It’s on: Coulter rips Trump for looming amnesty sellout

posted at 11:21 am on August 25, 2016 by Allahpundit

Somehow, in the span of about 12 hours, this went from being the least fun election ever to the most fun.

I guessed yesterday that Coulter would be the only big-name Trumper with the stones to come after him for flipping on amnesty and, so far, that’s correct. Actual quote from her new book, ahem, “In Trump We Trust”: “There’s nothing Trump can do that won’t be forgiven. Except change his immigration policies.” And now here we are. She’s reacting below to what he told Hannity yesterday about illegals having to pay “back taxes,” a talking point perennially used by amnesty fans in support of legalizing illegals. If you make them pay back taxes and learn English before handing them the right to remain in the U.S. forever, well, that’s not really “amnesty,” is it?

The sellout is coming, in other words, and Coulter knows this topic well enough to recognize the buzzwords instantly.

Skip to 3:15 of the first clip below and watch him in action at his townhall with Hannity. The Republican establishment has been waiting for decades for someone to come along who can sell amnesty to the GOP’s populist base. They thought they had their man in Marco Rubio in 2013. Little did they realize it was Donald Trump, supposed scourge of the corrupt globalist donor class.

Jeff Sessions is coping as best he can:

“Oh yeah, I can be supportive of that,” Sessions told “Fox and Friends” when asked if he could get on board with Trump’s proposal on how to deal with longtime undocumented immigrants.

During a town hall earlier this week, Trump raised the idea that undocumented immigrants who have been in the country for a long time could pay back taxes and “we [could] work with them.” Trump clarified Thursday that there would be no amnesty granted.

“I think what he’s saying is let’s prove the weakness in so many of the plans that have been offered over the years is that they’ve given amnesty first and promised enforcement in the future,” Sessions said.

“Security first, amnesty later” is the current position of none other than Marco Rubio. Trump could have taken that line from the beginning, as National Review has spent the last 48 hours pointing out. He could have argued last summer that Republicans should worry less about amnestizing the illegals who are already here, which is a fait accompli, and more about preventing future amnesties through tougher enforcement — including enforcement against visa overstays, which his border wall does nothing to address. If Democrats will agree to enforcement that demonstrably reduces illegal immigration, not merely promises to do so, then Republicans can work with them on amnesty. But that was never Trump’s position (until now) because it didn’t do enough to polish his image as a politically incorrect authoritarian superhero. The squishes in Washington tell you we can’t deport 11 million illegals? Screw them. President Trump will do it, through sheer force of alpha-male will. Now here he is, a newly minted squish himself. There’s nothing left of the world-beating system-smashing persona that made him a phenomenon in the first place, and thus no reason to think he’ll go to the mat against the left on things like Supreme Court appointments. And Sessions knows it, which is why he’s moving the goalposts from mass deportation, a pillar of Trump’s immigration bravado, to a sensible policy endorsed by the supposed RINOs at William F. Buckley’s magazine. The deeper point about the Great Amnesty Sellout is that it’s a case study in what happens when Trump bumps up against milquetoast Washington political consensus. He caved. Why wouldn’t he cave on other things as president?

What we’re left with now is the argument that he’d still be better than Hillary Clinton on immigration, which is true but might not mean much in practice. Odds are we’re going to have a Democratic Senate next year and a somewhat less red Republican House. Ryan will be under intense pressure not to back down on amnesty despite his personal inclinations, but if a deal’s going to be done, it’ll obviously need Chuck Schumer’s approval. And Schumer doesn’t strike me as a guy who’d agree to demonstrable improvements in enforcement upfront in return for a promise to legalize illegals later. Will Ryan hold the line on that? I’m not so confident. And if he makes a Gang-of-Eight-style deal with Schumer, will President Trump hold the line against it? President Clinton would probably sign anything that can make it through a Schumer-led Senate. President Trump was supposed to be a bulwark against Ryan selling out in a bad deal, but now I don’t know. What if next year’s Gang of Eight compromise includes back taxes?

Two clips here, one of Trump yesterday and the other of Katrina Pierson arguing, to laughs from the CNN panel, that Trump’s not changing his positions, he’s merely … changing his words. Exit question via Dan Foster: The Great Amnesty Sellout will now be part of the list of excuses if Trump ends up losing in November, right? He would have won had he merely stayed the course on mass deportation, never mind the fact that he’s getting blown out in various swing states right now after having spent a year pushing that policy. If only he hadn’t started listening to the damned consultants, he would have ridden that nationalist immigration policy straight to the White House!



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback