The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichelle Malkin Archive
20 Years: the Murder of Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy David March
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Two decades ago this spring, I was furiously pounding out the manuscript to “Invasion,” my very first book on the systemic failures of immigration enforcement in America. On April 29, 2002, as if to underscore the bloody consequences of open borders that I had been compiling, a violent illegal alien repeat criminal offender named Jorge Arroyo (aka Armando) Garcia assassinated Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputy David March during a routine traffic stop in Irwindale, California.

Garcia had been thrice-deported back to Mexico, twice-convicted for felony drug dealing and weapons violations, and was under investigation in two separate attempted murder cases when Deputy March pulled him over for a broken front light while on morning patrol. Despite federal law requiring criminal prosecution for illegal reentry into our country, serial invader Garcia never faced any action by the then-Immigration and Naturalization Service or the U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles to kick him out and keep him out. The career lawbreaker was working illegally as a cook at a Mexican restaurant on Deputy March’s last day on earth.

According to the L.A. County Sheriff’s office, what happened next was a deliberate, cold-blooded assassination.

Garcia “had stated to friends that he wanted to kill a police officer during a traffic stop,” the department discovered. “The suspect intentionally got stopped and waited for Deputy March to get in front of his patrol car so he could open fire, as Deputy March would have no place to take cover. Deputy March was shot several times in the head and chest.” One of his colleagues who rushed to the scene, Deputy Tiffany Burgoyne, recounted holding the beloved leader’s head in the ambulance on the “longest ride in her life” — and arriving at the hospital “covered in blood.”

Despite heroic attempts to save his life, Deputy March died and left behind devoted wife Teri, stepdaughter Kayla; and his tight-knit parents and siblings, dad John, mom Barbara, sister Erin, and brother John. Deputy March worked as a security guard, joined the Marine Corps and then entered the Sheriff’s Academy in 1996. He had served with distinction for seven years before giving his life at the age of 33 years young. At his packed memorial, a colleague read from a recent self-evaluation that Deputy March had penned, summing up his personal credo that was adopted as his department’s official credo after his murder:

“My goals are simple. I will always be painfully honest, work as hard as I can, learn as much as I can and hopefully make a difference in people’s lives.”

ORDER IT NOW

While a massive outpouring of support from law enforcement officers and an unforgettable hero’s funeral helped ease the family’s grief, their nightmare had just begun. It would be another four years before Deputy March’s killer was brought to justice after he immediately fled to Mexico and enjoyed pro-criminal extradition protections from his native country. “(I)t’s a slap in the face to me, it’s a slap in the face to what my husband stood for, and it’s a slap in the face to law enforcement,” Teri March testified before Congress in 2003. Her advocacy shed light on hundreds of similar illegal alien fugitive murder suspects harbored by Mexico to avoid life imprisonment.

When Garcia was finally taken into custody and turned over to the U.S. in January 2007, he was shackled with Deputy March’s handcuffs. He pleaded guilty to intentional killing of a police officer and will be locked up the rest of his life without parole.


When I saw his sister Erin March in Idaho last month, she donned a shirt honoring her brother emblazoned with his face, badge and creed. The March family, she told me, is “upset” by what the Biden administration “is allowing at our southern border.” Mom Barbara declared that “it’s a crying shame that 20 years ago people didn’t understand the seriousness of this issue and now things are out of control.”

“People don’t tend to act until an issue has some direct effect on their own personal lives,” Erin observed. “It’s just human nature. Now we have a literal flood of people entering this country illegally needing all kinds of assistance, and taxpayers are expected to carry the burden. Even worse, in the years since my brother’s death, the number of victims of illegal immigrant crime has grown exponentially. Now Americans are receiving their gut punch, but the damage has been done.”

Thanks to bipartisan America Last sellouts and globalist profiteers, the border remains a deadly sieve. But Deputy David March is not forgotten. Every year, for the past 20, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department has held an anniversary vigil at his memorial site.

A hometown park was named in his honor.

Deputy March’s nephew at his uncle’s memorial in 1993.

Deputy March’s nephew at his uncle’s memorial last year.

In a world endangered by cowardice, compromise and incompetence, Deputy March has inspired countless citizens to uphold tradition, honor, integrity and truth-telling. His creed — memorialized in “Invasion” — is still mine, too:

“My goals are simple. I will always be painfully honest, work as hard as I can, learn as much as I can and hopefully make a difference in people’s lives.”

Michelle Malkin’s email address is [email protected]

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Crime, Immigration 
Hide 35 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Ms Malkin like most illegal immigration opponents lack sincerity. Here is the “tell.” Ms Malkin writes: “The career lawbreaker was working illegally as a cook at a Mexican restaurant on Deputy March’s last day on earth.”

    An actual opponent of undocumented workers would demand that restaurant that employed the “career lawbreaker” be seized and closed. She would demand that the owner and the person who authorized the “career lawbreaker’s” hiring be imprisoned on felony charges for employing an undocumented worker. It is not a matter of punishing the “career lawbreaker.” It is a matter of punishing the business that paid him to live in the country.

    The problem is not the border. The problem is largely Republican small business who since the Reagan Amnesty for the undocumented in the 1980s, have learned they can employ undocumented workers to bid down wages.

    The answer to stopping illegal immigration is to seize the assets of businesses that employ illegal workers and to charge owners and hiring managers with felonies. There is plainly no stomach to do that or plan to do that? Why not? Insincerity. It is easy to complain about enforcement, that is a nice campaign issue. Republicans certainly don’t want enforcement because the goal of Republicans is to bid down business wages to Mexican levels.

    Low hanging fruit … why doesn’t ICE run around wealth neighborhoods and check the immigration status of the folks doing the landscaping and house painting? Then seize the homes of every case where an undocumented worker did the landscaping?

    That won’t happen–and until folks like Ms Malkin start campaigning for that to happen I find then all entirely insincere.

  2. Revisiting another senseless act of violence to duck saying anything about the war in Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  3. @Harry Huntington

    I coulda’ just kept it simple and used the [Troll] tag, as trolling is mostly what we get out of you, Harry. However, I’ll write to set the record straight.

    Mrs. Malkin has plenty to write about. As you know, she writes about many aspects of the cultural war we are in, as waged by the modern Communists

    Even just narrowed down to the Population Replacement Issue, there are lots of topic and lots of different aspects of the immigration invasion. Guess who covers every bit of it? VDare does. Michelle Malkin is a regular (syndicated) columnist on that site (which features mostly original writing), but she is also associated with the organization as one of its courageous defenders, rather than being a coward about it like most “conservatives”.

    I would bet money Mrs. Malkin would agree with your point on the punishment of businesses that hire illegal aliens (those “11 Million” that are more like 30 to 40 million). So would Peak Stupidity and I.

    However, that’s not what THIS column was about, Harry. There’s nothing “insincere” about not including everything and anything about the immigration invasion in one freaking column. That’s just your being a troll. Why don’t you quit that and actually ADD to the conversation. (You could have simply added your good point about punishing employers without criticizing the writer here like a dumbass.)

    • Agree: Adam Smith
  4. @Greta Handel

    For you and Harry Huntington:

    Got a point to make? Write your own damn column.

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
  5. @Achmed E. Newman

    This is another breathless moral whine about immigration that makes no argument about immigration, but proves Ms Malkin’s “deep concern.”

    First, the killers immigration status has zero to do with the killing. If he killed a police officer in Mexico it would be the same moral wrong. If he committed other crimes in Mexico it would be the same moral wrong. Thus, his being an illegal immigrant has no connection with the wrong caused by his criminality. His criminality is morally wrong wherever he does it.

    Second, if anything, this is an argument for banning guns. If guns were not so easily available to the illegals.

    Third, the actual crime is the business who employed the shooter. They are employing the undocumented and encouraging them to come to the US. Indeed, it is the casual way Ms Malkin treats that criminality that betrays the insincerity. The “enabler” of this is not lax US border enforcement. The enabler is the businesses who pay the undocumented and allow them to afford to live in the US, and to send money back to Mexico and central america. Border enforcement would be immaterial and unnecessary if there were no jobs.

    Fourth, the fact that the family of a police officer slain in the line of duty is upset and hurt is immaterial to any argument about immigration. Police get shot all the time. The identity of the shooter is immaterial to the fact of the shooting. When police are shot the issues are always training, equipment, and procedure. Perhaps this is a better case to illustrate that only two officer cars should be allowed to make traffic stops instead of the single officer stop in this case–better officer security. The “cause” here being bad police procedure not the fact of the shooter. Good police procedure protects against determined bad guys. Indeed, when you read the story again, it is not an immigration story. It is a bad police procedure story. The identity of the shooter has no causal relationship to what occurred. He could have been a former Navy Seal, a Catholic Priest, a newspaper reporter, or a world class tennis player. Same result. Being an illegal immigrant did not make the shooter here more criminal.

    Fifth, in dealing with the immigration issues the individual does not matter. Indeed, the whole reason we have an immigration debate is we allow emotional individual stories to confuse the argument. The argument is dollars and basic economics. Undocumented workers bid down domestic wages. The reason we have illegal immigration is that Republican small business owners want to bid down wages. I like to use landscaping as an example–take a walk around and see who is mowing everyone’s lawns. There is the problem. Those are the jobs citizens used to do. Lots of high school and college kids cut lawns in the summer and earned college money. They can’t get those jobs anymore. The business response will be “kids won’t take those jobs.” And that response is correct, kids won’t take the jobs at the garbage wages paid to the illegals. When you eliminate the undocumented workers you bid of wages to market competitive levels.

  6. @Achmed E. Newman

    Thank you, Achmed. Also: Anyone who has read INVASION, SOLD OUT, OR OPEN BORDERS, INC., or hundreds of my other columns since 1992 would know where I stand on punishing traitorous businesses and sovereignty-sabotaging Republicans…

    • Thanks: Angharad
    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
  7. @Michelle Malkin

    Ms Malkin wrote in her column:

    Garcia had been thrice-deported back to Mexico, twice-convicted for felony drug dealing and weapons violations, and was under investigation in two separate attempted murder cases when Deputy March pulled him over for a broken front light while on morning patrol. Despite federal law requiring criminal prosecution for illegal reentry into our country, serial invader Garcia never faced any action by the then-Immigration and Naturalization Service or the U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles to kick him out and keep him out. The career lawbreaker was working illegally as a cook at a Mexican restaurant on Deputy March’s last day on earth.

    Ms. Malkin
    I appreciate your response directed to another commenter, but we can look at one paragraph (and a few related facts) and question your commitment in how you approached this article.

    First, this took place in 2002. George W. Bush was President. All of the federal decision makers were Republican appointed. You leave that key fact out of the article.

    Second, you state in this paragraph that the bad actor was previously deported three times. That would extend back into at least the Clinton years. That is good evidence the Feds were doing exactly what you want. Catching, prosecuting, and deporting the bad immigrant actors. What else do you want the Feds to do? Chain him to a rock in Mexico?

    Third, you indicate the Feds and LA (or some jurisdiction) were looking to prosecute him for attempted murder. That sounds like the Feds were on to this guy and sought to put him in jail for 20 years and then deport him. That again sounds like exactly what you want. The reason that they did not have the case together at the time of the killing is not discussed in your article. Did you investigate the hold up in the attempted murder investigation? Likely the problem was the witnesses themselves were illegals who refused to testify unless they were spared deportation. You should have told us more facts about the incomplete investigation. We know becusae he had been deported three times previously that deportation itself was not a deterrant to anything with him.

    Fourth, you mention the bad actor worked in a business but you do not name the business, the business owner, or tell us if the business owner donates to any politicians. You also don’t tell us what businesses employed the bad actor on his previous trips to the US. Given that the bad actor had been three times deported, the failure here was not US immigration policy. The failure was that business in Southern California on four occasions enabled and funded the bad actor to come to California and work. That is your story and you bury it. What is worse, is the bad actor knew that a history of deportation would not deter another business from hiring him because business faced no consequences from hiring him. What happened to each of the businesses that hired him? You don’t report that.

    Finally, and you have missed this entirely, you actually prove border enforcement is not an effective policy. This man had been deported three times. Arrest and deportation fails because folks will simply cross the border again. Plainly the only target to stop illegal immigration is the employers. If there were not jobs they would not come, again and again and again.

    This bad actors shooting of a deputy had zero to do with his illegal immigrant status. It did not cause the crime. This man’s presence in America was not caused by failed immigration policy. He had been deported three times and was about to go to prison for murder. This man’s continued presence in America was due entirely to the fact that a business would employ him and was not punished for hiring him.

  8. @Harry Huntington

    Harry, thanks for the reply. What I get out of it is that a) you don’t know about very much of Michelle Malkin’s writing, and b) you didn’t even read this column thoroughly. I’ll address your 5 points:

    1) Sure, he’d have killed the guy whether an illegal alien or not. Did you not read? He came into this country MULTIPLE times. If he had been stopped from illegal entry even ONCE, he could not have shot the cop in Los Angeles, could he have?

    2) Guns are available to anyone in this country. I am very glad for that. However, as the NRA rightly says “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” This guy was an outlaw by definition – an illegal alien.

    3) No shit. Both I and Mrs. Malkin agree with you. She can’t write about every aspect of immigration control in the one column, get it? Sure, this column could have been about the employer, but it was about more specifically the shooting. Tell you what, Harry, if the left can get away with one picture of a dead baby on the shore of the Mediterranean to import MILLIONS of Africans to Europe, how about you let Michelle Malkin tell a sad story once in a while, very much a story of failed border control, without telling her what she was supposed to have written?

    4) I don’t know enough about police work to comment on all of that, but I am in complete agreement with you if you mean a cop’s life is worth no more than lots of other people’s lives. There should not be special crimes specified for cop-killing vs. any other murder.

    5) No argument from me here either, but how about a suggestion: Go read one, two, or all three of the books that Michelle Malkin has already written. I admit I haven’t read but one (sorry, Michelle), but then I’ve read VDare for nearly 20 years. I would make another bet, that you will read pretty much what you wrote as your point (5) in one of these books.

    You get back to me on this, Harry. I’m not going anywhere.

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
  9. *Yawn* Ask me if I give a damn about dead cops.

  10. ‘Deputy March’s nephew at his uncle’s memorial in 1993.’

    Typo?

  11. @Achmed E. Newman

    Let’s focus on three points:

    First, this guy was deported three times previously. That proves the Feds are actively working (or were before 2002) to catch and deport illegals. That is the Policy Ms. Malkin wants. But deportation failed. This suggests that had he been deported a fourth or fifth time, if he was bent on killing a LA deputy, it would have happened.

    Second, there is zero evidence that short of militarization of the border (mine fields, machine guns, drones, agent orange to kill 10 miles of vegetation in Mexico, etc.) you can reduce border flows.

    That leaves

    Three, change the economics. Change the economics means every article must identify by name the employers and hold them accountable.

    As a strategy for political activism, breathlessly complaining about 20 year old killings does not prove one is a sincere advocate for reform. Breathlessly writing books on the subject is the same. Sincerity is demonstrated by focusing on actual cause and identifying actual solutions.

    There are many insincere breathless conservative writers (think Ann Coulter or the late Rush Limbaugh). The conservatives writers are all on the book and syndicated column gravy train.

    They make money by keeping issues alive not by solving them.

    This article is an example of where real investigative reporting could have told a much better story and pointed at actual policy solutions.

    As I have said in numerous recent comments, Ms Malkin is an excellent writer but she no longer seems interested in doing actual investigative work or actually naming names or discussing root causes.

    Perhaps Ms Malkin’s next immigration article could be an expose of the landscapers in her home state of Colorado who rely on undocumented workers … and the homeowners (dox the home owners) who use undocumented labor for their landscaping. Perhaps she should interview (or seek to interview) the homeowners and ask them why they use illegal labor?

    Just think how strong this article would have been if Ms Malkin went to interview the business owner who employed the cop killer? Ask the business owner, why did you employ an illegal worker?

    A retrospective on a 20 year old killing is not usually good reporting unless it teaches us something new. This one did not even teach us something old.

  12. Angharad says:
    @Harry Huntington

    You had me until you got to the “banning guns” part.

    NO.
    NO.
    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

    To anyone who doesn’t like guns – GET OUT. GET OUT OF AMERICA. LEAVE GO GIT.

    The 2nd Amendment was put in place in order to defend those that would harm us or our kin, and specifically the Government. I want military grade weapons for EVERYONE because that’s what’s needed.

    The other element of your reply to Achmed is the bat feces CRAZY assertion that the identity of the officer’s killer, “The identity of the shooter has no causal relationship to what occurred. He could have been a former Navy Seal, a Catholic Priest, a newspaper reporter, or a world class tennis player”. WRONG. None those types would drive around with the stated intent to murder a cop, or anyone, during a traffic stop. The invading mestizo savage did THAT and DNA Uber Alles.

    Are you bipolar or something? You did so well with your first comment – and the second one went all screwy looey.

  13. One less bloated pension for the taxpayers of California to pay.

    Good riddance.

  14. @Harry Huntington

    You seem to be someone who is literally obsessed with writing lengthy screeds always in disagreement with Michelle Malkin. It is entertaining reading however I regret to tell you, you always end up as a distant second-best – you lose the argument every time. I congratulate you for your consistency!

  15. Exile says:
    @Harry Huntington

    First, the killers immigration status has zero to do with the killing.

    Bullshit. If the killer wasn’t in America that day, the killing doesn’t happen. Simple as.

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
  16. The cause of the problem that directly caused the death of David March is the fact that the US is a deeply diseased society. It’s a society that’s run by greed, the greed of politicians, the greed of business owners, the greed of the individual to pay the lowest price for goods and services without appreciating that something has to give if something has a ridiculously low price. The importation of millions of Mestizos and Indians from Central and South America comes with a price, you get cheap food and garden maintenance, but with horrendous social costs. In addition to this you get a certain ethnic group who want to destroy every vestige of European civilization on the planet taking advantage of the migrants to sew discord and disharmony all over the country, already adding to a hundred other problems they’ve caused. Even if the problem of migrants were solved tomorrow, the problem would come back in a few years unless we radically changed ourselves and our society.

  17. @Harry Huntington

    First, this guy was deported three times previously. That proves the Feds are actively working (or were before 2002) to catch and deport illegals.

    Uhhh, not exactly, Harry. It’s a matter of your wording. The Feds, as commanded from above, are making almost ZERO effort to deport illegal aliens in general. There are efforts made to deport the seriously criminal element among them, like this guy. Did you read “…twice-convicted for felony drug dealing and weapons violations, and was under investigation in two separate attempted murder cases…”?

    There’s a big detention center for the worst of these guys right on the airport property in Alexandria, Louisiana. A company formerly called Swift Airlines, now iAero group, flies about 30 737s, and they have been doing the job of flying these people, in true “Con Air” fashion, down home via Miami. However, they have been acting as flying whores lately, doing the Bai Dien administration’s Human Trafficking of illegals from the border well up into the American interior.

    That’s off the subject to a degree, but let me get back to it. You say the “deportations failed”. Whaddya’ mean, failed? Are you telling me that the guy never made it to Mexico because the airplanes all broke down and diverted? No, I’m sure the deportations were successful, Harry. This didn’t matter though, as relying on deportations doesn’t MEAN ANYTHING when the US southern border is wide freaking open! I’ll continue in a minute on that note …

  18. @Exile

    The only point you might be able to make was that if he had been deported the day before, he would have killed a different police officer on a different day the next time he returned to America. He had been deported three times previously. As I suggest above, short of militarizing the border (which will never be done), this man would return no matter how often he was deported because he could easily find employment.

    Therefore, there is no connection between the man’s immigration status and the killing. He did not kill because he was an illegal immigrant.

    By the same token, I would note, had he started his day at a different time and driven a different speed, he likely would have confronted a different officer. Ms Malkin states the killed of “an officer” (not necessarily this officer) was pre-meditated. Thus, changing time of start and speed of drive, there would have been a killing but a different officer would have died.

    Again, the result would have zero to do with his immigration status.

    • Replies: @Exile
  19. @Harry Huntington

    Second, there is zero evidence that short of militarization of the border (mine fields, machine guns, drones, agent orange to kill 10 miles of vegetation in Mexico, etc.) you can reduce border flows.

    I have nothing against militarization of the border, as that’s called defending your country in a sane society, but your statement is complete bullshit anyway.

    We heard all these complaints about the money for the border barrier (Trump’s “wall” terminology was just a good sound-bite to me, a wall not being strictly necessary) back 5 years ago. That was a crock, as the money to build a decent border barrier would be no more than 1/2 a day’s Feral spending, even for a non-Kung Flu-panic year! Read Peak Stupidity from that time period with back-of-the-envelope cost estimates for a simple 2 runs of strong chain-link topped with concertina wire, a couple hundred yards in-between, stations every mile, and 10’s of thousands of cameras that cost about nothing these days. Here is Border Control vs. the interstate highway system about the cost of building a simple well-working border barrier and here is Border control maintenance vs. defending some Koreans from other Koreans about recurring costs of manning it.

    Spoiler alert: Half of these American soldiers, sailors, and airmen who have been in Korea for 70 years (no, not the same freaking guys!) could control the border easily, with no 8,000 mile logistics chain. We’ve got an invasion going on, yet we have 25,000 US military people in Korea. WTF?!

    Actually, I’ll tell you WTF: There are people at the top that don’t WANT it done. They are bent on replacing the American White Middle Class with compliant peons of every sort. It’s not just about the D-votes – it’s a little bit more than that. It’s going swimmingly, BTW, no Rio Grand pun intended…

  20. @Harry Huntington

    I don’t know what this whole “breathless” theme of yours is about, Harry. OK, granted, Rush Limbaugh has been breathless for a couple of years. R.I.P., El Rushbo.

    Perhaps Ms Malkin’s next immigration article could be an expose of the landscapers in her home state of Colorado who rely on undocumented workers … and the homeowners (dox the home owners) who use undocumented labor for their landscaping. Perhaps she should interview (or seek to interview) the homeowners and ask them why they use illegal labor?

    Perhaps it could, Harry. Perhaps it could.

    Oh, perhaps she has already written about the employment and Welfare State American taxpayer giveaways being the main thing that draws in illegal aliens of all sorts (not just Hispanics, BTW, as there are millions of Chinese and Indian illegal aliens too). Perhaps you have missed this writing because you have not read her books or many of her previous columns.

  21. It’s very brave and even exhibits super human patience that Michelle would continue to write on the many abominations that have occurred in my home state of California. The reason is that the “leadership” of California, from Governor Gavin Newsom, right down to the average democrat party local city council member, have stated innumerable times, that California accepts anyone, from anywhere and that there are no illegal aliens. Essentially the message from these fools is that anyone in the world can come to California and live here illegally, receiving taxpayer benefits, in total violation of every single immigration law on the books. No life taken by any illegal alien( and that is a big number) has ever moved a single democratic politician in California. But, thank you for soldiering on any way Michelle

  22. @Achmed E. Newman

    My point doesn’t require a column:

    Mrs. Malkin was once Uncle Sam’s cheerleader at every away game. She recently has said she’s reconsidered her Exceptional! warmongering, but she’s yet to put her new boots on the ground and write anything about Ukraine. She should do so, and use her remaining influence to save innocent lives.

    Do you disagree?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  23. Anonymous[970] • Disclaimer says:

    Invaders should be machine gunned, mined, and droned at the border, including children. Sorry. Kill, kill, kill. Problem solved.

  24. @Greta Handel

    Greta, I’ll take your word for it that Mrs. Malkin was once something of a Neocon and has since reconsidered. I don’t know, but maybe she thinks as I do and would answer “yes” to the question “Is the Russia/Ukraine War another piece of Infotainment?” I’m not saying it’s not very serious for those involved, but for Americans, as the newest Big Story on the news, it’s a distraction from the accelerating slide into financial doom and the wide-open border and other entry points that is Biden Admin policy.

    This column is about a cop who was murdered due to the nearly-wide-open borders policy that has been in place for a few decades already. He is one of many who are hurt by the immigration invasion in various ways. Do you disagree with that?

    I am glad that this writer is concentrating on American lives. If she ends up writing about the Ukraine, well, more power to her – I don’t care about it very much.

  25. Green says:
    @Harry Huntington

    Or maybe some the crime happened 20 years ago the point is moot. It’s not likely the restaurant is still open today and owned by the same people.

    But you use that line as a “tell” so you can disbelieve whatever your told so you can confirm your confirmation bias.

    I’ll bet there are 20 year old articles that identify where that KILLER worked.

    Tell me, which is the biggest crime – crossing a boarder illegally, working in this country legally, being involved in gang life, seeing out deliberately to murder a police officer, fleeing the country and hiding out in his own country, being protected in his own country even though he purposely traveled illegally to another country and MURDERED one of their public servants; or is it leaving out the name of a restaurant that have a criminal a means to remain in this country while he joined a gang and set in motion his plan to kill a police officer? Obviously it’s leaving the name out of the article. Your whole argument depends upon it.

    No wonder this country is doomed.

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
  26. It hilarious that some people think catch and release is a good policy. No, a good policy would be to close the border and not let anyone through.

    Democrats don’t want good policy though. They want anything that will bring about the destruction of America more quickly.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  27. @Green

    The biggest crime is for an illegal alien to work in this country (which is illegal) and constitutes an economic attack on the middle class by bidding down wages. Every illegal employed in the US every day bids down wages for working citizens. Arguments that some illegal committed a murder are a distraction from the real issue–which is economic. The “criminals” in the employment of illegal aliens are not the aliens, they only want a job, the criminals are the businesses that engage in the economic attack on citizens.

    In this case, the illegal alien status had zero causal relation to the crime. Being illegal did not cause the murder. Being illegal was a circumstance of the murder. People shoot at police officers all the time–avoiding being killed by bad actors is part of the police job. Good police practices designed to keep officers safe work the same way whether the bad actor is a citizen or an illegal alien. The best police practices typically work to keep police safe from bad actors. As I also said, this is really a police practices story for how to approach traffic enforcement. Ms Malkin would not have written this article at all if the shooter was a middle aged white guy named Fred who decided to shoot a police officer. How many other people shot police officers in 2002? Where are those retrospective stories?

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
  28. @Harry Huntington

    This is a solid argument:

    Ms Malkin would not have written this article at all if the shooter was a middle aged white guy named Fred who decided to shoot a police officer. How many other people shot police officers in 2002? Where are those retrospective stories?

    but there’s more to it than that. Also notable about her selections for sympathy and outrage is the disproportionate number of soldiers and police officers among the victims.

    This veneration of armed, uniformed authority for years helped Mrs. Malkin sell all the Exceptional! wars for Uncle Sam. Apparently, she still thinks it’s a reliably hot button for her audience.

  29. Exile says:
    @Harry Huntington

    Americans didn’t need this guy – he needed America. His presence was an entirely unnecessary risk. Every crime committed by an immigrant is an unnecessary crime, doubly so for illegal immigrants.

    Most immigration shills know to steer clear of this third rail but you’re trooping along as if we’re all dumb enough to let you lawyer your way through it.

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
  30. Mike Tre says:
    @Harry Huntington

    “Ms Malkin like most illegal immigration opponents lack sincerity. Here is the “tell.” Ms Malkin writes: “The career lawbreaker was working illegally as a cook at a Mexican restaurant on Deputy March’s last day on earth.”

    While it’s a valid point, it’s a separate issue and of no direct relevance to the theme of Malkin’s article.

    The rest of your comment is partisan nonsense.

  31. Mike Tre says:
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Yeah, except your cartoon got the ethnicity of the cops wrong. Here is a photo of the Uvalde Swat team that was too busy tasering terrorized parents to deal with the school shooter:

    Perhaps your artist doesn’t have a brown crayon.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  32. @Exile

    If you read carefully, I said the way to stop illegal immigration is to punish employers severely. I would like to see felony prison time for persons who hire illegals, and asset seizures for those who employ them. That would mean if a chicken plant had a single illegal, we seize the chicken plant. That would mean if an illegal cut your lawn, we seize your house. The rule is zero tolerance. A single illegal is sufficient to seize the business.

    I also contend those who do not embrace this position are actually insincere about immigration. Short of militarizing the border, we will not stop illegals. Illegals will not come to America if they cannot find employment.

  33. @Harry Huntington

    Dude, you are just thick as a brick. Those of us who bring up the illegal alien crime also want to shut down employers who hire illegal aliens and also would be glad to militarize the border if it came down to it. (As I wrote, that’s not strictly necessary, if you just build a decent border barrier.) Oh, and then there’s the LEGAL immigration. How about a 50 year moratorium, keeping it at under 100,000 or so?

    It all goes together when you are against the immigration invasion. Thing is, it just can’t all fit in one freakin’ column, got it?!!

    Hey man, you didn’t bring up the millions of LEGAL immigrants, from the most foreign place in the world that come every year, you insincere bastard!

  34. @Harry Huntington

    “Illegals will not come to America if they cannot find employment.”

    Do you actually believe that? As long as we’re not relying on actual hard facts, allow me to guess that we could end ‘legitimate’ employment of illegal aliens completely, and still enjoy their enrichment by the hundreds of thousands per year for at least another decade or two to come.

    Filling the gap will be government services and (for the time being) a higher standard of living, not to mention a ready supply of relatively affluent targets, and work of the untraceable under-the-table or outright criminal kind. Hell, it would be worth it for a lot of illegal parents to remain unemployed in the US as long as their children are granted automatic citizenship.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Michelle Malkin Comments via RSS