Democrat Hypocrisy Laid Bare by DeSantis (Cartoons Bonus)

  • Former presidential candidate and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decried Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R-FL) move to fly illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard as “literally human trafficking.” (WASHINGTON EXAMINER)

Well then…Ted Cruz lay’s down the law (figuratively speaking):

  • “Right now, the biggest human trafficker on the face of the planet is Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. He has transported hundreds of thousands, millions of illegal aliens populating them now, putting many of them in Red states. He’s happy to put them in Red states where it’s not the rich peoples’ concerns, it’s the little peoples’ concerns. You know, all of the folks on Martha’s Vineyard happily voted for Joe Biden.”

TUCKER!

Fox News host Tucker Carlson reacts to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sending migrants to Martha’s Vineyard on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’

(FYI, more diversity [strength] coming: BREITBART)

The above TUCKER video was with thanks to AMERICAN GREATNESS (and hat-tip to ACE OF SPADES):

….The reaction of the loving, open, soft-palmed, Democrat-voting residents? “The horror, the horror”: Mr. Kurtz’s expostulation at the end of Conrad’s Heart of Darkness about sums it up.

Floundering Florida pol Charlie Crist said that DeSantis’ action “shocks the conscience of any fair-minded human being.” Hillary Clinton said that it was an example of “human trafficking,” while other talking heads decried it as pure “evil.” Documentary filmmaker and anti-American propagandist Ken Burns has just made a film about the Holocaust that explains how the murder of 6 million Jews by the Nazis was, at bottom, if you look at it the right (i.e., the Left) way, the fault of America. Interviewed just as the story about the migrants-come-to-Martha’s-Vineyard was breaking, Burns said that DeSantis, by sending illegal immigrant to Martha’s Vineyard, had taken a page from that “authoritarian playbook” and was “weaponizing human beings for a political purpose” just as you-know-who had done in World War II.

Surreal, isn’t it?

Meanwhile, Gavin Newsom, governor of the failing state of California, wrote to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland asking him to look into kidnapping charges for those involved in DeSantis’ gift to Martha’s Vineyard. (Newsom did not mention his own habit of shipping homeless people out of San Francisco with “one-way tickets.”) The Babylon Bee was on the case with a story explaining, “Migrants Decline Newsom’s Offer Of Asylum In CA Since They Just Came From A Collapsing Communist Hellhole With No Electricity.”

The outcry was partly amusing, partly malevolent, as Tucker Carlson showed with his customary aplomb. NBC News took to Twitter to quote a “founding member of a foundation which helps refugees” who said that DeSantis sending “asylum seekers” to Martha’s Vineyard is like “me taking my trash out and just driving to different areas where I live and just throwing my trash there.” Trash?

It wasn’t revealed whether this chap (or chapette, as the case may be) was also a student of Heart of Darkness. If so, perhaps he admires Kurtz’s exit line, scrawled at the end of his report for the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs: “exterminate all the brutes.” In any event, someone at NBC must have understood that analogizing migrants to “trash” did not send quite the right message, so the tweet was quickly deleted (but not before it was picked up and preserved for posterity by several public -spirited commentators).

Anyway, within 40 hours, the National Guard had been summoned. The blinking migrants were pushed onto buses and whisked off to a military establishment, out of sight, out of mind.

Except that they are not out of mind. In a single stroke, Ron DeSantis tore the mask of hypocrisy off the smug faces of the liberal elites who love crowing about the virtues of “diversity” and the evils of “whiteness” just so long as they don’t have to suffer any real-world consequences. “People who make and advocate certain policies,” Tucker Carlson said, “should at some point have to live with those policies.” That was the moral of Ron DeSantis’ bravura performance. God bless him for it.

After posting an excerpt of the above article, J.J. SEFTON has this [lol]:

Bingo. DeSantis is not backing down and in fact has threatened, and really from his track record you can say promised, to double down. The comparison to the Shoah just shows how absolutely exposed the left have been. And Martha’s Vineyard is DeSantis’ way of upping the ante. He, as well as Texas’ Governor Greg Abbott, suffering an intentionally erased border in their home states and the Junta in DC flying planeloads of illegals all over the country under cover of darkness — including Florida — and having no authority (Constitutional eagles please correct me if I am mistaken) to round them up and ship them back across the Rio Grande, sent them to places where “no one is illegal”: the so-called sanctuary cities and states.

In my former hometown, the Rotting Apple, party boy leftist Eric Adams was voted in to fix what DeBolshevik wrought, which as those with half a Biden brain knew was the equivalent of changing deck chairs on the Titanic. He’s fixed absolutely nothing. If you want to be charitable, you can say he’s somewhat powerless given the Leftist machine in City Hall and in Albany have the real power. But, he’s a fellow traveler for sure (big fan boy of Calypso Louis FarraKKKahn, and a racialist to the core) and wasn’t about to suddenly turn into an acolyte of Rudy Giuliani. Instead, he rails against the usual suspects while proposing anything and everything wrong to fix a problem that he himself has embraced.

New York City shelters are so overwhelmed by the migrant crisis that Mayor Eric Adams is considering using cruise ships as temporary housing.

“We examined everything from the legality of using any type of cruise ship for temporary housing,” Hizzoner during an interview on WCBS Sunday.

“We’re looking at everything to see, how do we deal with this?”

Adams made the suggestion just hours before The Post reported that a record number of 9 buses carrying migrants traveled into the city.

Each bus typically carries between 40 and 50 migrants.

It’s not how you play the game, it’s how you place the blame.

The mayor of New York City blamed Republican governors for what he called an “American crisis” and “humanitarian crisis” in the sanctuary city as it grapples with migrants arriving from Texas

“These migrants and asylum seekers are not coming to any particular city, they’re coming to America,” the mayor asserted, adding, “This is an American crisis that we need to face – a humanitarian crisis that were made by human hands by some of the governors in our southern states. . .”

[ABC’s Jonathan] Karl asked Adams whether he thought New York’s sanctuary policies might be attracting illegal border crossers, to which Adams replied, “No, not at all.”

No, of course not! It’s the fault of white cracker-bastard red state governors who refuse to turn America into a third world shit hole and thereby give Democrat-Leftists absolute power forever. Part of me thinks (that is, hopes and prays) that most Americans, including blacks, Latinos and actual LEGAL immigrants and naturalized citizens who came here the right way because they wanted to flee a third world shit hole instead of turning their new homeland into something even worse than where they came from, see what is going on and reject the rank hypocrisy and lies from the pie-holes of Adams et al.

I think they do. The numbers of formerly solid Dem constituents fleeing the destruction of that party since the Vegetable-in-Chief was installed are growing day by day. Instead of cruise ships or as Chubby Gillibrand and Lori Groot-foot are doing, shipping the illegals to non Democrat parts of their city and state, maybe if they rejected open borders and called for the hiring of 87,000 DHS and INS agents to round up every single illegal alien in this country and ship them back, cut them off from Tio Azucar and ended bilingualism, as well as an immigration moratorium for at least 20 years with a concomitant ramping up of carrots and sticks to ensure ASSIMILATION, they might try that.

Meh, if my aunt had a beard, she’d be my uncle. Well, in this day and age


CARTOONS/FUNNIES


 

Does the Bible Advocate For “Open Borders”?

This was from a Facebook post from a friends wall… I wanted to add this verse to a discussion I had from 2018 when Santa Clarita was discussing becoming a “sanctuary city”

This post should be read as a companion to the above, older post.

I will post the “meme” making a point about Leviticus… which the WASHINGTON TIMES (June 24, 2018) responds to well. Even their headline: Suddenly, the left loves Leviticus Funny, they reject the edicts against the gay lifestyle in Leviticus but accept what they want.

Here is the “meme”

Great article by Everett Piper, president of Oklahoma Wesleyan University, at the Washington Times:

This week in the news: All of the sudden, the mainstream media, Hollywood, the liberal church, and other members of our national intelligentsia seem to care about what the Bible says. In particular, they appear to have suddenly acquired some affection for the Old Testament — a book that, heretofore, these proud members of the “smarter-than-thou” club have excoriated as laden with “hate-filled rhetoric.”

More to the point: These newly minted defenders of biblical orthodoxy seem to have all of the sudden fallen in love with the third book of the Jewish Torah (otherwise known as the Pentateuch); a book referred to in the Bible as Leviticus.

One of the passages quoted over and over again in recent days has been that of Leviticus 19: 33-34, “When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.”

As a Wesleyan university president and as a Christian, I am always thrilled when anyone wants to discuss scripture. But let us first be sure we are taking every measure to be historically, theologically, logically, linguistically and hermeneutically accurate in our efforts. I hope we can all agree that any exegesis to the contrary, any misusing and misapplying the Bible for political gain, is a detestable and damnable practice.

Old Testament scholar and Wheaton College Professor James Hoffmeier is a person who actually lived as an alien in the Middle East growing up. His family had to flee Egypt because of the 1967 war. For nearly two months, they lived in tents at a mountain camp in Cyprus. Not only does Mr. Hoffmeier know his Bible, he knows what it is like to be the “stranger” in a foreign land.

It is fair to say that he is not insensitive to plight of immigrants. Please read carefully what Mr. Hoffmeier has to say about the Levitical directive to care for the “stranger” in our midst:

“What I learned in my study is that there are three relevant terms used in Hebrew [for the word ‘stranger’] (ger, zar, nekhar). [Some translators] render them all as [simply] ‘foreigner.’ That is misleading and incorrect.

“Zar and nekhar, indeed, refer to foreigners or visitors passing through a foreign land. [But], Ger refer[s] to foreign residents who live in another land with the permission of a host The law is clear that ger is not to be oppressed but they were also obligated to live in accordance with the laws just like the Israelites.”

Mr. Hoffmeier goes further:

“The Law does not, however, extend to the zar and nekhar such [protections], benefits and services. From this I conclude that ger was viewed as a legal alien. The mistake of some well-meaning Christians is to apply the biblical laws for the ger to illegal aliens in America even though they do not fit the biblical legal and social definition.”

Mr. Hoffmeier concludes:

“The Old Testament Law is very clear about the practice of sanctuary The purpose of sanctuary was not to avoid the law or one’s sentence, but to get a fair trial So, when American[s] offer their cities as sanctuary from federal law, or when churches offer their facilities as a refuge for illegal immigrants who have been tried and order deported, they are neither following the letter or spirit of the Old Testament law.”

The biblical narrative is not one without borders. Just read the book of Nehemiah — it is a story about rebuilding a wall. Boundaries have existed throughout antiquity. Yes, Abraham was a sojourner who crossed borders, but he sought approval in order to do so and such permission was granted contingent upon his agreement to honor and obey the laws of the country of his desired residence.

Yes, Egypt and Israel alike allowed “strangers” to travel in their countries, but they never stopped defending their own sovereignty and territorial integrity. Bottom line: Abraham was an alien who sought permission before entering Egypt and there is no indication that, centuries later, Mary and Joseph did anything different as they crossed the same boundaries with the baby Jesus.

A quote this week from a Facebook friend named Nancy is perhaps the best response of any to those suddenly infatuated with Leviticus:

“Manipulating the definition of words is one of the hallmarks of genius propaganda. Take a sliver of truth and use misquotes or quotes out of context Ignore history and facts. Get all the people who read the first few sentences of an article all worked up and sit back and smirk at the mayhem Could [this] all be a giant power play at the expense of the children who are apparently just pawns in this game?”

Amen, Nancy. Amen.

Here are some quick takes as well:

19:33 The “foreigner” (Hb. ger) in the Bible was most often a foreign merchant, craftsman, or mercenary soldier. This term never refers to the prior inhabitants of the land. Generous actions to foreigners were motivated by the memory of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (Ex 23:9; Dt 5:14–15).

Ted Cabal et al., The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007), 182.

Do him wrong: the verb may be translated “mistreat,” “oppress,” “exploit,” or “take unfair advantage of.” In this context there seems to be the idea of a person in a position of power taking unfair advantage of one who is weak.

René Péter-Contesse and John Ellington, A Handbook on Leviticus, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1992), 299.

Vers. 33, 34. Lange: “Humanity towards the stranger, who is not a Jew, who thus certainly might dwell as a private man in the future inheritance of Israel. He was to be treated exactly as an inhabitant in human intercourse. Thou shalt love him as thyself.—With this the remembrance is still preserved that the Israelites had been strangers in the land of Egypt.” The royal law of ver. 18 is here expressly extended to the stranger, and notwithstanding the national narrowness necessary to preserve the true religion in the world, the general brotherhood of mankind is hereby taught as far as was possible under the circumstances.

John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, and Frederic Gardiner, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Leviticus (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 152.

Here is a good short video via GOT QUESTIONS regarding illegal immigration:

  • What does the Bible say about illegal immigration? How should Christians view illegal immigrants?

And here is a good post over at CULTURE WATCH:

….I want to focus on the Hebrew terminology used in the Leviticus passage (and in others). One expert that is worth being aware of is Old Testament professor James Hoffmeier. He has written a very important and incisive volume on these matters called The Immigration Crisis: Immigrants, Aliens, and the Bible (Crossway, 2009).

I have quoted from him before, as in this piece: CHRISTIANS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS

In pages 48-52 of his book he has a section called “What is an alien according to the Bible?” It is a very important discussion indeed. However, for those who cannot get hold of his excellent book, he did an article-length discussion of these particular matters in 2011 called “The Use and Abuse of the Bible in the Immigration Debate”.

Since the material in the article is fairly similar to what is found in his book, let me make use of the article here. He opens his piece with these words:

Secularists and liberals, both political and religious, are typically loath to consult the Bible when it comes to matters of public policy. So it is somewhat surprising that in the current debate about the status of illegal immigrants, the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible is regularly cited in defense of the illegal. Debra Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister — a denomination not known for taking Scripture seriously — offered a recent critique of the Arizona illegal immigration law in the Washington Post online (May 25, 2010), saying “It’s as if the 70 percent of Arizonans who support the law have forgotten the Biblical injunction to ‘love the stranger for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.’” This verse and others like it are frequently quoted in the name of “justice” for the illegal immigrant. A left-wing Christian advocacy group Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which is affiliated with Sojourners, had this passage on its website: “When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the stranger. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you.” (Leviticus 19:33)

But the main point is how the biblical writers use certain specific terms when they seek to make specific points – something that can get easily lost however in some English translations. So let me quote this important part of his article:

What about the “stranger” or “alien”? The Bible is not “a living breathing document” that can mean whatever you want it to say. This question must be answered contextually and based on what the key words meant when they were written before we apply what that might mean in our own times. The most significant Hebrew word for our discussion is ger, translated variously in English versions, which creates some confusion, as “stranger” (KJV, NASB, JB), “sojourner” (RSV, ESV), “alien” (NEB, NIV, NJB, NRSV), and “foreigner” (TNIV, NLT). It occurs more than 80 times as a noun and an equal number as a verb (gwr), which typically means “to sojourn” or “live as an alien.” The problem with more recent English translations (e.g. TNIV and NLT) is that they use “foreigner” for ger, which is imprecise and misleading because there are other Hebrew terms for “foreigner,” namely nekhar and zar. The distinction between these two terms and ger is that while all three are foreigners who might enter another country, the ger had obtained legal status.

There are several episodes in the Bible that illustrate how a foreigner became a ger. The individual or party had to receive permission from the appropriate authority in that particular culture. Perhaps the best-known story has to do with the Children of Israel entering Egypt. In the book of Genesis, we are told of how during a time of famine in Canaan, the sons of Jacob did the natural thing under the circumstances — go to Egypt where the Nile kept the land fertile. Even though their brother Joseph was a high-ranking official who had recommended to Pharaoh that they be allowed to settle in the northeast delta of Egypt, they felt compelled to ask Pharaoh for permission:

He looks at Genesis 47:3-6, and then discusses a few other passages. He then says this:

From the foregoing texts we can conclude that in the ancient biblical world, countries had borders that were protected and respected, and that foreigners who wanted to reside in another country had to obtain some sort of permission in order to be considered an alien with certain rights and privileges. The delineation between the “alien” or “stranger” (ger) and the foreigner (nekhar or zar) in biblical law is stark indeed. The ger in Israelite society, for instance, could receive social benefits such as the right to glean in the fields (Leviticus 19:9-10; Deuteronomy 24:19-22) and they could receive resources from the tithes (Deuteronomy 26:12-13). In legal matters, “there shall be one statute for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. You and the sojourner shall be alike before the LORD. One law and one rule shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you” (Numbers 15:15-16). In the area of employment, the ger and citizen were to be paid alike (Deuteronomy 24:14-15). In all these cases, no such provision is extended to the nekhar or zar. In a sense, the ger were not just aliens to whom social and legal protections were offered, but were also considered converts, and thus could participate in the religious life of the community, e.g. celebrate Passover (Exodus 12:13) and observe Yom Kippur, the day of atonement (Leviticus 16:29-30). They were, moreover, expected to keep dietary and holiness laws (Leviticus 17:8-9 & 10-12). It is well known that within Israelite society, money was not to be lent with interest, but one could loan at interest to a foreigner (nekhar). These passages from the Law make plain that aliens or strangers received all the benefits and protection of a citizen, whereas the foreigner (nekhar) did not. It is wrong, therefore, to confuse these two categories of foreigners and then to use passages regarding the ger as if they were relevant to illegal immigrants of today. cis.org/Report/Use-and-Abuse-Bible-Immigration-Debate

I could quote from various critical commentaries on Leviticus and other OT books to further make these distinctions with the Hebrew terminology, but hopefully you get the point. Simply ripping a text out of its context – especially while ignoring important grammatical and linguistic nuances – is not how a political point should be made by believers.

As both Hoffmeier and I have often said, yes, having a compassionate response to the needy, including genuine refugees, is one thing. But misusing texts to push for radical open border policies, and to call to ‘tear down the wall’ is not how the biblical Christian should proceed.

In another excellent (and long) article at BIBLE ARCHAEOLOGY, the conclusion sums up the MUST READ article well:

The basic message we get from this study is that there are two basic kinds of immigrants in Scripture: the ger who, though not natives of a nation, have all the rights and privileges of the native citizens; and the nokriy, who have a second-class status because they are unwilling to take the steps the fully privileged immigrants were.

In addition, it is clear that a great majority of the passages dealing with the ger are of a prescriptive nature, being based on explicit instructions from God. It is thus safe to view them as being of enduring pertinence for basing policy decisions on.

Regarding those termed the nokriy, it is clear that although they, like the ger, have crossed a country’s border, they are distinct and separate from the ger in terms of the rights and privileges they are granted. That they are not mentioned in many passages where the rights of the ger are clearly delineated strongly implies that, in God’s sight, they do not warrant receiving these privileges.

This study thus offers biblical support-i.e., God’s sanction-for policies which preferentially give immigrants who show a willingness to do what it takes to integrate into and fully participate in the life of a society, rights and privileges which do not accrue to those who do not. The claim that it is unjust or unloving to withhold any privileges from those unwilling to do certain things appears to be a gross misapplication of ‘social justice.’ The Apostle Paul said, ‘For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat’ (2 Thess. 3:10). This principle can easily be seen to apply to immigration issues. Privileges come to those who do what it takes to warrant them, a truism that applies to a biblical perspective on immigration as well as to so many other things in life. And it should be added that, since the Church is to obey the civil authorities (Rom. 13:1-8), Christians should not be advocating people from foreign nations to break laws when they attempt to cross into another country. We who claim to be the Lord’s children have an obligation not only to follow His principles ourselves, but to encourage others to do the same. Since the loving God we serve is not wishy-washy but has definite opinions about how we should live, we should make every effort to line up our opinions and policies with His.

Senator Ted Cruz Mentions “Rape Trees” (Illegal Immigration)

(As an aside, the “rape culture” Democrats always mention is being created at the border and the trip up here by their invitation to come, illegally.)

Just wanted to excerpt a portion of a larger post where I detail three lies by the media and Democrats about President Trump. Before that excerpt however, I want to add a more recent story regarding a portion of what will follow:

JUST THE NEWS reports on Senator Ted Cruz’s above mention of “rape trees”:

Mexican cartels are moving millions of people into the U.S. over the border, and “rape trees” are a reminder that the Biden administration isn’t doing enough to stop them, Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz said during a news conference with a group of Republican senators who visited the U.S.-Mexico border.

“We heard multiple reports of something, I’ll be candid, I had never heard of before until today — something called a rape tree, which are trees where the traffickers would violently rape young women and then hang their undergarments in the tree as a trophy,” Cruz said on Friday.

According to an Amnesty International report, about 60% of the women and girls who make the trek to the U.S.-Mexico border are raped.

Cartels reportedly charge thousands of dollars to bring someone through Mexico to the U.S. illegally. Republican senators have noted that migrants who cannot afford to pay the fee end up working for the cartel to repay the debt once they enter the U.S.

“How do you think the young women pay off their 5, 6, 7, 8 thousand dollar human trafficking fee?” asked Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson. “I think we all know,” he said, referring to the “rape tree.”

I mentioned this way back in November of 2016, as well as the Amnesty International report… here is the excerpt.


EXCERPT


OKAY… I will now post three responses to items of discussion that my guess is those who are very distraught over Trump’s win and view either him or a large segment of the population who voted for him as racist or bigoted, or mean to disabled persons, is more complicated than these labels. First up is this:


Is Mexico Sending Rapists?


When I ask people to offer me an example of Trump’s “racism,” I get a reference to this example most often:

  • “The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems…. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you…. They’re sending people that have lots of problems…. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” ~ Donald J. Trump

Before I add information that I doubt a millennial has heard because either they or their friends are quick to label Trump as being bigoted or racist for saying this, and moving on without further reflection, I want to note that all Republican politicians said to round up illegals in America would be an impossible task. Trump has evolved on his statement that many understood as rounding up 11-million (actually, there are 30-million). ALSO, every Republican politician noted that the Constitution would not allow for the banning of all Muslims coming to our country. Again, our Constitution forbids this. It allows for banning all persons from a country, but not a religious or sectarian belief. He [Trump] has backed away from this as well, as all of us knew he would. In fact, this was removed from his site. Trump is not a politician, but his team is counseling him well.

…Continuing.

Okay. What of Trump’s statement? It surely sounds bigoted at best.

I will shock the reader.

I think that is the most pro-woman statement in a long time by a politician regarding real — violent — crime against women.

Let me explain.

This is from the HUFFINGTON POST:

As the number of Central American women and girls crossing into the U.S. continues to spike, so is the staggering amount of sexual violence waged against these migrants who are in search of a better life.

According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report

[….]

Through May, the number of unaccompanied girls younger than 18 caught at the US-Mexico border increased by 77 percent.

But while many of these girls are fleeing their homes because of fears of being sexually assaulted, according to the UNHCR, they are still meeting that same fate on their journey to freedom

For clarity in the sources for the HUFFPO article, for those that are of the impatient and research non-oriented generation:

✦ 60% Amnesty International Report (PDF)
✦ 80% Is rape the price to pay for migrant women chasing the American Dream? (FUSION)

(UPDATED EDITORIAL BY RPT) To be clear, these rapes are happening by residents who live in towns and districts these migrants are passing through. Other rapes are happening by Coyotajes, as well as many by the men making the trip as well. We know that many Honduren gang-members make the trek, and so, a high percentage of these men (criminals) do in fact cross our border into our nation. Where American women of all ethnic background are subjected to assault. Since we know illegals commit crimes at double the rate of native-born rape is also part of these increased stats.

NEW STORY

80% of C. American Illegals Raped on Trip to US, Still Dems Encourage Them to Come

“According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report,” the well-known news outlet continued….

So, many of the men they travel with are rapping them. Many of the Coyotajes as well take advantage of them. There are what are now being called “RAPE TREES,” which you can learn more about on a previous post of mine, here. Here is how a conversation using this understanding went in the real world:

  • The above exchange was discussed a bit wrong, like Trump, the main idea is lost in the presentation. Gavin McInness made it sound as if the rapes were happening at the border when in actuality they are happening during the entire trip. And the girl thought he meant Coyotes, the real animal. Not Coyotajes. (That was very funny BTW, and why I ended the video like I did.)

What would be the most compassionate step to take? I would say, to control our border. That would help the migrant woman AS WELL AS our own mothers, daughters, and wives. Many from these countries that are experiencing these horrible circumstances are experiencing it because of their government models they have chosen. But this is neither here-nor-there.

The bottom line is that Trump, while not explaining this well at all, was actually making a statement about policy that in the end will protect women. There is this as well dealing with drugs and violence aspect of the comment:

A fresh wave of crime from the infamously violent MS-13 gang in the District of Columbia is being driven by the heavy recruitment of young illegal immigrants.

A surge of minors crossing the U.S. southern border is helping the notorious gang boost their ranks and instigate a new string of violent attacks in the city, reported The Washington Times. Over the past few years a wave of illegal migrant children crossed the U.S. border, and MS-13 appears to be targeting them for recruitment.

“They are certainly susceptible,” Ed Ryan, gang prevention coordinator in Fairfax County, Virginia, told The Washington Times. “They are new, they have very little family, they don’t know the language very well. They are looking for someone who looks like them, talks like them.”

Experts say violence from MS-13, which originally started in California, historically occurs in waves. Currently MS-13, on orders from El Salvador, is ramping up efforts in cities across the U.S. to reestablish their dominance on the streets, reports The Washington Times….

This is just a very short clip of a longer audio (here: ) of John and Ken discussing Mollie Tibbetts and her murderer, Christian Bahena-Rivera. According to the DAILY CALLER, he was employed by a Republican small business owner

  • “He worked on Yarrabee Farms, which is owned by the family of GOP official Craig Lang, who was a former 2018 Republican candidate for state secretary of agriculture, according to reports by the Des Moines Register.”

who may have illegally had him in their employ? However, he was an example of the DACA young so did he have his temporary papers? I have no idea. Nor would I know if he immigrated legally if he would have passed all the checks/balances.

As an side…

Is this man a racist or bigot? He was the co-founder of the United Farm Workers union, and spoke out against the racist organization, La Raza, as well as calling workers who crossed the border “illegal immigrants” and “wetbacks.”

“In the mid 1970s, he conducted the ‘Illegals Campaign’ to identify and report illegal workers, ‘an effort he deemed second in importance only to the boycott’ (of produce from non-unionized farms), according to Pawel. She quotes a memo from Chavez that said, “If we can get the illegals out of California, we will win the strike overnight.”

“Cesar Chavez opposed illegal immigration,” Levin said during a Wednesday appearance on Fox News’ Hannity.

After saying that the premise that “compassion is an open border” is a “new idea” that has been pushed in recent times, Levin said that “a nation has a right to secure its border” and its citizens have a right to know who is coming into their country.

Chavez, who was also against ethnic organizations like La Raza, would tell illegal immigrants to get out of the country, especially because they lowered the wages of American workers. And he was often far from compassionate in handling illegal immigrants….

(NATIONAL REVIEW, BREITBART and the HUFFINGTON POST)

Democrats Pushing Divisive “Replacement Theory”

Who is pushing the “Great Replacement Theory”??

SUPERCUT

ELISEO MEDINA PLAYBOOK

BEN SHAPIRO

The Left decides Tucker Carlson is responsible for a racist mass shooting in Buffalo; Liz Cheney slanders the GOP as complicit in white supremacy; and the Biden administration tries to tax its way out of inflation.

LIZ WHEELER

The mainstream media is deliberately misrepresenting the Great Replacement Theory in order to associate the Buffalo shooter with conservatives and Republicans.

TUCKER

Fox News host points out how President Biden and Democrats are using race politics to capitalize on the deadly Buffalo shooting on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’ (Published May 18, 2022)

Fox News host weighs in on the Buffalo shooting and gives his take on Democrats and the media discussing voter demographics on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’ (Published May 19, 2022)

OPPORTUNISM

Why would the Left being doing this??

MSNBC guest Donny Deutsch: “What the Democrats need to do … is take this ‘replacement theory’ and now make it the ‘Republican racist replacement theory'”

 

The Infrastructure Is NOT Collapsing

Armstrong and Getty react to and read from a few articles making the point that out of almost all nations of comparable size, we are #1 in infrastructure soundness. Here are some of the articles read from (note, stories go in order of: Left Leaning; Libertarian; Conservative)

  • No, America’s Infrastructure Is Not ‘Crumbling’ (WASHINGTON POST at FREE MEDIA: reproduced below)
  • Our Infrastructure Is Not ‘Crumbling.’ Repeat: Our Infrastructure Is Not ‘Crumbling’ (REASON)
  • End of the Runway: Rethinking the Airport Improvement Program and the Federal Role in Airport Funding (HERITAGE FOUNDATION)

One of my beefs, as an example, is this:

A few days after the Chicago City Council approved a $1.3 million legal defense fund to help illegal immigrants facing deportation, officials in Los Angeles unveiled their version with more than seven times the money. It appears to be a growing trend of using public funds to protect those who have violated federal law. The offenders are municipalities that have long offered illegal aliens sanctuary and an array of taxpayer-funded benefits.

[….]

Shortly after the city announced its fund, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors offered to kick in another $3 million to provide lawyers for illegal aliens that may face removal under the new administration. The board voted 4-1 in favor of contributing to the L.A. Justice Fund. The supervisor who voted against it, Kathryn Barger, said it’s irresponsible for the board to allocate funding for such a program.

(JUDICIAL WATCH)

That is a lot of funds that could have been used for city and county infrastructure projects instead of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Why do I say TDS? Because Obama deported more people than Trump… and not a single public money program was spent on legal defense of ILLEGAL aliens.

We already spend almost 500-Billion on infrastructure, and Biden’s “Build Back Better”/Partly The Green New Deal, spends “Only $110 billion of the so-called $1 trillion-plus bipartisan infrastructure package goes toward road, bridges, and other major projects that the American people generally consider ‘infrastructure,’” (BREITBART)…. over ten years.

The WASHINGTON POST story that the ARMSTRONG and GETTY SHOW read from, but it is behind a paywall. So the following is an unlocked version of it.

No, America’s Infrastructure Is Not ‘Crumbling’ (FREE MEDIA)

By Charles Lane,

The United States covers 3.8 million square miles, with 95,471 miles of shoreline and about 12,000 miles of commercially navigable inland waterways; it soars from 282 feet below sea level in Death Valley to 20,310 feet above sea level at Mount Denali.

Knitting this vast and varied territory together are 2.7 million miles of paved roads, more than 500 commercial airports, more than 615,000 bridges, approximately 140,000 miles of freight railroad and more than 300 ports on the coasts, Great Lakes and inland waterways.

Miraculous as these engineering marvels are, it would be even more amazing if some U.S. infrastructure — e.g., the Boston-to-Washington passenger rail corridor, the up to 10 million homes that still get their water through lead pipes, or Texas’s electrical grid — did not need expensive modernization or replacement.

Yet the task before us is not to rescue a neglected, “crumbling” system, as President Biden put it while announcing his $2 trillion American Jobs Plan — in rare agreement with his predecessor, Donald Trump, who pitched his own infrastructure bill (without success) by talking about tiles falling from the ceiling inside New York City’s tunnels.

The real challenge is to take what is by any reasonable measure the best, or nearly the best, infrastructure in the world, and to sustain improvements that have already been occurring in recent years.

Biden warned that U.S. infrastructure is “ranked 13th in the world,” as if it were shameful to outscore about 90 percent of the 141 economies analyzed in 2019 by the World Economic Forum.

In fact, 13th place represents an upward shift of about 10 spots since the 2011-2012 WEF survey — and still underrates the United States.

Of the 12 economies the WEF ranked ahead of the United States in 2019, three — Singapore, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates — are tiny coastal city-states. It’s patently spurious to compare their infrastructure challenges with those of the United States.

Among the 10 geographically largest countries, including Canada, Australia, China and Russia, the United States places first, based on WEF criteria. The United States is also top among the 10 most populous countries.

Relative to other wealthy countries, the United States does still trail the Netherlands, Switzerland, Japan, Korea, Spain, Germany, France, Austria and the United Kingdom. However, it’s more realistic to treat the six continental European countries in this group as a unit, since goods and people move through them freely, via the borderless Schengen area. (The European Union members partly share infrastructure costs.) Coupled with deletion of the aforementioned micro-states, this adjustment puts the United States in the top five.

WEF ratings rest largely on a subjective survey in which business executives rate their countries’ roads, ports, and air and rail services on a scale of 1 to 7. This tilts against the United States because the rail-quality question does not distinguish between passenger (poor in the United States but excellent in Europe) and freight (a U.S. strength).

The American Society of Civil Engineers, a pro-construction lobby, issues quadrennial, and unflattering, “report cards” on U.S. infrastructure, frequently cited in support of the “crumbling” talking point. The ASCE’s 2021 report card gave the United States a C-.

But that was the best grade in 20 years. “Five category grades — aviation, drinking water, energy, inland waterways, and ports — went up, while just one category — bridges — went down,” relative to ASCE’s 2017 report card, the organization acknowledged.

That lone downgrade (from C+ to C) occurred despite a decline in the share of highway bridges the U.S. government rates as “poor,” to just 7.5 percent, concentrated in lightly traveled rural areas. The ASCE complained, nevertheless, that “the rate of improvements has slowed,” while a small percentage of the nation’s bridges slipped from “good” to “fair.” (Both “good” and “fair” denote safe, usable structures.)

Talk about accentuating the negative! The impartial Congressional Research Service saw the cup half full in a May 2020 report, noting that “the number and share of bridges in poor condition have dropped significantly over the past 20 years,” and that “a relatively modest increase in spending” between now and 2040 could solve the problem.

As for interstate highways, a 2019 study by economists from the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University confirmed that “over the past generation, the condition of the interstate highway network improved consistently,” according to government data, even as “its extent increased modestly, and traffic about doubled.”

Obviously, all such assessments incorporate subjective judgments and debatable definitions. The big picture, though, is that the gigantic U.S. infrastructure is fundamentally sound — impressively, but not surprisingly, given that governments at all levels spent $370.5 billion on it in 2018, up from $284 billion in 2008, according to official data. Recent projects include the $8 billion modernization of New York’s LaGuardia Airport, a $4.4 billion bridge connecting Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, and a more than $2.4 billion overhaul of Central Florida’s I-4 highway.

To repeat: There’s no reason for complacency about U.S. infrastructure. Yet alarmist generalizations don’t help us identify the most pressing needs with the greatest potential economic benefits. They might pave the way to wasted resources and public disenchantment.

ARMSTRONG and GETTY SHOW read from the following article as well “Highways and Bridges Are Not Crumbling (REASON)

One of the great myths of American politics, no matter who is president and no matter who runs Congress, is that our infrastructure is “crumbling.” Former President Barack Obama repeatedly warned us about our “crumbling infrastructure.” President Donald Trump now tells us that our infrastructure is “crumbling.” The next president is going to hatch a giant plan to fix our crumbling infrastructure as well, because most voters want to believe infrastructure is crumbling.

The infrastructure is not crumbling. Ask someone about infrastructure and his thoughts will probably wander to the worst pothole-infested road he traverses rather than the hundreds of roads he drives on that are perfectly safe and smooth. That’s human nature.

So “crumbling infrastructure” peddlers play on this concern by habitually agonizing over things like the impending outbreak of tragic bridge collapses that will kill thousands. They bring up tragedies like the 2007 disaster with the Interstate 35 bridge over the Mississippi River in downtown Minneapolis even though, according to federal investigators, the collapse was due to a design flaw rather than decaying infrastructure. Many outlets and politicians simply ignore the inconvenient fact that the rare fatality involving infrastructure typically has nothing to do with “crumbling” and everything to do with natural elements or human error.

In reality, the number of structurally deficient bridges, never high to begin with, has been dropping over the past 30 years despite all the hand-wringing. The overall number has fallen from over 22 percent in 1992 to under 10 percent in 2016. According to a Reuters analysis of those bridges, only 4 percent of those that carry significant traffic need repairs. Of the nation’s 1,200 busiest bridges, the number of those structurally deficient falls to under 2 percent—or fewer than 20 bridges in the entire country. And none of those bridges need repair to save them from collapse.

That has never stopped politicians from fearmongering, however. “Our roads and bridges are falling apart; our airports are in Third World condition,” Trump claimed during his 2016 campaign. Yet as the Heritage Foundation’s Michael Sargent points out, the percentage of airport runways deemed as poor has fallen from 4 percent in 2004 to 2 percent in 2016. And for the past 30 years, the number of “acceptable” or above roads has remained relatively consistent at approximately 85 percent.

Perhaps because they’re constantly being told that America’s roads are on the verge of disintegrating into dust, some voters aren’t aware that federal, state and local governments spent $416 billion on transportation and water infrastructure in 2014—around the same 2.4 percent of gross domestic product they’ve been spending for decades. About $165 billion of that $416 billion, incidentally, was spent on highways. (This doesn’t count the bipartisan Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act of 2015, which added another $305 billion over five years.)………..

And this is an interesting article:

A recent report from the RAND Corporation looks at America’s infrastructure and concludes that “not everything is broken.” In face, what is broken, more than the infrastructure itself, is “our approach to funding and financing public works.” This is largely because governments by-pass market signals and rely on “often complicated and multilayered governance arrangements and competing public goals and preferences” to make decisions about where to spend money.

For example, the report shows that government spending on infrastructure as a percentage of gross domestic product declined from a peak of 3 percent of GDP in 1960 to about 2.5 percent in 1980, and has hovered between 2.5 and 2.7 percent since then. But governments also made a clear trade-off in infrastructure spending: spending on roads declined from 1.6 percent of GPD in 1960 to around 1 percent in and since 1980, while government spending on mass transit grew from 0.1 percent in 1970 to 0.4 percent in and since 1980.

This would be fine if spending on mass transit had been as productive as spending on highways had been. But it wasn’t. Until the 2008 financial crisis, per capita driving continued to grow despite the lack of much capital spending on new roads, while per capita transit ridership was stagnant or declining. The report doesn’t have data after 2014, when per capita driving began to increase again while transit ridership began to collapse.

Demographic Changes and Illegal Immigration (Eliseo Medina)

Differences

(Originally posted April 2021)

DEMOGRAPHIC REPLACEMENT

‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host says the left is obsessed with ‘demographic replacement.’

What a difference an administration makes when it comes to immigration. Let’s remember at one time (and not very long ago), Democrats sounded just like former President Trump on the issue of illegal immigration. They even used the term ‘illegal alien.’ And why do they always throw around the number of immigrants in the United States is 11 million? And for the record, ‘illegal alien’ is not the same thing as an undocumented worker or undocumented immigrant. An illegal alien is an illegal alien. (Elder plays Eliseo Medina’s speech – who is noted in the video below that!)

Eliseo Medina PLAYBOOK

This is a montage of democrats revealing their true goals for illegal immigrants and other minorities – they want their votes. This is a clip from Trevor Loudon’s film, the “Enemies Within.” Watch the entire film @AMAZON:

Eliseo Medina PLAYBOOK


It’s About Power!


See more at:

Historically, Democrats supported strong borders because they knew American workers could never compete with illegal immigrants. Now, they regularly support “open borders.” So why the drastic change? Tucker Carlson, host of Tucker Carlson Tonight, explains.

Via SOOPERMEXICAN! (h/t to LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICAN – now defunct):

The popular Mexican-born comedian Paul Rodriguez shocked the CNN panel on illegal immigration when he advocated for deportation for illegal immigrants. Shamelessly, Don Lemon accosted him by insinuating that legal immigrants like Rodriguez can’t be against illegal immigration. Yeah, that’s pretty pathetic.

What about the leftist hero who was recently lionized by Obama? Mark Levine takes you on a short tour-de-forces of how Democrats try and re-write history:

BREITBART notes a recent visit by Mark Levin to the Sean Hannity Show:

Chavez, who was also against ethnic organizations like La Raza, would tell illegal immigrants to get out of the country, especially because they lowered the wages of American workers. And he was often far from compassionate in handling illegal immigrants.

As Breitbart News has reported, “Chavez was so opposed to amnesty that even the film’s producers, who have a history of making politicized movies, decided, out of respect, to steer clear of the subject”:

As the New York Times noted, Participant Media, which produced the film, has a “fondness for films about social issues.” The company made Lincoln as a statement about bipartisanship, The Help to “highlight the plight of domestic workers,” and Promised Land as a “call for environmental action” against fracking.

But the producers avoided immigration reform in the movie because Chavez “fought for better wages and conditions for workers but held complex and evolving views on the status of unauthorized immigrants, some of which would be at odds with the changes many Hispanics and others are seeking today.”

Breitbart News has also detailed how much Cesar Chavez opposed amnesty:


Ruben Navarrette, Jr., a supporter of comprehensive immigration who has “studied and written about Chavez and the United Farm Workers … for more than 20 years,” wrote in a 2010 essay that “the historical record shows that Chavez was a fierce opponent of illegal immigration.” He added that “it’s unlikely that he’d have looked favorably on a plan to legalize millions of illegal immigrants.”

Chavez also wanted stiffer sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants, and Navarrette emphasized that it was “absurd for anyone to invoke the name of Cesar Chavez to pass immigration reform.” He stressed, “As I said, were he alive today, it’s a safe bet that Chavez would be an opponent of any legislation that gave illegal immigrants even a chance at legal status.”

Navarrette wrote that, according to numerous historical accounts, “Chavez ordered union members to call the Immigration and Naturalization Service and report illegal immigrants who were working in the fields so that they could be deported.”

He noted that while Chavez was with the UFW, “UFW officials were also known to picket INS offices to demand a crackdown on illegal immigrants,” and the UFW even “set up what union officials called a ‘wet line’ to stop Mexican immigrants from entering the United States. Under the supervision of Chavez’s cousin, Manuel, UFW members tried at first to convince immigrants not to cross the border”:

When that didn’t work, they physically attacked the immigrants. Covering the incident at the time, the Village Voice said that the UFW was engaged in a “campaign of random terror against anyone hapless enough to fall into its net.” A couple of decades later, in their book The Fight in the Fields, Susan Ferris and Ricardo Sandoval recalled the border violence and wrote that the issue of how to handle illegal immigration was “particularly vexing” for Chavez.

Chavez was also against ethnic groups like La Raza. In fact, he saw the dangers of such organizations from the beginning.

“I hear more and more Mexicans talking about la raza—to build up their pride, you know,” Chavez told Peter Matthiessen, the co-founder of the Paris Review, for a profile piece in The New Yorker in 1969. “Some people don’t look at it as racism, but when you say ‘la raza,’ you are saying an anti-gringo thing, and it won’t stop there.”


BORDER TOWN DEMOCRATS


Democrat Congressman Vicente Gonzalez noted that Joe Biden’s border policies will be “catastrophic for our party, for our country,” when he appeared on CNN on 3/1/2021.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, who represents a district on the U.S.-Mexico border, says he has a lot of tough questions for the Biden administration on immigration policy.

LA TIMES: Even the Democratic mayor, Bruno “Ralphy” Lozano, backed the Republican governor, attacking President Biden on Twitter, saying he’s failed to address the border crisis.

Also, “Democrat Texas Judge On Border Crisis: ‘Biden Fomented This And Now He’s Alienated Us,’ ‘At Our Wits End’

Webb County (TX) Democratic Judge Tano Tijerina unloaded on the Biden administration during a Fox News interview on Thursday, saying that President Biden caused the crisis on the border and that he has alienated people in the region.

“What has he done?” Tijerina asked as the southern border has been flooded with over ten thousand illegal aliens in recent days. “I invited President Biden to come down to the border, speaking to my other colleagues, the other county judges.”

Tijerina said that “the Haitians are causing great havoc” and that “they’re not incredibly the best,” adding that they are difficult to work with because “they’ve been a little bit pushy, like compared to everybody else.”

“Biden fomented this and now he’s alienated us,” Tijerina said, later slamming the administration for the costs imposed on local communities because of the Biden administration’s crisis.

“I don’t know what’s going on with America today, but I can tell you that it’s not, it’s not right,” Tijerina continued.

Tijerina said that he called “BS” on the administration’s claims that their highest priority is people’s health “because in all reality, what’s going with our southern borders is wide open” as the pandemic continues.

Tijerina slammed the media for latching onto “one picture,” a reference to a recent incident involving a U.S. Border Patrol agent, “and they go off on it.”

“But there’s a thousand pictures of everything else that’s going on, that’s basically falling through the cracks,” Tijerina continued. “And yet nothing’s been mentioned.”

“You know, our county judges, I’ve spoken to almost all of them; we’re at our wits’ end, our mayors, we’re at our wits’ end,” he said. “We don’t know what to do anymore.”………..

Friedman is WRONG. Donald Trump did lay compromise on the table — the Dems rejected it. ALSO, the “hard-liners” Friedman mentions (Stephen Miler) are saying NOTHING DIFFERENT that Democrats a decade ago. Nothing. But at least the HARD-LEFT is admitting Trump is right. To Wit:

(DAILY CALLER) New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman explained on Wednesday on CNN how he thinks the U.S. government can solve the situation at the border, following his trip there.

Friedman’s appearance on the network corresponded with his op-ed from the day before, in which he described the port of entry at San Diego a “troubling scene.”….


BIDEN’S MESS


A friend posted the following on Facebook:

One of this friend’s – friend’s responded:

  • PRESIDENT Biden is just trying to clear up the mess the former occupant of the White House left…

I respond:

He cleaned up the former Prez’s issue by ripping up agreements….

    • The Biden administration said on Saturday [Feb 7th] it was immediately suspending Trump-era asylum agreements with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
    • As well as ending the “remain in Mexico” policy. Which is maybe why they will “reimplement” Trump’s policy’s to combat Trump’s policies??

LOL: Biden Accidentally Admits He Will Re-Establish TRUMP Border Policy as Crisis Spirals Out Of Control (TRENDING POLITICS)

The above bullet pointed story is one of many in the description of my upload….

I coble together some reminders that this crisis is all Biden’s doing.

Here are the linked stories:

  • Biden Called for the Border Surge, and Now He Owns It (TOWNHALL)
  • Mexican President Blames Biden For Border Crisis, Says He Created ‘Expectations’ (DAILY CALLER)
  • Biden Adviser Appears to Admit Biden Caused Border Crisis, Tells Spanish Speakers ‘Border NOT Closed’ By Accident (DAILY WIRE)
  • Biden Admin Says Migrant Surge A Response To ‘Hope’ (FOX)
  • All Democrats at Main Debate Agree Illegal Immigrants Should Get Health Care Coverage (REAL CLEAR POLITICS)
  • Tom Homan: Biden Created Border Crisis with Rush To ‘Undo Everything’ Trump Did on Border Security (FOX)
  • Migrant Surge At US-Mexico Border Is Worst In 20 Years, DHS Boss Says (NY POST)
  • LOL: Biden Accidentally Admits He Will Re-Establish TRUMP Border Policy as Crisis Spirals Out Of Control (TRENDING POLITICS)
  • After Border Patrol Release, Asylum-Seekers Test Positive for Covid In Brownsville, Texas (NBC)
  • 108 Illegal Immigrants Released by Border Patrol in Texas Test Positive For Coronavirus, Officials Say (FOX)
  • Biden’s Immigration Policy Putting Children at Risk (RPT’s LARRY O’CONNOR Excerpt)
  • Not 11-Million Million Illegals Living in America, closer to 30-Million (TUCKER CARLSON)
  • Biden Wants To Legalize 11 Million Illegals, Who Says There Are Only 11 Million? | LARRY ELDER
  • While Biden Beckons Illegal Immigrants, Democrats Are Working to Let Them Vote In US Elections (THE FEDERALIST)
  • Study Finds More Immigrants Equals More Democrats — And More Losses for GOP (WASHINGTON EXAMINER)
  • Democrats Want Illegals to Vote Because They Vote Democrat (IBD)
  • Study Shows That Most Immigrants by Far Vote For Democrats; GOP’s Future Bleak Without Substantial New Limits (NATIONAL SENTENIAL)
  • Democrat Caught on Video Teaching Illegals How to Vote (THE LID)
  • Eliseo Medina: Revolution Through Illegal Immigration (EPOCH TIMES)
  • Remember When Democrats Cared About Illegal Immigration and Border Security? | LARRY ELDER (ends with Eliseo Medina – video above)

A Wall… With Cars?


First of all, as you look at the wall of Texas State Troopers vehicles lined up to make a wall — note, Texas is going to build a wall. BUT, the irony should not be lost on my Democrat friends, which is this: walls work. It just so happens that the Border Wall Trump envisioned has a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline fed movable walls.


Democrats Finished “Wall”


RIGHT SCOOP hat-tip to Rep Crenshaw:

Here is a portion of the border “secured” by the 2006 SECURE BORDER FENCE ACT... as you can see in the video (and the picture) just how effective this was:

Representative Peter King (R-NY) introduced the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was subsequently passed with bi-partisan support and signed into law by then President George W. Bush. The goal of this law was to reduce illegal entry into the United States by adding fences and vehicle barriers along 700 miles of the southern border, plus provides funds for surveillance, checkpoints, additional lighting, and drones to support the border security. The overall program was funded with over $1 billion dollars, but in hindsight did little to stop the illegal invasion as the fences were easily scaled and the surveillance minimal if any along most of the fence. In 2008 the Reinstatement of the Secure Fence Act was introduced in Congress intended to add an additional 700 miles of two layer 14’ high fence, but the bill died in committee and never even came up for a vote. In 2010 a Finish the Fence bill was again unsuccessful and deemed too expensive and underfunded….

>> Building a Border Wall to stop Illegal Immigration

We recently posted this video of an immigration official saying building a border fence “isn’t possible” even though $1.2 billion was given in 2006 for a fence (100% FED UP):


Biden’s Policies Hurt
Women & Children


Larry O’Connor reads a bit from this article at THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER:

The Biden administration is weighing a new name for the facilities it is setting up to manage the influx of migrant children and families at the southern border, hoping to limit the criticism and emphasize that the buildings will hold people only temporarily.

Biden officials are considering naming the facilities “reception centers,” according to three people familiar with the discussions, on the logic that the name sounds less harsh.

The name would distinguish the facilities, one of which has been set up in Carrizo Springs, Texas, from existing structures maintained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Health and Human Services’s Office of Refugee Resettlement. Images of one such Border Patrol facility led to criticism that President Donald Trump held children in “cages.” Often, other such buildings are called “detention centers” or “holding facilities.”

In particular, one official said, the new name would mark the Biden administration’s intention to use the “reception centers” not for holding people in custody, but for serving as sending-off points for releasing migrants into the United States….

More about Hurting Women/Children with an Open Border:

  • Texas Governor Greg Abbott is releasing some horrifying numbers from the first month of Operation Lone Star, an operation he launched to combat #smuggling and other crimes at the southern #border. He explains how smugglers and cartels get drugs and criminals across the border by abusing young children.

Here is horrible footage of kids drugged for smuggling purposes:

Disturbing footage has been found showing Mexican smugglers carting drugged and sedated children across the southern border.

Human smugglers have been using children to fraudulently claim that they are migrants with their babies so that U.S. officials will allow them into the country. Border officials know that these coyotes often transport children from ages two to five over and over again to be used by illegal aliens to use as fait to get into the country.

But this disturbing video seems to show that the coyotes are drugging the tiny tots to make them easier to deal with.

(FLAG and CROSS)


Is Mexico Sending Rapists?


When I ask people to offer me an example of Trump’s “racism,” I get a reference to this example most often:

  • “The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems…. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you…. They’re sending people that have lots of problems…. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” ~ Donald J. Trump

Before I add information that I doubt a millennial has heard because either they or their friends are quick to label Trump as being bigoted or racist for saying this, and moving on without further reflection, I want to note that all Republican politicians said to round up illegals in America would be an impossible task. Trump has evolved on his statement that many understood as rounding up 11-million (actually, there are 30-million). ALSO, every Republican politician noted that the Constitution would not allow for the banning of all Muslims coming to our country. Again, our Constitution forbids this. It allows for banning all persons from a country, but not a religious or sectarian belief. He [Trump] has backed away from this as well, as all of us knew he would. In fact, this was removed from his site. Trump is not a politician, but his team is counseling him well.

…Continuing.

Okay. What of Trump’s statement? It surely sounds bigoted at best.

I will shock the reader.

I think that is the most pro-woman statement in a long time by a politician regarding real — violent — crime against women.

Let me explain.

This is from the HUFFINGTON POST:

As the number of Central American women and girls crossing into the U.S. continues to spike, so is the staggering amount of sexual violence waged against these migrants who are in search of a better life.

According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report

[….]

Through May, the number of unaccompanied girls younger than 18 caught at the US-Mexico border increased by 77 percent.

But while many of these girls are fleeing their homes because of fears of being sexually assaulted, according to the UNHCR, they are still meeting that same fate on their journey to freedom

For clarity in the sources for the HUFFPO article, for those that are of the impatient and research non-oriented generation:

✦ 60% Amnesty International Report (PDF)
✦ 80% Is rape the price to pay for migrant women chasing the American Dream? (FUSION)

(UPDATED EDITORIAL BY RPT) To be clear, these rapes are happening by residents who live in towns and districts these migrants are passing through. Other rapes are happening by Coyotajes, as well as many by the men making the trip as well. We know that many Honduren gang-members make the trek, and so, a high percentage of these men (criminals) do in fact cross our border into our nation. Where American women of all ethnic background are subjected to assault. Since we know illegals commit crimes at double the rate of native-born rape is also part of these increased stats.

NEW STORY

80% of C. American Illegals Raped on Trip to US, Still Dems Encourage Them to Come

“According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report,” the well-known news outlet continued….

So, many of the men they travel with are rapping them. Many of the Coyotajes as well take advantage of them. There are what are now being called “rape trees,” which you can learn more about on a previous post of mine, here. Here is how a conversation using this understanding went in the real world:

  • The above exchange was discussed a bit wrong, like Trump, the main idea is lost in the presentation. Gavin McInness made it sound as if the rapes were happening at the border when in actuality they are happening during the entire trip. And the girl thought he meant Coyotes, the real animal. Not Coyotajes. (That was very funny BTW, and why I ended the video like I did.)

What would be the most compassionate step to take? I would say, to control our border. That would help the migrant woman AS WELL AS our own mothers, daughters, and wives. Many from these countries that are experiencing these horrible circumstances are experiencing it because of their government models they have chosen. But this is neither here-nor-there.

The bottom line is that Trump, while not explaining this well at all, was actually making a statement about policy that in the end will protect women. There is this as well dealing with drugs and violence aspect of the comment:

A fresh wave of crime from the infamously violent MS-13 gang in the District of Columbia is being driven by the heavy recruitment of young illegal immigrants.

A surge of minors crossing the U.S. southern border is helping the notorious gang boost their ranks and instigate a new string of violent attacks in the city, reported The Washington Times. Over the past few years a wave of illegal migrant children crossed the U.S. border, and MS-13 appears to be targeting them for recruitment.

“They are certainly susceptible,” Ed Ryan, gang prevention coordinator in Fairfax County, Virginia, told The Washington Times. “They are new, they have very little family, they don’t know the language very well. They are looking for someone who looks like them, talks like them.”

Experts say violence from MS-13, which originally started in California, historically occurs in waves. Currently MS-13, on orders from El Salvador, is ramping up efforts in cities across the U.S. to reestablish their dominance on the streets, reports The Washington Times….

This is just a very short clip of a longer audio (here: ) of John and Ken discussing Mollie Tibbetts and her murderer, Christian Bahena-Rivera. According to the DAILY CALLER, he was employed by a Republican small business owner

  • “He worked on Yarrabee Farms, which is owned by the family of GOP official Craig Lang, who was a former 2018 Republican candidate for state secretary of agriculture, according to reports by the Des Moines Register.”

who may have illegally had him in their employ? However, he was an example of the DACA young so did he have his temporary papers? I have no idea. Nor would I know if he immigrated legally if he would have passed all the checks/balances.

As an side…

Is this man a racist or bigot? He was the co-founder of the United Farm Workers union, and spoke out against the racist organization, La Raza, as well as calling workers who crossed the border “illegal immigrants” and “wetbacks.”

“In the mid 1970s, he conducted the ‘Illegals Campaign’ to identify and report illegal workers, ‘an effort he deemed second in importance only to the boycott’ (of produce from non-unionized farms), according to Pawel. She quotes a memo from Chavez that said, “If we can get the illegals out of California, we will win the strike overnight.”

“Cesar Chavez opposed illegal immigration,” Levin said during a Wednesday appearance on Fox News’ Hannity.

After saying that the premise that “compassion is an open border” is a “new idea” that has been pushed in recent times, Levin said that “a nation has a right to secure its border” and its citizens have a right to know who is coming into their country.

Chavez, who was also against ethnic organizations like La Raza, would tell illegal immigrants to get out of the country, especially because they lowered the wages of American workers. And he was often far from compassionate in handling illegal immigrants….

(NATIONAL REVIEW, BREITBART and the HUFFINGTON POST)


Josh Hawley Owns Dept of Homeland Security Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas

(Hat-Tip WEASEL ZIPPERS!) POWNED by POST MILLENNIAL

Don’t forget then Candidate Biden calling for illegal immigrants to surge the border…

Bordertown Democrats Sounding Alarm!

Democrat Congressman Vicente Gonzalez noted that Joe Biden’s border policies will be “catastrophic for our party, for our country,” when he appeared on CNN on 3/1/2021.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, who represents a district on the U.S.-Mexico border, says he has a lot of tough questions for the Biden administration on immigration policy.

10 Reasons Why Blacks Should Leave the Democratic Party

Does the Democratic Party represent the interests of black Americans? Larry Elder gives 10 reasons why blacks might consider leaving the Democratic Party.

10. School Choice
9. Social Security
8. Race-Based Preferences for Diversity
7. War on Poverty (Welfare State)
6. Illegal Immigration
5. Hostility Towards Police
4. Job Killing Regulations
3. The Great Recession (Housing Crisis)
2. Playing the Race Card for Votes
1. Pro-Abortion

Thomas Friedman Admits There Is A Border Crisis

U.S. Customs and Border Protection released video over the weekend showing the “escalation of tactics” used to smuggle illegal immigrants into the country, which now apparently involves heavily armed security.

Friedman is WRONG. Donald Trump did lay compromise on the table — the Dems rejected it. ALSO, the “hard-liners” Friedman mentions (Stephen Miler) are saying NOTHING DIFFERENT that Democrats a decade ago. Nothing. But at least the HARD-LEFT is admitting Trump is right. To Wit:

(DAILY CALLER) New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman explained on Wednesday on CNN how he thinks the U.S. government can solve the situation at the border, following his trip there.

Friedman’s appearance on the network corresponded with his op-ed from the day before, in which he described the port of entry at San Diego a “troubling scene.”….

Cory Booker Admitted Sanctuary Cities Make Us Less Safe

MARC THIESSEN: This is probably never going to happen but I think it is pure genius and I can’t understand why Democrats are upset about this. Two sets of facts, number one, it is the position of the Democratic Party that illegal aliens held by ICE should be released into the country, into our communities. During negotiations during the government shutdown, Democrats’ official negotiating position was we should limit amount the amount of beds ICE has to 35,000 and they expressly said for the purpose of forcing the Trump administration to release noncriminal aliens into the community. So they’re for releasing them into the community, periods. Secondly, they created sanctuary cities and this is their policy for the purpose of giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. NYC Mayor de Blasio wants to offer them free healthcare. Stacy Abrams wants them to vote in local elections. Governor Newsom wants to make the entire state a sanctuary, so how can you be upset about President Trump offering to do exactly what you say you want to do?

“Winning!” Here is a link to a YOUTUBE version if wanted.