Mr. President, Let's Have More Oval Office Meetings with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer

SOMETIMES PRESIDENT TRUMP IS SO HONEST THAT IT TAKES AWHILE FOR HIS BOLDNESS TO SINK IN. Consider this Oval Office exchange with Democrat Leader Senator Schumer in front of the media : "I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it." • • • LEADERSHIP -- WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME you heard a politician take responsibility for anything, and especially for a decision that would certainly be negative for him or her in the media? NEVER is my answer. It would have been so easy for President Trump to blame the Democrats -- the Democrat Party leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer were in the Oval Office with Trump and were sitting ducks. But, no. President Trump didn't blame anyone. He said "I will shut it down." • • • THE GOVERNMENT PARTIAL SHUTDOWN That was what the President was talking about. The exchange recorded by the entire White House press corps cameras and mics is a masterful lesson in leadership. The Democrats Pelosi and Schumer asked for the discussion to continue in private and said that the government shouldn’t shut down over the wall dispute. Trump answered : “It’s not bad, Nancy; it’s called transparency,” he said at one point -- and said he would be “proud” to have a shutdown over border security. “I will be the one to shut it down,” he said. • Trump wants $5 billion for the wall in 2019, and House Republicans support his demand. The Democrats have offered $1.3 billion for border security and have backed away from a previous $1.6 billion offer. They insist that a wall would be ineffective and a waste of money. With 10 days left before the shutdown deadline, Democrats are saying that they got what they wanted in the Oval Office meeting because they can now call any shutdown a “Trump shutdown.” The President publicly took ownership of any shutdown over the border wall : “Yes, if we don’t get what we want, one way or the other -- whether it’s through you, through a military, through anything you want to call -- I will shut down the government, absolutely. And I am proud -- I’ll tell you what, I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck, because the people of this country don’t want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting down, and I’m going to shut it down for border security.” • • • THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING. While the Washington Post’s #NeverTrump neo-conservative Jennifer Rubin was calling it an "early Christmas present" for the Democrats, here is what the ProgDem Washington Post published as its transcript of the meeting. It is a delicious study in how ot win a political debate : "PELOSI: So I don't think we should have a debate in front of the press on this, but the fact is, the House Republicans could bring up this bill if they had the votes immediately and set the tone for what you want. TRUMP: If we thought we were going to get it passed in the Senate, Nancy, we would do it immediately. We would get it passed very easily in the House. We would get it. PELOSI: That's not the point. TRUMP: Nancy, I'd have it passed in two seconds. It doesn't matter though, because can't get it passed in the Senate because we need 10 Democrat votes. That's the problem. PELOSI: Well, again, let us have our conversation then we can meet with the press again. But the fact is that legislating, which is what we do, you begin, you make your point, you state your case. That’s what the House Republicans could do if they had the votes. But there are no votes in the House, a majority of votes, for a wall, no matter where you. SCHUMER: That’s exactly right. You don’t have the...CROSSTALK). TRUMP: If I needed the votes for the wall in the House, I would have them in one session; it would be done. PELOSI: Well, then go do it. Go do it. TRUMP: It doesn't help, because we need 10 Democrats in the Senate. PELOSI: No, don’t put it on the Senate; put it on -- put it on the negotiation. TRUMP: Okay, let me ask you this, just -- and we’re doing this in a very friendly manner. It doesn’t help for me to take a vote in the House where I will win easily with the Republicans. PELOSI: You will not win. TRUMP: It doesn't help to take the vote, because I'm not going to vote the vote of the Senate. TRUMP: I need 10 Senators. That's the problem. PELOSI: Mr. President, you have the White House, you have the Senate TRUMP: I have the White House. The White House is done. PELOSI: You have the House. TRUMP: And the House would give me the vote if I wanted it. But I can’t because I need...(CROSSTALK). TRUMP: Nancy, I need 10 votes from Chuck. SCHUMER: All right, let me say something here. PELOSI: Let me -- let me say one thing. The fact is that you do not have the votes in the House. TRUMP: Nancy, I do, and we need border security. PELOSI: Well, let's take the vote and we'll find out. TRUMP: Nancy, Nancy, we need border security. It's very simple. PELOSI: Of course we do. TRUMP: We need border security. People are pouring into our country, including terrorists. We have terrorists. But we caught 10 terrorists. These are over the last very short period of time -- 10. These are very serious people. All of our law enforcement have been incredible, but we caught 10 terrorists, these are people that were looking to do harm. We need the wall. We need -- more important than anything, we need border security of which the wall is just a piece, but it’s important. Chuck, did you want to say something? SCHUMER: Yes, here’s what I wanted to say. We have a lot of disagreements here. The Washington Post today gave you a lot of Pinocchios, because they say you constantly misstate how much of the wall is built, and how much there...But that’s not the point here. We have a disagreement about the wall. TRUMP: The Washington Post...(CROSSTALK). SCHUMER: Whether it's effective or it isn't. Not on border security, but on the wall. We do not want to shut down the government. You were called 20 times to shut down the government. You say, I want to shut down the government. We don't. We want to come to an agreement. If we can't come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the House and Senate right now and will not shut down the government, and that's what we're urging you to do, not threaten to shut down the government. TRUMP: But you don’t want to shut down the government, Chuck...(CROSSTALK). SCHUMER: Because you can't get your way. TRUMP: The last time you shut it down you got killed. SCHUMER: Yes, let me say something, Mr. President. You just say, my way or we'll shut down the government. We have a proposal that Democrats and Republicans will support to do a C.R. [Continuing Resolution] that will not shut down the government. We urge you to take it. TRUMP: And if it's not good border security, I won't take it. SCHUMER: It is very good border security. (CROSSTALK) TRUMP: And if it's not good border security I won't take it. (CROSSTALK) SCHUMER: It’s what... TRUMP: Because when you look at these numbers of the effectiveness of our border security, and when you look at the job that we’re doing with our military...SCHUMER: You just said it is effective. TRUMP: Can I -- can I tell you something? SCHUMER: Yes, you just said it's effective. TRUMP: Without a wall -- these are only areas where you have the walls. Where you have walls, Chuck, it’s effective. Where you don’t have walls, it is not effective. (CROSSTALK) SCHUMER: Yes. PELOSI: Let’s call a halt to this. We have come in here -- the first branch of government, Article 1, the legislative branch, we’re coming in, in good faith to negotiate with you about how we can keep the government open. SCHUMER: Open. TRUMP: We're going to keep it open if we have border security. If we don't have border security, Chuck, we're not going to keep it open. (CROSSTALK) PELOSI: I'm with you. I'm with you. We are going to have border security. SCHUMER: And it’s the same -- you’re bragging about what has been done. TRUMP: By us. SCHUMER: We want to do the same thing we did last year this year this year. That's our proposal. If it's good then, it's good now, and it won't shut down the government. TRUMP: Chuck, we can build a much bigger section with more money. (CROSSTALK) SCHUMER: Let’s debate -- let’s debate in private, okay. Let’s debate in private... (CROSSTALK) PELOSI: ...that is devoid, frankly, of fact, and we can... (CROSSTALK) TRUMP: We need border security. I think we all agree that we need border security, is that right? SCHUMER: Yes, we do. We do. TRUMP: Good, good. See, we get along. Thank you, everybody. • Every time I red that transcript, I enjoy it more -- President Trump manages to squeeze Pelosi and Schumer so badly that they admit that "we need border security" and that the 10 needed Senate Democrat votes are what is keeping the border security at risk, while arguing that the people's business ought to be negotiated in private so that the people cannot hear what's going on. • Here is what the President was talking about when he said that where there's a wall there is border security. Again, the Washington Post provides the statistics in the transcript : "But the wall will get built. A lot of the wall is built. It’s been very effective. I asked for a couple of notes on that. If you look at San Diego, illegal traffic dropped 92% once the wall was up. El Paso, illegal traffic dropped 72%, then ultimately 95% once the wall was up. In Tucson, Arizona, illegal traffic dropped 92%. Yuma, it dropped illegal traffic 95 to 96%. I mean, and when I say dropped, the only reason we even have any percentage where people got through is because they walk and go around areas that aren't built. It dropped virtually 100% in the areas where the wall is. So I mean, it's very effective. If you really want to find out how effective a wall is, just ask Israel : 99.9% effective...our wall will be every bit as good as that, if not better. So we’ve done a lot of work on the wall, a lot of wall is built. A lot of people don’t know that. A lot of wall is renovated. We have walls that were in very bad condition and they are now in A-1 tip-top shape. And frankly, some wall has been reinforced by our military. The military has done a fantastic job. So the wall will get built, but we may not -- we may not have an agreement today. We probably won’t. But we have an agreement on other things that are really good." • • • PROTECTING AMERICA'S BORDERS. Who is interested in protecting Americans from illegal human traffickers, criminals and drug cartels who dump drugs into the US? Not the Democrats if their leaders Pelosi and Schumer are the standard. AND, with funding for parts of the federal government set to expire on December 21, all that Democrats Pelosi and Schumer could do was stammer that the discussion to continue in private and that we need border security. Alors -- as the French say -- when they are exasperated -- Alors, dummies : Give the President the measly $5 billion he is asking for. Don't shut down the government over $5 billion for the wall -- you spend ten times that on housing illegals who sneak in because there is no wall. • The public, as always, doesn’t want a shutdown, but Republican voters are geared up for a fight: A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll finds that, by a 57% to 36% margin, Americans think Trump should compromise on the wall to avoid a shutdown. And nearly 70% of Americans say they don’t think the wall should be an immediate priority for Congress. But Trump might be more focused on what his base thinks -- Republicans overwhelmingly (65% to 29%) say Trump should not compromise, even if it means a shutdown. And, President Trump let his Republicans and conservatives see the real Washington Swamp as the Oval Office meeting unfolded. Political commentator Jeffrey Lord told Newsmax TV last Wednesday : "Trump pulled the curtains back and let everybody see how the game is played for real. And this is one of the reasons why he's sitting there in that Oval Office in the first place." Lord emphasized the confrontation shows how "Donald Trump is the new American populism versus the old order, and what you saw was the old order in that Oval Office confronting the President...this is an old order here that is crumbling fast, and they are furious that Donald Trump is in their midst." Lord noted that the meeting was a perfect example of Trump loving a foil, and "Nancy Pelosi is the best of the best of the best of the foils for the next two years. And he is going to have a great time making her the reason no wall is built." Lord stressed "this story is going to move in the next days as we approach the shutdown threat" and Trump is setting up the Democrats to be blamed for whatever happens. • But, Senator Chuck Schumer is a slow learner. On Sunday TV he said : "President Trump should understand there are not the votes for the wall in the House or the Senate. He is not going to get the wall in any form." • President Trump took that Schumerism on : "Anytime you hear a Democrat saying that you can have good Border Security without a Wall, write them off as just another politician following the party line. Time for us to save billions of dollars a year and have, at the same time, far greater safety and control!" • • • WHAT ABOUT A PEOPLE'S WALL??? BizPac Review wrote on Monday that New York Post columnist Michael Goodwin has offered an alternative to the US government funding a wall along the southern border: crowdfund the wall. Goodwin was asked by Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade during a discussion on President Donald Trump’s willingness to shut down the government if he does not get border wall funding if there was a “private way” to get the wall built. “There is,” replied Goodwin, who insisted the public supports strong border security. “You can create a GoFundMe operation. Others suggest other ways, there’s an existing effort called FundTheWall.com run by a sheriffs association that’s raised some money, but nowhere near what is needed.” Goodwin then suggested that the President’s supporters could get it done : “According to my mail, a lot of people are willing to chip in. One reader writes to me and says if the 63 million people who voted for Donald Trump each contributed $80, that would get you near the $5 billion mark.” Many Americans would gladly surrender $80 if they could be assured it would result in an effective border wall -- Goodwin was adamant that “that’s the kind of thing that needs to happen. It could be a people’s wall,” he told Kilmeade. You can read Goodwin's column, Time for those who want the wall to go fund it, at < https://t.co/hv4SbNLEEv via @nypost >. • I would add that any contribution to building the wall ought to be deductible from the bottom line of federal taxes due. • • • DEMOCRATS ARE IN BIG TROUBLE. The Western Journal Conservative Tribune wrote last Saturday : "If a new poll is correct, Democrats might be counting on a guy who couldn’t win a Senate seat in Texas with all the money in the world against a media whipping-boy to take back the White House in 2020. The survey, conducted December 6-9 by CNN, found that the biggest mover in the Democrat field between October and December is none other than Representative Beto O’Rourke, who now sits in third place with 9%. In spite of losing the race for Ted Cruz’s Senate seat, O’Rourke saw his share of the vote more than double from 4% in the presidential October poll. First place, as usual, was taken by Joe Biden, whose percentage of the vote shrank slightly from two months ago. The former vice president and human gaffe machine -- Joe once said the Germans attacked Pearl Harbor -- now sits at 30%, compared with 33% in October. Bernie Sanders, everyone’s favorite socialist and Clarence Darrow impersonator, was second at 14%; that’s virtually unchanged from 13% in October. Among Democrat politicians not named Biden, Bernie or Beto, the leading candidate was New Jersey Senator Cory “Spartacus” Booker, holding at 5%. The only real movement further down the ballot came from candidates losing momentum. California Senator Kamala Harris fell from 9% in October to 4% in this survey, presumably because Kavanaughmania is over and voters aren’t treated to her visage on the tube every half-hour or so. Meanwhile, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren also saw a 5% dive, from 8% to 3%. I can’t possibly imagine what might have happened in the interim to precipitate that. Perhaps most telling is that none of the other candidates broke the 5% barrier." • The new CNN poll aside, the top three on the Democrat side, all have their flaws, according to the Conservative Tribune : "Biden might have put it best himself back in 2012 : 'My mother believed and my father believed that if I wanted to be president of the United States, I could be, I could be vice president!' Yes, exactly. Two runs for the presidency have ended badly for Uncle Joe. In 1988, a plagiarism scandal basically ended his chances before the primaries even began. A 2008 run attracted about as much interest as a professional tee-ball league, but he found himself as vice president because Barack Obama needed to prove his seaworthiness with the party establishment. While running a huge lead now, Biden didn’t particularly distinguish himself during his time as vice president, and there’s nothing to indicate another presidential run wouldn’t end the same way his other two did, particularly given the fact there’s no excitement factor behind him. Also, it’s worth noting that Biden is getting up there in years -- perhaps not as much of an issue against 72-year-old Donald Trump, but this is someone who’s going to turn 78 right after Election Day in 2020. As for Bernie Sanders, well, while I’m sure the prospect makes all of the comrades happy, it’s not necessarily a viable way toward victory in 2020. When you look at where the Democrats need to pick up electoral votes -- particularly blue-collar states like Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin -- one wonders how Bernie is the answer. Socialism may be real in right now, but it doesn’t exactly play in Peoria, at least not yet. There’s also the same age issue at play again -- Sanders will be 79 on Election Day and looks and acts like every one of those years. And then there’s Beto. No, age isn’t an issue with Mr. O’Rourke, who has both the name and mannerisms of a character from a Wodehouse novel. That sort of calculated, rich-kid insouciance may work in limited doses -- particularly when the media are busy calling him a 'rock star' -- but can it carry a whole campaign? Then there’s the issue of money. Namely, O’Rourke likely won’t have the same waterfall of cash flowing into his campaign when he’s running against other Democrats, particularly when more experienced names are likely to be in the field. Most of the reason O’Rourke got as close as he did in November is that he was able to leverage a massive advantage in resources over Ted Cruz -- more than $80 million compared with Cruz’s $34 million. That was a preposterous amount of money for a Senate campaign, an advantage he probably won’t have once the nomination season begins in earnest later next year. There’s also the issue of experience. O’Rourke is giving up his seat in the House of Representatives in the 116th Congress, meaning he likely won’t be holding any position except professional candidate between now and November 2020. Only one individual has gone straight from the House to the White House (James Garfield in 1880, for those of you who are curious). Beto will be a private citizen in 2020, but his experience still ends at the House of Representatives. That’s a huge experience handicap for someone who’s running based on their achievements in the political arena, particularly when the field will be littered with senators, governors and (presumably) a former vice president." • • • DEAR READERS, the Democrats are just as much out of candidates as they are out of ideas. And time is running out for 2020. Republicans may have smoother sailing retaining the White House than the media wants you to believe. • And, as we discussed in our December 14 Blog, thousands of American families have undoubtedly lost children and family members to illegal aliens in a variety of horrific ways. Yet, in the Oval Office meeting, both Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer effectively told America that they don't care about Americans or their losses to illegals. They simply don't care. They told President Trump to wait until next year and debate the issue. What is there to debate?? It's clear that they care about keeping their cushy jobs and titles and perks and they need Democrat votes to do that. And, difficult as it is to accept, the base of the Democrat Party has moved so far to the Progressive-Globalist Left that they have become radicalized ideologues who just don't care about Americans. President Trump knows just how thoroughly hellish the visions of Pelosi and Schumer and their elected Democrat storm-troopers are. They spout "transparency" and "we're the good guys" while they plot insurrection against the elected President and fight openly to reject any of his proposals that would stem the tide of illegal immigrants who they see as future Democrat voters -- legally or by voter fraud. They prefer illegals over American citizens because illegals vote for them. AND, last Tuesday, President Trump had them for breakfast. It was glorious to behold. • The truth is that Democrats -- all Democrats -- want Trump to be a failure. Now that they have won the House majority, we can count on Pelosi to lead an Armageddon-like battle to destroy President Trump. The sadder truth is that the House was given back to the Progressive-Globalist-socialist-marxist Democrats with the help of #NeverTrumpers and RINOs. It is a sad day for the Party of Lincoln when members of his Grand Old Party see economic success, minority jobs, world leadership, and secure borders as a reason to support Democrats, the Party of plantation identity-group politics and shredding the Constitution that Lincoln held so dear. Are #NeverTrumpers and RINOs really happy to see America threatened with a future that is Progressive-Globalist-socialist-marxist? • But, for now, let's simply encourage President Trump to speak the truth openly and force the Democrats to respond. That is the path to victory in 2020. Mr. President, more Oval Office meetings, please. And, don't be surprised if it is President Trump who shows Pelosi and Schumer what a good, honest compromise on the wall funding looks like.