Friday AM ~ TheFrontPageCover

TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
Border-Security Debate Highlights 
Need for Tactics and Strategy
678T9_tF9tL-6MgD-Ju9YQdAvxYoglqHuC0S8Hm2E4J5hUjXhRIH1kG2ZDuc8VPdjONYZj9vuIz3KdfoY8n8xLBPQ34RBThw_kOi_DBksQ6F_IxDIFmeuNPq5An1mHJwxFrjaf2LLDnF60sRtb6Pq3iJp9pHY-mCmWiaoS4=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Harold Hutchison  
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
scumbag-Adam Schiff Lies Again, Says There is “Compelling Evidence” of Collusion
 
{patriotnewsdaily.com} ~ One might have hoped that when Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff (D-CA) took control of the House Intelligence Committee, he would have recognized the weight and responsibility that role bestowed on him as a congressman... As ranking member under Devin Nunes, one could almost excuse scumbag-Schiff’s fanciful tales, which he spun on TV whenever he got the chance. Nunes was determined to run a clean investigation free from Democrat-inspired conspiracy theories, and we understand that made things difficult on a partisan hack like scumbag-Schiff. He had to vent, and what better place to do that than CNN and MSNBC? But once you assume control of the committee, you have to take your job seriously. That job, contrary to scumbag-Schiff’s assumptions, is not to be the lead witch-hunter for the DNC. It’s not to set the stage for a Democratic victory in 2020. It is to run an unbiased, impartial committee for the purposes of providing oversight of our federal intelligence agencies. It is to the country’s misfortune that scumbag-Schiff thinks he’s no more than an attack dog for Nancy Pulosi, and it is to his committee’s shame that he’s still out there telling lies on CNN. scumbag-Schiff was on the network this Sunday, telling Dana Bash of “State of the Union” that he disagreed with Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s assessment earlier this month that there was no direct evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” scumbag-Schiff said. Referencing the Trump Tower meeting, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, scumbag-Schiff said there was plenty of evidence of collusion. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” scumbag-Schiff said. “There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.”... Show us the prove, scumbag.  http://patriotnewsdaily.com/adam-schiff-lies-again-says-there-is-compelling-evidence-of-collusion/ 

How Many Times Trump’s Predecessors 
Declared a National Emergency
Tw8rbDzdd77NpKWM0ER_x-vmsnO2sI6QqH8m7po-LAJXLxNZNYTf0no5RyhaG7EV1dzIFkiCYF-G0imNoiQsF_aYZmypVCd-vnPv-5ioJU1usASFifMe00fTDOyP0R1lBfjbqOw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby Fred Lucas
{dailysignal.com} ~ The push for a border barrier marks President Donald Trump’s fourth declaration of a national emergency—about a third as many as his three immediate predecessors in their two terms... The number of declared emergencies puts Trump on a par with Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. President Gerald Ford, who signed the 1976 National Emergencies Act, did not declare an emergency under it. His successor, Jimmy Carter, made two such declarations during his single term—one of which is still in effect. In all, 32 presidential declarations of a national emergency remain in effect, counting Trump’s action Friday, while 21 expired or were canceled. The overwhelming majority of national emergencies involved either blocking access to U.S.-held assets for bad actors on the world stage or preventing financial transactions with those countries or with international entities and individuals... The Dems have completely lost their marbles.  https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/02/19/how-many-times-trumps-predecessors-declared-a-national-emergency/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTVdJMk9XWXdNakl3TUdVeiIsInQiOiIrWHhGMEJ5RDRjU09KT0VkZTF1WktnOFRyb2QwUTF0MkRhUDhYSlBXSEVqNW9FNUNNTTZpa0lXUEhLbDdiMnkwNVwvQ0ZHcW4wa09WaVVzU0N5ck5FSXdGVGc4U3duek9UdE5cL0J2eXJscmplZ3lyaWtReXE5cnRcL1UxcjNRRHVGaSJ9
.
Supreme Court rules against 'excessive' 
seizure of property by states
DWfhVYVZ6UHnTITtGYP7tgldhlldy5wucDdtkgHXs21n4trmO_aNIyHcbp_H0XlvgLB1QmMQ-79mBo2-ccHjp6_T6Xisnh_SiYeM8fTSM-DNZEMJzLaKK6tCB3oFm9mm7P7T0b34lI-d6Ym1oSXNfEqnz2uUI2W0TfbosWEsR9gWsWizodxicBMhggUAehizsRoWgXbh_LuCN1tq6ki34pvrCSffuHqS9Ik7oEx3UPdTpbGsUY-v6qvESHTGkoV3jIxbW-vgTFX7g_4U7zw2WAUlXHl2DXF69whFATh0sYoahSXuhxmCdj4enP9rJ0mZ24_D_22b9ETtqoAXFkPvB5g=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby Melissa Quinn
{washingtonexaminer.com} ~ A constitutional provision prohibiting the imposition of excessive fines extends beyond the federal government to states and cities, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday... The high court's unanimous decision expanding the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause delivered a victory to an Indiana man who challenged the state’s seizure of his $42,000 Land Rover. The ruling means in states and cities — like the feds — the amount of the forfeiture must bear some relationship to the gravity of the offense that it is designed to punish. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who returned to the bench for the first time since undergoing lung cancer surgery in December, wrote the opinion.“For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history: Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties,” Ginsburg wrote. The justices heard oral arguments in the case in November, which raised the question of whether the Eighth Amendment’s excessive fines clause should be applied to the states under the 14th Amendment — the Reconstruction-era constitutional change broadly expanding citizenship rights. While the Bill of Rights originally applied only to the federal government  when enacted, the Supreme Court has since ruled that provisions of the Bill of Rights apply to the states under the 14th Amendment, with the exception of a few. In a 2010 case, the Supreme Court ruled the 14th Amendment prevents the states, as well as the federal government, from infringing on the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense...
.
US Sends Destroyer to Black Sea After 
Russia Fires On Ukrainian Vessels
8QyfAzRxhECM4ZBLVVAmR7qCB0iLrzKweaAY0xDnohz3IMVEdkpoyLtoUozdursZYCAugR4r_4_Hv5evwUeQmTIeq5ljZdNyfigMHIfpkUDaOo1hUkQ5NGgHfHKglHi89OLgO-IWTw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Jack Davis   
{westernjournal.com} ~ To prove that the United States has neither forgotten nor forgiven an incident in which Russia detained the crews of several Ukrainian ships last year... an American destroyer entered the Black Sea on Tuesday. “We’re showing solidarity,” Adm. James Foggo, commander of U.S. naval forces in Europe and Africa, said, according to the Washington Examiner. The guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook entered the Black Sea on Tuesday, Military Times reported. The destroyer, which had left the Black Sea last month, was followed by Russian ships, Stars and Stripes reported. Last November, Russian ships fired on three Ukrainian naval vessels as they sought to enter the Kerch Strait, a waterway that connects the Black Sea to the Sea of Azov. Russia then detained the sailors, claiming the ships violated Russian waters. The U.S. has rejected that claim. He focused upon the fact that Russia is still holding 24 Ukrainians. “Let me tell you, that irritates me to no end,” Foggo said. “They are uniformed Ukrainian sailors and officers and chiefs. They’re not criminals, and they are being charged under a criminal code. They should be protected under the Geneva Convention, which is why the United States and other NATO allies have come to the table and said, ‘Release them immediately,’ and they still continue to hold them...
Digging reveals suspicious payments
to comie-AOC’s boyfriend began during 
campaign as more damning allegations surface
xYIYb9rVOASR9JrsV62_8CER61LX7hZrXP7Xn-OphyWt47ff5k63f7r8JJlC8TRM-87ceF-0jJOVEX2aXvNQBpXRXwM9rNpS7iVCPjrcyRWVzE9xOA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby Tom Tillison
{bizpacreview.com} ~ Writer/reporter Luke Thompson divulged last week that Rep. commie-Alexander Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, set up her boyfriend, Riley Roberts, with an official house.gov email address, noting that he was “drawing a salary on the taxpayer’s dime.”...  The self-avowed democratic socialistic was quick to dispute that notion, responding to say Roberts was set with the email account to access her Google calendar, which may not be entirely within House rules, given that they don’t appear to be married — the haste in which commie-Ocasio-Cortez responded verified the accuracy of the boyfriend having a government email address. And Thompson is back this week with even more damning information regarding the alleged proletariat who claims to be fighting the political class. Information that, if true, says more about commie-Ocasio-Cortez adapting to the DC swamp than it does about her fighting it.Taking to Twitter, Thompson lays out a case where commie-Ocasio-Cortez’s boyfriend was paid $6,000 by a PAC owned by Saikat Chakrabarti, now her chief of staff, at a time “when her campaign was running out of money.” The PAC is affiliated with Justice Democrats, a collaboration between Chakrabarti and Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks, Thompson noted...  https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/02/20/digging-reveals-suspicious-payments-to-aocs-boyfriend-began-during-campaign-as-more-damning-allegations-surface-725744
.
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Border-Security Debate Highlights Need for Tactics
and Strategy
678T9_tF9tL-6MgD-Ju9YQdAvxYoglqHuC0S8Hm2E4J5hUjXhRIH1kG2ZDuc8VPdjONYZj9vuIz3KdfoY8n8xLBPQ34RBThw_kOi_DBksQ6F_IxDIFmeuNPq5An1mHJwxFrjaf2LLDnF60sRtb6Pq3iJp9pHY-mCmWiaoS4=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Harold Hutchison:  When President Donald Trump signed the compromise spending legislation and then declared a national emergency, there was criticism from both the establishment wing of the Republican Party and from the conservative movement. To be honest, getting about a fifth of what he sought in funds for physical barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border was on the low end, but his critics from all sides miss some big points.

First of all, the situation on the border is arguably an emergency with national-security overtones. Brandon Darby, the Director of the Border and Cartel Chronicles Project from Breitbart News, noted that two cartels headquartered in Mexican cities on the Texas border have morphed into terrorist groups. Does anyone seriously think that the depredations of these cartels do not spill over into Texas?

Second, as The Heritage Foundation’s Conn Carroll stated, Trump was able to reprogram roughly $3.1 billion under two sections that did not require an emergency declaration. Another $3.6 billion will require the demonstration. But the funds from the budget and the $3.1 billion that didn’t require the declaration will be spent first. In other words, litigation will likely not halt progress immediately.

Third, given that Democrats vowed to not give one dollar for any barriers, and some went so far as to advocate abolishing  Immigration and Customs Enforcement, this bill is quite a win in a tactical sense — Trump has $1.3 billion from Congress. Not all of the 1,960 miles of border between the United States and Mexico need man-made barriers. Nature has provided obstacles in some parts. Others already have barriers (but it never hurts to update them).

In this sense, Trump was smart to get what he could. Future continuing resolutions will likely include other funding for physical barriers. To paraphrase a saying, 55 miles here, 55 miles there, and soon you’re securing the entire 1,960 miles of border between the United States and Mexico. Essentially, Trump used the shutdown to show the general public how serious he is on the issue — and he was able to secure some seed money for physical barriers.

The compromise (which passed by veto-proof margins) was not all he wanted. Those who think he should have vetoed the bill have shown the same inability to count that marred the 2013 scumbag/liar-nObamaCare shutdown. One reason is that Trump has been hampered by the fact that there are substantial divisions amongst the right-of-center coalition that makes up the GOP on this issue.

The more libertarian wing sees no problem with legal immigration and little with illegalimmigration. They’d set the limits higher. Other conservatives want to cut back on even legal immigration. Moderates wince at the extreme rhetoric from the hard-liners on this issue, which gives the media enough to hand the Left’s claims of racism across all those who insist on Rule of Law vis-à-vis the border. Proponents of more border security argue that moderates are ignoring the very real harm done by an unsecured border.

It goes without saying that seeking a secure border is not proof of racism. Nor is wanting to deal with MS-13. Nor is wanting to stop human trafficking and drug smugglers. At least that’s what an honest media would be pointing out. Alas, we do not have an honest media. For the most part, with the exception of Fox News, some smaller outlets, and talk radio, the media is pretty much parroting the Left’s talking points. Right now, the Leftmedia-Democratic National Committee team is painting everyone who does take border security and enforcement of immigration laws as racist, with the help of the comments by Rep. Steve King.

But this went beyond the tactical fighting; it’s also about having a good strategy. As The Patriot Post team noted in 2016, Trump has shown much more tactical and strategic competence than many conservatives. We’ve seen that emerge in the debate over border security. President Trump has managed to draw some Democrats into an extreme position against secure borders — a strategic move that will only help him and his Republicans in 2020.

How extreme have the Democrats become? Well, they not only want to abolish ICE but some talked about zeroing out the entire Department of Homeland Security. This included the Coast Guard, which they held up as victims during the current shutdown. Others are literally talking about demolishing the physical barriers already in place. This extremism may end up giving Republicans something to unite against on the issue.

Here’s what many conservatives struggle with: Principles and policy objectives are nice, but to implement the former and to reach the latter requires strategy and tactics. But often good strategies and tactics require compromises — something too many conservatives have not taken to heart. Too many view the Barry Goldwater approach — a principled stand — as a good one, even if it means a massive defeat. This Goldwater envy has done much to hurt the ability of conservatives to win elections in a hostile media climate.

Trump, on the other hand, has shown what good strategy and tactics can accomplish on immigration, one of the thorniest issues in America. If Republicans and conservatives learn from this example, they can avoid the trap Goldwater fell into and, as a result, they could fare far better in future elections.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/61234?mailing_id=4086&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4086&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center

Comments

  • Bonnie

    Thats a though, burn them all and yes how can anyone keep on re-elect an idiot, I guess they are idiots also. And they don't want to see the border is an emergency. It digs into their dreams of being a leader in their states.

  • u called that bill a compromise i call it something a match can fix; light it up and burn it.   

    the Dems and rinos are a horror y we re-elect them is a mystery to me.  

    the border is an emergency my God only the blind and dems cannot see that.  

This reply was deleted.