And Coulter goes on the offensive in a very long whiny rant! Money, money, money!

Ann Coulter: Trump’s Failing. Don’t Ask Me to Lie About it

20 Feb 2019

For decades, voters have been lied to by politicians promising to crack down on immigration. We vote and we vote and we vote, and nothing ever changes. Wage-lowering, culture-destroying policies manage to appear in every bill Congress passes.

We finally got sick of it and voted for Trump. He promised to build a wall, deport illegal aliens and end the anchor baby scam. No matter how much the establishment screamed at him, he never backed down.

To call Trump’s promise to build a wall his “central campaign promise” routinizes it. That promise was indispensable to his election in a way that no other president’s campaign promises ever were.

Trump had none of the qualities voters typically look for in a president. He hadn’t been vice president, a U.S. senator or governor of California. There was little about his character to inspire a nation.

Trump’s mandate on immigration was the loudest bell ever to be rung in American politics.

While I admire people’s loyalty to the first presidential candidate to speak honestly about America’s problems, what if they’re being loyal to a false front?

The bill President Trump signed last Friday is worse than anything Hillary could ever have gotten through Congress.

To mention the two most shocking examples, the bill prohibits Trump from using any Homeland Security funds to build a wall anywhere along the border. Only bollard fencing is permitted — and even that is allowed in only one small section of the border with the approval of local authorities.

Inasmuch as the “local authorities” in that particular sector are liberal Democrats and/or beholden to Mexican cartels, the bill Trump just signed effectively prohibits any barrier whatsoever from being built on the border.

The bill also expressly prohibits the deportation of any illegal aliens who are part of a household, or thinking of becoming part of a household, that contains an “unaccompanied minor” — i.e. any illegal alien who claims to be under 18 years old with no parent in the country.

This is why the bill is being referred to as the Pedophiles-Go-Free Act.

Trump — and those hoping to be invited to the next White House Christmas party — refers to this as a “deal.” Gen. Custer struck a similar “deal” at Little Bighorn…..

https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2019/02/20/ann-coulter-trumps-failing-dont-ask-me-to-lie-about-it/

Really good read so I’m posting Part 1 of 3, judge refutes the basis of dem lawsuits on border wall..

.

Art Arthur, a resident fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and former immigration judge, referred to a federal lawsuit filed against President Donald Trump by California and 14 other states over the president’s declaration of a national emergency and plans to redirect federal funds for border wall construction as “political theater.”

The lawsuit dismisses Trump’s characterization of the status quo of unlawful immigration and border security as an emergency, framing it as a “manufactured crisis“:

Contrary to the will of Congress, the President has used the pretext of a manufactured “crisis” of unlawful immigration to declare a national emergency and redirect federal dollars appropriated for drug interdiction, military construction, and law enforcement initiatives toward building a wall on the United States-Mexico border. This includes the diversion of funding that each of the Plaintiff States receive.

1 – Redirection of Military Funds Hurts Plaintiff States’ Economies

Arthur said, “The lawsuit appears to be based on the fact that they will be using funding for military facilities in their state, so it’s a pretty slim read given the fact that military facilities by definition are federal, and I guess that they will lose money in the states, but as you mentioned before, we’re talking about 15 Democratic states’ attorneys general. This is, quite frankly, more the same. This is just political theater. They filed it in the Northern district of California, a place that you’ll note that there is no border wall planned. It’ll go to the Ninth Circuit, and the president’s plan will probably be enjoined in the Ninth Circuit, possibly.”

The Supreme Court would decide in Trump’s favor, speculated Arthur.

“In any event, if it went to an en banc panel in the Ninth Circuit, almost definitely the injunction would be upheld, and then it will go to the Supreme Court,” predicted Arthur. “The Supreme Court will say the president has the authority under the National Emergencies Act to do this and it’ll all be fine, but we’ll have to get to that point.”

Mansour asked how long the lawsuit would take to reach the Supreme Court.

“It could probably take about 18 months to two years,” assessed Arthur. “Keep in mind, we’re just talking about one lawsuit. As soon as they break ground anywhere, then whoever owns that ground or hovers near that ground or because of language that was put in the latest appropriations bill, DHS has to consult with local officials anywhere that it’s planning on building a wall.”

Arthur went on, “So there’ll be lawsuits in conjunction with the consultations, even if the consultations are completely fulsome and in good faith. This is simply going to be tied up in litigation forever. The fact that the funds of the people of this state have to be spent on this political theater is just ridiculous. People are dying in this city. People are dying in this country because of these drugs, and they need to be stopped.”