No Impeachment: Tom McClintock, GOP holdout on impeaching Homeland Security Secretary, helps sink vote

Rep. Tom McClintock was one of three Republicans bucking party by voting against the impeachment of President Joe Biden’s Homeland Security Secretary over his handling of the southern border.

JACK GRUBER USA Today Network

His and other defections sank a vote to impeach Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas — something GOP leadership pictured as a victory last week that was soon cast into doubt.

The vote failed, 216-214. Tuesday night. It is expected to be reconsidered in another vote, though no specific date or time was announced. “The only way to stop the border invasion is to replace the Biden administration at the ballot box,” McClintock wrote on social media Tuesday.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

“Swapping one leftist for another is a fantasy, solves nothing, excuses Biden’s culpability, and unconstitutionally expands impeachment that someday will bite Republicans.” McClintock, R-Elk Grove, wrote a 10-page memo released Tuesday against impeaching Mayorkas.

With a razor-thin House majority, Republicans could only stand to lose a few members’ support tonight to impeach Mayorkas, assuming all available members voted. Democrats were united in opposing impeachment. On Tuesday night, McClintock, Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wisc., and Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo. voted no.

Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, changed his vote to “no” so the articles could be reconsidered at a later date. To propose reconsidering a vote, a House member has to be on the side that won. Buck said he’d vote no last week, confirming his conviction in an opinion piece published Monday.

The Colorado Republican is leaving Congress in 2025 due to disagreements with party members who continue to raise false claims about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Previously, McClintock blasted the impeachment effort as based on policy disagreements.

He said while Mayorkas was the “worst cabinet secretary in American history, guilty of malfeasance, neglect of duty and maladministration,” those weren’t grounds for impeachment. “The founders specifically rejected terms like malfeasance, neglect of duty and maladministration as grounds for impeachment,” McClintock said in a November statement, “because they feared such vague terms would be twisted for political ends and render the executive subordinate to the legislative branch.”

Impeachment is one of Congress’ highest powers of checks and balances to charge and try federal officials for treason, bribery or “other high crimes and misdemeanors.” While the House has the power to impeach an official, only the Senate can remove one from office through a trial.

“This baseless impeachment should never have moved forward; it faces bipartisan opposition and legal experts resoundingly say it is unconstitutional,” said DHS spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg. There are 219 Republicans and 212 Democrats in the House.

Four seats are vacant. With all the remaining members voting, Republicans needed 216 yeses to meet the majority threshold to impeach Mayorkas. If Mayorkas is impeached, the Senate is expected to quickly convene a trial. It would take two-thirds of the Senate, or 67 votes, to remove him from office. Since 51 senators typically vote with Democrats, that’s probably impossible.

McClintock was one of three California Republicans who helped block a floor vote to impeach Mayorkas in November. But the other two Californians, Reps. John Duarte, R-Modesto, and Darrell Issa, R-Vista, said they would vote to impeach after the Homeland Security Committee put forth articles through the normal process.

The November attempt, pushed by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., was thwarted 209-201, with eight Republicans joining all Democrats against it. McClintock, who leads the House subcommittee on immigration and border security, called her effort unconstitutional. He chastised the impeachments of former President Donald Trump when Democrats held the House majority.

“We must not allow the left to become our teachers,” McClintock said. “If these clear constitutional principles are not restored, now, that power will be just one election from being turned against the constitutionalists on the Supreme Court, or upon any future Republican administration.”

The Homeland Security Committee last week approved two articles of impeachment that claim Mayorkas failed to enforce U.S. immigration laws and breached public trust in congressional testimonies about the U.S.-Mexico border.

The committee had started interviewing former officials in June to try to build a case that Mayorkas was in “dereliction of duty.” Democrats, including Biden and Mayorkas, have criticized the effort as baseless. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters last Wednesday: “Congressman Tom McClintock said, ‘These are not impeachable offenses.’”

“Our challenge to House Republicans is this,” Jean-Pierre added: “Will you go against the very voices you typically listen to play a dangerous, unconstitutional game?”

Click here to read the full article in the Sacramento Bee

What Does the Expiration of Title 42 Mean?

It is officially Friday in the east coast United States, marking the end of Title 42… but, what does it mean? Who does it affect?

“Title 42 is an emergency measure put in place when COVID-19 was declared a national emergency,” said Orange County Congressman Leo Correa. 

But, Title 42, which was started by the Trump Administration and continued under President Biden, has some feeling nervous.

“The challenge we have at the border is that we have many people, thousands – hundreds of thousands – that have been waiting to come into the US,” Correa added. 

“It’s going to have an impact in the immediate because of the pent-up demand,” said LMU Political Science Professor Fernando Guerra.

RELATED: 10,000 migrants stopped in one day ahead of Title 42 expiration

He said after Title 42, Title 8 will play a role and UCLA Chicano Studies Professor Raul Hinojosa says that will, “… allow immigrants to come to the border and say ’I have a well-founded fear of persecution in my homeland. I want to be able to go see a judge to begin the process of applying for political asylum.”

Guerra says it does impact people in LA but not to the same degree as those on the other side of the border or currently at border towns.

He added that for those in LA seeking asylum, it doesn’t change anyone’s daily routines, but, now it gives them a path to legalize their status.

Meanwhile, back at the border if an asylum seeker can’t prove fear of prosecution, then UCLA Law Professor Ahilan Arulanantham says, “… you get what they call an expedited removal order which is a deportation order and now that is on your record. If you try to come in the country again and cross over you can be criminally prosecuted for illegal reentry after deportation.”

To deal with whatever backlog may be created by people seeking asylum, the LA Times is reporting that the Biden administration is cutting the time that migrants have to get lawyers with the idea of speeding up the process.

Click here to read the full article in FoxNews

Trump Prevails: Justices Clear Border Wall Funding

The Supreme Court on Friday handed President Trump a major victory by clearing the way for him to divert $2.5 billion from the military’s budget and use it to build an extra 100 miles of border wall in California, Arizona and New Mexico.

The justices voted 5 to 4 to lift orders by a federal judge in Oakland and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that had barred the administration from using the Pentagon’s money to build a border wall.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s four other conservatives joined in ruling for the Trump administration. They questioned whether the Sierra Club and other plaintiffs had standing to challenge the government’s spending policy.

The court’s four liberals dissented.

Though the environmental group’s lawsuit challenging the wall will continue in lower courts, Trump can begin using the money for the wall in the meantime.

Trump celebrated the decision on Twitter. “Wow! Big VICTORY on the Wall,” he tweeted. …

Click here to read the full article from the L.A. Times

Legitimate Lawsuit Against Trump? Or Political Posturing?

donald-trump-2The big news last week was the lawsuit filed by California and 15 other states challenging President Trump’s declaration of an emergency related to border security and the building of a physical barrier on the southern border. The reaction was a great deal of political hyperventilating from both sides of the political spectrum.

So, after everyone has taken a breath, what should rational taxpayers think about this lawsuit and the dozens of other lawsuits filed by California against the Trump administration?

Let’s stipulate that there are times when litigation is appropriate between states and the federal government. The United States is a constitutional republic with a political structure based on federalism. Brilliantly, our founding fathers (with some intellectual help from our founding mothers, no doubt) devised a system of divided government. Not only was the federal power divided into three branches, but substantial political power was reserved to the states via the Tenth Amendment.

Controversies between the federal government and the states have been bitter and, when one considers the Civil War, they’ve been violent as well. Fortunately, modern disputes between the federal government and the states involve lawyers, not bullets.

To read the entire column, please click here.

Gov. Newsom Shifts National Guard to Fighting Marijuana Black Market

Marijuana1Gov. Gavin Newsom is shifting the California National Guard from border enforcement to cracking down on the illegal marijuana industry — even though he was an advocate for the legalization of the drug.

After announcing earlier this month that he was scaling down the National Guard presence near the border, Newsom shifted resources to fighting illegal marijuana farms, which are maintaining a black market that makes it difficult for legal suppliers to thrive, and that deprives the state of tax revenues that it expected legalization would provide.

The Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday:

ast week, Newsom announced an expansion of efforts by the California National Guard to work with federal officials to target the black market, including illegal drug grows in Northern California operated by international drug cartels.

The governor proposed that at least 150 California National Guard troops would be redeployed from the U.S.-Mexico border to join a federally funded Counterdrug Task Force. The new forces would focus on illicit cannabis activity in Northern California.

As much as 80% of the marijuana sold in California comes from the black market, according to an estimate by New Frontier Data, a firm that tracks cannabis sales and trends. Analysts also found that California’s illicit pot market was valued at an estimated $3.7 billion last year, more than four times the size of the legal market.

In addition to black market woes, marijuana entrepreneurs in California are frustrated at the slow pace of local permitting processes for dispensaries.

California voters approved the legalization of recreational marijuana by passing Proposition 64 in 2016.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

This article was originally published by Breitbart.com/California

Trump threatens to permanently close border if needed

donald-trump-2President Donald Trump is seizing on an attempt by 500 migrants to rush the southern border to use immigration as an issue to bolster his presidency at a critical political moment.

Trump spent weeks ahead of the midterm elections warning that the United States was about to experience an invasion from a migrant caravan trekking north across Mexico, and sent troops to the border in what critics branded a political stunt.

He seized on unrest at the frontier on Sunday to hike pressure on Mexico and to squeeze his political opponents in Washington as he demands financing for his border wall in a looming government funding showdown.

“Mexico should move the flag waving Migrants, many of whom are stone cold criminals, back to their countries,” Trump tweeted early Monday morning. …

Click here to read the full article from Fox 5 San Diego

Gov. Brown Agrees to Deploy 400 National Guard Troops to Border at Trump’s Request

California Gov. Jerry Brown responded to President Donald Trump’s request to add more troops for border security, saying he’ll add about 400 troops but also saying they won’t be used for “enforcing federal immigration laws.”

The location of the troops and the number working along the border, the coast and other places in the state will be determined by the needs on the ground, the governor’s press office said.

This supplements the 250 troops already working statewide, including 55 Guard members already at the border.

Trump said last week he wants to send 2,000 to 4,000 National Guard members to the border, issuing a proclamation citing “the lawlessness that continues at our southern border.”

Arizona, New Mexico and Texas all made new pledges that add up to almost half of the up to 4,000 troops Trump requested. Some Guard members started arriving at the border as states and the federal government officials continued to discuss what they will do. …

Click here to read the full article from KCRA News

Huge Drug-Smuggling Tunnel Discovered Beneath U.S. / Mexico Border

As reported by Newsweek:

After one of the longest cross-border tunnels between Mexico and the U.S. was discovered near San Diego earlier this month, several tons of cocaine and marijuana were seized, officials said on Wednesday.

The 2,622-foot-long tunnel started under a house in Tijuana, Mexico and ran to an industrial lot in Otay Mesa, around 20 miles southeast of San Diego, which was advertised as being part of a wooden pallet business, the Associated Press reports. The tunnel was about three feet wide and had rail and lighting systems and ventilation. The tunnel’s exit in the U.S. was a three-foot-diameter hole that was sometimes covered by a large dumpster.

The Tijuana house where the tunnel originated was equipped with a “sophisticated” elevator large enough for eight people, according to the Justice Department. The tunnel is believed to be the longest discovered along the California-Mexico border. …

Click here to read the full story