Understanding that there are two firm positions concerning the Open Border Crises, but many realties regarding its current, and, or projected real impacts to the functioning, sustainability of this Constitutional Republic: What position below best represents what you know to be true regarding this impactful policy?
0% The United States' must continue the Executive initiative of Open Borders until a Democratic Congress can codify full Demographic Inclusion by keeping the Biden /Harris Open Borders policy in place.
33.33% Our United States' borders are sovereign just as are our self-governed citizens, where borders must be maintained, monitored and defended, which is the position of core Republicans.
3.6% I am in favor of Open Borders to make my America more of a global community; however, the federal government must now fix problems that "Red State" governors have caused in our cities.
63.06% I do NOT favor the Democratic Socialists' disruption of the cultural fabric of my Representative Republic, and there will be Treasonous Hell to Pay when the certain calamity begins in earnest.
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) said that the island nation of Taiwan is not where it needs to be in terms of having the capabilities that it needs to repel an invasion from communist China.
McCaul made the remarks during a Saturday interview on NBC's "Meet The Press" that aired on Easter Sunday.
McCaul's remarks came as other top Republican lawmakers also warned on Sunday shows that the U.S. needed to increase its support of Taiwan to prevent a war from breaking out with China.
"They're not where they need to be. If we're going to have deterrence for peace, we need to get these weapons into Taiwan," McCaul said. "I sign off on all foreign military weapon sales. Twenty-two weapon systems over three years ago that have yet to get into Taiwan, onto the island. That will provide deterrence to Chairman Xi to think twice, you know, about an invasion."
McCaul, echoing recent remarks made by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), added that it was in the best interests of the U.S. and the world that Russia loses its war in Ukraine because that alone would serve as a strong deterrent against China invading Taiwan.
"I've talked to the prime ministers and the presidents of Japan, you know, South Korea, and Taiwan, what's happening in Ukraine will determine what happens in Taiwan and the Pacific," McCaul said. "I think the prime minister of Japan going down to Ukraine to signal their support - and he said himself, 'What happens in Ukraine today will happen in the Far East tomorrow.' I believe the best deterrence to Chairman Xi is a failure for Putin in Ukraine."
CHUCK TODD: Welcome back. Despite the domestic political divisions on full display this week, the effort that the United States made this week to show a united front on Taiwan was extraordinary, when you think about it, as lawmakers at home and abroad met with Taiwan's president and promised a U.S. commitment to the island's security. It was bipartisan. In response, China launched three days of military exercises in the Taiwan Strait, deploying at least 71 fighter jets into Taiwan's airspace and surrounding the island with war ships, all in an attempt to simulate a naval blockade. On Saturday, I spoke exclusively to House Foreign Affairs chairman Mike McCaul, at the end of his congressional delegation's visit to the island of Taiwan, and I began by asking him about whether the drills represented an escalation.
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: We have a large number of sorties, those are Chinese aircraft fighter jets in the air right now as I speak from the island. And this is in response to President's Tsai's trip to the United States, but also our delegation's visit to Taiwan and with President Tsai. This is an intimidation tactic that they're known for. The size of this one is - is quite large, one of the largest ones we've seen. And - but it's not going - it's not going to intimidate us. We have every right to be here, to meet with President Tsai. And it actually strengthens our resolve.
CHUCK TODD: The Taiwanese themselves seem to be downplaying this. Look, you've got a first-hand look. How would you assess their defensive capabilities right now?
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: They're not where they need to be. If we're going to have deterrence for peace, we need to get these weapons into Taiwan. I've - I sign off on all foreign military weapon sales. Twenty-two weapon systems over three years ago, Chuck, that have yet to get into Taiwan, onto the island. That will provide deterrence to Chairman Xi to think twice, you know, about an invasion. And, and secondly is the combat training that is occurring on the island. We need to ramp that up to a larger scale so they can provide that projection of strength and deterrence. They're not where they need to be right now.
CHUCK TODD: Do you have a sense of what the Taiwanese people want? And I say that in that we know pre-sort of what China did before it took over Hong Kong, it was always this sense that you know, a lot of people in Taiwan wanted some sort of relationship with mainland China that was negotiated, that was sort of respectful. Is that what they still want? Or do they think some sort of military confrontation is now going to be inevitable?
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: Well, they don't want a military confrontation. We certainly don't want that. I think after Hong Kong, it was a wake-up call for the people of Taiwan. President Tsai, we spoke with her today. That obviously helped her in her re-election. But I also think Putin's invasion in the Ukraine was an eye-opener, right? It - it woke up the Taiwanese people that now you're seeing what we haven't seen since World War II, and that is dictators invading sovereign territory and getting away with it. So Putin in Ukraine, wake-up call here. Chairman Xi in his addresses to his congress about wanting reunification of Taiwan to China, I think they're very nervous. Now there's a political debate here, the two different parties. One party wants to talk to China. President Tsai's party does not want to be a part of China. And I think the next elections in next January are going to be extremely important because I do believe with the former President Ma in China right now, China's going to try to influence this next election and take over the island without a shot fired.
CHUCK TODD: I want to play something that Speaker McCarthy said, because he - it seemed to at least shift a perception of where he is on the issue of Ukraine. Let me play it.
SPEAKER KEVIN McCARTHY: I think what's happening in Ukraine is an atrocity, and I think Ukraine - not just Ukraine, the world has to win there. What Russia has done is wrong. And a phase that I used, the "blank check," I use that for anything. Well, I look at every dollar of taxpayers that we would use. But the one thing I know that, in Ukraine, we have to win, because it also would save Taiwan at the same time.
CHUCK TODD: Are you reassured now, and should the Ukrainians, should President Zelenskyy be reassured that House Republicans are not going to stand in the way of more aid to Ukraine?
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: You know, I traveled with Kevin, Speaker McCarthy, to Poland, Romania. He's always believed this, felt this way. When you're over here, Chuck - when you talk to - and I've talked to the prime ministers and the presidents of Japan, you know, South Korea, and Taiwan, what's happening in Ukraine will determine what happens in Taiwan and the Pacific. I think the prime minister of Japan going down to Ukraine to signal their support - and he said himself, "What happens in Ukraine today will happen in the Far East tomorrow." I believe the best deterrence to Chairman Xi is a failure for Putin in Ukraine.
CHUCK TODD: I have one political question for you. I know this is a very bipartisan trip. Really, there's been - you know, not about partisan politics, and I know that's the message that's being sent. The Republican Party's had a rough week, your party here, while you've been overseas. You've had the former president's indictment. You had what happened to the conservative in Wisconsin, this situation in Tennessee. I don't know how closely you've followed that. But if you put all of it together, it's not a good look for the Republican Party. Are you concerned that the Republican Party is not being as responsive to, say, the middle of the electorate right now, whether it's on abortion, whether it's about Donald Trump, or even democracy?
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: You know, I have to say, Chuck, I'm kind of a Reagan Republican. I grew up, you know, 1980, first president I had the opportunity to vote for. I believe in what Reagan stood for, and I ask the question of my colleagues: What would Reagan do? Reagan, who brought down the Soviet Union, what would he do in Ukraine? What would he do in - with respect to Taiwan, and freedom, and democracy, and human rights, which Reagan stood for? I personally think my party needs to go to, you know, rejuvenate itself with the principles of Ronald Reagan, who I think was a very popular president for a lot of reasons. But what he stood for is what many of my colleagues stand for in the House and Senate. We may not just be the loudest ones in the House.
CHUCK TODD: All right. You seem to - I get that you sort of ducked this question, but do you think, right now, the party's headed in the wrong direction?
REP. MICHAEL McCAUL: No, I don't. I mean, look, we still believe in, you know, limited government, strong national security. There is a bit of an isolationist wing in the party that, you know, concerns me with respect to foreign policy. And we're going to have those internal discussions, you know, as a family. But, you know, I don't see President Biden's policies working so well. Since Afghanistan fell, we've been projecting weakness, and this is precisely why you're seeing aggression from Putin, and Chairman Xi, and the Ayatollah, and Kim Jong-Un, all four of them and the struggle for the global balance of power. And I think that the turning point was Afghanistan, when this president started to project weakness. So I think - I disagree with your premise. I think Republicans have a very strong argument when it comes to, particularly, national security and foreign policy.