The DNC’s Standard Illegal Immigration Sophistries

posted by Richard McDonough at American Thinker 

“Illegal Alien” Is One of Many Correct Legal Terms for “Illegal Immigrant”

                                                            --Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute, Oct. 14, 2019

Since the Democrat News Media Colluders (or DNC) believe that most illegal immigrants will eventually be made citizens and vote Democrat, they fabricate fallacious arguments in favor of illegal immigration. 

One of the most common of these, as Rep. Primila Jayapal (D-WA) put in 2019, is that:

No human being is illegal.  I urged my colleagues to stop dehumanizing immigrant communities and instead use the term “undocumented.”

Similarly, The Guardian reports that Hillary Clinton, challenged by an “immigration activist,” admitted that “illegal alien” is a “poor choice of words” and committed to abandon it. 

The same article reports that the Associated Press struck the expression from its style guide and that the Los Angeles Times, USAToday, the Huffington Post and ABC soon followed suit. 

In 2013 the New York Times public editor Margret Sullivan wrote that since “many people find it offensive to describe a person with an adjective like ‘illegal’ I now favor the use of ‘undocumented’ or ‘unauthorized’” instead.  Since the CATO article notes that “most people assume that “illegal alien” is the correct legal term,” Sullivan must mean that many people on the DNC find the term offensive.  The same argument has also been adopted by migrant rights organizations and combined with other fallacious arguments to normalize illegal immigration.

We reject the word ‘illegal’ to describe undocumented migrants. … This word is factually incorrect: an action can be illegal, not a person.

This “migrant rights” organization, on this basis, goes on to argue that the use of the word “illegal” to describe illegal aliens is

… dehumanizing, immoral, inaccurate and contributes to the demonization of migrant communities. … [It] is dehumanising and reductive, an insult to the struggle and arduous experiences migrants may have been through.  Even when an action is defined as illegal, legal status is arbitrary and often does not coincide with morality.  The word also contributes to increased hostility towards migrant communities and insinuates they are undeserving of rights.

Since these claims are premised on the view that the expressions “illegal alien” or “illegal immigrant” imply that the person themselves is illegal consider that claim first.

When little 11-year-old Johnny decides to take the family car on a 70-mph spin in a 15-mph school zone and is called, by the judge an “illegal driver”, the judge is not saying that little Johnny is an illegal person.  He/she is saying only that his action of underage driving without a license is illegal.  Using the Latin legal expression “qua,” the judge is not saying little Johnny is illegal qua person but only qua driver. 

Since the DNC’s foundational claim is transparently false, all of the sub-arguments that presuppose it are so as well.  The claims that the expressions “illegal alien” and “illegal immigrant” are “dehumanizing” or “immoral” are false because the use of that term to describe someone does not address their humanity per se but only their status as an immigration lawbreaker, nothing more.  The claim that the use of these expressions contributes to the demonization of migrant communities is clearly false, first because that term is not used to describe migrants per se but only illegal migrants.  The use of those expressions is not “reductive,” that is, it does not reduce illegal immigrants to their status as breakers of immigration law any more than the judge’s calling little Johnny an “illegal driver” deprives Johnny of his other rights under the Constitution.  The claim that the use of these terms is “an insult of the struggle and arduous experiences” they may have been through is no more compelling than the claim that calling little Johnny an “illegal driver” is an insult to the fact that he bloodied his head when he crashed the car. 

The argument that the use of these terms “contributes to increased hostility towards migrant communities and insinuates they are undeserving of rights” are also false for several reasons.  First, it makes the DNC’s standard deliberate confusion between illegal migrant communities and legal migrant communities.  Second, calling an illegal alien an “illegal alien” no more increases hostility towards them than calling little Johnny an “illegal driver” increases hostility towards him.  If there is hostility towards little Johnny it is because he broke the law and exactly the same is true of illegal aliens.   Finally, the claim that describing illegal aliens as “illegal aliens” or “illegal immigrants” somehow “insinuates that they are undeserving of rights” is no more accurate than that the fact that the judge calls little Johnny an “illegal driver” somehow “insinuates” that his constitutional rights are suspended. 

The DNC needs to learn to make basic distinctions and face the real issues for a change.

These DNC’s arguments also make ample use of the Appeal to Emotion Fallacythat fallaciously appeals to emotion rather than reason to win an argument.  In the present case the DNC tries to create the impression of an evil boogey man, a heartless Republican or conservative, who, like racists and slavers, wants to deny certain categories of people their legal and moral rights as human beings.  

In fact, the opposite is true.  The whole point of calling someone an “illegal alien” is that since they broke the law it is they who are disrespecting both the citizens of the country and the legal immigrants who followed the process and that, therefore, have the right to see their laws respected. 

The reason the DNC prefers to use such transparent fallacies is because they do not want to face an argument that they know they cannot win on the merits.  They do not want to face the fact that illegal aliens broke the law by getting into line ahead of other immigrants that go through the legal process. They do not want to face the argument that every country has the legal and moral right, even obligation, to defend their own citizens from possible foreign threats.  They do not want to face the argument that one party, the Democrats (aligned with weak or corrupt Republicans), are using illegal immigration to increase their own political power, a clear attack on American democracy,

Illegal immigrants aren’t allowed to directly vote for the commander-in-chief yet, but in vast numbers they can dramatically alter the Electoral College to favor Democrats for at least a decade because a state’s electoral votes are based on the number of people residing within that state, not the number of citizens [in that state].

Despite the DNC’s constant refrain that they are defending our democracy, there is nothing more anti-democratic than importing new people into the country because one cannot convince the citizens to support one’s absurd policies. 

The appropriate way to reclassify illegal aliens is by going through this thing called Congress and change the laws, but the DNC does not want to do that because they know they would fail.  The DNC’s fallacious arguments attempt to make an end run around U.S. citizens.  Since most Americans view a weak border as a major problem for the country, the defenders of weak immigration enforcement in both parties have contempt for American democracy. 

X22, And we Know, and more- Feb 13

 

Do Leftists Now Believe Leftism Doesn’t Work? ~ VDH

In 2024—an election year—the left is trying to undo what it created without explaining why and what they did to us and themselves as well.

by Victor Davis Hanson for American Greatness

It is hard to destroy a naturally beautiful city like San Francisco, with ideal weather and stunning infrastructure inherited from far better earlier generations.

Yet San Francisco continues its much-publicized and self-inflicted doom loop. The productive classes still flee the increasingly crime-ridden city and its self-induced pathologies. The city is eroding not because of the doomsayers and not because of what people say about San Francisco, but because of what San Franciscans have done to San Francisco.

In 2023, more than 40,000 crimes were reportedly committed in San Francisco. The great majority of the perpetrators were either not arrested or never jailed, indicted, or convicted.

Downtown office vacancy rates exceed 35 percent—and are climbing. Tourists have ostracized the city, given the thousands of homeless that occupy sidewalks and downtown. San Francisco claimed to be on the cutting-edge of the woke green movement, proud that it had enacted the most stringent environmental laws and regulations in the world—except when it came to defecation, injection, and urination on the sidewalks, doorways, and parks and during storms, when the toxic, effluviant human waste escapes sewage treatment and flows into the once-cherished bay.

In a mere five years, the city went from being one of the most envied and wealthy in the world with a vibrant nightlife and new high-tech start-ups to a West-Cost Detroit.

Now billionaires are trying to heal San Francisco by returning it to the old normality in the era before the progressive city councils, the boards of supervisors, and mayors defunded the police, allowed the homeless to absorb the downtown, and promoted prosecutors who refused to enforce the laws.

The rich are rallying to undo the damage wrought by the very officials whom they and the majority of the city voted into office. Their principles seem simple—start doing the very opposite of the progressive agenda: enforce laws; arrest, convict, and incarcerate criminals; balance city budgets; and insist that the homeless leave the streets, follow the laws of the city, and relocate to shelters.

Across the bay, Oakland is in even worse shape. The city is on life support as a predictable result of progressive nihilism: do not enforce the law; do not arrest or jail criminals; raise taxes and overregulate businesses; pay exorbitant salaries to unionize public workers and bloated city staff; create toxic racial animosity. And the result is Oakland 2024, a mix between 19^th-century Tombstone and contemporary Port-au-Prince.

The city is becoming a veritable ghost town as more overtaxed employers leave and more taxes rise on those who cannot leave. Cities like Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and New York follow the same trajectory. They suffer the symptoms of a collective madness triggered by a combination of the destructive national COVID quarantine that birthed the zoom culture, the systematic attack on police after the George Floyd death, and a nihilist woke epidemic that postulated a binary of stereotyped oppressors and oppressed that saw the so-called punching bag victimizers shrug and move far away from blue states and cities.

In all these doom-loop cities, progressive reformers in the eleventh hour are now trying to undo the very policies of those they elected, as if they are slowly waking up from a collective madness—in an election year.

A similar confessional and re-examination among the left is occurring over the border catastrophe. Upon ascension, the Biden administration discarded, and ridiculed as illiberal, the security measures it had inherited from the prior administration—the end of catch-and-release, the demand that would-be refugees apply for entry in their home countries, the continuation of the wall, and Mexico’s responsibility to stop the transit of millions northward through its country.

Much of the sudden left-wing panic over the border is, of course, opportunistic because it is an election year and the left fears losing power for what it has done to the middle class. The optics of 8 million people swarming the border with impunity over the last few years have alienated the public. And the infusion of illegal migrants into inner-city and border communities threatens to hemorrhage the Democratic base.

So suddenly, no one takes credit for the once wonderful, porous Biden border. Abruptly, the crossings are blamed on Trump—as if no one remembers Joe Biden’s 2019 performance-art boast for illegal aliens to “surge” the border and how he facilitated that advice over the next three years. Abruptly, the Democrats insist that after three years and 8 million illegal aliens into the Biden administration, something must be done—perhaps even a rebranding of what worked in 2020 as their own.

The same rethinking of energy is occurring as well among the left—in an election year. The more they talk of banning natural gas, mandating electric vehicles, and ending internal combustion engines, the more they quietly reverse course, draining the strategic petroleum reserve, quietly allowing more federal oil leases, and encouraging national production to return to pre-COVID levels present during the Trump administration.

Frackers and drillers are working at near-full production. Production in 2023 ended up at 13.5 million barrels a day. In short, halfway through the Biden administration, as it desperately drained the strategic petroleum reserve on the eve of the midterms to lower the high gasoline prices it had spawned, the left kept up the green rhetoric as it greenlighted oil production.

In early 2024, the U.S. is once again the largest oil producer in the world. Monthly production now matches or exceeds the high record months during the pre-COVID Trump administration.

Why the turnabout? Once again, reality strikes. In an election year, the return to reasonable energy prices is helping to moderate the inflation that the Biden administration fueled.

Energy self-sufficiency is a valuable foreign exchange earner. It allows the U.S. to be independent abroad, free from foreign leverage, whether from the Middle East, Russia, or Iran. American petroleum autarchy keeps the world price low and reduces the income of belligerent states. Again, the green rhetoric continues as the oil flows more than ever. Understood is that the left quietly agrees that oil and gas are necessary for the now slow transition to alternate fuels—in an election year.

Are any of our major cities, the vast majority blue and progressively run, still hammering away at the police, eager to cut more from the police? Are they rallying around another Soros-funded critical legal theory wannabe district attorney?

Or are they more likely desperately trying to offer bonuses to recruit officers whom, in just two or three years, they libeled and drove out?

Why the shift? Perhaps because they got their utopian wish that asserted that blameless criminals break the law only because of society’s biases and unfairness, not because they calculate perceived benefits of criminality offset by its dangers. And now they rue the result—in an election year. In other words, leftists don’t like getting mugged, car-jacked, assaulted, and beaten and fear their own policies are endangering their own safety.

Why are corporations no longer lavishing money on Black Lives Matter? Why are donations to Ivy League schools down? Is Professor Kendi still a hot ticket on the lecture circuit? Is the reparations movement picking up steam?

Or does the left now fear that its promotion of tribalism and guilt-ridden racial essentialism is leading to a race-obsessed, fractious society, headlong on its way to a Rwanda, former Yugoslavia, or Iraq—in an election year?

The Biden administration, staffed by Obama-era foreign policy apparatchiks and functionaries, sought to remake what National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan once bragged was a quiet inherited Middle East.

The progressive therapeutic approach was supposed to lead to an ecumenical Middle East. A tolerant, passive, turn-the-other cheek enlightened foreign policy for the 21^st century would lead to a new, better Iran without nukes, a two-state solution of Hamas living peacefully with Israelis, while the occasionally raucous Houthis calmed down, Hezbollah would become more a partner than mere terrorists, Israel would be lectured and sermonized to as an overdog punching too much above its weight, and the childish Abrams Accords nonsense would end the work of Trump’s conniving son-in-law, and the pariah Saudi Arabia.

Or so they thought.

So everything was rebooted to kinder and gentler premises—and thus the Biden administration blew up the once calm Middle East.

And now? Two carriers were dispatched to the Mediterranean. The U.S. is belatedly bombing and launching missiles to respond to some 170 attacks on American installations. In an election year, Biden seems baffled that distancing himself from Israel still earns him the moniker of “Genocide Joe” from once loyalist Democratic Arab-American communities.

The woke, Jacobin revolution was promoted by progressives, mostly out of guilt and insecurity, as an overdue remake of America based on therapeutic principles. For three years, it found a rare pathway to power, enacted much of what it had long wished, and discovered the result was not just a catastrophe but dangerous to the very architects themselves.

So now in 2024—an election year—the left is trying to undo what it created without explaining why and what they did to us and themselves as well.

Guilt-Tripping Our Way to Self-Destruction

Most, if not all, of the major societal problems we are confronting today are a direct result of abandoning the principles that are the underpinnings of American culture.

by Laura Hollis for American Greatness

Everywhere we turn, the country looks like it is falling apart. Crime is out of control. Millions of illegal immigrants are pouring across our borders. Our schools are more interested in cultivating gender dysphoria and a proclivity for porn in our children than in educating them. The press routinely censors the truth at the behest of the government, which also increasingly prosecutes (or opts not to) based on political party affiliation. In sport after sport, biological males who have decided to “identify” as female are taking awards away from actual biological women, and we’re told that we must indulge their delusions.

Americans are asking themselves: How on earth did we get here? And even more urgently: How do we turn things around?

Most, if not all, of the major societal problems we are confronting today are a direct result of abandoning the principles that are the underpinnings of American culture. In fact, we have been guilt-tripped into abandoning them, and we are reaping the consequences.

The current immigration crisis is an example of this catastrophe.

It is estimated that between six and 10 million people have crossed the southern border of the United States since Joe Biden took office in January 2021. One of the lynchpins of American governance has been the rule of law—the concept that laws are fairly and uniformly enforced by our government. Additionally, both our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution explicitly state that our government was instituted for the protection of Americans and our rights.

This administration has utterly abandoned both fundamental principles, and millions of Americans are willing to let them get away with it.

But it’s worse than that. The United States is a big country; in truth, we could probably absorb 10 million people. It isn’t the raw numbers; it’s the policies in place when the millions of migrants arrive. There was a time when immigrants were expected to assimilate, to learn English, to support themselves and family members or other dependents via gainful employment—and to abide by our laws.

No more. Now they pour across the border and receive free phones, welfare payments, housing and food, education, and health care, all courtesy of the American taxpayer. Those who import drugs and traffic women and children do so with impunity. There are disturbingly large numbers of drunk driving instances involving illegal immigrants, and in most cases, the perpetrators have no insurance. When they commit violent crimes—like the group that violently assaulted police officers in New York City last week—they flip America the middle finger. Migrants who commit crimes know that, in the unlikely event that they are arrested, they will be released. If they happen to be tried and convicted, they won’t be deported. If they are deported, nothing will happen if they return.

Why is this happening? Because we have been guilt-tripped into accepting that demanding integration into American society is insufficiently “multicultural” and that America is an exploitative nation that somehow “owes” the world’s poor billions of dollars that must therefore be extracted from American taxpayers.

American schools provide more examples. Each week brings more amateur videos of violent behavior by students. Social media commentator Marina Medvin posted on X earlier this week a list of 53 Illinois schools at which nostudent—not a single one—was grade proficient in math. Most of them were in Chicago. These dismal results are not limited to Illinois by any means. Oregon recently eliminated the requirement that high school students be proficient in reading, English, and math in order to graduate. Many colleges have eliminated entrance exams.

Why is this happening? Because we have allowed ourselves to be guilt-tripped into believing that demanding appropriate behavior and insisting upon objective academic standards is “white privilege” and that we must expiate our collective guilt as a nation by excusing the violence and catastrophic failures permeating our schools.

In states like California, Illinois, and New York, shoplifting has become epidemic. Flash mobs steal thousands of dollars’ worth of inventory and are not prosecuted. Retailers across the country lost $112 billion just in 2022. Homelessness has been allowed to explode in our major cities, contributing to crime, disease, and filth that would have been unimaginable in America just 20 or 30 years ago. Stores and other retail establishments are closing in the downtowns of major cities due to theft, crime, and generally unlivable conditions.

Why is this happening? Because we have been guilt-tripped into believing that involuntary commitment of the mentally ill isn’t “compassionate” and that enforcing shoplifting laws protecting property is “systemic racism.”

Men now insist that they can become women—and vice versa; minor children and staggering numbers of preteen and teenage girls with clear mental illness are being railroaded into chemical sterilization and surgical mutilation. Teachers think it is appropriate to discuss their sexual proclivities with grade schoolers and expose them to pornography.

Why is this happening? Because Americans have been silenced by buzzwords like “cisprivilege,” “heteronormative,” and “transphobic.”

Enough.

If these crises have been facilitated by our silence and our willingness to be cowed into submission, then they can be addressed when we refuse to be cowed; when we refuse to be silent; when we refuse to use the nonsense lingo that activists demand be injected into everyday parlance; when we stop apologizing for the sins and imperfections of those who lived generations ago; and when we vigorously defend the principles that represent the best of America.

Those principles built this country. Abandoning them will destroy it.

Oversight Committee Puts Feb 19 Deadline on Demand for Special Counsel Hur's Biden Transcripts

Jennifer Oliver O'Connell reporting for RedState 

As reported by my colleague Mike Miller, Chair of House Committee on Accountability and Oversight James Comer (R-KY), House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH), and House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-MO) have requested the documents and classified conversations between President Joe Biden and Special Counsel Robert Hur be released to the committee for their review. The Special Counsel report surrounds Biden's holding and misuse of classified documents from when he was a private citizen, and the report cites Biden's significant cognitive decline as the reason Hur will not recommend Biden be forced to stand trial.

The Committee issued a Monday letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and put a deadline on their request. 

A trio of House committees investigating President Biden are asking the Justice Department to turn over transcripts and recordings of his interviews with special counsel Robert Hur following the release of a report critical of Biden’s cognitive abilities while reviewing his handling of classified documents.

The request, sent in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, echoes GOP leaders critical of the Justice Department’s conclusion of the report, complaining Biden received more favorable treatment than that of his 2024 campaign rival, former President Trump.

“The Committee on the Judiciary requires these documents for its ongoing oversight of the Department’s commitment to impartial justice and its handling of the investigation and prosecution of President Biden’s presumptive opponent, Donald J. Trump, in the November 2024 presidential election,” wrote the chairs of the three committees.

They asked for the information by Feb. 19.

We are giving the Justice Department until February 19 at 5p to produce the transcript of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur and other documents included in the report that relate to our impeachment inquiry. Americans deserve transparency about President Biden’s mental state and his mishandling of classified documents.

Since the Special Counsel report's release on Wednesday, the White House and the legacy media have been downplaying the findings and condemning Special Counsel Hur for spreading misinformation. However, Biden's own behavior at a press conference the same day of the report's release and his visit on Monday with the Jordanian King Abdullah II add weight to Hur's assessments.

The Justice Department confirmed with The Hill that it had received the request but declined to comment on the matter. The Committee has stated it will compel production of the documents and audio tapes if their request is not fulfilled.

The Hole in Biden’s Marble Bag is Bigger Now

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

He’s losing it faster now.   There’s no way Biden can make it to the general election.   In my own estimation, Gavin Newsom is still the convention nominee, with a soft exit for Biden announced.

Joe Biden with King Abdullah of Jordan.  WATCH THIS (prompted)  

Uniparty Buried an 'Impeachment Time Bomb' in Ukraine Funding

Katie Pavlich reporting for Townhall 

Republican Senators J.D. Vance and Rand Paul are sounding the alarm about a provision buried in the latest funding bill for Ukraine, claiming it will allow the Uniparty -- led by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer -- to justify another impeachment against President Donald Trump should he retake the White House in 2024. 

"President Trump has said, in regard to the war in Ukraine, 'We got to get that war settled and I’ll get it settled.' He has stated that he would resolve the war in 24 hours," Vance wrote in a memo to Republican colleagues Monday. "If President Trump were to withdraw from or pause financial support for the war in Ukraine in order to bring the conflict to a peaceful conclusion, 'over the objections of career experts,' it would amount to the same fake violation of budget law from the first impeachment, under markedly similar facts and circumstances."

"Partisan Democrats would seize on the opportunity to impeach him once again. The Washington Post has reported that tying President Trump’s hands on foreign policy is very much top of mind for Biden administration officials, who are openly boasting about their plans," the memo continues, calling the clause an impeachment time bomb. "The supplemental represents an attempt by the foreign policy blob/deep state to stop President Trump from pursuing his desired policy, and if he does so anyways, to provide grounds to impeach him and undermine his administration. All Republicans should oppose its passage."

Former Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell is urging Republicans to vote against the bill if the language isn't removed. 

The Reasons To Impeach Biden Keep Stacking Up

It’s not just Biden’s corruption, it’s also his mental unfitness and his collusion with Mexico to foment the border crisis.

by John Daniel Davidson for The Federalist

There are now at least three major reasons to impeach President Joe Biden: his corruption, his mental unfitness for office, and his criminal collusion with Mexico to foment the border crisis. Republicans in Congress could take their pick and be on solid footing, but they probably won’t pursue any of them.

It would be easy to do, and impeachment hearings should already be on the schedule for this week. First of all, there’s the corruption of the Biden family business, evidence of which has been piling up since House Republicans launched their impeachment inquiry back in the fall. Then there’s Biden’s mental unfitness for office as detailed in the special counsel report released last week and immediately corroborated by Biden himself in a disastrous news conference. And finally, there’s the lesser-known but in some ways most compelling cause for impeachment: Biden’s collaboration with a corrupt cartel-state synthesis in Mexico to create the ongoing border crisis.

Any one of these should be reason enough to impeach the president — certainly they amount to far more than what Democrats had on former President Trump in both of his sham impeachments. And yet Republicans seem determined to find reasons to do nothing.

In the months since House Republicans launched their impeachment inquiry, they have understandably focused on Hunter Biden’s influence-peddling schemes in China and Ukraine, and how the president and other members of his family are implicated in them. Despite uncovering mountains of evidence that the Biden family has indeed operated an overseas bribery racket for years, the inquiry will likely just peter out. Earlier this month, a number of House Republicans cast doubt on the proceedings, one calling it a “jumbled mess,” and another saying, “I don’t think it goes anywhere.” Given the GOP’s historic timidity and cowardice, this is hardly a surprise. At this point, Republican lawmakers probably won’t impeach Biden for corruption unless they have a recording of the president saying, “Thanks for the $5 million, Burisma. Now I’ll go fire that prosecutor like you asked.”

Then there’s the question of Biden’s mental fitness and ability to execute the duties of his office. The special counsel report, together with Biden’s embarrassing performance at a press conference that was meant to allay concerns over his cognitive decline, articulated what we’ve all known for some time now: Biden isn’t all there. The report was actually too kind, describing Biden as an “elderly man with a poor memory” when the truth is that Biden’s brain is mush. He rarely seems to know where he is, when it is, or what he’s talking about. He’s even confusing world leaders with their dead predecessors. Last week, he twice referred to the late German Chancellor Helmut Kohl instead of former Chancellor Angela Merkel and then confused François Mitterrand, the former French president who died in 1996, for French President Emmanuel Macron.

But it got worse! During the press conference about the special counsel report last week, Biden referred to Egyptian President El-Sisi as the president of Mexico. And that was just moments after he forgot where he’d gotten the rosary he wears in honor of his late son, lied about where classified documents had been found in his home, and angrily lashed out at reporters for daring to ask about his memory problems.

It wouldn’t be rocket science to impeach Biden for being unfit for office. Indeed, the special counsel report could be quite useful in this effort. The report references a recent recording of an interview with Biden that revealed “significant limitations” on his memory, as well as recorded conservations in 2017 with Biden’s ghostwriter, Mark Zwonitzer, that were “painfully slow,” with Biden “struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries.”

Why haven’t House Republicans subpoenaed these recordings? Why have they not deposed Zwonitzer and the physicians treating Biden? These steps and more should have already been taken, or should be taken now, to advance what would be a fairly straightforward and airtight case for impeachment on the grounds that Biden is unfit for office.

Lastly — and most unlikely because it would require the most work by GOP lawmakers — is the increasingly apparent collusion between the Biden administration and the government of Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or AMLO as he’s commonly known. As the border crisis spins out of control, evidence mounts that what’s happening is not an organic surging of migrants just seeking a better life in the U.S., but a coordinated effort being carried out for profit by a corrupt and compromised Mexican state working hand-in-hand with the cartels that control the border.

Proving this would be a heavy lift, but the evidence is in plain sight. Simply put, the border crisis is manufactured, a for-profit scheme cooked up by cartels and elements of the Mexican state, including the AMLO administration. The illegal immigrant black market was worth an estimated $13 billion as of July 2022, and is likely worth much more than that now. And that’s not counting the $56 billion in remittances to Mexico from the U.S. every year, a large portion of which comes from illegal immigrants living and working in our country — and often sending remittances not just to their families but to the cartels as well.

AMLO is directly implicated in all this. Every Republican in Congress should take 15 minutes to read the recent report published by ProPublica chronicling the Sinaloa cartel’s bankrolling of AMLO’s 2006 presidential campaign. That was the beginning of a partnership that endures to this day. It’s the reason AMLO consistently tells the Biden administration that if they want Mexico to help with the crisis, they need to get paid — compensation for lost revenue. It’s also the reason AMLO has pursued a policy of appeasing the cartels since taking office at the end of 2018. 

At this point, it’s clear the Biden administration is doing the bidding of the AMLO administration when it comes to the border. From the Justice Department’s efforts to stop Texas from securing the border, to the White House’s disavowal of the ProPublica story, to the recent “bipartisan” border deal that provided hundreds of millions in bribe money to Mexico, the Biden administration is clearly colluding with AMLO’s corrupt cartel-backed regime to keep the border open.

More could be said about all three of these obvious cases for impeaching Biden. But the place to make those cases is in the impeachment proceedings themselves, which Republicans should be pursuing as their sole mission in life right now. If they did, they could make a case so compelling that even if it didn’t convince their Democrat colleagues, it would certainly convince the American people that it’s time to remove Biden from office.

Very Damning New Info From Hur Report, Plus Embarrassing Evidence That Might Upend Biden Claim About Docs

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

There's some new damning and embarrassing information from the Special Counsel's report now coming out, and if it wasn't bad enough for Joe Biden before, it is now.

The Hur report indicated what a complete disaster Biden was in terms of keeping and not returning classified documents. What's described here is insane, and former president Donald Trump didn't come close to any of this. RealClearInvestigations reporter Benjamin Weingarten grabbed some of the most damning and concerning parts. 

He had all kinds of classified material and they appeared to have no system for recovering it. 

This has been a problem for years, with the "Executive Secretary Team" expressing concern in 2010 about all the classified briefing books he had not returned, and that even when things were returned, some items were missing.  

They were unable to determine if some of this material was ever returned. 

He took his notebooks home with him and kept them, even though they had classified materials in them. He kept them in unsecured locations. 

According to the report, Biden read portions of his notebook that contained classified information up to the Secret Level. 

Here's another place where it looks like Biden told the Special Counsel's team something that wasn't true. 

But of course, given the story about his discussions with the ghostwriter, that appears to be false. Why is that not being pursued as a false statement? The "poor memory" defense? 

The National Archives had no recollection of him ever returning anything after his term as Vice President. 

Imagine that and how much stuff that could encompass. 

But one of the worst things for Biden and funniest at the same time is how the second folder in a box with marked classified documents had Joe Biden's distinctive misspelling of Afghanistan, "Afganastan." 

Now this is the guy that claims to be the foreign policy expert? Oh, my gosh. 

On top of that, the fact that the folder is in the box with the classified documents tends to show that he had a connection to that folder, and it ties him to the documents and the box.  He admitted it probably was his writing because of the spelling. 

He's tried the ridiculous defense that it's the fault of the staff that moved things. But the facts show how problematic that claim is. 

Wow. I mean I know Joe Biden is a mess. But he's been a mess for years, and the way he has handled classified documents is unconscionable. How is he not slapped with all kinds of charges when this is what the Special Counsel says occurred? 

It's hard to look at any kind of prosecution of former President Donald Trump as fair and not selective prosecution when you read what Joe Biden has done, for years, according to this report.