TEA PARTY PATRIOTS CO-FOUNDER ENCOURAGES CONSERVATIVES TO GIVE RUBIO CHANCE TO IMPLEMENT IMMIGRATION AGENDA

[Love of Country]

 

In what some may consider a surprising move, Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin suggested that conservatives should consider welcoming Senator Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL

Rubio’s bill, which was also endorsed by La Raza and Mark Zuckerberg, would admit seven times more permanent immigrants on green cards (30 million) than Ted Kennedy’s original 1965 legislation (4.1 million) that turned much of America blue.

In an op-ed in USA Today, Martin suggested that Sen. Rubio had somehow changed his position on immigration:

Sen. Marco Rubio famously worked with the so-called Gang of 8 to develop an immigration reform bill that offered a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the U.S.; now he says he understands and shares the concerns of the broad majority of the American people, who believe that before any discussion of what to do about illegal immigrants can take place, the border must first be secured — and must be secured long enough, and well enough, that the American people believe it has been well and truly secured.

However, a review of Rubio’s public statements, comments, and legislative actions since the Gang of Eight bill failed in the House reveals the opposite — Rubio has not changed a single one of his policy positions on immigration.

In fact, he has even made clear that if elected president or vice president, he would push every single immigration policy favored by business groups like the Chamber of Commerce.

For instance, as recently as last week at a New Hampshire presidential candidates forum, Marco Rubio endorsed immediately legalizing illegal aliens and potentially granting them green cards that would put them on a pathway to citizenship, which would confer voting privileges, the ability to bring family members in to the country, and access to welfare and federal benefits.

Martin asserts that Rubio now “understands and shares the concerns” of the American people regarding border security; however, Rubio’s verbal assurances on border security are nothing new. In fact, the strongest statement Rubio has issued with regards to border security came during the Gang of Eight push, in which he called the bill, “The Toughest Border Security & Enforcement Measures In U.S. History”– a claim which, to this day, he has never retracted.

Indeed, throughout his entire push to sell the Gang of Eight bill, Rubio maintained that border security was his top priority.

As he promised talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh, he would not support the bill unless enforcement measures preceded amnesty: “If there is not language in this bill that guarantees that nothing else will happen unless these enforcement mechanisms are in place, I won’t support it.”

And yet, even after he subsequently admitted in a Spanish interview on Univision that amnesty would come before enforcement, Rubio still voted for the bill.

Rubio’s recent comments calling for the implementation of e-verify, border fencing, and visa tracking are also not new. For instance, during Gang of Eight immigration debate, Rubio argued that those provisions were the main reason to support the bill. He warned that if Congress refused to act and refused to pass the bill, then “we’re not going to have the fencing… we’re not going to have e-verify, we’re not going to have entry-exit tracking.”

Yet when the bill came to the floor, Sen. Rubio joined Chuck Schumer in voting down an amendment offered by
Sen. John Thune (R-SD)

which would have required the completion of a border fence. He also successfully defeated an amendment offered by Sen. Vitter (R-LA) which would require the implementation of an exit-entry tracking system in order to prevent foreign nationals from illegally overstaying their visas.

And an amendment offered by Sen. Chuck Grassley—which would have required e-verify be implemented within 18 months—was killed in committee and was, therefore, not present in the bill Rubio pushed successfully through the Senate.

Rubio’s legislative actions after the Gang of Eight bill similarly creates tension with his public statements on his immigration position. For instance, despite his continued public comments about border security, the only new immigration plan that he has co-authored and introduced since the Gang of Eight’s demise is a massive expansion of the foreign workers program. The Immigration and Innovation Act, known as I-Squared — which is backed by the same corporate CEOs and wealthy donors who backed his Gang of Eight plan — would triple the number of wage-cutting H-1B visas for big tech and would substantially increase immigration from high risk regions in the Middle East, without implementing any corresponding security or tracking measures.

Together these items demonstrate that far from flip-flopping on immigration, Rubio’s position has simply remained unchanged — it’s the same as it was in 2013, as it was in 2014, as it is today: he still supports citizenship for illegal immigrants, he still supports doubling and tripling expansions in foreign workers admitted to the country on visas, and he still supports a green card policy that would push immigration levels past all known historical records.

Indeed, in the first Republican presidential candidates debate, Rubio made another veiled reference to his plan to increase immigration — insisting that the people who don’t get enough attention and “who never ge[t] talked about in these debates” are the foreign citizens “who have been waiting for 15 years to come to the United States.”

However, the United States — far from being difficult to get into — each year admits one million plus new green cards, one million foreign workers, refugees and dependents, and half a million foreign youths sought by college administrators.

The irony perhaps is that conservative activists and publications including, for instance, the National Review, are in effect accepting an apology from Mr. Rubio, which he has never given. Rubio has never acknowledged any wrong doing in pushing the Gang of Eight bill, nor he has ever admitted that any of the multitudinous claims he made about it were false, nor has he retreated from any of the policy positions that characterized that effort.

In fact, as recently as just four months ago, Marco Rubio told Chris Wallace that “it’s not that we bailed [on the Gang of Eight bill],” Rubio said. “It’s that we don’t have the votes to pass it… I still believe we need to do immigration reform.”

If Sen. Rubio had been president instead of Barack Obama, House Speaker

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

would have had no difficulty getting the Gang of Eight bill through the House and onto President Rubio’s desk for signature.

So far, at this point in the race, Rubio’s policy positions on immigration have not been fleshed out to the American voter. At the Republican presidential candidates debate moderated by Fox, for instance, Rubio was asked the following questions:

“[Why are you] better prepared to be president than he [Jeb Bush] is?”
[On immigration] “Is it as simple as our leaders are stupid, their leaders are smart, and all of these illegals coming over are criminals?”
“Why is Governor Bush wrong on Common Core?”
“Describe one action you would do to make the economic environment more favorable for small businesses and entrepreneurs and anyone dreaming of opening their own business.”
“How do you justify ending a life just because it begins violently, through no fault of the baby?”
“So I put the question to you about God and the veterans, which you may find to be related.”

Rubio kept his answers vague, optimistic, and focused on the future: “God has blessed our country. This country has been extraordinarily blessed. And we have honored that blessing. And that’s why God has continued to bless us.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ration-agenda/

[Love of Country]

Wow it appears she sold out......geez they all  fall like dominoes......could it be greed?

[M]

Good to see you posting April.

Enjoy the site.

Mike

[Love of Country]

Thanks for the Welcome! :-)

-Love of Country

[Love of Country]

Rubio’s Gang of Eight Bill Would Have Rewarded Sanctuary Cities Harboring Illegals

In the wake of yet another murder of an American at the hands of an illegal immigrant, it’s worth revisiting the immigration bill put forth in part by GOP presidential candidate

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

80%

, which offered rewards for sanctuary cities.

Juan-Francisco Lopez Sanchez, a felon with multiple convictions and five deportations under his belt, admitted to shooting Kathryn Steinle dead at Pier 14 in San Francisco and says he came to work in that city because he knew that he would not be deported, crimes and illegal status notwithstanding.

Had the Gang of Eight measure become law, not only would it have allowed sanctuary cities to continue to refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities, it would have stopped ICE from pushing to strip federal funds from sanctuary cities that defied them by releasing aliens back onto the streets, thanks to an amendment added by California

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

0%

.

“The bill would have made it much harder for ICE to detain even criminal alien felons, meaning that most would simply disappear into the wind if arrested, and settle in different locations, especially sanctuary cities, as Sanchez said was his intention,” Director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies Jessica Vaughan told Breitbart News. “Sanchez probably would have been entitled to a taxpayer-funded immigration attorney under the Schumer-Rubio plan, who might have found a way to get him amnesty, perhaps by claiming a mental disability.”

“The biggest problem with the Schumer-Rubio bill is that it failed to restore immigration enforcement and boost border security, so even if Sanchez were deported, he likely would have tried to return, and the same employers who offered him jobs in San Francisco could feel free to do so again without repercussion,” Vaughan added. 

The San Francisco’s Sheriff’s office defended its decision to allow Sanchez to stalk the streets, saying the policy “makes us safer.” This same office received hundreds of thousands of dollars in what could now be considered blood money thanks to the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP), meant to offset the cost of jailing illegal aliens in theory and all but guaranteeing they will be released in practice.

State and local governments already make millions of dollars by obstructing federal immigration law, in part by choking off access to aliens ripe for deportation. Rubio’s amended bill would have rewarded them all the more, according to immigration expert Jessica Vaughan. Had Gang of Eight become law, Sanchez would have been just as free to roam from sanctuary city to sanctuary city, all of which would be flush with SCAAP cash.

As conservative author Ann Coulter has remarked: “I have a little tip. If you don’t want to be killed by ISIS, don’t go to Syria. If you don’t want to be killed by a Mexican, there’s nothing I can tell you.”

Law enforcement officials condemned the amended bill in 2013 for encouraging more crime and lawlessness.

“The amended 1,200-page immigration bill, if passed, will exacerbate USCIS concerns about threats to national security and public safety,” said USCIS Council President Ken Palinkas about the amended bill in 2013.  “It will allow immigrants to break the law in the future and still be eligible for citizenship, as it absolves prospective behavior, not simply past mistakes…It will wipe away the enforcement process that compels law breakers who overstay their visas to return to their home country and restart the immigration process.”

ICE Council President Chris Krane has a number of harsh criticisms of the bill.

“[T]hese are not reforms at all, but instead provisions written by special interest groups concerned only with their own political agendas and future financial gains… S. 744 places unprecedented new restrictions on interior enforcement, making the current situation much worse and much more hazardous,” he said, hammering the Gang of Eight for permitting the legalization of gang members, drunk drivers, and sex offenders. “It is as if S. 744 were explicitly written to handcuff law enforcement officers-binding their hands while giving virtually unchecked authority to executive branch officials to prevent future removals, including removals of criminal aliens.”

ICE also issued a joint statement with USCIS: 

The Schumer-Rubio-Corker-Hoeven proposal will make Americans less safe and it will ensure more illegal immigration — especially visa overstays — in the future. It provides legalization for thousands of dangerous criminals while making it more difficult for our officers to identity public safety and national security threats,” the statement reads in part. “The legislation was guided from the beginning by anti-enforcement special interests and, should it become law, will have the desired effect of these groups: blocking immigration enforcement.

While Rubio’s bill ultimately failed — and President Obama picked up where it left off — law enforcement’s warnings are painfully pertinent after Steinle’s murder. She was in the wrong place at the wrong time, as the media like to say: In a country where both parties fight to dismantle all immigration enforcement.

Email Katie at [e-mail].

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/rubios-gang-of-e...

[Love of Country]

Jenny Beth Martin: In Defense of a ‘Changed Mind’

by Jenny Beth Martin11 Aug 201583

By now, readers of this publication have likely seen this piece excoriating me for an op-ed I published in USA Today on the subject of “flip-flopping.”

As a long-time reader of (and frequent contributor to) Breitbart.com, it pains me to say I found the piece to be dishonest reporting, bordering on a personal attack. But because I believe the author and I share a determination to prevent an amnesty of millions of illegal immigrants from taking place, I will attempt in the following passages merely to point out where I think my piece was misunderstood.

In my very short USA Today op-ed – which was originally accepted for publication months ago – I made the point that politicians often change their minds, and I argued that there is nothing inherently wrong with changing one’s mind or policy positions if they are changing to the right position and if the change is sincere. As the leader of a grassroots organization that aims to build a broad coalition and which recognizes that the growth and success of any political movement necessitates a welcoming attitude toward those who once held views in opposition, but who now have adjusted those views, I stand by those statements.

The Breitbart News piece focuses on just one example from my op-ed, in which I mentioned that

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

80%

appears to have changed his mind on immigration. It is a fact that Sen. Rubio in 2013 was one of the authors of the notorious Senate “Gang of 8” amnesty bill, which was a broad amnesty bill that lacked even the most basic border security measures. It is also a fact that Sen. Rubio today says he shares our concerns about granting amnesty to millions of people without first addressing border security. These two facts indicate a “flip-flop,” and recognition on his part that the bill he originally championed was severely flawed.

What Breitbart News fails to mention is that after I used this example of a flip-flop, I made it very clear that we were still skeptical of Sen. Rubio’s position.

Did Scott Walker and Rubio “flip-flop”? Or did their thinking on these issues merely change, as they spent more time learning about the issues in question, and had more conversations with thoughtful advisers and — dare we say it — regular American citizens?

We honestly don’t know. We do know we’ll be watching them closely, as we’ll watch the other candidates seeking to earn our support.

After all, President Reagan had a philosophy of “trust but verify,” and our position with Sen. Rubio on amnesty is exactly that.

Tea Party Patriots was one of the most visible and vocal opponents of Rubio’s 2013 amnesty bill. During the summer of 2013, we created activist toolkits, organized rallies across the country, and orchestrated a massive effort on Capitol Hill to draw attention to the many weaknesses of Sen. Rubio’s “Gang of 8” bill. We are proud of that work, and even prouder of the fact that Rubio today appears to have changed his mind on a key aspect of this issue, and appears to be using some of our talking points on border security. That’s progress, plain and simple.

At Tea Party Patriots, we have a philosophy that guides our grassroots activities: “When politicians do the right thing, we stand by them. And when they fail to do the right thing, we hold them accountable.” The Marco Rubio incident is illustrative of that guiding principle. In 2013 we held him accountable with grassroots pressure – letters to the editor about him, calls into his office, and rallies. And in 2015, as he signals an embrace of our messaging, we welcome it. Why wouldn’t we?

That doesn’t mean he has gained a pass or that we are encouraging conservatives to give Rubio a chance to implement his immigration agenda, as was falsely suggested in the Breitbart News headline.

Marco Rubio’s flip-flop will give many voters cause for concern, as it should, and GOP primary voters will certainly want to examine Rubio’s remarks in light of his previous actions on immigration.

As the 2016 presidential election heats up, we can expect a lot of flip-flopping from every candidate. When the candidates flip their views to align with ours, we will celebrate those victories and welcome them, to the extent we are satisfied they are sincerely-held changes of opinion.

Breitbart News’ view on this issue seems to be that candidates can never do a course correction or change their positions. That is wrong, of course, and Tea Party Patriots has an impressive track record proving just how often politicians can be persuaded to do the right thing.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/11/jenny-beth-marti...

[Love of Country]

At Tea Party Patriots, we have a philosophy that guides our grassroots activities: “When politicians do the right thing, we stand by them. And when they fail to do the right thing, we hold them accountable.” The Marco Rubio incident is illustrative of that guiding principle. In 2013 we held him accountable with grassroots pressure – letters to the editor about him, calls into his office, and rallies. And in 2015, as he signals an embrace of our messaging, we welcome it. Why wouldn’t we?

Jenny Beth certainly has let her power and the backing of her sheep go to her head, She is a flip flopper herself so of course she is going to defend her new stance on Rubio........Now lets see are we all fools or what....Rubio like all the other RINOs who say what they think others want them to say when going for the gold....but as soon as they get the position they flop right back to their puppet masters plan....good try Jenny but no go....so glad I left TPP a long ago I will not be going where they try to lead, would not want this woman speaking for me on any level. She has always appeared to be to be a waffler and not the sharpest tool in the shed. I love the way she tries to speak for all of TPP, surely there are some belonging to that organization who see through this clear line of BS. Rubio met with her and more than likely bought her off in some way that is usually how these amazing transformations take place.

At Tea Party Patriots, we have a philosophy that guides our grassroots activities: “When politicians do the right thing, we stand by them. And when they fail to do the right thing, we hold them accountable.” The Marco Rubio incident is illustrative of that guiding principle. In 2013 we held him accountable with grassroots pressure – letters to the editor about him, calls into his office, and rallies. And in 2015, as he signals an embrace of our messaging, we welcome it. Why wouldn’t we?

Jenny Beth certainly has let her power and the backing of her sheep go to her head, She is a flip flopper herself so of course she is going to defend her new stance on Rubio........Now lets see are we all fools or what....Rubio like all the other RINOs who say what they think others want them to say when going for the gold....but as soon as they get the position they flop right back to their puppet masters plan....good try Jenny but no go....so glad I left TPP a long ago I will not be going where they try to lead, would not want this woman speaking for me on any level. She has always appeared to be to be a waffler and not the sharpest tool in the shed. I love the way she tries to speak for all of TPP, surely there are some belonging to that organization who see through this clear line of BS. Rubio met with her and more than likely bought her off in some way that is usually how these amazing transformations take place.

[DE]

Hi..LOC..Excellent thread..I am thanking God that the co-founder of TPPs ..Mark Meckler was voted out because of his love of democrats...I am not surprised that he wants Rubio in...Good riddance to Mecjker,,,and you gooooo girl...good to be able to read you again.......

[DE]

Sorry about my duh post..at a glance I thought th op was one that I had read on Meckler...That said..Good to be able to read you again....:)

[Love of Country]

Thanks, no problem, most of the leadership of TPP has been less than savory and most of what they do is greed based IMHO. I feel bad for the people who made their monthly donation and got nothing but more of the same crap for their money.

[DE]

you were badly missed there by lots and lots of people .including me..Your work on voter fraud brought it to the attention of the repubs as well...The forum has never been  what it needs to be since you left...The lights went off when you left...We are still fighting to keep it alive but it is hard with some of the Libertarians who lean left there...anyways it is great to see you posting here ...I  will check your posts from time to time...:)

[Love of Country]

I put alot of work into that site, no regrets, I got the word out to alot of people, I do that gladly everywhere I go, however sometimes it is wise to just walk out smiling and turn the lights off. You have alot of trolls masquerading as conservative on  TPP, who are running a muck.... so alot of good patriots left .....so think about it what is really left there to save.....Jenny Beths site/moneymaker?  When it starts being all about the money and not about cause...all about PC and not about the truth to me it is not worth it.

True patriots can thrive anywhere I am proof of that so why choose to stay in chaos ....I guess that is a choice each patriot has to make for themselves.As for myself I have no problem moving on when the environment becomes toxic or strong arm tactics are implemented.

[DE]

We are infested with trolls there and need new moderation to take them out..Tio did a good job there but he is ill and cannot do it now. the new mod is weak and unble to detect them...Take care and keep posting. ...You have the star  quality ...You will shine everywhere you  post..You are a great patriot against the EVIL DEMOCRATS...YOU GOOO GIRL...