UPDATED (1/12): NEW COLUMN: DACA: ‘A Bill Of Love’ Or A Bill Of Goods?

Ann Coulter, Donald Trump, Family, IMMIGRATION

“DACA: ‘A Bill Of Love’ Or A Bill Of Goods?” is the current column, now on Townhall.com. An excerpt:

“DACA.” That’s the magic word, the “Open Sesame” of sorts, that stopped Democrats from saying President Donald Trump was senile.

DACA is the acronym for “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.” The DACA program is Barack Obama’s grant of education, food stamps, health care, a shot at a job and a reprieve from deportation for the youthful alien among us.

Or, for the older illegal immigrant who still has that certain, impish je ne sais quoi, and can pass for a younger lawbreaker.

Trump said “DACA,” and he said it with love.

At a well-staged, “bipartisan immigration bill roundtable”—CNN’s billing—Trump vowed to pass “a bipartisan bill of love”:

“If we do this properly, DACA, you’re not so far away from comprehensive immigration reform. And if you want to take it that further step, I’ll take the heat, I don’t care. I don’t care—I’ll take all the heat you want to give me, and I’ll take the heat off both the Democrats and the Republicans. My whole life has been heat. (Laughter.) I like heat, in a certain way. But I will. … We’re going to come up with DACA. We’re going to do DACA, and then we can start immediately on the phase two, which would be comprehensive. … I think what we’re all saying is we’ll do DACA and we can certainly start comprehensive immigration reform the following afternoon. Okay? We’ll take an hour off and then we’ll start.”

Whether the president knew it or not, “comprehensive immigration reform” stands for amnesty.

High on whiffs of a DACA give-away, Democrats and their media dropped the charges of dementia being leveled at the president.

Which is when patriot Ann Coulter charged.

Today was “the worst day of Trump’s presidency,” she told  broadcaster Larry O’Connor. …

… READ THE REST. “DACA: ‘A Bill Of Love’ Or A Bill Of Goods?” is the current column, now on Townhall.com.

The column has a “Postscript.” It appears in the versions published on WND, The Unz Review and elsewhere. It’s the backdrop, the likely bigger picture, as to why The Donald’s “unsexy,” America-First agenda has yielded:

… These are early-innings for the ambitious young couple in the White House.

Daddy’s girl and her poodle, Jared Kushner, long “to press flesh with local and global elites.” As I pointed out in April of 2017—back when Trump bombed Syria for Ivanka—Davos is upon us. “Befitting young Democrats in high-society,” the two want to attend this, the World Economic Forum, also “the ultimate schmooze fest of the elite.”

I suspect the duo will accompany Daddy to Davos. And now that The Donald’s unsexy agenda has yielded to the Democrats and the Mexican Mafia (I mean lobby), Deplorables be damned—Ivanka and Jared will receive a warm welcome from the gilded and the glamorous.

That tidbit is on WND and The Unz Review.

UPDATE (1/12): From the Unz Review column version:

Bill Meyer says:

January 12, 2018 at 5:42 pm GMT • 100 Words

Ilana, you and Ann speak of the same problems I detect with Trump Inc. I’m not one of those individuals who insist Trump is playing some wizardly 7D chess game strategy every time he does/says something stupid. However, my gut is telling me it’s a “talk out of both sides of his mouth PR stunt to stanch the Wolff bleed”. If I’m wrong and he caves on this promise, or signs an amnesty, he is a political dead letter.

The Importance Of Executive Orders In A Post-Constitutional Order

Constitution, Donald Trump, Federalism

An idea developed in my book, “The Trump revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June, 2016),” rests on the importance of Executive Orders in a post-Constitutional order. Steve Bannon seemed to hold a similar view. An excerpt from Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff:

Bannon’s strategic view of government was shock and awe. In his head, he carried a set of decisive actions that would not just mark the new administration’s opening days but make it clear that nothing ever again would be the same. He had quietly assembled a list of more than 200 executive orders to issue in the first 100 days. The very first EO, in his view, had to be a crackdown on immigration. After all, it was one of Trump’s core campaign promises. Plus, Bannon knew, it was an issue that made liberals batshit mad.

Bannon could push through his agenda for a simple reason: because nobody in the administration really had a job. Priebus, as chief of staff, had to organize meetings, hire staff, and oversee the individual offices in the Executive-branch departments. But Bannon, Kushner, and Ivanka Trump had no specific responsibilities — they did what they wanted. And for Bannon, the will to get big things done was how big things got done. “Chaos was Steve’s strategy,” said Walsh.

On Friday, January 27 — only his eighth day in office — Trump signed an executive order issuing a sweeping exclusion of many Muslims from the United States. In his mania to seize the day, with almost no one in the federal government having seen it or even been aware of it, Bannon had succeeded in pushing through an executive order that overhauled U.S. immigration policy while bypassing the very agencies and personnel responsible for enforcing it.

The result was an emotional outpouring of horror and indignation from liberal media, terror in immigrant communities, tumultuous protests at major airports, confusion throughout the government, and, in the White House, an inundation of opprobrium from friends and family. What have you done? You have to undo this! You’re finished before you even start! But Bannon was satisfied. He could not have hoped to draw a more vivid line between Trump’s America and that of liberals. Almost the entire White House staff demanded to know: Why did we do this on a Friday, when it would hit the airports hardest and bring out the most protesters?

“Errr … that’s why,” said Bannon. “So the snowflakes would show up at the airports and riot.” That was the way to crush the liberals: Make them crazy and drag them to the left.

MORE.

Court Blocks DACA Phaseout Because Of Trump Administration’s Constant Contradictions

Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Law, Logic

At the video’s 2 minutes and 17 second mark, Judge Andrew Napolitano, who’s obviously rather for a DACA reprieve, explains why a “federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s plans to phase out protections for undocumented “dreamers”:

“President Trump’s statement in tweets and elsewhere—like ‘I love the Dreamers. I want the Dreamers to stay’—was so inconsistent with what his own Justice department was arguing before the deciding justice that the government appears to be speaking out of both sides of its mouth.”

“Napolitano to Trump After DACA Ruling: ‘If Judge Gives You a Lemon, Make Lemonade‘”

Knuckle-Dragging, Anti-Semitic, Intimidated Readers Who Simply HATE Mercer

Anti-Semitism, Critique, Ethics, Etiquette, Gender, Ilana Mercer, Intellectualism, Old Right

A reply to this knuckle-dragger at the Unz Review’s Comments Section. You can read his bile for yourself:

Thank you for the opportunity to share, once again, a magnificent column, published on the Unz Review and elsewhere.

“The Curious Case Of WND’s Vanishing, Veteran Paleolibertarian” addressed, for once and for all, a small, shrinking community’s stunning and consistent displays of intellectual dishonesty, over the years.

In this context, I am reminded of British comedian Alexei Sayle. When asked what he does when he watches a really talented satirist performing, Sayle replied: “I go back stage and tell him he’ll never make it.”

Indeed, the attitude to my work over 20 years has been the best proof of its quality.

If the Comments threads about “ilana mercer,” on the Unz Review, prove anything (other than that anti-Semitism lives), it is that mediocre men (for the most) hate a woman who can out-think them. As a defender of men, this saddens me, but it is, nevertheless, true.

So here is “The Curious Case Of WND’s Vanishing, Veteran Paleolibertarian,” which the venomous mediocrity commenting here so rudely derided, but failed to link for obvious reasons.

Ron Unz chose the image appended to the column.

In reply to the kunckle-dragger’s sniveling: I’ll continue to refrain from interacting with his ilk (“fanboys”) on my column’s thread. But this dreadful cur (with apologies to dogs, which I love) further embarrasses himself when he offers up the non sequitur that engaging him is the litmus test for being a “good writer.”

You see what I’m up against? (Comment published here.)