Prediction: Second Term and Trump Finished the WALL

Let me begin by predicting that Trump will finish a wall of protection along the southern border, just not in this term in office. I predict that Trump will not only win in 20/20 but voters will bring in with him congressmen who will support the President’s policies. It’s going to be a swamp clean up like this disaster of a Congress never happened. Trump will eventually win as usual. Some of you, perhaps most of you were not pleased with my article predicting that Trump will temporarily be prevented from finishing the wall in his first term. Some of you jumped to the conclusion that I do not support President Trump, nothing is further from the truth. The progressives may be able to slow down the Trump train, but they can’t stop it.

I’m quite sure that this audience knows that if we had a democrat as president none of this would be happening. It doesn’t help that progressives make up most of Congress starting from McConnell and Ryan down to little Rubio who does support the national emergency. Progressives don’t want to see Trump succeed on stopping illegal immigration; nevertheless, Congress did give the President authority to declare a national emergency (NEA) and gave him power to enforce existing statutes, which President Trump is doing.

The question is by building a wall that Congress definitely does not want (Republicans and Democrats alike) and did not authorize, is the President performing a legislative act that is the province of Congress? Quite possibly. The way I see it the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2019 (CAA2019) was passed specifically to give progressives in Congress an argument in court. Congress decides domestic policy and not the President. Perhaps an argument can be made that a border invasion is not a domestic issue but rather foreign affairs. The Constitution is not definitive on this issue; however, the recent pattern, although not precedent setting as in court cases, shows that the power of the executive during times of national emergency and war have been expanded in the area of foreign policy.

Congress barred the Obama administration from using funds to transfer detainees out of Guantanamo Bay prison. Could he have declared a national emergency in order to use funding from other sources? If he thought he could, you better bet he would have. All of the enumerated presidential powers dealing with foreign affairs require the consent of the Senate. Former Presidents have used their “implied” powers to accomplish their objectives. In the past Congress has granted authority to the President to impose economic sanctions on foreign entities (International Emergency Powers Act of 1977). Furthermore in U.S. v Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. the court held that in international relations, the President is the sole organ of the Federal Government. Congressional legislation that effects international relations should accord the President a degree of discretion and freedom to implement foreign policy. The powers of the Federal Government are derived from the States and the States did not have power beyond their borders. Even before the Declaration, the colonies were a unit in foreign affairs, acting through a common agency—namely, the Continental Congress, composed of delegates from the thirteen colonies.

Speaking of how the president is the negotiator for our foreign policy, the court in Curtiss-wright Export Corp. wrote: This consideration, in connection with what we have already said on the subject discloses the unwisdom of requiring Congress in this field of governmental power to lay down narrowly definite standards by which the President is to be governed. One could argue that by limiting this President in how he proposes to protect America’s borders by imposing “narrowly definite standards” limits the power of the presidency in exercising his power in foreign affairs.

Trump can win a second term and bring in some Congressional districts with him.

As for the border barrier, he is imo not communicating effectively. He has mentioned these issues before such as during the campaign and at the SOTU but imo he needs to presss these reasons every time he speaks about it. I’ve mentioned that in part this is personal, he lost his brother to substance abuse and drugs like fentanyl are pouring across the border causing thousands of deaths. Amnesty Int’l report that thousands of kids have been kidnapped and some 60% of women sexually assaulted while making the trek from central and south America to the USA. People are indentured (enslaved, some in the sex trade) to pay the cost of entering to human smugglers. In addition to the potential for enemy combatants and saboteurs to enter the country he does mention hardened criminals like MS-13. But by emphasizing the human tragedy - drug deaths, kidnapping, sexual assault - he puts the left on the defensive. They come because they think they can get in, and along the way they are victimized. With a barrier making it harder to get in, fewer people will be victimized. Trump has the moral high ground yet he lets people like Pelosi preach about morality. It is immoral to continue to allow rape, assaults, slavery, kidnapping, and thousands of deaths to go without a response.

There are other reasons he could win. I think of Reagan in 1984 saying “you don’t change horses midstream” when you realize he will be likely to have advanced talks on North Korea as well as Israeli-Arab peace fronts by the time the elections roll around. He has renegotiated NAFTA and will have a new China trade deal. Loathe though the left is to give him credit for anything he will be able to make a great case that progress on these fronts should not be interrupted in 2020 with a change in leadership.

It remains to be seen if any of the real “colluders” in the 2016 election will face consequences for their actions, but should the DOJ or a Special Prosecutor get the indictments flowing and the “Russia” story exposed and turned on its head, he will further have a case to make about the nature of his opposition and the poor state of American news outlets.

We don’t know who the Dem challenger will be but they are likely to have a 1972 (and 2016) type fracas between the far left and the corporate left. Bernie is running and that will push other candidates to the left as well, and those who don’t move left will have a harder time contrasting themselves with Trump because in a bird’s eye view of things opposing the wall is a small issue.

In the SOTU he laid down the gauntlet on socialist ideology. Whether he and his surrogates can effectively communicate the foolishness of ideas like free healthcare for all and free college for all is an open question. These ideas should not have much traction as it is for we already know the outcome - higher costs, rationing, debt and more taxation, plus lower quality outcomes. Just look at rent control as an example: Rent control means less incentive to build new supply and less incentive to rent and maintain properties in tip top shape. In time rent control leads to urban decay and loss of property values. Right now the ease of obtaining student loans is a direct cause of the ever-escalating cost of education; and universities are pushing a lot of ideological nonsense and jacking up their administration vs teaching faculty ratios to ridiculous proportions. Universities have no incentive to economize or improve their product because they have no risk; shoving risk off to the students themselves who are usually not well equipped to make a decision about how much value they will receive for 20-30 years of debt.

These and other issues may be the centerpieces of the 2020 election cycle. It could be an important lesson for the American people, many who have been indoctrinated into some of these outlandish ideas, if the message can get out.

The wall is important. But it is just a tool. The numbers are what counts.

So far, based on the numbers for legal and illegal migration, Trump is not succeeding in his reason for being elected (to stop our country from becoming Mexico).

There has been some reduction in certain “refugee” admissions but it is still full-speed ahead on everything else. And over half his term is over.

But worse, Trump is talking now about Increasing(!) legal migration over Obama levels.

If that happens, Trump becomes Jeb Bush (with less personal discipline), and his presidency becomes a tragic waste of the final opportunity to save our nation.

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.