Nancy Pelosi is an vain, egotistical 79-year-old woman; the proverbial "poster girl" as to why we need congressional term limits.
Through the past week, never once was it mentioned that Donald Trump receive 306 electoral college votes in the 2016 election. Nor was it admitted that Pelosi represents one of the most "far left fringe" congressional districts in America.
Two nights ago, my wife issued a startling metaphor: She called Robert Mueller "Stalin."
This came on the heels of another metaphor: "CNN is America's Pravda."
Interesting that such an assertion would come from someone who spent her first 25 years in the former Soviet Union. Unfortunately, it is more fact than fantasy!
When I speak to friends from Alaska to Florida, from California to Maine(as I have done during in the past two weeks), it seems that literally EVERYONE favors building not simply a barrier, but a serious border wall that will inhibit traffic. I found one person, a 26 year-old-male who lived at home with his mother, who said that a wall "didn't feel right."
Yet, "polls" say otherwise. But who are these respondents? Perhaps they are they same the respondents who had Hillary Clinton winning by 7 to 14 points, the day before the 2016 presidential election.
Yesterday, Louisiana Senator, Bill Cassidy noted that "four billion dollars" had been apprehended from Mexican drug cartels in 2018. "There is the money for the wall." said the Senator. "If you go back to what was captured in 2017 and 2016, there is even more money."
Money for the wall. Mexico, in effect pays for it. Trump makes good on a campaign promise. Borders are better secured. End of discussion. Right?
Unfortunately, the discussion has gone past securing the borders. It is now a matter of Trump not being allowed to add "building a wall" to his growing string of accomplishments. The question becomes, "are Democrats that petty?"
Pelosi is. She sees Trump's agreeing to reopen the government without 100% assurance of a wall being included, as a political victory. In her mind, it was never about securing the wall, the dreamers or anything other than winning a political argument.
Should Trump simply declare an emergency? Who would object to his using confiscated drug money to achieve this goal? Chuck and Nancy would! But, they are only thinking about political aspects.
Trump knows that he will ultimately face the 9th district if he declares a national emergency. At that point, it would be a year long wait for the case to be heard by the Supreme Court. These same polls are suggesting that Americans oppose his declaring an emergency.
For those who bother to read history, Abe Lincoln made some calls that were not too popular! Had they taken polls during that time, it's likely that his approval rating would have hovered in the high 20's. Lincoln knew that in order to preserve the nation as we knew it, he would need to make some unpopular decisions.
This Lincoln did, knowing that if he did not, a determined minority might find that magic moment where they could defy the odds and achieve their objective.
That magic moment came in September 1862. CSA General Kirby Smith had between 18,000 and 20,000 battle tested, Confederate troops in Lexington. He had learned from Calvary General John Scott that the Union had "less than 5,000 raw levies" guarding Louisville.
Had Smith moved on Louisville, the Union would have evacuated the city. British Prime Minister, David Palmerston would have moved forward with his bill to recognize the Confederacy as a Sovereign nation. The American Civil War would have been over. In spite of the odds, the Southern states would have gained their independence.
Why Kirby Smith did not move is another topic for a different post. The parallel is noteworthy, in that Donald J. Trump has the machinery to end the border question, once and for all. Will he use it?
Many on the inner circle suggest that Pelosi's stiff necked, stubborn posture, coupled with the Democrats inability to find a strong challenger, will ice the 2020 election for the President. Perhaps they are right. But, what if they are not?
The country needs major immigration reform. Nearly everybody is in agreement on this subject. But, where is the compromise?
In a true compromise, neither side is totally happy. To the President's credit, he has tried to find some middle ground. The fact that the other side has shown virtually no interest in compromise, suggests that there is a motive that goes beyond the question of "do we or don't we build a border wall."
Maybe that motive is to sufficiently change the American demography just enough to tip the scales in states like Texas. This past weekend, it was discovered that 58,000 illegal votes have been tabulated over the past four years in the Lone Star state. In a close election, this could prove decisive.
We all know about California's "ballot harvesting" this past election.
And how about this endless Mueller probe? What I cannot fathom, is "why" similar action has not been taken against Hillary Clinton? Or, Obama for that matter?
We all hope that tomorrow morning, we'll awaken to a world of no media bias, no election fraud, no endless, politically inspired probes and no prejudice against insuring the safety of American citizens.
Sadly, we are not dealing with a foe that actually "gives a shit" about American citizens!
When traditional Democrats put "two and two together," many will walk away. After all, this isn't the party of Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton.
"Give us a crime, we'll find a man." Or, "it's not who votes, it's who counts the votes." In the end, as Harvard Law Emeritus, Alan Gershoeitz, describes, "the criminalization of politics."
How utterly "Soviet!" Joseph Stalin would have been proud!
Does Nancy Pelosi see this?
Of course she does. She isn't stupid. The sad thing is that she doesn't care! She is consumed with winning a political argument and is obsessed with her hatred of Donald Trump. That is all.
Could it be enough to insure the president's reelection in 2020?
Too early to tell. There are other factors that will play in. My biggest concern in the near inevitability of voter fraud. "Where" and "to what extent" will be key questions.
Conversely, if the President declares an emergency, it will ignite a firestorm in the Democrat party. Even, if he announces that he will use confiscated monies from captured Mexican Drug lords. To his opponents, this would represent a win for the President and a fulfilled promise to his base.
Polls or no polls, border security is a winning issue for the president. Better to do as Lincoln did: Make a tough decision, knowing that the people who put you in power favor it, taking your chances with those who already oppose you on everything.
Which brings us to the final question: "When you know who your true opponent is and know that their desire is to destroy this nation, do you even want to allow this debate to continue?"
Today, Donald Trump has the Military, Homeland Security, I.C.E. and "armed America" in his corner. As distasteful as an "old fashioned, mano y mano brawl" might appear, it's also fact that the President would score a victory that would end in Communist expulsion from the continent.
We must also remember that the United States of America was never founded as a "Democracy." We are a "Republic." In short, a nation founded on "laws."
A "Democracy" has never worked over the long term. Never! They always end up as "Oligarchies."
Sooner or later, the two factions are going to fight over this question. We can either stick out heads in the sand and allow self interested "relics" like Nancy Pelosi call the shots. Or, we can "right" a long festering wrong that should have been addressed decades earlier.
Like Kirby Smith, the President is entering that "magic moment" where he can make the historical determination.