Fortress Washington

For John, BLUF:  i can remember when Pennsylvania Avenue, in front of the White House, was closed to vehicular traffic, on a temporary basis.  Now it appears permanen.  I hope the fencing around Capitol Hill does not become permanent.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Demands Intensify for Security Fence Around Capitol to Come Down

From The Epoch Times, by Writer Mark Tapscott, 19 February 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Forty-one House Republicans want Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to take down the razor-wire-topped steel barrier surrounding the U.S. Capitol complex and send the troops manning it home as soon as possible.

“We write with concerns about the security measures and enhanced fencing around the U.S. Capitol even though high-profile events like the inauguration are over,” the group said in a Feb. 5 letter to Pelosi.

“In particular, we are concerned with recent reports that the fencing surrounding the Capitol may become permanent.  We are willing to have an honest debate about providing Capitol Hill Police (CHP) with the resources they need to be better prepared without turning the Capitol into a permanent fortress.

“To that end, we urge you to remove the barbed wire fencing surrounding the Capitol and send the National Guard troops home to their families.  It’s time.  It’s time for healing and it’s time for the removal of the fencing so the nation may move forward.”

It is interesting that we, the Citizens, have not yet been told about the specific threat or threats justifying the fencing and the retention of the Nation Guard.  We were warned about threats to all the State Capitols on Inauguration Day.  However, nothing happened.

Perhaps the leadership on Capitol Hill, all Democrat, thinks the Impeachment Trial will bring out the worst.  Maybe they are hoping, as a sort of reverse time justification for the trial.

Regardless, it is time to "tear down this wall!"

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Wall From the Other Side

For John, BLUF:  After all the whinging about the wall separating us from Mexico, now we have Mexico wanting to keep those Gringos out.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Mexico is considering closing its border to stop Americans bringing coronavirus into its country as US case count passes 2,000

From The Daily Mail, by Reporter Jennifer Smith, 13 March 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

For once, the conversation over closing the US-Mexico border is being driven by Mexican health officials who say they are considering shutting out Americans to keep coronavirus out of their country.

There are currently more than 2,000 cases of the virus in the US and it is spreading rapidly. Forty-three people have died from it.

By contrast in Mexico, there have only been 16 confirmed cases and no deaths.

At a press conference on Friday, health minister Hugo Lopez-Gatell said: 'Mexico wouldn't bring the virus to the United States, rather the United States would bring it here.

It is good to see that in this first diverse world that some nations see the value of borers.  Poet Robert Frost, in his book North of Boston (Derry, New Hampshire, actually) tells us "Good fences make good neighbors," twice ("Mending Walls").

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Even RINOs Grasp the Obvious

For John, BLUF:  So Senator Mitt Romney is able to see the border problem Speaker Pelosi is not.  Put another way, Senator Romney nails it.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

"It's a little jarring to hear an American president say, 'Our country is full,' given the history of the United States of America."

Here is the sub-headline:

Said Chuck Todd, prodding Senator Mitt Romney to set himself apart from President Trump. But that's not what happened. Romney staunchly backed up Trump:

Blog Post from Rofessor Ann Althouse, 8 April 2019.

Here is the lede plus five:

MITT ROMNEY:  Well, we've seen a dramatic shift in the nature of immigration and illegal immigration just over the last few weeks.  I mean, a number of years ago and up until just a few weeks ago, the great majority of people coming into our country were coming, looking for work.  Single men and oftentimes just were turned at the border.  Sent back home typically to Mexico.  In the last few weeks, there's been a dramatic change and that is we're seeing unaccompanied young people, as well as families with lots of kids, pouring into the border.  And they say the magic word, "I'm seeking asylum."  And by virtue of our laws and processes here, we bring them into the country.  We don't begin to have enough space in our facilities to maintain the kind of care that these people deserve.  And so they're being just turned out into our country, 125,000 of them so far this year.  It's overwhelming our system.  We have got to be able to deal with this in a way. It's going to take some legislation to get it fixed.

CHUCK TODD:  Well, and that's what I'm curious about.  How would you be handling this?...

SEN. MITT ROMNEY:  Well, I think what has to happen is an effort for Republicans and Democrats to come together, generally with presidential leadership.  That's what's going to be essential to get us all together and say, “Okay, we need to fix --

CHUCK TODD: But you just said-- Senator I just heard your hesitation there.  Does he have the credibility to do this?

SEN. MITT ROMNEY:  Well, he does.  He has the capacity to bring together the top Democrats, top Republicans and to sit down and say, "Okay, what can we do legislatively to make sure that we're not creating this extraordinary asylum magnet that's bringing people into the country?"  And let me tell you, in my opinion, the Democrats are making a huge error by making border security an issue and saying it's a partisan issue.  Look, this is an American issue.  We can't have millions upon millions of people flooding into our country without a border that's secure, without ICE making sure the people that are here illegally are sent back.  This is a winning issue I think for Republicans.  But more importantly, it's a winning issue for Americans to say, "We have to have the sovereignty of our nation."

I think the president has tapped into something which the people feel very deeply.

And I think Professor Althouse is on to something.  And, I wonder, if The Host, Reporter Chuck Todd, was a little surprised and disappointed by the answer.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.

Regards  —  Cliff

Heading North

For John, BLUF:  Refugees at our Southern Boder come from somewhere.  That somewhere is Central America, where conditions are not good.  The good news is that between us and Venezuela stands the nation of Columbia.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

'We’ve never seen anything like this':  As Trump threatens to close border, migrants overwhelm Texas cities

From USA Today, by Reporterw Aaron Montes and Rick Jervis, 30 March 2019.

Here is the lede plus three:

Under a bridge connecting the U.S. with Mexico, dozens of migrant families cram into a makeshift camp set up by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.  The families are there because permanent processing facilities have run out of room.

Seven hundred miles east, busload after busload of weary, bedraggled migrants crowd into the Catholic Charities Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas.  Organizers there are used to handling 200 to 300 migrants a day.  Lately, the migrants have been arriving at a clip of around 800 a day, overflowing the respite center and straining city resources.

“It’s staggering,” McAllen City Manager Roy Rodriguez said.  “Really, we’ve never seen anything like this before.”

Along the Texas border with Mexico – from El Paso to Eagle Pass to the Rio Grande Valley – masses of migrants have been crossing the border in unprecedented numbers, overwhelming federal holding facilities and sending local leaders and volunteers scrambling to deal with the relentless waves of people.

So, if we accept the view of illegal immigration experts House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer that there is no crisis on our Southern Boder, can we at least grant that there is a caution?  And will they help round up the money to help deal with this caution?

And there is this Associated Press story from the end of this last week, "Mexico braces for new caravan of Central American migrants".  There are 44 million people in Central America, many in criminal gangs and most of the others looking to go some place better.  How many of those even understand what it means to be an American?  Nancy?  Chuck?

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

Mass Delegation re Wall

For John, BLUF:  So the Dems in the House of Reprsentative exerted their will on the President, but didn't expect blow back?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Trump’s wall:  ‘This is constitutional vandalism’

From MASSterlist.

Here is the "blog post":

A coalition of 16 states, which doesn’t include Massachusetts (at least not yet), yesterday officially challenged in court President Trump’s plan to use “emergency powers” to spend billions of dollars on a new border wall, the NYT reports.

Meanwhile, protests were held yesterday in Boston, Worcester, Northampton and elsewhere against the president’s wall plan, with U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley in Boston calling Trump’s attempted unilateral move “constitutional vandalism” and asserting Trump has “lost all moral authority to continue to serve,” reports Jacqueline Tempera at MassLive and Simón Ríos at WBUR. George Barnes at the Telegram and Jacquelyn Voghel at the Gazette have details on the Worcester and Northampton rallies, respectively.

From an Old Gray Lady article.

Does our whole Congressional Delegation think President Trump has “lost all moral authority to continue to serve”?  I was never good in language arts in school, but I parse that to mean Representative Ayanna Pressley believes—not just thinks, but deep down believes—Resident Trump should be Impeached, and Convicted.  This is not a half measure step.  As fellow Massachusetts thinker Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”  If we, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as represented by our all Democratic Congressional Delegation are going to make war on President Trump they had better make quick work of it.  He apparently doesn't suffer fools gladly, and while there is safety in numbers, the President can find ways to diddle with us.

Regards  —  Cliff

Nancy the Master Politician

For John, BLUF:  Mayor, and former California Assembly Speaker, Willie Brown is an excellent politician and reader of politicians.  Well worth following him every week.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Kamala Harris learns the perils of presidential front-running

We are back at "Willie's World".

From The San Francisco Chronicle, by Mayor Willie Brown, 2 February 2019.

Here is the portion on Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat from San Francisco:

No one smarter: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the envy of every politician in America.

She took on the most powerful person on the planet and humbled him.

Pelosi is also the most disciplined politician in America. She had the grace and smarts not to rub President Trump’s face in it when she beat him on the shutdown without having to deliver money for his wall.

She gave him the space to pull himself back together as Congress talks about border security measures, but make no mistake — not one shiny dime for the wall is going to roll through her House.

I think Speaker Pelosi has been firm in her commitment to not letting President Trump have a victory on the Wall.  But, as readers may know, I think the President's play is to demand money to tear down the wall, from San Diego to Yuma, due to its immorality.

For updates on 2020 Candidate Kamala Harris, go to the article

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Tear Down Those Walls?

For John, BLUF:  What is the Wall fight about?  The 2020 Race.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Byron York:  In border talks, a new fight for barrier deniers

From The Washington Examiner, by Columnist Byron York, 29 January 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

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 Pelosi, 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.

If we take the Speaker at her word, and in her utterance she may just be echoing President Ronald Reagan ("Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall), then she should be ensuring the bill has a couple billion dollars to tear down the boarder wall with Mexico, say starting with the 160 miles from the Pacific shore, south of San Diego, to Yuma, Arizona.  That would give us the opportunity to determine if we lose anything in terms of effectiveness without the wall.

It doesn't make sense to me, but Speaker Pelosi has all those staffers helping her.  But, if the wall is morally wrong, then it must come down.  On the other hand, this might just be about 2020, and the Democrats can't afford to give President Trump a win, any win, in light of the fight for 2020.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Building A Wall

For John, BLUF:  Didn't anyone check first with Speaker Pelosi?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Will Pakistan's Wall Work?

Here is the sub-headline:

Pakistan is building a wall along its border with Afghanistan. Will it actually make the country safer?

From The Diplomat! By Mr Muhammad Akbar Notezai, 19 January 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

Bramcha (sometimes spelled Bramacha) is a tiny town in Pakistan’s far western Balochistan province, situated in a corner of the province’s Chaghi district on the border with Afghanistan.  There used to be an extension of the same town on the Afghan side of the border, too.  After the United States’ invasion of Afghanistan, the Afghan side of the town was wiped from the map due to bombing campaigns – the town not only housed the Afghan Taliban but also drug traffickers.  Some called Afghan Bramcha the epicenter of drug trafficking, and it’s not hard to see why.  Even today, Bramcha is situated in one of the remotest and most lawless corners of the world.

Over the years, Pakistani authorities have grown increasingly concerned about the security situation on its borders with both Afghanistan and Iran.  The border with Afghanistan, in particular, has been loosely governed and porous from day one.  This is why Pakistani authorities have now commenced fencing its border with Afghanistan, in a bid to stop militants and drug traffickers from pouring into Pakistan.

This development is opposed by not only Afghan authorities but also by the Afghan Taliban.  In recent months, when Pakistani security forces were stationed in Bramcha to fence off the border with Afghanistan, the Afghan Taliban blocked the effort in some areas.

I wonder how this will work out?

Regards  —  Cliff

Who Wants What?

For John, BLUF:  Maybe it means nothing.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Shock Poll:  Trump Gains 19 Points with Latino Voters During Border Wall Shutdown

From Mediaite, by Caleb Howe, 17 January 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

In the latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released Thursday, President Donald Trump may have suffered some among Republicans overall, but he saw a huge point gain in a different demographic breakdown, and an unexpected one by conventional wisdom.

In early December, the poll had Trump’s approval rating among Latino adults at 31%.

The results from the poll released Thursday show the president’s job approval among Latino adults at 50%.

I wonder what this means?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Democratic Party Future

For John, BLUF:  Where is the Democratic Party and where is it going?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The House Democrats’ Best Path Forward

Here is the sub-headline:

To counter Donald Trump, and to prepare for 2020, the Party needs to think big.

From The New Yorker, by Ms Margaret Talbot, 14 January 2018.

Here is the lede plus two:

One of the worst side effects of Trumpism is the way that it drives its opponents into reactive mode, amid an atmosphere of cooked-up chaos.  Donald Trump wants to build a “great, great wall,” and last week he considered declaring a national emergency to do it, despite the fact that illegal border crossings have drastically decreased since 2000, and that many of those trying to cross these days are women and children who are not evading border guards but seeking them out, to ask for asylum.  At the outset of 2019, we’re in the second week of a partial government shutdown—which Trump said could last for months or years—because congressional Democrats have had to take his fixation seriously and insist that they won’t allocate the five billion dollars that he wants for the wall.  (The actual costs of a concrete barrier could climb as high as forty billion dollars, according to an analysis in M.I.T. Technology Review, and a report from the Government Accountability Office warns that the wall could “cost more than projected, take longer than planned, or not fully perform as expected.”)

Democrats are offering two compromises that would reopen government agencies and give the Department of Homeland Security $1.3 billion to improve border-security technology and other measures, including fortified fencing.  Meanwhile, some sense of the psychological vagaries that Democrats have to contend with can be derived from the increasingly peculiar way that Trump talks about the wall, as though it were not a policy but a totem—for the protection of his own ego, perhaps.  “The wheel, the wall, some things never get old,” he said last week, at a rambling Cabinet meeting.

Still, whatever compromise is eventually reached to reopen the government, the best path forward for the Democrats as they take over the House of Representatives—the most effective way to counter the Administration’s frantic, unmoored agenda-setting, while also motivating voters for 2020—will be to pursue ambitious ideas.  These could include the once utopian-sounding Medicare for All; a Green New Deal, to combat climate change while creating jobs; a national fifteen-dollar minimum wage; and a Voting Rights Advancement Act, to revive some of the protections that the Supreme Court eradicated in 2013, in Shelby County v. Holder.

Of course this depends on the individual Democrats being able to stay sane and stable, but they don't seem to have a good track record in that area.

There is, also before us, the Example of Senator E Warren, who seems to be combining her left wing experience with a sense of the issues of flyover land, perhaps based upon her experiences growing up in Oklahoma and time living in Texas.

I am wondering when we will see a like item from The New Yorker with regard to the GOP.

Regards  —  Cliff

Antifa in DC

For John, BLUF:  Yes, this is two week ago, but still interesting.  I think the Democrats are playing with fire, and could burn the country down.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

When Antifa Chants 'No America at All'

From PJ Media, by the one and only Sarah Hoyt, 17 August 2018.

Here is an excerpt:

Apparently while countering the “Unite the Right” (which is neither) demonstration, the brown shirts of Antifa got a little upset there was no one there to fight them. According to this article on Powerline, quoting an article in the Washington Post by Petula Dvorak (who covered the Antifa demonstration):

Masked — in black instead of KKK white — they pinballed around the empty streets of downtown D.C., randomly chanting and searching for a brawl .

“Bust some windows!” (Why?)

“Nazis, go home!” (They did.)

“No border! No wall! No USA at all!” (Huh?)

I love the last, “No border! No wall! No USA at all!”.  If there is no USA, perhaps there will be no more illegal immigration.

I wonder if the "Resistence" wants to turn us into Venezuela?  Maybe we could all flea to Canada, since Columbia, the notional Venezuelan country of refuge is a tad far, and a tad full, with a million refugees..

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Building the Wall

For John, BLUF:  Leave it to Texas to lead the way.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Texas Constructs Border Wall To Keep Out Unwanted Refugees From California

From The Babylon Bee, 3 August 2018.

Here is the lede:

The Texas legislature has approved construction of a border wall surrounding the state in order to keep out unwanted refugees fleeing the rapidly crumbling dystopia of California.

Here is the key paragraph:

A recent conversation about changing the name of the city of Austin to be more politically correct opened lawmakers’ eyes to just how many liberal California residents had come to the state in recent years, bringing their crazy ideas with them.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Walls Have Existed For Millennia

For John, BLUF:  Sure, there are places it is hard to build the wall, so step back and build it elsewhere.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Aristotle: Build The Wall!

Here is the sub-headline:

From , by Mr Andrew Klavan, 22 June 2018.

While re-reading Aristotle’s classic Politics, Mr Klavan finds that Aristotle says, build the wall.

Who am I to argue with the eminent Greek?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Schumer Gambit

For John, BLUF:  The Blogger thinks that Mr Dan McLaughlin thinks that Senator Schumer has painted himself into a corner.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Chuck Schumer Doesn’t Want An Immigration Deal

From The National Review, by Mr Dan McLaughlin, 24 January 2018.

Excerpts of this article were posted by Mr Stephen Green, at InstaPundit. He starts out:

Here is the thinking of Mr McLaughlin:

• Trump will sign basically anything that he can claim includes “The Wall.”
• Trump would be effectively admitting defeat if he signs something that he can’t claim includes “The Wall”
• If Trump is on board with an immigration deal with the Senate, that will give cover for it to pass the Republican-controlled House.
• Most of the Republican voters who care about restricting immigration will take their cues from Trump if he says he got a wall from Schumer, and will be happy and encouraged regardless of what else is in the bill.
• Most of the Democratic voting base will be furious at Democrats that they did something to make Trump happy – especially on his signature issue – regardless of what else is in the bill. The “Resistance” will treat this as the equivalent of a deal with Hitler.
• The optics of a smiling Trump signing a bipartisan immigration deal will play well overall for Trump and Republicans, and will help defuse some of the most polarizing arguments against Trump.
• Schumer expects to have more leverage to extract better terms in 2019, given that the Democrats are universally expected, at a minimum, to gain seats in the House in November.

The Blog Post continues:

Dan concludes, “Now that both Schumer and Trump have declared the wall non-negotiable, one of them has to cave or there’s no deal – a situation that was completely predictable when Schumer made his announcement.”

I’ve been reading Dan for years and respect the heck out of him, but his take might be too generous to Schumer. It isn’t that he doesn’t have any plays to make, but I don’t see any — at least not yet — which overcome his essential bind:

• Democrats can’t deliver the immigration deal which their most energized voters demand, even to the point of protesting at Schumer’s home.
• Continued Democratic obstruction on immigration restrictions — which poll surprisingly well (surprising to Beltway types, anyway) — risks turning off the very same Obama-to-Trump voters who Democrats need to win back in November.

This is far from over and Schumer is a crafty Washington player, but for now it looks like a “bad” deal for Schumer might be better than no deal at all.

Time will tell.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff