WND

The fight rages on, over whether an illegal alien deported by the Trump administration to a prison in El Salvador can be extricated from that prison and returned to America.

El Salvador’s president says no.

Further, whether judges in America can force President Trump to go into a foreign nation, retrieve one of its citizens from behind jail bars, and bring him back to America in a scenario that likely would lead to further deportation orders.

Amid all of this, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland, traveled to El Salvador and insisted to officials there he had to meet with the inmate, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, pressuring them over and over until they relented and set up a photo opportunity.

Now Trump is calling Van Hollen a “fool.”

The Washington Examiner said Trump’s comment on social media was, “Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland looked like a fool yesterday standing in El Salvador begging for attention from the Fake News Media, or anyone. GRANDSTANDER!!!”

President Trump, citing the catastrophic damages to America from Joe Biden’s years-long open borders scheme that allowed millions of illegal aliens, including known terrorists, to come into America, has made one of his term’s goals to crack down on that activity.

He’s literally closed off illegal aliens’ paths into the U.S., and also has been working to deport as many as can be identified and captured.

Democrats, smarting from landslide losses in the Electoral College and popular vote in last fall’s presidential election, have chosen to object to anything Trump does regarding national security.

As part of that they have taken up the cause of Garcia, who was eligible for deportation but apparently had a court order that he should not go to El Salvador.

I said my main goal of this trip was to meet with Kilmar. Tonight I had that chance. I have called his wife, Jennifer, to pass along his message of love. I look forward to providing a full update upon my return. pic.twitter.com/U9y2gZpxCb

— Senator Chris Van Hollen (@ChrisVanHollen) April 18, 2025

HOLY SH*T El Salvador President Nayib Bukele is trolling Democrats so badly. I absolutely love it

Now it’s time to impeach Sen. Chris Van Hollen pic.twitter.com/iydbpxAfH3

— MAGA Voice (@MAGAVoice) April 18, 2025

Senator Chris Van Hollen met with a deported illegal alien MS-13 member instead of the family of his own constituent, Rachel Morin, who was slain by an illegal alien.

Thoughts? pic.twitter.com/KdRzm6VOa8

— JOSH DUNLAP (@JDunlap1974) April 18, 2025

Van Hollen said, “I said my main goal of this trip was to meet with Kilmar. Tonight I had that chance. I have called his wife, Jennifer, to pass along his message of love. I look forward to providing a full update upon my return.”

The Department of Homeland Security targeted Abrego Garcia for deportation due to his alleged MS-13 ties. On Wednesday, Attorney General Pam Bondi released 13 pages of police and immigration records on Garcia dating back to 2019, revealing suspicions against him of human trafficking, gang activity and more.

A federal judge has claimed the Trump administration must “facilitate and effectuate” Garcia’s return to the United States by April 7, a claim that is on appeal.

Van Hollen had simply traveled to El Salvador and demanded access to Garcia, to which authorities there explained there was more to the process than that.

Eventually the meeting was staged, and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele mocked the senator.

“Kilmar Abrego Garcia, miraculously risen from the ‘death camps’ & ‘torture’, now sipping margaritas with Sen. Van Hollen in the tropical paradise of El Salvador!”

Bukele added, “Now that he’s been confirmed healthy, he gets the honor of staying in El Salvador’s custody.”

The backlash for Van Hollen advocacy for an illegal alien is expanding, too.

BREAKING: American Accountability Foundation has filed an ethics complaint against Sen. Chris Van Hollen for assisting a foreign terrorist organization with his trip to El Salvador.

In our letter to Leader Thune, we demand that he instruct the secretary of the Senate not… pic.twitter.com/VFzqhEAd3X

— American Accountability Foundation (@Theswampmonitor) April 18, 2025

The American Accountability Foundation said it had filed an ethics complaint against him “for assisting a foreign terrorist organization with his trip to El Salvador.”

“In our letter to Leader Thune, we demand that he instruct the secretary of the Senate not to foot the bill for Van Hollen’s trip and wants the Senate Ethics Committee to open an immediate investigation,” the organization said.

 

Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan are turning their attention to Google over concerns that the tech giant is censoring users and infringing on Americans’ free speech rights.

Google’s parent company Alphabet, which also owns YouTube, appears to be the GOP’s next Big Tech target. Lawmakers seem to be turning their attention to Alphabet after Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta ended its controversial fact-checking program in favor of a Community Notes system similar to the one used by Elon Musk’s X.

Cruz recently informed reporters of his and fellow senators’ plans to protect free speech.

“Stopping online censorship is a major priority for the Commerce Committee,” Cruz said, as reported by Politico. “And we are going to utilize every point of leverage we have to protect free speech online.”

Following his meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai last month, Cruz told the outlet, “Big Tech censorship was the single most important topic.”

Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent subpoenas to Alphabet and other tech giants such as Rumble, TikTok and Apple in February regarding “compliance with foreign censorship laws, regulations, judicial orders, or other government-initiated efforts” with the intent to discover how foreign governments, or the Biden administration, have limited Americans’ access to free speech.

“Throughout the previous Congress, the Committee expressed concern over YouTube’s censorship of conservatives and political speech,” Jordan wrote in a letter to Pichai in March. “To develop effective legislation, such as the possible enactment of new statutory limits on the executive branch’s ability to work with Big Tech to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users, the Committee must first understand how and to what extent the executive branch coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech.”

Jordan subpoenaed tech CEOs in 2023 as well, including Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Tim Cook of Apple and Pichai, among others.

Despite the recent action against the tech giant, the battle stretches back to President Donald Trump’s first administration. Cruz began his investigation of Google in 2019 when he questioned Karan Bhatia, the company’s Vice President for Government Affairs & Public Policy at the time, in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Cruz brought forth a presentation suggesting tech companies, including Google, were straying from free speech and leaning towards censorship.

Even during Congress’ recess, pressure on Google continues to mount as a federal court ruled Thursday that Google’s ad-tech unit violates U.S. antitrust laws and creates an illegal monopoly. This marks the second antitrust ruling against the tech giant as a different court ruled in 2024 that Google abused its dominance of the online search market.

Cruz, Jordan and Google did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Several Democrat lawmakers refused to answer why they voted against a measure to ensure that non-citizens cannot vote in U.S. elections in footage exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Only four Democrat lawmakers joined Republicans to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would require states to obtain proof of citizenship before registering an individual to vote and remove all non-citizens from existing voter rolls. Several lawmakers who voted against the legislation either refused to tell the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) why they seemingly support non-citizens voting in elections or claimed that the idea is a myth.

“Congresswoman, why do you want non-citizens to vote in U.S. elections?” an individual with the NRCC asked Democrat Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who ignored the question. “Why do you not want to keep American elections safe and secure?

Among those asked were Democrat Reps. Mark Takano of California, Jasmine Crockett of Texas, Greg Caser of Texas, Eric Sorenson of Illinois, Tom Suozzi of New York, Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick and Lateefah Simon of California.

WATCH:

Suozzi said the idea that non-citizens vote in U.S. elections is a “myth” spread by Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) head Elon Musk.

“I don’t want that,” Suozzi said. “That’s actually a myth that, what’s his name, Elon Musk was on a show where he was talking about non-citizens voting in New York. It’s just not true.”

Cherfilus-McCormick, Caser and Jared Moskowitz of Florida also said they do not want non-citizens to vote in U.S. elections.

However, non-citizens participating in recent U.S. elections does not appear to be a myth. In August, government officials in Alabama, Virginia, Ohio and Texas identified as many as 17,000 non-citizens on state voting rolls and worked to remove them from the lists ahead of the 2024 general election.

America First Legal, a Washington, D.C.-based organization aligned with the Trump administration, sued Maricopa County, Arizona, in August, after the county had allegedly failed to remove 35,000 registered voters from its voter rolls who did not provide proof of citizenship. The lawsuit prompted all 15 counties in Arizona to verify and remove voters from the voter rolls, including nearly 50,000 registrants who did not provide proof of citizenship, Fox News first reported.

After Oregon resumed automatic voter registration, the Oregon Driver & Motor Vehicle Services division found 118 non-citizens on its voter rolls, and at least 13 of them had voted, according to Willamette Week. In September, the DMV had mistakenly sent the names of 1,619 people to the Elections Division to be added to voter rolls. In that group, at least 17 people voted.

Angelica Maria Francisco and Carlos Abreu, two illegal immigrants from Guatemala and the Dominican Republic, pleaded guilty to falsely identifying themselves as American citizens and voting in U.S. federal elections. A Chinese national allegedly registered to vote and cast a ballot in the 2024 general election, according to statements made in October by Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office and the Washtenaw County Prosecutor’s office.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration fought against states that worked to remove non-citizens from its voter rolls. The Biden-led Justice Department sued Virginia and Alabama to prevent the states from taking such an action.

The Democrats who voted in favor of the SAVE Act were Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington and Ed Case of Hawaii.

The NRCC told the Daily Caller News Foundation that Democrats are refusing to explain why they treat “our sacred ballot box like an open border.”

“Democrats continue denying reality to explain their pathetic votes against requiring proof of citizenship to vote. The American people deserve better than these Democrats who treat our sacred ballot box like an open border,” NRCC spokesperson Ben Petersen said.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The legal team at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, during the Joe Biden administration, took on the United States Department of Agriculture for programs that were race-based, and ended up injuring those of the wrong race.

But the problems were not eradicated, and the legal team now is confirming that Wisconsin dairy farmer Adam Faust is telling the feds to fix the rest, or be sued again.

The issue is that the programs violate both the U.S. Constitution and President Donald Trump’s executive orders from earlier this year.

They are similar to the fight handled by WILL under Biden.

“If not corrected within 60 days, a federal lawsuit will be filed on Mr. Faust’s behalf against the Trump administration,” the legal team’s report said.

Deputy counsel Dan Lennington explained, “Trump administration has taken some commendable steps to root out race discrimination in many agencies, but we have a long way to go. Millions of farmers face economic uncertainty, from unpredictable weather to rising input costs, all of which are far beyond their control, only then to be punished economically because of their race. It’s immoral, unconstitutional, and it’s time for it to stop once and for all. The clock is ticking, and we won’t hesitate to take the Trump administration to court to protect farmers from race discrimination.”

The team’s client, Faust, said, “USDA offers important resources for dairy farmers, including margin coverage, loan guarantees, and grants. But it is outrageous that some farmers get a better deal based on race. I am hopeful the Trump administration will change course and fix these discriminatory programs.”

Faust runs a dairy in Chilton, Wis., and like millions of other American farmers, is a white male.

He sued the Biden administration, successfully, for race discrimination in the Farmer Loan Forgiveness Program, in which a federal court held granting loan forgiveness only to “socially disadvantaged farmers” was, in fact, unconstitutional race discrimination.

Congress eventually repealed that scheme.

But the USDA still is “running over two dozen race-based programs that unconstitutionally discriminate against farmers and ranchers every day,” WILL said.

Among those is the discriminatory Dairy Margin Coverage Administrative Fee.

That “offers financial assistance when the margin between the milk price and the average feed cost falls below a coverage level chosen by the producer. All ‘socially disadvantaged farmers’ are exempt from the fee. USDA regulations define this phrase to include only the following racial groups: American Indians or Alaskan Natives, Asians or Asian Americans, Blacks or African Americans, Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, and women,” WILL said.

Others include the Loan Guarantee Program and the Environmental Quality Incentive Program.

 

Joe Biden, after decades as a politician on some fairly good salaries in Washington, and after his family took in tens of millions of dollars in what appeared to be an influence peddling scheme during his time in office, now is a former president, and is trying to make a bit of income from giving speeches, like so many out-of-office politicos.

He’s signed with an agency and outlined his demands, $300,000 per speech plus a jet if travel is involved plus expenses for a full staff to accompany him.

But, it seems, no one is buying.

A comment at the Gateway Pundit delivered a devastating assessment of Biden: “Apparently, there isn’t much of a market for angry, yelling, incoherent babbling speeches from former presidents who have difficulty forming sentences.”

It was the New York Post that revealed, “It’s not just Biden family artwork that’s struggling to sell these days. Former President Joe Biden’s attempt to bill $300,000 per speaking appearance is finding few takers, The Post has learned — as some of his own former aides say it’s time for the 82-year-old to leave the spotlight for good after reminiscing about ‘colored kids’ Tuesday in his first public address since leaving office.”

Biden has established a reputation for telling wild – and untrue – stories during his days campaigning and in office.

His speeches typically feature long periods of mumbling, interspersed with sudden bouts of shouting and screaming.

“I’M NOT KIDDING,” is a popular insert on just about any topic.

Biden has been known to call on dead people while speaking, and often insults listeners, once calling someone a “dog-faced pony soldier.”

The Post reported a source familiar with Biden’s “faltering speaking career” confirmed the $300,000 price tag.

Biden has been represented since February by the Creative Artists Agency, and delivered his “first public speech since leaving office Tuesday, stumbling when he referred to ‘colored kids,’” the report said.

He had spoken earlier, but nobody covered it.

The Post’s source said, “CAA is having trouble booking gigs, which isn’t surprising.”

The report cited Biden’s “history of peddling glaring inaccuracies before his political career came to a crashing end when he delivered incoherent debate remarks that prompted a Democratic mutiny.”

The CAA declined to comment to the Post on the topic.

Joe Biden is spending his first speech since leaving office saying he didn’t have to grow up around black people

“I remember watching a bus go by… it was full of colored kids… I had never seen those.”

The face of the Democrat party pic.twitter.com/4keCWCep8O

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 15, 2025

Biden starts randomly yelling during his first speech since leaving office.

This man is not well.

pic.twitter.com/PFpHQ4SjIA

— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) April 15, 2025

Karoline Leavitt: “My first reaction when seeing former President Biden was speaking tonight was, I’m shocked that he is speaking at nighttime; I thought his bedtime was much earlier than his speech tonight.”

pic.twitter.com/TxLEqceza4

— Julia (@Jules31415) April 15, 2025

I am shocked – shocked – that Joe Biden’s influence peddling business is struggling now that he no longer has any influence to actually peddle. https://t.co/jgOogbDimL

— Rhode Islander (@rhodeislander) April 17, 2025

April 17, 2025: 11:00 p.m.:
April 17, 2025: MAHA Highlights

• A leaked draft of the Trump administration’s FY2026 budget proposes cutting the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) discretionary spending by one-third, including reducing the NIH budget from $48.5 billion to $27.3 billion and consolidating its 27 institutes into eight. The CDC would also see its budget cut from over $9 billion to $5 billion, eliminating programs like the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

• The budget plan outlines the elimination of the Head Start program and significant cuts to community mental health clinics and teen pregnancy prevention initiatives. Approximately $20 billion would be reallocated to establish a new agency within HHS, the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), consolidating several existing health services.

• HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and CMS Director Dr. Mehmet Oz are promoting the MAHA initiative across Republican-led states. In Indiana, they supported Governor Mike Braun’s issuance of nine MAHA-related executive orders, including a proposed ban on soda and candy for SNAP recipients. Similar measures are being considered in Arkansas, West Virginia, and Utah.

• House Republicans are preparing to mark up a major domestic policy bill in early May, central to President Trump’s agenda, which includes $880 billion in spending cuts from programs like Medicaid. The proposed cuts, with $500–$600 billion potentially coming from healthcare, have sparked internal GOP tension and Democratic criticism.

• Some Republicans in Congress have expressed concerns that the MAHA initiative may lead to restrictions on pesticide use, fearing potential overreach and negative impacts on agriculture. ​

April 17, 2025: 11:00 p.m.:
April 17, 2025: State Highlights

• U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and envoy Steve Witkoff met with European and Ukrainian officials in Paris to promote a U.S.-led peace framework to end the war in Ukraine. The framework received a positive response from European powers and Ukraine, although Russia remains cautious. President Donald Trump seeks a swift resolution and has proposed a minerals and economic cooperation deal with Ukraine as part of the peace initiative. French President Emmanuel Macron hosted the talks, emphasizing Europe’s continued involvement in negotiations and opposition to exclusive U.S.-Russia talks. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized perceived Russian narratives promoted by Witkoff and accused China of supporting Russia militarily. While a full ceasefire remains elusive, there is tentative agreement on limiting attacks on energy targets and at sea. Negotiators plan to reconvene in London next week. Separately, U.S. and French defense leaders discussed NATO defense spending and Ukraine’s long-term security. U.S. officials also held side talks with Iran regarding its nuclear program, with further discussions scheduled in Rome.

• Secretary Rubio spoke with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, presenting the same peace proposal discussed in Paris. The State Department reported an “encouraging reception” from European and Ukrainian counterparts, though Russia remains cautious.

• President Trump hosted Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni at the White House, expressing support for a future EU-US trade deal. On Ukraine, Trump gave mixed messages, stating his desire to end the conflict while expressing dissatisfaction with all parties involved, including Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, whom he criticized. A potential US-Ukraine minerals deal is expected to be signed soon. Trump also praised Meloni for aligning with NATO defense spending targets and accepted her invitation to visit Rome.

• The U.S. and Iran have resumed indirect nuclear talks, with initial discussions held in Oman and further meetings planned in Rome. The Trump administration seeks to cap Iran’s uranium enrichment at 3.67%, while Iran continues its nuclear development. Russia has ratified a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Iran, adding complexity to the negotiations.

• The State Department held a press briefing led by Spokesperson Tammy Bruce, addressing ongoing diplomatic efforts in Ukraine and Iran, and reaffirming the U.S. commitment to European security partnerships.

What precisely did candidate Donald Trump mean with his campaign pledge to “Make America Great Again”? From the first week of this presidency to today, it is clear MAGA was more than a campaign slogan. It was a substantive campaign promise. And a defining part of that promise is to “Make American Self-sufficient Again.”

Partisan Democrats hate the idea. Registered Democrats not so much. Finding work in a semiconductor chip factory is not so bad. In fact, while the partisans try to enforce their opposition by defacing or burning property, or staging protests to inconvenience as many working Americans as possible, they have no answer for Trump’s push to create more domestic jobs. Their fallback position is to claim jobs require energy and energy use is a threat to earth. This week we were told dogs are a threat to the planet too.

Elon Musk is the Trump administration face of a parallel campaign to reduce the cost and the scope of the federal government at home and abroad. Those same partisan Democrats are violently opposed to any welfare-state reduction. Characterizing the reduction of government as a threat to democracy is nonsense, and the general public knows it.

For decades those bitter partisans have galloped into office astride social issues, but their overall campaign seeks a total destruction of what American has been, and still is. The partisans want to burn it down, replaced by government as the provider of all things necessary. The Trump administration labors to discard the bureaucratic model and build upon the successes of this nation.

The partisans have gone so far some state legislators and governments are attempting to withdraw from the union by defying federal law. This week Maine said it would not obey federal rules excluding men from women’s sports. Also this week, Gov. Gavin Newsom filed a lawsuit to block President Trump’s authority to establish tariffs. California will go it alone, Newsom argued. This is not new to the United States of America. Americans killed each other in record numbers over the issue of a federal ban on slavery. Will the next civil war be waged to settle immigration policy?

While partisan Democrats would deny the federal authority to regulate immigration to this country, non-partisan Democrats who suffered a job loss to an illegal alien, or worry about that prospect, are not so enthusiastic about defying the federal government.

To complicate matters, the United States Supreme Court has obfuscated over the plain language of the Constitution for decades, and soon it will have to decide. Do we hang in there with the founders, or plunge into fragmented chaos? That issue is knocking on the courthouse door. Will we have 50 separate sets of immigration rules? Will the federal government be relegated to a roll of welfare provider? Will the fiction of sanctuary California serve as a backdoor to an eastern migration?

Meanwhile, working Americans watch and listen. Working Americans already have made sacrifices to the cost of the welfare state. Family size has been declining as the cost of government rises.

Suburban parents do not allow their children to walk to school today. They are driven, and the traffic jam around the neighborhood school is a twice-daily headache. The children all have smartphones to protect them. Tree forts and secret hideaways are no more. In fact, outdoor playtime is not heard in the neighborhood.

In a broad sense, insecurity has replaced freedom as a feature of American family life.

Donald Trump confronted all this and more with “Make American Great Again.” His critics screamed “hate” and rapidly morphed into violent behavior. More and more partisan Democrats call for violence against the president. The non-partisan Democrats, not so much.

What would our world be like today if the internet did not host websites independent of some sprawling corporate entity, websites offering debate instead of directional commands? Those Democrat partisans did recognize the threat of the internet, but their campaign of “disinformation” and “misinformation” failed under the weight of freedom of speech.

At least now we can begin to debate tariffs and world trade, gas-powered cars versus EVs, and perhaps participate, as is our right, as the decisions are made.

This week, Democrats decided to expend their quickly diminishing political capital in defense of a deported Salvadoran illegal immigrant named Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Garcia was deported to El Salvador some weeks ago; the Department of Justice initially admitted that his deportation was an “administrative error.” It turns out that Garcia had an order withholding removal to his home country, due to his claims that returning to El Salvador would risk his life. Nonetheless, the administration flew him to that country’s Terrorism Confinement Center, where he is apparently being held to date.

Initially, a district court judge ruled that Abrego Garcia’s removal was violative of due process, and that the administration had to “facilitate” his return to the United States. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court, which found 9-0 that while the executive branch likely had the power to order his deportation, it still had to follow court orders to “facilitate” his temporary return for due process reasons. The Trump administration, for its part, claims that it has already “facilitated” his release from custody – that they’ve asked Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele nicely to release him, and that Bukele has refused. Bukele sat in the Oval Office with President Donald Trump and said just that: “The question is preposterous: how can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?”

Regardless of the legal wrangling over the case – and there is in fact a solid legal basis to the idea that the administration ought to temporarily return Abrego Garcia just to receive a court hearing, after which he can be deported right back again – Democrats have wrong-footed themselves yet again. This week, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., decided to fly down to El Salvador to visit Abrego Garcia; other congressional Democrats vowed to do the same. In their telling, Abrego Garcia is an innocent caught up in the mills of wrongheaded justice.

But Abrego Garcia is indeed a nefarious character. It turns out that aside from his illegal immigration status, Garcia’s wife accused him of “violently beating her multiple times” in a 2021 court filing, according to the Daily Mail. When he was originally arrested in 2019, arrest records show he was found with cash and drugs, as well as two other members of MS-13, while wearing gear associated with MS-13. And this is the person Democrats have tried to valorize.

Abrego Garcia isn’t the only awful person Democrats have attempted to sanctify. Democrats have also rushed to the defense of terror supporter and Columbia student visa holder Mohsen Mahdawi, who posted on his social media in commemoration of his terrorist cousin: “a leader of a fierce resistance fighter.” The New York Times went so far as to headline his story, “He Wanted Peace in the Middle East. ICE Wants to Deport Him.”

Meanwhile, Democrats have little to say about the illegal immigrant killer of Rachel Morin, a 37-year-old mother of five who was raped and murdered; Rachel’s mother, Patty, visited the White House briefing room to explain the case to a media that largely ignored it. Democrats similarly have gone silent about the burning of the home of Gov. Josh Shapiro, D-Pa.; his home was set aflame by an anti-Israel man who said he wanted to let Shapiro know he “will not take part in his plans for what he wants to do to the Palestinian people.” Democrats’ inconsistency here speaks volumes: If you are an illegal immigrant criminal, they will either ignore it or downplay it; if you are a visa-holder or criminal who favors Hamas, they will do the same.

Democrats have a wide variety of lines they can use to attack the Trump administration. But their binary view of the world – opponents of Trump must by necessity be good – leads them down dark pathways. Which means that no matter how much they decry the lack of due process, nobody will trust them with the levers of power.