Archive for the ‘Immigration’ Category

It’s more than a little strange to read that Joe Biden won the debate, then find out that, for the second debate in a row, Biden didn’t make himself available to the press in Spin Alley. That isn’t what winners do. Confident people want another round of publicity to get their message out to another potential group of voters.

The question that can’t be ignored is the one I’ll ask here. Mr. Vice President, if you’re the winner of tonight’s debate, why aren’t you acting like the winner of tonight’s debate? Why are you employing the strategy that Hillary used in 2016? If you didn’t notice, she lost. Mr. Vice President, did you skip Spin Alley because you won only because the others on stage were more mediocre than you were?

Certainly, Kamala Harris had a difficult night after Tulsi Gabbard dismantled her:

Sen. Harris’ statement might’ve been fine as part of a stump speech. It’s foolish to think that a candidate who just attacked you will let you get away with an evasive answer like that.

Whoever wins the Democrats’ nomination won’t face John McCain or Mitt Romney on the debate stage. They’ll face a guy who smells blood in the water like a great white who hasn’t eaten in awhile. Any sense of weakness will be seized upon immediately.

Tuesday night’s debate stage didn’t have anyone on it that has a realistic shot at the nomination. Crazy Bernie and Pocahontas have no chance at the Democrats’ nomination. Tonight’s candidates had a bunch of wannabes that don’t have a chance. Watch the idiotic reply Julian Castro gave on immigration:

If Castro thinks that he’s auditioning to be someone’s running mate, he’s foolish. Anyone pushing an open borders policy is kidding himself.

At the end of the day, though, Joe Biden’s hiding strategy is foolish. He might or might not win the Democrat nomination. If he wins the Democrats’ nomination, he’ll get eaten alive by the human shark known as President Trump.

Jerry Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, insists that Bob Mueller would’ve indicted President Trump if not for the now infamous Office of Legal Counsel memo that says you can’t indict a sitting president. At the start of the House Intel Committee hearing, Mueller walked that statement back. Not that Mr. Nadler admitted that in his interview with Jake Tapper.

Let’s be clear about this: Nadler is caught in ‘God’s little acre’ — east of the rock, west of the hard place. It isn’t like he can admit the truth. The Democrats’ case for obstruction of justice died when John Ratcliffe asked Mueller a series of questions. Questions like ‘were you allowed to finish your investigation? Or was you investigation ever impeded? Or ‘were funding requests ever denied? Mueller dutifully replied no to each of those questions.

It isn’t possible to charge President Trump with obstruction of justice when he had a lengthy history of saying yes to each of your requests.

Then again, Russiagate is everything that Democrats have. Jackie Speier essentially admits that in this op-ed:

Indeed, I am still reeling from the humanitarian disaster I witnessed at the McAllen Border Patrol Station, the “Ursula” Centralized Processing Center and the Gateway International Bridge: Desperate people fleeing extreme poverty and life-threatening violence being detained in shameful conditions. Their journey is perilous, they face danger every step of the way, and the threats are no less potent once they arrive at our border. This is more than a crisis. It’s a nightmare with no end.

Things were so bad that she waited 2 weeks to write about the atrocities at this processing center. When a house is on fire, is it common to invite neighbors over for a BBQ and play some yard games before calling 911? Speier’s op-ed might have a little credibility if she’d written it the day after the trip.

Sen. Rick Scott criticized the Democrats for playing partisan games:

SEN. RICK SCOTT: Well, look, I, I, look, I didn’t do the tweets, Chuck. I can’t talk about why he did what he did. But I’m very disappointed in the people, like Congressman Cummings, who is attacking Border Patrol agents that are trying to do their job, when the Democrats won’t give them the resources to do it. They won’t secure the border. They won’t fix the asylum laws. And then Democrats want to sit there and say, “Oh, those Border Patrol agents don’t care.” Let me tell you, I’ve been to the border. I’ve talked to Border Patrol agents. I know they care about these individuals. But we have got to give them the resources and the ability to do their job.

Sen. Scott’s statements fly in the face of Rep. Speier’s op-ed. Democrats won’t fix the crisis with legislation. Democrats only criticize Republicans. That isn’t an agenda. That’s what losers do.

The Democrats don’t have a list of accomplishments. They have a lengthy list of complaints. That’s why they’ll lose their House majority in November, 2020.

To say that Doug Collins was upset with Democrats is understatement. Thursday, Rep. Collins exploded with righteous indignation at do-nothing Democrats, saying “lately, this has become a committee of press releases.” Collins thanked the witnesses for coming to the hearing, then saying “dehumanizing is taking people you say you care about but then doing nothing for them.”

Rep. Collins started reading his opening statement, then stopped rather dramatically. If you want to see what righteous indignation looks like, watch this video:

That’s what righteous indignation looks like. That’s what a man looks like who’s frustrated by do-nothing Democrats for doing nothing. This clip will be shown in campaign ad after campaign ad next fall. If Pelosi, Nadler, et al, don’t get a ton of bills passed and signed by this time next year, expect Republicans to bury freshman Democrats with ads cut from Rep. Collins’ justified diatribe.

Collins went on:

I think about these kids being used. I think about the Flores Agreement and the trafficking issue or the asylum issue.

Collins finished, saying “I couldn’t read the rest of this. This is dehumanizing. This is showing a non-competent, non-capable majority.” Let’s add some context to Rep. Collins’ speech:

Collins, the top Republican on the panel, spoke at a forum titled, “Oversight of Family Separation and U.S. Customs and Border Protection,” where Democrats sought to bring attention to what they say is the continued practice of separating children from adult migrants at the border.

The Do-nothing Democrats are experts at whining about what they think is wrong. They’re utterly worthless at fixing things. What have Do-Nothing Democrats gotten done since regaining the majority? Here’s what:

NOTHING!

That’s what they’ve fixed. Nothing. Then there’s this:

“My Democratic colleagues have ideas, I may disagree with those ideas but put a bill up,” Collins yelled. “I have a bill, put mine up, make amendments to it, do whatever you want to do — that’s what Congress is supposed to do. Dehumanizing is this.”

A vote for a Democrat is a vote for a blowhard politician who isn’t interested in fixing problems. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for a politician who isn’t interested in keeping their campaign promises. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for doing nothing. It’s that simple.

If anyone ever thought that Nancy Pelosi’s first goal was to make the United States the best nation it could possibly be, that notion died last night. That’s because Pelosi “told a ‘Tucker’ producer” that “I wonder what Putin has politically, financially, or personally.”

Accusing the President of the United States of treason without a scintilla of proof is partisanship at its worst. Next fall, voters need to know that a vote for House Democrats is a vote for this despicable person. In 2018, Democrats ran away from Pelosi to look moderate. Then half of these Democrats voted for Pelosi to be Speaker. More importantly, most of these Democrats have hung tight with Pelosi on every major vote that’s been taken.

Moderate? Give me a break. But I digress.

Let’s get into the heart of this accusation. What proof does Speaker Pelosi have that suggests that President Trump is compromised? This is pretty high-stakes stuff. When the person who is third in line to the Oval Office accuses the current occupant of the White House of having committed treason, that person better have gold-plated proof that supports her accusation.

Democrats don’t have that type of proof. If they did, they would’ve started impeachment hearings the minute they got their gavels. The next question that needs to be asked is this: If Democrats don’t have proof to support such a flippant, irresponsible accusation, what’s the basis for that accusation? I think Tucker nailed it in this paragraph:

Carlson said that she is once again intimating that the president is a traitor committing treason, but she doesn’t mean it. He said her comments are annoying and ominous. “Everything is political. … It’s just about power,” he said.

This reminds me of Harry Reid’s comments on the Senate floor where he accused Mitt Romney of not paying taxes for 10 years. When asked about making those accusations, Reid replied “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Harry Reid didn’t care about doing what’s right for America. What’s frightening is that Pelosi is more cold-blooded than Reid. With her, it’s all about gaining, then maintaining, political power to check items off the Democrats’ ideological checklist. This is what evil looks and sounds like:

“It’s about what matters. It’s not politics, not partisanship. It’s patriotism.”

Pelosi doesn’t give a damn about patriotism. She wants to maintain the Democrats’ majority in the House no matter what. She isn’t leading Democrats by focusing them to do the right thing in terms of the economy, the border or impeachment. Democrats are chasing impeachment. Do they have any proof of high crimes and misdemeanors? Of course they don’t.

Here’s the key question for voters: Do you want a House majority that puts its priorities first? Or would you prefer a majority that puts your priorities first? A vote for a Democrat is a vote for putting the Democrats’ priorities first. That translates into a chaotic situation at the border. That translates into a stagnating economy. That’s a vote to ignore small-town America. That’s a vote against energy dominance, too.

Worst of all, it’s a vote to hand the Speaker’s Gavel to Evil Nancy Pelosi. No thanks.

What a shock! Supposedly pro-border security Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee boycotted a hearing that would fix most of the problems with the US-Mexico border. Once again, this proves how unserious Democrats are on the subject of border security. What these Democrats are quite skilled at is complaining about Republicans’ bills.

The article notices that “Ms. Feinstein said Mr. Graham’s bill went too far to eliminate the Flores Settlement, which she said included important protections for migrants when they are in custody. She also complained that he hadn’t worked hard enough to make his bill bipartisan. ‘We believe that the solution on the immigration issue can and should be done on a bipartisan basis,’ the California Democrat said.”

This is a political stunt. Anyone that complains about the minor details in a bill without offering an amendment to fix that detail isn’t interested in bipartisanship. They’re interested in signaling to the media to cover, then criticize, the Democrats’ PR stunt.

Sen. Josh Hawley, (R-MO), nailed it with this analysis:

I triple-dog dare a Democrat to tell me what serious bills Democrats have submitted in either the House or Senate. I’m not worried about the results because Democrats aren’t serious about border security. Yesterday’s stunt was proof that Democrats care more about the optics of the issue than they care about fixing the problem.

In 2020, Americans will need to decide whether they’d rather have a president and a unified congress that wants to fix problems or whether they’d rather have a congress that’s mostly interested in obstructing. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for obstruction. In the House, Democrats haven’t written a single serious bill that would fix our asylum laws or would fix the Flores Decision.

For several years, Politifact has been seen by conservatives as a joke. Their ‘fact-checks’ have been more opinion than objective fact. This weekend, a controversy erupted over whether AOC had gotten her picture taken in front of an empty parking lot. This article sets the record straight.

The fact-check, titled “No, this isn’t a photo of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez crying over a parking lot,” was written by Ciara O’Rourke and Duke University student Stefanie Pousoulides. It was reviewed by several editors, Fox News is told.

Their approach didn’t pass muster among commentators Tuesday, who said the site had missed the point intentionally, for the sake of issuing a “false” rating that would help bury stories unfavorable to Ocasio-Cortez about the episode.

Politifact deserves a misleading rating. Here’s why:

Wrote humorist Frank Fleming: “‘Ha! AOC was crying over a parking lot!'” POLITIFACT: ‘False, haters, we checked a satellite image and it was an empty road.’ I might be paraphrasing @jamestaranto, but fact checks are like editorials but dumber.”

“IMPORTANT CORRECTION: @AOC Was Weeping Over an Empty Road, Not an Empty Parking Lot,” joked PJ Media’s Jim Treacher.

Whether AOC was ‘crying’ over an empty road or empty parking lot is immaterial except in the most nit-pickiest of senses. Nothing there is nothing there except in the most insignificant of details.

The story started by saying that AOC was crying over little children being kept in a cage. As usual, the initial story was intentionally fake. It was legitimately called fake news. Someone named Ivan Pierre Aguirre started the story with this tweet:


Now that you’ve seen AOC’s fiction, take a look at what AOC actually saw:

The fact that Politifact stands by their false rating against Jim Treacher’s article earns them a new name. They shouldn’t be called Politifact. They should be called PolitiFiction. Either that or they should be called another weapon in the DNC’s ministry of propaganda, aka the MSM.

One last thing: here’s how AOC laid it on thick about being heartbroken for the children:


Now that’s empathy. Caring about children that aren’t even there.

Anytime that the matchup is Rep. Dan Crenshaw vs. AOC, it’s bound to be a mismatch. Crenshaw is a rising star in the GOP. Part of that status is earned by his willingness to subject Democrats to harsh truths about the Democrats’ policies. Rep. Crenshaw unloaded on AOC and other Democrats because he’s tired of Democrats offering nothing except complaints.

AOC has now proposed a commission to study the border crisis. What genius! The house is burning to the ground. The neighbors are worried that their home is the next to go and AOC thinks that a commission that will take 3 months minimum to staff will fix anything? It isn’t as stupid as some of her other proposals but it isn’t that bright, either. A commission is the right option if you’ve got the time. It’s the worst option in a crisis.

One of the things that Republicans should run on is the do-nothing Democrat House majority. If Pelosi rattles off some partisan bills that got passed in the House but went nowhere beyond that, the people should be reminded that it only matters if the President signs the bills into laws and they actually fix things. If they don’t meet that criteria, then Democrats will have failed.

“Notice that they never come up with a solution,” Crenshaw told “Fox & Friends” Monday morning. “They talk about the over-crowded facilities. They never have a solution. They don’t have a solution for our immigration system. They say it shouldn’t be defined by the administration — well, we do have laws right now…that says you can’t illegally cross the border. That’s immigration policy set by Congress. It’s a law in place. We need to enforce it.”

Democrats like passing laws, then not enforcing those laws. Don’t pay attention to the Democrats’ words. Pay attention to their actions. Pay attention to their shifting priorities, too. What is a priority one week isn’t a priority the next, often for no good reason. Rep. Crenshaw wasn’t finished unloading both barrels. Here’s more:

“I’m worried that the Democrats like this crisis too much,” Crenshaw added. “I’m worried as I’ve seen them fight against every single, even the smallest measures to help fix our immigration problem, they fight against. They don’t want walls. They don’t want a fix to the asylum loopholes. They’re talking about decriminalizing illegal border crossings.”

Where are the Democrats’ solutions? Do the Democrats think in those terms? Thus far, I’ve seen Democrats only proposing fixing symptoms. I haven’t seen them fix the underlying problem on anything.

Rep. Crenshaw vs. AOC is a mismatch. It isn’t pretty. Then again, AOC is a dipstick.

This Washington Free Beacon article contains the latest whopper from Rep. Ilhan Omar. In responding to a question about her sham marriage, her office said “Whether by colluding with right-wing outlets to go after Muslim elected officials or hounding family members, legitimate media outlets have a responsibility not to fan the flames of hate. Continuing to do so is not only demeaning to Ilhan, but to her entire family.”

The only responsibility that media outlets have is to find the truth. News organizations don’t have an obligation to politicians except to report fairly what that politician has done.

If news organizations report things accurately, then they’ve met their obligation. The last I looked, reporters report to their editors, not to the politicians. If politicians don’t like getting asked uncomfortable questions about touchy subjects, then they should stay out of politics.

Lately, Democrats have thought that they aren’t accountable to the people. Proof of that is the quickly-thrown-together rally at MSP Airport:

It takes a trained eye but the proof is in this picture. That ‘spontaneous’ rally was thrown together by TakeAction Minnesota, one of Minnesota’s furthest far left organizations. This paragraph is rather telling:

“We’ve asked her these questions, and also asked her to make her father available. We’ve tried to reach Elmi. We’ve tried to reach her sisters. Her family could put this (the question of Elmi’s relationship to Omar) to rest easily. No one will talk to us. I wish we could send a reporter to Mogadishu (Somalia) but we don’t have the bandwidth.”

A simple DNA test would determine whether her Omar ‘siblings’ were actually siblings. If they aren’t her siblings, then she’s potentially committed immigration fraud. It’s also likely at that point that she isn’t a legal citizen of the United States because her citizenship is tied to her father becoming a citizen before she turned 18. If she isn’t Mr. Omar’s daughter, then she isn’t a citizen.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out that she doesn’t meet the Constitution’s requirements if she isn’t a citizen. Here’s the text of the Constitution pertaining to eligibility:

No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.

This helps explains why Rep. Omar hasn’t cooperated. Potentially, she’s got a lot to lose.

To: Swing Voters
From: Gary Gross, uppity peasant, aka Trump supporter
Subject: Why voting for President Trump is imperative

This past week +, the Agenda Media, aka the MSM, aka the Media Wing of the Democratic Party, spilled tons of ink on the subject of President Trump’s criticism of 4 women known as the Squad, aka AOC + 3. Let’s stipulate immediately that some of the things that President Trump said shouldn’t have been said. Period. Before we move on to more important matters, however, let’s also stipulate that each of the members of the Squad said disgusting things this week.

AOC insisted that Border Patrol agents forced illegal aliens to drink water from toilets. There’s no proof of that. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib co-sponsored a resolution calling for a policy known as BDS. BDS stands for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. In this instance, Rep. Omar and Rep. Tlaib advocate for boycotting products made in Israel. They also advocate for placing crippling sanctions on Israel.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Further, Israel is the strongest ally of the United States. Is this policy, presented by Democrats, the direction we want to take the US at this point? I’d argue that it’s never the direction we should go in.

President Trump has said things he shouldn’t have said but that’s virtually irrelevant. Here’s why:

  1. President Trump’s economic policies have produced the most prolific economy in the last century.
  2. Minority unemployment is the lowest in history
  3. Women unemployment is the lowest it’s been since WWII.
  4. President Trump is the only person who is serious about protecting the US-Mexico Border.
  5. President Trump’s regulatory policies have started rebuilding communities that the previous administrations forgot.
  6. President Trump’s corporate tax cuts have rebuilt the manufacturing sector, creating 467,000 jobs during Trump’s first 2 years in office compared with creating a paltry 73,000 manufacturing jobs in President Obama’s final 2 years in office.
  7. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, fewer minority families will get split apart, thanks to the First Step Act, which was passed in 2018.

Knowing these things and knowing that Democrat presidential candidates want to incentivize chaos at the border by decriminalizing illegal aliens, isn’t the choice exceptionally clear that the only real choice is a vote to re-elect President Trump? Further, isn’t it painfully obvious that the Democrats’ policies of a) ending employer-provided health care, b) preferential treatment of illegal aliens and c) job-killing tax increases would cripple the US economy just at the time when the economy is working for everyone from blue collar workers to small businesses to corporations?

Put differently, why would we think about voting for a Democrat in 2020? A vote for a Democrat might restore a little civility, though I doubt it. (Just ask Andy Ngo if he thinks Democrats are pro-civility. Here’s the video of Antifa Democrats attacking Andy Ngo:

American voters face a stark choice. They can vote for a president who’s accomplished more in his first 2+ years than most presidents got done in 2 terms in office. The other option is voting for the people who voted for policies that created a stagnant economy, pathetic wage growth and that crippled small town America.

True patriots should reject that second option in a heartbeat. That option isn’t a legitimate option. That’s an act of foolishness.

Do I wish President Trump’s tweets were more civil? Definitely. If given the choice, though, I’ll pick the blunt guy who’s gotten an amazing amount of things done while dealing with a fake scandal over the smooth-talking do-nothing Democrats. That isn’t a choice. That’s just common sense.

Although it felt like fingernails running across a chalkboard, I still listened to Dick Durbin’s spin about the Democrats’ trip to the US-Mexico border. Durbin tweeted out a message that essentially said that Trump is a racist for enforcing US immigration laws. Specifically, Durbin said “Just got done with my trip to the southern border in McAllen, TX. Our immigration system is broken. You can’t walk into these facilities, see these children, and believe that this situation is acceptable. America is better than this.”

Like Sen. Schumer, Durbin didn’t mention a thing about tightening the asylum laws, closing immigration loopholes or fixing the Flores decision. Neither man mentioned building a physical structure to funnel drug cartels or human traffickers into chokepoints. Everything these men said focused exclusively on the conditions for the children.

What these Democrats didn’t talk about spoke louder than the things these Democrats did talk about. Here’s Durbin’s tweet:


What chutzpah from Sen. Durbin. President Trump first told Democrats that there was a crisis on the border before the midterm elections. Back then, Democrats called it a “manufactured crisis.” CNN joined in to sing from the Democrats’ spin hymnal. Ditto with MSNBC. Kirstjen Nielsen testified before Congress that Homeland Security was at a breaking point. The day after Christmas, 2018, she re-iterated that point in this article:

Declaring the U.S. immigration system had been “pushed to a breaking point by those who seek open borders,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on Wednesday ordered mandatory medical checks on all children under the age of 10 in U.S. custody and said she would send U.S. Coast Guard medical personnel to the border to help. Nielsen said she also planned to visit the border later this week to see “first-hand” how medical screenings were handled.

Apparently, Democrats didn’t give a damn one way or the other about “the children.” Apparently, Democrats didn’t start caring until it reached a political tipping point. The Democrats’ phony solution to everything that’s happening on the border is nothing more than treating symptoms. Caring for children in custody is the right thing to do but that’s treating a symptom. In this post, I noted Sen. Schumer’s ‘solution’ to the border crisis:

We must pass our bill to help end it—the Stop Cruelty to Migrant Children Act.

I don’t know who’s worse between Sen. Schumer or Sen. Durbin. Neither of them paid attention to the crisis until a month ago. These Democrats ridiculed President Trump, who correctly identified the crisis months ago. Then again, Sen. Durbin has a history of criticizing law enforcement and the military. Here’s an oldie but goodie:

A US senator has refused to apologize for comparing the actions of US soldiers at Guantanamo Bay to those of Nazis, while others have decried or defended the mandate and method used to hold prisoners there.

“If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime – Pol Pot or others – that had no concern for human beings.”

That’s what Sen. Durbin said about our military guarding terrorists in Gitmo. That’s what a Democrat dirtbag sounds like.

Don’t mistake the Democrats’ calls for helping the children as actual empathy. Always remember my old saying about Democrats. If you’ve forgotten, it goes like this: Democrats will always do the right thing … when it’s the last option left.

That’s the definition of a dirtbag politician.