Are Americans Enabling Our Enemies?

American Thinker 

Islamic influence continues to expand in the United States. Adam Hamawy, an Egyptian Muslim, won the House primary in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District. In the past Hamawy, not only accompanied Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheikh’ linked to the World Trade Center terror attacks, he also volunteered for an Al Qaeda-linked group. A newly formed pro-Palestinian political action committee spent more than $1.5 million to boost his candidacy.

Then there is niqab-clad Lakeshia M. Alston, who has snagged the Republican nomination for North Carolina State Senate District 22.

Indeed, Election Jihad is on the rise in America. This 2024 article documentsthe growth of Islamist political power. In 2020, CAIR released a “Strategic Election Plan” for mobilizing one million Muslim voters. Consider that Nihad Awad is one of the featured speakers at CAIR events. CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood money run thousands of Muslim candidates in the U.S.

In 2025, 42 Muslim Americans were elected to public office across the U.S. in the off-year elections.

In 2019, U.S. congressman Andre Carson, a Muslim convert, highlighted the role of Muslims elected to the U.S. Congress.

“It’s more than just about having three Muslims in Congress… but I won’t rest until 2020 [when] we have five more members of Congress; 2022 and 24, we have ten more Muslims in Congress. In 2030 we may have about 30, 35 Muslims in Congress.

Each and every one of us has a directive to represent Islam, [emphasis mine]... to represent Islam and let the world know that Muslims are here to stay, and Muslims are a part of America. And we will, we will have a Muslim caucus that is sizable, that is formidable, and that is there for you.

Stephen M. Kirby, Ph.D. unpacked the ramifications of the above quotation in his booklet titled “Islamic Doctrine versus The U.S. Constitution.  In the book’s preface, Clare Lopez, Vice President for Research and Analysis at the Center for Security Policy, writes:

“Increasing numbers of Muslim candidates for office are entering the U.S. political system at every level from local to state and federal; and, while we applaud civic engagement by all citizens in our democratic system, we also are mindful that Islam is a faith like none other in the obligation levied on its followers to place Islamic Law (shariah) above any other law, including the U.S. Constitution [emphasis mine].

“Such declarations set up a direct challenge to Article VI Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, to which each and every Member of Congress, House and Senate, is pledged under oath to uphold.

Hence, “...it becomes possible to assess Islam and statements of loyalty to it by elected officials such as Andre Carson not only in the context of the First Amendment to the Constitution (which protects freedom of religion), but in light of Article VI Clause 2, which would allow an accurate assessment of Islam as an alien legal system (Islamic Law or shariah) [emphasis mine] that is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution in many respects.”

Indeed, “Dr. Kirby has elucidated the very direct conflicts between Islamic Law and the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 13th, and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.

The obvious dichotomy between the Constitution and Sharia law begets a logical question.

Aren’t all members of Congress obligated to swear or affirm an oath to support the Constitution (Article 6, Clause 3)? So, how could a Muslim official take such an oath and yet remain true to both his faith and the Constitution he has pledged to uphold?

“Dr. Kirby turns next to a brief review of what Islamic doctrine in fact consists, including the actual obligation... to lie to infidels (non-believers in Islam) under certain circumstances. Critically, he notes that there is no such concept as individual liberty, right to government by consent of the governed, or equality before the rule of man-made law under Islam.

Consequently,

“The glaring incompatibility of shariah with the Supreme Law of the Land in this country is obvious and perhaps shocking for some who may not have considered it before.

In fact, Kirby set out to determine which Muslim public officials and candidates (over 200) would express support for the Constitution over Islamic doctrine. He inquired whether these Muslim officials would:

• Condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising the First Amendment right to criticize or disagree with the prophet Mohammad?
• Go on record and state that in the United States, a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and also go on record to condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?
• Agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th-century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?
• Agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th-century command of Allah?

The results are alarming, as the list of those who expressed support for the Constitution is considerably smaller when contrasted against those who would not express support for the Constitution.

In 2020, “it would appear that 93% of the Muslim public officials Kirby contacted gave more credence to Islamic doctrine than the United States Constitution and their oath of office.”

As of May 5, 2026, seventeen Muslim officials expressed support for the Constitution, while 250 would not express support for the Constitution.

One puzzling piece in all this is the reaction by Dr. Zudhi Jasser, who is running for office in Arizona. In this interview, he explains that he is “an American who happens to be Muslim, that [his] faith identity is important for [his] relationship with God, but [his] community identity is primarily related to being an American and having a faith and loyalty to the U.S. Constitution and our system of government.” On the other hand, he has twice refused to support the Constitution as per the Kirby questions above.

In 2019, Andre Carson asserted that in time Americans would see “Madame Chair Rashida... Madame Chair Ilhan. Hell, we could be saying Speaker of the House Ilhan, Speaker of the House Rashida, Senator Rashida, Governor Ilhan, President Fatima, Vice President Aziza, Inshah’ Allah.”

These people mean business. And, I fear, that virtue-signaling faux feminists, as well as naïve and uninformed Americans, are surrendering to a system that is hell-bent on the destruction of this country and our freedoms.

Podcast thread for June 6th

 

bleh.

Rush Was Right

American Thinker 

On April 20 of this year, onetime liberal firebrand Alan Dershowitz announced in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that he was officially leaving the Democrat party and registering as a Republican.  Discussing his decision the next day with Newmax’s Greg Kelly, Dershowitz stated, “I cannot be associated with the Democrats in any way.  I want to see them defeated.”

A longtime listener of the late, great Rush Limbaugh, I had to smile.  For thirty years, Limbaugh had said the same thing, and been vilified for it.  The “reach across the aisle” crowd, including Republican lawmakers and failed presidential nominees, condemned him for being divisive.  But Rush was adamant.  “These people cannot be dealt with, cannot be compromised with,” he told his radio audience for the umpteenth time on May 7, 2018.  “They have to be defeated.”

Dershowitz is only the latest of a growing number of commentators who, knowingly or not, are echoing El Rushbo’s most controversial statements.  For example, in the early 2000s, America’s Anchorman was denounced for suggesting that critics of the Iraq war were actually rooting against American success so they could gain political advantage.  “They not only wanted the war in Iraq to fail; they proclaimed it a failure,” Limbaugh told the audience at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting on February 28, 2009.  “There’s Dingy Harry Reid waving a white flag: ‘This war is lost.’”

In April 2026, conservative commentator Victor Davis Hanson said virtually the same thing about critics of the Iran War.  “Anything that looks unfortunate from the point of the American success in Iran, they cling to,” Hanson told the audience of his April 14 podcast for The Daily Signal.  “They don’t look at the war empirically.  They look at it entirely in political terms.  In fact, people as diverse as Tom Friedman or Bill Crystal, if you collate what they have written, they almost feel that anything that happens negatively in Iran might be positive because it would hurt Donald Trump and then therefore that would be in the long-term interests, forgetting that we have 100,000 soldiers in the theater, risking their lives.”  On May 5, Hanson was even more direct: “Donald Trump has ... to deal with an opposition who feels the war was a mistake or they’re actually rooting in some cases for the Iranians.”

No one called out Hanson for his remarks.  Rhetoric that was considered irredeemably divisive when Rush used it seventeen years ago is now mainstream.

One reason the outrage has dissipated is that the Democrats are no longer trying to pass themselves off as centrists or moderates.  Commentators like Dershowitz, Hanson, and former speaker of the House New Gingrich frequently point out that the party has taken a hard left turn.  “We talk about a Democratic Party as if it’s the party of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Bill Clinton,” says Hanson.  “It doesn’t exist.  It’s gone.  It’s gone forever.”  Gingrich agrees.  “I don’t think there’s any such thing as the Democrats,” he told Fox News.  “You have groups of left-wing cuckoos, and then you have a handful of rational people.”

True enough, but it’s hardly news to anyone who listened to Limbaugh.  “JFK ... was not in any way a liberal as you know liberals today,” Limbaugh remarked in 2013.  Rush played a soundbite of Kennedy saying, “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low, and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.”  Rush remarked: “John F. Kennedy, 1962.  Not a Democrat alive today who would say that, who believes it, and who could get elected saying it.”

This change in the Democrat party was at the heart of what has become Rush’s most famous (or, his critics would say, infamous) statement.  When asked by the Wall Street Journal to write four hundred words on what he hoped for the new Barack Obama presidency, Limbaugh remarked: “I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.”  He went on to explain: “I’ve been listening to Barack Obama for a year and a half.  I know what his politics are.  I know what his plans are, as he has stated them.  I don’t want them to succeed. ... Liberalism is our problem.  Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here.  Why do I want more of it?”

Limbaugh was excoriated for refusing to participate in the national love fest surrounding Obama’s election.  Michael Harrison, publisher and editor of TALKERS Magazine, called Limbaugh “petty” and predicted he would lose credibility.  Yet fourteen years later, former attorney general William Barr, who once stated that Donald Trump committed a “grave wrongdoing” in the January 6 riots, echoed Rush’s thoughts on NBC’s Today show: “I believe that the greatest threat to the country is the progressive agenda being pushed by the Democratic Party.”  Hanson agrees, stating that today’s Democrat party, which he likens to the Jacobins who hijacked the original goals of the French Revolution, is putting forth “a radical agenda that wants to remake the United States into a social welfare state and to completely redirect the course of Western civilization.”

It is fascinating to watch today’s pundits repeating Rush’s talking points almost word for word.  No one shrinks from his bold statements anymore.  Rush often proclaimed that he was on “the cutting edge of societal evolution.”  The mainstreaming of his once controversial views proves, once again, that Rush was right.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Outrage Grows in U.K. as British People Witness DEI Outcome and Two-Tiered Policing in Brutal Murder

Conservative Treehouse 

New information about the brutal stabbing murder of 18-year-old Henry Nowak continues to surface, and each revelation is seemingly worse than the last.  In the latest development the Daily Mail now outlines that Nowak’s killer, Vickrum Digwa, actually recorded his victim lying on the ground in agony as the murderer mocked him.

Incredibly the judge in the trial ruled the killer’s own recording of his murder, “too disturbing to be shown” in court.  Digwa did not call for an ambulance after stabbing his victim but did take pictures and record Henry Nowak.  However, the killer’s own video was NOT shown in court!  The footage the court ruled too disturbing to show was five minutes of Vickrum Digwa filming the 18-year-old as he bled to death on the pavement.

The entire event is highlighting a two-tiered policing system in the U.K, and now police are revealing documents and training material that specifically tell them to treat encounters with racial minorities differently than encounters with white people.  The outrage is growing and British politicians are afraid to talk about it.

Reform party leader Nigel Farage did not stay silent, and immediately he began facing backlash for speaking truthfully about the murder of Henry Nowak and the circumstances that led to a horrific encounter with police.  WATCH: 

Below is the initial statement from Nigel Farage that was mentioned in the interview above.

The U.S. State Department said in a statement on social media: “Ideological conditioning and two-tiered policing are glaring symptoms of civilizational decline. They must be rejected across the West.”

[SOURCE]

Well said pic.twitter.com/ks2LNlMy4C

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 4, 2026

Here’s What 60 Minutes And The New Jersey Anti-ICE Riots Have In Common

Scott Pelley and the ICE detention rioters are raging because things aren’t going their way. 

It’s how they plan to win the midterms.

The Federalist

What’s happening at CBS’s 60 Minutes and outside the illegal alien detention center in New Jersey is the same thing: Democrats acting out hysterically, even violently, when they don’t get their way. The only difference between the two is an obnoxious little queen named Scott Pelley.

Like the rest of CBS’s News division, 60 Minutes is under new management, and because the network previously operated as a propaganda outlet for the Democrat Party (and in many ways still does), a lot of the staff are uneasy about being told that their new bosses expect them to behave more like curious journalists and less like Jimmy Kimmel’s joke writers. Chief among them is Pelley, who over the past few days has had a public crash-out with the very obvious intent of becoming yet another one of the dying news media’s Trump “Resistance” heroes.

The New York Times reported Monday on an internal 60 Minutes meeting wherein Pelley berated his superiors in front of their colleagues, accusing one of them of “murdering” the show. In what was surely a tell that Pelley himself was the one to leak all the details to the Times, the report said the staff “applauded” Pelley after his tantrum.

And, scene! Pelley flourishes his right arm up and across his waist and takes a bow. “Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.” The curtain closes.

He’s such an actress. No one is “murdering” 60 Minutes. It’s a network broadcast show, and like all network broadcast news shows, it’s ratings are in steep decline, even as 60 Minutes saw an increase in viewership this most recent season. By the way, the most recent season is the one overseen by the new bosses, a correlation Pelley didn’t seem to grasp, as he cited that piece of data in a huffy public statement this week, as if the growth was in spite of, rather than because of the change in leadership.

Pelley was rightfully fired and he continued to openly gripe about it, complaining that the program’s new executives actually took an interest in the show and didn’t let the entitled little divas like Pelley at the network call every shot. Outside of the media, this is what is known as “having a boss.”

To date, the most prominent example of new leadership at 60 Minutes interfering with any of the longtime correspondents’ work was when a segment on deportations to a detention center in El Salvador was held back until additional reporting was included. Bari Weiss, the executive who held the story, reportedly asked the correspondent to include an interview with White House senior aide Stephen Miller (Weiss even provided his contact information), and she objected to the segment’s use of the term “migrants,” since what it was referring to were people in the U.S. illegally. This is standard journalistic guidance. But Pelley prefers to call it “murdering” 60 Minutes.

A more chaotic and sometimes violent version of this dynamic has been playing out outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in New Jersey, where leftists have tried to create a human barricade preventing ICE agents from entering and exiting. They also harangued Democrat Gov. Mikie Sherrill for — let’s see here — oh, failing to completely thwart federal immigration law enforcement.

When Sherrill showed up at the rioting in solidarity with the leftists, “some protesters shouted in Ms. Sherrill’s face to criticize her for not showing up earlier in the weekend,” according to The New York Times. And when she left, “her security had to clear the road of a couple people who tried to stop her S.U.V. from leaving.”

Naturally, the rioters are pretending to be upset about something other than what they’re really mad at. They say it’s about inhumane treatment of detained illegal aliens at the facility when there’s no evidence of that being the case, other than detainees trying to get out claiming so. They want to stay in the U.S. What wouldn’t they say?

No, what the rioters are mad about is that the Trump administration is enforcing immigration law at all. They would prefer their precious illegals be left alone so that Democrats can gain more power on both the local and federal level. More illegal aliens means more Democrat voters or, at minimum, more Democrat representation in Congress. It’s why they resist every single deportation. It’s why a sitting Democrat senator literally flew to El Salvador last year to reimport a self-professed illegal alien who had been deported.

Scott Pelley and the ICE detention rioters are raging because things aren’t going their way. And rather than offer constructive criticism or win with a persuasive argument, they act out. This is their strategy for winning elections. It’s their very strategy heading into this next one.

FBI Foils Alleged ISIS-Linked Plot, Arrests Three in Kansas and California

Townhall 

Early this morning, the FBI arrested three men in Kansas City, Kansas, San Diego, and Sacramento, California, on charges that they conspired to provide material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Bisaam Ghafoor, 21, of Leawood, Kansas; Elias Shamsaldeen, 21, of Porterville, California; and Bereen Dzayee, 25, of Lakeside, California, were arrested on a complaint filed in the District of Kansas for conspiring to provide material support to terrorism after collectively providing over $2,000 to an individual they understood to be a member of ISIS.

As detailed in the complaint, in various messaging exchanges, Ghafoor exclaimed it would be “sick” if his name could be written on the drone used in an attack on Americans.

“This administration has put terrorists, cartels, and gangs on notice,” said Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. “Today’s arrest of three individuals who allegedly conspired to provide material support to ISIS makes clear our commitment to taking down terrorist networks — anywhere. Thanks to the vigilance of the FBI, their alleged scheme was dismantled and further acts of violence against U.S. service members were prevented.”

Dzayee suggested that targets of drones should include U.S. Special Forces. In other exchanges, Shamsaldeen expressed a desire to stab and injure a U.S. servicemember.  Ghafoor said he has always wanted to kill a female soldier by beheading, and added, “I wish I could kill 300,000,000 Americans.” 

“These subjects allegedly swore allegiance to ISIS, plotted multiple attacks, and even targeted U.S. service members — but this FBI stopped them cold,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “The success of this op shows once again this FBI’s continued record of stopping terrorist attacks before they happen, simply the best way to defend the homeland — and shows we’ll stop at nothing to defend Americans from those who seek to do us harm. I want to thank our teams in Kansas City, San Diego, Sacramento, Newark, and Richmond, and the Counterterrorism Division for their outstanding efforts on this investigation and commitment to mission.”

According to the complaint, filed in the District of Kansas, beginning at least in February 2025 and continuing to about June 2026, the individuals communicated about several plans to support ISIS, including through the provision of personnel, services, and money. Through Discord chats, voice calls, and other messaging platforms, the coconspirators pledged allegiance to ISIS and its leader. The defendants exchanged messages in social media groups promoting violence in furtherance of ISIS.

“According to the complaint, these defendants conspired to support ISIS, a ruthless terrorist organization, with the intent, among other things, to fund plans to kill American servicemembers abroad,” said Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg. “Thanks to the work of the FBI, their plans to betray their country in the gravest way lies in ruin. Instead, these defendants will face justice in our courts.”

The defendants collectively provided over $2,000 to an individual they believed to be an ISIS member. Ghafoor’s name was written on the projectile of one of the rocket-propelled grenades purportedly to be used in an attack overseas to kill U.S. servicemembers. Shamsaldeen provided financial resources for the purpose of purchasing drones, which, in turn, were to be used to attack and kill U.S. servicemembers deployed overseas.

“For years, the Department of Justice has been encouraging Americans that if they see suspicious activity, they should report it to law enforcement. That’s because long gone are the days where terrorist threats and attacks are incidents that only take place far away on foreign soil,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan A. Kriegshauser for the District of Kansas. “Unfortunately, we must face the reality of bad actors living within our borders clandestinely conspiring on ways to create fear and havoc. The only way to root out and prevent terrorism plots is through collaboration among all levels of law enforcement and across jurisdictions. Collaboration is what facilitated the arrests of these three suspects.”

The defendants and others communicated their desires to travel outside the United States to fight on behalf of ISIS. In some of these communications, they expressed a willingness to die on behalf of ISIS.

The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in the Kansas City Field Office, the San Diego Field Office, and the Sacramento Field Office investigated the cases, with assistance from FBI Field Offices in Richmond and Newark.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Scott Rask and Michelle MacFarlane for the District of Kansas and Trial Attorneys Justin Sher and Jay Rezai of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section are prosecuting the case, with valuable assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Eastern District of California and the Southern District of California.

An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Democrats Spent Months Trying to Rein In ICE - They Have Nothing to Show for It

RedState 

The Senate passed a $70 billion funding package for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection early Friday morning, and Democrats have nothing to show for the months they spent trying to stop it.

Just before 5 a.m. Friday, senators approved the legislation by a 52-47 vote after an all-night amendment session that stretched more than 18 hours. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) was the lone Republican to vote against final passage. The measure now heads to the House. 

Democrats spent months blocking long-term funding for ICE and Border Patrol, helping produce the longest Homeland Security funding lapse in recent memory. Republicans turned to the reconciliation process, which allowed them to move the bill with a simple majority rather than the normal 60-vote threshold. Democrats got nothing for it.

Throughout the fight, Democrats pushed for judicial warrants in immigration-related arrests, restrictions on masked federal agents, and limits on certain enforcement operations. None of it made it into the final bill.

Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) said Republicans did not have to accept any of the Democrats' conditions.

"Democrats side with illegals over American citizens every chance they get. But thanks to reconciliation, we didn't need their votes or have to accept their radical demands that would have tied the hands of federal law enforcement."

Banks added:

"Now ICE and CBP have the funding they need to keep the border secure and continue mass deportations through the end of President Trump's term."

During Thursday's all-night amendment process, Democrats also pushed measures targeting Trump's proposed settlement fund and the White House ballroom project, using the bill to force Republicans onto the record on politically uncomfortable votes. Those efforts failed, too.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called the bill a giveaway to Trump, saying Republicans chose "more money for Donald Trump, more power for Donald Trump, and nothing to lower costs for working families." He accused Republicans of pumping "another $70 billion into Trump's personal police force."

Republicans pushed back, saying Democrats spent months holding ICE and Border Patrol funding hostage to force policy changes that could not pass on their own. Former Acting ICE Director Jonathan Fahey said Democratic negotiators walked away from potential compromises because their real goal was limiting immigration enforcement authority.

"Because when there were situations where the Republicans were willing to concede or to give them some of the things they wanted, they rejected that in favor of just shutting down the agency."

Fahey was especially critical of proposals requiring judicial warrants for ICE arrests.

"As probably most people know, you can't get a judicial warrant from these ICE arrests. They're issued out of the Executive Branch. So it didn't even mechanically make any sense."

Democrats spent months fighting to starve the agencies. They got every vote they wanted and changed nothing. ICE and Border Patrol are funded. 

D-Day Remembrance - A Canadian Honours His Father

Courseulles-sur-Mer is the town overlooking Canada’s Juno Beach

https://www.junobeach.org/events/ceremonie-commemorative-canadienne/

Service Ribbons / Medals

Bergen-Belsen was a Nazi concentration camp in Lower Saxony, Germany, established as a prisoner-of-war camp in 1940 and converted to a concentration camp by the SS in 1943.  It became infamous for the extreme overcrowding, starvation, and disease—particularly typhus, typhoid, and dysentery—that killed an estimated 50,000 to 70,000 inmates, including Anne and Margot Frank, who died there in early 1945. 

The camp was liberated by British forces on April 15, 1945, when soldiers discovered approximately 60,000 starving and mortally ill prisoners and thousands of unburied bodies.  Although there were no gas chambers at Bergen-Belsen, the conditions were lethal, leading to the camp's burning to prevent disease spread and its subsequent replacement by the largest Jewish displaced persons camp in the British occupation zone, which operated until 1950.

 

 

Remembrance

June 6, 1944 - Marked the launch of Operation Overlord, the largest amphibious invasion in history, where Allied forces landed on the beaches of Normandy, France.

♦️𝐖³𝐏 𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝

 

W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

posted by DarkGoldenMan

Welcome to the W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

Post whatever you got in the comments section below.

This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain time. 

 

Finally! Senate Passes $70B ICE/CBP Border Bill

RedState 

How long have the Democrats been throwing a wrench into the funding of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol (CBP)? 

Their obstruction led to the longest government shutdown in history. But they did not care about who they might hurt in the process. Hopefully, everyone who cares about the safety of the nation remembers, come November, and votes out whoever was involved in this travesty. 

"Democrats would not agree to anything, and eventually they walked away altogether, presumably because they thought that it would serve them better to have an issue for November," Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said.

The Democrats were still trying on Thursday, as the final battle went down in the Senate over the reconciliation package to fund the agencies. 

Many of the amendments pushed by Democrats put Republicans in tough reelection bids, including Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Jon Husted, R-Ohio, and Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, into politically challenging positions. 

Because, of course. Even as they're losing, they were still trying to hamstring the Republicans. 

There were a variety of amendments that people on both sides of the aisle attempted, including an attempt to permanently shut down any question of an anti-weaponization fund, to stop the building of the ballroom, and to add the SAVE America Act. Those attempts failed. 

"It's not that tense," Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said. "I mean, I've seen worse. Nobody's stabbed anybody yet."

Well, that's a way to put it. 

But for all the months of Democrat obstruction, the Senate finally managed to pass the $70 billion package to fund the immigration enforcement agencies for the next three and a half years. 

The measure now heads to the House, where the Republicans are expected to pass it by next week, and at least for three and a half years, Democrats won't be able to stop ICE and the CBP from being fully funded to do their job for the American people.