Saturday AM ~ TheFrontPageCover

TheFrontPageCover

~ Featuring ~

In Border Talks,

a New Fight for Barrier Deniers

by Byron York

World-Wide Threat Assessment

Makes Powerful Case For Border Security

by Michael Cutler

{frontpagemag.com} ~ Timing is everything. Congress is currently in the midst of debating the construction of a "border wall" or “border barrier” to protect the dangerous U.S./Mexican border... as the clock ticks down to another possible partial shutdown of our government if an agreement cannot be reached. Meanwhile, on Tuesday, January 29, 2019 the Senate Intelligence Committee conducted a hearing on Worldwide Threats that was predicated on a just-released paper, "World-Wide Threat Assessment," that was issued by Daniel Coats, the Director of the Office of National Intelligence, which oversees the U.S. intelligence community. As we will see, elements of that report addressed issues that have a clear nexus to border security and immigration law enforcement. However, the leaders of the Democratic Party have thus far made it clear that they will oppose any and all efforts to construct a barrier to block the uninspected entry of aliens and cargo into the United States while simultaneously claiming that they don't oppose border security -- even as some Democrats call for disbanding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). While the Democratic Party leaders claim that a wall or barrier on the southern border is a waste of money and find all sorts of other absurd excuses to oppose it, House Speaker Nancy Pulosi outrageously and infamously claiming that any such structure would be “immoral,” the leaders of the U.S. Border Patrol as well as the leaders of the Border Patrol Council, the union that represents our valiant Border Patrol agents, have publicly and repeatedly stated that a wall or barrier is essential to help them to secure our nation’s borders...

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272739/world-wide-threat-assessment-makes-powerful-case-michael-cutler

US pulling out of Cold War-era arms

control treaty with Russia, Pompeo says

by foxnews.com

{foxnews.com} ~ Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Friday that the U.S. is pulling out of a major arms-control treaty with Russia... Citing alleged violations by Russia regarding the pact that's been a centerpiece of arms control since the Cold War, Pompeo said the U.S. is suspending its obligations and will terminate the deal entirely if Russia does not return to full compliance in six months. He said the U.S. "has fully adhered" to the pact for more than 30 years, "but we will not remain constrained by its terms while Russia misrepresents its actions. We cannot be the only country in the world unilaterally bound by this treaty, or any other." The American withdrawal had been expected. It follows years of unresolved disputes over Russian compliance with the 1987 pact, known as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, treaty. It was the first arms control measure to ban an entire class of weapons: ground-launched cruise missiles with a range between 310 miles and 3,400 miles. Russia denies that it has been in violation. U.S. officials also have expressed concern that China, which isn't part of the treaty, is deploying large numbers of missiles in Asia that the U.S. can't counter because it's bound by the treaty... https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-pulling-out-of-cold-war-era-arms-control-treaty-with-russia-pompeo-says

VIDEO: https://video.foxnews.com/v/5997388651001/

‘The Wall Is Getting Done One Way or the Other!’

by Evie Fordham

{westernjournal.com} ~ In a Twitter post on Thursday, President Donald Trump assured Americans that his proposed border wall “is getting done one way or the other”... which could include invoking emergency powers. “Large sections of WALL have already been built with much more either under construction or ready to go,” he wrote. “Renovation of existing WALLS is also a very big part of the plan to finally, after many decades, properly Secure Our Border. The Wall is getting done one way or the other!” “Lets just call them WALLS from now on and stop playing political games! A WALL is a WALL!” he added. Trump entered contentious negotiations with congressional leaders this week after reopening the federal government Friday with no concessions on wall funding. Lawmakers have until the temporary funding bill expires on Feb. 15 to come to an agreement. Trump could declare a national emergency to build a southern border wall if both sides can’t reach a deal. That decision could be complicated by legal action from opponents of a wall. But his administration has been laying the “groundwork” for that route since as early as Jan. 10, according to a Washington Post report...

https://www.westernjournal.com/trump-wall-getting-done-one-way-2/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=libertyalliance&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=libertyalliance

Sens. lowlife-Harris And Fein-stein LIVID As

Trump Nominates Conservatives To 9th Circuit Court

by Dave Workman and Jeff Dunetz

{lidblog.com} ~ President Donald Trump has infuriated California Senators Dianne Fein-stein and lowlife-Kamala Harris by re-nominating a pair of conservative judges... to occupy vacancies on the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals over their objections, according to Fox News. It’s part of the president’s efforts to reshape and balance the courts with conservative jurists. The 9th Circuit has a history as the most liberal and often overturned circuit court in the nation. It’s the court liberals go to when they want a Trump policy overturned. Uh-Oh I think that means Senator Fein-stein is going to make up a sex scandal about these judges and Senator lowlife-Harris will swear to it. Fein-stein and lowlife-Harris had objected to the nominations of Judges Daniel Collins and Kenneth Lee last fall. They had hoped to “work together” with the White House on filling the two open spots. In other words, they wanted him to pick liberals. Although I am not an attorney, I believe the correct jurisprudence term for what the president did in appointing those judges is “lenta stercores dominarum” which when translated from the Latin means something like, “Tough sh*t Ladies.”... https://lidblog.com/9th-circuit-court/

commie-Bernie and Teddy:

What If Trump Had Done This?

by PAUL KENGOR

{spectator.org} ~ I posted an article at The American Spectator on Wednesday, titled, “commie-Bernie... Bolshevik Party Boy.” It relates to amazing footage of commie-Bernie Sanders partying in a Soviet city north of Moscow on his honeymoon in June 1988. A shirtless, drunk commie-Bernie belts out a rendition of comrade Woody Guthrie’s “This Land is Your Land” with Bolshevik buddies. The footage was found by the left-wing magazine, Forward, which, interestingly, has retained the article but removed the video, which now can be found at YouTube. The whole scene deserves mockery, which I offered aplenty. And yet, there’s also a serious side to the spectacle, and it relates to both commie-Bernie and his old Senate colleague, Teddy Kennedy, and his Soviet shenanigans. There’s also great hypocrisy at work, by our liberal media. As to Kennedy, I’ve frequently written about his Soviet escapades, including an article for The American Spectator last year and exhaustively in my book Dupes. I addressed it at length on Mark Levin’s Fox News Channel show, “Life, Liberty, and Levin,” a few weeks ago. Kudos to Levin for providing a platform for Kennedy’s scandalous actions to finally receive a national audience. As readers here know, my research on Kennedy underscored a confidential overture he made to the Kremlin via his confidant and old law-school roommate John Tunney, a former California Democratic senator. Proof of that overture is a striking May 14, 1983 document written by KGB head Victor Chebrikov to Soviet General Secretary Yuri Andropov, tellingly titled, “Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Y. V. Andropov.”... https://spectator.org/bernie-and-teddy-what-if-trump-had-done-this/?utm_source=American+Spectator+Emails&utm_campaign=896aa7e121-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_02_01_11_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_797a38d487-896aa7e121-104608113

In Border Talks, a New Fight for Barrier Deniers

by Byron York: A House-Senate conference committee is beginning work on a package of border security policies that, it is hoped, can win the support of both Democrats and Republicans. The final product is certain to include several measures that already have full, bipartisan approval: more immigration judges, more technology to detect illegal drugs at ports of entry, more humanitarian aid for migrants in custody, etc.

The hang-up, of course, will be a border barrier. President Trump insists on money — his demand is $5.7 billion — that would build new steel-slat barriers along about 230 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. About 80 miles of that would replace current, dilapidated, inadequate fencing, while 150 or so miles would cover currently unfenced areas.

On the other side are Democrats led by House Speaker Nancy Pulosi, who has called a border wall “an immorality between nations” and denies evidence that a barrier would increase border security by decreasing the number of illegal crossings into the United States.

Pulosi won the 35-day partial government shutdown by sticking to her position. The new negotiations will test whether she and other Democratic barrier deniers can prevail again.

The need for new and improved barriers along some parts of the border is in the news almost daily. Take, for example, the events of Jan. 24 near Lukeville, Arizona, in the Tucson Sector of the border. Even though there is a six-lane crossing at Lukeville, migrants seek to enter the United States illegally in nearby areas that have ineffective fencing. Thus, on the 24th, Border Patrol agents found a large group — 242 people, most from Central America — who illegally crossed the border west of Lukeville.

“Agents discovered the group after they crawled over and under the crude vehicle barrier separating the United States from Mexico,” the Border Patrol said in a press release.

Just a week earlier, a group of 84 migrants arrived nearby in a tour bus, and then crawled under the fence into the United States, where they were taken into custody by Border Patrol agents.

On Dec. 19-20, in nearly the same place, the Border Patrol apprehended 306 Central American migrants crossing illegally into the U.S.

Clearly, the fencing in that part of the Tucson Sector is not working.

The border is 1,954 miles long. Everyone agrees that big parts of it do not require any fencing because the terrain is so rough that it makes crossing very difficult.

On the other hand, a significant part of the border does need barriers. Right now, there are about 705 miles of fencing — about 405 miles of pedestrian fencing and about 300 of vehicle fencing, which blocks vehicles but allows people on foot to cross easily.

The vehicle fencing did nothing to stop recent crossings near Lukeville and in other places on the border. In addition, some of the pedestrian fencing is easy to breach because it is old, falling apart and was never that imposing in the first place. The Trump administration seeks to do three things: 1. Replace some ineffective pedestrian fence; 2. Replace current vehicle fence with new pedestrian fence; and 3. Build new pedestrian fence in some currently unfenced areas.

The construction of barriers dramatically reduces illegal border crossing attempts. Looking at the Yuma Sector along the border in western Arizona, in 2005, before the construction of barriers, the Border Patrol caught 138,438 illegal crossers, according to figures compiled by the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors greater restrictions on immigration. Last year, with barriers, there were 26,244 such apprehensions in the Yuma Sector.

The San Diego Sector in California is a case study in the effectiveness of a border barrier. In 1986, before the construction of a barrier, there were more than 628,000 apprehensions, while untold numbers of others successfully made it across the border illegally. In 2017, after the construction of extensive barriers, there were 26,086 apprehensions, according to the Border Patrol.

Would anyone argue that border barriers had nothing to do with those striking before-and-after reductions? And, given what is happening in the Tucson Sector and other places today, would anyone argue that new, more daunting barriers such as the Trump administration proposes would not reduce the number of illegal crossings?

The effectiveness of border barriers is a settled fact. Yet some Democrats, led by the speaker of the House, deny that fact and insist that new and improved barriers would not increase border security. Other prominent Democrats, such as recently declared presidential candidate Sen. lowlife-Kamala Harris, have called the Trump barrier proposal a “medieval vanity project.”

At the same time, other Democrats seem more willing to take a fact-based approach. “In the past, we have supported … enhanced fencing,” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, a member of the Democratic leadership, said recently. “And I think that’s something that’s reasonable that should be on the table.”

Who will prevail in the border talks? Will it be Pulosi and her fellow deniers, or Jeffries and the reality-based community? The president and Congress have two weeks to find out. ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/60848?mailing_id=4044&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4044&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body

ACTION

Saturday AM ~ TheFrontPageCover

Comments