Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Ann Coulter’

This Weeks Ann Coulter Letter: “Dreamers In The News”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2018/04/11/dreamers-in-the-news/

With all the tender concern President Trump and Nancy Pelosi have been heaping on “Dreamers” of late, you’d think the media would notice and pepper us with stories about these “incredible kids,” as Trump calls them. Alas, no. Our tedious media drones refuse to provide us with moving human interest stories about the Dreamers.

Journalists and politicians love to give us archetypes: the DACA soldier, the DACA valedictorian, the DACA grandmother. But there are so many other roles they fill!  To make up for the Fourth Estate’s failure, this week, I’ll highlight five Dreamers who have done noteworthy things just in the last month.

The Bounceback Child Rapist

A few weeks ago, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement caught up with Dreamer Anastacio Eugenio Lopez-Fabian, 24, in a courthouse parking lot in Oregon. Police in Seaside, Oregon, had arrested Lopez-Fabian for multiple rapes of a girl “younger than 14,” assault and harassment.

Law enforcement then released Lopez-Fabian the day of his arrest, without notifying I.C.E., despite the fact that he had already been deported twice to his native Guatemala, in 2013 and 2014.

Apart from conservative websites — and Britain’s indispensable Daily Mail! — this story made only the local press.

The Butterfingered Gun Slinger

Also two weeks ago, Dreamer Jaime Melchi-Sigas, 22, pleaded guilty to the federal offenses of unlawful possession of a firearm and unlawful possession of a counterfeit alien registration card. Melchi-Sigas was already serving time in a state prison for reckless homicide and tampering with physical evidence.

His convictions stemmed from an incident last year when Melchi-Sigas was sitting in the back seat of a car, examining an illegal gun he intended to purchase, and accidentally shot and killed the man in the front seat.

This item appeared in one small local Bowling Green, Kentucky, newspaper.

The Oppressed Rapist

Three weeks ago, Dreamer Alejandro Perez-Cortez, 26, appealed his five-year sentence for attempting to anally rape a woman, pointing out that he was drunk at the time and barely made enough money to live on, much less send back to his wife and two children in Mexico.

The appeal was denied, on the grounds that being drunk and poor did not constitute evidence of good character — and also that Perez-Cortez was an illegal alien. (Until Trump has his way on Dreamers!)

The opinion of the Indiana court turning down Perez-Cortez’s appeal was published on March 19, but no media found the story interesting enough to print. What I find interesting about the case — fascinating, in fact! — is that we have lawyers willing to bring utterly frivolous appeals on behalf of drunk, raping illegal aliens, but not one willing to represent the president.

The Fleet-Footed Drunk Driver

Dreamer Ivan Gerardo Zamarripa-Castaneda, 26, killed 57-year-old John Anderson in Denver at around midnight on March 3, when he smashed his pickup truck into Anderson’s truck, setting off a fiery explosion and shutting down I-70 for hours. This poor Mexican who was driving drunk on an interstate — through no fault of his own — fled the scene.

In another example of the day-to-day terror illegal aliens endure “living in the shadows,” Zamarripa-Castaneda was captured by the police the next day, sound asleep at his home. And that wasn’t the end of Zamarripa-Castaneda’s nightmare. After his arrest, Denver police held him for ONE FULL WEEK, before releasing him without informing I.C.E.

Only after Attorney General Jeff Sessions and President Trump began denouncing the local sheriff for refusing to turn Zamarripa-Castaneda over to I.C.E. did the story appear anywhere beyond the local press. Now in I.C.E.’s clutches, Zamarripa-Castaneda waits impatiently for Trump to amnesty “incredible kids” like him.

The May-December Rapist

Dreamer Juan Vazquez Cornelio, 38, was recently charged with raping a 10-year-old girl and sending her to the hospital. The reddest state in the Union — Alabama — gave Kardashian-level media coverage to the arrest: THREE local news stories. The Tuscaloosa News lavished 100 words on the child-rapist before turning to another topic: “Severe weather possible Monday in state — Tuscaloosa County could experience severe weather beginning Monday afternoon, according to the National Weather Service.”

The illegal alien Mexican Dreamer was charged with rape in the first degree, the girl was hospitalized and it’s going to rain on Monday.

this Weeks Ann Coulter Letter: “We Used to Care About One Another”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

Once upon a time, we cared about the welfare of our fellow Americans. Farmers in the Midwest devastated by tornadoes, trailer parks washed away in a Florida hurricane, our country’s ranking on various international comparisons — we all rooted for our fellow Americans. Like all countries, we would squabble, but we were family. We were all Americans. Not anymore! Now, no one cares about anything but getting rich, the better to separate oneself from the lives and concerns of poorer Americans. 

Businessmen, Wall Street bankers, ethnic activists, Democrats and Republicans (including the president, apparently) — all of them have a stronger fellow feeling toward Saudi princes and German bankers than toward Iowa farmers. Being “inclusive” to “Dreamers” necessarily means being exclusionary toward our own working class.

So what if wages have flatlined — or declined! — for several decades? The smart set aren’t wage-slaves.

Mexican drug cartels aren’t swarming through their towns. They live in fancy neighborhoods.

Somali refugees aren’t beating up their kids — who are safely ensconced in expensive private schools, anyway.

Members of our governing class seem to have decided the country is doomed, so they may as well make their pile. Sure, they’ll have to face the wrath of voters and may be voted out of office, like Eric Cantor. But they’ll end up on corporate boards or win lucrative lobbying contracts. Plus, being “progressive” on immigration will look great on their kid’s Princeton application.

Everybody’s looking out for No. 1.

It wasn’t always this way. Politicians, liberal activists and journalists used to care about even non-fashionable Americans. One doesn’t have to go back to the Garfield administration to find a time when everyone wanted to protect the nation from dysfunctional immigration — the crime, the drugs, the poverty, the wage-depressing effect, the burden on our social services. Positions that are today considered hateful used to be called “common sense.”

A 1995 news article in The New York Times calmly described preparations the Immigration and Naturalization Service was making in case a “vast flood of illegal immigrants” surged across the Mexican border, “inundating entire communities as it washes north into the American heartland.” Under the Clinton administration, the illegals would face either “immediate voluntary deportation” or “emergency detention.”

No indignant denunciations followed.

More hate speech from the Times:

“Fighting illegal immigration is a difficult and important job. But Congress should do it in a way that will deter illegal entry at the border.” — New York Times editorial, Sept. 29, 1997

“(The I.N.S.) is extremely troubled, but has improved under the leadership of Doris Meissner. Since her appointment in 1993, … (t)he border is tighter, and the I.N.S. is deporting record numbers of criminal aliens.” — New York Times editorial, Aug. 10, 1997

Just a few years ago, Charles Lane, an editorial writer at The Washington Post, called for “prompt exclusion of unaccompanied Central American minors” during the border surge under Obama. “Only by showing people there is nothing to be gained by paying traffickers for the traumatic voyage through Mexico will the chaos cease.”

The great civil rights icon Barbara Jordan produced a report on immigration more than two decades ago, calling on the government to end chain migration and put a dead stop to illegal immigration, for the benefit of all Americans.

“Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: Those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave.”

She added: “Deportation is crucial.”

Far-left Democrats used to openly proclaim ideas that would get them banned from Twitter today:

“When push comes to shove, there is only one realistic way that you can stop illegal immigration into this country, and that is by making it illegal and being tough enough that illegal immigrants cannot work in this country.” — Democratic Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, 1985

“No sane country would (reward illegal immigrants), right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission, and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides — and that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?” — Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, 1993

Very recently, a presidential candidate who seemed to actually care about America’s working class denounced illegal immigration as “a Koch brothers” idea. That was Bernie Sanders.

He explained: “Open borders? No, that’s a Koch brothers’ proposal. … That’s a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. … It would make everybody in America poorer — you’re doing away with the concept of a nation-state. … You have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people.

“What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour — that would be great for them. I don’t believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country; I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.” — Bernie Sanders in interview with Ezra Klein of Vox on July 28, 2015

Forget hypocrisy — I don’t care about that right now. It’s the cruelty that interests me.

Have well-heeled Americans really decided to abandon their fellow citizens? These merchants of compassion have none to spare for our own people? I’m not a steelworker, a waitress or a black teenager looking for an entry-level job, either. But I still care about other Americans.

This Weeks Ann Coulter Letter: “3-D Chess: It Only Looks Like Trump Is Throwing Away His Presidency!”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

I can’t wait to see Trump’s next move in his game of “3-D chess”!

You see, it only looks like Trump is The Worst Negotiator God Ever Created. Instead of telling Democrats, “I won’t even talk about DACA until we have the border wall,” Trump has repeatedly given up the wall, aka The Central Promise of His Campaign, Without Which He Would Not Be in the White House. 

He has now signed a spending bill that, if it actually did what it claims to do, prohibits him from building the wall, hiring any new ICE agents capable of making arrests, and building any new detention facilities for illegal aliens.

The strange thing is, as commander in chief, he doesn’t need congressional authority to do any of these things. But he obviously doesn’t know that.

Why? BECAUSE HE’S PLAYING 3-D CHESS!

Instead of making even a fake effort and forcing Democrats to get up off the couch to vote against the wall, Trump cleverly leapt to the front of the anti-Trump parade and pretended it was all his idea.

I told Sen. Schumer: I WANT AMNESTY! I was very clear! Look at him, running around like a loser doing my bidding.

Trump’s main response to a bill that actively prohibits him from keeping his central campaign promise was to denounce Congress for not sending him a bill legalizing “Dreamers.” Which also breaks a campaign promise.

It’s all part of the act, you fools! Trump is making the Democrats think that, even though they don’t have the House, the Senate or the White House, he needs Chuck Schumer’s permission before moving a muscle.

Carefully observe the master. He gives up everything and — in exchange — gets NOTHING. See?

The easy thing to do would be to say, There’s no way any amnesty happens until the wall is complete. Anybody could do that. But we didn’t elect just anybody.

We elected the guy whose name is on the cover of “The Art of the Deal.” Sure, he didn’t write it — and probably didn’t read it — but Trump must have heard about some of the trite advice it contains.

This shows what a master strategist Trump is. He throws out the rulebook! You know what else, suckers? Now he can put out a paperback edition with a new chapter, How to Give Up Everything in Return for Nothing.

The wins are already rolling in. Guess who’s suddenly dying to negotiate with Trump? That’s right: Kim Jong Un. One look at how Trump negotiates and Kim couldn’t wait to sit down with him.

Trump took office with the most precious gift any president could ever ask for: winning the White House with ZERO support from Wall Street. But instead of calling in the big banks and saying, Welcome to hell! Trump checkmated them by spending his first 15 months in office cravenly begging for their approval.

The expression “dance with the one who brung you” is old paradigm thinking. This is Trump Thinking.

The Republican Brain Trust sneered at Trump throughout the 2016 campaign, certain that they were in no danger from this ridiculous creature.

And damned if he didn’t win.

After that, Trump could have summoned Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to the Oval Office and demanded that they show him their testicles. Instead, he became their water boy.

Doing Sen. McConnell’s bidding, he endorsed Luther Strange in Alabama, instead of the Trumpian candidate, Mo Brooks. That resulted in a gigantically embarrassing loss, so, naturally, he continued to do whatever McConnell said.

You think Trump doesn’t know exactly what he’s doing? That’s another new chapter for “The Art of the Deal”! (Ignore People Whose Advice Has Been Good; Hire People Whose Advice Has Been Catastrophic.)

Following the McConnell/Ryan playbook, Trump cut taxes (which is vitally important to Americans who don’t have jobs and whose communities are overrun with heroin) and expanded the bloated, wasteful defense budget. (The permanent-war wing of the GOP LOVES him now!)

Thanks to Trump’s 3-D chess, he may well be in line for an endorsement not only from Boeing, but also from the powerhouse Bush family.

When a Republican House and Republican Senate deliver a spending bill to Trump that prevents him from putting so much as a rickety fence on more than 33 miles of the border, I think it’s safe to say that not only do congressional Republicans not fear Trump, they’re laughing at him.

3-D chess, baby! Trump has lured Republicans right into his trap.

Obviously, a blue wave this fall is much more likely now. That’s the plan, morons.

Just wait and see how they like it when the GOP gets wiped out in the midterms. Sure, we’ll get all the heinous PC policies we would have gotten under Hillary. But Trump is thinking three moves ahead. He could make history by being only the third president ever impeached.

Top that, Obama!

Only a chump would complain about Trump cheerfully doing a 180 on everything he campaigned for. If Trump voters are upset, it’s on them, not on him.

I was there! At every single rally during the campaign, Trump would whip the crowd into a frenzy over the wall, deporting illegals and no more “stupid wars” — but he was always VERY careful to end his speeches by saying:

Unless, of course, anyone who represents conventional Republican thinking disagrees, in which case, I will do none of this.

I can’t wait to see what comes next!

Just hang on to your hats, because while you’re all playing checkers, Trump is playing 3-D chess.

(NOTE: If I am wrong and President Trump ever builds the wall, I will apologize profusely, return to calling him “the Emperor God” and throw a fabulous party at the grand opening of the completed wall.)

This Week’s Ann Coulter Letter: “Give Me Your Dreamers…”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  

Does anyone know why President Trump loves “Dreamers” — i.e.: illegal aliens allegedly brought here before the age of 12 (which no federal judge will ever check) by their parents (which no federal judge will ever check), “through no fault of their own” (which no federal judge will ever check)?

We’ve been lectured by Mark Zuckerberg about how much better “Dreamers” are than you lazy Americans — especially African-Americans, whose jobs are disproportionately taken by illegals. (As former Mexican President Vicente Fox once charmingly put it, illegal immigrants “are doing jobs that not even blacks want to do there in the United States.”) 

So why aren’t we being bombarded with television interviews and profiles of these amazing human beings?

Liberals can’t make an argument without producing a victim. Attack the media — they bleat about journalists getting shot in the face while reporting abroad. Complain about FBI corruption — they choke up over G-men putting their lives on the line EVERY DAY! Denounce the Deep State — they moan that CIA officers have been killed in the line of duty.

Isn’t this the moment for our hearts to be breaking over the millions of wonderful “Dreamers” who will suffer unless we amnesty them immediately?

Let’s see ’em! Surely they’ve got a few Einsteins! After all, the media are capable of turning a gang-admiring thug who forcibly robbed a convenience store and assaulted a cop into “Gentle giant, Mike Brown.” They turned jewelry-stealing juvenile delinquent Trayvon Martin into an altar boy.

But even MSNBC dare not show us Trump’s beloved “Dreamers.” The snarling Muslim showcased by the Democrats at their 2016 convention has gotten more airtime than any “Dreamer.”

There are plenty of vague descriptions of “Dreamers,” all of whom seem to be valedictorians. But can anyone identify precisely what they have contributed to our country — other than lots of police work, welfare and protests? The best “Dreamers” always sound like the “honor student” in Tom Wolfe’s Bonfire of the Vanities: “somebody who attends class, isn’t disruptive, tries to learn, and does all right at reading and arithmetic.”

How about MSNBC interview five new “Dreamers” every night? Five non-hateful ones are probably the most they could get.

As long as Trump is going to keep babbling about these “absolutely incredible kids” — “I love these kids!” — and obstinately refuse to deport them, he must have met thousands of them. He plans to amnesty millions. Why doesn’t Trump showcase his favorite two dozen “Dreamers”? Let the rest of us decide how “incredible” they are.

But no Glamour magazine profiles, please! We want to know everything, e.g.:

> How much have they cost the taxpayers in free school lunches and medical care?

> How many anchor babies have they had?

> What percentage have been convicted of a felony or killed someone in a drunk driving accident?

> How many have been admitted to college by taking affirmative action spots intended for the descendants of American slaves?

In 2009, The New York Times’ Lawrence Downes gushed over illegal alien Benita Veliz. Three years later, liberals still hadn’t come up with a better one: In 2012, she was the featured illegal alien at the Democratic National Convention. (It only seems like the Democrats have an illegal alien speak at all their conventions. Veliz was the first.)

Downes ticked off Veliz’s “impressive” accomplishments: “She was valedictorian at Jefferson High School” — naturally! — “graduating at age 16. She went to St. Mary’s University in San Antonio on a full scholarship.” (A scholarship, I note, that otherwise might have gone to a yucky American.)

I gather Veliz is the left’s designated baby seal of “Dreamers.”

Veliz is probably a nice lady, but she was valedictorian at a school that Downes would never send his kids to. Jefferson High School is 98 percent minority, less than half the students are “English proficient,” and only 16 percent are ready for college.

HOW DID AMERICA EVER GET BY WITHOUT HER?

Or to use Downes’ more-relaxed standard: “How will this country be a better place once we force Benita Veliz to leave it?” Off the top of my head: There would be less strain on education budgets, hospital emergency rooms, roads and bridges, and that college scholarship Veliz got would be open to an American kid.

This is a country built by Western Europeans. Immigrants arrived after it was already set up and running well. The idea that any immigrant who hasn’t committed a felony is someone we can’t live without is absurd.

If you’re a yuppie in a rich white area and don’t like cleaning your toilets, the Trump administration has been great for you. But if you’re a Trump voter, you’re scratching your head wondering what happened to those campaign promises that set him apart from every other Republican.

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “Racial Quotas Kill Kids”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

President Obama did a lot of bad things, but pound for pound, one of the worst was the January 2014 “Dear Colleague” letter sent jointly by his Education and Justice Departments to all public schools threatening lawsuits over racial discrimination in student discipline. The letter came after years of his administration browbeating schools for their failure to discipline every race of student at the same rate.

As the Huffington Post put it: “American Schools Are STILL Racist, Government Report Finds.” The evidence? “Five percent of white students were suspended annually, compared with 16 percent of black students, according to the report.” Q.E.D. According to theory, there’s NO WAY blacks and Hispanics are doing things that require more school discipline than whites or Asians. So if more black students are expelled than Asians, well, gentlemen, we have our proof of racism. To comply, schools would have to stop suspending black kids for breaking a teacher’s jaw, but suspend Asians for dropping an eraser.

Using the same logic, I could close the achievement gap between blacks and Asians in a single day by going to every principal’s office in the country and burning the transcripts. (Liberals are saying, “You know, that’s not a bad idea.”

The “school-to-prison pipeline” argument for racial quotas in discipline was hatched in education schools and black studies departments. What I want to know is: How did they test the idea?

To validate the theory that recording students’ criminal behavior produces students with criminal records, we divided students into two groups. Group A we continued to suspend when they acted up; Group B we would not suspend no matter what — even when they engaged in their little mischief, like cracking heads with crowbars, dropping teachers off buildings, using a switchblade to cut other students’ eyes out.

RESULT: At the end of the year, Group B had better records.

Were the researchers really in suspense about how the experiment was going to turn out? I could have told them at the beginning that their odds of success were tremendous — unless they forgot halfway through and began accidentally suspending students in Group B. But the Obama administration said: Wow! That’s amazing. Do you think other schools could replicate those results?

One of the administration’s models was Broward County, Florida. Which is kind of important, now that we know that it was Broward’s official policy to make it impossible to arrest students like Nikolas Cruz, thus allowing him to amass a cache of firearms, walk into Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and murder 17 people.

The “school-to-prison pipeline” nonsense may not be the explanation for every school shooting, but it is absolutely the explanation for THIS school shooting. No matter what Cruz did, no matter how many times his crimes were reported to the sheriff or school officials, there was no way a lad with a name like “Nikolas Cruz” was ever going to leave school with a record.

Broward County’s innovative idea of eliminating school discipline captivated Obama’s Department of Education. It was expressly cited by the department’s Civil Rights Division with the notation: “New model for other jurisdictions?”

Last October — nearly a year into the Trump administration — Broward Schools Superintendent Robert W. Runcie humbly noted that the district was receiving “invitations from around the country, including from The White House and Federal Office of Civil Rights, to share details about the historic reforms” on school discipline. Either: Liberals truly believe that all races commit crimes at exactly the same level, frequency and intensity; OR they are willing to have people die for their political agenda.

Conservatives didn’t pick this school shooting as the test case for gun control. It was liberals who were going to ride the Parkland shooting all the way to the midterms. They thought they had a beautiful story about the evil NRA.

Not the mass shooting in Orlando — because of the obvious immigration angle. Not San Bernardino — for the same reason. Not Las Vegas — probably for the same reason, but we’ll never know because law enforcement has issued only lies and nonsense about that shooting.

The media did all the hard work of making sure Parkland was the only topic on anyone’s mind, with everyone demanding that we “do something!”

And then we got the facts. Cruz’s criminal acts were intentionally ignored by law enforcement on account of Broward’s much-celebrated “school-to-prison pipeline” reforms.

Thank God for the internet, or we’d never have known the truth.

Admittedly, most of the harm done by the policy that enabled Cruz is not usually a mass shooting. The main damage done by the “school-to-prison pipeline” idiocy is: broken bones, smashed teeth, traumatized students, making it impossible for other students to learn, having a bad influence on marginal students and teachers sinking into depression.

Check at your local school for the full results. Thanks to the Obama administration, this crackpot theory is sweeping school districts across the nation! The next time Democrats control Congress and the presidency, we will have racial quotas for prisons, too. When that happens, you better hope the government hasn’t taken your guns.

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “The School-To-Mass-Murder Pipeline”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2018/03/01/the-school-to-mass-murder-pipeline/

Nikolas Cruz’s psychosis ended in a bloody massacre not only because of the stunning incompetence of the Broward County Sheriff’s Department. It was also the result of liberal insanity working exactly as it was intended to.

School and law enforcement officials knew Cruz was a ticking time bomb. They did nothing because of a deliberate, willful, bragged-about policy to end the “school-to-prison pipeline.” This is the feature part of the story, not the bug part. 

If Cruz had taken out full-page ads in the local newspapers, he could not have demonstrated more clearly that he was a dangerous psychotic. He assaulted students, cursed out teachers, kicked in classroom doors, started fist fights, threw chairs, threatened to kill other students, mutilated small animals, pulled a rifle on his mother, drank gasoline and cut himself, among other “red flags.” Over and over again, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School reported Cruz’s terrifying behavior to school administrators, including Kelvin Greenleaf, “security specialist,” and Peter Mahmood, head of JROTC.

At least three students showed school administrators Cruz’s near-constant messages threatening to kill them — e.g., “I am going to enjoy seeing you down on the grass,” “Im going to watch ypu bleed,” “iam going to shoot you dead” — including one that came with a photo of Cruz’s guns. They warned school authorities that he was bringing weapons to school. They filed written reports.

Threatening to kill someone is a felony. In addition to locking Cruz away for a while, having a felony record would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.

All the school had to do was risk Cruz not going to college, and depriving Yale University of a Latino class member, by reporting a few of his felonies — and there would have been no mass shooting.

But Cruz was never arrested. He wasn’t referred to law enforcement. He wasn’t even expelled. Instead, Cruz was just moved around from school to school — six transfers in three years. But he was always sent back to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in order to mainstream him, so that he could get a good job someday!

The moronic idea behind the “school-to-prison pipeline” is that the only reason so many “black and brown bodies” are in prison is because they were disciplined in high school, diminishing their opportunities. End the discipline and … problem solved!

It’s like “The Wizard of Oz” in reverse. The Wizard told the Scarecrow: You don’t need an education, you just need a diploma! The school-to-prison pipeline idiocy tells students: You don’t need to behave in high school, you just need to leave with no criminal record!

Of course, killjoys will say that removing the consequences of bad behavior only encourages more bad behavior. But that’s not the view of Learned Professionals, who took summer courses at Michigan State Ed School. In a stroke of genius, they realized that the only problem criminals have is that people keep lists of their criminal activities. It’s the list that prevents them from getting into M.I.T. and designing space stations on Mars. Where they will cure cancer.

This primitive, stone-age thinking was made official Broward County policy in a Nov. 5, 2013, agreement titled “Collaborative Agreement on School Discipline.”

The first “whereas” clause of the agreement states that “the use of arrests and referrals to the criminal justice system may decrease a student’s chance of graduation, entering higher education, joining the military and getting a job.” Get it? It’s the arrest — not the behavior that led to the arrest — that reduces a student’s chance at a successful life. (For example, just look at how much the district’s refusal to arrest Nikolas Cruz helped him!

The agreement’s third “whereas” clause specifically cites “students of color” as victims of the old, racist policy of treating criminal behavior criminally.

Say, in the middle of a drive to cut back on the arrest or expulsion of “students of color,” how do you suppose the school dealt with a kid named “Nikolas Cruz”? Might there be some connection between his Hispanic last name and the school’s abject refusal to do anything about Cruz’s repeated criminal behavior?

Just a few months ago, the superintendent of Broward County Public Schools, Robert W. Runcie, was actually bragging about how student arrests had plummeted under his bold leadership. When he took over in 2011, the district had “the highest number of school-related arrests in the state.” But today, he boasted, Broward has “one of the lowest rates of arrest in the state.” By the simple expedient of ignoring criminal behavior, student arrests had declined by a whopping 78 percent.

FOOTBALL COACH: “When I took over this team a year ago, we were last in the league in pass defense. Today, we no longer keep that statistic!”

When it comes to spectacular crimes, it’s usually hard to say how it could have been prevented. But in this case, we have a paper trail. In the pursuit of a demented ideology, specific people agreed not to report, arrest or prosecute dangerous students like Nikolas Cruz. These were the parties to the Nov. 5, 2013, agreement that ensured Cruz would be out on the street with full access to firearms:

Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools

Peter M. Weinstein, Chief Judge of the 17th Judicial Circuit

Michael J. Satz, State Attorney

Howard Finkelstein, Public Defender

Scott Israel, Broward County Sheriff

Franklin Adderley, Chief of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department

Wansley Walters, Secretary of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice

Marsha Ellison, President of the Fort Lauderdale Branch of the NAACP and Chair of the Juvenile Justice Advisory Board

Nikolas Cruz may be crazy, but the parties to that agreement are crazy, too. They decided to make high school students their guinea pigs for an experiment based on a noxious ideology. The blood of 17 people is on their hands.

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “Anatomy of a Coup”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  

Every place you look in Robert Mueller’s investigation, the same names keep popping up: FBI agent Peter Strzok and sleazy, foreign private eye — or “British intelligence agent” — Christopher Steele.

So it’s rather important that they both are Trump-hating fanatics, and one was being paid by Trump’s political opponent in a presidential campaign. 

Steele is the author of the preposterous dossier that sparked the special counsel investigation, and Strzok is the FBI agent involved at every crucial turn of both the Trump and Hillary investigations.

As we found out from the House Intelligence memo, Steele told Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr that he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” (Ohr’s wife worked for Fusion GPS, and, like Steele, was being paid by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.)

In the hands of Trump-obsessive Peter Strzok — he of the estrogen-dripping texts to his Trump-hating FBI lawyer mistress — the dossier was used to obtain a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act against Trump’s alleged “foreign policy adviser,” Carter Page. The FISA warrant against Page constitutes the last crumbling piece of the “Russia collusion” story.

Strzok was the person who instigated the Russia investigation against Trump back in July 2016. He was the lead agent on the investigation into whether Hillary, as secretary of state, sent classified information on her private email account. (Conclusion: She had — but it wasn’t any of the FBI’s business!) He volunteered for the Mueller investigation and remained there, right up until his Trump-hating texts were discovered by the inspector general of the FBI. (He was also, one surmises, the authority for many of the media’s lurid, anonymously sourced claims about how the investigation was proceeding.)

Most strangely, Strzok was the FBI agent who asked Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, about his phone call with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s conversation with Kislyak, but Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to an FBI agent about it, based on a secretly recorded intercept of the phone call. The question remains: Why was any FBI agent even asking about a perfectly legitimate conversation? No one seems to know. But we do know the name of the FBI agent who asked: Peter Strzok.

Aside from Strzok’s girl-power text to his mistress upon Hillary becoming the first female presidential nominee — “About damn time!” — his most embarrassing message to her was about the Russia investigation:

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office (FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe) — that there’s no way (Trump) gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40 …”

The media have tied themselves in knots trying to explain this text as meaning anything other than its obvious, natural meaning. To wit: “Although the worst is unlikely (Trump wins/you die before age 40), you still prepare by taking out ‘insurance’ (we take Trump down with the Russia investigation/your family gets a payout).”

I keep looking for a plausible alternative interpretation, but they’re all absurd; e.g., The Washington Post points out that even with an insurance policy, YOU STILL DIE! (Yes, and even with the Russian investigation, TRUMP IS STILL PRESIDENT.) Everyone except American journalists understands that Strzok’s “insurance” was their plan to tie Trump up with an endless investigation. Which, coincidentally, is exactly what they’ve done.

Contrary to every single person talking on MSNBC, the issue is not whether FBI agents are allowed to have political opinions. In a probe of the president, FBI agents shouldn’t be dying to take him down for political reasons.

You want drug enforcement agents to be hungry to shut down drug cartels. You want organized crime prosecutors to be hungry to dismantle the mob. You want your maid to be hungry to clean your house. But the staff on a special counsel’s open-ended investigation of the president aren’t supposed to be hungry. They’re supposed to be fair.

This is an investigation with no evidence of a crime, apart from politically motivated, anti-Trump investigators relying on a Hillary-funded dossier.

Also contrary to every single person talking on MSNBC, Steele’s dossier is not like a neighbor who hates you telling the police you’re cooking meth in your basement. The police still have to investigate, don’t they?

First of all, if after 18 months of police work, the only evidence that you’re cooking meth in your basement is STILL your neighbor’s bald accusation, reasonable people will conclude that your neighbor is a liar. That’s what the Steele dossier is. It was the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia 18 months ago, and it’s the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia today.

Moreover, it’s not just the informant who hates the target. The investigators do, too. This is more like a police officer calling the police on his wife, sending himself on the call, shooting her, then writing up the police report concluding it was a justified shooting.

When your entire investigation turns on a handful of people with corrupt motives, maybe it’s time to call off the investigation.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: