Clinton: Laken Riley Would Still be Alive if We had Secure Borders
Did…did Bill Clinton just blame the Biden-Harris administration for Riley’s death?
So VP Kamala Harris has former President Bill Clinton out campaigning for her.
During one stop in Georgia, Clinton, it appears, criticized the Biden-Harris administration’s policies for Laken Riley’s death.
Now, you have to listen to the whole audio because before he mentioned Riley, he brought up the border bill that never happened.
Clinton claimed that former President Donald Trump had killed the bill, but it would never have passed with or without Trump’s opinion.
But Clinton’s not stupid. He knows the border is a mess, and the crisis has caused people to cut corners, letting people slip through the cracks.
I believe he knew exactly what he said and where he aimed it because we all know who has been in the White House these past four years:
And on the immigration thing. She’s the only candidate who actually endorsed a bill that would hold down immigration in any given year to a certain point and then make sure we gave people a decent place to live. We didn’t design, divide people from their children and we did total vetting before people got in.
Now Trump killed the bill. The bill was being written by senior Republicans in the Senate and he killed the bill.
You got a case in Georgia not very long ago didn’t you, they made an ad about it, a young woman who had been killed by an immigrant. Yeah, well if they’d all been properly vetted that probably wouldn’t have happened.
José Ibarra, an illegal alien from Venezuela, is on trial for Riley’s murder. He crossed in September of 2022. Officials released him because they lacked detention space.
The video is cued up:
So let’s say he wasn’t sticking it to Harris. I’m tired of people saying the bill was a good bill. It would have made immigration worse and they filled it with pork.
- Codify catch and release
- Allow up to 1.8 million illegal aliens to enter before temporarily closing parts of the border
- Funds sanctuary cities and NGOs sending illegal aliens to the country
- Expands parole
- Increases green cards
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“trump killed the bill”
the gop want to defund the police”
russia russia russia
p-gate we didnt steal the election
and on and on it goes with the lefty in charge and controlling the narrative
take back the schools
the msm will fall
That “border” bill was just another amnesty bill. That’s why Trump helped kill it. POTUS doesn’t need any new legislation to defend the border.
LOL. Yeah … First of all, ILLEGALS breaching our border is not “immigration”. And the bill only set a suggested limit of TWO MILLION ILLEGALS PER YEAR!!!! – in addition to any and all legal immigrants welcomed in. And even that “limit” was only a suggestion that didn’t trigger anything automatically.
The bill, basically, formalized all of the treasonous open border policy of Traitor Joe and his junta, to render America without any border and to finish off the complete destruction of this nation.
It is not the responsibility, nor the option!!!, of the United States’ government to house aliens. The US government is obligated to one and only one group – Americans. No one else.
“and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity“
It is not the responsibility, nor the option!!!, of the United States’ government to house anyone.
Not true. The US and state governments are obligated to give all persons within the USA equal protection of the law, which includes protecting their God-given rights to life, liberty, and property.
Liberty does not include free housing, or indeed free anything.
“ourselves and our Posterity” does not include aliens, and most especially not illegal aliens.
It doesn’t matter what the purpose was for which the USA was founded. The constitution explicitly says that it protects the liberty of all persons. That includes aliens, even illegal ones.
You don’t seem to understand that the preamble to the constitution is not law.
By the way, you do realize, don’t you, that “ourselves and our posterity” means only those who were citizens of the thirteen original states, and their descendants. The majority of citizens today have no ancestors who were in the USA in 1788, so we are not included. If the preamble had any legal meaning, and meant what you claim it means, then the constitution would not protect most citizens. Obviously that is wrong, and the 14th amendment explicitly says it’s wrong. Because the reason the people at the time adopted the constitution has no bearing on its meaning.
Also by the way, if you were correct that the constitution’s meaning is controlled by its preamble then you would perforce have to say the same about the second amendment. I don’t think you want to do that.
The most important point on that border bill in not WHO is responsible for killing it, but WHY it was killed. It was killed because it would have effectively codified a disastrous open border.
Now, as for his comments related to Laken Riley, Lady Hillary is likely asking, “What difference does it make?”
I have tried to read the bill but it’s like reading an iPhone agreement. There is no concrete wording in it at all. Everything is “At the discretion of the government”. It mentions nothing about a wall and gives $40,000,000,000 to Ukraine and $14,000,000,000 to Israel. It does nothing at all until “Encounters” at the border reach 5,000 per day and then it triggers a “Shutdown” of the system, whatever that means. Since they can’t stop any illegals now, what would a shutdown accomplish? It would also hire thousands of judges and CBP agents to “Expedite” asylum requests. not deportation orders. Every action that might look good is left up to the agency in charge to do or not. There is not one concrete action in the entire bill except giving money to foreign countries. Why Vance and Trump do not quote from this POS bill I cannot understand. Kamala constantly refers to it as the bill Trump killed and it would have solved our border problem. It would have cost a fortune and only made things worse.
She probably would have been killed by an American who otherwise would have killed an immigrant. It’s the relative crime rates of the two populations that matter. Immigrants are both perps and targets. If the target to perp ratio is higher in immigrants, they make us safer by diverting American perps from Americans to immigrants.
WTF?
Another irrelevant theory that proclaims what matters, but is without a clue.
The FACT is that she wasn’t killed by an American, just like the woman allegedly slapped by Emhoff was NOT hysterical.
It’s not intelligent to base theories on false suppositions.
A less erudite comment has probably never been posted here on LI.
JR will probably be along any moment to challenge that otherwise-solid theory.
Had she not been killed by Ibarra she would very likely, almost certainly, not have been killed by anyone. Murder is not a common occurrence in this country, and certainly not in the area where she was jogging.
Some other American, then. Is one more important than another? It depends on relative crime rates whether it increases safety or decreases safety.
Ibarra’s presence in the USA did not lower the crime rate. Had he not been in Athens it’s likely no one would have been killed there that day.
Maybe it did lower the crime rate. That’s what I’m saying that we don’t know. With the black crime rate so high, the immigrants crime rate is likely to be lower, and it’s possible then that the loose immigration policy lowers the US crime rate. In particular, two US women were not killed that day because the particular Americans who would have killed them instead killed two immigrants.
rh, your understanding of statistics starts and stops with the MLB, right?
No, Ibarra’s presence in the USA definitely did not lower the crime rate.
Pardon?
Dear God ,you win , we all hate you, but JR.
And I’m
It sure your not really JR
This might be a surprise to many but I’d rate the Clinton Administration as being somewhat more pro-enforcement than some of the other Administrations I worked under as a Border Patrol agent for 34 years.
He still has memories of the Carter Administration dumping thousands of Cuban detainees in Arkansas while he was Governor.
In the mid-1990s there was a rush at the Texas border by El Sala, Guats, Hondos, and Nicis.
He set up tent camps to hold hundreds of the aliens and brought down EOIR judges to hear the alien’s claims within a day. Everyone had their claim denied were deported.
Give a listen to Clinton’s second inaugural address, in which his comments on border security and illegal aliens sound distinctly Trumpian. A data point among many that shows that today’s “right wing extremists” in yesteryears would have been considered moderate Democrats. The right has not become more extreme, the movement of the Overton Window has been entirely the work of progressive (Marxist) Democrats.
Yep. Bill Clinton running his ’92 and ’96 campaign policies somehow transported to 2024 or even 2016 wouldn’t have gotten the d/prog nomination. HRC is way to Bill Clinton’s left as is the current d/prog party platform. This is why many folks are looking at the d/prog from within and wondering in essence just how the hell do these woke weirdos demanding a tranny in every locker room and CRT/DEI along with oddball pronoun police and an open border think we gonna vote for them? All those are unnecessary forced errors that don’t include more mainstream policy differences on 2A, abortion, foreign policy, taxes, tariffs/trade, size of govt and Federal debt.
Bottom line is the current lineup of d/prog party platform policies is definitely not recognizable to long-term d/prog voters. The wokiestas and race hustling grievance grifters took charge and went way too far in pushing the policies outside of the mainstream.
What are you talking about? The words “border security” and “illegal aliens” or anything close to them do not show up in that speech. He mentioned “immigrants” once, and only in this context, which is something you’d never hear out of Trump’s mouth:
“The divide of race has been America’s constant curse. And each new wave of immigrants gives new targets to old prejudices. Prejudice and contempt, cloaked in the pretense of religious or political conviction are no different. These forces have nearly destroyed our nation in the past. They plague us still. They fuel the fanaticism of terror. And they torment the lives of millions in fractured nations all around the world.
These obsessions cripple both those who hate and, of course, those who are hated, robbing both of what they might become. We cannot, we will not, succumb to the dark impulses that lurk in the far regions of the soul everywhere. We shall overcome them. And we shall replace them with the generous spirit of a people who feel at home with one another.
“Our rich texture of racial, religious and political diversity will be a Godsend in the 21st century. Great rewards will come to those who can live together, learn together, work together, forge new ties that bind together.
Johnny Cash is correct. I don’t know what “comments on border security and illegal aliens” DaveGinOly is referring to, but the speech contains no such comments.
“It is not the responsibility, nor the option!!!, of the United States’ government to house aliens.”
Heck, it’s neither the responsibility nor the option of the US Government to house anyone. The US Government’s job with respect to housing is limited to maintaining an environment wherein we have the opportunity to house ourselves.
And that job to maintain such an environment is owed equally to citizens and aliens who happen to be here, regardless of their legal status.
The US government owes NOTHING to illegal aliens, other than a quick transport outside the borders.
The US government’s only concern is the US citizenry and no one else. Others have their own governments to fights for their rights. The US government belongs to Americans and is obligated to no others. PERIOD.
You seem to have a serious problem understanding the concept of national sovereignty and the purpose of government.
You have a problem understanding the f***ing constitution.
They know that the uncontrolled border is a huge sore spot with voters so they’re trying to deflect blame.
Clinton’s smart enough to know that ignoring the issue won’t make it go away, so it’s better to bring it up and blame it on Trump.
“It’s Trump’s fault because he didn’t support the bill that would have slightly narrowed the floodgates that the Biden/Harris administration opened wide through executive orders.” Or something.
Unlike almost all his successors Clinton is highly intelligent. I have seen videos with him talking to businessmen where he exhibited a highly informed grasp of the issues involved. Unfortunately he has the morals of an alleycat. A tragic figure. He could have done so much better. Why he got involved with Hillary mystifies me. No brains, no morals, and ugly as sin. He must think so too as evidenced by his many affairs.
The massive immigration we have had since 1965 has ruined America. I don’t think the country is fixable without deporting at least 20 million infiltrators. That won’t happen. I keep hearing conservatives and Republicans make excuses like it’s impossible to deport that many people. Well put a bounty on them an see how fast they self deport. Will never happen because Americans like the collective will to survive.
I seems likely that Bill Clinton’s affaires were motivated more by her temperament that her appearance. Take a look at Chelsea, Hillary’s sperm donor was one one ugly dude. I think that Hillary had few options.
I am fed up with the Clinton-Obama-Biden criminal syndicate, who have cost all Americans dearly. We are all suffering economically, and much poorer quality of life as a result of Affirmative BS, illegal parasites and all the money squandered on them.
Oops, that got completely messed up. I’ll try again in the correct place and with the correct markup.
“Not true. The US and state governments are obligated to give all persons within the USA equal protection of the law, which includes protecting their God-given rights to life, liberty, and property.”
How about an invading army? They would be persons within the US. Do they get equal protection and due process? Suppose Mexico invades the US to recover territories it regards as “stolen” from them. What protections under US law are they entitled to?
“All persons” means “all persons”. If a member of an invading army were to commit a crime (which invading itself is not), and were to be arrested for it (not likely to happen), he would be entitled to due process in his dealings with the criminal justice system. The military is a completely different matter. It is not part of the criminal justice system.
Proposition 187 (anti illegal immigration – Save Our State) passed in California by almost 60% back in 1994. Illegal immigration is more unpopular than many people realize. Just ask the people on Martha’s Vineyard.
Trump Ad: Clinton saying how Biden-Harris not vetting got Laken Riley killed, followed by Harris’ comment on the View that she would do nothing different.
My response any time anyone brings up that farce of a bipartisan border bill is to talk about the democratic senate killing HR 2, which actually would have fixed the border. Biden said he would veto it, and Schumer made sure he never had to. The house needs to keep pushing it and howl when the Dems stop it. Can Trump and his surrogacy please follow suit?
The Democrat Machine is dumping Harris.
I have no idea what they are thinking.
The only way they could replace her at this point is to knock her off.
Of course, most of our RINOs’ are closer to the roots of the Democrat Party that we knew 40+ years ago then these Commiecrats…
I always said if they had a brain amongst em, they would have lined up, rank and file behind Tulsi.
And Tulsi would have been a formidable opponent to President Trump.
I am glad to have her though. Can’t let her run wild.
I dunno.
What gives here??
They don’t want a president. They want a marionette.