THE PATRIOT POST 03/18/2016

Right Analysis | Right Hooks | Right Opinion Patriot Headlines | Grassroots Commentary Mid-Day Digest March 18, 2016    THE FOUNDATION "I have often expressed my sentiments, that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." —George Washington (1789) TOP RIGHT HOOKS Kerry Finally Admits: ISIL Is Committing Genocide On Wednesday, the State Department indicated that John Kerry would miss a congressionally mandated deadline to determine if the mass slaughter of Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East constitutes genocide. But Thursday, for unknown reasons, Kerry decided to meet the deadline and finally conceded an obvious fact: Genocide is being perpetrated in war-torn Iraq and Syria. Here's what he said at his press briefing: "My purpose in appearing before you today is to assert that in my judgment DAESH [Islamic State] is responsible for genocide against groups in areas under its control, including Yazidis, Christians and Shia Muslims. DAESH is genocidal by self-proclamation, by ideology, and in what it says and what it believes and what it does. DAESH is also responsible for crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing directed against these same groups and in some cases also against Sunni Muslims, Kurds and other minorities." The Obama administration has been very reluctant to use the term. When asked about it recently, Josh Earnest said, "The use of that word involves a very specific legal determination that has at this point not been reached." Kerry's proclamation now makes it official. Sadly, ethnic cleansing is not relegated to just the Middle East. On Wednesday, the Christian Post reported, "Radical Muslim Fulani herdsmen in Nigeria have killed close to 500 predominantly Christian farmers in Benue state in central Nigeria in a series of attacks over the last month." Terrorism's spread means the State Department will inevitably face more of these decisions regarding genocide over time. Unfortunately, a mere label won't stop anything. Ask the people of Darfur. Only destroying the Islamic State will do the job. Comment | Share Republicans Seek to Deny Funds to Sanctuary Cities During a congressional hearing about the budget of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency's director publically accused five major cities of ignoring ICE's requests to detain illegal immigrants charged with crimes. Sarah Saldana said Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle do not honor the requests from ICE to detain certain individuals to give the agency a chance to deport them. Some tell ICE after the fact that they had the illegal immigrant in custody, but then released them. This matters because the Obama administration's deportation policies are currently to deport only the worst of the worst — the illegal immigrants who have committed major crimes. The cities' catch-and-release method of law enforcement has fomented a crime spree. One of the more well-known victims being Kathryn Steinle, who was shot in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant who was deported five times, yet still freely walked the city's streets. In response, congressional Republicans are looking to stop sending money to the self-avowed sanctuary cities. "They can keep their policy; just don't ask for federal money," Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) said. Similarly, even the Obama Justice Department has warned those cities that federal grant money going to law enforcement needs is imperiled if the cities continue to stymie ICE. While the federal government is gearing up for a funding fight with these cities over immigration enforcement, a lot can be said of a candidate's respect for Rule of Law depending on where they fall on the issue. Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has had a worrying track record on the issue. He rose to the front of the GOP pack because of his strong words on immigration. Yet in 2011 and 2013, Trump gave a total of $6,000 to the re-election campaign of California Attorney General Kamala Harris, one of the nation's most ardent supporters of sanctuary city policies. If he becomes president, which Trump will we get? Will he be the tough-on-illegal-immigration candidate? Or will he break campaign promises and back the wards of sanctuary cities? Comment | Share DOJ Admits 'Flawed Execution' in Fast and Furious In a letter to Congress this week, the Justice Department said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms "accepts full responsibility for the flawed execution of Fast and Furious." In the early months of Barack Obama's administration, the Justice Department started the sting in order to prove that American guns were arming the Mexican drug cartels, which would thus aid in making a case for gun control. (So notice that Justice accepted responsibility for "flawed execution," not flawed intent.) To make their case, the ATF turned into gunrunners, allowing straw purchasers to pass off hundreds if not thousands of firearms. But play with fire, and you will get burned, as the guns were turned onto American law enforcement, leading to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in 2010. And more deaths are being uncovered. Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik wrote in his letter: "ATF and the department deeply regret that firearms associated with Operation Fast and Furious have been used by criminals in the commission of violent crimes, particularly crimes resulting in the deaths of civilians and law enforcement officials." That letter has a lot of obfuscating language. Let's clarify. The guns the ATF let roam across the criminal landscape have traveled wide. The Justice Department officially admitted that a .50-caliber sniper rifle found in the arsenal of drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman was the fruit of Fast and Furious. These guns have not only lead to the death of American Border Patrol. Last year, three Mexican police officers were killed in a shootout and one of the weapons the criminals used was a WASR-10 rifle purchased Nov. 12, 2009 — thanks to Fast and Furious. And hundreds of Mexicans have died in gang violence since these guns found their way into Mexico. So far, the U.S. and Mexico governments recovered 885 of the guns U.S. law enforcement let walk. Unfortunately, these will not be the last times these guns will be used in a crime, on either side of the border. Comment | Share BEST OF RIGHT OPINION Jonah Goldberg: Garland Nod the Latest Move in Democrats' Game of Thrones Eric Erickson: Arguing With Data Mona Charen: Please Lie to Us Charles Krauthammer: There's an Air of Menace About This Campaign For more, visit Right Opinion. FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS Merrick Garland Is No Antonin Scalia By Michael Swartz He may not be the radical leftist many people imagined Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee would be, but 63-year-old Merrick Garland of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals would provide the reliable fifth liberal vote leftists have been salivating over since Obama took office. Instead of the liberal-for-leftist swaps of Justices Sonia Sotomayor replacing David Souter and Elena Kagan succeeding John Paul Stevens, filling the empty seat of one of the most brilliant and conservative jurists in generations with someone well to his left is bound to be a political hot potato. And for good reason: Merrick Garland would alter the balance of the Court for a generation. The concern about Garland from certain quarters is well-founded. The DC Circuit judge has a long record of restricting Second Amendment rights, leading the National Rifle Association to strongly oppose his nomination: "[A] basic analysis of Merrick Garland's judicial record shows that he does not respect our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense." Abortion foes were also quick to point out that Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards visited the White House immediately after the announcement of Garland's nomination — a clear signal to leftists of Garland's pro-abortion credibility. As Mark Antonio Wright of National Review noted, "[T]his would be the functional equivalent of President Bush — having just nominated Samuel Alito to the bench — ushering Wayne LaPierre of the NRA into the inner sanctum of the Oval Office." Garland may be the best of what promised to be a bad lot, but Obama defended his choice as a thorough and careful investigator. As evidence, Obama pointed to Garland's work on the Timothy McVeigh case, which led to a conviction. "Throughout the process, Merrick took pains to do everything by the book," said Obama. "When people offered to turn over evidence voluntarily, he refused, taking the harder route of obtaining the proper subpoenas instead, because Merrick would take no chances that someone who murdered innocent Americans might go free on a technicality." Regarding Garland's record as a jurist, Obama added: "On a circuit court known for strong-minded judges on both ends of the spectrum, Judge Garland has earned a track record of building consensus as a thoughtful, fair-minded judge who follows the law. He's shown a rare ability to bring together odd couples, assemble unlikely coalitions, persuade colleagues with wide-ranging judicial philosophies to sign on to his opinions." Obama also noted that Senator Orrin Hatch defended Garland when first nominated to the appellate bench, calling him a potential "consensus nominee" to the Supreme Court. As for Senate Republicans vowing to stop any Obama nominee given his status as a lame-duck president in an election year, there are a few cracks developing in that armor. So far seven Republicans have expressed an interest in meeting with Garland, with the reliably moderate Senator Susan Collins of Maine leading the way. "The White House has asked me to meet with him," said Collins, "and I've agreed to do so." There is a political calculus at work here, of course. Instead of doing what many suspected he would do and selecting a young, minority, political ideologue to the SCOTUS bench, Obama is daring the Senate to deny a hearing to an older white male jurist who he claims is occupying the center of the political spectrum. On the other hand, Senate Republicans have to weigh the possibility that they may lose the Senate as well as miss out on the White House — it's a fear that keeps GOP strategists awake at night as they continue to see poll after poll showing Donald Trump both losing to Hillary Clinton and being a drag down ballot. And even if Trump prevails in November and the Senate holds its GOP majority, there's no telling just what type of nominee would come from The Donald. Republicans in general have a pretty mixed record on court picks, though Democrats are guaranteed to choose poorly. The other possibility is that the Senate could hold Garland in its back pocket for a lame-duck session should Hillary Clinton win the White House. Naturally that could be thwarted if Obama withdraws the nomination and replaces Garland with a further-left nominee, but perhaps part of the thawing of this process was intended with this play in mind. With several jurists on the court being long in the tooth, there's also the likelihood that we'll have another vacancy in the near future from the liberal side. Garland would not be the ideal judge, but compared to other names that have come up (including Obama himself) there's at least some chance of sanity on a few issues. If the nightmare scenario of a Clinton presidency comes to pass, we would see if Merrick Garland really is good at "building consensus" or is simply the rubber stamp in a lot of liberal 5-4 decisions. Comment | Share Share MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS: Who Are Those 'Evangelical' Voters? A National Security Team of One EPA Washes Its Hands of Flint Debacle Israel's Biggest Security Threat Isn't the Islamic State Lie Witness News — Supreme Court Nominee Edition Charter Schools Don't Need More Regulation When It Comes to Food, Where Are Sanders' Principles? TOP HEADLINES Carter Confirms Iran Broke International Law by Detaining U.S. Sailors Meet the Fugitive U.S. Terrorists Sheltered by Cuba CO2 Emissions Have Now Been Flat for Two Years Running For more, visit Patriot Headline Report OPINION IN BRIEF Jonah Goldberg: "All the Constitution says is that there has to be a Supreme Court. (Even the existence of lower federal courts is entirely optional). There's nothing holy, never mind constitutionally sacrosanct about the number nine. Congress could decide tomorrow to make the Supreme Court a body of 72 people picked randomly from the phonebook (so long as the president was the one doing the random picking and the Congress approved them). When the president, a former teacher of constitutional law, says, 'the Constitution is pretty clear' about the need for hearings on his pick, he's not telling the truth. He's playing politics. The same goes for all the Republican senators who say the Constitution is clear that they don't have to hold hearings if they don't want to. The issue isn't whether the Constitution is clear. The simple fact is that the Constitution is silent. And where the Constitution is silent, politics is supreme. ... We've invested in the Supreme Court powers never imagined by the framers. And when I say 'we' I mostly mean progressives. The growth of the administrative state and the encroachment of federal law into every nook and cranny of local life has been a century-long project of the left. It should be no surprise that when we bequeath monarchical powers to nine — or eight — lawyers, the battle for succession to one of the nine thrones will be ugly. Indeed, it's surprising it's not uglier." Comment | Share SHORT CUTS Insight: "The system of private property is the most important guaranty of freedom, not only for those who own property, but scarcely less for those who do not." —Friedrich August von Hayek (1899-1992) Observations: "For seven months, Republicans — myself included — have argued against the data. The data showed that Donald Trump would be a viable candidate. Many of us presumed he would eventually fade. ... The polls that showed Trump winning the Republican nomination also show that he cannot beat Clinton. In 19 of the 20 past polls, Trump consistently trailed Clinton by around eight points. ... Trump voters who disagree are only arguing with the very data that shows Trump will be the Republican nominee. The only way to avoid it is to avoid making Trump the Republican presidential nominee." —Erick Erickson Non Compos Mentis: "We've got a lot of [real life super heroes] in this room, so I want to acknowledge a couple of them. First of all, we've got Cecile Richards in the house, making sure women's health care is on the front burner." —Barack Obama Braying Jackass: "McConnell's blind rejection of Obama's policies was simply the kinder, gentler Senate version of bitherism." —Harry Reid Demo-gogues: "This isn't supposed to be a circus. The president has done his constitutional duty, he has sent us a nominee, and now it is our job in the United States Senate to hold hearings, to examine his credentials, and then to have a vote on him. That's what the Constitution calls for. This has just really taken off in a direction that is a direct insult to the president, it is a direct insult to the Constitution, and now it is a direct insult to Judge Garland." —Sen. Elizabeth Warren (The Constitution also says: "Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.") The BIG lie: "I think we've done a really good job securing the border. I think that those who say we haven't are not paying attention to everything that was done the last 15 years under President Bush and President Obama." —Hillary Clinton Late-night humor: "This election is going to be the political equivalent of having lunch at Panda Express — nobody wins." —Jimmy Kimmel Comment | Share Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis! Managing Editor Nate Jackson Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm's way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.