|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Michael Bielawski
In the race for Vermont’s U.S. House seat, GOP candidate Mark Coester says he saw what are being called “rape tents” during a “horrific” southern border visit two years ago.
The comments were in a debate with Incumbent Democrat Becca Balint which occurred on Oct. 1, on Vermont Public. The debate spans several different issues including immigration.
The Coester campaign is now highlighting parts of this debate in their campaign emails, stating “Mark Coester confronts Becca Balint on border security failures in U.S. House debate.”
For her part, Balint asserted that she will be strong on border policies. She says the current leadership in Washington has “kicked the can for far too many years in the federal government.”
They were asked about the challenges of both the southern and northern border. Coester brought up the tents when talking about his visit to the southern border two years ago.
“Yes, the northern border has increased, I believe, 1,700% or more, more incursions than there had been in the previous 10 years,” he said. “The southern border, I went there to see it myself, back in ’22. It was horrific, absolutely horrific. You could look across and see the rape tents. You could see children’s—”
At this point moderator Mikaela Lefrak says “I’m sorry, what?” and Coester reiterates, “Rape tents. You could look across the border and see the rape tents.”
Lefrak disputes this assertion, saying “OK, I have not seen any evidence of a rape tent.”
Coester doubles down, saying, “You could see — I saw them in person. You could see the cartel on the hilltops, not only on the Mexican side, but on the U.S. side, in camouflage. Everywhere you looked. I was there for more than 24 hours. We were handing out water bottles and snacks and Bibles in Spanish with a number to call if people got in trouble.”
According to a report by Doctors Without Borders, they interview witnesses and victims of these tents. Their report focuses on a land bridge that travelers from South America must pass through to get to the States.
It includes an interview with one of the victims who says she was raped five times. Her name was not used in the report.
“Like many migrants, she was forced by the economic conditions in her country to cross the Darién Gap, a route that is described as one of the most dangerous in the world,” it states.
The report offers some statistics. It says, “In October alone, MSF teams assisted 107 survivors, including 59 people in one week—which equates to one incident of sexual violence occurring every three hours. Three of the rape victims were children aged 11, 12, and 16.”
At the debate, Coester suggests that existing immigration laws are not being enforced.
“Follow the existing laws,” he said. “That’s that’s the thing. First, you need to follow the existing laws. Enter only through a port of entry, and then we can negotiate some sort of immigration reform. My, my wife, came into this country legally from the Ukraine.”
Balint talks about fentanyl and working on legislation
Balint took her turn to talk about immigration and she focused on the legislation she’s been working on.
“There was a border bill that came, bipartisan border bill, in the Senate that would have infused more money, significant more money to hire more border patrol agents, more asylum judges, more technical assistance to detect fentanyl, which I know is a ravaging so many, so many families here in Vermont.”
She suggests that some treatment of border crossers is too harsh, saying, “I think it is absolutely understandable that we do want a safe and secure border, and we also have to treat migrants and immigrants and people seeking asylum with dignity and humanity.”
Her page for the U.S. House further reiterates these positions, and notes that she is “the daughter of an immigrant and someone who lost her grandfather in the Holocaust.”
Her page says, “Becca supports comprehensive immigration reform as well as surging resources and increasing efficiencies to reduce processing wait times and alleviate hardships faced by refugees, asylum seekers and other immigrants arriving in the United States.”
The whole interview spans several subjects where the candidates differentiate from one another, it can be heard/read at Vermont Public.
The author is a writer for the Vermont Daily Chronicle
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: politics
You could hear the moderator’s jaw hit the floor.
Federal Government and Local Government should not and never be in the Free-Marketplace of Businesses (energy, farming, water, internet, technology, etc.), or peoples’ lives – such as housing, schools etc.. That’s the problem of rising costs – government intrusion of regulations, restrictions, taxes, codes, permits, etc. Cut the Federal & Local Governments by 75%. The Federal Government was set-up for the defense of America, a sovereign nation, for example to stop the invasion from the both Southern and Northern Borders.
Watch A Line In The Sand – the documentary by James O’Keefe on the Tucker Carlson Network (tuckercarlson.com)
Mention the 20MM illegal entry crossings and Balint will just yawn. She’s counting on a Harris win in November to facilitate their go-big plan. December will be the tsunami of all tsunamis for illegal crossings if Harris wins. Followed by formally extending the right to vote (via citizenship) to all illegals and, with it, the right to bring all their relatives near and distant. Under the rules of DEI, illegals will be at the front of every line. First in the hierarchy. First in all things. You and your family? Last.
I watched the Coester-Balint debate for about ten minutes. Then I listened to it. The difference in my perception of the conversation stunned me. While I watched, Mark Coester appeared to be a rude, truck driving, redneck (my apologies to rednecks). His baseball cap was pulled down over his face as he peered out from under it as though he was some special forces military contractor. When introduced by Mikaela Lefrak, Coester barely nodded. Thus, no transcript of his responding to her introduction.
Becca Balint was, well, you know, a nice, polite neighborhood schoolteacher.
I was so disappointed in Coester’s demeanor; I couldn’t watch further. So, I turned off the video and just listened.
Wow!
Virtually everything Mark Coester said was fact of the matter. He didn’t pontificate. He didn’t exaggerate. He wasn’t verbose (just the opposite). Even when Lefrak pressed for more comment, Coester remained brief and matter of fact. Not only did the brevity of Coester’s remarks surprise Lefrak, Coester, in hindsight, skillfully turned the tables on Lefrak.
For example, we all know the example of a question based on a false premise – ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ Lefrak led right in with one. Under the guise of addressing rising costs, Lefrak said, “I want to ask you about manufacturing”. That was the bait. Then came the switch.
“President Trump’s economic plan centers on offering companies low tax rates to manufacture goods in the U.S., otherwise they’ll face sky high tariffs”, Lefrak stated. “but the data shows….”, yada, yada, yada.
Coester would have none of it. “Sounds like hearsay to me”, he said. Lefrak, taken aback, said, “Which part sounds like hearsay to you?” “What you’re saying”, said Coester. Lefrak, tried to regain her composure and restate ‘the switch’. I’m asking if you support corporate tax cuts”, she said.
Well, no. That’s not what Lefrak asked initially. She wanted to discuss rising costs and “to ask… about manufacturing”. And when she tried to insert her opinion on Trump’s policies, as though it was a fact of the matter, Coester exposed her false premise as ‘hearsay’. And he was right. Almost stuttering now, Lefrak said “OK, all right. Well, let’s move on. Congresswoman Balint”.
Balint then said, “[I] Really appreciate the question.” And then she rambled on with a Kamalaesque ‘word-salad’ on ‘price-gouging’ and Medicare price controls.
Lefrak presented almost all of the questions put to Coester with false premises. And he addressed Climate, Housing, Healthcare, Health Insurance, and Abortion, in the same concise fashion. Yes. Mark Coester is a bit rough around the edges. He’s not our typical silky smooth political orator. But upon watching, then listening to, and now rereading the transcript of this debate, it is clear to me that Mark Coester deserves our consideration.
Becca Balint, on the other hand, is a typical Vermont socialist who presents herself well, but knows little, if anything, about how the world actually works. I challenge any of Mark Coester’s detractors, or Becca Balint’s supporters, to pick apart the transcript of this debate and say otherwise.
No, Mark Coester doesn’t have a Vermont snowball’s chance in this upcoming election. But I will vote for him none the less.
@H.Jay Eshelman
>>>”Mark Coester appeared to be a rude, truck driving, redneck (my apologies to rednecks).”<<<
Why are you "apologizing" to truck driving rednecks? You said it exactly how you intended…derogatory. Making yourself seem rude and judgemental. Without those truck driving rednecks your house would be empty. Yet, as you listened without visual you got a better sense of the man. Like the old saying goes, never judge a book by its cover! Vote for the underdogs!
Just because some of these politicians dress and speak well and say things people want to hear doesn't mean they have common sense or our best interests at heart.
#HOYT4VTGOVERNOR❤️
It’s a problem, sophisticated speaking is not the sign of a good leader, it’s often the sign of a con man/woman.
Bet they didn’t ask about any campaign funding for Bailant.
yes the school teacher, who innocently tell your children to explore their sexuality a 7 years of age, that biology is a construct of society, that we are in a democracy, that the world is going to end, that school teacher?
Yeah, or the Dad who says, make sure you get your chores done and math problems solved for school tomorrow.
The people in North Carolina know who butters their bread in times of need. We are in times of need in Vermont, we need more leaders like this gentleman.
He gets lots of listening time to the propaganda while on the road, he was seasoned against their bs lies before going in. He should be the coach for the VTGOP, we’d get somewhere with people like him.
He wasn’t afraid of being cancelled and telling the truth. marks of good leadership.
You’re right, TJ. I would have been better served to have left my criticism at ‘rude’, and not emphasized appearance. But if you watched the debate, when he was introduced by Lefrak, Coester was rude.
Apparently, you missed the gist of the rest of my commentary – which was to emphasize that appearances can be deceiving, that despite his appearance, Coester responded well to Lefrak’s questions, and that Balint, as well presented and polite as she was, demonstrated that she knew little if anything about economics and she obfuscated every other question put to her.
And yes, Trump can be rude too. I wish he wouldn’t be. None the less, I support Coester’s and Trump’s policies hands down over their opposition.
So yes, again, you’re right. I said what I intended to say. I own it. And I’ll say it again. I don’t care for pretentious people from either side of the aisle. But I’ll continue to support Mark Coester and Donald Trump because, as sweet and ‘joyful’ as the opposition makes themselves out to be, their policies are dangerous and unacceptable.
PS: Most days of the week I appear much like Mark Coester. I drive a truck, wear a baseball cap with an American flag on it, and can be as rude as the next guy. But I’m not running for political office.
Re: “…sophisticated speaking is not the sign of a good leader, …”
Really? Why then are most good leaders sophisticated speakers.
A great leader does not need sophisticated speech to convey ideas, quite the opposite a great leader can convey complex ideas with simple speech that an entire populate can control.
Sophisticated speech is often used to hide, deceive and betray. Example?
Friendly fire vs, shooting your own troops
Military Police vs. we took military control of a country.
Product of Conception vs. a baby in the womb.
Safe and effective vs, untested, not effective and not safe.
Anything President Barak Obama spoke about vs…..the truth.
So no, well-spoken truthful speech is far more effective and honest. Qualities needed for good leadership.
We need to be wiser than snakes and more innocent than doves.
Name one great leader, Neil, who couldn’t articulate a thought, or a concept, and I’ll list ten who can. In fact, I can’t think of one leader who can’t (or couldn’t) verbally, visually, or through the written word, express their point of view.
And, as always, beware the false dichotomies. Just because someone is an articulate leader’ doesn’t mean they’re leading in a direction that ultimately benefits their followers. The world, especially the American political landscape these days, is loaded with examples of sophistry… even right here on VDC.
After all, a great leader must have great followers too, who, while perhaps not being articulate in their own right, can recognize snake oil when they see it.
President Obama Hope and Change
Marxist decoder ring of sophistry…
Your country will become a Marxist Hell hole, based upon the teachings of Saul Alinsky, my mentor and we’ll ruin this beautiful republic, via calling it a democracy, acting as a democracy and through that instability bring about a one world government.
How’s that? He was the great orator. He’s a vindicative punk, his true colors are showing now. Some of us saw them at first speech.
I’ll take “Clinging to my guns and religion for $1,000”
Neil, you just proved my point.
Not so sure about that Jay.
Sophisticated speech leads many Vermonters to believe that VPR is unbiased and truthful source of news. They are very sophisticated.
Sophisticated speech lead Gun Owners in Vermont to support Phil Scott.
Sophisticated speech led to the EB-5 scandal and cover up.
Sophisticated speech led many to believe that the teaching organization in Vermont is about education of the students and are open to discussion about making changes to reach that goal.
Sophisticated speech has led many to believe the founding of this nation was to be a democracy.
Sophisticated speech is a problem, which is why we are taught to judge a person by their actions, their character, not their silver toungue.
What is a community organizer? 🙂
Re: “Not so sure about that. Sophisticated speech leads many Vermonters to believe that VPR is unbiased and truthful source of news. They are very sophisticated.”
Again Neil. I asked you to name a leader, any leader, good or bad, who can’t (or couldn’t) verbally, visually, or through the written word, express their point of view.
I also said:
“Just because someone is an articulate leader’ doesn’t mean they’re leading in a direction that ultimately benefits their followers. The world, especially the American political landscape these days, is loaded with examples of sophistry… even right here on VDC.”
Both of your examples (Barack Obama and Vermont Public) are prime examples of skillful oratory used to mislead listeners.
‘Sophistry’, by the way, describes ‘A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument’.
It doesn’t mean sophisticated.
What is a community organizer? 🙂
A community organizer is someone who, of course, organizes a community. People like Jesus and Gandhi were community organizers. But so were Mao Zedong and Hitler…skillful orators all.
Jay, respectfully, you don’t know what a community organizer is, this is no different than 99% of the people. If you read rules for radicals, with an understanding of the intent, you would not have said what you did. This is the major problem across the nation.
People have no idea what a community organizer is and does, along with their methods.
It’s really not much different than BLM, but then most don’t know what BLM truly is either, so there’s that. This poor horse is pounded flat. Appreciate the back and forth…..
Coestner….proof that the game is rigged against conservative. They basically select some grifter nobody has ever heard of and tell him to look like a fool.
Last post on this:
Good to know old Mark has the endorsement of Log Cabin Republicans.
https://mark4vermont.com/endorsements/
Probably all two of them. Dang.
Why do we need legislation when the White House has the power to shut this down yesterday? Because they don’t want to!!!!!!!
You are correct. Our federal government passed legislation that supported the creation of “The Office of the New American.” I believe I have that name correct. Our legislature also passed legislation to set up a state program called “Office of The New American.” This is not a coincidence. The truth is that most countries are on the cusp of a population collapse where birth rates are below or almost below replacement level. I have read multiple books about the upcoming collapse of the international monetary system which is tied to this population collapse. Migration is the democratic solution agreed upon by governments and the international order. The United Nations put out a document in 2001 about Replacement Migration being the solution to aging and declining populations.
There is a lot more at the southern border than that, more than what the press or any politician will tell you. How do I know? I worked there for a year with the military and saw enough. We need to close it.
https://www.instagram.com/jamesokeefeiii/reel/DAUjdi2MkM1/?hl=en
James O’Keefe has done and is doing a great job exposing the corruption of the US government at both our northern and southern borders. Unfortunately, many well-meaning Customs and Border Protection agents have become dupes of the state, just as many good Germans also looked the other way when millions of Jews were being abused and murdered by the Nazis.
Jay Eshelman perceives what people who have talked to Mark Coester for more than 60 seconds already know: beneath that rough, workingman exterior is a first-class mind, not to mention an independent spirit, warm heart, and fire in the belly. I read the online debate comments calling him a dope, a fool, etc. There was an ignoramus in the crowd that night – indeed many of them – but it wasn’t Mark. Do I share his every view? Do I approve of his direct, sometimes profane manner of speech? No and not always. But I will take a free thinking independent over a member of The Squad every time.
Question/// Which leader told you to put on that stupid face diaper and line up and get the COVID KILL SHOT???? In Vermont, it was GOVIE and his stupid administration along with the house and senate members. You need to pick better leaders. Now i can become quite rude when it is in my best interest.
A fundamental element of Kamala’s campaign is supposed to be about womens’ rights…
It needs to be repeated that the disastrous pullout from Afghanistan overnight relegated half the population to the status of property. Also, the US southern border being controlled by criminal gangs is allowing for the trafficking of thousands of girls/women. That’s some record on women’s rights, democrats.