Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: Clinton: Republicans Want to Round Up Illegal Immigrants, Shove Them in Boxcars

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Administrator Jean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006

    Clinton: Republicans Want to Round Up Illegal Immigrants, Shove Them in Boxcars

    by Alex Griswold | 2:14 pm, August 28th, 2015

    Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton once again took aim at her Republican rivals Friday afternoon, accusing them during a press conference of wanting to round up illegal immigrants and throw them in trains.

    Clinton was asked by a reporter how she would handle the millions of illegal immigrants currently in the country. “Well, I’m glad you asked me that,” she responded. “Because I know that there are some on the other side who are seriously advocating to deport 11-12 million people who are working here.”

    She continued, saying it was “the height of irony that a party which espouses small government would want to unleash a massive law enforcement effort– including perhaps National Guard and others– to go and literally pull people out of their homes and their workplaces, round them up, put them, I don’t know, in buses, boxcars, in order to take them across our border.”

    “I just find that not only absurd, but appalling,” Clinton said.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at

  2. #2
    Senior Member artclam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    If she doesn't like massive law enforcement efforts how about giving up trying to stop the 7 million people in the U.S. who abuse illegal drugs? After all, they are doing so to escape a difficult life due to poverty and other factors
    kevinssdad likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member southBronx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    want to Round them all up illegal immigrants & shove them in a box car you lie
    just like obama .
    I would not vote for you at all U & that Bush

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    I thought they liked riding on box cars. I think we've got pictures of them doing that. Also, Border Patrol is always finding them in truck trailers. They like to hide and ride in things like that.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    The potential deportation number would not be so high if deportation law had been enforced by Presidents Reagan, Clinton and others. All the while Americans were dying at the hands of aliens while Presidents smiled and took bows Even more insulting were Americans electing them to second terms!!
    artclam likes this.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Heart of Dixie
    She should know how it is done because she was right there with Bill Clinton when he ordered Elian Gonzales removed - She really is a duplicitous old bag and I will never forget that she stole the furniture when she left the White House the last time.

    Clinton Regime Outdoes Itself by Snatching Elian Gonzalez

    By Deroy Murdock
    April 24, 2000

    Saturday’s Nacht-und-Nebel-style seizure of Elian Gonzalez by armed U.S. agents resembled Munich 1940 more than Miami 2000. The abuses of power and excessive force in this revolting episode epitomize a federal police state that has goose-stepped from Ruby Ridge to Waco and now to Little Havana.At 5:14 a.m. — while attorneys for the young Cuban refugee negotiated his status with Justice Department officials — eight Immigration and Naturalization Service officers used a battering ram to knock down the front door of Elian’s great uncle, Lazaro. Wielding machine guns, the body-armor-clad agents knocked over a picture of Jesus Christ and a statue of the Virgin Mary on Easter Eve. They then kicked down another door inside the Gonzalez home.

    According to Elian’s cousin, Marisleysis Gonzalez, federal agents held her at gun point while one screamed, “Give me the f - - - ing boy or we’ll shoot you.” An NBC cameraman said federal gunmen kicked him in the stomach, hit his sound man with a rifle butt and yelled, “Don’t move or we’ll shoot.”

    A Border Patrol agent in a helmet and goggles soon pointed his assault rifle at Elian and the man who shielded him in his arms — Donato Dalrymple, one of the fishermen who rescued him from the Atlantic Ocean last Thanksgiving. As Elian hollered, “Help me! Help me!”, he was whisked away in a white van driven by yet another federale whose face was hidden in a ski mask. Onlookers, meanwhile, were kept at bay with pepper spray.

    This nauseating episode — captured by TV cameras and Alan Diaz, an intrepid Associated Press photographer — looked more like a kidnapping than an official act of the United States government. Then again, very little about this case has been kosher.
    This raid supposedly was triggered after Attorney General Janet Reno decided that talks with the Gonzalez family had collapsed. Attorneys for the Gonzalezes say they spoke by phone with Reno and her subordinates late into the night and faxed proposals back and forth to Justice headquarters in Washington.

    “For Janet Reno to say that negotiations had broken down at the time of the raid was an utter, utter lie,” Barbara Lagoa, one of Elian’s attorneys, told Fox News Channel.

    The president previously urged the Gonzalezes to follow the rule of law — and who better than Bill Clinton could make such an admonition? Nonetheless, it appears that federal officials trampled the rule of law when they burst into Lazaro Gonzalez’s private property with a dubious search warrant. As Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe wrote in the April 25 New York Times, “it was not a warrant to seize the child. Elian was not lost, and it is a semantic sleight of hand to compare his forcible removal to the seizure of evidence, which is what a search warrant is for.” Tribe, a veteran liberal, added: “Ms. Reno’s decision to take the law as well as the child into her own hands seems worse than a political blunder. Even if well intended, her decision strikes at the heart of constitutional government and shakes the safeguards of liberty.”

    Furthermore, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 20 that Elian Gonzalez himself may have the right to seek political asylum in the United States, even against his father’s wishes. The decision that Elian is entitled to a day in court — specifically a May 11 INS asylum appeal hearing — argues against his immediate transfer to his father. Juan Miguel Gonzalez is currently influenced, if not thoroughly controlled, by Cuban functionaries. His parents are reportedly in a Cuban government compound, perhaps held as collateral until their son returns to Fidel Castro’s “workers’ paradise.” Juan Miguel has spent nearly his entire sojourn in America in the home of a senior Cuban diplomat. Imagine a North Korean boy who had escaped to Seoul awaiting a court hearing in the “neutral” territory of an apartment occupied by the Pyongyang regime’s attache.

    The Circuit Court also chastised the Clinton Administration for ignoring Elian’s desires. “According to the record, plaintiff - although a young child - has expressed a wish that he not be returned to Cuba,” the three-judge panel wrote.

    “It appears that never have INS officials attempted to interview plaintiff about his wishes.

    “It is not clear that the INS, in finding plaintiff’s father to be the only proper representative, considered all of the relevant factors — particularly the child’s separate and independent interests in seeking asylum.”

    Fox News analyst Dick Morris joked that Hillary Clinton’s next book will be called “It Takes a SWAT Team.” The thuggishness of the Clinton Administration, reputedly the best friends a child could have, likely will scar Elian for years. Just last April 17, the Justice Department released a letter from Dr. Irwin Redlener claiming that “Elian Gonzalez is now in a state of imminent danger to his physical and emotional well-being in a home that I consider to be psychologically abusive.” Perhaps the Clintons and Janet Reno believed Elian would find federal gun muzzles psychologically soothing. As Reno helpfully explained: “Elian Gonzalez is a child who needs to be cherished.”

    Adding further to all this intrigue is the fact that Dr. Redlener is a pediatrician, not a psychologist. As such, he is as qualified to comment on Elian’s state of mind as a psychologist is to treat him for chicken pox. Beyond that, Dr. Redlener never even spoke with Elian. Unless Dr. Redlener is clairvoyant, he seems entirely unable to evaluate Elian’s psyche. Redlener, it transpires, also served on Hillary Clinton’s health care task force in 1993 and chaired the 1992 Clinton-Gore National Health Leadership Council. He is little more than an Administration flack with a stethoscope.

    Add to this that Juan Miguel Gonzalez is represented by President Clinton’s top-dollar impeachment attorney, Greg Craig. Nothing about the Elian Gonzalez case is as it seems. An adorable six-year-old boy is the latest victim of a lawless regime seemingly bent on serving the political wishes of Fidel Castro, even at gunpoint. So it goes these days in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

    Last edited by Newmexican; 08-28-2015 at 10:08 PM.

  7. #7
    Administrator Jean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Can't see why anyone could believe anything she says.
    Newmexican likes this.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at

  8. #8
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Heart of Dixie
    Quote Originally Posted by Jean View Post
    Can't see why anyone could believe anything she says.
    I don't know why anyone would believe anything either one of the Clintons say and remember that they will do anything for money or gain. They turned the White House into a pay for play Bed and Breakfast. This is from way back when the media actually reported the news.

    Watch the video at the link.

    General Information

    Source:NBC Nightly NewsCreator:Tom Brokaw/Jim MiklaszewskiEvent Date:02/25/1997Air/Publish Date:02/25/1997Resource Type:Video News ReportCopyright:NBCUniversal Media, LLC.Copyright Date:1997Clip Length:00:02:55


    The White House releases the names of 958 visitors who slept in the Lincoln bedroom during President Bill Clinton's first term. While most were family friends, many were major political contributors, sparking a fundraising scandal.


    President Clinton Embroiled in Fundraising Scandal

    TOM BROKAW, anchor:

    Good evening. It's a great honor to spend a night at the White House, but for hundreds of people in the last four years, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue turned out to be the most expensive bed and breakfast in North America. They stayed and they paid. Whether the two are connected, you decide. More tonight on The Money Trail leading into and out of the White House from NBC's Jim Miklaszewski.

    President BILL CLINTON: And I thank the members of Congress for...

    JIM MIKLASZEWSKI reporting: President Clinton today insisted the Lincoln bedroom in the White House was not for sale.

    President CLINTON: The Lincoln bedroom was never sold. That was one more false story we have had to endure.

    MIKLASZEWSKI: But White house documents, some in the President's own handwriting, indicate the Lincoln bedroom was at least on the market to major political donors.
    Under increasing public pressure, the White House released the names of 958 visitors who slept at the White House during Clinton's first term. Most were family friends, but many were major political contributors, like computer magnate Steve Jobs, who gave $150,000; and Hollywood producer Steven Spielberg, $200,000. But the most potentially damaging revelation came unexpectedly from former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes. Under threat of subpoena, he turned over some 500 pages of documents pertaining to Democratic fund-raising to the House Oversight Committee.
    The documents appear to support allegations the Democrats turned the Clinton White House into a political fund-raising machine.
    In one 1995 memo, Democratic Finance Chairman Terry McAuliffe recommends the President meet with major supporters for ‘breakfast, lunch, or coffee’ to ‘energize them for the upcoming year.’ President Clinton himself wrote back, ‘Yes, pursue all three, and promptly, and get other names at 100,000 or more, 50,000 or more.’ The President added, ‘ready to start overnights right away.’
    And in a 1996 memo, Clinton campaign Chairman Peter Knight tells the White House that Democrats expect to raise $350,000 from just one White House coffee with the President. As bad as it may look, White House spokesman Mike McCurry insists it's still all perfectly legal.

    Mr. MIKE McCURRY: We did not solicit here at the White House, or at the residence, funding for our campaigns at the various events that are described in some of these documents.

    MIKLASZEWSKI: The Republican majority leader isn't so certain.

    Senator TRENT LOTT: At best, is a, you know, bad judgment. And depending on the circumstances could be more than that. I--I--it's...

    MIKLASZEWSKI: And Trent Lott has joined a growing number of Republicans and Democrats calling for an independent counsel to investigate Democratic fund-raising inside the Clinton White House. Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News, the White House.

    BROKAW: The Center for Public Integrity, that's a Washington campaign finance watchdog group, has analyzed that overnight guest list, and it estimates that the guests over the years donated at least $4 million to Bill Clinton's races for the White House and also to the Democratic National Committee.

    Then there was the stripping of the White House when they left. Then they billed the government for the offices for the Clinton Foundation. Lying,cheating and stealing are not attributes that anyone should want in a President.

    Clintons Return White House Furniture

    W A S H I N G T O N, Feb. 8 2001

    Former President Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sent $28,000 worth of household goods back to Washington after questions arose over whether the items were intended as personal gifts or donations to the White House.

    “We have been informed that it is being shipped back, and the National Park Service is ready to receive it, take possession of it and take custody of it,” Jim McDaniel, the National Park Service’s liaison to the White House, said Wednesday.
    “The property is being returned to government custody until such time that the issues can be resolved. It may well turn out that that property is rightly the personal property of the Clintons.”

    Giving Back

    After they were criticized for taking $190,000 worth of china, flatware, rugs, televisions, sofas and other gifts with them when they left, the Clintons announced last week that they would pay for $86,000 worth of gifts, or nearly half the amount.

    Their latest decision to send back $28,000 in gifts brings to $114,000 the value of items the Clintons have either decided to pay for or return.

    McDaniel discussed the matter Wednesday with Betty Monkman, the White House curator, and Gary Walters, the chief usher, or executive manager of the White House.

    They were reviewing the gifts the Clintons chose to keep after $28,000 worth of items were found on a list of donations the Park Service received for the 1993 White House redecoration project. The Washington Post this week quoted three people who said that they assumed the furnishings they donated for the project would stay in the White House.

    “As a result of questions about the status of certain property donated to the White House during the Clinton administration, the National Park Service will accept the return of the property in question and act as a custodian of such property,” according to a statement released by the Park Service, which administers the White House as a unit of the national park system.

    A person familiar with the Clintons’ move out of the White House, who spoke on condition of anonymity, would say only: “They’ve been returned.”

    Furniture Movers

    While the Clintons’ decision to return these gifts was a way to get out from under this and other criticism surrounding their departure from the White House, the couple provided scant details about the shipment.

    Mrs. Clinton’s office referred all questions about the gift return to the former president’s transition office. Transition office workers said the Clintons would make no statement. They referred all questions to the Park Service, which wasn’t exactly sure which gifts were being returned or where they had been kept.

    In a statement released Monday, Clinton’s transition office said every item they accepted was identified by the White House gift office as a present to them. They said none of the gifts taken was on a curator’s list of official White House property.

    “Gifts did not leave the White House without the approval of the White House usher’s and curator’s offices,” the statement said. “Of course, if the White House now determines that a cataloging error occurred, ... any item in question will be returned.”
    Instead of waiting for the issue to be resolved, the Clintons returned the items.

    The gifts in question were: A kitchen table and four chairs valued at $3,650 from Lee Ficks of Cincinnati, Ohio; a $1,000 needlepoint rug from David Martinous of Little Rock, Ark.; two sofas, an easy chair and an ottoman worth $19,900 from Steve Mittman of New York; lamps valued at $1,170 from Stuart Shiller of Hialeah, Fla.; and a $2,843 sofa from Brad Noe, a businessman from California.

    The gifts were just one of several flaps that followed the Clintons out of the White House:

    Lawmakers are questioning Clinton’s desire to rent expensive office space in New York City at government expense. Because of the contention, the former president’s foundation has offered to pay at least $300,000 of an estimated $790,000 annual rent for the office Clinton favors.

    Mrs. Clinton, the new senator from New York, has faced questions about the propriety of accepting the gifts in the period between her election and her swearing-in. Senate rules would have limited what she could accept had she been a senator.

    Members of both parties also have criticized Clinton for granting scores of eleventh-hour clemency requests, including the pardon of Marc Rich, a fugitive in Switzerland from 51 counts in the United States of tax evasion and fraud.

    Last edited by Newmexican; 08-29-2015 at 08:00 PM.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Heart of Dixie
    Clintons Began Taking White House Property a Year Ago

    February 10, 2001|
    From the Washington Post

    WASHINGTON — President Clinton and his wife started shipping White House furniture to the Clintons' newly purchased home in New York more than a year ago, despite questions at the time by the White House chief usher about whether they were entitled to remove the items.

    The day before the items were shipped out, chief usher Gary Walters said he questioned whether the Clintons should be taking the furnishings because he believed they were government property donated as part of a White House redecoration project in 1993, during Clinton's first year in office.

    But Walters was told by the White House counsel's office that the items he asked about--which included an iron-and-glass coffee table, a painted TV armoire, a custom wood gaming table and a wicker table with wood top--were "personal gifts received by the Clintons prior to President Clinton assuming office."

    Personal property brought to the White House by an incoming president does not have to be disclosed on financial reports. As a result of the counsel's determination, the furnishings were sent on to the Clinton's new home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

    However, government records show that the gifts that concerned Walters did not arrive at the White House until after the Clintons moved in. At least one of these items, a Ficks-Reed wicker table, was logged in at the White House on Feb. 8, 1993. The widow of the manufacturer, Joy Ficks, said last week that it was meant for the White House, not the Clintons.

    This week, the Clintons returned the four items to the White House, along with other furnishings, after questions were raised about whether they actually belonged to the Clintons. All the furnishings had been designated official White House property by the Park Service in 1993.

    Julia Payne, a spokeswoman for the former president, said the Clintons wanted to be "over cautious" in light of the concerns that had been raised. Despite the questions posed by Walters, Payne said the Clintons or their interior decorator acquired the four items in Little Rock, Ark., before they came to Washington.

    Kaki Hockersmith, the interior decorator, did not return repeated calls this week seeking comment.

    The Clintons came under strong criticism after disclosing that they were taking with them $190,000 in gifts received over the last eight years. GOP lawmakers and others criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton in particular for accepting many presents just before she joined the Senate and became covered by strict ethics rules that prohibit accepting gifts worth more than $50.

    Bowing to such criticism, the Clintons decided Feb. 2 to pay for $86,000 worth of gifts given them in 2000. This week, they agreed to return another set of gifts, including the four items questioned by Walters, and $28,500 more in furnishings identified by the Washington Post this week as having been legally designated as White House property by the National Park Service.

    Walters said he accepted the determination of the counsel's office that the gifts were personal Clinton property without a fuss. "I'm not a lawyer. I didn't feel I was in a position to argue with the counsel's office." He said he'd been troubled all along by the lack of donor letters.

    Payne said, "No item, nothing, was removed without the approval of the usher's and curator's office."

    Walters blamed himself for not raising questions when the rest of the furnishings were taken from the White House last month. He said an aide to Sen. Clinton had told him these too were "the Clintons' personal property."

    "I should have asked for more specifics on these items," he said. "I shoulder the blame for not saying, 'Hey, wait a minute.' "

  10. #10
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Heart of Dixie
    Dead Broke’ Clintons Took White House Furnishings, Received Gifts From Wife Of Man Bill Pardoned

    Hillary claimed to Diane Sawyer that when the Clintons left the White House, they were “dead broke”. Of course, that wasn’t quite true. She inked an $8 million book deal in the month before she left, and spent millions on houses. She also fails to mention the pension and support that Bill would receive as an ex-President.

    But perhaps that attitude explains taking White House furnishings which caused quite the stir way back when, plus accepting gifts from the wife of a man Bill would later pardon in a highly controversial move.
    Via Legal Insurrection:

    On top of all this was the tawdry spectacle of the Clintons receiving questionable gifts in preparation for their departure from the White House:
    Less than a week after leaving the White House, Bill and Hillary Clinton are facing criticism for accepting gifts worth $190,000 for their New York State home.

    There have been allegations of favouritism, as one of the donors is the former wife of fugitive financier Marc Rich, who was pardoned by Mr Clinton on his last day in office.
    And the even more tawdry spectacle of the Clintons having purloined White House furnishings, as this February 6, 2001 NY Times reportrecounts:

    Former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton received authorization to take certain household furnishings to their new homes as gifts but will return any items that are found to be White House property, a spokesman said today.

    In the latest criticism over their departure from the White House, the Clintons faced questions today about taking $28,000 worth of furnishings, which two donors were quoted as saying had been intended to become part of the permanent White House collection, not gifts to the Clintons.

    The disclosure, reported in today’s Washington Post, came three days after the Clintons said they would pay $86,000 to cover the value of gifts they received last year in an effort to avoid the appearance of impropriety. The couple had originally sought to leave with $190,000 in gifts.

    Officials said that at least $28,000 worth of furnishings, donated in 1993 as part of the White House restoration project, had been registered by the National Park Service as gifts to the permanent collection of the White House and not the Clintons.

    The removal of White House furnishings started a year before Bill left office, The L.A. Times reported on February 10, 2001:

    President Clinton and his wife started shipping White House furniture to the Clintons’ newly purchased home in New York more than a year ago, despite questions at the time by the White House chief usher about whether they were entitled to remove the items.

    The day before the items were shipped out, chief usher Gary Walters said he questioned whether the Clintons should be taking the furnishings because he believed they were government property donated as part of a White House redecoration project in 1993, during Clinton’s first year in office.

    If you think children are running the White House now, this is not the first time. The Clinton staff also vandalized the White House in the transition, causing thousands of dollars in damage which was clearly intentional. They even stole a Presidential seal dating from the Eisenhower years. In a juvenile response to George W. Bush coming in, they also damaged or removed ‘W’ from computer keyboards.

    As William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection notes, it’s not a “hard choice” to tell the truth. But it’s a choice Hillary chose not to make.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why Railroads Can’t Keep Enough Boxcars in Service
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-22-2015, 01:19 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-21-2013, 12:04 AM
  3. NY-Paterson on Illegal Immigrants: Round 'Em Up
    By FedUpinFarmersBranch in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-19-2010, 12:19 AM
  4. Round Two: Farmers Branch Vs. Illegal Immigrants
    By GREGAGREATAMERICAN in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-21-2008, 11:49 PM
  5. AZ: Agents round up 41 illegal immigrants
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-23-2007, 02:46 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts