In case you are wondering if Trump will keep his promises…
In the first hour as president he did the following:
He rolled back an 11th-hour Obama administration rule that lowered home borrowers’ mortgage insurance costs.
The Federal Housing Authority uses that money to underwrite banks when low-income – and therefore high-risk – borrowers default on their loans.
Republicans argue that unless the FHA has significant cash reserves, all taxpayers including those with no stake in the housing market would be forced to pay for bailouts.
This happened in 2013, when the FHA required a $1.7 billion taxpayer cash infusion to keep going.
Back at the White House before a string of three inaugural balls, the new president inked formal commissions for a pair of retired Marine Corps general whom the U.S. Senate confirmed in their new cabinet roles.
Vice President Mike Pence swore them both in immediately.
Retired Gen. James Mattis is now the U.S. secretary of Defense. Retired Gen. John Kelly is secretary of Homeland Security.
Just as consequential were a pair of orders marking the Trump administration’s first firepower volley against Obamacare and signaling a massive, government-wide regulatory freeze.
The Obamacare executive order directs government departments and administrators to limit the cost of complying with the Affordable Care Act in every way possible while preparing for a Republican-dominated Congress to repeal and replace the law.
The regulatory memo, in the form of a memorandum from White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, orders federal agencies to cancel new regulations that haven’t yet been officially published and to delay for 60 days all those that are in place but haven’t yet taken effect.
It also orders bureaucrats to stop submitting most new regulations without first seeking White House approval.
Trump pledged during his campaign that he would pare back the American regulatory state in order to liberate the financial, energy and manufacturing sectors.
He also vowed to eliminate two federal regulations for every new one that takes effect.
Hollywood conservative and staunch Donald Trump supporter Jon Voight released a video “Plea to Save America” on Thursday, urging Americans to vote for the Republican candidate in next month’s election, which the actor called the “most important in American history.”
The actor, who recently sparred with Democratic contributor and Hillary Clinton supporter Robert De Niro over the latter’s disdain for Trump, appealed to Americans to vote for the only candidate who can “save our America.”
The full transcript of Voight’s remarks are below:
My dear fellow Americans.
We are all feeling tremendous anxiety with only a few weeks left to the election. This will be the most important election in American history.
We were once a country of freedom, and now we’re becoming a country of tyranny.
We are witness to our own people burning down and looting our cities. Ferguson, Missouri, Milwaukee, Orlando, Florida, Baltimore. We are all witness to our own people killing our policemen. Islamic terrorists have killed thousands of people all over our country, and Hillary and Obama want to be politically correct and pretend all the killings are not happening.
How many Americans are aware of George Soros? An evil man, who turned hundreds of Jewish people over the Nazis to be exterminated during World War II. He was interviewed on 60 Minutes, and was asked does he feel guilty for what he has done. And arrogantly, he said ‘Absolutely not. If I didn’t do it, someone else would have.’
Soros is a billionaire, who made most of his money manipulating currencies and almost bankrupting many countries. He supports hate groups, who are responsible for taking down our cities. And he is a close friend of Hillary Clinton, and a major supporter of her campaign.
Robert De Niro is a millionaire, as are so many of our Hollywood stars who are voting for Hillary, and who have absolutely no tolerance for anyone with a different opinion, forgetting that that is what our country is founded on: freedom of choice. But they will not be affected by Hillary’s open borders. Only our poor and middle class will suffer.
Thousands of refugees will flood our nation, and no one will know the good guys from the bad guys. It will kill our economy, which is at an all-time low now under the years of Obama’s presidency. And Hillary boasts of how proud she will be to continue Obama’s legacy.
No one can afford health insurance now. Prices for healthcare have gone through the roof thanks to Obamacare. Our once reasonable healthcare is gone.
With Hillary as President, we will lose our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Freedom of religion will be attacked, and Hillary will try to stop all conservative voices on TV and radio. Our highest court will become Socialist, and she will restrict what America was founded on, our freedom to become a small business owner and pursue our own personal dreams.
She has blood on her hands from the Benghazi terrorist raid. Four of our American patriots died, and when the parents stood over their loved ones’ coffins, she lied to them about the cause of their sons’ deaths.
The pendulum of freedom is not balanced. Hillary and her followers are on a crude campaign to stop and degrade all of Trump’s followers. Her words were echoed loud and clear for all Americans to hear. Hillary said Trump’s followers are a basket of deplorables. They are un-redeemable.
May God protect the real truth, and may Donald Trump win this presidency. He will save our America, and he will certainly make it great again.
It’s not only illegal aliens who are escaping enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws.
Under the Obama administration’s expansive interpretation of executive authority, legal immigrants seeking citizenship through the nation’s Naturalization process are now exempt from a key part of the Oath of Allegiance.
Immigrants seeking to become citizens no longer have to pledge to “bear arms on behalf of the United States.” They can opt out of that part of the Oath. Nor do they have to cite any specific religious belief that forbids them to perform military service.
According to the Naturalization Fact Sheet on the US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) website, In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015, the nation welcomed 729,995 Legal Permanent Residents into full citizenship.
- Over the past decade 6.6 million have been naturalized through a process that ends with the Oath of Allegiance.
- In the decade 1980-1990, the average number completing Naturalization was only 220,000 annually, but from 1990 to 2000 that number jumped to over 500,000 annually.
- 1,050,399 new citizens were welcomed in the year 2008.
- 18.7 million immigrants are eligible to eventually become citizens, and 8.8 million already meet the 5-year residency requirement.
The pledge to help defend America was good enough for the 6.6 million immigrants naturalized since 2005 and good enough for the over 15 million naturalized since 1980, but Obama’s appointees at the USCIS think that is too much to ask of the 18.7 million estimated legal immigrants eligible today for eventual naturalization or the 750,000 who will be naturalized in the coming year.
This radical change was announced a year ago, in July of 2015. Congress did not enact the change in new legislation. There was no congressional debate, no filibuster in the US Senate, and no sit-in in the House to demand that a bill to repeal the USCIS action be brought to a vote.
No, this radical change was implemented while Congress slept. Like other Obama actions to undermine our immigration laws, the Republican-controlled Congress has not used its constitutional powers to reverse the administrative action. Thank God many states are stepping up to fill that void.
This week, the US Supreme Court let stand a federal district court ruling invalidating Obama’s unconstitutional “DACA” amnesty.
By a 4-4 tie vote, the Supreme Court declined to review the Circuit Court’s ruling upholding the Houston district court decision. Therefore, it is now the law and Obama’s DACA amnesty is voided. If Justice Scalia were still alive and participating in the case, it would have been a 5-4 ruling because the “swing vote,” Associate Justice Kennedy, voted with Justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas.
Where was Congress? Why did it take a lawsuit by the Governors and Attorneys General of 26 states to overturn Obama’s unconstitutional actions?
It’s true that other Presidents have made changes in the Naturalization process by administrative decree and without congressional approval. In 2002, in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attack, President George Bush by executive order expedited the naturalization process for 89,000 immigrants serving in the armed forces. While many will agree with Bush’s action and even applaud, that change should have been done by act of Congress, not a presidential executive order.
In fact, most Americans will think it extremely odd that the USCIS action with regard to the Oath of Allegiance is not illegal. But the fact is, unelected bureaucrats at the USCIS can change the wording of the Oath without approval of the people’s representatives in Congress. Strange as it sounds, the law as it stands today allows USCIS bureaucrats great leeway in managing the Naturalization process, so Obama’s actions will not be challenged in federal court.
Yet, in view of Obama’s actions, why doesn’t Congress change the law and take control of the Oath of Allegiance? So far, there is no indication that the Republican leadership will do so. If they won’t even bar Islamic terrorists from the refugee program, why should we expect them to protect the Oath of Allegiance? Some members of Congress will grumble, make speeches and issue press releases, but the Republican leadership will do nothing.
Such is the state of the nation as we approach this 240th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Some Americans see great irony in the British declaring their independence from the tyranny of Brussels while Americans quietly accept the new tyranny of Washington, DC.
Americans trust Donald Trump to keep America safe more than former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, despite repeated assertions from Democrats that she is one of the most qualified candidates for president in history.
A new poll from Morning Consult shows that 41 percent of Americans believed that Trump would do a better job of keeping the country safe while only 37 percent favored Hillary Clinton. (Twenty-two percent said they didn’t know or had no opinion).
Trump’s boost comes from Independent voters, as 38 percent say they trust Trump while only 26 percent favored Clinton.
The poll also shows that Americans support Trump’s proposal for a temporary ban on Muslims traveling to the United States. Forty-eight percent of those polled supported the idea while only 40 percent opposed it. (Eleven percent said they didn’t know or had no opinion)
The Morning Consult survey polled 2,001 voters from June 15-18 for a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.
The Obama Administration “grossly misrepresented” the number of crimes the criminal aliens it released from custody in FY 2014 subsequently committed by nearly tenfold, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) charges.
According to FAIR, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) records the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FIOA) request on FAIR’s behalf reveal that the 30,558 criminal aliens ICE released in FY 2014 committed 13,288 additional crimes.
The number of subsequent convictions contained in FIOA documents is far higher than the 1,423 additional offenses ICE reported to the House Judiciary Committee last July.
The criminal aliens released in FY 2014 who went on to commit those additional crimes had convictions for offenses like homicide, kidnapping, assault, sexual assault, and drunk driving. The new crimes, according to ICE’s report to Congress, included vehicular homicide, domestic violence, sexual assault, DUI, burglary and assault.
“Rather than end dangerous politically-driven policies that have put a total of 85,000 deportable criminal aliens back onto the streets in the last three years, ICE tried to hide them by providing grossly inaccurate information to Congress and the American people,” Dan Stein, the president of FAIR, said in statement.
In April, ICE revealed that it released an additional 19,723 criminal aliens —who had a total of 64,197 convictions among them including 101 homicide convictions, 216 kidnapping convictions, 320 sexual assault convictions, 1,728 assault convictions, and 12,307 driving under the influence of alcohol convictions — from custody in FY 2015.
In response to the FY 2015 numbers, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte warned that the Obama Administration’s immigration policies are creating “a sanctuary for tens of thousands of criminal aliens.”
“The American public has been misled by the enforcement priorities, deferred action, and executive action policies of this Administration, which categorize only certain so-called ‘serious’ criminal aliens as worthy of detention and then removal,” Goodlatte said in a statement. “Despite its rhetoric, the fact remains that the Obama Administration continues to willingly free dangerous criminal aliens, allowing them to continue to prey upon communities across the United States.”
The folks at NR launched a similar effort to excommunicate conservatives in 2003, with a much-hyped cover story titled “Unpatriotic Conservatives.” Back then it was Pat Buchanan and the now-deceased Bob Novak who were the targets. Former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum, a dear friend, made the case that these men and others who stood against our invasion of Iraq, had “made common cause with the left-wing and Islamist antiwar movements.” In other words, these “disgruntled paleos,” weren’t truly conservative because they opposed the war in Iraq.
As it turned out, of course, that small band of thinkers knew more about what was in the national interest than anyone at National Review or myself, who was also a strong advocate for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
“I never received an apology note,” Buchanan told me on my radio show. “They’re Davos conservatives,” he added, referencing the annual meeting of the world’s elites in Switzerland.
Whatever you think of Trump personally, his supporters are pushing for three big things:
- A return to traditional GOP law and order practices when it comes to illegal immigration.
- A return to a more traditional GOP foreign policy that would put the national interest ahead of globalism.
- A return to a more traditional GOP trade policy that would analyze trade deals from the perspective of the country as a whole and not blindly support any deal — even one negotiated by President Obama.
On each of these issues, Trump’s voters are calling for a return to policies that were GOP orthodoxy as recently as the late 1990s.
The matriarch of the conservative movement, Phyllis Schlafly, who likes but isn’t endorsing Trump, put it this way: “I’m not going to tell you that Donald Trump is perfect, or right on everything … but immigration is the top issue today, and he’s the one who made it a front-burner issue.”
By refusing to make room for these ideas within conservatism, NR risks creating the impression that the revolution brought about by George W. Bush — in particular, his belief in open borders, his effort to create a permanent U.S. military mission in the Middle East, and his notion that trade can never be regulated, no matter how unfair — is now a permanent part of conservatism that can never be questioned. They are also inviting those who disagree with Bush on those points to leave conservatism and start seeking their allies elsewhere.
This is an absolute disaster for conservatism. It is obvious by now that Bushism — however well-intentioned it may appear on paper — does not work for the average American. It is also clear that Bushism has almost no support within the rank and file of the GOP, much less within the country as a whole. Making the tenets of Bushism into an orthodoxy that conservatives cannot question will cripple conservatism for years to come.
National Review’s Manhattan-based editors brand Trump as a “menace to conservatism” and even ding him for his “outer-borough” accent. But who really is the menace — the rough-edged Queens native or the smooth-talking GOP Establishment that has brought us open borders; massive giveaway trade deals; monstrous debt; bank bailouts; and a sprawling government that never stops expanding? The failure to ruthlessly oppose and defeat such existential threats to the country — and the passivity in the face of such peril — is the real menace to the credibility of conservatism.
National Review Editor Rich Lowry and his people will be left preaching their narrow doctrine to a smaller and smaller audience.
If blue-collar Americans are told that their concerns on immigration, trade, and foreign policy cannot be addressed within the conservative movement, they will look elsewhere — just as they looked elsewhere in the late 1960s after they learned that their problems couldn’t be addressed within liberalism. National Review Editor Rich Lowry and his people will be left preaching their narrow doctrine to a smaller and smaller audience.
There is room for all voices in the GOP “big tent” — including relative newcomers like Trump, who has garnered such a following. That’s why I have an open door on my radio show to everyone from Marco Rubio to Ted Cruz. (We look forward to having Lowry on radio soon.)
Back in 2008, another populist was running for president, and ended up winning the Iowa caucuses. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who’s running again in 2016, sympathized with Trump in the NR dust-up. Recalling that the publication also took after him during his primary fight with Arizona Sen. John McCain, he said, “This is a fool-hearty effort … [by] the elitists who live in their own little bubble.”
NR is “completely out of touch … [and] represents big business, not the American people,” he added, noting NR’s support for the 5,500-page Trans-Pacific Partnership. “Out here in Iowa, they are not representative and their views are not representative.”
Of course there is ample room to criticize Trump’s approach and his lapse into sloganeering where substance is needed — as I have done on many occasions. But if NR rejects the Trump voters, it will be reversing the decision by Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, and others to welcome blue-collar voters, Democrats, and independents into the conservative fold. Whatever that means for the country, it will do major damage to conservatism. If the conservative movement devotes itself to defending the legacy of George W. Bush at all costs, it will become irrelevant to the debate over how to make things better for most Americans.
In the end, NR’s attempted hit-job on Trump won’t won’t matter much. Folks who like Trump will continue to like him. Those who don’t will feel reconfirmed in their views. One of the many reasons I loved Reagan is that he understood how important it was to grow the conservative movement.
“Conservatism,” Reagan biographer Craig Shirley said, “transcends any individual or organization, because it’s ultimately about the God-inspired belief that we are destined to be free.”