By DEXTER DUGGAN
PHOENIX — Amid the controversy over borders and barriers and whether they’re useful, there was indisputable evidence that impenetrable protection is provided to the leftist mindset by its bubble or cocoon or whatever you call its glistening fortress that can’t be breached by facts and evidence.
On January 2, Phoenix conservative radio host James T. Harris (KFYI, 550 AM) played an audio clip of MSNBC’s Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski urging Democrats to stand strong against President Trump’s “stupid wall that nobody wants.”
A few days later, after Trump announced on January 7 that he’d soon address the nation on the southern border crisis, the liberal Easterner Brzezinski urged the networks to deny airtime to the president.
Otherwise, she said, wouldn’t they be allowing him to spout “more lies, more misleading statistics, more twisting of reality, mindless confrontation, all for the sake of defending Trump’s dark, twisted fantasy of a wall on the Mexican border to fight an enemy that doesn’t exist, except in the most fevered swamps of American politics?”
The day after Trump spoke on the “growing humanitarian and security crisis” on January 8, radio host Harris had the sheriff of Yuma County, Ariz., Leon Wilmot, on the air. Yuma County is in the southwest corner of Arizona, with Mexico to its south and California to the west.
Despite declarations by national media bullhorns and some of the most powerful Democrats in the nation that there’s no border crisis, Wilmot said, “It’s not a made-up crisis. We see it each and every day.”
There are so many unauthorized family units coming into the U.S., Wilmot said, that Greyhound doesn’t have enough bus drivers to transport them to other locations across the U.S.
Harris said that people don’t hear more from officials like Wilmot on the air because this wouldn’t contribute to the picture these media want.
After having played Brzezinski’s declaration that “nobody wants” the “stupid wall,” Harris had Cong. Andy Biggs (R., Ariz.) as a guest. Harris asked Biggs what he’s hearing from the public, without prompting Biggs about possible replies.
Biggs said what he’s hearing is concern about getting the border wall.
Take that, Mika.
Either the personable Brzezinski consciously is lying seriously and repeatedly to a national audience, or, in the sweet, heedless uplands of dominant media’s magnificence, she actually is kept so deeply ignorant of facts and realities that she might as well be living on Saturn.
If a barrier on the Mexican line were as impenetrable as Brzezinski’s shield against reality, not a single unauthorized entrant could ever get into the U.S.
During his ten-minute January 8 evening address to the nation from the Oval Office, Trump quickly brought up problems caused by “thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country” every day. “We are out of space to hold them, and we have no way to promptly return them back home to their country.
“America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation,” Trump continued. “But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled, illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African Americans and Hispanic Americans.”
Young black activist Candace Owens, who argues that the Democratic Party has done tremendous damage to blacks, quickly picked up on this. She tweeted about Trump’s “reminder that those most negatively impacted by illegal immigration are Black and Hispanic Americans.”
Owens immediately added, “From abortion to open borders, never forget that rich white Democrats always fight for things that hurt minorities.”
Indeed, massive abortion and massive invasion are the top priorities of national Democrat leaders and their tools in the media, who surely understand this leads to the destruction of their nation. Or do they shelter behind the same anti-facts shield used by Brzezinski?
Conservative GOP campaign consultant Constantin Querard told The Wanderer on January 8: “Democrats have long used ‘for the children’ as a common line in their pitches for liberal ideas, but they’ve also long been fully committed to defending the murder of children in unlimited numbers. That hypocrisy has been pointed out in pro-life publications and ignored by the mainstream media for just as long.”
Back in the twentieth century, Bernard Nathanson, MD, was not only one of the U.S.’s leading pro-abortionists, but also one of the biggest actual abortionists, personally killing or supervising the deaths of tens of thousands of preborn infants, including one who was his own child.
But as ultrasound came on the scene to demonstrate the science of preborn development, Nathanson, willing to view new evidence, was deeply shaken and renounced his former ways. He became an ardent pro-lifer who eventually died from cancer while pleading from his sickbed to spare the babies’ lives.
Nathanson was a dedicated baby-killer who thoroughly repented and washed oceans of blood from his hands, and his conscience.
How is it, then, that dominant media, so deeply involved in promoting abortion and invasion, so grimly refuse to repent and change their ways as the negative evidence grows overwhelming?
Some abortion or border-jumping may have seemed justified in the past to them as necessary help for a hard situation. But as the bad dreams have become nightmares enveloping society, they both stand by them and conceal them in order to keep the horrors happening.
Even though sonogram pictures of unborn babies are as common on people’s refrigerator doors as other family photos, dominant media allow the powerful images no place in their tunnel vision.
When the Center for Medical Progress released videos in 2015 of abortionists casually dickering over prices for aborted babies’ limbs and organs, dominant media quickly became angry — not at the abortionists, but that CMP had exposed them.
Frequent forcible rape of women journeying to cross the border illegally was another fact kept in the shadows for years by these media that refused to come to the women’s defense. Women’s rights? Not now. To reveal the sex assaults would hurt their beloved cause of massive invasion.
When Trump announced his presidential candidacy in mid-2015, he frankly mentioned rapists as one of the wrongs of illegal immigration. Media gasped at such candor. Or, as they would put it, bigotry. That was another fact in full sight that they concealed behind Brzezinski’s anti-facts shield. Hordes of border rapists must never be acknowledged.
In June 2018 the legendary progressive Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM, spoke at length at the national conference of the Association of U.S. Catholic Priests in Albuquerque that I covered for The Wanderer. The priest used the familiar slant that mentioning border rape is bigotry. In a long story on page 3 of the July 12, 2018, hardcopy edition, I wrote:
“Rohr asked if President Trump and his many Catholic supporters actually think that Mexicans are rapists. ‘We have a compulsive liar leading our country who tells pretty much 12 lies a day,’ Rohr said. ‘The whole world is laughing at us’.”
However, I pointed out in the story: “Although it’s not regular front-page news, border-area rapists long have been one of the scandals in the lawlessness and chaos along the suffering international line. It assuages no fears and solves nothing by trying to brush off this reality as baseless bigotry.” I proceeded to list some rapist stories from the news.
I never heard from Rohr to apologize for or correct his incorrect remarks slamming Trump.
During the January 8 talk from the Oval Office, Trump once more mentioned rape as one of the border crises.
“Last month,” Trump said, “20,000 migrant children were illegally brought into the United States — a dramatic increase.
These children are used as human pawns by vicious coyotes and ruthless gangs. One in three women are sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek up through Mexico. Women and children are the biggest victims, by far, of our broken system.”
The president was calling attention to aliens’ undoubted crimes once again. And had he laid a trap for dominant media?
Aha, CBS News said, Trump was wrong. Actually, CBS fact-checked the president, “Between 60 percent and 80 percent of female migrants traveling through Mexico are raped along the way, Amnesty International estimates.”
What!? The nonexistent rapes that are only the fantasies of bigots actually involve up to 80 percent of female migrants? Mika, Mika, get us one of your anti-facts shields, quick.
Leftists think there’s no problem for U.S. security or tranquility or any sort of health — fiscal, physical, or otherwise — by having less of a barrier on the border than you have between your back yard and the alley.
If you fenced, you probably chose at least a wire lattice or mesh that presents some resistance, not four spindly strands of barbed wire that any ambler could slip past almost instantly.
When I’ve visited the southeastern Arizona international boundary a few times near the San Pedro River during the daylight, I saw footprints from Mexico coming right up to a fence of only a few strands of barbed wire.
So, after someone has come hundreds or thousands of miles northward to this spot, with the promise of easy entry ringing in his ears, we’re to believe he’ll spin on his heels and return southward?
Moreover, these days he has been told that if only he endangers his entire family by dragging them with him through deserts and green water, and he claims to need asylum, that’s almost as good as full-fledged citizenship papers.
That’d be about like elitists confusing my conscience to believe that if I only drove a few hours westward to Beverly Hills, I’d be entitled to a mansion with, um, a wall there, with property taxes paid in advance, at least until the California Supreme Court ruled on my legal status a decade from now.
A number of issues arose during the president’s current fight for serious border protection. Although dominant media were mostly interested in how Trump could be made to bend, Dems should be vulnerable to some pressures, too.
As a number of government workers started to feel the pinch caused by the partial funding shutdown due to Dems’ refusal to provide the requested border money, national conservative radio talk host Mike Gallagher noted on January 9 that having to go without a paycheck is nothing to make light of.
Government employees generally are regarded as a Democrat constituency. Perhaps they could help push Dem leaders to end their intransigence.
Even though Trump didn’t declare a national emergency over the border crisis during his Oval Office talk and thereby expedite moving forward for a barrier, he still could do so. The president had a border visit to McAllen, Texas, scheduled for January 10, the day this hardcopy issue of The Wanderer went to press.
Did Trump Err?
The Wanderer asked a former chairman of the Phoenix-based Maricopa County Republican Party, Rob Haney, if he thought Trump erred by not declaring the emergency on January 8.
“Yes, I do think it was a mistake,” Haney replied. “I told Marne (Haney’s wife) there was nothing new there. I was disappointed that he did not declare an emergency. . . . It is past due. More forceful action is required. Justice delayed is justice denied.”
However, Querard, the GOP campaign consultant, told The Wanderer he didn’t think Trump erred:
“I think there are legitimate questions as to whether or not he would have any real power just because he declared a national emergency. It seemed unlikely that he could simply grab money from other buckets and direct it towards a border wall. At the end of the day Congress appropriates the money, and that is rather settled law.
“So whatever he did would end up back in the courts and delayed for lengthy periods of time. It might also let Congress off the hook because they could then do nothing on the basis that the president had declared an emergency and was already taking action without them,” Querard said.
“Finally, if you could grab money from other buckets, those buckets would likely be national-defense buckets, and there is very real need for that money to be spent where it has already been appropriated. This showdown will have to last until the Democrats in Congress give in and appropriate money for border security that frankly they have already voted for in the past,” he said.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress