Connect with us

Watch: Sarah Palin Had No Idea There’s A Refugee Screening Process, So Seth Meyers Had To Explain It

Published

on

Watch as Sarah Palin covers up her lack of knowledge about the intensive and rigorous refugee screening program by blaming Obama.

Monday night Sarah Palin was Seth Meyers’ guest on “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” and the topic of the Syrian refugee crisis came up. Palin, a former (half-term) governor, has been cheering on the 30 or so Republican (and one Democratic) governors who insist they will deny the refugees entry to their states – something that is not only unconstitutional and illegal, but practically impossible.

Palin, as she did last week, Monday called the governors’ America’s “last line of defense,” as if they personally are standing at their borders, perhaps muskets in hand, ready to forcibly refuse refugees.

But one thing seemed especially clear when Palin was talking with Meyers in defense of the governors.

She had no idea there is a rigorous and intensive program in place, involving the Dept. of Homeland Security and several other federal government agencies, to ensure refugees coming to America are thoroughly vetted.

“Their message is not, we don’t want Syrian refugees,” Palin said, presumably speaking for the governors. “Their message is, what is the vetting process? How do we know that these are the innocents who are coming over and actually needing aid, and they’re not the bad guys infiltrating under the guise of refugee? And they want a vetting process, because we don’t have that from the top, we don’t have that at the federal level.”

Um, actually, governor, we do (see below).

Meyers very generously pretended he wasn’t correcting her, and offered a very and gracious response.

LOOK: Texas GOP Governor Abbott Hypocritically Tramples On Religious Freedom

“In order for any refugees to come in, it is, like, an 18- to 24-month process for them to get through,” Meyers told Palin. “It starts at the UN, and then it comes through multiple government agencies here in the states. Is it maybe just that, at the core, I think there’s just a lack of trust across the board of the federal government? Do you think that’s what these governors are really saying, that ultimately anything the federal government tells them, they don’t trust?”

Of course, Palin went for it, because she’s made her fortune claiming that government is bad and doesn’t work, and President Obama can’t be trusted.

“Well, I don’t trust what the federal government is telling us,” Palin said. “But even you should not trust that the federal government is telling you about the 18- to 24-month vetting process is as legit as perhaps they’re trying to make the public believe, because truly, there is no way to filter out those that would want to do this country harm with the process that we see in place today. And that’s why it’s not just Republican governors, but Democrats, too, who are saying, wait a minute — somebody’s got to be the last line of defense here, so the states are taking on that authority.”

Meyers, who at this point deserves a medal for finding common ground with the former Republican vice presidential nominee, settled on “freedom,” to which Palin of course agreed.

“If we were to strive to reach absolute safety, we would not have freedom,” Palin said. “If people have the choice here — I mean, we can have both, but we’re all about freedom. That’s a foundation of our country, so we’re not going to give up freedom for that.”

But Meyers quickly took back the upper hand.

“I think this idea that they’re coming here to infiltrate, I think that is fear-based,” Meyers said. “I do think they want to come here and enjoy the same things you and I are lucky enough to enjoy.” 

And Palin was stuck being forced to agree, after the audience applauded Meyers.

“I do think most people want to come to America to enjoy what it is that we’ve been blessed with,” Palin said. “I do, I do. It’s just unfortunate that we know, as we saw in Paris, there are some people who want to get to a country to do harm. But no, I agree with you — for the most part, people want to be here to enjoy that exceptionalism that we’re all blessed to enjoy.”

Watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfYT4mRRwBA

 

By the way, here’s a graphic via The White House that details the actual vetting process:

wh_blog_refugee_workflow_1120b.jpg

 

Image: Screenshot via Late Night with Seth Meyers/YouTube
Hat tip and transcript via Travis Gettys/Raw Story

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

FIRST AMENDMENT? WHAT FIRST AMENDMENT?

Justice Clarence Thomas Believes Media Criticism of Decisions ‘Jeopardizes Any Faith’ in the Supreme Court

Published

on

Justice Clarence Thomas complained about the harsh criticism the Supreme Court has received since allowing a controversial anti-abortion law to go into effect in Texas.

Thomas delivered the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture at the University of Notre Dame on Thursday, where he complained about media criticism, The Washington Post reported.

“I think the media makes it sound as though you are just always going right to your personal preference. So if they think you are anti-abortion or something personally, they think that’s the way you always will come out. They think you’re for this or for that. They think you become like a politician,” Thomas said.

“That’s a problem. You’re going to jeopardize any faith in the legal institutions,” he said.

A second Post report on the speech noted Thomas’ remarks on the ongoing mistrust of the court.

“The court was thought to be the least dangerous branch and we may have become the most dangerous,” Thomas said. “And I think that’s problematic.”

The newspaper noted the lecture was interrupted by protesters who yelled, “I still believe Anita Hill.”

 

Continue Reading

AMERICAN IDIOT

‘Genius’ Madison Cawthorn Mocked for Claiming the Constitution Prohibits Airlines From Requiring Vaccinations

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Madison Cawthorn is once again being mocked, this time for yet again not understanding the very basics of American democracy.

On Thursday the Republican from North Carolina claimed it is “illegal” and unconstitutional for airlines to require passengers to be vaccinated, because “you actually have a constitutionally protected right to free, unrestricted travel within the United States.”

That last part has a tiny shred of truth to it. Just not in the way Congressman Cawthorn thinks.

(Those inteested in the legal mechanics should examine this and this.)

Anyone could take a minute to come up with arguments why his claim is false, including that anyone driving a car is required to have a driver’s license and insurance, and wear a seat belt.

The freshman Congressman was quickly mocked:

 

 

Continue Reading

News

29 Months Later Bill Barr’s Super Secret Russia Special Counsel Files His Second Indictment – for Alleged Lying

Published

on

In April of 2019 then-Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut to open and lead an investigation into Russia – not into how Russia has been attacking the United States via cyber warfare, undermining Americans’ trust in American institutions, and using social media to do it, but into whether or not the Federal Bureau of Investigation had been warranted in opening an investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, including its investigation of Donald Trump.

On Thursday, 29 months after Barr first appointed John Durham (photo, right) to lead that super-secret investigation, 11 months after Barr secretly turned Durham into a special counsel to ensure the investigation would continue past his and Trump’s tenure, and after spending untold millions of taxpayer dollars, the Dept. of Justice has announced Durham has obtained a second indictment.

“A prominent cybersecurity lawyer was indicted on a charge of lying to the F.B.I. five years ago during a meeting about Donald J. Trump and Russia, the Justice Department announced on Thursday,” The New York Times reports.

The lawyer, Michael Sussmann, “of the law firm Perkins Coie, which has deep ties to the Democratic Party — is accused of making a false statement about his client at the meeting.”

Mr. Sussmann’s defense lawyers have denied the accusation, saying that he did not make a false statement, that the evidence he did is weak and that who he was representing was not a material fact in any case. They have vowed to fight any charge in court.

At issue is who was Sussman working for when he “relayed concerns by cybersecurity researchers who believed that unusual internet data might be evidence of a covert communications channel between computer servers associated with the Trump Organization and with Alfa Bank, a Kremlin-linked Russian financial institution.”

Apparently not at issue is if the Trump Organization or campaign had a secret communications channel to a Kremlin-linked organization.

Frequent viewers of MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow are likely familiar with her reporting on Alfa Bank, including this segment from October 2018:

Durham has not obtained any indictment against anyone in Russia, any Russian operatives, any Trump Organization or campaign official, or anyone who may have been involved in Russia’s attack on the United States.

The only other indictment Durham has obtained from his two-plus year investigation? The Times in 2019 reported on a “low-level” FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who “altered an email that officials used to prepare to seek court approval to renew the wiretap,” on Carter Page, a Trump campaign advisor.

One expert calls the indictment “weak.”

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.