Connect with us

News

NY Sen. Gillibrand: ‘I Could Support’ Beto’s Call To Tear Down Existing Border Wall

[This article originally appeared at Lidblog.com and is reprinted with permission.]

Published

on

Kirsten Gillibrand

[This article originally appeared at Lidblog.com and is reprinted with permission.]

When NY Senator/Presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand was appointed to the U.S. Senate, Hispanics went nuts because she was so anti-illegal immigration. Now the political hack is talking about tearing down the existing border barriers.

On Thursday, Twitchy said that Democrat White House hopeful Beto O’Rourke told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes that he would tear down the parts of the border wall already up and in place.  Sensing that stance would be popular with the extreme leftists Sen.Gillibrand one of what seems like the thousand Democrats considering a run for the White House in 2020, said she could support O’Rourke’s call to tear down existing barriers.

take our poll - story continues below

Will Hillary Clinton enter the 2020 race for president?

  • Will Hillary Clinton enter the 2020 race for president?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

If there was ever any doubt that Democrats support open borders, this should remove them.

“I’d have to ask folks in that part of the country to see whether the fencing that exists today is helpful or unhelpful,” she told Fox News.  “I could look at it and see which part he means and why, and if it makes sense, I could support it.”

Fox News added:

O’Rourke, who’s seriously mulling a White House bid of his own, said Thursday in an interview with NBC News that he’d “absolutely … take the wall down,” referring to the barrier by El Paso, Texas.

O’Rourke, who came close to upsetting GOP Sen. Ted Cruz in last November’s Senate election in Texas, argued that the existing 600 miles of wall and fencing along the 2,000-mile border have “not in any demonstrable way made us safer.”

Republicans quickly criticized O’Rourke, charging that he embraces open borders.

Quite an agenda for the Democrats, wouldn’t you say?

While speaking in New Hampshire, Gillibrand also claimed the border crisis is “manufactured.”  In other words, she thinks it’s all FAKE!

“I think the only national emergency is the humanitarian crisis that President Trump has created at our border by separating families from children and treating people who need our help inhumanely. I think this is manufactured, I think this [is] inappropriate,” she said.

Odd, we don’t recall her angst when Obama separated families at the border…

Here’s the strange part, before she advocated open borders she was strongly opposed to illegal immigration.

In Jan 2009 when she was appointed to take over for Hillary, the NY Times wrote:

During her one term in the House of Representatives, from a largely rural, traditionally Republican district, Kirsten E. Gillibrand was on safe political ground adopting a tough stance against illegal immigration.

Ms. Gillibrand, a Democrat, opposed any sort of amnesty for illegal immigrants, supported deputizing local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws, spoke out against Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s proposal to allow illegal immigrants to have driver’s licenses and sought to make English the official language of the United States.

The Spanish language daily El Diario gave the Senator front page coverage. They ran. Kirsten Gillibrand’s photo on their front page with the blaring headline “ANTI INMIGRANTE” (anti-immigrant)

Even New York Assemblyman Peter Rivera, a fellow Democrat and  the senior Hispanic in the state legislature, issued a statement condemning Gillibrand for among other things, wanting to “use local police to enforce federal immigration law, against the advice of state law enforcement groups,” and supporting “more walls and guards on our southern border.” 

She wanted more walls, but since then the direction of the winds shifted, the Democrats became the no borders party, and the spineless Gillibrand changed her stance.

How high does the body count have to get before she recognizes that a problem exists? A body count doesn’t really matter to the NY Senator, Gillibrand is a political hack who changes her positions whenever the wind direction changes.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

News

Biden Condemns Trump for Using the Word ‘Lynching,’ But Said the Same Thing In 1998

Ain’t that something?

John Salvatore

Published

on

Democrats can literally quote themselves from decades past and then argue they didn’t say what they said. Doesn’t even matter if their words are on record. If that sounds funny to you, it’s because it is. They are ridiculous. President Trump for example, if he wanted to, could pull a word-for-word sentence from Joe Biden’s past, blast Biden for using it, then Biden would claim he never said it. That’s how Democrats operate. It’s just lie after lie. On Tuesday, Trump used the word “lynching” to describe how he’s being treated by Congressional liberals. Naturally, the left blew a gasket. Biden, himself, wasn’t pleased with 45’s words. But Biden is pretty much a comedian at this point. From Daily Wire: Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden was quick to attack President Donald Trump on Tuesday after Trump referred to impeachment as a “lynching,” which is the same term that Biden used in 1998 to describe the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton. “So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights,” Trump tweeted. “All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN!” So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN! https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1186611272231636992 Impeachment is not “lynching,” it is part of our Constitution. Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable. https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1186691273870233601?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186691273870233601&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F1998-remarks-from-biden-surface-after-he-attacks-trumps-lynching-remarks WATCH: While Biden has called Trump’s lynching…

Continue Reading

News

Dem Lawmaker’s Bill Would Put Citizens In Jail for Six Months for Using the B-Word Out of Context

In what world??

John Salvatore

Published

on

Democrats not only want to regulate the 2nd Amendment but they figure it’s time to go after the 1st, also. Because who needs freedom of speech? After all, even Rhodes Scholar Lebron James said there are negatives that come with freedom of speech – and he’s someone to be listened to! Check out this Democrat lawmaker from the same state as Elizabeth Warren. He wants the word “bitch” to be taxed but he’s going about it in a way only a Democrat would go about it. If you use the word in a wrong way, you’d be fined $200 or sent to jail for six months. Seems just a tad bit excessive for using…a word, doesn’t it? Oh, those silly Dems. From Reason: Massachusetts is taking the fight against nasty words to the next level with a new state bill that would ban the use of the word bitch in certain contexts. State Rep. Daniel Hunt (D–Boston) has put forward H. 3719 that would prohibit the use of the big, bad b-word when deployed to “to accost, annoy, degrade or demean” another person. Anyone who did so would be considered a “disorderly person” under state law. Penalties could include fines of up to $200 or six months in jail. Hunt’s bill specifies that either the person called a bitch or a witness to the bitch-calling could report the crime to the police. Reactions: Thanks a lot Massachusetts! California, the center of the universe when it comes to stupid, stupid laws, will see this and not only copy it but one up it somehow. https://twitter.com/Arqahn/status/1186764482611236864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186764482611236864&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F What will we do with all the dogs https://twitter.com/SorryNotaBot/status/1186786524991389696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186786524991389696&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F “Don’t mess with my first amendment, bitch.”- Jesse Pinkman (probably) https://twitter.com/presidentshemp/status/1186776934958665733?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186776934958665733&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F Free speech unless some bitch gets feelings hurt. https://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy/status/1186766905442537474?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1186766905442537474&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F10%2F22%2Fmassachusetts-democrats-bill-would-make-it-a-crime-to-say-the-b-word%2F Daniel J. Hunt is too big for…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend