Coulter: Please, No More ‘Border Security’

Ann Coulter talks about the illegal immigration crisis with the candor, sarcasm and irony that few can.


by Ann Coulter:

The media are trying to convince Trump that if he abandons the wall, he’ll be a statesman, so that as soon as he folds, they can start making fun of him as an untrustworthy liar.

Everyone knows that we can never have a secure border without an impermeable barrier — something like a wall — across all of it. The Democrats know it, the voters know it, and the millions of illegals hurtling toward our border like cannonballs know it.

The Democrats’ latest idea is to call a wall “immoral, ineffective and expensive.”

If they think a wall is “immoral,” then they’re admitting it’s effective. An ineffective wall would merely be a place for illegals to stop and get a little shade before continuing their march into the United States.

Democrats’ backup argument is to cite — every four minutes on MSNBC — Trump’s claim that Mexico would pay for the wall. We’re all baffled by Trump not having already taxed remittances to Mexico to pay for the wall (100 percent within the president’s authority under various banking regulations), but if we’re going to start listing the promises Trump hasn’t kept, this is going to be a long column.

In point of fact, however, he never said Mexico would pre-pay. We can tax remittances anytime.

To keep the Third World masses flowing across our un-walled border, the media are demanding that Trump agree to nonspecific “border security.” It’s like ordering a Starbucks and instead of getting a coffee, you’re told to have more “pep.” Now move along. Here’s your change.

Would liberals accept such airy statements of intent in lieu of clear legal commands for any of the things they care about? (Not to be confused with “our country,” which they do not care about.)

Instead of EPA emissions standards, with specific parts per million of pollutants allowed into lakes and rivers, how about a law promoting “enhanced appreciation of God’s bounty”? Emissions standards are immoral and ineffective!

Nearly every Republican presidential candidate tried to con voters with these meaningless catchphrases about “border security.”

Here are The Des Moines Register’s summaries of some of the candidates’ positions on immigration a few weeks before the 2016 Iowa caucus:

Jeb Bush: “has called for enhanced border security.”

Marco Rubio: “proposes … improved security on the border.”

John Kasich: “believes border security should be strengthened.”

Chris Christie: “urges … using technology to improve border surveillance …”

Rand Paul: “would secure the border immediately.”

Carly Fiorina: “would secure the border, which she says requires only money and manpower.”

They all lost.

The guy who won: “Trump has said many illegal immigrants are rapists and are bringing drugs and crime to the United States. He has called for building a wall along the southern border, and has said he would make Mexico pay for it. He said he would immediately terminate President Barack Obama’s ‘illegal executive order on immigration.’”

Trump got more votes than any other Republican in the history of presidential primaries. No one was falling for “border security” then, and they aren’t now.

But instead of doing what he said and building a wall, Trump has hired people who don’t even grasp that the point is to make it unattractive to break into our country.

On ABC’s “This Week” last Sunday, Trump’s head of Customs and Border Protection, Kevin McAleenan, announced plans to give illegal alien kids free medical care at the border: “What we’ve done immediately, (Homeland Security) Secretary (Kirstjen) Nielsen and I have directed that we do medical checks of children 17 and under as they come into our process.”

Apparently, our working class is rolling in so much free health care that now our country is diverting medical resources to treat other countries’ sick kids. Read more HERE.

Stop Partisan Corpse Abuse


by Michelle Malkin

Impolite question, but it needs to be asked: Is there a Republican dead body that left-wing partisans won’t use to bash Donald Trump?

This week’s partisan corpse abusers callously exploited the passing of George H.W. Bush, America’s 41st president, to get in their digs at the current commander in chief. Their vulgar level of incivility was inversely propositional to their sanctimonious calls for decency.

“The View’s” Joy Behar rudely and crudely soiled the ABC show’s tribute to the 94-year-old World War II hero and lifelong public servant. While Whoopi Goldberg and other panelists paid homage to Bush’s character and love of family, Behar wielded an old Bush quote about federal Clean Air Act amendments to attack Trump on climate change. Her narcissistic pledge to become a “one-issue voter” on “pollution and the greenhouse effect” was interrupted when co-host Meghan McCain forcefully objected to the hijacking of their short-lived unity message.

Instead of apologizing for her ill-timed lapse into Trump Derangement Syndrome, Behar ripped into McCain while Goldberg cut to a commercial break. Not-so-joyful Joy reportedly shrieked in earshot of the audience: “Get this b—- under control” and told producers “If this s— doesn’t stop, I’m quitting this damn show. I can’t take this much more.”

Neither can my ears. Can’t we just all get along? Read the rest of this article at townhall.com.

The Media’s ‘Sean Hannity Standard’ Is a Wonderful Idea!

Paul Zimmerman/Getty

by John Nolte

From what we know so far, conservative talker Sean Hannity had a limited business relationship with Michael Cohen, who is also President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, and who just had his offices, home, and hotel room raided by the FBI. Because Hannity is a commentator with four hours to fill every day, he has a lot to say about the raid.

But now that a partisan judge (to say the least — the swamp is deep, my friends) has forced Cohen to reveal that Hannity is a client, everyone in the establishment media (read those with much lower ratings than Hannity) have the knives out because Hannity did not reveal this potential conflict of interest.

So desperate are they to bloody Hannity, the media have just done a very good thing with the creation of what we will call the “Sean Hannity Standard,” a standard that demands commentators and reporters disclose any and all potential conflicts-of-interest pertaining to the story or person they are reporting on.

What a wonderful idea!

Over at the far-left Politico, Michael Calderone writes, that Hannity “should have disclosed that he’s a client of Cohen’s.”

What a wonderful idea!

Kathleen Bartzen Culver, director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin, told Politico, “commentators should still be expected to maintain independence from subjects they covering and disclose relevant ties.”

What a wonderful idea!

CNN, Media Matters, MSNBC… Everyone agrees with this wonderful idea!

And I could not agree more.

It is long past time for the media to pour sunshine on any and all potential conflicts-of-interest.

And the timing could not be more perfect. Good grief, less than 24 hours before the creation of the “Sean Hannity Standard,” former-President Bill Clinton’s very own press secretary George Stephanopoulos interviewed James Comey, the disgraced former chief of the FBI, about his decision not to prosecute Bill Clinton’s wife Hillary over her countless email crimes (bold type, mine).

Naturally, neither ABC or Stephanopoulos bothered to disclose this.

But thanks to the “Sean Hannity Standard” this will never happen again.

Right? Continue reading at breitbart.com.

 

Michelle Malkin Beclowns Mika Brzezinski & Her America-Ashamed Pals With 1 HILARIOUS Observation

MSNBC “Morning Joe” co-host said this morning that her American friends traveling abroad are ashamed:

And yet…

Funny, that! Go figure.

Read the rest of this article at twitchy.com.

Mark Levin to the Media: Want Trump to Act Presidential? Then Have Respect for the Office of the President

By Jeff Poor

Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” conservative talk show host Mark Levin, author of the book “Rediscovering Americanism: And the Tyranny of Progressivism,” reacted to the controversy created by two tweets from President Donald Trump attacking MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and its co-host Mika Brzezinski.

zzz

zzz

zzz

zzz

zzz

 

 

Read the rest of this article at breitbart.com.

Learn more about Mark’s new book at Rediscovering Americanism: And the Tyranny of Progressivism

Al Jazeera America Spends $73,519 Per Viewer

Surely they could buy their votes cheaper than that!

John Nolte Apr 28th, 2015

Eighteen months after its launch, Al Jazeera America (AJA) is still losing gobs of money, and according to numbers provided by the New York Post, spending $73,519 per viewer. Since its August 2013 debut, AJA has spent a whopping $2 billion and brought in only around $15 million in advertising revenue. The result is an average of only 27,000 total viewers. According to my admittedly shaky math, that’s $73,519 per viewer. Read more: at breitbart.com.

Al Jazeera America Spends $73,519 Per Viewer

Surely they could buy their votes cheaper than that!

AJA

John Nolte Apr 28th, 2015

Eighteen months after its launch, Al Jazeera America (AJA) is still losing gobs of money, and according to numbers provided by the New York Post, spending $73,519 per viewer. Since its August 2013 debut, AJA has spent a whopping $2 billion and brought in only around $15 million in advertising revenue. The result is an average of only 27,000 total viewers. According to my admittedly shaky math, that’s $73,519 per viewer.  Continue reading at breitbart.com. (more…)