It looks like Obama is going to follow through with his threat to grant amnesty through executive fiat to as many as six million illegal aliens – in his most egregious abuse of executive authority to date. John Hinderaker of Powerline, echoing Glenn Reynolds, likens the move to a coup d’etat.
When a tyrant asserts the right to rule by decree in a state that has formerly been subject to the rule of law, he is commonly described as carrying out a coup d’etat.
That is just what the Obama administration has done, and reportedly will continue to do. When Obama changed the Affordable Care Act by decree–to name just one example, substituting “2014″ for “2013″ in a critical provision of the statute–he acted as a tyrant. In his refusal to enforce the immigration laws, contrary to the Constitution which requires him to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” he has acted like a tinpot dictator, asserting the right to change or ignore the law by fiat. If he now directly nullifies Section 274(a) of the Immigration and Nationalities Act by legalizing, and issuing work permits to, five or six million illegal immigrants, thereby repealing federal law by decree, how else can we describe his action but as a coup? The Obama administration openly takes the position that the rule of law no longer applies.
Obama has a meager 31 percent approval rating on immigration which will certainly plummet further if he follows through with his threat.
But Obama is a Marxist in a hurry, and he knows his time is limited. The fundamental transformation of the country requires a massive infusion of 3rd world immigrants into the nation’s permanent dependency class – clients and supporters of the ever expanding welfare state. Democrats will deal with the political fallout in the short-term in the only way they know how – accusing Republicans of being racists and haters of the poor. And Republicans will be hamstrung to do much about it until after the election because our Democrat-compliant media will be pushing the Democrat narrative. Even with the media’s assistance, Dems will be more hurt than helped in November – but this is an action that will produce massive dividends for them in the long-term, and they know it. Obama figures he’s sitting in the catbird seat.
But first things first. As White House Dossier’s Keith Koffler notes, Obama is timing his coup d’etat to take place after his August vacay. Nothing can be allowed to interfere with Dear Leader’s down time.
On Sunday, White House senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s This Week, that the executive action would take place at “the end of the summer” – some time in September.
Pfeiffer pretended there was some kind of formal process exogenous to the White House – where the real power lies – in play, saying Obama would not act until he got “recommendations” from Attorney General Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Johnson, and that those weren’t due until end of summer.
(Oh, phew. Eric Holder’s involved. If anyone can talk sense into the nation’s out of control chief executive – it’s the most corrupt attorney General in our nation’s history who has been held in criminal contempt by the US Congress, and who should by all rights been impeached a long time ago. I’m on pins and needles, here, wondering if Holder, together with his crack team of radical, activist lawyers, will be able to scrounge together some laughably weak legal justification for this abomination – which won’t pass muster with the courts but that won’t matter after millions of people have been turned into instant American citizens.)
But you and I know Obama simply doesn’t want all the shpitt hitting the fan while he’s on Martha’s Vineyard August 9-24, or ruining a possible three-day Labor Day Weekend golf extravaganza.
Pfeiifer offered up the usual White House drivel about Obama needing to do something because Congress won’t bend to his will.
Because of Congress’ failure to fix the immigration system and to pass the supplemental appropriations will need to deal with the specific crisis on the border, the president has no choice but to act.
Because according to the Constitutional Law Professor Obama, if Congress doesn’t approve of his policies, he’s permitted to go over their heads. It’s somewhere in the emanations and penumbras that a president is allowed to use his pen and his phone if he’s frustrated with Congress.
Scott McKay at the American Spectator writes that as appalling as his behavior is – there’s really nothing we can do about Obama at the present time.
Impeachment was discussed a good deal last week. We all know the score there. Obama is more impeachable as a matter of conduct than any president in modern times. But no Democrat in the Senate will cross the aisle and vote to impeach, which means no sixty-seven votes to remove. This is true no matter how bad things get after the midterms. Even Andrew McCarthy, who literally wrote the book on impeaching Obama, doesn’t think it’s doable under current circumstances. Hence the president’s flunkies, who won’t shut up about impeachment and are in fact attempting to goad Congress into pursuing it.
And it gets worse. The purse is no help. If you defund certain parts of the government in an effort to get him to change policy, Harry Reid will kill your budget bill in the Senate and that will lead to a shutdown: bad politics, especially in an election year.
And as it happens, because of the way we know Obama does business if there is a shutdown he’ll make sure the Border Patrol leaves the border wide open and ICE opens those detention facilities so all the tattoo-faced MS-13 goons who make up a terrifying percentage of the current influx through our border will have the run of the country.
Meaning that any attempt to use the power of the purse to close the border will have the unintended consequence of wiping out the border. Plus, conservatives will be the ones who get clobbered in the November congressional races for having tried to restore lawful governance to the executive branch.
That’s the political reality of the situation.
McKay suggests using “as many creative strategies and tactics as possible” to reel the president in. “Civil disobedience should be on the table,” he suggests. “State action—even nullification—should be considered.”
I also heard last week that there is talk in Washington about the GOP possibly filing an injunction if Obama actually moves to grant amnesty to 6 million illegal immigrants.