Via Hot Air:
The headlines I’ve seen this morning about this exchange claim that Bush said he wouldn’t rescind Obama’s executive action “right away,” which is sort of true. What Jeb said is that he’d rescind the amnesty as part of a deal with Congress on immigration. That won’t happen on day one of his presidency, so yeah, technically O’s order would remain intact for at least a few months while President Bush works out the details of the new bill with the House and Senate. But focusing on the timing misses the point of what Jeb’s implying: If Republicans in Congress refuse to go along with his plan for a new comprehensive bill, Bush 45 will presumably … keep Obama’s executive amnesty in place indefinitely. The price of getting it rescinded is to give the president what he wants, at least to some degree, on immigration. That’s the same type of Hobson’s-choice extortion that Obama’s been engaged in for most of his second term. Congress can either pass what the White House demands or the White House will simply pass it for them. Now here’s Jeb suggesting he’ll use O’s actions as leverage against the legislature too. Even worse, when Megyn Kelly raises the possibility that Obama’s amnesty will be struck down in federal court, Jeb says he thinks the legal challenge will succeed. Does that mean he thinks O’s order is illegal? If so, why on earth isn’t he promising to undo it on day one as president, no questions asked, as Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have promised to do?