Hillary Clinton has been clear, she will rule over the people of the United States and go around Congress the very first Day. Open Borders means No Borders...
She would be the President who would bring about the complete
and, possibly irreversible, dissolution of our nation’s borders.
A review of Clinton’s stated positions on the issue suggests
she is perhaps the most extreme candidate on immigration ever to run for the
office of the U.S. Presidency. Her views place her even further outside the
mainstream of the American electorate than President Barack Obama, who
systematically dismantled U.S. immigration law during his two terms in office.
Below are just a few of the extreme immigration positions
held by Clinton.
(1) Expanding Unconstitutional Executive Amnesty
Perhaps one of the most radical aspects Clinton’s open
borders platform is that she is openly campaigning on defending and even
expanding President Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesties.
“You can count on me to defend President Obama’s executive
actions on DACA and DAPA when I am president,” Clinton said, referring to
Obama’s 2012 (DACA) and 2014 (DAPA) executive amnesties, which gave work
permits and access to federal benefits to millions of illegal immigrants.
Clinton’s campaign website states that, as President, she
will “defend President Obama’s executive actions to provide deportation relief
for DREAMers and parents of Americans and lawful residents.” Meaning, Clinton
will allow millions of illegal immigrants to remain in the United States,
receive work permits to legally fill American jobs, and get access to federal
benefits paid for by U.S. taxpayers.
In addition, Clinton’s website says she will “extend those
actions to additional persons with sympathetic cases if Congress refuses to
act.”
If Congress continues its refusal to act on comprehensive
immigration reform, Hillary will put in place a simple, straightforward,
accessible system for parents of DREAMers and others with a history of service
and contribution to their communities to be able to make their case and be
eligible for deferred action as well.
However, as Sen. Jeff Sessions has pointed out, Congress has
acted on so-called “comprehensive immigration reform” and it has rejected it.
Sessions explains that the reason any executive-ordered amnesty is
unconstitutional is because “the President’s action erases the laws Congress
has passed in order to implement laws Congress has refused to pass.”
Sessions said that “Congress considered and rejected these
changes to immigration law in 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014.”
While Clinton is pushing for immigration policies that would
expand migration rates, polls show that the American electorate overwhelming
wants immigration levels to be frozen or reduced—including 92% of the GOP
electorate and 83% of the American electorate overall.
Moreover, according to an October Rasmussen survey, most
Americans still oppose Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty. A Kellyanne
Conway poll found that by a 2-1 margin, voters believe that illegal immigrants
should be encouraged to return home by shutting off their access to U.S. jobs
and welfare.
(2) Amnesty Within 100 Days
Clinton has pledged to enact amnesty within her first 100
days in office. As NBC recently reported: “If elected, the former secretary of
state has promised to build on President Obama’s executive actions and
introduce comprehensive immigration reform during her first 100 days in
office.”
Clinton’s website has explained that by “comprehensive
immigration reform,” Clinton means full citizenship for illegal immigrants,
which would give them welfare access, voting privileges, and the ability to
bring over their family members through chain migration.
“As president, Hillary will fight for comprehensive
immigration reform that provides a full and equal path to citizenship,”
Clinton’s website states.
Full amnesty for the illegal immigrant population will cost
U.S. taxpayers $6.3 trillion, according to a report from the Heritage Foundation.
Clinton’s pledge for amnesty perhaps explains why she won
the endorsement of open borders advocate Luis Gutierrez–who has previously said
“I have only one loyalty… and that’s to the immigrant community.”
In return, Clinton has heaped praise on Gutierrez, declaring
that “few people have done as much as Luis to make sure that when it comes to
America’s policies on immigration, those policies reflect America’s values. He
organizes, strategizes, preaches, teaches, inspires, cajoles, whatever it takes
to keep this movement moving forward.”
Interestingly, Paul Ryan also won the early endorsement of
Gutierrez prior to being elected as House Speaker. As Bretibart News has
previously reported, Ryan’s views on foreign migration, foreign trade, and
foreign wars are more similar to Hillary Clinton’s views than those of GOP
presumptive nominee Donald Trump.
(3) Freezing deportations
Clinton has said that, as President, that she will
essentially freeze deportations.
“I would not deport children. I do not want to deport family
members either,” Clinton declared in March. Clinton’s pledge not to enforce
U.S. immigration law as President represents an essentially unprecedented
departure from the nation’s history of enforcing immigration law.
The Center for Immigration Studies’ Mark Krikorian described
Clinton’s pledge as “a breathtaking step toward open borders.”
As the Washington Post reported: “Clinton’s pledge not to
deport any illegal immigrants except violent criminals and terrorists
represents a major break from President Obama, and it could vastly increase the
number of people who would be allowed to stay in the country.”
Clinton’s vision erases entirely the protections that U.S.
immigration laws are supposed to afford American citizens: such as protecting
Americans from losing a job to an illegal immigrant, preventing the sapping of
school and hospital resources, as well as defending the voting privileges and
enfranchisement of U.S. citizens (giving citizenship to illegal immigrants
allows them to cancel out the votes of native-born American citizens).
The implication of Clinton’s platform– i.e. that illegal
entry is not in and of itself a deportable offense–represents a central pillar
of the open borders credo: namely, that millions of people can illegally come
to the country, take jobs, attend U.S. schools, receive affirmative action,
apply for federal benefits, and give birth to children who receive birthright
citizenship.
Moreover, waiting until after a violent conviction has been
obtained to deport an illegal alien means that immigration laws were enforced
far too late–i.e. they were not enforced until after an American was
victimized, raped, or murdered by a criminal alien. A federal policy that waits
to enforce immigration laws until after there is a criminal conviction would
mean admitting and releasing criminals by the hundreds of thousands, and
letting them roam free until after they have committed a crime, and have been
apprehended, tried, and convicted for that crime.
As Sen. Sessions has explained, immigration laws ought to
remove criminal aliens before they are convicted of a violent crime. “Our goal
should be to keep 100% of dangerous aliens out of the United States… we need to
remove potentially violent offenders before they hurt innocent families—before
the irreversible occurs.”
(4) There’s no need to secure the border because it’s
already “the most secure border we’ve ever had”
Even as tens of thousands of migrants continue to pour
across our southern border, Clinton has declared that the border is “the most
secure border we’ve ever had”– suggesting that she does not feel it is
necessary to take additional actions to secure it. Clinton argues that since
the border is already secure, it is time to give amnesty to the millions of
migrants who have entered illegally.
“We have the most secure border we’ve ever had… The
Republicans, the opponents, no longer have an argument,” Clinton said during a
March CNN/Univision Democratic debate. “We enhanced the border security. That
part of the work is done… Everybody who I know who has looked at it says it is
OK. We have a secure border. There’s no need for this rhetoric and demagoguery
that still is carried out on the Republican side. You’ve run out of excuses.
Let’s move to comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship.”
(5) Closing Detention Centers
On her website, Clinton pledges to “end family detention and
close private immigrant detention centers”.
“Hillary believes we should end family detention for parents
and children who arrive at our border in desperate situations. We have
alternatives to detention for those who pose no flight or public safety risk,
such as supervised release,” Clinton’s website explains.
This again represents a radical step in further dismantling
what little immigration enforcement is now in place. Clinton is essentially
saying that she will not detain new incoming illegal immigrants, but will
instead release them into the interior of the United States.
(6) Obamacare for illegal aliens
Clinton has repeatedly said that she supports giving
Obamacare to illegal immigrants. Clinton’s website says that Clinton wants to
“Expand access to affordable health care to all families… She believes we
should let families—regardless of immigration status—buy into the Affordable
Care Act exchanges.”
Chelsea Clinton echoed this sentiment while campaigning for
her mother. “It’s so important to extend the Affordable Care Act to people who
are living and working here, regardless of immigration status, regardless of
citizenship status,” Chelsea Clinton said in March.
(7) Full path to citizenship
Clinton has pledged to use federal resources to ensure that
millions of more foreign migrants are able to vote in U.S. elections:
There are millions of people in America who could be
naturalized, but for one reason or another, they’re not. So let’s help more of
our neighbors claim their rights. It’s so powerful, so precious, to be a
citizen of the United States!
To be able to vote in our elections, to have a voice in our
future, and I want to take down the barriers that are holding people back. So
here’s a few things I will do: I will work to expand fee waivers, so more
people seeking naturalization can get a break on the costs. I will increase
access to language programs to help people boost their English proficiency. I
will enhance outreach and education so more people know their options and are
engaged in the process. I don’t want anyone who could be a citizen to miss out
on that opportunity.
Polling data suggests that Clinton’s voter importation plan
will overwhelmingly benefit the Democratic Party.
A 2011 Pew survey found that Hispanics have a more negative
view of capitalism (55%) than do supporters of Occupy Wall Street (47%). A 2012
Pew Hispanic Center survey found that 75% of Hispanics prefer bigger
governments that provide more services as opposed to smaller governments that
provide fewer services.
Political scientists have documented how mass immigration
helps Democratic politicians. As University of Maryland’s James Gimpel noted:
“the enormous flow of legal immigrants into the country — 29.5 million 1980 to
2012 — has remade and continues to remake the nation’s electorate in favor of
the Democratic Party.”
Reuters has similarly reported: “Immigrants favor Democratic
candidates and liberal policies by a wide margin, surveys show, and they have
moved formerly competitive states like Illinois firmly into the Democratic
column and could turn Republican strongholds like Georgia and Texas into
battlegrounds in the years to come.”
(8) Expanded refugee resettlement
Hillary Clinton has called for a massive expansion in Middle
East migration.
As Donald Trump has observed, “Crooked Hillary wants a
radical 500% increase in Syrian refugees.”
Indeed, last year Clinton called for admitting 65,000 Syrian
refugees—on top of the roughly 30,000 refugees and asylees the U.S. already
admits from the Middle East each year. Adding in refugees from across the
Muslim world, this means that under Clinton’s plan, the U.S. would admit at
least 105,000 thousand refugees from the Muslim world annually.
“I’ll work to ensure that every single refugee who seeks
asylum in the United States has a fair chance to tell his or her story, this is
the least we can offer people fleeing persecution and devastation,” Clinton
said in December.
As Breitbart News has previously reported, below is a more
detailed breakdown of Islamic migration that would occur in her first term
under the minimum numbers she has put forward thus far:
– 374,000
refugees/asylees from the Middle East during her first term, based on DHS data.
– 420,000 refugees/asylees from the Muslim world during her
first term.
– 560,000 permanent migrants from the Middle East during her
first term.
– 730,000 permanent migrants from the Muslim world during
her first term.
According to a September 2015 Rasmussen survey, only 5% of
likely voters said that they wanted the U.S. to admit more than 100,000
refugees from the Middle East.
Women oppose Clinton’s plan to bring more than 100,000
refugees from the Middle East by a remarkable 21-to-1 margin, with 84 percent
opposing and four percent supporting.
Democrat voters oppose Clinton’s refugee plan by a 17-to-1
margin with 87 percent opposing and five percent supporting.
Most remarkably, 85 percent of black voters oppose Clinton’s
refugee agenda with less than one percent of black voters supporting her plan.
No comments:
Post a Comment