Connect with us

Democrats

Kyrsten Sinema’s ‘Operation Safe Return’ is a good effort but won’t work to slow migrants

Published

on

Kyrsten Sinemas Operation Safe Return is a good effort but wont work to slow migrants

Any time a Democrat makes an effort to do something tangible to stop illegal immigration, it’s praiseworthy. Today’s Democratic Party is not only devoid of a plan to slow the migrant surge or end the border crisis. Many are doing what they can to make the problem bigger by pretending it isn’t a problem at all. This is why it’s refreshing to see Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema psuh for “Operation Safe Return.”

The proposal would set rules that would expedite the removal of migrant family units who do not demonstrate a “credible fear” of persecution. It’s a complex, multi-stage plan that sets time limits on how soon migrant families are interviewed and tightens the criteria for them to be released to the interior.

What it does not do is make changes to the Flores Agreement, which enables family units to be released quickly from detention once they file for asylum. This rule is dangerous to the children involved because it makes them a hot commodity for those wanting to move quickly into the interior of the country. Children are being used as “tickets” and are being sold to or rented by illegal immigrants.

Sinema’s plan doesn’t address this, but does go after “economic migrants” which likely accounts for the vast majority of those crossing the border illegally. Our asylum rules do not allow for those seeking better opportunities in America to claim asylum simply because they cannot get a good job in their home country.

According to The Arizona Republic:

The program would allow the Department of Homeland Security to deport certain migrants within 15 days, according to the letter, and would help alleviate overcrowding at border facilities, Sinema said.

“This pilot program would apply to families who aren’t claiming ‘credible fear,’ which of course is the first threshold in seeking asylum,” Sinema told The Arizona Republic. “If someone says ‘I left my country because I can’t make a living,’ (or) ‘it’s hard to take care of my family’ — that’s what we call an economic migrant.”

Sinema is one of the main architects behind the proposed program, along with Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

Sinema said she came up with the idea for the pilot program in response to a meeting with White House and Trump administration officials who she said were focused on changing asylum laws and challenging court rulings like the Flores Settlement Agreement, dictating how the government treats certain migrants.

“I just felt those weren’t the right answers,” Sinema added. “We wanted to solve the problem. We wanted to protect the asylum process for valid applicants … and we want to respect the Flores decision.”

This is a nice attempt, but here’s the problem. Word will continue to spread that migrants should not claim economic hardship as their reason for filing for asylum. They are being given talking points about their status that include saying they’re being persecuted because of their beliefs. This is easy to say and difficult to prove, making it the easy path through which migrant families can come to America and be released to the interior three weeks later.

The proposal has been delivered to acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan for review. It was signed by Sinema and Johnson as well as five Republican and two Democratic Senators.

This is a stopgap plan that may slow the migrant surge and expedite deportations on a small scale, but eventually it will become worthless. Sinema deserves credit for trying, but we need bolder measures if we’re going to make a dent in the border crisis.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Dianne Feinstein’s comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Published

on

Dianne Feinsteins comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Gun control is the talk of the town as the week comes to a close. Well, that and Greenland. And Jeffrey Epstein. But the mass shootings two weeks ago has DC buzzing, media furiously reporting, and activists on both sides of the debate furiously Tweeting at each other. Senator Dianne Feinstein weighed in on the discussion by pointing out some important facts about the alleged Dayton shooter, Connor Betts.

Her facts are correct. Her analysis is off because it missed one important point. We’ll get to that in a minute, but let’s declare once and for all (though I’m sure I’ll have to repeat myself later) that the 2nd Amendment IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING OR HOME PROTECTION. Our right to keep and bear firearms was put into the Constitution by our founders because they recognized what could happen if the people had no recourse against an oppressive government. Just as Venezuelans didn’t realize they danger they were putting themselves into when they allowed their guns to be taken away, so too do many Americans put way too much trust in government.

The authoritarian left wants guns because they know they’ll never achieve their endgame as long as the people can defend themselves from tyranny.

Feinstein is correct that the Dayton shooter was able to cause an extreme amount of death and injury in a short period of time. Police were quick to respond, otherwise it could have been much worse. But as our EIC pointed out in a Tweet, Feinstein’s narrative is worthless when you look at it from the opposite perspective.

Gun control is not the solution to our mass shooting problem. If anything, gun control has enabled shooters to enact their crimes without fear of many “good guys with a gun” to stop them. We must never give up our 2nd Amendment rights.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

President says AOC ‘fuming’ that Tlaib, Omar are becoming the faces of the party

Published

on

President says AOC fuming that Tlaib Omar are becoming the faces of the party

President Trump took to Twitter to make fun of the opposition party as two of its most outspoken members, Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, continue making headlines and stirring up controversy. He even threw in an accusation against Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for good measure.

There are no indications that this is accurate, but that’s not the point. This isn’t hard policy or thoughtful analysis. It’s a petty jab, and while many Americans, including some of his fans, are against him taking shots at the opposition in such a manner, this is the society we live in and it includes a President who takes jabs on Twitter. You can stress over it or sit back and enjoy it. I choose the latter.

For AOC’s part, she took the jab with a chuckle.

Beyond the diversion this offers ahead of a weekend, reality is probably more closely reflected by the President’s Tweet than Democrats are comfortable admitting, at least the part about them being the face of the party. “The Squad” makes more headlines among the four of them than the rest of the Democrats combined, and this includes the powerful heads of committees who are actively investigating President Trump ahead of a possible impeachment.

Both Democrats and Republicans have different degrees of infatuation with “The Squad.” Are they a real threat to our republic, as many on both sides claim, or are they merely a diversion from real decisions being made in DC?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Published

on

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Senator and failing Democratic candidate for president Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate your guns. The former “conservative” when it was politically expedient to be one in upstate New York has now gone the way of most her new party. She’s a radical progressive who wants your guns.

For someone who used to have an “A” rating with the NRA, she’s come a long way to hit rock bottom by calling for “assault weapons” bans and mandatory buybacks, AKA confiscations. Oh, but she won’t actually SAY they’re mandatory buybacks. She danced around that question like a pop star.

Gun activist Colion Noir broke down a recent interview she did with CNN. It was clear, as Noir pointed out, that CNN has already weighed Gillibrand in the balance and found her wanting. They went after her to corner her on her old gun rights support and tried to get her to admit what she wants to do as president with gun confiscations.

It’s funny watching Democrats flail around trying to get attention for themselves. There are only a handful of candidates leaving a mark, and Kirsten Gillibrand isn’t one of them. But she’s still trying to do damage to the 2nd Amendment on her way out.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending