With the last of Symphony's saboteur suspects being expelled from the Trump administration, establishment Republicans have their undies in a bunch. Their objections indicate two main motives. Toward the surface, they still think Trump's decisions are based on calculation of "election strategery" rather than made by an administrator who wants certain things done a certain way. But, on a deeper level, they don't want their stable, "established" world being unraveled by anyone, outsider or not. But then, there is a third, less apparent layer, more sinister—a question of whether they knew about the saboteurs and wanted them to stay there. Publicized opposition to the president of their own party certainly proves the kind of character that would undermine their own party's president by any means.
Now that Russianewsgategate nonsense is being seen for the yesterday's yesterday's tabloid newspaper it always was, the media machine is gearing up to save face: Goldman Sachs thinks Trump might be re-electable. The Left doesn't get it. The most important two things to understand about Donald Trump is that from the time he announced his candidacy, 1. he was always going to be elected and 2. he was always going to be re-elected. Those two things aren't obvious to people who don't understand Donald Trump.
Democratically-controlled "sanctuary cities" have been working, as they purport, to be a safe haven for immigrants. The kinds of immigrants they seek to protect, as they purport, will be helpful to their communities and to the nation. Now, they have a splendid and long-hoped-for hope of seeing their hard efforts pay off. They will be the beneficiaries of thousands of exactly the kinds of, as they purport, good people they have been standing up to defend. Yet, they found a way to be angry.
If the Trump administration were to send immigrants to the very cities hoping to be sanctuaries for them, wouldn't that be a good thing? One would think so, unless sanctuary city laws were known to be designed to create problems. By objecting to getting what they wanted, Democrats imply that they know something that they purport everyone else doesn't. Is there something wrong about sanctuary city laws that their Democratic leaders aren't telling us?
The rest of America—the "fly-over" counties, the rural areas that the Democratic cosmopolitans turn their noses up at, the Conservatives who grow everyone's food and cling to their "guns and religion"—they were suspicious about sanctuary city laws. They thought it might be a bad idea. If the Conservatives were right, then sending the invited immigrants to the party that invited them could create a breakdown of law, paving the way for the Federal Government to declare martial law and deal with sanctuary city policy makers that way.
Just imagine: Trump-controlled Democratic cities—and it all would have been made possible by Democrats. But, that's assuming that the Conservatives were right. We'll see.