Patterico's Pontifications

3/25/2017

Sanctuary Cities Prevent Wealthy Communities From Becoming Paralyzed And Stuck With Dirty Houses

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:35 am

[guest post by Dana]

The once truly Golden State has descended to this:

State Attorney General Xavier Becerra has filed a brief in in support of a lawsuit filed by Santa Clara County challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting sanctuary cities.

The amicus brief filed Wednesday says Trump’s order threatens to withdraw federal funds from states and cities that don’t help the federal government enforce immigration laws.

Santa Clara County last month asked a federal judge to block Trump’s executive order threatening the loss of nearly $1.7 billion in federal funds to local governments.

Becerra says he has a responsibility to protect state laws and policies that ensure public safety and protect the constitutional rights of residents.

He adds that Trump’s attempt to “hijack” state and local resources to do the Trump Administration’s bidding raises serious constitutional questions.

Becerra conveniently ignores that it is the law that the Trump administration seeks to enforce, not a whimsical, willy-nilly, pull-it-out-of-your-hat bidding. Becerra certainly does have a responsibility to protect state laws and policies that ensure public safety and protect the constitutional rights of residents, so why is he selectively exercising that responsibility to benefit just 6% of the state’s population? Where does that leave the rights and safety of the other 94%?

Anyway, to pile onto the absurdity, the uber-wealthy beach community of Malibu has jumped on the state’s sanctuary movement. Spearheading the effort is none other than onetime president – on television anyway – Martin Sheen. (The last time we saw Sheen was during the election when he channeled President Bartlett from the West Wing, and implored Republican members of the Electoral College not to vote for Donald Trump.)

Ah, yes, nothing says solidarity quite like the wealthy 1% desperate to maintain their lifestyles of luxury and ease:

The discussion inside Malibu City Hall over whether to become a sanctuary city last week bore the usual hallmarks of the heated national debate over illegal immigration.

While some residents praised the proposal, others blamed those who are in the country illegally for crime and called the move a thinly disguised rebuke of President Trump.

But it being Malibu, there was a celebrity twist. The idea was inspired by one of the town’s many famous residents: actor Martin Sheen. In December, he grabbed the lectern during a City Council meeting and — as if conjuring his inner President Josiah Bartlet from “The West Wing” — urged the city to become a sanctuary city.

Like many sanctuary city resolutions, Malibu’s is largely symbolic. Backers said the move, which passed on a 3-2 council vote, is a chance for Malibu’s privileged to stand up for the city’s vulnerable population.

Malibu is about 92% white and one of L.A. County’s wealthiest cities. Everyone agrees the city has workers who are not authorized to be in the United States, and they tend to serve the food at upscale eateries, clean the beachside mansions, look after children and keep the landscaping looking lush.

And confirming just how utterly out of touch with the every-man the uber-wealthy residents of Malibu are, Mikke Pierson, a supporter of the resolution, commented:

[I]t’s hard to imagine a Malibu without the many immigrants who toil there. That why expressing support for people who are in the country illegally is so important, he said.

“Heck … we would be paralyzed and no one’s houses would be cleaned,” the former surf shop owner said.

Paralyzed!

In a city where the median price of homes currently on the market is nearly $3.9 million, quite obviously illegal immigrants working in Malibu are compelled to make long commutes to the beach community from places like South Los Angeles and Compton where they can afford to live.

Juan Lopez, who works in Malibu, is quoted:

Most immigrants just want to work, and they end up doing jobs that hardly anyone else, let alone most Americans, want to do.

In each house, there’s one immigrant here. You see Spanish speakers taking care of babies in every house. They help people here.

Gosh, one might suppose that Malibu seeks to protect its own little service industry because the city would come to a grinding halt if residents had to do their own yard work, take care of their own children, and cook their own meals. Obviously, hiring those who are here legally and without fear of being reported would come at a much higher price than the wealthy residents of Malibu are willing to pay.

Self-serving elitism is never an attractive look – no matter how expensive the rags. And given that it has been the residents of Malibu who have worked exceedingly hard to keep illegal immigrants and other non-residents off their the public beaches in Malibu, that they now deem themselves a “sanctuary city” is spectacularly rich, indeed.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

3/24/2017

Paul Ryan: There Is A Path To Repealing ObamaCare Without 60 Votes In The Senate

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:59 pm

OK, I admit it: I cheated a little bit in the headline, by quoting Paul Ryan from 2016, rather than Paul “We’re Done Here” Ryan from 2017. But the principle is the same, even if the GOP wants to pretend it’s now impossible:

“It’s no surprise that someone named Obama vetoed a bill repealing Obamacare,” Ryan said in a statement.

“But here’s the thing. The idea that Obamacare is the law of the land for good is a myth. This law will collapse under its own weight, or it will be repealed. Because all those rules and procedures Senate Democrats have used to block us from doing this? That’s all history,” he added. “We have now shown that there is a clear path to repealing Obamacare without 60 votes in the Senate. So, next year, if we’re sending this bill to a Republican president, it will get signed into law.”

It’s next year, Paul Ryan. It’s next year, right now. You have a Republican president.

Send him the same bill. He’ll have no choice but to sign it into law.

Thanks to commenter JoeofPa.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

GOP Lawmaker: Previous ObamaCare Repeal Votes Were a Fraud

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:09 pm

Yup, this is pretty clear.

If the quote from Rep. Joe Barton isn’t showing up properly in your browser, I’ll repeat it. It deserves to be repeated anyway.

Reporters asked why, after Republicans held dozens of nearly-unanimous votes to repeal ObamaCare under President Obama, they were getting cold feet now that they control the levers of power.

“Sometimes you’re playing Fantasy Football and sometimes you’re in the real game,” he admitted. “We knew the President, if we could get a repeal bill to his desk, it would almost certainly be vetoed. This time we knew if it got to the President’s desk it would be signed.”

That’s about as blatant an admission of political fraud as you are ever likely to see.

Confirming that this was kabuki are Paul Ryan’s and Donald Trump’s reactions. Paul Ryan says they’re moving on from health care. After a very, very, very short effort. Trump is glad he got it out of the way:

Frauds. Charlatans. Liars.

I can’t exit the post without some reminders of how easy it was going to be:

And this:

My first day in office I’m going to ask Congress to put a bill on my desk getting rid of this disastrous law, and replacing it with reforms that expand choice, freedom, affordability. You’re going to have such great health care at a tiny fraction of the cost, and it’s gonna be so easy.

Con artists.

Today’s lack of a vote was glorious. We avoided a disaster. But giving up now? Unforgivable.

Pass the real repeal you promised.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

I Hope He Fails

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:15 am

As President Trump tries to strongarm Freedom Caucus members into voting for TrumpCare, I have just one thing to say:

I hope he fails.

Those words might sound familiar if you were following politics eight years ago. You youngsters may have to Google it.

Naturally, I want Donald Trump to succeed at the things he seeks to do that limit government and restore freedom. Appointing excellent Supreme Court justices and slashing regulation are some of the things I hope he succeeds in doing — and so far, so good.

But when it comes to putting political pressure on the few people in Congress who are for freedom, to get them to vote for TrumpCare, I do not want him to succeed.

TrumpCare retains the basic conceit of ObamaCare: that health care can be centrally planned. It must be voted down.

And then the GOP must deliver on what they promised: full repeal.

I want the country to succeed. And so, in this endeavor, I hope he fails.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

3/23/2017

There Is No Feminism. . .

Filed under: General — JVW @ 11:09 pm

[guest post by JVW]

. . . quite like whiny Dog Trainer op-ed writer feminism.

– JVW

Nunes Spokesperson: Nunes Had No Idea What He Was Talking About

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:53 pm

They didn’t say that in so many words, mind you. But that’s what they said.

This is your big vindication:

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, R-Calif., does not know “for sure” whether President Donald Trump or members of his transition team were even on the phone calls or other communications now being cited as partial vindication for the president’s wiretapping claims against the Obama administration, according to a spokesperson.

“He said he’ll have to get all the documents he requested from the [intelligence community] about this before he knows for sure,” a spokesperson for Nunes said Thursday. Nunes was a member of the Trump transition team executive committee.

So the incidental collection of material relating to Trump’s team didn’t even necessarily involve any communications in which Trump’s team took part. In other words, for all this sh[vowel deleted]thead Nunes knows, the Big Reveal is people talking about Trump or members of his team?

Are you kidding me? This is what this clown held a press conference about?

Trumpalos

TRUMP VINDICATED!!!1!ELEVENTY!!!!11! NO TAKEBACKS ANYTHING ELSE IS JUST LAWYERS PARSING WORDS

/Trumpalos

If anyone here is vindicated, it’s me — since I warned people yesterday afternoon that Nunes appeared to be contradicting himself all over the place and was not inspiring confidence.

I’m willing to believe there was scandalous behavior on the part of many intelligence officials. That is a separate question from the idiot Donald Trump being even close to right about anything. Please keep claiming he was, Trumpalos. I enjoy watching you beclown yourselves.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

Trump: Why Should I Apologize for Tying Ted Cruz’s Dad to Lee Harvey Oswald?

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:00 am

On a day when Donald Trump is trying to get the House to pass TrumpCare (I hope he fails, by the way) and the Senate’s business is overshadowed by the Gorsuch hearings, we have a new interview in which Trump plays the jackass. And nowhere is his jackassery more on display than in this comment:

But you would agree also that some of the things you have said haven’t been true. You say that Ted Cruz’s father was with Lee Harvey Oswald.

Well that was in a newspaper. No, no, I like Ted Cruz, he’s a friend of mine. But that was in the newspaper. I wasn’t, I didn’t say that. I was referring to a newspaper. A Ted Cruz article referred to a newspaper story with, had a picture of Ted Cruz, his father, and Lee Harvey Oswald, having breakfast.

That gets close to the heart…

Why do you say that I have to apologize? I’m just quoting the newspaper, just like I quoted the judge the other day, Judge Napolitano, I quoted Judge Napolitano, just like I quoted Bret Baier, I mean Bret Baier mentioned the word wiretap. Now he can now deny it, or whatever he is doing, you know. But I watched Bret Baier, and he used that term. I have a lot of respect for Judge Napolitano, and he said that three sources have told him things that would make me right. I don’t know where he has gone with it since then. But I’m quoting highly respected people from highly respected television networks.

This is why it’s difficult for me to get that upset if there’s a bogus story about Trump in a newspaper or on TV. I still criticize such stories, out of a sense of intellectual honesty, but I don’t feel the same fervor that I feel when almost any other Republican is unfairly attacked. Because that’s the standard he sets: If it appears in some media outlet or even blog and it benefits me, I quote it. No matter how bogus the story obviously is, I quote it. And I never apologize, even if the story was clearly wrong.

That’s the standard you want to set? OK. Live by the bogus story, die by the bogus story.

I won’t feel sorry for you.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

Sen. Chuck Schumer Apparently Not Too Interested In Making Sure The People’s Business Is Getting Done

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:05 am

[guest post by Dana]

This morning, Sen. Chuck Schumer announced that he’s a “no” on Judge Gorsuch:

Untitled

Reminding us of that this is yet more partisan hypocrisy, here’s what Sen. Schumer had to say back in January when the Senate Republicans exercised their prerogative not to give President Obama’s nominee a hearing:

“The Supreme Court handles ‘the people’s business,’ as President Reagan put it. Every day that goes by without a ninth justice is another day the American people’s business is not getting done.”

Sen. Schumer’s grandstanding notwithstanding, Allahpundit points out:

In this year of all years, with the left pushing Schumer to filibuster Gorsuch on principle to avenge Merrick Garland’s honor or whatever, Gorsuch should want to present himself as being as unobjectionable as humanly possible. That way, if Schumer filibusters anyway, McConnell can nuke the filibuster with little political problem: Judge Gorsuch is eminently qualified, he’ll say (correctly), he gave not a single answer at his hearing that would disqualify him from this position (also correct), therefore Schumer’s obstruction is petulant and illegitimate and deserves to be overridden with brute force.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

3/22/2017

CNN: Trump Folks May Have Possibly Coordinated with Russia, Sources Might Say. Possibly.

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:35 pm

This is CNN:

The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, US officials told CNN.

This is partly what FBI Director James Comey was referring to when he made a bombshell announcement Monday before Congress that the FBI is investigating the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, according to one source.

The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those U.S. officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing.

Wow. So some anonymous sources, based on evidence we can’t see, have inconclusive maybes that suggest possibly there could have been this thing that happened.

After all the stories Big Media presents us with that fizzle out, forgive me if my attitude is: wake me up when you have actual evidence.

I’m really tired of this. And, just to piss off everybody in an equal opportunity fashion: I’m equally tired of all the partisans out there who are declaiming that this Nunes character somehow proved that Donald Trump was surveilled and wiretapped and PEOPLE OWE DONALD TRUMP A BIG APOLOGY!!!!1!!111!!!!1!! (If this confuses you, read Jay Caruso and learn about incidental collection. It ain’t targeted surveillance and it ain’t wiretapping.)

Good Lord. Settle down, people.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Confirms Info Was Collected On Trump Transition Team

Filed under: General — Dana @ 2:08 pm

[guest post by Dana]

But, as Chairman Nunes (and Rep. Adam Schiff) make clear, they do not have any evidence supporting President Trump’s claim that President Obama wire-tapped Trump Tower before the election.

President Trump told CNN that he feels “somewhat vindicated” after being personally briefed by Chairman Nunes about this:

The U.S. intelligence community incidentally collected information on members of President Trump’s transition team and the information was “widely disseminated” in intelligence reports, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said Wednesday.

“I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions, the intelligence community collected information on U.S. individuals involved in the Trump transition,” Nunes told reporters.

“Details about U.S. persons involved in the incoming administration with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reports.”

He said that “additional names” of Trump transition officials had been unmasked in the intelligence reports and indicated that Trump’s communications may have been swept up as well.

The intelligence collected has nothing to do with Russia or the investigation into Moscow’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election, according to Nunes.

“I want to be clear — none of this surveillance was related to Russia or the investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team,” Nunes said.

Professor Reynolds notes:

It’s the “widely disseminated” part that may be felonious.

Gabriel Malor clarifies the terminology:

1

2

…and follows it with the obvious question:

4

Two takeaways:

3

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1833 secs.