Fleming: Boehner’s Team ‘Toning Down’ Border Crisis Legislation in Wake of Conservative Criticism

One of the key immigration hawks in the House is signaling that changes to a border crisis package could find acquiescence from the right flank of the GOP conference, although he and like-minded colleagues are still looking to see a resolution accompany the package expressing protest against President Obama’s executive actions on amnesty.

Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) told Breitbart News that he expects the legislation that House Speaker John Boehner’s border crisis working group, at the direction of its head Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX), will introduce Tuesday will be a much subtler version of what Team Boehner was pushing a couple weeks ago.

The bill, he suspects, will be just a few hundred million dollars of supplemental appropriations for the administration in order to carry it until the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, with no substantive changes in funding levels or policy.

“I don’t think there will be a lot of time to read it [before leadership brings it up for votes], but on the other hand, I don’t look for this bill to contain much,” Fleming said in a phone interview Monday evening.

“If the only spending we have to approve is just until the end of the fiscal year, which is Sept. 30, then I just suspect it’s simply going to be a little bit of padding of cash to make sure that we don’t get to mid-August and the President says all of a sudden that the ‘country is now breaking down and I can’t enforce the border now because the House of Representatives didn’t do their job,'” Fleming said. “From the standpoint of leaving for the August recess, I do think it’s a smart thing to take off the table any claims the President may have that we have left the Department of Homeland Security high and dry, and HHS as well. I think that’s smart.”

Fleming’s idea, if that’s the direction House leadership takes—something he thinks they may get the votes for since it’s so far from what the president and Senate Democrats want, and something they probably won’t touch anyway—is to push Speaker Boehner and the other members of leadership to include in the final package a resolution he just introduced that would call for an end to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and stop any expansion of the president’s executive amnesty plans, changes to the 2008 anti-human trafficking law and for the deployment of the National Guard along the border.

“It’s a combination of the DACA and the 2008 law that’s created this problem, because obviously once word got back to Central America that this was working, that started the major tide—the tsunami, if you will—of humans across the border,” Fleming said of the key points of his resolution, which calls for an end to DACA and a block to any expansion of it to cut off incentives for illegal aliens to sneak into America, key fixes to the 2008 law so it can no longer be twisted by Obama to keep illegal aliens in America once they get here, and for the mobilization of the National Guard along the full border to stop the flow of illegal immigration into America.

Fleming’s move—a big-picture, strategic play—would allow Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), the principal sponsors of legislation that would defund DACA and any attempts to expand it, the August recess and September to build the support they need among Republicans to take the fight directly to the President. Cruz already has key backers in the U.S. Senate, with people like Senate Budget Committee ranking member Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) backing his play along with Sens. David Vitter (R-LA) and Jim Inhofe (R-OK). Blackburn has been even more successful on the House side, gaining key cosponsors like House Rules Committee chairman Rep. Pete Sessions (R-AL) and committee chairmen, and many other influential GOP cosponsors.

“What I really think we should do, and what I hope to do tomorrow, is if the House leadership is saying ‘let’s at least give enough money, maybe a few hundred million dollars, to get us through the end of September, so we won’t be called back to Washington or called out’ then I would also want to add my resolution to that as well to send the message that we’re going to give you some money now and some time to think about it, but before we do anything significant in the way of funding, you’ve got to do these three things: which is to reverse the DACA decree, to pull back or re-evaluate the 2008 Wilberforce law and the way it’s being implemented, and to put adequate security on the border,” Fleming said. “You’ve got to do those things before we’re going to do anything significant on funding of that point.”

Fleming said he has not spoken with GOP leadership about this effort but suspects that Boehner does not have the votes to pass Granger’s original plan—so this would be an acceptable pathway forward that could bring Republicans together against Obama’s planned executive amnesty heading into the final months of the midterm election season.

“I haven’t talked to [leadership], but I can tell you I suspect they don’t have the votes to pass the original Granger bill because they’re already toning it down, and that tells me they have concern over whether they can even pass it,” Fleming said. “I watched Scalise’s interview on Sunday, and he was really non-committal that there would even be action. He hinted there would be some type of an approach, but he was not clear cut that there would be a bill on the floor and that it would pass. So I think that leadership wants us to come together on something, so they’re lowering the funding level and lowering the requirements, I think, to get enough votes to pass because they know that the Democrats are not going to support it.”

“What I intend to say is, ‘Fine, if you want to pull this down to a much lower level – and it’s just even spending – to get us through the remainder of the fiscal year that’s fine,” Fleming added. “But I think we should also have this resolution which speaks to the President and tells him that he’s also got to take action and do his part in this as well.”

Heading into the final months of the election season with this big fight over immigration, this is something that could—if senior members of the Republican Party finally drop pushing amnesty once and for all, and use it as the weapon it could be against Democrats—unite the GOP against the President and Senate Democrats on this issue for the last couple months of the year. Ex-Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), for instance, a not-so-conservative Republican who’s now running in New Hampshire, has begun using immigration to great success in an advertisement slamming incumbent Democrat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). Overall, Fleming says, this issue could be a policy winner and political winner for the GOP if Republicans fight the left with it.

“I think Republicans all along have been misreading the polls,” Fleming said. “Right now, the President—his approval rating on immigration is in the 30s. He’s hurting, and that’s kind of why I made the comment that got quoted in a lot of places that it’s Obama’s nightmare and we’re jumping in the middle of it and making it our own. He’s hurting himself, and he’s hurting his party, doing what he’s doing. Even if you ask immigrants themselves, and Latinos themselves, they’ll tell you that it’s still important that we have border security and that we have a good legal process to immigrate to this country, and… I don’t think anybody in this country thinks that amnesty is the first thing that we should be doing. It should be an orderly process of immigration policy, one that makes sense, and border security. The President by his actions is showing that he wants anything but that, and now communities across this country are worried—even in blue states. They’re worried about these—and I’m not calling them children, because many of them are not children. Many of them are actually adults, and many of them are older children, teens, adolescents and many of them are coming to these communities, and they have to be taken care of. They don’t like that, and they don’t like the fact that they’re having to pay for it.”

The city of Bourne, Massachusetts—a Democratic stronghold—just unanimously voted to condemn efforts by the Obama administration and Gov. Deval Patrick to bring illegal aliens to their town, for example. Americans in other places that aren’t the most pro-Republican are rejecting the administration’s efforts as well, something Fleming says Republicans should grasp.

“Obama’s big problem with all of this is as these people seep into the communities, the communities are upset—they’re angry because they’re going to have to take care of them,” Fleming said. “That’s a politically bad position, so what he’s wanting is Congress to subsidize what he’s doing which is really to demolish and annihilate our border security on this. That’s why I’m pushing back on our leadership, to say if we start writing checks to the President… he’s not going to work with us in solving the problem—he’s just going to use his power maliciously to make it worse.”

Source: Breitbart Feed

What You Need to Know About The Ebola Outbreak

With reports that two Americans have now been diagnosed with the Ebola virus while working to help Africans in Liberia, Western focus has shifted to the dangers of an Ebola outbreak. According to Samaritan’s Purse, the group for which both Americans work, doctor Kent Brantly contracted Ebola and then isolated himself; Nancy Writebol, an employee of Serving in Mission, was helping Ebola patients as well when she was infected.
The World Health Organization, according to CNN.com, has measured the current outbreak in West Africa as the “deadliest ever,” including at least 1,093 people in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia. CNN states, “Of the 1,093 confirmed, probable and suspected cases, 660 people have died.”
So, here’s what you need to know about Ebola:
Transmission. Scientists speculate that original outbreaks come from human-animal contact. The World Health Organization states:
Ebola is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals. In Africa, infection has been documented through the handling of infected chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines found ill or dead or in the rainforest.
While Ebola transmission is not airborne, according to the Centers for Disease Control, it can be transmitted by “direct contact with the blood or secretions of an infected person,” as well as “exposure to objects (such as needles) that have been contaminated with infected secretions.” That is why medical personnel are in a more dangerous position than members of the general public – they routinely deal with bodily fluids. As the CDC notes, Exposure to ebolaviruses can occur in health care settings where hospital staff are not wearing appropriate protective equipment, such as masks, gowns, and gloves.” Ebola can be spread via semen for up to 7 weeks, according to WHO.
USA Today reports that according to Michael Osterholm of the Center for Infection Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, “Ebola is actually much harder to spread than respiratory infections, such as influenza or measles. Those viruses pose a much greater threat on a plane or in any confined space.”
Incubation Period. The typical incubation period for the virus is somewhere between eight and ten days after exposure, although symptoms could appear, according to CDC, “anywhere from 2 to 21 days.” It has been measured to survive in semen up to two months.
Symptoms. Symptoms mimic those of the typical flu virus, until they spiral out of control. Symptoms begin with fever, headache, weakness, diarrhea, vomiting, and muscle aches. Ebola then can accelerate to include internal and external bleeding.
Kill Rate. According to the World Health Organization, “EVD outbreaks have a case fatality rate of up to 90%.” A history of Ebola outbreaks shows incidents ranging from 280 deaths in Congo (out of 318 diagnosed) in 1976 to 224 dead out of 425 diagnosed in Uganda in 2000.
Treatment. There is no vaccine for Ebola. The only treatment, as Medecins Sans Frontieres states, “consists of hydrating the patient, maintaining their oxygen status and blood pressure and treating them for any complicating infections.”
Will It Spread? CNN talked to MSF epidemiologist Kamiliny Kalahne. She said Ebola has not reached first world countries because “people generally transmit the infection when they are very sick, have a high fever and a lot of symptoms — and in these situations, they don’t travel. And even if they do get sick once they travel to a developed country, they will be in a good hospital with good infection control, so they are very unlikely to infect others.”
All of this, of course, assumes that people don’t travel when they’re sick…or immigrating. It assumes a level of distance between immigrants and non-immigrants. Should we all start wearing masks? Probably not. But that doesn’t mean we should be nearly as blithe about the situation as our government seems to be.
Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the new book, The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org. Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

Source: Breitbart Feed

Planned Parenthood Complains About Protests in SF

Bay Area Planned Parenthood executives, used to presenting their pro-abortion case to prospective clients without a countervailing response, are whining that the San Francisco police and the city attorney aren’t protecting them from those nasty pro-life protesters who are appearing at the organization’s facility and threatening their business by (gasp!) passing out literature.

The organization claims that it is being subjected to “harassment and intimidation” at its health center on Valencia Street, as people violate a 25-foot buffer zone rule in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that struck down a similar buffer zone in Massachusetts.

Planned Parenthood’s Bay Area chapter leader, Heather Saunders Estes, penned a letter to City Attorney Dennis Herrera: “Each week, as the harassment and intimidation escalate… the city’s ordinances are violated ever more flagrantly,” adding that when Planned Parenthood’s staffers contact law enforcement, the response is that “there is nothing they can do.” She blistered Herrera, writing that other cities in the state “have come out in strong defense of their ordinances,” while “your office continues to dither.”

Herrera replied that his office understands “some of the understandable bitterness and disappointment” over the Supreme Court ruling and is consulting with legal experts as to how to proceed. Some people familiar with the internal politics of the situation argue that if San Francisco’s defends its 25-foot no-protest zone, antiabortion activists could file a lawsuit and the city could lose thousands of dollars in legal expenses.

Supervisor and Assembly candidate David Campos said that police are not going to act until they see a city “policy decision on how to proceed… I hope we stick as close to the [existing] ordinance as possible, because I think the only way to protect women’s access to the clinic is to continue to enforce a buffer zone. Even if there are legal risks involved.”

Source: Breitbart Feed

OH Sheriff Estimates One-Third of County Births Are by Illegals

Butler Co., OH Sheriff Richard K. Jones estimated that around one-third of the children born in his county are the children of illegal immigrants. 

“We’ve got kids that are born in these hospitals to the illegals that we can’t afford to pay for. A third of the hospitals, the births here, just in our community, are born for free, and they’re illegals that are having these children and then the ones that are coming over to our school system” Jones said on Monday’s broadcast of “Fox & Friends” on the Fox News Channel.

He also detailed the impact of illegal immigration on county schools, saying “every kid gets less. Imagine being in a school and you have a classroom with 25 or 30 students, then you have an interpreter for each one of these kids that are sitting-can you imagine the disruption?” And “I talked to the school people, that work in these schools, off the record. They said it’s a total disruption. It comes out of the money that they don’t have and it’s killing our system here.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett

Source: Breitbart Feed

Why More Israelis Should Die: The Left’s Twisted Logic

To remedy the simply awful tragedy of not enough Israelis dying as a result of Hamas rocket attacks, something must be done! Send in NATO, bomb an old people’s home, send in UN inspectors to dismantle the Iron Dome systems! It simply is not fair! 

Such would be the twisted logic that the anti-Israeli crowd are peddling at the moment. Supposed moral outrage points to the heavy casualties suffered by Gazans, and asks, ‘Why can’t it be more tragic for Israel, too?’.

When humanitarian ceasefires were finally agreed upon (a disproportionate amount of which were refused or broken by Hamas), anti-Israeli nutbags amongst the Twitterati began indulging themselves in frivolity. Comparative pictures were posted of Israelis returning to beaches, whilst Gazans searched the rubble.

Amidst the retweets and favourites, most tend not to criticize the failure of equivalence: after all, to match like for like would have been to show a photo of a district in Sderot, where the buildings are pockmarked by Hamas rocket fire and the bus shelters double up as bomb shelters. Better still would be to compare it to a funeral of a dead IDF soldier and their grieving family.

The plain truth is, there is no counterfactual that would ever please the anti-Israeli crowd. If Israelis do not die in large numbers, they’ll scream genocide. If Israelis do die, there’ll be smug retorts about chickens coming home to roost, their deaths somehow being justice for supposed Israeli colonialism.

But the rationale behind their moaning implies that defining a ‘just war’ involves both sides taking equal numbers of casualties. This is rot: just because a conflict is disproportionate does not make it unjust. In fact, the Israeli dispute with Hamas actually tells us the exact opposite.

Why is it that so many Gazans die, after all? Sure, we get emotional and dewy-eyed when we see injured Gazan babies, weeping mothers, confused siblings; in a humane sense, we are right to do so. But too much sacrifice of reason to the altar of emotion cannot do. A little reflective space allows us to point the finger at those responsible for the woe of much of Gazan life, and who bears the brunt of responsibility for these people.

Who advocates that Gazans give up their own lives and those of their families to protect terrorists and gangsters? Who keeps their people in poverty because they use every opportunity for trade to smuggle in weapons, rather than food and books? Who uses international foreign aid and UN-funded resources to stockpile weaponry? Who places such weaponry in schools and hospitals, relying on the morality and the expertise of the Israelis who go to their best efforts to avoid hurting innocents, to not attack? And when the IDF call off such attacks, who claims it as their own sick victory?

But this is only a reasonable question, not meant for the realm of discussion. At least, not according to the Hamas Solidarity Campaigns that have plagued capital cities across the West over the last three weeks. For these people, Israelis could die by the thousands, and it would do nothing to lessen the perverse convictions of this crowd.

But it isn’t just a matter of Israel doing well (i.e. Israelis not being dead) that these folks are upset about; there is also the huge issue of all of the other problems in the Middle East for which Israel cannot be blamed. How many of these Socialist Worker placard-carrying nutters know, for example, that there is actually a very good chance that more Palestinians have been displaced and/or killed as a result of the conflict in Syria over the last three years than in at least a decade of Israel-Palestinian conflict, if not far longer?

Perhaps even since the inception of the State of Israel, if we count deaths alone. Bearing in mind that all official statistics regarding the number of Palestinian deaths also include those deaths suffered by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups killed in open combat.

Between Bashar al-Assad’s forces and ISIS, the Palestinians have been getting a rough ride, and still are. Nobody is quite sure the figures of the casualties, but considering Hamas is a Sunni militant group like ISIS, one can induce that the bulk of oppression of Palestinians comes from Assad loyalists. My point is this; who protested at the Syrian London embassy the last two Saturdays? Syria is an open case of ‘collective punishment’, a phrase with which Israeli policy is often smeared. But nobody cares. It isn’t Israel, after all.

Compare another example. Egypt at present recognizes the need for an economic blockade against Hamas, and (presumably) implicitly works with Israel to uphold it. Trade routes into Gaza have time and again been taken advantage of by Hamas for its own nihilistic ends. So Egypt close the trade routes, bomb the tunnels, and close the borders. Maybe one day, the sanctions will be different. But for now, we can ask, why are there no anti-Egyptians? Where were the crowds outside the Egyptian embassy? Can the BDS crowd not find Belgravia on a map?

The people walking down Kensington High Street towards the (empty; it was a Saturday) Israeli Embassy chanting “we are all Hamas!” are cut from the same pathetic cloth as the deluded whitey ultra-Guardianistas who chanted “We are all Hezbollah!” in 2006, blissfully unaware that given the chance, Hassan Nasrallah and Khaled Mashal would almost certainly kill them. But that’s not important. The crowd want more Israeli blood; that’s what will please them. That way, it’ll be fairer. Thank goodness the Israelis will hopefully never have to please such people.

Source: Breitbart Feed