The divide between Republicans and radical, progressive Democrats on the issue of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is as clear as ever. This has been highlighted by recent praise from a Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, for ICE agents involved in a major operation. This operation resulted in the arrest of approximately 200 illegal aliens, some with criminal histories involving child-related sexual offenses.
Breitbart reports that Fetterman, who is known for occasionally stepping away from his party’s talking points, commended the agents for their efforts. His support for ICE’s actions is notable, given the broader Democratic stance on the agency. Fetterman emphasized the importance of apprehending illegal aliens with criminal backgrounds.
Despite his support for this operation, Fetterman clarified his general stance on ICE. He stated, “I don’t support or agree with all of ICE’s tactics or actions. I do fully support moves like these.” He argued that such actions contribute to national security and the safety of children.
The senator’s comments were shared on his social media, where he reiterated his position. He highlighted the significance of removing dangerous individuals from communities. This move, he believes, enhances the safety of American citizens, especially children.
Earlier in the month, Fetterman also defended ICE against calls for its dismantling from within his party. He described these calls as “outrageous” and emphasized the critical role ICE plays in national security. His remarks on July 10 underscored his belief in the necessity of the agency.
Meanwhile, GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida expressed a different sentiment regarding the arrested individuals. She suggested a harsher penalty, advocating for the death penalty for those apprehended. Her comments reflect a more hardline Republican stance on illegal immigration.
The operation and subsequent reactions have sparked significant discussion on social media platforms. Fetterman’s comments received a mixed response from users. Some lauded his break from Democratic norms, while others were critical of his stance.
One social media user praised Fetterman for diverging from his party’s usual perspective. They appreciated his support for actions that prioritize national security. Another user critiqued his party’s historical approach to immigration, suggesting inconsistency.
Despite the mixed reactions, Fetterman remains firm in his views. He acknowledges the importance of ICE’s role in maintaining public safety. His statements continue to draw attention and may lead to further debate within his party.
The conversation surrounding ICE and its operations remains a contentious topic. Fetterman’s recent remarks have only intensified the dialogue. As political leaders weigh in, the discussion is likely to continue to evolve.
Social media has become a platform for public figures to express their viewpoints. Fetterman’s use of this medium has allowed him to communicate directly with constituents. The responses he receives serve as a gauge of public sentiment.
The topic of immigration and enforcement is deeply polarizing. It highlights the stark differences in ideology between parties. This divergence is evident in the varied reactions to ICE’s recent operation.
Public opinion on the issue remains divided. Social media amplifies these divisions, showcasing a range of perspectives. The discourse around ICE and its actions is indicative of broader political disagreements.
As the debate unfolds, leaders from both sides continue to express their positions. The conversation reflects the ongoing struggle to balance security and humanitarian concerns. These discussions are a key aspect of the nation’s political landscape.
Fetterman’s remarks have sparked a broader conversation about the role of law enforcement agencies. His stance challenges some of the prevailing narratives within his party. This highlights the complexity of the immigration debate in the United States.
Isn’t it high time that Federal Charges are preferred for these radical traitorous renegade judges for obstruction of a duly elected President’s order as the commander in Chief and protector of America’s Sovereignty and the Citizenry, just as the U.S. Constitution specifically provides such action when duly warranted that such actions be taken! These are “not judges” with integrity but rather they are “enemies of the People” and “Renegade Marxist Activists” Driven not by proper judicial conduct or interpretation of such Constitutional Laws!!! They actually already belong in the slammer with all the Criminals awaiting their trials for “High Treason, Sedition and Conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. Constitution” and “inflict damage upon this Nation and its People for an AGENDA,” which has already been happening in spades with accompanying Havoc, Anarchy, Rampant Destruction and Death to innocent law abiding U.S. Citizens! The same thing has been going on in the EU and the disastrous results are clearly evident! Get this Done DOJ and all appropriate law enforcement agencies standing behind the President or the Military will have to intercede and get it completely under control, perhaps by Martial Law!
{Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot control our borders we cannot defend our national sovereignty…..it’s that simple. This week we will hear from Major General Paul Vallely (ret.) and border security expert Chuck Floyd about a plan being considered by President Trump to use National Guard and U.S. Military forces in coordination with the U. S. Border Patrol in an effort to end the flow of: illegal aliens, drugs, human trafficking and gang/terrorist sleeper cells into the United States. This is a very constitutional and legal use of military resources and represents a paradigm shift from the open border policies being promoted by generations of socialist progressives and globalists at leadership positions within our government. We should all support a reasonable level of legal immigration, after all, we truly are a nation of immigrants. However, we must end the open borders policy that makes a mockery of law enforcement, public safety, private property and states rights; cornerstones of our republic and essential to the concept of national sovereignty.}
Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely (US Army Ret) (April 19, 2018)
://danhappel.com/article-4-section-4-protecting-our-borders-under-the-u-s-constitution/