Immigration Watch International (2): Rio Grande-Gate

Thursday, July 20, 2023

Rio Grande-Gate

Are Biden administration officials deliberately engaged in alien smuggling and are they subject to criminal prosecution?

Summary

My colleague Todd Bensman has uncovered what appears to be active participation in alien smuggling by the Department of Homeland Security — collusion with Mexican authorities to direct and facilitate the illegal entry of large numbers of aliens across the Rio Grande River — carried out in order to further the Biden administration’s immigration agenda.

The acts at the heart of these shocking allegations (if proven) would seemingly constitute criminal violations of the federal anti-alien-smuggling law, violations that carry with them potential punishment from a fine or one year’s imprisonment to life imprisonment or even the death penalty. Of course, the greatest culpability would lie with whoever in the Biden administration developed this scheme and ordered it to be carried out.

The lessons that congressional Democrats and Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh implored the nation to draw from the Iran/Contra Affair seem directly applicable here, among them being:

“The common ingredients of the Iran and Contra policies were secrecy, deception, and disdain for the law. A small group of senior officials believed that they alone knew what was right.”

Iran/Contra displayed “a vision of a government operated by persons convinced they have a monopoly on truth.”

With regards to Iran/Contra, “What may aptly be called the ‘cabal of the zealots’ was in charge.”

“Government officials must observe the law, even when they disagree with it.”

“The President must ‘take care’ that the laws be faithfully executed. This is both a moral and legal responsibility.”

“There is no place in Government for law breakers.”

“When a President ... chooses to skirt the laws or to circumvent them, it is incumbent upon his subordinates to resist, not join in.”

“[T]he failure to punish governmental lawbreakers feeds the perception that public officials are not wholly accountable for their actions.”

I can only hope that congressional Democrats will treat “Rio Grande-Gate” with the same seriousness they treated Iran/Contra, and apply their Iran/Contra lessons in good faith.

We surely cannot count on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice to fairly investigate these allegations, if it even investigates them at all. Therefore, it is imperative that the attorney general appoint a special counsel to investigate and to bring prosecutions as appropriate, as he has already done in other instances.

If Attorney General Garland fails to appoint a special counsel, or appoints a special counsel whose work turns out to be compromised, it is imperative that the next administration launch an investigation and bring prosecutions as appropriate. It will certainly be able to do so (unless President Biden wins reelection), as the statute of limitation for federal alien smuggling crimes is at least five years.

https://cis.org/Report/Rio-GrandeGate

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Thursday, July 20, 2023

Rio Grande-Gate

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors