Posted on Aug 20, 2018
Here's the terrible secret about why Democrats did a complete 180 on illegal immigration and...
1.5K
12
8
3
3
0
One opinion, I know, but it bears reading. This IS our most pressing domestic issue, PERIOD. It must get solved ASAP. It has gone on too long. And BOTH sides of the aisle are to blame, and again, PERIOD!!!
Here's the terrible secret about why Democrats did a complete 180 on illegal immigration and...
Posted from foxnews.com
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Immigration
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
I always enjoy the tunnel comments. I work for ICE and have read hundreds of reports from illegal entries, and I have yet to see one when someone said they came through a tunnel. Obviously, I don't see them all, as does no one. I think tunnels are reserved for the drug cartels and maybe high value or for profit smuggling, but not for people that generally desire to come to the US illegally for a better life, or whatever their reason may be.
(2)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
Thank you, Bill, for your Spot On reporting. And do ‘watch your six,’ Brother. You certainly have your hands full. Stay safe.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
There can be no doubt, no argument, that the Democrats have reversed their position on illegal immigration and border control. The Congressional Record is replete with examples of speeches by party leaders and votes in Congress in which they support building fences and securing the borders. There are countless videos of them, including (then Senator) Obama and Fienstein speaking out in the strongest possible terms to stem the tide of illegal immigration. However, when someone proclaims that they know "the terrible secret about why..." I doubt it. No one knows the inner most secrets of another's thoughts or motivations. Yes, these things can be inferred from evidence of their acts in courts of law, but new reports and commentaries hardly rise to such standards. Whatever their motivation, it can't be good
(2)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
Once again, Amigo, an astute observation. Gracias. (I thought it appropriate to practice my limited Español!!!)
(1)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
Changing gears completely, but staying with your assertion, I have always had something of the same problem with the judicial system’s reliance upon ‘intent,’ especially when the subject of that intent is or was deceased, and whether victim or suspect. As a career law enforcement officer, intent was an omnipresent issue when making charges stick in court. But I, not too infrequently, felt a little reticent being a part of the state’s team that was bound by law to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that very issue in court. Circumstantial and physical evidence was used to ‘prove’ it, but it still reverberates with me today that we were and still are pressing the farthest boundaries of our judicial capacity to even suggest we can state the condition of a person’s mind at any given point In time. Just an editorial observation that I was itching to elucidate!!!
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Interesting. The article asks the question but never answers it. Has anyone else actually taken the click bait and read it?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google