{"id":15837,"date":"2017-12-07T08:46:45","date_gmt":"2017-12-07T13:46:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=15837"},"modified":"2018-12-28T12:28:41","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T17:28:41","slug":"washington-post-says-support-wall-white-nationalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2017\/12\/07\/washington-post-says-support-wall-white-nationalism\/","title":{"rendered":"Washington Post Says Support for Wall = \u201cWhite Nationalism\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Recently, the Washington Post<\/em><\/a> ran a piece in its Political Analysis section asking the question, \u201cWould a wall have kept Kate Steinle\u2019s killer out of the country?\u201d The answer: those who support a wall on the southern border<\/a> are \u201cwhite nationalists.\u201d<\/p>\n

Huh? We\u2019ll the Post<\/em>\u2019s argument goes something like this\u2026.<\/p>\n

According to a 2006 analysis by Pew Research<\/a> \u201cas much as\u201d 45 percent of the illegal alien population overstayed a visa. The Post<\/em> says that signals a shift in the way in which illegal aliens are entering the U.S., so a border wall is a bad investment<\/a>. Walls are expensive, and they only stop entrants without inspection (EWIs), not visa overstays.<\/p>\n

We\u2019re not sure how the Post <\/em>\u00a0did the math on that one but that would mean a majority<\/em> of the illegal alien population snuck over the border. And it\u2019s a pretty reasonable assumption that a 30 foot wal<\/a>l would have kept most of those folks out of the United States<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In any case, the supporting evidence gets even more attenuated. The Post <\/em>notes that most contraband entering the United States passes through ports-of-entry in passenger vehicles or tractor trailers. The intimation seems to be that because unlawful goods go through border checkpoints, illegal aliens must do so, too.<\/p>\n

Of course, analogizing the manner in which people cross the border to the way in which goods make their transit is a classic apples to oranges comparison. It doesn\u2019t take into account the fact that most EWIs just walk over the border at a remote location. Moving several thousand pounds of illicit narcotics involves entirely different logistical requirements \u2013 like a paved road that will support a loaded truck.<\/p>\n

How is any of that germane to the Steinle case<\/a>? That isn\u2019t particularly clear since no one \u2013 not even the Post<\/em> \u2013 is claiming that her killer Juan Ines Garcia Zarate entered the U.S. legally and overstayed his visa or had anything to do with smuggling contraband.<\/p>\n

So, would a wall have prevented Kate Steinle\u2019s death? It\u2019s pretty obvious that the Washington Post<\/em> isn\u2019t interested<\/a> in answering that question. It would rather just brand anyone who believes in securing our borders as a \u201cwhite nationalist.\u201d (And by the way: Yes, a properly constructed wall would most likely have kept Mr. Garcia Zarate out of the U.S. Kate Steinle\u2019s death was preventable<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

The Washington Post <\/em>pompously claims on its masthead that \u201cDemocracy dies in the dark.\u201d Apparently good journalism<\/a> does too.