Biden Says He ‘Inherited One God-Awful Mess at the Border’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by WikiImages from Pixabay

During a Friday interview on NBC News’ “Today Show” with co-host Craig Melvin, President Joe Biden said his administration “inherited one God-awful mess at the border.” He blames it on “the failure to have a real transition — cooperation from the last administration, like every other administration has done.” I think even most Democrats realize the stunning dishonesty of these remarks.

“The two departments that didn’t give us access to virtually anything [during the transition] were the immigration and the Defense Department,” Biden told Melvin. “So we didn’t find out they had fired a whole lot of people, that they were understaffed considerably.”

Melvin pointed out that in April, 170,000 people had been apprehended at the border and that 22,000 unaccompanied minors are currently in the U.S. “That’s a record. That sounds to most folks like a crisis.”

“Well look, it’s way down now. We’ve now gotten control,” declared Biden. “For example, they didn’t plan for – it comes every year – this flow …  they didn’t have the beds that were available. They didn’t plan for the overflow. They didn’t plan for the Department of Health and Human Services to have places to take the kids …”

Not even Melvin appeared to be buying it.

Here’s the reason why tens of thousands of illegal immigrants have flocked to our southern border, Mr. President. You invited them. In fact, this was a central issue in your campaign. Your formal invitation can be found on your campaign website and it’s called “The Biden Plan for Securing our Values as a Nation of Immigrants.”

One of the Biden Administration’s first moves was to end former President Donald Trump’s “remain in Mexico” policy and to resurrect the Obama era policy of “catch and release.” Knowing that asylum seekers would be released into the U.S. after they’d been processed at the border to await their court dates was akin to putting up a large flashing neon invitation. “Come on over!”

No matter how hard the President tries to spin it, Americans know that Trump had this situation under control by the end of his term. All Biden had to do was maintain those policies.

Over the last several days, three Democratic senators have criticized Biden over the border crisis.

Following Biden’s State of the Union address, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly said, “While I share President Biden’s urgency in fixing our broken immigration system, what I didn’t hear tonight was a plan to address the immediate crisis at the border, and I will continue holding this administration accountable to deliver the resources and staffing necessary for a humane, orderly process as we work to improve border security, support local economies, and fix our immigration system.”

In a statement to Fox News, Kelly’s colleague from Arizona, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s office wrote, “Sen. Sinema has been clear that she – along with Sen. Kelly – wants to see more action from the administration to address the border crisis and support Arizona border communities. She’s spoken directly with administration officials on this.”

Even Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii was forced to admit that Vice President Kamala Harris, whom Biden has tasked with leading the White House response to the “migration challenge,” needs to do more.

During an interview on PBS News’ “Firing Line,” host Margaret Hoover asked Hirono (whom she said was a “trailblazing lawmaker”), if she would urge Harris to visit the border.

“Of course,” Hirono replied.

Hoover asked why Harris hasn’t done so yet.

“I don’t know. Maybe — We have a few other things to deal with, like the pandemic and everything else, so I’m not going to point fingers at her in the sense of — I hope that she will go down to the border,” answered Hirono. “I hope that we can have a comprehensive, ‘whole of government’ approach to what we need to do to have a humane immigration system.”

“According to an ABC News poll, the majority of Americans actually disapprove of President Biden’s handling of the border,” noted Hoover. “Senator, why is it so difficult for some to call the situation at the border a crisis?”

“I think the President calls it a crisis. I would call it a crisis. We can call it a challenge. But we know what the factors are. We know what is happening. So whatever you call it, we’re going to need to deal with it. We’re going to need to address it in a humane way.”

So why will no one in the Biden Administration take action to end the border crisis? Conservative commentator Candace Owens provided the best answer I’ve ever heard during a March appearance on Fox News’ “Life, Liberty and Levin.” I posted about this interview here.

Owens begins with an explanation of how the Democratic Party, which claims to help blacks through all of their social programs, has actually suppressed them. While it may appear on the surface that Democrats have supported blacks by providing for them financially and rhetorically, their “largesse” has actually been a mechanism designed to hold them back, preventing them from taking the reins and succeeding, from breaking out of the cycle of poverty. Most blacks see only that Democrats are more generous than Republicans and have loyally supported them at the polls for decades. Many of us have known this for a long time.

Owens larger point, however, is that the black population has not grown fast enough for the Democrats. So, they are now “importing” a new class of voters. Democrats will ensure these people receive health care and that they are housed, fed and even educated. The party will see to it that the illegals now flooding into the U.S. from Central and South America in record numbers will become completely dependent on them for their survival.

Just as the majority of blacks continue to vote Democratic, so too will the Hispanics. The cycle of poverty will repeat itself.

“Everyone keeps calling this a border crisis Mark. This isn’t a border crisis, this is a border plan,” Owens tells Levin.

“They are trying to import a new class of voters. They are trying to say to the Mexican-Americans, to the South-Americans … ‘we will help you, we’ll give you free stuff like we gave black Americans free stuff after Jim Crow ended. We’re gonna welfare-ize you. We’re gonna give you handouts, we’re gonna marry you to the government like we married black Americans to the government.’ It’s pure evil.”

So, in response to Biden’s feeble attempt to blame the Trump Administration for the border crisis: Everyone knows the Biden Administration caused the border crisis. The policy changes were made to encourage large numbers of illegals to enter the U.S. All of this was intentional. And everything seems to be going according to plan.

Black Leaders Take Aim at Sens. Sinema, Manchin Over Refusal to Nix Filibuster; ‘They Are, in Effect, Supporting Racism’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

The Senate website defines the filibuster as an “informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.” This device is meant to prevent the party in the Senate minority from being completely overpowered by the majority party.

Prior to the election, the Indivisible Project, a movement dedicated to advancing the election of progressive candidates, explained why the filibuster is bad news for Democrats:

“It’s simple: none of the progressive issues that Democratic candidates and congressional leaders are discussing today will become law unless we do something about the filibuster.”

“If [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell expects to be the Grim Reaper of progressive policies, the scythe he’ll use is the Senate filibuster. Unless we change the rules.”

With a 50-50 balance of power in the Senate, Democrats control the upper chamber by the slimmest margin possible.

Current Senate rules require a minimum of 60 votes to pass legislation. Some Democrats have hoped to abolish the filibuster so that only a simple majority of 51 votes (50 Democratic senators plus Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote) would be necessary to advance their progressive agenda.

Their latest challenge is that two Democratic Senators, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, have both quite strongly announced their opposition to abolishing the filibuster.

Just two months ago, a representative for Sinema told The Washington Post’s White House reporter, Seung Min Kim, that “Kyrsten is against eliminating the filibuster, and she is not open to changing her mind about eliminating the filibuster.”

Up until then, conservatives had been counting on Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to save us from being overrun by leftist lesiglation. Manchin won re-election in 2018 in a state that went overwhelmingly for former President Donald Trump by nearly 40 points in 2020 and over 41 in 2016.

Shortly after the announcement from Team Sinema, Politico reported that Manchin was “emphatic” that he “will not vote to kill the filibuster.” Asked if there were any scenario in which he would change his mind, the senator replied: “None whatsoever that I will vote to get rid of the filibuster.”

Protecting the filibuster is essential to protecting us from the tyranny of the majority.

Even with the filibuster in place, Democrats can do and have already done a lot of damage. But their major radical initiatives, such as the Election Reform bill which passed the House earlier this month, granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, and stacking the Supreme Court, can be blocked by the Republicans.

Naturally, Democrats are trying to exert maximum pressure on Sinema and Manchin to change their minds.

Politico has interviewed several black civil rights leaders to find out what they plan to do about this. According to Politico, “top [civil rights] officials framed the choice as existential for a party that depends on Black and brown voters — and they are planning pressure campaigns privately and publicly to make that clear.”

Rev. Al Sharpton plans to hold town halls and rallies in Sinema’s and Manchin’s home states. He said, “The pressure that we are going to put on Sinema and Manchin is calling [the filibuster] racist and saying that they are, in effect, supporting racism. Why would they be wedded to something that has those results? Their voters need to know that.”

Sharpton cautioned Democrats that if they fail to end the filibuster, then “civil rights leaders might have less reason to help generate enthusiasm and turnout in the 2022 midterm elections without being able to point to actual laws Democrats passed.”

Sounds like a threat.

He added, “Many of us, and certainly all of us in the civil rights leadership, are committed to policies and laws and causes, not to people’s political careers. We’re not into that. We want to change the country. And if there is not feasible evidence that we’re doing that, it is not in our concern to be aggressively involved.”

Sinema and/or Manchin may yet flip, but I would be willing to bet it wouldn’t be because Al Sharpton and his merry band of civil rights leaders come to their states and call them racists.

Although politicians are famous for flip-flopping, after putting out such a strong statement of opposition as her representative did in conversation with the Washington Post reporter, I would be surprised if Sinema caved. Sharpton’s actions might just make her dig in her heels a little deeper.

Manchin, on the other hand, strikes me as less resolute than Sinema. However, he did say he was “emphatic” he wouldn’t vote to end the filibuster.

There is another option. The Senate could potentially create a carve-out specifically for voting rights legislation, a measure they’ve taken before. The Senate has created exceptions to the filibuster in the past for confirmations of Supreme Court nominees and for budget reconciliation (which is how the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill was passed).

Manchin is currently the only Senate Democrat who is not a co-sponsor of the voting reform bill known as S. 1.

On Wednesday, Manchin told reporters, “I think all of us should be able to be united around voting rights, but it should be limited to voting rights.”

But if the bill were to be limited to votings rights, according to CBS News, “it would strip provisions related to campaign finance and ethics reform, which are key priorities for progressives.”

In a Tuesday statement, “Manchin expressed concerns about S. 1, and said that he would support bipartisan legislation on voting rights.” The statement said:

As the Senate prepares to take up the For the People Act, we must work toward a bipartisan solution that protects everyone’s right to vote, secures our elections from foreign interference, and increases transparency in our campaign finance laws. Pushing through legislation of this magnitude on a partisan basis may garner short-term benefits, but will inevitably only exacerbate the distrust that millions of Americans harbor against the U.S. government.

He issued another statement on Thursday in which he reiterated his opposition to creating a carve-out to the filibuster rule specifically for voting rights. He noted that would be “like being a little bit pregnant.” You either kill the filibuster or you keep it.

Let’s hope that both he and Sinema stand by their pledges not to abolish the filibuster. All Republican senators, even those whose votes can’t always be counted on, such as Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, are unanimously opposed to ending the filibuster. They are also opposed to the voting reform bill.

Sinema and Manchin are the only thing standing between us and the enactment of the Democrats’ entire radical agenda.  Let’s hope they stand strong.