VFP/C4L, May 4th.
MURDOCK – Middle East Refugees; GOLDBERG – Minimum Wage; Hanson – Diversity Contradictions.
GOP: LOWRY – Establishment; FLYNN – NY Delivers Big; PHILLIPS – Texas Secession?
LEADS: McCARTHY – Obama shreds Constitution; PODHORETZ – Trump vs. Clinton; BATCHELOR 4/19/16; GERSTEIN – FBI/NSA Excesses.
PA: SCHWARTZ – Cruz to take half.
END NOTES: MARK LEVIN 4/19/16
Janet: VFP & Citizens for Liberty
WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, KING OF PRUSSIA VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, 170 ALLENDALE ROAD, 7-9p.m. (doors open at 6:30).
KEYNOTE SPEAKER: The nationally acclaimed Ted Patterson “Ted Patterson serves as the Senior Vice President for the Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership, and is a national consultant who has used the confrontational model to grow grassroots organizations and lead successful political projects around the country.
“- May is our 4th year anniversary. Help us celebrate in all that you have given us. “- We will acknowledge the recent passing of a fellow Patriot and friend to our organization, Mike Souders. “- An update will be given about the situation occurring in Oregon, pertaining to the LaVoy Finicum family, as well as our friends, the Cliven and Carol Bundy family. “- An introduction to the new ‘umbrella’ groups will be announced. We will be seeking volunteers to set brushfires in the minds of PA residents. Our new HB 230/Constitutional Carry Bill team, was kickstarted in PA at our April Meet and Greet. “- Find out what our summer activities include. We will be non-stop. While May is our final event here, we have alot going on that you can participate in, until we return to King of Prussia in September. “- We will have our random monthly door prize. “- FREE potluck dinner buffet included. Feel free to bring a dish or a snack, or just simply enjoy. “- Feast on our 4th birthday cake. “- Cash bar available.”
“Ted Cruz: Trump Supporters ‘Might as Well Put a Hillary Sticker on Your Car’
Deroy Murdock, NRO: “Nothing to Worry about from Middle-Eastern Refugees? Think Again”
“As President Obama rolls out the red carpet for Middle Eastern refugees, he totally ignores the fact that militant-Islamic killers lurk among this bedraggled population. Obama replied to ISIS’s March 22 mayhem in Brussels, Belgium, by reasserting ‘our openness to refugees fleeing [ISIS]’s violence.’ “How excruciatingly ironic that one of the men who brutalized Brussels — killing 32 innocent people (including four Americans) and wounding 300 more — was one of the same “refugees” to whom Obama promises “openness.”
Jonah Goldberg, NRO: “A Higher Minimum Wage Is Well-Intentioned but Problematic”
“. . . With the exception of some very cynical labor unions that support a higher minimum wage because it amounts to an indirect subsidy of their members’ earnings and some politicians who know it is bad economics, the Fight for 15 movement is entirely well-intentioned. But good intentions do not automatically translate into good policy. Last week, the Los Angeles Times reported that California’s recent decision to raise the minimum wage to $15 by 2022 is already having nasty consequences, accelerating the demise of the local apparel industry. “I used to pay $5 to get this sewn, and now it costs $6.50,” Felix Seo, the owner of L.A.-based Joompy told the Times, holding up a patterned dress. “But my customer doesn’t want to pay that, so I can’t sell it anymore.” To stay in business, Joompy will probably have to start importing its clothes. “It will be impossible to make clothes in Los Angeles,” Seo said. This is an old story. My grandmother was a seamstress in New York’s garment district. Those jobs left for the South almost 100 years ago, as costs in New York became prohibitive. They started leaving the South for Asia shortly thereafter. Businesses don’t have to send their work to low-wage countries. They can simply hire robots. Already, many restaurants facing mandated wage hikes are moving to replace human cooks and servers with machines and iPads.
“The Times article had a great little infographic breaking down “Who Gets a Raise” under the minimum-wage hike by age and race. Latinos got the biggest share, with 54 percent. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a companion chart showing how many of those Latinos will simply lose their jobs, resulting in the real minimum wage: zero. . .”
Victor Davis Hanson, NRO: “Contradictions of Diversity”
“Whereas the Founders prized unity, 21st-century America has embraced diversity.
“Diversity is a neutral term, no more positive or negative than its array of antonyms such as homogeneity and uniformity. Iraq is certainly diverse. So is Syria or the Balkans; Japan and South Korea are not. Yet uniformity seems a virtue in the latter while difference in the former has birthed tragedy.
“In other words, diversity as a positive demographic idea depends on how it is manifested within a particular political landscape. In the U.S., diversity was traditionally a word less fondly used than unity. Our coins, after all, do not bear the motto E singulis plures. And the Confederacy failed in its effort to allow the states their own diverse cultures without yielding to federal unity. The German-led invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 was certainly one of the most diverse coalitions in history, the invaders eventually including, besides the Germans themselves, Finns, Hungarians, Italians, Romanians, and Spaniards, in opposition to a mostly unified Soviet Red Army.
“How, then, did diversity become the mantra of the American 21st century? A few reasons stand out.
“First, during the 20th century the U.S. was steadily moving toward a multiracial, intermarried, integrated, and assimilated society. As a result, the 1960s idea of ‘affirmative action’ had largely become played out after a half-century of canonized use; by the 2000s it was beset with a variety of class and racial paradoxes. The country was no longer the 90/10, white/black binary that dealt with the issues of the Civil Rights era. . .” http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434189/diversity-21st-century-americas-mantra
GOP . . .
Rich Lowry, NRO: “Trump, Rush, and the Establishment”
“Rush said yesterday that the Republican establishment is preparing to vote for Hillary to protect its ‘fiefdoms’ from Trump. This doesn’t make sense to me. Yes, a lot of people in the establishment oppose Trump, but this is largely because they believe Trump will lose to Hillary, and perhaps badly. Since all the polling data at this moment suggest that this is exactly what would happen, this isn’t a far-fetched fear.
“As for Trump destroying fiefdoms in Washington, there is no doubt that he is highly unpredictable and that he is over-throwing conservatism as we have known it for decades, but it’s not as though he’s going to show up in Washington and all the lobbying shops and law firms are going to disappear. In fact, Trump is much less of a threat to the Washington status quo than a conservative like Cruz is, since Trump is not promising to reduce the size of the federal government or significantly reform it, only to run it better and cut smarter deals. This is what the stereotypical Washington establishment exists to do. . .”
Mike Flynn, Big Govt: “Empire State Delivers Big for Trump and Clinton”
“New York primary voters delivered big results for both native son Donald Trump and political transplant Hillary Clinton.
“Trump won the Republican primary with around 60 percent of the vote, more than enough to trigger winner-take-all rules for the state’s at-large delegates. Hillary Clinton likewise dominated the Democrat primary, winning almost 60 percent of the vote against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
“Both frontrunners will try to leverage momentum from the lopsided wins to consolidate support in the remaining primaries. Both Trump and Clinton still face challenges in securing the majority of pledged delegates necessary to win the nomination before their parties’ conventions. The advantage they both have, however, is that, after the results in New York, no other candidate could capture a majority before the convention.
“Trump’s large margin in the statewide contest means he is very likely to pick up almost all the delegates at stake in New York. The bulk of the Empire State’s delegates, 81, are awarded through the state’s 27 congressional districts. If a candidate wins a congressional district with more than 50 percent of the vote, that candidate wins all three delegates in each district.
“Trump has won 18 districts by strong majorities, netting him all three delegates in each. He is winning, but well below the 50 percent threshold in four districts. In these districts he will collect two delegates each, while second-place John Kasich picks up one delegate in each. Another district, in Manhattan, is still too close to call between Trump and Kasich. . .”
Amber Phillips, WaPo: “The Texas secession debate is getting kind of real”
“When Texas Republicans assemble for their state convention next month, it’s possible they will debate whether Texas should secede from the United States.
“There’s almost no chance Texas Republicans will actually vote in favor of seceding, mind you — not least because most of the party wants nothing to do with this — but the fact we’re even mentioning secession and the Texas GOP convention in the same sentence suggests that the once-fringe movement has become a priority for at least some conservative grass-roots Texans.
“To be sure, that seems to be a relatively small group. The Texas secession movement says 22 out of the 270 county GOP conventions passed some kind of independence resolution this spring. A party official said he’d be surprised if that were the case, and the Houston Chronicle was able to confirm only 10 counties. But 10 is a lot more than the one county that passed an independence resolution in 2012.
“Texas Republicans say these independence resolutions are just a handful of tens of thousands various resolutions to be considered at their convention. But it does seem like the secession movement is growing . . .”
LEADS . . .
Andrew McCarthy, PJM: “Pay Attention! While Primaries Distract, Obama Shreds Constitutional Governance”
“. . . because of Obama’s obvious desperation for a deal, coupled with the incompetent manner (or, more cynically, the intentionally ambiguous manner) in which the deal is drafted, Obama has created the following situation:
- “(a) Iran — having already pocketed major concessions — continually threatens to walk away unless the United States agrees to additional sanctions relief.
- “(b) If it is to accommodate the mullahs, as Obama is hard-wired to do, the administration must lean on the relevant actors to relax sanctions even if they are based on non-nuclear activities (e.g., terrorism or ballistic missiles).
“Against that backdrop, the JCPOA also purports to oblige the federal government to use:
- … “all available authorities [to eliminate any] law at the state or local level … [that] is preventing the implementation of sanctions lifting as specified in this JCPOA[.]”
“Obama further explicitly commits in the JCPOA:
- “The United States will actively encourage officials at the state or local level to take into account the changes in the U.S. policy reflected in the lifting of sanctions under this JCPOA and to refrain from actions inconsistent with this change in policy. (Emphasis added)
“Notice anything odd?
“This is a foreign relations matter. So why does the Iran deal commit Washington merely to “encourage” and otherwise try to persuade state and local officials to honor the deal’s terms? Why not simply direct them to do so?
“Because, for all its bluster about domestic and international law, the administration knows this deal has no legal standing.
“Plainly, the president is trying to muscle his way through the inconvenience that the JCPOA is merely an executive agreement. It is not a legally enforceable treaty, nor is it supported by any legislation that would bind the states.
“Obama is willing it to work through sheer extra-legal executive power. . .”
John Podhoretz, NY Post: “Resign yourself to the depressing reality: It’s going to be Trump vs. Clinton”
“We New Yorkers were excited by the fact that for the first time in 24 years (on the Democratic side) or the first time ever (on the Republican side), our votes were going to make a difference in the nomination of a presidential candidate.
“And did they ever. Bad exit polls suggested Bernie Sanders was giving Hillary Clinton a race, but in a matter of minutes, it was clear they were wrong. She just walloped him.
“This means New York’s Democrats have brought the Bernie insurgency closer to its inevitable end.
“Here in New York, reality bit the Bernie bandwagon. He may deliver endless lectures about how money is everything in politics, but he outspent her in New York by 2-to-1 and she still romped. So give a listen in old Brooklyn-speak: Sometimes, money means bupkis.
“Meanwhile, the state’s Republicans just did something for Donald Trump no other state’s GOP electorate has done for him: It gave him an outright majority of the votes in the single largest primary victory any candidate has scored thus far.
“It’s a glorious night for Trumpkins for the same reason it’s a sobering night for those of us who believe a Trump nomination would be disastrous for the party and the country.
“For the first time in this race, Trump actually closed strongly and ended up significantly outperforming his poll average by about 7 points. . .”
John Batchelor, 4/19/16
“Tuesday 19 April 2016 / Hour 2, Block A: Rita Cosby, WABC radio political director, in re: As expected, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump did win, by larger-than-expected margins. Clinton has won by a landslide: 60% to 39%. Trump is 62%; Kasich in the twenties, Cruz in the teens. Trump: “We don’t have much of a race any more. . . . . It’s really nice to win the delegates with the votes.” “Mary Kissel, Wall Street Journal Editorial Board & host of Opinion Journal on WSJ Video; in re: Yes, 1237 means: 1237. Mr Trump says that it’s all finished, he has enough even if not quite the needed number. He didn’t complain about normal process where he had landslide victories; only when it doesn’t redound to his advantage. We play all nine innings. Mr Trump has retooled his operation: Paul Manafort from the Twentieth Century will reorganize. . . As well as Trump is ding tonight, we already have factored in a great night for him; on a delegate map, factored in a good night next week; and May is different map, where Cruz and Kasich may be able to [do better]. Sanders is running strongly for a serious underdog; he’s pulled her ‘way to the left. The longer she stays in, the more he attacks her, the weaker she is and the more fodder she gives the GOP. With her backers – unions, many ethnic groups, et al. – she’s most likely to get the nomination absent a surprise such as something to do with her email problems. From Trump: a more dialled-back tone, less-caustic rhetoric. He did say that the Party system is rigged and the convention proves doesn’t matter. What he could have done was embraced the delegates and system – they might think differently about him. When he accuses all those grass-roots Americans of being corrupt, he does himself a disservice. “Tuesday 19 April 2016 / Hour 2, Block B: John Fund, NRO, in re: just back from Europe; 1237 = 1237? Yes. And the delegates have independence after the first ballot. Trump has shown himself to be volatile and unreliable. We have delegates to supplement the judgment of the voters. True; their job is to elect someone who can win. . . . I keep being told that 1100 is 1237. Trump runs his campaign as a series of rallies. When he doesn’t win, he complains that it’s fraud. However, it’s the same rules as used by Lincoln, Eisenhower, Reagan. / Trump has lent himself about $20 mil, and has agreed to invest another $20 mil – he sees that even with winning New York, he’ll fall about 100 or 150 delegates short; he certainly cannot afford to lose the first ballot. Indiana is the Wisconsin of May. They don’t like sharp elbows or demagogic speeches.”
Josh Gerstein, Politico: “Court troubled by surveillance excesses at FBI, NSA”
“In a just-released court opinion, a federal court judge overseeing government surveillance programs said he was “extremely concerned” about a series of incidents in which the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency deviated from court-approved limits on their snooping activities.
“Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Judge Thomas Hogan sharply criticized the two agencies over the episodes, referred to by intelligence gatherers as “compliance incidents.” He also raised concerns that the government had taken years to bring the NSA-related issues to the court’s attention and he said that delay might have run afoul of the government’s duty of candor to the court.
“The court was extremely concerned about NSA’s failure to comply with its minimization procedures—and potentially” a provision in federal law, Hogan wrote. The NSA violations appeared to involve preserving surveillance data in its systems beyond the two or five years after which it was supposed to be deleted.
PA . . .
Ian Schwartz, RCP: “NBC Reporter: Cruz to Win Half Of Pennsylvania’s Delegates, “Even If He Comes In Distant Third”
“NBC’s Hallie Jackson reports Cruz has changed his focus to Pennsylvania and making a play for the state’s unbound delegates. Jackson, the network’s Cruz correspondent, said even if Cruz has a third place finish in Pennsylvania’s Republican primary, he’ll win more than half the delegates. “‘It’s very telling that’s Ted Cruz tonight is not in Brooklyn or Manhattan or any of the boroughs or state. He’s in Pennsylvania,’ reported Jackson. “‘He’ll be in Philly for his watch party tonight,’ Jackson said. ‘That’s indicative of where he and his campaign see this race going, to Pennsylvania, where they are looking to make a play for these unbound delegates. Even if they come in a distant third, a top campaign aide tells me, they will still, they believe, pick up more than half the delegates there.’ “‘They’re looking at more than 30,’ Jackson said. “Pennsylvania allots 71 delegates in the Republican primary; 54 of which are unbound. . .”
END NOTES . . .
Mark Levin, 4/19/16
“On Tuesday’s Mark Levin Show, Tuesday is primary day with voting commencing in New York State and some people pretend that they don’t understand how the delegate system works. They should take some context from the election of 1800, one of the most amazing of all elections in American history. As it is today, the matter of selecting the state electors was reserved to the states back in 1800.
“In addition, none of the candidates in 1800 complained about the system being corrupt. Also, Donald Trump knew the intricacies of the bankruptcy system and eminent domain, yet is out-maneuvered and out –managed when it comes to getting delegates in states that don’t have primaries. He claims to be for the little guy, but has failed to meet with the little guy to make his case. Meanwhile Ted Cruz is the one outmaneuvering Donald Trump and persuading delegates to support his cause. Later, it looks like there are problems in paradise for the Trump campaign. Paul Manafort has taken over the campaign and displaced Corey Lewandowski.
“Finally, Joe Biden thinks he knows better than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu what is best for Israel. He and others need to stop meddling in the affairs of Israel.”