last year’s tour of India dressed as a Bollywood bridesmaid strongly suggested as much, and his multiple blackface capers stretching into early middle age merely confirm it. The Liberal establishment, wittingly or not, chose to build a personality cult around the pathological weirdo. In the normal course of events, and in a healthy functioning polity, that would invite a strong rebuke from the electorate.

Yet, as we game out various likely scenarios for Monday night’s results, that strong rebuke appears to be the one thing that’s not on the cards. If anything, the revelation that Justin Trudeau is Jolson Trudeau only confirmed the Grits and the media in their determination to drag the Prime Minstrel over the finish line: After four years of hammering anyone who dissents from the New Trudeaupia as a hateful racist, the exposure of Justin as a shallow over-promoted nitwit who can’t even be left alone with a tub of shoe polish is too much: it taints them, it daubs them with Justin’s Kiwi, all the clever people who presume to lecture the ignorant masses and regulate and coerce them into the new virtues. For if the coolest PM on the planet is just a third-rate mammy singer who wants you to tally his banana, what does that say about the backstage boys and the media panjandrums who anointed him “because it’s 2015”?

So they have worked hard to contain the damage. On Monday night, absent a massive polling upset, everyone is expecting either (if he holds it together) a Liberal minority government led by Trudeau or (if not) a Conservative minority government led by Andrew Scheer. In a parliamentary democracy, what matters is not who wins the most seats but who can command a majority in the House of Commons – which is why the media and the Tory leadership are now engaged in a semi-literate constitutional dispute about whether, in the Westminster system, the Queen invites the outgoing PM or the head of the largest party to take first crack at forming a government.

China’s Maritime Strategic Challenge By Douglas J. Feith & Admiral Gary Roughead

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/china-maritime-threat-us-allies-must-work-together-to-meet-challenge/

America and its allies must cooperate to counter the military-commercial threat.

C hina is working to end U.S. military predominance in Asia, and likely beyond. This forces U.S. officials to rethink how military security relates to trade and investment. U.S. officials are urging friends around the world to join the reexamination.

How to regulate its business and other relations with China is the greatest strategic challenge facing the United States. The answer is not to stop all trade with China; that is neither necessary nor practical. But obliviousness is not the answer, either. It would be reckless to ignore the role of commercial transactions in China’s national-security strategy.

The challenge has become reasonably clear only in the past half-dozen years or so. U.S. officials are just beginning to develop the necessary new laws and policies and to discuss — and sometimes quarrel — with allies about how to counter Chinese ambitions regarding 5G Internet infrastructure, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, advanced manufacturing technology, cyber operations, influence over critical facilities (e.g. seaports), and other militarily sensitive matters.

Chinese president Xi Jinping has moved China into a new era. He declares that China stands “tall and firm” and should now “take centre stage in the world.” China is asserting itself, claiming, for example, sovereignty over vast areas in the South China Sea long widely recognized as international waters. It presses those claims against the Philippines, Japan, Vietnam, and other neighbors. It threatens them, punishing some by attacking their fishermen and sinking their boats. The way Chinese leaders abuse their neighbors is of a piece with the anti-democratic brutality of their rule in China.

China aspires to become a maritime great power and is well on its way. Having created a formidable regional navy, President Xi is building the capability for what Chinese doctrine calls “open seas protection.” Through prolific naval shipbuilding; deployment of a fleet of aircraft carriers, amphibious ships, surface vessels, and submarines; development of missiles; conduct of long-range missions; and establishment of numerous facilities abroad that can facilitate blue-water naval operations, China shows its determination to operate a global maritime force. In August 2017, it inaugurated its first overseas military base in Djibouti, at the chokepoint between, on the one side, the Indian Ocean, and on the other, the Red Sea, Suez Canal, and Mediterranean.

President Xi’s maritime strategy extends beyond strictly military vessels. China operates one of the world’s largest commercial shipping fleets and the largest distant-waters fishing fleet. It is a world leader in commercial shipbuilding. If the U.S. naval presence in strategic locations wanes further and China maintains its trajectory, China will in time enjoy a sea-control advantage.

Schiff caught tampering with another witness By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/schiff_caught_tampering_with_another_witness.html

Adam Schiff is at it again, tampering with witnesses.

Yesterday, he got caught trying to shove words into a witness’s mouth, to make him say things he didn’t want to say. I wrote about that here.

Today, he’s doing something just as bad, getting together with other witnesses and working out a pre-coordinated story for the coming show trial.

According to Breitbart News:

Itinerary for a trip to Ukraine in August organized by the Atlantic Council think tank reveals that a staffer on Rep. Adam Schiff’s House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held a meeting during the trip with acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, now a key witness for Democrats pursuing impeachment.

The Atlantic Council is funded by and works in partnership with Burisma, the natural gas company at the center of allegations regarding Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

Taylor has been called by House Democrats to appear next week to provide a deposition as part of the investigation being led by Schiff into President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Against precedent, and under the cover of secrecy, he’s holding hearings to impeach President Trump, loudly stating that he’s doing it secretly to make sure the Trump-linked witnesses don’t coordinate to get their stories straight.

Gabbard Responds to Hillary’s Russia Attacks, Challenges Her to Join Dem Primary By Tobias Hoonhout

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/tulsi-gabbard-responds-to-hillary-clinton-russia-attacks-challenges-her-to-join-democratic-primary/

After Hillary Clinton suggested that the Russian government was “grooming” her for a third-party run in the 2020 presidential elections, Hawaii representative and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard returned fire Friday afternoon, challenging the 2016 Democratic nominee to join her in the 2020 primaries.

In a fiery response to Clinton’s accusation, Gabbard called the former secretary of state “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long.”

The staunchly non-interventionist Gabbard has been consistently dogged by suggestions that her campaign panders to the alt-right and Russia. During Tuesday night’s Democratic debate, she accused CNN and the New York Times, who were co-hosting the event, of smearing her with “completely despicable coverage.”

Clinton made headlines earlier Friday for suggesting that Gabbard was “the favorite of the Russians” among the field, and that the Kremlin was “grooming” her for a “vigorous third-party challenge in the key states” in 2020.

Hillary Clinton Engages In Insane Conspiracy Theory Attacking Tulsi Gabbard By Tristan Justice

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/18/hillary-clinton-engages-in-insane-conspiracy-theory-attacking-tulsi-gabbard/

Former secretary of state and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton claimed Tuesday that the Russians are propping up U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii for a third-party presidential run in 2020.

“I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” Clinton said of Russia’s involvement in the next presidential election on former Obama White House advisor David Plouffe’s podcast. “She’s the favorite of the Russians.”

During the interview, Clinton also branded former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein as a Russian asset.

“That’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which, she might not ’cause she’s also a Russian asset.” Clinton added. “She’s a Russian asset, totally. They know they can’t win without a third-party candidate. So I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee you they will have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most needed.”

Pelosi’s impeachment drive is all politics, no law Andrew C. McCarthy

https://nypost.com/2019/10/16/pelosis-impeachment-drive-is-all-politics-no-law/

President Trump won’t budge: He refuses to comply with demands for information because the House has not formally voted to conduct an impeachment inquiry.

House Democrats won’t budge: Speaker Nancy Pelosi says nothing requires the House to vote for an impeachment inquiry before conducting one.

So who is right? They both are.

We are an over-lawyered society that likes to see itself as governed by the rule of law. In truth, our fundamental law, the Constitution, is about the division of political authority — particularly between the Congress and the executive, the federal government’s political branches.

The ultimate check on presidential power is impeachment. Article I vests the sole power over impeachment in the House of Representatives. (The Senate is assigned the sole power to conduct impeachment trials and decide whether the president should be removed from office.)

Often overlooked, though, is a critical constitutional check on Congress: It is powerless to enforce its own laws and demands for information. Only the president can execute. Congress needs the executive branch’s cooperation.

When presidents believe congressional actions are unconstitutional, they often refuse to cooperate. Congress may threaten contempt and impeachment, but it cannot make the president comply. Our brows furrow as we try to sort out the legal ramifications of all this. But in the main, the fallout is not a legal dispute; it is a political contest.

The Constitution is designed to promote both cooperation and competition between the political branches. Often, the judiciary stays out of these duels, prudently reasoning that the Framers endowed the executive and the legislature with powerful tools to confront each other.

Maneuvering To Force The U.S. To Accept Immigrants Who Will Become Public Charges Francis Menton

https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?e=a9fdc67db9&u=9d011a88d8fe324cae8c084c5&

“Vile.” “Repugnant to the American dream.” “Cruel.” “Callous and despicable.” “An abhorrent act of moral terrorism.” These are just a few of the comments that have been uttered in the past few weeks with respect to a policy change recently announced by the federal government. (These comments come, respectively, from Attorney General Xavier Bacerra of California, U.S. District Judge George Daniels, Congresswoman Grace Meng (D-NY), Congresswoman Judy Chu (D-CA), and Families USA.)

I know what you are thinking: What completely sensible thing has the Trump administration done now?

The quoted comments all relate to a so-called “final rule” issued by the Department of Homeland Security in the Federal Register on August 14, scheduled to take effect on October 15, on the subject of “Inadmissibility [for immigration] Based on Public Charge Grounds.”

So what is this new rule, and what about it has caused the progressive left to go completely berserk?

Here’s my take: Since Immigration Act of 1882, the U.S. immigration statutes have in clear terms explicitly instructed that entry be denied to any person deemed “unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” Despite the rather explicit language of Congress, the Clinton administration, in “guidance” issued in 1999, found a way to effectively read this provision out of the statute and admit large numbers of immigrants without regard to whether they were likely to become, or even were already, public charges. The Trump administration has now specified a basis on which the statute can and will be enforced as written and intended. Cue the outrage!

Let’s go through this in some more detail. The Immigration Act of 1882 was the very first general immigration statute in the U.S., so the “public charge” basis for exclusion of an applicant for a visa has existed for as long as we have had immigration laws. The relevant language has changed somewhat over the years, as extensive amendments and updates to immigration laws have been enacted; however, as far as I can determine, none of the changes have been material. Here is the current version of the “public charge” provision, as codified at 8 U.S.C. Section 1182(a)(4):