“Ellmers [is] . . . working hard to secure the border and fix our broken immigration system once and for all. No amnesty, period.” – TV ad for Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC) sponsored by the Mark Zuckerburg-backed group, Americans for a Conservative Direction.
Fact Check: This ad and a similar radio ad initially will cost $150,000, but that is small change to Zuckerburg, the billionaire CEO of Facebook. Zuckerburg favors the version of “immigration reform” will provide him with steady stream of cheap tech workers. Tech interests support amnesty to cement their legislative alliance with open border advocates.
So why is Zuckerburg supporting Ellmers if she stands for “No amnesty period?” Well, the fact of the matter is that she does support amnesty. In an op-ed she wrote for the Fayetteville Observer, she stated that she was for “earned legalization.” Legalization of illegal aliens, whether “earned” or not, is still amnesty. And it still rewards foreigners who have broken our laws, while encouraging more of them to come and do the same.
In fact, it is no secret to informed people that Ellmers supports amnesty, so much so that she’s facing a Republican challenger, Frank Roch, in North Carolina’s primary on May 6th. Roch is making Ellmers’ stance on immigration an issue. Still, that doesn’t keep Ellmers from trying to cover it up. On the Laura Ingram radio show, Ingram interviewed Ellmers about the race. During the interview, Ellmers denied supporting amnesty, but later responded with cliché talking points commonly used by amnesty advocates.
Said Ellmers, “We have to deal with those who are here illegally, who are living in the shadows. That’s what we have to deal with.” Ingraham replied, “What you said is infuriating to my listeners. . . . Your responsibility . . . is to your constituents who are legal residents and American citizens whose lives are slipping away from them right Ellmers responded by insulting Ingraham, calling her “small minded” and “ignorant.” More recently, at a meeting with constituent Ron Woodard who questioned her position on amnesty, the congresswoman called him a “racist.”
Woodard noted Ellmers’ “arrogance,” but it probably comes in second to the arrogance of Zuckerburg and his group. Apparently, they understand that amnesty is not popular with most Americans. So they calculate that they can sway support to Ellmers by claiming that she opposes it. Contemptuously, they calculate that they can deceive most people in her district with their misleading ad campaign.
Zuckerburg and company, it would seem, care as little for truth and integrity as they do for our nation’s rule of law.