Politics
Opinion: Mayorkas isn't to blame for border mess. House Republicans should impeach themselves
If governing amid the chaos of migrants crossing the southern border is an impeachable offense (it’s not), then it’s members of Congress, mostly Republicans, who deserve condemnation — not a Cabinet secretary.
They, along with since-departed lawmakers of recent decades, are the ones responsible for our dysfunctional immigration system: Congress has consistently failed to provide immigration officials with enough funding and legal power to stem, vet and process in an orderly way the increasing number of people yearning for opportunity in the United States. The border problem is not new, it’s just worse than ever.
Opinion Columnist
Jackie Calmes
Jackie Calmes brings a critical eye to the national political scene. She has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.
As Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas told Senate Republican critics last year: “Our asylum system is broken, our entire immigration system is broken and in desperate need of reform. And it’s been so for years and years.”
But instead of taking some responsibility and addressing the problem, House Republicans are flaying a scapegoat — Mayorkas — for their own election-year advantage and that of their lord and master, likely Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. The full House is expected to vote next week on the two articles of impeachment against Mayorkas that the Homeland Security Committee approved along party lines late Tuesday.
If enough so-called moderate Republicans go along, the resolution would go to the Democratic-controlled Senate, which will no doubt acquit Mayorkas because the charges of dereliction of duty are bogus. Even so, House Republicans would have an election-year dog-and-pony show about an issue that’s become a top concern for voters, in particular their party’s MAGA base.
The politics nonetheless are stupid — why focus on Mayorkas rather than his boss? Here’s why: because they don’t have the goods or the votes to impeach President Biden. South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman said the quiet part out loud when he explained in November that his fellow Republicans “need to focus on what they can get — Mayorkas is easier than impeaching the president of the United States.”
Republicans’ overt politicking in impeaching a Cabinet secretary for only the second time in U.S. history is bad enough. “Get the popcorn,” Homeland Security Committee Chair Mark Green, a Tennessee Republican, told party donors last April, adding, “It’s going to be fun.”
What’s doubly damning is they’re impeaching Mayorkas even as they’re allied with Trump to kill a bipartisan bill that the Cabinet secretary negotiated with senators of both parties, and that would be the toughest immigration law in memory, with added billions for just what the Republicans say they want: more border security.
Not since President Reagan signed a landmark 1986 immigration act has Congress been able to agree on policies to better control the migration waves, despite presidents of both parties trying their darndest to get new laws signed and more funds approved. Republicans doomed compromises under Presidents George W. Bush and Obama.
Bush’s second-term Homeland Security secretary, Michael Chertoff, nodded to Congress’ sorry record when he came to Mayorkas’ defense this week in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. Despite insufficient resources, the Department of Homeland Security under Mayorkas “removed, returned or expelled” more migrants in late 2023 than in any similar period of the past decade, he wrote.
“The truth is that our national immigration system is outdated, and DHS leaders under both parties have done their best to manage our immigration system without adequate congressional support …,” Chertoff added. “House Republicans are ducking difficult policy work and hard-fought compromise.”
Chertoff is also a former federal judge, which gives weight to his charge that Republicans “have failed to put forth evidence that meets the bar” for impeaching Mayorkas under the Constitution’s “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” clause. In that, he echoed other conservative lawyers who know the difference between legal evidence and political claptrap, including Jonathan Turley, Republicans’ and Fox News’ go-to constitutional authority. “Being bad at your job is not an impeachable offense,” Turley said of Mayorkas.
Indeed, Republicans’ resolution alleging the secretary’s “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and breach of the public trust is nothing more than mumbo-jumbo for what’s really a run-of-the-mill policy disagreement.
“Mayorkas is carrying out President Biden’s policies. That’s what a secretary is going to do,” said Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, the lead Republican in the closed-door negotiations for a border bill. “Until we change the law … we’re going to have the same results.”
Given their bare majority in the House, Republicans can only lose two votes on the impeachment resolution if the tally falls along party lines, and several Republicans are on the fence. Rep. Tom McClintock, who’s among several California Republicans running in swing districts, wrote his constituents late last year that the authors of the Constitution explicitly rejected “maladministration, malfeasance, and neglect of duties” as impeachable offenses.
Mayorkas isn’t even guilty of maladministration. An immigrant himself — he came to the U.S. as an infant when his parents fled Castro’s Cuba — he has lived the American dream, rising to become the widely respected (except by partisans) chief of the department in charge of immigration.
As Rep. Seth Magaziner, a Rhode Island Democrat, noted during the House committee’s impeachment debate, Congress has so inadequately funded border security that Mayorkas, like his predecessors, has had to use discretion as to how many migrants to detain, and which ones. “In the last two years of the Trump administration,” Magaziner said, “52% of migrants apprehended at the southern border were released, not detained. … I did not hear my Republican colleagues trying to impeach the secretary” then.
No, they didn’t. And they shouldn’t now. Instead, they should act like legislators and legislate: Solve problems, not campaign on them as they worsen.
Politics
Opinion: If Martin Luther King Jr. were alive, how would he have approached the Trump era?
Unlike the many people who are upset that Donald Trump is being inaugurated on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, I see it as a good thing. First, it calls even more attention to the day and its significance. Second, it is a chance to speculate about what King might say and do if he were alive in the Trump era.
Counterfactual, “what if” history is a trend in the literary world. Trump’s inauguration on the holiday may prompt us to think about what America and the world might have looked like with King alive and well. Conversely, how did America and the world devolve without him?
King was the kind of leader who comes along once in a lifetime, one with unmatched eloquence and passion. His gift for oratory could energize all kinds of people, including workers, presidents and other heads of state. He possessed visionary insight on the complex racial, social and economic ills as well as their solutions and consequences.
He worked tirelessly to build a grassroots civil rights and social justice movement and serve as its guiding force. And his charismatic presence influenced people to act on the issues and problems he was working to solve.
How might that play out in the Trump era? To begin with, King abhorred all violence. He most likely would have been deeply pained by the mass gun killings that have become somewhat commonplace in American cities. He would almost certainly have butted heads with the National Rifle Assn. and its ardent backer Trump while lobbying Congress to pass comprehensive gun control legislation.
When it comes to international politics, King surely would have condemned Russia’s war in Ukraine. One can also envision him speaking out against Hamas’ kidnapping and slaughter of Israelis as well as Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians. He would have called these wars ineffectual, repressive and wasteful, a drain on resources that should go to programs that aid the poor and minorities. On this point, he and Trump, who repeatedly claims he has kept America out of wasteful wars, would likely be in some agreement.
It’s impossible to imagine King not fighting tooth and nail against the rash of voter suppression laws and the GOP’s ploys to dilute Black and minority voting strength, including the assault on the Voting Rights Act. He’d bump heads with Trump on that. But Trump would also have a comeback: He’d cite the sharp increase in Black and Hispanic votes for him in the recent presidential election.
King would almost certainly try to prevent the country’s Republican-led rightward sprint, drawing negative attention from Trump and his MAGA coalition. But even he would not have been able to stop the many powerful forces with vested interest in halting or reversing the country’s momentum toward expanded civil rights, labor protections and economic fairness.
The resurgence of overtly racist sentiments, acts and conflicts under Trump would obviously trouble King, who famously hoped for a day when Americans are judged “not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
King would have had to find new ways to challenge the continuing ills of poverty and wealth inequality, which ballooned in the decades after his death. Even given his superb organizing and planning skills, this growth likely would have been a losing battle.
Had he lived, King’s unshakable commitment to the cause of human rights and economic equality surely would not have diminished. Wherever there was a campaign, march, rally, lobbying effort or event that his presence could boost, it’s a safe bet that he’d have much to say and do. In the Trump era, there would be plenty to keep him busy.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson’s latest book is “Day 1 The Trump Reign.” His commentaries can be found at thehutchinsonreport.net.
Politics
Who Is Coming to the Inauguration — and Who Isn’t
Three of the richest men in the world, foreign dignitaries, tech and business executives, former presidents and an assortment of performers and other celebrities are on the guest list for President-elect Donald J. Trump’s inauguration on Monday, even as much of the midday ceremony has been moved indoors amid forecasts of extreme cold.
It is unclear what impact, if any, the relocation of Mr. Trump’s second swearing-in ceremony into the Capitol Rotunda will have on the seating arrangements. Unlike the outdoor venue, the Capitol Rotunda only seats about 600 people.
Four years ago, Mr. Trump skipped President Biden’s inauguration in a snub to his political rival. Every living former president is set to witness his return to power, but some prominent Democrats are opting out.
Here’s the list of those who are planning to attend the inauguration, and notable no-shows.
Going
Billionaires, businessmen and tech executives
Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos, three of the world’s wealthiest men, were reported to be among the major tech executives who would sit in a position of honor on the dais at Mr. Trump’s inauguration — before the event was moved indoors. Tim Cook, the chief executive of Apple, and Shou Chew, the chief executive of the imperiled social media app TikTok, had also been invited to sit on the dais.
Seating for other high-dollar donors from the business world was already highly competitive even before the last-minute move indoors. Some offered donations to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee as high as $1 million without receiving any access to the inauguration or accompanying receptions in return.
World leaders
China’s vice president, Han Zheng, will attend the inauguration on behalf of Xi Jinping, whom Mr. Trump had invited to the inauguration.
Unlike at the inaugurations of President Biden and former President Barack Obama, a number of other world leaders will be in attendance. Many of them share Mr. Trump’s ideology and policy preferences.
From Latin America, Javier Milei, the right-wing populist president of Argentina, is reportedly planning to make an appearance. Jair Bolsonaro, the former president of Brazil and another right-wing populist, had intended to attend, but his passport was previously seized by federal police in Brazil and his request to a Brazilian Supreme Court justice to make the trip was denied.
From Europe, Giorgia Meloni, the right-wing prime minister of Italy, affirmed that she planned to attend. The press secretary of Viktor Orban, the prime minister of Hungary who has a friendly rapport with Mr. Trump, told a Hungarian media outlet that the prime minister had received an invitation but would not be attending.
Three representatives from key U.S. allies in the Asia-Pacific region will also be attending: S. Jaishankar, the external affairs minister for India; Penny Wong, the foreign minister of Australia; and Takeshi Iwaya, the foreign minister of Japan.
Trump’s presidential predecessors
Mr. Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton will all attend Mr. Trump’s inauguration — as they did his first inauguration, eight years ago. They will not, however, attend a traditional lunch with the president-elect on that day, according to NBC News.
Former Vice President Mike Pence is also planning to attend the inauguration, according to two people with knowledge of the planning. He received an invitation, as is the custom for all former presidents and vice presidents.
Celebrity invitees
Carrie Underwood will sing “America the Beautiful” at Mr. Trump’s inauguration, according to a program of events. Victor Willis, the last surviving founding member of the Village People — whose music Mr. Trump frequently plays at this political rallies — announced on Facebook on Monday that the group had accepted an invitation to participate in Mr. Trump’s inaugural activities.
NBC News also reported that several athletes and musicians would be in attendance: They include Antonio Brown, the football player; Mike Tyson, the boxer; Jorge Masvidal, the martial arts fighter; and Evander Kane, the hockey player. The musicians Anuel AA, Justin Quiles, Rod Wave, Kodak Black and Fivio Foreign will also attend, NBC said.
Not Going
Michelle Obama
Mr. Obama is scheduled to attend, but Michelle Obama, the former first lady, will not. A statement from Mrs. Obama’s office did not specify a reason for the scheduled absence but noted that she had not attended another event this month: She did not accompany her husband to the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter, which every other living former president and first lady attended.
Nancy Pelosi
Representative Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House and a chief antagonist of Mr. Trump during his first term in office, will also skip the inauguration. Ms. Pelosi, 84, is still recovering from a hip replacement after falling while on an official trip to Luxembourg, but she has been attending votes in the House. A spokesman would not specify why she would not attend, but there is long-running acrimony between Mr. Trump and Ms. Pelosi.
A number of House Democrats are also skipping the inauguration
Democratic members of Congress who have announced or told reporters of their plans to skip the inauguration include: Representative Adam Smith of Washington, Representative Judy Chu of California, Representative Delia Ramirez of Illinois, Representative Donald S. Beyer Jr. of Virginia, Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee, Representative Jasmine Crockett of Texas, Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Representative Veronica Escobar of Texas.
Politics
Trump wants to visit China again after he takes office: report
President-elect Trump is discussing the possibility of visiting China again as president with aides, according to a report.
The incoming president, who takes office on Monday, visited Beijing during his first term in 2017, and spoke to Chinese President Xi Jinping over the phone on Friday.
Trump has been threatening China with tariffs but has told advisers that he wants to strengthen ties with the communist country with the visit, possibly even traveling there within his first 100 days in office, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing sources familiar with the matter.
“I just spoke to Chairman Xi Jinping of China. The call was a very good one for both China and the U.S.A.,” Trump wrote on Friday on Truth Social. “It is my expectation that we will solve many problems together, and starting immediately. We discussed balancing Trade, Fentanyl, TikTok, and many other subjects. President Xi and I will do everything possible to make the World more peaceful and safe!”
HOUSE DEMS THREATEN TO BLOCK TRUMP’S BIG TARIFF PLANS: ‘UNACCEPTABLE’
He didn’t say if they had spoken about a visit.
Fox News Digital has reached out to the Trump transition team for comment.
It is also possible Xi could come to the White House for a visit, the Journal reported.
TRUMP LEAVES CHINA GUESSING WHAT HIS NEXT MOVE IS WITH UNUSUAL INAUGURATION INVITATION
Xi also met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Florida in 2017.
Xi was invited to Trump’s Monday inauguration – no senior Chinese official has ever attended a U.S. presidential inauguration – but Chinese Vice President Han Zheng will be attending instead, in a first.
Trump and Xi plan to establish a strategic communication channel, China said of their Friday phone call, adding that Trump said he was “looking forward to meeting with President Xi as soon as possible.”
Trump has also mentioned the possibility of going to India to aides, the Journal reported.
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta is highlighting a splintering global approach to online speech
-
Science1 week ago
Metro will offer free rides in L.A. through Sunday due to fires
-
Technology1 week ago
Amazon Prime will shut down its clothing try-on program
-
News1 week ago
Mapping the Damage From the Palisades Fire
-
Technology7 days ago
L’Oréal’s new skincare gadget told me I should try retinol
-
Technology4 days ago
Super Bowl LIX will stream for free on Tubi
-
Business5 days ago
Why TikTok Users Are Downloading ‘Red Note,’ the Chinese App
-
Technology2 days ago
Nintendo omits original Donkey Kong Country Returns team from the remaster’s credits