Let’s play a picture game!

I’m going to show you a sequence of pictures.

See if you can see something they all have in common.

flags 1

flags 2

flags 3

flags 4

flags 5

flags 6

flags 7

flags 8

flags 9

flags 10

flags 11

Well…, what do you think?

Yes…, these are all either pictures from “caravans” headed to our southern border or people attempting to enter our country illegally.

But…, the answer I was looking for is they all show migrants waving a flag that is typically blue and white.

No American flags, however.

The flags we see in these pictures are all from either Honduras,

flags 12

Guatemala,

flags 13

or El Salvador.

flags 14

The question is, why would you travel over 1,000 miles, on foot, to escape a country that is supposedly oppressing you to the point that you have to seek political asylum in another country, but then wave the flag of the country that you were forced to escape from?

If you desired political asylum from the United States, wouldn’t you be carrying and waving an American flag?

Wouldn’t someone…, anyone…, be carrying an American flag?

In fact…, I dare you to find a picture of migrants making their way to America, carrying an American flag.

These people aren’t  fleeing for their lives…, they’re fleeing for their wallets.

They’re fleeing to America to get on the gravy train…, not the freedom train.

It’s not that big of a deal I guess.  I just normally like a “kiss” before I get screwed.

Just sayin’.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

This is what happens when the government doesn’t take care of its responsibilities.

According to The Constitution, our federal government isn’t really specifically tasked with a lot…, but in Article 1, Section 8, Item 1 it states: “The Congress shall… provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States…”

When citizens feel threatened and the federal government is not providing the proper laws…, enforcing the laws…, or generally protecting or providing “domestic tranquility,” “the common defense,” “the general Welfare,” and “the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” people will protect themselves.

It’s the American way.

In this instance, a New Mexico militia group detained migrants, who crossed our border illegally, at gunpoint until the Border Patrol could arrive.

vigilantes 1

I would call these people heroes.

According to Danielle Wallace for Fox News, “An armed right-wing militia group operating along the U.S.-Mexico border posted several videos to social media this week, including one in which they held about 200 asylum-seeking migrants at gunpoint near Sunland Park, N.M., until U.S. Border Patrol agents arrived, according to a report.”

Before we proceed, let’s put this reporting in the proper perspective.

Okay, Danielle.  First off, I have an issue with you when you label these people as “an armed right-wing militia group.”  Can’t we just say they are a militia group or a group of vigilantes?  Do we ever see any other groups labeled as “left-wing” groups?  No…, we don’t.

Second of all, the people that were held are described as “asylum-seeking migrants.”  The truth is you really have no idea who all of these people are or what they want, and you left out the word “ILLEGAL.”  These are ILLEGAL immigrants who crossed our southern border ILLEGALLY.

Okay…, that being said…, let’s continue.

“The militia group, which calls itself the United Constitutional Patriots, said, ‘… it is determined to monitor the border until President Trump fulfills his campaign promise of a border wall or until Congress enacts stronger legislation to make it more difficult for migrants to request asylum,’ Jim Benvie, a spokesman, told The New York Times in a phone interview.”

‘“It should go without saying that regular citizens have no authority to arrest or detain anyone,’ the governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, said in a statement to The New York Times, adding that it is ‘completely unacceptable’ that migrants be ‘menaced or threatened’ upon entering the U.S.”

“The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement that ‘the Trump administration’s vile racism’ emboldened these groups.”

“Carlos A. Diaz, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection, would not divulge specific details about the scene in the video or about the United Constitutional Patriots, but said in a statement that Border Patrol ‘does not endorse private groups or organizations taking enforcement matters into their own hands.’”

Well Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham…, let’s begin with you.

It does not “go without saying that regular citizens have no authority to arrest or detain anyone.”  In fact, in the nearby illegal immigrant friendly state of California, in section 837 of the California Penal Code, it says, “A private person may arrest another: For a public offense committed or attempted in his/her presence.  When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his/her presence.  When a felony has been in fact committed, and he or she has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.”

So, no, Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham…, it does not go without saying.

In addition, you continue by saying that, “it is completely unacceptable that migrants be menaced or threatened upon entering the U.S.”  But apparently it is acceptable that some of these (and she left out the word ILLEGAL as well) migrants go on to “menace” and “threaten” law-abiding U.S. citizens.

vigilantes 2

vigilantes 3

vigilantes 4

In my opinion, you are a disgrace of a governor Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham, and the state of New Mexico should be ashamed for having elected you.

I guess, in the end, people get what they deserve.  Good luck with that New Mexico.

Then we have The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) saying in a statement that “the Trump administration’s vile racism” has emboldened these [militia] groups.”

The ACLU has already lost any semblance of credibility it may have had at one time…, but in response I would like to say that the inaction of the U.S. Congress and many prior presidents, along with the actions of many of the current democrat politicians and their supporters, has emboldened these illegal immigrants to put unprecedented pressure on our southern border.

There is no racism being demonstrated here.  Being “illegal” is not a matter of race…, it’s a matter of law.

vigilantes 6

Lastly we have a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection, Carlos A. Diaz, saying that the Border Patrol “does not endorse private groups or organizations taking enforcement matters into their own hands.”

With all due respect…, and I am saying “with all due respect,” Mr. Diaz, patriotic citizens of this country don’t need your endorsement…, and these patriots only “take matters into their own hands” when the government is not taking care of their business for one reason or another.

Hard working, God fearing, Americans don’t need these politicians who have their heads up their backsides to figure out what’s right and what’s wrong…, we already know.  We just hope they figure it out sooner than later.

vigilantes 5

Until that time these patriots will just have to help them do their job…, for their own sakes and ours.

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

We’re sorry Mexico, but we have to fix the border problem one way or the other.

It’s become pretty apparent that as long as the democrats control the House of Representatives, the problems on our southern border and our problems with illegal immigration are not going to change.

If we can’t properly address these problems the way they should be addressed…, by fixing our own laws…, our only other option is to coerce Mexico into taking care of the problems on their side.

Mexico should be given six months to “seal” their side of the border.  If their results at that time don’t meet with President Trump’s approval, he should shut the U.S-Mexico border to trade and travel, until such time that President Trump is satisfied with their efforts.

This travel ban should include air travel to Mexico as well.

obama we-simply-cannot-allow-people-to-pour-into-the-us

The threat of this economic nightmare for Mexico should be reason enough for them to do what is necessary, and to do it quickly, to make us happy.

This six month window would also give US companies with ties to Mexico the time to apply the appropriate amount of pressure on the Mexican government, as well as make any business related “adjustments” they may need to make, regarding a potentially closed border.

Elvia Díaz is an editorial columnist for The Arizona Republic, where her comments first appeared, before appearing in USA TODAY.  She feels that, “…shutting down all trade and travel would be disastrous for Mexico.  But the U.S. economy also would be hit hard, if not collapse.”

All the more reason that US companies and Mexico would do what’s needed to be done.

I seriously doubt our economy would “collapse” if we can’t have guacamole with our nachos for a month or two!

No matter what is done by our government, about anything, is never completely convenient for everyone.

Being a white, male, heterosexual, conservative, like I am…, I and all of the others like me have come to understand that we get NO level of consideration regarding anything.

This is one reason why our demographic group tends to have lower levels of sympathy for others I suppose.

americas closed

Apparently Ms. Diaz thinks that our country absorbing the extensive costs to our social programs, our education system and our correction and law enforcement programs, incurred by the stream of well over 1,000 illegal immigrants a day poses less of an economic threat to us than closing the border with Mexico.

I’m willing to bet that an open border ends up costing us way more than a closed one would.

She continues by saying, “Many of these asylum seekers come from violence-ridden Central American countries.”

Would you like me to create a list of all of the “violence-ridden” countries in the world for you Ms. Diaz?  Would you like me to take a poll and see how many people in Chicago feel sorry for these “violence ridden” countries?  Let’s just say the list of “violence ridden” countries in the world would be quite long.  So the US should accept 5,000 “asylum seekers” a day?  10,000 a day?  25,000 a day?  Do you think they’d feel any safer if we sent a bunch of them to the projects in Chicago to live?

I have a feeling that Ms. Diaz would not be too eager to open up her own home to help accommodate some of these poor “asylum seekers.”  But she would be more than happy to overwhelm our country’s support systems, which are already overwhelmed and failing our own homeless and economically dependent citizens as it is.

immigration_USbordersign

BUILD THAT WALL!

CHANGE THOSE LAWS!

OR CLOSE THAT BORDER!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Crisis?  What crisis?

The democrats are always crying that “this” is a crisis and “that” is a crisis.  But when they are asked to acknowledge and deal with a real crisis they choose to take the political low road, stick their heads in the sand, and not only pretend like there is no crisis, but denounce those who call a situation for what it is and attempt to do something about it.

Even though the democrats chose to ignore her last report and actually walk out of her presentation, The Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, was back again and issued a dire assessment of the migration crisis on the southern border, telling a House committee that illegal immigration is “spiraling out of control” and predicting that crisis will “get even worse” in the coming months.

According to Adam Shaw of Fox News, “The U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) is warning that the Border Patrol is at its ‘breaking point’ as apprehensions skyrocket.  Children and families now make up more than half of those in custody on the southern border, according to Customs and Border Patrol.”

“Secretary Nielsen also said in a startling revelation that, ‘Customs and Border Protection is on track to apprehend almost 1 million illegal immigrants at the border this year.’”

‘“In February, we saw a 30 percent jump over the previous month, with agents apprehending or encountering nearly 75,000 aliens,’ Nielsen told the House Committee on Homeland Security. ‘This is an 80 percent increase over the same time last year. And I can report today that CBP is forecasting the problem will get even worse this spring as the weather warms up.’”

‘“We want to strengthen legal immigration and welcome more individuals through a merit-based system that enhances our economic vitality and the vibrancy of our diverse nation. We also will continue to uphold our humanitarian ideals,’ she said. ‘But illegal immigration is simply spiraling out of control and threatening public safety and national security.’”

Shaw adds that, “Nielsen’s testimony came a day after the Trump administration released figures showing that more than 2,000 migrants are apprehended each day, a total of 268,000 since the beginning of the fiscal year. DHS reports that the Border Patrol is apprehending illegal immigrants at the highest rate since 2007.”

And remember…, we’re only talking about those we caught.  How many illegal immigrants are coming across that we don’t even know about?

Two times as many?

Three times as many?

Five times as many?

Ten times as many?

Think about it.

How many people who are driving drunk actually get caught?

How many people who speed actually get ticketed?

See what I mean?

‘“We face a crisis, a real, serious, and sustained crisis at our borders. We have tens of thousands of illegal aliens arriving at our doorstep every month. We have drugs, criminals, and violence spilling into our country every week,’ she said.”

“Nielsen predicted disaster if migrant flows escalate: ‘Our capacity is already severely strained, but these increases will overwhelm the system entirely.’”

‘“This is not a ‘manufactured’ crisis. This is truly an emergency,’ she said.”

The Border Patrol has reported a 300 percent spike in illegal crossings at the border, but the media is opting to turn a blind eye, since it just doesn’t represent the narrative they want to present…, that there is no emergency at the southern border, in the attempt to discredit President Trump and his determination that there is a national crisis on our southern border.

“Trump’s declaration would give him access to about $3.6 billion for projects on the border, but the move has seen fierce opposition from Democrats and some Republicans, several of whom are expected to support a congressional rebuke of the emergency declaration, which could, in turn, prompt Trump’s first-ever veto. The House has already passed the measure.”

“Meanwhile, in prepared testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, CBP Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said in testimony that the initial investments in Trump’s wall project were being put ‘to good use’ and barriers in key areas have ‘made an immediate impact’ in stopping illegal immigration in hot spots.”

But Nielsen’s comments seemed likely to be brushed off by Democrats…, again.  Before Secretary Nielsen even spoke, Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a democrat from Mississippi, criticized Trump’s “non-existent emergency” at the border, as he parroted the standard democrat talking points while choosing to ignore reality.

Our democrat/socialist friends always like to point to Denmark, Finland, and Sweden as examples of how “good socialistic” countries handle these types of issues.  So let’s take a look at how these countries are dealing with the problem of illegal immigration.

Let’s start with Denmark.

Christopher Brito of CBS News reports that, “The Danish government has come up with a plan to send dozens of rejected migrants to a remote island that currently houses a research center conducting tests on diseased animals.”

Hmmm.  Well that sounds interesting. I’m skeptical as to whether anybody in the U.S. Congress would support these actions, however.

“Denmark’s government reached an agreement under its new finance bill for 2019 to decontaminate Lindholm Island, located around two miles from the nearest shore, and then use it hold as many as 100 people by 2021, according to a government website. Among the migrants who could be sent to the island are criminals, rejected asylum seekers and others who can’t return to their home country ‘due to the risk of ill-treatment.’”

“100 people by 2021!?”  The U.S. probably deals with 100 illegal immigrants on an hourly basis.

‘“If you are unwanted in Danish society, you should not be a nuisance to ordinary Danes,’ Denmark’s immigration minister Inger Støjberg wrote on Facebook. ‘“They are undesirable in Denmark, and they must feel it.’”

“It’s not the first time Denmark has taken controversial actions aimed toward migrants amid a wave of populism throughout Europe. In August, the nation banned garments covering the face, including traditional Islamic veils such as the niqab or burqa.”

Obviously we can’t model our handling of illegal immigrants on Denmark’s system.

How about Finland?

According to Virginia Hale of Breitbart News, “Police forces across Finland are carrying out a search for illegal immigrants in a six-day crackdown on aliens living in the country without permission, local media reported.”

“In the period between March 12 and 18, officers will be carrying out identity checks in public places such as restaurants and shopping centers where they suspect illegal immigrants are at large based on intelligence held by police forces in advance.”

Ha!  I know this definitely would fly in the good ole’ USA!

And the democrats are complaining about our own ICE agents in the United States.

“In practice, this means that when a person who is being checked turns out to be foreign, officers will check their immigration status and relevant papers,” said Finnish police chief Mia Poutanen.”

Around 3,000 illegal immigrants are caught each year in Finland as a result of targeted initiatives lasting several days like the one taking place this week.”

Wow…, 3,000?!  That many?  In a year?

In the U.S. we are dealing with that many illegal immigrants per day on a slow day!

Ok…, how about Sweden?  Surely Sweden can show us the way.

According to Johan Ahlander and Mansoor Yosufzai for “Reuters,” “Sweden has intensified its crackdown on illegal immigrants after a failed asylum-seeker killed five people in Stockholm, but the move has raised concerns that more migrants will be driven underground to join a shadowy underclass.”

“In the past months, police have staged wider sweeps on workplaces to check papers, netting undocumented workers, sending a warning to employers and sparking heated debate in a nation that has been traditionally tolerant to migrants.”

“Tough measures against immigrants go against the grain for many in Sweden, a country of 10 million (about the population of North Carolina) which once called itself “a humanitarian superpower” that generously welcomed migrants fleeing conflict in the Middle East and Africa.”

“But attitudes appear to be changing and a 2017 study by Gothenburg University showed 52 percent favored taking fewer refugees into the country with 24 percent opposed. Two years ago 40 percent backed reducing refugee numbers with 37 opposed.”

“The Social Democrats, the Sweden’s biggest party in every election since 1917 and leader of the governing coalition, has been forced to balance its traditional left-wing credentials with the need to enforce immigration laws.”

“The government never discloses how many are held in detention centers, saying there are about 360 beds and deportees are normally repatriated within three weeks. The government has told the migration agency to add another 100 beds.”

Ohhh the pain!  360 beds!  Oh my God.

Please note that the United States operates with over 40,000 detention center beds, and President Trump has asked for those levels to be increased to 52,000 beds!

“In 2016, police made about 1,100 unannounced workplace checks, almost three times more than in 2015, and caught 232 illegal immigrants.”

I believe we caught about that many illegal immigrants in one hour last year when we raided one company!

So not even Sweden provides us with a good immigration option.

The truth is, compared to any time in our past and compared to any other country in the world, the situation on our southern border with Mexico IS A NATIONAL EMERGENCY regarding illegal immigration, illegal drug trafficking, and human trafficking.  Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is just a disingenuous liar, plain and simple.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Illegal-Immigrant-Superior-Rights-In-USA

 

President Trump has officially declared the US-Mexico border security crisis a national emergency. Is it?

“We’re going to confront the national security crisis on our southern border…, one way or the other.  We have to do it,” President Trump said in the Rose Garden.

Speaker Pelosi has directly contradicted President Trump by claiming, “There is no crisis on our southern border,” and that, “President Trump has manufactured this crisis.”

Ok…, well…, let’s look at the facts.  Let’s look at the numbers.

According to “Investor’s Business Daily:”

“[Regarding] illegal immigration: Democrats and the mainstream press accuse President Donald Trump of manufacturing a crisis at the border. The numbers tell another story.”

“NPR’s ‘fact check,’ like countless others, dismissed [President] Trump’s claim as false because ‘illegal border crossings in the most recent fiscal year (ending in September 2018) were actually lower than in either 2016 or 2014.”

“What they aren’t telling you is border patrol agents apprehended more than 100,000 people trying to enter the country illegally in just October and November of last year. Or that that number is way up from the same two months the year before.”

“Nor do they mention that last year, the border patrol apprehended more than half a million people trying to get into the country illegally. And that number, too, is up from the year before.”

“Trump’s critics certainly don’t bother to mention that those figures only count illegals the border patrol caught.  It does not count the ones who eluded border patrol agents and got into the country.”

 

The Department of Homeland Security claims that about 20% of illegal border crossers make it into the country.  Other studies, however, say border agents fail to apprehend as many as 50% of illegal crossers.

Is that not a crisis at the border?

Wait…, there’s more.

“Pelosi and company also don’t bother to mention the fact that there are already between 12 million and 22 million illegals, depending on which study you use, in the country today already.”

I would venture to say there are probably even more that 22 million in the country.

Let’s put those numbers in perspective.

“At the high end, it means that the illegal population in the U.S. is larger than the entire population of countries like Syria, Chile, the Netherlands and Ecuador. Even if the number is just 12 million, that’s still more than the entire population of Sweden, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Ireland and New Zealand.

Isn’t having millions and millions in the country illegally, with thousands joining them every day, not a crisis at the border?

But wait…, there’s more.

“Critics also complain that Trump overstated the risk of illegal immigrants committing crimes. They all point to a report from the Cato Institute, a pro-immigration libertarian think tank. Cato did a statistical analysis of census data and concluded that incarceration rates for Hispanic illegals were slightly lower than those of the native-born.”

Oh goody!

“But the Center for Immigration Studies looked at federal crime statistics [as well].  It found that noncitizens accounted for more than 20% of federal convictions, even though they make up just 8.4% of the population.”

The state of Texas alone “Has been monitoring crimes committed by illegals.  It reports that from 2011 to 2018, it booked 186,000 illegal aliens.  Police charged them with a total of 292,000 crimes.  Those included 539 murders, 32,000 assaults, 3,426 sexual assaults, and almost 3,000 weapons charges.”

Maybe we should talk to the victims of those 539 murders, 32,000 assaults, 3,426 sexual assaults (in Texas alone), and see if they think there is a crisis at our southern border.

And all of this does not even take into account the smuggling of illegal drugs.  According to the “VeryWellmind” website, “The estimated cost of drug abuse in the United States, including illegal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, is more than $820 billion a year and growing. Substance abuse in the U.S. costs society in increased healthcare costs, crime, and lost productivity.”

According to The National Institute on Drug abuse, “More than 70,200 Americans died from drug overdoses in 2017.”

Unquestionably, the overwhelming majority of dangerous illegal drugs pours through our southern border.

In 2018 alone, border agents seized 5,000 pounds of heroin, 60,000 pounds of cocaine, 80,000 pounds of meth, and 1,600 pounds of fentanyl.  And that’s what they caught.  How much made it over the border?

Maybe we should talk to the families of the “more than 70,200 Americans [who] died from drug overdoses in 2017,” all of those people who have had their lives ruined by illegal drugs, and all of their families, and see if they think there is a crisis at our southern border.

Then we have the whole issue of human trafficers, who smuggle women and children into our country for sex and as slaves.

So, after looking at the numbers, is there a national crisis at our southern border?

I believe the only answer we can responsibly give is “yes.”

Others, of course, put their politics before the safety of the American people.

“This is plainly a power grab by a disappointed President, who has gone outside the bounds of the law to try to get what he failed to achieve in the constitutional legislative process,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “The President’s actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution.”

They vowed Congress would “defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.”

“The President’s declaration of a national emergency would be an abuse of his constitutional oath and an affront to the separation of powers. Congress has the exclusive power of the purse, and the Constitution specifically prohibits the President from spending money that has not been appropriated. … This is a gross abuse of power that cannot be tolerated,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in a statement.

First of all, Mr. Nadler, all of the money that President Trump is talking about using has been “appropriated.”

And on a related note…, when former President Obama sent over $150 BILLION (in cash by the way) to Iran as part of the failed Iran Nuclear Deal, where exactly was that money “appropriated?”  Just sayin’.

So…, what gives President Trump “the right” to declare a national emergency anyway?

The National Emergencies Act (NEA) authorizes the president to declare a “national emergency.”  This legislation was signed into law by President Gerald Ford on September 14, 1976

A declaration under NEA triggers emergency authorities contained in other federal statutes. Past NEA declarations have addressed, among other things, the imposition of export controls and limitations on transactions and property from specified nations.  A national emergency was declared in 2001 after the September 11th terrorist attacks and has been renewed every year since then.

58 national emergencies have been declared since the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law.

31 have been annually renewed and are currently still in effect.

Here’s a list of the presidents who declared national emergencies.

President Jimmy Carter:

Nov. 14, 1979 (still in effect): A national emergency in response to the Iran hostage crisis, which froze Iran’s assets in the United States.

President Ronald Reagan:

April 17, 1980: Further Prohibitions on Transactions with Iran, never terminated or continued;

Oct. 14, 1983: Continuation of Export Control Regulations, revoked in 1983.

March 30, 1984: Continuation of Export Control Regulations, revoked in 1985.

May 1, 1985: Prohibiting Trade and Certain Other Transactions Involving Nicaragua, revoked in 1990.

Sept. 9, 1985: Prohibiting Trade and Certain Other Transactions Involving South Africa (in response to apartheid), revoked 1991.

Jan. 17, 1986: Prohibiting Trade and Certain Transactions Involving Libya, revoked 2004.

April 8, 1988: Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to Panama, revoked 1990.

President George H.W. Bush:

August 2, 1990: Blocking Iraqi Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Iraq, revoked 2004.

Sept. 30, 1990: Continuation of Export Control Regulations, revoked 1993.

Nov. 16, 1990: Chemical and Biological Weapons Proliferation, revoked 1994.

Oct. 4, 1991: Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to Haiti, revoked 1994.

May 30, 1992: Blocking “Yugoslav Government” Property and Property of the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro, revoked 2003.

President Bill Clinton:

Sept. 26, 1993: Prohibiting Certain Transactions Involving UNITA (a political party in Angola), revoked 2003.

Sept. 30, 1993: Measures to Restrict the Participation by United States Persons in Weapons Proliferation Activities, revoked 1994.

June 30, 1994: Continuation of Export Control Regulations, revoked 1994.

Aug. 19, 1994: Continuation of Export Control Regulations, revoked 2001.

Sept. 29, 1994: Measures to Restrict the Participation by United States Persons in Weapons Proliferation Activities, revoked 1994.

Oct. 25, 1994: Blocking Property and Additional Measures with Respect to the Bosnian Serb- Controlled Areas of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, revoked 2003.

Nov. 14, 1994 (still in effect): Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, continued in November 2018.

Jan. 23, 1995 (still in effect): Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process, continued in January 2018.

March 15, 1995 (still in effect): Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources, continued in March 2018 and expanded in August 2018.

Oct. 21, 1995 (still in effect): Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers, continued in October 2018.

March 1, 1996 (still in effect): Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels with Respect to Cuba, modified by President Obama in 2016 and again by President Trump in February 2018.

May 22, 1997: Prohibiting New Investment in Burma, terminated in October 2016.

Nov. 3, 1997 (still in effect): Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan, continued in October 2018.

June 9, 1998: Blocking Property of the Governments of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the Republic of Serbia, and the Republic of Montenegro, and Prohibiting New Investment in the Republic of Serbia in Response to the Situation in Kosovo, revoked in 2003.

July 4, 1999: Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with the Taliban, revoked in 2002.

June 21, 2000: Blocking Property of the Government of the Russian Federation Relating to the Disposition of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted from Nuclear Weapons, expired 2012.

Jan. 18, 2001: Blocking Property of the Government of the Russian Federation Relating to the Disposition of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted from Nuclear Weapons, revoked in 2004.

President George W. Bush:

June 26, 2001 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Persons Who Threaten International Stabilization Efforts in the Western Balkans, continued in June 2018.

Aug. 17, 2001 (still in effect): Continuation of Export Control Regulations, continued August 2018.

Sept. 14, 2001 (still in effect): Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks, continued in September 2018.

Sept. 23, 2001 (still in effect): Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism, continued in September 2017.

March 6, 2003 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe, continued in March 2018.

May 22, 2003 (still in effect): Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest, continued in May 2018.

May 11, 2004 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria, continued in May 2018.

July 22, 2004: Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Importation of Certain Goods from Liberia, revoked in November 2015.

Feb. 7, 2006: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Côte d’Ivoire, terminated in September 2016.

June 16, 2006 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus, continued in June 2018.

Oct. 27, 2006 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, continued in October 2018;

Aug. 1, 2007 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its Democratic Processes and Institutions, continued in July 2018.

June 26, 2008 (still in effect): Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea and North Korean Nationals, continued in October 2018.

President Barack Obama:

Oct. 23, 2009: Declaration of a National Emergency with Respect to the 2009 H1N1 Influenza Pandemic, was never terminated or continued.

April 12, 2010 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia, continued in 2018.

Feb. 25, 2011 (still in effect): Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya, continued in February 2018.

July 24, 2011 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal Organizations, continued in July 2018.

May 16, 2012 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen, continued in May 2012.

June 25, 2012: Blocking Property of the Government of the Russian Federation Relating to the Disposition of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted from Nuclear Weapons, revoked in 2015.

March 6, 2014 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine, continued in March 2018.

April 3, 2014 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons with Respect to South Sudan, continued in March 2018.

May 12, 2014 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic, continued in May 2018.

March 8, 2015 (still in effect): Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela, continued in March 2018.

April 1, 2015 (still in effect): Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities, continued in March 2018.

Nov. 22, 2015 (still in effect): Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi, continued in November 2018.

President Donald Trump:

Dec. 20, 2017: Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption.

Sept. 12, 2018: Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election.

Nov. 27, 2018: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Nicaragua.

Based on everything I’ve laid out here, President Trump’s declaring a national emergency IS NOT “plainly a power grab.”

This President HAS NOT “gone outside the bounds of the law.”

The President’s actions DO NOT “clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution.”

The President’s declaration of a national emergency IS NOT “an abuse of his constitutional oath and an affront to the separation of powers.”

And, this IS NOT “a gross abuse of power that cannot be tolerated.”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

trump national emergency

Brilliant!  CNN’s Jim Acosta makes President Trump’s case for him without even realizing it!

“I found some steel slats down on the border. But I don’t see anything resembling a national emergency situation.. at least not in the McAllen TX area of the border where Trump will be today. pic.twitter.com/KRoLdszLUu”

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) January 10, 2019

Ian Schwartz of RealClear Politics reported that, “White House officials and Trump supporters on Twitter roundly mocked CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta after he filmed himself taking a walk along a border barrier he called “tranquil” and claiming there was “no national emergency.”

Per Jim Acosta’s CNN broadcast:

“Here’s some of the steel slats that the president has been talking about,” Acosta said as he grabbed a bar. “As you can see, yes, you can see through these slats to the other side of the U.S.-Mexico border.”

“But as I am walking along here we’re not seeing any kind of imminent danger,” Acosta reported as he walked against the barrier. “There are no migrants trying to rush toward this fence here in the McAllen, Texas area.”

“As a matter of fact, there are some other businesses behind me along this highway. There’s a gas station, a Burger King and so on,” the intrepid reporter said into the camera.

“No sign of the national emergency that the president has been talking about. As a matter of fact, it’s pretty tranquil down here.”

Acosta then ended his transmission.

Ha!

Not only is Jim Acosta obnoxious, he’s an obnoxious idiot.

Actually, it turns out that he is an obnoxious, useful, idiot!

And that’s the best kind!

I’m sure Mr. Acosta is kicking himself for unwittingly making the President’s point for him.

Let’s see what some others had to say about Jim “I Tawt I Taw a Puddy Tat” Acosta!

“When I went with President @realDonaldTrump to the border today I never imagined @Acosta would be there doing our job for us and so clearly explaining why WALLS WORK. Thanks Jim! https://t.co/7wC4rdEsZ2”

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) January 10, 2019

 

“I would like to thank @Acosta for pointing out how peaceful, safe and secure it is at a part of the border that HAS a wall. #RealNews #BuildTheWall  https://t.co/bkssL9nOW3”

— Brad Parscale (@parscale) January 10, 2019

 

“A sincere and heartfelt “thank you” to @Acosta and @CNN for finally showing what @POTUS has been saying: barriers work! Great job Jim!!! https://t.co/jZx1NanMgh”

— Hogan Gidley (@hogangidley45) January 10, 2019

 

“Brilliant reporting from CNN’s @Acosta —walls work! Thank you Jim! https://t.co/Ymw9iCgPzx”

— U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (@SenBillCassidy) January 10, 2019

 

“Is it possible Acosta is actually a pro-Trump false flag operating under deep cover in the media? If so, he’s a genius. https://t.co/EvRYGrIQZI”

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) January 10, 2019

 

Yes, thank you Jim.

Thank you for your unwitting support.

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

jim acosta at the border

 

BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!

With all due respect Mr. President, and I am saying “with all due respect,” it is time to draw a line in the sand and make your stand.

President Trump met Democrat leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi in the Oval office yesterday, December 11, 2018, to discuss border security, the wall, and continuing to fund the government.

The President allowed the press to attend the beginning of the meeting, and the cameras were on, as The President said, “If we don’t have border security, we’ll shut down the government.”

President Trump repeatedly told Mrs. Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, that what she’s proposing would not pass the Senate.

“If it’s not good [on] border security, I won’t take it,” President Trump quickly replied.

Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer repeatedly urged The President to take the meeting private, (all the more reason not to) but not before he declared he’s “proud to shut down the government for border security” and will “take the mantle.”

Prior to the meeting, and earlier in the morning, President Trump threatened to have the military “build the remaining sections” of the wall if Congress doesn’t deliver the funding.

As President Trump began discussing the details of the negotiations, with Vice President Mike Pence also in attendance, Mrs. Pelosi complained, “I don’t think you should have a debate in front of the press.” And at another point, Mr. Schumer added, “Let’s debate in private.”

I’m sure there was a reason President Trump wanted at least a portion of the discussion out in the open for all to see.  I’m guessing The President wanted the two Democrat leaders, and democrats in general, to have to own their positions in a way that could not be confused or re-translated later.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, they say.

“Elections have consequences, Mr. President,” Schumer interjected, undoubtedly hoping to bolster his position.

“And that’s why the country is doing so well,” The President responded.

Mr. Schumer then challenged President Trump over his boasting that Republicans kept control of the Senate.  “When a president brags that he’s won Indiana and North Dakota, he’s in real trouble,” Schumer offered.

Apparently Mr. Schumer has a lack of respect for the states and the people from the states of Indiana and North Dakota, as he seems to denigrate the value of these states.

Congress last week temporarily averted a partial shutdown amid the funeral services for the late President George H.W. Bush, pushing the new deadline to Dec. 21.

President Trump wants $5 billion for the wall project, while Democrats are offering $1.3 billion for border security, which doesn’t include an actual wall.

Mrs. Pelosi said she and many other Democrats consider the wall “immoral, ineffective and expensive.”

Speaking for conservatives, I think we have seen with the recent caravan and those people waiting in Tijuana, Mexico, how effective an actual wall is and how necessary it is given our current immigration laws.

Mr. Schumer said Democrats want to work with President Trump to avert a shutdown, but said, “Money for border security should not include the concrete wall President Trump has envisioned.  Instead, the money should be used for fencing and technology that experts say is appropriate.”

Yes, Mr. Schumer, we are all aware that you can always find “experts” to support any position you may take or any belief you may have.

President Trump has said that Congress should provide all the money he wants for the wall and called illegal immigration a “threat to the well-being of every American community.”

Even though the Republicans will pick-up a couple of seats in the Senate next year, they currently have 51 votes.  Sixty votes are required in the Senate to overcome a filibuster, thus effectively blocking a proposal.

Let’s remember that during President Trump’s campaign for president, at every jam packed rally, in the dozens of states he visited, he promoted building a wall and the people in attendance chanted, “BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!”

If ever a president had a mandate, based on an election, to do anything, it is President Trump’s mandate to “build the wall.”

“We the People” have waited long enough.

We want our wall!

And yes, Mr. Schumer, elections do have consequences, and don’t you dare try and throw your weak midterms in our faces.  Especially you, as your party lost even more seats in the Senate!

You want The President and us to “own” shutting the government down in order to get our wall?  Fine!  We will proudly own the shutdown, and we don’t care if it’s shut down until the 2020 election!

“We the People” wanted a wall on our southern border and we elected Donald Trump to build that wall.

I would further respectfully suggest that President Trump address the nation, similar to the way President Reagan did on several occasions, bypassing the “biased, liberal, fake news media” “filter,” and make your case for the wall directly to the American people, putting some pressure on their representatives.

“Maybe Poker’s just not your game, Chuckie.  I know, let’s have a spelling contest!” – adapted quote from the movie “Tombstone.”

 

Thanks to Alex Pappas and Chad Pergram of Fox News, and Judson Berger and The Associated Press for contributing to this article.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

trump pelosi schumer wall mtg

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑