Trump's Deportation Rhetoric Crushing to GOP

It has come to this: The GOP, formerly the party of Lincoln and ostensibly the party of liberty and limited government, is being defined by clamors for a mass roundup and deportation of millions of human beings. 

To will an end is to will the means for the end, so the Republican clamors are also for the requisite expansion of government's size and coercive powers. 

Most of Donald Trump's normally loquacious rivals are swaggeringly eager to confront Vladimir Putin, but are too invertebrate — Lindsey Graham is an honorable exception — to voice robust disgust with Trump and the spirit of, the police measures necessary for, and the cruelties that would accompany, his policy. The policy is: "They've got to go."

"They," the approximately 11.3 million illegal immigrants (down from 12.2 million in 2007), have these attributes: 88 percent have been here at least five years. Of the 62 percent who have been here at least 10 years, about 45 percent own their own homes. 

About half have children who were born here and hence are citizens. Dara Lind of Vox reports that at least 4.5 million children who are citizens have at least one parent who is an illegal immigrant.

Trump evidently plans to deport almost 10 percent of California's workers, and 13 percent of that state's K-12 students. He is, however, at his most Republican when he honors family values: He proposes to deport intact families, including children who are citizens. 

"We have to keep the families together," he says, "but they have to go." Trump would deport everyone, then "have an expedited way of getting them ["the good ones"; "when somebody is terrific"] back." Big Brother government will identify the "good" and "terrific" from among the wretched refuse of other teeming shores.

Trump proposes seizing money that illegal immigrants from Mexico try to send home. This might involve sacrificing mail privacy, but desperate times require desperate measures. 

He would vastly enlarge the federal government's enforcement apparatus, but he who praises single-payer health care systems and favors vast eminent domain powers has never made a fetish of small government.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

Lindsey Graham: ‘Perfect storm’ brewing vs. U.S.

The United States faces the greatest risk of terrorist activity since 9/11 and national security will be a defining issue of the 2016 election, presidential hopeful Lindsey Graham told New Hampshire residents at a Town Hall-style gathering yesterday in Manchester.

The South Carolina senator — with Sen. John McCain by his side — gave a bleak assessment of the country’s security status, and said the expanding reach of terrorist groups, defense cuts and the Iran nuclear deal create a recipe for domestic disaster.

“This deal is a bad deal for us and for Israel and everyone else,” he said. “There is a perfect storm brewing for us to get hit. Here. Hard.”

A roomful of voters encircled Graham and McCain, who both slammed President Obama for a soft approach to foreign policy.

The meeting gave Granite State voters a glimpse of what’s to come at a Voters First Forum tomorrow, where residents will get to vet GOP candidates.

As president, Graham said, he would pour more money into the military and send soldiers back to Iraq.

Via: Boston Herald

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Lindsey Graham: Iran Deal a 'Declaration of War on Israel, Mideast'

The goal going into the talks with Iran was to dismantle its nuclear program, Sen. Lindsey Graham said Tuesday, but instead, the Obama administration has "ensured they've become a nuclear nation" and created a situation that will lead to nuclear proliferation throughout the Middle East.

"This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Middle East," the South Carolina Republican and presidential candidate told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program. "You have put every Sunni Arab in a terrible spot ... with the passage of time, this industrial-strength program we have locked in place will become a nuclear program."

In regards to Israel, Graham said,  "You have taken their biggest threat on the planet, who constantly chants 'Death to Israel,' and you have created a possible death sentence."

And as for the United States, "you have taken our chief antagonist, people who have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq, toppled pro-American governments throughout the region, including Yemen, and given them capability to become a nuclear nation."

Graham blamed the deal on a "dangerously naive" President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, who have effectively brought new levels of chaos to the Middle East.

"Any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast, and is voting to give the largest state sponsor of terrorism $18 billion," said Graham. "What do you think they'll do with the money? It's going to go to [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad, to Hezbollah and Hamas."

Graham said he would have been more open to a deal that tied Iran's enrichment programs to a change in its behavior, including inspections and finances.

"I would never relieve inspections until there was a certification that Iran is no longer the state sponsor of terrorism," said Graham, adding that he also would never have agreed to lifting the arms embargo "until they changed their behavior."

The deal is also a "virtual declaration of war against Sunni Arabs," said Graham. "You're making every Sunni Arab nation recalculate. You have locked in an industrial-sized nuclear program on behalf of the Iranians."

Further, the deal ensures that "every Sunni Arab nation who can get a nuclear weapon will because now they must," Graham said. "The goal President Obama set out [to achieve] I shared — to dismantle the program, to give them a nuclear capability consistent with a peaceful power program, and to require them to change their behavior before you gave them weapons or a nuclear capability. The goal has not been achieved."

Instead, he said, "With this deal, you've ensured that the Arabs will go nuclear. You have put Israel in the worst possible box. This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don't push back. You put our nation at risk."

And at the end, "every goal the president expressed two years ago has absolutely not been met, and you put the arms embargo on the table at a time when they're destroying the Mideast with their conventional weapons program," Graham said. "This is a terrible deal. It's going to make everything worse, and I really fear that we have set in motion a decade of chaos."

Even though the agreement's details have not yet been made public, Graham said he has been to the Middle East enough to know that the deal is a disaster, as it will "lock in a nuclear program that is mature over time without behavior change because that's going to push every Arab to get a weapon."

Graham said he considers Kerry a "good man," but he and Obama "want a deal so bad" Kerry is not listening to the Arabs or to Israel, as they are "are telling him something he doesn't want to hear."

The deal will now move to the Senate for a 60-day review period, and Graham said he plans to argue to his colleagues that it will initiate a nuclear arms race, and that giving Iran cash means "they're going to put it in the war machine, which puts us at risk."

He said he will also "tell the president to go back and try to get a better deal. Tell them there's a better deal to be had."

Graham also had a warning for Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton: "If you think this is a good deal, you're dangerously naive." But still, he said even she could broker a better deal than the one at hand.

"I think she could negotiate a better deal than this," he said. "I think everybody on our side could, except Rand Paul."

And he said that if the Senate cares about Israel, "you will not put her in this box," and if it cares about the United States, "you will not allow our chief antagonist to become a nuclear threshold nation ... If you care about Americans, you will not give this regime one penny."

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

Sunday Show Round Up - Kerry defends deal with Iran that eases sanctions

Secretary of State John Kerry took to the airwaves to defend the Iran-P5+1 diplomatic deal that was reached in Geneva early Sunday morning.

“This negotiation is not the art of fantasy or the art of the ideal, it’s the art of the possible, which is verifiable and clear in its capacity to be able to make Israel and the region safer,” Kerry said on ABC’s “This Week.”

“The fact is that Iran’s ability to break out will expand under this program. Therefore, Israel will be safer, the region will be safer, Iran’s 20 percent uranium will be destroyed, therefore they are safer. Iran’s 3.5 percent uranium stock will be frozen at its current level and the centrifuges will not be able to be installed in places that could otherwise be installed and advance the program.”

Despite Kerry’s assurances, many lawmakers and foreign leaders have already expressed frustration and concern at the deal.

A key issue for critics, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), concerns the dismantling of centrifuges. Last night Graham tweeted, “Unless the agreement requires dismantling of the Iranian centrifuges, we really haven’t gained anything.”

Rep. Mike Rogers (R., Mich.) echoed that worry this morning during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” arguing, that Iran had been given “a permission slip to continue enrichment.”

“That’s the one thing the whole world was trying to stop them from doing. … We made this mistake in Pakistan. We made this mistake in North Korea. History is a great judge here and a great teacher, why would you make the same mistake to a nation that will proliferate a nuclear arms race in the Middle East if they are successful at getting a nuclear weapon,” Rogers said.

Via: WFB

Continue Reading....

AWESOME: Tim Scott refuses to endorse Lindsey Graham…

Lindsey Graham didn't get much love Wednesday night from his fellow South Carolina Republican in the Senate.

During an appearance on CNN's "Crossfire," Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) was put on the spot and asked if he supports Graham for re-election in 2014.

"You know, as you three have just heard recently, I am up for re-election next year myself," Scott said. "I’m going to make sure that Tim Scott gets out...I'm gonna allow for all the other folks on the ballot to represent themselves very well. I'm gonna continue to work hard for my election."
"So no endorsement for Lindsey tonight?" host Van Jones asked.

"I certainly am going to work really hard for Tim Scott," the junior South Carolina senator said. 
A two-term senator, Graham is facing a crowded primary field that includes four GOP challengers. Scott was appointed late last year by South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) to serve the remainder of former Sen. Jim DeMint's (R-SC) term. 

Via: TPM

Continue Reading.....

Justice and State departments blocking access to survivors of Benghazi attack

The Justice and State departments are now citing a year-old FBI investigation and a future criminal prosecution to block access to survivors of last year’s Benghazi terror attack.

In an Oct. 28 letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.,the State Department’s Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, Julia Frifield, refers to "significant risks" and "serious concerns about having the survivors of the attack submit to additional interviews."

Graham has been asking since last year for the FBI’s transcripts of interviews with State Department and CIA survivors who were evacuated to Germany after the Sep.11 attack on the U.S. consulate.

He and other Republicans believe the transcripts will show the survivors told the FBI it was a terrorist attack and made no mention of a video or anti-U.S. demonstration at the consulate.

This intelligence was  likely available to the president, his national security team and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who five days after the assault blamed it on an anti-U.S. demonstration and inflammatory video.

"You can't hide behind a criminal investigation," Graham told reporters during a news conference on Capitol Hill.  "That's not a good reason to deny the Congress witness statements 48 hours after the attack."

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....

Lindsey Graham: Block Senate Nominations Over Benghazi

Sen. Lindsey Graham is threatening "to block every appointment" the administration makes until the survivors of the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, are allowed to testify before Congress.

"I'm going to block every appointment in the United States Senate until the survivors are being made available to the Congress. We need to get to the bottom of this," the South Carolina Republican said Monday on "Fox & Friends." 

"Fourteen months later, the survivors of Benghazi have not been made available to the U.S. Congress for oversight purposes," Graham said, referring to the attack that took place on Sept. 11, 2012, that took the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

Editor’s Note: New Video: Obama Plans to Redistribute Seniors’ Wealth

Graham also said he was demanding to know what role former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton played in making decisions about security around the Benghazi complex. According to numerous reports, concerns had been raised repeatedly about the lack of sufficient security, especially after other nations had closed their consulates and left Benghazi. 

In addition, he said he was still concerned with the administration's portrayal of the attack as being spontaneously inspired by an anti-Islam YouTube video, which was the explanation given by former United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, now the White House national security adviser, on television a few days after the attack. 

"Where was Hillary Clinton during all these multiple requests for security? You could see this attack a long time in the making, according to the people on the ground in Libya. Why couldn't you see it in Washington?" Graham asked on Fox & Friends.

"Who ... told Susan Rice this story about a protest gone bad? And who told the president there was no evidence of a preplanned terrorist attack, in light of all this information?" Graham continued.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

Graham Joins Vitter in Fight over Hill’s Carve-Out

It’s a contest over which senator is the most unpopular with his colleagues. Surprisingly, it’s probably not Ted Cruz. The most likely winner is David Vitter of Louisiana, who is mounting a campaign to end government subsidies for congressional health coverage. Polls show that 92 percent of voters dislike the idea of a special Obamacare privilege for anyone on Capitol Hill.

Yesterday, Vitter won an influential new recruit: GOP senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Graham told NRO’s Bob Costa that he will “object” to any pending fiscal deal unless the Senate at the same time votes on Vitter’s proposal.

“We’re down to stopping bad things, and the only bad thing at this point that we can really push on is the [Office of Personnel Management] rule,” he told Costa, referring to the rule that allows subsidies for Congress and its staff. “At this point, I’m not sure if we’re going to get it, so I’m going to object on any deal until I get that up-or-down vote. That’s only fair, and I believe the American people will be with me.”

Graham knows Vitter’s amendment may be the best leverage the Republicans have in any budget-deal negotiations. Democrats have personally and passionately appealed to Graham not to throw up a poison pill such as the Vitter amendment. But Graham says the Senate Democrats and President Obama “have moved the goal posts on a reasonable deal.”

Throwing the Vitter proposal into the mix is hugely unpopular with Capitol Hill veterans of both parties. Harry Reid, the majority leader, has slammed Vitter as “an anarchist” and “mean-spirited.”

Vitter responds that the original 2010 Obamacare law barred members of Congress and their personal staffs from continuing to get employer subsidies — worth $5,000 for individual policies and $11,000 or more for family coverage — because they would be buying coverage from the health-care exchanges, where employer subsidies are banned.

Via: NRO

Continue Reading.....

[VIDEO] Graham Calls on Ryan and Boehner to Pass Bill That Would Not Delay, Defund Obamacare

Senator Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) today called on Representative Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) to take on a leadership roll in negotiations over the government shutdown.

Speaking on ABC’s This Week, Graham told host George Stephanopoulos that he believed Ryan should partner with Speaker John Boehner to pass something “that doesn’t delay or defund [Obamacare], but would be good government.”

“That’s the best thing for the Republican party and for the country,” Graham said. “But as between House and Senate Republicans, the sooner this is over, the better for us, guys.”

Ryan has come to the fore lately in negotiations; last week, Ryan published an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that proposed a compromise that would trade relief from the sequester for entitlement reform.

Via: NRO

Continue Reading,...

Accusations subside as lawmakers, White House quietly work toward possible deal

Washington's hush-hush budget talks Friday, while not yet producing a concrete deal by any means, were notable for one detail -- the relative lack of vitriol, after weeks of nonstop, hyper-charged accusations between Democrats and Republicans. 

The suddenly restrained tone in Washington was a signal that, while talks could derail at any moment, lawmakers and White House officials were at least trying to reach common ground. 

"I've never seen the president, quite frankly, more open to the idea of meaningful reforms to address why we're in debt in terms of entitlement reform," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News, while calling on his own party to consider the prickly issue of taxes. 

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney delayed his daily press briefing by hours, as back-channel talks were underway. Later addressing reporters, Carney said President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner spoke by phone Friday afternoon, and had a "good conversation." 

No details were released. 

Though progress was slow, lawmakers said the fact both sides are talking was a good thing. Some pointed to indications that Obama might even be open to modest changes to ObamaCare, despite fighting them for months. 

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading..... 

Exclusive Gyms For Members Of Congress Deemed ‘Essential,’ Remain Open During Shutdown

Head Start programs have been shuttered, small businesses can’t get loans and hundreds of thousands of federal government employees are furloughed. But the exclusive gyms available only to members of Congress have remained open throughout the shutdown.

A House aide confirmed to ThinkProgress that the House member’s gym is open. The House gym features a swimming pool, basketball courts, paddleball courts, a sauna, a steam room and flat screen TVs. While towel service is unavailable, taxpayers remain on the hook for cleaning and maintenance, which has been performed daily throughout the shutdown. There are also costs associated with the power required to heat the pools and keep the lights on.

According to the aide, the decision to keep the gym open — even while other critical government services were shelved — came directly from Speaker Boehner’s office. Meanwhile, the staff gym available to Congressional staff has been closed.

It appears that the members gym in the Senate remains open on similar terms. Yesterday, Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) complained to a reporter from the Omaha World-Herald that the members gym was getting “rank.”

The daily operating cost of the House and Senate gyms remains shrouded in secrecy. The Architect of the Capitol, which oversees both gyms, has previously refused to provide information about the gyms for “security reasons.” A call to the Architect of the Captol for this story was not immediately returned.

Dozens of House members — including many members of the Tea Party who pushed the government into shutdown over demands to defund Obamacare — live in their offices to save money and use the House gym to shower.

Via: Think Progress

Continue Reading.....

Graham: Obama Must Act On Syria After Speech, With Or Without Congress

GLORIA BORGER: OK. But you say he's backed himself into a corner. So does he even have to go to Congress?

LINDSEY GRAHAM: You know, there's probably a reason 225 times presidents didn't come to Congress. I don't know if I'd come to talk with us. Quite frankly. The president has mismanaged this from day one about what we're trying to do, the goals we're trying to achieve. I think he made an unbelievably compelling case that we need to act here and compare that to the unbelievably small response we're going to give.

So at the end of the day, if I were the president I would act after this speech if diplomacy fell apart and I wouldn't come back to Congress.

JESSICA YELLIN: Do you think he --

GRAHAM: Because if he does his credibility as a world leader is completely shot. You can't address the world and talk to your enemies and your friends in the tone he did and do nothing.

YELLIN: But was it a mistake not to lay out a timeframe for diplomacy to work?

GRAHAM: Don't worry. The Congress will help him there. If two weeks from now we're still talking about how many -- what the inventory in Syria is like for the chemical weapons, nobody is going to be able to tolerate that.

YELLIN: Really? You don't think he's shown exceptional patience today?

GRAHAM: What I think is the president really is trying to do -- force does matter. I don't think we'd have this conversation without the threat of military force. I really believe the president's right about that when the Foreign Relations Committee passed the resolution. I think Assad and Russia took this a bit differently.

Via: Real Clear Politics

Continue Reading

LINDSEY GRAHAM POLLING UNDER 50 PERCENT IN PRIMARY, COULD FACE RUNOFF

Ten months out from his primary election against three different Tea Party candidates, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has dropped to below 50 percent in the polls, meaning he is particularly vulnerable to a runoff strategy conservatives have employed against him.

Graham received just 42 percent of support from likely South Carolina GOP voters in an Aug. 25 poll of 500 likely GOP voters conducted by Landmark Communications and Rosetta Stone Communications, UnitedLiberty.org reports.

“These numbers should be of concern to the Graham campaign. The senator fails to reach 50% of the vote against any of his opponents,” Rosetta Stone Communications president John Garst said. “Graham does not break 40% among voters who think of themselves as evangelistic conservatives, and that group makes up 58% of the primary electorate.”

Lnadmark Communications president Mark Rountree added that Graham “has developed a serious problem with male voters and conservative voters in particular.”

“His support among those demographic groups is weak,” Rountree said. “But worse for Senator Graham is that he currently does not even win an outright majority in a potential runoff primary election, despite the fact that his opponents are not even well known to the general public.”

As Breitbart News has reported, Graham’s three primary challengers—State Sen. Lee Bright, public relations executive and first female graduate of The Citadel Nancy Mace, and pro-life activist and businessman Richard Cash—aim to take Graham to a runoff after the primary next June. If Graham receives less than 50 percent of the vote in the primary, then the second-place candidate will go head-to-head with him in a runoff election a couple weeks later.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

Graham: Obama's Cliff Meeting is Political Theater

President Barack Obama and congressional leaders were to meet on Friday for the first time since November with no sign of progress in resolving their differences over the federal budget and low expectations for a fiscal cliff deal before Jan. 1.

Instead, members of Congress are increasingly looking at the period immediately after the Dec. 31 deadline to come up with a retroactive fix to avoid the steep tax hikes and sharp spending cuts that economists have said could plunge the country into another recession.

"It's feeling very much to me like an optical meeting than a substantive meeting," said Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, noting that it was not a sign of urgency to set a meeting for mid-afternoon with a deadline just days away.

"Any time you announce a meeting publicly in Washington, it's usually for political theater purposes," Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said on Thursday on Fox News.

"When the president calls congressional leaders to the White House, it's all political theater or they've got a deal. My bet is all political theater," said Graham, adding that he did not believe an agreement could be reached before the deadline.

With taxes on all Americans set to rise when rates established under former President George W. Bush expire on Dec. 31, lawmakers would be able to come back in January and take a more politically palatable vote to cut some of the tax rates.

U.S. stocks fell on Friday, with the Dow Jones industrial average dropping 0.48 percent as investors fretted about the lack of certainty.

But some in the market were resigned to Washington going beyond the New Year's Day deadline, as long as a serious agreement on deficit reduction comes out of the talks in early January.

"Regardless of whether the government resolves the issues now, any deal can easily be retroactive. We're not as concerned with Jan. 1 as the market seems to be," said Richard Weiss, a Mountain View, California-based senior money manager at American Century Investments.

The new factor in the mix was involvement by Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who held conversations with Obama this week and said he expected a new proposal from the president that he would consider.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading...