Did New York Times columnist Tom Friedman have a true epiphany resulting in a "flying pigs" moment when, after going on a tour of the border, he declared that a high wall as President Donald Trump has wanted is needed? Well, not exactly. His call for a high border wall probably comes more from desperate political expediency since Friedman has a history of extreme Trump Derangement Syndrome. He knows that the basically open borders position by the Democrats will be political suicide for that party in 2020 resulting in Trump's sure re-election. Therefore take his recent support of a high border wall with a grain of salt.
Friedman urged the construction of a high border wall in both his column as well as during The Situation Room interview with Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday.
WOLF BLITZER: You did a lot of reporting. You went to the U.S.-Mexico border. You have written a very powerful article. I recommend our viewers go to The New York Times and read it.
Among other things, you write this line -- quote -- "The whole day left me more certain than ever that we have a real immigration crisis, and that the solution is a high wall with a big gate, but a smart gate."
So you're talking about a wall. You want to wall along the U.S.- Mexico border, a high wall with a -- what you call a smart gate.
TOM FRIEDMAN: A big gate, a smart gate and a compassionate gate, I have said.
Wolf, I'm as radically pro-immigration as they come, but it's pretty clear to me that, unless we can assure a significant number of Americans that we can control our border, we're never going to have the proper immigration flow I think we need, we desire and that we have actually a moral responsibility, given our history, as a nation of immigrants and a refuge for people fleeing persecution.
I think the only way is a compromise on this. The tragedy -- and that's why my column was -- said Trump is wasting this crisis. A crisis is a terrible thing to waste. We have a president, actually, when you think about it, Wolf, he has that -- he has the chops with his base.
If he were to sit down, call Nancy Pelosi up, say, we're going up to Camp David, you bring your immigration team, I will bring mine, I will leave Stephen Miller at home, and we will actually sort out a compromise here, where -- because Democrats are ready to defend more border security.
But, at the same time, we're going to create a legal pathway for people here....
We need a compromise.
Friedman must have been in a state of hibernation a few months ago when both Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer refused any compromise at all by refusing even a cent of funding for a border wall.
BLITZER: When you say, though, you want a high wall with a big gate, a smart gate...
BLITZER: ... but a high wall, that's going to sound a lot of folks out there that's what Donald Trump wants.
FRIEDMAN: Well, I think you got to control the border.
When you have an increase of illegal -- apprehensions of illegal entries by -- of 374 percent since October, obviously, you have got a situation where the border security is not sufficient. And that's going to drive people who we should want to be pro-immigration against immigration.
Democrats have been willing to fund more border security, OK? I'm for a high wall with a big gate, a compassionate, a smart gate, so we can keep immigration going. But you're not going to do that. Wolf, if people think people can just walk into this country, they're not going to support the immigration that we need.
Unfortunately for Friedman the far left of that party will continue to refuse funding for border walls and none of their presidential candidates can hope to be nominated by supporting such funding. Just see how the Left reacted: "Thomas Friedman Goes Full Fascist After Border Patrol-Approved Immigration Tour."