RUSH: Try this, folks, this is from Breitbart. Lubbock, Texas. "A leaked intelligence analysis from the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reveals the exact numbers of illegal immigrants entering and attempting to enter the US," from nearly every nation on earth. "The report was obtained by a trusted source within the CBP agency who leaked the document and spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity. ... It is important to note these numbers do not include data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unavailable ICE data are in addition to these numbers."
So, in other words, what we have here is a Customs and Border Protection report, doesn't even include ICE numbers, which means the numbers we do have are low, if we don't the ICE numbers. The bottom line is, it's not just people from Central America trying to get into the United States through the Southern border. We have sat around and we've made jokes, like Kathryn and I have people that live in Great Britain, friends of her family from way, way back who are trying to get in on student visas. They're going through the process, and it's hard. And we've made jokes, "Why don't you just catch a plane to Mexico City and come up through the Southern border?"
We joke about it. Except that's what's happening for real. People all over the world are pouring into the United States from the Southern border. And that's not a wild-eyed, panicked prediction. It is from a leaked report from Customs and Border Protection. And again, it does not include ICE numbers. To top it all off, there's this at the bottom of the article.
"Individuals from nations currently suffering from the world’s largest Ebola outbreak have been caught attempting to sneak across the porous US border into the interior of the United States." This is the last thing in the story. "At least 71 individuals from the three nations affected by the current Ebola outbreak have either turned themselves in or been caught attempting to illegally enter the US by US authorities between January 2014 and July 2014."
Now, bear in mind, we are regularly told US authorities only capture about one out of 10 border crossers at best. So 71 people have been nabbed, one out of 10, that's quite a huge number. And that's the number we're given from the government about the number of people who have been apprehended. And, of course, it's not a surprise to anybody. It's just documentation. And it is further -- I don't know, evidence or whatever, it's just more gasoline on the fire about people in this country concerned and not understanding. I tell you, there's still people that do not understand. They look at what Obama is doing and threatening just to grant amnesty to five or six million of the so-called 11 million that are here.
There are some people, "Why would he do it?" They want to give him the benefit of the doubt, he's the president, why would he do it? They can't understand it. You tell 'em, "Well, he said he wanted to transform America." "Well, yeah, but..." they can't conceive of a president who doesn't like the country. They just can't conceive of it. Some people can't. Others do and don't want to deal with it. It's too scary. It's too freaky to think that they participated in electing that. So they look the other way or make up some other excuse for it. Meanwhile, it just continues to happen. And it may well be -- in fact, folks, I should tell you -- let me see if I can find the story. Here it is.
After about a week, maybe 10 days, last week and the week before, of intense reporting from White House spokesmen, news media types, that Obama was gonna grant a blanket amnesty to five or six million illegals in the country -- I know you heard it. It was being bandied about. One of the reasons that people gave for it, "Well, he's trying to goad the Republicans into impeaching him." And I think that was true. But they're pulling back on this now. White House officials are now downplaying. This story's from yesterday, and it was actually mid-afternoon yesterday. It's USA Today and it was intended for today's newspaper.
"White House officials are downplaying stories that President Obama is prepared to take executive action on immigration that would allow millions of undocumented people to stay in the United States. 'The reports you're seeing are uninformed speculation,' White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Pfeiffer said Obama asked the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to 'present him with recommendations by the end of the summer.'" And Pfeiffer said (imitating Pfeiffer), "Hey, the agencies haven't even reported back to the president yet on ways he could do it. So there's really nothing to see here."
Now, it could be a head fake. Pfeiffer said, "So let's wait and see what those are before we make judgments about them." But this is the first time that the White House is walking it back. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend to know conclusively what this means. Let's look at practicality here. Let's say you're Obama, and let's say he does want to go full Cloward-Piven. He just wants to overwhelm the welfare system of this country so that it cannot handle millions of new people overnight and the influx across the border. Let's say that's what he wants to do.
Let's say that he wants this country to become a white minority country, and to do it, he's just gonna legalize any kind of foreign person he can get in here, any country, any group, whatever, just shake up the numbers, the balance, bring in the poor, bring in the thirsty, the hungry, the uneducated, the low educated, the low skill, just bring in a bunch of people that in no way Jose could be productive. And he wants to do it overnight with the stroke of the pen because he's got only two years left. He knows he can't do this legislatively, but he wants to get it done because this is what America deserves.
You have to think that somewhere -- I mean, what would that be? That kind of action, in addition to being lawless, I mean, that kind of thing, if it happened in a Third World country, you'd call it a coup. So let's say that that's what Obama wants to do. Why would he do it before the November elections? It can't possibly help the Democrat Party. Nobody in their right mind could think it would. But then, on the other hand, we know Obama doesn't care about that anymore 'cause he not running. He doesn't need the Democrat Party to be successful in order to do what he wants to do, 'cause he's gonna do it without 'em.
In fact, there is some view that it would be ultimately better for him if Republicans were elected because when the excrement hits the fan, they would be in power, in Congress, and therefore the people in power get the blame, except for Obama has been in power and he doesn't get the blame, so it's dicey. But then even further, let's say, okay, the number, five, six millions he wants to grant amnesty to, but we're told there are 11 to 12 million here that are seeking it. So which five or six million are gonna get it? How do you apportion that? First come first serve, huh?
So you just say, okay, we're gonna shine the light in the shadows. We're gonna illuminate the shadows so that you can get out of the shadows to our recruitment center, and the first six million that show up are gonna be granted amnesty? (interruption) Well, do you realize the riots that would cause? We've got 12 million in the shadows. We say the first six million that show up get amnesty?
They're all 12 gonna show up and if they only give amnesty to five or six million, then it leaves six million without amnesty, you got a really large bunch of unhappy, angry people, to which the solution, ah, hell with it, let's just grant 'em all amnesty, since they came out of shadows, that's the way we want it anyway. (interruption) Well, that's a whole 'nother thing. I think the number of people in the country illegally is way more than 11 or 12 million.
Are they trying to tell us that -- this all emanates here from Simpson-Mazzoli 1986. Are they trying to tell us that since 1986 only 11 or 12? Look, 500,000, 300,000 since April. So it's an absolute mess, and Obama has been threatening to do this in order to gin up Republicans impeaching him, for whatever convoluted reason we know. But now the White House begins to talk it back Sunday. "Well, not so fast. We're really not sure the president's gonna do this."
And I read over the weekend, there are some people on our side, Mr. Snerdley, who said, "Obama would never do it. Come on. He knows that's the biggest losing proposition for the Democrat Party. He is not gonna grant blanket amnesty outside of Congress for five million, six million, 12 million, two million, he just isn't gonna do it. He's not that extreme. He wouldn't go that far." Which is right where I think Obama wants them to be, thinking that way. But the fact that we're even talking about this, the fact that it is a possibility, is damn scary.
RUSH: Now, I want to go back, if I may, to this impeachment business and this granting of blanket amnesty to five or six million illegals currently living in the shadows, because I think there's a key point here. What is the president doing? The president is running around bellyaching, whining, and moaning that the Republicans won't work with him, saying such things as (imitating Obama), "Come on, man, you know what, just stop the hating, you know, just stop the hate and stop being so mad all the time. Stop being so mad. Work with me on this. Help me do this."
And of course the Republicans don't want any of this to happen, so they're not helping. And Obama can't get the Congress to go along with what he wants to do so he runs around and says, "Well, you know what, if they won't act, I will." And he says, "I'm not gonna sit here and not do something just 'cause they won't."
He tries to make all these low-information people think, "Well, you know, what a great guy, what a great guy. These buffoons in Congress that simply won't do anything, he's gonna do it anyway." Well, let's not forget something. This president had control of both houses of Congress for two years, and he did not even put forth an immigration bill. In fact, during the two years that Obama had total control of the legislative branch, when he went out and made public appearances and people said, "Why don't you just grant amnesty, why don't you just do?"
"I can't. The Constitution, I can't do that. The Constitution doesn't give me that power." Remember that? He would tell people. He went to the United Nations. (imitating Obama) "You ask why don't we just put the guy that did the video that caused Benghazi in jail? Because of our laws. I just can't put people in jail." Even though he had. So this guy hides behind the Constitution whenever he finds it convenient. Now, folks, this is crucial, important. For two years he had control of both houses of Congress and he did not move an immigration bill. And during those two years he was complaining that he was constrained by the Constitution.
Now, to say, as he is today, that he's going to act alone because the Congress won't act is a lie. The president would act unilaterally after refusing to act with Congress when he controlled it. Why didn't he do this when he controlled Congress? Why didn't he grant amnesty when he controlled everything? And why is he willing to do it now when he doesn't? And Mr. Snerdley, good old Mr. Snerdley swerved into the answer in the last hour.
He didn't want his party getting blamed for it. But he'll do it now with the Republicans in control of the House, because as far as the media is concerned, the Republicans control the Congress, see, even though the Democrats control the Senate and even the Senate bottles up anything coming out of the House. One of the reasons House Republicans don't put anything forward is 'cause it's gonna die in the Senate. That's just one reason why. Another reason is that -- well, I don't even want to go there. But it'll die in the Senate.
Point is, the Republicans do not control Congress; they just have one house, House of Representatives. So it's divided. It's bipartisan. But the reason Obama didn't do this when he had both houses of Congress, is because the Democrats would have gotten blame. And not credit, not credit. Now, Obama's out trying to make it look like blanket amnesty and all these children, "That's who we are, that's who we are as Americans, and if somebody wants to come to our country and improve their life, then we're not gonna stand in their way."
Well, why didn't he do it when he had nobody stopping him? And why does he want to do it now? Well, there's a whole host of reasons, but one of them is it's still unpopular and he thinks that the Republicans will end up getting some of the blame for not working with him on it. He was left with no choice, but the Republicans end up in the discussion of who gets blame. When the Republicans didn't have the House and the Democrats did, there was no way to blame it on the Republicans. My point is, it was unpopular then -- amnesty -- it is unpopular now. And the only way to do it, the only reason to do it now is if you can get the Republicans blamed for it and maybe goad them into impeaching, or saying or doing things that might rally the Democrat base.
But this sob story that he has to act alone because the Congress won't work with him is bogus. There are no good intentions here, folks. And this is something that the left relies on constantly. We're never supposed to examine the results of what they do, like the failure of the Great Society and the failure of the War on Poverty and the failure of the whole social welfare system. No, no, no. We are supposed to examine their good intentions and how big their hearts are and how much they care. They care more than Republicans and they're bigger hearted and we're supposed to look at that as we judge them.
Well, there aren't any good intentions here. They might try to say, "Well, look, we only want to help these poor people from Central America that are fleeing gangs and cartels and war torn poverty and strife and so forth." But at some point if you're gonna let people in for that reason, how do you keep anybody out? Because everybody in this planet comes from someplace worse off than we are. So on what basis do you close the border to anybody? If you open it because they're coming from poverty, crime, war, whatever, that's never been the basis on which we let people in. That's never been the formation of immigration policy. That's why there's been political asylum and that kind of thing, but that isn't immigration.
So there are no good intentions here. What this is, this is the cynical use of race as an excuse to transform the Constitution and destroy the exceptional results that separate and equal branches of government have delivered for over 200 years. And I'm telling you what is the root of this. The root of this, for people in the modern leftist movement, the reason why the Constitution doesn't mean anything to them, and, in fact, the reason why it has to be blown up is because the Constitution was ratified when we had slavery. And some of these people, anything that happened after that, such as the Civil War, the 14th Amendment, anything to deal with it, to fix it, to make amends for it, does not count.
The fact the Constitution was ratified during slavery is all these people need to despise it and to want to get rid of it, to rewrite it, whatever. That is the basis. And that is why, at the heart of all of this illegal immigration, is race. The impoverished, the poor, the hungry, the war torn, the fleeing criminals, drugs, they're all people of color. The exact kind of people who are not given the same freedoms and equalities as the white people when this country was founded, and so they are all due payback no matter where they come from.
The cynical use of race is being used. When Obama talks about transforming the country, he simply means ignoring and transforming the Constitution. The Constitution spells out the three branches of government, it spells out the separation of powers, it provides checks and balances to make sure that one branch doesn't become dictatorial. So what's Obama do? Obliterate the separation of powers. Act unilaterally without Congress. What better way to shred the Constitution or spit on it than to do that, than to totally wreck to smithereens the whole concept of the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances, which has worked for over 200 years.
What better way to render the Constitution inapplicable than to flood this country with victims of this country the world over, because anybody alive who is not experiencing the bounty and the prosperity available in this country is a victim of this country. That's what they believe. The colonial instincts behavior or the imperialistic tendencies of this country or the use of our military, it all fits that meme, if you will. So, in other words, acting alone, as Obama is threatening to do, is the undermining of the process that creates laws in our constitutional republic. Acting alone, or threatening to, is a calculated act of -- oh, what's the word? Insurrection?
It's a calculated act of opposition and protest against the Constitution and what it means. And in so doing, that is supposed to communicate to Hispanics and the rabid left and all these victims out there that he cares about them, that he is tearing down all of these walls that exist to keep the poor and the downtrodden out, because, after all, that's what America did at its founding. It's right there in the Constitution. We established a supposed free and equal country with slaves in it. And for this they can't get past that, no matter what's happened, Civil War, 14th Amendment, all the things that have happened to deal with that, to fix that, those things don't matter. The original ratification is what serves to tick them off forever.