The Patriot Post Digest 11-21-2016

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-21-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

Nov. 21, 2016

IN TODAY’S EDITION

    Sergeant Dakota Meyer is banned from the Marine Corps Ball for espousing politically incorrect views.
    Trump’s pick for attorney general increases the odds of Obama pardoning Hillary Clinton.
    Obama won’t follow Bush’s lead of removing himself from meddling politically.
    The next administration faces a stiff challenge upending sanctuary cities.
    And more news, policy and opinion.

THE FOUNDATION

“There is in the nature of sovereign power an impatience of control, that disposes those who are invested with the exercise of it, to look with an evil eye upon all external attempts to restrain or direct its operations.” —Alexander Hamilton (1787)

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

MoH Recipient Uninvited From Marine Ball1

Why would one of the Marine Corps' biggest heroes be uninvited from the Marine Corps Ball in Afghanistan?

Sergeant Dakota Meyer received the Medal of Honor2 for his actions on Sept. 8, 2009, during the Battle of Ganjgal, in which five Americans and eight Afghan security personnel were killed in action. Meyer made five runs into enemy fire to evacuate wounded personnel and recover the bodies of American KIAs.

For this year’s Marine Corps Ball held to celebrate the 241st birthday of the Marine Corps, Meyer had been invited to attend in Afghanistan, where he had served with Embedded Training Team 2-8. According to a report by tribunist.com, the celebration was to be held at the American embassy in Kabul due to security concerns. Such concerns are valid, as a recent murder-suicide bombing at Bagram Air Base left four Americans dead and wounded 17 others.

Meyer’s invite was reportedly rescinded3 at the direction of Amb. P. Michael McKinley over Meyer’s “political views.” On his Facebook page, Meyer has been vocally critical of the Obama administration on a number of issues, including a push for additional gun control laws. Meyer’s wife, Bristol Palin, is also the daughter of former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

“It’s disheartening that he’s using the Marine Corps Ball as a chance to be petty and political. This should be beyond politics and a time for him to support the men and women who defend he and his staff at the embassy,” Meyer said. On his Facebook page, Meyer added, “I want to make sure the Marines in Afghanistan know I really wanted to join them for our birthday, but politics got in the way. Let me know when you guys get back in country and we’ll rock out then!”

Incoming AG Sessions and a Clinton Prosecution4

There’s been much discussion since Hillary Clinton’s stunning defeat of whether or when she’ll be pardoned. Of course, the first thing about a pardon would be the admission of guilt, so that much is interesting all by itself. Barack Obama’s spokesman, Josh Earnest, pointedly did not answer the question of whether his boss would pardon Clinton. And Donald Trump has so far demurred about continued prosecution, even going so far as calling the Clintons “good people” and saying, “I don’t want to hurt them.”

Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy wrote a fairly lengthy consideration of the various options. (Don’t miss the whole thing5.) Would Obama or Trump pardon Hillary? What political capital would it cost to do so? Conversely, would Trump allow the FBI’s investigation to proceed, or would he seek a special prosecutor as he warned on the campaign trail? McCarthy writes, “This is one of what will no doubt be many things that Mr. Trump will find were easier to say in the heat of the moment (a contentious debate between the candidates) than to do in his new political reality. During the campaign, nothing damaged Clinton as badly as the specter of criminal jeopardy. But now Trump has been elected, and he has a governing agenda that will require cooperation from Capitol Hill. A prosecution of Clinton would provoke Democratic outrage, which means media outrage, which, in turn, means Republican panic.”

Besides, Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw muses6, “At this point it almost seems as if she’s being punished more thoroughly than any judge could manage. Hillary has essentially become the villain in a Larry Bond novel who works on her evil plot for decades and is within moments of detonating a tactical weapon on the National Mall when some geek comes along at the last second, clips the correct wire on the device and notifies the authorities to come haul her away. She’s serving a four year sentence in a prison named Anywhere But The White House.”

On the other hand, our own James Shott argues7, “As secretary of state, Clinton breached security and put at risk sensitive national security information, destroyed evidence, and lied to Congress about it. Others who have done similar things have suffered criminal penalties for their wrongdoing; retired Army General David Petraeus, active-duty Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier, and many others were punished through the legal system for security breaches. So, too, must Clinton be.” In order for Rule of Law to be restored, justice must be applied equally.

Enter Trump’s pick for attorney general, Jeff Sessions. That puts Sessions in charge of both the Justice Department and the FBI, each of which has some form of open probe into Clinton and her email and/or Foundation. Sessions has been quite critical of both agencies' handling of the investigations thus far and has called for a special prosecutor. This ups the ante for Obama to issue a pardon, because it seems unlikely that Sessions will let Hillary’s loss be punishment enough. In any case, stay tuned…

Obama Reserves Right to Criticize8

An unwritten rule of outgoing presidents, considering the many challenges the position brings, is to respect the office by making a commitment to refrain from publicly criticizing the incoming president and his policy decisions. No one has exemplified this commitment better than George W. Bush, who despite being blamed almost incessantly by Barack Obama for everything from the poor economy to Iraq never fought back or attempted to defend his legacy. He left it for historians to judge generations from now.

While every president desires to leave a lasting, positive legacy, once the individual has left the office he has no control over what becomes of his policies or how future historians will judge his time in office. The office is and always has been greater than the individual. Obama seems to think otherwise.

On Sunday in Lima, Peru, Obama — while acknowledging the respect George W. Bush showed him, saying he “could not have been more gracious to me when I came in” — showed he’d learned very little from his predecessor. Contending that he reserved the right to comment on Donald Trump’s policy decisions, Obama stated, “As an American citizen who cares deeply about our country, if there are issues that have less to do with the specifics of some legislative proposal or battle or go to core questions about our values and ideals, and if I think that it’s necessary or helpful for me to defend those ideals, I’ll examine it when it comes.” And what may those “values” be of which Obama speaks? We’re betting that Americans will find out soon enough as Obama is sure to continue his legacy as the lecturer in chief.

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-21-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

    John Goodman: The Politics of Hate9
    Peggy Noonan: What to Tell Your Children About Trump10
    Joe Bastardi: Oh the Irony of It All!11

For more, visit Right Opinion12.

TOP HEADLINES

    4 Cops Shot in 24 hours in 4 Cities13
    Democrats' ‘Nuclear Option’ Backfires14
    Obama Halts Amnesty Push in Court15
    Feds Rescind Arctic Drilling Proposal16

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report17.

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Sanctuary City Showdown18

By Arnold Ahlert

“To be clear about what Chicago is, it always will be a sanctuary city. To all those who are, after Tuesday’s election, very nervous and filled with anxiety as we’ve spoken to, you are safe in Chicago, you are secure in Chicago and you are supported in Chicago. Chicago will always be a sanctuary city.” —Chicago Mayor19 Rahm Emanuel

Perhaps nothing defines progressive arrogance better than the idea the Rule of Law can be ignored when it doesn’t align with the Left’s “superior” wisdom. Thus, of all the battles president-elect Donald Trump will wage against entrenched progressivism, the effort to deconstruct sanctuary cities is one of the most important.

Trump has the law on his side. Section 137320 of the U.S. Federal Code is clear: “Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.”

It further notes that no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, the same entities from exchanging such information with ICE, maintaining it, or exchanging it with any other Federal, State, or local government entity. Reciprocally, ICE is expected to respond to those entities “seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information.”

There’s also Section 13321 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 199622 that allows the U.S. attorney general to enter into an agreement with a state, or any political subdivision therein related, to carry out “the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States.” This authorizes the AG to train local police for the purposes of identifying and detaining illegals.

Despite these statutes, more than 340 municipalities in the nation have been identified23 by ICE as having polices non-cooperative with, or obstructive of, law enforcement.

A report24 released last August by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) illuminates the damning consequences of that defiance: Between January 2014 and September 2015, more than 17,000 ICE detainers were rejected by these municipalities — including about 11,800 detainers for individuals with prior criminal histories.

Detailed information of crimes committed by illegals would go a long way toward underscoring the recklessness of sanctuary city policies and galvanizing public opinion against them. Yet the same government agencies that crunch numerous sets of crime statistics are either unable25 — or unwilling — to provide comprehensive data on illegal alien criminal activity. Former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams, who characterizes immigrant crime as a “wave of staggering proportions,” explains why: “These numbers would expose how serious the problem is and make the government look bad.”

How bad? U.S. Commission on Civil Rights member Peter Kirsanow released26 hard numbers for illegal aliens “imprisoned for homicide-related offenses” in five states — Arizona, California, Florida, New York and Texas — with high illegal alien populations. Assuming they only committed one murder apiece, these illegals accounted for approximately 5,400 homicides.

For illegal immigrant advocates, that level of slaughter is apparently tolerable because “using the data we have, it seems impossible to responsibly claim that those immigrants are more likely to commit crimes than their American-born neighbors,” writes27 columnist Alan Gomez. In other words, Americans are supposed to take solace from the idea that people who shouldn’t be here are at all might be murdering, raping, molesting and otherwise accosting them at lower rates than American criminals are.

It doesn’t get more intellectually or morally bankrupt than that.

A Trump administration aims to cut federal funding for sanctuary cities. By contrast, until Congressman John Culbertson (R-TX) used his position as chairman of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Subcommittee on Appropriations to force the Obama administration to reverse course, it was actually rewarding sanctuary cities with hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grant money.

Thus, is it any wonder why politicians in cities like Chicago, New York, Seattle, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, Denver and Washington, DC, etc., insist they will maintain their sanctuary status? Mayor Emanuel, whose city has endured28 more than 600 murders and 3,000 shootings so far this year, epitomizes29 their arrogance. “I would say to the president-elect that the idea that you’re going to penalize Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia — these are the economic, cultural and intellectual energy of this country,” he contended.

No, they are not. They are leftist strongholds populated by elitist, illegal-immigration-supporting officials who believe they’re entitled to defy the law and embrace de facto anarchy.

Trump’s efforts to stop this nonsense will be hindered by one certainty and one possibility. In South Dakota v. Dole30, the Supreme Court ruled that any withholding of federal funds by Congress must be “reasonably related” to the purposes for which those funds are allocated. Thus, it is likely law enforcement agencies in various locales will take the hit, and it remains to be seen if political officials will be willing to endure the likely wrath of American citizens who realize their safety is being held hostage to progressive-inspired lawlessness.

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-21-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

It also remains to be seen if a GOP-controlled Congress can summon the will necessary to withhold that funding. The Senate failed to pass a couple of bills targeting sanctuary cities because vote totals fell short of the 60-vote threshold needed to overcome a filibuster. That’s the same 60-vote threshold eliminated by former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s invocation of the “nuclear option” when it suited Democrat purposes. It remains to be seen if traditionally spineless Republicans are willing to return the favor, especially those attuned to the leftist siren song of “comprehensive immigration reform.”

Nothing says reform better than reining in the rampant lawlessness sanctuary cities epitomize. Trump’s nomination31 of staunch anti-illegal immigration advocate Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) for U.S. attorney general is a great first step.

A suggestion for Sessions: In addition to exploring ways of limiting funding, the DOJ could lend its unambiguous support to citizens like the parents of Kate Steinle, murdered by seven-time felon Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez who had been deported five times. They have filed32 a suit against former San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, the city and federal officials for failing to do their respective jobs.

Successful litigation by sanctuary city crime victims, making officials liable for large cash awards, should be pursued with vigor all over the nation. There’s nothing quite like the prospect of facing personal financial calamity — for supporting lawlessness — to focus the progressive mind.

In 2016, millions of Americans voted to upend the status quo. Sanctuary cities are one of the worst aspects of that status quo.

American have lived with lawlessness orchestrated by leftist politicians long enough. Being a nation of laws is about having respect for all laws. Not just the ones leftists like.

MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

    Obstinate Obama Lectures Abroad33 — He took one final apology tour around the world.
    Yet More New York Times Propaganda34 — Seeking to protect Obama’s Iran deal with biased “experts.”

OPINION IN BRIEF

John Goodman: “One family canceled Thanksgiving dinner so they wouldn’t have to be with pro-Trump relatives. Another family canceled a Christmas reunion for the same reason. One couple changed the date of their wedding so that a pro-Trump relative wouldn’t be able to attend. Another couple chose to get married in Italy — a place too distant for their relatives to travel to. These are just a few of the ruptures that have followed the election of Donald Trump, as reported by The New York Times. Are we a deeply divided nation? Maybe. But if we are divided the cause of that division comes squarely from the left, not the right. In virtually every case, the people who are canceling reunions and refusing to talk to their friends and family members are Hillary supporters. The Times reported not a single instance of a Trump voter shun. What’s the cause of all this? I think it is identity politics. … Identity politics works on some voters. I have heard stories of women who break down crying at the mere mention of the election results. Are they crying because NAFTA may be renegotiated? Or the pipeline may be built? Of course not. If elections are about identity, then elections are about you in a very personal way. If the other candidate wins, you have been personally rejected. I would probably cry too if I were naïve enough to believe all that.”

SHORT CUTS

The Gipper: “Speech delivery counts for little on the world stage unless you have convictions, and, yes, the vision to see beyond the front row seats.”

Upright: “‘Hamilton’ is just an incredible production, incredibly talented people. And it was a real joy to be there. You know, when we arrived, we heard — we heard a few boos, we heard some cheers. And I nudged my kids and reminded them that’s what freedom sounds like.” —Mike Pence

Observations: “This is my fear: The question we ask after every national election is, ‘Can we come together?’ The question this year is more, ‘Do we even want to come together?’ Have the two nations within our nation reached a point of permanent estrangement? … I think many people intuitively sense this: The Trump era either really will work or really won’t. It’s going to be something good or a disaster, but it won’t be a middling thing. This big, burly country can take it either way. The proper attitude now? Give him a chance, watch close, wish well. Cheer what’s sound, criticize what isn’t.” —Peggy Noonan

The BIG lie: “The electoral college system for choosing the President was based upon the protection of slavery and a distrust of democracy. That system has allowed the loser of the popular vote to win the Presidency in five of our 56 Presidential elections. Such a system would be illegal in any state or local election. But it is contained in the Constitution. Can a section of the Constitution itself be unconstitutional? The answer is yes.” —Leon Friedman in The Huffington Post

Admitting the obvious, albeit a little late in the ballgame: “ESPN is far from immune from the political fever that has afflicted so much of the country over the past year. Internally, there’s a feeling among many staffers — both liberal and conservative — that the company’s perceived move leftward has had a stifling effect on discourse inside the company and has affected its public-facing product. Consumers have sensed that same leftward movement, alienating some.” —ESPN Public Editor Jim Brady

Non Compos Mentis: “It is by no fault of their own that these [illegal aliens] are prisoners in their own country, living their daily lives not knowing if they will be deported to a foreign country.” —Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard

Late-night humor: “Vice President Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Mike Pence had lunch together. Pence was like, ‘I’m eager to discuss the issues facing our nation.’ While Biden said, ‘If you tell the waiter it’s your birthday, you get a free piece of cake.’” —Jimmy Fallon

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.