The Rushmore Report – The Border Wall: Dems Were for It Before They Were Against It

According to the media, the government shutdown is President Trump’s fault because he won’t give the Democrats what they want. Of course, if the Democrats would give Trump what he wants, the government would open tomorrow. And while Trump is back in Washington waiting to negotiate, Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi is vacationing in Hawaii. But the crazy thing is that these same Democrats were actually for the border wall – until they were against it.

The President’s new acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was clear in an interview Friday. He blasted Democrats, including Senate leader Chuck Schumer, for supporting border security measures – including a wall – in 2006 and 2011, before abandoning the position when Trump took office.

Mulvaney said, “This is a crazy discussion to be having. It seems like Democrats really like border security when there’s a Democrat in office, and don’t like it when Donald Trump is in office.”

Still serving as White House budget director, Mulvaney said he believes Schumer is willing to come to an agreement on border security funds, but Pelosi is holding up a deal. He said Pelosi will soon face a vote on becoming Speaker of the House and she does not want to be seen as caving to Trump’s demands.

“Nancy Pelosi cannot be seen by her party as being weak on negotiating with Donald Trump. So we fully expect that until she’s elected Speaker and has locked that vote up, we won’t hear from the Democrats again. They told us last night that they were not countering our last offer,” he explained.

Mulvaney called on Democrats to come back to the negotiating table to see if a deal can be reached at a number between their $1.3 billion offer and Trump’s $5 billion demand.

So we have two issues here, both lost – as usual – on the mainstream media.

First, as Mulvaney points out, Democratic leaders are balking at the very thing they voted for twice already.

Second, although the Executive Branch (president), House of Representatives, and Senate are all in agreement on the border wall, it takes 60 Senate votes to pass legislation. That means eight Democratic senators must vote with the Republican majority in order for the bill to pass. So, essentially, eight Democrats are holding up a bill that has the support of the White House, House of Representatives, and the majority of the Senate. Still, according to the media, the president alone is responsible for the shutdown.

Until the majority caves to the minority, the majority will be seen as obstructionists. Only in Washington.

The Rushmore Report – Guess Who Leads First Poll of Democratic Contenders for 2020?

A new poll was just conducted, with results being announced two days ago. The CNN poll asked two questions. Do you think President Trump will win a second term? If you are a Democrat, who would you vote for at this point? As for the first question, 46 percent believe Trump will win a second term, up from 36 percent since May. And as for the second question, 16 candidates were put on the poll – not including Hillary Clinton. The winner garnered more support than the next three candidates – combined.

First, there is good news for Republicans. The country’s slow migration to the belief that he will win a second term may deter some stronger, younger Democratic candidates from running until 2024. And this also feeds Republican support for Trump. A record low of just 20 percent of Republicans now want to see another candidate challenge the president from within his own party.

The leader among Democratic candidates is former Vice President Joe Biden. Here are the numbers . . .

  • Biden – 33%
  • Sanders – 13%
  • Harris – 9%
  • Warren – 8%
  • Booker – 5%
  • Kerry – 5%
  • Bloomberg – 4%
  • O’Rourke – 4%
  • Holder – 3%
  • Garcetti – 2%
  • Avenatti – 1%
  • Gillibrand – 1%
  • Klobuchar – 1%
  • Patrick – 1%
  • Bullock – <1%
  • Delaney – <1%

Biden has yet to announce any intention to run for president, but he has said he has “considered” the possibility. In recent weeks, Biden has emerged as a vocal critic of the Trump administration, after a two-year hiatus from public life.

None of the more progressive Democrats, Like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), who used Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court hearings to court the far left, has benefited from this strategy. Even the darling of progressives, Sen. Bernie Sanders (VT), trails Biden by 20 points.

The first Democratic debate is probably about eight months away. But get ready. We are about to see the most contentious, crowded primary in American history since way back in . . . 2016.

The Rushmore Report – Democrats: ‘We Aren’t Done with Kavanaugh Yet’

Democrats aren’t done with now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. According to at least one prominent Democrat, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), the plan is to keep investigating Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations if Democrats regain control of Congress. Nadler claims he’s not “eager” to undertake the task of “advising” the president on whether Kavanaugh continues to be fit for his position on the bench, but if he has to, he’ll lead the House Judiciary Committee in an inquiry into Kavanaugh’s past.

“It is not something we are eager to do,” Nadler said. “But the Senate having failed to do its proper constitutionally mandated job of advise and consent, we are going to have to do something to provide a check and balance, to protect the rule of law and to protect the legitimacy of one of our most important institutions.”

Nadler says that, if he ends up in charge (he’ll lead the Judiciary Committee if the Dems retake the House in November), that he’ll subpoena records sent from the FBI to the White House detailing the accusations leveled against Kavanaugh by at least two accusers, Dr. Ford and Deborah Ramirez. He’ll also lead an investigation into whether the White House communicated with the FBI and tried to place parameters on their probe into Kavanaugh’s past.

Additionally, “the committee would also seek to interview Judge Kavanaugh’s accusers and the dozens of potential witnesses they identified in recent days, most of whom were not contacted by the F.B.I. He said he would also call the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, to testify,” the Washington Examiner reports.

There’s danger in this plan: Kavanaugh seems to have become a flash point for Republicans, who united behind his nomination and seem poised to express their disgust with Democrats at the ballot box in November. Democrats want to maintain a cloud of suspicion over the now-Supreme Court justice in order to color any decisions he may render, but in doing so, they may continue to inspire Republicans to take action.

About the Author

Emilk Zanotti writes for The Daily Wire.

The Rushmore Report – The Remarkable Hypocrisy of the Democrat Party

It appears that the accuser of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. But days before she enters the Senate chambers, several Democratic leaders have already pronounced that they believe her, and Judge Kavanaugh should step aside at once. What is remarkable is not that they have ditched that old “innocent until proven guilty” thing, but the abject hypocrisy on clear display. Exhibit A – Juanita Broaddrick.

According to Senators Schumer, Feinstein. Whitehouse, Blumenthal, etc., Kavanaugh is guilty. As evidence for their conclusion, they have one unproven, unsubstantiated, uncollaborated claim from 36 years ago.

What we don’t know about that night in question is more than we do know. Dr. Ford, while naming Kavanaugh as an attempted rapist, does not remember the date (or even the year), the place, or anyone else at the alleged party. Speaking in Kavanaugh’s defense are the man Ford said was in the room (he says it never happened) and 60 women who have spoken with one voice in their unanimous praise of Kavanaugh’s character – then and now.

Of course, the lack of evidence does not mean Ford’s claims are untrue. When both she and the judge testify under oath, we will presumably know more. But when we think back to the Clarence Thomas hearings of 1991, we remember that sometimes, such testimony does not bring closure to these cases.

Democratic leaders are right to listen to Ford’s testimony. And Republicans are right to call for her to appear before their committee. But what is shocking – and sad – is that so many are willing to convict a man with a spotless record simply on the basis of an accusation. By this reasoning, if one woman makes an unsubstantiated similar claim against Chuck Schumer, for example, he should resign immediately – guilty or not.

But what is more shocking is the hypocrisy of the Democrats. And that takes us back to Exhibit A.

In 1999 Juanita Broaddrick asked to speak before the same Judiciary Committee, of which the same Senator Diane Feinstein was a member. Her claim? President Bill Clinton had raped her. But Feinstein would not even hear her case.

What was different about Broaddrick’s claim, compared to Ford’s?

1. Broaddrick claimed Clinton raped her; Ford is accusing Kavanaugh of attempted rape.

2. Clinton is accused of the crime while a sitting Governor, Kavanaugh as a 17-year-old boy.

3. Broaddrick had five witnesses; Ford apparently has none.

Still, while claiming to want to get all the facts, not a single Democrat on the current Judicial Committee would even show up to join their Republican colleagues in questioning Kavanaugh about the accusations last week. (Of course, the cameras weren’t on yet.)

Again, none of this is to say Ford’s accusations are less than accurate. At this point, we simply don’t know. What we do know is that Judge Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty.

Oh, we know one other thing. Democrats stand for women and for equal justice under the law. Unless that woman is Juanita Broaddrick and the man in question is a sitting Democratic President named Bill Clinton.

The Rushmore Report – Guess Who They Want to Impeach Now? (Other than Trump)

Most Democrats calling for impeachment proceedings have their eyes on President Trump. One lawmaker in Massachusetts has someone else in mind. State Senator Barbara L’Italien, who is running to replace retiring Rep. Niki Tsongas, wants to send Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas packing because of his past “lies” about the sexual assault allegations against him. During his 1991 confirmation hearings, Thomas was accused of making sexual advances against Anita Hill, a woman who had worked for him at two federal agencies. He denied the claims, but L’Italien doesn’t buy it. She is prepared to file the impeachment resolution against Thomas for perjury.

“There is an elephant in the room for Congress in the #MeToo era. Our leaders have to start talking about it. Two of the most powerful men in the country have been credibly accused of sexual crimes and gotten away with it,” L’Italien said. “Laws cracking down on sexual assault have to be signed by a president who multiple women say assaulted them. Regulations to stop sexual harassment can be struck down by a Supreme Court justice who lied under oath to counter allegations of sexual harassment. Why would victims think a government like that is looking out for them?” (Politico)

L’Italien may be the first politician to advocate for Thomas’s impeachment, but she’s not the first person. The Daily Intelligencer’s Jill Abramson wrote a piece entitled, Do You Believe Her Now?, laying out the case for impeaching Thomas based on new evidence.

And given the evidence that’s come out in the years since, it’s also time to raise the possibility of impeachment. Not because he watched porn on his own time, of course. Not because he talked about it with a female colleague — although our understanding of the real workplace harm that kind of sexual harassment does to women has evolved dramatically in the years since, thanks in no small part to those very hearings. Nor is it even because he routinely violated the norms of good workplace behavior, in a way that seemed especially at odds with the elevated office he was seeking. It’s because of the lies he told, repeatedly and under oath, saying he had never talked to Hill about porn or to other women who worked with him about risqué subject matter.

Although L’Italien is focused on Thomas’s supposed indiscretions, she hasn’t completely let Trump off the hook. She has asked for congressional hearings into his alleged sexual misconduct.

About the Author
Cortney O’Brien writes for TownHall.

The Rushmore Report – It’s Official, Democrats Now Prefer Socialism to Capitalism

It’s official. The Party I supported in my youth no longer exists. Raised in the home of proud Republicans, I rebelled. After all, the Democratic Party of Texas was conservative. They believed in lower taxes, a strong military, and – capitalism. The party of John Kennedy nominated a Southern Baptist deacon for president. Jimmy Carter was a small businessman. He believed in capitalism. But Kennedy and Carter would not recognize the Democratic Party of today. Why? Because they were not socialists.

Sure, the Democratic Party of 40 years ago had their share of liberals who leaned socialist. But the Republicans had their share of crazed far-right extremists who saw a Communist behind every bush. Like Republicans, Democrats stood up for the American businessman. They rejected socialist ideals outright.

Well, those days are gone. According to Democrats themselves (not Fox News), the Democratic Party of yesteryear is no more. Shockingly, more Democrats now favor socialism than capitalism.

For the modern Democrat, in a battle of political ideas, if it came down to the United States vs Venezuela, Venezuela would win. In recent days, we have watched in horror as Democratic leaders have advocated for the elimination of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement  agency (ICE), which protects our borders. They favor tax-subsidized abortions of unborn babies. They want to eliminate all of the tax cuts that middle income Americans just received. In their view, the top one percent of wage earners – who pay 47 percent of all taxes – are not paying “their fair share,” while the bottom 50 percent pay almost no taxes at all.

The Democratic Party nearly nominated a non-Democrat for president in 2016. Now, Sen. Bernie Sanders shares the stage with avowed socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, whose views are sheer lunacy.

And now, Gallup has conducted a poll that found that for the first time, more Democrats view socialism favorably than capitalism. Today, 57 percent of Democrats view socialism in a positive way, compared to just 47 percent who view capitalism in positive terms.

This is what socialism would cost Americans. The price tag for the agenda of Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez would be $42.5 trillion over the next decade, and $218 trillion over the next 30 years. (Neither Sanders nor Ocasio-Cortez dispute these numbers, nor do they care.) Keep in mind, the national debt is “just” $22 trillion.

Can such an agenda every carry a Democratic Socialist to the White House? Surely not, right? But then again, who among us thought that a certain billionaire real estate tycoon with zero political experience would have won in 2016?

We live in a day of incredible political uncertainty. But one thing is sure. The Democratic Party I supported in my youth no longer exists.

The Rushmore Report – NY Dem Governor Cuomo: ‘America Was Never that Great’

The governor of the most taxed state in America just dropped a bombshell in a moment of honesty. In a public speech, Andrew Cuomo, a strong 2020 presidential candidate, mocked President Trump’s desire to “make America great again.” His astonishing perspective is that “America was never that great.” Even his liberal audience was awestruck by such an anti-America statement.

A few days later – for purely political purposes – Cuomo walked back his statements a bit. He called his comments “inartful.” Note, he didn’t say he didn’t mean what he said; he just regretted that what he said was so accurately understood.

Will this cost him among his political base? Probably not. Consider this – according to a recent poll, Democrats view socialism more positively than capitalism. So for an audience that is so incredibly liberal, Cuomo’s comments are not out of bounds.

But can you imagine Democrats of past generations saying “America was never great?” Can you imagine Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, or Bill Clinton saying that? Of course not. Why not? Because a) they didn’t believe it, and b) to say that would be political suicide. But in today’s Democratic Party, saying America was never great has become frighteningly mainstream.

Of course, Gov. Cuomo will not have to answer for his un-American sentiments, because he will only agree to interviews with members of the press who agree with him on everything he is going to say. But if – and I know this is a longshot – Cuomo did take honest questions, I suggest the following to any press members who are so fortunate as to interview the governor. Ask him . . .

“Was America not great when she abolished slavery?”

“Was America not great when she won two world wars?”

“Was America not great when she went to the moon?”

“Was America not great when she won the Cold War?”

“Was America not great when she received more refugees than any other country in the last century?”

“Was America not great when she passed historic civil rights legislation?”

“Was America not great when she did more to feed the world’s hungry than any other country on earth?”

As expected, President Trump blasted Cuomo for his statement. He is begging the governor to run against him for president in 2020. Is it possible that the Democratic Party would nominate a man who thinks so little of our country – to represent our country on the world stage? Unfortunately, yes, it is possible. A party that is more in line with socialism (see Argentina) than capitalism (see America) just might embrace the governor whose state takes back more money from her citizens (state taxes) than any other state. But will America ever elect a man who believes America is neither great nor ever has been?

Surely not.

The Rushmore Report – American Patriotism Hits 18-Year Low; Here’s Why

The number of United States citizens who consider themselves “extremely proud” to be Americans has hit an 19-year low, according to polling by Gallup. According to findings released Monday, Gallup reported that 47 percent of Americans consider themselves “extremely proud” of being Americans. But the downturn in patriotism is not a national trend as much as a trend within members of one political party. But which one?

Gallup found that there was a distinct political element to the decline, as there were “sharp declines evident among Democrats and political liberals and no decrease among Republicans and conservatives.”

They concluded, “Left-leaning groups’ antipathy toward Donald Trump and their belief that other countries look unfavorably on the president are likely factors in their decline in patriotism, particularly the sharp drops in the past year. But the declines began before Trump was elected.”

The data came from a poll conducted by Gallup June 1-13 from a random sample of 1,520 adults, with a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Gallup first conducted this survey in 2001, with 55 percent of Americans identifying as “extremely proud.” The highest number reported came in 2004 when 70 percent of respondents identified as “extremely proud.”

“After the 9/11 terror attacks caused the public to rally around the nation and its leaders, the percentage expressing extreme pride in the country increased to 65 percent, and went up further to 70 percent less than two years later,” explained Gallup.

“By 2005, about the time George W. Bush was set to begin his second term in office and the U.S. was going on its second year of military involvement in Iraq, the percentage of Americans who were extremely proud fell to 61 percent.”

About the Author

Michael Gryboski writes for The Christian Post.

The Rushmore Report – ‘Abolish ICE’ Zealots Occupy Fantasy Island

“No ban. No wall. No borders at all.” That is the radical rallying cry of the Democratic Socialists of America. Waving desecrated U.S. flags, grubby fists and ratty anarchy banners, DSA’s professional protesters are targeting Trump administration officials, threatening immigration enforcement agents, and blockading detention facilities and processing centers nationwide. On a similar note, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., proudly marched in a parade last week with a T-shirt emblazoned with “Yo No Creo En Fronteras” — Spanish for “I don’t believe in borders.”

These are abjectly unserious people, operating in bad faith, who pose a serious threat to our nation’s well-being.

In New York, DSA rabble-rousers took over a loading dock used to transport immigrants at an ICE processing center on Varick Street. Genius move. Now, detainees whose bond hearings were canceled because of the protest disruptions face another six or more extra weeks in detention.

In Portland, Oregon, DSA operatives shut down a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office after preventing workers from exiting the building.

In Detroit, organizers disrupted ordinary processing and appointments at a downtown ICE field office and plan to camp out there 24 hours a day until the end of the month. “Our short-term goal is to shut down operations at this particular center,” ringleader Robert Jay explained.

“Our long-term goal is to abolish ICE entirely.”

This reckless, simpleton sentiment doesn’t belong to the fringe of the American left. It is the center. Across the country, supposedly mainstream Democrats, activist groups and entertainers are pushing to “Abolish ICE.” To be clear, if the hashtag didn’t clue you in: They don’t just want to reform or reduce the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which was created by merging existing immigration entities after the 9/11 attacks to better coordinate enforcement against alien lawbreakers inside the country.

They want it gone. Zapped. Poof.

An informational flyer lists the agenda of the ICE breakers:

“A moratorium on deportations.

“End all forms of immigration detention.

“Reimagine Border Patrol as a humanitarian force that rescues migrants, rather than destroying their water supplies to hasten their deaths.”

It seems these hysterical extremists were too busy stalking Republicans at restaurants and blocking roadways to notice the Border Patrol agents in Arizona who rescued 57 illegal immigrants, men, women and children (as young as 1), abandoned by smugglers in 108 degree heat in the Tucson sector this weekend. Or the Border Patrol agents in Texas who rescued a pregnant immigrant woman who nearly drowned while attempting to cross the Rio Grande River illegally.

If the Kumbaya leaders of the Abolish ICE campaign were limited to ragtag millenials demanding the whole world operate like an Oberlin College co-op or Fantasy Island, it would be easy to dismiss. But their ranks are spreading:

Organizers of the Women’s March, endorsed by celebrities, journalists and Democrats, announced this week that the “call to #AbolishICE is a call to eliminate the agency that has been terrorizing immigrant communities for 15 years. Women from all backgrounds must take up @conmijente’s call to #FreeOurFuture.”

Mijente, a Latino activist group leading the Abolish ICE movement, proudly displays on its Twitter home page a huge “Chinga La Migra” banner. (Translation: “F—- the Border Patrol.”)

Endorsing the movement, The Nation magazine dubbed ICE a “mass-deportation strike force is incompatible with democracy and human rights.”

Reps. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Jim McGovern, D- Mass., Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., and nearly 20 Democratic congressional candidates have all called for eliminating ICE. Boston-area Democratic congressional candidate Ayanna Pressley wants to defund ICE because it’s an “existential threat” to “immigrant communities.”

And New York actress-turned-Democratic gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon declared that “ICE is a terrorist organization.”

Silly Cindy is campaigning to destroy ICE’s entire 20,000-person workforce, which handles not only enforcement and removal operations, but also homeland security investigations combating criminal organizations illegally exploiting our travel, trade, financial and immigration systems. That includes international smugglers of women and children, drugs, weapons and cash.

So, how exactly do these ICE-melters propose to deal with criminal alien fugitives, such as the estimated 300,000 deportation absconders who’ve been ordered by immigration judges to leave the country?

How about the 40 percent of illegal aliens, from the pool of between 11 million and 30 million immigration law-breakers, who overstayed their visas and are on the loose doing heaven knows what?

And when will these noble 21st-century abolitionists be stepping up to open their homes to the members of the ICE Most Wanted list, which includes illegal aliens wanted for murder, aggravated homicide, narcotics and human trafficking, and membership in terrorist organizations?

I don’t just question their patriotism. I question their sanity.

About the Author

Michelle Malkin is host of “Michelle Malkin Investigates” on Her email address is To find out more about Michelle Malkin and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at

The Rushmore Report – Incivility Hits New High; Every American Should Be Alarmed

Decades ago, George Will referred to American politics as “a contact sport.” Indeed, the rhetoric from both sides of the political aisle has always been rough. But we have not seen anything that matches the vitriol of today since Vice President Aaron Burr challenged former treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton to a duel in 1804. As evidence, I offer four examples from just the past week. All four – coming from the political left – should frighten every American.

1. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is refused service at a public restaurant

Last week, the White House spokesperson just wanted to take her family out for a quiet dinner near her home in Lexington, Virginia. They sat at a table at the Red Hen restaurant. But within two minutes, their server, Jaike Foley-Schultz, asked the family to leave. The owner did not want them in his restaurant. With incredible grace, Sanders and her family left, without making a scene.

2. Rep. Maxine Waters calls for attacks against Trump supporters.

The Los Angeles Democrat made her outrageous comments at a toy drive at the Wilshire Federal Building on Saturday. Her rage-filled rant called for aggressive attacks on conservatives. “Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up and if you see anybody from that Cabinet (Trump Administration) in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

3. Protesters surround the home of DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

Protesters swarmed around Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s home Friday. They shouted, “No justice, no sleep” for hours, while playing the cries of immigrant children on loudspeakers. Other DHS employees have reported numerous anonymous death threats, as well.

4. Portland mayor rallies against ICE.

Ted Wheeler is in his second year as mayor of Portland, Oregon. He lambasted the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) in a series of tweets Wednesday, then announced that he would not order city police to break up protests, regardless of how violent they might become. The Democrat sided with protesters, who called for the banishment of the agency altogether.

Of course, there is plenty of blame to go around. We have never had a president so quick-tempered as Donald Trump. His daily tweets certainly stir the pot and anger his political opponents. Media outlets cater to their ideological bases. There is little debate, but lots of screaming.

But this has escalated beyond tweets and over-the-top rhetoric. From one side of the aisle, we see attacks on officials such as Sanders and Nielsen, unbelievable rants from a U.S. Congresswoman, and a large city mayor refusing to break up protests against immigration officials who are simply doing their jobs – no matter how violent those protests may become.

Would a return to the “compassionate conservatism” of George W. Bush help? Perhaps. Would a return to the days when Ted Kennedy and Bob Dole had lunch together every week make things more civil? Maybe. Have things gone too far for that? Probably.

My prayer is that President Trump tamps down the tweets. And my prayer is that elected officials would quit acting like spoiled children who go into a rage when they don’t get the right toy in their Happy Meal.

A country in which people cannot enjoy a quiet meal with their family, have family time at home void of protesters on their lawn, or support the candidate of their choice without being shunned by gas stations and grocery stores – is not the country I grew up in.

Every American should be alarmed.