WaPo: Stirring the pot, highlighting controversy
between White House and DOS on refugees, etc. by Ann Corcoran 7/10/17
We told you about the discussions
(supposedly) on-going in the administration to possibly shift the refugee
program and consular affairs from the Dept. of State to the Dept. of Homeland
Security, here.
The Washington Post describes the battle lines as Tillerson/Democrat (the ‘good
guys’ in the Senate) vs. Stephen Miller (leader of the “Nativist strain”) in
the White House. Who knows what is really going on! I don’t.
Stephen Miller, we are told, crafted
that historic Warsaw speech last week (the save Western Civilization speech!).
Here he is during the campaign with his former boss and now Attorney General
Jeff Sessions. The Left (including the WaPo) would like nothing better than to
put the two on the President’s wrong side. See WND here when Trump tapped
Miller: http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/trump-snags-top-aide-to-jeff-sessions/
However, Washington Post opinion
writer Josh Rogin has got it all figured out and it all goes back to that Poland speech the left is having hissy-fits over—the LOL! Nationalist speech
and its boogeyman author.
Here is what Rogin says in his closing paragraphs after
trying to make a case that bureaucratically the refugee program should stay at
the State Department.
That nativist strain in the White House is represented by Miller, who was the principal author of Trump’s travel ban, which
targeted six Muslim-majority countries, as well as of Trump’s speech last week in
Poland, which cast the mission of U.S. foreign policy as one based
on threats, not relationships.
“The fundamental question
of our time is whether the West has the will to survive,” Trump said. “Do we
have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the
desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who
would subvert and destroy it?”
I would like to think that there is
a great battle of ideals happening around the subject of moving one
bureaucratic function from one federal agency to another, but it is more likely
that the little fiefdoms and power structures built around certain federal
agencies (and their friends in Congress) are simply protecting turf and their MONEY!
Earlier Rogin tells us this which
I think is closer to the truth about what the concern is—there are little fiefdoms
to protect at Foggy Bottom and the bureaucrats/Senate lackeys are trying to not
have their little world rocked or any power removed from the State Department,
a bastion of liberalism in Washington.
Although the State Department’s
internal reorganization plans are still under review, spokeswoman Heather
Nauert told me that Tillerson believes the two bureaus should remain where they are and
he views consular and refugee work “as essential to the Department’s mission to
secure our borders and protect the American people.”
State stands to lose not
only the 12,000-plus personnel billets associated with the work but also the
more than $3 billion annually that consular fees bring in.
Tillerson’s position runs counter to
the “Listening Report” he commissioned to review the State Department’s
organizational structure, which actually recommended handing over all consular
functions to DHS. The report, compiled by the private firm Insigniam, claimed such
a move “would elevate security at our borders and remove a source of
dissatisfaction and frustration.” Read it all here.
As for those fiefdoms! Such a move
could upset the little fiefdoms developed between the State Dept. Bureau of
Population, Refugees and Migration and its nine federal contractors that
monopolize all refugee placement in America.
Someone once told me that one must
repeat the same message seven times before people listen. I’m probably up
to at least that many on this subject!
There can never be real reform of the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program
as long as these nine fake non-profit groups, functioning as contractors,
lobbyists, and community organizers, are being paid with taxpayer dollars
to seed refugees in to unsuspecting towns and cities.
A move of the program from one
federal agency to another won’t be enough, but it might be a good start.
No comments:
Post a Comment