This past week the Democrat Party went to war against the Trump administration’s defense department on Capitol Hill.
Fortunately, the Trump team was ready and the Democrats seemed shorthanded on facts. What ensued was a Democrat attack, followed by a bloodbath against these ignorant politicians.
First, it was Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen appearing before a Senate committee whose Democrats were foaming at the mouth and looking for blood.
Democrat Senator Patty Murray (D-OR) took Nielsen to task for the way Homeland Security has been dealing with illegal immigration:
As you know, Congress, not this administration, sets your budget and you have to live within the means that we give to you, and to me far too frequently it seems a big part of DHS overspending is caused by ICE unnecessarily detaining people, like we talked about, pregnant women.
As you know, detention is really expensive, every year ICE — each year ICE detains someone, it costs taxpayers over $50,000. For comparison, by the way, that’s four times the amount the federal government spends on each child in our public schools.
So what this means is that taxpayers are now footing the bill for food, medical care, clothing and the expensive prison contracts that ICE is using for detention, like the facility that’s in my home state.
To me that’s really inexpensible (ph) because there are less expensive and more effective alternatives to detention. And in fact, according to your own budget, to use one of the alternatives to detention costs less than $1,500 per year compared to that $50,000.
So while you’re asking for billions of dollars in additional funds to build the unnecessary border wall, hire more ICE and border patrol, expand detention, militarize the border, you’re asking to cut funding for alternatives to detention in your budget.
So why is the department not asking us to expand the use of alternatives to detention in order to save taxpayer money?
Nielsen attempted to answer the obviously biased question as well as she could, by explaining department policy and laying out how illegal immigrants seeking asylum could best help themselves.
Kirstjen Nielsen: We are looking to do both. So as you know, one of the alternatives to detention is an ankle bracelet. We do utilize those in situations where appropriate. If somebody, however, is — has broken the law, in the sense that there are multiple re-entry, or they have some other reason to be criminally prosecuted, we actually turn them over to the Marshals.
We defer them over for prosecution, in which case there is no option for an alternate to detention. So if you look at all the numbers, we are trying to find ways to do it. But I do want just say again, if you cross in between the ports of entry, if you –
Patty Murray: I know what your philosophy is. I’m out of time. I just want…
And this is the moment that Nielsen dropped the hammer on the Democrat talking points.
Kirstjen Nielsen: It’s not a philosophy. It’s a law Congress passed.
Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen just dropped a bomb. This is something that every Republican in Congress should just keep repeating, particularly when they appear on news and in the media.
Consider the insanity of what Secretary Nielsen was dealing with.
What job was Nielsen hired to do? Enforce the laws. What was Nielsen being attacked for doing? Enforcing the laws.
A Congresswoman was berating her for enforcing the laws, that Congress had passed!
Sadly, the attacks didn’t stop with Nielsen, soon another liberal Senator was attacking the first female nominee to lead the CIA, Gina Haspel.
Leftwing Senator, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) did her very best to scuttle Haspel’s nomination by repeating some ugly lies, that had already been debunked.
Here’s what Feinstein (wrongly) said of Haspel:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) on Wednesday questioned CIA director nominee Gina Haspel using inaccurate information that has since been corrected by the original author.
The passage in question was written by former CIA lawyer John Rizzo in the book Company Man, and reports citing his book claimed Haspel ran an interrogation program at a CIA site where al Qaeda suspect Abu Zubaydah was interrogated, but Rizzo has corrected that claim. Feinstein asked her question after saying she likes Haspel “personally very much,” and Haspel took the opportunity to correct the senator regarding Rizzo’s writing.
You could almost see Haspel begin to salivate at the opportunity to unravel Feinstein’s lies. She even smiled as she began her reply, “Senator, I am so pleased you asked me that question. If you have your staff check, Mr. Rizzo has issued a correction.”
Undeterred Feinstein tried another lie, this one even more unbelievable than the first. “My understanding is that it was recently confirmed it was you,” the Senator said.
Um. Nope. No one confirmed it, because IT WASN’T TRUE.
Haspel, obviously realizing that Feinstein didn’t care about the accuracy of her smears, finally just said, “Senator, I did not run the interrogation department. In fact, I was not even read into the interrogation program until it had been up and running for a year.”
Gina Haspel fact checks Senator Feinstein in real time over false and retracted reports of her role in the CIA's interrogation program pic.twitter.com/ZkoZQctB1D
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) May 9, 2018
Thankfully, even the most biased of the mainstream media was forced to report that Feinstein was wrong on all counts, and that everything Haspel said was entirely accurate. Feinstein’s staff had simply neglected to get their smears in order before presenting them to Haspel on the Hill. Normally, they would have chosen to smear her with lies that hadn’t yet been debunked, but apparently someone in Feinstein’s staff didn’t check to see if the smears had been disproven.
Fortunately for Haspel, this is an election year and so Red State Democrats are lining up to offer her their support. West Virginia’s Joe Manchin (D-WV) was so effusive with his praise that Haspel must have been left blushing by his comments.
“I have found Gina Haspel to be a person of great character,” Manchin said in a statement. “Over her 33 year career as a CIA operations officer, she has worked in some of the most dangerous corners of our world and I have the utmost respect for the sacrifices she has made for our country. She has earned the trust of her colleagues in the intelligence community and her intellect, steady temperament, vast knowledge of threats we face, and dedication to our country are undeniable. These attributes make her supremely qualified to serve as our next CIA Director.”
With some Democrats indicating their support, it’s beginning to look more and more likely that Haspel will be the next CIA Director.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com