Tag Archives: illegal immigration

Impeach Biden over … border? Really?

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Chip Roy has signed his name to the Republican Party’s loony bin caucus roster.

The Texas U.S. representative wants the House to impeach President Biden and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas because they haven’t done enough to secure our border against illegal immigration and — I will presume — all those criminals who are “pouring” into the country.

Impeach them? For that? Is this guy serious? He thinks he is. I happen to believe he is nuttier than a Snickers bar.

Texas Rep. Chip Roy calls for impeachment of President Biden, DHS Secretary Mayorkas (msn.com)

If we’re going to apply that so-called “logic” as grounds for impeachment, than every president who came before Biden should have been sent to the House gallows to be impeached. Dare I mention that should include Republican presidents as well as Democrats? There. I just did.

Rep. Roy needs to get a grip on reality.

President Biden inherited a mess when he took office. His presidential predecessor had not stemmed the illegal immigrant flow. Neither had the man who preceded him, Barack Obama, or the man who was on the watch before that, George W. Bush.

Republicans along our southern border — and that is the crux of the argument here — are yapping and yammering about the pi**-poor job Biden allegedly is doing. I agree he needs to take a stronger grip on the border issue and, yes, it is a “crisis.”

Impeach him and the DHS boss for it? This matter doesn’t even begin to rise to the level of a high crime or misdemeanor.

Gov. Abbott’s wall gets little endorsement

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Today’s edition of the Dallas Morning News offered an interesting snapshot of public opinion on a plan that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is trying to foist on the state he leads.

I refer to the border wall Abbott wants to build along our state’s border with Mexico.

The Morning News today published 13 letters to the editor on its opinion page commenting on Abbott’s idea. Eleven of them came from writers who oppose the wall construction outright; one letter seemed somewhat neutral, proposing the state build a ravine along the border; one letter applauded Abbott’s leadership as governor.

Hmmm. It got me thinking. If the Dallas Morning News — which publishes a moderate/conservative editorial page — cannot find more support for Abbott’s wall than it did in today’s letters package, then what is the point of the governor’s wall-building initiative?

I certainly realize that a single day’s newspaper collection of letters to the editor does not constitute a scientific survey of public opinion. Still, it seems instructive to me that so many North Texas residents seem opposed to the idea. It’s not as if this part of the state is a haven for left-wing progressive thinkers … you know?

It brings me to the point of Abbott’s decision. Abbott says he is acting because of what he determines is the federal government’s failure to secure our border. He has bought into the clap-trap offered by the previous president that the “horde” of undocumented immigrants is full of criminals intent on harming Americans.

So Abbott wants to build a wall. He calls it a “down payment” on securing our state. Except that he is now treading on federal authority, which is charged with securing the nation. Abbott isn’t having any of that. If the feds won’t act, he said, then Texas will take matters into its own hands.

I happen to agree with most of my fellow North Texans who expressed displeasure with Abbott’s initiative. A wall is too costly and will ultimately prove to be ineffective. It also illustrates how a one-time reasonable Republican politician has morphed into a cult follower who has bought into the crazy notion that we are being overrun by criminals.

How much will it cost, governor?

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

The individual who preceded Joe Biden as president of the United States used to proclaim that “Mexico is going to pay for the wall.”

It didn’t happen. It won’t happen. Not ever.

Now we have the governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, declaring his intention to build a wall along the state’s lengthy border with Mexico. He isn’t making the same preposterous claim that the ex-POTUS did. However, we need some specifics on this matter if it manages to survive the expected challenges to whether it is even constitutional for a state to assume a federal responsibility.

Texas border wall may not be feasible, or even legal | The Texas Tribune

How much will it cost, Gov. Abbott?

You see, the U.S. Constitution requires in the Fifth Amendment that the government provide “just compensation” for any private property seized for public use. Texas’s share of public land comprises a tiny fraction of its total land mass along the border, which will require the state to pay a whole lot of money it takes from private ownership. So, we have that expense.

As for the rest of the price tag, which would be bound to skyrocket as the state grapples with ways to erect a secure border, well, we haven’t heard a word from Gov. Abbott on how much that might cost you and me.

The state’s economy happens to be performing quite well in the wake of this COVID pandemic. However, we shouldn’t be asked to spend an unspecified amount of money to seal off our southern border from “hordes of criminals” who, in my view, do not exist.

Welcome them, however …

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

President Biden said he is wants to “go big” on an immigration reform proposal for Congress to consider.

I agree with him, but with an important caveat. I want there to be strict border security and enforcement of immigrant-entry rules for those seeking to come to the United States.

The president has unveiled a sweeping reform that enables undocumented residents already living here an eight-year path to seeking citizenship or legal resident status; it seeks to speed up that path for agricultural workers and recipients of the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program; and, yes, it seeks technology to help patrol the nation’s borders.

The childhood arrivals idea, aka DACA, became a favorite target of the Trump administration. Donald Trump rescinded President Obama’s executive order granting a form of amnesty from deportation for those who were brought here illegally as children. Joe Biden then rescinded Trump’s order in a kind of take-that approach to peeling back his predecessor’s policies.

Democrats unveil Biden’s immigration bill, including an eight-year path to citizenship (msn.com)

I am trying to take a longer view of the approach to immigration reform is taking. For sure I do not want to see a continuation of the heartlessness espoused by many of Donald Trump’s immigration advisers, namely that prince of darkness Stephen Miller who sounded for all the world like someone who wants to shut the door completely to all immigration. As the grandson of immigrants, I take deep personal offense at the approach that the Trump administration took and I welcome the more compassionate approach being expressed by the Biden team.

And no, I do not favor any sort of “open border” notion that has become a sort of whipping boy for those on the right who suggest that anything short of walling off the United States is an endorsement of welcoming everyone … legal and illegal immigrants alike. That is the stuff of demagogues.

I want President Biden to deliver on his 2020 campaign promise to fix the nation’s immigration policies. He has thrown a bold plan out there to ponder. Finding common ground is the basis for sound legislation. The president’s decades of experience as a U.S. senator puts him in position to lead that effort.

Biden a ‘far lefty’? Huh?

Stop it, Mr. President. You’re killin’ me!

You’re now trying to paint Joe Biden as some sort of squishy far-left, socialist-leaning, open-borders guy who will take our guns from us and appoint wacky loons to the federal judiciary.

Forgive the candor, Mr. President … but I think you’re off your rocker.

The first signs of the kind of campaign you are going to wage against the former vice president are coming into sharper focus now that the Republican National Convention has commenced.

I don’t listen to you when you speak on my TV. If I don’t turn the TV off I’ll mute the volume, given that you have nothing — not a single damn thing — to say that I want to hear.

However, the media report what you say and I do read media reports. They say you’re accusing Biden — an establishment Democrat if there ever was one — of adhering to some far-left idiocy.

I think of all the things you have accused Biden of supporting, I laugh the hardest at the open-borders assertion. Jumpin’ jiminy, Mr. POTUS, no reasonable American wants to throw open our borders. Indeed, the term “open borders” implies no enforcement of immigration laws, no intercepting of undocumented immigrants. Has the former VP ever said anything that suggests such nonsense? Umm. Let me think. No. He hasn’t.

Yet you keep yapping that he wants open borders. That he’s now a tool of the far left.

You seek to denigrate Biden the way you did to Hillary Clinton. The former vice president is trading on his decency, on his compassion, on the very virtues that you lack. That will be his staunchest defense against the scurrilous attacks you are going to launch against him.

So, I cannot wish you “luck” in your effort to defame a decent — and knowledgeable — political foe. I will turn away from you whenever you spout that nonsense and I intend fully to call attention to the lies you spew whenever they fly out of your mouth.

See you in the funny papers, Mr. President.

POTUS’s petulance on full display

“These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd. Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020!”

“Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn’t like me?”

Come on, Mr. Crybaby in Chief. You should know better than that, but you don’t.

The U.S. Supreme Court performed its duty in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, which you and the justices all took an oath to uphold, to protect and defend.

The court’s 5-4 ruling on the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals is a victory for reason, for humanity and for sane public policy. Its ruling is clear: You didn’t follow the law when you rescinded the order that kept DACA recipients from being deported to countries they never knew, as they were brought here as young children illegally by their parents.

And if you would read the Constitution, Mr. President, you would understand that the court’s decision isn’t about “liking” you. It has nothing to do with what the justices think of you personally … although I can deliver a fairly educated guess on how most of them might think of you. They keep those thoughts private, unlike you, who continues to blast out those idiotic tweets bitching about this and/or that policy matter that doesn’t go the way you prefer.

I’ve been watching politics for a long time, Mr. President, and I do not recall a president as thin-skinned and as churlish as you. I do remember that moment in the House of Representatives when President Barack Obama scolded the Supreme Court — whose members were sitting in front of him — during a State of the Union speech about its Citizens United campaign finance decision. I didn’t think that was appropriate, either … and I said so at the time.

However, President Obama didn’t blather on via Twitter the way you have done and you continue to do. Other predecessors of yours have taken their lumps like grownups.

Good grief, dude. Suck it up.

Yes, POTUS did say Mexico would ‘pay for The Wall’

(Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Donald Trump is trying now to take back what he said the day he announced his candidacy for the U.S. presidency.

You can’t do that, Mr. President. Really. You cannot!

He now says he never pledged to have Mexico pay “directly” for a “big, beautiful wall” he wants to build along our nation’s southern border. But actually, he did say it. Many times, in fact. He said it all along the campaign trail. He’s been repeating it since winning the 2016 election.

When you say “Mexico is going to pay for the wall, believe me,” then what else are Americans supposed to infer? When I heard him say it, I heard that “Mexico is going to pay,” period … full stop, end of story.

Sure, POTUS did seek on a few occasions say that he never suggested Mexico would “write a check” to cover the wall’s cost. He said it again Thursday at the White House. However, the direct payment idea has been crystal clear since the day he entered political life in June 2015, when he declared he would run for the presidency.

Let’s not play these games. The notion of Mexico paying for a wall along our nations’ shared border has been arguably the key campaign pledge that Trump made on his way to the White House.

He must not be allowed to lie his way out of what he said repeatedly.

The fact checkers  are hard at work keeping track of these things.

DACA appears to be on the ropes at SCOTUS

The word out of Washington, D.C. is out: The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority appears to be readying a decision that will enable the deportation of U.S. residents who were brought here illegally as children by their parents.

Donald Trump sought to have them sent back to their country of origin, even though these individuals know only life in the United States. They are the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals recipients.

DACA might be on the ropes.

The court will issue its decision in mid-2020, at the height of the presidential election. One should be wary of trying to predict what the court will rule.

The president has seated two new members on the court, giving him a narrow but solid conservative majority. I realize that elections have consequences and we well might learn next year just how dramatic those consequences can get.

President Obama issued an executive order that granted temporary amnesty from deportation for DACA recipients. Trump took office and then rescinded that order. Critics, such as yours truly, have called the rescission a heartless act. DACA recipients by and large have grown up as de facto Americans. They aren’t citizens, but they are full-fledged residents of this country. Many of them have become successful in many endeavors.

What would happen to them if they are sent to countries they do not know?

Well, the highest court in America will deliver its decision in due course. The hearing today, according to those who heard it, suggests the court is leaning heavily toward backing Trump on DACA.

This well could be a sad moment for many hundreds of thousands of U.S. residents.

Fix the DACA mess; restore humaneness to our immigration policy

 ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images)

A Facebook friend, a man I actually know and respect, brought up a point on an earlier blog post that I want to acknowledge here.

He agrees with my belief that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency needs to be repaired, not eliminated, but he cautions about the need to deal with the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals matter as well.

He is correct.

DACA recipients are being punished unjustly only because they were children when their parents sneaked them into the country illegally. The Donald Trump administration wants them deported. The president rescinded an executive order that President Obama signed that gave DACA residents a form of temporary amnesty from deportation.

ICE is under orders to find these folks and detain them.

This isn’t right. It’s cruel and it is inhumane to deport DACA recipients, many of whom have excelled scholastically in the only country they’ve ever known.

I should point out as well two previous Texas governors — George W. Bush and Rick Perry, both Republicans — have all but embraced the idea contained in the DACA executive order that Obama signed. They have supported initiatives, for instances, to grant DACA students in-state tuition at public colleges and universities in Texas. Why? Because they recognize the contributions these young students can make if they are allowed to succeed while continuing to reside in Texas.

ICE can do much good for the country as we seek to reform our immigration policy. I also agree with former Vice President Joe Biden, who’s campaigning for president, that the best way to ensure a thorough and lasting repair of ICE is to change presidents. Donald Trump won’t do it.

Indeed, DACA reform must be part of any effort to re-humanize our nation’s immigration policy.

ICE can be mended

Joe Biden is having trouble finding his footing lately as he campaigns for president, but I want to fully endorse an idea he has put forth about the nation’s immigration enforcement policy.

The former vice president says it is wrong to abolish the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. It can be repaired. Indeed, the best remedy, according to Biden, is to elect a new president in 2020.

I have been troubled, along with progressives, by the ham-handed approach ICE has used to detain immigrants who have entered the United States illegally. However, the principle behind ICE’s formation remains sound. Yes, we need better enforcement along our borders — both north and south, I hasten to add — as well as along our expansive Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coasts. ICE’s mission is to enact enforcement policies that seek to stem illegal immigration into the country.

ICE critics have taken the argument against the agency’s policy too far, though, by calling for its abolition.

Democratic presidential candidates, such as Elizabeth Warren, say the human rights abuses are a direct result of ICE policy. She’s only half-right. The direct responsibility for that policy flows from the White House, where Donald Trump is currently residing.

I agree with Joe Biden: The best cure for what ails ICE is to replace the president with someone with a semblance of empathy and compassion for those who are seeking to enter this country while fleeing oppression and crime in other nations.

There is no compelling need to abolish ICE. The agency simply needs to be repaired. Let’s start with removing the guy at the top of the chain of command.