Islamists are here, and with deadly intent

American Thinker 

Who are the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR, and why should Americans care? Because both are Islamist front groups dedicated to Islam’s eradication of Christianity and Judaism, the genocide of the Jews and anyone opposing them, and the conquest of Western Civilization.

The invaluable Discover the Networks notes the Muslim Brotherhood is determined “that Islam should be ‘given hegemony over all matters of life.” To accomplish that, the Brother’s credo states:

“God is our objective, the Koran is our Constitution, the Prophet is our leader, struggle [jihad] is our way, and death for the sake of God is the highest of our aspirations.”

CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, postures as a non-violent advocacy group, but as Discover The Networks explains, it’s anything but:

CAIR promotes a radical Islamic vision, as evidenced by the fact that its co-founder Omar Ahmad told a Fremont, California audience in July 1998: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

This is not mere religious sentiment. Islam is a political system with religious trappings, and the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR are deadly serious about their goals of Islamic world domination. They’re hard at work toward this goal—in Texas—which has caused Governor Gregg Abbott to declare the Brotherhood and Cair foreign terrorist organizations and transnational criminal organizations. 

Graphic: X Post

Both groups are behind an attempt to establish an exclusionary Muslim enclave in North Texas, originally called “Epic City,” but more recently branded “The Meadows.”

So far, Texas has been successful in putting a halt to the project, however numerous lawsuits are forging ahead to push the project through.

The Texas branch of CAIR follows the Brotherhood playbook of deflecting scrutiny by claiming opposition to the project constitutes an "Islamophobic witch hunt."

The man behind the EPIC/Meadow project in Texas is Islamic scholar Yasir Qadhi, who is Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is named in the Brotherhood's "Explanatory Memorandum" as one of the organizations involved in the "civilizational jihad"/grand jihad strategy in North America. In short, Qadhi is about as Muslim Brotherhood as it gets.

Islamist organizations have long sponsored antisemitic groups on college campuses, many of which have more recently become overtly violent with the support of college administrators. They’ve branched out into K-12 Texas schools:

Meanwhile, Islamic associations are now visiting American schools, seeking to indoctrinate American kids with sharia law – an effort at proselytizing known as dawa. At Wylie East High School in Texas, an Islamic group called "Why Islam, " without approval, set up a booth at the front of the school during school hours and began courting students. The "Why Islam" group is an official outreach project run by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), widely regarded as a Muslim Brotherhood group.

The useful idiot principal of that high school, one Tiffany Doolan, posted this about celebrating “World Hijab Day”on Instagram:

Graphic: Instagram Post

The very real and ongoing Islamist attempt to subvert America from within isn’t limited to Texas, and scholar of Islam Robert Spenser reports at PJ Media. An Islamist woman recently prayed before the Illinois legislature, asserting that:

[Islam] is stitched into the fabric of our land [America], and carried in the sacred inscriptions…

She’s claiming that Islam was instrumental in the founding of America. Spenser explains:

The claim is actually based on the contention that a large number, if not all, of the black slaves in antebellum America were Muslims. This is an increasingly popular claim among the leftists who insist that “black and brown people built this nation,” but it is as unlikely as it is widely circulated. The uncomfortable fact is that Muslims in Africa often captured non-Muslim Africans and sold them to the Atlantic slave traders; they didn’t generally capture or sell their fellow Muslims, as that would have been against the Qur’an’s injunction to be “ruthless to unbelievers, merciful to one another” (48:29).

Why would anyone make such a fanciful claim, and why would a state legislature allow it? Well, Illinois, of course, but Islam’s goals are not inclusive and benign. Her “prayer” was part of a concerted campaign to stake Islam’s claim on America and to assert Sharia—Islamic law—is inherently American. 

It’s an incremental, insidious approach. Once there are enough exclusionary Muslim enclaves, once Sharia has been imposed and upheld, Jihad—armed conquest—will be the next step.

Islam is fundamentally, violently incompatible with Western Civilization. It is not kidding when it proclaims America “the great Satan,” and Israel “the little Satan,” and promises to destroy both. Texas, for now, understands that. Illinois apparently does not. 

Podcast thread for June 3rd

 

some should just knock it off.

The Calamitous Legacy of the GOP's Civility Caucus

American Thinker 

Why does the United States find itself in a political environment wherein the ruthless and fully radicalized Democrat Party was, before Donald Trump’s second term, well on the way to transforming the country into a Marxist “paradise”? It is because until Donald Trump effectively took over the Republican Party in 2024, after soundly defeating the two-party Washington Establishment and the unrelenting and vile machinations they unleashed against him from 2015 to 2024, there has not been a viable, determined, and equally ruthless opposition party.

While the Democrat Party was stealthily being taken over by the American Marxist movement and subsequently employing the tactics used by the Nazi Party during the 1920s and early 30s, the Republican Party wing of the Washington Establishment was wallowing in political civility and its corollary, obsequious compromising, choosing to not only be nonconfrontational but to bend over backwards in order to continuously accommodate the Democrats regardless of the absurdity of their demands.

How did this situation evolve? While it had its beginning during the 1930s, it accelerated dramatically in 1988 with the election of George H.W. Bush. He won, not on his own merits, but almost solely because he was the beneficiary of being the vice-president during the two terms of Ronald Reagan, in many ways the most successful and popular president of the twentieth century, but who also was vilified by the Washington Establishment as being an oblivious racist who was an uncivil, uncouth, and senile warmonger.

On the other hand, the Bush family dynasty exemplified the patrician attitude of holding oneself above the fray and fulfilling their preordained obligation to society while assuming those who may disagree or are political adversaries are equally honorable people. Among the archives at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library are the texts of 27 major speeches he delivered during his presidency referencing the importance of civility in our discourse and politics.

During the 1992 presidential election campaign, George H.W. Bush, in keeping with his penchant for civility, ran a lackluster campaign against Bill Clinton relying on the belief that his litany of compromises with the Democrats would buy their goodwill. The Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee, upon his instructions, never responded to a parade of false accusations and never went for the jugular with Clinton, who was saddled with innumerable scandals.

Clinton, not shackled by the niceties of civility, unabashedly attacked Bush’s character and integrity, accusing him of being an inveterate liar and conman. He falsely implied that Bush, despite not a shred of evidence, was not only complicit, but a major player in the Iran-Contra scandal while vice president.

This charge was seemingly coordinated with Lawrence Walsh, the Special Prosecutor for the Iran-Contra Affair. A mere two weeks before the election, he indicted Caspar Weinberger,  Bush’s Secretary of Defense, for a second time while obliquely mentioning Bush in the footnotes. Four weeks later, a federal district court judge threw out the indictment, but the damage was done and Bill Clinton was president for the next eight years.

While George H.W. Bush opened the door to political civility as being applicable to Republicans only, his son George W. Bush cemented that premise as being the foundational underpinning of Republicans not only running for president but Congress as well.

In his Inaugural Address in 2001, George W. Bush stated the following as he committed himself to adhering to the ideal of political civility:

Civility is not a tactic or a sentiment. It is the determined choice of trust over cynicism, of community over chaos.

These are fine and noble sentiments if both political parties endeavor to follow them, but not if one party is hellbent on overturning the foundational tenets of the country by any means possible.

During his eight years in office, Bush was incessantly and falsely accused by the Democrats and their allies in the media of being the worst human being on earth as he was a genocidal warmonger, one of the most racist presidents in history, a prevaricator, as well as a misogynist. Therefore, he was someone who should be assassinated for the benefit of mankind.

But in keeping with his dedication to civility and reverence for the office, Bush, following in his father’s footsteps, consistently compromised with the Democrats while refusing to respond or allow his subordinates to defend him in public against any of these vile charges, thus by default cementing the caricature of a malevolent buffoon in the public psyche. By the end of his presidency, Bush’s approval rating of 22% was the lowest ever recorded.

Not having learned their lesson from the George Bush experience -- that the Democrats and their allies in the media would never again campaign on issues but instead focus on personal destruction and incivility -- the Republican Establishment in 2008 orchestrated the nomination of the next man in line and a member of the Civility Caucus, John McCain, who ran his campaign as the model of civility and decorum against the neo-Marxist Barack Obama. Predictably, the opposition went scorched earth.

During the campaign and using the playbook established to tear down George W. Bush, John McCain, an American military hero, was smeared as warmonger, an unapologetic racist, of having an affair with a lobbyist, of being a phony POW in Vietnam, and too old and scared by his POW experience to be president.  

Like Bush, McCain refused to aggressively fight back and take the offensive. Unsurprisingly, he was soundly defeated by Barack Obama, thus opening the door for the American Marxist movement to fully take over the Democrat Party. Further, during his presidency, Obama unabashedly exploited the political civility and compromise mindset of the cowering Civility Caucus in Congress, who were further intimidated by Obama’s unabashed exploitation of his skin color.

The Tea Party Movement of 2010 was a direct response not only to the efforts of Obama and his henchmen to transform America culturally and economically, but more importantly, it was a gut reaction to the Republican Party Establishment and its presidential candidates, as well as the vast majority of Congressional candidates continuously surrendering while waving the white flag of civility and accommodation. Particularly as the Democrats were free to wage scorched-earth campaigns without compunction, consequence, or pushback, knowing that if the Republicans won, their dedication to compromise would allow them to still achieve their objectives.

The Republican Party Establishment not only chose to ignore this grassroots movement that was the primary catalyst in the 2010 mid-term election of an historic 63 new Republican seats in the House, but mocked and belittled the Tea Party while remaining mired in their civility and compromise mindset.

In 2012, the Establishment stage-managed the nomination of Mitt Romney, another member of the Civility Caucus. As he had no skeletons in his closet, they assumed he could avoid or weather the character assassination tactics of the media and the Democrats.

As expected, Romney chose to utilize the same bland and civil campaign tactics of his predecessors instead of exploiting Obama’s character flaws, radicalism, and the underlying factors in his historic defeat in the 2010 midterms (causing Obama to openly admit that he suffered a “shellacking” in the election),

However, it took little time for the left-wing forces arrayed against Romney to fire their volleys. A new and previously off-limits accusation was hurled as the Democrat machine compared Romney and the Republican Party to Nazis. Romney was also portrayed as a right-wing extremist, a congenital liar, a warmonger, and a corporate elitist whose only interest was protecting the wealthy. Further, he was a sexist bordering on being a misogynist. And he, of course, was a racist, as were all Republicans.  

By the end of the campaign, Romney, like both Bushes and John McCain before him, was portrayed as being among the most reprehensible men on earth and the Republican Party as the personification of evil.

Yet these gentlemen and the party establishment never responded and accepted these caricatures with civility and grace. Meanwhile, the congressional members of Civility Caucus continued to unabashedly promote compromise while the country inexorably fell into the hands of the neo-Marxists and radicals in the Democrat Party.

Rank and file Republicans and conservatives instinctively knew that 2016 was a watershed election. The future of the nation as founded was hanging by a thread. When Donald Trump declared his intention to run for president, he immediately vaulted to the top of the Republican field because he made it clear he would not follow in the footsteps of the recent spineless nominees by not only confronting the Democrats but, more importantly, purging the Republican Party of its nation-destroying “civility caucus.”

Overshadowing Donald Trump’s historic second-term accomplishments in international affairs and the restoration of the American culture and economy will be the potentially dramatic transformation of the Republican Party into a formidable and determined opposition focused on defeating the American Marxist movement while permanently disbanding the “civility caucus” that aided and abetted the evolution of the Democrat Party into being America’s most dangerous adversary.

Europe Needs Patriotism

Townhall 

European friends recently visited an NFL football game and marveled at America’s reverence for our national anthem. “This does not happen in Europe,” they said wistfully. But it should. Europe, in its fear of nationalism, has abandoned healthy patriotism.

At American sporting events, the talking quiets, people get up from their seats, baseball caps come off, for many a hand goes over their heart. It doesn’t matter the sporting level; at high school sporting events, it is sung. At every race I’ve run across the country, the last-minute stretching and bathroom runs settle down enough so that the anthem rings out over all participants. For NFL games, we have an expectation of the anthem being there. For stadium events, a massive flag is carried and held on the field during the national anthem.

Often, our military will take time from their duties to do a flyover of the stadium. It is a symbol of the comingling of the riches of American prosperity and security, thousands turning out to watch a sporting event for the sheer fun of it because we are free from fear, and the jets overhead reminding us that our military has the watch, and we can enjoy our hotdogs in peace.

Not so in Europe. Even our closest European cousins, the British, are no longer the same nation that once built up a reputation for their stoicism and a “stiff upper lip,” an ability to withstand pain and suffering, and not show that they were rattled. Perhaps not as defiant as their former colonies, the U.K., at least, had a culture of steely toughness that made it a worthy ally.

Obviously, modern Germany does not gloss over the horrors of WWII, but a nation that only ever dwells on its past sins will not thrive. At some point, Germany must still recognize that it is a people with a history of efficiency, strategy, and a hard work ethic. It still produces brilliant scientists and is capable of greater innovation than its regulatory state allows. Along with a reputation for sternness, it also has the joviality of Oktoberfest and Christmas markets, and many traditions that America has been blessed with through our German immigrants.

Italy and France have long been dominant in the arts and culture and food, but they too have had histories of military strength. Those past flames are but dim flickers today, but they should consider themselves to be the successors of that greatness, the way the United States recognizes our freedom is inherited from past generations, and must be preserved by each new generation.

Europe made a grave mistake in its unfettered immigration policy, leading to almost no cultural assimilation occurring among recent immigrants, and they are now seeing the consequences. The obsession of the New Right with “heritage Americans,” referring to those who have the longest history in the U.S., is contrary to our founding and our creed, because it is the culture that has drawn freedom-loving peoples to America. And U.S. immigration should continue to be intensely vetted, not because the U.S. sees no value in immigrants or believes new citizens are second-tier citizens, but because America wants to preserve a culture where hard work and freedom are valued. America is still the place where you can climb as high as your hard work, creativity, and tenacity can take you, regardless of skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

Our NATO allies are very fond of fawning over their “free healthcare” and view that as a pinnacle achievement. They’ve been sucked away from the strength of individualism in a patriotic nation into the comfort of a coddling government. A government program, though, is no cause for patriotism. But a country that withstood the might of Germany in WWII on its own is worth a hat tip, and the same country that gave the world Shakespeare, Jane Austen, and Charles Dickens has a culture worthy of preserving and protecting. A nation that produced the Reformation and the Gutenberg press (what some say is the most important invention in the world) is worthy of defending.

France, in its understanding of preserving the world’s most beloved artwork and the richness and worthiness of a world that values beauty, must know that the love of beauty is worth arming up for. Europe must not view its contributions to the world as merely a gloried history, but as a legacy to build itself upon and decide that it should be strong enough to defend itself, with allies, hopefully, alone if necessary.

The United States sings our anthem everywhere because we are proud of our freedom; it has been hard-won over 250 years, and we have armed ourselves with innovation, military prowess, and freedom so that we may carry it on for another 250 years. Europe must similarly arm itself and recognize that its cultures and histories are worth that same defense.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Playing With Fire – Tehran's Deadly Gambit As Economic Collapse Looms

Townhall 

As negotiations between Washington and Tehran stagger forward amid mutual suspicion and escalating tensions, a fundamental question hangs over the future of Iran's ruling clerical regime. Are the mullahs once again deploying their familiar strategy of delay and deception while pursuing military and nuclear ambitions behind closed doors, or have they finally reached the point where economic collapse leaves them with no room for maneuver?

Recent comments by Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran's chief negotiator and Speaker of the Majlis (parliament), offer a revealing glimpse into the regime's mindset. His warning that the United States cannot be trusted and his insistence that Tehran will approve no agreement unless the "rights of the Iranian people" are fully secured reflect a leadership still clinging to defiance despite overwhelming evidence that the Islamic Republic faces its gravest crisis since the 1979 revolution that brought it to power.

Reports that President Donald Trump has returned a tougher framework for consideration have widened the gulf between the two sides. The White House seeks ironclad guarantees that Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons and demands the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for global energy supplies. Tehran, meanwhile, continues to advance new conditions, propose amendments and seek concessions, including the release of billions of dollars in frozen assets. For seasoned observers of the Iranian regime, this pattern is painfully familiar.

For more than two decades, Tehran perfected the art of diplomatic procrastination. Successive rounds of negotiations with Western governments produced endless meetings, technical discussions, revised drafts, and procedural obstacles. While diplomats debated wording and timelines, Iranian scientists enriched uranium, expanded centrifuge networks and advanced missile programs. Delay became a strategic weapon. Today there are compelling reasons to suspect the regime remains committed to the same approach.

Yet the circumstances confronting Iran in 2026 differ dramatically from previous crises. The clerical establishment enters these negotiations weakened, isolated, and economically shattered. The devastating military campaign launched earlier this year by the United States and Israel eliminated the then-Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and much of Tehran's senior military leadership and inflicted severe damage on strategic infrastructure. Oil exports have collapsed. Maritime restrictions have crippled trade. Inflation continues its relentless assault on ordinary families.

The economic indicators emerging from inside Iran are catastrophic. Iranian economists now forecast economic contraction approaching 10 percent. Experts speaking at policy forums in Tehran warn that more than 40 million Iranians could soon fall beneath the absolute poverty line. The labor market has effectively ceased functioning. Job creation has all but disappeared. Millions of working families remain trapped in poverty despite full-time employment.

Behind these statistics lies a humanitarian tragedy of staggering proportions. In provinces such as Sistan and Baluchestan, Khuzestan, Kerman and Ilam, food insecurity has become a daily reality. Parents struggle to provide basic meals. Malnutrition among children is rising. Essential staples increasingly lie beyond the reach of ordinary households. What once seemed unimaginable in a nation blessed with immense oil and gas wealth has become commonplace. Families are now surviving on bread and tea while state resources continue flowing into military programs and regional proxy networks.

The regime's own institutions increasingly acknowledge the danger. Coinciding with World Hunger Day, state-affiliated media published unusually candid warnings of a looming "poverty explosion." Even more telling are reports that Iran's Ministry of Intelligence has issued internal alerts concerning the risk of widespread social unrest driven by hyperinflation, shortages, and economic despair. The authorities understand the explosive potential of hunger. Iran's rulers survived previous waves of protests through repression, arrests, and executions. Yet history demonstrates that regimes confronting both economic collapse and political illegitimacy eventually encounter a tipping point where fear loses its effectiveness. Hungry citizens become increasingly difficult to intimidate.

Adding to the pressure, Iranian university students have sustained protests on campuses across the country. Their demonstrations represent a deeper challenge than isolated economic grievances. Student movements traditionally serve as an early warning system for broader political upheaval. They reflect growing frustration among younger generations who see little future under a system defined by corruption, censorship, and economic failure.

Against this backdrop, Trump's tougher negotiating position appears increasingly significant. The central strategic debate now confronting Western policymakers concerns whether additional concessions would stabilize the regime or merely prolong its survival. Advocates of compromise argue that sanctions relief and renewed oil exports could reduce regional tensions, restore stability to energy markets, and avert further military confrontation. They warn that excessive pressure could provoke desperate actions by Tehran, including renewed attacks on shipping or acceleration of nuclear activities.

Others reach a very different conclusion. They argue that sanctions relief would provide the regime with a financial lifeline precisely when internal pressures are reaching unprecedented levels. Billions of dollars released into Tehran's hands would almost certainly strengthen the Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), finance domestic repression, and revive military programs rather than alleviate public suffering. Iran's leadership has repeatedly demonstrated that preserving its ideological project takes precedence over improving living standards.

The evidence supporting this view is substantial. Decades of oil revenue and sanctions relief following previous agreements failed to deliver meaningful prosperity for ordinary Iranians. Instead, vast resources disappeared into corruption, foreign interventions, and security apparatuses designed to suppress dissent. This reality presents President Trump with a difficult but crucial decision. If Tehran genuinely seeks a peaceful settlement, abandoning nuclear ambitions and ending efforts to dominate the Strait of Hormuz, an agreement remains possible. Such a settlement would require unprecedented transparency, rigorous verification, and enforceable guarantees. However, if current negotiations merely serve as cover for renewed rearmament and nuclear advancement, further concessions would represent an historic mistake.

The clerical regime stands closer to the brink than at any point in its 47-year history. Economic collapse, social unrest, student activism, factional infighting, and international isolation have combined to create an existential crisis. Every signal emerging from inside Iran suggests a leadership increasingly fearful of its own people. The mullahs may believe they can once again outmaneuver the West through delay, deception, and tactical concessions. Such calculations amount to playing with fire. The flames of economic misery, political repression, and public anger are spreading rapidly across Iran. This time, the fire may consume the regime itself.

Trump's New Order Targets the Money Behind Illegal Immigration

RedState 

President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Tuesday to tout an executive order he signed May 19, calling it one of the administration's most powerful tools yet against illegal immigration, cartel activity, and financial fraud.

The order, titled "Restoring Integrity to America's Financial System," directs Treasury and federal regulators to review banking, lending, and customer-identification practices that the administration says have allowed illegal immigrants, money launderers, human traffickers, and other criminal actors to exploit American financial institutions.

Illegal Immigrants and Foreign Fraudsters steal BILLIONS every year from the American Taxpayer. As part of my Administration's Historic effort to end FRAUD and reverse MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, I recently signed a powerful new Executive Order, which will be led by the Treasury Department, to stop Banks, Credit Cards, and Financial Institutions from being used to facilitate Human Smuggling, Drug Trafficking, Illegal Immigration, and the Criminal Cartels who orchestrate these activities. Access to our Nation's Financial Systems must be limited to those who have a Legal Right to be here, and who are engaged in Lawful and Legitimate Commerce. Bank Accounts being used to enable Illegal Immigration, or to store the Welfare received by Illegal Aliens, will be shut down, and funds will ultimately face Impoundment and Seizure so they can to be returned to Taxpayers. It is not ludicrous, but profoundly dangerous, that any Illegal Alien can simply present a Blue State Drivers License, or Biden Border Document, and have unrestricted access to the U.S. Financial System. This also sends a clear message to the anti-ICE rioters that your violent disruptions are only strengthening our resolve. My Executive Order will also allow us to stop Billions in leaving our Country in all manner of criminal activity. It has been said this measure we are taking is the most effective means of reversing Biden's Border Invasion. We shall soon find out!

The executive order goes well beyond a messaging document. It directs Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to issue guidance identifying suspicious financial patterns tied to payroll-tax evasion, labor trafficking, shell-company activity, off-the-books wage payments, and the use of Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers to obtain financial services without verified legal presence.

Treasury is also directed to work with federal banking regulators on proposed changes to Bank Secrecy Act regulations that would strengthen customer due diligence requirements and give financial institutions broader authority to obtain additional information when evaluating fraud, money laundering, sanctions evasion, and other illicit-finance risks. 

Under current practice, immigration status is generally not part of routine underwriting decisions for most consumer loans. The Trump administration is now signaling that financial institutions should pay closer attention to whether an applicant's immigration status creates repayment risks or raises broader compliance concerns.

The lending provisions are the most controversial part of the order. Trump directed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to consider clarifying that potential deportation and resulting wage loss may be factors lenders can consider when evaluating a borrower's ability to repay a loan. 

That's a sharp reversal from the Biden era. Earlier this year, the CFPB and Department of Justice withdrew Biden-era guidance that discouraged the use of immigration status in certain lending decisions.

Legal analysts at Mayer Brown, a global law firm specializing in financial regulation, note that the directive could eventually require banks to consider immigration status as part of customer due diligence and underwriting reviews, depending on how regulators implement the order.

The White House fact sheet accompanying the executive order points to Chinese money-laundering networks that have used U.S.-based accounts to move illicit funds and cites financial activity connected to Mexican cartels involved in fentanyl trafficking and human smuggling. The administration argues that existing identification and verification standards have created vulnerabilities that criminal organizations have learned to exploit.

The left is already pushing back. The National Consumer Law Center warned the order would "radically destabilize the U.S. financial system and force debanking on an unprecedented scale." Deputy director Diane Thompson said the measure would "weaponize the financial system against immigrants" and accused the administration of pushing people to "put their money under the mattress instead of in the bank." Senior attorney Carla Sanchez-Adams called the order "misguided and cruel," arguing it would "systematically debank millions of people based on suspicion and stereotypes."

The administration is moving the immigration fight into a new phase. The first Trump term focused heavily on physical barriers, detention policies, and enforcement actions. This order targets the financial infrastructure surrounding illegal immigration and the criminal enterprises that profit from it.

None of this happens overnight. Treasury has 60 days to issue its advisory and 90 days to begin proposing regulatory changes. After that, the process moves into the hands of federal regulators and, potentially, Congress.

DHS Sec. Mullin Delivers Epic Takedown of Chris Murphy and His Attack on the DHS

RedState 

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy (D-NJ) is one of the more odious people in Congress (I don't use the words "odious" and "execrable" for that many people, but he certainly fits the bill).

He was at it again, attacking the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) during a hearing with DHS head Markwayne Mullin. Murphy ridiculously claimed that the DHS was violating the law and the Constitution every day, which is truly ugly stuff because Murphy doesn't give a darn about all the good men and women he is smearing when he makes comments like that. 

He does it because the Democrats are desperate to attack President Donald Trump and wrest power from the Republicans. And that's despicable. But Mullin, Murphy's former colleague, brought Murphy up short with a little reality. Murphy deserves this, and so much more. 

"The outlandish claims you made there is just flat wrong. You start saying we're breaking the law, and you really start looking at it, and we're enforcing laws that Congress did pass. That's reckless.

When you say it's unconstitutional, what's unconstitutional? We swore to uphold the Constitution just like you swore. 

For you to throw my 275,000 employees underneath DHS, with a broad stroke like that, is reckless and irresponsible on your part.

We're doing the job that Congress gave us the authority to do, and our men and women out there every single day is enforcing laws. If you don't like the laws, you can change them.

We're not picking and choosing which laws to enforce. We're simply enforcing the law. Period. Full stop.

Mullin put Murphy on the spot on the danger he was helping to cause to law enforcement. 

When you throw out reckless terms and you start referring to our agents as being "dangerous, unconstitutional, and lawless," that's why our agents' death threats are up by 8,000 percent.

I know that's not what you want. But your political theater, that's what it causes. When you start looking at assaults on our officers, they're up by 1,300 percent. Senator Murphy, is that what you want?

Then Mullin really nailed Murphy over his political ambitions and what he really cares about. 

"I understand the political theater, I understand wanting to get soundbites, and that was obvious because the whole time you was giving your testimony, he wasn't looking at me, he was looking at a camera. I get that. If you have bigger political ambitions, just say it. But don't do it at the expense of my officers. If you want to talk about funding, you haven't funded my officers; CBP and ICE have been willing to work for free. 

The agents were willing to do it, Mullin said, because of the reckless Biden administration and the problem they left behind. 

But they shouldn't have to, and that's all the fault of the Democrats, who refuse to support enforcing the law when it stands in the way of their political agenda.

Banana Republic by Mail: Why We Probably Won't Know Outcomes of CA's Crucial Primaries for Days

RedState 

In California, the term “Election Day” is really a misnomer — it’s election month, at least. Ballots were sent out for Tuesday’s primary on May 4 to every eligible voter, which amounts to over 23 million people. Folks have been voting ever since.

So Tuesday marks the end of a seemingly never-ending period that ends this evening; it’s hardly election day.

Well, perhaps we’ll know the winners and the losers by the end of the evening, you might argue, so we can still call it "election night." Oh no, no, no, this is the Left Coast, and things get strange out here. It can take weeks to get final results, sometimes even months.

It shouldn’t be this way:

On multiple occasions, the presumed outcome changed days or even weeks later — and wouldn’t you know it, the revisions usually benefit Democrats. In 2018, for instance, Republican Young Kim was leading her opponent for the race for California's 39th Congressional District and appeared to beat Democrat Gil Cisneros. She even went to Washington, D.C., to attend freshman-member orientation. Weeks later, the count was revised, and her win was ripped from her hands. (Kim eventually got to the House and is now running for reelection. She faces another Republican in Tuesday’s primary, Rep. Ken Calvert, due to redistricting.)

Does this sound like banana republic shenanigans, or is it just me? Believe it or not, the convoluted process is not an accident; it’s by design. State lawmakers wanted to improve so-called “access,” but mostly just ended up appearing to the rest of the nation as stupid and inefficient. Not only does voting go on for a ridiculous period, but the counting is almost guaranteed to go on for eons as well:

By state law, the process of voting and tabulating ballots stretches far beyond the traditional single day of in-person polling. With universal mail-in ballots sent out to every registered voter up to 29 days before Election Day, and early in-person voting available at designated voting centers starting as early as the weekend before the election, voting in the Golden State is effectively a multi-week affair.

Didn’t get your vote in by “election day?” Don’t worry — California Dems got your back:

Vote-by-mail ballots can be postmarked by Election Day but received and counted up to seven days later.

Hey, we don’t need results immediately following the vote. Let’s draw this process out for up to a month:

California’s vote count often stretches beyond Election Day because officials must verify signatures, process millions of vote-by-mail ballots, and conduct required audits before certifying results.

State law gives county election officials up to 30 days after an election to complete the official canvass, count every valid ballot, and perform post-election checks to ensure accuracy.

Frankly, this third-world idiocy is a national embarrassment. Since California is rarely a factor in the presidential race — it’s virtually a lock to go Democrat in modern times — it’s never come into play on a national level. But what if in the future the outcome in the Golden State could decide who’s president? Would the nation have to live in a dangerous limbo for 30 days?

There’s probably no need to stay up wanting to see if Steve Hilton gets through to the general election for governor, or if Spencer Pratt can do the same in the LA mayoral race. Sanity in the California vote count would be a little too much to ask for.

♦️𝐖³𝐏 𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝

 

W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

posted by DarkGoldenMan

Welcome to the W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

Post whatever you got in the comments section below.

This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain time.