Since the terrorist attacks in Paris last Friday, most Republican presidential candidates have changed positions on whether they would accept Syrian refugees if they were the next president-elect. That’s only natural because new information surfaced in the aftermath of last Friday’s attack. Specifically, French authorities have verified that at least one of the ISIS terrorists that killed Parisians got into Europe using a Syrian passport.
Footnote: This isn’t a flip-flop. A flip-flop is defined by someone changing their position out of political expediency. Often, their statements change with which special interest group their speaking with. John Maynard Keynes supposedly once said something that should clarify the difference between flip-flops and changing one’s mind when he said “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, Sir”?
When asked about whether a Fiorina administration would accept Syrian refugees, Mrs. Fiorina said “she is not in favor of accepting refugees because they cannot be adequately vetted. Following a town hall in Plymouth, N.H., Fiorina told reporters she stands with state governors who say they will not accept refugees into their states. She said if the U.S. could adequately vet the migrants it would be a different situation.” Later, on the Kelly File, Mrs. Fiorina had this exchange with the host:
FIORINA: Well, first, we have to stop the flow of Syrian refugees. The truth is that most of these refugees are not 3-year-old orphans. Most of these refugees are young able-bodied men. Secondly, the former deputy director of the CIA, Michael Morell, a man I’ve known for a long time, particularly from the time I chaired the Advisory Board at the CIA, recently said something very chilling on the Sunday shows. He said that we’ve known for a very long time that ISIS was trying to build an attack capability in Europe. They’ve clearly succeeded in doing so and they are clearly focused on building an attack capability in the United States. We know from our own FBI Director that our domestic intelligence and security forces are overwhelmed by the number of perceived threats that they think are already in this country. So why would we add to that problem? Why would we add to that problem when we know we can’t vet these people?
MEGYN KELLY: You would add to the number of FBI agents. How would we do it? Donald Trump is already talking about possibly closing mosques. Would you do that?
FIORINA: I would not do that because I think that will inflame populations. What I would do, however, is absolutely add to the number of agents that we have on the ground. You know, here’s a startling fact, Megyn. We have more IRS agents than we have FBI and CIA agents. Does that strike you as a misallocation of resources? Of course it is.
The thought that there are more people investigating people for their tax payments than there are people trying to track terrorists abroad and terrorist cells within our borders is stunning. Only government would think that that allocation of resources is appropriate.
This weekend, French officials said they didn’t know this terrorist attack was coming. If there’s anything that should change ASAP, it’s making sure that law enforcement agencies that track terrorists get more agents. If the FBI, the CIA and the NSA don’t know which terrorist group is planning attacks, then it’s simply a matter of waiting for the next attack. At that point, it’s just a matter of when, not if.
The Obama administration should change its priorities but it won’t. Mrs. Clinton should change directions on killing ISIS but she’s essentially tied herself to President Obama’s ISIS strategy. Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have advocated different strategies for crushing ISIS.
If the American people want to just wait for the next terrorist attack, voting for Hillary Clinton is a viable option. If they’d prefer preventing ISIS-coordinated attacks before they happen, they’ll have to vote for Mrs. Fiorina. Sen. Rubio or Sen. Cruz. It’s that straightforward.