Commie loving, pinko… President?! In the 1950s and 60s, they would have run you out of town on a rail. Selling out US intelligence in favor of Russian denial was lunatic and treasonous from a President, regardless of how you walked it back after pressure from your base. Your rise to power was unfortunately fueled by Russian involvement with or without the complicity of you and your campaign, and the fears of white America that its place in the sun would be replaced by a more diverse America. To that end, your base of conservatives and whites including evangelical church leaders has tolerated your sexual misbehavior towards many women, your adultery, and your endless lying. Your agenda has been not to make America great again, but white again.

To appease your base of non-college graduate whites who were stuck in the economy, you have taken a great many steps to ensure that the country marches relentlessly towards fuller than the optimal rate of employment, thus forcing employers to find and pay higher wages for workers. But it is obvious to even a non-economist that high inflation will be the price to pay for your ruinous actions of trade tariffs, and chasing the undocumented from the country. With trade tariffs, the price of goods coming into the country for US consumers will be higher. With the inflated wages to be paid US workers, US employers are raising prices on their goods, so the US consumer can expect no relief in buying domestic goods. The continual cycle of employers looking for workers, workers demanding higher wages, and employers having to raise prices to compensate is one guaranteed to lead to spiraling inflation and loss of earning power. There are not enough U. S. workers to go around, and the relief valve of immigrants is being hounded out of the country by you and your cohorts by any means, legal or illegal. To you, the only good nonwhite illegal is a deported one, and it is highly doubtful that you recognize that the Constitution applies to them also. The future augers worse for workplace replenishment as U. S. women are not reproducing at sufficient rates to replace the present population.

The problem, Mr. President, is that you are unconcerned about the long-term effects of your policies – you only look to the short-term like a burglar in a house before the police come as you have doubts that you legitimately belong in the White House and are trying to do is much to promote your agenda before the voters come for you in the midterms and 2020. Part of your strategy is keeping up stock market prices as long as you can so that voters approve of your performance. You believe in the Roman concept of panem et circenses – bread and circuses to keep the crowds happy. In your case, the bread appears to be stock prices and employment and the circus is your daily media circus. The Federal Reserve is the independent institution tasked with monitoring the economy and taking the proper steps to ensure that it does not seize up or move too fast. It recognizes that where there are strong signals of inflation (2.9% climb in June numbers), it should tap the brakes by raising interest rates and making money harder to borrow for companies thinking to expand or to start new projects. Yet such a move almost always rattles the stock markets, causing the Dow to tumble. With the midterms so close, you insinuated yourself last week in the Fed deliberations to express your displeasure on its decision to raise rates, an unwarranted and dangerous move made not for the welfare of the country but for yourself. Your displeasure was especially threatening as you have already nominated 5 members to the Fed board.

Mr. President, although it is now late in the game, could you do and act like you promised on the night of your election that you would be a President for all Americans?

About The Author

Alan Lee, Esq. The author is an exclusive practitioner of immigration law based in New York City with an AV preeminent rating in the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory for 20+ years, registered in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers, on the New York Super Lawyers list (2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-2017), and recognized as a New York Area Top Rated Lawyer. He has written extensively on immigration over the past years for Interpreter Releases, Immigration Daily, and the ethnic newspapers, World Journal, Sing Tao, Epoch Times, Pakistan Calling, Muhasba and OCS; testified as an expert on immigration in civil court proceedings; and is a regular contributor to Martindale-Hubbell’s Ask-a-Lawyer program. His article, "The Bush Temporary Worker Proposal and Comparative Pending Legislation: an Analysis" was Interpreter Releases' cover display article at the American Immigration Lawyers Association annual conference in 2004; his 2004 case in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Firstland International v. INS, successfully challenged Legacy INS' policy of over 40 years of revoking approved immigrant visa petitions under a nebulous standard of proof, although its central holding that the government had to notify approved immigrant petition holders of the revocation prior to the their departure to the U. S. for the petition to be able to be revoked was short-lived as it was specifically targeted in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (which in response changed the language of the revocation statute itself). Yet Firstland lives on as precedent that the government must comply with nondiscretionary duties established in law, and such failure is reviewable in federal courts. His 2015 case, Matter of Leacheng International, Inc., with the Administrative Appeals Office of USCIS (AAO) set nation-wide standards on the definition of “doing business” for multinational executives and managers to gain immigration benefits.