The Gruber Tapes 1 – 14 (Updated)

I thought it might be useful to compile these all in one place and update as needed. (There will be more.)

THE GRUBER TAPES

#1: Gruber proudly cites the lack of transparency in crafting the bill, taunting the American people as to stupid to notice the subterfuge.

“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass,” said Gruber in the recently released bombshell video of a University of Pennsylvania panel he was on in October, 2013.

#2: Gruber again displays his contempt for the American people who are “too stupid to understand the difference”

On Tuesday’s broadcast of “The Kelly File” on the Fox News Channel, a new clip of ObamaCare architect of Jonathan Gruber saying that “American voters are too stupid to understand the difference” of the language of the ObamaCare legislation.

#3:  Obamacare Architect Talks About ‘Basic Exploitation’ Of American Voters 

“It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter,” Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said during a speech at the University of Rhode Island in November 2012.
He was discussing what is known as the Cadillac tax and how it came into being.

#4: Obamacare architect discussed misleading public:

“Barack Obama’s not a stupid man, okay?” Gruber said in his remarks at the College of the Holy Cross on March 11, 2010. “He knew when he was running for president that quite frankly the American public doesn’t actually care that much about the uninsured….What the American public cares about is costs. And that’s why even though the bill that they made is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control. How it’s going to lower the cost of health care, that’s all they talk about. Why? Because that’s what people want to hear about because a majority of American care about health care costs.”

The video has been removed from Youtube, but you can watch the entire speech on the C-SPAN website here.

Gruber said the measures in the bill that attempt to lower costs constitute a “spaghetti approach” — throwing everything against the wall to see what sticks. And while preferable to the status quo, Gruber said he could offer no guarantee that any of the measures would work.

#5: Gruber Laughs at and Mocks ObamaCare Critic’s Accurate Predictions

Watchdog.org’s Bruce Parker has this clip from the ObamaCare architect’s appearance before a Vermont legislative panel in February 2011, where one of the committee members read a warning letter about the dangers of adopting a massive, top-down government program controlling health insurance markets. After hearing a list of predicted negative consequences, Gruber dismissed it as something that might have been “written by my adolescent children”

#6: ‘Mislabeling’ helped us get rid of tax breaks

The issue at hand in this sixth video is known as the “Cadillac tax,” which was represented as a tax on employers’ expensive health insurance plans. While employers do not currently have to pay taxes on health insurance plans they provide employees, starting in 2018, companies that provide health insurance that costs more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will have to pay a 40 percent tax.

“Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy provided for employer provider health insurance,” Gruber said at the Pioneer Institute for public policy research in Boston. The subsidy is “terrible policy,” Gruber said.

“It turns out politically it’s really hard to get rid of,” Gruber said. “And the only way we could get rid of it was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it’s a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.”

(The White House press secretary said at a press briefing in 2010: “I would disagree with your notion that it is a tax on an individual since the proposal is written as a tax on an insurance company that offers a plan.”)

UPDATE (Nov 15):

#7:  2012 OFA ‘Truth Team’ video features Jonathan Gruber touting O-care development role

As Democrats try to distance themselves from “this guy Gruber”, a 2012 “Truth Team” video emerges which proudly touts his involvement in crafting the law.

UPDATE: (Nov 17)

#8 Gruber: States Refusing to Expand Medicaid “Awesome” in their “Evilness”

A new video featuring Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber, uncovered by White House Dossier today, shows Gruber concurring that some states refusing to expand Medicaid as part of Obamacare do so out of racist motives and asserting that the refusal is “almost awesome in its evilness” and an effort to “punish poor people.”

About half the states have refused to accept federal dollars to expand their Medicaid programs as part of the new insurance coverage provided under the Affordable Care Act. States say they have done so not to hurt poor people – or minorities, for that matter – but because they view Medicaid as a failed program and fear that the increasing costs of the expansion to be born by the states are unaffordable.

Many probably also think Obamacare harms their populations and don’t want to take actions that would support it.

 #9 Jonathan Gruber: ‘The Short Attention Span of the American Public Works To President Obama’s Advantage

Rightpundit unearthed an interview from 2013, showing Gruber commenting on the disastrous rollout of Obamacare. In another insult to the intelligence of the American voter, he said going forward, the “the short attention span of the American public” works to the president’s advantage. “A year from now when the law’s working, it will be long forgotten,” Gruber said.

The attention span of the American public is perhaps a little longer than Gruber realizes. A year later, ObamaCare’s approval rating stands at it’s lowest point to date – 37% according to Gallup.

#10:  Jonathan Gruber: “I Love the Hillary Clinton Plan”:

Jonathan Gruber praised Hillary Clinton’s health care plan in the run up to the 2008 election.

“I love the Hillary Clinton plan. What can I say? The Hillary Clinton plan was the Massachusetts plan,” Gruber said. “The Hillary Clinton plan was Obama’s plan plus the mandate. And I think it was a better plan.”

Gruber let’s the cat out of the bag, here: “I was surprised politically she did that. I think Obama was a lot smarter politically to not have a mandate–at least in his proposal for the election.”

When Obama was running in 2008, he was “against” the  unpopular individual mandate.

#11: Jonathan Gruber Contradicts Himself on Obamacare and Single-Payer:

Speaking at a health care town hall event held in Seattle back in January 2012, Gruber said that if Obamacare was not successful at controlling costs, “we’ll have to revisit single-payer.” Gruber emphasized the point by stating it twice in response to a question about whether Obamacare could succeed at controlling costs without a public option.

But Gruber’s 2012 statement was called into question by Gruber himself in October of this year at Harvard University. “It’s very important to recognize the fallacy of something I frequently hear which is well, if Obamacare fails next we’ll go to single-payer. That is absolutely backwards,” Gruber said. He added, “Every single health reform effort moves to the right. If you like single-payer then Obamacare has to succeed.”

The contradiction was caught by Rich Weinstein, the same person who uncovered a series of video clips which have made Gruber and his role in crafting Obamacare a major topic of conversation this month.

Watch video here.

#12:  Gruber provides stunning evidence favoring the side that is seeking to destroy Obamacare in a case headed to the Supreme Court:

Here’s what he said in January 2012:

If you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits. But your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So you’re essentially saying to your citizens, “you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country.”

Here’s why this is so important.

The Supreme Court agreed last month to hear arguments in a case that claims subsidies for people under Obamacare are only for people who, as spelled out in the law, use an exchange established by a state. The infamous federal exchange was really a backup mechanism that the law’s writers didn’t expect to be used because, you know, what state would refuse federal subsidies and fail to set up an exchange?

Thirty six, as it turned out. So as you can see, if people in these states can’t get subsidies because of a ruling by the Supreme Court,   a central component of Obamacare falls apart, and possibly the law itself.

UPDATE (12/11/2014):

#13 Gruber’s 2011 Reply on Federal Fallback Exchange:

Gruber  states that he’s not super panicked that a number of states have not yet set up exchanges, (because under Obamacare, subsidies  are only for people who use an exchange established by a state.) Explains that there’s still a lot of time for them to do so before October of 2014.

#14: Gruber boasts of helping to write ObamaCare:

At a congressional hearing on December 9, Jonathan Gruber claimed that he was not the “architect” of ObamaCare people were making him out to be – but a mere “advisor.

But in the latest Gruber video to be released, Gruber portrayed himself as (full disclosure!) one of the primary designers of the Affordable Care Act.

Bonus videos:

Peter Orzag, Obama’s Budget Director in 2009, Lauds “Cadillac Plan” Tax Chicanery As More “Viable” Than Other Possibilities

In the 2008 campaign, McCain took the gutsy step of arguing in favor of repealing the health care exemption — gusty, because while most Pointy Heads agreed this would make the best policy, most people just say “You’re gonna tax my health insurance?!”

And note McCain offered a $10,000 or so tax credit in the deal — so that most people would not experience any negative tax consequences from the change in the law.

Obama ran against this and demagogued McCain on the issue. He promised he would not tax your health insurance.

As soon as he’s elected, Obama begins scheming as to how he can tax people’s health insurance — this time, not bothering to offer the $10,000 tax credit, which would make people net-neutral on the deal. He wants to tax them more. So no tax credit.

And since he just got done demagoguing the issue, he has to do it secretly. So he gets together with Orzag and Gruber to repeal the exemption over the course of years, as the “Cadillac Plan” threshold fails to keep pace with actual inflation.

So where are we now? Well, according to Gruber, we are 20 years away fromall plans being taxed at 40% rate, which means that most employers won’t offer them, and will just dump people on to the government exchanges.

The man behind many of these videos, mild mannered investment advisor, Richard Weinstein on the Chris Stigall Show on WPHT in Philadelphia, Nov 12  claiming more video is still to come regarding Obamacare.

“The big one” may have been #6.

Watch Obamacare architect say his reputation would suffer if he blatantly lied!

The Obamacare architect is the moronic gift that just keeps on giving. In this newest video to come out, Jonathan Gruber says that academics can be trusted more than anyone else because if he blatantly lied, his reputation would suffer, unlike all the other industries where people lie all the time!

Democrats Loved Jonathan Gruber Before They Forgot Who He Was:

Sen. Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said in 2009 Gruber’s defense of the Affordable Care Act was high praise, indeed, according to PJ Media.

“CBO’s experts aren’t the first to recognize these benefits,” Reid said. “Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Jonathan Gruber, who is one of the most respected economists in the world, said in today’s Washington Post, ‘Here’s a bill that reduces the deficit, covers 30 million people and has the promise of lowering premiums in the long run.’ Pretty good statement.”

Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.) also took care to name Gruber on the floor of the U.S. Senate in 2009.

“In addition to the Congressional Budget Office, I might say that MIT’s John Gruber has also done a study on our premiums and what does he conclude—he concludes, using Congressional Budget Office data, that the Senate bill could mean that people purchasing individual insurance would save every year $200 for single coverage and $500 for family coverage in 2009.”

Then-Speaker of the House and current House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) praised Gruber in 2009 as well before saying this week that she didn’t know him and that he didn’t write the bill.

“I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill for those who seek insurance within the exchange,” she said in 2009. “Our bill takes down those costs, even some now, and much less preventing the upward spiral.”

SEE ALSO:

 The Daily Caller: Gruber in 2010: I’m an Ivory Tower Kind of Guy:

A snippet of MIT economist Jonathan Gruber speaking candidly has resurfaced, but this time it’s about himself rather than American voters.

“I’m an ivory tower guy at heart and do my thing and figure I’m an honest guy and people will trust it,” Gruber told Politico in Jan. 2010.

The self-description is likely to resonate with the public after several videotaped recordings surfaced this week of Gruber calling Americans “stupid” and bragging about how “a lack of transparency” was necessary to pass Obamacare.

Gruber called himself “an ivory tower guy” after it came to light that he had been paid $392,600 by the Obama administration to help create Obamacare. Some media outlets that used Gruber as a source – such as Politico and Ezra Klein, then of the Washington Post – were unaware of the arrangement.

The Daily Caller: Gruber: ‘Seniors do a terrible job choosing’ health care plans:

ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber said “seniors do a terrible job choosing” their own public health care plans, according to presentation slides Gruber wrote that were obtained by The Daily Caller.

With ObamaCare limiting patients’ ability to choose their own insurance plans, doctors and medications, we might now know why: the law’s designers don’t think people know how to choose.

“We have experimented with choice in public insurance: Medicare Part D,” Gruber stated on a presentation slide dated Jan. 22, 2013. “Typical senior has 50 PDPs [Prescription Drug Plans] to choose from.”

But what’s wrong with seniors being able to choose their own plan?

“Seniors do a terrible job choosing,” Gruber said.

Gruber’s slide then claimed that 12 percent of seniors allegedly picked the lowest-cost Medicare Part D plan and could on average save up to 30 percent more, without noting that some seniors pick prescription drug plans that work for them that are not necessarily the cheapest possible plan.

The Daily Caller: Gruber Video: ‘Guns Are A Public Health Issue’ [VIDEO]

Another video has resurfaced of MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, this one showing the Obamacare architect speaking candidly about guns while claiming that the National Rifle Association is holding “hostage” President Barack Obama’s nominee for Surgeon General.

“By the way you have now permanently prevented yourself from winning a high elected office in the United States despite your charisma,” Harold Pollack told Gruber at the end of a three-part interview about Obamacare recorded in April, predicting the backlash Gruber is facing by months in advance.

“You know they’ll be playing this tape back in an endless loop with a guy with a deep voice in the background,” Pollack predicted.

Gruber doubled down, segueing from speaking openly about Obamacare to another topic.

“I’ll guarantee it further by highlighting that guns are a public health issue,” Gruber said.

Powerline: A WORD WITH THE MAN WHO…

The RightScoop puts it this way: “This is a great interview [by] Pat and Stu [with] Richard Weinstein, the man who is responsible for bringing us the latest Gruber videos. He explains what sparked his interest in Gruber and how he was ignored by everyone (even by Glenn Beck and crew) when he was trying to draw attention a Gruber video earlier this year.”

American Commitment: GOVERNMENT TELLS GRUBER LIE TO THE SUPREME COURT

“I think what’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits.  But your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill.  So you’re essentially saying to your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country.  I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges and that they’ll do it but you know once again the politics can get ugly around this.”

Very clear – and it means Gruber lied in his own amicus brief to the DC Circuit, when he wrote: “Appellants’ interpretation of the ACA cannot be squared with the basic economic framework undergirding that statute.”

So how did Gruber try to explain away his own statements? He told Congress:

“The portion of these remarks that has received so much attention lately omits a critical component of the context in which I was speaking. The point I believe I was making was about the possibility that the federal government, for whatever reason, might not create a federal exchange.”

This excuse is quoted to the Supreme Court in the government’s official brief as well as amicus briefs by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the AARP, and a group of liberal professors.

But it’s a lie.  How do we know?

When Rep. Scott DesJarlais pointed out the law requires a federal fallback exchange and asked Gruber why he was concerned there wouldn’t be one, Gruber said:

“I was concerned about the Federal exchanges because it was a very complicated task to get them set up and we weren’t sure who would be President when the time came to stand them up.”

This explanation can’t be true, because in both of the 2012 talks Gruber presented the risk of state resistance as one of the other threats to the law in addition to the risk Obama would lose reelection.  And here’s the thumper, the latest find from Weinstein.  Gruber was still publicly expressing his concerns about states not setting up exchanges after the election.

In March 2013, months into Obama’s second term, Gruber said this to interviewer Gillian Roberts.

Inside Jonathan Gruber’s ObamaCare For Dummies Comic Book:

image-1-770x510

Linked by Doug Ross, and Legal Insurrection, and Newsbusters,  thanks!

The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results

https://i1.wp.com/www.trevorloudon.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/wat1.jpg

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

“The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it.” – Thucydides

“They have healed also the hurt of my people lightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace”. – Jeremiah 6:14

“Let there be no mistake. We will not be intimidated. Canada will never be intimidated.” – Canadian PM Stephan Harper, addressing the nation after the Ottawa jihad attack on parliament, Oct. 23, 2014

“Only the dead have seen the end of war.” – George Santayana

https://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/b4625-joshua_dali_sun.jpg

This week’s winning essay,Joshuapundit’s The Day The World Stopped was written on Armistice Day (called Remembrance Day in Canada, Australia, the UK and other parts of the Commonwealth)and consists of my reflections on that day, then and now. Here’s a slice:

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

– Lt. Colonel John McCrae, Canadian Army Medical Corps(1872-1918)

The poem above is a product of World War One, the great scar of history that changed the world and differentiated between ages. As you can tell by the dates, the writer became one of the millions who died in the carnage.

96 years ago today, November 11, 1918 started out as a day like any other day. Men sat in their trenches, looking at each other over the blasted and tormented ground that was No Man’s Land where so many of their comrades had fallen, where the very earth was gorged with blood and pain.

According to the accounts of those who were present, there was no air of celebration. The orders had come through that the Great War was to end on November 11th, 1918 at precisely 11 AM local time, the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, but many of the soldiers refused to believe it, thinking it was a trick to lure them into exposing themselves to enemy fire.

The gods of war held sway until the last minute. Among the soldiers of the British Commonwealth,there are 863 who are recorded as having died on that November 11th. The constant din of machine guns, cries, small arms fire and artillery continued.

Colonel Thomas Gowenlock, who served as an intelligence officer in the American 1st Division was in the trenches that day.The orders had come through, but no one was completely certain they would be obeyed by either side, or that the armistice would last:

Official Radio from Paris – 6:01 A.M., Nov. 11, 1918. Marshal Foch to the Commander-in-Chief.

1. Hostilities will be stopped on the entire front beginning at 11 o’clock, November 11th (French hour).
2. The Allied troops will not go beyond the line reached at that hour on that date until further orders.
[signed]
MARSHAL FOCH
5:45 A.M.

Colonel Gowenlock wrote later that he drove over to the bank of the River Meuse to see if the war would really end. He wrote later that even with the orders for an armistice, the shelling was heavy on both sides.

“It seemed to me that every battery in the world was trying to burn up its guns. At last eleven o’clock came – but the firing continued. The men on both sides had decided to give each other all they had-their farewell to arms. It was a very natural impulse after their years of war, but unfortunately many fell after eleven o’clock that day.”

“…at the front there was no celebration. Many soldiers believed the Armistice only a temporary measure and that the war would soon go on. As night came, the quietness, unearthly in its penetration, began to eat into their souls. The men sat around log fires, the first they had ever had at the front. They were trying to reassure themselves that there were no enemy batteries spying on them from the next hill and no German bombing planes approaching to blast them out of existence. They talked in low tones. They were nervous.

After the long months of intense strain, of keying themselves up to the daily mortal danger, of thinking always in terms of war and the enemy, the abrupt release from it all was physical and psychological agony. Some suffered a total nervous collapse. Some, of a steadier temperament, began to hope they would someday return to home and the embrace of loved ones. Some could think only of the crude little crosses that marked the graves of their comrades. Some fell into an exhausted sleep. All were bewildered by the sudden meaninglessness of their existence as soldiers – and through their teeming memories paraded that swiftly moving cavalcade of Cantigny, Soissons, St. Mihiel, the Meuse-Argonne and Sedan.

What was to come next? They did not know – and hardly cared. Their minds were numbed by the shock of peace. The past consumed their whole consciousness. The present did not exist-and the future was inconceivable.” *

We, who have grown up with the memory of wars like Vietnam with its 50,000 dead and Iraq with its 4,000 can barely conceive of what 5 years of total, merciless war was like. A whole social order overturned and a generation literally cancelled out, with over one million dead from the British Commonwealth and Empire, almost a million and a half Frenchmen, over one hundred thousand Americans and over 2 million Germans – something like 10 million military dead on both sides, and probably 6-7 million civilians who joined them.

It was a horror so complete that for the men who fought it, it became a way of life to the point where many of them had difficulty adjusting to any other, even if they survived.When the guns stopped it was as if the world had stopped.

And yet, as Lt. Colonel McCrae’s poem tells us, that sacrifice was not meaningless. And today is a day to remember that.

In Canada, where Veteran’s Day is called Remembrance Day, there was a special ceremony.

In Britain and Australia, Canada and other Commonwealth countries, today is known as Remembrance Day, a name that dates from the Great War so many never came home from. The red poppies, mentioned in Lt. Colonel McCrae’s poem are a symbol worn by millions – to remember.

Today, Canadians rededicated their memorial to those whom fell in the Great War in honor of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, who were casualties of a newer war..one as yet undeclared, but no less of a sacrifice for freedom.

The Canadians are not the only ones who have lost men and women to this undeclared war that, at least here in America, doesn’t dare speak its name..not yet. Instead, there are attempts to hide it behind names like ‘workplace violence.’

There are defining moments in history. Sometimes, many of the men and women involved in them are aware of it as much as those whom come after them. Others remain unseeing of what is unfolding, and it is only revealed to them later.

We are in the middle of such a defining moment, whether we realize it or not.

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Andrew McCarthy in the NORO with Amnesty and Impeachment submitted by Nice Deb

McCarthy, a very skilled former federal prosecutor as well as a brilliant writer (full disclosure..I’m halfway through my review copy of his new book, Faithless Execution)answers the question on many people’s minds right now – if President Obama orders amnesty for illegal migrants by executive order, can he be impeached? His answer may surprise you.

Here are this week’s full results. Only The Razor was unable to vote ths week,but was not subject to the 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Krauthammer: Exec Immigration Action ‘A Flagrant Assault on Constitution’ and ‘An Impeachable Offense’

On “The Kelly File” tonight, Charles Krauthammer once again blasted the president’s planned executive action on illegal immigration, going so far as to say it is “an impeachable offense” but without recommending that he be impeached for it.

After Megyn Kelly showed a clip from 2011 of Obama telling a liberal audience that he can’t suspend deportations via executive actions because there were laws on the books and to not abide by those laws would not conform with bis “appropriate role as president.”

“It is very clear that what he’s doing now as he has said many times in the past, is a flagrant assault on the Constitution, on the separation of powers,” Krauthammer said of the president.

Krauthammer noted that he’s sure Attorney General Eric Holder was able to find lawyers who say that this action is OK.

“As we know, if you’re a district attorney, you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, and this is the equivalent,” he said.

He advised Republicans to fight it tooth and nail but not to lose their heads over it and shut down the government.

“We’re in unprecedented territory, Kelly noted, making the point that no president has ever done anything like this, before, and that’s why people want congress to call out that perceived lawlessness and do something as politically unpopular as impeachment.”

Krauthammer agreed with the premise, saying, “look, I believe it is an impeachable offense.” But he stopped short of recommending impeachment, which in the past he has said wouldn’t work and make the president a martyr.

He continued, “this idea of prosecutorial discretion is really a travesty. It is intended for extreme cases – for a case where you want to show mercy for an individual or two where it’s unusual… circumstances and you say, okay we’re going to give this person a pass. It was never intended to abolish a whole class of people subject to a law and to essentially abolish whole sections of the law.”

Megyn Kelly expressed her disgust with Obama’s excuse for taking the illegal action, whining “we really want this, it’s time. The Republicans didn’t do it. We tried to get it passed in congress and we couldn’t. Therefore the president must act.”

“That’s they way the system works in Venezuela. Krauhammer declared. “If the Caudillo isn’t able to get stuff done through congress, he issues a decree –  and that’s it –  and he’ll arrest anyone who gets in the way. The whole American system is designed so that there has to be a collaboration between congress and the president. Congress has to pass it and he has to sign it. That’s the way the damn thing works.”

He added, “you can’t say I waited and waited”  which Krauthammer noted is cynical of the president given the Democrats held congress for two years, and it didn’t get done.

SEE ALSO:

Breitbart.com: FOURNIER: ‘SIT DOWN, SHUT UP’ EXEC AMNESTY WILL HURT HISPANIC TURNOUT

The Hayride: Our Fundamental Problem Is That We Do Not Have An American President…

HotAir: Obama promises his deeply unpopular views on amnesty, Keystone won’t change