Trump's Biggest Achievement in His 1st 100 Days? Stopping the Left

President Donald Trump's biggest achievement in his first 100 days? Easy. He stopped the left.

Measure Trump's first 100 days not just by looking at what he has or has not accomplished. Look at what America would have experienced under the alternative: Hillary Clinton.

Under Clinton, the debate would not be on how to replace Obamacare, but how quickly can the left realize its ultimate ambition, a Canadian-style, single-payer system. Under Clinton, the issue would not be how steep the tax cuts, but how many "rich" people, also known as job creators, would experience yet another growth-restricting tax hike.

Under Clinton, the $100 billion-plus annually in new regulations imposed by President Barack Obama -- much of it to fight "climate change" -- would continue to rise. This has stopped. President Trump signed an executive order that requires an elimination of two regulations for every new regulation proposed by an executive department or agency in 2017, with a zero-dollar net increase in the cost of regulations.

Under Clinton, newly confirmed conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch would've been another Ruth Bader Ginsburg/Sonia Sotomayor/Elena Kagan clone. Four left-wing SCOTUS justices, in the Heller case, ruled that there is not an individual right to keep and bear arms. Spare us a fifth one.

Trump, too, has put the left-wing media on notice. No more Mr. Nice Guy. Through WikiLeaks, we found that John Harwood, a debate moderator, emailed a letter to Hillary Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, bragging about a question he had put to Donald Trump. He also emailed advice on dealing with the challenge posed by Dr. Ben Carson. Staffers for newsmen Jake Tapper and Wolf Blitzer of CNN contacted the Democratic National Committee to seek questions they might put to Republican presidential candidates. There were many other examples of flat-out collusion, well beyond the liberal bias we've come to expect.

President Trump also changed eight years of Obama's "leading from behind" foreign policy by using our largest non-nuclear bomb on ISIS in Afghanistan and bombing Syria for its use of chemical weapons. Under Obama, we pulled out all the troops from Iraq, despite the objections of his foreign policy and national security and defense teams. One of the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, now-retired Army Gen. Ray Odierno, said: "I go back to the work we did in 2007 (through) 2010, and we got into a place that was really good. Violence was low, the economy was growing, politics looked like it was heading in the right direction. ... We thought we had it going exactly in the right direction, but now we watch it fall apart. It's frustrating. ... I think, maybe, if we had stayed a little more engaged, I think maybe it might have prevented it."

Under Obama, we bombed Libya, a mission that the Obama administration admitted was done for humanitarian reasons. Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi had paid reparations for the terrorist explosion of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. And following the American-led invasion of Iraq, Gadhafi had surrendered his weapons of mass destruction to the U.S. Yet under President Obama, America joined the French and British in bombing Libya to rid the country of Gadhafi. Incredibly, after criticizing President George W. Bush for not thinking through the invasion of Iraq, when Obama was asked what he thought was the "biggest mistake" of his presidency, Obama said, "Probably failing to plan for the day after what I think was the right thing to do in intervening in Libya."

For the most part, President Trump has delivered on his promises, or has attempted to deliver on them.

Take immigration. While the wall construction has not begun, nor has Trump been able to figure out a way to get Mexico to pay for it, a psychological wall has already gone up. Border-crossing apprehensions were down more than 60 percent from January to March, after Trump made it clear the welcome mat for illegal entry has been rolled up.

As for the so-called "failure" to repeal and replace Obamacare, businesspeople nevertheless have confidence that whatever emerges will be less expensive, less onerous and less intrusive than what they would have faced under a President Hillary Clinton.

Ultimately, Trump will likely be judged on one thing -- the economy. If he manages a 4 percent GDP growth, as promised during the campaign, few will care about his nocturnal tweets.

After 100 days of Trump, the earth did not open up and swallow America. His critics can crawl out from under the bed. The stock market has hit record highs; small-business and consumer confidence polls show optimism in levels not seen anywhere from 10 to nearly 40 years, depending upon the poll. Something is happening.

When Ronald Reagan died, George Will wrote: "Today Americans gratefully recall that at a turbulent moment in their national epic, Reagan became the great reassurer, the steadying captain of our clipper ship. He calmed the passengers -- and the sea."

It's not too soon to wonder whether someday something similar might be said of President Trump.

Good summary. The article below deals with Justice Gorsuch, a really big win for us and Trump!

Gorsuch Puts Down The Left’s Serial Rapist
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 4-27-2017 | Daniel Greenfield
Posted on 4/27/2017, 4:44:48 AM by servo1969

A few months after lefty activists crowded Washington D.C. for the Women’s March, activists from many of those same organizations went to bat for a serial rapist and murderer.

Ledell Lee’s victims were all women. While he was on trial for the rape and murder of Debra Reese, the testimony of three of his rape victims was presented. Lee had made a habit of knocking on doors and asking to borrow some tools to see whether a woman’s husband might be home.

Debra Reese called her mother and told her that a strange man had tried to borrow some tools. A few minutes later, Ledell Lee had beaten her to death with a tire thumper. Marks on her neck showed that the former baby boutique worker had also been strangled.

Then Lee headed out to spend the $300 he had stolen from her.

Three years earlier, Ledell Lee had attacked a 17-year-old girl while she was rocking her 3-month old niece to sleep. Lee hit her, dragged her out of the house, held her head under water until she lost consciousness and raped her.

A year after that atrocity, Ledell Lee attacked a 50-year-old woman walking home from the grocery store. He strangled her repeatedly, dragged her to the back of a building and raped her.

When Lee was caught after murdering Debra Reese, the evidence tied him to these assaults and two murders. He was convicted of two rapes and sentenced to death for his crimes against Debra Reese. Justice would be done. But first justice had to elbow past the ACLU and the pro-crime lobby.

In a Supreme Court dissent written on April 20, 2017, Justice Breyer whined, “Why now?” “The state is rushing to put him to death,” complained Nina Morrison of the badly misnamed Innocence Project.

But it’s her client who rushed to put his victims to death. Ledell Lee had committed his crimes in the first years of the nineties. His youngest victim is now in her forties. Arkansas had let him live for decades.

Three other Supreme Court justices, feminist heroines Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor, also clamored for a serial rapist.

Midazolam, a medication approved for sedating infants, has a “risk of severe pain”, Sotomayor wailed. The “wise Latina” failed to clarify whether it’s more painful than being beaten to death with a tire thumper, being strangled behind a school building or being held underwater until you pass out.

Any and all of these alternative methods of execution should have been offered to Ledell Lee.

Despite the panicked warnings by agonized human rights activists about the suffering that Ledell Lee might experience if Midazolam were used, it took the left’s latest monster two minutes to lose consciousness. There was nothing to show that the murderer and rapist had suffered as he died.

The objections to Midazolam were a sham. The pro-crime lobby has worked to cut off the supply of drugs that might be used to execute murderers. Demanding more tests and filing new appeals was a slimy scheme by the pro-crime lobby to run out the clock until the Midazolam expired.

And then Arkansas wouldn’t have been able to execute Lee no matter the results.

The pro-crime lobby has pursued a cynical game of cutting off the supply of reliable drugs thereby forcing states to use medications not intended for that purpose. And then filing suit to complain that the medications being used are not intended for that purpose. But the Supreme Court didn’t bite.

Justice Neil Gorsuch cast the deciding vote. And a monster died.

The left loved Ledell Lee as it loves all its monsters. The ACLU and Innocence Project filing tenderly dwells on Lee’s victimhood. We are told that he repeated eight grade and his mother smoked when she was pregnant. But despite Lee’s supposed retardation, he was cunning enough to scout houses, contrive a pretext for finding out if women were home alone and then raping and murdering them. Despite his time in special education, he managed to conduct a rape and murder spree for three years.

The pro-crime lobby would have us believe that Ledell Lee is smart enough to rape and kill, but too stupid to die.

The stupidity defense has become the new insanity defense. Every killer on death row is suddenly diagnosed with lead poisoning, fetal alcohol syndrome and mental retardation. Once you hear an ACLU lawyer argue that his murderer is too stupid to die, you know that he’s guilty as hell.

The case of Ledell Lee showed us again what was at stake in the Gorsuch battle. Legal debates sometimes seem abstract. And yet they are as real as a teenage girl being dragged out of her sister’s home into the woods, a woman being strangled behind a school and a housewife being beaten to death with the tool that her husband gave her to protect her.

The left is a pro-crime lobby. Behind the empty theater of its sham feminism and pink rallies, it is on the side of the rapists and the murderers. It is on the side of Ledell Lee and all the other monsters like him.

“If the six of you had been in that conversation, you would have come away not saying, oh these are some thugs or superpredators that I can’t relate to,” Obama smugly boasted. The left prides itself on relating to “superpredators”. It empathizes with Ledell Lee and not his victims.

That’s what Obama’s justices did. That’s what anyone else he appointed would have done.

Gorsuch’s successful appointment to the Supreme Court won justice for the women whom Ledell Lee raped and murdered. Over the objections of the pro-crime Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg and Breyer.

In a small moment, Justice Gorsuch stood up for justice and against the pro-crime lobby. He brought closure to the victims and their families. He made sure that Arkansas was allowed to do the right thing.

“With his first vote, the Supreme Court’s newest member sent a man to die,” the New York Times sneered.

But the Times, as usual, is wrong. With his first vote, Justice Gorsuch helped put down a monster.

During his trial, Ledell Lee’s lawyer asked who were we to decide when someone dies.

“I will tell you who we are,” the prosecutor replied. “We are the hunted.”

We are the hunted. The monsters that the left shields, protects and promotes are hunting us on the streets and in our homes. When they are caught, the left frees them. When they are sentenced, the left fights for them. It builds sanctuary cities to protect them and ties the hands of the police who fight them.

Everyone who has been a victim of crime knows what Lee’s prosecutor meant. The left stands with the hunters, the robbers, the rapists, the killers and looters. Justice Gorsuch stood with the hunted.

The left stands with them. He stood with us.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3547796/posts

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.