60 Reasons Why Trump is Right on Immigration Stance

recent story exposed some shocking reasons why the President’s policy on immigration is right and necessary along with some other reasons the Left doesn’t want us to know.

Michelle Malkin, famed author, blogger, and businesswoman, was the focus of that story or at least the one who put a spotlight on a very disturbing issue.

The real story, the one Malkin has written a book about, is the good that the President’s immigration reform is doing and the efforts of the left to hide that story.

She also didn’t hesitate to suggest some rather unscrupulous motives (and not political ones) that lie behind these efforts to thwart President Trump’s plans.

During the Obama administration, as the aforementioned story reminded us, refugee numbers stood at 100,000. President Trump has slashed those numbers to a historic low of 30,000, which many bleeding-heart groups call according to the story “inhumane.”

This isn’t an act of cruelty from President Trump, however, it is an act of keeping Americans safe.

Safe from what?

How about safe from “…convicted weapons felons, confessed aiders and abettors of terrorism, stabbing spree vigilantes, and bombers all sworn to wage war against infidels in the name of Allah” among other dangers as Malkin tells us.

In her book Open Borders Inc, she writes about what she calls “…60 of the planet’s most maleficent refujihadis nabbed over the past dozen years.” The crimes above are only a sample of the serious acts committed and these 60 people only represent those who have been caught as she so aptly reminds us.

Our story goes on, using some quotes from Malkin’s work to defend Trump’s policies. Along with Malkin, our story argues that limiting and controlling the number of refugees allowed into the country isn’t an act of hate but necessity saying ‘they’re not here to strengthen our nation with their “diversity.” They’re here to destroy it. That’s fact, not “hate.”’

If anyone questions the reasoning, the humanity or the logic in these steps by the President, Ms. Malkin offers 60 very good answers as to why these are the right measures.

Is it inhumane to keep out thousands who we don’t know or is it humane to allow murderers, terrorists, rapists and worse into the country to maim and harm us all?

At least we know that many of these groups, these “bleeding-hearts” activists, really do have pure and good intentions. Near-sighted, unwise, and impractical… but good. The others though may have some more questionable motives behind fighting against tougher borders and immigration reform.

According to the story, the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), David Miliband, rakes in billions of dollars from the refugee resettlement programs. Malkin challenges Miliband’s accusation that cutting refugee numbers is “inhumane” and she suggests another motivation behind opposing the Trump refugee cuts.

She asks, “is it because cutting the numbers would cut into Miliband’s first-class travel and business lunch tabs?”

It is a fair question because that is a lot of dough and even if those numbers aren’t very accurate, that is still a lot of dough! How much dough, our story reports that the IRC made “…nearly $900 million in refugee resettlement profits over the last decade.”

That would be considered a motive in any court of law anywhere in the world.

Someone might even say that there are 60 well-known reasons and many others, to support and prove that Trump’s policies on safer borders are working. They could also say that there are 900 million reasons why it needs to be changed – and that is exactly what the President is doing.

He is making the nation stronger by keeping out those who make us weaker. He is making us safer by reducing the risks of such unsavory persons entering the country and he is putting America first, again.

We can forgive the people who don’t know any better. We can help educate those who think more with their hearts than their heads, but for those willing to put all of us at risk for profit, for their own benefit?

Well, that would make them almost as bad as the 60, wouldn’t it?