The Curious Case of Donald Trump

Donald J. Trump

Unless you have been hiking the Amazon for the last few months, chances are you have watched the juggernaut that is Donald Trump crashing through the caucuses and primaries being held throughout the United States.

What had started out as a fad, in most voter’s minds, has become a steamroller; crushing the competition one voting booth at a time. So why has someone like Donald Trump, a man who has never held any type of political office, suddenly become the front runner in the 2016 presidential race?

Truthfully? Most likely the reason is the fact he has never held political office.

What I find truly interesting are the protestations that are coming from both sides of the aisle.

What you are witnessing is not so much a validation of Mr. Trump’s bona fides, as much as it is a repudiation of the party system here in the United States. Plain and simply put, Americans are growing increasingly weary of the political bullshit being heaped on them by anyone with the letter (D) or (R) after their name. And why shouldn’t they? 

For decades we have been cheated, ignored, marginalized, and lied to by those we have elected. Rather than do the work of ‘We The People,’ they have instead done the work of ‘We The Party.’  Anyone who truly believes that politicians go to Washington to help you, probably needs to sit down and binge watch a season or two of House of Cards. 

For as long as I can remember, and certainly for as long as I have been voting, I have witnessed one politician after another promise that they were: a) going to Washington to fight for me, b) change the tone of politics, c) be my voice in Congress.  

And just how many of those promises were kept? None.

To be fair, it’s not all their fault. We have a level of complicity in all this. I liken it to the parents who send their kid off to college with a credit card to be used for emergencies. Then, when they get the bill showing it was maxed out, they yelled at their kid to be more responsible and sent them a new card. The truth is we stopped holding our elected representatives accountable for their actions a very long time ago; so is it any wonder that they look down at us with contempt?

No, the majority of folks in D.C. have only one thing on their mind when we elect them and that is getting re-elected. Old Joe or Janey might have needed you to elevate them to their perch, but they really need the party to keep them there. That means doing what the party wants, rather than what you want.

Ever wonder why that ‘fiscal conservative’ you sent to D.C. suddenly is listed as a co-sponsor on a bill that is wasteful? Party politics, plain and simple. Vote the way they want you to, or watch your re-election war chest wither away like a slug in a sandstorm.

People in D.C. are a special brand of hypocrite.

They are the same ones who lose their mind when Donald Trump doesn’t disavow David Duke or the KKK ‘fast enough,' yet are completely silent on the fact that Hillary Clinton once referred to the late Senator Robert Byrd, himself an actual member of the KKK and an Exalted Cyclops, as her mentor.

They are the same folks who claim that judicial nominations in a presidential election year should not go through, when the sitting President is not a member of their party, yet demand that it go through when he is.

This is not a swipe at any one party, but examples of hypocrisy that both sides are guilty of. The real problem is when We The People are too blinded, too entrenched by party politics to see that neither side has our best interests at heart.

Now I don’t know if Donald Trump will become the party nominee, but one thing is for certain, the Republican Party is on very thin ice right now. In fact, I would venture to say that the fracture that is growing is at a critical juncture.

The rank and file members of the Republican Party are tired of the nonsense. In 2011 they sent a strong message by electing 242 Republicans to congress, the most since 1947. John Boehner was sworn in as Speaker of the House and the members waited. Unfortunately, the news was bleak. The Congress couldn’t do anything, because the Democrats controlled the Senate. They changed that in 2015 when they also gave Mitch McConnell the Senate. Yet despite the unequivocal mandate, many felt that the establishment was ignoring them.

Charles M. Schulz / United Feature Syndicate

It soured a great many, who began to consider whether the party was really interested in doing their will or the party’s will. The rank and file began to see themselves as Charlie Brown, while the establishment took the role of Lucy Van Pelt, giddily snatching away their political ‘football’ at the last minute. In the end, it took down the speakership of John Boehner and ended his congressional career.

Last September the RNC strong armed Donald Trump into signing a loyalty pledge, a pledge that was ultimately signed by all 17 Republican presidential candidates. Each one pledged to support the GOP's eventual presidential nominee in what RNC chair Reince Priebus called a sign of party unity. Unfortunately, in September of 2015, no one really thought Donald Trump had a snowballs chance in hell of being that nominee.

Surprise, Surprise, Reince………. Didn’t see that one coming, did you?

So now come the knives in the back, fitting in a way, since we are quickly approaching the Ides of March.

Donald Trump has won ten of the last fifteen state elections, while Cruz has won four and Marc Rubio has won only one. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure that at this point there is no way, short of Trump and Cruz walking off hand-in-hand into the sunset, that Rubio could amass enough delegates to get the nomination. So why is he still running? Why are all the ‘establishment’ people supporting him?

Because he is the establishment’s choice. He has been ordained, just as Hillary has been on the left.

It’s the same reason that they whipped out old Mitt Romney, a man who single-handedly managed to rip defeat from the jaws of victory, to excoriate Donald Trump. Really? This is the same man who, back in 2012, said: “Donald Trump has shown an extraordinary ability to understand how our economy works,…. It means a great deal to me to have the endorsement of Mr. Trump.”

Hypocrite much, Mitt?

The truth is the establishment does not know what to do. Donald Trump is a threat to them, to their very way of life. He’s brash, he's bold and he's a media darling: @RealDonaldTrump He is also rich enough that he doesn’t need them. At the end of the day, that’s what scares them: a candidate who doesn’t need them or, more importantly, their money.

However, what they fail to realize is that there is something even more dangerous to them and that is a membership base that has become completely disenfranchised with them. This isn’t true for just the republicans either. Polling indicates that a lot of democrats are beginning to feel this way as well, as witnessed by the defection of 20k plus in Massachusetts since January. Is this a trend that we will see continue through the election cycle? Only time will tell, but it should serve as a wake-up call to those in charge that the people of this great nation are fed-up with politics as usual.

I don’t know how Donald Trump would be as President. Some contend that he will be the same bombastic individual he presents on reality television while others say that he is a savvy businessman who will help lead us away from the precipice of financial doom. Who is right? I don’t know.

What I do know is that over the last eight years we have seen the promise of ‘hope and change’ fade away into more of the same. The political rancor is at an all-time high and growing nearly as fast as our national debt. Watch any political interview once and you can recite the other dozen appearances because all that is regurgitated is party approved talking points. Our elected officials repeatedly lie to us, about things big and small, and we tolerate it. Yet ask the same people if their kids acted the same way and they’d tell you they would immediately put foot to ass. Obviously we have much more lenient standards when it comes to those ruining, I mean running, our country.

So here are your choices:

• Marco Rubio – Attorney / Career Politician - 1 term US senator.
• Ted Cruz - Attorney / Career Politician - 1 term US senator.
• John Kasich – Investment Banker / Career Politician – 9 term US congressman / governor
• Hillary Clinton - Attorney / Career Politician - 2 term US senator / Secretary of State
• Bernie Sanders – Community Activist / Career Politician – 8 term US congressman / 2 term US senator

Notice a trend here? Does it sound a bit familiar?

• Barrack Obama - Attorney / Community Activist / Career Politician - 1 term US senator.

There is an old saying that goes: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

We are nineteen trillion dollars in debt and growing. Eighteen trillion of which we have added in the last 34 years!! Think about that for a moment. We rack up debt like the energizer bunny main-lining speed. Seriously, it’s like ten grand a second. Take a look at the Debt Clock. The numbers rotate so fast that you’ll need to take Dramamine to watch it.

In 2015, we brought in 3.1 trillion dollars and spent 3.7. This isn’t an anomaly. Over the last seventy-five years there have only been 12 years we have kept our spending under control. That means both parties have pissed our money away like drunken sailors all while pointing the finger at the other person when it comes time to pay.

And what do we get from our politicians? Reforms? No, don’t be silly, we’re just going to spend our way out of debt…… If we ran our personal lives like this we would be homeless or in jail.

It has been said that Donald Trump started out with around $200,000.00 after college. By 1982 his worth was estimated at around $200 million. When his father died he inherited an additional amount, possibly as high as another $200 million. Today his worth is in the billions. Some might squabble about it, is it two billion? Four billion? Eight billion?....... seriously? I don’t care if it’s only one billion. The bottom line is that he obviously has a knack for taking money and making more. Perhaps we should take the reins away from the career politicians and give it to a career businessman.

I’ve had enough with the career politicians and their hollow promises. Trump might not be the answer, but I know the other five knuckleheads certainly aren’t.

The one thing I do know about Trump is that he surrounds himself with the right people and he listens.  Is that any different than what any President does? Maybe it’s time to give Trump a chance.

What’s the worst that can happen? We rack up trillions in debt, the Middle East falls apart, illegals flood across the border, our enemies don’t respect us and our allies don’t trust us………. ? Sounds like a normal Tuesday under the current administration.

But hey, at least Whoopi Goldberg, Kanye West, Cher, Al Sharpton, Miley Cyrus and Rosie O’Donnell will be another countries problem. I'd call that a win! #MakeAmericaGreatAgain

But what do I know? I'm just an old retired NYPD sergeant who writes books about cops, criminals terrorists and politicians. 

If you’d like to stay up to date on the newest releases, then please like my Facebook page and feel free to follow me on Twitter.

An Enemy By Any Other Name - Islamic Terrorism

#MuslimsAreNotTerrorist

It’s a catchy Twitter hashtag, isn’t it?

I saw it this morning as I did my daily Twitter session for my books and thought it kind of ironic that it was trending higher than #ParisAttack. In today’s politically correct climate, a certain segment of society goes to great lengths to scold the rest of us that we shouldn’t paint everyone with the same broad brush.

Unfortunately, that only seems to apply to their causes. It is the same group that seems hell bent on trying to use the same broad brush in making the connection between criminals and mentally ill folks, who use guns in mass shootings, and legal gun owners. They also like to try and blame Christians for disgusting groups, like the Westboro Baptist Church.  What they don’t tell you is that the ‘church’ was founded by Fred Phelps, a civil rights activist and member of the Democratic Party. But those are topics for another day.

I checked out the hashtag page and was not surprised to see a large majority of folks, the same type I routinely see on TV at various protests, condemning the association of Muslims with terrorism. To be fair, they are correct, not all Muslims are terrorists, but in the case of this attack, it appears that THESE Muslims were and there is nothing wrong with pointing that out.

I don’t care how you quantify it, clarify, or categorize it, the bottom line is that we are at war with radical Islam. Wring your hands, grit your teeth, but the folks in ISIS, Al Qaeda, Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hezbollah, Haqqani Network, Palestine Liberation Front, or any of the hundred other groups, currently engaged in terrorist activities around the world, are at war with us.

Here’s a newsflash: They don’t care what you think of them or their religion. They are Muslims and they are proud to wage jihad against non-believers.

If the rest of the Muslim world is offended at being ‘lumped’ together with the radicals, then they need to stand up as one and condemn it. That means working with the rest of the world to root out this evil wherever it exists, like King Abdullah II of Jordan. Unlike Saudi Arabia which continues to be one of the most prolific sponsors of Islamic terrorism.

I'll be the first one to get up on the soapbox and vehemently condemn anyone who attempts to hijack my religion in order to kill non-believers. I think everyone has the right to their religious beliefs, but I also believe that they have a duty to denounce those who use it as justification in the slaughter of innocent men, women and children. If you can't grasp that concept, I can't help you. 

It is time we stop with the silly hashtags. It makes you look like a bunch of petulant little collegiate assholes, stomping your feet when someone bruises your feelings with their hurtful words. Your enemy is at the gate and you are too busy condemning the folks manning it, because they have the audacity to identify them for who they are: radical Islamic terrorists.

I spent over two decades in law enforcement, a majority of that time dealing with the threat of terrorism. This is not a new threat, but one we have been facing for decades.

In the 1970’s I thought we would wake up when we had to deal with the Iranian’s storming our Embassy in Tehran and taking our people hostage.

In the 1980’s I thought we would wake up after the embassy / barracks bombings in Beirut or Pan Am Flight 103.

In the 1990’s I thought it would be the 1^st World Trade Center attack, or the bombing at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia or the embassy bombing in Kenya and Tanzania, Africa.

In the 2000’s I knew the attacks of September 11^th would finally be our wake up call.

But in the 2010’s we had the attack in Benghazi and then the Boston Marathon bombing.

Apparently we do not wake up easily.

Despite what you want to believe, despite what you have been told, we are at war with radical Islam. Whether we are weary doesn’t matter to our enemy, because they are not. It is literally what they live and die for.

If a Christian committed these acts, they would expect to go directly to Hell, but these radical Muslims expect just the opposite; they truly believe they will go directly to Heaven for killing infidels. That is what so many people refuse to acknowledge. We, the entire world collectively, need to shine the light of truth on Islamic terrorism and acknowledged it for what it is. If this offends you, grow the fuck up. Being offended is going to be the least of your problems when you’re standing there with a knife to your throat.

One of the most precious rights we have in this country is the 2^nd Amendment, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It is something that many civilized nations do not have, including France. French gun laws are extremely strict, but once again we must face the truth: Gun laws apply only to those who are so inclined to follow the law. Terrorists apparently do not fall into this group. In fact, it is a theme I have discussed previously in my books. I specifically wrote about the problem France was facing in the city of Marseille in Bishop’s Gate. Tragically, the first officers to arrive at the Charlie Hebdo attack last January were unarmed Paris police officers who had to retreat because they didn’t have the ability to confront their attackers. Three officers were later killed.

As I watched the attacks unfold last evening I couldn’t help but wonder if things might have been different if there was someone carrying a legal weapon? That is not a flippant comment, but an honest question. I know that many of my fellow sheepdogs are thinking the same thing.

Sadly, there is nothing we can do about the attack in Paris. It is done. All we can do is prepare for what is coming, and make no mistake, it is coming.

Last night Isis made the statement: “The American blood is best, and we will taste it soon.” 

If you do not believe them, then you are a fool.

Yesterday, on the very day of the Paris Attack, the first load of Syrian refugees quietly arrived in Louisiana. It is estimated that the United States will take in some 10,000 +  refugees over the next year with the president calling for an even greater number. This is a fairly significant issue, considering that over 70% of the ‘refugees’ are young men. Even more disturbing is the fact that an ISIS operative confirmed that the group had infiltrated the refugees and thousands of them were already in Western Europe. If that doesn’t make you take pause, consider that there are already members of ISIS in the United States; that is undisputed fact. Sadly, they are not the only terror group that is here.

Just like in 1993 and again in 2001 we must realize that the threat is not over there, but here in our own country. We saw that most recently in Texas where two terrorist were killed as they prepared to launch an attack on a 'Draw Muhammad' event. Whether you agree or disagree with the person hosting that event, you must understand that these terrorists were already here.

As the left continues to call for more ‘reasonable gun control measures,’ understand that you are facing a very real threat to your 2^nd Amendment rights. I am often mystified when I hear people talking about how military style weapons are not required for hunting or sport. No, you’re correct, they aren’t. Now show me where in the 2^nd Amendment it says anything about hunting or sport? The protected firearms, spoken about in the 2^nd Amendment, are precisely those used by the military.  The founding fathers were keenly aware of the threat they faced from the King and British military. The 2^nd Amendment addressed that and protected the individual right of Americans to possess the proper weaponry to defend themselves against that threat.

Yesterday I had an occasion to go to a location that proudly displayed a ‘no guns’ sticker on the front door. The paper threat was enforced by an unarmed, and extremely bored looking, security guard. I shook my head. This is the silliness of the left.

When, not if, we are subject to the next attack here, I wonder if the terrorists will be thwarted by the ‘aggressive looking’ no gun decals displayed outside the restaurant or government building? Maybe they will turn away when the unarmed guard sternly points out their flagrant violation of the paper noticed proudly displayed.

I don’t think so. Hopefully he will have a place to retreat to, like the first officers in the Charlie Hebdo attack.

Unfortunately, it has been my experience that you cannot change the mind of someone so inclined to believe in this silliness. The only thing that actually causes someone to re-examine their beliefs is when they become the victims.

For the rest of you, I suggest that you take the threat very seriously.

If you are so inclined to carry a concealed weapon then you had better train with it. Understand the responsibility that comes with it and the fact that you might one day be called upon to act in defensive or yourself or your loved ones. 

If you’d like to stay up to date on the newest releases, then please like my Facebook page and feel free to follow me on Twitter.

San Francisco County Sheriff Defends Release of Illegal Immigrant

San Francisco County Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi defended his department’s release of the suspect in the shooting death of Katie Steinle. The suspect, Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant with an extensive criminal history, and who had already been deported five times, was released, from the San Francisco County jail, after local authorities there declined to prosecute on a drug related charge.

                     

Sheriff Mirkarimi contends that if the feds wanted San Francisco to ‘hold’ Sanchez, then they should have issued a warrant or a court order. Since SanFrancisco is a Sanctuary City, they simply opened the door and let Sanchez walk away.

Pardon me if I take exception to Sheriff Mirkarimi’s statement. During the course of my twenty-two year law enforcement career I ran a county jail. We routinely housed federal inmates, including those that were released to us for the purpose of dealing with local charges. This is exactly the situation that existed in San Francisco.

Sanchez was picked up by federal authorities after he had completed a prison sentence. Since he had an outstanding charge in San Francisco, that charge needed to be addressed before they could process Sanchez for deportation on the federal immigration charge.

Federal inmates, which Sanchez was, are remanded to local authorities with what is called a detainer. Basically it directs the local agency to notify the feds when the local charges have been addressed, either by release or incarceration. In the case of release, the feds come and pick-up the prisoner. In the case of incarceration, they update their records and notify the correctional facility, where the prisoner is remanded to, that they have a federal hold in place and issue another detainer to the facility.

For Sheriff Mirkarimi to say that federal authorities should somehow have done more, belies the simple fact that he did nothing. The optics on this are horrible and he knows it. He is trying to deflect the blame instead of recognizing that San Francisco’s failed sanctuary city policies cost the life of another innocent young person.

Most career law enforcement officers will tell you that they often feel constrained by the politics that seems to pervade local law enforcement policies, but Mirkarimi is not a career law enforcement officer. He is an elected official whose law enforcement career didn’t begin until 2011, when he was elected as sheriff. Prior to that, he was a member of the San Francisco County Board, the same folks who are responsible for the whole Sanctuary City debacle. A policy he vigorously defends, despite being at odds with the members of his own department.

He is no stranger to controversy. In 2012, just after his election, he was suspended from office after being charged with domestic violence battery, child endangerment and dissuading a witness, in connection with an altercation with his wife. He pled guilty to one misdemeanor count of false imprisonment and was sentenced to three years of probation and had to stay away from his wife for seven months. He was reinstated seven months later, after the Board of Supervisors failed to get enough votes to remove him from office.

He has also had to deal with internal issues as well. In March, Mirkarimi issued a directive stating that only he could turn them over to ICE. This was brought about because his deputies, who opposed the policy, were reportedly secretly helping federal authorities get illegal immigrants off the streets.

Under the circumstances, I can understand why he would want to pawn off the blame to someone else.

This is another example of what happens when the rule of law becomes subverted; abused and twisted to comply with the rule of man, or, as it is in this case, the Board of Supervisors.

Mirkarimi, as well as the Board of Supervisors, is trying to push the blame for the tragic death of Katie Steinle to the feds, but it is a responsibility that lies squarely on their doorstep. It was their policy that allowed this to happen and they need to be held responsible.

San Francisco – The Dark Side of Sanctuary Cities

By now you have all heard of the terrible tragedy in San Francisco, where Kathryn Steinle was killed by Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Her death brought to the forefront the tragic policy of sanctuary cities.

For those of you that don’t know what a sanctuary city is, it is a term given to a city in the United States that follow certain local practices designed to protect illegal immigration. There are many who feel this is a good policy and I am sure their hearts are truly in the right place; however this policy belies a problem that many of these cities face, which is a growing threat from violent criminals.

We must understand that these sanctuary cities have taken the step to intentionally violate a 1996 federal law (the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act) which requires local governments to cooperate with the Department of Homeland Security's, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. These ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct city employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities. The policies also end the distinction between legal resident aliens and illegal aliens, so those here illegally often benefit from taxpayer funded government services and programs too.

Consider the ramifications to a police department, sworn to uphold the law, who are told not to co-operate with a federal agency. It tells them, in no uncertain terms, that the rule of man, and not law, is the order of the day. What is even scarier is the fact that the law becomes volatile, subject to political winds that may change to suit the whims of those in office at the time.

One of the justifications, for creating a sanctuary city, is the alleged concern for protecting immigrant rights, but that belies the fact that illegal aliens are not immigrants. Immigrants come to the United States legally, often as a result of a long and arduous process, and take the necessary steps to maintain their legal status. A person who is illegally smuggled into the U.S., or violates their visa restrictions, is not an immigrant, but an unauthorized alien subject to deportation under existing federal law.

I have heard all of the excuses, such as “Illegal aliens, who are victims of crimes, or who may be a witness to a crime, won't report them to police for fear of arrest and deportation.” Okay, sure……..

I spent twenty-two years in law enforcement. Let’s admit that this is a very convenient excuse which ignores one fundamental fact:  if illegal aliens were properly deported from the U.S., then they would not be here to become victims, nor would the predators that pray on them be here either. Try as I might, I could not find a spike in crimes committed by people legal immigrants from Denmark, Netherlands or Germany.

The truth of the matter is that these sanctuary policies do little to protect, but actually create a thriving environment for the criminal element, who fundamentally understands that they are unlikely to face any serious risk of being deported.

While I probably understand better than most, the need to protect the weak, I don’t believe that turning a blind eye to the law is the best choice. We have a problem in this Country in terms of illegal entry through our southern border. Simply renaming someone from ‘illegal immigrant’ to ‘undocumented worker’ is a ruse, which should be insulting to anyone capable of cogent thinking.  How would you feel if society decided to rename ‘burglars’ to ‘unannounced houseguests’, ‘drug dealers’ to ‘unlicensed pharmacists’, or, better yet, a ‘rapist’ to an ‘unrequited lover’?

Seems pretty absurd, doesn’t it?

Yet that is exactly what is occurring, under the false guise of protection. The truth is, anyone coming over the border illegally is a criminal. Simply changing their name does not negate that. If you don’t believe me, I suggest trying that you illegally enter the country of Mexico and see how well you are treated there when you claim that you are simply an ‘undocumented worker’.

And it is not just ‘protection’ that is being offered in these sanctuary cities. Consider for a moment that NYC recently implemented a program which allows illegal immigrants to obtain an official NYC identification card and they won't be asked about their immigration status. The card can be used for, among other things, to open a bank or credit union account, and obtain residential benefits from City Hall. NYPD officials have said the card will be used to issue summonses or desk appearance tickets instead of arrest. Think about that for a moment. Someone, who has come illegally, with no verification of ‘who’ they are, will be given a card that can be used to obtain benefits and as ID in the case of an arrest……… How do you know it’s them? Remember that the next time you are jumping through hoops to prove who you are at a governmental agency.

Just for the record, this nonsense is also being promoted by the same folks who tell you that getting an ‘ID’ to vote is somehow racist, because it somehow disproportionately affects minorities, the poor, and Democratic voters. Huh? What?........ Wait, we’re giving ID’s away to ‘poor, minority’ people, who we don’t even know, yet asking for ID to vote is somehow bad? I’ll leave that discussion for another day, as I digress.

For, once again, we are seeing the folly of the sanctuary city play out in stark reality.

Kathryn Steinle, 32, died in her father’s arms after being shot at random by Francisco Sanchez. Her last words were “help me, Dad.” As a father, I cannot begin to imagine the pain that her father is going through, but my heart breaks for him. It was a tragedy that did not have to happen.

Sanchez, a career criminal with a lengthy arrest history, should not have been on the streets of San Francisco, or any other U.S. city for that matter. He had been in the custody of the San Francisco Sheriff's Department last March 26, on a decade-old drug charge, but he was released on April 15, after local prosecutors declined to pursue charges against him. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said that at the time they had turned over Sanchez to local law enforcement, they’d requested to be kept apprised of any changes in his status, a common request that is routinely conducted in other jurisdictions, but they weren't. Instead, Sanchez was released from custody.

According to ICE records, Sanchez had been previously deported five times, most recently in 2009, and his record included seven prior felony convictions. ICE briefly had him in their custody after he completed a prison sentence in California, but turned him over to San Francisco, in March, on an outstanding warrant for a felony drug charge. 

Now Sanchez sits in the same jail he had been previously released from, but this time he won’t be leaving anytime soon. Unfortunately, that is unlikely to be of little solace to the grieving family of Kathryn Steinle.

How long before another family in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Washington, D.C., Detroit, or any of the other two dozen more ‘sanctuary cities’ have to bury a relative because of the tragic and misguided policies that give safe haven to criminals.

Oh, and not to let a good tragedy go to waste, the White House has just announced that the death of Steinle, is actually the fault of congressional Republicans. They are also apparently at fault for the continuing gun violence in the President’s hometown of Chicago.

Maybe both the federal and state governments need a refresher course in the rule of law, instead of trying to play politics with the lives of American citizens.