Untangling the Gang of Eight Web of Deceit


Never trust Washington.
Check it out:

Do you remember, ladies and gentlemen, when legislation was passed and signed into law by the president to build 700 miles of fence along the southern United States-Mexico border? Do you remember that? I remember that, too. So far, 36 miles have been built, and that’s it, no more. Legislation to build 700 miles of fence signed into law. It is the law of the land. Thirty-six miles were built. Recently, a couple of senators offered an amendment to the current immigration bill basically reaffirming the build-the-fence law, as part of immigration reform an amendment or two, maybe two people sponsored the amendment, to complete the job.

In other words, an amendment that merely confirmed what was already the law. It was voted down. So I want you to keep that in mind as you hear and digest everything about the Gang of Eight immigration bill, and it’s moving hot and heavy today. It is unfolding as we speak. There is, understandably, some confusion, because it’s moving so fast, and that’s what I’m going to attempt to do is wade through this web of deceit and untangle it for you. At least as best I can.

Now, the CBO came out with its report in the last couple of days, and something, if I’m right, something has caused somebody to hit the accelerator and really speed this up. Now, I don’t know what it is. It might be — just guessing — it might be the fact that the Congressional Budget Office report on immigration informed everybody who read it that, even after the passage of the Gang of Eight bill, even after it’s signed into law, as it’s written, if it were to happen that way, illegal immigration will continue at 75% of current levels. That’s the CBO, that’s a government agency, supposedly nonpartisan, telling everybody that even after doing this fix, 75% of current inflow continues, which might have made people start asking questions such as, “Well, then, what’s the point? Why are we doing this? Because isn’t part of this supposed to stop that?”

And that takes us to border security, which people that we have trusted have told us from the get-go that that must be ironclad or they won’t vote for this. Closing the border, shutting it down, security, making sure that people do not get across it illegally anymore, had to happen, had to be real commitments to it, otherwise people wouldn’t vote. Well, amendment after amendment was offered and beaten back, then in the process something changed and we were told that the legalization had to happen first, so that we could identify who was here, which then would permit us to beef up the border. Because how can we beef up the border, how can we start preventing people ’til we know who’s here? So we scratched our heads, said, “Okay.”



Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.


Previous post

Washington's False Premise on Amnesty

Next post

What Happened in the Last 24 Hours to Cause This Full-Court Press on Border Security?

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.