Donald Trump will not send eleven million illegal aliens back to their homeland, but he might send tens of thousands, and no doubt he and Ted Cruz will get the worst of the out of the country, fast. The latest debate dustup between Rubio and Cruz, with Rubio accusing Cruz of supporting “legalization” alludes falsely to Cruz wanting amnesty. Cruz did not want a “path to citizenship.” He proposed to document those here at the time, with no citizenship. It was unthinkable that any Republican would dare to propose sending them all home –– until Donald Trump. There are other issues around legalization v citizenship, and I’ll let Limbaugh explain that below, but I want you to remember that 1) Rubio campaigned that he WOULD NOT do what he did with the Gang of Eight, yet Chuck Schumer snatched him up like a young man standing on a street corner doing what women are accused of doing: asking for it, and 2) Rubio was a seasoned politician. Seasoned. Yet he fell in with Schumer, McCain, Graham and Jeff Flake. Forgot those campaign promises pronto. See my Rubio compendium below for more on his part in the Gang of Eight. (A question for readers: Does it bother you that I use colored text at times to emphasize a point, as I’ve done below? I’d really like to know. In the annals of “professionalism,” it isn’t done. What do you think?) On to Limbaugh.
Now here’s the point: Conservatives were furious that the border would NOT BE SECURED FIRST. Rubio, yes Rubio, said numerous times: We must freeze 11 million in place first, and the bill assured, that no matter what Rubio said, the border would not, could not, be secured first. It was written that way, intended for security to be less than you and I knew would be workable.
So it’s better to understand who they are and legalize them now so they can start paying their taxes, and start proving who they are and what they’re here for. In addition to all of that, we want to freeze the problem that we have in place right now. Source: rubio.senate
All of the above before securing the border, which will take some time, although any fence company here in Tulsa can have a wall up before government even gets its day started, if pols stay out of it.
S.744 allows DHS to grant legal status (registered provision immigrant, or RPI status) in 6 months, before any measure to secure the border has been taken. (Sec. 3, p. 10; Sec. 5, p. 2 . . .
S. 744 does not require any additional border fencing or completion of current border fence requirements. Instead, it requires DHS to submit to Congress a fencing “strategy,” in which DHS recommends what additional fencing is needed along the U.S.-Mexico border, if any. (Sec. 5, p. 24) . . . Source
The bill gave six months for the DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, in consultation with Attorney General (Eric Holder), the Secretary of Defense (Leon Panetta) to come up with a “strategy.” Then the “strategy” would be presented to nine Congressional committees. Think about how long that would take –– while illegals are flooding over the border. The bill provided for the “strategy” to be “successfully executed.” No demand that a wall or fence be built. The word “fence” or “barrier” is used twice in Sec. 296, simply saying that if fences or barriers are destroyed (remember, some are already in existence –– this is not about new fencing or barriers) there is punishment or penalty.
There were minimums set: towers, fixed camera systems, unattended ground sensors, handheld device for thermal imaging.
You’ll love this one: “At Points of Entry, Checkpoints.” among two other types of detectors, the first is “2 non-invasive inspection systems. . . .”
By the way, S. 744 put Border Patrol training under the jurisdiction of the Civil Right Division of the Department of Justice.
Training: DHS must develop, in conjunction with DOJ’s Office of Civil Rights, training for Border Patrol agents and certain others on: civil, constitutional, human and privacy rights of individuals; use of force policies; identifying vulnerable populations such as children and victims of crime and human trafficking; and the impact of border operations on communities. Section 3721 restricts Border Patrol enforcement activities at hospitals, schools, religious facilities, and organizations that assist children, pregnant women, victims of crime or abuse, or individuals with disabilities. Source: Gang of Eighter, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
And, Janet Napolitano was the decider. If Napolitano said the border was secure, it was secure. Bwwwaaaahahahaha!
In May 2013, The Hill reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to “put eleven million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.” That’s eleven million, probably more like twenty million voters. Ted Cruz was arguing for legalization, not a path to citizenship. Source
At the time, there was no Donald Trump. No one would say these people need to go home, because the are here illegally, and this country has laws. No one would say it from Capitol Hill. Cruz stepped in to stop the “path to citizenship,” but allow legalization = documentation. Without Trump, neither Cruz nor Rubio could imagine that someone would give us hope that we may not be forced to allow 11 million new immigrant Democrat voters.
Rubio was a tool well-used.Doesn’t matter what you think of him, we have Donald Trump to thank for today’s hue and cry. Cruz said recently, he will build the wall and let Trump pay for it. Love that! Maybe the Rule of Law will survive.
Marco Rubio was part of the Gang of Eight trying to secure amnesty and wishes he wasn’t. Ted Cruz never was and they’re trying to make it out like he was. At the end of the day when people go vote, people are gonna remember, of the two, it was Marco Rubio that was a member of the Gang of Eight and Ted Cruz that wasn’t, and that’s as
complicated or simple as it’s gonna end up being.
But I’m gonna tell you how we get there, ’cause it’s fascinating. (laughing) I mean, it is fascinating to get deep into this. That’s the end result. I mean, that’s the bottom line. That’s what voters are gonna remember when this is all said and done.
The Republican establishment, as you well know, not only dislikes and is frightened to death of Donald Trump, they intensely dislike Ted Cruz, and they are deeply afraid of Ted Cruz. . . .
A key member of the Gang of Eight was Senator Marco Rubio, newly arrived to the Senate, Hispanic, very much adored and appreciated by conservatives.
So the Democrat and Republican leaders in the Senate wanted Rubio in the Gang of Eight as a means of persuading conservatives that this wasn’t amnesty. “We weren’t going to grant legalization, we weren’t gonna grant citizenship, we weren’t gonna give them the right to vote (yet), but we have to do this.” And it was thought that Rubio — with his fresh, conservative newness and arrival on the scene — would bring recalcitrant Republican voters along. It was a giant miscalculation, but nevertheless they tried it. . . .
Rush discusses getting the bill to Obama’s desk and trying to get the House to go along with it.
And it involves Cruz ostensibly inserting an amendment in the Gang of Eight bill that is called “a poison pill.” . . .
A poison pill amendment is designed to kill the legislation by exposing, in this case, the proponents as being engaged in deceit and fraud. …
Here, Rush tells us something he did back then, when the legislation was underway –– his own poison pill. He proposed that the bill be passed by disallowing anyone legalized or put on a path to citizenship (granted Amnesty) to vote for twenty-five years, because this is all about Democrat voters. According to Rush, he didn’t get one phone call, not one “feeler,” and as he said, if there are no voters for Democrats, they don’t want these people here.
Well, Ted Cruz, in the process of debating the Gang of Eight bill, essentially did something close to that [what Rush did], in an attempt to expose it and in an attempt to kill it. And it is that attempt that Cruz made that Rubio and other forces are now claiming he’s a hypocrite on because they’re claiming that he really did privately and to certain groups say that he was in favor of legalization and citizenship. . . .
And that number is anywhere from 12 to 20 million, and maybe more.
It was not just legalization. It was not just granting them amnesty for violating the law, being here illegally. The Gang of Eight bill also contained a provision that put them on a path to citizenship. And you know damn well, if that had passed, and if the path to citizenship required a five-year wait, Chuck Schumer would have been to the cameras and microphones within two hours of the bill passing and signed by the president and said, “This is unfair. We’ve just granted ’em a path to citizenship and they have to wait five years? That’s not fair. We need to move this up. They should be able to register to vote tomorrow.” And that would have passed. And so the effort to defeat the Gang of Eight bill was to expose to as many people as possible that the real purpose of the Gang of Eight was not legalization, but the path to citizenship. . . .
Cruz’s intention was to make sure the proponents of the Gang of Eight ended up voting against it. Ted Cruz’s amendment was the equivalent of saying, “Hey, I’ll support this, but they can’t vote for 25 years.” It was an effort to get the proponents to vote against their own bill because it did not contain the fundamental number one requirement they wanted it to have, path to citizenship and right to vote.
Now Rush explains that at at least one time, Cruz has clearly said that he wanted the legislation to pass because he wanted to be a part of a bipartisan compromise, but he did not want a path to citizenship,(and HE DID NOT VOTE FOR THE BILL IN THE END) and from there he says:
But Ted Cruz never supported amnesty. He wants to say now that his amendment was designed to kill the Gang of Eight bill, but in 2013 he was telling people that he really wanted the bill to pass, that he wanted a reform package that he was instrumental in having passed, but that did not include amnesty, it just included legalization. And of course the Democrats, nobody wanted anything but amnesty
So the bottom line is the Gang of Eight bill failed, and people are attempting to make others believe that Ted Cruz secretly supported amnesty at one time and is lying about it, and that didn’t happen. So that’s what I would say if this conversation were over. But to get there I need to return to it, so hang on.
Powerful Forces rewriting history of Gang of Eight bill:
So I’m defending nobody here. I’m trying to cut through all of this noise and get to the essence of this for you. . . .
And there are some people that would very much like to have you think that Ted Cruz was much more for amnesty or involved in it, because that would take some pressure off other people who actually were.
It was the Gang of Eight.
It wasn’t the Gang of Ten or the Gang of 12.
It was the Gang of Eight, ’cause there were eight guys in it — and Cruz was not one of them.
And Rubio was instrumental in supporting this, and that was not good for him with Republican voters. . . .
To me, this is not complicated. The Gang of Eight bill failed. Ted Cruz ended up voting against it; Rubio was for it. When all is said and done, the Gang of Eight bill was never supported by a majority of the American people, and it went down to defeat.
But to me, this very simple. What was the purpose of the Gang of Eight? It was to register 20 million new Democrat voters. The Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass of dependent people who are ill-educated, poor, maybe don’t even speak English well. They can’t survive without government assistance. That’s the ideal Democrat voter. The more of them, the better.
That’s what amnesty is.
That’s what their whole point is.
That’s what the whole desire for this to pass.
And the Republican side? Republicans ditto. The Republicans are for amnesty but for different reasons. Their donors want the cheap labor, the Chamber of Commerce and all that, and some Republicans want to support amnesty ’cause they think Hispanics will love ’em and be more supportive, and they think people won’t call ’em racists. I mean, there’s all kinds of different reasons that various politicians support amnesty. The Democrats’ reason is universal. From Democrat to Democrat, it doesn’t matter which one you’re talking to, they see whatever it is, 12 million, 20 million brand-new voters — 70, 80% of which are gonna vote for them. And that’s all that matters. . . .
It isn’t about compassion. It isn’t about helping the poor. It isn’t about saving people from war-torn regions of Central America and South America. It isn’t about saving people, escape from poverty. It’s about empowering the Democrat Party. That’s why Rubio’s got so much trouble with it. People on the Republican side do not understand why he could be hoodwinked into helping the Democrats expand their voter base by anywhere from 12 to 20 million people. Believe it or not, these are snippets. Read it all at Rush Limbaugh
And that is exactly where I stood at the time and stand today. How could Rubio hit the Senate floor and join the cabal?
Related: My Rubio Compendium
If you have time, please vote in my presidential poll in the right sidebar.