Calling Out Amnesty Pandering at the Beach Cities Republicans (Endorsements for AD-66 Central Committee)

It was really good–and invigorating–to speak out at the Beach Cities Republicans meeting last night.

I liked meeting with many familiar faces, and there were some other people whom I did not recognize, or whom I had not seen for at least two years.

The first guest speaker talked about Lyin’ Ted Lieu and his

One of the guest speakers, William Valladares, was talking about immigration. He was playing up the fact that he is a “minority Latino GOP” whatever. Aren’t we at a point in this country where we stopped judging people by the color of their skin, but started looking at the content of their character?

He then started talking about the “Dreamers”, the so-called “Dreamers.” He said that he supports giving them amnesty. He also said that some of them love this country more than other Americans. I was really offended by these liberal talking points.

Illegal immigration is illegal immigration. Illegal is illegal. Just because your parents broke the law and brought you into the country does not mean that we should ignore the integrity of a nation’s borders and the sanctity of the rule of law. Children often have to deal with the consequences of their parents’ crimes. There should be no exceptions made in the case of illegal immigration.

I spoke out at length about this, and I refused to relent. One person told me to let him finish. I responded that I had a right to counter him on that point. Allan Ku (whom I enthusiastically endorse for Central Committee), also known as Allan Wright, was sitting next to me. He’s an immigrant, and he came legally. He completely agreed with my decision to speak out. I then left the meeting because I was tired, because I had had a long day.

Two minutes later, I received a phone call. A friend of mine, Marlene Silva (whom I also enthusiastically endorse for Central Committee!). She applauded me for speaking out against the speaker who wanted to give amnesty to illegal aliens.

THEN, THEN she told me that six other people also walked out of the meeting because they were so disgusted with the comments from the speaker.

This is the movement that we are starting. This is how we start making a difference. It’s time to stop being civil and play defense in the face of wrong ideas and wrong-doing!

Let’s speak out and win!

I ENDORSE THE FOLLOWING CANDIDATES FOR AD-66TH Central Committee:

Allan Ku (aka Wright)

Peter Michel

Todd Rubenstein

Arthur Schaper (Of course!)

Eric Shuchman

Marlene Silva

Claude Todoroff

LET’S DO THIS! LET’S MAKE THE 66TH AD Central Committee GREAT AGAIN!

Singapore Christian Lawyer Dishonors Faith in Suit to Repeal 377A

It is very troubling to me the lengths that individuals will go to in order to justify promoting or defending worldly or ungodly tenets all while calling themselves Christians.

One of the thorniest issues in this conflict is homosexuality.

There are a cohort of Christians who think that tolerance of homosexuality is acceptable. It’s not.

The proper, holy response to this matter is the Gospel. God sent His Son to die for us sinners, to put away our sins forever, and to bring us into reconciliation with His Father, and now our Father.

This reconciliation takes us from death to life, from sin to son:

“And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:11)

“Such were some of you”. We are not called to remain in sin once we receive the perfect work of the Son.

So, why do Christians insist on placating homosexuals and accommodating homosexuality?

This problem comes up in a considerable fashion in the legal challenges to Singapore’s statute 377a, a law from Britian’s colonial rule over Singapore (and other countries) which criminalizes sodomy and other acts of gross indecency.

One lawyer who is fighting for repeal of this law, Jordan Tan, makes the case that his advocacy to repeal this law is fully in concert with his Christian faith:

Christian lawyer in 377A constitutional challenge explains why hisinvolvement is consistent with his faith

Jordan Tan is one of the lawyers bringing the constitutional challenge against Section 377A in the Singapore Court right now.

Mr Tan is also a Christian. This is noteworthy now because he mentioned that there have been queries as to why a Christian lawyer would be involved in such a case, given that he is advocating to repeal a law that criminalises consensual sexual acts between adult males which goes against the teachings of the church.

Indeed, and it goes against nature itself. God made mankind male and female, and He designed marriage for one man and one woman. This is not open for debate.

On 15 November, Mr Tan took to Facebook to answer this question. He said, “Although my relationship with God is a personal private matter, Christian accountability and the exhortation not to stumble others (Romans 14:12-13) calls for an open and honest response to such queries.”

Here is his Facebook post:

Our Relationship, our standing before God is NOT a private matter. This idea that our relationship with God has no bearing with public awareness and conviction is just inconsistent with Biblical revelation.

“But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:33)

How do we come to faith in Christ?

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

Confession is a public act. Christians do not have a private faith with Christ Jesus.

He explains why he is acting as a counsel to advocate for the constitutional challenge against 377A and why he considers it consistent with and is an advancement of his Christian Faith. He said, “I am completely at peace with my role advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A in the Singapore courts.”

Indeed:

“They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14)

People can say peace all do, but it does not mean that their standing is in concert with God’s grace or His goodness in a fallen world.

In his post titled “A Christian Advocate’s Role in the Constitutional Challenge against Section 377A”, Mr Tan laid out five points to explain why he thinks that not only is it appropriate for him as a Christian advocate to be involved in this challenge but that it is “required” by his faith.

Quoting Romans 13:1 which says that Christians should submit to the government authorities for all authorities come from God, this means that the constitution is the highest authority in Singapore since that is where the power of all three branches of the government – executive, legislative, judicial – is derived.

We submit to governing authorities as unto the Lord, for:

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” (Romans 13:1)

The highest power belongs to God, and He has empowered all who believe in His son to reign in life (Romans 5:17). Paul the Apostle did not hesitate to appeal to Caesar when he was wronged in court, for example (Acts 25:1-12).

Mr Tan explained, “Given that there are legally meritorious grounds to support the conclusion that section 377A is unconstitutional, it would be wholly inappropriate to shirk away from the responsibility of scrutinising that law against the Constitution and to have it construed or read-down in a manner so that it is consistent with the Constitution.”

No, there are no grounds for repealing the law. Acts which criminalize, and thus discourage gross indecency, carry merit all of themselves.

He added, “Accordingly, advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A advances, instead of detracts from, the highest authority of the land, namely, the Constitution. It is a submission to authority which is called for in the Word.”

The highest authority for a Christian is not a man-made Constitution, but Christ Himself. Full stop.

Mr Tan’s second reason was that he is assisting the court by presenting rigorous arguments in an intellectually honest manner, which is in line with the value of justice. He said, “in our system of law, the adversarial system works best when both sides of an issue are presented rigorously and in an intellectually honest manner. The Court is more ably assisted and the crucible of the adversarial system produces more robust and better-reasoned judgments.

Honesty requires a recognition of the truth, not just speaking one’s honest feelings or thoughts on a matter. I may honestly believe that I am the prime minister of Singapore, and I may ardently profess that I am such. That does not make the prime minister.

Mr Tan quoted Psalm 37:28 which highlight’s God’s love for justice and said that “it is appropriate to participate in a process which serves the ends of justice and to do so in a manner that promotes, at the minimum, better-reasoned judgments.”

Therefore, the just thing to do is maintain 377a. Acts of gross indecency should be criminalized.

The third reason Mr Tan outlined was his view that God prefers obedience grounded in faith instead of fear. He said “my firm view that God does not delight in compliance with the law for fear by persons of criminal sanction; God delights in obedience which comes from believing in Him and having a personal relationship with Him, not fear of going to jail.”

Yes, we should come to God in faith, not fear. His perfect love sent His Son to die for us, to rise for us, and that through Him we live. Part of walking by faith is walking in concert under His grace. The grace of God teaches us to reject sin and live godly lives (Titus 2:11-14). Homosexual conduct is sin, and anyone under grace is no longer under the dominion of sin:

“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” (Romans 6:14)

Next, Mr Tan highlighted Jesus’ iconoclastic way of life as he spent time “in the company of the very religious and the powerful, pursued the marginalised, the weak, and the downtrodden”. Quoting Matthew 20:16 which says the last shall be the first and the first shall be the last, Mr Tan noted how Jesus “loved and cared for the last”.

Connecting that to Singapore, Mr Tan talked about how Section 377A alienates, discriminates, and marginalises an entire community. He said, “In the course of my work, I have found that it has had seriously damaging effects on the LGBTQ+ community and demeans them. In some extreme cases, it emboldens those who would actively discriminate against them.”

This is the most outrageous, failed argument yet. Homosexuality is a behavior, not an identity. LGBT “people” is a non sequitur, and this flawed reasoning evades proper debate.

The behaviors themselves are demeaning, for God did not create man to engage in sexual perversion, male with male, or female with female.

He says this is morally wrong.

Finally, Mr Tan pointed out that 377A forms a serious barrier in the communication and forming of relationships between the Christian community and the LGBTQ+ community, and presents a block for the latter community to form relationships with God.

The Christian community is the Church, the Body of Christ. The Church is not peripheral to the world, but vice versa. The Church does not need to change and conform to allow for more people, but to speak the truth of God’s grace in love.

God calls all of us to come out of the fallen world and come home to Him, to come home to His love.

He says, “It is self-evident which is more important: the roadblock or the potential of forming meaningful relationships with the entire LGBTQ+ community.”

The Church needs to invite homosexuals, transgenders, and other sexual paraphiliacs to be reconciled to God!

“20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. 21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Corinthians 5:20-21)

He continued, “It also self-evident which will lead more people into a relationship with God.”

No. The purpose of the state is to restrain evil. The purpose of the Church is to bring the Goodness of God to the world.

In concluding his post, Mr Tan said he wanted to title the post “A (struggling) Christian’s Role…” for fear that he might be holding himself out as a paragon of a Christian, which he admits he is not. But he decided against it because all Christians are struggling Christians, said Mr Tan.

Mr. Tan is not a paragon of Christian virtue. Not once has he magnified Christ Jesus and His finished work. Not once has he declared that homosexuality is something to abhor and reject, but that God loves sinners, and does not reject those who come to Him.

Rather than normalizing or enabling the destructive behaviors, Mr. Tan should be advocating for the further dissemination of God’s Word, Grace, and Truth to those who are in bondage to homosexuality, transgenderism, and the like.

He then recalled something his senior pastor once said, “The litmus test of whether one is a Christian is whether one struggles. The struggle reflects the continued desire to do God’s will and the human failings which call for the need to rely on God’s strength.”

NONSENSE. The Christian life is a life of rest–the only struggle is to enter into His rest!

“Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.” (Hebrews 4:1)

Yes, there is a passage about fighting:

“Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.” (1 Timothy 6:12)

The literal translation reads “Let the good fight of faith by fight.”

This is a fight of trusting God, of resting in the truth of His Word. Faith, after all, is about seeing what is invisible, and recognizing that God’s promises have come to pass.

Mr Tan continued, “In my years on this journey with God I have found that in addition to weighing decisions against the Word and prayer, it is peace which characterises making the correct decision which pleases God.”

No. We are always supposed to have his peace. It’s not the sudden presence of peace upon making a decision which matters. We should refrain from actions when there is a lack of peace:

“And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.” (Colossians 3:15)

In this case, Mr Tan says “I am completely at peace with my role advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A in the Singapore courts.”

Final Reflection

This Jordan Tan fellow is brazenly disregarding Christ and Him Crucified. There is some other perverse pretext for his advocating the repeal of 377A. He is more interested in being liked and accepted by some community of sexual deviants, perhaps.

Or, if his sentiments are genuine, he is clearly misguided about this effort. He thinks that he is helping individuals come closer to Christ by taking away the secular sanction against an abominable behavior. What church, what pastor has told him that the quiet promotion of homosexuality is acceptable and in keeping with Biblical truth?

This challenge must be met with conviction and clear understanding of God’s Word. The churches of Singapore must restore the full understanding of the Gospel, which takes us from death to life, which takes from living in sin to living in the Son, and thus sets us free from dead works, sin and death.

Keep 377A.

More Winning: Illegals on DACA Can’t Afford to Sign Up

For what it’s worth, President Trump and his attorney general Jeff Sessions did the best that the could with a very difficult situation: DACA.

President Trump initiated a lawless program by executive order, which should have resided with Congress. This Deferred Action nonsense was nothing more than a cheap attempt to bring in more Democratic votes and create a perennial wedge issue to help the Democratic Party hold onto whatever power they had left.

Now the program has been rescinded, and in spite of different court actions either reviving or striking down the program, the people who could use the program cannot even afford to enroll in it.

This is a report out of New Mexico, where a considerable illegal alien population resides:

Thousands of DACA students can’t afford renewal applications

 

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – More than 6,000 young immigrants living in New Mexico are eligible for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, but some are struggling to sign up.

 

About a year ago, President Donald Trump announced a plan to end the Obama-era program. However, back-and-forth court battles have kept the program alive.

 

According to a recent survey, about 64,000 DACA recipients – or four in 10 – admit to being too scared to register given the president’s stance on immigration.

They should be scared. Enough is enough. It is unconstitutional and unconscionable for the federal agencies to continue using this corrupt program. It needs to be shut down for good.

No more illegal immigration, and no more amnesty.

 

Meanwhile, officials with the New Mexico Dream Team told KOB that other students can’t afford the $495 renewal fee.

In other words this whole program is too costly on so many levels. It’s costly in terms of the rule of law, in that people in this country illegal should not be getting a free pass to continue flouting our election laws.

And it’s costly in that the illegals cannot afford it. That is fine with me. It’s time for these illegal aliens, regardless of their age, to self-deport. If the press reports on these “sob stories” as something to inspire pity or compassion, they are sadly mistaken.

 

“At the moment, we’re not able to hand out any scholarships just because of the funding,” said Flaviano Graciano, the group’s communications director. “A lot of these kids are in school and don’t have a job and their parents worked to support their families so they don’t have that money to allocate for that specifically.”

Now universities are paying for this corruption? Where are they getting the money from? This is outrageous! What about American students? What about the right of citizens to ensure that their children as well as they themselves are able to get an education and take advantage of every privilege which belongs to citizens, not illegal aliens.

 

The New Mexico Dream team has helped 230 DACA recipients renew their applications.

New Mexico Dream is apart of the illegal alien nightmare which needs to be confronted. Where are they getting their money from? Indeed.

 

“It’s like a vicious cycle, right? They need this to find a job but they can’t afford to do it,” Graciano said. “Our organization has really focused on providing them with that financial resource for anybody who wants to renew to be able to do so.”

Time to pull the plug.

DACA is over. Illegal immigration is coming to an end in this country, and these lawless programs which enabled this border-breaking lawlessness are going bankrupt, too.

I wonder what is happening in other states and with illegal aliens in this states who want to purchase a DACA permit, but cannot …

BREAKING: DACA Federal Judge Walks Back Pro-DACA Ruling

Here’s some incredible news from last week which received very little press so far:

Judge halts full DACA restart

Yes, the same arrogant federal district judge who had arbitrarily demanded that President Trump and the Department of Homeland Security begin accepting DACA applications again, has backed off that demand.

The federal judge who had ordered the government to restart the Obama-era deportation amnesty in full has backed off his decision and said the government does not, after all, have to begin accepting brand new applications.

 

Judge John D. Bates acknowledged the legal mess that’s arisen around the program, called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and said he didn’t want to make it worse, so he issued a partial stay of his own ruling.

How about that! The judge saw the light, or more likely he felt the heat, realizing that his capricious judgment would not only have been overruled, but perhaps would have embarrased him greatly in front of his judicial peers.

One thing that I have learned about judges, even the federal ones with lifetime tenure: they have to be overturned. They do not like developing a reputation in which their decisions are automatically doomed to failure and rejection. It just hurts their pride on so many levels, and these federal judges are full of pride.

 

That means that while “Dreamers” who already have had DACA protections can apply for renewals, no new applicants can seek to start the process.

So, the Trump Administration will not have to fight the foolish order which would have forced them to accept new applications. What a savings, but they still have to fight to ensure that current DACA recipients can no longer receive those permits.

And it gets better. This arrogant judge had to go back further on his own ruling!

 

Judge Bates also delayed part of his previous ruling that would have let those who can stay under DACA also apply for special protections known as advance parole — permission to travel outside the U.S. and then return — which can, in some cases, turn into a pathway to citizenship.

Wow!

This is incredible. These same recipients have no guarantees of safe re-entry once they leave the country. They should take a one-way ticket back to their countries of origin, along with the parents how uncharitably brought them into the United States against their–and more importantly our–will.

 

Hundreds of DACA recipients had exploited that loophole under the Obama administration, but the Trump administration had shut it down.

Thank God for President Trump! One rule of law, and full enforcement of the rule of law is needed in this country.

 

The government had said that if DACA were completely restarted more than 100,000 new applications would be filed, as well as 30,000 requests for advance parole. That would overwhelm U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency that handles the applications, Judge Bates ruled.

This federal judge is coming up with an excuse which will make him look good while making the Trump Administration look bad. “I am the good guy,” the Judge Bates wants to signal to the public, “but because the Trump Administration’s citizenship processing facilities and staffing are inadequate, I am going to undo my order.”

AS IF!

The truth is that this federal judge, like the series of federal district judges who have waged unjust lawfare against President Trump’s proper executive authority, had no right to reinstate an unconstitutional program, one which did not originate in Congress, nor did the program derive from any just powers assigned to the President by Congress.

DACA is a terrible fraud, a blight on modern United States legislative prudence, and something which President Trump had every right to rescind. The President engaged in an incredible series of media, policy, and political maneuvers to get what he wanted–enforcement of our laws–while taking advantage of the media to make himself appear reasonable and compromising on this issue.

The Democrats refused every single offer for amnesty, because President Trump would have received even more essential reforms, like ending chain migration, terminating the dangerous diversity visa lottery, and transferring all necessary funds to building the border wall.

 

He said he realized immigrants who were in the U.S. illegally were being denied rights he said they were entitled to, but said he feared the confusion that would result.

The confusion has already resulted, your DIS-honor, because of President Obama’s lawlessness. President Trump and his staff are doing the right thing to demand full enforcement of our immigration laws and the deportation of all illegal aliens out of our country. He is trying to bring stability to this very confusing, chaotic situation, and you would have made it much worse.

For anyone reading this account, this judge’s decision to roll back his own ruling is nothing short of incredible.

 

“Because that confusion would only be magnified if the court’s order regarding initial DACA applications were to take effect now and later be reversed on appeal, the court will grant a limited stay of its order and preserve the status quo pending appeal, as plaintiffs themselves suggest,” he said in a short opinion late Friday.

 

Immigrant-rights advocates, who had originally wanted a full restart, eventually changed their minds and agreed with the split ruling of no new DACA applications, but renewals could be processed.

Here’s the problem. Even with all of these half-baked rulings, the injunction against DACA applications will continue. Other federal district courts, with real judges who interpret the law and respect the power of the executive, will continue to challenge this terrible program.

 

That decision was based on a legal gamble.

 

DACA cases are pending in three courts right now. Judge Bates‘ case is likely to be appealed to the circuit court in Washington, D.C., while circuit courts are already handling appeals of similar decisions from California and New York.’

The idea is that the appellate courts in these liberal jurisdictions will affirm the lawlessness. What the don’t understand, however, is that Trump has continued to reshape the judiciary to respect the United States Constitution rather than progressive ideals.

 

Each of those lawsuits challenged the Trump administration’s decision last year to phase out DACA. The judges in those cases ruled that the Trump administration cut too many corners, and so the phaseout is illegal.

 

But another case in Texas involves a challenge to the original 2012 Obama administration decision to create DACA in the first place. If that judge were to rule against DACA it would create a messy situation where the program itself is illegal — but so is the phaseout.

The program is illegal. The program is unconstitutional. DACA must go. No judge has a right to protect any order like this, and the President had every right, every necessity to end this terrible, unlawfull program. Seriously, what is going through some of the federal judges’ minds? Did they not graduate from law school? Do they have any legal training whatsoever, or are they a bunch of recently-installed SJWs who came into the legal profession to change the world to their perverted, idealized liking?

 

The activists in the case before Judge Bates figured that they could undercut the anti-DACA Texas case by agreeing not to allow new DACA permits to be granted.

Final Reflection

One federal judge had to stay his own ruling. That almost never happens. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, that has never happened. The idea that these overly powerful judges would realize that they went too far, well that seems so far-fetched as to be unreal.

Yet here we are. This is great news for the rule of law and for the widespread citizenry who tired of the pandering and placating which has been done for illegal aliens, while the expected protections of the rule of law for citizens continue to be ignored.

The DACA program is facing legal challenges from every angle, and more conservative jurists at every level of the federal judiciary are bringing back constitutional governance again. This program is going to die a slow, lingering death, and DACA recipients are going to realize that there is less and less chance of their receiving any kind of amnesty, especially after the 2018 election, in which there is a strong likelihood of more Republicans in the United States Senate, and some reports indicating that the House will stay remain in Republican hands, albeit by a slimmer margin.

DACA is over, and even the federal activist judges realize that they cannot fix it.

This is YUGE VICTORY for our side!

How about we focus on putting American Dreamers first for a change, while we are at it?

DACA “Survives” Because of Judicial Tyranny

Tyranny and anarchy is ruling the day in the federal court system.

The latest ruling, this time from the federal district court in Washington DC, has ordered President Trump to reinstate the DACA program.

WHAT?

These courts are overplaying their hand, the same way that the regressive, left-wing press has gone full SJW. They had enjoyed such sweeping powers undisturbed for decades. Now that President Trump is reasserting the rule of law, now that he his Making America Great Again, now that he is expecting every acting political agent to to respect the rule of law, we have federal courts fighting as hard as they can to make themselves unconstitutionally powerful.

They don’t want to let go, the same way that Chief Justice Roger Taney invalidated the Missouri Compromise and dishonored black people in Dred Scott v. Sanford. Taney and other justices would fight against Lincoln’s efforts to effectively prosecute the Civil War to a civil end. They even tried to subvert his constitutional power to suspend habeas corpus during the Civil War, even though the United States Constitution permits his power to the chief executive during times of insurrection.

Lincoln fought his own party, he fought the Democratic Party, and he stood strong against an abusive judiciary that was determined to shred the foundational principles of the Declaration of Independence.

This judicial recalcitrance must be disciplined and stopped as soon as possible.

Judges are not above the law, either!

Arthur,

Earlier today, a district court in Washington, DC ruled that Trump ending DACA was wrong. Here’s what you need to know:

Right now, you can still apply to renew your DACA. But if you’ve never had DACA, you cannot submit new applications at this moment. And, if your DACA expires before 2020, you should renew now. If you need help with the application, information, or covering the fee, visit renewmydaca.com and we’ll make sure you have everything you need.

If you aren’t a DACA Recipient, we need you to step up and help in two ways:

1. At $495 per application, DACA renewals are unaffordable for many recipients. We can’t stress enough how urgent it is that we are able to cover these fees for DACA recipients who can’t afford them. That’s why we’re asking:

   Can you make a contribution to our DACA Renewal Fund now? We have hundreds of requests for assistance, and urgently need your help to cover them.

   Donate

2. While the judge did call for USCIS to continue accepting DACA renewal applications, and begin accepting new DACA applications, this won’t happen until August 23. At this time, nothing has changed. We expect the Trump administration will respond before August 23rd, which could change the whole outcome of this ruling. Please help us spread the word to DACA recipients, to ensure they know to renew NOW if their DACA expires before 2020. We have a whole support guide available with everything they need at renewmydaca.com — so share it with your networks now!Share DACA Information

We are here to support you and ensure that as many people as possible have what they need to renew their DACA. As soon as we have more information, or any new updates, we will email again — so keep an eye out for our messages.

No matter what comes next, our communities are #HeretoStay and we will keep on organizing to protect one another. Thank you for being a part of this movement and this community with us.

Nestor, and the rest of the team at United We Dream

APPEAL! APPEAL! APPEAL!

This is not going to last very long. This is not going to go very well.

Shame on this abusive, rogue judiciary. This abuse of power will not last forever.

I think that Congress should seriously consider vacating all the judicial officers in districts and circuits which routinely defy federal law and the constitutional executive power of the President, especially for political means.