This is for information purposes only. So, when you see headlines like the recent “Kellyanne Conway cited for two violations of the Hatch Act,” you will have a working knowledge of what it means. First off, what is the Hatch Act? This has nothing to do with Orrin Hatch, senator from Utah. Simply put, it states one cannot advocate for or against candidates while serving in an official capacity in the government. The president and vice president are exempt from the Hatch Act, but their employees are not.

According to reports, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel said it found that Kellyanne Conway violated the Hatch Act in an appearance on “Fox & Friends” on Nov. 20, when she talked about why voters should not support Doug Jones in the Alabama senate race. The other violation was for her appearance on CNN talking about this same topic.

What is the Office of Special Counsel? It is not Mueller’s special counsel. This is a separate Office of Special Counsel that reports to the president. The Office of Special Counsel referred its report to Trump for disciplinary action. So, in this case, it will be up to the president to take any action. The president is not required to take any.

Sign Up for E-News

Immigration Protection Act

According to Westchester County Legislator Catherine Borgia, a very liberal Democrat, the Immigration Protection Act passed out of committee on Wednesday, March 9, with the full support of the County Commissioners of Public Safety, Corrections, and Probation. This was vetoed by Astorino last year when he was county executive and could not be overridden by last year’s board. This year, things are different. The county executive is a Democrat and the board is overwhelmingly Democrat. The Immigration Protection Act is a policy on how the county will work with federal immigration authorities. As I said last year, voters made their choice and now they will be punished.

Opponents said this would make Westchester a sanctuary county, thereby possibly costing the county federal grant monies for law enforcement. Proponents say this is not true. They say it is 100 percent in compliance with federal immigration law. Borgia said in a Facebook post: “We were careful to add the language that mirrors Federal Law. Our county atty (attorney) has to sign a document to confirm we are in Complience (stet) for our federal public safety grants (which total about $2 million depending on how you calculate. They change each year so there is some estimating involved).”

Now, as we have just seen, read or heard recently, the Democratic Party is pro-illegal immigration. They shut down the government for three days over it. So, in spite of what she says, history tells me that if this was as innocent as she says, why do it? History tells me we are being misled.


In a related issue, March 5 came and went with no action on DACA. Right now, Democrats are using the courts to thwart Trump. They, by judge shopping, found a couple of federal judges to rule that an unconstitutional act (as stated by the 5th Circuit) by President Obama by fiat cannot be undone by Trump the same way. What really happened is Trump called their bluff.

He offered a pathway to citizenship (read: amnesty) to not just the reported 850,000 DACA “children” (they are in their 20s and 30s by now), but double that number to include relatives. However, as part of the deal, they would have to give him what he wanted on border security and revised immigration law. The Democrats walked away and never came back to the table. They wanted a clean bill. They lost. They do not get to dictate the terms.

This passing of the March 5 deadline only proves that the Democrats never wanted this problem solved. They want the issue, no matter who it hurts. The Democrats have proven again they are not the party of the little guy. They are the party of the acquisition and retention of power and will use the little guy to get it. The liar is not Trump, but them.

This is what I say. What say you?