Proposal to Ship Illegals to Sanctuary Cities Assailed

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

A Trump Administration proposal to send illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities spurred cries of dismay from Democrats. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif) called the idea “cruel and inhumane. Sanctuary cities are already struggling with the difficulties and expense of dealing with the newcomers who have come on their own. Living conditions are degraded, as anyone who has visited San Francisco recently may have discovered. It isn’t fair for the federal government to send us more of these people.”

On the other hand, President Trump argues that “my proposal would more expeditiously get the illegal immigrants to places that vow to protect them from deportation. I would have thought that this idea should be received more positively by the Democrats who oppose taking any actions to reduce the flow of illegal immigration into our country.”

“The whole point of open borders is to bring in the voters who will help transform America into the kind of nation former President Obama envisioned,” Pelosi argued. “For this to be most effective, the immigrants need to be sent to states and congressional districts currently voting for Republicans. That’s the way President Obama handled the catch-and-release program. Trump has no right to change that policy.”

The Speaker expressed confidence that “the courts will block this latest attempt to overthrow the policies of President Obama. On so many policy issues the courts have been ruling that it is illegal for Trump to reverse the policies implemented by the previous administration. The courts have correctly placed the pursuit of good policy ahead of ritualistic adherence to the letter of the law.”

In related news, Pelosi denounced former Obama Administration Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson for agreeing with Trump’s assessment that there is a crisis on the border. “Where is this man’s sense of honor and loyalty?” she asked. “President Obama made him a member of his cabinet. Now he is stabbing his benefactor in the back by siding with the enemy of everything that is good and pure in this country.”

Clinton Relishes Assange Arrest

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange was arrested by UK police and is expected to be turned over to US authorities in the near future. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton professed herself “pleased that this international villain will finally get what he deserves for saddling the world with Donald Trump as the US president. His role in invading my privacy and publishing emails that I went to great efforts to conceal sabotaged my assured election as the 45th president of the United States.”

Clinton predicted that Assange’s claim that “the ruled have a right to know what their governments are doing will be struck down in court. Governments act in secret for a good reason. Questioning those reasons—even to the point of inquiring what those reasons are—imperils the odds of success. The safety and security of the masses depends upon the freedom of the government to covertly neutralize threats. People like Assange and Snowden are a clear and present danger that must be interdicted by any means possible. That’s why I urged President Obama to take Assange out with a drone strike on the Ecuadoran Embassy in London.”

In related news, Judicial Watch released 422 pages of FBI emails it received via a Freedom of Information Act request. These emails included discussion of an FBI-run cover-up of Clinton’s illegal handling of classified information. The emails included phrases like “it’s all part of the Hillary cover-up operation,” “Hillary cover up operation work ticket,” and “we’re in deep shit.”

“Spying” Comment Sparks Outrage

During his recent testimony at the Senate Appropriations Committee Attorney General William Barr acknowledged that federal government “spying did occur” on the Trump campaign, that “government spying on political opponents is a big deal,” and “I need to explore that.” Democrats were outraged.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called Barr’s statement “a conspiracy theory” and demanded that he “retract his statement immediately. This is so far wide of the narrative that everyone in the Democratic Party and the media has accepted for the last three years that it cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged.”

Fantasy Vietnam vet, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) called Barr’s statement “unfounded and irresponsible” and demanded it be retracted. “Saying something that everyone knows is false manifests a mental illness that should disqualify Barr from serving in any capacity. Honesty is an essential requirement for public officials.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) echoed Blumenthal’s take and averred that “Barr has gone off the rails. First of all, covert surveillance of innocent Americans is not spying. Second, this surveillance was authorized by the FISA Court. It is only unauthorized surveillance by private parties that constitutes spying. As long as it is the government that’s doing it it’s perfectly legal.”

Former FBI Director James Comey claims to be “mystified by Barr’s choice of words. Those of us in the intelligence community never refer to what we do as ‘spying.’ We use terms like ‘investigation’ or ‘counter-intelligence operation.’ These less pejorative words convey a more respectable public image. I am not surprised that an outsider like Trump would be ignorant enough to use the word ‘spying,’ but we all thought that a man with the kind of pedigree that Barr has would have know better.”

Meanwhile, the Oxford Dictionary defines “spying on” as “to observe furtively” or “keep under surveillance.” Either of these pretty much describes what the FBI did during the Trump campaign and during the Trump Administration. The FBI also deployed covert agents to try to infiltrate the Trump camp and plant false evidence. So it’s easy to see how the former FBI Director might be confused about Barr’s statement.

Sanders Explains “Medicare for All” Plan

Democratic presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) hopes his “Medicare for All” plan will win him votes. Currently, Medicare covers only those age 65 and older. Many like it because its strict price controls keep their out-of-pocket costs low. Health care providers make up the losses incurred serving Medicare beneficiaries by charging other patients more. If all are covered by Medicare this offset would no longer be available.

Sanders explained that his plan explicitly outlaws private health insurance “because no one should have the option of seeking more or less coverage than the government decides they need. The notion that individuals should be free to choose what they want to purchase elevates crass individualism above collective solidarity. Experts in health care working for the government have the data and the incentive to choose what’s best for the collective whole. We cannot allow any individual to selfishly opt out.”

In contrast to Canada’s socialized health care, Sanders’ version would seek to interdict travel outside the country for medical care. “True socialized medicine requires that all must receive the care the government has allocated for them,” the Senator emphasized. “If individuals are permitted to purchase health care in other countries those rich enough to afford it will get better care than those too poor to have this option. That’s why my plan mandates that anyone seeking to travel outside our borders will have to first get a government permission slip and attest that the trip is not for the purpose of receiving medical care.”

“If it turns out later that the traveler lied and did, in fact, get medical treatment abroad he or she will be punished on his or her return for false statements on the application for permission to travel,” Sanders said. “So, you see, my plan closes the loopholes that so many other socialized medicine plans have left open.”

The only people that would be exempt from Sanders’ mandatory Medicare for All “would be persons of such overriding importance that the fate of the nation would be endangered should they fall ill,” Sanders allowed. “This would naturally include high-ranking members of the government like the president and vice-president, cabinet officials, and members of congress. These irreplaceable leaders must be saved if at all possible no matter what the cost in terms of dollars.”

Dems’ Bill Pushes Transgender Rights

An amendment (HR 5, the Equality Act) to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 sponsored by 234 Democrats and two Republicans in the House of Representatives would compel schools to allow boys who claim to be girls to participate in girls’ gym classes, play on girls’ interscholastic athletic teams, and use the same locker rooms and showers. Religious schools would not be exempted from this new regulation. It would also require that biologically male criminals who claim to be women to be sent to women’s prisons.

Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) hailed the legislation as “the logical next step in our quest to make our laws match the social evolution taking place in society. It is up to each individual to determine his or her own identity. Our bill protects their freedom to make this determination and bars anyone from attempting to impede the exercise of this emerging civil right.”

A merely repugnant aspect of this social evolution is the increasing incidence of biological males easily beating biological females in scholastic sports. A more dangerous aspect arises when men are sent to women’s prisons. Women’s Liberation Front spokeswoman Julia Beck warned that “male rapists will go to women’s prisons.”

Cicilline brushed off this concern saying that “many men are raped by men in men’s prisons. Our bill will help level the playing field and spread the pain over a wider array of the prison population and, I think achieve a greater degree of equality among the incarcerated segment of our nation’s population.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.” His work has been cited on the Rush Limbaugh program. This post is also available on Facebook.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Leave a Reply