A so-called immigration deal that links money to “close” the border with financial support for the wars in Ukraine and Israel is apparently in the offing.
This is going on while anyone with the proverbial IQ in triple-digits knows the border was opened in the first place via executive fiat from President Joe Biden moments after he assumed office and could be closed again in the same manner at any time he wishes.
President Biden could close the southern border in one day.
That the Biden administration, with the help of an oddly complaisant Supreme Court, objects to the state of Texas employing razor wire to prevent illegal aliens from entering this country underscores, and then some, the titanic border hypocrisy of the administration.
Their real goal is to mollify an American public that is justifiably upset about the border invasion in order to get reelected and then return to the status quo ante shortly thereafter. If not, why did they wait three years to correct this?
Aiding them in the promotion of this bogus legislation are, shamefully, two leading Republicans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.).
It’s hard to believe that they would support a proposal that allows up to 5,000 (why any?) illegal aliens to pass through the border per day, which could add up to 1.8 million in a year. How many fentanyl deaths and jihadi entries would that make? How many agents of China, Cuba, Venezuela, and so forth could slip into our country, not to mention, perhaps worst of all, human traffickers?
The mind boggles.
Mr. Lankford has already been censured by his home state GOP.
But it’s not just many of their fellow Republicans who are upset with the pair.
So what’s going on with these people? Why don’t they do the obvious and call for President Biden to close the border immediately, by himself, just as he opened it?
In the cases of Mr. McConnell and Mr. Lankford, we can find elements of Trump derangement syndrome. They just don’t want former President Trump back in office, for reasons we could only guess at, and are willing to have four more years of President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris or just about anybody else, if need be.
No questions would be asked about President Biden’s possible connections with Ukraine or China, let alone Russia. That would be the unspoken part of the deal.
For Republicans in the Senate to even consider something such as this legislation is disturbing. But at least when the votes are recorded, we will know definitively where each senator stands.
This legislation is so consequential, with such an obvious lie built into it, that the votes will not easily be forgotten and, in a number of instances, will result in electoral changes at the next primary.
The disparity between Mr. McConnell’s views and those of Republican voters on this and other issues appears to be gigantic.
This does not reflect well on what was once considered “the world’s greatest deliberative body” or on our political system in general, which seems increasingly out of whack.
But here we are.
As usual, the mainstream media is doing its best to favor Democratic views, with the Associated Press, as per usual, in the lead.
In theory? Why just “in theory” when President Trump had already done much of it without significant or successful objection?
But to give the AP its due, it is a bit more realistic when it comes to answering the question, “What is the outlook for the proposed deal?”
“Prospects are dim,“ the AP wrote. ”A core group of senators negotiating the deal had hoped to release detailed text this week, but conservatives already say the measures do not go far enough to limit immigration.
“[House Speaker Mike] Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, on Friday sent a letter to colleagues that aligns him with hardline conservatives determined to sink the compromise. The speaker said the legislation would have been ‘dead on arrival in the House’ if leaked reports about it were true.”
Imagine, in this instance, they are.
Next Tuesday, I will be interviewing Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, one of the most highly regarded public officials in the state.
Mr. Skrmetti was involved in the strong stand against the administration and, alas, the Supreme Court taken at this writing by a majority 27 of our 50 states supporting the border defense barriers in Texas.
“Securing our border isn’t a political or ideological issue, it’s a matter of basic governmental competence,” he said in a statement. “The record-breaking number of illegal entries has strained resources in states and cities across the country, even those far removed from the border. Texas is fulfilling its duty to enforce the law and protect its citizens given the federal abdication of serious border enforcement. America would be better off if the federal government worked toward collaboration rather than confrontation with the states that are working to solve the problem.”
It will be interesting to see what he has to say as this controversy, crucial to the survival of our Republic, continues to evolve.
