Kate Steinle's killer, a murderer who should've never been in the country in the first place, is now suing (how is that even possible?) for the same court case in which he clicked his heels to be found "not guilty." That wasn't enough for our gun-slinging toe rag. See, he thinks he's the victim of "vindictive prosecution." Let's roll tape:

The man who shot Kate Steinle is suing the taxpayer saying he was the VICTIM of vindictive political prosecution. In the trial he was found not guilty of murder. Even after shooting Kate Steinle.

There are two children's books I often cite round these parts. The first, The Emperor's New Clothes for its chilling account of how people abandon all reality because it's popular, politically expedient, and if you dare question the authorities determining the status quo, something awful will happen to you. See also the Transgender Debate.

The second is If You Give a Mouse a Cookie. Grant an intruder one wish, he'll ask for a second. So we have Kate Steinle's murderer. A man who should've never been here to start. Who should've never had access to guns. Who, never the less, got a gun in the gun control wet dream of California. Who then shot and killed a legal American citizen. Was then found NOT GUILTY of her murder. That's one heck of a good luck string. Now he's hoping to cash in by taking even more American tax dollars. Over "vindictive prosecution." It would be a crying shame if this man was chopped into chum, used to feed hungry sea life. A crying shame.

How he's even able to sue, when he's not a legal citizen, is beyond my legal know-how. Then again, California is known for recycling its law books into homeless people's butt-wipes. Read California Appoints First Illegal Immigrant to Government Job.

Build the wall. Build it high. And may we grant ICE with swiftness, justice, and bravado.

NOT SUBSCRIBED TO THE PODCAST? FIX THAT! IT’S COMPLETELY FREE ON BOTH ITUNES HERE AND SOUNDCLOUD HERE.