patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
756,819 comments in 77,896 posts by 11,081 registered users, 4 online now: errc, mell, Onvacation, TwoScoopsMcGee

new post

WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton Says Vetting Rapefugees Is Impossible

By zzyzzx   2016 Oct 11, 5:26pm   5 links   1,456 views   8 comments   watch (0)   quote      

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/11/trump-pushes-extreme-vetting-hillary-says-vetting-impossible/

Hillary Clinton regards vetting refugees as impossible, according to email released by WikiLeaks.

For his part, Donald Trump says his immigration plan does not ban Muslims, but instead requires “extreme vetting” for Muslims arriving from countries with documented problems of Islamic terrorism—consistent with the U.S. Constitution.

Regarding policy, Americans will decide between the sharply contrasting visions of Trump and Clinton—one focusing explicitly on security and America’s interests, the other saying behind closed doors that she believes in “open borders” but does not say so publicly, and that national leaders can have a private position that is different from their public positions.

Apologists for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton say that Trump’s immigration plan is both bad policy and unconstitutional, and that one type of immigrant—Syrian refugees—should be admitted in far greater numbers.

But hacked emails released by Wikileaks show Clinton thinks vetting Syrian refugees is “impossible.” Michael Patrick Leahy reports that Clinton acknowledged this reality for refugees pouring into Jordan.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper already admitted that the U.S. cannot vet these refugees, so this may be an instance of Clinton telling the public a different position than you take in private.

Emails also show Clinton’s inner circle caught in an echo chamber when it comes to constitutional rights for aliens (legal or illegal, not just refugees). Mandy Grunwald writes of wanting to “whack” a Republican “for trying to change the Constitution to deny babies born here the right to American citizenship if their parents aren’t citizens? (basically get rid of the 14th Amendment).”

To the contrary, the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not guarantee citizenship to the children of foreigners, whether they are in the United States legally or not. Congress chooses to grant citizenship very broadly in the Immigration and Nationality Act, but the Constitution does not require it except for the children of American citizens born on American soil.

This is not exclusively a conservative idea; in addition to constitutional conservative stalwarts like Prof. John Eastman, noted judicial activist Judge Richard Posner on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has declared that the Fourteenth Amendment does not confer birthright citizenship, calling the idea “nonsense.”

Moreover, in 1993 now-Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid introduced a bill (the Immigration Stabilization Act) that would change current law, denying citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. Since the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, the constitutional contours of this issue have not changed from 1993 through 2016—only the politics of a cynical attempt to create millions of Democratic voters for those who racially stereotype foreigners from certain countries.

All this goes back to the famous line of Justice Robert Jackson that the Constitution is not a “suicide pact.” It is a document that ensures several fundamental principles of fairness and justice—like due process and equal protection—to all persons, whether citizens or not. But for the most part, it is a document predicated upon American exceptionalism, and showcasing an “America First” paradigm. The Constitution frames issues like national security and immigration in terms of what is best for America.

The Supreme Court seemed split on what the Constitution requires when it comes to immigrants, including refugees. Liberal justices refer to constitutional limits on immigration laws, while conservative justices say that the Constitution gives Congress complete discretion and full authority to determine who can cross the U.S. border and who can stay in this country.

#rapefugees #politics #crookedhillary

Comments 1-8 of 8     Last »

1   Ceffer   2016 Oct 11, 6:27pm     ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Just let the TSA vet them with a veterinarian's glove. The refugees will slow to a trickle, but the ones left will be really kinky.

2   Strategist   2016 Oct 11, 6:37pm     ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Ironman says

Oh Wait, 7% would be over 4,500 radicals or close to 100 PER STATE, wandering around the country looking to kill us...

Oops...

And each one of those 4500, could kill a 100 of us.
My advise......dont eat the fuckin skittles.

3   Strategist   2016 Oct 11, 6:39pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Ceffer says

ha ha. That could go up your ass, right up to the throat.

4   bob2356   2016 Oct 11, 8:28pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

WTF this is ridiculous even for the make shit up crowd. She said jordan couldn't vet all the refugees, now up to 1.5 million, pouring over the border into jordan. It has nothing to do with the process of the US vetting them. Then breitbart facts checks itself and still spews out the same bullshit. Amazing.

zzyzzx is deplorable says

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper already admitted that the U.S. cannot vet these refugees

No Clapper never said that. Cruz said Clapper said it. Cruz was wrong. Clapper said ISIL might try to put operatives into the pool of refugees applying for asylum, but we have an aggressive screening program. Here is the Sept. 9th interview:

I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees. So that is a huge concern of ours. We do have a pretty aggressive program for those coming to this country, for screening their backgrounds. I’m not as uniformly confident about each European country that is going to be faced with welcoming or allowing refugees into their countries.

Idiotic even for the usual cast of clowns.

5   Strategist   2016 Oct 11, 8:36pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

bob2356 says

No Clapper never said that. Cruz said Clapper said it. Cruz was wrong. Clapper said ISIL might try to put operatives into the pool of refugees applying for asylum, but we have an aggressive screening program. Here is the Sept. 9th interview:

I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees. So that is a huge concern of ours. We do have a pretty aggressive program for those coming to this country, for screening their backgrounds. I’m not as uniformly confident about each European country that is going to be faced with welcoming or allowing refugees into their countries.

We can't screen Syrian refugees. what's wrong with you?

6   landtof   2016 Oct 11, 8:45pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Ironman says

Dan would really like that.

let's teach tovarichparrot to say this:

dan is a fat gay nerd with a mullet. SQUAWK!

7   bob2356   2016 Oct 12, 3:51am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Ironman says

Bob had a tough day in the barn, the cows kept running away from him.

Fantasizing about people having sex with animals again? Did you get anything sticky on the keyboard? Ever consider actually having sex with a human women? Never mind, sorry I asked such a ridiculous question. Question withdrawn.

8   bob2356   2016 Oct 12, 4:01am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

We can't screen Syrian refugees. what's wrong with you?

Because you say so? Ok whatever dude. We've screened 784,000 refugees so far since 9/11. Three have been arrested for terrorist activities, all for sending weapons to other countries.

Comments 1-8 of 8     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home