I am glad that President Trump declared the state of National Emergency on the southern border. However, some people feel very uncomfortable with the spending bill that he approved just prior to his address. Among others, Daniel Horowitz wrote a very depressing but very astute analysis of some of its provisions. In a nutshell, this spending bill (that exists in more that one version, by the way) seems to limit the ability of the President to deter the invasion instead of enhancing it. He got peanuts for the funding (1.375 billion instead of 25) and accepted things such as amnesty, an increase in low-skilled workers, veto powers for local officials, etc. So Trump made his National Emergency address essentially to say that he would seek funds for the wall through some other channels. But that’s not all. On top of that, during his National Emergency address, President Trump missed the point about the invasion. As was cleverly pointed out by Stewart Rhodes of OathKeepers.org, the address failed to underline the military and terrorist dimensions of the invasion, focusing only on the crime and drug aspects of it. Cartels are not only in the business or drug and crime but also active in the fields of terrorism and military operations. With all that in mind, I think it is a sad day for America. It would have been better for the President not to sign the bill at all and simply declare National Emergency. At this point, we don’t even know if there will be a wall at all. In closing, I think we can see now some pattern emerging from the political machinations of both Democrats and establishment Republicans. Washington politicians are doing anything they can to obstruct President Trump. When spending bill negotiations occur, they impose on the President the worst possible conditions and demands. In other terms, they put Trump into a position where he has to give his consent to a lot of crap and poison pills in order to get a little bit of what he wants. That was already obvious in the spending bill last fall that renewed the funding for the military and it is even more obvious now. To shut down the government is better than to sign bills that go against national security. Rosemary Jenks at NumbersUSA gives her take about this recent bill on the air of Secure Freedom Radio just below. I also provide the video of the National Emergency address by the President.
In this interview, Mr Gaffney explains to Fred Fleitz how the terrific resource that he has created, the Center for Security Policy, came into existence. He provides here a wonderful presentation of the Center, of its goal, main objectives, purpose, etc. I am glad that he took the time to talk to us on the Center’s 30th Anniversary. I take this opportunity to suggest a few interviews aired on Secure Freedom Radio, the radio show of the Center, recently. I also want to extend all my appreciation, my thanks and my admiration for such great work and dedication. Really, the Center for Security has been at the forefront of the war for the free world and it was possible thanks to a man, Frank Gaffney, and all his contributors. You can find his interview in the fourth segment of the first link.