The power of Javanka grows every second spent in the White House. The duly elected legislative branch must curtail the aspirations of Javanka.
What would we do if Chelsea Clinton really wanted to build a wall? Hillary ran in opposition to that idea. Now let’s say that Hillary won in 2016 and decided to give her daughter a position as an adviser and permitted her to craft immigration policy.
The only thought that should be running through the electorate’s mind is this: We didn’t vote for that.
It doesn’t matter how or why people voted, if Hillary won on a platform that opposed a wall, a hypothetically hawkish Chelsea should not be allowed near Hillary’s immigration policy.
The nation did not elect Javanka or Chelsea.
Regardless of why you did or didn’t vote for Trump, everyone knew what he ran on. Increasing immigration was not a tenet of his campaign.
As such, Politico reports that several Republican Senators are planning on introducing legislation meant to curtail the policy aspirations of one Jared Kushner.
“The low-profile effort to allow more legal immigrants into the U.S. stands in stark contrast to Trump’s increasingly dramatic efforts to curb illegal immigration, an issue he speaks about daily and describes as a national crisis.”
Hawkish immigration activists are worried that the president will be influenced by Kushner’s more moderate views on immigration and will fail to fulfill his campaign pledge to crack down on immigration. Trump already has spoken about expanding legal immigration at least four times this year.
Kushner is considering increases in the number of low- and high-skilled workers, as well as permanent and temporary workers.
In response to those plans and the concerns raised by immigration hawks, GOP Senators are introducing legislation the counteract Jared’s influence over Trump’s immigration policy.
A group of Senate Republicans is moving to slash legal immigration, a plan designed to undercut a proposal by White House adviser Jared Kushner to boost the number of migrant workers admitted into the country.
Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, David Perdue of Georgia and Josh Hawley of Missouri, key allies of President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill, will introduce a bill Wednesday that would favor admitting skilled workers and their immediate family members but cut by half the number of legal immigrants, according to officials close to the process.
The bill will serve to both challenge Kushner’s unexpected effort to increase the number of low- and high-skilled workers, and to remind Trump to make good on his promise to cut both legal and illegal immigration.
I highly recommend reading both Politico articles, they are lengthy and explain the situation well.
But there is one aspect of this immigration debate that isn’t being addressed. Why is Jared involved in this process in the first place?
Many have questioned Kushner’s security clearance and other aspects of nepotism, but as soon as he is advocating policies that are amenable to the left, he is back to being “White House adviser,” instead of “know-nothing twit.”
Prior to Trump’s campaign, Kushner did real-estate stuff. Kushner is not conservative. Yet somehow, we are led to believe that Kushner is A: competent enough, and B: conservative enough to address immigration policy on behalf of the Trump Administration.
Further to the point, Jared shouldn’t be allowed near policy of any kind.
Ann Coulter’s most recent column details aspects of Jared’s lack of qualifications. She concludes with this, “Instead of “Make America Great Again,” the motto of the Trump presidency is, as one of Trump’s legal spokesmen put it: “The advance team for Jared and Ivanka.” This is not what anyone voted for. “
Senators Perdue, Cotton, and Hawley are working on legislation based upon the campaign promises of Donald Trump. That is what people voted for. They voted for it even if they were just voting to stop Hillary. Trump’s views on immigration were the centerpiece of his campaign, yet Kushner is taking up policy positions that are diametrically opposed to those of campaign Trump.
While the legislative branch works to achieve those policy ends, I still want a constitutional amendment banning Javanka from public life.