Trump Senior Adviser: Rubio the Candidate of ‘The Open Borders Syndicate’; Represents

Trump Senior Adviser: Rubio the Candidate of ‘The Open Borders Syndicate’; Represents ‘Obama’s Third Term’

http://media.breitbart.com/media/201...-2-640x480.jpg

by JULIA HAHN
5 Feb 2016
Washington D.C.
499 comments

On today’s program of Breitbart News Daily, Donald Trump’s Senior Policy Advisor, Stephen Miller, blasted donor-class favorite Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) as the “front man for the open borders syndicate.”

Miller, former communications director for Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and the Senate Budget Committee now serving as Trump’s Senior Policy Adviser, appeared on today’s program to provide policy analysis on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the immigration issue ahead of Saturday night’s debate.

“Marco Rubio is the front man for the open borders syndicate,” Miller declared.

“Understand this,” Miller told listeners, “Marco Rubio is determined to finish what he started with the Gang of Eight bill and to be President Obama’s third term on immigration.”

Indeed, Marco Rubio has been one of the most ardent champions of the donor-class’ open borders agenda. In 2013, Rubio co-authored and ushered through the Senate an immigration plan endorsed by La Raza, Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, the AFL-CIO, the Chamber of Commerce, SEIU, and Barack Obama.

As reports from the The National Review, the Tampa Bay Times, the Washington Post, the New Yorker and others have all suggested, it is unlikely Obama’s immigration agenda would have ever made it through the Senate if not for Sen. Rubio’s tireless efforts. Rubio was the bill’s chief salesman. To this day, Rubio continues to defend the his progressive immigration bill– maintaining that it did not grant amnesty.

Moreover, Rubio continues to support every substantial policy outlined in his 2013 bill— including granting citizenship (and, thereby, welfare access and voting privileges) to illegal immigrants, increasing guest worker visas, expanding refugee resettlement, and allowing the foreign-born population to surge beyond all known historical precedent.

Even after the Gang of Eight agenda died in the House, Rubio introduced new legislation last year—backed by his corporate backers—which would expand the controversial H-1B foreign worker program and would allow for an unlimited expansion of Muslim migration.

According to Pew polling data, Marco Rubio’s desire to expand projected immigration growth is opposed by at least 92% of Republican electorate.

Perhaps underscoring the argument advanced by the Trump campaign is the fact that Rubio’s candidacy has been enthusiastically embraced by some of the most powerful mass migration advocates, such as Paul Singer and Larry Ellison.

(can hear the interview at the source link)

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...as-third-term/

We need to get Rubio out of there! I want to see a two man race between Trump & Cruz ... let the chips fall where they may between those two. The rest, including Rubio, need to be sent packing back to their respective jobs or state!

Nice job Miller!

Hopefully the donor class candidates will take direct aim at Rubio tomorrow while Trump and Cruz pound his flanks. It is do or die for some of them.

Rubio and Cruz. A vote for either one is a vote for Obama's third term.

As bad as Hilary is, at least she is, without a doubt, a citizen.

If either Rubio or Cruz win the Republican nomination, I will cast my vote for Hilary. As far as I am concerned, the situation is really that bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

Rubio and Cruz. A vote for either one is a vote for Obama's third term.

As bad as Hilary is, at least she is, without a doubt, a citizen.

If either Rubio or Cruz win the Republican nomination, I will cast my vote for Hilary. As far as I am concerned, the situation is really that bad.

---

Anyone that would support Hillary Clinton over Ted Cruz deserves amnesty and open borders. Hillary Clinton has already said she plans on taking illegal alien amnesty further than Obama has. That's a fact.
Cruz on the other hand has promised to end all unlawful executive orders signed by Obama to include the Dreamer program and current proposed amnesty program. He has also promised to enforce our immigration laws, secure the border, complete the fence as called for in the Secure Fence Act of 2006, guaranteed no amnesty for illegals, etc., etc. Nope, a vote for Cruz definitely isn't a third term for Obama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Anyone that would support Hillary Clinton over Ted Cruz deserves amnesty and open borders. Hillary Clinton has already said she plans on taking illegal alien amnesty further than Obama has. That's a fact.
Cruz on the other hand has promised to end all unlawful executive orders signed by Obama to include the Dreamer program and current proposed amnesty program. He has also promised to enforce our immigration laws, secure the border, complete the fence as called for in the Secure Fence Act of 2006, guaranteed no amnesty for illegals, etc., etc. Nope, a vote for Cruz definitely isn't a third term for Obama.

---

I'm sorry, but any way you look at it, Clinton, a citizen, trying to administer amnesty is still better than some cockroach who skittered over the border from Canada (from Venezuela) whose whole administration is based on a corruption of our immigration system and our political system.

Putting Cruz in the White House would be worse than any amnesty.

Clinton may endorse the nomination of both Cruz and Rubio and why wouldn't she? They represent the product of the policies that the Democrat represent and their corruption of our citizenship and dereliction of our immigration system. Where would Cruz and Rubio be without the Democrats and punks like Obama?

A vote for Cruz or Rubio is a vote for a third term for the Obamination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

I'm sorry, but any way you look at it, Clinton, a citizen, trying to administer amnesty is still better than some cockroach who skittered over the border from Canada (from Venezuela) whose whole administration is based on a corruption of our immigration system and our political system.

Putting Cruz in the White House would be worse than any amnesty.

Clinton may endorse the nomination of both Cruz and Rubio and why wouldn't she? They represent the product of the policies that the Democrat represent and their corruption of our citizenship and dereliction of our immigration system. Where would Cruz and Rubio be without the Democrats and punks like Obama?

A vote for Cruz or Rubio is a vote for a third term for the Obamination.

---

Cruz didn't "skittered" across the border and he's not a cockroach. He was born a U.S. citizen to his mother, who is also a U.S. citizen, and she brought him back home after leaving her job in Canada. Ted Cruz was 4 years of age at the time.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question, let's assume your mother, while pregnant, went to Cancun, Mexico, on vacation and went into labor early. Would you then be a Mexican?

IMO, calling anyone a cockroach is inappropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Cruz didn't "skittered" across the border and he's not a cockroach. He was born a U.S. citizen to his mother, who is also a U.S. citizen, and she brought him back home after leaving her job in Canada. Ted Cruz was 4 years of age at the time.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question, let's assume your mother, while pregnant, went to Cancun, Mexico, on vacation and went into labor early. Would you then be a Mexican?

IMO, calling anyone a cockroach is inappropriate.

---

I disagree. There are people, like Cruz, who deserve the contempt. "Cockroach" has a nice ring to it. He was four years old at the time and entirely capable of skittering. Very appropriate.

I will repeat myself.

If both your parents are US citizens, then it doesn't matter where you are born. You are a US citizen. If only one parent is a US citizen, the it still doesn't matter where you are born, you are not ​a US citizen.

See my signature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

I disagree. There are people, like Cruz, who deserve the contempt. "Cockroach" has a nice ring to it. He was four years old at the time and entirely capable of skittering. Very appropriate.

I will repeat myself.

If both your parents are US citizens, then it doesn't matter where you are born. You are a US citizen. If only one parent is a US citizen, the it still doesn't matter where you are born, you are not ​a US citizen.

See my signature.

---

According to our law, you are wrong. Please familiarize yourself with the Immigration and Nationality Act created in 1952.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

According to our law, you are wrong. Please familiarize yourself with the Immigration and Nationality Act created in 1952.

---

According to US history, sound principles and law, you are wrong.

How many other people sitting in government in the US suffer from this problem? How many falsely claim citizenship based on the fraudulent practice of posing people as US citizens simply because one parent was a US citizen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

I'm sorry, but any way you look at it, Clinton, a citizen, trying to administer amnesty is still better than some cockroach who skittered over the border from Canada (from Venezuela) whose whole administration is based on a corruption of our immigration system and our political system.

Putting Cruz in the White House would be worse than any amnesty.

Clinton may endorse the nomination of both Cruz and Rubio and why wouldn't she? They represent the product of the policies that the Democrat represent and their corruption of our citizenship and dereliction of our immigration system. Where would Cruz and Rubio be without the Democrats and punks like Obama?

A vote for Cruz or Rubio is a vote for a third term for the Obamination.

---

pkskyali

That you are a Clinton supporter is obvious from you comments and you entitled to your loyalties. But, you should get your facts a little straighter when you are baiting someone in an attempt to get an argument started. No one on the Republican Presidential ticket is from Venezuela. Furthermore, the term "cockroach" is intended to be inflammatory and is uncalled for.

Please review this announcement from ALIPAC 02/07/2016 at 11:49AM.

Rules Review: Automatic 30 Day Suspension for Next Person that breaks a rule

ALIPAC Activists,

We are so proud of the online community that we have built here that includes people that just joined in the last year and folks that joined us 10 years back!

For this part of ALIPAC's overall operations to succeed, our code of conduct must be maintained by ALL participants here regardless of tenure. It has actually been awhile since we have had any problems, conflicts, or drama on the boards but considering the recent altercations our moderators are issuing the following notice.

We need everyone at ALIPAC tor review the rules below that each person participating here agrees to when they create an account or make a post.

ANY RULE VIOLATION (Especially Rule #2) WILL RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC 30 DAY SUSPENSION IF DETECTED. SUSPENSIONS CAN BECOME PERMANENT DEPENDING ON THE REACTION OF THE PERSON SUSPENDED.

We regret that we even have had to conduct a meeting on this matter and issue this warning.

BUT THE LINE HAS BEEN DRAWN.

We hope you will all read the rules once again and make every effort to stay well within the rules that have been crafted by the people that participate here.

William Gheen
www.alipac.us


ALIPAC Rules for Discussion Groups Area
ALIPAC Rules for Discussion Groups Area

http://www.alipac.us/f9/rules-review...s-rule-328478/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newmexican

pkskyali

That you are a Clinton supporter is obvious from you comments and you entitled to your loyalties. But, you should get your facts a little straighter when you are baiting someone in an attempt to get an argument started. No one on the Republican Presidential ticket is from Venezuela. Furthermore, the term "cockroach" is intended to be inflammatory and is uncalled for.

Please review this announcement from ALIPAC 02/07/2016 at 11:49AM.

Rules Review: Automatic 30 Day Suspension for Next Person that breaks a rule

ALIPAC Activists,

We are so proud of the online community that we have built here that includes people that just joined in the last year and folks that joined us 10 years back!

For this part of ALIPAC's overall operations to succeed, our code of conduct must be maintained by ALL participants here regardless of tenure. It has actually been awhile since we have had any problems, conflicts, or drama on the boards but considering the recent altercations our moderators are issuing the following notice.

We need everyone at ALIPAC tor review the rules below that each person participating here agrees to when they create an account or make a post.

ANY RULE VIOLATION (Especially Rule #2) WILL RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC 30 DAY SUSPENSION IF DETECTED. SUSPENSIONS CAN BECOME PERMANENT DEPENDING ON THE REACTION OF THE PERSON SUSPENDED.

We regret that we even have had to conduct a meeting on this matter and issue this warning.

BUT THE LINE HAS BEEN DRAWN.

We hope you will all read the rules once again and make every effort to stay well within the rules that have been crafted by the people that participate here.

William Gheen
www.alipac.us


ALIPAC Rules for Discussion Groups Area
ALIPAC Rules for Discussion Groups Area

http://www.alipac.us/f9/rules-review...s-rule-328478/

---

I agree completely.

I apologize and repent the use of the term at this public forum.

Since you insist on including a political comment in this warning, I will add that I am not a Clinton supporter. Furthermore I think I made that clear. As much as you are well motivated to step in and discipline the discussion, you have no cause to pose me as something that I am clearly not. That is dishonest and, strictly speaking, a violation of rule #2:

Quote:

---

Don't call other users names or apply labels to them that you can't substantiate (See Bayourod).

---

(Who or what is Bayourod?)

I quote myself,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

Rubio and Cruz. A vote for either one is a vote for Obama's third term.

As bad as Hilary is, at least she is, without a doubt, a citizen.

If either Rubio or Cruz win the Republican nomination, I will cast my vote for Hilary. As far as I am concerned, the situation is really that bad.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkskyali

I'm sorry, but any way you look at it, Clinton, a citizen, trying to administer amnesty is still better than ... whose whole administration is based on a corruption of our immigration system and our political system.

Putting Cruz in the White House would be worse than any amnesty.

Clinton may endorse the nomination of both Cruz and Rubio and why wouldn't she? They represent the product of the policies that the Democrat represent and their corruption of our citizenship and dereliction of our immigration system. Where would Cruz and Rubio be without the Democrats and ... Obama?

A vote for Cruz or Rubio is a vote for a third term for the Obamination.

---

As a demonstration of your sincerity in this matter, you might retract the accusation that I am a Hilary supporter.

I am happy to retract the Clinton supporter assumption and relieved that you have clarified your position. I admit to being a bit confused since you specifically named Hillary as the person that you would vote for instead saying the Democratic nominee or anyone running against either of two candidates that you mentioned.

Quote:

---

If either Rubio or Cruz win the Republican nomination, I will cast my vote for Hilary. As far as I am concerned, the situation is really that bad.

---

I believe that the best way to expose the shortcomings or strengths of a candidate is to dredge up and expose their documented record for public review and discussion. There is a lot riding on this election and I think it may be the dirtiest election we have ever witnessed in this country. Not just the primaries but the election in general. We have issues like illegals voting to dilute the electorate, voter fraud, voting machine fraud, incorrect or fraudulent precinct counts and other things that we haven't even heard of yet. People are upset and angry and they have been angry for the past seven years as it seems every day brings more news of yet another government fiasco. We are all angry, lets not get angry at each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newmexican

I am happy to retract the Clinton supporter assumption and relieved that you have clarified your position. I admit to being a bit confused since you specifically named Hillary as the person that you would vote for instead saying the Democratic nominee or anyone running against either of two candidates that you mentioned.

I believe that the best way to expose the shortcomings or strengths of a candidate is to dredge up and expose their documented record for public review and discussion. There is a lot riding on this election and I think it may be the dirtiest election we have ever witnessed in this country. Not just the primaries but the election in general. We have issues like illegals voting to dilute the electorate, voter fraud, voting machine fraud, incorrect or fraudulent precinct counts and other things that we haven't even heard of yet. People are upset and angry and they have been angry for the past seven years as it seems every day brings more news of yet another government fiasco. We are all angry, lets not get angry at each other.

---

Sorry, but a part of the problem is people -- like Cruz -- like Rubio -- who claim to be a part of the immigration problem when they represent the absolute worse part of the problem. And then we have to read others here who support on the same bogus principles. We are not united on this issue and all this glib dissembling is provoking me and others as it is clearly intended to do. Nobody believes for a minute that you were honestly confused about what I had so simply put.