What’s the big difference between the identical facilities Donald Trump and Joe Biden used for unaccompanied minors at the border? How they feel about it, of course!
REVOKED: Immigration Mitigation During A Global Pandemic.
These measures, including a freeze on the diversity lottery program, reduced legal immigration to the United States during the Coronavirus pandemic. Spouses and children of U.S. citizens, some healthcare workers, and certain investors were exempt from the restrictions.
In his proclamation on revoking Proclamation 10014, Biden writes that the previous order “does not advance the interests of the United States.”
“To the contrary, it harms the United States, including by preventing certain family members of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents from joining their families here. It also harms industries in the United States that utilize talent from around the world. And it harms individuals who were selected to receive the opportunity to apply for, and those who have likewise received, immigrant visas through the Fiscal Year 2020 Diversity Visa Lottery. Proclamation 10014 has prevented these individuals from entering the United States, resulting, in some cases, in the delay and possible forfeiture of their opportunity to receive Fiscal Year 2020 diversity visas and to realize their dreams in the United States.”
Likewise, Americans of every national, ethnic, and demographic background have experienced the delay and forfeiture of “realizing their dreams in the United States” due to unemployment, economic crisis, and a year without in-person schooling. For Biden, the interests of non-citizens who want to come to the United States are simply a higher priority.
The Difference Between Trump and Biden’s Detention Facilities? Heartbreak.
The major difference between Trump’s “kids in cages” and Biden’s “temporary facilities?” For Team Biden, it’s more “heartbreaking.”
When FOX correspondent Peter Doocy asked what exactly the difference is between “kids in cages” and “kids in containers,” Psaki offered up “a broader description of what’s happening here.” Psaki distinguished Biden’s approach from the family separation policy enforced by Trump and explained the dilemma—not unique to the year 2021—of sending minors on a dangerous journey back home, detaining them in HHS-run facilities, or releasing them to unvetted sponsors.
“We’ve chosen the middle option… This is a difficult situation. It’s a difficult choice. That’s the choice we’ve made,” Psaki said.
The facility that has been reopened is the same facility that was used by the Trump administration in the summer of 2019.
At the time, in an op-ed in the Miami Herald about his Latin America policy published on June 24, 2019, then-candidate Joe Biden said: “Under Trump, there have been horrifying scenes at the border of kids being kept in cages, tear-gassing asylum seekers, ripping children from their mothers’ arms.”
And in July 2019, then-candidate Sen. Kamala Harris said that Trump “has pushed policies that’s been about putting babies in cages at the border in the name of security,” instead calling it “a human rights abuse being committed by the United States government.”
Dems Don’t Trust Biden With the Nuclear Football.
Congressional Democrats’ concerns about the nuclear football did not evaporate when President Donald Trump left office.
About three dozen House Dems have signed on to a letter asking President Joe Biden to renounce singular authority over the nuclear codes, writing that “Vesting one person with this authority entails real risks.”
Rep. Jimmy Panetta tweeted, “I’m calling on @POTUS to install checks & balances in our nuclear command-and-control structure. Past presidents have threatened nuclear attacks on other countries or exhibited concerning behavior that cast doubt on their judgment.”
“No one person should have the ability to start a nuclear war,” Rep. Ted Lieu tweeted, along with the full text of the letter. “We led a letter with @RepJimmyPanetta to @POTUS urging him to modify the decision-making process the U.S. uses in its command and control of nuclear forces.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proposed similar discussion on January 8, saying she had spoke to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Miller “to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike.”
“The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous,” she said.