Immigration is a terrible issue for the Democrats
Politico reports:
The Trump administration's increasingly aggressive moves on immigration are pulling Democrats back into a border security debate they had tried to ignore.
For months, Democrats scarred by the politics of the issue sought to sidestep President Donald Trump's immigration wars — focusing instead on the economy, tariffs or, in the case of deportations, due process concerns.
But in the span of a week, that calculation was jolted in California, after a series of high-profile raids and arrests, including of a labor union leader and dozens of other people in Los Angeles, and with President Donald Trump on Saturday announcing the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to the area.
In this citadel of Democratic politics, party officials from the governor's mansion to city halls are suddenly tearing into Trump on immigration again, inflaming a debate that worked to Trump's benefit in 2024 — but where Democrats believe they now have a political opening.
No they don't. Having Democratic officials complain that Trump is too aggressively deporting illegal aliens just reminds people of the porous border they had under Biden. Gallup has only 16% of Americans saying they want more immigration.
The next day, when Trump announced the Guard's deployment, Democrats rushed to take a stand in a fight shifting from deportations to the deployment of the Guard. Gov. Gavin Newsom blasted the measure as 'purposefully inflammatory.' And when Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth threatened to deploy the U.S. military, too, Newsom posted on social media, 'This is deranged behavior.'
I am no Trump fan, but he is playing the Democrats for suckers here. He deployed the National Guard hoping it would be decried by Newsom and co. The average American doesn't sympathise with rioters interfering with law enforcement, especially as they wave Mexican flags.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
31 minutes ago
- 1News
Pentagon has contingency plans to invade Greenland if necessary
Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to acknowledge that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by force if necessary, but refused to answer repeated questions at a hotly combative congressional hearing Friday about his use of Signal chats to discuss military operations. Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee repeatedly got into heated exchanges with Hegseth, with some of the toughest lines of questioning coming from military veterans, as many demanded yes or no answers, and he tried to avoid direct responses about his actions as Pentagon chief. In one back-and-forth, Hegseth did provide an eyebrow-raising answer. Representative Adam Smith asked whether the Pentagon has developed plans to take Greenland or Panama by force if necessary. 'Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any contingency,' Hegseth said several times. It is not unusual for the Pentagon to draw up contingency plans for conflicts that have not arisen, but his handling of the questions prompted a Republican lawmaker to step in a few minutes later. ADVERTISEMENT 'It is not your testimony today that there are plans at the Pentagon for taking by force or invading Greenland, correct?' said Representative Mike Turner. As Hegseth started to repeat his answer about contingency plans, Turner added emphatically, 'I sure as hell hope that is not your testimony'. 'We look forward to working with Greenland to ensure that it is secured from any potential threats,' Hegseth responded. Time and again, lawmakers pressed Hegseth to answer questions he has avoided for months, including during the two previous days of hearings on Capitol Hill. And frustration boiled over. "You're an embarrassment to this country. You're unfit to lead," Representative Salud Carbajal snapped, the California Democrat's voice rising. 'You should just get the hell out.' GOP lawmakers on several occasions apologised to Hegseth for the Democrats' sharp remarks, saying he should not be subject to such 'flagrant disrespect'. Hegseth said he was 'happy to take the arrows' to make tough calls and do what's best. Questions emerge on Signal chats and if details Hegseth shared were classified ADVERTISEMENT Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth fields questions on the Pentagon budget from the House Armed Services Committee, at the Capitol in Washington (Source: Associated Press) Hegseth's use of two Signal chats to discuss details of the US plans to strike Houthi rebels in Yemen with other US leaders as well as members of his family, prompted dizzying exchanges with lawmakers. Hegseth was pressed multiple times over whether or not he shared classified information and if he should face accountability if he did. Hegseth argued that the classification markings of any information about those military operations could not be discussed with lawmakers. That became a quick trap, as Hegseth has asserted that nothing he posted — on strike times and munitions dropped in March — was classified. His questioner, Representative Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and Marine veteran, jumped on the disparity. 'You can very well disclose whether or not it was classified,' Moulton said. 'What's not classified is that it was an incredible, successful mission,' Hegseth responded. ADVERTISEMENT A Pentagon watchdog report on his Signal use is expected soon. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds including Air India crash, ferry still out of action, and ignoring TikTok KiwiSaver hacks. (Source: 1News) Moulton asked Hegseth whether he would hold himself accountable if the inspector general finds that he placed classified information on Signal, a commercially available app. Hegseth would not directly say, only noting that he serves'at the pleasure of the president'. He was asked if he would apologise to the mother of a pilot flying the strike mission for jeopardising the operation and putting her son's life at risk. Hegseth said, 'I don't apologise for success'. Trump's speech at Fort Bragg raises Democratic concerns about politics in the military Gen Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who appeared along Hegseth, was questioned about Trump's speech at Fort Bragg this week and whether the military was becoming politicised. ADVERTISEMENT The Defense Department has a doctrine that prohibits troops from participating in political activity while in uniform. Members of the 82nd Airborne Division were directed to stand behind Trump at Fort Bragg, and they booed and cheered during his incendiary remarks, including condemnation of his predecessor, Joe Biden. There was also a pop-up MAGA merchandise stand selling souvenirs to troops in uniform. Caine repeatedly said US service members must be apolitical, but that he was unaware of anything that happened at Fort Bragg. Hegseth is pressed about policies on women in uniform and transgender troops Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth fields questions on the Pentagon budget from the House Armed Services Committee, at the Capitol in Washington (Source: Associated Press) Hegseth got into a sharp debate about whether women and transgender service members should serve in the military or in combat jobs. He said he has worked to remove diversity programs and political correctness from the military. He said he has not politicised the military but simply wants the most capable troops. ADVERTISEMENT Representative Chrissy Houlahan demanded to know if Hegseth believes that both men and women can pull a trigger, cause death, operate a drone or launch a missile. 'It depends on the context,' Hegseth said, adding that 'women carry equipment differently, a 155 round differently, a rucksack differently'. Hegseth, who has previously said women 'straight up' should not serve in combat, asserted that women have joined the military in record numbers under the Trump administration. He said the military 'standards should be high and equal'. He was also asked about three female service members, now being forced out as part of the Pentagon's move to ban transgender troops. Hegseth agreed that their accomplishments, which Houlahan read out, were to be celebrated, until he learned they were transgender. Republican lawmakers jumped to his defence, criticising any Pentagon spending on gender transition surgery. Democrats ask about plans for action against Greenland and Panama ADVERTISEMENT President Donald Trump has said multiple times that he wants to take control of the strategic, mineral-rich island nation of Greenland, long a US ally. Those remarks have been met with flat rejections from Greenland's leaders. 'Greenland is not for sale,' Jacob Isbosethsen, Greenland's representative to the US said at a forum in Washington sponsored by the Arctic Institute. In an effort not to show the Pentagon's hand on its routine effort to have plans for everything, Hegseth danced around the direct question from Smith, leading to the confusion. 'Speaking on behalf of the American people, I don't think the American people voted for President Trump because they were hoping we would invade Greenland,' Smith said.
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Israeli strikes on Iran to 'continue for days'
Israel said early on Friday it had struck Iranian nuclear targets to block Tehran from developing atomic weapons, and Iranian media and witnesses reported explosions including at the country's main uranium enrichment facility. Calling the offensive "Rising Lion," Israel said it was also targeting Iranian commanders and missile factories, and declared a state of emergency in anticipation of retaliatory missile and drone strikes by Tehran. "We are at a decisive moment in Israel's history," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a recorded video message. Israel targeted Iranian scientists working on a nuclear bomb, its ballistic missile programme and its Nantanz uranium enrichment facility, in an operation that would continue for days, he said. People gather in the street in the aftermath of Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS A witness in Nantanz city said multiple explosions were heard near the facility, and a senior Iranian official told Reuters that the country's leadership was holding a top security meeting. Iran's state TV said several explosions were heard in Tehran and the country's air defence system was on full alert. An Israeli military official said Israel was striking "dozens" of nuclear and military targets. The official said Iran had enough material to make 15 nuclear bombs within days. "Following the preemptive strike by the State of Israel against Iran, a missile and UAV (drone) attack against the State of Israel and its civilian population is expected in the immediate timeframe," Defence Minister Israel Katz said in a statement. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Israel acted unilaterally because it believes the operation was necessary for self-defence. "Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran. We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region," Rubio said in a statement. "Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel," he added. CNN reported that US President Donald Trump was convening a cabinet meeting. New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon called it "a really unwelcome development in the Middle East". "The risk of miscalculation is high. That region does not need any more military action, and risk associated with that." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Photo: Reuters Crude oil prices jumped more than $US3 a barrel on the news. US and Iranian officials were scheduled to hold a sixth round of talks on Tehran's escalating uranium enrichment programme in Oman on Sunday, according to officials from both countries and their Omani mediators. But the talks have appeared to be deadlocked. Trump said on Thursday an Israeli strike on Iran "could very well happen" but reiterated his hopes for a peaceful resolution. US intelligence had indicated that Israel was making preparations for a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, and US officials said on condition of anonymity that Israel could attack in the coming days. The US military is planning for the full range of contingencies in the Middle East, including the possibility that it might have to help evacuate American civilians, a US official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Kiwiblog
2 hours ago
- Kiwiblog
We should target US international students
Eric Crampton writes: And so, New Zealand universities have the chance to do well while doing good. The case is simplest for students who have not yet begun US studies and are stuck in limbo with a pause in America's processing of F-1 student visas, or who just want to get out of the US. New Zealand could clearly advertise that any student accepted into an American university but who are having second thoughts about it will face simplified processing for a New Zealand student visa. And students who already have their American F-1 student visa could also be offered speedier, simplified NZ student visa processes. Students part way through their US degrees but nervous about being there next year may prefer to spend a couple of semesters here as study-abroad rather than as a full transfer. New Zealand's universities already handle study-abroad. It's a well-trodden path. Reminding students in American universities that this option is available could be very worthwhile. Tuition fees in the US are much higher than here. Simplified Immigration New Zealand processes for students already accepted to US universities should mean lower processing costs. The processing charge enabling Immigration New Zealand to do the job should be small when compared with the tuition fee difference between the two countries. … Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's pledge to double export earnings had seemed more than a little aspirational. But international education is an export service. The world's biggest provider of that service is in disarray. Doubling the number of international students served by New Zealand universities would previously have meant lowering standards. Now it could mean attracting excellent students who wouldn't have previously considered New Zealand – while helping a lot of people put into very bad circumstances. Doing well while doing good seems worth trying. This is an excellent idea, that the Government should pursue with urgency. We do indeed have a huge opportunity as foreign students in the US face great uncertainty. Having them enrol in NZ universities would benefit them and benefit us.
