Connect with us

Opinion

MOSELEY: Republican Establishment to Block Border Security Once Again

Published

on

Republicans in Name Only say they will vote with the Democrats in the U.S. Senate Thursday to block President Donald Trump’s plans to build a border wall.  Almost-Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and even Kentucky’s quixotic Rand Paul have already pre-announced their plans to vote with the Democrats against President Trump.

This author’s news analysis here as opinion after more than 30 years in conservative politics is the author’s opinion and not necessarily that of everyone at Big League Politics.

Once again border security will be blocked by the D.C. Swamp and the flood of illegal immigration will keep pouring across the country’s borders. This charade of the Republican establishment lying to the American people goes back at least to the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli scam that the Democrats pulled on President Ronald Reagan (with lots of help from liberal George H.W. Bush).

Trending: CDC Admits There is No Proof COVID-19 is Airborne Virus and They Have Been Misleading the Public All Along

Trump says he will veto the resolution.  But as a lawyer experienced in this level of governmental case — without wanting to draw a map for enemies of our nation’s sovereignty — Thursday’s vote will severely damage Trump’s prospects of winning the lawsuits already filed.  So Trump can veto the resolution.  But congressional opposition may cost us the lawsuits so that the border wall will never get built.  This is not a harmless gesture.  This will cause severe harm in the litigation.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

For decades, Republicans have always insisted that they support securing our country’s international borders — but just not today.  It is never the right time or circumstance to secure our borders. But trust them:  Someday, somewhere they will secure the border.  Listen to what they say, don’t look at what they do.

The pattern has been that the establishment suckers the voters with promises.  For decades, the border security never happens while they push amnesty on the country.  Once voted in to office, quasi-Republicans break their promises.  Liberal establishment Republicans are now once again going to keep the borders open.

We should never forget that in 2006 the Congress passed a law mandating the building of a border wall along the entire stretch of both the Northern and Southern borders, from sea to sea, as well as operational control of the maritime borders.  The Secure Fence Act of 2006 is the law of the land.  Under the Secure Fence Act, it is mandatory — not discretionary — that the government take complete “operational control” of all of the borders.  That is the law passed by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush.  The Secure Fence Act and a 2007 amendment led by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (RINO-TX) allows and requires the Department of Homeland Security to decide what kind of barriers are best for each section of the border.  But it is mandatory that the barriers must prevent “all” unauthorized entry into the country.

So why hasn’t the border wall mandated by the Secure Fence Act of 2006 been completed?  Because Republicans and Democrats keep lying to the voters.

In 2018, almost-Republican U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (RINO-Kentucky), also known as the Swamp King with an “F” 36% rating from Conservative Review, and then Almost-Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (RINO-Wisconsin) promised President Trump and the American people that the then Republican-controlled Congress would pass funding for the border wall.  Then they promised that they would pass the funding for a border wall after the 2018 mid-term election, before the Democrats took over in the U.S. House.  As Trump told The Daily Caller:

“Well, I was going to veto the omnibus bill and Paul told me in the strongest of language, ‘Please don’t do that. We’ll get you the wall.’ And I said, ‘I hope you mean that, because I don’t like this bill,”‘ Mr. Trump said. “Paul told me in the strongest of terms that, ‘Please sign this and if you sign this we will get you that wall.’ Which is desperately needed by our country. Humanitarian crisis, trafficking, drugs, you know, everything — people, criminals, gangs, so, you know, we need the wall.”

The president signed the $1.3 trillion spending bill in March to avoid a government shutdown. Hours later, he voiced regrets.

“I will never sign another bill like this again,” Mr. Trump said at the time. “I’m not going to do it again. Nobody read it. It’s only hours old.”

They lied.   We have to blow away the smoke and get to the reality.  Establishment Republicans lied.  Lying to the voters is what the  Republican establishment has always done.

Senator Susan Collins (RINO-Maine) has an “F” rating of only 10% from Conservative Review.  Although calling herself a Republican is dishonest, liberal Collins is part of the decades-old “We will defend the border — but just not today” scam.

Why will anti-conservative Republican Lisa Murkowski with an “F” score of 22% from Conservative Review get to vote Thursday?  Never forget how we got here:   In August 2010, Republican voters chose former magistrate judge and attorney Joe Miller as the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate from Alaska.  The Republican voters rejected Lisa Murkowski and the Murkowski family dynasty.

Joe Miller was  one of the most qualified U.S. Senate candidate to ever challenge an incumbent.  Miller graduated from West Point in 1989. He then served as an armor officer with the 1st Infantry Division in Desert Storm. Miller then earned his Juris Doctor from Yale Law School and his master’s degree in economics from the University of Alaska. At age 30, he was appointed as a State Magistrate. Four years later he was appointed an Acting State District Court Judge and U.S. Magistrate Judge in Fairbanks.

However, when the voters chose Miller over Murkowski in the primary election, the establishment rejected the will of the party’s voters.  The establishment cheats.  Mitch McConnell sabotages conservative candidates by dishonest manipulation.

So the Republican establishment ran Lisa Murkowski as a write-in campaign against the Party’s nominee.  They threw all the Republican Party resources in Alaska and nationwide to oppose the Republican nominee.  Because this split the Republican vote, Murkowski won 101,091 votes to Miller’s 90,839 votes while the Democrat took 60,045.

Why do we have a liberal Senator Lisa Murkowski about to vote against border security?  Because the Republican party stole the Alaska election from the voters.  Note that opposing the party nominee is grounds to expel anyone from the Republican Party under State and federal party rules.

How can Senator Thom Tillis with an “F” rating of 38% from Conservative Review, elected from conservative North Carolina be preparing to vote against border security?  Again, in 2014 Tillis was the establishment ploy to steal the U.S. Senate seat from the conservative grassroots.  Tillis was supported by the Swamp, including Mitch McConnell, large corporate donors and GOP insiders like Mitt Romney.  In the primary, the establishment beat Tea Party favorite Greg Brannon by 45% to 27% in the primary.

The Guardian explained:  “A Republican strategy to tame the influence of the party’s radical fringe reaped its first victory on Tuesday as the national leadership’s preferred candidate in North Carolina comfortably beat rivals backed by the Tea Party and religious right.”

Tillis and Collins face potentially competitive re-election fights in 2020.  But the GOP establishment is focused not on doing what the voters want, but on destroying the conservative candidates who are trying to do the will of the voters.

[UPDATE:  Thom Tillis at the last minute — after almost a month of encouraging other Republicans to defect from the President — switched sides.  He is facing a possible loss of re-election in 2020.]

Alleged Republicans voting with the Democrats will claim that they are just objecting to the use of the declaration of an emergency to get the border wall funded.  They are lying.

Why is it that politicians only stand on “principle” when it will ultimately destroy the country and destroy the very principles that they deceptively point to as their reasons for voting Left?

Son of Ron Paul, Sen. Rand Paul, is willing to hand the country over to the Democrat Party who will turn the country into a socialist, authoritarian dystopia in the name of Paul’s libertarian principles.  Seriously?  So flooding the country with future Democrat voters who will ensure that the Paulistas’ unrealistic idealism never sees the light of day is a vote of principle?  Not seein’ it.

Libertarians are for open borders, but also for hoodwinking people about the border.  Ron Paul would always pivot from questions about illegal immigration to the magnet of welfare spending.  While that point is correct, Ron Paul and the acorn near the tree Rand Paul make people think they want to secure the border, but they really don’t.  Ron Paul would always give an angry response that never actually opposed illegal immigration or unsecured borders.  If you listen carefully, he hid from the issue behind the topic of welfare spending.  His little acorn has not fallen far from the tree.

Yet Washington politicians always seem to stand up for “principle” when the result will be to move the country Left towards bigger government, more regulation, more socialism.  They conveniently forget about their “principle” when it comes to implementing the conservative agenda they promised the voters they would fight for.

On February 15, 2019, President Donald Trump declared a national emergency at the border.  That declaration frees up federal funding and gives any president the power to move money around from different purposes to meet an emergency.  President Trump declared his intentions to shift money to the building of a border wall from funds that Congress appropriated for other, sometimes similar purposes.

The National Emergencies Act of 1976 (as later modified) gives any president these powers.  The Act also provides several ways for a declared emergency to end.  The President can declare an emergency concluded.  An emergency automatically ends within a year if not renewed.  Or Congress can vote to terminate an emergency.

I have avoided mentioning this in public until the last minute before the vote:   CONGRESS DOES NOT HAVE THE POWER TO “ANNUL” THE EMERGENCY (as if it never happened).   The National Emergencies Act of 1976 gives Congress the power to “terminate” the emergency.

That means that any actions taken by President Donald Trump, the Office of Management and Budget, and affected U.S. Departments and Agencies would remain valid. 

Congress does not have the power under the Act to overturn or annul the emergency.  Congress only has the power to conclude the emergency.

So if the Office of Management and Budget has not already moved the federal funds between accounts, they should all be fired and never given another job again.  Under the Act, if OMB has already shifted the money among federal accounts, the Congressional vote to “terminate” the emergency would not over-turn, reverse, or limit those actions.  During the time that the emergency was in force, all actions taken would remain valid.  Again, there is no place in the Act to vote on whether the emergency should have been declared — only when it should be brought to an end.

Warning to U.S. citizens.  The magician’s sleight-of-hand depends upon getting your eyes looking in the wrong direction while the magician pulls the magic trick.  That’s why it’s called sleight of hand.

Republican politicians are doing the same thing, robbing you blind, by distracting you and diverting your attention away from their hand picking your pocket.

 

Around The World

Not all Shi’a-Majority Nations are the Same

Published

on

The recent alleged arson attack on the Tomb of Esther and Mordechai, a Jewish holy site in Iran, was indicative of the ever-rising rate of anti-Semitism and broader religious intolerance in the Islamic Republic. The recently released United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) annual report had highlighted Iran’s anti-Semitic targeting of its small Jewish population as well as other minorities including followers of the Baha’i faith; the most persecuted faith in Iran.

The USCIRF described that it documented “a particular uptick in the persecution of Baha’is and local government officials who supported them in 2019. Iran’s government blamed Baha’is —without evidence — for widespread popular protests, accusing the community of collaboration with Israel, where the Baha’i World Centre is located. Iran’s government also continued to promote hatred against Baha’is and other religious minorities on traditional and social media channels.”

U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Elan Carr has said that “anti-Semitism isn’t ancillary to the ideology of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is a central foundational component of the ideology of that regime, and we have to be clear about it, and we have to confront it and call it out for what it is.” After the Tomb of Esther and Mordechai was set ablaze last weekend, Carr reiterated these statements and called Iran the “world’s chief state sponsor of anti-Semitism.”

In 2016 I wrote, “According to Articles 12 and 13 of the Iranian Constitution, all branches of Islam and Christianity have the right to worship, as do Jews and Zoroastrians, within the limits of the law there. However, converting away from Islam to any other religion is considered haram, or forbidden, and in many cases, could result in execution.”

Anti-Semitism is a historical reality in Iran’s strict brand of Shi’a Islam, which emphasizes the separation between believers and non-believers, expressed in terms of purity versus impurity. The Jewish People Policy Planning Institute explains that in Iran, “under the influence of Zoroastrian traditions, the Jews were considered physically impure and untouchable (najasa). Jews were also prohibited from inheriting from Shiites, whereas the opposite was allowed. A Jew who converted to Islam was entitled to the entire inheritance. Shiites were not allowed to marry Jewish women, except for in temporary marriage (mut’a), which is an inferior and exploitative type of concubinage.”

It is also a little-known fact that the country name of Iran is derived from the ancient Persian word Arya, a linguistic predecessor of the modern European term Aryan. Further, Armenian Nazi collaborator Garegin Nzhdeh (1886-1955) is the founder of the racist Tseghakronism movement, whose ideology is reminiscent of the Aryan supremacy espoused by Nzhdeh’s Nazi comrades. Today, Nzhdeh’s brand of Aryan and anti-Semitic ideology is palpable in both Armenia and Iran, neighboring countries where the Anti-Defamation League has documented that more than half of the populations hold a series of anti-Semitic views — at even higher rate in Armenia (58 percent) than in Iran (56 percent).

At the same time, it is important to note that the majority of Iranians are secular and the regime does not necessarily represent them, or their values. In fact, the Iranian government persecutes its Azerbaijani, Arab, and other citizens from minority populations.

Yet a stark contrast with Iran is found in its Shi’a-majority neighbor, Azerbaijan, which has strong relations with Israel and protects its Jewish citizens as well as other religious and ethnic minorities.

Southern California-based evangelical pastor Johnnie Moore has elaborated on the telling differences in the realm of religious tolerance between Azerbaijan and Iran, noting that Azerbaijan is “a country where Sunni and Shi’a clerics pray together, where Evangelical and Russian Orthodox Christians serve together, and where thriving Jewish communities enjoy freedom and total security in their almost entirely Islamic country.” He has also called Azerbaijan “a model for peaceful coexistence between religions.”

During my own visit to Azerbaijan, I observed and documented this first-hand. I believe that Azerbaijan is a nation that bears the torch, and burden, of bringing religious freedom to its less tolerant neighbors in the region, like Iran.

Perhaps the most dramatic indicator of Azerbaijani tolerance is the post-Soviet state’s special relationship with its Jewish community and with Israel. Last November, Azerbaijan unveiled a statue in honor of the nation’s Jewish war hero Albert Agarunov (1969-1992). Although Agarunov was killed in battle, his legacy remains a powerful symbol of Jewish integration and pride for his Muslim-majority country.

Israel and Azerbaijan have closely cooperated for more than a decade in the realms of security, energy, and tourism. Most recently, Azerbaijan sent its Finance Minister Samir Sharifov to this year’s American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference, where Sharifov said that the country’s “cooperation with Israel is not limited to oil supply; we are interested in widening cooperation in defense and the transfer of technology.”

Sharifov also read remarks from a letter to AIPAC by Mehriban Aliyeva, the first vice president of Azerbaijan, who wrote, “It is gratifying that our former compatriots of Jewish origin, living nowadays in the United States and Israel, have maintained close ties with Azerbaijan and contribute to the strengthening of our relations with these countries. We are grateful to them.”

How can Azerbaijan govern and act so differently from its Shi’a neighbor? Iran is a theocracy that mixes religion and state more thoroughly than any other country in the world. In contrast, Azerbaijan’s constitution affirms the country as a secular state and ensures religious freedom for its citizens. Azerbaijan is also facing its own human rights issues and working on progressing as a nation. However, the fact of the matter remains, though Iran and Azerbaijan share a border, the similarities between their governments largely end there. Not all Shi’a-majority nations are the same.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending