In their every press conference and interview rejecting President Trump's call for a wall along our southern border to help prevent and protect against human trafficking of women and children, the unbridled import of opioids, and the entry of criminals and terrorists into our country, the Democrats maintain that they oppose only the Wall but otherwise strongly support border security.
Just ask yourself: Side by side with their opposition to a wall, why do they also support Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States? If they truly are so concerned about protecting the public against the infiltration of Illegals into our midst, why do they seek to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement from receiving the information and tools ICE needs to remove illegal entrants safely and promptly from our land? Would that kind of helpful cooperation with ICE not be a logical part of any drone, hi-tech, and "Everything-but-a-wall" approach to protecting the border?
They support Sanctuary Cities because they want porous borders, and they will do everything humanly possible to swell the tide of illegal immigration into a tsunami.
Voting in the Ninth Circuit minority to support the President's Executive Order was U.S. Circuit Judge Ferdinand Fernandez, initially named a federal district judge by President Reagan and there after elevated by President George H.W. Bush to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
When they say they are for border security in every which way - everything, everything except for a wall - there is the truth, the proof.
The pernicious "Sanctuary City" secessionist movement from the federal government and from the supremacy of federal immigration law that has spread throughout Democrat-controlled urban polities proves definitively that all the other talk about "Protecting our borders, just not with a wall" is facially mendacious.
For the liberals and their Democrat party, the issue is not The Wall but assuring that our southern border remains porous so that the national voting electorate can continue to be transmogrified from a rooted majority-conservative constituency to a blue New Mexico, a converted-blue California, an increasingly blue-ing Nevada, and a purpling Arizona.
https://spectator.org/if-democrats-honestly-cared-about-border-security-they-would-not-support-sanctuary-cities/
Just ask yourself: Side by side with their opposition to a wall, why do they also support Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States? If they truly are so concerned about protecting the public against the infiltration of Illegals into our midst, why do they seek to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement from receiving the information and tools ICE needs to remove illegal entrants safely and promptly from our land? Would that kind of helpful cooperation with ICE not be a logical part of any drone, hi-tech, and "Everything-but-a-wall" approach to protecting the border?
They support Sanctuary Cities because they want porous borders, and they will do everything humanly possible to swell the tide of illegal immigration into a tsunami.
Voting in the Ninth Circuit minority to support the President's Executive Order was U.S. Circuit Judge Ferdinand Fernandez, initially named a federal district judge by President Reagan and there after elevated by President George H.W. Bush to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
When they say they are for border security in every which way - everything, everything except for a wall - there is the truth, the proof.
The pernicious "Sanctuary City" secessionist movement from the federal government and from the supremacy of federal immigration law that has spread throughout Democrat-controlled urban polities proves definitively that all the other talk about "Protecting our borders, just not with a wall" is facially mendacious.
For the liberals and their Democrat party, the issue is not The Wall but assuring that our southern border remains porous so that the national voting electorate can continue to be transmogrified from a rooted majority-conservative constituency to a blue New Mexico, a converted-blue California, an increasingly blue-ing Nevada, and a purpling Arizona.
https://spectator.org/if-democrats-honestly-cared-about-border-security-they-would-not-support-sanctuary-cities/
No comments:
Post a Comment