Joe Biden's border security Executive Order

When the tri-partisan Border Security Bill died in the Senate, Senate Democrats accused Republicans of selling out to Donald Trump. Republicans argued that Biden didn't need legislation to restore order to the border. When Democrats heard that, they insisted that wasn't true. What a difference 2 weeks makes.

Axios is reporting "One bold move that Biden has considered, we're told, is an executive order that would dramatically stanch the record flow of migrants into the Southwest. This could even happen in the two weeks before the address, allowing Biden to say he took action while Republicans just talk."

There's 2 problems with that scenario, neither of which will get reported by the MSM. The first problem is that the House passed HR2 on May 11, 2023. Unlike the Senate capitulation bill, which has a few decent provisions in it and tons of loopholes and poison pills to offset the positive provisions, HR2 is rock-solid. The Democrats' next problem is that the GOP will shout 'I told you so' when Biden signs this Executive Order. Why didn't he sign it months ago? This crisis didn't start last week. Sen. Cruz, (R-TX), effectively made that case at this press availability:

Picture the Democrats running on this:
What they're saying: Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) a first-term progressive who was mayor of Long Beach, told Axios that Biden should use his SOTU address to spotlight domestic victories to appeal to younger voters.

"It's gonna be a good moment for the president to re-engage on these domestic issues," Garcia said. "He's got a huge record and I think it's important to remind folks what he's done. Insulin prices, infrastructure — those are going to be critical."

Those accomplishments are ancient history, politically speaking. People are legitimately worried about open borders, gang crime rising and affordability for necessities like groceries, home heating bills and rent. Border security, not abortion, will be the top social issue in 2024. Check this out in terms of I told you so:
Biden, according to the AP, is considering potential action under Section 212(f) of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, which allows the president to deny immigration for anyone deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States."

Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination, cited the same provision when he banned the entry of individuals from majority-Muslim nations. Biden took action to overturn Trump's ban on his first day in office.

QUESTION: Why hasn't Biden been citing this provision since Inauguration Day, 2021? Did Biden think that 1,750,000 illegal immigrants coming into the U.S. in FY2021 wasn't "detrimental to the interests of the United States?" If he thought that was ok, did Biden and Democrats think it was ok for 2,400,000 illegal aliens entering the U.S. in FY2022? In FY2023, 2,500,000 illegal aliens entered the U.S. Was that ok with Biden? Apparently, it was because Biden did nothing about it.

The Trump Difference

By comparison, 460,000 illegal aliens entered the U.S. in FY2020, Trump's final year. We know that the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act has been in place since 1952 so Biden could've used that law from Day One. Why didn't Biden use that to prevent the crisis? Suddenly, Biden and Democrats are silent. Why?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue...
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp...
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio...
Read more