President of the Young Democrats of Orange County, FL Rasha Mubarak Sponsors Anti-Semitic Hate Fest [Video]

Rasha Mubarak

Rasha Mubarak – CAIR Leader and President of the Young Democrats of Orange County sponsored an anti-semitic hate fest on December 8, 2017 at Lake Eola Park, Orlando, Florida.

CAIR, Young Democrats of OC, and Organize Florida held a rally protesting the United States moving our Israeli Embassy to Jerusalem, but that is not what really motivated them. You will see Rasha Mubarak’s friend Said Lutfi, scream every anti semitic, Jewish hating curse, in both Arabic and English at our camera.

We translated the Arabic curses and one of them was a veiled death threat inciting violence against our investigative team. You will see how a few of the Palestinian supporters use low level intimidation tactics that are laughable but always entertaining.

The United West investigative team learned some very interesting lessons at this CAIR sponsored Israel hatefest. Key takeaways from the video:

  1. We learned the Israeli Palestinian conflict is not about land but about religiosity. The vocal hatred of the Jews Said Lutfi proudly displayed had nothing to do with Israel. Lutfi and CAIR’s hatred of the Jews is personal.
  2. The Young Democrats of Orange County, FL partnering with CAIR for this Israeli hatefest is troubling. More troubling is the crowd standing silently as Lutfi utters every anti-semitic slur known to man. A sad day indeed for the Democratic party, unless you are an anti-semite then you will fit right in.
  3. We learned that CAIR, a “Civil Rights Group”, and the Young Democrats of Orange County must share the same views based on Garson Larza’s silence and the bigot Rasha Mubarak as their President.

Lastly, we learned the followers of Islam don’t even believe Jesus died on the cross so the lies of Said Lutfi about the Jews are false and motivated by a dark and evil hate.

The video camera is a powerful tool showing exactly what evil people do and more importantly when they do nothing.

Today we saw both and it is a stain on Orlando The City Beautiful.

The Battle between the Trust Orlando Coalition and the No Sanctuary City Coalition

This battle should not exist were it not for certain Mayors and Commissioners that refuse to obey and enforce federal law.

Back in June 29th, 2017 President Trump made the following statement regarding the passage of Kate’s Law and No Sanctuary for Criminals Act.

President Trump,

“[A]pplauded the House for passing two crucial measures to save and protect American lives. These were bills I campaigned on and that are vital to our public safety and national security. The first bill, Kate’s Law, increases criminal penalties for illegal immigrants who repeatedly re-enter the country illegally.”

“The second bill, the No Sanctuary for Criminals Act, restricts taxpayer grant money to cities that prevent their police from turning over dangerous criminal aliens to federal authorities. Sanctuary cities are releasing violent criminals, including members of the bloodthirsty MS-13, back onto our streets. Innocent Americans are suffering unthinkable violence as a result of these cities’ reckless actions. The House bill also includes what is known as Grant’s Las and Sarah’s Law. These provisions, which prevent the release of dangerous criminals awaiting removal proceedings, are named for two slain Americans whose parents I was able to spend time with during the campaign”

This battle over enforcing federal immigration law has now reached Orlando, Florida where the Mayor has chosen to make it an unsafe pseudo sanctuary city. I refer you to an article that was published in the “Orlando Rising” on Oct. 30th, 2017.

This article refers the Trust Orlando Coalition having made inroads to convert Orlando into a city where people of all races, backgrounds, religion, and IMMIGRATION status, are welcome!

To quote Mayor Dyer when speaking to a female DACA recipient:

“You have nothing to worry about – the Orlando police officers do not detain immigrants or inquire about their immigration status. The city and its legal department will continue to work with the Trust Orlando Coalition to show they are willing to step forward on this issue. The City will not focus on immigration enforcement but on making Orlando the best place in America to live, work, play, and raise a family”.

Ivan Velazques, a DACA recipient and activist who heads the “Florida Immigration Coalition” is responsible for the defeat of 9 anti-Sanctuary bills in the Senate back in May. They are seeking the TRUST Act from Mayor Dyer that sends a clear message to the “migrants” (illegal aliens) that they are welcome and protected in Orlando.

Legal Immigrants for America got involved to form a coalition of our own: The No Sanctuary City Coalition, to write a Resolution, and present it to Mayor Dyer and the Orlando City Commissioners to enforce and cooperate with federal law and deny the codifying of Orlando as a pseudo-Sanctuary City. The Resolution reads:

To: Mayor Buddy Dyer and Members of the City Council

Re: Resolution affirming that the City of Orlando, Florida shall continue to enforce Federal Immigration laws and regulations and shall not adopt Sanctuary City Policies

WHEREAS, certain municipalities and counties in the United States have adopted or implemented sanctuary city policies that limit cooperation with the federal government in the enforcement of immigration laws and regulations; and

WHEREAS, sanctuary city policies may prohibit the sharing of immigration information between local law officials and federal agencies; restrict the authority of local police officers to make arrests for federal immigration violations; restrict local police responses to federal immigration detainers; and implement other policies intended to limit cooperation with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); and

WHEREAS, failure to cooperate with the federal government in the enforcement of immigration laws and regulation may bring financial repercussions that will harm our lawful resident, both immigrant and native born, in particular the neediest and most vulnerable among us; and

WHEREAS, the City of Orlando is committed to enforcement of federal immigration laws and regulations; and

WHEREAS, The Orlando Police Department will send a notification to the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) upon reasonable suspicion that a person arrested for, or suspect of criminal activity, is not legally present in the United States as per ICE Detainer Form (1-247A) implemented April 2,2017; and

WHEREAS, the proper authority will respond to an ICE detainer until the end of an inmates’s scheduled release date. During this time, ICE may arrange to assume custody of any undocumented immigrants; and

WHEREAS, Purchasing requires that any City contractor or vendor rendering services or goods in an amount of $3,500 or more must provide a sworn certification of compliance with all federal immigration laws, including the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act; and

WHEREAS, The City of Orlando will abide and enforce all federal and local immigration laws equally amongst all people showing no favor or bias towards anyone group over another, end ‘Bias Free Policing’; and

WHEREAS, ICE and Customs Border Protection (CBP) will have full access to city facilities or person(s) in custody without a warrant; and

WHEREAS, The City of Orlando, Mayor, or by any Executive Order will not prevent Orlando police officers and city employees from asking about immigration status “except as required by federal or state statute or court decision.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Orlando, Florida:

1. The City of Orlando, Florida has no intention of adopting policies intended to restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws and regulations; and
2. The City of Orlando, Florida, under the direction of the City Manager, will continue to uphold all federal, state and local immigration laws, and cooperate with ICE, CSP, and other agencies in the enforcement of the same.

On the 11th of December about 20 of The No Sanctuary City Coalition representatives appeared in front of the Mayor to present our Resolution and defend it. The Trust Orlando Coalition had many representatives in the room. CAIR, La Raza, the local AFL-CIO, and organizations from UCF, unions, etc.

We will be publishing the u-tube video on LIFA’S Facebook Page. To watch it, go to: and then to Facebook.

LIFA believes that we need to emulate Governor Abbott or Texas and make our state immune from the Sanctuary City threat and aberration. Such a bill (HB-9) has already passed the Florida House, but has been held up in the Florida Senate. We all need to contact them

The Trust Orlando Coalition has about 34+ organizations that have joined to disrespect the laws of our country. They believe the higher the number of anti-American organizations they have the greater the chances for them to prevail.

We, The No Sanctuary City Coalition believe that we are on the right side of the issue. We believe that by illuminating the unfairness and biases of our politicians giving preference to the illegal criminal aliens over and above Americans and legal immigrants, that they should be considered in dereliction of duty and suffer consequences.

The open borders have attracted people from as many as 70 countries hostile to America. If they won’t obey the law, perhaps they will listen to We The People. I ask that you help us become greater in number as well.

Thank you and God Bless the United States of America!


Amapola Hansberger

Legal Immigrants for America


Amapola Hansberger was born and raised in Managua, Nicaragua. She attended a French Roman Catholic Academy. At the age of 18 she entered the United States as a US Resident. Studied English and Secretarial Sciences at UC Chatsworth. Went to work for Gene Autry’s TV station KTLA-5, Hollywood, Ca. as Executive Secretary for the Chief Engineer. Three years later, she went to work for NBC-4, Burbank, Ca. as Executive Secretary and Assistant to the CFO of Technical Operations. In 1973 she went to work for Pan American World Airways as a Spanish qualified Flight Attendant. She has been a licensed Realtor in California, Hawaii, and Florida and a real estate investor. She became a US Citizen in 1975. In 1979 she lost her country of birth to Communism. Amapola and her husband, James, founded Legal Immigrants for America. The voice of the voiceless legal immigrant, in Oct. 2014.


VIDEO: Nurse and Former Military Wife on What’s Wrong with Refugees Resettling to America

Suzanne Shattuck

Suzanne Shattuck is a Virginian, former military wife of 22 years with four grown children. As a nurse, Suzanne noticed the alarming number of immigrant patients who required translation services for treatment. This led her to research refugee resettlement and immigration in general and subsequently to the Islamic movement in America.

Suzanne became aware of the economic, security and health risks involved in the government run refugee program; and seeks to educate people of its lack of serious insight and transparency.

Please watch Suzanne explain the impact of refugee resettlement at the America – The Truth conference held in Sarasota, FL.


NYC Subway Bomber one of 141,501 Bangladeshi’s who came to U.S. via Chain Migration since 2005

Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. Taxpayers a Stunning $134.9 Billion a Year

EDITORS NOTE: Suzanne produces a 1 hour radio show called “Wide Awake” and contributes to several conservative websites. Her website is

New York attempted terror attack: Luck is not a policy

Luck is not a policy. That’s the mantra we’ve been hearing today on the cable news shows. Even politically-correct New York mayor Bill de Blasio and Governor Andrew Cuomo agreed this morning as they addressed the media that New York had been lucky.

There’s no way you can prevent this type of thing from happening, they suggested. It’s just a fact of life. So let’s all get together and praise our first responders.

Well, sure. The NYPD and the transit police responded admirably and deserve praise, after a wannabe jihadi from Bangladesh tried to blow himself up in Port Authority in an attempt to murder scores of innocents, all in the name of Allah.

Lucky for us he was incompetent and his bomb was either a fizzle or prematurely detonated.

But Mayor Bill de Blasio and his police commissioner, William J. Bratton, deserve a portion of blame, for dismantling effective preventative tools used by the NYPD since 2003 to identify potential Muslim extremists through a sophisticated threat-warning matrix developed in conjunction with the Central Intelligence Agency.

Eventually formalized into a 2007 document called “Radicalization in the West: the Homegrown Threat,” the 90-page primer on jihadi Islam and its telltale outward signs was banned by de Blasio and Bratton in 2014, following an extensive lobbying campaign led by Muslim activist Linda Sarsour and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a group closely associatedwith the Muslim Brotherhood.

Among the mosques previously under surveillance by the NYPD’s since-disbanded “Demographics Unit,” was the Bangladeshi mosque in Paterson, N.J., that was attended by Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, the jihadi terrorist who mowed down innocents along Manhattan’s West Side highway in October, killing eight and wounding at least a dozen more.

As of this writing, we do not know whether this morning’s Bangladeshi terrorist went to that particular mosque. But we do know this: If he attended any mosque in the metropolitan area, De Blasio and Commissioner Bratton have banned the NYPD from keeping it under surveillance or even communicating with mosque leaders to identify potential threats.

And that’s why the NYPD had no warning signs. Mayor de Blasio forbid it. DeBlasio and his politically-correct administration have been focused like a laser on defeating “Islamophobia,” a creation of Islamist activist groups that have successfully shamed Americans from identifying and eradicating Islamic extremism in our midst.

The watchword today from the PC police in New York is “see something, say something.” But that is completely cynical and an outright lie.

Well-meaning Americans who “say something” about Muslim clerics chanting before settling into their seats on domestic airliners, or about a Muslim youth building a clock that resembles a bomb, regularly get excoriated on the national media, and at times, even prosecuted or accused of “hate” speech.

Former Department of Homeland Security officer Philip Haney revealed in a recent memoir that this politically correct “see nothing” culture infected his own agency, where he was ordered to purge immigration records on Muslim green card holders with known ties to jihadi networks.

Rather than “see something, say something,” Haney said the prevailing culture during the Obama administration that continues until today is “see something, say nothing.” The alternative is lose your job, public shaming, prosecution, or all three.

ISIS has been defeated on the ground in Iraq and Syria. That is good news. But as the recently appointed Chief Strategy Officer at the Broadcasting Board of Governors, Haroon K. Ullah reveals in a new book, ISIS has morphed into a worldwide virtual terror organization that uses the Internet to recruit, instruct, and organize terror attacks, even without holding territory.

We will not defeat it by pretending Islam has nothing to do with motivating young Muslim men to commit jihad and kill innocents. Instead, we need to motivate Muslim scholars to repudiate that ideology and to promote alternate “narratives” for young Muslims in their own countries.

The de Blasio option of sticking our heads in the sand and pretending Islam has nothing to do with the jihadi terrorists seeking to murder us, is irresponsible — and deadly.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill.

Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. Taxpayers a Stunning $134.9 Billion a Year

Illegal immigration costs American taxpayers a mind-boggling $134.9 billion annually, according to a detailed analysis of federal, state and local programs that include education, medical, law enforcement and welfare. Conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a Washington D.C. nonprofit dedicated to studying immigration issues, the in-depth probe reveals that state and local taxpayers get stuck with an overwhelming chunk—$116 billion—of the burden. State and local expenditures for services provided to illegal aliens total $88.9 billion and federal expenditures $45.8 billion, the analysis found. For those who claim illegal immigrants contribute by paying taxes, government figures show that only $19 billion was recouped by Uncle Sam.

Click on the image to read the full report.

“A continually growing population of illegal aliens, along with the federal government’s ineffective efforts to secure our borders, present significant national security and public safety threats to the United States,” the FAIR report states. “They also have a severely negative impact on the nation’s taxpayers at the local, state, and national levels. Illegal immigration costs Americans billions of dollars each year. Illegal aliens are net consumers of taxpayer-funded services and the limited taxes paid by some segments of the illegal alien population are, in no way, significant enough to offset the growing financial burdens imposed on U.S. taxpayers by massive numbers of uninvited guests.” This defies a myth, long promoted by influential open border groups, that illegal aliens pay their fair share of taxes.

More than 12.5 million illegal immigrants and their estimated 4.2 million citizen children benefit from the U.S. government’s generosity. The biggest expenditure ($17.14 billion) on the federal level is for medical services, which include uncompensated hospital costs, Medicaid births, Medicaid fraud and Medicaid benefits for U.S.-born children (anchor babies) of illegal immigrants. The second-largest federal expenditure is law enforcement and justice ($13.15 billion), which includes incarceration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations and an alien assistance program. The feds spend $8 billion on general government programs and $5.85 billion on welfare, which consists of free school meals, food stamps, a supplemental nutrition program known as Women Infants and Children (WIC) and temporary assistance for needy families. FAIR points out the profound impact that illegal immigration has on programs intended to provide services exclusively to low-income Americans.

For state and local governments education is by far the largest expense, an eye-popping $44.4 billion that goes mostly to K-12 public schools nationwide, though over a billion of it is spent on college tuition assistance. General public services, described as expenses associated with garbage collection, fire departments and other locally-funded services total $18.5 billion for illegal aliens, the analysis found. Medical expenses came in third ($12.1 billion) for state and local governments and law enforcement ($10.8 billion) in fourth. FAIR researchers determined that a large percentage of illegal aliens work in the underground economy and frequently avoid paying income tax, leaving law-abiding, taxpaying Americans to foot the exorbitant tab for public services. The report also breaks down expenditures by state, with the top four spenders to provide illegal alien benefits California ($23 billion), Texas ($10.9 billion), New York ($7.5 billion) and Florida ($6.3 billion).

Over the years Judicial Watch has reported on a variety of studies and assessments involving the huge cost of supporting illegal immigrants, but this appears to be the most thorough and alarming in recent memory. The breakdown by category, state and federal services offers an incredibly detailed account of a major crisis perpetuated by a famously porous southern border. As FAIR writes in its report, it’s not just about money though the cost of supporting illegal immigrants should outrage every legal U.S. resident and American citizen. “A continually growing population of illegal aliens, along with the federal government’s ineffective efforts to secure our borders, present significant national security and public safety threats to the United States,” FAIR writes.

Judicial Watch has also extensively covered the dire national security crisis along the Mexican border, including an investigative series documenting how Islamic terrorists have joined forces with Mexican drug cartels to infiltrate—and attack—the United States.

RELATED ARTICLE: Latest ICE Operation Snaps Up 101 Illegal Immigrants, Mostly Criminals, in New Jersey

EDITORS NOTE: The cost of illegal aliens in Florida is estimated to be $6.3 billion. Democrat candidate for governor Andrew Gillum sent out the below answer to a tweet from Republican candidate for Governor Adam Putnam. Gillum has made statements that oppose President Trump’s immigration policies. As Tallahassee Mayor, according to Politifact, “was clear that local law enforcement agencies are not Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. In other words, Gillum believes local law enforcement should be focused on enforcing the laws of their city, not deporting undocumented immigrants.” Putnam was given a Half True by Politifact on his charge that Gillum would make the Sunshine State into the Sanctuary State.


NYC Subway Bomber one of 141,501 Bangladeshi’s who came to U.S. via Chain Migration since 2005

Another program that should be ended immediately. There will be the usual howls of “racism,” but how many people must die in jihad massacres before officials stop falling for that?

“DHS: Suicide-Bomb Suspect Arrived by Chain Migration,” by John Binder, Breitbart News, December 11, 2017:

The terror suspect who allegedly attempted to detonate a suicide-bomb in New York came to the United States from Bangladesh as a “chain migration” relative of an individual who had immigrated earlier into the United States.

In October, President Donald Trump called for an end to this “chain migration” process in his immigration principles.

On Monday 27-year-old Akayed Ullah, a Bangladesh national, injured three individuals when he allegedly tried to detonate a suicide bomb in New York City in a planned terrorist attack.

Ullah, as confirmed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), entered the U.S. in 2011 as a chain migrant.

Under “chain migration,” new immigrants to the U.S. are allowed to bring an unlimited number of poorly-screened foreign relatives with them, creating a never-ending flow of immigration from some terror-ridden countries.

Ullah came to the U.S. through the F43 visa, allowing him to obtain a Green Card simply because his father’s brother or sister had recently been naturalized as a U.S. citizen. This process is known as “extended-family chain migration.”

Trump has repeatedly demanded an end to chain migration, saying “Chain migration is a disaster for this country and it’s horrible.”

As Breitbart News reported, more than 140,000 Bangladeshi nationals — larger than the population of Dayton, Ohio — have entered the United States since 2005 for no other reason than to reunite with extended family members.

  • 8,508 Bangladeshi nationals entered U.S. in 2005 as chain migrants
  • 9,936 entered in 2006
  • 7,765 entered in 2007
  • 7,795 entered in 2008
  • 12,974 entered in 2009
  • 11,407 entered in 2010
  • 13,136 entered in 2011
  • 13,379 entered in 2012
  • 11,346 entered in 2013
  • 14,170 entered in 2014
  • 13,034 entered in 2015
  • 18,051 entered in 2016
  • Since 2005, 141,501 Bangladeshi nationals have entered U.S. as chain migrants

This is the second time in three months that a foreign-born suspected terrorist entered the U.S. through an immigration program that Trump has called for the end to.

Another suspected ISIS-inspired New York City terrorist, Uzbek national 29-year-old Sayfullo Saipov who is accused of murdering at least eight individuals, entered the U.S. in 2010 by winning one of the 50,000 visas randomly allotted every year under the Diversity Visa Lottery.

The Visa Lottery dolls out 50,000 visas annually to foreign nationals from a multitude of countries. The countries include those with terrorist problems, including Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela, Yemen, and Uzbekistan.

Trump most recently slammed the visa lottery, saying:

We want a system that is merit-based. They come in on merit, they don’t come in on a lottery system. How about the lottery system? Folks did you see that? That’s the guy in New York City. The lottery system where they put names in a bin… so what they do, I would say but more than just say, they take their worst and they put them in the bin and then when they pick the lottery, they have the real worst in their hands… and we end up getting them.

No more lottery system. We’re going to end that. We’ve already started the process.

We want people coming into our country who love our people, support our economy and embrace our values. It’s time to get our priorities straight.

About 9.3 million foreign nationals have come to the U.S. as chain migrants between 2005 and 2016, Breitbart News reported. In that same time period, a total of 13.06 million foreign nationals have entered the U.S. through the legal immigration system, as every seven out of 10 new arrivals come to the country for nothing other than family reunification….


CNN, MSNBC Forego Terror Attack Coverage To Report On Trump’s Love Of Diet Coke, TV — Seriously.

Gov. Cuomo and Commie Mayor de Blasio Hold Press Conference After Bombing => Don’t Mention ISIS, Islamists or Jihad ONCE!

Trump Ties New York Terror Attack to Immigration Reforms

NYC subway jihad bomber chose location because of its Christmas posters

Robert Spencer video: CAIR’s rabbi and the perils of “interfaith dialogue”

Podcast: Botched Terror Attack on U.S. Homeland

Trump’s Immigration Policies are Working: How 800 Americans in Chicago got jobs overnight!

I often focus on the nexus between failures of the immigration system and the way that these failures undermine national security and public safety.  Today, however, we will consider a more prosaic issue, but one that impacts millions of American and lawful immigrant workers and their families and hurt the U.S. economy.  The fact that millions of illegal aliens have taken jobs that should be done by Americans and lawful immigrants.

For years we have heard the lament spewed by globalist immigration anarchists that there are “jobs Americans won’t do.”

That statement is one of many employed in committing the crime of what I have come to refer to as Theft By Deception: The Immigration Con Game.

There are no jobs Americans won’t do, provided that they are paid fair wages under lawful working conditions.  The very concept of “jobs Americans won’t do” is insulting to tens of millions of hard-working and conscientious Americans who trudge off to work each and every day to do dangerous, back-breaking and filthy jobs so that they can support themselves and their families.

Homer Hickam, is the author of the book, “Rocket Boys,” an autobiographical account of his early years in the 1950s as the son of a coal miner in Coalwood, West Virginia.  Back then, the launch of the Russian satellite Sputnik motivated him to become involved with rocketry.  He ultimately went on to become a NASA engineer.  His book became the basis for the must-see film October Sky.

Because of his background and eloquence as a writer, he was called upon to address the memorial service for the miners who perished at the Sago Mine disaster in 2006. In the eulogy, Hickam said, “There is no water holier than the sweat off a man’s brow.”

Contrast Hickam’s reverence for hardworking Americans that his eloquent statement reflected with the contempt of those who derisively claim that Americans apparently won’t do hard work.

Employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens generally are putting their bottom lines first and not acting out of compassion.  There is nothing compassionate about firing hard-working Americans to replace them with foreign workers who are vulnerable to exploitation.

In point of fact, such actions are illegal and anti-American in the truest sense of that term. President Trump is the first president, in all too many decades, who understands the issues and is determined to address this betrayal of American workers by ramping up immigration law enforcement against unscrupulous employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens and the illegal aliens themselves.

This two-pronged approach is effective if enough resources are brought to bear to not only punish the law violators but to punish enough of them that meaningful deterrence is created to dissuade employers from hiring illegal aliens and also to deter aspiring illegal aliens from coming to the United States in the first place.

This is comparable to having police arrest prostitutes and their clients.  In both situations it literally “takes two to tango.”

On November 28, 2017 the Chicago Tribune published a report on a recent field operation by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) “Chicago immigration raid leaves bakery scrambling to rehire after 800 workers lost.”

That report began with this sentence:

A Swiss maker of hamburger buns for McDonald’s Corp. said it’s struggling to run a Chicago bakery after it lost a third of its workers in a clampdown on 800 immigrants without sufficient documentation.

That sentence could have been written by George Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth.”

The “immigrants” did not lack “sufficient documentation.” They lacked the lawful right to work in the United States and, in fact, were likely illegal aliens, meaning that they not only did not have the right to work in the United States, they did not have the right to be present in the United States at all.

The distinction is that aliens who run our borders and enter the United States without inspection are immediately subject to arrest and deportation.  However, non-immigrant aliens who are admitted as tourists, for example, are not permitted to work unless they are granted specific authorization.  An alien who works illegally becomes immediately subject to removal (deportation) even if he/she has not overstayed his authorized period of admission.

That article went on to note:

The raid on workers at Cloverhill is one of the biggest U.S. employment headaches reported by a European company so far as President Donald Trump has made curbing undocumented immigration a centerpiece of his presidency. Aryzta said it faces challenges in retaining staff in the U.S. and pressure to raise wages.

One of President Trump’s primary campaign promises was to put American workers first by enforcing our nation’s immigration laws. Clearly this strategy works.  Eight hundred American and lawful immigrant workers will be the beneficiaries of that field operation in Chicago.

Furthermore, foreign workers, whether they are legally or illegally working in the United States send as much of their earnings as possible back to their families in their home countries.  This certainly makes sense for them, but is not in the best interests of the United States.

Every year tens of billions of dollars in wages earned by illegal aliens is wired or otherwise transferred out of the United States.  This money is permanently lost to the U.S. economy and increases America’s national debt.

While almost all candidates for political office promise to create jobs, effective immigration law enforcement can liberate jobs, freeing up already existing jobs for American and lawful immigrant workers. Creating new jobs can be difficult and time-consuming, often requiring that funding be arranged to start a new business or expand an existing business.  Liberating jobs can be done literally overnight as was reported in the Chicago Tribune story, without the expenditure of time or money.

At the beginning of my career with the former INS I participated in worksite investigations and happily witnessed, up close and in person, lines of new employees standing at the doors of factories I had helped to raid the day before.  Those new workers were of every race, religion and ethnicity.  What united them was that they were all either Americans or aliens who were authorized to work in the United States.

While immigration law enforcement is a function of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) because of the national security and public safety concerns that relate the potential for criminals, spies and terrorists entering the United States, prior to the Second World War, the Labor Department had primary responsibility for the enforcement and administration of our immigration laws.

Our leaders of the Greatest Generation understood that for America to do well, Americans had to do well.  Their goal was to make certain that American workers would not have to compete with foreign workers for a job.  This was of particular concern during the Great Depression which saw millions of desperate unemployed Americans standing on line at soup kitchens. Shielding American workers from foreign competition gave rise to the middle class which, in turn, created the “American Dream.”

Immigration law enforcement authority was moved into the Justice Department during the beginning of the Second World War when concerns arose that enemy combatants, including spies and saboteurs, might seek to enter the United States.

Today tens of millions of hard-working Americans are unemployed or under-employed.  President Trump’s immigration policies are beginning to have the desired effect of liberating jobs and raising wages.

However, politicians from both parties seek to undermine the President’s goals.  What is particularly infuriating is that Democrats in Congress, who claim to be “pro-labor,” continue to block the administration’s efforts to secure our borders, not only against narcotics and other contraband as well as criminals, terrorists and fugitives but against the entry of foreign workers who undercut the jobs and wages of Americans.

The Democrats support massive chain migration and demand the legalization of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who were granted temporary authorization under Obama’s DACA (Deferred Action- Childhood Arrival) program, threatening to shut down the government if they don’t get their way.

If those DACA aliens, who had claimed to have entered the United States prior to their 16 birthdays are legalized, once they acquire U.S. citizenship they will have the right, under current law, to file to have all of their brothers and sisters and their spouses and minor children admitted into the United States as lawful immigrants.  Under such a scenario, one newly minted U.S. citizen could bring in dozens of extended family members.

The Democratic Party used to be the party of blue collar America- supporting laws and policies that benefitted that segment of the U.S. population.  Their leaders may still claim to be advocates for America’s working families, however their duplicitous actions that betray American workers and their families, while undermining national security and public safety, provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of their lies.

Americans must demand that all of our political leaders finally accept the wisdom, morality and true leadership of the Greatest Generation and support President Trump’s immigration policies and the underlying principle that for America to do well, Americans must do well.

RELATED ARTICLE: GAO says climate of “fear” in chicken plants where refugee workers are part of the workforce

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Fox News is just as big a problem on refugee issue as CNN, NBC, ABC and PBS

The other day when we reported that the Heritage Foundation got it so wrong with its “Roadmap for Reform” one of my first thoughts was it is because they clearly are living in a D.C. bubble and have no idea of what is going on in ‘flyover country.’

Fox News reporter

Elizabeth Llorente Fox News Latino reporter.

I think it is because the mainstream media isn’t reporting on the trouble in towns and cities where refugee overload has created enormous tensions. We don’t expect fairness from CNN etc, but Fox News is just as much to blame!

This Fox News story by Elizabeth Llorente makes my point.  Llorente clearly hasn’t read very much about the program and then she uses Linda Hartke, of all people, as her source for views from the religious Left.

We will get to Hartke shortly, but first this.  Reporter Llorente clearly got this talking point from the refugee contractors (probably from Hartke!).

The number of refugees entering the U.S. has plummeted since President Trump lifted a four-month ban on admissions.

Only 3,108 refugees came to the U.S. in October and November, the first two months of the new fiscal year. The Obama administration admitted 18,300 refugees in the same period last year. The new numbers represent a dramatic 83 percent drop.

Lazy reporter?

Take a look at this data (below).  What do you see? Those two months she uses as comparison are the highest two October/November admissions for probably 20 years (at least 10 here). Yes, Trump’s numbers are thankfully low, but it is disingenuous to take the top Obama months and compare them this way—this is what the lying Left does all the time!

Screenshot (64)_LI (1)

This is a screenshot from Wrapsnet. I cut the later months off so that we could see the early months for the last 11 years more clearly.  November numbers have not been added yet. We know however that the total for Trump’s October and November is 3,108. What steams me is when I see Trump’s numbers compared to the largest numbers Obama ever had in those months. That is what the Leftwing media does all the time, so why is Fox News doing it?

In the fall of 2016, fearing that Trump would be elected in November, the Obama administration was working furiously to bring in extremely high numbers in those months leading up to and following the election.  The numbers were so high that refugees were dumped into motels because the contractors couldn’t keep up.

Now to Linda Hartke!

Of all the people to quote representing the nine contractors*** she picked the embattled Hartke and gives her many column inches to lament! (Does she know Hartke personally?)

Don’t these reporters at Fox News read?

Hartke is embroiled in accusations of financial mismanagement. See Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart’s expose here.

Llorente goes on….


Hartke makes over $300,000 annually and her organization is allegedly in deep turmoil.

Groups that work with refugees lamented the drop, saying the U.S. should not scale back its support for people fleeing upheaval.

Could Fox just once mention the fact that these “groups that work with refugees” are paid government contractors who have a financial interest in seeing ever-larger numbers of refugees admitted to the US.

“It’s tragic, really,” said Linda Hartke, president and chief executive of the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which resettles refugees. “It’s tragic for refugees who’ve fled for their lives, who are simply looking for the chance to be safe and provide for their families and see their kids go to school and live in dignity.”

She said to Fox News, “It hard for many Americans to understand why this administration fails to see that we not only have an international obligation to protect the most vulnerable, but an opportunity to demonstrate American leadership.”

As for the administration’s withdrawal from the global talks on migration, Hartke viewed it as bewildering.

“The global compact was an opportunity, including for our neighbors, to be much more thoughtful about the flows of migrants, what’s good for this country and for our neighbors as well,” Hartke said. “Having these conversations in a global context is something we shouldn’t be afraid of.”

And, in light of what is happening inside Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, I have to say that Hartke has chutzpah!

Readers, stop believing everything Fox News says, please read many sources of alternative media to become fully informed.

Here, for new readers and for reporter Llorente, are the nine federal resettlement contractors paid by you to place refugees in your towns and cities.  These middlemen get paid by the head for their ‘charitable good works,’ so they have no incentive to ever see a reduction in numbers.

European Union Suing Countries that Refuse to take Migrants

Pressure from Brussels is being ratcheted up against the so called Visegrad three (there were four!) to take thousands of those illegal migrants that have ‘made their way’ across the Mediterranean or came in via Turkey to Greece and are now piled up in Italy or Greece.

I’m calling them migrants because in most cases their status as legitimate refugees has not been determined.  Asylum seekers who can prove they would be persecuted if returned to their own countries become legitimate refugees only after having had their asylum claims processed and approved.

Orban and Soros

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán (left).

We learned this week that Germany was preparing to begin returning to Syria those migrants who failed their asylum requests.  See here.

Hungarian Prime Minister Orban says George Soros is working to push migrants throughout Europe. As I have said repeatedly, Donald Trump should invite Orban to a state dinner and send a powerful message!

Here is news from News Europe:

The European Commission is suing Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary for failing to fulfill their obligations in the context of the European refugee relocation programme.

The Visegrad four had all objected, with Slovakia joining Hungary in suing the European Commission for interfering with their sovereignty. Slovakia stepped down from its confrontation with Brussels, but Prague, Warsaw, and Budapest continue to express objections to the programme. Turning the tables, the European Commission is now taking the three countries to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

The refugee relocation plan was adopted in 2015 and envisaged the relocation of 160,000 refugees from Greece and Italy to the rest of the EU. The resettlement scheme took into account unemployment, GDP, and population. The quota for the Visegrad countries was 8,000 refugees.

The Law and Justice (PiS) government insists Poland will not accept migrants from Africa and the Middle East citing security concerns.

I wonder if these countries are thinking about getting out of the EU as the UK is now (slowly) doing.  Each could trade directly with the UK and the US.  But, they would need to build up their armies, shore up their borders as the Muslim population grows in Germany, France, Belgium, etc. in the coming decades.

See my complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive by clicking here.


Bulgaria Moves to Criminalize Radical Islam, Support of Jihad, Sharia, Caliphate

Resettle Rohingya ‘refugees’ in Muslim countries where they can have a future

Politifact: There is no way to get at the true cost of resettling refugees in the US

US Conference of Catholic Bishops not happy with the President

Refugees lured to Aberdeen, South Dakota are now going to be jobless!

We have admitted 130,000 Somalis to the US since 1983! Do we have any obligation to clean out Kenyan camps? NO!

Plane with deportees lands in Africa and then returns to US without dropping off Somalis

DACA Is Not What the Democrats Say It Is. Here Are the Facts.

Some members of Congress are threatening to block government funding unless Congress provides amnesty to so-called Dreamers—the illegal aliens included in President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which President Donald Trump is ending.

Responsible members of Congress should not give in.

Such an effort would be fundamentally flawed and would only encourage even more illegal immigration—just as the 1986 amnesty in the Immigration Reform and Control Act did.

Democrats portray the DACA program as only benefiting those who were a few years old when they came to the U.S. illegally, leaving them unable to speak their native language and ignorant of their countries’ cultural norms. Therefore, the reasoning goes, it would be a hardship to return them to the countries where they were born.

Obama himself gave this rationale when he said DACA beneficiaries were “brought to this country by their parents” as infants and face “deportation to a country that [they] know nothing about, with a language” they don’t even speak.

While this may be true of a small portion of the DACA population, it certainly is not true of all of the aliens who received administrative amnesty. In fact, illegal aliens were eligible as long as they came to the U.S. before their 16th birthday and were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012.

DACA also required that beneficiaries enroll in school, graduate from high school, obtain a GED certificate, or receive an honorable discharge from the military; have no conviction for a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors; and not pose a threat to national security or public safety.

However, the Obama administration appeared to routinely waive the education (or its equivalent) requirement as long as the illegal alien was enrolled in some kind of program. Only 49 percent of DACA beneficiaries have a high school education—despite the fact that a majority of them are adults.

How thorough was Homeland Security vetting? In February 2017, after the arrest of a DACA beneficiary for gang membership, the Department of Homeland Security admitted that at least 1,500 DACA beneficiaries had their eligibility terminated “due to a criminal conviction, gang affiliation, or a criminal conviction related to gang affiliation.”

By August 2017, that number had surged to 2,139.

In fact, based on documents obtained by Judicial Watch, it is apparent that the Obama administration used a “lean and light” system of background checks in which only a few, randomly selected DACA applicants were ever actually vetted.

Additionally, DACA only excluded individuals for convictions. Thus, even if a Homeland Security background investigation—which apparently was almost never done—produced substantial evidence that an illegal alien might have committed multiple crimes, the alien would still be eligible for DACA unless Homeland Security referred the violation to state or federal prosecutors and the alien was convicted.

DACA had no requirement of English fluency either. In fact, the original application requested applicants to answer whether the form had been “read” to the alien by a translator “in a language in which [the applicant is] fluent.”

The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that “perhaps 24 percent of the DACA-eligible population fall into the functionally illiterate category and another 46 percent have only ‘basic’ English ability.”

This is a far cry from the image of DACA beneficiaries as all children who don’t speak the language of—and know nothing about the culture of—their native countries.

In fact, it seems rather that a significant percentage of DACA beneficiaries may have serious limitations in their education, experience, and English fluency that negatively affected their ability to function in American society.

Providing amnesty to low-skilled, low-educated aliens with marginal English language ability would impose large fiscal costs on American taxpayers resulting from increased government payouts and benefits, and would be unfair to legal immigrants who obeyed the law to come here.

Any congressional amnesty bill providing citizenship for DACA beneficiaries could significantly increase the number of illegal aliens who will benefit unless Congress amends the sponsorship rules under federal immigration law. Providing lawful status to millions of so-called “Dreamers” will allow the extended families of those aliens to profit from illegal conduct.

The U.S. accepts about a million legal immigrants every year. According to a recent study, of the 33 million legal immigrants admitted over the last 35 years, about 61 percent were chain migration immigrants.

The average immigrant has sponsored 3.45 additional immigrants, but for DACA beneficiaries, that number is likely to be much higher. This is because, according to an analysis by the Department of Homeland Security, 76 percent of the DACA beneficiaries were from Mexico. Mexican immigrants sponsor an average of 6.38 additional legal immigrants—the highest rate of any nationality for chain migration.

Providing amnesty would simply attract even more illegal immigration and would not solve the myriad of enforcement problems we have along our borders and in the interior of the country. Congress should concentrate on giving the federal government (with the assistance and help of state and local governments) the resources to enforce existing immigration laws to reduce the illegal alien population in the U.S. and stem entry into the country.

Until those goals are accomplished, it is premature to even consider any DACA-type bill.


Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. Twitter: .


Why Congress Should Not Legalize DACA: The Myths Surrounding the Program

Podcast: Liberal Rhetoric on DACA vs. Reality

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.


EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of New Mexico Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham who is a prominent Democrat pushing for a DACA-style amnesty deal. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)

60 Thousand Imaginary Fascists in Warsaw

The annual ‘Independence March’ held on Polish Independence Day – November 11 – is the embodiment of the Polish spirit – independent, strong-minded, individualistic, unpredictable. The spirit that drove the Poles to wage a hopeless fight against the Nazis and Soviets in 1939. The same spirit that will not politely yield to whatever EU decision is made in Brussels or Berlin. For which – as usual – they may finally be severely punished. Unfair labeling, distortion, and disinformation in the international media do not bode well for Poland.

By Maria Juczewska

According to the international media, 60 thousand fascists appeared in the streets of Warsaw on Polish Independence Day in the ‘Independence March’ on November 11th. This date, marking the armistice ending the First World War, is commemorated in the UK as Remembrance Day, with the iconic poppy; in the USA as Veterans Day, (previously Armistice Day); and concurrently celebrated as the anniversary of the restoration of Poland’s national sovereignty.

It is impossible to understand Poland if one tries to apply the clichés from his own country formed by his own historical experience. The Polish experience is not the one of the Anglo-Saxon world. No ideology that expects people to become uniform, manageable, disciplined, and obedient could appeal to the feisty Polish spirit. Poland had no Oswald Mosley, no Mitford sisters, no fascist union. Thus, the characterization of the annual ‘Independence March’ in Warsaw as ‘fascist’ is as gross a distortion of reality as calling America’s Veterans Day parades ‘fascist’ marches.

In celebrating national sovereignty, Polish Independence Day marks the end of 123 years of partitions. The partitions ended the existence of a multi-ethnic polity that lasted between 1385 and 1795. Known as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for the majority of that time period, the polity was a unique political entity widely known for its system of noble democracy, inclusiveness and religious tolerance for all denominations. It achieved the zenith of its power in the 16th and 17th centuries. Finally, the Commonwealth was undermined by internal weaknesses and subversion of the surrounding powers and partitioned between Austria, Prussia, and Russia at the end of the 18th century.

With Poland no longer appearing on the map of Europe, nationalism became a tool that allowed the Poles to preserve their national identity and eventually regain independence in the 20th century.

Long centuries of coexistence in a multi-ethnic federal state shaped the identity of people inhabiting the areas of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Poland has always been inclusive and directed towards co-existence and multiculturalism. The main criterion for being Polish thus became the willingness to serve Poland, understood as a community of people accepting the spiritual heritage of the Polish nation (literature, art, customs, politics) as their own. Anybody could become Polish, if they chose to serve the honorable cause.

As a result, nationalism in Poland of the 1920s and the 1930s was never based on the criterion of bloodline put forward by Nazism or social class proposed by communism. The majority of nationalist Polish organizations had a strong Christian element, which prevented them from becoming totalitarian. Although anti-Semitism was present in the political life of Poland in the interwar period, it was related not to race, as such, but to socio-economic factors and the dominance of Jews in certain professions. The fact that many leftist Jews supported Communism did not improve internal relations in Poland either. After all, the Soviet Union was a lethal threat to the existence of the reborn Poland.

However, all those concerns did not matter anymore when the Second World War broke out. Seeing that Jews were facing planned biological extinction under the Nazi German occupation, Poles of all political views, also the nationalists, came to their rescue.

Members of the Polish nationalist organizations were not only providing false identity documents, food stamps or hide outs to their Jewish acquaintances but also organizing larger rescue operations.

For instance, one that allowed for placement of children smuggled out of the Warsaw Ghetto into orphanages managed by Catholic nuns. It was supervised by Jan Dobraczynski, a writer and a supporter of the Christian nationalist movement in the interwar period.

Another example is Jan Mosdorf, one of the founders of the radically Polish nationalist ONR and a confirmed anti-Semite before the Second World War. Yet, in 1940 he was arrested by the Gestapo and sent to Auschwitz concentration camp. While in the camp, he became involved in the creation of an underground support organization, providing additional food rations and other kinds of help to Jewish prisoners. Denounced by a “kapo,” he was executed at the camp for helping Jews in 1943. During the war, in occupied Poland, many “former anti-Semites” sacrificed their lives to help the Jews.

Today in Poland, the youth harken back to the ideals of Polish interwar organizations.

However, it needs to be made absolutely clear that the Polish nationalism of the interwar period had nothing to do with fascism, as the National Socialism of Nazi Germany is presently known.

Poland was the first country that fell prey to the joint aggression of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia in 1939, precisely because it rejected the acceptance of Nazism or Communism. Occupied by two totalitarian powers propelled by socialist ideologies, one national and one international, Poles paid a high price for their refusal to yield to one or the other.

Half of the territory lost, one third of the population killed, and the remaining two thirds trapped behind the Iron Curtain for fifty years. Concentration camps used to exterminate Jews and other minorities, as well as the Poles during the war, were used after the war by the Communists to murder the remaining Polish independence fighters.

For 50 years, every decade, Poles would stand up against the Communist regime in Poland calling for basic civil rights and liberties. The Solidarity movement that greatly contributed to the fall of USSR was partly based on the ideas of the nation and civil duties formed by the Polish nationalists of the interwar period. This is the tradition to which the ‘Independence March’ held on Independence Day refers.

As a result, there is no fascist tradition in Poland that could inspire the young Poles of today.

Nazi German occupation of Poland was such a societal trauma that no ordinary Pole would willingly associate with the ideals of national socialism or venture into the Polish streets in a brown uniform. What Poles celebrate by marching in the streets of Warsaw on Independence Day is their political freedom. Their right to live in liberty in their own country. They commemorate the independence fighters who lost their lives in the first years of Soviet rule involving the planned extermination of the Polish underground. They also contest the political situation in the present-day European Union. A considerable majority of them are regular Polish patriots. Some may have more nationalist leanings. A fraction of them may be radical – but they would comprise a drop in the proverbial bucket among the vast sea of people.

The annual ‘Independence March’ held on Polish Independence Day – November 11 – is the embodiment of the Polish spirit – independent, strong-minded, individualistic, unpredictable. The spirit that drove the Poles to wage a hopeless fight against the Nazis and Soviets in 1939. The same spirit that will not politely yield to whatever EU decision is made in Brussels or Berlin. For which – as usual – they may finally be severely punished. Unfair labeling, distortion, and disinformation in the international media do not bode well for Poland.


Maria Juczewska is an MA candidate in International Affairs at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, DC where she works for the Kościuszko Chair of Polish Studies. Ms. Juczewska is a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis of the conservative-online-journalism center at the Washington-based Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research.


Ethnic Fragmentation in the Global Era: The Case o…

German Alt-Right Surges and Dominates the Former C…

NFL: It’s “Taking Back Our Taxes” Time!

Theresa May’s Florence Speech: A Deeply Brexity-lo…

Stunning Surprise Looms in German Election: Nation…

Wow! Trump withdraws U.S. from UN Compact on migration/refugees

“We will decide how best to control our borders and who will be allowed to enter our country.” – U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley

The Human Rights Industrial Complex (HRIC) must be going nuts!

Thanks for the tip from reader ‘heymister24’ who sent this overnight.

Here is Deutsch Welle‘s version of the news (reported in many publications):

The United States has announced it is withdrawing from the Global Compact on Migration. The non-binding UN migration pact was meant to boost international cooperation on migration issues.

US President Donald Trump’s administration has withdrawn the United States from a United Nations pact to coordinate and improve international migration and refugee issues, the US mission to the global body said.


“Today, the US Mission to the United Nations informed the UN Secretary-General that the United States is ending its participation in the Global Compact on Migration,” the US mission to the UN said. The global approach … not compatible with US sovereignty.”

In September 2016, all 193 UN member states of the General Assembly adopted the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. [You may remember that was Obama’s big show at the UN.—ed]

The non-binding declaration includes a set of pledges to protect migrants, foster migrant integration, develop guidelines on the treatment of vulnerable migrants and strengthen global governance of migration, among other issues.


“The New York Declaration contains numerous provisions that are inconsistent with US immigration and refugee policies and the Trump Administration’s immigration principles. As a result, President Trump determined that the United States would end its participation in the Compact process that aims to reach international consensus at the UN in 2018,” the US statement said.


US Ambassador Nikki Haley said, “America is proud of our immigrant heritage and long-standing leadership” on supporting migrants and refugees.

“No country has done more than the United States, and our generosity will continue. But our decisions on immigration policies must always be made by Americans and Americans alone,” she added. “We will decide how best to control our borders and who will be allowed to enter our country. The global approach in the New York Declaration is simply not compatible with US sovereignty.”

I hope this means we are going to choose our own refugees (if any) without dancing to the UNHCR’s tune going forward.

Mostly I tell readers to complain to the President about something. This time send him your thanks by clicking here.


The Atlantic contributing editor, Peter Beinart, wants taxpayers to fund special cemeteries for Muslims

Tyson Foods changing America one town at a time; up next Humboldt, TN

Did you know that Church World Service is helping to replace American doctors with Cuban ones?

Find out who is in charge of refugee resettlement in your state…

We Can Thank a Flawed Jury System for the Steinle Verdict

Much has been said about the acquittal of felonious invader Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, the killer of young Kate Steinle, who died in her father’s arms. Yet while most of the focus has been on “sanctuary cities” — a euphemism for treasonous, lawless cities — there perhaps has been no scrutiny of the people whose minds are too often a sanctuary from knowledge and reality: modern jurors.

The problem stems from “The Error of Impartiality,” which is the title of an essay on this very subject. For what is often perceived in jurors as fairness is just fecklessness, of the moral variety.

When choosing jurors, pains are taken to dismiss people with preconceived notions about the case. But consider: If in question is a high-profile matter such as the O.J. Simpson or Steinle case, what kind of person would know nothing about it and/or have formed no opinions? Does this reflect impartiality or just indifference?

Assuming such a person makes the ideal juror is like supposing that someone still undecided the day before a high-profile election is surely a better voter than someone who reads the news and formed an opinion early on. An undecided individual may be a better voter in the particular (relative to a given wrongly decided voter), but in principle this supposition simply is untrue. G.K. Chesterton explained the matter brilliantly in the aforementioned essay, writing:

What people call impartiality may simply mean indifference, and what people call partiality may simply mean mental activity. It is sometimes made an objection, for instance, to a juror that he has formed some primâ-facie opinion upon a case: if he can be forced under sharp questioning to admit that he has formed such an opinion, he is regarded as manifestly unfit to conduct the inquiry. Surely this is unsound. If his bias is one of interest, of class, or creed, or notorious propaganda, then that fact certainly proves that he is not an impartial arbiter. But the mere fact that he did form some temporary impression from the first facts as far as he knew them — this does not prove that he is not an impartial arbiter — it only proves that he is not a cold-blooded fool.

If we walk down the street, taking all the jurymen who have not formed opinions and leaving all the jurymen who have formed opinions, it seems highly probable that we shall only succeed in taking all the stupid jurymen and leaving all the thoughtful ones. Provided that the opinion formed is really of this airy and abstract kind, provided that it has no suggestion of settled motive or prejudice, we might well regard it not merely as a promise of capacity, but literally as a promise of justice. The man who took the trouble to deduce from the police reports would probably be the man who would take the trouble to deduce further and different things from the evidence. The man who had the sense to form an opinion would be the man who would have the sense to alter it.

Chesterton also noted that the logical outcome of our “impartiality” standard is that a “case ought to be tried by Esquimaux, or Hottentots, or savages from the Cannibal Islands — by some class of people who could have no conceivable interest in the parties, and moreover, no conceivable interest in the case. The pure and starry perfection of impartiality would be reached by people who not only had no opinion before they had heard the case, but who also had no opinion after they had heard it.”

The essay is pure gold, and I strongly recommend you read the whole thing.

I once wrote a piece titled “Why Most Voters Shouldn’t Vote,” and a corresponding principle may be that most jurors shouldn’t sit on juries. People so apathetic that they couldn’t be bothered to try and determine reality on high profile candidates or cases probably won’t transform, magically, into sagacious sleuths of reality upon entering a ballot or jury box. Apathy is not an asset, and ignorance is not a virtue.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to

RELATED ARTICLES: Kate Steinle Deserves Better Than Democrats Opposing Deportation of Illegal Aliens

Dramatic drop in number of refugees entering the U.S. in first 2 months of fiscal year

The President now has completed the first two months of what will be his first full year in admitting refugees to the US and we see numbers are dramatically lower. 

In fact they are so low that if the present pace continues until the end of the fiscal year, September 30th, less than 20,000 could be the final tally.

As readers know the Trump Administration set the CEILING for this fiscal year at 45,000, but that is a ceiling, not a target!

Doing okay, but I continue to argue that simply dropping numbers isn’t enough because the next Prez could raise the numbers higher to make up for lost time. The entire program should be abolished and if the President and Congress want a program they need to work on it.  Removing the middlemen contractors should be the first order of business when (if!) they put America First!

Trump thumbs up flags

I caution readers to not get too excited by the dramatic downward (so far) trend because if past years are any indication there is usually a lull in the first few months followed by a summer uptick then a huge flood comes in in September because everyone is pushing to reach the ceiling (with the exception being the year Obama and Trump shared the fiscal year).

In FY 17 Obama was pouring them in in the first months while in the closing months Trump was slowing the flow.

(See chart below through October 31 to see monthly admissions.  Note the ceiling numbers and the ultimate admissions numbers.) And, do you see that dip in the middle of FY11, that is when those Iraqi refugee terrorists were arrested in Bowling Green, KY and caused the whole huge Iraqi flow to America to grind to a halt as they needed to be rescreened.

Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart had a look at the numbers here yesterday, however he concentrated on the November numbers which were available yesterday at Wrapsnet.

I’ll focus my attention on the numbers in this fiscal year which includes the months of October and November combined.

For the first two months of FY18 we admitted 3,108 refugees. If that pace continued for the year the total would be less than 20,000 (again 45,000 is the ceiling).

The resettlement contractors*** must be having hissy-fits as they ‘bid for bodies’ (aka paying refugee clients) as each must fight to keep its taxpayer-funded budget from imploding.

***Update*** The wailing began yesterday as Jewish and Lutheran refugee contractors saw the numbers, see here.  The Lutherans esp. need the cold hard cash refugees represent because they have some funny-money problems going on there, here.

So what do the Muslim numbers look like?

There is no question that the Muslim percentage of refugees has dropped precipitously this fiscal year, again see Leahy for November.

Muslim refugees account for 16% of the flow this fiscal year which is way down from nearly 50% during some of Obama’s years in office.

My calculations indicate that of the 3,108 total refugee admissions for those two months, 487 are Muslim. That works out to about 16% for the two months.  Wrapsnet has the various Muslim sects designated like this:

Amadiyya: 7 total, all from Pakistan

Moslem: total 362

Tops in that category: Burma 111, DR Congo 35, Eritrea 50, Ethiopia 23, and Somalia 107 plus smaller numbers from other countries (Those from Burma are Rohingya)

Moslem Shiite: total 45

Tops in that category: Afghanistan 13, Iraq 29

Moslem Suni: total 73

Tops in that category: Iraq 27, Somalia 19, Syria 22

It makes me laugh to see those Iraqi numbers.  We have the Sunnis and Shiites fighting each other in Iraq and then we bring in the two opposing sides!  Will they continue their centuries of quarreling in your city?

By the way, if you run your own numbers at Wrapsnet I encourage you to use the fiscal year numbers instead of annual year because this whole program is run on a fiscal year basis.

Have a look at the entry numbers for each month since FY2008 (a Bush year) below:

Screenshot (55)_LI.jpg

Notice what the tricksters at the DOS have done here. Obama set the FY17 ceiling as he was walking out the door at 110,000.  Note that he had 7 previous years where he could have done the same. Why didn’t he?   Trump legally reset it at 50,000, but the DOS left the 110,000 there because they want to make Trump look as mean as they possibly can compared to their dear leader Obama, and so that their media lackeys can continue to write about Obama’s 110,000 level that was really pie in the sky.  110,000 could never have been accomplished.

***And here for new readers are the nine federal resettlement contractors paid by you to place refugees in your towns and cities.  These middlemen get paid by the head for their ‘charitable good works,’ so they have no incentive to ever see a reduction in numbers.


The Atlantic contributing editor, Peter Beinart, wants taxpayers to fund special cemeteries for Muslims

Tyson Foods changing America one town at a time; up next Humboldt, TN

Did you know that Church World Service is helping to replace American doctors with Cuban ones?

Find out who is in charge of refugee resettlement in your state…

De-Naturalization Sought Against 5 Child Molesters

Naturalization has provided the “keys to the kingdom” to criminals and terrorists.

On November 21, 2017 the Department of Justice issued a press release, “Denaturalization Sought Against Five Child Sexual Abusers in Florida, Illinois and Texas.”

According to the press release, each of the five men had become naturalized United States citizens more than a decade ago and had all engaged in illegal sexual contact with children prior to becoming U.S. citizens.  Three of the victims who had been sexually assaulted were merely six years old at the time they were assaulted.

In each case the alien concealed his criminal acts against his victim in filing for citizenship.  Such false statements constitutes a felony under the provisions of 18 U.S. Code § 1425 (Procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully) with a potential maximum prison sentence of 10 years in prison.  However the maximum sentence of 25 years in prison may be imposed if such fraud was committed in conjunction with terrorism.

However, the statute of limitations of ten years has tolled for each of these individuals.  (Most federal felonies have a statute of limitations of 5 years, where naturalization fraud is concerned, however, the statute of limitations is ten years.  We will address the reason for this shortly.)

Consequently while these criminals cannot be criminally prosecuted for committing immigration fraud, all were naturalized well over a decade ago, the Justice Department is seeking to have them stripped of their citizenship to set the stage for removing (deporting) them from the United States.

Advocates for immigration reform insist that such aliens will undergo “security checks” that are conducted when aliens file applications for various immigration benefits.  Clearly this flawed system failed where these five individuals referenced in the DOJ press release are concerned.

The only thing worse than no security is false security.

Aliens who seek to naturalize are supposed to undergo in-depth background investigations known as Good Moral Character (GMC) investigations.

Naturalization fraud not only enables criminals to evade detection but has a serious national security component as well.

This vetting process was greatly abbreviated under the Clinton administration and, as I noted in my April 2015 article, How DHS Ineptitude Facilitates Terrorist Operations has not only enabled terrorists to escape proper scrutiny, they have been able to acquire various immigration benefits that enhance their ability to travel freely and embed themselves.

For terrorists United States citizenship and a U.S. passport is the ultimate “Key to the kingdom” facilitating their travel around the world using both their U.S. passport and the passport of their country of birth to cover their tracks and gain credibility in seeking entry into a series of counties around the world as they travel to receive training, conduct clandestine meetings and carry out attacks.

My article was predicated on a naturalized United States citizen, Abdirahman Sheik Mohamud who had immigrated to the U.S. from his native Somali and was subsequently charged with traveling to Syria to fight against members of the U.S. military in the hopes of killing several American soldiers.

He was charged with several crimes including making false statements to the FBI agents who interrogated him but no mention was made of the fact that he had naturalized just one year earlier and had apparently lied on his application for citizenship.

On June 29, 2017 The Justice Department issued a press release, “Ohio Man Pleads Guilty to Providing Material Support to Terrorists” which laid out all of the charges to which the defendant pleaded guilty.  However, the charge of naturalization fraud was not included.  It is interesting to note that for one of the crimes, lying to the FBI agents in a matter involving terrorism, Mohamud can be sentenced to a maximum of 8 years in prison.  However, naturalization fraud committed in conjunction with terrorism carries a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison and would pave the way for his being stripped of United States citizenship.

There are many other documented cases of naturalized citizens who, intent on carrying out terror attacks seek U.S. citizenship thereby enabling them to obtain a U.S. passport.  That strategy that was an integral part of their plans yet, inexplicably, not all of those cases have resulted in the terror suspect being charged with naturalization fraud.

Because of the particular significance of naturalization fraud and its potential nexus to national security and terrorism, while most federal felonies have a statute of limitations of five years, the statute of limitations for naturalization fraud is ten years.

In point of fact, the 9/11 Commission determined that immigration fraud and visa fraud were frequently used by terrorists as a means of entering the United States and embedding themselves in the United States in preparation for the deadly attacks they planned to conduct.  This fact prompted me to write about Immigration Fraud- Lies That Kill.

Going back to the press release about the five aliens who face denaturalization, while, as the saying goes, “better late than never,” what is not clear is why it took the federal government more than a decade to uncover the fact that these individuals had lied on their applications for United States citizenship.

This is not simply an issue of the matter of being frustrated that justice delayed is justice denied, and the fact that because of the statute of limitations they escaped the possibility of being prosecuted and sentenced to jail time and a fine.  A potentially even more significant issue is the unavoidable fact that each every day these child molesters were present in the United States, moving freely through the towns and cities where they lived that they may have had the opportunity to attack more defenseless children.

Indeed, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that some additional children may have been attacked but that the attacks went unknown and/or unreported.

If the system had worked as it should have worked, these predatory aliens might well have been stripped of their lawful immigrant status and deported from the United States before they even had the opportunity to file for naturalization.

Therefore Attorney General Sessions should consider issuing a directive to find out how the system permitted these five miscreants to slip through the cracks for such a long period of time.

It would be important, for example, to know if any of these criminal aliens had been aided by the anarchistic sanctuary policies of jurisdictions that seek to downgrade the nature of crimes for which aliens stand accused so that these aliens can be shielded from deportation, even where this endangers public safety including the youngest and most vulnerable members of communities across the United States.

Not only does this endanger pubic safety and national security but also undermines the principle  of equal protection under the law for United States citizens.

Undoubtedly there are many other aliens who have similarly fallen through the infamous “cracks in the system.”

Every such criminal is a potential ticking time bomb whose presence, each day, poses a threat to the safety to the residents of the communities in which they live.

In the wake of recent mass shootings attention has focused on failures of the system that is supposed to prevent criminals and those suffering from serious mental illness from purchasing and possessing firearms.  In the wake of several mass shootings, to everyone’s horror and frustration, it was determined that the shooter should have been barred from possessing firearms but, for various reasons, the system was not provided with relevant information that would have barred the gunmen from owning firearms.

The laws did not fail, the way they were administered, however, did.  Vital relevant information was not included in databases undermining the integrity of the background checks.

On November 22, 2017 the U.S. Department of Justice issued a press release entitled, “Attorney General Jeff Sessions Directs FBI and ATF to Conduct a Comprehensive Review of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.”

It is important to make certain that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals and the severely mentally ill.  It is, however, no less important to make certain that no less attention is given to the vetting systems concerning aliens who live in towns and cities across the United States.

As was noted in the official report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud…

Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or embed themselves in the United States if their operational plans were to come to fruition. As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status, or applying for asylum after entering. In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated. Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials, and execute an attack.

Therefore a similar directive needs to be issued that addresses the failings of the process by which aliens seeking immigration benefits are scrutinized, including the impact that “sanctuary” policies may play in undermining this critical system.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.