Author Topic: How much mass migration is enough for Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and liberal Republicans who hail  (Read 107 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chosen Daughter

  • For there is no respect of persons with God. Romans 10:12-13
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,527
  • Ephesians 6:13 Stand Firm in the face of evil


Paul Ratje/AFP | Getty Images

How much mass migration is enough for Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and liberal Republicans who hail from solid red states? Well, they won’t say exactly how much, but they always want more.

Last week, the Trump administration announced a commonsense policy to lower the refugee cap for fiscal year 2020 to 18,000, given the record border flow this year and the historic backlog of one million people in immigration court, many of whom are claiming asylum. One would think that Republicans can at least unite behind that proposition, yet nine Republicans, led by Sen. James Lankford, joined with a group of Democrats in rebuking the administration for not electing to bring in more refugees this year.

“While I appreciate the administration’s focus on curbing illegal immigration and caring for asylum seekers, that doesn’t mean we should continue to reduce the admittance of refugees who are fleeing from persecution in their home countries to support these policies,” wrote Lankford in a statement last week.

Well, actually it does, Senator Lankford. You can’t triple- and quadruple-dip on the dime of American taxpayers who shoulder the burdens of the financial cost and social transformation of your open-borders policies. Let’s review the score:

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/record-border-surge-sen-lankford-8-republicans-want-refugees/
Winning without problem is just victory , but winning with lots of trouble create History ..


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf