The Daly Weekly (1/31)
Joe Biden, Pete Hegseth, Kamala Harris, and more.
Hi everyone.
Welcome to this week’s Daly Weekly, where I answer whatever questions you throw at me.
Let’s get right to it…
National security is the number one responsibility of any President. At the very least, why Didn’t Biden deport the KNOWN criminal illegal immigrants just as Trump is presently doing. — Rob O.
Hi Rob. I think Biden’s deportation policy was a little more nuanced than that, but suffice to say, Biden was absolutely terrible on the border. A record number of people poured into our country on his watch, and with them a number of criminals.
As for why he was so negligent on this issue, I think a lot of it had to do with party-politics and liberal sensibilities. Biden, like many Democrats, wanted to present himself as someone who was welcoming and compassionate toward people of color — especially poor people of color who were looking for a better life. And after four years of The Left portraying Trump as a monster on the issue (often unfairly and hypocritically), signalling that America would be “kinder and gentler” to border-crossers was something Biden probably figured would help him and his party come election time. It, of course, backfired. Any time the rest of the world hears about relaxed policies at the U.S. border, attempts to cross the border go up. The situation turned into pure, extended chaos, and the American people didn’t like it.
As you say, national security should be a president’s priority, and Biden’s handling of the border showed that it was not.
What do you think about Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America? — Alex D.
I honestly couldn’t care less, Alex. But isn’t it interesting how no one’s talking about the price of groceries anymore, and instead we’re talking about things like the Gulf of America, Canada as a 51st state, Greenland, and the Panama Canal — stuff virtually no one cared or even thought about until just a few weeks ago? I think there’s a political method to this madness, especially with Trump’s tariff fetish threatening to drive prices even higher.
Hello Sir John, this video claims that, according to investigative journalist Greg Palast, Kamala Harris would have won the election with both the popular vote and the Electoral College had it not been for over three million votes that were tossed out for shady and questionable reasons, thus giving the victory to Trump. The Dems and the legacy media are largely silent on this, which of course makes me question the validity of it. After all, if there actually WERE solid proof of Republican chicanery, I would assume that Maddow, Schiff, Acosta and all the other usual suspects would be shouting this out night and day with the evidence to back it up, unlike last time. So what is this? Is it evidence of vile Republican voter fraud? Or is it the typical rant of a sore loser who can’t even convince people on his own side to take him seriously? Your thoughts please. —“THIS time there IS proof that Trump cheated!” regards from The Emperor
A good rule of thumb, Emperor, is to not put any faith in conspiratorial YouTube videos. Like you touched on, it should be a tip-off when high-profile media liberals, who were desperate for Harris to win, aren’t even bothering with this. Social-media is full of disinformation, and it’s scary that it’s where more and more people go to get their news.
Do you think Trump 2.0 seems to have slightly more of a connection to / influence from Libertarians? If so - to what do you attribute that to? — Ryan
I wish you had given me some examples, Ryan, since I’m not sure what you’re referring to. I suppose the idea behind DOGE feels kind of libertarian, but that mostly conceptual department started off pretty cartoonish (as do most things involving Vivek Ramaswamy), and already seems to be falling apart. Any meaningful cuts to federal spending would have to include entitlement reform (which most libertarians want), but Trump, unfortunately, refuses to go there.
From a law and order perspective, I suppose starting off Trump 2.0 by pardoning almost 1,600 criminals might be considered kind of libertarian (libertarians tend to want lighter — and sometimes no — sentences for various crimes). I’d say there are some foreign policy parallels too, with non-interventionist tendencies, but those tendencies are pretty selective and seem to depend on the country. I actually think there is more influence on the administration coming from the Democratic Party of 20 years ago than there is libertarian sensibilities.
Well after all that hullabaloo, Pete Hegseth got confirmed! Can you believe it!? I agree that he's not qualified to run a vape shop, let alone the biggest department of the US government. Do you see him lasting more than 2 years? The bar has been set pretty low for Senate confirmations. Is there anybody less qualified for the remaining positions? — FDM
I was not at all surprised that Hegseth was confirmed (despite being highly unqualified for the position), but I will be surprised if he makes it two years. My assumption is that the rest of Trump’s nominees will also be confirmed, though I would love to be wrong. Gabbard, Kennedy, and Patel are absolutely horrific choices (for different reasons).
Since Tulsi Gabbard refused to answer this question at the senate hearing, I’ll ask you: Is Edward Snowden a traitor? — Ben G.
Yes.
National Review’s Jeffrey Blehar wrote a good summary of why:
In May 2013, a young National Security Agency contractor named Edward Snowden quit his job and left with portable drives full of hundreds of thousands of documents revealing details of the United States government’s foreign and domestic surveillance programs, with the intent of publicizing them.
In advance of their partial publication by The Guardian and the Washington Post, he fled to Hong Kong — a city controlled then as now by the People’s Republic of China. There, he sought to ingratiate himself with the Chinese Communists by revealing IP addresses for computers in China and Hong Kong that were being monitored by the NSA. Keeping Snowden was impossible; though already our fiercest global competitor in 2013, China was unwilling to declare itself so openly hostile. Snowden was thus allowed by the Chinese to depart for Moscow, where he remains to this day.
As you said, Ben, Gabbard refused to even answer the question, which alone should disqualify her from being confirmed. But like I said earlier, I fully expect that she will be.
Thanks everyone! You can send me questions for next week by leaving a comment in the comment section.
John: There's understandably a lot of focus in history on presidents - good, bad and in between. Do you have a favorite non-presidential politician? Someone you admire as having special skills or force of personality for the good?
Kennedy, Katel and Gabbard all stupidly, repeatedly and recently spewed toxins into the public square and they know better. Now they try to minimize and evade accountability. For this, they should be barred from any public office or position unless and until they come clean with the nation and, as penance, publicly use whatever bully pulpit they have to denounce the nonsense they spewed.
It doesn't matter how much was done for the adrenalin rush and how much was for financial gain. They did it. They must account or be barred from public office or public position.
In RFK Jr.'s case, it's most unfortunate. He has a lot to offer in the nutrition field. Nonetheless he must account for what he did or be barred from public office. Even a Nobel prize winner who commits a series of abominable and public acts must be held accountable.
The same goes for Pete Heseth (sp.). While I'm at it, the same also goes for President Trump.
The bar has been lowered so much that the trio may well skate.