So all Schumer can say is that it is a "troubling" matter, instead of admitting that maybe the Trump Administration was right on extreme vetting (although India was not on the list of countries on the first executive order - yet Schumer used this athlete's visa issues to score political points against Trump -- backfired!)
The media and the Dems want to paint a troubling picture of the Trump Administration, but it is stories such as this one that show us that the President knows what he is doing. Chuck Schumer's grandstanding just got egg in his face.
Today is Legislative Day 28 of the 2017 Session. It is called Crossover Day because it is the last day for a bill to pass the House or Senate and "cross over" to the other body. A long day ahead!
Very good comments from our friends across the pond.
AP spreads fake news. You can't trust anything reported by the mainstream media!
There is no plan to deploy a hundred thousand National Guard troops somewhere throughout America to find illegal aliens and throw them over the wall, throw them over the fence. There is no such operation. AP reported fake news.
This is general condition of humanity with no moral compass: intellectual inconsistency.
Those I have had conversations with in the past few days know that I see the Trump election as an echo of Brexit. It was the U.K. Vote that convinced me that a major historical, political, social and economic paradigmatic shift was coming and happening in our time. We won't know what it will look like until 4-8 years from now, but it is happening, and I dare to prematurely call it the rise of the "Conservative-Nationalist Populist." Yes, brand new term. And now, this article is published! And I assure you this is only the beginning. So store away your copies of "A New World Order" and get ready for the neo-brave, new world.
The media turned itself into the opposition and, accordingly, was voted down as the new political reality emerged: Ads don’t work, polls don’t work, celebrities don’t work, media endorsements don’t work, ground games don’t work.
Early Voting Is a Bad Idea
My colleague from Louisiana, Vinicio Madrigal, shares my take on early voting. Good points. Let me know your thoughts.
The political parties in each state actually choose the slate of electors by rules and procedures they establish. When voters cast their ballots, they are stating a preference for a candidate, but they are actually choosing a slate of electors pledged to the candidate by state law or by party rules, with winner-take-all votes except... in Nebraska and Maine. Some states provide penalties against electors who do not cast their votes as indicated by the popular vote, although the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether those laws and penalties are constitutional.
These provisions were put in place to ensure a republican form of government, not a direct democracy. But the trend in recent years has moved away from the Founding Fathers' original vision, allowing all citizens to vote -- women as well as men, the indigent as well as property holders, the illiterate and non-English-speaking, and, most importantly, former slaves and their descendants. All states now provide for direct election of electors by popular vote, and most states now allow for early voting, either in person or by mail. Voting occurs as early as 50 days before Election Day. What this means is that each election is like voting on a moving picture. If you vote early in the reel, you may not know that your candidate turns out to be a villain.
This year, more than 22 million people will have voted before actual Election Day, and many of them are operating on partial information on the state of the campaign and the candidates. There has never been an election in which so many late-breaking stories have had the potential to decide an election.
We have begun to treat Election Day like one of those never-ending department store sales. Show up whenever you want and you'll still get a deal. The idea seems to be that we make voting as easy as possible. Heaven forbid we make people actually treat the occasion like the privilege it is.
Election Day should be a solemn occasion. If it takes some sacrifice to vote -- for example, getting up early or standing in line awhile -- isn't it worth it to be able to determine the course of our own future? But most of all, shouldn't voting be a civic celebration, a time when we meet our neighbors and gather at the same place and same time as everyone else in the country to act on the same information available to all of us? Expanding the franchise shouldn't be about diluting the significance of voting in the name of convenience, but unfortunately, it has become so. I, for one, think we're worse off because of it.