Evans' death and Biden's immigration mismanagement
27 April 2022 By Abiodun Giwa
Bishop Evans - a member of the National Guard who drowned in efforts to save an immigrant suspected of drowning.
No one goes to work without a wish to return to their family. So producing a casket of any serving soldier is a sad moment for a president who receives it. And, equally a police officer shot and killed becomes a tragic moment for the family. Likewise, no one expects a police officer to kill an unarmed fellow and deprive him of the right to return to the family alive.
The heroism accompanying an officer or anyone losing his life trying to save another is exemplary. Bishop Evans, a young and vibrant 22 years old member of the Texas National Guard, drowned attempting to save the lives of an immigrant suspected to be drowning. Found dead three days later. The news of Evans' death opened a pandora box about President Biden's administration's immigration mismanagement.
The worst aspect of the development is an argument from the White House that the Texas government be held responsible for the accident leading to Evans' death. Information pieced together following a reporter's question to Jen Psaki show's the White House Press Secretary saying because the Texas government sent Evans to the border, the state government is responsible for his death. Texas government shot back that it protects the wall against illegal immigrants' reckless entry since the federal government has abandoned its responsibility.
The argument between the White House and the Texas government is a quick reminder of the struggle that the state government has put up in checking the influx of illegal immigrants. It begs for enlightenment on how people seek asylum, whether it is lawful for anyone to walk into any country without any documentation for asylum processing. It also strives for a question about whose responsibility it is to protect the entry points.
If it is the federal government's responsibility and fails to do it, and the state government decides to do it, who is guilty of dereliction of duty? Should not respect for the passage of the young national officer makes the federal government manage the situation not allowing senseless mouthing of shifting responsibility? Psaki would have dodged the question than saying Texas caused the officer's death. It happens when politics is allowed to come before a fiduciary duty. There would have been no cause for ordering the National Guards to the border If the government had done its job in addressing the illegal influx of immigrants.
How does the White House want the family of the affected officer to feel in this circumstance? How does the government want other guards in the National Guard to feel? Evans committed no crime. He served and protected his country's territorial integrity. He lost his life trying to save another. The government is spending billions to protect Ukraine from Russian invasion and leaves America's borders open to infiltration by cartels enriching themselves by moving immigrants to seek asylum.
The heroism accompanying an officer or anyone losing his life trying to save another is exemplary. Bishop Evans, a young and vibrant 22 years old member of the Texas National Guard, drowned attempting to save the lives of an immigrant suspected to be drowning. Found dead three days later. The news of Evans' death opened a pandora box about President Biden's administration's immigration mismanagement.
The worst aspect of the development is an argument from the White House that the Texas government be held responsible for the accident leading to Evans' death. Information pieced together following a reporter's question to Jen Psaki show's the White House Press Secretary saying because the Texas government sent Evans to the border, the state government is responsible for his death. Texas government shot back that it protects the wall against illegal immigrants' reckless entry since the federal government has abandoned its responsibility.
The argument between the White House and the Texas government is a quick reminder of the struggle that the state government has put up in checking the influx of illegal immigrants. It begs for enlightenment on how people seek asylum, whether it is lawful for anyone to walk into any country without any documentation for asylum processing. It also strives for a question about whose responsibility it is to protect the entry points.
If it is the federal government's responsibility and fails to do it, and the state government decides to do it, who is guilty of dereliction of duty? Should not respect for the passage of the young national officer makes the federal government manage the situation not allowing senseless mouthing of shifting responsibility? Psaki would have dodged the question than saying Texas caused the officer's death. It happens when politics is allowed to come before a fiduciary duty. There would have been no cause for ordering the National Guards to the border If the government had done its job in addressing the illegal influx of immigrants.
How does the White House want the family of the affected officer to feel in this circumstance? How does the government want other guards in the National Guard to feel? Evans committed no crime. He served and protected his country's territorial integrity. He lost his life trying to save another. The government is spending billions to protect Ukraine from Russian invasion and leaves America's borders open to infiltration by cartels enriching themselves by moving immigrants to seek asylum.
HTML Comment Box is loading comments...
