Yeah, I don't know what is so scary about this actually, but I want to start by looking at what is going on here.
We're going to go over what's happening, what people say is happening, what we predict might happen, and sort of discussing who's against what's happening, and then also the statistics that back up why Trump is doing what he's doing.
Because we were for sure talking about weight while I have the floor.
Yeah, because we were talking about weight.
But anyways, CNBC released an article about what happened today.
And I want to kind of point out right here at the beginning is as we begin, it automatically starts out discrediting Trump's decision, which is interesting in the news media that before we even talk about the details of what Trump is doing or the news doing their job and giving us just the details, it already begins with an agenda.
Listen to this.
It says President Donald Trump on Friday declared a national emergency to build a border wall, yet illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border are at their lowest levels in nearly 50 years.
And the blue check mark to me these days is a little bit like degrees, where it's supposed to mean something and mean that you're credible or that you have some sort of standing.
But at this point, it just means that you've been accepted to some extent by the liberal media.
Even if you're not that good, it's hard for conservatives to get verified, but it's not hard for liberals.
If I get a blue check mark one day, I actually just got verified on YouTube, which doesn't mean anything because it was just, I just had to get 100,000 subscribers and submit it.
Yes, they want this guy verified because he had a beard.
If I grew out a beard, I might be verified.
And also, people might listen to my opinion on this matter because Ben White actually said, he said this, as we await the declaration of a national emergency on the southern border, this is what illegal border crossings actually look like over the last two decades via Trump's own customs and border patrol.
So, obviously, this graph, you have this terrible bar graft.
It looks like it was made in PowerPoint, which you just are learning how to use.
Ben White specifically stated that, you know, he shows this graph of this downward trend of illegal immigration.
And it goes down showing that there's only a few hundred thousand illegal immigrants crossing, which, like you stated earlier, is pretty remarkable that we're mocking the numbers of like, oh, only 300 and something thousand people legally crossed.
We don't need a wall.
As in, like, if 300 something thousand people crossed into my home illegally, I would have had a wall before the first one came in.
And the thing is, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that this national emergency is being called because, you know, it comes right down in the same article.
It says that Congress passed a spending bill Thursday night to avert another government shutdown.
The bill allocates $1.375 billion for 55 miles of border fencing, far less than the 5.7 billion Trump had requested, which is like, yeah, if the president is saying, hey, we need this amount of fencing and I need this amount of money.
And then Congress says, yeah, well, we got you a bill, but it's not what you thought is good for the country.
This kind of puts an interesting pike against the presidency and the Congress, which is not uncommon, especially Obama with Obamacare, right?
I mean, Obama had this idea where he wanted these mandates and he wanted everyone to have health care.
And he sort of circumvented and went around Congress as well in some ways.
And that's the point: they're kind of threatening saying Trump should be a president of inaction just because if you do something, then when we're in office, we're going to do something too.
Which I'm saying to the Democrats, good, when you're in office, please do something.
Now, I don't think that a border wall and security is the same thing as nationalized health care because a border wall is directly protecting citizens.
And you know what?
Actually, I'll say the truth here.
One thing interesting is that another article that was just from last month from CNBC, who mocked this number, did make a good point, though.
That before we start blaming Trump, saying, oh, he's just, you know, doing what Obama did and trying to push his agenda, you know, they said that one population at the border has grown in recent years, and that's asylum seekers.
Check this out.
In fiscal 2018, 92,959 people at the southern border requested asylum.
That's up 67% from the previous year.
And what's even crazier is that it says, okay, asylum seekers made up 18% of all apprehensions at the border, a dramatic departure from 2000, 2013, when fewer than 1% of those encountered by CBP initiated asylum claims.
Which is the point.
It's not because apprehensions are high that we need the border.
It's the aggregate population of people at the southern border is increasing, right?
Because the asylum seekers are waiting at the port of entry to get in.
This isn't just like people who are illegally crossing in.
It's up 67%.
So you have this mass of people hoarding towards the border, and you're mad at the president because he wants to put up a wall to contain them so that they can be processed instead of come over illegally.
When you think about this, the same study said that CBP apprehended six Al-Qaeda, I think it was Al-Qaeda-linked, maybe it's not, but just six people on the government terrorist watch list.
Okay, so you have this government terrorist watch list.
Some of it's a bit bogus.
I know it's like you might have texted the word bomb or something and you happen to be the race that also happens to very oftentimes be the race that uses bombs.
But we won't say that.
But, you know, you can get on the watch list.
But still, I mean, they apprehended people that they suspect of terrorism.
And this article does the same thing.
It like mocks the American people saying, look, guys, you really want a border wall?
Look, there was only six people who wanted to kill you trying to get over for sure.
Or probably.
And you know what?
Maybe whatever.
Maybe it only takes one person to set off a bomb or be a suicide bomber.
But look, we don't really care.
Which shows they don't actually care about the people.
But that's a good question, though, with this overreach.
The argument is here that there's overreach.
And there's an article from New York Times.
Check this out.
And we got to talk about this because this is really important to try to compare these.
You know, it's out of Washington.
Wow.
Thank you for clarifying that the president made a claim out of Washington.
It says, President Trump declared a national emergency at the border on Friday to access billions of dollars to build a border wall that Congress refused to give him, transforming a highly charged policy dispute into a fundamental confrontation over separation of powers.
All right, so what the New York Times is asserting here is actually a really important argument that I think a lot of conservatives are wanting to know.
And that's, do we support Donald Trump's national emergency at the southern border?
Like you mentioned, because there's always a struggle with people on whether or not we should support the government doing any power overreach.
And then the question is, then, is this new to President Trump?
Like, is President Trump really what the media is saying?
Is he like a fascist overlord who's trying to abuse his power and make these not even executive actions, but these national emergency executive orders, maybe I might call them.
Because they're making a claim here, right?
That Donald Trump is literally trying to acquire more power, that he's trying, he's violating the separation of power, that we should be alarmed.
They're insinuating this by what he's doing.
And a lot of conservatives are concerned too.
I mean, should a conservative president be creating national emergencies when he can't get his budget passed with Congress?
It could be, like you mentioned, a bait and switch.
But I want to bring this up because I think a lot of people don't realize how many national emergencies have been called.
If I was to give you a guess right now, how many national emergencies have been called since the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford?
And this is what's crazy: Trump's first national emergency was on December 20th, 2017.
And the national emergency was with respect to blocking the property of persons involved in serious human rights abuse or corruption in post sanctions on the Myanmar general for his role in persecuting Rohingya Muslims.
So right here, it says that literally Trump's first emergency was used to prosecute or punish people who unfairly hurt Muslims.
Why have we never heard about that?
That Trump used his power.
One of his first power actions in December of 2017 that he used nationally was in the protection of Muslims.
You're not going to hear that one on the mainstream.
Right, but the thing of the matter is, is when it comes down to it, is it's like, okay, cool.
Yeah, he used his national emergency to protect Muslims.
You wouldn't have known that.
But here's what's crazier.
Obama had a national emergency that he put out.
And guess what?
In July 25th of 2011, it was the national emergency with respect to blocking property of transnational criminals in response to a rise in crime by specific organizations, one of which was the Los Zetas criminal cartel in Mexico.
Which I didn't say whether it's active or not.
I'm sure it's probably still active.
Someone could fact-check me, but it probably is.
We have a national emergency being called by Obama in 2011 that's probably active about the increasing crime at the southern border.
And then we're getting mad that our current president is trying to fix that problem instead of just freezing their assets.
He's actually trying to prevent the cross-traffic of their goods and services.
Well, yeah, because there's got to be billions of dollars allocated that can be used and sold.
Because even crazier is, here's something that I think is really interesting about this whole thing, is that NPR released an article talking about how basically California is planning on suing Donald Trump for his executive action here or sorry, executive national emergency.
And it says that Governor Gavin Newsom joined State Attorney General Xavier Becerra to decry Trump's plan at a news conference Friday.
They also hinted that a multi-state lawsuit against the administration was imminent.
Donald Trump will see you in court, Newsom said.
And here's the crazy thing.
Donald Trump just asked Governor Newsom for $3.5 billion back from a botched railroad high-speed project in California that the federal government had given him.
So Governor Newsom shut down this project, right?
And so technically he owes the government, the federal government, $3.5 billion.
And when asked by Trump to return it, this was this week, he said it's California money now.
So California won't even give money back to Trump for their projects.
And now they think they can sue the federal government and Trump for more money or something.
And, you know, he's suing Trump when he himself is kind of liable in his state for $3.5 billion.
I would say if someone's considering that you owe them $3.5 billion, it's not the wisest thing to then come out and say, well, I'm going to sue you.
And actually, this might just be a response from Newsom, who's trying to deflect away from the fact that California has a fiscal financial responsibility to pay back the federal government, that he's going to do what a lot of leftists do, where he goes, I'm not going to pay you back because you're immoral.
Isn't that weird that he had sex with the same woman that Donald Trump Jr. did, which is like, maybe you might not say that on camera, but I would.
And I think that's kind of interesting that two powerhouses from the far left and not even the far right, because Donald Trump Jr. is not that far right.
But you have this far leftist, progressive guy, and Kimberly Guilfoyle was his wife.
And I think that's one of the main factors here that we have to consider is that when we look at why California is suing Trump, it's because they're saying the same thing that the ACLU is saying, which is that there's no national emergency at the southern border, which is totally untrue because I pulled up some statistics here from CBP.gov, which some people might not really, you know, think might be accurate, but at the same time, we have to look at them because realistically, they're just giving stats of what they found.
So basically, the U.S. Border Patrol and drug seizures for cocaine in pounds were 6,423.
Heroin was 532 pounds.
Marijuana was 439,000 pounds.
Methamphetamine, 10,000.
And fentanyl, 332.
Now, this is not even from the business.
Like, I was looking at this.
This is from patrol drug seizures.
So, like, when they're just patrolling and they catch people, this isn't actual where they, there's a whole separate stat for when they have like stings and seizures like that.
When you look at this map, you look at the densities of where MS-13 is.
And other than, of course, they're dense in Washington, D.C. I'm not going to get into conspiracy theories about MS-13 in Washington, D.C. and why Trump is against them and a lot of people dying under the Clintons because I wouldn't go into areas like that.
I mean, I don't know if the debt, but we don't know if the graph even pictured or accounted for Africa, but you do see the gang moving in a direction.
What I'm saying, I don't know if it accounts for South America.
Yeah, but it didn't go to Africa or South America because why?
There's not a good country to mess up there, really.
And that's not a bash.
Actually, Brazil's on the uprise, though.
I will say Brazil's going in a good direction.
But you know what?
Here's the thing.
And I kind of want to bring it to a dissent here.
The real reason why I think people are against this wall and why Trump had to file a national emergency is because I don't think that those on the left that are mostly, I would say, either far left or too far left from the center to have any reasonable self-will.
They're controlled by their party.
Are never going to clear this wall because they know that if they clear it, then Trump stays true to one of his most important campaign promises.
And if they have a president in this country who actually stood true to his promise, that would pretty much guarantee him re-elected.
So by complicating the process at the expense of the safety of the American people, these politicians are trying to make sure Trump doesn't get re-elected.
And they don't really care about us.
They don't care about the people or what it is that we, that, you know, that citizens are dying at the hands of illegals about illegal crime, about people taking jobs, about overpopulation.
And for those in this country that think that it's, oh, there's not a lot of them, come to LA.
Actually, there's entire enclaves that are just illegals.
So maybe it doesn't affect you, but a lot of us, it does actually affect.
And you have gangs and all these things, and the left doesn't care, though.
Because they don't, because this wall gives Trump more plight with the people.
It actually does good for the American people.
And if Trump does good for us, that's bad for them.
And so they're going to just gamble our safety away just to make him look bad.
And what's the best thing Trump could do would be to double down, stay strong, and demand the wall.
And in the meantime, when demanding the wall, show the hypocrisy.
Show what you're saying, how the Democrats are willing to sell out the safety of the American people in order to just play political politics and throw a political punch at Trump.
Yeah, but not, look, not the bars, not the kind of bars that Hillary Clinton would have been behind if people hadn't accidentally committed suicide or the kind of bars.
Now, I hate referencing Wikipedia, but I went and I looked, right?
Because Wikipedia is not that bad of a source.
I know people edit it, but if you look at the sources, right, that's what I'll do.
I'll go read something and then I'll go click on the source of where they got the information and I'll read the original source.
That's all you got to do on Wikipedia, I think, is make sure you don't just take what Wikipedia says.
You look at the sources.
And I think Wikipedia sometimes is a very good, almost encyclopedia to get you to information, like a research center.
That's what I use it as.
If you think about it, I mean, I'm not going to say that's how I got through college because I don't want to delegitimize my degree, but it might be how I got through college.
Well, every time I had to write a paper about something, actually, I don't know if I should say.
No, I'm just kidding.
Of course, I'm going to say it.
I wouldn't buy the books because it costs so much money.
I never read the books anyway.
So whenever I need to look something up, say the word was like prescriptions, right?
Like, oh, I've read about prescriptions.
Okay.
So I'd find the book on Google Books and I would hit Control F, like control find, and then I'd type in the word and I would just go through, oh, page 149, page 228, page 306.
And I would find like a paragraph that kind of talked about it.
And I would just cite that and write whatever I want.
Well, and every time I got a paperback, they'd be like, I would literally hand it in like a four-page paper I could write in like three hours about something I don't know.
And then every time I open the thing, it'd be like, oh, B-minus.
Like he could have gone into more detail.
You understood the subject, but could have gone deeper.
And it's like, oh, could I have finished this in a day?
I was going to say, I thought college was a waste of time as well.
I remember thinking, like, I would just wait till the night before with college papers and write them immediately because why would I need like, why would I need to wait and actually spend a week on a paper that the professor probably doesn't read?
They'd probably skim it looking for minor issues.
I wouldn't read all the, if I was a professor, there's no way I'm reading those papers.
On my senior thesis, I kind of have a similar story where I decided to write it on a very weird topic, which is transgender surgeries in adolescents because I had to answer a question.
By the way, I've not just like made that topic.
I was in molecular biology.
And so I tried to do something that was like at the hormone level to try to talk about how it's child abuse.
I actually tried to spin my paper.
And it turned out that it just ended in a lot of nightmares.
Because, you know, thank God there's not a lot of, you know, surgery videos that you have to look at in regards to transgender surgeries.
But I had to watch some videos of them actually taking the penis, flaying it open, tucking it in, sewing it.
And it was, I believe anyone who says that they think they're transgender, I didn't say I believe transgender is a real thing or I didn't deny it either.
I'm saying when someone says that I'm transgender and they're willing to cut off their weehuwa and stick it up in and sew it away, I'm not saying that it's a real thing.
I'm saying I believe they think it's a real thing.
Because you've got to really believe you're transgender to really cut off your snatcher roading and get it pushed up.
And I saw those videos and I remember turning in that paper and just thinking, God, I can never unsee this stuff.
And that was my conclusion.
I was like, I remember writing and I thought I'm going to get a bad grade on this paper because I literally said that transgender surgery and hormone treatment on kids is child abuse based off of these world health studies.
And I knew it was going to not go over too well in a college atmosphere.
And I was going to say at this Wikipedia though, that point is that when you look at MS-13 and these people, there's an entire section that says the Republican Party discourse on MS-13 with constant references to The Hill or to Washington Post or to New York Post saying, look, the Republicans like to talk poorly about MS-13.
Look at all these ways that they like to blame MS-13 for their problems as an inadvertently or indirectly defending MS-13.
And it's just anything to go against Trump to the point where it's like we're sacrificing our national security, something that we need, something that both sides have talked about needing for so long.
And we're going to throw it away just because Trump's mean and we're mad at Trump and Alex and a bartender's in charge.
Yeah, I think it's a good way to close it: is that the left really doesn't care about the American people.
They just hate Trump and their push to demonize him for this national emergency.
When Obama did it 10 times, Bush did it, and making him seem weird.
Also, failing to mention that his first national emergency was to actually help Rohingya, I think that's how you say it, Rohingya Muslims.
Either way, he was helping Muslims.
You'd never hear about Trump helping Muslims.
And this is all just going to be spun to make him seem like a psychomaniac, megalomaniac, fascist dictator who's trying to override the Constitution and the separation of powers all for the sake of his own pride and ego when really he's doing what his constituents and the people of this country voted for dramatically when they put him into office.
And Don Lemon very rarely said anything worthwhile.
So we end on that.
Thank you very much for watching another episode of Slightly Offensive Uncut with your favorite gay black woman.
Don't forget, if you love what we do, if you don't want to look like Austin, make sure you check out this awesome nutritional pill that is caffeine, B vitamins.
It keeps you going, keeps you running.
I love it.
Some of my roommates have tried it, and I know some of my friends turned me onto it.
Make sure you go to brickhouseso.com, keyword SO for 15% off.
