web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "crisis"

Watch: Virtue Signaling Swedes Say They’d Take Refugees Into Their Home Until Presented With One

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-1-1-620x343 Watch: Virtue Signaling Swedes Say They’d Take Refugees Into Their Home Until Presented With One virtue signaling Sweden refugees Rape Politics migrants International Affairs Front Page Stories Europe crisis crime Allow Media Exception

If there’s one thing I love about people who viture signal, it’s that when it comes time to practice what they preach, they suddenly have excuses as to why they don’t practice the virtues they’ve been preaching to you about.

Take, for instance, the good people of Sweden. The country leans so heavily left that it’s fallen over into the muck of its own making. It’s welcomed in refugees from the middle east, and as a result, has seen a spiking crime and rape epidemic that nabbed it the title of “rape capital of the west.”

Instead of helping the people of its country, the Swedish government went about covering up its rape statistics. What’s more, the Swedish people are seemingly proud of their newfound troubles and are outwardly welcoming to the refugees.

Outwardly being the keyword here.

Recently, a small group set out to get the reactions of Swedes when asked if they would be willing to take refugees in themselves. Every person in the video answered they would.

They were likely feeling pretty proud of themselves as they answered the question, but then the video makers suddenly put their convictions to the test as the Swedes were then presented with a migrant they could take in. A grown man named “Ali,” who needed a place to live.

Naturally, the people who were so welcoming just moments ago began desperately searching any excuse in the book to not have to take in the migrant and all their talk about helping those in need looked oh so foolish.

It makes you wonder what kind of society we’d be living in if people were just more honest with themselves and others about their beliefs. If Swedes would just stand up and say that they’re not into the idea of refugees living in their homes because of the fact that they know it may invite all sorts of troubles, then perhaps Sweden would be a country much lower in crime and rape.

But this simple video just unveiled the truth about virtue signaling. It’s many people creating problems for others that they themselves wouldn’t take on. This video may have taken part in Sweden, but it’s a principle that applies to everyone.

The post Watch: Virtue Signaling Swedes Say They’d Take Refugees Into Their Home Until Presented With One appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-1-1-300x166 Watch: Virtue Signaling Swedes Say They’d Take Refugees Into Their Home Until Presented With One virtue signaling Sweden refugees Rape Politics migrants International Affairs Front Page Stories Europe crisis crime Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history

Westlake Legal Group t-10 Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history wall Trump The Blog Problem migrant immigration gallup crisis border

These results don’t tell us which side’s policies the public favors as a solution to the immigration crisis, merely that they recognize that there is a crisis.

But since one party’s presidential nominee wants to throw everything he’s got at closing the border, from a wall to asylum reform to new “safe third country” agreements with neighbors, and the other party’s leading voices seem to want to open the border to such an insane degree that even liberal pundits have begun scratching their heads, I’m guessing this boils down to “Advantage: Trump.”

For now. If the crisis were to persist another 15 months, good luck to POTUS arguing that he should get another four years to try to handle an emergency which he couldn’t handle in two.

Westlake Legal Group 2-4 Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history wall Trump The Blog Problem migrant immigration gallup crisis border

The parties aren’t equal in their concern, with 42 percent of Republicans saying immigration is the country’s most important problem versus 20 percent each of Democrats and indies. But (a) immigration worries among Republicans are destined to bind some Trump-wary righties to him who might have otherwise considered voting Democrat next year and (b) getting 20 percent of the opposition to say this is the country’s top priority is no small thing, especially given the short shrift the issue has gotten in the Democratic presidential primaries relative to health care, taxing the rich, and, ah, busing.

Here’s the partisan difference in a nutshell. Trump this morning…

…versus Ilhan Omar last night:

Congrats to the congresswoman on somehow shoehorning open borders, universal health care, and abortion into the same tweet. I bet AOC could have worked climate change into it too, though.

NPR also polled recently on this issue, asking whether the public thinks various immigration positions which Dem candidates have endorsed are good ideas or bad ones. Decriminalizing border crossings pulled a 27/66 good/bad rating, with even Democratic adults underwater at 45/47. Instituting a national health insurance program to cover illegals polled better with Dems but not much better with Americans overall, landing at 33/62. That’s the good news for Trump, that most Americans agree that some of the left’s favorite ideas on immigration are bananas. The bad news is that various other Democratic proposals unrelated to immigration polled much better in NPR’s survey: From a public option for health insurance to a pathway to citizenship for illegals to, ugh, the Green New Deal, majorities are in favor of all — although NPR conveniently didn’t mention the price tag that each program would carry.

We might deduce from that that so long as the national conversation stays focused on immigration, Trump is more likely to win reelection. The more it strays from immigration, the less likely. Although…

Westlake Legal Group 4 Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history wall Trump The Blog Problem migrant immigration gallup crisis border

And:

Westlake Legal Group 8 Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history wall Trump The Blog Problem migrant immigration gallup crisis border

Again, how good does Trump look on immigration next year if the crisis continues and he’s proved himself seemingly powerless to stop it? Especially bearing in mind that the Dem nominee will likely tack towards the center on the issue next year.

The post Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group t-10-300x153 Gallup: Share who say immigration is America’s most important problem reaches highest level in modern history wall Trump The Blog Problem migrant immigration gallup crisis border   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Mark Sanford presidential campaign ad(?): We have a fiscal crisis whether we want to admit it or not

Westlake Legal Group ms Mark Sanford presidential campaign ad(?): We have a fiscal crisis whether we want to admit it or not Trump The Blog south carolina Mark Sanford fiscal Deficit debt crisis

LOL at this guy trying to win righties over with something other than brute lib-triggering.

Although, even by the degraded modern Republican cardinal rule of “we’re for whatever the left is against,” you would think it’d be easier to maintain GOP interest in shrinking government. By one estimate the Green New Deal will cost $93 trillion, no typo. It’s no exaggeration to say that AOC and the Squad think the national debt should be waaaaaay bigger than it already is. They also think the problem of not being able to pay for federal programs can be solved by, ahem, simply printing more money. “Slash spending, reform entitlements” is the most obvious way to own the libs.

But it turns out the subject of debt and deficits is the one exception to the cardinal rule. Perfect.

Here’s Mark Sanford, who lost his congressional primary last year for the right-wing heresy of not thinking much of Trump, announcing that … actually, it’s not clear what he’s announcing. He’s considering a primary challenge to POTUS, but he’s also seriously considering passing on electoral politics and launching an “advocacy organization.” In fact, this is the first ad I’ve ever seen in which an apparent candidate for high office makes clear right in the ad that he may *not* end up running after all. He might go off and found “Nerds for Tax Cuts” or whatever instead.

Maybe wait a week until you’ve made up your mind before cutting the ad, eh, Mark?

I like him but he’s one weird dude. Always has been, and not just for his infamous “hiking of the Appalachian Trail.”

He was on “The View” today as well — another move typical of a presidential candidate, not a think-tank founder — and naturally was asked about the topic du jour. That clip is interesting because it shows Sanford grappling with his biggest challenge if he ends up primarying Trump: How does he resist getting sucked into talking about the daily Trump controversy and away from what he really wants to be talking about, spending? You can see an early example of that here, with the hosts pressuring him to call Trump’s tweets about the Squad racist and Sanford obliging them but also making a point of noting that they’re playing Trump’s game by focusing on it. America’s political class can’t go chasing every shiny object he tosses at them, he scolds. Uh, Mark, m’man, I have bad news. We can and we will.

The post Mark Sanford presidential campaign ad(?): We have a fiscal crisis whether we want to admit it or not appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group ms-300x159 Mark Sanford presidential campaign ad(?): We have a fiscal crisis whether we want to admit it or not Trump The Blog south carolina Mark Sanford fiscal Deficit debt crisis   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

BREAKING: Trump Makes Major Change to Asylum Rules

The Trump administration has finally moved forward with making major changes to our asylum rules.

This is long overdue.

It makes no sense for any true asylum seeker to to be allowed to country shop on their journey. The point of asylum is protection from immediate danger. It is not to garner the most economically beneficial situation. If someone is truly physically threatened in Guatemala, there is no reason for them to travel almost 2,000 miles, paying off drug cartels and putting their children in mortal danger, to cross the U.S. border illegally.

We simply do not have the amount of facilities, immigration judges, nor welfare to continue to sustain the influx of migrants currently coming. Asylum is not something that should be abused and allowing so many to do so only makes it harder for legitimate claims to be adjudicated. Lax enforcement and asylum abuse only incentivize more to come, which leads to more abuse, more rapes, and more sick and dead children.

The United States is an incredibly charitable nation, but we simply can not absorb the entirety of the world’s poor. This change to asylum laws is common sense and should be allowed to go into effect.

With that said, you’ll be able to count the days on your hands before a liberal judge puts an injunction in place, stopping this rule change. We aren’t governed by elected officials anymore, only the whims of district judges.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post BREAKING: Trump Makes Major Change to Asylum Rules appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group migrant-caravan-adjusted-cropped-AP-300x159 BREAKING: Trump Makes Major Change to Asylum Rules Trump administration Politics migrants Illegal Immigrants Front Page Stories Front Page donald trump crisis CBP Caravans Breaking News Border Emergency Asylum Rules Asylum Abuse Activist Judges   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Logic Need Not Apply As California Passes Law Giving Free Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants

Westlake Legal Group gavin-newsom-fortunate-son-620x284 Logic Need Not Apply As California Passes Law Giving Free Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants United States unintended consequences unfunded liabilities Politics Illegal Immigration Gavin Newsom Front Page Stories Front Page Financial Trouble Featured Story dumb democrats crisis California border patrol

California Gov. Gavin Newsom just signed into law a bill that will extend free healthcare coverage to illegal immigrants 0-25 years old (the coverage for minors had been previously passed).

On Tuesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law State Bill 104, which now extends health care benefits to illegal immigrants between the ages of 19-25, in addition to the law that already had guaranteed coverage to illegal immigrants under the age of 19.

The Hill noted, “The bill, introduced earlier this year, is estimated to cover about 90,000 low-income residents overall and comes with a roughly $98 million price tag.”

This comes as California’s financial future gets even bleaker. While some are claiming a recent single year surplus means everything is all good, that ignores the unfunded liabilities and the fact that they have almost four times as much debt as cash on hand (and states can’t just print more money to cover shortfalls).

In fact, things are so bad that of the $5T in unfunded state and local liabilities in the United States, a full $1T of it resides in California, which only makes up 12% of the actual population in the country. California’s debt-to-GDP ratio is also approaching that of several eurozone countries that experienced economic collapses.

Worth noting is that cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco are dealing with an explosion of homelessness right now, many of which are mentally ill or drug addled. Instead of spending the proper resources to try to handle that issue, California is using its already finite, over-strapped resources to give free healthcare to illegal immigrants. Meanwhile, crime has spiked and feces litter the streets as homeless encampments spring up everywhere.

Keep in mind, there are plenty of poor Americans in the state not getting such coverage. It’s actually gotten to the point in California that it could be preferable to be in the country illegally.

Even past the financial considerations, giving free healthcare to illegal immigrants only incentivizes more illegal immigration. That means more money for the cartels, more women raped on the journey, more sick and dead children, and further strain on an already resource-starved Border Patrol. This also means that the “price-tag” for this program will balloon as more and more people show up, creating yet more liabilities for California they can’t pay.

It’s completely irresponsible and ignores all the unintended consequences that are ultimately produced by such a move. That’s a trademark of progressivism though. As long as it feels good, it’s worth doing. Who cares if it actually makes the situation worse, right?

As a moral imperative, I’d love to give everybody on this planet free healthcare. But I recognize that’s not only impossible, trying to do would could cause far more harm than good if it ends up bankrupting everyone in the end.

I’ll end by mentioning the other reason none of this is sustainable. Because of California’s ridiculous finical decisions and over-regulation, which has lead to high taxes and housing shortages, they are experiencing massive emigration to other states. Their tax base shrank to the tune of over 1M people between 2007-2016. Adding more and more debt as you continue to lose tax payers is a recipe for disaster.

But Gavin Newsom got to smile for the cameras and that’s what’s really important here.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

 

The post Logic Need Not Apply As California Passes Law Giving Free Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 02f7c7e0-4bf6-401e-9693-e92c39291877-300x153 Logic Need Not Apply As California Passes Law Giving Free Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants United States unintended consequences unfunded liabilities Politics Illegal Immigration Gavin Newsom Front Page Stories Front Page Financial Trouble Featured Story dumb democrats crisis California border patrol   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

$300K anually for one bathroom for L.A.’s homeless?

Westlake Legal Group toilets $300K anually for one bathroom for L.A.’s homeless? The Blog los angeles homeless crisis bathrooms

As has already been established, the homelessness problem in Los Angeles has long since reached epidemic levels. Officials estimate that there are currently more than 36,000 displaced individuals living on the streets of the City of Angels. So in addition to people dumping trash all over the streets, there are homeless people literally relieving themselves on the pavement, with growing deposits of excrement constantly needing to be cleaned up and fears of disease rising.

So what’s to be done? The obvious answer is toilets, right? More toilets open to the homeless population should tidy up the situation nicely. But that’s not going to happen any time soon because the City Council has been informed that it will cost more than $300K for each toilet – staffed with a couple of attendants – that they put out on the streets. (L.A. Times)

It seems like an obvious fix to the squalor and stench as homelessness surges on Los Angeles streets: more restrooms.

But L.A. has estimated that staffing and operating a mobile bathroom can cost more than $300,000 annually — a price tag that has galled some politicians. During budget talks this spring, city officials estimated that providing toilets and showers for every homeless encampment in need would cost more than $57 million a year.

“How many single-family homes could you build for that much money?” Councilman Paul Krekorian asked at a hearing at City Hall last month, saying that L.A. had to find a cheaper solution.

This is a real hammer and nails approach to a serious problem that would probably work pretty well if you had an unlimited budget. But the city is already pinching pennies and spending $57M annually on toilets and bathrooms for the homeless encampments is beyond their reach at the moment.

Consider all of the complications involved. Portable facilities need to be emptied on a daily basis and cleaned regularly to tamp down on the spread of disease. Considering where they will be placed and the problems with violence in those areas, each of the bathroom/shower stations have to be manned around the clock. And who are you going to hire to perform that tasty job, and how much would you have to pay someone to do it? It would have to be someone who can handle themselves in a potentially violent situation most likely someone who is armed. (At least with crowd control equipment if not actual firearms.)

You’re basically talking about an entirely new branch of city government devoted to nothing but toilets and showers for the homeless. And if you can figure out a way to manage a budget in the tens of millions to do all this work, not to mention the cost of city personnel to organize and manage the effort, perhaps there’s another way to deal with this. You won’t need to provide thousands of portable bathrooms and showers if you get rid of the homelessness problem driving the need for them.

No, I’m not talking about arresting or shipping out all of the homeless (except possibly the illegal aliens among them). This is Los Angeles we’re talking about here. It’s the home of Hollywood and one of the largest concentrations of wealth in the nation. And yet in the midst of all the luxury and capital, there is a literal army of people who are so destitute that they can’t put a roof over their own heads and they’re defecating in the streets. One of the City Councilmen, Paul Krekorian, asked: “how many single-family homes could you build for $57 million?” It’s a fair question. Given the price of real estate there, I’ll say maybe… two (?) in a lower cost of living part of the city.

But as I said, this is an area that’s home to a vast amount of wealth. How about establishing some larger scale homeless housing shelters, complete with security forces, bathrooms, and all the rest? And if the city can’t come up with the money, perhaps all of those compassionate liberal millionaires in the film industry could kick in to cover the cost. A small percentage of the profits from a couple of summer blockbusters per year could easily do the trick. Or does their money only go to the Democratic Party?

The post $300K anually for one bathroom for L.A.’s homeless? appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group toilets-300x153 $300K anually for one bathroom for L.A.’s homeless? The Blog los angeles homeless crisis bathrooms   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

AOC Flips Again, Goes Back to Saying We’ve Only Got 12 Years to Save the World

Westlake Legal Group yellow-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-pointing-yellow-SCREENSHOT-620x339 AOC Flips Again, Goes Back to Saying We’ve Only Got 12 Years to Save the World twitter power grab Politics New York Moron House Global Warming Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats crisis Crazy Congress Climate Change AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 12 Years Left

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is talking about global warming again and she still can’t get her story straight.

After making several public appearances claiming that we only had 12 years to act on global war…excuse me…”climate change,” she suddenly reversed course a few weeks ago.

You see, she was just joking and if you believed her, well then it’s you that is the moron.

This never made any sense because in all the instances she made the claim, she was clearly not joking. But hey, she’s AOC, so making wild claims is kind of her thing. She also knows the media will rush to defend her, so she’s pretty comfortable with not being consistent.

Welp, AOC has decided that we all only have 12 years left to live on our current trajectory again.

Got whiplash yet?

What climate scientists is she even talking about? I’m curious if she’s ever actually cited a source for her crazy statements. I bet she hasn’t.

Also, notice that she mocks the idea of “communist cow farts,” ignoring the fact that it was her office the released a FAQ to the media asserting that cow farts were something needing to be eliminated. It was also those same FAQ which proposed paying people not to work. Is it really our fault for responding to her idiocy?

But again, she knows the media will play along and they certainly did when she suddenly claimed the FAQ was an “early draft,” because early drafts are typically pushed out as part of a full media campaign and then never updated with later drafts. It’s all so stupid.

There’s something perhaps a bit more insidious in her comments though.

As she goes back to claiming we’ve only got 12 years to live, you get the sense that there’s literally nothing she won’t justify to fight her made up crisis. This is the danger of politicians trying to use false urgency to push their power grabs. If the world is going to end, who needs freedom right? There’s no doubt in my mind that AOC thinks that way and we see it come out in her statements frequently.

But hey, maybe the media will actually call her out for her flip-flop-flip here?

Westlake Legal Group seinfeld-laughing-SCREENSHOT-620x332 AOC Flips Again, Goes Back to Saying We’ve Only Got 12 Years to Save the World twitter power grab Politics New York Moron House Global Warming Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats crisis Crazy Congress Climate Change AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 12 Years Left

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post AOC Flips Again, Goes Back to Saying We’ve Only Got 12 Years to Save the World appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group alexandria-ocasio-cortez-pointing-SCREENSHOT-300x162 AOC Flips Again, Goes Back to Saying We’ve Only Got 12 Years to Save the World twitter power grab Politics New York Moron House Global Warming Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats crisis Crazy Congress Climate Change AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 12 Years Left   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Pelosi: Nadler’s right, this is a constitutional crisis

Westlake Legal Group pelosi-nadlers-right-this-is-a-constitutional-crisis Pelosi: Nadler’s right, this is a constitutional crisis white house Trump The Blog subpoenas pelosi nadler House democrats crisis constitutional

Westlake Legal Group p-1 Pelosi: Nadler’s right, this is a constitutional crisis white house Trump The Blog subpoenas pelosi nadler House democrats crisis constitutional

My hot take for today is that this cynical strategy of shouting “constitutional crisis!”, which is clearly aimed at appeasing pro-impeachment progressives, will backfire by stoking their desire for impeachment instead. Even friendly outlets like CNN have taken to asking Democratic guests why, if the White House’s refusal to comply with subpoenas is really a “constitutional crisis,” they don’t just impeach Trump already. Democrats seem to have no good answer except to mumble vaguely that “we’re not there yet” or that “there are other options.” Pelosi was asked about it in her presser today too. Quote: “Impeach or nothing — it’s not that. It’s a path that is producing results and gathering information.”

She’ll get back to you. In the meantime, please enjoy some complimentary heavy breathing about a “constitutional crisis” instead.

Are there other options besides impeachment if Democrats are serious about this? Here’s one, I guess:

Among the options they are considering is to bundle contempt citations for multiple Trump administration officials into one overarching package that could be referred to the Federal District Court here, in much the way Congress looked to the courts to compel President Richard M. Nixon to turn over tape recordings of his Oval Office conversations. Nixon’s refusal to do so prompted impeachment proceedings…

Mr. Cummings also said Democrats should consider “inherent contempt” — the congressional power, last used in the 1930s, to jail officials who defy subpoenas. Mr. Connolly, who leads an oversight subcommittee, agreed.

“We should be putting people in jail,” Mr. Connolly said.

Would throwing Bill Barr and Don McGahn in a dungeon be considered more or less draconian than impeachment by most of the public? We’ve reached a point of such relentless partisan rancor that I’m not sure impeachment would be viewed as that extraordinary a development; imprisoning cabinet officials definitely would. If nothing else, it’d be hard to reconcile the crocodile tears that were shed in 2016 over Trumpers chanting “Lock her up” about a political opponent with literally jailing the Attorney General of the United States for making the sort of executive privilege claim that every presidential administration eventually ends up making.

Keith Whittington, a Princeton professor who’s writing a book on constitutional crises, knows a stunt when he sees one:

[Nadler] feels the need to elevate a relatively routine dispute over the scope of executive privilege into the last gasp of democracy. Only if the House gains access to the last few sentences under redaction in the Mueller report can America be spared the collapse of the republic and the ascension of a “monarchy.” Only if Attorney General William Barr can be cross-examined by committee staff in a public hearing will we be able to avoid Donald Trump making “himself a king.” Someone has been watching too much Game of Thrones.

Politicians have become incentivized to declare constitutional crises because it enhances their own importance as saviors and demonizes their opponents as illegitimate. The rhetoric of constitutional crisis attempts to short-circuit routine constitutional processes and justify extraordinary and extraconstitutional responses. Donald Trump has played this game as well.

Andrew Napolitano is right, I think. It’s a real constitutional crisis once one branch or the other starts disobeying court orders. Until then it’s two co-equal branches asserting their constitutional prerogatives.

The post Pelosi: Nadler’s right, this is a constitutional crisis appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group p-1-300x159 Pelosi: Nadler’s right, this is a constitutional crisis white house Trump The Blog subpoenas pelosi nadler House democrats crisis constitutional   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hell Freezes Over as The New York Times Says “Give Trump His Border Money”

Westlake Legal Group hell-freezes-over-as-the-new-york-times-says-give-trump-his-border-money Hell Freezes Over as The New York Times Says “Give Trump His Border Money” The New York Times Politics Ice Hell Froze Over Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats crisis CPB Congress border funding Border Emergency

Westlake Legal Group AP_080722043710-620x306 Hell Freezes Over as The New York Times Says “Give Trump His Border Money” The New York Times Politics Ice Hell Froze Over Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats crisis CPB Congress border funding Border Emergency

I had to double take at this headline.

The New York Times has endorsed giving Trump the $4.5B he requested in funds for the border. Not just a single writer either, it’s the whole editorial board.

The New York Times editorial board urged Congress to give President Trump the administration’s requested $4.5 billion in emergency funding for the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“President Trump is right: There is a crisis at the southern border,” the editorial board wrote Sunday in a piece titled, “Congress, Give Trump his Border Money.”

Crisis is the santizied word liberals like to use about the border because they are loathe to say “emergency” and possibly give Trump any credit. We all know what it is though. Over 100,000 people crossed illegally last month. The CPB don’t have the manpower or resources to handle the situation. Our asylum laws are being abused at a ridiculous level and Congress refuses to act.

If what’s going on at the border isn’t an emergency, then the word has lost all meaning.

While the Times manages to get the top line decision right, they still had to get their shots in.

“There is no pressing national security threat — no invasion of murderers, drug cartels or terrorists. No matter how often Mr. Trump delivers such warnings, they bear little resemblance to the truth,” it said.

They of course base that on absolutely nothing. When you have 100,000 un-vetted people crossing in a few weeks time, the idea that the drug cartels and gangs aren’t heavily taking advantage of that is nonsensical. They are out to make money, among other things. As the system is being overrun, it’s common sense that bad actors would work toward their own gain.  The Times assuming otherwise is pure gaslighting.

“None of the money would go toward Mr. Trump’s border wall,” it wrote. “Several hundred million dollars would, however, go toward shoring up border security operations, including increasing the number of detention beds overseen by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. This, for Democrats, is a nonstarter.”

“But until better policies are in place, Democrats need to find a way to provide money for adequate shelter,” the board continued, encouraging both Democrats and the White House to be open to conditions from the other side of the aisle.

Perhaps the Times should examine why it’s acceptable for Democrats to reject increasing the number of beds instead of just passing over it as a legitimate position to hold. That never made any sense and always seemed inhumane at best, yet the media have done nothing to put pressure on Democrats for holding CPB hostage. Instead, they spend all their time gnashing their teeth over whether Trump is accurately describing every asylum seeker properly.

You can almost feel the torture in every word as you read the Times’ article endorsing Trump’s funding request. They really, really would have preferred not to write this. What we are seeing here is a decision driven by pure pragmatism, even as they long to push their political narrative in a different direction. I guess that’s better than nothing though. Perhaps the Democrat party should try the same thing?

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Hell Freezes Over as The New York Times Says “Give Trump His Border Money” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 2zr8u6-1-300x201 Hell Freezes Over as The New York Times Says “Give Trump His Border Money” The New York Times Politics Ice Hell Froze Over Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats crisis CPB Congress border funding Border Emergency   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Coulter: Let’s face it, this border crisis wouldn’t be as bad under a Democratic president

Westlake Legal Group coulter-lets-face-it-this-border-crisis-wouldnt-be-as-bad-under-a-democratic-president Coulter: Let’s face it, this border crisis wouldn’t be as bad under a Democratic president wall Trump The Blog immigration hoover firing line crisis border asylum Ann Coulter

Westlake Legal Group c-5 Coulter: Let’s face it, this border crisis wouldn’t be as bad under a Democratic president wall Trump The Blog immigration hoover firing line crisis border asylum Ann Coulter

Man, she really wants to vote for a Democrat next year, doesn’t she?

To think, after all that garbage about a Flight 93 election in 2016, it turns out that electing Hillary would have been the “storm the cockpit” option at the border.

She’s overstating her case in the clip below to get under Trump’s and his fans’ skin but a few realities are undeniable:

1. Trump will lie and lie about progress at the border (and everything else) and his more cultish fans will believe anything he says. A Democrat “couldn’t just tweet something out and have everybody say ‘yay,’” an annoyed Coulter notes at one point in the video. For months she’s tweeted sarcastically to counter Trump’s border reassurances. “NUMBER OF MILES OF WALL BUILT ON OUR SOUTHERN BORDER SINCE TRUMP HAS BEEN PRESIDENT: ZERO,” she wrote in a column last month titled “Trump By The Numbers.” There’s not a shred of doubt that a Democratic president presiding over the crush of phony asylum seekers Trump is coping with right now would be rhetorically shredded by border hawks every day, just as there’s no doubt that obstruction allegations about a Democrat like the ones Mueller laid out in his report yesterday would have Republicans demanding impeachment. A Democrat would need to show progress on the border, not merely claim it.

2. The partisan flip side of the argument in point one is that rank-and-file Democrats would have been muted in their criticism of tougher border enforcement measures implemented by a Democratic president. That’s not to say President Hillary would have tried to separate families, for instance; Trump has clearly gone further in some ways that even a centrist liberal would. But Obama famously put unaccompanied minors in “cages” during the last border crisis in 2014. New tent cities and chicken-wire detention facilities built by a Democrat to cope with the current crush would have passed practically without comment from his/her party. It would have been fascinating to see how outspoken in favor of open borders Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or other radical freshmen Dems would have been if President Hillary were managing a border crackdown. Although, given the likelihood of a GOP midterm victory, maybe there’d be no AOC or Ilhan Omar in Congress under President Clinton. Or, if there was, they’d be part of a rump minority caucus whom no one needed to pay attention to.

3. It’s possible that Trump’s tough talk about the border without commensurately tough action is actually making the border stampede worse. Various news reports about migrants traveling north from Central America have noted how coyotes and other traffickers have tried to take advantage of Trump’s policies, warning would-be immigrants back home that the border is closing soon so they’d better act now. Trump’s recent “threat” to dump illegals on sanctuary cities might also be backfiring:

In fact, Suro said, the Trump threat to send Central American immigrants to sanctuary cities isn’t a threat at all and could very well be a dream come true for many fleeing the violence in their home countries. This is especially true if they are sent to big cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago and New York, where most of the immigration courts and judges are located, facilitating efficient adjudication, he said.

These cities also have substantial legal resources and immigrant rights organizations to help new arrivals navigate the legal process and resettle. And most importantly, Suro said, they have large well-established communities of Latino immigrants, including many from the Northern Triangle nations of El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, as well as relatives of asylum seekers who can help them find housing, jobs and services.

“If you were to design the plan for resettlement of these immigrants that was meant to be orderly and cost effective to the immigrants, you would do this,” Suro said. “This is really good policy design. … It’s what a great many of these migrants would want.”

Obviously Trump’s not as insulated from political pressure as Coulter suggests. He demanded a shutdown in December in a sort of blind hope that it would force Democrats to cough up money for the wall, fearing that his base expected some sort of action on that before 2020. Although you know what she’d say to that: If he cared about actually building the wall, he would have leaned on Republicans to do it when they had total control of Congress. A shutdown on the eve of Pelosi taking power is more like kabuki, aimed at creating the illusion of action. He fought with the Dems on a big stage, knowing that even if he lost his base would (a) respect him for trying and (b) blame Pelosi for any ensuing crisis on the border.

Margaret Hoover asks a fair question in the clip. What *exactly* would a Democratic president do differently than what Trump’s doing now? What would be the Democratic solution to asylum laws that entitle illegals subject to expedited removal to remain in the U.S., often under catch-and-release, while awaiting their appeal? What would Obama or Clinton do to streamline the asylum consideration process so that rejected applicants can be removed quickly? In theory a Dem president could have brokered a compromise with Congress, as either a Democratic or Republican House would have been willing to work on border enforcement at the behest of a president from the left. But probably the open-borders nuts in Pelosi’s caucus would have demanded some sort of amnesty concession before agreeing to that, which Republicans wouldn’t agree to, thus forcing the president to take executive action of some sort which both sides would have grudgingly tolerated — the GOP because it would mean more enforcement and Dems out of pure partisan loyalty.

The post Coulter: Let’s face it, this border crisis wouldn’t be as bad under a Democratic president appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group c-5-300x153 Coulter: Let’s face it, this border crisis wouldn’t be as bad under a Democratic president wall Trump The Blog immigration hoover firing line crisis border asylum Ann Coulter   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com