While Trump attacks conservatives, his immigration agenda burns

The biggest news story of the week is not that President Trump is attacking conservatives for wanting to uphold his campaign promise and protect him from owning a more insolvent version of Obamacare. The biggest story is that he is not attacking the establishment and Senate appropriators for preemptively negotiating away his leverage by promising Chuck Schumer there won’t be funding for the border wall in the April budget.

President capitulating on border funding

One of the few good things that has come from this nascent administration is its discretionary budget proposal for FY 2017 and FY 2018. The budget bill for the remainder of the fiscal year, which comes due on April 28, presents the president with his only opportunity to force through critical policy changes and his spending priorities. The president has asked for immediate supplemental funds for the border wall and for rebuilding the military in exchange for $18 billion in cuts to the non-defense bureaucracies. Yet, as we noted earlier this week, Senate Republicans already forged a deal to fund Planned Parenthood, refugee resettlement, and the extra spending for the bureaucracies…but not for the border wall!

Why isn’t the president demanding an immediate course correction? The border wall is the most foundational promise of Trump’s campaign, yet he has nothing to say when liberal Republicans negotiate away his leverage. The more the border wall funding is delayed, the less likely it will ever get done. What gives?

Refusing to fight for moratorium

Meanwhile, the maniacal courts continue to assault national sovereignty. On Wednesday, the radical judge in Hawaii upgraded his temporary restraining order on the immigration moratorium to a preliminary injunction. Unfortunately, this administration refuses to plow ahead with the moratorium and its lawyers are capitulating to the courts, even though courts have no jurisdiction over this issue and there was no legitimate case or controversy to rule on. A district judge cannot place a nationwide injunction on the lack of issuance of visas to hypothetical prospective immigrants or travelers.

There is a term for this obsequious behavior from the White House, widely popularized by some pro-Trump social media outlets, and it begins with a C.

Welcome to sanctuary nation  

We haven’t heard the last from the courts, either. The Seattle mayor is also suing the administration for cutting off funding to lawless sanctuary cities. Mayor Ed Murray filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (the court where James Robart sits) claiming that the federal government cannot cut off funding despite the jurisdiction’s violation of federal law and national sovereignty. I’ve already explained that their anti-coercion federalism argument is absurd, but there is no doubt the courts will place a nationwide injunction on this order and declare America a sanctuary nation. The courts are insane and have already issued similar rulings.

Which is why it’s so important to include in the funding bill a provision denying Justice Department grants to lawless jurisdictions. Why is the president not making the case, and why is he groveling before the courts when the courts are engaging in civil disobedience?

Make refugee resettlement great again

Worse, as the Huffington Post reported, the State Department has reset the refugee caps to near-Obama levels and is bringing in 900 refuges per week. This is completely gratuitous, even for one who wants to abide by the lawless court decision.

Obsessing with Palestinian “peace” and allowing terrorist travel

Meanwhile, the State Department is issuing a visa to Palestinian terrorist Jibril Rajoub to participate in peace talks! Aside from the fact that this action reveals the administration is just as obsessed with the two-state solution as the Obama administration, the issuance of such a visa violates federal law (INA Sec. 212(a)(2)(B)), which bars entry to anyone associated with terrorists or who has espoused support for terrorism.

What happened to putting Americans first?  

Moreover, why is he not demanding that the House and Senate vote on all his immigration promises – from halting the Central American surge to the Davis-Oliver interior enforcement bill? Why isn’t he demanding that they pay for the wall by cutting off remittances to Mexico and refundable tax credits for illegal aliens, including the “DACA” amnesty he continues to facilitate?

Sure, constitutionally speaking, Congress sets the agenda, but politically, the president sets the agenda when his party controls Congress. And if Trump has the time and moxie to go after conservatives on health care, why is he not subjecting the establishment to his Twitter treatment as it relates to the budget, immigration, and his most foundational promises?

Yet instead of harnessing the outrage from the Rockville rape to protect our sovereignty, DHS Secretary John Kelly won’t stop talking about “Dreamers” as if they are covered by a legitimate statute. He promised Democrats on Wednesday that he would not deport any “Dreamer” without a criminal record. Not only is it against the law to categorically exempt them from deportation, but the Rockville rape demonstrated that there are indeed violent ones who have never previously offended.

It is precisely the promise of “Dream” amnesty that has led to the disastrous border surge from Central America. Furthermore, forget about deportations, why is DHS handing out affirmative benefits to new applicants every week? This is patently unconstitutional, as well as a violation of our sovereignty and a drain on taxpayers. Not to mention a violation of another campaign promise.

Then again, it’s always easy to make conservatives the bogeyman. The media will certainly let that one go. Attacking the swamp? Not so much.