Trump’s budget is not the dire killing kids and Grandma

So much all of this gloom and doom about the 2018 Budget proposal by Trump. Today a guest post by Mustang with his interesting analysis.

America’s Economic Security

Diaper-headed persons aren’t the only folk capable of throwing bombs.  OMB Director Mick Mulvaney threw one recently and by every measure, the bomb was one of those multiple warhead configurations.  At this early stage, I think it would be fair to say that Trump’s plan for achieving America’s economic security has the leftists quaking in their designer shoes. Here first the Mulvaney presser; it gets interesting around the 9:30 mark.  It is worthy of a few minutes of your time.  For more background on Mulvaney, click here.

The Trump bill calls for a spending cut of $1.74 trillion.  No surprise, the usual suspects are running around proclaiming the bill is dead on arrival.  How’s this for optimism?

In criticizing the previous administration, Mulvaney stated, “Look, if you borrow money … if I take money from you and have no intention of giving it back, that’s not borrowing; it’s theft.”  Rather, Mulvaney stated that he’s offering the American people a 3% growth rate, and a balanced budget in ten years … and he says the Trump administration can do this without touching Social Security and Medicare.

 In any case, the way I see it, Mulvaney’s approach seems to be a centrist position; helping people by weaning them off welfare assistance programs.  This is not an ultra-conservative notion, but it is Reaganesque.  I can support it.  Mulvaney went on to say, “We’re no longer measuring compassion by the number of programs, or the number of people on those programs, but by the number of people we get off of those programs.”

 So, the leftists are screaming bloody murder, but then so too are the ultra-conservatives.  One in particular is a fellow named Peter Schiff.  Peter is a broker, which means that no matter what happens to the economy, he stands to profit by it.  In my view, brokers are somewhat like bookies … they get paid even if you lose.  If you have a few more minutes, here is Peter (not a fan of Trump, or his budget) being interviewed about the Trump economic plan.  (Note: look at the small banner in the upper right side of the screen that reads “Revenge Economics.”  Is this clever, or what?)  What Schiff wants is to stop all entitlement programs, period.  For an expanded background on Schiff, click here.

 Personally, as someone who’s paid in to social service programs against my will for more than fifty years, I want every dime I can get from it.  Still, I would be interested in hearing what the reader’s think about the Trump bill.

Advertisements

Alan Dershowitz: “What’s the Crime?”

Alan Dershowitz who is no fan of Trump, comes out with a unique legal view on the fake Russian story and why it is so. He presents a historical background for his view with Tucker Carlson last night. A good one.

Tucker Carlson Tonight – Alan Dershowitz – 5/19/17 Special Counsel

Paul Ryan piles on, Demands answers after Washington Post’s hit piece on Trump Russia

I have had it with the so-called news. It has gotten to the point of total absurdity. The final straw? Now Ryan, the traitor, has come out as well about this faux Trump leak of classified information to the Russians. Meanwhile, Hillary is getting herself a PAC together to be  the “resistance.” Folks, we are losing our Democracy. Here is Ryan:

Will a Judge order Trump to double 50,000 refugees into the U.S?

What the environmentalists did in the courts to win so-called “settlements” with the EPA, the Soros sponsored groups will move on to attack Trump. I suggest that March 28, 2017 will become D-Day for whether anarchy will prevail. Will a Judge attempt to usurp the power of the President and “order” more imports of terrorists? In the case of the “greenies” a simple suit against the government would bring a wink and a nod in court and an out of court settlement would occur. So consider the ramifications of this:

A federal District Court judge in Maryland is considering whether he should order President Donald Trump to double the annual inflow of refugees up to 100,000 per year.

Any demand by the judge that the federal government airbus an extra 50,000 migrants — including many adherents of Islam’s sharia legal system — into American neighborhoods would be an unusual intervention into government roles normally left to the elected President and Congress.

The judge revealed his proposal in a footnote in his March 15 decision where he denounced Trump’s reformist Executive Orders, which sharply curbs the inflow of refugees from war-torn Islamic countries.

The judge’s footnote declared:

On February 22, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction of S 5(d) of the Executive Order, ECF No. 64, requesting that the Court enjoin a specific provision of the First Executive Order. With the agreement of the parties, the Court set a briefing and hearing schedule extending to March 28, 2017. The Court will resolve that Motion, which the parties have agreed should be construed to apply to the successor provision of the Second Executive Order, in accordance with the previously established schedule.

The plaintiffs’ request for 100,000 refugees each year was made by lawyers for the International Refugee Assistance Protect, HIAS Inc., a so-called “VOLAG” which is paid by federal agencies to import refugees, and by members of the Middle East Studies Association.

“Judge Chuang’s ruling … leaves the door open for further discussion of our challenges to the refugee ban, an opening we intend to pursue,” said a March 15 statement from HIAS. “So stay tuned for more news as our lawsuit continues.”  HIAS received at least $19.5 million in government grants in 2014, according to its federal 990 form.

More at Breitbart

Plaintiff in Trump travel ban runs Muslim Brotherhood mosque

The plot thickens on this one. First we have Obama in Hawaii, then we learn that the judge who ruled happens to be a classmate of his from Harvard, and last?

Judge Watson, managed to produce a 43-page decision within two hours of the case being filed in Hawaii. (Let’s make Hawaii the new Gitmo.)

The judge issued his 43-page ruling less than two hours after hearing Hawaii’s request for a temporary restraining order to stop the ban from  being put into practice.

Speedy guy, huh!  More at Gateway Pundit and we learn this:

The main plaintiff in the Hawaii case blocking President Trump’s revised temporary travel ban is an imam with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The irony is hard to miss: Trump has talked about declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, and now it is a Brotherhood-backed imam who is playing a key role in blocking his executive order on immigration.

Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries.

One of those six countries is Syria. Elshikh’s mother in law is Syrian and would not be able to visit her family in Hawaii for 90 days if Trump’s ban were allowed to go into effect.

Imam Ismail Elshikh, a native of Egypt, leads a Muslim Brotherhood-tied mosque in Honolulu, Hawaii, and claims he is suffering ‘irreparable harm’ by President Trump’s temporary travel ban.

According to the lawsuit:

“Plaintiffs allege that the Executive Order subjects portions of the State’s population, including Dr. Elshikh and his family, to discrimination in violation of both the Constitution and the INA, denying them their right, among other things, to associate with family members overseas on the basis of their religion and national origin. The State purports that the Executive Order has injured its institutions, economy, and sovereign interest in maintaining the separation between church and state.”

Read more at WND

Comey: Citizens Should Have No Secrets That The Government Can’t Access

James Comey, the ultimate Universal Man, a wolf in sheep’s clothes or a chameleon? He has been a Prosecutor, Lobbyist, Hedge Fund operator, Chairman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. For some reason, Obama felt safe enough to appoint him head of the FBI. let us take a second look at his background. This is taken from a number of my posts since 2013. First his view on spying.

The latest sign of this stealth takeover of civil rights and freedom was epitomized in recent Senate testimony by FBI Director James Comey, who voiced his objections to civilian use of encryption to protect personal data – information the government has no automatic right to obtain.

As reported by The New American, Comey testified that he believes the government’s spy and law enforcement agencies should have unfettered access to everything Americans may store or send in electronic format: On computer hard drives, in so-called i-clouds, in email and in text messaging – for our own safety and protection. Like many in government today, Comey believes that national security is more important than constitutional privacy protections or, apparently, due process. After all, aren’t criminals the only ones who really have anything to hide?

In testimony before a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled “Going Dark: Encryption, Technology, and the Balance Between Public Safety and Privacy” Comey said that in order to stay one step ahead of terrorists, as well as international and domestic criminals, Uncle Sam’s various spy and law enforcement agencies should have access to available technology used to de-encrypt protected data. Also, he believes the government should be the final arbiter deciding when decryption is necessary.More over at  Zero Hedge

He voted for Carter in 1980, but in ’84, Comey: “I voted for Reagan—I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.”

“I had no sense whether Jim was an R or a D,” says Eric Holder Jr., who worked closely with Comey when Holder was deputy attorney general to Janet Reno in the Clinton administration—and who remains a confirmed D.

Sounds like a man with a story. Where did he start? In law. He was a partner at firm McGuireWoods, where, among other things, he successfully defended a company against claims its machinery had caused asbestos-related injuries.

And from there? From there he moved into public prosecution and eventually came to the attention of President George W Bush, who appointed him deputy attorney general of the United States in 2003. But he left after two years in the role.

To do what? Sell tanks, bombs and jets to drop them from. He joined Lockheed Martin, one of the world’s largest defence contractors, as senior vice-president. (A Lobbyist)

In 2005, Comey left law enforcement for the defense industry, joining money-in-politics powerhouse Lockheed Martin. As senior vice president and general counsel he earned more than $6 million in compensation in his last full year with the company.

And then? Dipped his toe in the world of hedge funds at Bridgewater Associates before joining the board of HSBC Holdings.

The author of this piece makes a prescient observation regarding the Comey Ashcroft relationship:

On the surface, it’s an odd pairing: Comey—who cites liberal theologian Reinhold Niebuhr as a formative influence, and who can sing along with Good Charlotte pop-punk hits—and Ashcroft, a reactionary born-again Christian who breaks into spirited renditions of biblical hymns. There’s little risk Comey will lose his sense of humor in his new job. It’s only his soul that’s up for grabs

Now we know why it was so odd.

Oh, by the way, where’s John Ashcroft today? Why he’s on the Board of Directors of Blackwater USA,which now goes by the harmless sounding name – Academi – conjuring up images of ivy-covered buildings and lounging intellectuals.

Comey and Ashcroft – Lockheed Martin and Blackwater: Defenders of our civil liberties?

Eric Holder? He is now a white-collar defense attorney at a firm that lobbies for major banks, pharmaceutical companies and defense contractors.

Other posts that add to the pot:

FBI releases Trump’s real estate investigation records from 1970’s  

FBI Comey got millions from Clinton Foundation Defense Contractor  

Additional Sources: Guardian  NY Mag   Open Secrets

Bunkerville: Guess where in the world Former AG Eric Holder is working?

Church Leaders denounce Trump’s plan to favor Christian refugees

Forget that only a handful of Christians have been permitted refugees status while hordes in the millions have flooded Europe, mostly male. Forget that Christians are the most persecuted minority with horrendous stories of torture and murder. So where are our Christian church leaders in this? According to the New York Times, ‘outrage’ at Trump’s plan to save them. I can believe it. Many churches have become nothing more than indoctrination hubs for  progressivism. Here tis:

christiansThe executive order he signed on Friday gives preference to refugees who belong to a religious minority in their country, and have been persecuted for their religion.

But if Mr. Trump had hoped for Christian leaders to break out in cheers, that is, for the most part, not what he has heard so far.

A broad array of clergy members has strongly denounced Mr. Trump’s order as discriminatory, misguided and inhumane. Outrage has also come from some of the evangelical, Roman Catholic and mainline Protestant leaders who represent the churches most active in trying to aid persecuted Christians.

By giving preference to Christians over Muslims, religious leaders have said the executive order pits one faith against another. By barring any refugees from entering the United States for nearly four months, it leaves people to suffer longer in camps, and prevents families from reuniting.

Also, many religious leaders have said that putting an indefinite freeze on refugees from Syria, and cutting the total number of refugees admitted this year by 60,000, shuts the door to those most in need.

“We believe in assisting all, regardless of their religious beliefs,” said Bishop Joe S. Vásquez, the chairman of the committee on migration for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

More at  New York Times and well worth the full read.

%d bloggers like this: