Yesterday (6/12), the Ninth Circuit, on the basis of a Trump tweet, blocked the President’s travel ban.

When President Trump tweeted that his measure to protect Americans from Islamic terror was a “travel ban” and that it should never have been watered down, he was right.

Maybe the Supreme Court will uphold the Constitution. Maybe it won’t. The track record has been decidedly mixed. And this is an area where the courts had no actual right to intervene.

Immigration is in the hands of Congress and the White House. It is not up to judges to decide who can come to America.  If this judicial coup succeeds, elected officials will lose their authority over immigration.  That means that the American people will lose all control over immigration.

Federal courts have been unconstitutionally treating states like this for far too long, intervening in everything from elections to prison populations, but now they’re using the general anti-Trump hysteria to assert judicial supremacy over the elected branches of government.

If this judicial coup is allowed to stand, anything that any White House official or member of Congress says at any time in the past, can and will be used by Federal courts to seize control over any policy.  And then we will be living under a permanent reign of judicial terror.

Operation Overlord, the most successful amphibious invasion in history, was in no small part successful due to the most effective deception and disinformation campaign in history.

The key to the Allies completely fooling the Germans as to the real location of the invasion (Normandy) as opposed to where Adolf Hitler thought the troops would land (Calais)—thus meaning all the German generals who wanted their jobs had to think that as well—was the Allies knew what Hitler believed and just played to his preconceptions.

Flash forward from June 1944 to February 2017.  The Trump team had known for months that, far from getting even a reasonably fair shake from the Fake News Media (and even conservative media), they would face the most blistering, unrelenting, baseless and usually cowardly attacks of any Presidential administration since Abraham Lincoln’s.

Team Trump also understood that they needed a window of a few months to lay the groundwork for all of this, to get the necessary people in place, and to begin drafting all the paperwork necessary.

So they came up with the “Cheese in the Maze” deception program.

“2,000 plus cases.”

That was the most overlooked revelation to come from the May 3 Senate testimony of the then-FBI director. While the media parsed every Comey hiccup to bolster its election conspiracy theories, it ignored that number.

Comey stated that there were around 2,000 terrorism investigations. 1,000 of those came from “home grown violent extremism” with no evidence of contact with foreign terrorists. Another 1,000 had "some contact with foreign terrorists." 300 from that 2,000 had come to America as refugees.

Two-thirds of the refugee terrorists were from Iraq. The other third were mainly from the six countries named in President Trump’s travel pause which left-wing activist judges have unconstitutionally halted.

10,000 British soldiers are now deployed on British city streets after Manchester and the London Bridge.  A Muslim terrorist network in London, Paris or New York is as much of a military issue as one in Baghdad or Beirut.

Which means: Every effort to oppose President Trump’s travel pause is a vote for soldiers in the streets and car bombs every morning.

What the heck is “climate denial”? Is that even a thing?

I need to tell you a secret.  What TTP dubbed my “Liberal Head Exploding Cartoon of the Week” (HFR 05/10/17) was created as a cognitive dissonance trap.

I wanted to see if I could make an argument about the reliability of economic models and dupe irrational people into labeling me a climate denier. 

My hypothesis was that I could make a public argument about the reliability of economic models, and partisans on the climate debate would not be able to see the word economic on the page. Literally.

Sure enough, my experiment worked like a charm.  Here’s how.

Under promise and over deliver.

As a businessman, Trump knows that those are the rules. And as president that’s just what he did yesterday (6/01) in his inspirational speech about pulling out of the Paris climate agreement.

It was inspirational because it articulated better than any world leader has ever done before why environmentalism is in fact such a harmful creed.

Rather than get bogged down in the “science” of climate change — an elephant trap so arranged by climate alarmists to make anyone who disagrees with them look ignorant or “anti-science” — he cut to the chase and talked about the important stuff that hardly ever gets mentioned by all the other politicians, for some reason: the fact that the climate change industry is killing jobs.

This argument ought to be low hanging fruit to any half-way intelligent politician: it’s such an obvious way of connecting with the workers.

Yet Trump is the only one who has ever said it. And hearing him say it was a reminder of why it was that he won the presidential election. He connects with his people in a way that so many politicians just don’t.