By Jimmy The Saint

The Democrat’s leading presidential candidate is no stranger to emigrating from one locale to another in an effort to better her political position. After leaving her cushy First Lady post in Washington D.C., Hillary Clinton did a midnight flight to New York in order to carry out a last second run for the U.S. Senate. With boatloads of special interest money, biased mainstream media and uniformed, out-of-touch Hollywood support, Clinton easily shed the correctly appointed carpetbagger label and settled into the Empire State as if she were a real state resident.

This is perhaps why she is so sympathetic to allowing undocumented, Syrian refugees to float into American ports and fly into American airports – and stay on U.S. soil without proper, if any, investigation into their backgrounds, agendas, and motives. She got away with little scrutiny over her slip-into-town-unnoticed-trot-plot. So, why not laud others for doing the same.

Clinton said, “We have always welcomed immigrants and refugees. We have made people feel that if they did their part, they sent their kids to school, they worked hard, there would be a place for them in America.” She added that shutting out the 10,000 Syrian refugees that President Obama wants to permit (and the extended 65,000 she wants to allow in) would subterfuge “who we are as Americans.”

Clinton is, thus, a fan of permitting these masses of Syrian refugees into the U.S. Donald Trump, who has no illicit immigration past, says not so fast.

The Republican’s top ranked presidential candidate stated, “I’m looking at this migration, it’s a terrible thing. I have a tremendous heart, I want to take care of people,” but, Trump continued, “We have no documentation on these people.”

Trump’s concern is a valid one. How can U.S. officials determine the political, moral, and ethical views of these thousands of people when they don’t even know their identities?

One may argue that the U.S. government has no right to ascertain such personal views. That’s true if these individuals were already American citizens – and where their views do not rise to the level of engaging in criminal conduct (i.e. terrorism). Even an American citizen can be lawfully detained and questioned – and arrested – if law enforcement has probable cause to believe that views have transcended into criminal conduct. But, ahh, yes, there isn’t an assertion that all, most, or maybe even any of the Syrian refugees are engaging in criminal, much less terrorist conduct.

But another “but” – they are NOT American citizens. They did not even go through the process of getting visas. Their arrival in the United States has occurred without any vetting – and in a very volatile time. The hard, cold reality is that they come from a country where many of its residents hate Americans – and where many want to kill Americans. Syria is a nation that currently is infested with ISIS and other radicals. Therefore, it is quite rational to insist, at minimum, that before any of these refugees walk freely into and about the United States, they are thoroughly investigated by the U.S. government. It is rather confounding that Democrats like Clinton and her former boss Barack Obama – who so fervently want the government involved in voluminous unwarranted manners in U.S. citizens’ lives – don’t want the government to carry out one of its only true constitutional mandates: to protect our borders.

In other words, some of these Syrian refugees could be ISIS members pretending to be refugees. Such a fear isn’t “fear mothering” as many liberals babble. It is a logical, reasonable fear. And it is logical and reasonable to resolve this issue by not permitting these refugees unfettered entrance into the United States, but instead to do what New York native Donald Trump suggests: send them back to Syria and build a “safe zone” for them in their own nation.

Trump proffered, “In Syria, take a big swatch of land…and build a big beautiful safe zone.”

The American government, in concert with allied countries, can allocate funds toward creating and supporting this safe zone area. In doing this, the refugees can live in their own country. Such a plan would be much cheaper for U.S. taxpayers than carrying the significant costs of harboring the Syrians on American soil. And, simply and realistically, while it’s not the politically correct solution that Clinton espouses, it’s the much safer solution – for Americans.

Comments disabled by site.

You may, however, comment through Facebook.