“Tell people not to come to our country illegally. That's the solution. Don't come to our country illegally. Come like other people do, come legally,”

Trump's answer to family separation: "Don't come to our country illegally"https://t.co/88K2iD4ul0

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) July 10, 2018

“Democrats want open borders and they don't mind crime. We want no crime and we want borders,” Trump said. “Our borders mean something, right? And remember this, without borders, you do not have a country.”

Krauthammer: ‘[Merkel] Made One of the Most Monumental Mistakes of Post-War

VIDEO - Krauthammer: ‘[Merkel] Made One of the Most Monumental Mistakes of Post-War Germany’https://t.co/KMZLVbIjva

— Grabien (@GrabienMedia) December 10, 2016

The evidence is overwhelming and metastasizing: To borrow a Safire line, Hillary Clinton is a congenital rule-breaker

In Hillary We Trust http://t.co/MLkDxj2a0R pic.twitter.com/4ybPh3dUNO

— The Weekly Standard (@weeklystandard) May 1, 2015

1. Shoot the messenger 2. Keep the cash 3. Delete the emails #Leadership https://t.co/500v07vL64

— Ron Fournier (@ron_fournier) May 1, 2015

The evidence is overwhelming and metastasizing: To borrow a Safire line, Hillary Clinton is a congenital rule-breaker http://t.co/uKje0UDkcz

— Ron Fournier (@ron_fournier) April 30, 2015

It's past time she come clean for the sake of "restoring trust in our politics."

The difference between the Republican Party and the Democrats today is over the rule of law.

◼ Obama’s Indifference to Law Echoes Famed Plot Of the Writer O. Henry - BETSY McCAUGHEY/NY Sun

The difference between the Republican Party and the Democrats today is over the rule of law. When President Obama appointed judges without Senate approval, made environmental law without Congress, and rewrote his health law two dozen times, Republicans protested that Mr. Obama was shredding the Constitution.

Most Democratic lawmakers turned a blind eye to the Constitution they swore to uphold. Last Thursday, Mr. Obama opted for lawlessness again, dictating broad changes to immigration law. He made them banana-republic style: one man ruling with the stroke of his pen.

The phrase “banana republic” was invented by the American fiction writer O. Henry, in exile a century ago in Honduras. It was a country where laws were changed frequently by petty dictators. Mr. Obama says he’s acting alone because Congress waited too long. But the Constitution vests all legislative powers, including immigration and naturalization law, with Congress. It doesn’t say “unless Congress waits too long.” There’s no timetable.

Republicans are condemning Mr. Obama’s latest power grab. Predictably, only a handful of Democratic lawmakers have said they were worried about the president’s dictatorial approach. Most are applauding him for getting something done. The framers of the Constitution were worried about presidential power grabs. They were steeped in the history of European despots, and invented a system of checks and balances to keep power-hungry presidents in line.

The problem today is bigger than one lawless man. Democratic Party leaders – half of the nation’s political establishment – talk a lot about rights, but not about the rule of law. The Constitution isn’t on their radar. No matter where you stand on immigration, this growing indifference to the Constitution is alarming. It’s given Mr. Obama license to pursue his dangerous course and future presidents to do likewise. KEEP READING

THE REPUBLICAN WAVE DEBUNKED BIG MYTHS ABOUT THE OBAMA ERA

◼ Guess what. Voters don’t really hate “obstructionism.” They hate the other party. - David Harsanyi/Human Events

FBI ‘very concerned’ about iPhone lock

◼ FBI Director James Comey on Thursday said he is “very concerned” about new privacy protections that Apple and Google are placing on their phones. - The Hill

According to the Huffington Post, Comey told reporters that he is "a huge believer in the rule of law, but I am also a believer that no one in this country is above the law.”

"What concerns me about this is companies marketing something expressly to allow people to place themselves above the law,” he added.
Last week, both Apple and Google announced that new iPhones and Android devices would automatically come loaded with encryption technology automatically preventing anyone without a passcode — even police holding a warrant — from accessing pictures, notes and other messages on the phone.

Carney: We Didn’t Negotiate With Terrorists Because Bergdahl Wasn’t a Hostage or Something

◼ Critics of the administration’s deal to free Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl are accusing Barack Obama of everything from negotiating with terrorists to breaking the law requiring that he notify Congress before releasing detainees from Guantanamo Bay. - IJ Review

Monday, White House press secretary Jay Carney claimed that because Bergdahl was a “prisoner of war,” as opposed to a “hostage,” the White House didn’t — technically — negotiate with the Taliban. Nice spin, Jay.

◼ White House Can’t Agree: Susan Rice Calls Bergdahl ‘Hostage,’ Carney Says He’s Not - DAILY CALLER

The Obama administration is struggling to explain how their deal to release five top-ranking Taliban in exchange for captured Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl does not violate the U.S. prohibition on negotiating with terrorists, splitting hairs and contradicting one another in deliberations over whether Bergdahl was a “hostage” or a “prisoner of war.”

◼ Did Obama Just Trade a Deserter for 5 Taliban Leaders to Distract from the Mass Mistreatment of Honorable Veterans? - Jim Treacher/Daily Caller

Obama clearly broke the law by releasing those prisoners from Gitmo without notifying Congress, but it’s easy to dismiss such pesky details by adding those two magic words: “Republicans say.”

◼ Jonathan Turley: Let’s face it, this Bergdahl prisoner swap is illegal - HOTAIR
◼ Via RCP, you already know ◼ why it’s illegal but stay tuned anyway for two excellent points that have been overlooked. One: There’s no reason why the White House couldn’t have complied with the statute and notified Congress months or even years ago of its intent to do a deal for Bergdahl involving the Taliban Five if/when the opportunity ever presented itself. The reason they kept mum and did this on the sly, without notifying anyone first, isn’t because they had to “move quickly” or whatever, it’s because they knew that advance notice to Congress would give hawks on both sides of the aisle time to build political pressure against the swap. Obama wants to empty Gitmo and make nice with the Taliban before we abandon Afghanistan to its fate, and complying with the law was an impediment to that. So he broke it.



And, by the way, if you take the Taliban at their word, this little Hopenchange gambit to build goodwill as a preface to broader peace talks is doomed to fail.

DRUDGE:
Reintegration: Military hides Bergdahl from public view...
◼ FLASHBACK: 'Converted to Islam And Taught Captors Bomb Making Skills'... - Mail Online 8/22/10
◼ NYTIMES: Left note explaining desertion before going AWOL... - New York Times
Pentagon knew whereabouts but didn't risk rescue for 'deserter'...
Never Officially Listed as POW...
CHARGE: Soldiers died searching for him...
Former fed prosecutor: Release of Gitmo terrorists impeachable offense...
◼ PREZ: 'Absolutely' Possible They Will Return to Terror - Real Clear Politics
Freed Taliban leaders given hero's welcome...
◼ Toobin: Obama 'Clearly Broke Law' - Mediaite
FATHER: 'I am still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners'...
Anger explodes...
BOWE 'SHOULD FACE COURT-MARTIAL'

SENATORS DENOUNCE OBAMA FOR THREATENING 'ENTIRE CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM' BY 'NULLIFYING' IMMIGRATION LAWS

◼ On Thursday, 22 Republican senators, including even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), denounced President Barack Obama in a scathing letter for threatening America's "entire constitutional system" with his immigration "enforcement review" that threatens to "nullify" the nation's immigration laws. - Tony Lee/Breitbart

"Your actions demonstrate an astonishing disregard for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the rights of American citizens and legal residents," the senators wrote in a letter to Obama. "Our entire constitutional system is threatened when the Executive Branch suspends the law at its whim and our nation’s sovereignty is imperiled when the commander-in-chief refuses to defend the integrity of its borders."

After intense pressure from pro-amnesty groups who fear that amnesty legislation will not pass this year, Obama's Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson met with advocacy groups last month to reportedly consider administrative actions--such as granting more forms of amnesty, not deporting illegal immigrants who have not committed "major" crimes, and allowing bond hearings for illegal immigrants--to further erode the nation's laws. The senators said they had "grave concerns" with these potential actions because they "would represent a near complete abandonment of basic immigration enforcement and discard the rule of law and the notion that the United States has enforceable borders."

"These policies have operated as an effective repeal of duly enacted federal immigration laws and exceed the bounds of the Executive Branch’s prosecutorial discretion," the senators wrote. "It is not the province of the Executive to nullify the laws that the people of the United States, through their elected representatives, have chosen to enact. Congress has not passed laws permitting people to illegally enter the country or to ignore their visa expiration dates, so long as they do not have a felony conviction or other severe offense on their record."

NORTH CAROLINA PASSES ANTI-SHARIA LAW

◼ The legislation passed without Gov. Pat McCrory signing it. He called the bill “unnecessary” but still did not veto it, so it became the law of the state on Sunday. - Breitbart

◼ North Carolina becomes 7th state to ban Muslim Sharia law - Deseret News

North Carolina now joins Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Tennessee, according to Religion News Service, in banning Islamic Sharia law. A constitutional amendment seeking the same change in Alabama will be on the 2014 ballot. In Missouri, the governor vetoed an anti-Sharia bill because of its potential impact on international adoptions.

But the law in Oklahoma was struck down in court as unconstitutional, according to the Progressive Pulse, because it discriminated among religions without justification.

North Carolina lawmakers tried to avoid that problem by not mentioning Sharia in the legislation but instead banning enforcement of all foreign laws.

Supporters hailed the bill as an important safeguard that protects the American legal system from foreign laws that are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, RNS reported, while critics argued the Constitution already overrides foreign laws.

◼ Anti-Sharia Bill Passed In North Carolina Without Governor Pat McCrory's Signature - Huffington Post

The North Carolina ban is limited to family law; bans in other states are broader, applying to commercial law, contract law and other types of laws.

◼ North Carolina bans judges from turning to Shariah law to decide cases - Washington Times

Immigration is the zombie of political issues–even when it is dead, it is still alive.

◼ The combination of the Democratic Party, business interests, and a GOP operative class yearning for its promise of improved standing with Hispanic voters means that you can never really count it out. - Jonathan Strong/Breitbart

That said, it is hard to imagine Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) moving forward after yesterday’s closed-door showdown. According to estimates from those who were in the room–both in favor of moving forward and against–the dozens of GOP lawmakers who spoke were at least 80-20 against bringing a bill to the floor this year.

There is a palpable sense of disappointment among those interested in moving forward. In private conversations, the word that is used is that the meeting was “predictable.” The same people in the GOP conference who kept Boehner from moving on a bill in 2013 are just as opposed in 2014.

...Drudge Report popped with hit after hit against amnesty yesterday--including Boehner with a superimposed sombrero hat and Sen. Ted Cruz's warning that immigration reform could doom the GOP in 2014...

◼ They Don’t Call ‘em the Stupid Party for Nothing - PJMedia

Is Boehner smart enough to heed their warnings, and spend the year employing “masterly inactivity” focusing all of the GOP’s activity on blunting the Obamacare rollout, as Hugh Hewitt recently suggested to Jake Tapper, or is he determined to suicidally ram immigration “reform” through this year, “because he can,” as Streiff at Red State suggested?

◼ Boehner Courts a GOP Civil War - J. Robert Smith/American Thinker

There aren't pejoratives adequate enough to describe and deride Boehner's resolve to tackle immigration surrender this election year. Either the speaker has one of the greatest tin ears in the history of American politics or he's got his sights set on a cushy post-speakership job and a corner office somewhere in DC....

Boehner's courting -- and must know he's courting -- a crackup of the Republican Party. House Republicans -- like all Republicans and conservatives -- should focus like laser beams on 1) exploiting ObamaCare's crass failures and growing unpopularity with voters; 2) aggressively pursuing the Obama scandals; 3) offering a "liberty" agenda, which goes heavy on reviving the nation's anemic economy and downsizing and reforming the federal government. That's a recipe for electoral success in 2014.

If its civil war the speaker wants, its civil war he'll get. Establishment Republicans may have the dough, but the grassroots outnumbers them roughly three to one. The commitment and passion are with the grassroots. At war's end, it's the speaker and his ilk who'll be trundling off on yet another retreat -- and, this time, for good.

◼ GOP CRAFTS PLAN TO WRECK THE COUNTRY, LOSE VOTERS - Ann Coulter

Egypt Is Ahead of Us

◼ Is our State Department paying attention? - The Other McCain
◼ Egypt names Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group - AP

CAIRO (AP) — Egypt's military-backed interim government declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization Wednesday, intensifying its campaign of arrests and prosecutions targeting its members and tightening the noose on the group's network of charities and businesses.

The unprecedented executive decision likely ends any chance of reconciliation between the government and the 85-year-old Brotherhood, still Egypt's most organized political group. It marks a stunning reversal of fortunes for the long-outlawed organization that saw member Mohammed Morsi reach Egypt's highest office in the country's first democratic election, only to be ousted in a popularly backed military coup in July....

The declaration comes after another sweeping decision Tuesday aimed at draining the Brotherhood's finances by freezing the funds of more than 1,000 non-government organizations with links to the group and putting more than 100 schools run by the group under government supervision. That directly attacks the grassroots strength of the Brotherhood, where it has much of its power in Egyptian life.

Eissa said Wednesday's decision means that those who "participate in the group's activities, in the organization or promotion verbally or by writing or by any other means or financing its activities" will be facing punishment according to the law.

"It's not possible for Egypt the state nor Egypt the people to submit to the Muslim Brotherhood terrorism," Eissa said.

Trey Gowdy to liberal law prof: If Obama can ignore parts of ObamaCare, could he ignore election laws too?

◼ Simple question from Gowdy to the legal panel: How far can Obama go? - Allahpundit/HotAir

Now that he’s claimed the royal prerogative to not enforce immigration law against young illegals, not enforce O-Care’s employer mandate against businesses, and not enforce the new rules about “essential benefits” against insurers who un-cancel old plans, what else can he choose not to enforce? If Congress imposes a mandatory minimum sentence for certain offenses, presumably Obama could refuse to enforce that by granting blanket commutations for thousands of people convicted of those offenses. Presumably he could also refuse to enforce election laws. Why not? What’s the limiting principle?

◼ Gowdy: If Obama Chooses Not to Enforce Immigration Laws, Can He Suspend Election Laws Too? - CNS News

...“Why not? If he can suspend mandatory minimum and immigration laws, why not election laws?” Gowdy asked.

“Because we live in a government of laws, and the president is bound to obey them and apply them,” Lazarus answered.

“Well he’s not applying the ACA, and he’s not applying immigration laws, and he’s not applying marijuana laws, and he’s not applying mandatory minimums. What’s the difference with election laws?” Gowdy asked.

◼ Liberal law prof: Obama’s unconstitutional power grabs are creating a “very dangerous and unstable system” - Allahpundit/HotAir

Turley makes two valuable points here. One: Courts tend to give the executive a wide berth in separation-of-powers challenges on the theory that Congress has the power of the purse and can defund any executive agency it likes. But that’s not true anymore, he says. Obama, by defying appropriations, has claimed some of that power for himself. What check does Congress have left? That brings us to point two: Even if Congress can’t stop Obama, the courts can. The problem there, though, says Turley, is that O and the DOJ have argued successfully in many cases that no one has standing to sue him because no one can show an injury from his power grabs that’s concrete enough to justify a federal lawsuit. So the courts can’t check him either.

The only check is to beat him at the polls, and since he’s now term-limited, there’s no real check there apart from his party’s fear that they’ll be punished for his excesses instead. Show of hands: Who thinks Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will keep Obama in line?