“I think the activists and the National Review crowd are just foaming at the mouth…”
My knuckle-dragging cousin, Michelle Malkin, foamed at the mouth in reply:
“There are nearly three times as many officially designated illegal aliens fugitives freed by the feds as there are illegal aliens who have been removed over the last year. In fact, according to DHS’ Detention and Removal office, 85% of the illegal aliens released that have been issued final orders of removal will abscond. That goes not for just illegal aliens from Mexico but for illegal aliens from terror friendly and terror sponsoring nations.”
Yet the Wall Street Journal’s Paul Gigot smugly derides my nieces and nephews at the National Review by saying, “this is part of their “enforcement first” agenda.” Daniel Henninger adds, “Their objection is fundamentally cultural.
“Hmmm…” The WSJ must be down for the struggle, my brother. Word u… wait a minute! “Let’s take a look around the room.”
I suspect the seating arrangment will look different in the next video of a WSJ editorial page meeting. [Ed. -- And I'll be so proud] Maybe they’ll even let mom and pop bring the boombox and play the theme to their favorite 1980’s TV show during the meeting.
Well, maybe not. ROFL!
Now that was hilarious! I do sort of wish Michelle had pointed out what is, at least to me, obvious. The WSJ editorial pukes publicly released their little meeting ridiculing US, perhaps expecting or hoping to shame us into silence, much as the political elites who supported that abomination of a bill have attempted to do. Also, ‘effete elitists’ that editorial board may be, but the fact that they’re not socialistic Dems does NOT make them conservative by any means. I’m hoping to see a precipitous decline in their circulation as a result of that 7 minute cf, with those canceling their subscriptions citing that as the reason. Well, I can dream, can’t I? Nice touch with the Jeffersons them, btw! LOL!