It is difficult being a Senate Democrat in a deep-red state. For proof, just look at the record of Sen. Joe Manchin (D- W. Va.) when it comes to border security, an issue which he consistently says he supports in order to appease his constituents, but always with some sort of contingency that prevents him from actually doing anything to improve border security.
“Centrist Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) signed a letter to President Obama Monday calling on him not to allow another Syrian refugee into the country unless federal authorities can guarantee with 100-percent assurance they are not connected to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS),” according to an article in The Hill from 2015.
In 2015, those words were meaningless – and Manchin knew that. Obama was not going to actually do anything about the refugee crisis, so Manchin’s comments would have no repercussions.
But watch how Manchin’s tune changed in early 2017, shortly after President Donald J. Trump announced “extreme vetting” measures for refugees.
“As a member of the Intelligence and former member of the Armed Services Committees, I know firsthand the threats facing our country, and my top priority is always the safety of my fellow West Virginians,” he said. “This is why I supported extreme vetting in the past for anyone seeking to come to our country. Unfortunately, after taking time to review the new executive order and discuss its impacts, I believe the scope and execution of the President’s action are not a common sense approach. We should focus all of our efforts on identifying potential terrorists, but commonsense would tell you that a 5 year old trying to join their family does not present a threat to our country.”
Trump’s extreme vetting program would include refugees from Syria, which two years prior, Manchin did not want to enter our country at all. Manchin, knowing that Trump would take action on this border security measure, backed off of his demand that America should allow any refugees from Syria – instead saying that we needed to take a “common sense” approach (whatever that means).
This is part of the theatrics of politics. Manchin agrees with Trump on this type of border security. It’s plainly obvious. But he cannot fully support the President for fear of breaking with the Democrats in Congress.
Now we jump to February, when Manchin said he was “disappointed” that a bipartisan bill to end sanctuary cities failed. This bill also would have provided amnesty for DREAMers, illegal aliens brought to America by their illegal alien parents, and funding for a border wall.
“I share the President’s commitment to border security. That’s why I voted for his plan. That’s why I fought to ensure the $25 billion he requested for border security was included in the bipartisan deal. That’s why I opposed the Democratic proposal that did not provide a single penny for border security,” Manchin said.
Manchin was safe in supporting this bill. His Democratic colleagues would have received the amnesty they so desperately need for their voting bloc, and his constituents would have received the wall they they elected Trump to build.
Just last week Manchin had an opportunity to fund that exact same wall. But did he do it? Absolutely not. Again, he claimed that he supported the wall – just not under these circumstances.
“Let me be perfectly clear: I support funding the border wall,” he said. “I have voted for every border wall funding bill that has come before the Senate from $1.6 to $46 billion, and I will continue to support border wall funding,” he said.
But the budget excluded a provision for a deeply indebted federal medical fund for coal miners, which Manchin said he just could not abide.
“However, a bill that funds border security but devastates our brave mining families is a bad bill, and there is no rational reason we can’t have both — border security and keeping our promise to miners. That is what I will continue to fight and vote for,” Manchin continued.
That excuse, of course, is simply a pretext for voting against a wall so as appease his Democratic colleagues. There is no reason the federal government should be paying into a medical care fund for West Virginia miners. The state – if it must – could easily fix that problem. There are many other ways, no doubt, to ensure the health of West Virginia miners without holding up a crucial bill on national border security.
So what is the perfect situation under which Manchin would support border security and building a wall? One that involves absolutely no pushback from his Democrat colleagues. One that will never exist.
Just remember, in the fashion of a true D.C. politician, Manchin absolutely does support a border wall, but his constituents will absolutely not get one. Ever.
Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca
Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca
Border Patrol Officials Reporting Biden Surge in Illegal Immigration Following Election
They think they’ll be granted amnesty.
Senior Border Patrol officials are warning of a surge in illegal migration at the southern border in recent weeks, coming directly in response to perceived results of the still-pending presidential election.
Acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan is ascribing a 21% increase in apprehension levels at the border over the last month to both economic circumstances in Central America and “perceived and or anticipated shifts in policies” following the November 3rd election. Morgan was speaking to the Washington Times.
CBP personnel intercepted 69,000 illegal migrants at the southern border in October, up from 58,000 in September.
Illegal immigration levels declined in early 2020 due to the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, but they’ve increased in recent months as border crossers flee the effects of the virus’s recession in Central America and Mexico. CBP has been authorized by the Trump administration to use expedited “expulsion” policies to return illegal immigrants to the nation they came from on the basis of coronavirus public health concerns.
Joe Biden has pledged to open the borders of the United States, stating that he intends only to deport felons convicted of violent crimes while in the country illegally. This repudiation of immigration enforcement, if actually adopted, would likely lure tens of millions- if not hundreds of millions- of unauthorized migrants to the United States in various forms in coming years.
Biden has also pledged to grant American citizenship to more than 11 million illegal aliens present in the United States. This proposal would require the cooperation of Congress, but he can reinstate the DACA amnesty program through executive action.
Asylum seekers camped out in the Mexican border city of Matamoros reportedly celebrated Biden’s perceived victory, eager for a chance to obtain access to the United States’ welfare, public education, healthcare and infrastructure.
Illegal immigration and cheap labor advocates have claimed that porous borders are an inevitability, but the contrast between President Trump’s immigration enforcement and the ramifications from the mere international perception of a Joe Biden administration seems to suggest otherwise.
Culture4 days ago
March Study Points to Pervasive Mental Illness Among White American Liberals
States3 days ago
COVER-UP: Whitmer Admin Says ‘Records Do Not Exist’ Pertaining to $25 Million Dominion Contract Set Up by Democrat Official
States4 days ago
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel Threatens Election Fraud Whistleblowers with Prosecution
Culture4 days ago
BASED: University Professor Placed on Leave After Exposing ‘Satanic, Globalist Elite’ in Explosive Letter
Big League Wellness3 days ago
Doctors Urge the CDC to Make the Public Aware of Painful Side Effects of Experimental COVID-19 Vaccines
Culture2 days ago
HMM: Michelle Obama was Desperate Not to be Photographed in a Bikini as First Lady
Opinion3 days ago
President Trump Must Consider Annihilating the GOP to Reverse Electoral Impropriety
Congress4 days ago
Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program